William the Conqueror's Arches--I Mean...
Guess I might have called this "The Hazards of Spellcheck."
I talk to so many writers who are chomping at the bit to get their work out there. Enthusiasm is great, but wisdom is better. You should NOT send your work out the week, month, or maybe even the year after you finish it.
I know, you think it's done. But listen to good writers, and they'll tell you that nobody's done just because he's written the final period. Concentrating on the story, you've made mistakes that you could not see, and now you need time, usually lots of it, and possibly help as well, to see what needs fixing.
This morning it was William the Conqueror's arches. The line said that he had them, and I guess that would be a good thing. I'd hate to think old Will had flat feet. But what I meant was "archers," which gives a much truer picture of how he won the Battle of Hastings. Nothing to do with his feet.
How many times had I read that passage already? Lots. What made me notice it this time? Don't know, except maybe this time I wasn't thinking about plot or character or sensory detail. How many times does it take to get it right? More than you think. Your eyes, your friends' eyes, your editors' eyes need to scan the text many, many times, and there may still be errors that some reader will gleefully point out for you at the drop of a hat.
It's great if you catch errors before the final printing, as I did for a friend who'd written, "He wanted to avoid pubic notice." (As do we all, one would hope!) Spellcheck won't bail you out on these, since the word is a word. It takes multiple readings by engaged, thinking readers, including the author herself, to find the little buggers. Because who cares about your book more than you do?
I talk to so many writers who are chomping at the bit to get their work out there. Enthusiasm is great, but wisdom is better. You should NOT send your work out the week, month, or maybe even the year after you finish it.
I know, you think it's done. But listen to good writers, and they'll tell you that nobody's done just because he's written the final period. Concentrating on the story, you've made mistakes that you could not see, and now you need time, usually lots of it, and possibly help as well, to see what needs fixing.
This morning it was William the Conqueror's arches. The line said that he had them, and I guess that would be a good thing. I'd hate to think old Will had flat feet. But what I meant was "archers," which gives a much truer picture of how he won the Battle of Hastings. Nothing to do with his feet.
How many times had I read that passage already? Lots. What made me notice it this time? Don't know, except maybe this time I wasn't thinking about plot or character or sensory detail. How many times does it take to get it right? More than you think. Your eyes, your friends' eyes, your editors' eyes need to scan the text many, many times, and there may still be errors that some reader will gleefully point out for you at the drop of a hat.
It's great if you catch errors before the final printing, as I did for a friend who'd written, "He wanted to avoid pubic notice." (As do we all, one would hope!) Spellcheck won't bail you out on these, since the word is a word. It takes multiple readings by engaged, thinking readers, including the author herself, to find the little buggers. Because who cares about your book more than you do?
Views: 10
Comment
Welcome to
CrimeSpace
© 2024 Created by Daniel Hatadi.
Powered by
You need to be a member of CrimeSpace to add comments!