Where To Begin

We are still glowing from the results of our 'Audience With an Agent' contest. So many wonderful entries made it very difficult to narrow down the choices to six finalists. Thank you for giving us the opportunity to read your work.

On Wednesday, it was our privilege to interview Andy Meisenheimer and Renni Browne of The Editorial Department (TED) - publishing's oldest full-service freelance editorial firm. I urge you to check out their services when you feel your manuscript is ready, and also to buy Renni's book (written with Dave King), Self-Editing for Fiction Writers. This is the book I hear recommended most often at writers conferences by agents and editors. As you read, exercises and checklists help you apply what you have learned. Have plenty of highlighters on hand. My copy is a rainbow of color!

Love it or hate it, rewriting is a necessary evil. So, where do we start? For lack of a better plan, we often start at the beginning of a manuscript, tweaking and trimming, cleaning up grammar and punctuation as we go. But what happens if the entire chapter needs to be deleted? We have just invested more time and energy, polishing our words to a glow and fallen more deeply in love with them. What's the answer?

Another fine book on revision is Getting the Words Right by Theodore A. Rees Cheney. In it, he states:

"Seventy-five percent of all revision is elimination of words already written; the remaining twenty-five percent is improving the words that remain."

His 'formula' for getting the words right can be simply stated as 'reduce, rearrange, reword.' He begins by reducing chapters, sections and paragraphs, then progresses from sentences to words and then to shorter words. The words that are left are the ones we tweak and polish because they are the 25% that remain. It's a simple place to start.

Most of us find it painful to cut chapters or large sections of our writing. The words represent characters or scenes we have labored over lovingly and have brought us joy. Perhaps for their creation we have sacrificed time away from other activities (or family) or hours of sleep. Making a file for these cuttings is not only comforting, but beneficial. We never know what important information might be woven back into the story.

The majority of the time, I find that I never miss the sections I have to cut. I save them in a file and never revisit them. What has been your experience? Do you find that it gets easier the more you trust your instincts? We would love to hear from you.

The Editorial Department - An Interview with Andy Meisenheimer and Renni Browne

The publishing industry is not for the faint of heart. It's an industry on the move, always shifting, morphing. It's one of the reasons why we love it so much. And why it's good to find resources that have the author's interests at heart. Today, we'd like you to meet TED. The Editorial Department is publishing's oldest full-service freelance editorial firm with a longstanding reputation for candor, integrity, and overall excellence. What sets us apart from others in our field is our 30 years in the business, our high rate of success with conventionally published first fiction, our literary agent matchmaking program, and our commitment to candid, respectful, practical feedback from experienced editors with a proven track record of success. Our old friend, Andy Meisenheimer is back to tell us about it, and he's brought a friend!

Thanks for having me back, Bonnie and crew. Things have definitely changed for me since I was last here. I’m a free agent now, editing for publishers, other companies and individuals, and dabbling in a few new things as well.

How is freelance editing different than your previous position as an in-house acquisitions editor?

First off, there’s no gray cubicle. My corner office has a wide oak desk my grandpa used to own, a loveseat my dogs like to curl up on, my best friend’s drumset (I take ten minute breaks and play along with Mates of State), bright blue paint, soft carpet, and a big fat wall of whiteboard material I picked up at Home Depot for cheap. Granted, I get plenty of stomping from the four-year-old in the family room above me, and a dog who sits outside my window attempting to kill a squirrel solely through the power of his voice, but it’s totally groovy.

I think you meant, how is the editing work different, right?

It’s probably not all that different. Circumstances have changed, but the situation’s still the same: there’s a manuscript, and it needs to be better. It’s my job to help the author make it better. I still see manuscripts at all different stages—even though I’m not in-house, I’m still working on some that go straight to copyediting before getting published traditionally. One thing is definitely different: variety. I’m working on a much wider variety of genres, and I’m working on books that are going to get published in a much wider variety of places.

Is your approach to editing the same?

Because I’m working on a lot of different types of manuscripts at different stages of the process, I’ve had to learn to adapt my editing style significantly. This can be hard at times, but it’s great in the end—I’m learning more skills and tools that I can apply in different situations as the manuscript or client calls for it. Which means, I hope, that I’m becoming a better editor as a result.

My approach to publishing is also different. Being a freelancer also has its advantage in this time of change in the industry. I don’t have to worry about organizational restructuring. I don’t have to worry about the decline of print. In fact most news of change in publishing is good for me, because it means more opportunities for the independent editor, the independent writer, and the independent publisher. As a free agent, I can adapt to changes much quicker. The possibilities are only increasing.

How do your individual clients find you?

I am terribly proud to do most of my individual client work through The Editorial Department or TED, a freelance editorial firm founded in 1980 by Renni Browne. I also get referrals from publishers and agents who know me from my in-house days and have prospective authors and clients who need help, and I get some people stumbling across www.andymeisenheimer.com, but on my website I’m directing people to approach me through TED. There’s a lot of advantages for both editor and writer in working with TED.

What’s your availability like?

Right now I’m surprised at how booked I am. I think I’m solid for the next eight weeks or so. But I don’t think I’ll always be that busy. Current clients get precedent over new clients, though, so waiting in the queue has its advantages in the long run.

TED is about being “highly personalized”. What does that mean to a potential client? What can they expect?

The worst thing you can do to your manuscript is give it to someone who is going to slap some generic rules on it and declare it critiqued. The advantage to TED is that we treat each manuscript on its own terms, evaluating it against the conventions and latest trends of its genre and applying guidelines of the craft as they serve to make the manuscript better. We also have the freedom to create customized services for you at TED, so if there’s something your manuscript needs that isn’t covered by our current service offerings, that’s not going to stop us from helping you. We’ll just create something that fits your needs exactly.

The other advantage to TED is that we’re all different in our editorial styles and strengths, and there’s no

effort to make us impersonal or detached. The editor-author relationship is vital to a manuscript’s success. If one of my authors from my days as an in-house editor came to me through TED, they wouldn’t find the experience much different than before. Except maybe I’d be happier. And smarter. And they’d have to pay me.

At what stage in a manuscript do you prefer to start talking with a client?

It’s always nice to have a full manuscript to deal with. But I’m happy being a part of any stage of a manuscript where I can help. I have at least two clients with partial manuscripts.

Does TED take on everyone?

We try to help everyone we can. But there are times when a client isn’t ready for editorial feedback.

I asked Renni Browne, founder of TED, to stop by too, let you ask her a few questions about TED. Renni has been editing for over forty-eight years. She is co-author of Self-Editing for Fiction Writers, the bestselling title on editing, now in its fifth printing and second edition from HarperCollins.

Renni, you started TED in 1980. What prompted you to launch this company?

I'd been an editor in mainstream publishing since the mid-sixties and knew publishers were doing less and less editing on the books they brought out—or were rejecting good books just because they needed editing. The vacuum was widening and I knew the time-consuming process of working closely with writers didn't fit the new publishing landscape. A company of experienced editors could help fill the vacuum.

Who should hire a TED editor?

Writers who take their work seriously and want candid, professional help.

We often hear about the art of crafting excellent fiction, but there is art in editing, yes?

Absolutely. A good editor is highly creative in responding to the challenges of a manuscript. Two examples: the editor looks for opportunities to increase its impact on the reader and makes suggestions to the author. And at the line editing stage, any change the editor suggests is in the voice of the author, not the editor.

You mention the decline of in-house editing. There seems to be a shift in publishing where more of the effort of both writing and marketing are falling on the shoulders of the writer. You seem to be saying that the editing of their work falls on them as well.

This is the reality of the publishing landscape today. Huge numbers of published writers, including ones that hit the bestseller list every year, hire their own editors. Many writers who are fortunate enough to have editors at their publishers who give them feedback still hire their own editors. Agents and publishers say they want "pre-edited" manuscripts. And as I've often said, really good writers still need editing. Your book is your child, and who among us can be 100% objective about our own offspring?

Would you advise an author to work with an in-house publisher and an editorial service like TED?

Certainly. Right now I'm working with a writer to help her meet her publisher's deadline. It's her second novel, and once her editor there sees it she's undoubtedly have some suggestions. (This author is one of the lucky ones.) But what she's seeing will be the very best manuscript the author can produce. Which, of course, is very much to her advantage in all sorts of ways.

I’ve heard literary agents report that in 2009 they have seen increases in queries up to 300%. Have you seen an increase in the number of writers trying to enter the marketplace in the last number of years? If yes, to what do you attribute the influx?

Yes, more are taking the leap. The expansion of self-publishing--and the fact that self-published books look better, cost less to produce, and are taken more seriously--has encouraged more writers, to judge by how many approach The Editorial Department.

TED offers more than editing services. One program that caught my eye was the Agent Matchmaking Program.

Agent Matchmaking is something we offer an author whose manuscript after editing is clearly publishable, something we think at least one of the many, many agents we deal with might like to represent. Agents trust our submissions because we only send them strong, marketable manuscripts. We have one full-time staff member whose only job is to make these matches, and several of us (including me) also get involved in getting an author's manuscript into the hands of a top literary agent.

TED has a blog and an E-zine as well as a website. It seems you’re generous with the information and help you offer for free. Isn’t it risky to give away so much content?

I like this question, because I've written some of the freebies! It's a big web site, and we try to make it as writer-friendly as possible. A lot of our writers hang out at the site for a while and then eventually decide to hire us--maybe just for the $35 critique of their opening. If they do that, they nearly always send the full manuscript in for Evaluation or Annotation. And sure we want to make money, but we also really want to help writers, most definitely including first-timers. And think about this: the more they know, the better for us once they submit.

Thank you Renni and Andy for stopping in today. You've pointed out some of the challenges of the industry today, but you've brought us energy and hope as well. We appreciate the advice and wisdom you've shared.

How about you, faithful reader? What take-away did you get from the interview? Are you feeling overwhelmed as a writer, or revved for the challenge? Do any of you have experiences with editing you'd like to share? We'd love to hear them! As always, this is a community - and we want to hear from everyone!

Watch Your Mouth, Young Man

Let me take you back to Friday, August 14 on this blog, to the insightful (and incitive) guest post by Zondervan editor Andy Meisenheimer. Do you remember all the conversation he stirred up by implying that a writer might find better ways to spend her time than hanging out on Twitter or Facebook or even (ulp!) her blog?

Well let me tell you, that was nothing - nothing - compared to the kerfuffle raised amongst us bloggers here at Novel Matters before his post even went live. Really, you have no idea. Well - If you were observant, you might have noticed this phrase: “this book sucked but they have such a (killer) brand" If you were impressively astute you might have guessed at the reason behind the parentheses.

But probably not, so I'll tell you: In the original, Andy didn't say "killer." He said something that started with the same letter, only... less seemly.

We couldn't believe it.

Because Andy and his ilk had told us more than once that this word or that word was unacceptable to a Christian audience. And I'm talking about words a lot milder than (killer). So what would we do? Edit the editor?

Believe it or not, we didn't all agree.

I'm a non-swearer myself - mostly. I hardly ever, almost never say a bad word. There have even been memorable occasions when I dropped heavy objects on my foot and bravely clenched my lips against the barrage of expletives clamoring just this side of my teeth.

However, I was raised not so much in church as in Alcoholics Anonymous (my mother stopped drinking when I was seven). And growing up, I knew a lot of very good and brave people for whom naughty language was the native tongue. To this day it's hard - though not impossible - to offend me with swear words.

Not only that, but my personal take is that we Christians sometimes get a bit too precious about the whole thing. Because Jesus said if you call your brother a fool you are in danger of judgment. "Fool" is not a cuss word; it's a put-down. And there are those among us who would never say (killer) but would call you a fool twice a day. So my first reaction to Andy's transgression was "Oh, what the heck."

Oh boy. I didn't even notice Andy had used a no-no word. Let me explain.

Soon after becoming a Christian, I abandoned my bad-girl vocabulary and thought less of anyone who used swear words, whatever their belief system. I asked people not to use certain language around me. The result? I became a holier-than-thou personality and a caricature of a churchgoer. My zeal for the menial built a wall between me and those around me.

And then...one night at Bible study, a young man said something like this: Our most powerful witness is to walk humbly alongside the lost as sinners saved by grace.

As I grow in my ability to walk humbly in this world, my need to edit people's vocabulary has lessened. After all, Jesus probably heard swear words as he hung on the cross. His response was to die for them. This is why I don't have a knee-jerk reaction to swear words.

But I don't use swear words in my novels.

Why?

Because they would be a stumbling block to readers, and I love my readers. We are the body of Christ! Besides, creativity without any strictures is not creativity at all. The challenge for the inspirational writer is to convey intensity of emotion with truly powerful language and action. Honestly, it would be a lot easier to use swear words.

And so, I voted to leave Andy's original words. There are so many other things more worthy of our passion.

~
When Andy sent me his guest post via e-mail I read it through - not with the intention to edit, but because, well, because I could. I loved its meaty goodness, it metaphorical bent, and its insider fun. This, I thought, is (killer).

I set about scheduling the post, but a wee voice in my head said, "(Killer) though it is, some may not appreciate the vernacular [My inner voice sounds very much like Stephen Fry]. I sent out a quick e-mail to my co-bloggers: Andy's post contains the word (killer). Are we okay with that? The six of us took the back roads getting to the answer.

Whenever you ask a novelist a question, expect a long, well thought out multi-dimensional response. It's to be expected. Ask six novelists and, well, I hope you packed a lunch. Those of us who agreed to leave in (killer) agreed for very different reasons. Those who preferred an edit did so for very different reasons. Me? Well, I was more like Pontius Pilate, trying to wash my hands of the whole thing. Edit Andy? Well, gee - how would that go over? I actually like this guy as a person as well as an editor. But risk offending readers? No!

It was a gong show for awhile there. What if I just posted a disclaimer? [Early risers may have seen it Friday morning before it was unceremoniously deleted]. What if we added dashes? If Lisa Samson* can get away with it, why not us? So many issues to consider. For me, the decision to change it became clear when I asked myself, "What compelling reason do we have to leave (killer) in? What great purpose is the word serving?" The word didn't strengthen Andy's idea, wasn't necessary to convey meaning - it other words; editable.

We want to hear from you - naughty language in your Christian fiction? Where do you draw lines? [Keep in mind, in an interesting and deliberate oversight, we left in the word "sucks"] Do you put a book down if it contained certain language?

*Lisa Samson employed the use of dashes for profanity in her latest, The Passion of Mary Margaret.
~

I confess to objecting to the questionable word Andy used in his guest post a week ago Friday, the (killer) word that was edited out. I respect the opinions of those in our NovelMatters group who voted to leave Andy's post as it was submitted to us, but I also appreciate their willingness to edit out the offensive word.

~

Profanity has become so commonplace in our society that it's easy to become desensitized to its usage. The argument for or against profanity in Christian literature is endless and one we'll never all agree on. We don't even agree on what constitutes profanity. But here's where I'm coming from. As a Christian author I feel my books, my blog, my website, whatever I put out there from a professional, public platform is my pulpit. I believe I'm held to a standard of conduct of which Christ would approve, and to me that means taking care not to offend those who read what I write, not to place a stumblingblock in anyone's path, and most especially not to offend the One I represent. Liberty isn't always license.

~

Yeah, we rub shoulders with the world, we don't live in a bubble. But who's supposed to be influencing whom? I have a feeling this will generate a lively debate. We look forward to your input.

Andy Meisenheimer Answers the Big Questions

Say howdy to Andy - he's our guest blogger today!

Andy Meisenheimer is in his seventh year at Zondervan, his tenth year of marriage, his third year of fatherhood, and his first year playing in the band Group Dancing for Dutch People, an accordion duo cover band he co-founded with band member Jim Kast-Keat. While at Zondervan, he has worked with important, influential and talented authors writing in many different impressive genres. One author writes, "Andy is the nerdy yet paternal editor you always wanted," though Andy was quick to edit that sentence down to its essence: "Andy's super cool." However, better than all of that, Andy lives with his best-friend-and-muse Mandy and their three-year-old cutest-little-boy-in-the-world near Grand Rapids, MI. They are the best part of his life.

Q&A with Andy Meisenheimer, the most heavy-handed editor in the business (seriously, my hands weigh a lot. “Banana-hands,” I’ve been called).

When are you inclined to take a chance on something "out of the box" -- away from a proven formula -- and how far are you willing to go with an untried theme, style, etc?

To answer the first part of your question: Thursday afternoons, mostly. Rarely on a Monday or Wednesday afternoon, but often on Tuesday late at night, when no one is around to hear me cry. I think we used proven formula for the first year or so of our son’s life, so if it’s good enough for the kid, it must be perfect for publishing.

The problem with something out of the box, an untried theme or style, is that it requires people to actually immerse themselves in a new experience. It can’t be reduced to sound bytes and flashy ads. It can’t be pitched as “Jaws meets Harry Potter”. Instead, much like an annoying girlfriend, it asks for commitment, and then like marriage demands that you open yourself up to growth and become vulnerable with your weaknesses—and sometimes look up a word in the dictionary. But some people just want something mildly amusing to read during lunch break.

I like to cook meals for my wife and kid. My blessing and my curse is that I rarely have exactly what a recipe calls for, and so I fudge a little. And then sometimes I augment recipes with my own ideas. But I preface each meal with “well, hope this worked!” It might sound scary, but my family’s learned that there’s a decent chance that my cooking is going to taste better than McDonald’s, and might even taste better than a good restaurant. And it’s definitely going to be made with healthier, fresher ingredients and cooked in a healthier way than McDonald’s.

I love that kind of cooking.

In your experience with actually meeting authors who produce what you regard as excellence, what common traits to you see in them as persons?
Brilliant writers, in my experience, are writers who are constantly writing really crappy stuff, and then tossing it or rewriting it eight times. They are the ice skater on the rink late at night, performing the same move over and over and over again; they are the painter at the museum imitating the paintings they see before them; they are the football star watching the replay frame-by-frame; they are the musician sitting around jamming with friends; they are the actor learning Shakespeare; they are the architect drawing plans that are both beautiful and functional. They are constant critics as well as studious observers of good storytelling. They have an appreciation for pulp even as they pursue literary genius. They are confident when they need to be and yet they have their trusted advisors who can say most anything.

Give us a glimpse into an ideal author/editor relationship.
Sometimes this Certain Author calls just to hear my voice. Sometimes he claims that my voice is the one he hears in his head as he writes his characters. His wife is the only one with more power over his stories than me. He’s writing his book in third person because I decided it was time to do some third person writing, and because it’d be best for his story. He couldn’t do it, wrote some first person, and so I rewrote it for him in third person. He sneaks in certain things he knows I’ll cut just so he can feel good accepting that cut. He reads the edited novel with tracked changes hidden just to see how brilliant my editing is. If he has another child I don’t think naming the kid Andrew Robert would be indecorous. We share book recommendations and gab about the craft of writing. I write in the margin exactly what I’m thinking, and he writes back exactly what he’s thinking. We know and respect each other’s style. I’m an editor, and he’s a writer. We both want the book to be a work of the highest order, and the best work he’s ever done. And deep down we know that if the other ever went to jump off a metaphorical cliff, we’d be there to say “hey, maybe don’t do that.”

But each one is different. But I don’t think symbiotic would be so terrible of a one-word answer. Now half my authors are going to think I’m weird—the other half, that is, that doesn’t already think that, and appreciate that about me.

How do you balance art and business?
Very carefully. We don’t all work for a rich anonymous benefactor whose sole concern is excellence in the literary arts. So like any editor who wants to enjoy life, I try to make sure I acquire at least a few people whose work I believe to be of the highest quality, even as I do my job and acquire the potboilers that feed my family. Do I believe it has to be that way? No. Does the company I work for have the same eye for that balance as I see it? Not always. I’m on a journey just like you. But my job is to keep looking, and keep pitching good books to my boss.

I’ll tell you the one thing I do that keeps me sane. When I’m on my own time, I spend it with my wife and kid—talk about quality—and when they’re tired of me, I read good books.

How do you think one should balance art and business as a writer?
Unfortunately, the internet allows aspiring writers to waste way too much time focused on business. Reading blogs about writing, writing blogs about reading, creating a brand and websites and tweeting and facebooking and revising your work according to the latest “rule” of writing. No editor or reader is fooled into thinking that your stuff is gold because someone’s got a great blog or tagline or brand or website or facebook. There is one and only one way to get the kind of loyalty you want from your readers. Good books. No one says “I loved this book but since I can’t follow the author on twitter, oh well. I guess I’ll just never read them again.” And conversely, “this book sucked but they have such a (killer) brand! I’ve got to read more.” Writers should focus on art until they have a business. Which in today’s world, many of you should just realize your dreams and publish your books yourself. Use that internet connection for a better purpose. And if your book’s as brilliant as you’d like it to be, you’ve got nothing to worry about.

Thanks for asking questions and letting me answer them. The blank page really scares me. That’s why I’m an editor.