Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven Lyle Jordan
The same can be said about unedited books: The assumption that no author can edit their own book and create a good product is simply ludicrous (not to mention the unspoken corollary that every pro editor will produce silk from a sow's ear). Every touch of an editor removes a bit of an author's voice, and substitutes the editor's own. Editors homogenize... not usually a positive when considering creativity.
. . .
Whereas I could have the greatest editor in the country working for me, but without advertising and product placement, struggle to sell 20 books.
|
Both statements are absolutely true. Professional editing is just one part of the mix. And there are authors who are quite capable of successfully and accurately editing and proofreading their own work. Similarly, there are hobbyist editors who are outstanding. In both cases, these are the Shakespeare's of their worlds, the rare person not the "normal" person.
Yet part of the problem with your defense of the author doing it all him-/herself is that it ignores certain realities. The author sees and hears with his/her eyes what the author expects to see and hear according to his/her mind.
A good example of the value of professional editors is Hemingway. It is not uncommon to hear Ernest Hemingway declared one of the greatest American authors. But Hemingway's unedited work is considered mediocre and a great deal of his success is attributed to his editor, Maxwell Perkins. The author-editor relationship is one of collaboration and partnership whose intent is to make the potentially great fulfill its promise and be great.