By Ann Patty
I was delighted to see the New York Times article last week about Johnny Temple’s success with Go the F*ck to Sleep. In this era of groupthink at the large publishers, it’s cause for celebration when a small house such as Akashic Books not only succeeds with a bold bet, but even manages to hang on to the property when the corporate sharks circle. Alas, my delight turned to consternation when I read the verse quoted in the article.
The cats nestle close to their kittens,
The lambs have laid down with the sheep.
You’re cozy and warm in your bed, my dear.
Please go the ____ to sleep.
Even my Word program, as I typed the above, knows that the second line should read “The lambs have lain down with the sheep.” Such a mistake, with a word whose meter and rhyme is incidental in the line, in poetry!
Ann Patty
In my many years as an editor, the most frequent lesson I’ve had to impart to writers — from fledglings to award winners to mega-bestsellers — is about the difference between the transitive verb lay, laid, laid and the intransitive verb lie, lay, lain. Some authors get it; some never do, even after eight or nine books. That’s why there are editors and copy editors and proofreaders, right?
Where was the editor on Go the F*ck to Sleep? Where was the copy editor, the proofreader? How did that laid slip by them? Isn’t it their job to protect the writer from such an embarrassing mistake?
Lest you think it’s the small publisher that may be skimping on careful copyediting, I recently encountered equally egregious blunders in a major title from a large, prestigious publisher. The bestselling writer is highly regarded, much awarded, and taught in English and writing departments at universities. The editor is seasoned, smart, and serious. Yet my enjoyment of the book was ruined by the many sentences that didn’t scan, violated proper usage, and were just plain bad and ugly by any standard. How did these get by the editor, the copy editor, and the proofreader?
I almost phoned that writer’s agent to suggest that writers, when they are “important,” not to mention well compensated, might spend an extra bit of money to hire someone to read the manuscript in galleys to make sure such bad sentences aren’t left for posterity. We know most editors no longer have time to edit; and now, it seems, copy editors don’t copyedit, proofreaders don’t proofread.
Even charter members of the grammar police misspeak from time to time. But there’s no excuse for such slips to appear in print. Isn’t that why the publishing process takes so long, because the words are read by many sets of eyes? Isn’t this one of the important services publishers are supposed to supply?
Students in MFA programs I visit are upset, even outraged, when I tell them that when I was an editor at Harcourt, I stopped reading a manuscript that contained a grammatical error on the first page. How could I take seriously a writer who hadn’t taken the time to learn the tools of her trade? Once, on a panel of editors, only minutes after I’d delivered some version of the above rant, a young editor used the phrase “between her and I.” Isn’t it imperative for editors to know the difference between the nominative case and the objective case?
I know the blame can be laid partly on the instantaneous nature of electronic communications, partly on the defunding of education (especially foreign language classes) in this country, and partly on the ever-increasing workloads of in-house editors. Nevertheless, the written word, when printed and bound, must be held to the highest standards. Editors, copy editors, and proofreaders, please clean up your act, do your job, and learn the f**king rules!
SURVEY: Has Digitization Increased Errors in Books?
Ann Patty worked in trade publishing for over thirty years, as Founder and Publisher of Poseidon Press, Editorial Director at Crown Books, an Executive Editor at Harcourt Inc. She is now a freelance editor, studying Latin in her spare time. You can find her online at www.annpatty.com.
69 Comments
Way to go, Ann! I agree with everything you say about writers learning the grammar of the language they choose to write in, if they wish to be taken seriously by their editors, agents and publishers. I have had some experience editing badly written manuscripts, both fiction and non-fiction. In India, most editors tend to rewrite books that they’re given to edit, because the grammar is so awful. However, it’s just considered a part of the job–I don’t think I’ve ever heard of an author’s work being rejected (in India) because of poor grammar.
When my daughter was about 10 she was keen to be an author. I suggested it would be a good idea if she was a bit more careful about her spelling and grammar. She demonstrated she knows what I do for a living as a freelance editor and proofreader: ‘If they like my story they send it to someone like you to sort out that stuff.’
Language is a constantly evolving form. Rules change and the path of least resistance will be found. “Lain” sounds archaic and reads awkwardly.
If you try to teach grammar in high school you get laughed at. Some students go to university barely aware that grammar even has rules. Don’t get me started on punctuation.
Ebooks are easily updateable, for correcting errors and adding information.
Why would you think “lain” reads awkwardly? Try singing the two lines. “Lain” flows. “Laid” doesn’t.
I can’t believe your biggest problem with this book is the grammar. Are you genuinely impressedby this pathetically juvenile piece of shock publishing whose joke wears very thin very quickly? (And, yes, I’ve read it.)
And there’s a typo in your copy: in ‘…writers, when they are “important,” not to mention…’, the comma should be outisde the quote marks, not inside. Try cleaning up your own act first.
Wow, I’m amazed at the number of comments and the tone! Your article has obviously touched a raw nerve, good for you!
And yes, I agree, I’ve also noted more and more mistakes in books I read, both printed and e-versions.
Wonder why that is…Work overload? Lack of time? Lack of professionalism? Maybe the latter more than anything else. It seems to be a rapidly spreading disease in our society: bridges are badly designed and actually collapse! It seems there are some 700 bridges at risk in the United States! That’s an awesome statistic!
Jonathan – “impressedby” is not a word in English, as far as I am aware. What was that you said about “cleaning up your own act”?
Furthermore, the punctuation that you criticise (in ‘…writers, when they are “important,” not to mention…’, the comma should be outisde the quote marks, not inside) is perfectly correct in American English. Illogical, but correct.
Oh yeah – “outisde” isn’t a word either, Jonathan.
The comments here sum up the rubicon that we are about to cross: are written standards of language important enough to defend and where do we draw the line? Some people think you are just being pedantic about the ‘lain/laid’ thing, some see barbarians at the gate. It’s a lot more subtle than that though. If we are moving to a digital/crowdsourcing world, where stuff can be rushed through, and then corrected based on feedback after the event, we then have to rely on enough of the crowd to be educated enough to make those judgement calls.
As a bookseller, and despite being a passionate supporter of language and standards, I believe the vast majority of readers of this book either will not notice the mistake, or believe they are wrong if it reads wrong, or won’t be annoyed enough to say anything. Then the balance moves, and the professional copyeditor finds him or herself being accused of archaic language use. It’s liberating or scary depending on which side of the divide you sit…
Oh, poor Jonathan. I agree with you, as it happens, but there was always going to be a typo in your post – sod’s law.
I just had my first novel, The Fix, published by Library Tales a small publishing house. The Fix is about a bookie chased by the mob, so typo and grammar are the least of his problems. In a curious way, the mistakes enhance the color of the narrative and make the book human. Besides,editors are expensive.
Actually, I haven’t read the book; only the aritcle (typical editor, yes?)
As to Stuart’s comment that lain “sounds” awkward, I totally disagree. I suspect that he’s become so used to the misuse of laid that his ear has been trained to it.
Of course language evolves, neologisms are necessary and add color and nuance; the rules of grammar, however, are set in stone, are they not?
I couldn’t possibly agree with you more. I am a copy editor, and there are times I simply can’t read a book cover to cover without also holding a red pen. People should be furious that their intelligence is being insulted in this way. Sometimes, I want to send my marked-up copy back to the publisher and demand a refund for such shoddy work. Actually, that’s an impulse I probably shouldn’t ignore.
You are very quick to blame the copyeditors or proofreaders, when to me a much more likely scenario is that the publishers haven’t set aside enough budget for good editorial work. They might have gone for the cheapest freelance quote, regardless of the quality, or paid so little that the editor/proofreader couldn’t do a reasonable job and make a living. Or, if their eds are in house, they might be overloaded with work. In my experience as a freelance editor, these things are all too common.
Thank you! But it’s not just grammar. I cannot turn off my editor head either. I recently read a book from a major publisher by a well-known writer that was just plain sloppy: clunky sentences that could have easily been cleaned up. And the writer thanked the editor in the acknowledgements! What the **** is going on?
P.S. To Jonathan who criticized the comma inside the quotes: check Chicago Manual. That IS the way it is done.
We are a small publishing house that releases over 200 individual products each July and January. I am the only full-time editor and I have one part-time assistant. We cannot afford freelance editing or proofing.
We edited 4 chapter books between January and last month. Fortunately, two were almost perfect, one mainly needed research since it was set in WW2, and the fourth has taken a lot of work and a lot of biblical research. Every product we print starts at the editors’ desks, and crosses them several times for proofing. I had one parent criticize our editing on a fantasy fiction novel, but when I wrote to ask her specifics, she would not reply. I told her we use the Chicago Manual of Style for publishing, so maybe that is why I never heard back from her. What bugs me is that English students who want to pursue editing are not given access to the CMS, nor are they taught from it. Some people think because they learned grammar 30 years ago, the same rules, mainly for punctuation, still apply. Punctuation (use of commas, mainly), have changed significantly and keep changing. Kids in public schools today are still taught the old ways. Their parents think we’re bad editors. ARGH!
I agree about errors leaping from the page when reading thereby diminishing the pleasure of reading. I have “one of those eyes” as well. I missed it when reading this book because I was laughing so hard the tears obscured my vision and it is difficult to see properly when one is rolling on the floor with laughter.
The sad truth is that publishing houses can’t afford to hire seasoned editors. That’s why the age demographic of in-house editorial teams is so low. I’d have to say that only about 25% of the editors I worked with were people I trusted to do a solid proof behind me. The pressures of unrealistic schedules and sales demands only exacerbate the problem.
But if publishers don’t start to realize that the root of their troubles is the quality of the content they’re adding to their lists, then it’s only going to get worse. Produce fewer books if you have to. So I think I’m with Ann when she sets such high standards for submissions. It should be less about shock value and more about a genuine good read.
1, Why would you call out the small indie publisher by name & book title but protect the big publishing house?
2, “Lain” does scan nicely there, but it sounds so dated — especially in this explicit context! Also, I feel like “laid” has become so common that it’s now acceptable, in the same way that, say, using “who” for “whom” has become de facto correct.
3, The rules of grammar are set in stone no more than the rest of language, come on Ann Patty, surely you realize that.
Hi Ann,
As a hopeful writer one day, who was never thought grammar or even really punctuation, I usually just go with what feels right when writing. But my question is can you recommend an easy to understand grammar book, with explanations and examples? When writing you want to be understood, but you also want the freedom to fully express yourself and sometimes say be damned to correct grammar. Anyway, I’d love some tips on books or websites that might help.
Copy editing? Proper English? Where have you been? That’s all ancient history. When media sites like CNN and even, god help us BBC, daily make obvious errors in grammar, punctuation, and spelling do you expect a mere publisher or author to bother with them? The fact that most word processing programs and computers check these things is meaningless. I am sure those features are ignored or even disabled because they are, “too much trouble.”
The “dumbing down of America” is proceeding well with the international media leading the way. Even “dumbing” is wrong, I know. My computer agrees.
I recently reviewed two books for professional publishing journals, and they each were marred with serious and numerous errors. One book was about digital publishing and was issued by the British Publishers Association–with over 100 basic errors in it! The other, about copyright, came from Oxford University Press and contained errors that any good proofreader should have caught. So, yes, I too wonder what is going on. Standards seem to be eroding everywhere. Just listen to the dialogue on any TV show and you’ll see what I mean. TV script writers are among the worst offenders.
Good points, but I find this ironic: the use of “above” as an adjective or noun, as in “Even my Word program, as I typed the above, knows…”
“Above” is an adverb. Don’t use it as a noun or adjective. Use “previous” instead.
And this just made me stumble: “The bestselling writer is highly regarded, much awarded, and taught in English and writing departments at universities.” Do you mean to say that the writer *is* taught in English and writing departments? Or the writer *taught* in writing departments? If the former, it’s awkward and should be recast (“is educated”). If the latter, it’s unparallel structure (i.e., bad grammar) and should be recast.
A note about editing costing a lot has been noted at least a couple of times so far and I think that’s where the issue starts at least in part. If a publisher doesn’t value the extra editing it often takes to make a book shine, why on earth would the average writer make the effort?
I’ve recently read a comment on another blog which pointed out that if you cannot afford proper editing for example, then you probably aren’t really ready to self-publish or you need to rethink your business model. Would a bakery say well we can’t afford sugar or eggs, but hey, we’ll make do with what we have and expect to not only stay in business but to be viewed as putting out high quality product? Can a writer write half a song and expect it to be played, purchased and recommended? The same goes for artists, clothing designers, carpenters or anyone else. Performing your job, working at your craft half way is generally not a formula for success. Why should publishing be viewed any differently?
Yes, mistakes are going to slip through and less and less people will notice. I understand and can deal with that. What is tougher to accept is that a top notch effort was not put forth in the first place. If someone is fine with “good enough or average” then expect reaction and results to most likely be about the same.
…less and less people…”? Try “fewer…” Just sayin’
I often read ARCs that are better edited than some of the “finished” books I read. When “they” is substituted for “then” and a character is repeatedly given the wrong name (another character’s name!)I find it difficult to finish the book.
In one book, there were 3 typos on one page alone!
I am a teacher and librarian. I give extra credit to students who find and can correct the errors they find in our textbooks and readers. One student raised his grade from a B to an A. Perhaps my high school freshman should be editing books!
“Do you mean to say that the writer *is* taught in English and writing departments? Or the writer *taught* in writing departments? If the former, it’s awkward and should be recast (“is educated”).”
Gudspelar: she means the writer’s WORK is taught in writing departments, in much the same way as you’d say “Shakespeare is taught in many English schools”. I didn’t think it was that complicated a sentence to grasp.
And this error in subject-verb disagreement: “Such a mistake, with a word whose meter and rhyme is incidental in the line, in poetry!”
That “is” needs to be “are.”
I agree with you, Ann, and I take a tremendous amount of time to craft my sentences (and urge my students to do the same). That said, when I am writing in my characters’ voices, I have to stay true to what they say, even if they make mistakes. Generally, what this means is that one of my characters uses the occasional fragment. Likewise, I sometimes demonstrate the breakdown of my mentally ill character’s psyche through the organization of her thoughts and sentences. I do go back and read it all aloud, and I work hard to make sure that readers understand and track everything. So far, I’ve rarely had anyone “correct” my sentences. They comment about everything else, mind you (character motivation, tone, the shape of the scene), but not that. That said, if I were under contract and someone said “you really need to rethink the grammar here in the voices of these characters,” I’d take the comment under consideration. I just try to remain as close to the voice as I can, especially when writing in first person or third person close points of view.
But these are artistic choices, made consciously, and for an audience. I suspect what you’re talking about is something different?
Per Webster’s:
“Usage Discussion of LAY
LAY has been used intransitively in the sense of “lie” since the 14th century. The practice was unremarked until around 1770; attempts to correct it have been a fixture of schoolbooks ever since. Generations of teachers and critics have succeeded in taming most literary and learned writing, but intransitive lay persists in familiar speech and is a bit more common in general prose than one might suspect. Much of the problem lies in the confusing similarity of the principal parts of the two words. Another influence may be a folk belief that lie is for people and lay is for things. Some commentators are ready to abandon the distinction, suggesting that lay is on the rise socially. But if it does rise to respectability, it is sure to do so slowly: many people have invested effort in learning to keep lie and lay distinct. Remember that even though many people do use lay for lie, others will judge you unfavorably if you do.”
The primary function of language is communication, and it is doubtful than any of the mistakes mentioned above are an impedance to understanding.
I’m not sure I agree with you about errors, at least not to the same degree as many. I agree that editors and authors should take care when they publish, to put out the very best product that they can. However, it is very difficult to catch every detail, even if one goes through a document one-hundred times. I think that people should be diligent, but if something slips through, I don’t feel inclined to get frustrated with them. I have worked with communities and organizations on a number of issues, and it seems to me that if we blast people for every mistake, they become paralyzed and don’t get anything done at all. That observation is from community work, but I believe it applies to writing as well. I go to writing groups where people fail to even finish a first draft because they are so intimidated by the process. And when that happens, I think we have the potential to lose out on a lot of creative voices and ideas.
I am constantly appalled by some of the errors I find. One of my pet peeves is the use of the oxymoronish term, “exact same.” Not only is it bad grammar but it is very poor thinking. I hear it from newscasters and radio hosts, everyday speakers, especially the young, and I read in books by well-published, seasoned writers. It is either exactly like, exactly the same or identical to, but never the exact same. Arghgh, my English teachers would have given me an F for just speaking that way in class, much less using that term in a paper!
This article makes me sad. Not because there was an error in a published book, but because of the tone and the insistence that grammar trumps all else. That, to me, is a poor editorial viewpoint. I’ve been a copyeditor, a proofreader, and a senior editor for a combined 21 years, and the attitude of this article’s author is one I often see in unseasoned new editors. They don’t have the experience to understand when rules should be bent and broken, and when not. They latch on to rules because then they can’t be wrong. But while a text that is free of any grammatical issues is certainly clean, that doesn’t make it good. A good editor understands that each book is its own thing, its own world. Some authorial voices are more prim and proper than other. Not all follow the rules of grammar.
That doesn’t mean it’s okay to input the flat-out wrong word (“they” for “there” or some such), but it does mean that voice (of authors, characters, and readership) must be considered.
Now, let me be clear. I’m not arguing that there’s no mistake in the book mentioned. I’m arguing that it may have been a conscious choice. Perhaps there was an editorial decision made that it scanned better as is; we’ve seen in the comments that some people think so. That’s a choice the author and publisher have the right to make. You are free to go ballistic about it being improper if you like, but that does not mean it was a mistake.
Of course, it might have been. None of us know for certain.
My point is that your article doesn’t go far enough. Yes, editorial professionals must absolutely know the fu**ing rules. That way, if they need to fix something they can do it properly.
Maybe we don’t know enough about the writer of this article, but I too am appalled that she would stop reading a manuscript because of a grammatical error on the first page. That’s symptomatic of an editor who is looking for reasons to reject, rather than looking for reasons to accept. Grammatical errors can be fixed; poor story control, pacing, characterization, and writing style are much more difficult to fix. If a single error like that pushes you away from a story, then you’re looking at grammar, not language. Not story. And that is a rather sad thing.
Grammar and punctuation are not the “highest standards” to which the printed word should be bound. They are important, certainly, but the real value of literature is in its impact on readers and society. When people remember the books that affected them, they don’t remember the sentence structure of the verb tense. They remember the emotion and the meaning.
And I am a proponent of correcting all errors except for those changes that might adversely affect the emotion and the meaning and the characterization, etc.
Ah, and foot in mouth at the couple of typos in my long-winded message. Because I didn’t proofread it before submitting, but then couldn’t help reading it over afterward.
This is why I have always said that when publishers accuse self-published authors and small presses of making such errors, it’s a case of the kettle calling the pot black. But they also try to lump everyone of that category into the same class. Look, I don’t care for profanity blatantly paraded on the covers, in titles, or in prose, and I am not old school. There is a line which has been crossed and it has nothing to do with grammar. But it is also true that editing is not “moving stuff around” for the authors either. The growing trend toward publishing “as is” and not even going to the effort to do the proper editing ONESELF is why there are so many badly written and badly edited books slipping through the cracks. If you can’t be bothered to use proper grammar and self edit along the way, don’t even try to write in the first place.
Here, here, Marco. Beautiful reply and I totally agree!
Who knew an editorial calling for more attention to good grammar could cause such a heated discussion? Perhaps that alone should give me hope? I agree with Ann, and while I am not surprised there are so many people who don’t care about the rules of grammar, I am surprised that they put down people who do. What’s the win there?
First off, language is a pliant and ever-changing thing, and how we use it varies across generations — not just in terms of slang, but also casing, spelling and subject/verb order. Witness the evolution of American English over the last hundred years, which I’m sure some would cite as evidence of the decline of Western civilization. While I acknowledge that consistent grammar and spelling are important to good writing, I find this sort of proscriptive lecture pedantic. It’s the mark of one who has stopped innovating, stopped producing, and neglected her craft in the name of her “trade.”
Look, Chomsky points out that language is innate; to claim that humanity is returning to the primal mud because some undergrad can’t tell a participle from a predicate is ridiculous. Language is a part of what makes us human, and it will continue to evolve long after everyone posting here is dead. More to the point, writers have a duty to shape language, not just regurgitate it, and if we were to go by the opinions of this author alone we’d have to write off Chaucer, Shakespeare, even Cormac McCarthy, all because some staid old bat in a high-rise gave too much indulgence to her personal peeves. I mean, really.
Isn’t the author of this book Adam Mansbach? Why give the publisher credit and not the author?
I agree with a lot of what you’ve said here in regards to publishing standards, but you come across like a super snob, Ann.
I don’t know if digitization is to blame (I’ve been working in publishing for 15 years, which means I’ve never worked in a non-digital environment), but constant pressure to produce more and more stuff for less and less money is certainly a factor. I’m also not sure whether it’s getting worse, but I’ve certainly seen some pretty bad things in print. A few years ago I read a very long book (published by Cambridge, which should certainly have had the resources to do a better job with it) which was meticulously researched and covered its topic exhaustively and was so very, very badly written that I could only get through a few pages a day. A good editor could have reduced the length of that book by about one-quarter, and made it clearer and easier to read, by making sure the author made each point only as many times as necessary. A decent editor could at least have made sure the author used verb tenses correctly and consistently and reduced the number of unintentionally comical misplaced modifiers. Even a newbie could, you would think, have checked to make sure readers would be able to tell which of the persons named in the text are fictional characters and which are (were) real people. But no.
In the example cited, though, it’s also entirely possible that the error is the author’s fault. Astonishingly, many people don’t hear “the lambs have laid down with the sheep” as jarring, wrong, and ugly; perhaps the copy editor fixed it and the author, thinking the change either incorrect or pretentious, changed it back. I see this error in published fiction *all the time*, unfortunately.
English grammar is not hard to understand, those who object to observing what are essentially universally accepted basic standards firmly established by centuries of consensual agreement are simply too lazy to get a grip on them. Embarrassed by their ignorance, they become defensive and insulting.
Of course the rules of language change, but that does not give an individual the right to set him or herself up as the arbiter of what is acceptable. The rules of soccer have changed over the centuries, but that does not mean I can suddenly pick up the ball and run with it to the other team’s goal, or carry a sword onto the pitch and swing at my opponent.
Standards, people, standards.
Bravo,Ann!
Is the past tense of ‘to dive’ ‘dived’ or the ornithological variant?
Ditto ‘to spit’ ‘spit’ or ‘spat’?
More power to Ann Patty!
Bravo, Ann, for stirring up that particular hornets’ nest! If grammar can get people this worked up, then there’s still hope – even if there is still a lot of ignorance about the basic rules out there! My wonderful high school English teacher probably spins in her grave every time she hears “he gave it to John and I”. Language does and should evolve, but some things make the writer or speaker sound just plain dumb!
THANKS FOLKS,
With all these comments, there is indeed hope. Though I agree with many of Marco’s points about evaluating fiction, why can’t one care about story and character developement as well as the rules of grammar? I Obviously if there was anything else to keep me reading in a ms with grammatical mistakes I would; but I find it rare that a writer who doesn’t take great care with her first page has little to say to enrapture me.
For the best, most brilliant discussion of all this, see David Foster Wallace’s piece (in his collection, Consider the Lobster, and downloadable here:
http://instruct.westvalley.edu/lafave/DFW_present_tense.html
This article is self-righteous, petty, and unimportant.
Nevertheless, in the spirit of pettiness, I decided to proofread Ms. Patty’s website. There is an error on the main page on the sidebar to the left, where Ms. Patty uses the em dash incorrectly. The dash is flanked by spaces, and Chicago style indicates that em dashes shouldn’t have spaces before and after the dash. It even looks like the dash may be an en dash instead, and that would compound the error, but the type may be to blame.
In the spirit of Ms. Patty’s editing, I closed the browser window to her page after finding the error.