Book geekery!

The January issue of Romantic Times magazine is out. Two books I edited are reviewed. One is a top pick and got 4 1/2 stars, and the other got 4 stars. This makes me very happy. I enjoyed working on both books and the authors are very cool. I hope the sales are good too! Whee!

a rarity

An author posts to his blog in praise of his copyeditor.

::glows, for loves to see editors praised::

Tags:

Huzzah!

I just got a call from one of the publishers I work with. I’ve edited several books by one of their authors, all part of the same series, and they’ve just asked me to do the next book. Things like this make me extremely happy because it means they like what I’ve done in the past, and the author seems to like working with me, and I think it’s often better for a series (especially if it involves complex world-building, character relationships, or plot lines) to maintain continuity in the editing.

So, yay!

Tags:

another editing nitpick

utilize =/= use

No, really, it doesn’t. Two different words, two different meanings.

“Utilize” has a particular connotation: “to turn to practical use or account.”

For example, “Sarah didn’t know how to utilize the laptop she’d been given” means Sarah quite possibly knows how to use a computer, but cannot make practical use of this particular laptop. Perhaps there is no software loaded on the machine, or it’s running an operating system she isn’t familiar with. Or perhaps it simply isn’t powerful enough for her to make practical use of it in her job.

Avoid using “utilize” as a fancy way of saying “use.” According to the American Heritage Dictionary, “many occurrences of utilize could be replaced by use with no loss to anything but pretentiousness.”

Invisible Words

Sometimes when I’m reading something, either as an editor as a reader, I come across an awkward or clumsy construction that makes me stop and think, “Why on earth did this writer do this?” Nine times out of ten, it is to avoid “overusing” a common word.

Thing is, though, common words are just that: common. So common, in fact, that they’re invisible. The eye goes right over them. Examples of this are: he, she, is, was, were, did, had (as a helping verb), character names, and said.

This is important because a reader will not notice that you’ve used a character’s name twice in the same sentence if it’s needed to make the meaning clear. A reader will, however, notice if you’ve used some clumsy descriptor:

Mary burst into the room and upon seeing the hostages tied up in a corner, the tall blonde rushed to their aid.

Not only does it sound funny, but it actually makes things more complicated, especially to a nonvisual reader who might ask, “Okay, but where did the blonde come from?”

Also, a reader will not notice if you use said in dialogue attribution, because that’s what people do: they say their dialogue. They do not cough, smile, beam, chortle, chuckle, or laugh their dialogue. Try it sometime – you’ll find that it’s not really possible to speak while you’re performing these actions. A reader is far more likely to notice – and not in a good way – the avoidance of the word said than the overuse of it.

There are some other verbs that can be used. Asked, answererd, replied, and the occasional retorted are just fine. But if you’re going to use another word for said, you need to make sure of a couple of things.

First, is the verb describing a way of speaking? Ask is. Smile is not.

Second, is the verb intransitive? Far too often I see a dialogue attribution such as: she greeted, she admonished, she reprimanded with no direct object. A transitive verb must have an object, and to include the direct object (“Hello!” she greeted her sister.) is often painfully redundant, so you have the choice of either eliminating the dialogue or using a different verb.

Finally, a lot of writing/self-editing guides suggest eliminating unnecessary instances of the word had but do not go on to explain (probably assuming that writers will know that) this does not apply to formation of the past perfect tense (I had already been there for two hours when she finally arrived).

Now, off to work!

very exciting

Sure enough, that book is on next week’s New York Times bestseller list!

I am so excited for the author. This book is the second in a series. I’ve edited the first three (the third will be released early next year) and they just keep getting better. She’s over the moon about this, and who can blame her?

YAY!

YAY!

The new USA Today bestsellers list is out, and two books I edited are on it. One has been for six weeks now, and the other just made the list this week. There’s a very good chance that the second book will make the NY Times bestseller list next week, which would make me ridiculously happy.

(Please to repeat the familiar refrain: I am low man on the totem pole, I did not have all that much to do with these books, but I’m still very excited and thrilled for the authors.)

IPPY!

The Independent Publisher’s Awards have been announced – this year instead of a winner, a finalist and honorable mentions they have awarded Gold, Silver and Bronze awards. A total of 2,690 national entries came from all 50 U.S. states, 8 Canadian provinces, and 17 countries overseas.

The complete listing can be found here.

Romance
Gold: Mistress in Training, by Edwina Columbia (Dorian Press)
Silver: Turn Back Time, by Radclyffe (Bold Strokes Books)
Bronze: The Devil’s Bastard, by Charlsie Russell (Loblolly Writers House); The Vengeance Trap, by A.L. Hansen (Ophir Publishing); The Crossroads Cafe, by Deborah Smith (BelleBooks)

Erotica
Gold: Best Women’s Erotica 07, edited by Violet Blue (Cleis Press)
Silver: Erotic Interludes 4: Extreme Passions, edited by Radclyffe and Stacia Seaman (Bold Strokes Books)
Bronze: Room with a View, by Lucy Fur (Feral House); The Smart Girl’s Guide to Porn, edited by Violet Blue (Cleis Press); Gay Art: A Historic Collection, by Felix Lance Falkon with Thomas Waugh (Arsenal Pulp Press)

The Erotic Interludes books are so much fun to work on. So many amazing women, so many amazing stories. Thanks to everyone who contributed (authors, beta readers, proofreaders, our amazing cover designer) and to everyone who reads the books! YAY!

tip of the day

Here are some quick and easy things you can do to tighten up a manuscript and bring down the word count without having to rewrite:

1. “started to,” “continued to,” “commenced to,” “began to.” Most of the time, these are unnecessary. Not only that, but they imply that the action will at some point be interrupted – “She started to wash the dishes, but the doorbell rang” – or that something else is going on – “She continued to wash the dishes as the fight raged on in the dining room.” You can trim a lot of fat by deleting these constructions when they aren’t needed.

2. “that.” Another word that is often used unnecessarily and can be cut without affecting the sentence.

3. “proceeded to.” I’m not sure how this construction became so popular, but I delete it almost every time I see it outside of dialogue.

Happy Mother’s Day!

Tags: ,

more good news, plus random meme-age

Earlier this week I mentioned a book in the USA Today top 150 list. This week’s list is out, and the book has moved up 60 spots! Always exciting.

And now, a music meme.