MSI Press Blog

  It is Tuesday. Monday's madness is over, and Wednesday will take us over the hump, so Tuesday it is--for some serious discussion with authors. Tuesday talks mean to address authors in waiting and self-published authors who would like to go a more traditional route or who would at least like to take their steps with a publisher by their side.  Today's post addresses an issue that comes up a lot in book reviews by amateurs: "This book would have benefitted from better editing." When that happens -- and for a lot of books, it does -- what should be your reaction (assuming that your book was traditionally or hybrid published or was self-published after having been professionally edited)? Should you be mad?  The answer to that can question requires a bit of research. There can be reasons that a reviewer would write this other than that, indeed, the book needs to be better edited. Here are some of those reasons: An insecure reviewer often writes that there are editorial p

  (photo by Frank Perez) It is Tuesday. Time to tall turkey. Monday's madness is over, and Wednesday will take us over the hump, so Tuesday it is--for some serious discussion with authors. Tuesday talks mean to address authors in waiting and self-published authors who would like to go a more traditional route or who would at least like to take their steps with a publisher by their side. Today's topic shares an important reason for a book being turned down by an acquisitions editor. While there are almost as many reasons for turning down a manuscript as there are manuscripts submitted, there is one reason that has nothing (or very little) to do with the manusciprt. It has to do with the author, and it comes across in the proposal, the cover letter, or the enote (if emailed), or in all of them. That trait is arrogance, and it will turn off an editor before the editor even reads the manuscript. After all, a publisher has to work with an author, and if they dynamics are poor, it wi

  (photo by Frank Perez) It is Tuesday. Time to tall turkey. Monday's madness is over, and Wednesday will take us over the hump, so Tuesday it is--for some serious discussion with authors. Tuesday talks mean to address authors in waiting and self-published authors who would like to go a more traditional route or who would at least like to take their steps with a publisher by their side. Today's topic is about preparing a book for submission. We are talking here about the final version that gets sent to the publisher (after the inquiry and proposal, after the acceptance and contract). There are reasons that you would want to take the extra time to make sure that the book is just as ship-shape as possible: Most publishers have a clause in the contract that allows them to turn down a book after submission if it is not of good enough quality. The cleaner the book, the less expensive for the publisher to copyedit -- should you want to submit another book later, you will be remembere

  photo by Frank Perez Because we work with first-time authors, we often receive book submissions that are clear they would have benefitted from a professional edit. Yes, we edit, but when it is clear that the task will be immense, we are not interested in taking on the book. You may not need to hire an editor if: You have professional writing experience. You have a friend or acquaintance who is an English teacher, editor, or something similar. You were the star in your college English class in short story writing, advanced composition, or the like. Most new authors can benefit from a professional editor if they can afford one. (If not, then find a friend to help.) A professional editor can give your manuscript the edge among the vast number of manuscripts received.  An editor can, of course, find your typos and grammatical errors, but so can a good computer program. If you are writing a book not because you are a writer but because you are a content specialist and want to share your c