Pushing your points - how far?

I'd not make the switches, except if it's unclear or if you haven't dropped the characters' name in a while, and where the note is, explain you disagree that it's necessary.

If it comes back again, or there's some contact with insistence, ask for specific reasoning. There may be something you're not thinking of, or some house style (this seems unlikely, but I don't know if we're even talking about fiction or non-).

If there's nothing that makes sense, just say you prefer to keep the pronouns in the places they are. It is, as you note, your name on the thing. If he or they can explain the reasoning or rule behind the switch, that's one thing, if not, then don't switch.

I've always edited with the view that the author gets the final say on the text of a book. If you disagree with your editor's comments, then say so. Explain why, if you want to, but otherwise, nope. Your book, your decision.

Old Hack said:

I've always edited with the view that the author gets the final say on the text of a book. If you disagree with your editor's comments, then say so. Explain why, if you want to, but otherwise, nope. Your book, your decision.

Click to expand...

Ditto.

In fiction, if John is clearly doing something, saying something or whatever, you don't need to repeat "John" the next time he is mentioned, unless something--or someone--has intervened:

"John went to the window. John saw a car drive up. John wondered if it was a stolen car. John picked up his phone."

That's ridiculous.

But if a passage were to read "John went to the window. Mary stepped from the kitchen with a plate of cookies and asked, 'Hungry?'"

At this point, you have several choices. You might write, "John ignored her, still looking at the car and wondering if it was stolen," or you might write, "He ignored her, still looking..." Or you might write "John reached for a cookie" or "He reached..."

As long as there is no doubt about which character is behaving or speaking, there should be no need to repeat that character's name. Pronouns are useful parts of speech. I have no idea where your editor is coming from.

You shouldn't have to "push" your point. Good editors offer suggestions, and do not try to give orders. You can just say, "No, I want it left as it is", and the editor should be fine with it.

It's still your book, it goes out with your name on it, and you need to be happy with it. You're the one critics and reviewers will praise or blame, not the editor.

Prophetsnake, I agree with your take on name versus pronoun.

I edit short stories for a publisher of anthologies. My editor-in-chief's rule is "Suggest and explain to our submitters but don't insist. It's their names under the titles."

Not an editor (in publishing, anyway), but I don't think much of your editor in this case.

Everybody's got pet peeves and style quirks, of course, but any editor preparing a MS for publication should, I would expect, know the difference between house style, the author's predominant usage, his or her own preferences, and what works for the story's readership. His or her own preference is pretty low on the importance list. Not to mention, if what you describe is accurate, we're straying awfully close to outright wrong. Repeating a name like that is repetitious writing, and not the kind that can be kinda-sorta ignored in certain cases. Speaking as a reader, it's enough for me to require some new drywall after your book goes through it.

Hopefully you can sort everything out and get the best possible scenario. Do bear in mind that it is, long-run, better to not publish than to publish badly. What you're describing falls under my personal definition of publishing badly.

VeryBigBeard said:

Not an editor (in publishing, anyway), but I don't think much of your editor in this case.

Click to expand...

Ditto.

Snake, the overuse of proper pronouns is aggravating, and not just because it comes across as juvenile. Here's why. The reader will be happily reading along, into the story, and then trip over a proper pronoun, and wonder, Wait, 'Bob'? Was there just another character doing all that awesomeness back there? The reader will then re-read the previous paragraphs, only to confirm that it was indeed Bob doing all the action. All because the writer dropped an inconsiderate proper pronoun for no good reason.

Proper pronouns are needed to clarify who is doing or saying what. Otherwise they can fool the reader into momentarily thinking they missed a character switch. For example, if you have a man and a women in a scene, and no one else, it's best to identify them properly at the beginning of the scene, and then call them 'he' and 'she' for the remainder of the scene.

I've run across this approach in a few published novels, and it drives me absolutely bonkers, especially if it's in limited third. Knocks me out of the immersion, because it feels like there's an external narrator doing it, and yes, if it's done over and over, it does give it (imo) a "See Spot run" feel. I'm one who will rewrite a sentence if needed to avoid using a character's proper name too often, and if they're the only person in the scene, I only use it very occasionally, so an editor who wanted me to insert proper names over and over would drive me bonkers.

Is this a common approach? Like I said, I've even seen trade-published books from big-five publishers where this is done, and I've assumed it was an author mistake that the editor failed to catch and correct because they were pushing a deadline or something. Could it be something editors actually prefer, and style, tone and narrative focus be hanged?

Roxxsmom said:

I've run across this approach in a few published novels, and it drives me absolutely bonkers, especially if it's in limited third. Knocks me out of the immersion, because it feels like there's an external narrator doing it, and yes, if it's done over and over, it does give it (imo) a "See Spot run" feel. I'm one who will rewrite a sentence if needed to avoid using a character's proper name too often, and if they're the only person in the scene, I only use it very occasionally, so an editor who wanted me to insert proper names over and over would drive me bonkers.

Is this a common approach? Like I said, I've even seen trade-published books from big-five publishers where this is done, and I've assumed it was an author mistake that the editor failed to catch and correct because they were pushing a deadline or something. Could it be something editors actually prefer, and style, tone and narrative focus be hanged?

Click to expand...

I tend to agree with you strongly on this issue, on this style of writing, but whenever possible, editors prefer letting writers have their own way, their own style, and their own voice. There are limits to this, of course, but if the novel is publishable, the editor usually gives in to the writer.

I'm not sure I'd call what these writers do a mistake. Some readers may hate it, others may love, and still others just don't care. I think "he" and "she" can get just as annoying as overuse of pronouns. Some writers are just better than others, and so are some editors, but much of it is just style.

The truth will come out after the novel is published. This is when readers vote with their dollars, and sales numbers can change both editors and writers. It's still a learning process, even when you reach the point of selling a novel.

All I can tell you is that if you are displeased now it'll be worse when the book is pub'd. Yeah, "cool you've been pub'd and all." But things like this can really put a damper on things, from my own experience. So tell the editor how you feel and really try to get them to accept your point of view. G'luck.

Prophetsnake said:

I'm a first time author and have a contract with a small time company.
The big issue is that he's replaced nearly every pronoun with a proper noun. 'He' has become 'John" and so forth.

There's no question of ambiguity. In my version the reader always know who is speaking or acting. In the editor's it's "John did this. John went to the door. John saw Mary at the door. John spoke to Mary and said. -"

Click to expand...

That sounds absolutely terrible. Sorry. I mean the editor's corrections sound terrible. I've never had an editor that "replaced" anything for me. They only suggested that I figure out for myself ways to make certain things better, and that I cut words used too often and replaced them with other words of my choice etc..

Have you asked your editor why they made this change? If you can understand their reasoning then you may be in a better position to accept or reject the changes. If this is a company you are publishing through (not someone you are paying), you may be in a sticky situation if they do not accept your desire to change things. If you are working with a publishing company, the publisher has the ultimate say in what happens with the book - not you. As harsh as that sounds, and as much as it can suck if you don't have a good editor, that's the reality of it if you've signed a publishing contract.

That said, with what little you've explained here, I think the editor may have been overzealous in removing the pronouns.

I'll second (third, fourth, whatever) what many others have said...

Not a style I like, personally, and I would be equally reluctant to do it. That said, I would take the following actions:

• Double check the clarity of each use and, if a pronoun is acceptable and would sound better, reject the change. But do take the time to really look at the text and pretend you don't know the story. Is it crystal clear?
• Check with the editor and specifically ask about house style, and if it's not a house style, what the reasons are for the lack of pronouns.
• If it's house style - prepare to have an argument you may lose.
• If it's not house style and the editor can give thoughtful reasons - re-check your manuscript and accept/reject changes as needed.
• If it's not house style and the editor cannot give thoughtful reasons - let them know you respect their opinion, but you disagree with it, and are therefore rejecting (some/most/all) the pronoun changes.
• If you need a backup reason for rejecting the changes, the magic bullet here is "author voice". It is not your "voice" to use proper names when a pronoun will do. May not work if house style demands it, but I can't imagine it's actually a matter of house style.

All of that said - most editors are making suggestions. It's up to you to accept or reject their changes. Most of the time, they're good changes - grammar flubs you missed, clarity errors, the rare typo, etc. Sometimes, they're the editor's personal quirks. (I will ruthlessly delete "that" anywhere it is not absolutely necessary for clarity.)

Glad it worked out well for you! I recently went through a short story edit with an anth editor who suggested I replace some of the question marks with commas and the tag, she/he asked. As in: "Where are we going," he asked. I thought it looked a little strange and decided to just alter the sentences so that it was obvious who was speaking. Here's hoping it won't be a problem!