Should I explain my puns to this publisher?

August 12, 2008 7:06 AM

Should I explain my puns to this publisher?

So I showed my manuscript to this publisher, who liked it enough to ask me out to lunch to talk about it. He said it could do with some editing and gave me back the manuscript with notes in the margins.

I finished reading his notes about an hour ago. Some of the suggested edits will kill some elaborate puns and references.

Now should I tell him about these puns?
If I don't, and insist on scrapping his edits, I'll probably have to settle for a little less money.
If I do, I will probably keep the money promised, but 'puzzles' will be 'out'.

As in: something that would've pleased the reader more if they had figured it out for themselves will now leak from the publishers office, to the editors, to the interns, to some random girl on the street, end up on the blurb etc.

What do I do?

posted by anonymous to writing & language (22 comments total)

There are two separate issues here.

One is, "should I explain something to my publisher that he/she seems to not be getting as a complex joke/pun?"

The other is, "I have some kind of crazy paranoia about my Super Sekrit puzzle by which I can't even bring myself to explain it to the guy who's footing the bill to get this thing published."

I mean, why won't the very first reader to puzzle start right out at the Random Girl in the Street level?

I'd suggest explaining the damn thing, and seeing how they react. Maybe it's "oh, wow, okay, let's keep that in." Maybe it's "What the heck are you talking about? Nobody will ever get that!" If it's the latter, that's a very different kind of discussion to have with an editor than "oh, no, I can't tell you, the guy who's in charge of making sure my manuscript is in good shape - You might spoil it for everyone else."
posted by Tomorrowful at 7:15 AM on August 12, 2008 [10 favorites]

In my opinion, you should avoid puns anyway. The publishers notes are presumably trying to improve the way the piece reads. Assuming the publisher is correct that the changes will improve how the piece reads, then the puns are getting in the way of readability. Is that what you want?

Sure, if you want to keep the puns in place, then mention them to the publisher. What could it hurt? But still, if they're getting in the way of the broader purpose, then sometimes you have to kill your babies.
posted by willnot at 7:20 AM on August 12, 2008 [1 favorite]

Why don't you just ask your publisher what his opinion is on the puns and why he deleted them? If he got the jokes, but felt them delete-worthy for some other reason, he'll explain why. If he didn't get them, you can explain, but then discuss their obscurity...because if your publisher doesn't get the joke, chances are it will be lost on many others as well.
posted by iamkimiam at 7:20 AM on August 12, 2008 [1 favorite]

Maybe a second opinion. I agree with the others that if he's not getting the joke, your readers might not either. On the other hand, some people just don't get jokes that might be perfectly clear to the majority. I would ask someone else (or a few someone elses) to read it and offer advice. Preferably someone who doesn't already know you and understand your sense of humor. Is there another editor in his office? I don't know anything about the publishing world, so maybe he wouldn't like you asking other people?
Also, yeah, ask him about the parts that concern you. I'm sure the suggestion is not: "I will only publish this if you make these exact changes and will not discuss them further with you".
posted by purpletangerine at 7:30 AM on August 12, 2008

Why would you get less money if you don't go along with his edits?

If that's actually a stipulation of the offered contract -- "Go along with our edits or we'll pay you less" -- then you're dealing with a very strange publisher and I would take great pains to make sure they're legitimate.

If you're just supposing that they'll offer you less money in some sort of revenge for defying their editing suggestions, well, again that's not really how legitimate publishing works.

I'm a humor writer, and throughout my career I've gotten notes from editors saying "I don't get this, why do you put it this way?" In some cases I've changed the joke to be more clear, in some cases I've left it as-is, and in some cases I've dropped the joke completely because it's too convoluted.

In no case has an editor taken my responses personally. If I felt like I was in an adversarial relationship with an editor, I'd be very uncomfortable working with them.
posted by lore at 7:33 AM on August 12, 2008

I'm also a bit confused about why accepting or rejecting his edits would affect the amount of money that the publisher is offering. It sounds like you don't have an offer in hand at the moment, but that you have been promised a certain advance if you make changes x, y, and z. If you don't make the changes, my guess is that the publisher may not publish the book at all -- it would seem odd to me that they would still agree to publish the book, but would penalize you by lowering the advance.

That being said, I agree with everyone else. Talk to the publisher about what you're hoping to accomplish with the book. They're the ones who are trying to help you make the strongest book possible -- don't hide information from them. If, after an open discussion, you and the publisher can't agree on what's right for the book, this publisher may not be right for you.
posted by cider at 7:38 AM on August 12, 2008

something that would've pleased the reader more if they had figured it out for themselves will now leak from the publishers office, to the editors, to the interns, to some random girl on the street,

You might be overestimating the impact your book will have on the collective culture before it's published.
posted by signal at 7:56 AM on August 12, 2008 [12 favorites]

You've probably thought of this, but might want to give it a second thought: is there any way to incorporate the publisher's advice, or at least the goal of his advice, while keeping some form of your puzzles intact? In other words, I guess I'm encouraging you not to give up on reconciling the two too easily.
posted by amtho at 8:19 AM on August 12, 2008

As others have said, you seem to have a fundamental confusion about the publishing and editing process.

I get editors' notes on technical books all of the time. Sometimes I keep their edits, sometimes I reject them, sometimes I take a third choice and make my own changes. In every case, the amount of money I receive depends on THE CONTRACT and not on the editing process.

If you don't have a paper contract, then you have NOTHING.

Also, if you have such a limited understanding of how book publishing works, I have to wonder if you might be ever so slightly overestimating the impact of your elaborate puns on interns and random girls on the street and blurbs.
posted by mmoncur at 8:25 AM on August 12, 2008

Yeah, I don't quite get why you're so hesitant to share your puns and puzzles with the publisher, especially if you hope or expect your readers to figure it out eventually. Is it a secretly-coded scathing indictment of the publishing industry or what?

Whatever the message, the publisher would rather know about it upfront than learn about it from Joe Reader after the completed work is in print.

And it's unlikely they're going to leak it. Most people hate being spoiled and publishers do their best to avoid it. Leaks do occur, but generally you have to be actively looking for spoilers in order to get them. There's not going to be a big display at Borders with your book all "Read This Book! HINT: THE GUY IS ALREADY DEAD AND SOYLENT GREEN IS PEOPLE."

It's possible he didn't get them. It's possible he did get them, and is unimpressed. It's possible your puzzles take away from the work as a whole, or that the way they're integrated into the story is awkward. It's possible they aren't even getable for anyone except you.

If it's that important to you, all the more reason to have a second set of eyes on it, so you can be sure the message is a good one and clearly (if obscurely) stated.
posted by Metroid Baby at 8:27 AM on August 12, 2008 [1 favorite]

I've been giving this some thought over breakfast, and I have a couple more observations.

First off, you can't go into it with the intention of hiding the puzzles from the editor. That's madness. That's like deciding you won't tell your accountant about your business expenses because you're afraid he'll leak your plans to the press. I think the only legitimate concern you have is that the blurb not give too much away. You handle that by saying "I want to make sure the blurb doesn't give too much away" and they work with you to make sure it doesn't.

Now, to be honest, your puzzle is probably not going to rock the literary world. Interns are not going to be gossiping about the elaborate puns strewn through the manuscripts of upcoming novels. They're going to be talking about who's an asshole and who's cute and hey I just met John Irving's agent.

But let's give you the benefit of the doubt. You're the next Pynchon, and your tapestry of puns, references, and allusions is so intricate and beautiful to behold that you'll influence the path of English-language literature for decades to come.

Well, then, the interns are the least of your concerns. Long before your book hits the shelves, the publisher is going to send out a bunch of copies to reviewers, book lists, book buyers, and anyone else who's in an influential position. If your puzzles are worth gossiping about, that's where the gossip is going to happen. Hiding it from the editor isn't going to help matters.

Nearly all writers are in the same position you are. They might not have puzzles and puns, but they have surprises and shocks, and of course it's always best if the reader doesn't know how the book ends. There's no way to keep that under wraps, and the main consolation is that if you're so influential that plot points from your books become cultural currency, then you're J.K. Rowling and you can afford to hire solid-gold pool boys to fan you with thousand dollar bills.

Okay, to sum up:

1. Your relationship with the editor shouldn't be adversarial. You should feel free to discuss proposed edits in a friendly manner. You shouldn't be afraid of a little back-and-forth as you iron these things out. If you feel like the editor is your enemy, then either you or the editor is coming into it with the wrong attitude.

2. Don't worry about giving away secrets. If the book is successful, then a small percentage of people will read it already knowing what to expect, just like any other book. Hiding your puzzles from the publisher won't help matters, and will just make things unworkable.
posted by lore at 8:56 AM on August 12, 2008 [4 favorites]

If I don't, and insist on scrapping his edits, I'll probably have to settle for a little less money.
If I do, I will probably keep the money promised, but 'puzzles' will be 'out'.

That's not how publishing works. If an editor asks for an on-spec revision, it's more like "I'll make him an offer if we work well together and I like the revision" than "I'll offer him 10K if I like the revision but I'll probably still offer 7K even if he refuses to do it." Unless he's specifically told you he'd offer you $X as is but more if you revise, there's no reason to assume that's the case.

If you do work with a publisher, a LOT of people will be working on your book. They ALL need to know everything there is to know about the book. Even the intern. That's just how it works. Don't keep secrets about your book from your editor. Even if you tell him the secret, and the deal fails spectacularly, he's not going to "leak" it. He's a professional.

Also, almost all books go through revisions after the offer is accepted and the paperwork's done. Book publishing is collaborative. Just something to keep in mind as you move forward.
posted by lampoil at 9:03 AM on August 12, 2008

I can't imagine an editor marking up a manuscript without having a signed contract.

"I showed my manuscript to this publisher..."

I also can't imagine shopping a book without an agent.

Book negotiations tend to go query, negotiate, sign, edit, not "show manuscript," edit, negotiate. Not to be a meanie, but the order in which you're doing things makes me agree with other posters above that you might be overestimating the impact of your book.

And filling your book with hidden obtuse references and carefully structured puns?
That way lies madness. Or Spider Robinson. :)
posted by lothar at 9:40 AM on August 12, 2008

Add my comment to the "you're worrying about nothing" and "ask why the edits were made" pile.
posted by Nattie at 9:43 AM on August 12, 2008

When in doubt, ask about the proposed edits. Sometimes editors aren't sufficiently familiar with your topic. For example, in one of my trivia books, I made reference to Lucy and Ricky Ricardo owning a car during the Connecticut episodes of I Love Lucy. The editor had crossed out "Connecticut" and replaced it with "California," and added in the margin "I think you're referring to when they went to Hollywood." I went back and explained (politely) about the move "to the country" during the final season of ILL. All was well afterward. So just ask about any edits that you find questionable.
posted by Oriole Adams at 10:04 AM on August 12, 2008

I work in publishing. No author should just accept edits from an editor, and they don't expect you to take everything.

Yes, you absolutely should allow your editor to know about something you constructed into your work such as a pun s/he might not have noticed.

not every editor will get ever reference, just as not ever reader will either. however some might see it and if you wrote it and feel it's important enough to mention, mention it. this is your work and we will be grading you with a number 2 pencil.


i don't understand why you think you'd be losing money if you didn't take all his edits. if your publisher has enforced this on you, i'd question that publisher.


... and considering the allure of dan brown and treasure trove titles on the market when they come out, why would anyone say that hunt-and-search books are less desirable on the market?
posted by eatdonuts at 10:26 AM on August 12, 2008

What lore, lampoli, and lothar said.
posted by Prospero at 10:26 AM on August 12, 2008

*ever = every

sigh, fast typing
posted by eatdonuts at 10:26 AM on August 12, 2008

Nonfiction editor and author here. From my point of view it's really very simple: Yes, you should explain your puns to the publisher. You should also discuss the edits you're uncomfortable with. Your editor (publisher?) will explain why he's suggested them. If they were meant to enhance readability, I'd say you should seriously consider accepting the edits.

The bit about your fee sounds peculiar to me. I'm also wondering why the manuscript has been edited before you've signed a contract - maybe I simply got the wrong idea from the original post?

Re: puns, readers usually don't find them half as clever or funny as authors do - even when the readers do get them!
posted by kaarne at 10:39 AM on August 12, 2008 [2 favorites]

I can't imagine an editor marking up a manuscript without having a signed contract.

Actually, in my experience this happens quite a bit, and for a variety of reasons. It's just that it's important for the author to understand that a mark-up, or even an explicit request for a revision on-spec doesn't mean:
1. We'll buy this if you make these changes, nor
2. We won't buy this if you don't make all these changes, and especially not
3. We're definitely buying this, but we'll give you more if you make these changes.

Only an offer is an offer.

Most of the time the on-spec revision is when they see great potential, but are looking for evidence that the author is willing to revise and is good at revising. Happens a lot with first-time authors.

The best thing, if you're interested in this publisher, is to really consider the suggestions in and of themselves--don't think about offers. An hour is not enough time to think about his suggestions. Think a week, at least. Really consider them. Then take a fresh look. Ask questions if you have them. Revise (or not) the way you see fit. (I love when an author finds their own solution that's different than mine but still improves the text). Then be honest with him about the changes and why you did or didn't make them.

You'll both see at that point if your collaboration improved the manuscript. If it did, you'll both probably be keen to continue working together and make it official. If not, it's probably best you didn't jump into the paperwork stage too fast anyway.
posted by lampoil at 10:50 AM on August 12, 2008

Because they're important to you, you could ask why? If you've woven a web through the story and the editor has knocked some big holes in it - either they've just cleared a path or they didn't even see it. If they didn't see it but they think it's a good idea maybe it just needs a little work? And if not, you seem to really like the whole concept so maybe some constructive criticism would be helpful for future projects?
And I wouldn't worry about the secret getting out too much. If it's truly clever it wouldn't matter anyway.

(I can't find it but there's a childrens' book with intricate illustrations that have animals hidden within them. You know they are there. You are even given some clues to figure out what you're looking for if you need them. But even still, by the last pages it is almost impossible to find them.)
posted by mu~ha~ha~ha~har at 9:48 PM on August 12, 2008

I don't have anything to add about the original question--it's already been said, better than I could say it. But mu~ha~ha~ha~har, I think you might be talking about Animalia by Graeme Base. One of my favorites when I was a kid--and I bet Graeme Base had to explain some of the puzzles to his editor.
posted by Ms. Informed at 12:46 PM on August 13, 2008