Why Write?

The problem with some publishers is that they think writers only exist to serve their needs. The problem with some writers is that they’re so concerned with being published that, knowingly or otherwise, they fall into line with that view.

Am I talking about editing here? Not exactly. The question of editing is a complex one that doesn’t easily lend itself to a simple rant. It does lend itself to a conditional rant, and I intend to get around to it one day because I’ve had some pretty silly experiences with editors; but, for now, I’m talking only about the furthest extreme of the editing spectrum: the re-write.

Publishers inclined to this view will read a manuscript and offer a provisional acceptance, but only if the writer makes substantial changes to fit in with the publishers’ requirements. I’ve had such requests, and I’ve always refused them. I’ve been accused of arrogance by publishers and other writers, but it has nothing to do with arrogance. It’s about integrity and the reason for writing.

Let me ask the visual artists out there a question. How would you feel if you were seeking to get work exhibited and the gallery agreed, but only if you repainted the pictures? Change that red background to blue. Get rid of that vase on the table. The woman’s dress should be striped, not plain. Obviously, you wouldn’t do it; so why should writers be expected to do it? One publisher told me that writing is different; words are easier to change, she said. Is that the point? Well, maybe writing is different, but it’s not that different. A bit of polishing is one thing; re-writes are quite another.

My view of this is really simple. I have stories I want to tell, and I have a way of telling them. People like them or they don’t. Either way is fine with me – really. Everybody is entitled to their own taste and I have no problem at all with rejections. Tell me yes or no, but please don’t ask me to re-write them your way. Why should I? Why should anybody?