Melville, Moby Dick and editors

[J. Dillon]

Old book stores yield treasures. I was fortunate to come across a students book edition of Moby Dick. There were numerous under linings and notes through out the pages of the book.

There were at least three publications of this masterpiece . One American in 1851 and about the same time by British publishers Also a later version in 1988 All were tinkered with by editors some with their versions of just what Melville meant.

(Sample attached)Moby Dick obstetrics.jpg


Can editors really toy with writers work and improve the authors intent, or should they just stick to grammar and spelling errors?

Sorry for the troll but maybe it will surface some interesting comments.

JD

[WI-Tom]

Re: Melville, Moby Dick and editors

A good editor can most certainly improve a piece of writing. And if not "improve" certainly change it significantly. Raymond Carver, I think, is one writer whose style as most readers encounter it was shaped in part by his editors along with the writer himself.

In the end, any book becomes what the reader makes of it. Authors lose sole ownership after publication.

Tom

[DavidC]

Re: Melville, Moby Dick and editors

There is a BIG difference between what a book editor does and what a copyeditor (grammar, punctuation, etc) does.

[purri]

Re: Melville, Moby Dick and editors

Rev. Bowdler was big in those days.

[Peerie Maa]

Re: Melville, Moby Dick and editors

Rev. Bowdler was big in those days.

My thoughts as well.

[Woxbox]

Re: Melville, Moby Dick and editors

A good editor will consult with and coach the writer. A bad one thinks he knows better and rewrites

[Breakaway]

The above all applies.

Additionally, one sells the book and it becomes the publisher's property, ( at least for a time)and it may have a message to convey that the author did not.

Kevin


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Favorite]

Re: Melville, Moby Dick and editors

A good editor can most certainly improve a piece of writing.

Maybe a crappy writer but Melville ? Hemingway ? Walt Whitman ? F Scott Fitzgerald ? I don't think so.

It's especially insulting when the author has been dead for a hundred years. This is like Walt Disney "improving" the Jungle Book.

[WI-Tom]

Re: Melville, Moby Dick and editors

The above all applies.

Additionally, one sells the book and it becomes the publisher's property, ( at least for a time)and it may have a message to convey that the author did not.

That's not quite right. The author retains copyright and ownership; the publisher buys the rights to publish and distribute the book.

Tom

[WI-Tom]

Re: Melville, Moby Dick and editors

Maybe a crappy writer but Melville ? Hemingway ? Walt Whitman ? F Scott Fitzgerald ? I don't think so.

But you're wrong. Two of the writers you mentioned worked extensively with Maxwell Perkins, for example. Readers see the finished product, which in most cases has been involved some degree of collaboration between writer and editor.

Tom

[Favorite]

Re: Melville, Moby Dick and editors

But you're wrong. Two of the writers you mentioned worked extensively with Maxwell Perkins, for example.

While they were alive ! Also, before it was published ! as a finished work !

Maxxie didn't come along a hundred years later and decide he was going to improve this. Also, he didn't make changes. He made suggestions. The authors made the changes or they decided not to. It's not the same at all.

[rbgarr]

Re: Melville, Moby Dick and editors

(Sample attached)[ATTACH=CONFIG]30104[/ATTACH]


Can editors really toy with writers work and improve the authors intent, or should they just stick to grammar and spelling errors?

Two answers, given the example you've linked:

1. I don't see how the edit improves Melville's intent. It actually obscures it.

2. There's no accounting for the British!

[Peerie Maa]

Re: Melville, Moby Dick and editors

The above all applies.

Additionally, one sells the book and it becomes the publisher's property, ( at least for a time)and it may have a message to convey that the author did not.

Kevin


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

That's not quite right. The author retains copyright and ownership; the publisher buys the rights to publish and distribute the book.

Tom

The publisher has all of the finanial skin in the game. He will not risk losing money by offending potential customers. So there are three choices. Publish as written and risk a loss, make minor changes and protect the investment, turn down the book and leave it unpublished.

[Peerie Maa]

Re: Melville, Moby Dick and editors

Two answers, given the example you've linked:

1. I don't see how the edit improves Melville's intent. It actually obscures it.

2. There's no accounting for the British of 1850!

Context my boy, context.

[DavidC]

Re: Melville, Moby Dick and editors

Maybe a crappy writer but Melville ? Hemingway ? Walt Whitman ? F Scott Fitzgerald ? I don't think so.

It's especially insulting when the author has been dead for a hundred years. This is like Walt Disney "improving" the Jungle Book.

Yes. ALL writers are edited -- some rather extensively -- but the way it works is that the pages full of red (or blue) pencil (and they are often covered in it) are given to the writer. He/she signs off on the ones that they agree with (which are usually the majority) and then discusses and negotiates with the editor about the remaining ones. If you are a big enough star, you can win that negotiation. A writer with no reputation (and ALL writers start this way) most likely must accept the editor's final decision.

Rarely does it come to this. Smart writers know that editors improve their writing 95% of the time.