Upon Receiving the Edit Letter for Corambis

[truepenny]

Yesterday, I got the edit letter for Corambis.

You'll notice I didn't post about it yesterday. That's because I was busy having the ObFreakOut, which is the author's Pavlovian response to editorial feedback. The content of the feedback is immaterial to the response.

I like my editor, and I think she's smart. But her great value to me is that she doesn't read the way I do.

I've mentioned this before, I think: that my attitude toward text, any text, all text, is that it's there to be close-read. I came a nasty cropper over my dissertation when it was finally pointed out to me that that's not how you're supposed to engage with secondary texts. (I have to admit, I still don't see why.) I assume that if the word is on the page, the author put it there for a reason, and that it's my job as a reader to figure out what that reason is. And I assume, until forced to believe otherwise, that the reason is both good and important. (I also have freakishly good recall for things I've read. Not so much for things I've done, or things that have happened to me, or things that people have said to me. But things I've read? Mind like an oiled steel bear-trap, people. I disturb myself sometimes.)

You begin to see why I am very fussy about my fiction-reading.

And of course, as a writer, I assume that all readers are like me. This is a subset of writing for yourself: I write books that I would want to read, not merely in the kind of plots and characters I have, but in the way I write. I expect readers to pay the same kind of attention to words that I do. And, as logically follows, I have beta-readers who read that way themselves (I'm not entirely sure whether I selected them or they selected me). heresluck, matociquala, and mirrorthaw all give excellent feedback of various kinds, but mostly they are on board with my project. In other words, they pick up on the subtleties.

My editor exists (in my tiny solipsistic universe) to remind me that not everybody reads that way. That, in fact, the vast majority of readers don't read that way. If I only say something once, especially if it's in dialogue, most readers will miss it--or not remember it a hundred pages later when it turns out to be important. And, you know, while I can be a prima donna and pitch a fit about it, a better response is to revise the book so that people who aren't exactly like me can enjoy it, too.

My ego would naturally prefer an editor who Understood My Genius, but I think it would be bad for me. And ultimately, bad for my books. Because the point here is not for me to stand on my pedantic little moral high ground and insist that everyone else is wrong. The point is to write books--to tell stories--that people will enjoy. Whether they read the way I do or not.

Comments

[txanne.livejournal.com]

that's not how you're supposed to engage with secondary texts.

Oh.

And now we all know why my topic changed from troubadour lyric to a critical edition of a late epic. (After three years of headwalling.

[libskrat]

I don't even write fiction, and I still have the ObFreakOut when I get the results of peer or editorial review for something I've written.

It's childish, silly, and unproductive -- and I darn well do it anyway, every single freakin' time. Sigh.

[lareinenoire.livejournal.com]

I came a nasty cropper over my dissertation when it was finally pointed out to me that that's not how you're supposed to engage with secondary texts. (I have to admit, I still don't see why.)

You mean you aren't supposed to do that? Oh, dear. I may run into problems in the future. My dissertation exists to pick primary sources to pieces, and by extension, pick apart the secondary sources that depend on them.

If I only say something once, especially if it's in dialogue, most readers will miss it--or not remember it a hundred pages later when it turns out to be important.

I had a nasty experience in a creative writing class when I made a deliberate narrative choice based on the assumption that people would remember the last story I'd submitted (about three weeks before). One of my classmates was kind enough to remark, 'Seriously? I totally forgot all about your last story.' Thanks, guy. Did wonders for my ego.

[truepenny.livejournal.com]

Talk to your director. Seriously. You may be able to swing it as part of your intellectual project, but my committee seemed to feel it was bad form to pick on other critics.

[casacorona.livejournal.com]

Everyone freaks out. I freak out. And for me, that's embarrassing. Soon, you'll dig into the pleasure of making your text accessible to lesser minds.

[jonquil.livejournal.com]

It's very, very useful to have an orthogonal view. I'm glad you have one.

(And even gladder to hear Corambis exists; I was just worrying yesterday at the ending of Melusine, not sure if you were leaving it there, ambiguous.) One of the things I love about your series is that Felix never ceases to be a bastard, encounters the consequences, and is shocked but not surprised. All those losses, and all of them due to his actions. In general, people do things and then have to live with them. I keep hoping somebody would magically heal [injured character] and re-realizing that you aren't that kind of writer.

I'm one of your sloppy readers; I rushed through Dunnett's Lymond series during post-partum depression and had to go back and read through many, many times to catch Dunnett's offhand allusions that became significant only a hundred pages later. (Also: skipping to the end of Checkmate to see if it has a happy ending? Bad, bad mistake.)

[romp.livejournal.com]

I think the focus of a reader--close-in, wide shoots, etc--differs by person. I'm close-in too and I like your books so perhaps the editor should remember that having a casual mention come back to be important is satisfying for a reader. This reader and, I suspect, most.

And as anyone who grew up with TV knows, every word is there for a reason. This isn't 1800, we don't have hours to kill every day, we want the fat trimmed!

FWIW, I think your focus must operate just fine 'cause you can pull out enough to see the plot. If you were stuck in close-in shots, you'd write vignettes with little to string them together. At least this is my theory and experience.

Re edits

[jonquil.livejournal.com]

I have to take them as a technical writer.

I have come to accept that my process is to get an edit, run away and SCREAM, and explain (in my head) why the editor is totally, totally wrong.

Then when that's over, I actually start implementing the corrections, cursing the person who was so @#$@#$# right.

There may be somebody whose first response to her edits is cries of delight, but I sure haven't met her.

[jade-sabre-301.livejournal.com]

*raises hand as a reader who close-reads* I tend to get into arguments with my friends over word choices. I feel like this is why they don't want me to edit their papers.

Good luck with the revising!

[http://users.livejournal.com/_che_shire_cat_/]

oh. but somehow this is a sad thing - concerning readers and writers both and in general.
now that you brought this fact to my awareness. I seem to have forgotten that it is possible to read books like that, because they just ceased to get published in such a way.

if you read literature from before, say the 19th century, you too have to take notice of details and hints. thinking that readers don't do that (either because they don't expect that it's necessary, or don't have the nerve/time/whatever to do it) I see why the majority of readers (even among my fellow German Philology students) does not get what (exempli gratia) "The Magic Flute" is about.

and sometimes it IS annoying to read a book that makes you feel like the writer thinks his/her readers are imbeciles because they feel compelled to explain the world to you. (e.g. *cough*Dan Brown*coughcough*)

maybe that kind of reading should be encouraged in school... HA I know I'm being delusional... I know nowadays it's a lucky thing if people actually learn to read at all... at least over here in Austria we're needing a new educational system.

[deepad]

See, but knowing this makes me want to ask you for the DVD commentary (or, annotated version) of your books, because I'm sure I missed things.
On the other hand, I am glad your editor pointed out that a lot of us won't get what you mean, because unless I am trying to outsmart a mystery novel, I enjoy throwing myself headlong into a book without having to second-guess every word in the dubious expectation that there is a pay off later.

[pameladean]

I have the same problem. "But it's RIGHT THERE!" is my invariable response to editorial feedback. If, after a lot of grumbling revision, it's RIGHT THERE five times and still a problem, I get stubborn. I don't really understand why I can't just put in in five times to begin with, though. It's a mystery.

I am really, really looking forward to Corambis.

P.

[truepenny.livejournal.com]

Because you put it in once! Clearly that's sufficient!

[kate_nepveu]

It depends on the edits. Sometimes I've been struggling with a section and I know it, and bang! There's a suggested fix that will work. That gets a cry of delight.

[motorbike.livejournal.com]

...Hang on, I hope that just now wasn't an argument for scaling down said Genius!

[woodburner.livejournal.com]

I'm the same way. And while it's not like I always catch those little details, my first response to going "huh?" is not "the author has not made this clear enough" but "oh, I probably missed something". It... actually kind of annoys me when that isn't a person's first response.

I do think there is a certain amount of repetition and clarity at the expense of subtlety that can be a good thing, but I'm pretty dubious of catering to it too much. It doesn't take much before the text starts feeling like it's spoon-feeding and talking down to the reader - at least, that's how it feels if that reader is me.

[lareinenoire.livejournal.com]

Oh, wow. That seems to be what my director is telling me I ought to be doing! One of her main criticisms in the past has been that I'm not engaging enough with my secondary material. Oy.

[truepenny.livejournal.com]

Which may or may not translate to "close read your secondary sources." It may just mean "you need to demonstrate that you've read and understood the critical conversation surrounding your topic." Really, I'd suggest giving her a sample of the kind of work you want to do with your secondary sources--a couple pages at least--and ask her to tell you specifically if that's what she meant and if what you're doing will be acceptable.

I know I sound ultra-paranoid about this, but you do NOT want to find out at your dissertation defense that you've been doing it "wrong." It's up there in the top five for Worst Experiences of My Life.

[lareinenoire.livejournal.com]

I know I sound ultra-paranoid about this, but you do NOT want to find out at your dissertation defense that you've been doing it "wrong." It's up there in the top five for Worst Experiences of My Life.

Oh, I really do appreciate the warning. I've already had a similar experience -- where I am, at the end of your first year, they require you to submit 10,000 words and an outline, and my first attempt was completely shot down. It threw me into depression for about three months, and this is my second attempt to get through it. But, in better news, the 10,000 words I submitted has just been accepted for publication as of yesterday, so I at least have that to arm me against my examiners.

I will admit, most of my close-reading is primary. The only time I nitpick secondary material is when they oversimplify the primary material, or use blatantly anachronistic ideologies (which has happened several times in articles that everybody cites). The way my supervisor put it was 'If you're going to go there, go there.' So I'm not really sure how to take that, to be honest.

[rarelylynne.livejournal.com]

Ah, it just means that it will give all those future scholars more to do, sorting out the truth...

I get edited fairly easily at this point, but I have the opposite problem--I make a jump from A to C, but can't understand why no one sees the "B" that was CLEARLY IMPLIED on the way, without me spelling it out.

[truepenny.livejournal.com]

Well, it sounds great to me.

Again, I say, give her a sample of what you're doing with the 2ndary sources and tell her exactly why you're giving it to her. Given the history you've related, she should be able to grasp your motivations.

And good luck!

[lareinenoire.livejournal.com]

Thank you! And I'll definitely get something written up to show her.

lightbulb

[soloadventure.livejournal.com]

I love reading that way, if the book is well crafted, not obscure. I think I've read Underworld five or six times now, and the last two readings were for the sheer joy of finding all the single word or single line or single paragraph references Delillo throws into the book that bring some matter elsewhere into crystal focus, either because he planted the seed before the big reveal, or because he circled back later and dropped some perfect jewel to blow our minds.

don't do too much big picture writing or the joy of craft and the joy of discovery, of being in on it, will be lost.

Am I wrong to think more people don't read that way because there's relatively literature written that way to delight and challenge us?

[pixelfish.livejournal.com]

I think I know how that feels--except I have no editor. But I do have people questioning words like apoplectic and arcane because they were being strict literalists in the reading, and couldn't work their way to the metaphorical side at all. "How does she know he has apoplexy? Is she a doctor?" I think is how one crit went.

What's the Ob stand for in ObFreakOut?

[truepenny.livejournal.com]

Obligatory.

[cathellisen.livejournal.com]

Ah! The "It's right there! Clearly! In the subtext!"That's me.

*headdesk*

Reading this thread has made me realise how not alone I am.

[yukis-kirausagi.livejournal.com]

I thought everybody read the way you do.....I'm not a professional writer or anything but I read the same way you do.

Maybe we get used to the primary people around us reading the way we do? People do tend to gravitate towards others of like minds but there is always someone in our lives that is there to remind us of these little details.

I can't wait until Corambis is released. I am out of school right now so I will be devoting more time to finishing The Mirador. I love your series and your entire universe. It always keeps me on the edge of my seat, eagerly waiting for the next one. Good Luck and Happy Writing.

[papersky.livejournal.com]

"In science fiction, everything must be mentioned twice, in at least two different contexts." Samuel R. Delany, appendices to Triton.

I have found this very useful when thinking about this kind of thing -- and I don't mean background stuff, which is what I think he's talking about, but also plot. Twice. Two different contexts. Then people will get it.

[saltypepper.livejournal.com]

The thing I like about your books... Well, there are many. One of the best is that upon close reading there is so much that is implied and unspoken, which makes them pleasurable to read more than once. I love to uncover details I may have missed the first go round when I am often focused on the plot.

Because the close reading part of my brain often goes offline when I am sick, I've discovered that many books I own are a nasty slog to read while ill. Yours, however, work as both pure just-can't-wait-to-see-what-happens-next! entertainment, and work that rewards deeper reflection. This is not so common as it once was, I find.

In short, I am completely convinced of Your Genius, and grateful for any input your editor may have in helping it to shine more brightly. And I am eagerly awaiting Corambis.

[clhollandwriter]

*I assume that if the word is on the page, the author put it there for a reason, and that it's my job as a reader to figure out what that reason is. And I assume, until forced to believe otherwise, that the reason is both good and important.*
I read that way too - quite often I'll see something apparently small and insignificant and mentally tag it as "will be important later". Loose ends wind me up like you wouldn't believe.

As for recall, my most useful skill is remembering whether something is on the left or right page, and where on the page it was. It makes finding things so much easier. :-D

*One of the things I love about your series is that Felix never ceases to be a bastard, encounters the consequences, and is shocked but not surprised.*
Me too. :-D
I'm trying to suppress the urge to read them again, because I want to wait for Corambis to come out so I can go all the way through in one go.

[ginny-t.livejournal.com]

Eeeeeeee! Corambis! *fidget*

[allaboutm-e.livejournal.com]

Without intending to be critical of your editor, only encouraging of you, FWIW, and granted, not everyone reads the way I do either: I am far more likely to be annoyed by and complain about the writer / editor who doesn't seem to respect my reading ability and engages in what seems to me to be excessive reiteration (dude! You just made that point 40 pages ago, I didn't need the reminder.) than the reverse...

[minerva710.livejournal.com]

Just wanted to say YES. I would pay like $50 a piece for annotated versions of this series!

[minerva710.livejournal.com]

I don't think I read as closely as you do, but I do think it's rewarding not to have everything spelled out (I have to say, if I realize I missed something important, I go back to try and find it). As I said above, I would read an annotated Melusine to tatters because it would excite me to see everything you thought was very clear and compare it to what I took away (or just have weird little anecdotes, like "Everytime I tried to work on this scene, one of my cats broke something"). I also think that any time I read a first person narrative I read much more closely, since there isn't an omniscient author/narrator to interpret events, just the characters. First person narrators are supposed to be unreliable, and I think it should make the reader pay more attention, since the only trust you can put on Felix or Mildmay is that they are narrating events faithfully as they perceive them; that I recall they have never intentionally misled the reader but they are often wrong or working with limited information. Ew, sorry about the long rambling comment. I'll go back to daydreaming about Corambis and its eventual release.

[(Anonymous)]

Wait, some people don't read like that? That must be how so many stories I can't stand get into print. Yay for reading what's been written! And yay for 95% written word recall!

[sunny7371.livejournal.com]

That's good to know.

Genius Dumb-Downed?

[(Anonymous)]

**My ego would naturally prefer an editor who Understood My Genius,...

Understanding your genius does not necessarily equate to a book too subtle to be read by the unwashed masses. Also, IHMO, there is the possibility that everyone else IS "wrong". And, if that is the case, should revision take place simply to make the "Genius" more palatable/understandable for those "who don't get it"? You seem to have a circle of betas "who get it" and a fanbase "who get it".

Question: How secure are you in the knowledge that an editor, who you feel does not Understand Your Genius, can also help tighten and fine-tune your book? (I understand you're ranting and being a bit tongue-in-cheek, but wanted to ask anyway.)

I am really looking forward to Corambis. And, if I read the book and go "WTF?!", I hope it's because it's how you wanted it written, not because of your editor's desire for mass consumption.

[tesseract-5.livejournal.com]

Oh! I'm here to say that as one of your readers, I read and reread your stories almost purely for the way that they are written. The turns of phrase and word choice delight me almost more than the plot. The characters are still the utmost pleasure of all though.

The only other author I've found that draws me like this is Jonathan Coe's satire, The Rotter's Club (one of the funniest, smartest best books I've ever read).

[tesseract-5.livejournal.com]

Er, and I forgot my main point. Some authors I'll only read for certain story lines or characters, but others I'd follow to the ends of the earth. Whatever topic they chose to indulge in and manage to get published in this crazy age of publishing, so be it! I'll read it. If one likes the word choice and sense of humor, one can enjoy anything written by that author.