Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

What we're reading

Find your new favourite book or recommend one on our Book forum.

Lionel Shriver needs an editor

51 replies

SnoopyPajamas · 26/06/2025 12:19

Just that, really. I'd never read anything by her before and recently started Mania. It might be one of the most frustrating books I've read in a while. My hands itch with how badly I want to pick up a red pen and edit this book. I can't make it through more than a page without wishing I could pick up the phone and hash it out with her. It's one of those books where you just keep thinking: where was the editor? Are they afraid to challenge an author of her prestige?

The frustrating thing is that the basic idea is good, and there are some flashes of sharp, spiky satire in there, that feel all too real. The problem is, Shriver's got swallowed-a-thesaurus syndrome, and never learned the art of understatement. Just because you've got a big fancy word in your arsenal, doesn't mean you have to deploy it. Sometimes simpler is better. Sometimes you can cut five words out of a sentence, and it's all the stronger for it.

A writer as celebrated as Shriver shouldn't have to be told all this. But even if the lesson passed her by . . . isn't this the job of the editor? Shriver is obviously a strong-willed person, and I imagine she's tough to wrangle. But, come on. The book is so much weaker as a result. The flashes of brilliance are swamped by boggy, overwritten surrounding paragraphs. The story could zip along at a much faster pace, and let the satire fly, but it doesn't. Every sentence is twice as long as it needs to be, and stuffed with information the reader doesn't actually need, dragging the whole thing down to the depths of the ocean.

In addition, every character is unrealistically verbose, and speaks with the same essential 'voice'. The main character's children, husband, and best friend all sound just like her. Which is just silly. A child shouldn't sound like a middle aged adult, no matter how clever they're supposed to be. I'm actually starting to wonder if Shriver knows that the world is full of clever people, who don't talk like Ivy League English professors? I can't shake the feeling she doesn't. I get the feeling we're supposed to be impressed by the way her characters talk, and agog at their cleverness. But it all feels so laboured.

I've never read any of Shriver's other books, but I'm struggling to make it through this one. It makes me quite angry to think she probably got a whacking great advance for this, and someone else was paid good money to edit it, and this is the finished product that made it to market.

But she's a big name author, and fancy words bamboozle people, so that's alright then 🙄

OP posts:
SheilaFentiman · 26/06/2025 13:53

Ironically, your own post is rather long (and felt a little ChatGPT)…

Personally, I thought “We Need to Talk About Kevin” was an incredible book. I tried a couple of others on the strength of it and they were just meh, so I haven’t read any of hers since.

ToastToppaz · 26/06/2025 13:56

Editors can't enforce changes OP, they can only suggest. And to be honest, though I agree with you, she is very successful so people obviously like her style.
BTW your post is very long... 😁

ronswansonstache · 26/06/2025 13:59

Before I opened this thread I wondered if it was about Mania! I completely agree. It would have made a better novella & could have done with fewer characters having the same exhausting conversations over and over. It’s not her strongest work but I enjoyed the ideas.

AppropriateAdult · 26/06/2025 14:03

I think Shriver’s books can be hit and miss (WNTTAK was superb, whereas I found So Much For That really awful), but I don’t find her prose overwritten, and I actually really liked Mania.

PlasticAcrobat · 26/06/2025 14:09

SheilaFentiman · 26/06/2025 13:53

Ironically, your own post is rather long (and felt a little ChatGPT)…

Personally, I thought “We Need to Talk About Kevin” was an incredible book. I tried a couple of others on the strength of it and they were just meh, so I haven’t read any of hers since.

I feel the same. We Need to Talk about Kevin is a startlingly good book. And then I tried to read another of hers and it seemed to have no merit at all. Plus, she is such a pound-per-word contrarian in the press.

I seriously feel she was possessed by some genius muse for Kevin, and then it flew away.

SheilaFentiman · 26/06/2025 14:17

I wonder if Kevin worked because she wrote all the characters through the eyes of the author stand-in mother, so the limited lens on how people behave made good sense, in that context.

BellissimoGecko · 26/06/2025 14:31

I’m a copyeditor.

A few things. Fiction houses rarely pay well - even the Big 5 - so they may have newer or inexperienced editors working for them.

The desk ed./commissioning ed. may have briefed the copyeditor to tread lightly and make minimal changes.

Things like baggy description, character voice, etc. should not be dealt with in a copyedit; they are dealt with before this, in a developmental edit.

The author may have rejected some copyediting changes. It happens!

BellissimoGecko · 26/06/2025 14:32

I loved We need to talk about Kevin. Haven’t read anything else by her.

SnoopyPajamas · 26/06/2025 15:40

SheilaFentiman · 26/06/2025 13:53

Ironically, your own post is rather long (and felt a little ChatGPT)…

Personally, I thought “We Need to Talk About Kevin” was an incredible book. I tried a couple of others on the strength of it and they were just meh, so I haven’t read any of hers since.

I've never used ChatGPT. You'll have to explain that one to me!

I don't see the irony in my post being long though. Long isn't the problem. I love a long book, if it's justified. What I don't have any patience with is padding. That's what I mean by "overwritten", if it wasn't clear. Mania is full of stuff you would lose nothing by chopping. Scenes that could be condensed, or merged into one. Tangents that go on for too long. Verbiage someone should have taken a hatchet to. That's what's driving me up the wall.

Kevin was going to be on my list of books to try if I liked Mania, but I don't see that happening now 😆

OP posts:
SnoopyPajamas · 26/06/2025 15:49

ToastToppaz · 26/06/2025 13:56

Editors can't enforce changes OP, they can only suggest. And to be honest, though I agree with you, she is very successful so people obviously like her style.
BTW your post is very long... 😁

Oh, I know. That's why I said she's probably hard to wrangle. I wondered if they were intimidated by her to speak up, or if she thinks she doesn't need to listen to them? Whatever happened, it let the book down.

I knew people would point out the length of my post😁In all seriousness though, this is me venting on the internet. It's supposed to be a bit of a rant. If you were paying to hear me, I promise I'd hold myself to a higher standard, and get some editors in. Can't say fairer than that 😉

OP posts:
TheaBrandt1 · 26/06/2025 16:07

I am a fan but far prefer her earlier work

TuesdaysAreBest · 26/06/2025 16:11

The Post Birthday World is excellent.

Vroomfondleswaistcoat · 26/06/2025 16:11

Is this the case of needing an editor or of an author's style not meshing with a reader? Some readers like books with a lot of lush description and a tendency towards prolixity. Others prefer a more 'spare' approach to storytelling. An author being a bit overblown doesn't necessarily make a bad book or a bad author - it might just be a mismatch between reader and book.

SnoopyPajamas · 26/06/2025 16:18

ronswansonstache · 26/06/2025 13:59

Before I opened this thread I wondered if it was about Mania! I completely agree. It would have made a better novella & could have done with fewer characters having the same exhausting conversations over and over. It’s not her strongest work but I enjoyed the ideas.

I'm not that far into it. Does it get worse?

I was immediately struck by how unnecessary the scene with the headteacher was. Given Darwin is at the dinner party later, and they rehash the whole thing again there, I don't know why Shriver didn't just start with him telling his mum about an incident he had at school, in front of their dinner guests. And use everyone's differing reactions to show their stance on Mental Parity. It would have added a bit more emotion and interest, especially if Darwin had believed like a believable human child and got upset about it.

As it is, we get the same scene twice, for no real reason. There's also been a page long digression about how all the boys love Emory, but she's too amazing for any for them. This has served no purpose I can see. Now I'm wading through a whole chapter about how much the young Pearson hated her childhood as a Jehovah's Witness. The points were made a page and a half in, but she just keeps going. And going . . .

OP posts:
EmeraldRoulette · 26/06/2025 16:28

Vroomfondleswaistcoat · 26/06/2025 16:11

Is this the case of needing an editor or of an author's style not meshing with a reader? Some readers like books with a lot of lush description and a tendency towards prolixity. Others prefer a more 'spare' approach to storytelling. An author being a bit overblown doesn't necessarily make a bad book or a bad author - it might just be a mismatch between reader and book.

This.

SnoopyPajamas · 26/06/2025 16:28

BellissimoGecko · 26/06/2025 14:31

I’m a copyeditor.

A few things. Fiction houses rarely pay well - even the Big 5 - so they may have newer or inexperienced editors working for them.

The desk ed./commissioning ed. may have briefed the copyeditor to tread lightly and make minimal changes.

Things like baggy description, character voice, etc. should not be dealt with in a copyedit; they are dealt with before this, in a developmental edit.

The author may have rejected some copyediting changes. It happens!

Yes, a developmental editor is exactly what I mean. The copy is fine. It's the content that needs oversight. This doesn't feel like it should have been the final draft. It's half-cooked.

I know, I sound like a disapproving teacher. "Can do better." It's true though!

OP posts:
WildCherryBlossom · 26/06/2025 16:54

I felt the same reading The Goldfinch by Donna Tartt. It was very strong in parts but the middle dragged and dragged. I felt she might be so revered as an author that nobody dared suggest that the book would be vastly improved by chopping large chunks out.

I wouldn’t let this put you off reading WNTTAK. I think that is definitely worth reading.

SnoopyPajamas · 26/06/2025 16:55

Vroomfondleswaistcoat · 26/06/2025 16:11

Is this the case of needing an editor or of an author's style not meshing with a reader? Some readers like books with a lot of lush description and a tendency towards prolixity. Others prefer a more 'spare' approach to storytelling. An author being a bit overblown doesn't necessarily make a bad book or a bad author - it might just be a mismatch between reader and book.

I don't think so, no. I have no problem with lush description, and don't need everything to be stripped back to the bones. But none of that is what I mean by the writing being boggy. This is a slog to get through. The prose isn't enjoyable to read, and the extra detail adds nothing to anything. Pure padding.

I actually don't think this is a bad book, or that Shriver is a bad author. But it could be a much better book. It has flaws that could have been fixed without too much effort. I'm just the reader and they're obvious to me.

I'm not hating, but I think it's fair enough to expect a certain standard. It's not a small title, or self-published. This isn't Shriver's first rodeo, and as someone said upthread, there would have been at least two different editors on it.

OP posts:
SnoopyPajamas · 26/06/2025 16:58

WildCherryBlossom · 26/06/2025 16:54

I felt the same reading The Goldfinch by Donna Tartt. It was very strong in parts but the middle dragged and dragged. I felt she might be so revered as an author that nobody dared suggest that the book would be vastly improved by chopping large chunks out.

I wouldn’t let this put you off reading WNTTAK. I think that is definitely worth reading.

Ah, okay! I might give it a try, but make that one library only 😂

The Goldfinch is on my TBR too, actually. Sounds like that one might be better as a library loan too

OP posts:
RattyNeighbours · 26/06/2025 17:13

I felt this way about Ian McEwan books when they used to be all the rage.

MorrisZapp · 26/06/2025 17:24

She could team up with Colm Toibin and give him half of her dialogue and description. He's 'spare' to the point of thin lippedness.

SnoopyPajamas · 26/06/2025 17:31

MorrisZapp · 26/06/2025 17:24

She could team up with Colm Toibin and give him half of her dialogue and description. He's 'spare' to the point of thin lippedness.

This is a fantastic description 😂

If anyone else has authors you don't think live up to their reputation, feel free to toss their names into the thread. I'm all ears

OP posts:
PlasticAcrobat · 26/06/2025 17:33

BellissimoGecko · 26/06/2025 14:31

I’m a copyeditor.

A few things. Fiction houses rarely pay well - even the Big 5 - so they may have newer or inexperienced editors working for them.

The desk ed./commissioning ed. may have briefed the copyeditor to tread lightly and make minimal changes.

Things like baggy description, character voice, etc. should not be dealt with in a copyedit; they are dealt with before this, in a developmental edit.

The author may have rejected some copyediting changes. It happens!

I'm sure that the sorts of edits the OP is talking about would be nothing to do with the copy editor. They would be raised at an earlier stage, by someone more like a desk editor. Copy editors have a much more limited brief

I'm going to whisper something sacrilegious now: I think Hilary Mantel needed a braver editor. I think that, in effect, she was bullied by her characters. They got into her head and demanded that she include too many scenes, too many details. An editor should have helped her to say no, sometimes, to Cromwell's demands.

The only reason I feel confident enough to say that is that she wrote a whole book about a medium who is bullied by ghosts. That seemed like it was literally about her relationship as an author with her characters. Someone should have rescued her. The books, already brilliant, would have been leaner and better.

PlasticAcrobat · 26/06/2025 17:45

Interesting post about The Goldfinch. I didn't feel that it needed an edit but I did find it a very long and painful read. Sometimes I think that she is deliberately rebarbative in some aspects of her writing, because it fits her themes.

She writes about the impossibility of redemption, the flaws and limits in the project of curing unhappiness by 'making things right'. One of the ways of making things right that she seems concerned with in The Goldfinch is processing trauma by converting it into art/beauty. And she tells us that this project is fraught with the possibility of dishonest claims of perfection - literally in the case of the antique furniture restoration that forms the allegorical part of the story. (My memory is a bit hazy here; I read it a long time ago.)

I think that her books have to stay ugly in some respects, so that she can be true to the bleakness of the conclusions that we are asked to draw about her characters' lives.

BellissimoGecko · 26/06/2025 17:51

PlasticAcrobat · 26/06/2025 17:33

I'm sure that the sorts of edits the OP is talking about would be nothing to do with the copy editor. They would be raised at an earlier stage, by someone more like a desk editor. Copy editors have a much more limited brief

I'm going to whisper something sacrilegious now: I think Hilary Mantel needed a braver editor. I think that, in effect, she was bullied by her characters. They got into her head and demanded that she include too many scenes, too many details. An editor should have helped her to say no, sometimes, to Cromwell's demands.

The only reason I feel confident enough to say that is that she wrote a whole book about a medium who is bullied by ghosts. That seemed like it was literally about her relationship as an author with her characters. Someone should have rescued her. The books, already brilliant, would have been leaner and better.

Didn’t you read my reply?