how perfect should a submission be?

Jamesaritchie said:

Well, again, it depends on what you mean by "perfect". I've never seen a manuscript that didn't have a few things that could be made better. It may be sentences here and there that need tightening, or need cut altogether, it may be a bit of dialogue that doesn't say what should be said, it may be a minor character who needs to be cut, etc., but a few things do need changed.

I have, however, seen many, many manuscripts that had zero spelling errors, zero grammattical errors, and had perfect formatting.

Click to expand...

I am sure it must be rare to see those manuscripts with no spelling and grammatical erros and perfect formatting. I think I mean a manuscript that can be sent straight to the publishing house because it's that perfect.

Issues of story structure, character development, etc., are always subjective. Getting "its" v. "it's" right isn't. Likewise "there" v. "their", or "hear" v. "here", etc. Which doesn't even mention pure typographical errors. You need not to have so many of these latter little things wrong that they make a bad moon rise in the reading experience of the person you submit to. One or two of these kinds of things on virtually every page will likely deep-six your manuscript after about ten pages, even if the agent/editor is interested enough to read on after the first page. Let's face it: Lack of attention to these small, easily-fixed things is commonly taken as a sign of lack of attention to the bigger things in a manuscript.

Be ye careful about the small things, and don't make excuses for failing to do so.

caw

Susan Littlefield said:

I am sure it must be rare to see those manuscripts with no spelling and grammatical erros and perfect formatting. I think I mean a manuscript that can be sent straight to the publishing house because it's that perfect.

Click to expand...

Well, perfect is as perfect does. There really is no reason to let spelling, grammar, and punctuation errors make it into a manuscript. Some here and there harms nothing, but it's wrong to say a writer can't catch them all.

But "perfect" in story and character really is highly subjective. I don't think I've ever seen a manuscript that didn't have something I thought needed changed, reworked, or even cut, but I can say the same thing about published novels.

There are exceptions to everything, but for the most part, editors do not take bad novels and turn them into good novels. An editor looks for novels that are already very good, and offers suggestions to make them better.

It's true that almost any manuscript will benefit by a proofread to clear up typos and the like, but it's also true that a lot of writers hand in manuscripts that could go the the printer just as they are. Editors take good novels, and with some help from the writer, try to make them better novels, but unless the novel is very nearly publishable as is, or is publishable as is, there usually isn't much an editor can do except ask for a rewrite/revision.

Many novels come in that don't need rewriting or revision, that are good enough to be published as is, even though the editor will offer suggestions to make them even better.

"Perfect" is just not a good choice of words. Unpublished or published, no novel is perfect, and the best you can usually achieve is Good Enough.

Susan Littlefield said:

Jeff, do you mean "perfect" as in the best you can make it, or "perfect" as in not one single error anywhere?

Click to expand...

Perfect, as in you know it's perfect. You're wrong, of course, but if you aren't convinced it's perfect, as far as you are able, then you need to run through it again.

For those who never feel it's perfect, that's an issue you'll need to overcome if you're ever going to submit.

There's a belief (Japanese?) that perfection can only be achieved by God (whatever god that may be...), therefor, if your work is perfect you have to introduce a flaw or insult God. I've never had the need to introduce any flaws...

Jeff

quicklime said:

Literal isn't your friend, unless you like friends who tie you up in useless knots and prevent you doing anything.

Click to expand...

50 Shades strikes again...

Jeff

quicklime said:

worse, anyone convinced their work is "perfect" is usually in serious trouble.

the hard part is figuring out when you're still making meaningful changes in one work, or better off turning it loose. But yes, the best one CAN make it....always. Control what you can; there's plenty of risks out there you cannot.

Click to expand...

I agree. I think I could have beta-read my book into oblivion, but I finally decided I had to take the leap and send it out. I'm sure there's mistakes that I didn't pick up on through my numerous rereads, but I am happy with the story and the plot. At some point, you have to stop fiddling.

"Perfect" is just not a good choice of words. Unpublished or published, no novel is perfect, and the best you can usually achieve is Good Enough.

Click to expand...

Perfect, as in you know it's perfect. You're wrong, of course, but if you aren't convinced it's perfect, as far as you are able, then you need to run through it again.

Click to expand...

Thank you, James and Jeff.