Quote:
Originally Posted by mr ploppy
I wouldn't have a problem listening to suggestions. I tend to know when my writing isn't right anyway, I just get a sort of feeling about it or someting will nag away at me for a few days until I figure out what is wrong.
The main problem really I think is a lot of writers see it as an artform rather than a collaborative process. But publishers tend to see things in terms of monetary value and how they can maximise profits.
So they will want things like 10 page kitten killing descriptions cut out because it will affect profits, or they will tell you not to write about snail racing syndicates because the potential market isn't large enough, or they will say you can't have the narrator swear in every sentence.
Those are the sort of things that will cause friction between "artist" and businessman.
|
The thing I think you're missing here is that the editors aren't on the business side of the house - they're on the artistic side too. The bean counters may say they need 25% cut to be able to market the book profitably, but they aren't likely to say which 25% needs to go.
They will still tell you to cut 10 pages of kitten killing descriptions - but that's more because most readers' eyes glaze over and stop reading when faced with 10 pages of description, and that's not something anyone wants.
As for not writing about snail racing syndicates, the normal idea is you write, then they buy. If they think your book about snail racing is that good, they'll make you an offer - if they don't, you can always choose another option.
Publishers do want money, but the publishing game is one of throw things at the wall to see if they stick. Most books make some money, but not a lot; some few books hit the jackpot, but no one can predict them beforehand.
It's not as simple as your post implied.