Sue Grafton: "The universe will come to your aid."

[Fbone]

Isn't the US the only country that removes the "u" from certain words?

UK, Ireland, South Africa keeps them. Canada, Australia, New Zealand, India?

The Philippines? I don't know

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

For what it's worth, whenever I see a comment that so irritates me that I *have* to reply I take care to counter it in general terms without quoting or addressing the poster.

Oh, I type up a response and hold nothing back, I let all the pent-up, personal invective fly, I even read it out loud in my very expressive angry-voice a few times. And then I delete it all ... because I'm usually over the urge to post it by that point.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Oh, I type up a response and hold nothing back, I let all the pent-up, personal invective fly, I even read it out loud in my very expressive angry-voice a few times. And then I delete it all ... because I'm usually over the urge to post it by that point.

That works, too.

[LuvReadin]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Explains a lot, doesn't it? Their ever-increasing interest in money; squeezing authors for it, raising prices, conspiring to limit competition. Bad-mouthing small and independent publishers. And of course, seeking to marginalize self-publishers.

And the existence of those high-end authors Katie Price and Snooki.

[LuvReadin]

Originally Posted by Catlady

Do you have any basis for your statement that "publishers are becoming increasingly reluctant to pay for copyeditors"?

Yes, I do. I've been in the publishing industry for over 20 years, and I'm a member of several trade groups and forums. Over the past few years, I've seen increasing (admittedly mainly anecdotal) evidence that work for these people has become more difficult to come by. Many of the big publishers' websites now carry details of editing services, and the publishers actively encourage the authors to do this. Annoyingly, most of these are large companies, and mainly overseas; the publishers seem very reluctant to even put up links to organisations such as the Society for Editors and Proofreaders, which would benefit individual freelances and smaller companies based in the UK.

Originally Posted by Catlady

There's copyediting, and there's proofreading. Proofreading has become somewhat iffy. Plus there may well be greater time constraints for copyeditors, and a lot of subpar copyeditors.

Quite right, and for a while, copy-editing (or what some publishers tried to call 'onscreen proofreading' so they could pay it at a lower rate) seemed to be considered enough - of late, even that isn't being done. And yes, I agree with you about both the time and the quality.

Originally Posted by Catlady

But my objection was mostly to the notion that copyediting and proofreading are done or not done based on the author's star power or lack thereof.

I do think there is an element of that - an author who brings in more money will have more clout. Of course, they have to be aware of the importance of copyediting/proofreading first in order to know that they want it!

Originally Posted by BearMountainBooks

I know of one author who was told it would not be done (either the proofreading or the copyediting). This was five years ago and she had to hire her own. She had a small publisher, not one of the big 6. I know of two authors who were with the big 6 who were told the book would go straight to copyediting and get no other editing steps due to time constraints (I believe the books were read by said editors and deemed good enough.) One of those authors had it happen within the last 2 years and the other was probably 7 years ago. I was at a conference when one author giving a talk (he was with the big six) said that after his original editor left, his book received no editing at any level. He got galley proofs and had only that chance to make his own final changes. No copyediting, not proofing, etc.
That is commonly known in the industry as "orphaning."

Sounds familiar! Although as the later post points out, orphaning often refers to the 'editor', which is more likely to be the commissioning or possibly developmental editor than the copyeditor.

Originally Posted by BearMountainBooks

Also beware of what is expected at the different levels of editing. Some copyeditors do not consider things such as "eye color went from blue to green" to be part of copyediting. Yet some proofreaders consider typos and grammar part of the job. There are very loose standards in the definitions. This is true in the entire industry these days and never more true than when hiring a contractor. If you're ever looking to hire a contractor be very careful to get an exact description and examples of what types of things the person will be looking for.

Excellent advice for any writer. It's worth looking at the trade organisations in your country as well; for instance, the SfEP in the UK has definitions of copyediiting and proofreading, so it does make people a bit more aware of what should be covered.

[LuvReadin]

Originally Posted by Fbone

Isn't the US the only country that removes the "u" from certain words?

UK, Ireland, South Africa keeps them. Canada, Australia, New Zealand, India?

The Philippines? I don't know

It's more a division into two (main) types of English rather than by country. In general, the UK and its former colonies use UK English, whereas countries that are geographically closer to the US will use US English. However, there are individual differences in spelling and grammar between countries. Language is also in a constant state of flux - for instance, some of the Caribbean islands are staying steadfastly with UK English, whereas some others seem to be moving towards US English.

US spelling is generally somewhat easier than UK English - this was one of the main reasons that Noah Webster decided to make wholesale spelling changes when he wrote his dictionary (well, that and the whole not liking the British very much thing). Unfortunately, few of these changes seemed to be particularly logical, and they tend to obscure the etymology of words and the relationship between them. This is particularly true in science and medicine; many of the approved drug names are now the US version, which generally don't reflect the true meaning of the name. So for instance, the change from 'cyclosporin' to 'ciclosporin' removes the very useful indication of the original name that there is a ring group in the chemical makeup of this drug.

There also seems to be an increasing tendency in US English to remove the difference between tenses. The verb 'to fit' is probably the most glaring example - US English generally seems to use 'fit' for both present and past tense now, whereas UK English still maintains the difference between 'fit' and 'fitted'. Again, this seems to be more likely to obscure than to clarify. The first rung on the ladder to Newspeak, perhaps?

[david_e]

Originally Posted by LuvReadin

I do think there is an element of that - an author who brings in more money will have more clout. Of course, they have to be aware of the importance of copyediting/proofreading first in order to know that they want it!

I believe someone mentioned earlier that they were familiar with writers who lost these services when their editor changed. Wouldn't this be something that was stipulated in their contract with the publisher?

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by david_e

I believe someone mentioned earlier that they were familiar with writers who lost these services when their editor changed. Wouldn't this be something that was stipulated in their contract with the publisher?

Contracts don't spell out what the publishers will do on an editing level. They do talk about their distribution rights, country rights, and format rights. There's pages of payment schedules, and manuscript delivery schedules. The rights can revert back to the author if the publisher hasn't "published' by a certain date after the author reaches her obligations.

I have an entire book on industry contracts and editing is not even mentioned other than a publishing company can drop an author if agreement cannot be reached on editing changes (that the publishing company wants to implement as it is rarely the author demanding changes in copy.) It's usually stated as something like "receiving a manuscript that is acceptable" which the publisher can interpret many ways, but protects them from the author suddenly turning in garble-gook. Unfortunately it can also leave an author high and dry if the publisher wants to drop the author. They can terminate the contract with very little reason given after holding up a manuscript for ages.

There are very few protections for the writer as far as quality. The writer has no say in the cover or the quality of it and the same goes for editing. Those things are not mentioned in the contract, nor is most marketing. Editors/publishers are notorious for making marketing promises--and sometimes a good agent can even get certain ones spelled out in the contract. However, there's little an author can do if the publishing company doesn't live up to those marketing promises (and they often do not unless the book is outperforming.) I know authors who have been told they would be given book tours--but it was all verbal and doesn't necessarily come to pass. Publicists that work for publishers handle many, many writers all at once. You are lucky to get bookmarks and your proper number of author copies. You can also request that the publicist send review copies to any contacts you have. Most of them are happy to help, but yes, some of these requests fall through the cracks.

Best selling authors have more muscle to get some of these things into a written contract. They can push for more money upfront, they can push for larger percentages of the royalties. But the average writer gets a standard contract with a few things that an agent may have fought for--and it's take it or leave it.

There's a lot of reasons authors who have already been published have put out self-published works.

Now all that said there are always good people, good editors and whatnot to work with. There are always those going above and beyond and some authors know when they have it good. But as in any industry things vary greatly and it is only experience that teaches you how the wheel turns on the car and whether you're the bug or the windshield.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by david_e

Wouldn't this be something that was stipulated in their contract with the publisher?

Contracts are subject to interpretation and the publishers have hordes of lawyers on retainer just to find loopholes that let them interpret things *their* way. Fighting costs time and money. Unless the scam is of Harlequin grade, most folks just grin and near it.

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Contracts are subject to interpretation and the publishers have hordes of lawyers on retainer just to find loopholes that let them interpret things *their* way. Fighting costs time and money. Unless the scam is of Harlequin grade, most folks just grin and near it.

Plus it should be remembered that *most* authors (whether trying to self-publish or trad publish) do not believe they need editing, especially at first. Once accepted by a publisher, it's even easier to assume it's all golden. Imagine our surprise when we get that first set of "suggestions." And that's if we're lucky enough to have an editor who cares enough to make them.

*That is not to say that the editor is always right, but a good one can do a lot to take a diamond and uncover that gleam.

[david_e]

.....

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by david_e

Just read this... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/willia...m_hp_ref=books

By William Petrocelli, attourney and, ahem, bookseller...

I see that publishers are heroic and noble and rescue kittens from trees regularly.
(No specifics, though--just take him at his word.)

[kennyc]

I want Universal Aid.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

By William Petrocelli, attourney and, ahem, bookseller...

I see that publishers are heroic and noble and rescue kittens from trees regularly.
(No specifics, though--just take him at his word.)

Well, it IS a blog.

[Barcey]

Originally Posted by david_e

Just read this... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/willia...m_hp_ref=books

The book stores and BPH aren't obsolete but they are facing declining market share and they're going to continue to be challenged to demonstrate value for $.

Authors aren't unique, they're small business people that are hoping to create a market, grow their brand and become a large business. They have to follow industry best practices to create a quality product and they need to effectively market it. They need financial backing to perform all this. If they have the skills, resources and drive to do all this themselves they can. If others provide valuable more cost effective services they can use them. If they want to do nothing but write they can but that plan doesn't make many successful small businesses and there will be vultures happy to collect the majority of the profits.