"Good enough" is not good enough. Balancing technique, marketing, and my worst critic.

I let my husband read chapter one of The Corridor, the book I am currently editing the proof of and hope to have out by the end of March. Not to say this isn't the first time he read chapter one. He read chapter one a year ago. Since he likes math and has no desire to be a writer, I put in a lot of his suggestions where he thought I was getting a little too "irrational." I enjoy having him as a super cerebral, logical beta reader. On some things he's way off and my socioanalytical-emotional side balances his scientific-mathematical side. But more often than not he has a strange 6th sense that exorcizes even the best concealed B.S. And for some reason I thought he wouldn't find any in my proof. The dialogue was as follows, starting with him:

"It's not good enough."

"Why, give me examples."

"You don't mention this, this, and this."

"But I mention this, this and this here."

"It's too late, you already made me put the book down."

"But my writer's workshop loved this."

"Well, that's fine, but you can do better."

"This is the proof, I've edited this already!"

"Edit it again."

"Why?"

"It's not good enough."

"Is the whole thing trash?"

"No, you do some things very well, but not well enough. Good enough is not good enough."

First I was in denial. Ok. Whatever. So says the math genius who sees the world in 1's and 0's.

He kept on me so I tried being combative to which he told me I would get nowhere if I couldn't take criticism, especially from him.

I attempted playing to his rational side. This is genre. To succeed in the commodity market I have to pump out a book every six months. Maybe this is great for that pace. He told me that attitude would only get me mediocrity and he would not tolerate mediocrity.

So I tried victimization. I'm so tired, I'm in pain, I work too much for too little and it keeps me from writing, I've edited this so much, not everything can be perfect. Well, the math genius doesn't understand this language, it's not in 1's and 0's.

Then I got indignant. I've been writing and studying this business and craft for ten years, I'm just getting to a point where I think I'm doing decent work, maybe I should have some faith in my own knowledge, skills and intuition and know I'm in control. Exactly, he said, and that means knowing chapter one needs work.

I want to say that next I did NOT throw the book across the room and start crying. But. Well.

Nervous breakdown aside, I'm reworking chapter one. And editing the rest of the book. Again.

"You know you don't have to listen to me," he said when I recovered my sanity. "I'm just trying to help."

But the truth is, I know he is right. I was aiming for good enough. I achieved good enough. It's not good enough.

It's hard to keep sight of personal goals amid daunting news about shifting publishing formats, flooding of the market, a dwindling importance on reading, an acutely concentrated consumer base, and how to adequately flaw your characters and balance your plot.

There are a few things I believe. I believe you must publish at least a book a year, if not more, to build your brand and start selling. I believe genre will make more readers happy and build a more loyal readership for the author. I believe you will fail if you write to appease your audience rather than work on projects that really mean something to you. I believe there are no rules, and all my statements are wrong.

What I do have to work with are my goals. My first and foremost is to publish a book every six months. I think this goal is not only achievable, but achievable beyond "good enough."

In many ways, aiming for good enough got me to this point. I didn't agonize over super small things. I powered through. But now I need to dig deep and make it better. Take the advice I've been given. Keep going, because the journey is not over. But eventually there will come a point when I will say, stop. Close the book. It is finished. That is where I will rely on my intuition, knowledge and skills.

I would not have recommended such a swift publishing pace to myself a year ago. And if I find it doesn't work out, I will rearrange my goals. Maybe I'll need 8 months. Maybe I can overlap projects. But more than that, I need to stay focused and work harder. So simple, but not the most easy answer to hear.

I noticed a trend in many hobbies/professions/random things people do. A skill set is like a ladder. When you start learning about, say, writing, you begin to climb the ladder. After awhile you'll find you're climbing higher than some of the people around you. Then higher than most people around you. It is at this point you think, "Groovy. I'm so far up here and so many are below me." We stop climbing. We are good enough.

Now don't take that as an egotistical statement that I'm so high on the writing ladder. I am still staring up at the heels of many, many others. But I have made great strides in the quality of my own work. I was very happy with how The Corridor came out in the first proof. But ultimately, I know there are a few more rungs to be had. As an author, I know what good enough looks like.

And yes. I have health issues, I work crazy shifting hours, I feel that I am forcing time to write instead of making time. But that's what writing is. If you want to be good, you have to answer to yourself. If you want to be good, you have to make yourself stronger. And that means you push harder when the weight doesn't seem as heavy.

Like I said, I made it to good enough. Equating good enough to bad is unfair. I have the foundation. What I am going to build on that will only make it better. I got the hard part out of the way. I have a book. A complete book. But there are some places that need fixed. It's not the end of the world.

(Not to mention, I've been over some of this before with a different first proof.)

In many ways, good enough means you've gotten better. Maybe there were things you settled for in the past. Don't do it again. Make it better. Move forward. Know you can have marketing goals and retain the integrity of your writing, your process and your technique. Keeping the balance is a challenge, but one that needs to be met for any improvement to occur.

Usually I don't like posts like these, that claim there's a right way for doing things and any form of "settling" means it's not good enough. I feel terribly inept some days, crafting covers out of toothpicks and bubblegum, or writing on a scrap piece of paper on an hour drive home from a wedding reception with my cell phone light because it's the only way I'll make word count. Good enough is personal and unique to each author. But you know when you've found it.

So when you do, do something about it. Good enough doesn't have to be bad. Being stuck with it is.

Proof myths debunked

With the publishing of my first full-length novel, "19 Years 10 Months 24 Days," I learned a lot about publishing that had up to that point been much theorizing and philosophy. One of the most interesting discoveries was the function of a proof in the publishing process. Here are a few misconceptions that I had. I shall call them myths, and debunk them accordingly.

I used createspace in a DIY fashion, formatting the ebook and directing the cover with my own photo and online tools. When I got the proof in the mail, it was very groovy and pretty much "that" experience that an author has. However, I had to run off to work, so I left the proof to look at later. I closed that night, and I got home an hour and a half later than usual, so I was dead tired. I ate some food and went to bed with my flashlight to read under the covers (so as not to wake the spouse unit) and wind down, as usual. For the fun of it, I decided to go ahead and read my proof, not expecting to edit, just to read. I got five sentences in and realized that reading in bed was a much, much different experience than going over my manuscript poised at my desk with a cup full of something caffeinated. Which brings me to…

Myth #1 − A digital proof is just as good as a physical one.

Now this is only a partial myth as the online and digital proofs generated on createspace were, in my opinion, very good. There was nothing in the physical proof that was not shown in the digital/PDF proofs. If you understand the PDF and digital layouts, you can make all the changes needed to have a well-formatted proof. I would have no problem approving a book for distribution after only seeing the digital proofs, if I had to.

The reading experience, however, was very different in print. I was amazed at how many things I caught that I had not found in my digital editing. I had even read the manuscript backward, five pages at a time to try to isolate emotional ties and dissect the passages from the holistic view that made me skip over words. Even more, things that I had left in intentionally trying to be artsy and descriptive did not work in my brain at midnight in bed with my flashlight. It took seeing a print version to realize many changes to make the book more reader friendly. It's very psychological. It soon became clear that there would be more than one proof to be ordered. Which debunks…

Myth #2 − Your proof is so close to done that it’s just kind of a formality/fun thing for an author to have.

I thought that I would order my proof, fix a few things here and there, and be ready to distribute in a week.

Three months later…

The first proof ended up having edits on almost every page. Having the physical proof gave me a whole new perspective, and one I really needed. I think some authors are so excited to be at the final stages of publishing that they get their proof looking to not find things to change instead of seeing the proof as a stage in the editing process. From this experience I will be ordering a physical proof earlier in the process to use specifically for editing, just because it helped me so much. I know all authors are different and with the rise of ebooks, some authors may have a better eye for screen-editing, but it's good for me to know that the print proof makes a big difference. But if you want my advice, print or screen, don't ever say "Oh, it's okay, I'll leave it" when going over your proof. Your proof is the chance to make changes before there's a copy in the library or people have bought it and you are confessing that there were too many mistakes and you will be uploading a newer version. And yeah, if I order a proof earlier, it will mean ordering more proofs. At CS, to print my book was $3.68 and another $4.00 or so to ship. To me, $7.00 a proof is worth what it allows me to do, editing-wise. And with the DIY capabilities with CS, the only costs I had directly with publishing the book were proofs. Around $21.00 when it was done. Another bit of advice: it will take more than one proof, but, don't fall prey to…

Myth #3 − It doesn’t matter how many times you go over it, you will always want to keep changing things in an endless spiral of doom.

As a writer, I've heard a million times, "Oh, I could never write a book, I'd never be happy with it and just need to keep changing it!" That's great, but my personal experience was, it did shape up the way I wanted it. The first proof was a disaster, but the second proof was much better. The third was even better and I was happy with where it was at. At that point, I took advantage of the digital proofs and formatting the ebooks for my final edits and then approved the proof for distribution. Changes and edits are good, but don't let some artistic cliché like that statement interfere with the process, because if you believe you will never be happy with it, you'll be more likely to skip over changes that do need to be made.


I'm gearing into the editing phase on Matilda's first print book, and I'm eager to put my new knowledge to the test and learn some more. Any other experiences out there with the wonderful, beguiling proof? Share in the comments!