If You Don’t Know What Professional Means…

Look it up!

If you are a writer putting a book out there, or an editor offering editing services to writers, then you are purporting to be a professional. I say ‘purporting’, because that’s the expectation, but not always the reality.

If you are putting yourself out there as a professional, then you should be holding yourself to a professional standard. There are some obvious issues that always get bandied around in these discussions, including:

• Having a book cover that doesn’t look like it fell off the back of a truck;
• Ensuring the book has been edited to within an inch of its life;
• Making sure the book has been thoroughly proofread;
• Ensuring the book is properly formatted, particularly ebooks, where all sorts of formatting pitfalls await; and
• Having a professional website (for writers and editors).

There are, however, two issues that are less discussed:

• The way you comport yourself – this means behaving with a certain level of dignity in the public sphere. It doesn’t mean you can’t disagree with someone, but for god’s sake, don’t get into flame wars with trolls; and
• Conflicts of interest.

Public Behaviour

This means don’t engage with someone regarding a review they wrote of your book, or a book that you edited. Don’t attack them. Don’t mass your fans to attack them. Don’t call them a troll. And if any of this happens completely independently of you, demand that your fans stop. If it’s your editor who attacks a reviewer, then rein them in!

Part of being professional means that you accept that the work you wrote, or edited, is out there in the public eye. You can’t stop people reviewing it. You can’t stop people giving it bad reviews. Just accept them with good grace, learn from any valid criticism that may be contained therein, and move on. Your book should have been through so many beta readers, editors and proofreaders that your skin should be thicker than dragonhide. If it hasn’t, then there’s every chance you deserved those bad reviews. 

There may be rare occasions where it is appropriate to address someone’s concern but do it in private, and with due courtesy and grace. Never engage in a shit-throwing contest in a public forum.

Conflicts of Interest

What are they, and what should you do about them?

A conflict of interest is where you have some personal stake that influences your judgement or assessment of something in a way that is contrary to the making of a proper assessment or judgement.  In the writing arena, this usually relates to reviews. If you write a review, and something influences the way you review that book other than the actual merits of the book, then you probably have a conflict. 

 Some conflicts should be avoided all together, and others need to be managed. 

Here are some examples of conflicts of interest:

• Writing a review on a book you were paid to edit – because you’ve been paid, you are predisposed to give it a good review. Impartiality is difficult (or impossible). I would suggest that you never do this;
• Writing a review for money – even if you aren’t guaranteeing a particular outcome (which is just dishonest, misleading, and potentially fraudulent) again the fact of payment may influence you to write a more favourable review than you would have if you weren’t paid. This one can usually be managed by disclosing the payment (prominently) so then the reader can assess the review in light of knowing that a payment has been made. Legally speaking, this practice may not be allowed at all in some jurisdictions. If you are posting the review on a site other than your own, you should check the allowable practices;
• Review for review arrangements – as bad or worse than being paid for a review. Writers have been known to hold reviews hostage until they get a good review for their own book, and even honest writers may be motivated to write a good review for someone else to avoid receiving an undeserved bad review of their own book. Should be handled with care;
• Sponsored blog posts – if someone pays you to write a blog, you may be inclined to say nice things about them just because they are paying you. Like a paid review, the fact of payment should be disclosed. Check any applicable legal requirements in your jurisdiction;
• Reviewing the book of a friend or family member – you are unlikely to be completely honest for fear of hurting the writer’s feelings;

You might look at these and think there’s not necessarily a conflict. For example, an editor might be capable of being honest about a book they edited. This is true, but:

• Even if the editor can be honest, there is still a perception of a conflict. A perceived conflict is just as bad as an actual conflict – remember, perception is reality.
• An editor might not give a 5 star review, but they might give 3 stars, instead of the 2 they really think it deserves, because they don’t want to upset their client, or because they hope to get repeat business from that client.

If you aspire to be a professional, then you have to think about conflicts. 

What sorts of unprofessional behaviour have you seen from writers? Can you think of more examples of conflicts?

Editing Software: Pros and Cons

As those of you who read this blog are well aware, I am an avid proponent of writers using editors. Real editors, flesh and blood people, with qualifications and experience in the publishing industry, who can review and edit your work with a human touch and exercise discretion in the way they apply the writing ‘rules’, such as they are, to your work. Editing software is not a replacement for a human editor. 

But that is not to say it doesn’t have its uses, as long as it is used appropriately.

I recently subscribed to the AutoCrit editing wizard, so I’ve had reason to become acquainted with the advantages of the software, and the places where it falls down – and it’s the places where it falls down that mean you still need an editor afterwards. I regard this software as a tool for use during my last set of revisions before the WIP goes to my editor. 

So what is the software good for? I recently did a workshop on the editing process which suggested using extensive checklists for each aspect of the editing process e.g, setting, characterisation, sentence structure, word use etc. I find this a cumbersome process. I can’t possibly remember to look for everything in one checklist on one pass through my manuscript, never mind everything on all the checklists. If I make one pass for each item, I’d be re-reading my 100,000 word WIP forever. 

This approach may be feasible when reviewing a ten page legal document for compliance with a dozen requirements. I don’t find it helpful for editing a 100,000 word fiction novel for dozens of requirements, many of which likely occur on nearly every page. 

I don't know about 5 minutes... it's a bit time-consuming!

Even when I do focus on one requirement, such as overuse of words like was, were, there, is, that etc., I miss some. I know I miss some. I know because I find some of them, but not all, on my next pass, and I sit there wondering how I missed them. 

So the CritMe software is helpful in finding some of (but not all) of these issues. It can’t find characterisation problems, plot holes, or setting problems, but it does:

• Generate a list of overused and redundant words, like was, were, it, there, that, hear, heard, knew, know etc. and give you an indication of how many of each should be removed;
• Identify use of clichés – and boy was I surprised to realise how many there were;
• Identify sentence length to help you find where you’ve fallen into a rhythm that might hypnotise your reader to sleep;
• Identify repetitious use of pronouns to start sentences so you can mix up your sentence openings;
• Find repeated phrases – this is useful since most authors have a favourite phrase they knowingly repeat, and this can help you find them, even if the instances of repetition are quite far apart;
• Find instances of repeated words close together – I was surprised to see I’d repeated the same word in sentences or paragraphs and not noticed;
• Identify sentences starting with conjunctions or ‘ing’ words;
• Identify overuse of adverbs.

This helps me to fix some of those problems before it goes to the editor. It won’t fix all of these kinds of problems, and there are other problems it won’t help with at all, but it’s a useful tool when I’m trying to weed out these issues.  

However, there are some drawbacks to the software:

• It can’t distinguish between dialogue and narration, so it will identify words as overused or inappropriate, when they may be completely natural and fine in a dialogue context;
• It generates a pacing report, but doesn’t explain, only marks the paragraphs it considers has a problem. I have no idea what to do with this information (such as it is) as I can’t identify the specific issue. This one I’ll leave to my editor;
• It doesn’t distinguish between unintentional repetition and deliberate repetition to create more impact;
• It doesn’t suggest alternatives, where an editor often will;
• It applies rules rigidly, and can’t assess the actual impact on a human reader – only the likely impact based on its rules, which isn’t always accurate.

So while I would recommend this kind of software as a tool to help you in your final revisions, to help you weed out some of these problems, I would strongly urge you not to consider this a replacement for your editor. It’s not. It can’t exercise the discretion and judgement of your editor, and it can’t offer the advice of your editor. It’s a tool only; a kind of complicated checklist to help your limited human eye spot patterns and problems you might otherwise not discern in your own work. 

By all means, make good use of editing software; but make sure it’s good use, and use with caution. 

If you enjoyed this post, please feel free to check out my previous posts if you haven't already. If you're finding yourself here often, you might as well join as a member, sign up to the blog through RSS or email, or sign up for the newsletter.

Don't forget to share the love and spread the word on Twitter, Facebook or StumbleUpon (or other social networking site of your choice) if you know other people who might also enjoy this.

Thanks for stopping by and visiting with us.

WANTED: An Editor Who Wants Me - Guest Post by Kelly Stone Gamble

Today I am hosting the fantastic Kelly Stone Gamble, bringing us an excellent rant on editors. Let's not get started on the debate about whether writers need an editor. For the sake of argument, let us assume they do. But I've met my share of people who don't like editors or, even, *gasp* think they are the spawn of evil, and Kelly may have hit on a few points which led to the scarring of said individuals...

~

Every writer needs an editor. No matter how good you think your work is, how engaging your neighbor found the plot or how interesting and complex your mother finds the protagonist, a second (or third, or fourth) set of eyes to go over it is necessary.  I get it. I agree with it. As a person who spends a lot of time editing for others, I would never claim that I don't need one myself; and I've been looking.  

In my quest to find that perfect freelancer who is going to 'take my work to the next level', I've discovered something very important.  Yes, writers need editors.  But, guess what? Editors need writers, too.  And because you need me (that is ME-as in Self Appointed Representative of Writers Seeking Editors), I am going to tell you a few things that you have to do to gain my business.  Oh, yes, freelance editing is a business, and I, SARWSE, am a customer.  

1. Have a website. I know, it requires that you actually spend a few hours to get it going, but, look at it this way.  Amazon has a website. Billy Bob's Discount Books does not.  I do not shop at Billy Bob's.  I know nothing about him.  I'm not really sure he isn't some guy in Arkansas selling me books from the local library.  I'm going to trust you with my baby, one that took me years to produce.  The least you can do is have a storefront for me to look at.  If you don't have a website, go no further in this reading, because trust me, I have gone no further in considering forking over my money and my manuscript. 

2. Make your prices public.  I realize that until you actually see someone's work, you have no idea the amount of time it will take to make it sing.  However, we, as shoppers, need to know what we 'may' be looking at.  "Send me a few page and then we'll discuss the price" doesn't work for me.  That is the equivalent of going into a store and trying on that perfect dress without knowing what you are going to pay for it until you check out.  I look at the price before I even try it on.  That's just me. Here's a suggestion: three (or four) tiered pricing.  If I decide to send it to you for a critique only at price A, feel free to tell me that you 'highly suggest' I let you line edit the entire manuscript at price C.  I can live with that.

3. Prices - Part Two.  Hourly rate versus price per page or word.  Think about this for a minute. I know how many pages and how many words are in my manuscript. I do not know how slow or how fast you are at doing your work.  

4. Give me a timeframe. I visited a website today that said: It will take at least six weeks to edit your manuscript, longer depending on the length, starting on the date that your work comes up in our queue. We cannot estimate when that will be. Okay. So I send you my money, and whenever my turn comes up, you will let me know, and then at a minimum, six more weeks.  Can I count on seeing it, let's say, by the year 2016?  You've got to do a little better than that.  Here's an idea.  On the website (smiley face) put a statement like this: Due to the high demand of our services, we are currently running at an eight to ten week turnaround time.  Oh, I like that. You are in high demand and I have another book to write, so go ahead, put me in the queue. 

5. Back to the website. If you have several spelling and/or grammar errors on your website, chances are, you aren't going to make my list of people to trust my work to.  I can make those errors all by myself, I need someone who will find them, not make them.  Professional presentation, remember, this is a business. 

6. Be yourself.  I have to say, I saw a freelance editor's blog the other day that made me laugh, in a good way.  She made some snarky remark about cats, and I thought, "this is someone I could talk to."  

7. Be honest about your interests.  If you don't like historical fiction or erotica or dragons or zombies, that is fine, and it doesn't necessarily mean you will get scratched from the list.  Maybe I am convinced that my Victorian era, sex-starved, zombie dragon is so awesome that I can win you over.  "I will edit anything" is fine, but I would like to know what makes you tick.  We are, however, going to be entering into a relationship.  Sometimes opposites attract. Who knows. 

8. Tell me about your work. Preferably let your clients tell me.  I called Billy Bob's the other day, and his mother told me that he's sold a truckload of books to people as far north as Sioux City, Iowa.  She didn't know how many actual books he has sold, how long it took him to deliver those books and had no contact information for any of his customers. You may have over a thousand clients, but how many were manuscripts? Blog posts? Journal articles?  Can you get some references or blurbs from some of those customers? Are they willing to let me contact them?  A great place for me to see these is, of course, your website. (Insert happy face)

Okay, I know, this is a lot to ask.  Or is it?  I want an editor that I can form a relationship with because I don't want to have to go looking again.  You, I would assume, would love to have clients that return to you time after time.  

But, in the end, it is your business, and you are free to run it any way you see fit.  

However, I am the one with the check in my hand. 

~

Was that free to run it, or ruin it, any way you see fit? Thanks, Kelly, for your insights and saying the things that somebody has to say - but all too often, nobody will! I've heard some real horror stories about editors, and if those editors had just followed Kelly's advice, the experience wouldn't have turned out so bad for either party. 

Writers are forever being told writing is a business, but hey, guess what? So is editing. Remember, for every customer who is complaining to your face, nine are bitching behind your back! Word of mouth is a powerful thing. 

 

Kelly Stone Gamble is a freelance writer and author of the historical novel Ragtown.  

You can find Kelly here:

www.kellystonegamble.blogspot.com

@KellySGamble

Now I know this is not Flight of the Dragon, where I post a picture of a dragon on every entry, but since Kelly mentioned zombie dragons...

If you enjoyed this post, please feel free to check out my previous posts if you haven't already. If you're finding yourself here often, you might like to join as a member, sign up to the blog through RSS or email, or subscribe to my newsletter.

Don't forget to share the love and spread the word on Twitter, Facebook or StumbleUpon (or other social networking site of your choice) if you know other people who might also enjoy this.

Thanks for stopping by and visiting with us!

The Writer's Long Road

I made a comment this week that newbie writers are not ready to publish.

So we’re clear, when I said ‘newbie’, I meant they have literally just picked up a pen for the first time to write a novel. This may not have been clear on Twitter, where 140 characters doesn’t allow room for such caveats and disclaimers, but I was surprised when someone tweeted me about the comment.

This person found my statement so disheartening they felt they should stop writing altogether. I must confess, I was taken aback by this sweeping statement. Why should someone be disheartened by such a comment? Don’t people already know this?

Apparently, people don’t know this. Which is perhaps a reason for me to say it more often.

But we should know it. We none of us expect to ride a bicycle perfectly the first time – that’s why we have training wheels. My first day at law school, I was not ready to be a lawyer. Hell, my first day in my current job, I was not ready to be a lawyer, and yet, eight years later, I am a senior lawyer. These things take time. Is there anything that anyone can expect to do well the very first time they do it?

If a writer expects to succeed immediately, I would suggest they need to think again. The very act of writing is a lengthy process, even if you can devote your full attention to it, and most of us need to have day jobs as well. I have been working on my current WIP since January 2008. Granted, there was a long time in there when I did nothing, but if we break it down into actual active time it looks something like this:

• Four months to write a first draft and revise;

• Three to six months receiving feedback from critique group;

• Six months revising and editing (three times).

Now that’s very nearly eighteen months, and I haven’t even finished the last set of revisions, nevermind written a synopsis or query letter. Even if I was to land an agent, it would take time to find a publisher, and then it’s something like two years for the book to land on the shelf. We’re talking four years minimum from go to whoa. It can easily be more.

Granted, it’s much quicker if you self-publish. But just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should. But you can see my earlier post on indie publishing for that particular rant.

The reality is a writer’s first ever manuscript is unlikely to be publishable without significant revisions. I won’t even try to rewrite my first manuscript. Or my second. Maybe – maybe – my third. The fourth I will.

Even well-known and best-selling authors were rejected multiple times before being published. Here are a few of the ones I know:

• John Grisham’s ‘A Time To Kill’ - rejected 45 times;
• Dr. Seuss - rejected 46 times;
• Tom Clancy’s ‘The Hunt For Red October’ - rejected 12 times;
• Patricia Cornwell’s ‘Postmortem’ - rejected 7 times;
• Mary Higgins Clark’s ‘First Story’ - rejected 40 times;
• William Stevenson’s 80’s bestselling thriller, ‘A Man Called Intrepid’ - rejected 109 times; and
• James Lee Burke’s ‘The Lost Get-Back Bookie’ - rejected 111 times over a period of nine years, and upon publication was nominated for a Pulitzer Prize and won the Edgar.

If it took these authors this long and this many rejections to be published, then why should anyone expect to pick up a pen and immediately be worthy?

  

I’m not trying to be pessimistic. I suggest writers be positive, which I distinguish from optimistic. Optimism is believing the best will always happen. I’m sorry, it won’t. Being positive is believing you can make the best happen, with hard work if necessary. Optimism allows no room for realism, being positive does.

Realism is important, because if you aren’t realistic, you will only be disappointed when the things you expect don’t happen.

Writers, the hard, real facts are, if you want to be a writer, you must be in it for the long haul.

Go Back To My Site