Sticking with my previous theme of editors and whether or not to incorporate their suggestions, I have been thinking a lot about JK Rowling. JK Rowling is in the traditional publishing world, so she had to accept her house's edits...at first. As a struggling writer out of the gate, she either accepted the edits or her book would go unpublished. However, as her books sold more, and her fame grew, the Harry Potter novels started growing larger. It began with The Goblet of Fire, and it became more pronounced thereafter.
Of course, it was by that point that Rowling was sufficiently powerful enough to demand the publisher retain pieces of her work they might've previously cut. I think that has been a great thing.
Novels like The Order of The Phoenix were far more immersive with the extra heft. I've found myself wondering what we missed in her first three books when they insisted on editing out lots of content. Rowling herself has said she fought to keep in the chapter about the troll in the dungeon, as it lent credence to Hermione's friendship with Ron and Harry, and she's right. What other tremendous tidbits readers would've enjoyed never made it to the stands?
Of course most writers don't have Rowling's talent, and so couldn't necessarily get away with books of her heft, but it does show that editors aren't always right either. What I've discovered is that most editors are readers that get paid. Yes, they have more experience, but given how publishers and editors have handled things like Steps, they aren't infallible either. If you feel strongly about something you wrote that an editor wants cut, push back(or, if you're indie like I am, publish anyway). You never know what readers will embrace that some folks wouldn't.
No comments:
Post a Comment