Wednesday, August 24, 2022

The Crucial Importance of Vetting a Potential Editor

 This blog post began life as a book review.

I bought a science fiction novel because its description intrigued me and it was on sale. (This is how I buy a great many ebooks. The rest usually come from a favorite author, like M.C.A. Hogarth, Grace Burrowes, V.E. Schwab, Lois McMaster Bujold, or my latest discovery, T. Kingfisher.) It didn't take long for me to discover that the book was exceptional -- in an unfortunate way. It was full of a great many errors, the kind that an edit should catch: mostly errors of grammar and vocabulary, but also continuity issues (not so much outright continuity contradictions as implausible shifts in attitude and expectation), ridiculous similes, and the occasional typo. I kept reading only because, underneath the absolute mess of the text, a somewhat interesting (if a bit derivative) story struggled to be told.

After a few chapters of this, I looked back at the front matter and saw that an individual editor was not only credited, but thanked for her impact on the finished product. The wording suggested a possibility even more unsettling than the editor's simple (if staggering) incompetence. Could the editor have taken a less problematic text and added some of the errors? Particularly where the misuse of words was concerned, I found it plausible that the author might have had a more limited vocabulary and/or a lack of confidence in her knowledge, and therefore accepted the editor's egregious substitutions.

I don't usually leave reviews that are primarily critical, though I'll mention what I see as weak points in a book I otherwise enjoyed. I was going to make an exception in the case of this book, as a warning to authors -- particularly new indie authors -- not to accept credentials or recommendations as a substitute for a test edit. Only a test edit can show whether a particular editor (a) is basically competent and (b) understands your authorial "voice" and will refine it rather than trying to replace it with some other style.

And then, the lawyer in me spoke up. (Yes, I'm an actual lawyer, though I'm quasi-retired.) If this review came to the attention of the book's editor, that editor might sue me for defamation (slander or libel, the latter for writings) -- even, possibly, for "defamation per se," which (among other things) covers defamation that could damage the subject's livelihood, and doesn't require proof of actual damages. I should be able to prevail in such a lawsuit, but it would be a waste of time and money, particularly if I did what prudent lawyers do when sued and hired some other lawyer to assist me or to be lead counsel.

So instead of leaving a review or otherwise identifying the book in question, I'm using this blog post to make my point more directly. For pity's sake, don't turn over your precious book to an editor who may let obvious errors go uncorrected or, worse, hand you back an unrecognizable Frankenstein's monster. (And if you answer this advice by pointing out that traditional publishers are unlikely to give most authors a choice of editor, you'll be quite right. Not every book that comes out of traditional publishers is well edited, let alone edited with sufficient care for the unique aspects of the author's voice. Indie authors, however, can vet editors.)

If I'd left a review, that review might have alerted the author to her predicament. I'm sorry not to have accomplished that. But who knows -- maybe the author and I will both be lucky, and she'll see this post and realize that it could apply to her.

No comments: