Master, thy name is Editor

Whenever my editor would send an email saying - Hey, your Ed letter and my editorial notes are on their way - I'd go into this low-grade panic that worked its way up to the screaming meme's by the time the Fed Ex arrived the next day.

The panic was, in part, due to the fact that I am somewhat of a control freak.

Shut up everyone who knows me and knows that "somewhat" is a gross understatement!

As I was saying, I have a few control issues. Yet, I found the editorial process to be an enlightening and humbling one. With each new page of insight I was astounded by my editor's level of detail.

My editor indicated that my manuscript was neither the manuscript that took up the most of her time nor the one that took up the least.

We got the edits done in two rounds, amounting to about six weeks.

So it was relatively painless.

I've come away from the process with the utmost respect for editors. And tonight, as I settled in for my required reading (ya know as part of the SKR), I also realized that editors absolutely must have an unending pool of love for books. They'd have to, to subject themselves to some of the inevitable not ready for prime time manuscripts that comes across their desks.

Call it an occupational hazard. But for every diamond in the rough there must be hundreds of really bad manuscripts.

There is nothing more distracting than...amateurish writing. And I'm only reading for pleasure.

I chose "amateurish" as opposed to "bad," because I think good and bad are subjective. But amateurish isn't quite as debatable.

You might be thinking - she acts like she's never read a bad book before. And the truth is, I haven't.

I've read books I didn't like before. But it's never been because the basics of writing were absent.

Usually I'm a loyalist. I have about a dozen or so authors that I read religioulsy. In addition, I try to read as many YA books by authors I've met in my Internet travels.

But the last six months I've ventured out. I've tried to broaden my horizons.

Man, I wish I'd never done that.

I've had several books on my shelf waiting to be read for a few months. I haven't made the time to read them until now.

But if I'm going to stay on the SKR, I'll need plenty of books. I read fast and can go through a book in a day if given the peace and quiet.

The book I'm reading, right now, would probably not be so bad if it had been picked and sliced apart then put back together again by a good editor.

A few key "writer do not's," consistently pop up within the writers, editors and agent blogs I frequent. But until tonight I'd never run across any of these "Do not's," in a book, because of that whole loyalist thing.

The writers I read are polished veterans.

Needless to say I've been spoiled!!!

This book has nearly every "Do not," mentioned. Which says two things:

One, one of the reasons there's such a vehement divide on the to self-pub or not self-pub issue, is because there are still too many self-published books on the market that need real work (my current reading included).

Those books take away from self-pubbed books that are as polished as any traditionally published novel. Self-publication does not and should not mean that you skimp on editorial services.

And for the record, this is not a POD book.

Two, there are still writers out there who are not following the fundamentals. So they bare repeating...

1) Just "Say" it stupid. By tagging dialogue with a simple "said," the tags almost disappear to the reader. When every other tag is a synoym for "said," its hella distracting.

2) Show me don't...let's say it together, tell me. It is tiring when a reader is told how characters are reacting to their world. At least it is for me. I need to be engaged and I can't be if the author is going to spell out every single emotion. For every "ly" (i.e. sadly, happily, peevishly) there's a more descriptive way to showcase emotions.

3) Listen up and then hear me. Redundant descrptions such as "whispered softly" or "stood up" aren't necessary. But they are distracting.

4) Leave the soliloquies to Shakespeare. There's this thing called backstory. We're allowed to use it to give the reader insight into how a character arrived, emotionally or physically, to the current point. When an entire backstory is explained in paragraph-long dialogue it brings us back to #2.

5) Learn the rules before you break them. When writing, if you're purposely breaking the basic rules of writing because you're a creative rebel or it's just your "style," remember your reader. A reader wants a good story. Period.

The basics aren't there to hinder your creativity. Embrace them.

And if you can't, by God find a good editor that will force you to!