Isn't it beautiful to write and publish your own book regardless of having an editor?

[Guest]

Wouldn't it make the book more raw and natural?

Thoughts?

By raw and natural I don't mean with typos, grammatical errors or sloppy tendencies. Moreso, an ability to feel connected to the author and what they are portraying in an emotionally ethereal projection of their art.

[Ruriks]

It depends on why you’re writing. If your endgame is to have your words printed and the trophy is the title of published, sure. You don’t need an editor for that.

But if your goal is to be read, to impact minds and hearts through your words - to communicate new and interesting ideas and stories - then an editor is necessary. You cannot read your own work for the first time, but an editor can. At the very least, an editor is a stand in for the audience to ask the questions about the writing that your grandmother is too polite to ask after it’s published.

[Judah]

No. You're bound to have inadvertent typoes which will destroy any sense of the reader's suspension of disbelief. If you want your reader to be pulled into your story and keep them there, you must have an editor. It depends on what you want. Also, I'm a firm believer in all art should be collaborative in some capacity. When I share my work with my close-knit writing group or an agent someday, I look forward to their insight. Furthermore, I like to test out my stories to make sure they have the effect and influence I intend with my readers. I want them immersed in my worlds. I want them to feel and be emotionally connected to my characters. I want my art to be just as alive for them as it is for me. Unintended grammatical errors will ruin all of that.

[Carmen]

Unless the author of such a book has superior editing skills, it’s bound to have errors which affect my reading pleasure. Those are the books I either delete or don’t finish and definitely don’t recommend to others.

[Thea]

As a reader, no it's none of those things you mention. We learn to read from books and my children are learning to read from...books. When I see errors, spelling mistakes or typo's I put the book down and don't go back to it. Personally I find it disheartening, unprofessional and lazy to leave it littered with errors. I'm not an expert by any means but sloppy workmanship is a surefire way of ensuring people avoid your work. One or two typo's is fine, but not on every 2nd page. I feel cheated if it hasn't been edited to a professional standard. Just one peson's opinion

[Lisa]

When you publish a book, you’re putting out a consumer product. Would you buy a product that had known defects?

[Lynn]

Absolutely no. Never do this. It is disrespectful to readers, and you will invite one star reviews.

[Joyce]

If I start reading a book that is poorly edited or not edited at all, it pulls me out of the story and it distracts me. Often I will not finish the book. I think every writer who self-publishes should put his best work out there.

[Liese]

No, absolutely not. If people enjoyed reading texts full of mistakes, there would be more language teachers.

It's more professional to have a book that isn't full of mistakes. It's more enjoyable when the reader doesn't have to scratch their head at the mistakes the author makes.

[Jim]

Wow, tough crowd... the assumption seems to be that there are no writers that understand sentence structure, grammar or can spell.... and MUST have an editor....

[Derek]

I get what you're saying and I've heard from at least one author who stopped using an editor and had no issues. For a new author, it's better to be safe than sorry, especially if you're publishing on something like KDP. If you publish something without it being edited and it turns out that you have some glaring issues with the writing, users can report it; enough reports result in a banned account and your new writing career will begin with a severe limitation. Of course, if you don't mind about that, then I say go for it. Writing is a form of art and without risk there is no creativity.

[Mick]

I edit my own work. (I also edit for others, that's how I got started with my own writing!) So yes, you should be editing out all the errors and mistakes well before it goes to "the editor" whomever that may be. Someone you hired, bartered with, or yourself if you have those skills. Raw and natural is good, you want the story YOUR telling to be authentic to what you are trying to express. However, you need to understand how important editing skills are in this profession, if you have them use them, if you dont, educate yourself and then use them. If you just cant grasp the types of editing out there and cant seem to smooth out your issues than hire someone. Either way, publish good clean work that the reader can easily comprehend, and voile- success!

[Lynn]

No. An editor helps your voice reach the readers without the things you did not even realize you were doing to muddy the waters. Another set of eyes who understands good grammar, clear communication, and doesn't have your inside knowledge of your story helps to make sure what you meant to say is what the readers actually hear. Sometimes we skip details that are important. Sometimes we focus on the wrong things to convey an emotion or mood in a setting. Editors help with all of that.