Monday, September 10, 2012


  There are quite a few points here:
  First there is the very idea of an editor, why there is any at all. I ask the inevitable question how anyone can profess to understand the true depths of a given author’s mind and stories and texts.
  Second inevitable conclusion is that no one with the closed mindset of an editor can even approach the necessary imagination needed to interpret and “correct” a given story of text.
  Third is the fact that all the editors I’ve encountered, every single one has confirmed my bias… Granted I haven’t met all existing editors, but more than enough to be disgusted.
  I always say “huh”? after they have commented on a given work, mine or others. You get the very distinct impression that they haven’t actually read the work in question at all and certainly not even approaching a true understanding of it. Any “advice” given under such circumstances must be dead wrong.
  Fourth is that I can happily report that approximately ten people have read and commented on my works prior to publication and given truly constructive criticism and that I have made changes based on their input, doing so because it clearly felt right, because they had spotted something I had missed.
  They had no desire to make my work theirs or serve a mighty and rigid publishing industry, but genuinely wanted to help me improve mine.
  To me the very existence of editors anywhere is just plain wrong.
  Another funny thing about this is that books released by those established publishers have quite a few mistakes in them, including the glaring was/were mistakes and similar. Take any major publishing house and you will confirm that fact.
  When people say “professional editing” they mean approved and stamped by established publishers, While I, in big and small ways do my best to distance myself from that stale flavor.
  I’m ashamed on behalf of all those writers blindly following the credo of established publishers and society. They give us true independent writers a bad name.

No comments: