An agrument with an editor

There’s this retired editor, I’ll call her Saint Mary, here, who “tore up” some of my manuscript (MS). I had about enough with her negative comments, that just seemed too nit-picky, so I sent her a piece from a book (will remain unnamed) which has already been published, to see what she would say.

She asked for a short synopsis, so I made up something, which you’ll see down the article.


Here’s the piece from the already published book. I edited the characters names, to match what I had told her in the synopsis:

My older sister’s name was Rosie. She had dark brown hair, pulled back very tightly, and dark eyes, and a soft way of speaking; I thought her very pretty, though she insisted she was not.
We grew up in a village in Ontario, where our father was a stonemason, and had four brothers and three sisters; five more of our siblings had gotten sick when they were still very young. There had been no time for mourning; our mother had been far too busy looking after the rest of us. And no, we had not had a nurse; we had been too poor for that. (ps to my readers: goofed up a little on copying there).
Whenever the weather was fine, Rosie and I would go out for a walk in the afternoon. Our house was in the city, and on those walks we would sometimes pause at the orphanage to watch the orphan girls at play in their white pinafores and brown serge gowns. It looked as grand as a palace with its avenue of lamps, and more windows than you could count, and a statue of an angel before the entrance. The orphans, Rosie told me (she had a friend in service who had grown up here), had been brought here as infants by their mothers, who were too poor, or too ill to care for them. And yes it was very sad for their mothers to have to give them up, but the orphans had a much better life at the orphanage.
“So if papa were to run away,” I asked, “Would I be sent for an orphan?”
“Of course not, my child,” said Rosie, “our papa’s not going to run away, and you’ve got me to look after you. And besides, you’re too old to be an orphan.”

SM: What’s the brief synopsis?

ME: It's about a girl (Amanda) and her sister (Rosie), who on occasion go to visit this orphanage. One day they find one of the orphan girls outside, "lost", and they decide to keep her at their house, pretending she is a friend staying over (that's what they tell their parents). The parents come to love the girl and find out the secret, that she's an orphan and they adopt her.

SM: When and where does this take place?

ME: In 1888 Ontario Canada

SM: Are you canadian?... and do you want to write for the canadian market, or the us market?

ME: no, I'm not from Canada.

SM: the us?... or uk?

SM: sorry to say, the premise is totally unbelievable, since authorities wouldn't allow such a thing to take place... nor would parents take in someone else's child even overnight, without checking with her parents first, let alone for a long enough stay that they 'come to love' her...

ME: The girls lie and tell their parents she's from school and her parents allowed her to come over. Then they keep lying to keep her there, saying her parents just fell ill and she needs to stay away so she wont fall ill too.

SM: .still nonsensical, unless her parents are severely mentally challenged

ME: I could write in there that they're crazy.

SM: wouldn't make any sense, since you have them adopting the kid... and children weren't given over to crazy folks even then...

SM: why don’t they look for her?

ME: The orphanage had too many kids (from the black plague killing their parents).

SM: the black plague' took place in europe, in the 14th -17th centuries!... and plague killed children, too...

ME: It took place all over the world, there were cases of it still in the 19th century. And the dead kids that died from the plague wouldn't be in the orphanage.... (note to readers: She didn’t catch on to what I said!).

SM: .you're splitting hairs... there was no major 'black plague' outbreak in canada in the late 1800s, or any time at all... and I didn't say dead kids were in the orphanage...

SM: How did the girls just find the orphan, that doesn’t make sense. Wouldn’t someone go looking for her?

ME: They didn't bother in 1888 to do much in terms of searching for her, she's just a drain on the system, so to speak.

SM: .doesn't explain why parents would buy the silly lies about where the girl came from and why she's staying with them

ME: I told you, they're crazy now

SM: .ok, then the whole story is crazy now

ME: I didn't want any advice on the premise or any of that, really. I was wondering if the grammar and format and all that are up to par, since that seemed to be the issue with my last story you critiqued. After that, I promise I'll get out of your hair. Just wanted to see what I did wrong as a writer. I have no intent on publishing it, it was more for writing practice

SM: ok... I'll give it a shredding later in the day...



Saint Mary’s comments, or “shredding” as follows:

My older sister’s name was Rosie. She had dark brown hair, pulled back very tightly,[all the time?... was it like that when she was born?] and dark eyes, and a soft way of speaking.; [see what I told you about these in the other piece]I thought her very pretty, though she insisted she was not.
We grew up in a village in Ontario, where our father was a stonemason, and had four brothers and three sisters[poor order… could mean the father had them];[get rid of all of these, do not use them in fiction] five more of our siblings had gotten sick when they were still very young.[so?... kids often get sick… how can all the others never have been ill?... 14 kids in all?] There had been no time for mourning[over what?... you never said anyone died]; our mother had been far too busy looking after the rest of us. And no, we had not had [awkward to the max] a nurse; we had been were too poor for that.
Whenever the weather was fine, Rosie and I would go out for a walk in the afternoon. Our house was in the city, and on those walks we would sometimes pause at the orphanage, to watch the orphan girls at play in their white pinafores and brown serge gowns[silly word choice… if you mean ‘dress’ why not say so?]. It looked as grand as a palace with its avenue of lamps,[meaning what?... do you mean a ‘drive’ or ‘driveway’?] and more windows than you could count, and a statue of an angel before the entrance. [whole sentence is a muddled mess] The orphans, Rosie told me (she had a friend in service who had grown up there),[you said kids are only 6 and 8, so how can that be true?] had been brought there as infants, by their mothers, who were too poor, or too ill to care for them.[nonsensical, since that’s not the only way kids are orphaned] And yes, it was very sad for their mothers to have to give them up, but the orphans had a much better life at the orphanage.[than what?]
“So if papa were to run away,” I asked, “Would I be sent for an orphan?”[makes no sense]
“Of course not, my child,” said Rosie., “Our[you do this a lot… need to learn proper dialog
(Note how she spelled dialog instead of dialogue. What a great editor!)

format/punctuation…] papa’s not going to run away,[also need to revisit rules of comma usage, since you often put them in where not needed and leave them out where they are] and you’ve got me to look after you. And besides, you’re too old to be an orphan.”[how does that make any sense?]

ME: Read the link on semicolon usage, I sent you.

SM: None of the pro’s are using them.

ME: But every book I have read, has them.

SM: Like who/what?

ME: Mark Twain, Gregory Maguire (Wicked), David Grann (The lost city of Z), Don Quixote, Stephen King.

SM: Mark Twain is not contemporary. Stephen King is just popular, not a good writer.

ME: You didn’t say they had to be contemporary writers.

SM: didn't think I'd have to... I assumed plain common sense would lead you to realize that only contemporary works will apply in re what's workable in today's world...

ME: In my opinion the dash looks gruff and stops the flow, and makes it look like a newspaper article.

SM: it's the ; that makes fiction look like a new article, since it's the more formal mark, while the em dash is the casual one... so, either you're not an experienced enough reader/writer, or you're british.

ME: No, exactly my point! If I'm writing historical gothic fiction, I want it to look formal.

SM: no, you only want it to be 'worded' a bit more formally... using archaic punctuation doesn't work with today's readers...

ME: Ok, are they mentally handicapped? If I were writing modern-day fiction, more casual stuff, I would use the dash to make it look trendy, or whatever that would be

SM: the problem is that most readers today have no clue what a semicolon means and it's annoying to them, to have fiction peppered with them... or have any at all... and, since you must write for your readers, if you hope to sell your work, you must put your own preferences aside and write what will be best received by agents/publishers/book-buyers.

ME: it's all about pandering to the masses.

SM: of course it is!... what did you think it was?!... who do you think would be willing to pay good money to buy from you something no one would want to buy from them?... if you want to be a professional writer, you'll have to start dealing with the real world...

ME: The other thing is, that every publishing house is going to have their own editor, that will edit the ms to fit their style

SM: but you won't get that far, if your ms looks like a clueless amateur wrote it...

ME: I may use all semicolons and get a house that hates it and vise versa. Damned if you do or don't, basically.

SM: not at all... because while no one will mind your not using semicolons, some will surely mind having them there... and you're supposed to be trying to maximize your chances of getting published, not minimize them..

ME: I just want to write and they can figure out what to edit later.

SM: the 'they' you're referring to won't get to see what you write, if it turns them off before they even read the whole thing... first you have to get an agent to want to rep it and then the agent needs to get a publisher to take it on... so why be so stubborn and stack the odds against any of that happening, even more than they are already?

ME: I would never think they would be so petty as to disregard it based on semicolons.

SM: I never said they would... but it's one thing that is instantly noticeable and added to other problems the ms may have, could be enough to tip the scales against taking it on... and, as I said, why narrow your chances instead of maximizing them?... if you're aiming for uk, or commonwealth publishers, it doesn't matter, as long as you don't use them improperly [which you have done, in places]

ME: Which is why they have editors. No ms is perfect and NO published book is even perfect! You're a cranky old person, who crushes people's creativity and dreams.