Good Morning and welcome back to Food for Thought. Today we have a star guest. All Write Proofreading Service. The founder and owner is offering a spectacular prize today. She will personaly proofread three pages from your ms. All you have to do is comment. The best one will win.
The question today is do authors really need a proofreader? I hear authors saying all the time, no I don’t. It is far too expensive. But can you put a price tag on your manuscript?
'Aoccdrnig to rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in what oredr the ltteers in a word are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is that the first and last ltteer be at the rghit pclae.The rset can be a tatol mses and you can still raed it wouthit a porbelm. This is beuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istelf, but the word as a wlohe. Amzanig, huh?'
If you can read this, then you just might need a proofreader!
Did you know the human eye only really looks at the first letter and last letter of a word. If it’s right, it will assume the rest of the letters are correct as well. That’s why fresh eyes are always invaluable when it comes to proofreading.
Today I’d like to hear your thoughts. Do you use a proofreader? If not, why?
Have you used a proofreader and what did you think?
First of all, let’s have a quick chat to Sharon, the founder/owner of All Write Proofreading Services.
Sharon, can you tell me what are the most common mistakes made in text?
Hello Margaret, and thanks for having me on your Thursday Food for Thought blog today! I’d say that often it’s the small words that are regularly missed – teh instead of the, your instead of you’re, their instead of their, or they’re instead of there!
Why do you need a proofreader?
As Margaret said, no-one should proofread their own work, because you know what should be on the page, that’s what you see, even if there is an obvious error present. A fresh eye will not see the same pattern as you do, and will pick up the mistakes. A professional proofreader is also trained to keep changes from causing expensive alterations to page layout, so saving you and your company money.
Another good example is that Margaret sent me these questions, and in my business name at the top, it initially said ‘Poofreading’ – see? Easy to miss…!
Hello Margaret, and thanks for having me on your Thursday Food for Thought blog today! I’d say that often it’s the small words that are regularly missed – teh instead of the, your instead of you’re, their instead of their, or they’re instead of there!
Why do you need a proofreader?
As Margaret said, no-one should proofread their own work, because you know what should be on the page, that’s what you see, even if there is an obvious error present. A fresh eye will not see the same pattern as you do, and will pick up the mistakes. A professional proofreader is also trained to keep changes from causing expensive alterations to page layout, so saving you and your company money.
Another good example is that Margaret sent me these questions, and in my business name at the top, it initially said ‘Poofreading’ – see? Easy to miss…!
What is the difference between proofreading & copy-editing?
Proofreaders check for many of the same things copyeditors do, but in general terms, proofreading checks for errors in spelling, basic grammar, punctuation, capitalisation, font and formatting. Copy-editing looks at the overall picture of grammar, fact, clarity, structure and style of document.
Why use a proofreader when there are spelling/grammar checkers on PC’s?
What a spelling/grammar cannot detect is the phonetically similar words, for example - where or wear, site or sight, enquiry or inquiry, compliment or complement. A poorly presented document or website containing misspellings and grammatical errors can give the wrong image of you or your business.
How long would it take to proofread my whole book?
A basic rule of thumb for a straightforward publication is a proofreading rate of about 10 pages per hour with about 300 words per page. However, more complicated texts, or ones that have been inadequately prepared, could take twice or three times as long.
I don’t know the proofreading symbols, so how else can you edit my document?
Thanks to technology, it’s not often that I actually proofread on paper and use the BSI symbols anymore, unless I’m working with a big publisher. Electronically, I can use the ’Track Changes’ feature in Microsoft Word (.doc’s) or the ‘Text Edits’ in Adobe Acrobat (.pdf’s). Track Changes enables me to indicate suggested changes and then enables you to accept or reject my suggestions. Text Edits allows me to indicate text that should be inserted, deleted or replaced. I can also use the ‘sticky notes’ feature in Adobe.
Alternatively, I am also happy to just write any of my corrections in a different colour to make them stand out. It all depends on the preference of the author, I’m here to help after all!
Thanks Sharon for popping in today. Please check out All Write and see what you think for yourself.
Proofreaders check for many of the same things copyeditors do, but in general terms, proofreading checks for errors in spelling, basic grammar, punctuation, capitalisation, font and formatting. Copy-editing looks at the overall picture of grammar, fact, clarity, structure and style of document.
Why use a proofreader when there are spelling/grammar checkers on PC’s?
What a spelling/grammar cannot detect is the phonetically similar words, for example - where or wear, site or sight, enquiry or inquiry, compliment or complement. A poorly presented document or website containing misspellings and grammatical errors can give the wrong image of you or your business.
How long would it take to proofread my whole book?
A basic rule of thumb for a straightforward publication is a proofreading rate of about 10 pages per hour with about 300 words per page. However, more complicated texts, or ones that have been inadequately prepared, could take twice or three times as long.
I don’t know the proofreading symbols, so how else can you edit my document?
Thanks to technology, it’s not often that I actually proofread on paper and use the BSI symbols anymore, unless I’m working with a big publisher. Electronically, I can use the ’Track Changes’ feature in Microsoft Word (.doc’s) or the ‘Text Edits’ in Adobe Acrobat (.pdf’s). Track Changes enables me to indicate suggested changes and then enables you to accept or reject my suggestions. Text Edits allows me to indicate text that should be inserted, deleted or replaced. I can also use the ‘sticky notes’ feature in Adobe.
Alternatively, I am also happy to just write any of my corrections in a different colour to make them stand out. It all depends on the preference of the author, I’m here to help after all!
Thanks Sharon for popping in today. Please check out All Write and see what you think for yourself.
Hi Mags. I'm a reader, but I do use proofreaders for my course work. I think they are invaluable if you want your work to look professional.
ReplyDeleteHello margaret
ReplyDeleteI have no idea what the person is on about in the previous comment. Anyhoo...I think everyone needs a different eye when it comes to checking and cross checking.
Proofing ones own work certainly isn't easy. I suppose since I've come up through the earlier version of the publishing world, though, that I wouldn't use one. Why? Because I never look at the ms I submit to a publisher as the end product. After 200+ publications I KNOW the editor will want rewrites. She will want me to change crimson to red, William to Chen, Bob to Bobbi, and get rid of the unreliable narrator. Oh, and she'll have the daggers out for my adverbs. Therefore, it would be a waste of money for me to hire a proofreader. If the book is accepted, it will be edited, I will rewrite, and then the in-house proofreader will read the proofs. So will I. I understand my experience is now pretty oldfashioned and with so many people going to small press and self publishing I can imagine a proofreader would be useful. I work part time as a manuscript assessor and editor and I am always amazed at how much work I pick up. Mind you... I seldom work as a proofreader for anyone other than myself. It's not my area of expertise.
ReplyDeleteI have never considered using a proofreader for my work, and, as Sally says, I usually rely on the post-contract revisions and copy-editing from my editor. That being said, I am often amazed that I can read through the same page 100 times and on the 101st time catch something that I've missed before. A friend of mine (unpubbed) has a great writing style but needs a lot of work with basic grammar, so someone like that would benefit from All Write's services. It really depends on the author's comfort level and background.
ReplyDeleteI am an author and have been a proofreader. I cannot imagine hiring a proofreader to go over my manuscript. FOr one thing, that is why I have both betas and belong to a crit group. For another, I find few people are as thorough at checking for errors as I am. And the publisher has people who will edit and proofread, without cost to me. I cannot imagine most authors can afford the service, though some might need it.
ReplyDeleteI understand you perform a service, but I just cannot conceive of availing myself of it. I wish you well in finding your target clients. Interesting blog.
I sort of agree with all of the above. lol I would use a proof reader if i had something that I wanted to look perfect
ReplyDeleteHi everyone
ReplyDeleteThanks for joining us today everyone. This blog is here to be the authors voice and we need to know what authors want so we can bring it to you.
Good afternoon the folk of All Write Proofreading services. Sharon is here to answer any questions that you man have, so ask away.
I'm a firm believer the more eyes the better. I can't believe that anyone would say they didn't need a proofreader because it's a well known fact that as an author, your mind will usually read what should be there. Proofreading is one of the reasons I belong to a critique group and I credit with those in my group for helping to hone my mansucripts to their finest. Even after so many people viewing my work, I don't believe I've ever had a totaly 100% accurate novel published. So...I vote for proofing...reproofing, and proofing again. :0
ReplyDeleteI definitely need a proofreader. I belong to a crit group, also have a few beta critters, but I don't trust myself.
ReplyDeleteMy basic grammar, punctuation and my other little items frankly suck. And oy, you should see the words I try to hyphenate. My poor critters. If my critters didn't 'sweep' up after me, you know what creek I would be up. lol.So a proofreader is a must for me. Bless my crit partners.
Hi, nice to see you Lorrie and Ginger.
ReplyDeleteI have to say I would like to use a proof reader all of the time, but they are costly. However some proof readers do cut you deals, so don't be afraid to ask.
With all due respect, Sharon, I understand what you're saying, but paid proofreaders are no more error proof than the ones you don't pay for.
ReplyDeleteWhat guarantees do you offer that your work is error free?
Hello everyone and thanks for your comments. I totally understand why alot of you say that you don't need an 'external' proofreader as many publishers have in-house proofreaders and editors, but let me tell you an example where this can still go wrong...
ReplyDeleteI recently read a Jodi Picoult book, published by Hodder & Stoughton. During the course of the book, I noticed many errors and found it was getting quite annoying, so I contacted Jodi & Hodder to mention my disappointment. Their response? "The truth is that about SEVEN different proofreading stages occur during the publication process, but it is pure human error that allows for some to slip through the cracks"
What??! The point of a proofreader is to avoid the human errors appearing..!
This is why it's often wise to use an 'external' proofreader like myself...
How many published books have we read that have huge glaring errors?? I read a Nora Roberts one not so long ago and they defo needed a proofread.lol
ReplyDeleteThe big Publishing houses use their own proofers, maybe they should start farming out to external ones.
Maybe they should hire better proofers?
ReplyDeleteAt what point would you suggest this, Sharon? There is no point in using a proofreader until a book has been edited. (That's my experience, anyway.) Would you suggest sending you the galley proofs of a contracted book?
ReplyDeleteI think electronic typesetting has caused a lot of problems. Back when I was first published, my typed ms came back with scribbled comments and edits. I would fix those as I retyped the ms or, if they weren't too plentiful, I would use proof symbols to denote changes. Next I'd be sent long sheets of galley proof which were typeset in the oldfashioned way. I'd correct those. Next would come page proofs which looked like the printed but unbound pages of a book. I would sometimes see a second page proof, but not always. Most of my 1970s and 1980s titles are close to error free.
One early 1990s title had "gold" instead of "golf". I corrected that twice in the proofs but it still slipped through. I think that was the period when electronic typesetting had come in, which meant "save changes" instead of "set again, properly".
Reading on screen, as I usually do these days with proofs, is much less efficient for catching errors. I especially dislike reading scans and PDF proofs since I can't make physical changes and have to rely on writing a separate errata document.
Anyone else think errors have got more common since the electronic age?
Personally, I don't see how using an in-house-proof reader versus an external proofreader would be any different. Those in-house-proof readers are also paid, so I am not sure if that really makes a difference in cutting done on the human errors.
ReplyDeleteI believe in proofreading and am thankful for the host of readers I have but I doubt I'd would pay someone to do it.
Hello Julie, As I'm sure you are aware, proofreaders in a publishing house are also paid, just not directly from the author. But they are given ms after ms to proof and often with very tight deadlines to meet so maybe they are not being quite as thorough as I would be...
ReplyDeleteCan anyone actually guarantee that something would be error free? No... but I can guarantee that I am consistent & very, very thorough.
For example, when I read for pleasure, I am reading quickly and not looking for errors as I don't expect to find too many in a published book - yet I found quite a few in Jodi Picoult's book.
I wonder how many more I would have found if I had actually been methodically going through her book as a proofreader? Lots, I imagine...
Surely authors aren't looking for guarantees of error free work, but to have a well read, thoroughly revised manuscript that has been checked by a third eye?
I tried to avoid the expense of a proofreader. For a long time, I proofed and read and submitted and had returned a faulty product to me. Desperate, I turned to a proofreader. While I felt like a naughty child when her enormous numbers of track changes came through, and while I don't share her affinity for hyphens, I was more than satisfied by her work. Can't do without them.
ReplyDeleteIn some cases errors slip through (or are even created) because a proof reader or editor is unfamiliar with a specific terminology. I learned that way back when I was eleven. I wrote a story in school that concerned a "two year old heifer". The teacher said that had to be a "two years old heifer". Grammatically she might have been correct. By common useage and actual farm standards she was incorrect. I have also seen the same kind of phrase "corrected" to read "two year old calf" which is quite wrong. A calf is a baby bovine. A heifer is a female bovine less than three years old. When she has her second calf at three, she becomes a cow, but up until she is six or eight months old she will be called a "heifer calf".
ReplyDeleteOne reason I'm not very good at reading proofs for other people is that they use terminology I'm not familiar with. If someone uses a lot of Spanish towns, for example, I have to trust s/he has spelled them properly. I can pick up an inconsistency (Conceptione/ Conceppione) but I can't tell if the word was correct in the first place.
I think self-publishing authors probably need an outside proofer. As you say, our eyes generally see what we expect. I've noticed men are often very good at proofing. Someone said men tend to read word by word while women more often read half a line at a time.
ReplyDeleteIt's time I went to bed now (it's after 2 a.m.). Thank you for being on hand for questions and comments. I'll check back in when I wake up. I'll also check your site. I do some self-publishing and it's pretty scary without those inhouse editors chasing down my feral commas.
Yes, I know that proofreaders are paid by the publisher, not by the author. I was one. I also beta and crit and edit. Whether I am doing it for money, or just to help, I do the same job. A thorough job. Am I perfect? No, but I'm good.
ReplyDeleteI too believe in having more than one eye look at my work before it goes to the publisher. I just don't believe that paying for it would make it any better. You want to impress me, give me a guarantee.
You can't do that.
Good points and great dicussion, here. I would like to add my point of view :o)
ReplyDeleteProofreaders are neccessary. But is paying for one, neccessary?
I agree, I don't see how the example of Hodder & Stoughton inspires one to hire this service.
Seven proofreading stages must be their standard, and I am sure most of the time their system works. Their response pointing out human error, also seems reasonable. What they said was, despite all the checks and double checks and the system which they have in place, human error does happen.
And I am not entirely convinced that hiring an "external" proofreader would guarantee no human error. Personally, I would be more likely to hire a copy-editor.
Now, I can see situations where this would be a great service. If you are sending out copy, or press materials, or something more academic in nature, it might make more dollar sense to hire an "external proofreader".
I think errors are much more common now we are electronic sally. A lot of people rely on word for grammer and various other gadgets, instead of the naked eye.
ReplyDeleteOne horrible slip was inbetween editing and publishing, one of my books came out and the main characters name had morphed from BRIAN to BRAIN through the whole book. It was a terrible and mortifying blip.
I too much prefer the old fashioned way, Sally! If all of my work could be on paper, where I have to use the BSI symbols to correct, it would make my job easier! I often find that I still print out pdf's or doc's and run through them the way I was taught as I feel this is easier than on screen.
ReplyDeleteA proofreader should be sent a manuscript after an editor has been through it, liaised with the author and had a typesetter create the first set of proofs. These proofs are then forwarded to the author and a proofreader. All changes from both the author & proofreader are then collated into one set of new proofs and given to the publisher again. Publisher gives final approval of these proofs and goes ahead with print... Or returns them to proofreader if too many errors still exist.
Not sure it actually goes through all that now with electronic editing!
Well it is coming up for 6pm here,(uktime) so All write will just be popping backwards and forwards until 9pm. So please do keep on with the duscussion, ask your questions ans she will get back to you. It has been so nice to see you all participating, it is going to be hard to allocate the best comment a gift from me lol
ReplyDeleteAPA is a site for authors voices. Tell us what you look for, need, would like to see on APA. Follow the blog and watch out for the next big event. I have a theatre director lined up for the blog and she is looking for books to rewrite as plays for the london stage. Have your synopsis ready ladies and gents.
OMG I need a proofer for that post lol
ReplyDeleteIf working for a publishing house, then a style sheet would sort the use of certain terminology Sally. If I were working direct with an author, then I would contact them with a list of queries I might have regarding fact, placenames, slang terms, etc.
ReplyDeleteCan I ask those of you who oppose the use of a proofreader, or at least of paying for one - how would you feel if, like Margaret mentioned, you had a book published with awful, glaring errors in it??
Copy-editors cost more too, but some of you would be prepared to pay for that service... interesting...
I'm a full-time proofreader for my day job, and I'm a writer. No matter how much I'm able to catch errors in others' works, I always miss things in my own.
ReplyDeleteWriters have generally gone through their novel or story dozens (hundreds?) of times. As Sharon points out, writers know what the text says. Our eyes see what we think should be there.
In my current novel, I read each line slowly, word by word, yet I'm sadly confident there will be a typo I missed. This comes from twenty-five years of experience, thinking I've caught everything, only to find, ah, that little bugger snuck through.
A fresh and careful eye is invaluable!
Thanks Margaret and thank you everyone for the discussion, it has certainly been an eye-opener for me! I'll still be answering your questions and I do offer great discounts for self publishing authors, so don't dismiss me just yet...!
ReplyDeleteWith my traditonally published books, I have always proof read although I know they had other proof readers. I still caught faults as I had the computer read it out loud to me that helps me pick up things I otherwise would have missed. I am about to self publish a book and I have had it edited and copy edited but I was going to proof read it myself. You've made me think that perhaps I do need another pair of eyes to check it as well.
ReplyDeleteHelen
As I am grammatically challenged yes I would like to use a proof-reader.
ReplyDeleteAs a reviewer, it saddens me the number of editorial errors I catch.As others have said, it is hard to see your own errors however many you catch for others in a crit group.
Have I used a proof-reader? No, not yet.
Thanks for this interesting topic
I would love to see an interview with a good independent publisher. By "good" I mean one that has good sales records and treats their authors well, doesn't use smashwords or any other POD services to "publish" their books and does both print and ebook. That's my challenge to you, APA. :D
ReplyDeleteI'm not an author, but an avid reader, sometimes two books a day. And the number of mistakes I find, not just with up and coming writers, but with well known ones is unbelievable, so yes I truely think that a proofreader is needed.
ReplyDeleteHelen, another pair of eyes could make the difference between a good read and a GREAT read!
ReplyDeleteAnd Patricia, I love your comment - "I'm sadly confident there will be a typo I missed." So very true, I wonder how many other authors feel that about their work?
Authors cannot guarantee their work, but a proofreader can guarantee to help make it better!
I am not disputing that everyone needs a proofreader for their work. I am disputing that paying someone to do it as opposed to getting other authors, betas, etc, and having the publisher's editors and proofreaders do it is any better. Your proofreaders are essentially people too, subject to human error. What makes them Super Proofreaders? Don't they have deadlines too? Other work to be done?
ReplyDeleteThis discussion tells me that authors really do have valid opinions on proofreading and we'd all like our work to be perfect, sadly sometimes it isn't, however much we try. It is true publishers have their own proofreaders, but we need to get to those proofreaders and avoid the dreaded slush pile. I know editors that have ditched ms's because of the grammatical errors, even though the premise is good. Why? Because there are far too many better ones out there. Nowadays authors need to stand out. Give better than they have ever given.
ReplyDeleteAs country queen says, bad books are out there. One of mine, unfortunately is amongst them!!!
Well said Margaret! Authors so need to stand out - especially to the bigger publishers.
ReplyDeleteOf course I have deadlines to meet, but that's why I choose to work freelance rather than in-house - I can make the decisions.
I spent a year studying to become a freelance proofreader and surely that makes me somewhat more qualified to carry out the work to a higher standard than someone who's just good at checking documents over.
Oh countryqueen, I do wish I had the time to read two books a day, you certainly are a very avid reader!
Being a starving writer, I can't afford to hire a proofreader, so I let my work "set" a while, then go back over it after it's old. Looking over something as soon as you finish it inevitably causes glossing over errors because it's still fresh in one's mind. I never sent a mss out until I've read through it from beginning to end at least three times over a period of weeks.
ReplyDeleteAre proofreaders necessary? Good God, yes! But only if they're up on grammar and spelling themselves. As a reviewer, I've come across so many books with bad and incorrect grammar and using the wrong homonyms...reign for rein, vein for vain, etc., that I want to scream. Generally, my publisher has someone do this, but whether privately hired or as part of the publication process, a proofreader is only as good as her education or her well-read-ness (is that a word?). But I think the writer should be responsible in the long run for making certain continuity, grammar, and spelling are correct.
If English was my second language, or if I knew deep down that my punctuation sucked, of course I'd use a proof reader. But as I used to be one and I belong to a really, really well-educated, on-the-ball crit group, there's no necessity for me to use a proof reader. But oh boy! In the past week alone I've downloaded e-books that needed a whole troop of proof readers.
ReplyDeleteOne thing that annoys me most is the use of commas where full stops (periods) should go. Makes my teeth itch and makes the writer sound as if they are gabbling.
The day is over for us in the uk, but I hope you will all carry on discussing the pro's and cons. If you have questions for All Write, her facebook page and website link are on this blog. Feel free to pop over and ask. I'll check back tomorrow to pick a winner for the Free service from All Write and the author who will win the pressie from me for participating.
ReplyDeleteThanks again everyone. You make this blog what it is. Your Opinions do count and APA do listen to authors needs.
Winners will we posted on my blog http://margaret-paranormalromanceauthor.blogspot.com/
sometime tomorrow. Remember to follow the blogs and keep up with what is happening on Food for Thought thursdays.
Good Night
It's been an enjoyable blog, thanks for inviting me Margaret and I'll look forward to proofreading for the winner!
ReplyDeletePlease do feel free to continue this blog, I'll be checking in again tomorrow. Or, as Margaret said, please do contact me via my website/facebook page if you've any further questions to ask.
Thanks to all who've participated so far!
Margaret,
ReplyDeleteIf you are looking to interview a great publisher who treats her authors well and is soneone who has established a great track record in one year, I suggest Lea Schizas from Muse It Up Publishing. I doubt you'll find an happy author there and Lea is filled with innovative ideas.
As for proofreading. I'm still pro. It's so easy to pick out mistakes in someone else's work, but not my own. As for relying lon the publisher for edits and proofing...aren't we supposed to send our most polished and professional work to them???
I failed my first book because I didn't know the difference between "editor" and "proof-reader". I paid for an editor, and was pleased with what she had to say but was disappointed when reviews came in (after I published it) that typos and errors were found.
ReplyDeleteThank-you to all who came by and gave us their opinions. Authors Promoting Authors does care about your opinions and values your suggestions--what we have on the blog is a reflection of what you've told us you'd want over the years.
ReplyDeleteProofreading, is very necessary and I think we can all agree on that point. To hire a professional or not, like any service, is a personal matter of choice and often comes down to what one can afford.
I love the suggestion of Muse It Up Publishing! And there are several publishers APA has met over the years who we know to be "good". I will be happy to look into interviewing indie publishers.
Truly enjoyed this edition of Food for Thought! Thanks so much Margaret and Sharon!
Like any service, available to authors, use extreme caution.
ReplyDeleteNow, I would USUALLY trust anything
I see on the APA Blog as I know these girls truly care about authors and have exposed faulty practices in the past (a certain "publishing" service, as I recall a couple of years ago)and I have followed this blog since the beginning of its time.
Yes proofreading is important. Paying for a service that does it, might be a consideration. But would I choose this particular service? Probably not---some of the replies bother me.The example given of the Big Publishing House, especially. I did not think that was very professional and it casts you in a bad light. You can't tell the big ones , how to do their jobs. You can try but at the end of the day, they are making zillions and you aren't.
However, I am happy they were spotlighted today.
So authors, if you are going to pay for a service, do your research. Ask questions and ask far and wide.
I use a combination of my eye + that of a professional author who does it freelance. I wouldn't recommend that route for everyone, but it's worked for me. Some form of intense editing is needed beyond you. ANd if you miss something, pay to correct it!
ReplyDeleteI am squarely in the camp that uses critique partners (thank the stars I have a great group of well-read and educated critics)for general proofreading.
ReplyDeleteAnd I also-even though "they cost more money"-have hired a couple of copy-editors before I started the process of subbing my work and on both occasions, I was very happy with the results and found the copy-editors did pick up on the what the proofreader said they do.
Surround yourself with great people and find great people to look at your work and you can't go wrong.
Very interesting--I've seen that fuzzy paragraph before--amazing how easy it is to read! As one of those picky readers though, I agree with and appreciate Sharon's comments. In so many instances I've seen a business letter or speech or manuscript go through SEVERAL hands and still have a typo. I hadn't realized the connection. Thanks for a great post! Meredith (author of Losers Keepers, coming out July 27 from Secret Cravings).
ReplyDeleteWhat I really, really want to see on the APA Blog and which no other blog has done...is interviews or spotlights on independently owned bookstores. Bookstores that would consider our books in their stores. Bookstores that would be open to reviewing our independently published and self-published books. Maybe the bookstores could even have a "Authors Promoting Authors book" tab or something.
ReplyDeleteYou know, as writers, we get so used to our own words that we become immune to what we're reading. I can spot the most innocuous of errors in another book, but my own manuscript? Eventually, I can't find them anymore.
ReplyDeleteI think if you can score a proofreader, you should go for it. Polish your manuscript until it shines in your eyes, then let someone else find the spots you may have missed. Seems to me, from what I've experienced so far, publishers aren't interested in works in need of some more help. They want as close to perfection as humanly possible. It's a personal responsibility to make sure you're presenting your best work.
I'm still in the trenches, promoting a debut ebook, so I know all about pinching pennies. It isn't easy, but as a previous commenter said, ask for help. A freelancer or a smaller entity may be more than willing to work out something you both can live with.