aprilhenry (aprilhenry) wrote,
aprilhenry
aprilhenry

Editorial letters – never the same animal twice

Once your book has been accepted by a publisher, it follows a path. First there’s an editorial letter. It may be combined with line edits, or it may be separate. Once your editor is satisfied with your edits, the book goes on to a copyeditor. Depending on their level of pickiness, your manuscript may come back from the copyeditor marked with two-dozen Post-Its, or so many it looks like a porcupine. And then you’ll have to proof the pages a couple of times, by which time you are thoroughly sick of your own book.

In the past couple of months I’ve worked on editorial letters from two editors/houses. I’ve worked with four editors so far, and each has a different approach. Here are the most recent:

1. Publishing House 1: Overview of things that need to be worked on, in order of importance. That took 2-3 pages. The rest gave page numbers and notes on what the particular issue was on that page. Its focus was mostly on what needed to be fixed.

2. Publishing House 2: Brief overview, followed by discussions of the market, structure, setting, timeline, points of view, plot, themes, and queries/margin notes. While this letter was as long as the first, it actually contained a lot of compliments as well as observations, so the amount of work it contains was less.



site stats

Add This Blog to the JacketFlap Blog Reader
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 4 comments