posted
Is there such a thing as a perfect manuscript -- as in, free of all spelling and grammar errors?
There has to be some you just miss or don't see as an error, no?
My question is, how tollerant are ediors with minor spelling or grammar erros in manuscripts? Do they throw something out on the spot because of an error, or will they read the story through to the end anyway and then judge from there?
posted
No ms is ever perfect. Books and magazines are frequently published with glaring errors in them, as my internal editor likes to point out!
One factor in my decision whether or not to put a story from slush through for further consideration was always "how much editing does it need?". Publishers and magazines have deadlines, and limited time available, especially magazines, which usually have either a very small staff or a staff of volunteers contributing in their spare time. The more editing a story needs, the more time it will consume, and therefore the better it needs to be as a story to justify putting in that time.
I would tolerate a certain level of typos and homophone errors in a story, as those can easily be fixed in editing. However, such errors didn't give me confidence in the author, and I would probably be less tolerant of the ms the more errors I ran across. Invoking the internal editor throws me out of a story with the inevitable result that I find it less involving than I would if the errors weren't there. Less involving equals more likely to be rejected.
Grammatical errors of the more serious variety--errors in sentence construction, inability to format dialogue correctly, etc--and the ms went back. It's not the editor's job to correct basics like those. Sorry.
Get the ms as perfect as you can. Don't rely on the spellcheck. It'll catch misspelt words but not homophone errors. But don't not send the ms out because you're afraid it isn't perfect. It won't be. Just get it as close to perfect as you can .
posted
I would recommend passing your MS around to people to read, and if you can, find someone who is anal about spelling and punctuation for a final check. Too often we can't see our own mistakes. On top of that, I learned in a Proofreading class I took that good readers make bad proofreaders, simply because your brain takes in the information swiftly and automatically corrects mistakes internally. Thus you tend NOT to see some pretty glaring errors.
Give it over to other eyes to review. A writing group is excellent for this purpose.
posted
yeah, I don't think there's a perfect manuscript. But you should really really try.
As buffy says, every error lowers the editor's confidence in the piece.
I have never seen a manuscript that is wonderful and perfect but just has a bunch of grammatical errors. Never. Generally if there are numerous errors, the story is as weak as the grammar. So when I see bad grammar, I suspect that I am reading a manuscript from someone who has not really mastered the basics of their craft.
But it is also true that errors slip past even the most diligent. And grammatical errors are pretty easy to fix - if the story was otherwise perfect, it would not be a huge problem to fix the grammar. So I read on, anyway, and reject the story for its other weaknesses, not its grammar per se.
posted
I recently had one "near-perfect" manuscript... er... punctuation, grammar, and formatting I mean; the story had some flaws. There were only two things wrong with it. One word should have been hyphenated but wasn't, and something else that eludes me presently.
I will say this: It is an absolute joy to read a story, even a flawed one, when the manuscript is formatted properly (per guidelines) and free from errors. As Beth said, every error counts against you. So, do try and be as perfect as possible. It makes a good first impression. And first impressions do matter.
[This message has been edited by HSO (edited October 08, 2005).]
Printer-friendly view of this topic
.
