Different books — different publishers — what about the editing?
Sandy McCutcheon reflects on being edited in various genres — Report by Helena Bond
Sandy McCutcheon knows a lot about editing. After all, he has been edited a lot. As a writer in many genres, including plays, radio documentaries, political thrillers, a memoir, contributions to anthologies and magazines, a children's book, and recently his first literary novel, he came to the February meeting to share with us how editing varies, how it remains the same, and what it's like being published by a range of different publishers.
Sandy's talk had all the pace of a thriller. He opened with the observation that a good relationship between writer and editor is essential, asserting that writer and editor should be as close as lovers or spouses to obtain a really first-class result. And for anyone feeling prudish at this thought, let me hasten to add that it transpired Sandy's relationships with his editors have usually been at the safe remove of email, marked-up pages and the telephone.
Sandy pointed out that each book has different editing challenges, despite the similarities of genre. His editors have always been thorough, looking at the structure of the book, done a copy/line edit, checked proofs, and cross-checked for internal consistency.
Fact checking is critical to his up-to-date, politically-charged thrillers, because it's the veracity of settings that make the plot believable. The editor engaged by Harper Collins to work with Sandy on his first novel, In Wolf's Clothing, was engaged specifically because of her extensive knowledge of ASIO, but her flair for meticulously checking facts turned this into a long and delightful collaboration. Also, readers care! Sandy chuckled over readers' emails about the lighting in the Russian subway system, which no longer matched his description due to renovations!
With a certain sense of mischief, Sandy recounted — or was it boasted? — of the city he constructed in meticulous detail for Delicate Indecencies, which was so believable that his editor searched in vain for it in the real world! In Poison Tree he used an ongoing thread of rose motifs, which led inevitably to that great icon of pre-Raphaelite art, The Heart of the Rose by Sir Edward Coley Burne-Jones <http://www.victorianweb.org/painting/bj/paintings/18.html>. So Sandy created a new painting by the same master — a study — and, slipping it deftly past his editor, was besieged by excited art lovers wanting to know where they could see this work!
Time spent editing, Sandy pointed out, does not have a fixed ratio to time spent writing. In his experience, novels that take a year to write take about six weeks to edit. Yet his one children's book, Blik, which took a weekend to write, still took six weeks to edit! He admitted to not being familiar with writing for children as a genre, and emphasised the need to trust your editor as you venture into uncharted waters.
Still on the theme of trust, Sandy pointed out that his first contribution to an anthology, On Murder (which he heartily recommended to us all), was edited and published with no consultation at all; he simply received a copy of the book. On checking through the text he found that only a few minor and non-controversial changes had, in fact, been made to his contribution, but he found the experience unnerving, and heartily recommends us to keep in touch with our authors.
In contrast, writing a piece for the Griffith Review , he was delighted with by editing of the same depth and care as for a novel. As the piece was about search for family, and Tony Abbott's search was in the news at the time, discussion as to whether or not to draw parallels between Sandy and Tony's experiences was a key question — another dimension of editing.
In speaking of his latest two books, Sandy could not resist naming names, despite his intention not to. He praised Meredith Rose, editor of his memoir The Magician's Son, as "the best editor I've ever had", and as this was also the most personal and hardest to edit of his works, this was a most fortunate thing. Recapping on the author–editor relationship, he clearly valued that Meredith was moved to tears by the text. Yet as well as being sensitive to its content, she had the editorial distance to be hard-nosed about it. It was the editor, Sandy explained, who drew the line about what facts needed to be checked and sometimes corrected, and what would stand as memory, whether or not the facts bore it out; the author who decided what to alter, or not, to keep peace with family and friends.
Black Widow — Sandy's latest, to be launched by Peter Goldsworthy at the Adelaide Writers Festival this March, if you needed an excuse to go — is an extraordinary literary novel. (I can say this, though Sandy didn't, because I've had the privilege of reading both MS and proofs.) From the moment that tragedy began unfolding in a primary school in Beslan, Chechnya, Sandy began to collect information about it, calling in a friend in the UK and her contact in Russia to capture and send him absolutely everything about what was happening, the people involved, the background, the implications, etc. For a month, he examined it. Then for another month he wrote. The entire book was written in 34 days of intense activity.
How do you edit a book whose plot is pure fantasy, yet which relies for its integrity on being absolutely accurately based on fact? For in Black Widow, six survivors of the Beslan tragedy, six teachers, capture the children of the perpetrators and re-enact those three days of agony. This raises many issues. Do you name names? Some names? All names? If not all, whose? Why? How do you know what "facts" to believe, which ones to cite, when the entire "incident" has been deliberately papered over with layers of misinformation and disinformation?
This book, like Sandy's work in progress The Cobbler's Apprentice, is published by Melbourne publisher, Scribe, and Sandy was full of praise for publisher Henry Rosenbloom's courage and integrity. He was also full of praise for his new editor, who chose to treat the book as a translation, in respect of the subtle, and entirely deliberate, non-Englishness of Sandy's prose. After all, this book is narrated by Ossetian women, and that is expressed through nuance and detail. Sandy reminded us that this kind of sensitivity is what authors crave from their editors.
Speaking of the contrast between publishing houses, Sandy pointed out that the key reason for parting with Harper Collins was their delay in releasing The Ha-Ha Man and the feeling that they began to treat him as a "product". In contrast, at Scribe, it's all personal. The designer has read the book three times, and the receptionist/event coordinator commented that she'd queried the tense in a particular passage, and what did he think? You've got to love it! At Harper Collins, small teams, particularly editor–author teams are encouraged to bond, even if this means a little more time in the editing, but the strong commercial thrust and its size do not encourage such a whole-of-staff approach. Sandy reminded us that these things are never black and white, and lamented parting professionally both with his long-term editor, and with Harper Collins's exceptional chief publicist.
In summing up, Sandy emphasised that he has learnt a lot from editors. He found himself unable to comment on the perennial question of resolving spats between authors and editors, because he relishes the collaboration and chance to improve his writing.
There was a lively question-and-answer session following Sandy's talk, most of which I've incorporated into the report. Thank you to Sandy for gallantly stepping in as speaker at short notice! Thank you to those who came along. Those who didn't, be there next time or you will miss out on another exciting evening!