Fans of Interracial Romance discussion
Authors/Writers' Corner
>
Who's To Blame For Errors In A Book?
date
newest »

Hi Arch. I can see where you're coming from. There seems to be a disconnect between the final manuscript and publication. I don't think it's fair to blame it all on the writer. I think there should be some safety nets there. And also I don't think that it's fair to the writer who turns in a spotless manuscript that has been typeset or transcribed into a published book with errors after the fact. I think that there are readers who are way too hard on writers in that respect. At the same time, I believe that the publishers should work to release a quality product. I hope that makes sense.
BTW, I admit I hate editing my stories. I know I miss things, even when I try to do a good job. Something I definitely need to work on.
BTW, I admit I hate editing my stories. I know I miss things, even when I try to do a good job. Something I definitely need to work on.
Danielle, you are a good storyteller. I like what you are doing on here. You are sharing some of your stories on your home page.
All great stories aren't on a bookshelf.
I know that you want to be a published author one day, but if a publishing company doesn't make your dream come true. Step out and do it yourself.
The internet is a writer's publishing ground. People maybe getting your story for free, but your work it getting out there. Your name is getting out there.
Whenever an internet writer gets a book published and they have their real name on the book and their internet name on the book, if their internent name isn't their real name. I'm sure someone will recognize the internet name. Especially if that reader is following that writer's internet stories.
All great stories aren't on a bookshelf.
I know that you want to be a published author one day, but if a publishing company doesn't make your dream come true. Step out and do it yourself.
The internet is a writer's publishing ground. People maybe getting your story for free, but your work it getting out there. Your name is getting out there.
Whenever an internet writer gets a book published and they have their real name on the book and their internet name on the book, if their internent name isn't their real name. I'm sure someone will recognize the internet name. Especially if that reader is following that writer's internet stories.

You also, don't want to be the kind of writer that does everything by the book. If you read literature, you will know that some of the most popular writers broke the rules. James Joyce frequently wrote long, unpunctuated run on sentences, and his book Ulysses is considered one of the greatests books ever written by scholars. At the same time, it is considered by some to be one of the mose unreadable books ever written.
In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with a sentence beginning with "And" or even a fragmented sentence, it's all about how your story flows when you read it. If you're into the story, and the sentences flow very well, how dumb is it to stop because that author broke the rules of writing? What's funny is everyone has their own rules as they've learned it in their head. So where do we draw the line with it?
My problem with bad writing is not misspelled words because I haven't seen those as much as I've seen basic grammar rules broken to the point that it interrupts the flow of the story. Editing goes far beyond misspelled words and rules. These are things I expect the editors and publishers to catch.
A big part of the problem lay with regular folks starting their own online publishing houses. These people have little or no training in the publishing field. They think because they have a college degree, it entitles them to do this. We've all been to school, but then we all need refresher courses. Then others employ their own writers (who cannot edit well) to edit another writer's work. I also think the main problem is time, when people rush to get their work out, so they don't have time to really read through the story to correct the errors. Another problem is I've heard where editors have brought errors to the attention of their writers and the writers have refused to make the changes.
Unfortunately, inevitably, it's the writer. That's my work and I'm ultimately responsible for it. Now, if the publisher puts out my work without my final say, then I can say the fault is mine. I know one writer, who went behind the editor and re-edited her work and found countless more errors.
I've put a lot of hours into editing to the point where I haven't yet finished my first book. I still find stuff that bugs me. Fortunately, I've found a good friend who I respect as a reader and her grammar is pretty good and she's become my critique partner.
All writers need someone to look over their work. As much learning as I have had, I still make mistakes as do all writers. I've had writers tell me that they are happy with their skills as they are, and they have fans who love them. They don't feel the need to improve themselves. And I find it hard to get through reading their stories.
As harsh as I may sound, I'm really not that hard with the rules. As long as your story flows, it makes sense and I'm enjoying it, that's all that matters to me. Still, a few grammar classes wouldn't hurt a few people.
I believe that a writer needs to know about grammar, but I don't believe that an editor knows more about grammar than alot of writers.
Just because someone is an editor, it doesn't mean they know a grammar book from cover to cover.
A lot of people try to make it seems as if editors don't make grammar mistakes and I know that they aren't exempt from mistakes.
I could be wrong, but I believe that editors use programs to help them with editing a book.
Just because someone is an editor, it doesn't mean they know a grammar book from cover to cover.
A lot of people try to make it seems as if editors don't make grammar mistakes and I know that they aren't exempt from mistakes.
I could be wrong, but I believe that editors use programs to help them with editing a book.

If these people are using a program, then God help them. I know at my job, we are expected to print out and do a line by line edit. Screen editing is not reliable. I've done both where I've done screen editing and then when I've done a line by line print edit, I've found mistakes I missed. There are some things you can do with a program, but there isn't a program out there that will pick up everything.
I don't know if editors use programs, I am just thinking that it's possible that some of them do. I have heard of a program called Grammar expert. Programs will not pick up a lot of errors.
I think that going over a story line by line is a good way to find errors.
I strongly believe that editors are looking for certain errors, when they edit a book.
I've noticed that when I've talked to editors or even read about editors - there are two things that it said that they look for when editing. Typos and punctuations.
Grammar is more than typos and punctuations.
How about sentence structure?
Does an editor has to make sure that every complete sentence has a subject and a verb?
Does an editor has to know about nouns, pronouns, direct object, indirect object, linking verbs, action verbs, glossary of usage, fragment sentences, etc.?
A lot of readers are hard on writers, I doubt that many of them know a grammar book cover to cover.
Writing is not easy. There's so much to writing.
I think that going over a story line by line is a good way to find errors.
I strongly believe that editors are looking for certain errors, when they edit a book.
I've noticed that when I've talked to editors or even read about editors - there are two things that it said that they look for when editing. Typos and punctuations.
Grammar is more than typos and punctuations.
How about sentence structure?
Does an editor has to make sure that every complete sentence has a subject and a verb?
Does an editor has to know about nouns, pronouns, direct object, indirect object, linking verbs, action verbs, glossary of usage, fragment sentences, etc.?
A lot of readers are hard on writers, I doubt that many of them know a grammar book cover to cover.
Writing is not easy. There's so much to writing.

Just because someone is an editor, it doesn't mean they know a grammar book from cover to cover.
A lot of people try to make it seems as if editors don't make grammar mistakes and I know that they aren't exempt from mistakes."
Well, no, not because someone is an editor doesn't mean they'll know everything about grammar. But they ought to as best as can possibly be. Why? Because they're trained professionals, that's what they are being paid for. That's usually a large part of their specialty.
If we all were to take the attitude that hey just because s/he's a doctor doesn't mean he will know 10cc from 20cc or just because this person is a make up artist doesn't mean they'll know how to apply the right shade of foundation to different types of skin tone, we'd have a serious problem on our hands.
No, they don't always have to know, but they should as much as possible. That's why we live in a market economy, where people are specialists in their chosen fields. We pay them for this specialised service. If they don't deliver accordingly, its in our right to get rid of them if you can.
That is not to say there isn't room for human error. Of course there is, but your errors shouldn't outweigh your expertise. If it does you're in the wrong profession. Therefore I'd say it IS an editor's business (literally) to know about grammar than a writer. That doesn't mean that writers don't know grammar themselves, but editors get paid to know more than the average person about grammar (including the writer as the case may be).
I don't particularly care how the books are edited really. If a programme is used or a dozen line editors ... as long as the book is free of glaring and disruptive errors, that's what's important.
I also agree with Chaeya. The same logic applies to the writer in many ways too. If you, as a writer take pride in your work, you ought to take every measure to ensure it is of the best quality. Furthermore, in the cutthroat environment that is publishing today your aim as writer is to make an overworked editor's job as painless as possible in an effort to increase your chances of making the sale. After all, you're selling a product as well as a story.
However, that said, at the core of it it's the editor's duty to ensure that the final product they offer up to the market provides value to the consumer. When an editor endeavours to purchase your work they can ask you to make changes pertaining to plot and or character development and even grammar, but writers are not writers because they're linguists. They're writers because they're storytellers and plot/character development would be arguably more within there expertise than grammar. That's just my take on it at least. Moreover, after a certain point in the process between an editor and a writer its all out of your (the writer's) hands. Thus making it, at the end of the day, the editors duty to ensure the final product is at its best.
Another thing to point out is that there are different type of "editors". Last time I checked LINE editors are usually responsible for grammar, while acquisition editors (also known simply as editors) scout for talent and eventually make the final decision on whether your book gets published. Please correct me if I'm wrong, those among us who are published.

I agree with you there. And a lot of writers are hard on other writers and don't know what they're talking about. A writer posted a blurb up and asked for critiques, so I critiqued. I admit, I'm a hardbutt when people ask me to critique, but it isn't to be mean. There was a lot I found not working for me, but I said that a writer has the final say over their story. I could tell she didn't like what I said, especially since everyone else on the board said it was fine. So she went and critiqued a blurb I had on my page. She told me I had some things wrong that wasn't grammatically wrong, but she felt it was. When I told her that I tend to write more in the European fashion, I offered grammar cites to support me; she insisted she was correct because some newspaper editor told her it was incorrect. Um, here's the point that not all editors know everything.
Honestly, I think people just like to complain and down other people so they can appear smart. Most of them don't know what they're talking about, can't support anything with facts and talk out their butts. That's why I stopped hanging out on a lot of reader boards because I just got tired of the complaints. Just read the darn book and enjoy the story. I know an author whose stories I love. Yeah, she's self published, so there are a few errors here and there, but I enjoy her stories so much, I don't mind.
I think it comes from the fact that Romance has a hard time being accepted in the book world. Even though it pulls in way more money than literary fiction and non-fiction, you still get other authors and readers talking smack about it. So readers and authors try to compensate by appearing they are well read grammar goddesses and they are well-learned in the area -- when many are not.
Grammar tends to be a touchy subject like politics and religion. Everyone will have their own ideas on how things should be done. I myself think there is basic grammar and there is still a lot of gray are in between where the rules can be bent here and there --- and, despite what agents and editors like to tell writers, you don't have to be Nora Roberts to bend the rules. All they really care about is if your book sells.
Just my couple of cents. Good subject to talk about.

I hang around Amazon a lot and I can definitely see where everyone has something to complain about. It's like a competition. They hate everything from the heroes, the heroines to the grammar, the setting, the way how the characters talk blah blah blah. It's a never ending lamentation. I almost NEVER make complains about grammar unless its so glaring you can not avoid missing it.
Writing is not easy, but complaining is.
I recall one Amazon member stating in more ways than one that she couldn't believe an author pinpoint her errors in her review, after she wrote a review about the errors in an author's story.
If a person is going to pinpoint my grammar errors, they better believe that I will pinpoint their grammar errors.
I feel that all writers should do that to readers, who does that to them.
I recall one Amazon member stating in more ways than one that she couldn't believe an author pinpoint her errors in her review, after she wrote a review about the errors in an author's story.
If a person is going to pinpoint my grammar errors, they better believe that I will pinpoint their grammar errors.
I feel that all writers should do that to readers, who does that to them.

This is something I've had problems with because why should it care what a character does in a book? It's a story and the author is relating a story. Why should a character conform to our morals and ethics? This is one of the biggest problems with Romance that I have. Some of the greatest romance stories in literature involved women behaving badly, men behaving badly.
I think there are plenty of authors out there who write "feel good" books and I'm not criticizing a reader wanting that, because I have my "feel good" authors too. But at the same time, I'm interested in where an author is taking me with their characters and the predicaments they get in.
As a writer, I don't want to get locked into a reader's codes and ethics. I'd rather tell them outright, my characters may say something or do something that will probably bother them. We all have our codes and ethics. Mine may not match with yours, so telling an author something offended you is kind of a moot point.
One time, a critiquer told me one of the men in my stories said something sexist and it offended her. I told her that my husband sometimes do that, as do a lot of men I know. So me making this man "politically correct" really takes away from his realness.
This is something that has often made me want to rethink writing exclusively for the Romance genre.

I have to point out, however, that is not what I said.
What I said is that if I'm critiquing a writer pal's work, I'd stick to the points which are likely to improve her / his story: plot, character, pace. If I've read a book by an author I've never met (let's say Lora Leigh) and that book contains stuff that I don't like, I'll comment on the plot, character and pace as well as the issues I had with the book, based on my moral codes and ethics.
I said I would criticise the act (for eg partner sharing) of something that offended me, but not the author. In other words, I wouldn't criticise the author's freedom to write about a certain topic, even if it bothers me. I don't like reading about partner sharing -- it just doesn't fall within my personal taste -- but does that mean I'll stop reading Lora Leigh books all together? Of course not. She writes some books with sharing and others without. I quite like the ones without because she's a good writer, and I'll continue to read those.
I'm pretty sure you've read such books you didn't like and commented on it? Doesn't mean you're saying the author should cater to your personal codes and ethics. You're just saying it's not within your code and ethics so that contributed to why you didn't like it. See what I mean?
It would be a difficult task for every entertainer to cater to everyone. Under those circumstances I don't think we'd have any entertainers at all.

I believe that a reader can not like something that a character says or does and state that in their review. That doesn't mean that the reader is against the author.
There is nothing wrong with choosing not to read certain authors because you are not comfortable with the subject matter in their stories, either. I believe time is valuable. You should spend it on things that you deem worthy of your time. Just like it's a writer's choice to write what they want, it's the reader's choice not to read their book. That's not censorship.

No worries.

I agree and this is where authors should be honest about what's in their book which many times blurbs don't cover. I am all for putting a label on books about content, especially with romance and sex is involved. If you don't like menages and all of a sudden a menage appears in the middle of the book, then the reader can make a decision whether she or he wants to read that or skip the book altogether.
I've seen where certain e-books had sufficient stamps of what was in the book and on Amazon you see a complaint about the excessive sex. If they had taken the time to check out the author, read the reviews, they would have known the book had a lot of sex in it. Then again, there have been some books where the blurb on the cover tells a person nothing.

One would be excused for thinking that this book is an historical romance along the lines of an Eloisa James or Loretta Chase. One would be wrong. The sexual content of this story is explicit, graphic and frequent.
The book created quite a sensation. Many, many people absolutely loved it. To be fair, the love story was quite nice. Others were outraged and shocked that they were duped into buying porn and blasted their outrage right onto the author. My understanding is that she supposedly received awful, hate mail.
Now, this book was supposed to be the first in a three, or maybe it was four, book series, with the followup book Patience being released the following year. Well, every so often the author would post to her web page with an announcement of the actual release date and that date would come and go. Supposedly, the hate mail upset her so much that she had a nervous breakdown. I don't know this 100% but that is the rumor. And it has caused the delay in her delivering the finished book.
Over time, people started to get very angry at the delay. So now, you not only have the original people who were pissed off at her for the sexual content -- which really, the bad marketing is not her fault -- but you also have some of her original fans who are mad at her for making them wait five years for the follow up book. She can't win.
The whole kerfuffle, is really on the head of the publishing house. They really did deliver a wolf in sheep's clothing and the fall-out, wrongly, imo, is on the head of the author.

I wish her all the best because I understand how getting a bunch of people blaming her for what's on her book can get to her. Then again, she could take the negative press and run with it to her advantage.

Many people, particularly those who are not familiar with publishing, will often turn on the author because he/she is the easiest target available.
I read Passion. It didn't really rock my world as much as it did others, but it wasn't a bad book. It gave a somewhat reflective, sometimes poignant, look at love and how it is born between two people. I was looking forward to the second installment, though not in a wildly anticipatory manner. I'm glad, though, to hear it's finally due for a summer(?) release.
As for me, if I should ever go pro, I'll probably avoid reading fan mail. Not because I'm overly sensitive to critique, but because my smart mouth would likely get me into trouble more than me end up having a nervous breakdown. lol


That reminds me about how wildly different authors can respond to criticism. About a month or so ago, a reviewer on Amazon posted a one-star review of a book called Electra Galaxy's Interstellar Feller by Candace Sams. A person on Amazon responded in the comments taking issue with the review (claiming they should leave reviewing to professionals like Harriet Klausner). Turns out this person was the author herself. Well, this author went on a comment frenzy and was really belligerent. The original reviewer, after responding to the first post, simply bowed out of the discussion, very graciously. But the author continued on with really insulting posts. More and more people came along and started to respond and the whole thing got crazy. It got to the point where other authors were coming onto the thread and advising her to please step away from the computer. I think the thread is still there on Amazon. Really just bizarre.
By contrast, on the Smart Bitches website they did a hysterical review of this book called Pregnesia. It is a Harlequin, I kid you not. And the premise is about as silly as the name. But the author, Carla Cassidy, comes onto the Smart Bitches site and giggles and snarks along with everyone else. She basically gained a ton of fans just for her good-natured response.

I think it's important for an author to learn to develop a thick skin. I guess I've learned mine from being a musician.

But when I see people being stupid like in the Lisa Valdez case, blaming authors because they dare to include certain content in their books and saying hurtful things about something you have no control over, in that situation I'd probably be tempted to put the lot of them in their place; and that would probably only hurt me as a writer in the long run.
I believe that writers and readers should have a thick skin, because readers should be aware that some writers may tell them something. Some in a good way and some in a bad way.
If a reader tells an author that they can't write, the writer might ask them to show them how to write, since they believe the author can't write.
If a reader tells an author that they can't write, the writer might ask them to show them how to write, since they believe the author can't write.

http://tokyogirl79.livejournal.com/

(Sorry if this is too long but I wanted to comment and explain my experiences and what I know as an author.)
Well, as a published author I say it depends on what the mistakes are and how many times they were overlooked. I think all books have mistakes. My books are with a big pub and they had a few mistakes. No book is perfect I believe.
I'll say it like this. It's mine and the editor at the house and possibly my agent. It can be all people's faults.
It's mine if I had mistakes from the getgo and didn't catch them. Then it's my agent's if she didn't catch them, then it's the goo-globs of in-house editors' faults if they didn't catch them. It takes a lot of people involved in publishing the book so everyone has to take responsibility. Authors aren't perfect and we make mistakes. But there are others like our agents, editors at the houses who are supposed to catch these mistakes. It's the editors job to go over the manuscript with a fine tooth comb before it goes to print.
I don't know any author who doesn't make any mistakes. I don't know any editor or agent who hasn't either, LOL! It's funny that it takes all these people, hundreds sometimes to be in charge of a book title and mistakes are still made. I chalk it up to it being expected. As long as the mistakes aren't huge mistakes someone else made (and I didn't) then I gotta accept if there are mistakes.
Also authors are given that chance to see their manuscript one final time after the editors have gone through them. So maybe then it is my fault if I am the last one to see it and still didn't pick up on any mistakes.
I take responsibility anyway because it's my name on the book and I don't have a choice. I don't mind. I'm a big girl (truthfully 6'0 tall) and big enough to realize I am not perfect and all humans make mistakes. I don't make excuses if a mistake is in my book. I take responsibility because it is my book and that's part of being the author. It might not be fair but no one sees the agent's name or the editor's names on the books. The name they see is mine. It's not always easy though, to say who is to blame. Books pass through many hands before they are printed and every one of those people who didn't catch that mistake share a little of the responsibility.
About editors, different editors have a responsibility to handle different things, At a house there are different types of editors(many, many, many) and they all have a specific job, checking for different things. They focus on their area of expertise or what they are trained to do. There's an editor at a house that does line by line. There's an editor that works on content issues. There's an editor who double checks historial facts and does research if your books include these things. There's an editor who checks for "quotes" etc, or anything you might need permission to use. There are editors that work with the author or author's agent and goes to bat with others in the house if there are any issues to arise. These editors do not perform the same job. There is not only one editor at a publishing house ever. Even small pubs have many editors.
The part about writers catching their own mistakes and editing. All writers need to be able to edit or they can forget getting published. But no writer is perfect. I take at least two months just to polish a manuscript. And after all that hundreds of times I go over it there are still things that someone else might catch that I never would. So the point is not to say writers can't catch their mistakes, it's a fact that you need more than two pairs of eyes on that book. Authors are very close to our work. We might not realize mistakes that need to be fixed. I don't mean just grammar and sentence structure.
There are other things authors need to be double-checked on:
1. Content issues
2. Pacing
3. Tension & Flow
4. Repetitive Words (sometimes you can check for these and still repeat words too much)
5. Correct scene breaks
6. POV issues
7. Showing Vs. Telling
8.Action Vs. narrative
9. Elements of Dialogue
I know about all of this and study it and use it. I know how to edit and revise my work to a T. I mentor aspiring writers online about these things. I write articles on how to hone your craft. My work is clean before it hits my agent's desk. It is very clean. I mean, I whip that baby into shape, LOL. But is it perfect? No and it never will be. No author in the world has ever, ever, ever not needed extra eyes. And if someone says their work is perfect without extra help, it's not possible. So yes, those extra eyes are important if they come from people who know how a novel should be written properly.
The thing about the two eyes is that you can catch mistakes in other people's work they cannot catch. That's why two or more eyes is important. I could catch many mistakes in a fellow writers book that they might not have seen just like they could catch some I might have missed. The point is that an author is too close to the manuscript. It has nothing to do with the editor's eyes because they are seeing that book in a different way. When we read our own books we don't see the same "types" of mistakes. That's the point. That is why you need extra eyes.
Believe me there is no author who is published (not self-published), published by a house and or who has an agent who has never had an extra pair of eyes. If a writer thinks they don't need extra eyes they aren't ever going to be published unless they do it on their own. So that's why the "extra eyes" is important. I can catch mistakes in someone else's book that they missed and it goes the same about my work.
That's the point of that. LOL! Hope I helped anyone.
Best Wishes!
http://www.stacy-deanne.net
Thank you for your reply Stacy-Deanne.
I know that when a pulbished book hit the stand and if it has mistakes, it's not only the authors fault, but the author gets slammed by a lot of readers, who themselves probably don't even know what it's like to write. Writing a review and writing period is different.
I'm glad that you have made it known that editors make mistakes as well. I know that editors aren't exempt from mistakes. No matter who they are.
Writing is not easy. I'm not afraid to admit that to anyone and writing is truly my talent.
I know that when a pulbished book hit the stand and if it has mistakes, it's not only the authors fault, but the author gets slammed by a lot of readers, who themselves probably don't even know what it's like to write. Writing a review and writing period is different.
I'm glad that you have made it known that editors make mistakes as well. I know that editors aren't exempt from mistakes. No matter who they are.
Writing is not easy. I'm not afraid to admit that to anyone and writing is truly my talent.
I appreciated you sharing your thoughts, Stacy-Deanne. I wish that the publishing companies didn't push the writers so hard to get the books out so soon. I feel it affects the writing quality in some of the ongoing series.

I can't tell you the number of books that I have read where incorrect grammar and misspelled words completely ruined the story for me!
There's just no way around it. If you have to stop to figure out what word the author is trying to use, then you cannot concentrate on the flow of the story.
Don't authors return to their first draft and do some editing before submitting to their editors?
I've seem some out of the world grammatical errors, misspelled words, incorrect punctuation that sometimes I have to ask myself if the story was written by an 8 year old...
Michelle,
Before a book hits the bookstores, who gets to read it first? The author, editor, publisher or all three?
Before a book hits the bookstores, who gets to read it first? The author, editor, publisher or all three?
A lot of readers blame the author if their are errors in their book and they will say some nasty things in reviews. I think they if a reader has a problem with the book, they shouldn't say ugly things in a review. They should contact the writer if there's an email address or even snail address. If not, then contact the publisher. They are listed in the book as well.
All mistakes in a book is not the author's fault. I know that some authors will take the blame, no matter what, because that's their work.
I would probably take the blame as well for my book, if I was to get one published and it had errors in it.
I don't desire to be published. I don't even like the idea that an editor can put their hands in an author's book. If I didn't write something, then an addition shouldn't be in my book.
All mistakes in a book is not the author's fault. I know that some authors will take the blame, no matter what, because that's their work.
I would probably take the blame as well for my book, if I was to get one published and it had errors in it.
I don't desire to be published. I don't even like the idea that an editor can put their hands in an author's book. If I didn't write something, then an addition shouldn't be in my book.
I'm glad they have libraries. I have suggested that people check out "the book", before buying it. That can save a lot of people from feeling like they have wasted their money.
Everyone review books differently.
Everyone review books differently.
Michelle Lauren wrote: "I love my library. I usually check out books, 7 at a time. It's hard to find erotic romances at the library -- some have better selections than others; however, my city libraries are incredibly well-stocked with romance and romantic fiction. I go there every week. So often the librarians known my name. ;D"
My libraries know me as the woman that buy books.
I haven't been to the library in a while. Hopefully, when I do get a chance to go back, I hope I can find a couple or few BWWM books.
I don't own a lot of them. Only a few.
I want books with good themes. I don't want books where race is an issue.
My libraries know me as the woman that buy books.
I haven't been to the library in a while. Hopefully, when I do get a chance to go back, I hope I can find a couple or few BWWM books.
I don't own a lot of them. Only a few.
I want books with good themes. I don't want books where race is an issue.
Books mentioned in this topic
Passion (other topics)Patience (other topics)
I have stated this on another group that I am on and it has offended some people. I haven't stated my opinon to offend anyone, but sometimes a person's words will offend someone no matter what.
I stand on my opinion.
I'm not trying to offend anyone on here either, but this is how I feel.
I have read other sites on the internet that believes that an English teacher can't be an editor and that's their opinion. I know an excellent English teacher and I think that if she wanted to be an editor, she would do a fine job!
I'm not just saying this because I am a writer, because I am not a published writer. People need to stop blaming authors for errors in their books. I could be wrong, but I am sure, a lot of authors will take the blame, because their name is on the product. But, if a published author have editors and proofreaders going over their work to find errors and fix them, then why aren't the editors and proofreaders being blamed for the errors in the book?
It's sad, but it's true. A lot of people will see a misspelled word in a book and not even finished the book and erase that author's name from their memory. They'll refuse to read another book by that author, because of that error.
I could be wrong and please any published author correct me, if I am. I don't mind being corrected. An editor is only looking for certain errors in a manuscript, right? I don't believe that he or she dissects every sentence in the manuscript, to make sure that it is following the grammar rules. There is no way that's being done, because if it was - a book wouldn't have fragment sentences in them and we wouldn't see sentences start with the word, "And."
I know that some people don't believe that a writer can fix their own errors in their stories, but I honestly believe that they can. I'm on a writer's forum, where other writers believe that they can find their own mistakes as well. I believe it takes patience. Writers tend to write, but how many of us, really take out the time to proofread our own work?
Think about all those essays, term papers, etc. you have made A's on in school. Who was your editor then?
If a writer miss errors with his or her two eyes. How can an editor that has two eyes as well be exempt from errors?
If a writer needs an editor, does that means that an editor needs an editor?
We all make mistakes. Error in books shows that editors make mistakes as well.
I'm going to be honest. When I write an installment to Courage, I post it after I write my last sentence. I don't look over the installment for errors. Now, I have glanced at a few installments afterwards and found errors and I have corrected them both in Word and on the group.
I don't know how many people on this group wants to get something published one day. My advice to you is to believe in yourself. Write for yourself. Keep a grammar book handy and of course learn grammar. Keep a dictionary/thesaurus handy. Be your number one editor. I know that you might want to use a paid editor to look over your work and that's your right, but please keep in mind that he or she is human and they can make mistakes as well.
And last but not least, I don't know who gets the last say so in regards to an author's book, but make sure you get to see your book, before it's printed. Be your editor's editor.
I'm going to blog about this issue in a few hours.
Again, I hope that I haven't offended anyomre. If I did, please accept my apology, because I'm not trying to offend anyone.
I'm only speaking my opinion.