Where did we get, and why do we perpetuate, this idea that writers are incapable of creating coherent, well-written, clean work without the help of editors to tell us what’s wrong with what we’ve produced?
 |
Abby: writer, director, star…
Photo by Alan Turkus |
I just left that question in a comment on yet another blog about how to write a book. It was rhetorical, of course, because I know where we got the idea and why we all keep it up. But it’s bogus and we really need to stop spreading this dung around.
In your quest to learn the ropes of writing and publishing, you will, inevitably, be told, over and over and over and over again, that you must, M-U-S-T, have an editor. And not just a copy editor to hunt down typos, spelling errors, and grammatical horrors. No, you must also have a content editor to tell you where your story lags, what went wrong with your arc, why you should merge or eliminate this or that character etc. etc. and on and on.
But that’s not all. Your book must go through a lengthy process before it’s good enough for the world. In fact, you can’t write it yourself. It takes a village to produce a book.
The author isn’t the master of his work. The author merely comes up with the idea, sometimes helped a bit by his critique group, agent, or editor. Then he writes the bare bones, squalid piffle until he thinks it shines. Next step is the critique group who parse the manuscript line by line, chapter by chapter telling the “author” exactly what’s wrong, what isn’t working, and what must be changed.
Sure, there’s always that caveat crap about only making changes with which you agree. But don’t make a change or two and see how that goes over.
Once the critique group has had its say, off the book goes to “beta” readers. These are your trusted friends who will tell you what else is wrong with the book. The color of your main character’s eyes changes in chapter twelve. The story got bogged down in description in chapter sixteen. They were bored as all get-out in chapter twenty-four. And get rid of that boy, Ralph. You don’t need him. He serves no purpose.
Once you’ve given the betas their due, it’s off to an agent who tells you that your chapters are in the wrong order and you must start the book with chapter three and nix chapter two completely. The ending is all wrong and you need two more sex scenes. The agent knows what sells and to whom, and you work for her, after all, so you do as she says.
If you’re lucky enough to sell your book to a traditional publisher, the editor there will get hold of it and tell you what is wrong with it. You should start the book with chapter two and add a chapter after it. You have too many sex scenes and you need a pivotal character to intervene between your main character and her family. You need more action and you’ve got typos all over the place. They help you fix it all, sometimes creating more errors than you started with.
In the end, what have you got?
I’ll tell you what you’ve got. You’ve got a collaborative work of fiction. Even if you’ve published independently and skipped the agent and the publishing house editor, you’ve no doubt sat in critique groups feverishly fixing your book, listened to your beta readers and anxiously axed chapters, and paid a fortune for editors to tell you how to make your book right instead of the wrong, albeit promising, pile of trash that it is.
You are not the author of your work.
And let me tell you, I never thought I’d see the day that someone would agree with me. But last week I came across the Alliance of Independent Authors. Within the “Alliance” the term “independent” doesn’t mean independent. No, not at all. I’ll let them explain it to you in their FAQ:
The Alliance allows that you are an independent author if you recognise that ‘indie’ does not necessarily mean ‘self-publishing only’ and acknowledge that even the most indie-spirited self-publisher works in collaboration with other publishing professionals (editors, designers, distributors) to produce a good book and reach readers. But you are open to mutual beneficial partnerships, including trade publishing deals where appropriate for you, so long as the author’s status as creative director of the book is acknowledged. [Emphasis theirs.]
That’s right. You are the “creative director” of the work.
Here it is elaborated on in their Code of Standards:
Collaboration: I recognized that “self” publishing and “independent” authorship are relative terms and that nobody who publishes a good book works alone. I partner with other writers, editors, designers, publiscists, distributors, booksellers, and of course, readers, with courtesy in a collaborative manner.
In other words, people who write books are not capable of doing it by themselves. They require help. Partners. There are no authors, there are only creative directors.
I won’t be joining the Alliance of [Pseudo] Independent Authors. Obviously.
Look, here’s the deal. It’s your job as an author to learn the skills necessary to write a book. The art, the passion, those things are within you. But the tools might need some work. So, you learn the rules of grammar, you learn what makes a great story, you learn about story arcs and the hero’s journey. Sure, you utilize critique groups, beta readers, and editors to help you learn these skills.
But you don’t continue in the role of student forever. At some point you have to spread your wings and be a man. [Mixed metaphor! See, I know what I’m doing.]
It’s your job, as an author, to author the book. All of it. From story to copy editing. Your job. Your story. Your book.
Do you hire a graphic artist for the cover? Why not? You’re a writer, not an artist.
But do you hire an editor to help you write your book?
If you are still learning, then sure, if you feel the need. But stop telling the rest of us that we are still children, incapable of producing a story without the village. And stop telling those of us who choose to learn through the actual act of writing and producing on our own that we’re doing it wrong and MUST hire professionals.
We ARE the professionals.
Or we certainly should be.