Panel discussion at Context 22
Tentative panelists: Myself (Danny Evarts, Art Director/ Technical Editor for Shroud); Tim Deal (Mr. Shroud himself); Kevin Lucia (Author/ Editor of an upcoming Poetry anthology form Shroud); R. Scott McCoy (Publisher/ Editor at Stygian Press/ Necrotic Tissue, as well as someone who recently went through having a novel edited); Dan and Jackie Gamber (all-around authors, publishers and editors at Meadowhawk Press. Jackie edits many things, as well as writing intense tales).
I still don't have a scheduled time at the convention for this, but thought I would give people more of an outline on what the panel will be.
This will be a panel on the "art" or "science" of editing and copy-editing an author's work, whether for magazine or book form. While authors put words on the page, it is up to the copy-editor to make those words readable for publication. How does this workflow move? How do large publishers and small press handle this? What is the relationship between a copy-editor or editor, and the author? What are the differences between preparing text for book form and magazine form?
How many times have you read through your own work? After the 2nd or 3rd or 50th read, do you really see it anymore? Sometimes an author is so close to their work—they hear it in their heads, know every character, see what they think they're saying—that they no longer see technical errors that may make it difficult for the reader to grasp their story. Sometimes, a writer just forgets that "let's" may have an apostrophe. Spellcheckers don't catch many flaws (plurals, alternate words, homonyms, punctuation, tense changes, etc.), and your mind sees what you know should be there. But is what you know should be there really what a reader will see? While you may read something one way, knowing the story, others may not see that.
It is the editor or copy-editor's job to point out such errors. To let you know that something may not be clear. A different word may be better in some place, or a sentence is run-on if it has 10 "and then he"s in it. Or, on the fly, punctuation must be changed for actual print (so you don't end up looking bad as an author). How do we (the technical side of the equation) do this, and—more importantly—how do we do this without offending you, as the author? What sort of changes do we make, to publish a technically correct story or article, and make both the publication (and the author) look good, without altering the voice of the writer?
We will also be delving into, and try to focus on, the relationship between technical editors and the author. Sometimes, a story may be rejected not on its content, but rather on its voice, and this is not personal. And, once it is accepted, changes may still need to be made. While large print houses may just thrust your words onto the page, trusting spellcheckers and the like (want proof? Read any Harry Potter book, especially the last one. Full of annoying and pointless errors), small presses (though usually strapped for time and manpower) often make it a point to take care of your words, to consult you about major changes or problems noted. What we do is not personal, or an attack on your skills, but trying to help both you and ourselves look good, and put out the best product possible.
Basically, we would like to expose writers getting into print to the notion that their words may be changed, that there is a relationship between the publisher/ technical editor that must be fostered, and that we do care about your words, even if we may change them. They are _your_ words, but it's our job to make certain that what is read is actually what you're saying. And personal feelings, or indignation, should not get in the way.
All this in only 50 minutes.
We're still framing the panel, and will let you know the time, and more details, as they are settled. But, anyone headed to Context that would like a peek at the more technical side of things, please attend! I even promise I'll try to be amusing, and let other people talk.
