A Question for Fiction Editors

[William]

Would you work for a percentage of book/ebook/audiobook sales instead of a fee? If so, what percentage do you envision as fair? And if not, what makes such an arrangement undesirable? Would having your name on the cover with the author alter your opinion?

[Suzie]

I might consider taking a percentage of sales in lieu of a one-time payment, but the main issue with such an arrangement is that it's nearly impossible to determine whether or not the author is actually paying me a percentage. It wouldn't be difficult for an author to say, "Hey, sorry, but I didn't sell enough to receive a royalty payment this month." I'd have no way, really, to verify the truth of that. Also, some books, even great ones, tank for no apparent reason. So, if a 100k word book makes only $200.00 dollars in a year, and I'm only charging 10% of sales... that's a whopping $20, whereas if I charged a one-time fee of $0.0045 per word (let's say for a final proofread), that's $450.

Writing is a gamble, and as an author, I understand and accept that. The book I write might tank or it might make a million; that's the nature of the game. If I pay an editor $450 up front, and I don't ever make that back on a particular book, it's my risk to take, not the editor's, because it's my book. As an editor, I don't like to gamble, because editing is my reliable, pay-the-bills income. When I'm figuring out my budget, the money I make from writing (until I do sell a million copies) isn't even part of the equation.

I hope that makes sense. Others may (and probably will) disagree with me, but these are my thoughts. Interesting question. Thanks for asking!

[Sirena]

I was going to say the same as Suzie but she summed it up nicely. I would consider it but it would probably be a combination of a flat fee and percentage. Something like, you pay a flat fee of a $100 and then 10% of sales so the loss isn't as great if the gamble doesn't work out.

[William]

I am trying to prognosticate what the publishing world is going to be like in 10 years. To me, it is obvious the current 'wild west' climate is going to change. What I want to avoid is an amazon 'createspace' site a Kindle 'indie' site where they pull non-corporate sponsored authors off of their pages. The idea of putting the editor name on the cover IS NOT for the editor- but for the reader. So the reader can tell, at a glance, that a book was professionally edited. I hear your concerns and I can see why you don't want to gamble since you don't have to now- but I wonder if that will still be true in 10 years. That's what I'm trying to figure out- not how to make things work now- but how to keep them working in a decade.

[Lin]

The issue with putting the editor's name on the cover is the extent to which the writer has followed the editor's recommendations. If I edit a book and the writer ignores all my suggestions, then to what extent have I edited it? And to what extent do I want to put my name to it?
And yes, I agree, flat fee - it's the author's talent that will sell the book, and it should be the author's finances that go into it. Reduced fee plus percentage if I were really confident in the author maybe.

[Suzie]

Here's another issue with putting the editor's name on the cover, aside from the very valid point Lin raised: in fiction and creative nonfiction (by this I mean memoirs and such), traditional book publishers rarely include the editor on the cover or even the copyright and title pages (anthologies and the like being the exception), so doing so might end up screaming "indie", thus having the opposite effect intended.

As a reader, I don't even look for an editor name when selecting books. I use recommendations, the cover, the blurb, the sample, and (to some extent) reviews. From those pieces, it's pretty easy to tell whether or not a book is up to par or within my preferences. My decision-making process hasn't changed since I picked my first book long before the advent of ebooks and the explosion of self-publishing, and it isn't likely to.

[William]

I hear the comments about the problem of author/editor disagreement and of course they're all valid arguments in the world as it is now- they're also as old as time. What has never happened before now- is the ability for a writer to publish, easily, on equal footing, a manuscript with no editing at all and sell it to anyone on earth with a computer- which is, right now, a couple of billion people. This fact puts the existence of the job of editor into danger. Why? Because as a writer I can send out a heavily polished (by me) manuscript out to a dozen devoted fans who will catch all but the most ticky-tacky errors- all without paying an editor a cent. I can then put that book up for sale right next to an author who has paid you a bunch of money for the same task. I happen to agree you would do it better- but that doesn't mean things won't end up working the other way. After all, free is pretty persuasive.
As I see it, I am trying to solve a problem that's coming. I am trying to enlist the help of others who also see the problem and want to get out in front of it. The specifics of the method don't matter. What matters to me is that the creators of books end up in control of publishing books- not some conglomerate corporation. That's my true goal. If not the editors name on the cover- then what? I am less interested in answering the question myself than finding others who are struggling with it and comparing notes.
If you don't see the problem- all I can do is ask that you look again.

[Lin]

I do indeed see the problem - I can only suggest that the power ultimately lies with the reader, who will lose patience with unpolished works and demand higher standards. Maybe then the editor's name will make a difference - or maybe readers will stop caring - or even noticing - which would be a great shame. But I see readers, as reviewers, holding more and more power over sales. What I would like to see is more picky readers. Will it happen?

[William]

Naiya,
Again, in 2013 I agree with what you're saying. However, what editors want to forget is that books have errors even after professional editing- sometime in the first sentence. Not to mention you can get three editors and they can each find different errors and argue over which is which. As any honest person would admit- editing is largely a matter of taste combined with 'style' and 'rules' stuff that 99% of readers don't notice and isn't anywhere near as black and white as you guys wish it was. Language is not physics and it simply doesn't have right and wrong in the same way. Editors care about these issues and have, through years of practice and doing the job come to synthesize the rules in a cogent way and to me, that's why we should care about editors.
But you have to understand most writer's don't think what you do is worth a few thousand dollars. They may be wrong (I think they are)but just look at the sheer number of unedited books getting published- hundreds if not thousands a day on kindle, smashwords, feedbooks, etc. Every single one of these people publish without it. You mention the little leagues- maybe you don't agree that the big leagues are bankrupt and collapsing in on themselves like a house of cards?
That's central to my thesis- the entire system is effectively gone- even if there are some holdovers from the old days. There are very very few new writers being discovered by the bigs because their whole system is collapsed and any smart writer who actually believes in what they're doing has no desire to turn over a majority of their money and publishing rights to a giant corporation for the privilege of what? Loss of creative control and no cash for ebooks or audiobooks? Everything is changing- and fast.
I hope I don't have to keep reiterating- I like editors- I agree you guys do a very important job that is vital going forward. But just because I agree doesn't mean you guys don't have a problem. Writers have a different problem- but its just as real.
I don't want to argue. I want to work together to find a solution. But, as with addiction, if you can't see the problem or refuse to admit it's there- you can't help yourself fix it. If you don't think it's a problem then you don't think it's a problem. Ignore me and ignore it.
The irony is- I actually hope you're right- I'm just pretty sure you're not.

[Laura]

I must agree with Naiya, both as a writer and an editor. I've been both, and I've also read some really messy books that surely could have benefited from professional editing. And while I prefer to have beta-readers and friends go through my own work to tell me if things don't flow well, give me their overall impressions and MAYBE point out an error here and there, it is with the knowledge that they are not editors.
We are all entitled to our opinions, and someone who thinks he or she doesn't need a professional editor is not going to be swayed by someone (editor or not) who says otherwise.
But rest assured, those of us who value the skills editors bring to our work know the truth - if we want the best shot of being published traditionally, having a polished, professionally-edited book improves the odds tremendously. (I can't comment on e-publishing.)
Those of us who are editors with education, training and experience under our belts also know the truth of what we offer writers: skills that go beyond the biased eyes of a friend or fan, or even the careful eyes of a beta. And our work speaks for itself.
As for the "system," I think it's a pendulum like so many other things. Perhaps there is a limit to how far it's going to swing in the direction of unpolished self-pubbers. At some point, won't the educated public demand more from their books than drivel? At the very least, it should be well-written drivel. Maybe I'm wrong. Perhaps we are content to read horribly-written novels, slapped together in a weekend writing binge by people simply looking to make it big and laugh all the way to the bank.
I speak for myself when I say I demand more from the books I read. I refuse to read crap, especially unedited crap. The poorly-written books I DO manage to get through, I serve a healthy portion of scolding to (in the form of a review) once I've finished.
And until the pendulum swings back? Well, editing isn't a full-time job for me, so I'm not too concerned. Folks who want a good editor and believe in the investment know where to find me.

[Suzie]

William,
In as few words as possible, what—exactly—is the problem you're trying to solve? You began this discussion with what seemed like a question regarding editing prices, but now you're trying to discuss a problem you have—in all honesty—only alluded to in this discussion. Also, in as few words as possible, what is your proposal and how would it solve the problem?

I am not asking this favor to argue, and I hope I'm not coming across as antagonistic, because I'm not. In fact, I am quite curious and would like to continue the discussion, but sometimes, it's easiest to discuss a topic when it is stripped down to its most basic essentials.

Thanks.

In the meantime, here are a few things I've noticed:

1. The stigma against "Indies" is fading, and relatively quickly when you consider the big picture. Readers are more willing to give indie authors a chance, and they're using their own intelligence to decide if a book is good/to their liking. In any given week now, an average of four of the top ten bestselling books are by indies. That's pretty cool. It's also pretty cool that I have several friends who now refuse to read anything BUT indie works.

2. There has been a notable upswing in requests for editing services. You'll see it in the various forums (such as the KDP communities). The writers who care about the craft of writing and publishing good books, as Laura pointed out, are seeking professional editors. As an editor, I am not concerned about losing business. I don't charge thousands of dollars like some, and there are enough writers out there who believe my services are worth the fees I charge to keep me quite busy.

3. Many of the "authors" who are only hoping to make a quick buck are quickly discovering that there is no such thing. They are sinking to the bottom. Granted, there will always be new crops of "authors" to replace them, but there always have been.

4. If the market continues as it is, readers—not big publishers—will become the Gatekeepers of the publishing world. They will determine which books succeed and which don't, and it will be up to authors to get their books in front of readers. Tying back in to #3, "authors" who don't care enough to put out a polished product are not as likely to put the monumental time and effort into gaining visibility, either.

[William]

Laura- not sure how to make it more clear: I agree with you about the importance of editors. But again, you are talking about right now. I am not. You are talking about 'being published traditionally' and I am saying that entire system is dead- a zombie still moving but no longer relevant. I am talking about what we do when the zombie drops on its face. Maybe you don't think 'traditional publishing' is in jeopardy. I do, and I don't think I'm alone in this view.
The internet and computers generally (have you seen the Oculus Rift yet? It's amazing) are changing the paradigms of entertainment. Anyone who doesn't think kids are shifting away from reading novels(and have been for a long time)- you don't know any teachers or children. The internet is changing how content is made, how it is consumed and by whom. That change will only accelerate when the internet becomes wearable (Google glass, Iwatch, etc) The shift is as fundamental as our change from an earth-centric to sun-centric worldview and thinking things are just going to go la la la in the same way they always have is to ignore history.
Shit, the entire idea of a book (as static words printed on paper and bound) is in jeopardy. The assumption that something that always was will always be is a dangerous one. Or, maybe the printed book will flourish in the future? The point is- we don't know and I want to explore the possibilities.
Respectfully, I'm trying to find people that want to think about and explore what shape of where we're going- I don't want to argue with people about how things are now because I don't actually disagree with you.

[William]

Sorry, there were comments while I was writing mine- I just want to say it's not 'end of the world' its a bright- exciting- excellent time- the most exciting ever as far as I'm concerned. I agree- I want readers to decide what books they want to read. I agree a well edited book is what EVERY writer should have without exception. I agree well edited books are what readers want. The answer to what problem do I want to solve is this: I want to figure out how to keep the old system from coming back and how to create a new system that will keep the novel relevant to the kids that are coming up now- while keeping creative control in the hands of the people creating the content.
This requires conjecture and speculation and discussion- not hard answers. That's what I'm trying to get at. Its a really broad issue- maybe hard to properly discuss in this format.

[Suzie]

I understand a little better where you're going now. Thank you.

I have taught at both the middle school and high school levels, and I currently work with teens at my local Boys & Girls Club. Kids are still reading and enjoying books at roughly the same percentages as they were twenty years ago. There are still the kids who like to read and the kids who don't. Unfortunately, thanks to the limitless distractions of modern technology, the attention spans of today's kids are noticeably shorter than even my generation. Even the kids who like to read today are shocked when I tell them I read the whole of Anne McCaffrey's Pern books in fourth grade. Sadly, I agree that the love for the beauty of the written word does seem to be fading in the this visually-orientated world. Then again, there are still millions upon millions of people who cherish books—publishing is still a multi-billion dollar industry—and technology is actually helping to bolster it, in its own way. I know of a few people who never used to read who are now ravenous readers because of the marvelous invention called the e-reader. I don't think books are going to go away anytime soon, at least not in my lifetime. There are simply too many people left who love to read.

[Laura]

William - Gotcha. I guess I got swept away by other comments that strayed a bit from your original topic. As a former reporter, it still hurts to admit that print journalism is changing. Some say it's dead (much like you discuss traditional books and publishing).
Okay, here's my two cents: I think that kind of thinking is a self-fulfilling prophesy. If people say these mediums are dead, they will stop buying them, perhaps in an effort to be on the cutting edge of the new media. If enough folks do this, then yes, I think it will really hurt both industries.
Change is unavoidable, but it would really be a shame if someday I no longer had the option of buying a newspaper printed on paper, or a physical book with a cover and binding and pages that I can dog-ear and write on to my heart's content. Bit I digress.
It's hard to imagine exactly what the landscape will look like 10 or 20 years from now. Perhaps all publishing houses will fold, put out of business by those self-pubbers. Perhaps there will be some sort of business regulation or changes to copyright law to protect the publishing houses and maintain their relevance. I have no idea.
What I do know is that as long as I have the ability to, I will purchase real books to read, as well as borrow e-books from the library.

[Suzie]

Laura, I'm with you. There's no way an ebook will ever provide the same intimacy with a story as a printed book I can hold and flip through, which is why, as an independent author, I refuse to ditch my paperbacks :) I believe—hope—there are enough traditionalists out there like us who love the feel of a real, bound book to keep them coming for some time. Food for thought:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001...

[Jim]

When CD's came out everyone quit buying vinyl records, mostly because of the convenience of the CD. There's no comparison in the quality of sound. The digital CD just doesn't have the warm sound of the analog vinyl record. Years later, vinyl is starting to make a comeback. It'll never make it back to its past glory days, but it isn't dead.

I think the same thing will happen to print books. Their sales will continue to fall but won't go away completely and will eventually make a comeback. I'm a big fan of the eBooks, but I completely understand about the feeling of a printed book in your hand. The younger generation has grown up with digital books and don't have that connection to print.

[Ryder]

I had my first book pubbed by a small press. Before I sent it out I had friends read it, and for the most part, they caught all the little things, spelling, grammar, punctuation. But when I worked with the editor at LL-Publications, I realized that editors do a lot more than spell check. Leslie Brown found unfinished thoughts that didn't get picked up later, lack of echo and mirroring that left the story a little flat, and a dozen other things that I can't think of at the moment. My story improve exponentially, and was still my story--I used my words, my way of putting them together, etc., but with her keen eye, I was able to see things I'd missed from looking at the story for so long and knowing it so well. Even letting it sit until it was cold didn't help me see how to improve it so much. If you don't want to pay an editor for spelling, grammar, etc., use your friends, assuming they know what's best in a pubbed book--what will sell and what will turn the reader off--but don't assume that because you polished it, it can't be improved upon by have eyes on it that are experienced in editing professionally.
My best friend has been a reader of fiction all her life. She devours books. But when she read my writing, she never noticed that I tended to start a dozen sentences a page with 'he' or 'she'. She didn't notice that I have favorite words that tend to show up in the script dozens of times. She didn't notice that the story could be improved a lot by changing the pov of one character.
She wants me to succeed, and she does the best she can, but she's not an editor, she's a reader.
Ryder