Copy Editor Revenge
Jun202009
You know, when I started getting all the annoyed comments on the Copy Editor rant post, I figured some of them were coming from the copy editing class. Then a pal told me she’d forwarded the URL to a copy editor listserve, which I think is great. Any situation is better with two sides. So while we do have a new pseudonym post up to play on, I thought it was only fair put up another to give any copy editor a place to vent about authors or the business. I fully realize that complaining on the internet may be dangerous to a copy editor’s financial well being, but anybody who can disguise things sufficiently is welcome to post here showing the view from the other side.
Note:
I’ve just remembered why I’ve had such easy copy edits on the last books that I did solo. My editor told the copy editors to write any changes they wanted made to the text (as opposed to punctuation, spelling, etc) on post-it notes. That way I could make the change if I thought it was good and pitch the post-it if I didn’t without having to write “stet” on everything. I assumed this didn’t make any extra work for the copy editor since she was just writing what she wanted on a different piece paper. How much of a hassle was that? Because I’m going to remind my editor to do that again.
Filed in Writing
Loading ...
21 Comments to 'Copy Editor Revenge'
On June 20, 2009 at 5:56 pm Melissa Blue said...
Not a copy-editor, but I have a love affair with post-its. That’s a brillian idea, because once the post-its is gone you can’t even remember what was on it.
For the record, I didn’t even know “insure” was a variation on “ensure”.
On June 20, 2009 at 8:00 pm Merry the CB said...
I think the ensure/insure debate deserves its own poll
On June 20, 2009 at 10:11 pm Reb said...
I agree – but please add “make sure” as an option.
On June 21, 2009 at 12:03 pm MJ said...
Actually, I’d like to know why the edits aren’t happening electronically. I just went through a critique partner’s 250-page MS onscreen, using track changes and inserting comments. And when I proofread or copy edit for non-fiction clients, it’s all electronic. A long way from when I used red ink for “must change” and pencil for “consider changing.” (For instance, in “Gus was oblivious to the fact that,” I’d have suggested a way to get rid of “the fact that.” Ducking, ducking…)
As for venting…it’s a pain when people shrug at a clear grammar mistake and say, “It just sounds better the other way.” Happens a lot with “me” and “I.” I’m all for writing for the ear, and preserving the author’s voice, and never changing dialogue. Sometimes, however, what sounds better is just wrong, and there’s no good reason not to correct it.
On June 21, 2009 at 1:53 pm Lani said...
MJ, actually, the epubs are doing copyedits electronically, and I like that idea, too. When we wrote Dogs and Goddesses, we did everything that way, made changes in each other’s scenes, and then the owner could reject them or not. I’m not sure why it’s still all done on paper, probably compatibility issues between electronic systems. After all, everyone can get a red pen but not everyone has Word or whatever. Still, I think eventually it’ll go that way.
As far as the argument between what sounds better and what’s right, you straddle a line there. Sometimes, “better” is in the ear of the beholder. For instance, the “me” vs. “I” thing drives me nuts, because almost everyone gets it wrong, and that’s natural, but I can’t stand it. Same with different than vs. different from. My 10-year-old used “different from” the other day and I was so pleased – of course, she’s my kid, and I’m a stickler about that one, so it would just sound right to her. These are very common misuses, and many times they “sound” fine to most people, but if I were a CE, I’d correct them every time just because they drive me nuts, but there’s an argument to be made that those kinds of mistakes speak to voice. The “so” and “as” thing, though, just sounds better the way Jenny had it, so I’d shrug and let that go.
Maybe it’s a good thing I’m not a CE.
On June 21, 2009 at 4:18 pm AgTigress said...
Remember that what ’sounds right’ and what doesn’t depends on many parameters, above all the exact dialect of English you happen to speak, but also age and social class. There are far, far more differences between American English and British English, not to mention Canadian, NZ and Australian English, let alone Indian English and Caribbean English, than many people realise. Furthermore, there are great differences in all those dialects between written and spoken English: variant syntax (as in ‘bad grammar’) in dialogue may be correct, if it is what the speaker would actually say. It is part of the characterisation.
The ensure/insure debate evidently has to do with a coalescing of meaning that is happening (or has happened) in AE, but has not happened in Commonwealth English, where the words are still distinct. I frequently see usages in well-written American books that I would never write myself, because to me they are actually incorrect, such as ‘careen’ meaning ‘to move rapidly in an uncontrolled fashion’: that’s career in BE. To us, the verb ‘careen’ means only ‘to clean and scrape down the hull of a boat’. Not only spellings, but also many punctuation rules, hyphenation, capitalisation and so forth differ in AE and BE, too.
My point is simply that the English language is hugely variable, and like all languages, is changing and evolving all the time. Both writers and editors need to be rather cautious about making sweeping declarations of what is correct and what is incorrect, and should remember that in any case, some readers, in other parts of the English-speaking world, will find ‘errors’, however perfect they thought the manuscript! And copy-editors must also respect the voice of the writer, in non-fiction as well as fiction. It is important.
On June 21, 2009 at 5:34 pm Lou said...
Well said, AgTigress, well said. . .
On June 21, 2009 at 6:11 pm Jenny said...
Did not know that about “careen.”
Ag, you’re right, the English language is hugely variable which is why, as you point out, voice is so important. Southern Ohio, where most of my fiction is set, and the mid-empty part of the state where I grew up are both heavily Appalachian/German. so word choice here can be distinctive. It’s a constant struggle to keep the regionalisms in while editors try to iron them out.
On June 21, 2009 at 8:31 pm Sue D said...
One of the first Crusie’s I read used “cut me a break.” Though Kitchener, Ontario and Ohio aren’t that far away, that line made me realize that there are definite regional differences. We say “give me a break,” kids don’t “skip” classes, they “bag” them, and the list goes on and on. I love your rants and your voice
On June 22, 2009 at 1:55 am RfP said...
I’m astonished if no copy editor’s ever sent you a rant along these lines:
“Hey Crusie, the car needs washed. The dogs want fed. And most of all, the verb needs completed.”
Wait, this sounds familiar. Googling….
Yes indeed, we already discussed Ohio verbs.
On June 29, 2009 at 3:18 pm Jenny said...
Tsk. You “to be” lovers, such sticklers.
On June 24, 2009 at 2:29 am colognegrrl said...
After your bird adventure, probably nobody is going to read this, but I wanted to get rid of a comment concerning your rant poll. I hope you will continue your rants, I think they’re completely legitimate, they give you the chance to vent your frustration, and I like to read them and to realize that the life of a well-known author is not only about best-selling lists and creativity and getting to work flexible hours. (And in your pajamas, if you like.)
What I don’t like is the co-rants. A “poor baby” is nice. A few lines of compassion and positive encouragement to hold out are great. A similar story to show that you’re not the only one is fine. But an attitude of “who is she to dare mess with the apple of our eye? Let’s start a posse and go after her head” is something that I don’t appreciate.
Besides, you’re a tough Ohio woman who doesn’t need defended, right?
On June 24, 2009 at 3:25 am Jenny said...
I’m not the apple of your eye, CG?
Sigh.
On June 24, 2009 at 5:26 am colognegrrl said...
Of course you are, but I guess I don’t have to play Lone Ranger at your rescue when it comes to dealing with copy editors. ;o)
On June 24, 2009 at 4:51 pm Bonnie C said...
Ha! I had a feeling after reading the Copy Editor Rant that a can of worms had just been popped.
I tend to be more for the “sounds right” over “is actually right” camp. My writing partner is the exact opposite. Somehow we manage to not strangle each other. With any luck those lessons will be of use to me when (if?) I find myself battling a CE.
Oh, and we totally use the notes feature in Word. Completely rocks. I actually just edited another friend’s resume that way last week and it worked REALLY well.
On June 25, 2009 at 5:10 pm Jackie said...
English is a living language that living people use and change daily. Most of us have a hard time understanding Shakespeare’s English, let alone Chaucer’s. This is true of most living languages. Just ask an historian or is that a historian? Or a linguist. If you want a static language try Latin. That’s dead. But not quite useless. Or Assembler. Hm…. I know a couple versions of assembler too….
Anyway, Just read Dr Suess’s The Butter Battle. (I think that’s it.) We lost it because that was the one Dr Suess book that my son hated because it was too like real life. We didn’t get the end of the story. And we won’t get the end of this rant because both sides are both right and wrong. But this particular book (Wild Ride) is Jennie’s and Bob’s so they get to say what’s rigth for this book. The end.
On June 28, 2009 at 12:32 am ruthie said...
Sounds right vs. is actually right, I usually come down on the side of what’s going to be the least jarring to the reader. If it’s become an acceptable colloquialism, and the majority of people don’t even realize it’s wrong, go for the sounds right every time.
However, and I wish I could think of some non-verbal examples of this but I can’t, ignorant mistakes, like pronouncing nuclear as nu-cu-lar or realtor as re-la-tor, are just wrong. Oh, one might be using “anymore” in a positive sentence.
“We *don’t do* that anymore” is correct. “We always do that anymore” is not. I believe this is a regionalism, but it’s not common enough throughout the English-speaking world, or even the American English-speaking world, to justify it _unless it helps set the locale of the story_.
So “you want to come with” or “the dogs need fed” are fine in a JCru book.
On June 28, 2009 at 2:43 pm Kathyann said...
I work with a lot of copy editors, and like anything else, there are good ones and bad ones. The bad ones try to rewrite, which is a no-no even in the world of college textbooks, which is where I live. The good ones know better than that, but frequently are paid too little and not given enough time to do the quality work they would like to be able to do. Oh, and the trouble with sticky notes? Manuscript pages take a lot of abuse, and the stickies fall off, not a good thing.
On June 29, 2009 at 12:58 am Barbara said...
I would have been offended if a copy editor changed the kind of things Jennie mentions when the CE should know her author’s background. I mean, c’mon, Jennie is a former college professor. They’re not perfect — well, I teach college classes so I should just speak for myself — but how many mistakes can Jennie have in her manuscript?
On June 29, 2009 at 3:19 pm Helen DeWitt said...
The thing that stands out to me in all this is that Jenny had two other books she wanted to finish. I had a similar problem with the copyeditor of my first book, which was acquired when I was trying to finish five other books. I had a clause in my contract saying no changes could be made without my approval, not because I can’t be wrong, but because at some point a line has to be drawn: for purely financial reasons, there was a limit to how much time I want to spent thrashing out issues of usage.
I flew to New York and offered to meet the copyeditor and discuss doubtful points before she started work; she said she would rather work through the text on her own, but her comments were only suggestions. She made hundreds of changes – work for which she got, I assume, an hourly rate. Given that she had made them, I assumed she had done so with good reason – i.e., standard authorities on the English language backed her up. It would have been arrogant to stet without checking; I went to the OED, Collins, Fowler, Merriam-Webster, to check. Which turned out to be more than she had bothered to do, because according to the authorities my usage was acceptable. Except, of course, I a) wasn’t getting an hourly rate for this and b) was losing whatever I might have earned from, y’know, finishing my other books. Having checked, anyway, I steted. I could have done a DFW and also written long marginal disquisitions on why the thing that was in the MS in the first place was acceptable, citing various standard authorities, but it seemed daft to have to justify usage that was (apparently) acceptable in the first place in hundreds of instances – going through the MS defending acceptable usage would have been even more time-consuming than just marking it up in the first place. In the absence of this justification, though, the production manager and copyeditor assumed the MS would bring shame on the publisher: the copyeditor went through and whited out my mark-up before sending the MS to the printer. So it then had to be done again. And none of the other books I was working on has ever seen the light of day.
My assumption is that Jenny will be better than I was at salvaging her work-in-progress. It still doesn’t seem right, though, that a copyeditor should throw out the timetable of Jenny’s other work. If another book doesn’t get finished, or is shortchanged on the mental energy that makes a book brilliant rather than just good, that’s disappointing for readers and expensive for Jenny.
On June 29, 2009 at 3:22 pm Jenny said...
Ruthie’s “come with” comment reminded me of my favorite newspeak: Buffyisms. Whedon practically invented his own dialect and I’m still using so many of them, having forgotten they were Buffyisms to begin with.