(no subject)

[randomsome1.livejournal.com]

I know we all like to grouch about the slipshod editing in LKH's recent books--but how much of it is really the editor's fault? Yes, it's their job, but there're only so many typos a poor soul's brain can handle before it melts down. Imagine trying to correct hundreds of pages of text that looks anything like her "sneak peeks." Now imagine doing so within a relatively short period of time, all while knowing that this crazy woman has an ego the size of Micah's wang and that she, the super-speshul Big Name Author, isn't good at taking crit/rejection. Scary as hell, isn't it?

Likewise, this was recently posted at the Writer Beware blog:

Editors are congenial souls, for the most part, who don't mind taking a pen and fixing the occasional typo, or incorrect tense usage, or subject-verb agreement. Anyone can make a boo-boo from time to time. Writers are expected to make such boo-boos RARELY. They're expected to use spell-check, and to proofread their work with great attention. But nobody is perfect, and editors understand this.

That said, editors just don't have time to give your manuscript a close read and red-pencil every line. Getting your manuscript relatively error-free is YOUR job as the author. It's NOT the editor's job.

So in all likelihood, it's not so much that the editor's shitty, it's that dear Laurell has broken them. It may be a miracle that the books come out as error-free as they do.

*isn't excusing "diety," but still wonders how bad the sex scenes were before editing*

Comments

[dracoliciousss.livejournal.com]

I understand the value of turning in a relatively clean manuscript, but at the same time, by having an editor (or team of editors) that doesn't closely pick apart LKH's terrible grammar and spelling, it makes the entire publishing team look bad. So while it is LKH's fault to an extent, she's got a big enough name where she or her company can hire the best editors to look over her drafts before printing.

[randomsome1.livejournal.com]

That'd kinda suck too . . . "She's got another book coming. Yeah, that one. We'll need about three of you, and the biggest bottle of vodka available."

But yeah, I agree that the state of things reflects badly on the publisher as well. You'd think they would've learned after ID to bring in that team.

And I don't know about you, but I don't know what I'd have to be paid or how many other people I'd need for backup in order to make it through one of her works in any decent amount of time.

[dracoliciousss.livejournal.com]

As a joke, I edited Danse Macabre with a red pen, and had a childish fantasy of sending it back to the publishing co. with all of the corrections. Instead, it sits on my shelf as a reminder that there is no one so good that they do not need an editor.

[tooimpurenangel.livejournal.com]

You should send it. I know several people who have sent their books back for the same reason.

[keepsake]

I dunno. I've done proofreading work (for catalogs, not books, but still, proofreading is proofreading) and I think it reflects rather badly on the editors when there are so many typos and mistakes. I know that not everyone is as freakishly nitpicky about grammar, but honestly, isn't that an editor's job? I know it's not easy. But it's possible.

Maybe her editor just doesn't care anymore. I know I wouldn't.

[randomsome1.livejournal.com]

Out of curiosity . . . have you ever gotten submissions that you had to print for whatever reason, but that basically made your eyes bleed? Some of the assignments I get (vanity press stuff) are so bad that I have to put them down and walk away, find myself fighting to get through them, or open the ms to a previously worked-over page and find a big ol' typo that I either missed or (god forbid!) even edited in.

Granted, I'm a n00b and the people who work on LKH's stuff are pros, but there's only so many times you can put something down if you're on a deadline and only so many errors you can process before it completely brutalizes your instincts.

Or they don't care, or are trying to have enough people disgusted to the point that the publisher does something about the quality as a whole. Leaning more towards "don't care" here. :)

[randomsome1.livejournal.com]

Hehehe XD "Forget" to edit, and then do something awful like tweak the page settings or dust jacket summary so every first capital letter spelled their true thoughts on the book.

>.> Not that I've ever had thoughts of doing so before, not I.

[keepsake]

I've gotten some pretty ridiculous things. For example, we've given someone a translation template before and they returned it with bits missing and moved around and practically illegible. How hard is it to fill out a freakin' template?

But yeah, sometimes I wonder how a 19 year-old college sophomore has better grammar and a better eye than some of these so-called professionals.

[cicipsychobunny.livejournal.com]

See, I can understand the argument on behalf of editors, but apparently plenty of big-name authors have atrocious spelling and grammar. Jeffrey Archer is apparently barely literate. But his editors make sure it's publishable.

I just can't believe no one sticks her work through any kind of word processor. Typos, okay, but spelling "deity" "triumvirate" and "suave" wrong EVERY SINGLE TIME would surely be noticed?

[klmorgan.livejournal.com]

Heaven forbid I blame anyone at LHK's publishing house for any of her (many) flaws. I understood they're driven by profit. (Not necessarily a bad thing, but it re-organizes your priorities.)

And certainly editors have a LOT more on their plate than to proofread.

But dude. Where is her copyeditor?

Again, I am not accusatory -- just wildly curious. Does she have one? If not, why not? If she does have one, is she rejecting their changes? Or are they not suggesting any, after years of arguing with her?

Again, not anyone's ultimate fault but LKH's. I mean, even if, say, the wrong copy of a manuscript was printed... any author worth her salt (especially one with LKH's supposed pull at her house) would look at expensive hardcovers FILLED with grammar and spelling mistakes and scream bloody blue murder for someone to make changes, stat.

[randomsome1.livejournal.com]

Unless her copyeditor is Jon.

I'm curious about the inner workings of this trainwreck, now.


I remember hearing something at one point about Stephen King dropping a publisher because he felt/realized that they were only concerned with profit via his name and were thus letting him go downhill. Maybe we're seeing the same thing, only with LKH not really being sharp enough to understand?

[klmorgan.livejournal.com]

I remember hearing something at one point about Stephen King dropping a publisher because he felt/realized that they were only concerned with profit via his name and were thus letting him go downhill.

Wow... he REALLY has no excuse for the last Dark Tower book, then.

*bu-dum-CHING!*


Maybe we're seeing the same thing, only with LKH not really being sharp enough to understand?

But see, it's never the editor's/publisher's place to "guard" the author's quality. I mean, jeez, can you imagine it with a stall of twenty authors (or so) per editor? They'd never get anything else done -- the stuff they're hired to do, like establish who'll work marketing and who's doing the cover art and whether anyone's interested in movie rights. Or read other agent submissions.

And say you were a published author. Wouldn't you want to have the final word on what your product looks like, how it arrives on the public's doorstep? It's not an editor's place to say: "Look, you're going downhill. Pull yourself up by your bootstraps." Or "I won't publish this until it's a better product." Their job is to sell a product to the public, and if the public keeps buying it, who are the editors to throw themselves in the way?

Now, as a friend they might say any and all of these things, and publishing history has a few of those relationships and similar scenarios. But LKH has made her insecurities and persecution complex very clear. She surrounds herself with yes-men. I highly doubt she would tolerate a "friend" who told her these kinds of things -- if she had any of that temperment in the first place.

I know I'm ranting. ;) It's not at you -- it's just that every time I think I'm done pondering the depths of LKH's crazy, I think about it a little harder, and realize anew how awfully and totally she has fucked herself. And this is a woman I used to really admire for the joi de vivre of her writing.

Final verdict: LKH is making it very clear that she wants to be in this handbasket, thankyouverymuch, and no, she doesn't need directions, she'll take the shortcut going down.

I just have to wonder if any brave souls tried to save her from herself, and what she did to scare them off.

[randomsome1.livejournal.com]

I just have to wonder if any brave souls tried to save her from herself, and what she did to scare them off.

I thought she divorced and then vilified him?


But yes, as long as it's selling I don't see why they'd try to discourage her . . . but then again, it's sold pretty miserably at the Borders where I work. Less than twenty copies, I think; and the amazon.com rating has dropped to two stars. Something's gotta give.


And for the record: I'd spazz out if I thought the people around me were letting me go downhill/weren't giving me honest crit. I don't quite have the same complexes LKH does in regards to my writing/self, though.

[klmorgan.livejournal.com]

But yes, as long as it's selling I don't see why they'd try to discourage her . . .

... and she's made it clear that she's "contrary" and likes to do the opposite of what people tell her. If they made ultimatums, she could EASILY take her bestselling books to another house.

At this point, what can they do to stop her from doing almost anything she wants?


the amazon.com rating has dropped to two stars. Something's gotta give.

Yeah, but that came out months ago. Strange Candy is still on the NYT bestseller list -- and it's a collection of short stories. That says volumes about an author's popularity.

*shrug* Maybe they think she might lose her cred soon, maybe that's why they pushed up Harlequinn's release date... but LKH publishes, what, at least two books a year? At that rate, they don't need to have staying power. As soon as one book's sales slump, she'll be out with another to climb the charts. As much as they snark on them afterwards, people are still buying her books.

[randomsome1.livejournal.com]

Something my one coworker (who's been in book sales for the past twenty years) told me comes to mind: that the NYT bestseller list doesn't reflect how well a book's selling to the public, only how it's sold to the bookstores/booksellers. It's how books immediately come out as bestsellers, when the public hasn't even gotten a hold of them yet. Eighty percent of the books could be shipped back and pulped in three months, but it still could've been a "bestseller."

I'll check tomorrow and see how many copies we've sold, and of what. Just for an idea.

[vanity-lost.livejournal.com]

Now THAT answers so very many questions about best-seller lists... I learn so much from this community. Should I be worried? lol

Maybe Danse Macabre's plummeting ratings and reviews are the reason for the new release date being pushed up? If I was marketing I'd want something to a)get the horrible taste out of the public's mouths/distract them as quickly as possible. or at least b) hit them with a one-two so maybe they'd buy the second one before they thought about it too long.

Book: "No! Look! Here is the explanation! The next part! It gets BETTER!"
Reader: "Oh thank diety! That wasn't what really-" *reads* "..." *reads* "Oh bloody hell."
Book: *is thrown*
Reader: "I can't believe I--"
New Book: "I can explain!"

It's a vicious cycle.

[randomsome1.livejournal.com]

Grah, I had a big post here and it got eaten by the lj monster.

Here we go again: Micah, released back in February, has sold forty-two copies. Danse Macabre, released around the end of June, has sold nineteen with eleven still on-hand, or about five a month.

Strange Candy? Four.

In relation, Janet Evanovich's Motor Mouth, which was released on the same day, has sold thirty-three copies (and sold out at one point), while Barack Obama's book The Audacity of Hope (10/17/2006) has sold twenty-three. I had another book here that's also in the front of the store and has also done better, but I can't read my own writing. :(

[klmorgan.livejournal.com]

but I can't read my own writing. :(

Hee. ;)

Not to disparage your sleuthwork or anything, but... what exactly can we draw from this? I work in a bookstore as well, and I know sales and even stocked merchandise can vary hugely depending on geography, store location, and even the author's proximity. Do you work at a subsidiary of Borders? Barnes and Noble? An independant, or another chain altogether? And that doesn't even take in pre-orders (which would be big for LKH with her built-in fanbase) and internet sales.

I'm not arguing the case either way... except that her house still seems to support her in terms of marketing and design. (And again, publishing a book of short stories. Do you know what kind of name you have to have to do that?)

Plus, keep in mind she's a genre author. Genre -- especially SF/F -- is never expected to sell as well as commercial fiction. Regardless of what publishing house she's at, she's probably still part of a "flock" of a particular editor who only handles genre. That makes her a big star, and seller, of that flock, and that's all the house is focusing on. (They certainly won't compare her to sellers like Obama, who's an international figure, or even Janet Evanovich, who's a name in not one, but two genres that sell better than SF/F.)

My point is that publishers will measure her success by a different standard. And according to that standard, she's still a huge asset. Since she's an asset, even if she might not be such a big one in the years to come, she'll be handled with kid gloves. Mostly because that's what she's indicated she wants.

[randomsome1.livejournal.com]

what exactly can we draw from this?

Not as well as some, not as well as may be told, sometimes not as well as itself. Granted, it's only one Borders out of a whole hell of a lot of bookstores and crossing genre comparisons in interests of keeping a particular release timeframe, but a sampling is still something.

(And again, publishing a book of short stories. Do you know what kind of name you have to have to do that?)

I'd say that it's more a captive reader base (Stephen King's a household name but that doesn't mean everyone charges out and throws money at him), but the end result is the same: sales to die-hard fans.

[klmorgan.livejournal.com]

You know, I think we've gotten a little tangled up in ourselves.

Just to reestablish...

You're arguing that she's not a big big seller anymore, correct?

I'm not arguing against that. I'm saying that regardless of her current sales, she's probably still considered a big draw and an asset to her publishing house -- mainly because they judge her success by different parameters than just sales of a short story collection.

[randomsome1.livejournal.com]

I think what I was going for is that she isn't nearly as big as some of the other things being released at the same time, and that her books aren't as wildly successful as some would have us believe. I think.

But yes, different parameters. And I'm still curious how long it takes or what it takes to go from "big draw" to "big joke."

[klmorgan.livejournal.com]

I think what I was going for is that she isn't nearly as big as some of the other things being released at the same time, and that her books aren't as wildly successful as some would have us believe.

I think MPE exagerrates her success as well -- certainly when it comes to quality of the books, but that's a given.

But if you're curious as to why she's still considered successful (while she still is), it might help to compare her sales to people within her genre. Even when she was at the top of her game, I doubt she would have outsold the two names you listed before.

And I'm still curious how long it takes or what it takes to go from "big draw" to "big joke."

As long as it takes for enough people to stop buying her to the point where the publisher isn't getting a return on its investment.

You mentioned before how Stephen King sells not because everybody "runs out and buys his books," but because he has a loyal fanbase. That's gold to a publisher. Those are garunteed sales. A publisher would rather bank on a sure thing, even if it's a sure thing in slow decline, than take risks on what could be a great talent that the public might not cotton to. The public has declared it liked LKH. Her publishers will continue to back her until her fanbase dwindles to the point where those garunteed sales aren't enough to return the publisher's investment.

And I wonder if that will ever happen. LKH may prove me wrong in her case, but many authors are big names and big jokes at the same time. We don't have to look much farther than Anne Rice. Declining talent? Check. One or two major books she's never quite surpassed in sales in the books since? Yup. Craziness? Many, many tales, and one Amazon.com fiasco she will never live down. Really weird and disgusting, fairly pointless book content? Let's see, we have incestuous rapes, a fairly uninspired S&M trilogy, and Lestat sucking on a used tampon -- pick your poison. Does she still sell?

You bet. Backlist is strong, and she had a bestseller last year.

Fanbases don't die out easily. And even if the old guard -- like people in this community -- leave in disgust at her new trends, there's a new wave of readers who are reading the "bad" books first, and her older stuff later. They're not hugely let down by her new choices, because it wasn't a surprise. I bet they keep buying her books.

But again, LKH may prove me wrong. I guess we just have to sit back and see.

[randomsome1.livejournal.com]

Oh GOD, the Beauty triogy. I'm still amazed at how godawful it is.


Meh. The thing with LKH's decline is that it's taking a while. Without an explosion of batshittery a la Anne Rice, I'll eventually get bored by her antics. And yes, there's really no accounting for the tastes of some people. :P

[ravenclaw-devi.livejournal.com]

To quote what rachel_martin64 said in a different context (http://minisinoo.livejournal.com/359097.html):

The biggest problem is -- call it pride, vanity, arrogance. Call it believing one's own publicity. Best-selling authors who won't accept any negative comment about their work. No one is allowed to edit them. No one is allowed to offer anything but praise. Piss off the best-selling author and he/she takes his/her manuscript away in a huff. So Best-Selling Author is "handled." Only a select few are permitted to communicate with Best-Selling Author. You can be sure that no agent, no editor, no marketing manager, no publicity rep, will dare tell this author the truth about his/her crappy manuscript. No one will dare edit it. And besides, the house's prestige and income may largely depend upon keeping this author in the stable. More incentive to lie about the emperor's new clothes. Behind the author's back the staff is saying, "Who cares if it sucks? You know it'll sell anyway."

[klmorgan.livejournal.com]

Exaaaaaaaaaaaactly. ;)

Which is why Best-Selling Authors should really, really continue to work with the writers' group that saw them through the years up until Best-Selling Authordom.

Except you're dealing with authors, who are by nature easy prey to neurotic self-doubt and crippling jealousy of others' success... and might take it out on Best-Selling Author... or Best-Selling Author might tell themselves that's what happening whenever someone critisizes them...

Hell. I think the moral of the story is: aim for the midlist. =P

[pith]

I've always defended editors because they can only do so much. Depending on the way contracts are set up, most authors see the manuscript one last time before it gets printed. I'm sure LKH gets a chance at a final edit. To me, that puts the onus on her.

I have experience on the writing side and the editing side. As an editor, I try to make a manuscript as flawless as possible, but some authors are, simply put, asses. As a writer, though, I try to make my work as flawless as possible before it gets to the editor. As far as I'm concerned, that's part of the writer's job.

[randomsome1.livejournal.com]

Depending on the way contracts are set up, most authors see the manuscript one last time before it gets printed.

I wasn't sure if that was something that happened in standard publication situations. I know that the one vanity press in the area sends the ms to the editor, then to the author for a final check-up and that's that. The other sends it to the editor, to the author for a checkup, and then back to the editor so they can try to fix what the author's done.

There may be another explanation for "diety" after all, hm?

[pith]

When I was editing full-time, my boss's mantra was thus: "It's the author's right to be wrong." Translation: Fix what you can, but don't sweat over it, because the author has final say." But like I said before, it depends on how the specific company is set up.

I just defend editors because I know it's a hard, thankless job: you get none of the praise, and most of the shit, and I know some editors who have turned mediocre works into jewels, and they get nothing for it aside from their own pride in a job well done.

[catskin.livejournal.com]

I don't know much about the editing side of writing, but I'm pretty sure there are lots of stages - proofreading, copy editing, line editing, etc... Okay, the odd type will slip through, but surely most of them should get caught?

And before it even gets as far as an editor... Spellcheck? Grammarcheck?

[pandorasblog]

Yeah; I always understood that the copy editor was there to catch typos, punctuation problems, and the like. Surely catching mistyped stuff (or persistant misconceptions about the spelling of a particular word, such as deity) doesn't count as changing the fabric of the author's work...

I do know that Anne Rice ended up refusing to work with editors after The Queen of the Damned (which, not coincidentally, is one of the last really good books she did), so it wouldn't surprise me if Laurell is equally precious about her work. And once you're selling as much as she does, you can dictate to your publisher about that stuff... and Laurell strikes me as one who would have a hissy fit even if all they asked was for her to switch on her spellchecker.

[randomsome1.livejournal.com]

Unless for some reason she saw the correction and STETed it? I'm not sure I'd put it past her to think she knew better than the editor.

[catskin.livejournal.com]

Good thinking, Batman. I can imagine her doing that to her appallingly bad sentence fragments and misuse of the comma, but some of the typos? Surely, surely, surely, no matter how much she scrawled STET all over everything, any sane person would change obvious mispellings?

[randomsome1.livejournal.com]

*shrugs* If it's how the author wants it?

[catskin.livejournal.com]

And I guess if the publisher knows the book will sell shitloads anyway, they probably won't mind as much.

[dragonfanguk.livejournal.com]

I would be ashamed to allow my manuscript to reach an editor in the state LKH's manuscripts are printed...

Hell, I have a hard enough time finding an agent, and thats with the manuscript being as near perfect as I can make it.

It annoys the crap out of me that Laurell can be so slip-shod about her writing, and get away with it...

[klmorgan.livejournal.com]

I would be ashamed to allow my manuscript to reach an editor in the state LKH's manuscripts are printed...

Hell, I'd be ashamed to post rough drafts on the internet in the state that she does (http://www.laurellkhamilton.org/Merry/Mistralskisschapterone.html)...

[michael-b-lee.livejournal.com]

I maintain that the biggest reason that so much atrocious mistakes get through the copyedit process is because LKH turns the books in so late that the editors don't have time to give the manuscripts the attention they desperately need. I would be willing to bet that if some far braver soul than I went back and charted the rise of typos and grammatical errors, it would roughly coincide with the beginning of the Merry Gentry series. When she went to two novels a year her deadlines began to slip farther and farther behind.

It's a theory, but its based on experience.

[dwg.livejournal.com]

I know when I was editing, we were told time and again to do soft edits - correct spelling mistakes and the odd bit of punctuation - but leave the rest alone, because we needed to get back to the author for permission to really hack into it.

Thus, if a piece of work looked like it needed us to break out a chainsaw, it went into the rejection pile.

And then there were the words so incredibly bad, most of the editors just could not be bothered reading all the way through.

But here's a theory for you: the actual publishing process can put mistakes into a book.

With the book that my uni recently put out, we had our cheif editors go over the proofs twice and word for word, and the finished product still had spelling/grammar mistakes in it. Somewhere between them and the printers, errors crept in and oh good lord, if the printer didn't offer us such a competitive price for the books - we would go elsewhere. It's kinda disappointing because the previous edition we released had no errors in it at all, and that went through the same process.

So between LKH (and I SO DO NOT BUY the "OMG SHE'S DYSLEXIC!" schtick), putting things off until the last minute, her editors/copyeditors needing to handle her/not getting a chance to deal with things/not caring, the actual printers etc. - I am no longer surprised by the sheer amount of technical errors that these books now have.

But I still want to bludgeon someone to death with my hardcover copy of DM for the sheer nonsense that this woman has been belching out. OMFG, nothing Anita says/thinks makes any kind of sense - logical, or grammatical. And the funniest part? The other characters seem to realise this and make fun of her/pick fights with her for it.

The crazy, it's gone to a scary place that crazy just shouldn't go.