# The Importance of Eliminating Typos?



## BWFoster78 (Aug 12, 2013)

I'm getting ready to send my novel to the editor.  I'm kinda hoping for a quick (less than 2-month) edit followed by self publishing.  Looking forward to getting the book out there, I'm struck with the question, "How much time should I devote to the elimination of typos?"

Don't get me wrong.  I hate typos and want to stomp out as many of the things as possible.  However, I can't afford a proofreader (budget is already shot!).  I will send it to my sister who does typesetting and is quite good at proofreading.  I'll also do a proof pass myself.

I'm just not sure either of those will guarantee elimination of typos.

To do so, I'd have to do a full proof myself.  I'm guessing that would add a full 40 hours of workload to do it right.

Worth it or is what I'm doing good enough?

Thanks.

Brian


----------



## Graylorne (Aug 12, 2013)

Somehow I think your texts aren't riddled with typo's and funny grammar  
I'd say do those last two checks and send it in. And keep in mind that even the best edited books will not be 100% error-free.
Besides, should you miss any, the editor will point them out.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Aug 12, 2013)

> Somehow I think your texts aren't riddled with typo's and funny grammar



I tend to have a lot of places where I changed a phrase and forgot to delete part of the old one.  Leads to things like: the her OR The Ashley.  Hard to spot as the mind tends to fill in what you meant to write.  Also so, so easy to leave off a quotation or some such.



> keep in mind that even the best edited books will not be 100% error-free.



I understand that, but people seem to notice it in self published works moreso than in traditional.  Makes me want to pay even more attention.



> Besides, should you miss any, the editor will point them out.



Can't afford a line edit, and I'm sure my final editing will introduce new ones.


----------



## Graylorne (Aug 12, 2013)

I know the first problem. Perhaps your sister could look for those? 

The second point I shouldn't worry about too much. There will always be people trying to catch you out. Well, there's only so much you can do.

Point three is a clear sign to stop editing. (Besides, one of the plus points of self-publishing is, you can always correct any leftover typo's afterwards).


----------



## Devor (Aug 12, 2013)

I think there's nothing worse than a review itemizing how bad your typos are. I mean, you can fix them later, but you can't get rid of those reviews. It depends on how good you and your friends and your editor is, sure, but I think if there's any doubt about whether you've gotten virtually all of them, then there's no doubt you need to do more to get them.

As a barometer, I believe I remember reading an article somebody posted about a bad review which complained about finding 6 typos in a novel. So 6 would appear to be too many.


((edit))



> Hard to spot as the mind tends to fill in what you meant to write.  Also so, so easy to leave off a quotation or some such.



There are tricks. Read sentences out of order, print it, read it aloud, have one of those computer programs to read it out loud to you. No problem is insurmountable.


----------



## brokethepoint (Aug 12, 2013)

You aren't doing beta readers?


----------



## Steerpike (Aug 12, 2013)

I just finished a novel that I liked, but that 7 or 8 very noticeable typos in it, and to be honest I thought about sending a message to the author letting him know they ought to fix those, at least in the electronic edition. It did bug me.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Aug 12, 2013)

> There are tricks. Read sentences out of order, print it, read it aloud, have one of those computer programs to read it out loud to you. No problem is insurmountable.



Devor,

I've no doubt that, should I do a full edit, I could almost be assured of getting rid of all of them.  The question is whether or not the time spent is worth it.

From yours and Steerpike's answers, perhaps it is.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Aug 12, 2013)

brokethepoint said:


> You aren't doing beta readers?



I had beta readers for early drafts.  None planned for the final version.  To me, the final version is for proofing, not beta reading.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (Aug 12, 2013)

I think one of the keys to successful self-publishing is to make your book indistinguishable in appearance & readability when compared to the product of a traditional publisher. That would cover everything from cover art, interior design, the quality of the story, editing quality, among others.

I'd say if you have doubts about those errors then you should address them. I wouldn't want something I've sweated over for such a long time, and my first big release to the world, to be fraught with errors.

As a reader, typos bother me.


----------



## Svrtnsse (Aug 12, 2013)

It's not unthinkable you may have spent a lot more time fixing issues that the average reader is a lot less likely to notice.


----------



## Nihal (Aug 12, 2013)

As a reader, typos bother me as well. Sometimes a lot.

I agree with T.Allen.Smith, it's desirable to have your work to be indistinguishable from a (good) traditionally published book. Typos are going leave a bad impression on your readers, making them perceive your work as, depending on the number and type of typos, something of subpar quality. If—from their point of view—you didn't take the time to make sure your book is ready to be published, why would they spend their time and money to read it/more of your work?


P.s.: I don't see the issue with have someone beta reading your final version. You could take this as an opportunity to get reviews too.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Aug 12, 2013)

T.Allen.Smith said:


> I think one of the keys to successful self-publishing is to make your book indistinguishable in appearance & readability when compared to the product of a traditional publisher. That would cover everything from cover art, interior design, the quality of the story, editing quality, among others.
> 
> I'd say if you have doubts about those errors then you should address them. I wouldn't want something I've sweated over for such a long time, and my first big release to the world, to be fraught with errors.
> 
> As a reader, typos bother me.



I agree that excessive errors are bad.

What I was trying to ask is: to what extend should you endeavor to try to eliminate all typos?

I've read numerous traditionally published books in which I've noticed typos.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Aug 12, 2013)

> P.s.: I don't see the issue with have someone beta reading your final version. You could take this as an opportunity to get reviews too.



I do plan to ask others to read it before the release date in order to do reviews.  Of those people that I have some (at least online) relationship with, I'll request the point out any errors they may find.

That, however, is not what I consider beta reading.  The product should be finished by the time I get it in the reviewers hands.


----------



## Steerpike (Aug 12, 2013)

BWFoster78 said:


> I agree that excessive errors are bad.
> 
> What I was trying to ask is: to what extend should you endeavor to try to eliminate all typos?
> 
> I've read numerous traditionally published books in which I've noticed typos.



I think it is worth trying to get them all. Although it may be unfair, I think a self-published book is going to suffer more for things like typos than a traditionally published one.

When people come across typos in a traditionally published book, they may tend to think "ah, that one slipped past the editor." If there are enough, it will irk them.

With a self-published book, I suspect even a few of them could lead a reader to say "this wasn't even edited. $&@#! amateurs." There's enough really bad self-published fiction out there that it probably wouldn't take a lot for a reader to mentally shift your work into the "unprofessional" category as a result of fewer mistakes than they'd tolerate in a traditionally-published work.


----------



## Nihal (Aug 12, 2013)

Yes, after writing a P.S. I considered changing it, my word choice was quite unfortunate. Not exactly beta reading (although it doesn't hurt to look into some issue that may be pointed by a considerable number of readers), but someone who you know you can also ask to point typos if this person happens to find them.

Sidenote: I believe I get more bothered by typos in traditionally published works than self published. While I believe self published works should strive for quality, something traditionally published should have it by default. It shouldn't look amateurish by any means.


----------



## brokethepoint (Aug 12, 2013)

Ok, with the example you were posing I thought it would be something they would catch pretty easy.



BWFoster78 said:


> I had beta readers for early drafts.  None planned for the final version.  To me, the final version is for proofing, not beta reading.


----------



## A. E. Lowan (Aug 12, 2013)

Personally, I have noticed a rise in the number of typos in the industry as a whole, and I find it to be incredibly unprofessional.  It's not even just a matter of small typos like dropped letters or misplaced apostrophes, but also an over-reliance on spell-checking.  For example, in one book I read a few years back, traditionally published by a major publisher and a best-selling author, a beautiful male character in a moment of emotional vulnerability tells the strong heroine that in his younger days he was a "catamount."  Yes, the word was spelled perfectly... of course, it was supposed to be "catamite," but that's not what made it into print.  So, tender moment blown by spell-check.

My advise, were this my project, would be to sit down with the manuscript and read the whole thing out loud, back to front, and take frequent breaks to keep your eyes from glazing too much.  Reading aloud uses a different part of your brain to process information and helps to keep your mind from filling in what it thinks should be there.  Sometimes it will try, anyway, but you can detect these attempts because there will be a small hiccup or hesitation in your reading.  It's time consuming, I know, but since we as writers are ultimately responsible for the quality of our products, regardless of the method we choose for publication, I think it's time well spent.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (Aug 12, 2013)

Steerpike said:


> I think it is worth trying to get them all. Although it may be unfair, I think a self-published book is going to suffer more for things like typos than a traditionally published one.



My thoughts exactly. Why let a few errors push your work headlong into the massive pile of drivel sitting, unread, on virtual shelves?

I don't see a lot of typos in works that have the benefit of professional line editing. If you want to be taken seriously, to be considered a professional, you need to hold yourself to the same standard and produce a similar quality.


----------



## ThinkerX (Aug 12, 2013)

> Personally, I have noticed a rise in the number of typos in the industry as a whole, and I find it to be incredibly unprofessional. It's not even just a matter of small typos like dropped letters or misplaced apostrophes, but also an over-reliance on spell-checking.



THIS.

And its not just spelling/grammar.  GRRM mentioned a few years ago he'd gotten a queary from a confused dutch translator for 'Game of Thrones' - apparently there was a horse which changed gender a couple of times.  Not in the same block of text, but from chapter to chapter.  He just shrugged it off.

I've seen the same from Feist and others.

It afflicts me as well. Last night I took a peek at parts of my WIP I considered to be 'well polished' - and found instances where I had the same (very minor) character with two similiar, but still different names.  (I'd changed his name in one draft, but didn't catch it every place.)

To me, this makes the works of the old line authors - the ones who banged out their masterpieces on typewriters where one mistake or revision killed an entire page - to be all the more impressive.  To get it right - to avoid all that retyping, they had to think it through the first time.


----------



## Kevin O. McLaughlin (Aug 13, 2013)

My thought is: work to eliminate ALL typos. Understand that this is an impossible goal, and some will slip through, and don't berate yourself when this inevitably happens.

If your 80,000 word novel has three typos in it, people are not going to complain. (Well, someone might, but don't worry about it.)

But DO strive to eliminate them all.

I would worry less about the whole "people give trad pub books a pass for things they will complain about for self pub". If you've done your job well, most readers will never know if your book was self published or not. Most SP ebooks that sell well are indistinguishable from other small press ebooks without putting in research work that most readers simply won't bother with.

You want your work to look polished and professional. That means as close to typo-free as possible. If trad pub is slipping in that regard (and they are), then it's not an excuse for us to be more casual. Rather, it is an opportunity to SHINE compared to the major publishers, whose work will look that much more shoddy compared to the stellar self published books.

(And yes, that IS happening right now...which I find fascinating. I find it related to Guy Kawasaki's concept of "artisanal publishing", because the professional SP writer simply pays more attention to every aspect of the work than a major press can afford to. Disasters like the formatting errors of "The Casual Vacancy" ebook just don't happen for professional self publishers, because they make sure everything is right.)

Line editing your own work is a skill, by the way. Anyone with a good grasp of spelling, punctuation, and grammar can learn it. I had a college class where we lost a letter grade (A down to an A- for example) for each spelling, grammar, or punctuation error on any paper. And we had a LOT of papers. Nobody passed unless they learned how to edit their own work very well. The idea that you cannot check your own writing is a MYTH. It is, however, a skill which must be acquired through work. (And having someone else check after is always a good idea!)


----------



## Caged Maiden (Aug 13, 2013)

I think you might be looking at this the wrong way, Brian.  40 hours.  What's that?  two weeks?  Isn't it worth it?  I mean, I spent four months just editing my novel into second draft.  Four whole months, on a novel it only took me eight weeks to write.  And I'm only half done!  After this, I need to write the ending, go back through and fix consistency problems that arose from changing details, and then give it one last sweep for nit-picks like word choice and typos.  I wouldn't even think of not spending the time to eliminate typos, and I'm pretty darn great at grammar/ punctuation/ spelling.  Also, right before sending it off is the perfect time to have readers looking at it for you.  It's like a free line edit, getting your best critters on it.

Absolutely, you should get your eyes, your sister's eyes, and anyone else's who will read the book for you again looking at it one final time for typos and other last-minute things.  If you don't, it might come back and bite you in the ass.  Unfortunately, if you publish sloppy work (with more typos than people will tolerate, or silly minute mistakes that make you appear unprofessional and amateurish), people will remember it forever.  You don't want to get a reputation for delivering unprofessional work, because it might taint people's view for years to come, whether it's warranted or not.


----------



## C Hollis (Aug 13, 2013)

BWFoster78 said:


> Worth it or is what I'm doing good enough?



Is your goal to put something out there that is just "good enough"?


----------



## Legendary Sidekick (Aug 13, 2013)

I can't remember off the top of my head if _Storm of Swords_ had typos. At any rate, I catch them often in published books. My kids have a Disney Fairies book that has its first typo ('at' instead of 'as') on page 3!

I think you're doing the right thing by sending it to your sister, who's good at that, then doing your own proof, then letting the publisher take over from there. Bob (R.A.) Salvatore reads aloud when proofing his own books. One read-aloud, send it, write the next.


----------



## Legendary Sidekick (Aug 13, 2013)

C Hollis said:


> Is your goal to put something out there that is just "good enough"?


I think for some people 'good enough' is a healthier goal than 'perfect.' By that I mean, there are some writers (like me at times) who will literally edit a scene to death (as in worse than the typo-ridden original) trying to perfect everything.

In the context of the OP's question, here's my idea of a healthy 'good enough':

If you've carefully read your entire manuscript and fixed what you and your beta reader(s) caught, you've done your job. You might consider another read once all is fixed, but if you catch nothing else, it doesn't mean it's error-free. _It's error-free to the best of your knowledge._ No shame in the publisher's people catching what you missed or the editor saying 'I don't get this scene, could you…?'


----------



## BWFoster78 (Aug 13, 2013)

C Hollis said:


> Is your goal to put something out there that is just "good enough"?



Absolutely.

The implication of your statement is that one should try to achieve perfection.

A. Perfection is impossible.
B. Since my goal is to eventually support myself through my writing, I have to treat writing as a business.  At some point, the benefit you gain from extra work is eclipsed by the profit you hope to achieve from that effort.
C. If you keep working and working, you'll never get anything out there.  At some point, you have to call it done.


----------



## Legendary Sidekick (Aug 13, 2013)

With my first (only) self-published novel, I proofread/revised three times before I was confident I caught all of the errors. I had it available on Lulu, CreateSpace and Amazon but would resubmit when I found new typos. It has other first-time-writer issues, but I'm pretty sure the typos are gone.


----------



## Devor (Aug 13, 2013)

There's a problem with "good enough." It isn't.

The phrase implies that you're shooting for a work that's just above the line of where you need to be. But add in even just a little variability, and you're seriously at risk of falling below that line.

The only way to make sure your work is "just good enough" is to overshoot your benchmark significantly.


----------



## Legendary Sidekick (Aug 13, 2013)

My point up here was that the phrases 'good enough' and 'perfection' mean different things to different people.

To me, 'good enough' is ready to sell where 'perfect' is that unrealistic, undefined ideal that prevents me from finishing the job if I attempt to achieve it or even meet it halfway. I prefer the 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it' approach, which is where beta readers come it… or in the case of an artistic project, I consult a better artist.

To others, 'good enough' is 100% when you should be putting in 110%.

And then there's the question 'good enough for what?' To sell? To blow away? To be the best fresh new thing out there?

Endless story shortened, I think this phrase is vague enough to interpret different ways, so I threw in a specific: Bob Salvatore's advice to me regarding what level of proofreading is 'good enough' for a first-time author to send to a literary agent. (I think for a self-published author, it's no different: error-free/makes sense/entertaining as far as you know; submit and move on.)


----------



## C Hollis (Aug 13, 2013)

If good enough is good enough for you, then go for it.

The Indie world is filled with stories the author's deemed good enough, and they are making money at it.  Some even make enough to live on.  And to them, that is good enough.



> The implication of your statement is that one should try to achieve perfection.



Okay, I don't have a problem with that.

The implication of "good enough" is sending a product out the door well before a person reaches the limits of their abilities and resources.


----------



## Devor (Aug 13, 2013)

Legendary Sidekick said:


> My point up here was that the phrases 'good enough' and 'perfection' mean different things to different people.



That link is either a bad copy-paste or a secret little Easter Egg cleverly posted to promote Dragon's Egg. Definitely the second.

My post was more to BWFoster and how I interpret his interpretation of the phrase, based in part on a common interpretation implied by the word "just," which I interpret to mean "barely" good enough..... I'll shut up now.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Aug 13, 2013)

Devor said:


> There's a problem with "good enough." It isn't.
> 
> The phrase implies that you're shooting for a work that's just above the line of where you need to be. But add in even just a little variability, and you're seriously at risk of falling below that line.
> 
> The only way to make sure your work is "just good enough" is to overshoot your benchmark significantly.



My wording was "good enough."  C Hollis added the "just," which I used to determine the implication that he felt I should instead seek perfection.

I believe a high degree of quality is an absolute necessity for gaining an audience.

I also feel that I have a tendency to go farther in that regard than is profitable.  I started the thread as a reality check for myself.  What is the standard that I should try to achieve?  I think it's been answered as: I should do a full proof of my final version before sending it out.

I feel that advice is perfectly reasonable.

At this point, truthfully, I'm not quite sure what we're discussing.


----------



## Devor (Aug 13, 2013)

BWFoster78 said:


> At this point, truthfully, I'm not quite sure what we're discussing.



At this point we're discussing attitude.

I'm sorry if I wound up put Hollis's words ("just") onto you by accident. I didn't intend to pan every possible use of the phrase.


----------



## Caged Maiden (Aug 13, 2013)

I think we're debating "good enough".  For some people, that statement is almost offensive (which I have to admit being one of those people).  I would never want to call my novels "good enough".  I'd prefer to say I'm really proud of them, or I did the very best I could. 

"Good enough" to some other people, means the best they could do without driving themselves mad over tiny, insignificant details.  So I think that's where the confusion is occurring.

For me, a "good enough" ending, might be lacking in resolution or satisfaction for the reader, but be suitable to close the story.  A "good enough" plot might be one that maybe relies on cheap tactics to explain why it had to happen that way, but it could certainly have been strengthened to make perfect sense and maybe surprise or inspire the reader. 

I think "good enough" for some people is them being lazy and not wanting to put forth the full effort it takes to take something from "good" to "great".  While for others, it simply means "I've done all I can to make this a work I'm proud to stamp my name upon".  

The thing writers should understand about publishing, is that when you query an agent, you're asking them to stamp THEIR name on the work.  They'll be picky over things like typos and plot consistency and a whole assortment of other things.  Some self-published works have dodged those constraints, by saying "this is good enough for me", when in fact, it wouldn't be for an agent or publishing house.  

So the inclination is to be concerned when someone says, "I'm striving for a good enough novel," because we would hate to see someone settle for less than their full potential.  I believe everyone here would agree that if you've (or any of us have) done your very best to catch typos and make your manuscript as strong as possible, that's all you can do.  Your plan to send it out to be read one final time is an excellent idea, and definitely worth your time.  But I don't think anyone was ever implying anything negative about someone who's done their best and feels really confident about their work.  Just that if a writer shoots for mediocrity, they'll probably end up suffering for that decision in the end.  And reputations, once tarnished, are hard to polish.


----------



## C Hollis (Aug 13, 2013)

When I read your opening post, it appeared to me you wanted someone to talk you down from going too far with the typo thing.  My response was more geared toward whether you would be happy with just "good enough", because the tone of your post implied you wouldn't be.

I mean, nobody here has to live with your decision of when to pull the plug and throw the book out there.  I don't know if you would be the person to brood over a review or two whining about typos, or if you would be the person to shrug it off.

Myself, I still get wound up over crap that I should've caught in my first book.

As far as the "perfection" derailment; we need a universal smart-a** font.  That was never an intended implication.


----------



## Steerpike (Aug 13, 2013)

I agree with Brian's comment about approaching things with a certain sense of pragmatism if you want to make a living at this. It seems to me that if you're spending 4 or 5 years on each novel, trying to get everything just right, you drastically reduce your chances of being a self-supporting writer in the near future. Particularly if you're self-publishing.

That doesn't matter to everyone. Some people approach writing purely as an art, and whether the work takes them ten months or ten years to complete, it's fine with them. It's not meant to be a self-sustaining income source. Nothing wrong with that. For others, writing is purely a commodity and they're focused on how much product they can move. Most of us fall somewhere in the middle, I suspect. Knowing your goals will help with issues like this.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Aug 13, 2013)

There are so many consideration to the whole self publishing thing.

First, as someone putting out my first novel, I have to make sure that my quality level is "good enough" to earn me an audience.  I put a lot of effort into improving my craft, and I'm driven by the motivation not to put something out there that is going to be an embarrassment.

On the other hand, I desire to be a professional, and I accept the advice that the only way to get to that point is to put out enough quantity.  At some point, I have to put my work out there even though it isn't perfect.

Finding that tipping point seems tricky.

Not "good enough" and I'll fail because no one will care to advocate my book to others.  If, however, I spend my entire life finishing my first book, I won't have a chance to follow it up, and there's little chance a single book is going to find the audience that I desire.


----------



## Devor (Aug 13, 2013)

Steerpike said:


> I agree with Brian's comment about approaching things with a certain sense of pragmatism if you want to make a living at this. It seems to me that if you're spending 4 or 5 years on each novel, trying to get everything just right, you drastically reduce your chances of being a self-supporting writer in the near future. Particularly if you're self-publishing.



There is a difference between spending 4 or 5 years on each novel, and spending 4 or 5 years on the first novel. There's editing to perfection, and there's editing to the point where it shows you've gotten over the learning curve.

I don't think that everyone struggling with the editing is necessarily fighting an overblown desire for perfection.


----------



## Caged Maiden (Aug 13, 2013)

My personal feeling on this, Brian, is that while it hurts, it's better to take the time to make sure I learn every important lesson on my first publishable novel.  For instance, exploring POV depth and learning how to strike the right balance between "show" and "tell".  While I'm not going to be perfect, making sure I've thoroughly grasped those concepts, will help me to make certain my first book finds an audience that will hopefully love it and line up to buy the next.  Also, while four years is a long time to spend on a single novel, by making sure I publish when I'm really ready, versus when I want to, I'm making sure that my quality isn't compromised and I appear every bit the professional.  So following that first novel that shined like the polished turd it probably was, my following works will be quicker, better, and already have an audience awaiting them.  

If you've done your best, there's really only a few options.  Ask people who are very critical to read it and point out the things they have problems with and wouldn't accept in their own work.  Ask a professional editor to have a look and pay them for their time.  Ask some reviewers to read and review your book without publishing the review, just so you can get a feel for the sort of comments you'll be receiving.  I can't think of any more, but I'm sure there's a couple more avenues.

If you're pleased with your work, consider it finished and move on to the next phase.  This too, will be a learning process.  If you receive bad reviews, you know more for next time, right?  There's nothing wrong with learning that lesson.  It's painful, but sometimes necessary to hone in on your goals.  If you meet with success, you've got your confirmation that you've indeed done enough and presented exactly what readers are dying to eat up.  You're going to get mixed reviews any way you slice it.  Some people will hate your characters or style, others will love it and tell all their friends how great it was.  the goal is to not get bad reviews for something you could have changed with a little more effort, right?  I know you strive for technical perfection, so if you feel you've done your best, then the best thing is to jump into the deep end when you're ready.  If you didn't know how to swim before you leapt, you'll learn very quickly how to, right?

Everyone is going to make mistakes.  But sometimes it's not easy to see how big our errors are until we take a risk.  You may have nothing to worry about. 

Besides, there's loads of people who make profitable careers publishing things many people on this site call sub-standard.  How that's possible, I don't know, but the point is, everyone needs to strike their own balance.  Time/ effort, standard/ time, volume/ quantity, etc.

Do you have a good idea of the readiness of the novel?  If you do, then you should probably pull the trigger.   I'm not ready to pull the trigger just yet.  I'm still learning and perfecting a few concepts I think are too important to miss on.  When I do pull it, I want my aim to be a kill shot.  

Best wishes.


----------



## Steerpike (Aug 13, 2013)

Devor said:


> There is a difference between spending 4 or 5 years on each novel, and spending 4 or 5 years on the first novel. There's editing to perfection, and there's editing to the point where it shows you've gotten over the learning curve.
> 
> I don't think that everyone struggling with the editing is necessarily fighting an overblown desire for perfection.



That's true. However, even with that first novel you've got to pull the trigger eventually. If you've had to spend 4 or 5 years revising, I tend to think you're spinning your wheels. I remember Brandon Sanderson commenting about the fact that he'd written 4 or 5 novels before his first got published. I've heard that said a lot by writers. If, instead of writing all of those works, they'd spent the entire time revising one novel, we probably wouldn't know who they are today. If your novel needs 4 or 5 years worth of rewriting and editing, you should at least consider whether it might be better to start on something else instead.


----------



## Caged Maiden (Aug 13, 2013)

@ Devor.  That's two jinxes I'm calling haha.  What's up with that?  You're a faster typist than I am and I tend to be really wordy, saying the same thing.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Aug 13, 2013)

Caged Maiden,

I have specific goals in mind for my writing.  My measure of goodness is twofold:

1. Is my writing engaging?  Is it hard to put down?  Does the reader want to return to it as soon as possible when they do have to put it down?

2. Does it envoke an emotional response?  Does the reader care about the characters?

These are the two things that I look for in a book, and, if a book meets one of those two criteria, I consider it a success.

I'd love to meet both those goals, but, truthfully, I've found few books that do.  I don't know if I'll ever achieve #2 to the level that I desire, though I'll keep striving.

Right now, I think that my writing achieves #1 well enough to be of an acceptable quality.  That's going to be my "good enough."


----------



## Caged Maiden (Aug 13, 2013)

It certainly sounds like you're ready to pull the trigger then.  I'd say give it your last effort and do it!

I think if you're ready, it's as ready as you'll ever be, right?


----------



## Legendary Sidekick (Aug 13, 2013)

Devor said:


> That link is either a bad copy-paste or a secret little Easter Egg cleverly posted to promote Dragon's Egg. Definitely the second.
> 
> My post was more to BWFoster and how I interpret his interpretation of the phrase, based in part on a common interpretation implied by the word "just," which I interpret to mean "barely" good enough..... I'll shut up now.


Strange! It's supposed to go to post #25 in this thread, but when I click it now, I don't get a URL at all, but text from Dragon's Egg. No, not deliberate!

@BW, I like the focus you have. Good luck with your debut novel!


----------



## Devor (Aug 13, 2013)

Caged Maiden said:


> @ Devor.  That's two jinxes I'm calling haha.  What's up with that?  You're a faster typist than I am and I tend to be really wordy, saying the same thing.



I just like to show off my type-jitsu.


----------



## Tirjasdyn (Aug 26, 2013)

I'd say do the line edit. Bad typos, even a few can ruin a story especially a bad one. Take the time and do the edit.


----------



## skip.knox (Aug 31, 2013)

I was taught a long time ago this bit of wisdom: there is no such thing as typos, there are only mistakes.

Put another way, to the author it's a typo, but to the reader it is a mistake. I can think of no reason to allow mistakes out the door if I can prevent it.


----------



## ALB2012 (Aug 31, 2013)

Typos happen. Even professionally edited books by well known authors have them. Of course ideally they shouldn't but they do. No book is perfect, someone will always spot something - that pesky typo, a slightly weak character, an inconsistency the author my not even have considered.  Look at any well known book and I bet you it has a mix of reviews. Someone won't like it.  Badly written books can become best sellers (I am not saying they should do but the fact that is so) and well written but slightly... rough books may not.  New writers often find their book might not be as strong as it might be but that is usually discovered AFTER the event.  

I agree an author needs to do the best they can with the resources available (whether that includes a professional editor or not) but they also need to be realistic. Writing gets better with experience. 

My own book I know needs... a little polishing and that is something I am intending to work on. Book 2 is better in many ways and I learned a lot, hopefully what is learned from that will be taken onto subsequent works. 

Do the best you can do, then learn from the mistakes which will be there and then make the next one better. At least with e-books they are easy to upload again if you do find something. 

I am not saying you should just toss out a rough book but if you do the best you can then that is all which can be asked.


----------



## pmmg (Oct 7, 2022)

I hate typos. And I greatly appreciate anyone who points them out to me. I can look at the thing a thousand times, and then one day...Bam! right in the first paragraph of the first page...a typo? I am not even sure how that is possible. And for me, my brain just plays tricks on me. I can omit entire words and never see that they are missing. Its actually quite vexing, and I consider it just a blind spot. I will go the route of getting it edited by another before I put it out. And if over time, readers care to point them out as well, I may fix them in another edition. That part depends.


----------



## Ned Marcus (Oct 8, 2022)

For final checks, I have my computer read my stories aloud, and then use an online writing checker. Not perfect, but I pick up quite a lot of stuff. I even have Grammarly advising me now. Not that I pay attention to all the advice.


----------



## Demesnedenoir (Oct 9, 2022)

It is flat-out amazing what stupid shit will get past Grammarly and other checkers as far as typos and just weird stuff. My impersonation of the apps thinking goes thus: That's such a terrible error grrbl-gonk... Next!


----------



## Ned Marcus (Oct 9, 2022)

Demesnedenoir said:


> It is flat-out amazing what stupid shit will get past Grammarly and other checkers as far as typos and just weird stuff. My impersonation of the apps thinking goes thus: That's such a terrible error grrbl-gonk... Next!



LOL. You need to ignore most, but it's still useful for some basic mistakes that you can't see because you're too familiar with your own ms.


----------



## A. E. Lowan (Oct 10, 2022)

Ned Marcus said:


> LOL. You need to ignore most, but it's still useful for some basic mistakes that you can't see because you're too familiar with your own ms.


My team cheats. One of us is a linguist and a grammarian who will read the entire manuscript out loud as our final editorial sweep. We still miss mistakes, but not many. Also, I married our grammarian so she can't escape.


----------



## Prince of Spires (Oct 10, 2022)

Smart thinking A. E. Lowan on marrying your grammarian...

Another trick I've come across is to read your manuscript backwards (as in, start at the last sentence, then the sentence before that and so on). That way, you're not reading the story but the actual text. No idea if it works. My spelling in such that I don't rely on it too much anyway. I just pray that between my editor and the Word spell checker the novel gets to a decent quality.


----------



## Ned Marcus (Oct 10, 2022)

Prince of Spires said:


> Smart thinking A. E. Lowan on marrying your grammarian...
> 
> Another trick I've come across is to read your manuscript backwards (as in, start at the last sentence, then the sentence before that and so on). That way, you're not reading the story but the actual text. No idea if it works. My spelling in such that I don't rely on it too much anyway. I just pray that between my editor and the Word spell checker the novel gets to a decent quality.



It works, but it makes me go crazy. I managed it for two novels.


----------



## Puck (Nov 17, 2022)

An editor reads the first paragraph of two submissions.  They are both similarly interesting.  One has a typo, the other does not.  

The editor picks up the one without the typo and decides to read on.

The one with the typo gets put to one side...

That's the way it works.


----------



## Demesnedenoir (Nov 17, 2022)

I record for my audiobooks—which maybe I'm not great at, but I keep the rights without paying through the nose—and between that and listening to it in replay and all the editing of audio, basic typos and weird phrasing/sentences are eliminated. Commas are still my bugaboo, I overthink the shit out of them, LOL.



Prince of Spires said:


> Smart thinking A. E. Lowan on marrying your grammarian...
> 
> Another trick I've come across is to read your manuscript backwards (as in, start at the last sentence, then the sentence before that and so on). That way, you're not reading the story but the actual text. No idea if it works. My spelling in such that I don't rely on it too much anyway. I just pray that between my editor and the Word spell checker the novel gets to a decent quality.


----------

