On Tuesday, February 18, 2003, at 08:18 AM, Andrew Lias wrote: >> I think that's brutally unfair to editors. They're not miracle >> workers, you know and turning a 900-page doorstop into a tightly >> plotted story a third that size in the time frame that most editors >> have isn't bloody likely. > > I take a middle stance. A lot of books that do reach the public sufer > for a lack of rigorous editing. However, you are correct, editors do > suffer limitations. A bigger limitation is that authors who are > successful can become 600 lb. gorillas. What editor is going to stand > his ground when confronting a defiant Steven King, for instance? I > think this is one reason why many authors have earlier works that seem > tighter and better focused than their latter works. > >> Not to mention the fact that people LIKE doorstop fantasy. Just >> because your taste doesn't match the market doesn't mean that editors >> aren't doing their jobs. > > There is a market but it is possible to write a big book that is, > never the less, well plotted and not stuffed with filler. An *ideal* > editor is capable of helping an author achieve that... but we don't > live in an ideal world. I am blessed with a good editor who does exactly that--she cuts filler mercilessly, asking me, "Why is this here? Does this advance the plot?". Probably why my books tend to be about 300 pages :-)