If a publisher told you to remove certain thoughts, phrases and expressions that may cause offence would you, or be damned?

[David Newrick]

Antony Horowitz is a prolific author and writer for the large and small screen. He has been told to edit his latest manuscript to remove certain thoughts, phrases and expressions that may cause offence. He said -

“What is happening to writers is extremely dangerous,” he continued, “where certain words are hidden, where certain thoughts are not allowed any more, where certain activities [are not allowed], obviously to do with gender or to with ethnicity or to do with trying to share the experiences of others.”

You can read the full article here -

Full article in Bookseller

What do Litopians think about this trend in publishing? Will you accept your manuscript being changed before it will be considered for publishing? Or do you refuse to budge. It is certainly more important than people realise. Having recently re-read George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty Four for my own WIP it makes you realise that controlling language is vital if you want to manipulate how people think. Will you alter how you think?

 

[Serra K]

I want to say so much in response to this, but my short answer is: no, I will not budge.
I think it's counterproductive to engage in debates where reason can't be found, and intimidation is used to silence. For that reason, I'll let my writing speak for itself.

 

[RK Wallis]

I want to say so much in response to this, but my short answer is: no, I will not budge.
I think it's counterproductive to engage in debates where reason can't be found, and intimidation is used to silence. For that reason, I'll let my writing speak for itself.

I agree. Books are there to start a conversation and if writers can't do that...

 

[Pamela Jo]

I would consider it. It's not a flat no. Depends. I think American Dirt for example is appalling and deserves all the ridicule it got from Hispanic writers who can't get published while a book that is so unauthentic did get published. There is a place for sensitivity readers. I'll ask some native friends of mine to read my upcoming manuscript because it revolves around a Northern Cheyenne woman who is still remembered in some tribes. I'm going to portray her mostly from a European perspective because I don't feel comfortable putting thoughts and words in her mouth. But I want to be sure that I do portray her in a way that respects her and her culture.

 

[Dorm Ant]

I had an agent tell me that my main protag shouldn't be vegan because "it could offend carnivore readers" (she meant meat eaters of course; cats etc. can't read!)

It's not as if the story had any kind of ethical lecturing or anything going on. He just mentions to another character about being vegan, AND it's directly relevant to the plot, because he's undercover and has to eat meat in front of the guys he's trying to fit in with. If I don't mention his vegan beliefs, that scene loses all tension. Besides, you walk down any high street nowadays and there's posters in front of Greggs and supermarkets advertising vegan products, so it's not as if it's a massively triggering word for a large proportion of people, so I can only assume that it was the agent's personal soapbox. Even if it wasn't, and other agents had the same option, they can get stuffed. I'm not going to water my character down. That would be like taking the chilis out of a curry and just using garam masala.

 

[Brayati]

To silence the voices of those who bring truth through the metaphor of fiction makes of all writers nothing less than liars and worse than politicians who speak in terms of only that which can't be understood.

 

[E G Logan]

Depends how much you want your book to be published.
Unless you are determined to produce a 'literary work' (and maybe even then..?), I think that's the bottom line.

It would be for me, BUT I'm aiming at commercial fiction, and I would plan, if I'm that lucky, to publish under a pseudonym. I recognise that an agent might suggest changes, and a publisher might very strongly recommend them (possibly different changes) – and, depending on what they were, and how much of a deal-breaker, with very few exceptions I'd roll over and play dead. I do very much want this book published.

As to Anthony Horowitz's comments – which, I accept, may have been taken out of context and blown up – I couldn't help but detect a sub-text. I may be alone in doing so. I heard: 'But don't you know who I am? I'm a writer of stature...'

 

[Pamela Jo]

I had an agent tell me that my main protag shouldn't be vegan because "it could offend carnivore readers" (she meant meat eaters of course; cats etc. can't read!)

It's not as if the story had any kind of ethical lecturing or anything going on. He just mentions to another character about being vegan, AND it's directly relevant to the plot, because he's undercover and has to eat meat in front of the guys he's trying to fit in with. If I don't mention his vegan beliefs, that scene loses all tension. Besides, you walk down any high street nowadays and there's posters in front of Greggs and supermarkets advertising vegan products, so it's not as if it's a massively triggering word for a large proportion of people, so I can only assume that it was the agent's personal soapbox. Even if it wasn't, and other agents had the same option, they can get stuffed. I'm not going to water my character down. That would be like taking the chilis out of a curry and just using garam masala.

I take your metaphor and have to agree for the most part. But I would probably ask more questions of the agent to get a better view of the objection. it might have less to do with just being vegan than other things in the character's nature that makes him unlikeable as a protagonist. All information is good information.

 

[Dorm Ant]

I take your metaphor and have to agree for the most part. But I would probably ask more questions of the agent to get a better view of the objection. it might have less to do with just being vegan than other things in the character's nature that makes him unlikeable as a protagonist. All information is good information.

The agent was commenting purely on my blurb and synopsis at an online pitching event, so hadn't had a chance to find out about whether the characters were likeable or not. She hadn't read any of the chapters. If she'd read my opening three and said that she had issues with my protag, including this aspect of him, I'd have given her comments consideration. Therefore, I dismissed the feedback as no use.

 

[Pamela Jo]

I hear you EG Logan. 'But don't you know who I am? I'm a writer of stature...' Along with tenure, the goal in the world of literary fiction is to reach that unassailable pinnacle given to a 'writer of stature.' Name one woman who has ever been allowed there. Bronte and Austin are only permitted to picnic on the slopes. My experience with literary fiction is that it is more about WHO you are selling to and what their current flavour is than quality. Shakespeare was anything but "literary." He was a people's choice, bums on seats sort of writer. Ditto Dickens and other writers all the way back to the Greeks. The play Amadeus is sneakily about this very dilemma. I would like to write something so beloved that one of the characters at the end of Fahrenheit 451 would memorise it to preserve it. I have a button that reads, "Art is whatever you can get away with." I disagree with the sentiment. Art is about what makes us hope and believe humans are worthwhile. In my estimation Sir Terry Pratchett is literary fiction.

 

[Dorm Ant]

I listened to a podcast once in which Brian Eno defined art as "anything that you don't have to do."

He gave the example of clothes - we have to wrap our bodies against the cold and sun, but we don't have to use certain fabrics, cut, coloured and embellished a certain way. So, styles and fashions are art in the same way as drawings, haircuts and music. I've tried to think of a better definition of art over the years and haven't come up with one.

 

[Dorm Ant]

and, depending on what they were, and how much of a deal-breaker, with very few exceptions I'd roll over and play dead.

I think we can all take it as read that we'd all make some changes. Very few writers are so precious that they wouldn't agree to some edits. Odd/uncool language can creep in to anyone's work. I once saw a beta reader point out to a fellow writer (not on this site) that referring to a female police officer as "a WPC" was old fashioned and could come across as sexist. I hadn't even noticed they'd written it, though as soon as the beta flagged it up, it stuck out as much as if they'd written "housewife" or "pushbike". That's the kind of edit that 99% of us are only too glad to make. Only a really stubborn writer doesn't take feedback like that on board.

What this thread is about though, surely, is edits that fundamentally change someone's work?

 

[Truant Memphis]

Hiya, everyone. First comment on a post here. I couldn't stay away from this one. Does stage in the process effect anyone's thinking? For instance, is it an agent interested in your work, and believes they can sell it with some form of fundamental change? Or, have you found an agent that generally believes in championing your writing as is, but has found a publisher who wants the rights if a change is made? Make the change or keep looking? What does your agent think? How long do you keep looking?

I've had friends ask me how I feel about the situation in general, and my general response is, fifteen years ago I'm stubborn. Today, I want to get published and will play nice to make it happen. But, I respect those who choose to dig their heels in for their vision. I just feel like I'm running out of time to continue doing so. There are always "what ifs" to my current position, but generally speaking it seems like one of the challenges of traditional publishing is accepting some of the nonsense parameters and still finding a way to put forth a great story that you're proud of.

 

[Serra K]

The guideline for me is this: if the requested change clashes with my values, my entire book loses its value.

 

[E G Logan]

There are always "what ifs" to my current position, but generally speaking it seems like one of the challenges of traditional publishing is accepting some of the nonsense parameters and still finding a way to put forth a great story that you're proud of.

I am entirely with you on this, probably for the same reasons. And there are a couple of compromises I would not make.

 

[E G Logan]

What this thread is about though, surely, is edits that fundamentally change someone's work?

Mmm. It's not unknown for an agent to look at a submitted ms. and work out if there is a 'box' – for example, a type of work they've been asked to look out for by a publisher – into which it could be made to fit so they can sell it.

Taking a completely hypothetic example: a historical novel is 'tweaked' to become a Gothic – if Gothic is hot and historical is not. Or the other way round, if that is the marketing reality.

Still the same question. How much do you want to see this published?

 

[E G Logan]

Or, putting it another way, what price your/my principles?

 

[Hannah F]

My take is: changes suggested - think about them. If they still fit your concept/theme/values then consider them seriously. If they don't fit, don't agree. It's your work, your characters, your vision.

 

[Brayati]

In the not too distant past, one of my stories was considered for publication (anthology) if I made changes. The changes meant it became a vampire story set in a medieval world. The original story was contemporary, using a specific mythic story brought into the modern world. The clash was too great. In this case, I'd rather find a new home for the story than rewrite it into a type of story I don't write and that wouldn't have fit their submission guidelines.

 

[Bloo]

I followed the link hoping for more insight, and was greatly disappointed. It would've been way more helpful if Mr. Horowitz told us what had to be cut.

Of course I would follow the advice of an publisher to fix inaccuracies or stereotypes. However, I'd be some pissed if I was told to change something merely to avoid butthurt. This would push me to find another publisher.

Is it possible to make two editions of a work? I could imagine a milquetoast version for the physical publication and something else for self-pubbing on Kindle, Nook, etc. Wasn't Hugh Howey able to retain digital rights to the Wool series?

I do wonder just how prevalent "cancel culture" really is, tho'. Project Hail Mary has one black character, and he's the least real in the entire novel. Remember Tuvok from Voyager television series? Imagine a human acting like that. Still...such an inaccurate depiction of a minority didn't stop Andy Weir from publishing a bestseller.