View Single Post
Old 09-02-2012, 07:47 AM   #81
rhadin
Literacy = Understanding
rhadin ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.rhadin ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.rhadin ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.rhadin ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.rhadin ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.rhadin ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.rhadin ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.rhadin ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.rhadin ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.rhadin ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.rhadin ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
rhadin's Avatar
 
Posts: 4,833
Karma: 59674358
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The World of Books
Device: Nook, Nook Tablet
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edward M. Grant View Post
Most books* need copy editing; if a writer is going to pay for one thing on their book then that's probably what they should spend the money on because it requires a mindset that most writers don't have. Despite that, I still find typos, duplicate words and misused words in most trade-published novels I read.
It seems that there is a standard of perfection at play, with some essentially saying that because there are still errors to be found in edited works, why waste money on editing. The pursuit of perfection is a laudable goal but not really achieveable. I always tell my clients that someone will find an error or two or three in any book that is published -- whether edited or not -- because there is no precise standard that has to be met. Just look at the subargument in this thread about splitting infinitives. I am of the camp, as an editor, who thinks the rule prohibiting splitting is nonsense and often detrimental to an author's writing. In contrast, there are editors who will contort phrases to avoid the split. I think the latter is an error; they think the former is an error.

As regards typos, it, again, depends, on what is meant. Even editors will sometimes see its when what is really written is it's. Editors are susceptible, like everyone else, to seeing what they expect to see. The difference is that because of the distance they have from the work, a distance that an author does not have, they are less likely to see what they expect rather than what really is present.

And one person's perfect book is a book that another person can and will find errors in. Consider the serial comma problem: Many authors are moving away from the serial comma, something that has come about by fashionable changes in British grammar, yet many editors, myself included, believe the serial comma is an important element of grammar. Consider these alternatives (thanks to Lynne Truss):
  • eats, shoots, and leaves
  • eats shoots and leaves
  • eats shoots, and leaves
  • eats, shoots and leaves

Each means comething different and the serial comma makes the meaning clearer dpending on which is meant.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Edward M. Grant View Post
* - I'm trying to imagine what Finnegan's Wake would look like if the publisher had forced Joyce to have it copy edited.
It would have looked like a readable book.
rhadin is offline   Reply With Quote