Session Start: Sun Mar 05 11:55:10 2000
<Bonnee> Okay, this first part isn't written down, so bear with me while I type. I
want to expand on a discussion Jeff and I were having last week. Mostly, don't be
intimidated by what you're about to do. JL posted the first chapter of a book (with
outlines for two more books) in a file for everyone to read. This is the first assignment.
To read that and we're going to comment on it. Think of yourself as a reader first. This
is an editor's primary job, regardless of what you think. Our job is to find those
manuscripts that everyone else wants to read only after we find that book we can't put
down does all the rest come into play. So, I would imagine that if you want to write or
edit, you're already a rabid reader...(And I do mean rabid <g>). You already edit
every time you pick up a book. Like it or not, but you do. You have writers you like.
Genres you hate. People whose advice is invaluable and others who you shy away from.
That's all a basic form of editing and it's all based on personal opinion.
Any thoughts so far? No?
<tamarion> I do agree with you. I found one book I could not stand...and critiqued
it without realising that is what I was doing. Felt bad for the author, cause I like most
of her work.
<Bonnee> See? Most people don't realize that they edit as they read, but they really
do.
<patric> Just a "what if" thought.
<Bonnee> And don't feel bad. Every writer is entitled to an "off" book
<g>. Yup, go ahead Patric.
<patric> Assuming an editor is working with a particular genre, what if you like it,
but it holds no "meat" for you?
<Bonnee> That happens in the business. Alot of editors start out with genres they
don't really care for hoping to someday be able to work in a genre they do like. Stinks,
but it's true. OTOH, those kind of editors don't usually last long with a genre they can't
really get into.
<tamarion> How can a person be fair in judgement if they don't like the genre?
<patric> Would you be biased then? Exactly Tam.
<Bonnee> Both questions get the same answer. It's almost impossible to take the
"personal" out of the equation.
<tamarion> That would make it harder for writers then to get published... explains a
lot.
<GregA> I think reading as an 'editor' is very different from reading as a 'reader'?
Can they be one and the same?
<Bonnee> If you love the genre, it's easy. If you don't like the genre, then you
have to base decisions on more of a cerebral knowledge of what works than any personal
feel for what you're reading. Yes, You can be an editor and reader at the same time.
Separating the two is what makes a professional. That's where market knowledge comes in.
You have to know what sells and what the boundaries are and when to push them and when
they've been pushed too far. It's all pretty basic and what makes editing a
"job", but it can be done.
It just takes a lot of research into the genre you'll be working with. And whether the
person involved is willing to make that kind of investment.
Okay, so where do you begin? You begin with reading, obviously. You've got to begin with
the whole picture. Not just the individual pieces. An editor begins by simply sitting down
and reading. It's not until s/he's into the book that s/he starts asking the questions
that need to be asked. The writer's initial job is to catch my attention and not let go.
(Easier said than done). That's why so many contests are designed around the "winning
beginnings" or the start of a novel. If you can't hold my attention to get me to page
two, you'll never catch me still reading at page 20. So, basically, you begin as a reader.
Know your genre, know how it's designed and then it's simply daring the writer to give you
the opportunity to put the book down.
Does that make sense?
<JL> yes!
<Bonnee> Are there any questions to this point?
<tamarion> What if you have a great beginning, but then about the 10th page you get
bogged down? That is where I am...trying to make it interesting in transition.
<JL> Ah, but this is a course in editing, not writing. We address that "what
should the writer do to make it interesting" in other courses.
<tamarion> To journey from place they are now...mundane things like packing for trip
seem blah. Oh sorry.
<Bonnee> Okay, if you're having trouble making a transition, maybe you should dump
the details.
<JL> That's a TRANSITION and INFORMATION FEED problem.
<GregA> Reading the first page is like stepping into a house...you feel warmth...or
coldness...rich...poor...but you feel something..and hopefully it is comfort..and you read
on or stop?
<Bonnee> To be honest, if a writer suddenly stalls, that's an indication to me that
they haven't thought out the direction.
<JL> Yes, Bonnee exactly! You slide the details -- move them back into the body of
the story.
<Bonnee> As long as the writer continues to hold my attention, I'll keep reading.
It's that simple (and yet complex <g>).
<tamarion> So, as editor, you catch them with first few pages, keep it moving.
<Bonnee> Yes, Tamarion.
<tamarion> An editor reads on to see what happens, checking it as they read.
<Bonnee> Keep my attention, don't give me a reason to put the book down, and I'll
continue reading.
<tamarion> Sounds hard. :) to read, enjoy and judge
<Bonnee> Yes, exactly. Okay, let's see if I can pull out my notes (and make this
work <g>). These are a few examples of questions I start asking if I've gotten to
the end of the first chapter, and these are also questions you should be asking yourself
when you read the assignment!
Character: Do the characters jump off the page and say, "howdy"? Are they people
you want to know and do you, as a reader, care about them? What makes them unique from
every other blonde-haired, blue-eyed heroine you've ever read? What makes them tick? What
do they want and how to they plan to achieve that goal?
I'll be honest with everyone here. I love character-driven stories. The character is the
be-all and end-all for me. If I don't care about them as beings, then I don't care what
happens in the story. People drive the action. The action comes back to haunt sometimes,
but it's ultimately the people who made it happen in the first place, so a book has got to
begin with the characters.
Does anyone have any questions about character?
Okay, let me move onto Plotting. That should be your next set of questions. Plotting: Do
you get to the end of the story and wonder what happened to XX? Are there holes? Is the
information given to the reader when the reader needs it or is it dumped by the author
when the author wants to reveal it? Is each step carefully planned? Are there too many
subplots (confusion) or not enough (stagnant)? Is every loose end tied up? And, yes, these
questions should also be asked as you're reading each chapter. (What I haven't got typed
out yet. <g>) When you reach the end of a chapter, do you feel like something has
occurred? Or has it simply covered the ground you've already learned? Is the main
character moving forward or are they stagnant? IOW, are we getting somewhere. And believe
me, this can be disconcerting. I once had a submission that it took me 10 chapters to
realize that I was having a grand ole time, but the character hadn't changed in the least.
IOW, there was no PLOT.
Any questions on the concept of plotting?
<patric> I take it then that you will know ahead of time if the book is intended to
have a sequel?
<Ann> How tight are you looking for the plot...same chapter resolution, by the end,
mirror of intro?
<Bonnee> Ann first - no, you don't have to resolve each chapter. That would be a
bunch of sequels strung together. But you should have movement. The character set himself
a goal at the beginning of the book. Is he at least making strides to accomplish that
goal? Is he getting anywhere?
Does that makes sense?
<Ann> Yes, very much so, thank you.
<Bonnee> Patric, yes. I usually know beforehand if a book is going to have a sequel.
<patric> Ok. So then you would expect the plot to not necessarily be resolved at the
end? Or rather, not completely resolved, since each book should be relatively complete in
itself, yes?
<Bonnee> It depends. Series tend to be structured differently than stand-alone
books.
<patric> Gotcha.
<Bonnee> Series have a bigger picture. The character has an individual goal, but in
a series, there's a bigger goal than just one character can accomplish. That doesn't need
resolution, but OTOH, you still need a sense of movement.
<Ann> How tight do you want the resolutions...can some be implied or must they all
be stated point blank?
<Bonnee> That the story you just read is part of the resolution and they're moving
toward that goal. If the problem is on the page, the resolution must also be on the page.
To resolve an issue that's important to be part of the plot only cheats the reader if it
happens "off stage". I mean, you dragged the reader through all the trials and
tribulations. Why would you want to cheat him out of the final scene? Make sense?
<tamarion> Yes...kinda. Like love scenes where folks are left hanging and cheated at
resolution of them.
<Ann> Some...I think...but in some stories there are a lot of things only implied,
costuming and so forth, should all of those be explained?
<tamarion> If not clear, or skipped over right? When they have been built up to in
the book.
<Bonnee> No, I'm not talking description or setting. I'm talking action points.
Plotting in terms of action.
<Ann> Good, that was what I needed clarification on...thank you.
<Bonnee> If it's important enough to be part of the initial conflict, the resolution
also needs to be on the page. (I will get to setting, though. Bear with me.)
Let's try pacing. Pacing: Does the action continue to build or does it waiver? Does it
stop dead when you reach that horrid "sagging middle syndrome"? Pacing should
vary with some parts speeding along at a good clip while others take more time to realize
fruition, but does it ever halt entirely? Does it ever speed by so fast you need a
scorecard to keep up with the action? Pacing is another important part of plotting. If
you've got a full action/adventure, the last thing you need in the middle of the book is
dinner at Mom's with a long, drawn-out conversation about what they're wearing to a
wedding that won't even take place in the book. (Obviously, I'm not talking about
mysteries where you're never sure where those clues will pop up.)
<tamarion> When a book does that, I won't finish it Bonnee.
<Bonnee> The pacing brought you to a complete standstill. Yup, that's what I'm
talking about. Don't "fill space".
<tamarion> It's like running full tilt and hitting a wall...you ain't gonna get up
again.
<JL> A point from our prior course ESSENCE OF STORY --
PLOT=BECAUSE -- you have an event at the beginning of the story, and everything that
happens afterwards happens BECAUSE that first event/decision/action happened which CAUSED
a REACTION in another character, in unbroken sequence. The BECAUSE-LINE is the plot-line,
and each event on that BECAUSE-LINE changes the SITUATION, and
ACTION=RATE-OF-CHANGE-OF-SITUATION.
<Bonnee> Exactly! Yes. Scene and sequel. Everything happens for a reason. It's the
writer's job to make it all fit together. If it's not fitting and the pacing is uneven,
you've just given me reason to put the book down and do laundry.
Okay...you asked about setting. Setting: Does the setting come alive? Does it become an
actual character and be utilized or could this story take place anywhere and it wouldn't
make a difference? Most writers forget the importance of setting. It should make a
difference where this book takes place. There's a great deal of difference between a
Gothic romance and a SF. World-building is just as important in a western romance as it is
in SF.
<Jean> But also the description of setting should mean something.
<Bonnee> Unfortunately, most writers forget this. Setting should be just as integral
to the plot as the characters are.
<Jean> A smart reader knows something is going to happen fast when the author stops
to describe exactly where everyone and everything is.
<tamarion> Or they sketch the setting too lightly...give readers something to see,
don't leave it all to imagination.
<GregA> Do you see many writers getting bogged down in describing setting...and
taking away from the pacing?
<Jean> If nothing happens after such a setup, the reader is disappointed.
<Bonnee> Yes, Greg, I do. But what happens is not that they're describing what's
important, but that they're describing all the stuff they researched. Now, to explain that
cryptic remark. Setting is important in that this plot should not be able to take place
just anywhere. It happens in this place at this time for a specific reason. That's what
has to be used in creating your setting. Tell me you've set the book in a typical
Midwestern town and I'll have a general idea of what you mean. Your job now is to get
across what makes this small Midwestern town unique. Don't tell me about the neat
rowhouses. Tell me about what makes them different from every other small Midwestern town
I've been through.
<Jean> Study Bobbie Ann Mason for a current writer who knows how to bring West
Kentucky to life.
<Bonnee> That's what makes your story unique and your setting apply to the story.
Like I said under character. It's nice to know your heroine has blonde hair and blue eyes,
but what makes her unique from every other blonde-haired, blude-eyed woman I know? This
builds character. What's unusual about this small town is what will bring it to life for
me.
<tamarion> So you look for hints of her character too...in with physical
description?
<Bonnee> Stephen King is great at building those small towns in Maine. Actions
define character more than description. It's more important that the character helps old
ladies across the street in chapter two than telling me they're kind. The same applies to
setting. Telling me they're conservative Midwestern church-going folk is nice. But show me
how they roll up the sidewalks on a Saturday night at 9PM and I'll get a clearer picture.
(It also sets the stage for the teens to be bored with nothing better to do than bait the
local geek if that's your plot.) This is how you build in setting. Set the stage by what
makes this place unique. What it has that contributes to the plot.
Does that make sense?
<tamarion> Yes, that makes sense...show not tell.
<Bonnee> Okay...next is voice. Voice: Does the author have a distinctive voice
(which will relay distinctive characters to the reader) or could anyone have written this
book? Do you get a sense of the kind of book this is? Is it a western? Is it a SF? Is it
paramilitary in feel? The voice should match the genre and the overall general feeling you
want to evoke in the reader. Does it work? Again, you're looking for that overriding
"tonal" quality to a piece. You'd write a Gothic much different than you would a
modern romance. Does the author utilize voice to set their stage or do they rely on
description to do it for them?
Any questions on voice?
Okay, how about clarity? Clarity: Do you wonder whose story this is? Does it jump from
character to character or is it consistent in whose story is being told? This will tell
you if the writer has a grasp of whose story this is. If they're jumping around with a lot
of characters who each have their own goals to reach, then the result is going to be mass
confusion.
One book should be the story of one person. What they want and how they achieve it.
<JL> If you use two Point-of-view characters, each of them must have a story which
is derived from the same or related THEME.
<Bonnee> Secondary characters matter only if they either want the same goal
(competition) or are in direct conflict to the character who wants to achieve that goal.
<tamarion> Otherwise it won't work and the character should not be in it right?
<Bonnee> Yes! There can only be one story. Yes, Tamarion. You'll only confuse the
reader if you start darting out in tangents. This is the basis for the KISS Rule (Keep It
Simple, Stupid).
<JL> It's theme that holds all these characters and parts together. They all must be
saying the same thing. See my reviews of some of the SF TV shows lately -- they are doing
that trick with theme.
<tamarion> That just answered a question I had about my own book...oh ho.gotta make
my character conflict with the other one.
<Bonnee> One direction and stick to it. Actually, you don't have to have your two
main characters in direct conflict. In a romance, you don't want the hero in instant
conflict with the heroine. He can be in a position to hinder her progress (for his own
reasons) or to help her (if she convinces him it would be in his best interest), but
direct conflict of the hero and heroine can come back to haunt you in romance.
Any questions?
<Ann> You're looking for a dovetailed conflict between the hero and heroine then?
Both towards the same goal, but opposite faces of same problem?
<Silke> Next time you see Xena on TV - analyse what makes the story.
<Bonnee> That can work, Ann. The thing is, for the reader to really get that zinger
satisfaction, the protagonist MUST defeat the antagonist. If we're talking romance and the
hero and heroine are in direct conflict, then one must destroy the goal of the other and
that doesn't bode well for a romantic future. To be honest, I HATE seeing at the end where
one suddenly realizes how important the other person's goal is and decides to simply give
up. That's not satisfaction. I want to see the protagonist face down the antagonist and
romp 'em. Romance novels shouldn't be about compromise and understanding. They should be
about finding a common middle ground... maybe. <g>
<Ann> Yes! I like it when the protags of a romance defeat the 'antag' together, and
is how I structure them.
<tamarion> Usually by female.
<Bonnee> The more important the goal, the more important it is to win! Yup, I agree
with both of you.
Okay, before I forget, I have a few other questions you should be asking yourself. Let me
dump them all here and then ask away.
Are there info dumps?
Do the characters talk with each other or at each other?
Are they really part of the story and creating it as they speak or are they simply
relaying info to the reader on behalf of the author? (Another form of info dump.)
Does the writer employ a good mixture of dialogue, narrative, action and reaction?
Is the writing active or passive? (sentence structure)
Does the writer spend two chapters warming their engines or do they jump right into the
story? (Whenever someone says, "Oh, but the story really gets good around page
100!", I want to reply, "Gee, doesn't that tell you that you should dump pages
1-99?" <g>)
<tamarion> But (asking innocently) isn't that what the girl does when she wins the
guy?
<Bonnee> Tamarion. Romance should never be the goal of a romance novel. That's a
nice boon to get at the end, but a character's intention at the beginning of the book
should NEVER be , "Gee, I want to fall in love." Yech! That's not a plot.
(Though I will say Jennifer Crusie used it beautifully in her book MANHUNTING.)
<tamarion> Seems to be the ribbon running through out the stories though, Bonnee.
<Bonnee> Yes, I agree. But the romance is really a sideplot. A subplot. It's
something the characters find along the way to achieving their goal. If they hadn't begun
that journey, they never would have found love, but love isn't the goal. And that's why
most people who diss romance simply don't get it.
Does that make sense?
<tamarion> Yes...most folks think romances are just about lust and 'love'
<Bonnee> The feeling in a romance should be, "Damn, I haven't got time for this
NOW!" <g>. It happens anyway, but that's not the goal of either character.
There still have to be a plot. Yes, exactly! Trust me, I wasn't looking for love when *I*
found it <g>.
<tamarion> Yes, provides the tension...wondering if they will get together. But also
a 'story' behind it to keep you curious in lives and other things. If it were just romance
that could be accomplished in a short story without the rest in it right?
<Bonnee> Yes, a romance needs a lot more than lust and love or you've got an erotica
<g>.
Okay... questions? Comments? Did I kill you with stuff or are you begging for more?
<Ann> More! I'm really enjoying what you have to say about what you want.
<JL> Does everyone now know how to read the Partial for next week's Assignment?
<tamarion> I am digesting all of this...feeling like it is coming together.
<Bonnee> Thanks, Ann!
<tamarion> no JL
<Ann> You are quite welcome...I do have a question though, what is your tolerance
for technical goofs, backgrounding errors and such?
<tamarion> So we just go by the tips given today to read the partial right?
<Bonnee> Low tolerance for any errors... LOL! No, seriously, it depends on how big
an error is. (Yes, Tamarion, just judge based on the notes I've given today <g>)
<Silke> Most errors aren't all that glaring, however.
<Bonnee> If an error is an easy fix, that's not a big deal. If it's something major
that requires an entire revamping of the entire book, then I'd probably reject.
<Silke> We're not perfect - but we try to check all the facts if we can.
<Bonnee> I will work with writers. Have 5 doing revisions based on my notes. As for
grammar and stuff like that, that's pretty easy to fix. Unless it's all over the place.
<GregA> Do you work directly with the writers...or is this done through the writers
agent?
<Silke> Usually direct, Greg.
<Bonnee> I work directly with the writers. The agents only get into it when it's
contract time.
<tamarion> Gives me hope someday when I try to publish.
<Bonnee> There aren't many agents left who'll "develop" a writer.
Nowadays, everyone wants production-ready material.
<tamarion> Knowing a bit of help is there is nice if lucky enough to get it.
<Bonnee> Give me a viable work and I'll work with you. I can never tell until I
start to read a piece. The thing is... here's the writer's advice column...Most editors
are severely overworked and underpaid. Like everyone else, we don't want to have to dig
into a manuscript. It's your baby. I can't write it for you. Only you can do that. So you
need to hand me a work that's as near-ready to go as possible.
<Ann> Are you willing to work with a high level of grammar glitchs to be cleaned up,
by the author, if you like the story?
<Bonnee> The minute I start getting my hands on it as an editor, I can do some major
damage. Like I said, it depends, Ann. Spelling is pretty easy (since I'm usually a good
speller.)
<MargeC3> Well put, Bonnee! I know this doesn't apply to YOU, but --
<JL> Ann -- a busy editor can't ENJOY a story that doesn't read smoothly. The trick
is to lull the editor into feeling like they're reading a published novel, not a rough
draft.
<Bonnee> But, if it inhibits me (well=laden with mistakes) from enjoying the story,
it'll never get off the ground for me.
<MargeC3> I have seen published works that were a ghastly mess because some
copyeditor "fixed" things to be wrong (grammatically).
<Bonnee> to even want to work with the writer. Yes, Marge. Believe me, there's stuff
out there in print where I want to shoot the editors. And I know of several instances
where the glitches came from the copyeditors and NOT the author.
<Marge> The worst recurrent error I've seen recently is "lay" for
"laid" (past transitive).
<Jean> I have taught English for 35 years. I hate it when copyeditors
"uncorrect" my ms.!
<MargeC3> Preach it, sister!
<Bonnee> I've seen outright misspellings in books because someone was too lazy to
look it up. And let's not even discuss the word "that" <g>
<MargeC3> I feel it would be tactless to tell an editor up front that I have a Ph.D.
in English and don't want my grammar messed with.
<JL> then/than is a biggie.
<Jean> No, but I have informed many a copyeditor of that fact.
<MargeC3> True, JL, and it's sheer carelessness.
<Bonnee> Do it, Marge. No reason to let some 20-year-old think they know better.
<Jean> I write out the rules the copyeditors need to learn to do their jobs.
<Silke> Breath and breathe is the one that gets up my nose.
<Jean> Many of THEM don't know lie/lay.
<Bonnee> Agreed.
<MargeC3> "Its" and "it's" -- I recently read a novel where it
was wrong EVERY single time.
<Silke> (Okay, confession time, I get lie and lay confused often. But then, I'm
German.<g>)
<Jean> You can lie by yourself, but somebody else has to lay you.
<Bonnee> I was once rejected by an agent for misuse of "it's" and
"its". Sorry, but that was NOT my problem. (My problem was a terrible story.
<g>)
<JL> As I see it, the editors' first paid job is usually as a slushpile reader, and
the form-reject usually goes to the ms that has the most of these kinds of grammar errors.
<Bonnee> I have a friend who read for an entry level job at a print publishing
house. She was taken into a room filled with people who'd been given stacks of paper. They
were given one page per mss to either accept or reject. Most were turning the pages faster
than she could read individual sentences.
<MargeC3> Shudder!
<Bonnee> Course, at a place like Harlequin, they're averaging approximately 3000 mss
a month.
<MargeC3> So much for the many novels that might be wonderful if only the first
half-chapter were chopped off.<G>
<Bonnee> That's 100 a day
<Ann> There is a great bit on SFWA's web site about ms acceptance.
<Bonnee> I talked with an agent once who gave me a good breakdown.
<MargeC3> Don't any publishers use freelance slushpile readers? I would really like
to have a job of that kind -- or freelance copyediting -- I could do by mail, from home.
<Bonnee> He figured about 3% of the manuscripts were publishable.
<Jean> Only 3%?
<Bonnee> Yup. 90% rejected in the first page, about 10% worth reading. 7% of those
needed revision (major or minor). 3% acceptable and only 0.1% major earners (big bucks
contracts). I've had submissions where they couldn't write a coherent sentence.
<Jean> I have no trouble being in the 3%. My problem is that I've never cracked the
0.1%.
<Bonnee> LOL!
<GregA> So... a well written ms does have a chance to be published?? For a new
writer that is.
<Bonnee> Yup, sure does.
<MargeC3> I know editors are overworked and all that -- but I still get irked to
receive a form rejection -- From some publishers, not even dated or signed -- for a novel
(as opposed to a short story sent to a periodical).
<Bonnee> I did a panel with Kate Duffy from Kensington... we talked about this with
the audience.
<MargeC3> That IS basically well written and comes from a previously published
author. Seems rude.
<Jean> With 100 ms. a day, who can write personal rejections?
<Bonnee> She has no background in writing. She only knows it's good when she reads
it. If it doesn't work, she doesn't have the background to make it personal and tell the
writer why it doesn't work. Because I came into the business as a writer, I try to make
all my rejections personal.
<MargeC3> Oh, I know the editor doesn't have time to write critiques. It just seems
the thing should at least -- be dated and signed and have the title of the rejected MS in
it. Could do that with a computer template.
<Bonnee> But some days, it's harder than others. But now they have to hire someone
to type the header into all those rejections.
<MargeC3> Yeah, I see your point, but what is the use of even sending my list of
previous credits, then, if it doesn't in any way change the level of attention I get?
Sorry, just being crabby I guess.
<Bonnee> Not excusing, only explaining. To be honest, previous credits are nice, but
they won't sell anything.
<Ann> How do you know which MS got rejected, Marge?
<Bonnee> For me, the story sells itself. Not the writer. Not her history or how many
she's sold.
<MargeC3> I had the wistful belief they (credits) would get the MS read by someone
higher up the food chain, I guess.
<Bonnee> Each book sells itself. Either it's good or it doesn't work for me.
<MargeC3> Sorry, Ann, could you clarify your question?
<Bonnee> Nope. Remember that each editor has a "stable" of writers she
works with. If you haven't been published by that company, you go into the slush pile and
get whoever's free that day.
<Ann> If there is absolutely no recognition on the form letter, date, name of MS or
anything like that, how do you know which MS got rejected if you have different ones out
there?
<Bonnee> And that free person will always be some underling.
<JL> MargaretC3 - previous credits are of value only when working consistently with
the same editor -- who knows you can fix anything they tell you to fix, and do it inside
their deadline.
<MargeC3> OH -- I keep a log of what I've sent where.
<Bonnee> Exactly, JL.
<MargeC3> Sigh. Then it comes down to the same conclusion -- one really needs an
agent!
<Bonnee> Yes and no. An agent can get you on a desk, but not necessarily to the
person you want it to go to.
<MargeC3> Then, one needs an agent who knows the genre and the editors.
<Bonnee> They're viewed as a screening desk for what comes into a publishing house.
That's the only reason it helps to have an agent. A good agent knows not only who the
editors are but what their likes and dislikes are. Your 15% is supposed to use their
knowledge to get you on the right desk. I know of an editor who abhores any kind of
physical violence -- she made a writer rewrite a scene where the hero spanks the heroine
(she was acting like a child, so he treated her like one).
<JL> There are two attitudes an editor must learn and cultivate -- one for an
expanding market that says "be sure not to miss anything we can use to fill a
slot" and the other is for today's "shrinking market" that says,
"Don't dare accept anything that is going to lose us market-share".
<Bonnee> This is the stuff an agent should know and know not to direct a manuscript
there that would have. Scenes that the editor personally doesn't like.
<Jean> I would have asked the writer to put in a scene where the heroine spanks the
hero. If both will fit, fine. If only the hero dare humiliate the heroine, not vice versa,
then it's unacceptable to me.
<Bonnee> It was private, so no humiliation involved. She simply refuses to accept
any mss with physical violence of any kind. (Yet this same mss began with the hero at war
and killing a man. Go figure. <g>) One of the most powerful openings to a romance
I'd ever read. But, yes, personal opinion and likes and dislikes definitely play a part in
the whole world of publishing.
<Jean> U-huh. I suspect her objection was the same as mine: if it's okay for the man
to overpower the woman physically, then it has to be shown that the reverse is also okay.
Or she can outsmart him, or SOMETHING to restore their equality.
<Bonnee> Well, the writer ended up rewriting the book so the hero banished the
heroine to the solar. It ended up working very well.
<MargeC3> Maybe the editor saw it as having implications of sadomasochistic sex and
objected for that reason.
<Jean> As long as she has the right to banish him to another room, fine.
<MargeC3> Lots of people hate the spanking scene in Heinlein's I WILL FEAR NO EVIL.
<Jean> Yuck!
<GregA> Brings the question...do you detail a murder...or show the police looking
down at the body??
<Bonnee> It was a medieval, so no equality when it comes to the sexes.
<Jean> I think that was the day my her-worship of Heinlein ended. Courtly love!
<Bonnee> If the murder is important to the story, then it should be shown.
<Jean> The woman controls.
<MargeC3> Well, if your book is a mystery, you can't show the murder.
<Bonnee> If the discovery of the body is more important than the murder itself, then
start with the body.
<Jean> I have no problem with murder, only with love between unequals.
<MargeC3> Courtly love put the woman on a pedestal in theory, but how much effect on
women's actual status?
<Jean> To me, a marriage of unequals is not a marriage. Chaucer said it better than
I can.
<Bonnee> I don't have a problem with...hmm, anything. Just make it work. If it's
there for gratuitous purposes.
<MargeC3> Esp. non-aristocratic women?
<Jean> In the 14th Century. The Wife of Bath is hardly aristocratic!
<MargeC3> Motherhood is theoretically put on a pedestal -- and mothers are expected
to do for "love" -- jobs that nobody would do for PAY unless they were starving.
<Jean> But she is wrong, too.
<Bonnee> (and that includes murder and sex), then dump it.
<Jean> Men do such jobs, too.
<GregA> Perhaps leaving it up to the readers imagination is more powerful..but as
you say..it depends on many factors.
<MargeC3> Nowadays, I guess. Not very many men did them in our fathers' day.
<Bonnee> Yes, it depends what point is being made by including it in the book
<Jean> What--men never cleaned out the outhouse?
<MargeC3> I mean, things like handle garbage, dirty diapers, and other people's
laundry and food scraps.
<Jean> Or the pigpen?
<Bonnee> (I only know ONE man who'll clean toilets.<g>)
<Ann> The thing I see with very graphic sex and violence, is it tends to overshadow
plot by the sheer volume of detail required to show it clearly.
<MargeC3> Oh <blush> -- I see what you mean.
<Jean> Men used to have to do those things.
<MargeC3> But when it's the pigpen, it usually IS economic rather than personal
"service" (they're going to sell the pigs).
<Bonnee> I hope y'all don't mind.... I'm going to call class for today
<Jean> Thank you for the class, Bonnee.
<JL> THANK YOU Bonnee - this was MARVELOUS!
<Bonnee> I've enjoyed my time here! Now, get to work reading! <g> I'll see you
on the message boards and here next Sunday if you can make it.
<JL> any more questions?
Session Close: Sun Mar 05 14:02:23 2000
