Neff 1

Developmental Editing: Exploring the Ethical Relationship

between the Editor and the Author
ABSTRACT
In examining the role of developmental editors, it is crucial to define how their role

plays into the ethical theory of representation. I.e. how is the editor able to best represent

the author while also satisfying the needs of the publisher? When it comes to publishing an

author’s work, four key ethical responsibilities must be upheld by the developmental editor:

remaining unbiased, upholding the publisher’s standards, avoiding research misconduct,

and maintaining healthy communication between all parties. To explore how the role of the

developmental editor impacts the quality of a book, I have decided to analyze the

relationship between author Thomas Wolfe and his editor Maxwell Perkins. I will illustrate

commonalities between the developmental editor’s influence on the publication of Wolfe’s

books and the quality/audience reaction to those books. Additionally, I will also analyze the

relationship between author James Frey and his editor, Nan Talese to illustrate how the

mislabeling of a book’s genre can ultimately destroy the credibility of the author and the

editor. I will then dissect how each editor either maintained or disregarded the four key

ethical principles. In doing so, I will illustrate how maintaining ethical responsibility can be

beneficial to the editor, whereas ignoring it can be detrimental to the editor. Once this

comparison is made, I will be able to conclude how a developmental editor’s practices can be

helpful or harmful to a book depending on how the editor maintains ethical responsibilities.

Keywords: Developmental Editing, Ethical Relationships, Research Misconduct, Unbiased

Editing, Creative Liberties, Ethical Veracity.

 Neff 2

INTRODUCTION
Nobody ever said that the role of the developmental editor was a simple endeavor.

When it comes to publishing a book, the editor has the most amount of responsibility to the

most amount of people. The editor has a responsibility to bring the authors’ work up to

publication standards while also keeping the original message intact. At the same time, the

editor has a responsibility to the publisher to make sure the author’s work falls in line with

the company’s standards, values, and practices. When it comes to publishing an author’s

work, four key components need to be taken into consideration: the editor’s intentions, the

author’s intentions, the publisher’s requirements, and the reader’s expectations. If one of

these components is lacking or unsatisfactory, the entire process falls apart. While the

editor’s job is ultimately to ensure that a book will make money, a great editor is able to

combine business expertise with strong communication skills to make sure all parties are

on the same page. As the saying goes, everyone either succeeds together or fails together.

Developmental editing is one of the biggest tasks an editor can take on, especially in

the realm of nonfiction writing. Unlike works of fiction, nonfiction writing has a set of

established criteria that must be maintained by all authors who write under this label. This

added level of criteria creates a high demand of excellence from the developmental editor.

As Scott Norton explains in his book, Developmental Editing, “developmental editing

involves significant structuring or restructuring of a manuscript's discourse” (Norton,

2009). The developmental editor has to satisfy the demands of multiple parties in order to

ensure the successful publication of a book. The editor needs to ensure that the author is

satisfied with the end product, as the author’s name will be on the book. The editor needs to

ensure the needs of both the author and of the publishing company are fully met and

satisfied. The publisher needs the author’s work to be clean and polished, while also
 Neff 3

aligning with the standards and practices of the company. Finally, the readers expect the

book they choose to invest their time in is competently written and will be well-worth their

time. While this is certainly a lot of components to juggle, there are ways to ensure success

and satisfaction for all parties involved.

Ethical Responsibilities of the Developmental Editor

Developmental editors have a hefty task set before them. When it comes to

publishing a book, the editor has the most amount of responsibility to the most amount of

people. The editor has a responsibility to the author to bring the book up to publication

standards while also keeping the author’s original message intact. In the book Tell It Slant,

Brenda Miller and Suzanne Paola analyze the way a work of creative nonfiction is produced

from concept to publication. Within the text, Miller and Paola outline how the narrative

and concept for a work of nonfiction are constantly changing and evolving over the course of

the drafting process (Miller & Paola, 2012). The developmental editor is present for every

step of this process. From the moment the author is signed on to write a book to when the

end product is published, the developmental editor has a hand in all of it.

In terms of ethical responsibilities, the developmental editor must abide by four

primary principals. The first being that the editor must remain unbiased. Developmental

editors are not always going to have the same beliefs and ideologies as the authors they

oversee, nor is it their job to. Rather, developmental editors have the job of putting

themselves in the shoes of the authors so they can understand their perspective. For

example, an editor with strong Christian values may be asked to develop a book for an

author whose subject matter focuses on disavowing religion. Good editors are able to leave

their personal opinions at the door in order to help authors realize the full potential of their

books, regardless of the subject matter. In their article on the process of editor selection,
 Neff 4

Silva and Al-Khatib note how, “a biased editor will taint the academic standards of a

journal… editors [must] conduct fair, balanced and impartial peer review and reach an

acceptance/rejection decision based on that feedback” (Silva & Al-khatib, 2016). That being

said, if working on a particular project creates a conflict of interest for any parties involved,

the developmental editor should be able to recognize said conflict and take measures to

avoid it. The best way for a developmental editor to identify a conflict of interest is to

determine which (if any) parties could be negatively affected by the author’s work. For

example, if a developmental editor was asked to produce an anti-religious book for a

Christian publication company, that would be a conflict of interest as the author’s objective

would directly oppose that of the publisher’s.

This ties into the second ethical responsibility for developmental editors, which is

that the editor must make sure the author’s book upholds the publisher’s standards and

reputation. Every publisher has a certain set of requirements when it comes to publishing

an author’s work. To paraphrase Jeff Herman, publishers want authors who fit their brand.

This is not to say an author’s primary motivator should be writing content that specifically

appeals to a sole publishing company. Rather, authors need to be aware of trends within

publishing companies and how other authors present their narratives (Herman, 2007).

When authors are writing within a particular genre, they should be aware of publishing

companies that specialize in that genre and look at examples of books that have published

by that company. This will give the author an idea of the types of themes and subject

matters commonly associated with said company. From there, authors can compile a short-

hand list of publishing companies that can help them bring their vision to paperback.

There is an old saying in Hollywood that studio executives will never get fired for

turning down a great script for a potentially great movie, but they will get fired for
 Neff 5

greenlighting a bad script for a bad movie. This same sentiment holds true for publishers.

Several publishers turned down the opportunity to publish Harry Potter, and while they

are probably kicking themselves nowadays, none of them were fired for their decision to

reject the series. That is because their decision did not create bad publicity for their

company. This is why publishers are always very selective when selecting books to approve

for publishing. They know that, regardless of the book’s reception, their company will be

represented on the cover. When people see that a book is published by a certain company,

the quality of the book will impact the reader’s opinion of that company.

In addition to making sure a book falls in line with a publishing company’s

standards, the publisher also has to ensure that the author’s image falls in line with the

company’s standards. An author can write a great book, but if the public image of the

author does not match that of the company’s, the publisher will not see the author as a

suitable mach. Similarly, if an author has an infamous background, the publisher will

perceive the author as a liability to the company. Whereas an author may be solely

concerned with getting a book published, a publisher is more likely to be concerned with the

company’s public image in the long run. Once an author is signed on with a publisher, any

books that author writes under said publisher become a permanent reflection of the

publishing company.

The third ethical responsibility of the developmental editor is to ensure the author’s

work avoids any research misconduct. When dealing in the realm of nonfiction, the editor

has to put in extra effort to make sure the author is respectful and accurate to the source

material. Even if there has never been another book written about the author’s particular

subject matter, the editor has to be sure that the end product is thoroughly researched and

has credible sources to justify the author’s content. When it comes to writing a work of
 Neff 6

creative nonfiction, five essential questions need to be addressed: Who, What, When,

Where, and Why? More specifically: who is the story about, what event(s) took place, when

and where did it happen, and why did it all happen? These questions serve as the basis for

every work of creative nonfiction. This structure allows authors to present information in a

way that is both factually accurate as well as unique. But many nonfiction authors still feel

the need to embellish or change certain aspects of their stories in order to create a more

appealing narrative. What leads to these changes? Sometimes, it is a direct result of the

author’s writing, while other times it is a result of the publisher wanting the author to

produce a more engaging narrative. Regardless of who is making the changes, it still begs

the same question: are creative changes justified when presenting a nonfiction story? And if

so, how much change is justifiable before the narrative fails to maintain its nonfiction

status?

When a developmental editor establishes a relationship with an author, it is usually

because the author is writing or developing a nonfiction narrative. In his book, You Can’t

Make This Stuff Up, Lee Gutkind discusses the flexibility nonfiction writers have when it

comes to portraying historical events in their writing. Because there is no one way to write

a nonfiction book, the rules and standards for each author are difficult to define. It becomes

the editor’s responsibility to determine a level of veracity in the author’s writing that

remains true to the source material while also maintaining a unique and insightful

narrative (Gutkind, 2012). When it comes to nonfiction narratives, the editor and the

author not only have to make sure that the book will be interesting enough for readers to

invest in, but that the book is historically accurate. Or at least historically accurate enough

that the audience will find the author credible. The gray area between nonfiction and

fiction is largely defined by the subject matter of the book. If the author is developing an
 Neff 7

autobiographical memoir, the reader may be more forgiving of creative liberties taken as

there is an understanding that the narrative is influenced by the author’s emotional

perspective. However, if the book is a nonfiction narrative about a historical figure or event,

readers will be more critical of changes made to the narrative as they will have other works

to compare it to.

Another important factor the editor has to take into consideration is the time period

of the author’s subject matter. There is a saying among comedians that the key to a good

joke is tragedy plus time. The same logic can be applied to how creative nonfiction authors

should or should not add creative embellishments to certain historical events. If the author

is writing about a person or event that took place hundreds of years ago, more leeway is

given to the author’s interpretation of the facts. In contrast, a book detailing facts

surrounding current people and/or events will be held to higher standards. For example, a

creative nonfiction book about the events surrounding the sinking of the Titanic would be

given more leeway for creative embellishments than a nonfiction books about the

September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center. Most readers will want a more

historically accurate depiction of the latter as it is a more current world event.

The fourth and final responsibility of the developmental editor is to keep all parties

informed throughout the editing process in order to guarantee the final product is an

accurate representation of the author. In his book, Editors on Editing, Gerald Gross

explains that editors select the books for their company to publish, they serve as the

primary line of communication between the publisher and the author (Gerald, 1993). This

last element may be the most crucial responsibility of the editor. While editing may be the

editor’s title responsibility, maintaining a healthy relationship between the author and the

editor is the most important way to guarantee the highest quality end product. Without
 Neff 8

communication between the author and the publisher, there is no way to ensure trust or

reliability between all three parties.

The Author’s Intentions

There are two primary challenges that all authors must overcome in order to bring

their work to the public. The first is writing the book itself, an endeavor that stumps many

would-be authors. The second is finding a publisher who will accept the book. In the mind of

many authors, securing a publisher is the biggest challenge they will ever have to face. The

author may think that securing a publisher is the end of the race, when in reality, it is just

the start of the journey. Once the author has established a contract with a developmental

editor, many tasks must be completed in order to get the book published.

Nonfiction authors may assume that because their subject matter is grounded in

pre-existing people, facts, and events, the job of writing the book has already been done for

them. However, writing a work of nonfiction requires a lot more effort than just listing off

names and dates. The best way to write a creative nonfiction book is to present the facts

from a unique perspective. As Gero states in Modeling Creativity and Knowledge-Based

Creative Design, “once creative thinking is achieved, the transition to structural form

should be routine,” (Gero & Maher, 136). Anyone can just list off facts about World War II,

but a good author knows how to construct a narrative around the details of the war. The

structure of the book gives the work its own identity that readers can identify with and

distinguish from other books that cover similar information.

The Reader’s Expectations

 Neff 9

All readers have a set of expectations when they decide to read a new book: the book

must be interesting, competently written, and worth the time it takes to read. When it

comes to nonfiction texts, readers will also be more analytical of the author’s credibility as

the book claims to be an earnest account of a true-life event/person. Dawan Coombs asserts

that providing readers with access to nonfiction texts allows them to assess the authors’

strengths and weaknesses based on their own analyses (Coombs, 2013). Readers will know

if they are being deceived by an author. With easy access to the internet, the reader can

compare an author’s book to other works on the same subject matter to determine if the

author’s account is actually truthful. This is why authors and editors need to be aware of

not just the audience they are writing for, but of all potential readers. Regardless of the

author’s best intentions, readers will interpret books the way they want to. Readers can

still be offended or off-put by an author’s words, even if that was not the author’s goal.

While a majority of readers demand a high level of authenticity from nonfiction

authors, most readers also demand an investing narrative. One of the reasons readers may

prefer a nonfiction book over a textbook is because they are interested in gaining a new

perspective from the author. Some readers may be well versed in the subject matter of the

book, but they choose to invest their time in the book because the author can provide a

fresh opinion that the readers may not have previously considered. Smart readers know not

every author has the same exact opinions surrounding a historical figure or event. By

engaging in the author’s work, the readers are able to broaden their own perspectives.

This does not mean the readers have to agree with the author’s opinions, rather they take

the time to listen to the author so they can understand his or her point of view. If every

person just read the same book about a historical event, there would be little to no room for

differing opinions. There would be no desire to learn more or question the author’s work as
 Neff 10

everyone would just accept the book as the sole account of the subject matter. By having a

plethora of authors share their own interpretations of a particular subject matter, readers

are able to form their own opinions and determine for themselves who they want to believe.

ETHICAL EDITING THROUGHOUT HISTORY

To explore how the role of the developmental editor impacts the quality of a book, I

have decided to analyze relationships between well-known authors and the developmental

editors who worked alongside them. Each of these relationships illustrate the importance of

having a competent editor bring an author’s work to fruition. The first relationship I will

analyze is between author Thomas Wolfe and his editor Maxwell Perkins. Using critical

analysis, I will analyze the dynamic between Wolfe and Perkins over the course of the

former’s career. I will outline the details of Wolfe and Perkins’s relationship, the history

behind each collaboration between the two, the public reception to Wolfe’s work, as well as

how the input from the editor affected the end product. I will also explore the career of

Wolfe after his falling out with Perkins and how the resulting lack of editorial input

affected his work and his reputation as an author. From there, I will illustrate

commonalities between the developmental editor’s influence on the publication of Wolfe’s

books and the quality/audience reaction to those books.

The second relationship I will be analyzing is between author James Frey and his

editor, Nan Talese. I have chosen to analyze the history around Frey and his controversial

book A Million Little Pieces as it perfectly conveys how giving the wrong label to an

author’s work can drastically effect the audience’s interpretation of the text as well as their

trust and respect for the author. It also illustrates how the editor and the publisher has a

specific set of responsibilities in ensuring that the label a book is given is not misleading.

By analyzing the facts around this controversy, I will illustrate how the role of the
 Neff 11

developmental editor played a part in this controversy. I will also determine how proper

labeling plays a crucial role in audience reception.

WOLFE & PERKINS

One of the earliest examples of an influential author-editor relationship is that of

Thomas Wolfe and Maxwell Perkins. Since Wolfe’s first publication, Perkins played a

significant role in the author’s success. Over the course of Wolfe’s career, Perkins would

demonstrate how having faith in the developmental editor could prove beneficial for the

author. However, their relationship also illustrated how not having faith in the editor can

be detrimental to the author. Their relationship also showcased how giving too much

control to the author can destroy the quality of a book.

Look Homeward, Angel

In 1929, author Thomas Wolfe had his first book published. This book, Look

Homeward, Angel, depicted an allegorical representation of Wolfe’s adolescence. Told in

three parts, the story follows a young man named Eugene who struggles to connect with his

family as he eventually finds a life for himself outside his hometown in North Carolina

(Wolfe, 1929). Wolfe’s book is one of the more prominent examples of the editor’s influence

within the last century. After Wolfe had finished drafting the book, it was picked up by

Maxwell Perkins. Perkins was one of the primary editors at Charles Scribner’s Sons

publishing company. When Perkins first read the book, he agreed to help Wolfe get it

published. However, he insisted Wolfe make drastic edits to the manuscripts before it could

be released in stores. By the time the book was released, Perkins had gotten Wolfe to cut

out over 90,000 words from the original manuscript (Hoey, 2017). That amount of words is

enough to fill 180 pages, single-spaced. Upon hearing this, one’s natural reaction may be
 Neff 12

outrage. How can an editor cut out almost 200 pages and claim to have the author’s best

interests at heart?

The published version of the book is 550 pages long, as opposed to the original

manuscript, which was over 700 pages long. So in terms of percentage, Perkins essentially

made Wolfe erase 25% of the book. While the edits Perkins made may seem overblown,

there are a few key facts to keep in mind. This was Wolfe’s first book, so he had more

incentive to take advice from Perkins, who had years of industry experience. Before

working with Wolfe, Perkins was known for working with F. Scott Fitzgerld, serving as

editor for This Side of Paradise and The Great Gatsby. Similar to Wolfe’s book, Perkins had

made substantial edits to Fitzgerald’s manuscripts before they were published (Hoey,

2017). With Fitzgerald’s books proving successful, it was reasonable for Wolfe to believe

that Perkins knew how to trim down unnecessary words and information while staying true

to the author’s core message. As Berg outlines, “few editors before him had done so much

work on manuscripts, yet [Perkins] was always faithful to his credo, ‘The book belongs to

the author’” (p.4, Berg). Wolfe’s faith in Perkins would ultimately prove to be wise as Look

Homeward, Angel was praised by critics at the time of its release. The success of this book

solidified Wolfe and Perkins’s working relationship.

Of Time and the River

With Look Homeward, Angel proving to be a critical and financial success, Wolfe

took to writing a sequel entitled Of Time and the River. In this 1935 sequel, the character

Eugene experiences life outside of North Carolina for the first time. However, he soon faces

personal struggles as he is not adept to living on his own (Wolfe, 1935). While Of Time and

the River proved to be as successful as its predecessor, the ordeal of getting the book to

publication on Wolfe and Perkins’s working relationship. After the success of his first book,
 Neff 13

Wolfe had gained name recognition for his writing skills. Because of this, he was less

willing to openly accept Perkins’s edits. The constant debate between the two over what

edits should be kept is what led to the six-year delay of the book’s publication.

With Wolfe’s books gaining more popularity, Wolfe did not appreciate how part of his

success was being attributed to Perkins’s skills as an editor. Wolfe’s ego is what ultimately

allowed Edward Aswell to convince Wolfe to leave Scribner’s and sign on with Harper &

Brothers. This publishing company granted Wolfe more freedom with his manuscripts

(Halberstadt, 1981). However, this move would ultimately prove detrimental for Wolfe.

After his death in 1938, several of Wolfe’s unedited manuscripts were published to

lackluster reception. Many critics noted how the author’s original writings were cluttered

and unfocused, proving that Perkins’s abilities as an editor is ultimately what helped shape

Wolfe’s entire career.

PERKINS’S ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITIES AS A DEVELOPMENTAL EDITOR

In examining the relationship between Perkins and Wolfe, one might assume that

Perkins crossed a line by taking too much control away from Perkins in terms of

determining what made the final cut of his books. The only way to truly determine if

Perkins was in the right or not is to compare his actions to the four principles of ethical

editing. First and foremost, did Perkins remain unbiased when editing Wolfe’s content?

Based on the types of books Wolfe wrote, there is nothing to suggest that Perkins held any

biases toward Wolfe’s subject matters. Additionally, because the books were published

primarily as works of fiction, there was no conflict of interest involved nor was there any

issue regarding research misconduct.

The primary issue comes into play when examining how Perkins went about

upholding the publisher’s standards. Ironically, by focusing heavily on meeting the

 Neff 14

publisher’s standards, Perkins ultimately failed to maintain healthy communication

between all parties. To be fair to Perkins, with his years of experience and expertise, it is

understandable to see why he was confident that his redactions to Wolfe’s work would

prove beneficial for all parties in the long run. However, because he failed to communicate

this thought process with Wolfe, Wolfe may have ended up feeling like he was left out of the

conversation. Perkins may have failed to realize just how important Wolfe’s work was to

him; so by demanding so many alterations from him, Wolfe may have felt that he was

losing his voice in his own book. He perceived his novels as a reflection of Perkin’s abilities

as an editor, rather than as his own abilities as a writer. So when a new editor comes along

with promises of unfiltered publications and complete creative control, it is understandable

to see why Wolfe jumped at the chance. Had Perkins made more of an effort to keep Wolfe

in the loop, he may have avoided losing one of his best authors to a competitor.

FREY & TALESE

A Million Little Pieces is a book by James Frey that received substantial backlash

after it was revealed his memoir was actually fiction. The book’s infamy illustrates how

allowing an editor to falsely label a book under a different genre can significantly impact

the reader’s reception of that book. I will analyze the label the book was initially given and

how that label was used to give readers false expectations. I will also discuss the role that

the author and the publisher of the book had in the making of this mistake and whether

one is more responsible for the mislabeling than the other. Additionally, I will also analyze

how labeling the book under the correct genre and subgenre could have prevented the

reaction that many readers had when this scandal first came to light.

Was it a Memoir?
 Neff 15

When discussing literary labels, it is important to make the distinction between the

genres and subgenres of literature. When looking at literature as a whole, there are four

separate genres that it can be divided into: Poetry, Prose, Fiction, and Nonfiction. Within

each genre of literature, there are multiple subgenres. For instance: memoirs, biographies,

autobiographies, and creative nonfiction are all subgenres under the nonfiction banner.

Now some may wonder why memoir and autobiography are listed as two separate

subgenres. If both deal with authors writing about their real-life experiences, then would

they not be considered synonyms for each other? This is a common misunderstanding made

by readers and authors alike. To paraphrase Brian Klems from Writers Digest, a memoir

details a specific instance in the life of the author, whereas an autobiography covers the

entire life of the author (2013, Klems). It is also important to emphasize how the term

memoir comes from the word “memory,” which implies that an author’s account of the truth

is likely based in a flawed, biased, but still valid perspective. Another common

misconception is that novels and books are synonyms. However, as any experienced writer

will tell you, a novel specifically refers to works of fiction. Therefore, a work of nonfiction

would be labeled as a book, not a novel. This is not to say nonfiction works do not share

similar narrative structures as novels. Memoirs, in particular, share many resemblances to

novels: they both tell a first person narrative with relevant stakes, obstacles, and

consequences. One of the major appeal of memoirs is that they can read like novels while

also providing details about real-life events and people. The issue arises when the line

between memoir and novel begins to blur. When a memoir starts to delve too heavily into

the realm of novel, it ceases to fit within its labeled genre.

The first thing to establish is that, despite initial marketing, Frey’s book is not in-

fact a memoir. As stated earlier, a labeling a book as a memoir implies that it is a real-life

account of a specific instance from the author’s life. One might argue that books, even those
 Neff 16

that are nonfiction, have to take some liberties with the source material in order to adapt

the story to fit a cohesive narrative. It is true that while dates and times cannot be

historically altered, there are methods by which an author can present a concise narrative.

Darrell Caulley justified how information can be presented in a creative way without

sacrificing factual accuracy. In his article, Caulley explains how putting an emphasis on

key information still gives the reader an accurate depiction of the reality of the situation

without having to describe insignificant or minute details. (Caulley, 2008). Based on

Caulley’s justification, there are means by which an author can create a narrative around

real-world events/people that provides accurate information regarding the subject matter

while also not bogging down the story with insignificant details. One practice used by

authors is time compression. Dave Hood defines time compression as “combining events

that happened over a few days, weeks, months, and so forth, into a shorter span of time”

(Hood, 2012). In the case of James Frey’s book, A Million Little Pieces, not only were

methods like compression used, but many of the event recounted in the book were entirely

fictitious. A 2006 article in the Chicago Tribune details how Frey eventually admitting to

fabricating several of the details within his book, including certain characters and major

events (Italie, 2006). Based on the information provided in Frey’s testimony, it is clear that

A Million Little Pieces is not guilty of abusing the literary rules within the subgenre of

memoir. Instead, the book is guilty of being falsely labeled under the genre of nonfiction.

James Frey did not write a memoir, he wrote a novel which was falsely advertised as a

memoir.

What was Talese’s Role?

While it would be easy to put all of the blame on James Frey for the outcome of his

book, it is crucial to understand that Frey was not the only person who had a hand in
 Neff 17

bringing A Million Little Pieces to the light of day. Frey’s editor, Nan Talese had an equal

hand in the controversy surrounding the book. In the same Chicago Tribune article where

Frey admitted to fabricating several details from the book, he discussed how “the

manuscript was offered to publishers as both a novel and as a memoir… there was only

brief discussion of shopping the book as fiction, out of respect for his family's privacy”

(Italie, 2006). So from the beginning, Frey had never claimed the book was 100% accurate

to real life. It was only after the book was picked up by publisher Nan Talese that the book

was officially marketed under the memoir label. As a publisher, it was Talese’s duty to

ensure that the book she was representing was in fact a memoir and not a novel. In a Times

article by Hilary Hylton, Talese has expressed no remorse for publishing A Million Little

Pieces. For while she admits that she did not do her job thoroughly enough to ensure the

book was nonfiction, she is confident that “the book has great value for anyone who must

deal with a loved one who is an addict” (Hylton, 2007). Though this does not exonerate Frey

from his role in the book’s deceptive labeling, Talese’s words illustrate how one person

alone was not responsible for the book’s controversy. Talese failed to do her job correctly as

a publisher, which caused a snowball effect until the deceptive labeling came back to haunt

everyone who was involved with the book’s creation and marketing.

TALESE’S ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITIES AS A DEVELOPMENTAL EDITOR

In examining the relationship between Frey and Talese, it is clear to see that Talese

was responsible for a lot of the backlash Frey received. That being said, exactly how much

of the blame falls on her and what could have been done differently to avoid this ethical

conundrum. The only way to truly determine Talese’s level of guilt is to compare her actions

to the four principles of ethical editing.

 Neff 18

When examining her initial actions, Talese seems to following the code of ethics

fairly well; she had no bias toward the subject matter and she did her best to uphold the

publisher’s standards. However, in her efforts to uphold the publisher’s standards, Talese

created a conflict of interest in how she wanted to market the book. Had the book been

published as a novel, as Frey initially wanted, the amount of creative embellishments

would not have been an issue. But because Talese insisted that the book be published as a

memoir to sell more copies, she opened up the book to research misconduct. Now that the

book was being regarded as a work of nonfiction, there were brand new standards Frey had

to be held to in regards to portraying real-life events. It is clear that the label of memoir for

A Million Little Pieces was just that: a label. Frey’s book was not held to the same

standards as a traditional memoir because Talese never intended to make it a true memoir.

This betrayal of Frey’s desire to keep the book as a novel effectively strained the

communication between the two parties. Because Talese was more concerned with doing

right by her publisher, she completely disregarded the wants and concerns of the author.

Not only that, but Frey was required to be complicit in the lie throughout all his public

appearances. In her Vanity Fair article, Peretz points out that prior to the publication of A

Million Little Pieces, Frey had a reputation as an author who experimented with his

writing. Had it not been for the spotlight that Oprah’s book club brought to the title, it

would have been a moderate success and then quickly forgotten. Even though Oprah

eventually apologized for attack on Frey’s character, the positive and negative attention she

gave to the book gave Frey a bigger spotlight than he ever intended. This growing attention

from the public made it easier for people to identify the cracks in Frey’s story. Worst of all,

when the truth about the book was revealed, Talese and Random House completely turned

their backs on Frey. As Peretz states, “Random House stopped paying him, citing breach of
 Neff 19

contract, at which point Frey’s lawyers threatened to sue the publishing house… They also

threatened to go to the media … The complaint alleged that [Random House] had directed

significant embellishment…Random House quickly resumed paying him” (Peretz, 2008).

Because Frey kept all of his correspondence between himself and the publisher, he was able to

prove that he was not solely at fault for the content of his own book.

PERKINS vs. TALESE

While the relationship between the author and developmental editor varies from

person to person, the author should have faith in the editor’s abilities. Additionally, editors

should ensure they are doing right by the author when they bring the book to fruition. The

relationship between Thomas Wolfe and Maxwell Perkins illustrates how, despite the

seemingly authoritative role of the editor, developmental editors have the skills and

experience to know when changes need to be made to the author’s work. At the same time,

there needs to be a mutual level of trust and respect between the author and the editor in

order for anything to be accomplished.

When an author is given too much freedom without any editorial supervision, the

author’s work can end up suffering. As was evident with Wolfe’s later work, having nobody

to tell an author when they should pull in the reigns can lead to overconfidence and sloppy

writing. On the opposite end of the spectrum, having an editor who does not care about the

author’s vision and only wants to turn their book into a profitable entity can also be

detrimental. The responsibility of the editor is to find the right balance between

maintaining the author’s vision, upholding the publisher’s standards, as well as ensuring

the end product will prove to be financially successful.

In analyzing the role that the author and the publisher had in the improper labeling

of A Million Little Pieces, the outrage derived from the public seems warranted. Not only
 Neff 20

was the book falsely labeled as a memoir, it was falsely branded as a work of nonfiction.

When looking back at how this all could have been avoided, the simplest answer is that

Talese should not have pushed for the book to be labeled as a memoir. It is the

responsibility of the publisher to ensure that an author’s work aligns with its genre and

subgenre so that readers will know what to expect from the material. When publishers

disobey their responsibilities, they set a poor example for other publishers and writers.

Many creative nonfiction authors tell stories about specific events. While they may also

discuss the impact an event has had on specific or various individuals, the primary focus is

on presenting historically accurate information regarding the event. In order for an author’s

book to be considered a work of nonfiction, the author must accurately discuss when and

where the events of the book take place. If the details of the book are historically

inaccurate, then the author’s claim that the book is nonfiction is fundamentally flawed.

CONCLUSION
In examining the role of developmental editors, it is crucial to define how their role

plays into the ethical theory of representation. I.e. how is the editor able to best represent

the author while also satisfying the needs of the publisher? When it comes to publishing an

author’s work, there are four key ethical responsibilities that the developmental editor

must uphold: remaining unbiased, upholding the publisher’s standards, avoiding research

misconduct, and maintaining healthy communication between all parties. If one of these

components is lacking or unsatisfactory, the entire process falls apart. While the editor’s job

is ultimately to ensure that a book will make money, a great editor is able to combine

business expertise with strong communication skills to make sure all parties are on the

same page. The relationship between Thomas Wolfe and Maxwell Perkins illustrates that

while the relationship between the author and developmental editor varies from person to
 Neff 21

person, the author should have faith in the editor’s abilities. The relationship between

author James Frey and his editor, Nan Talese illustrate how the mislabeling of a book’s

genre can ultimately destroy the credibility of the author and the editor. Additionally,

editors should ensure they are doing right by the author when they bring the book to

fruition.

If I was to further explore this topic, I would analyze more examples of author-editor

relationships over the history of modern publishing. Exploring other examples would help

create a more fleshed out exploration of the importance of the developmental editor and

how one can use business expertise and writing skills to the benefit of the author, the

publisher, and the reader.

 Neff 22

References

Barone, T. (2008). Creative Nonfiction and Social Research. Handbook of the Arts in
Qualitative Research. 105-115.
Berg, A. S. (1978). Max Perkins: Editor of Genius. New York: Penguin Random House LLC.

Bloom, L. (2003). Living to Tell the Tale: The Complicated Ethics of Creative Nonfiction.
College English, 65(3). 12-15.

Coombs, D. (2013). Fiction and Nonfiction: A Symbiotic Relationship. The ALAN

Review, 41(1), 7-15.
Fishmann, M. (2009). Thomas Wolfe’s ‘Old Catawba’ in VQR. The Virginia Quarterly
Review. https://www.vqronline.org/authors/thomas-wolfe%E2%80%99s-final-journey

Frey, J. (2003). A Million Little Pieces. New York: Doubleday Publishing.

Gerard, P. (2018). Creative Nonfiction: Researching and Crafting Stories of Real Life.
Illinois: Waveland Press, Inc.

Gero, J., Maher, M. (1993). Modeling Creativity and Knowledge-Based Creative

Design. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishing.

Gutkind, L. (2012). You Can’t Make This Stuff Up: The Complete Guide to Writing Creative
Nonfiction—from Memoir to Literary Journalism and Everything in Between.
New York: Da Capo Press.

Gross, G. (1993). Editors on Editing: What Writers Need to Know about What Editors Do.
Third Edition. New York: Grove Press.

Halberstadt, J. (1981). Who Wrote Thomas Wolfe’s Last Novels? The New York Review of
Books. https://www.nybooks.com/articles/1981/03/19/who-wrote-thomas-wolfes-last-
novels/

Herman, J. (2007). Jeff Herman’s Guide to Book Publishers, Editors, and Literary Agents.
Stockbridge, Mass.: Three Dog Press.

Hoey, B. (2017) Legendary Book Editors. Books Tell You Why Inc. https://blog.bookstell
youwhy.com/maxwell-perkins-gordon-lish-robert-gottlieb-legendary-book-editors

Hood, D. (2012). The Ethics of Writing Creative Nonfiction. Find Your Creative Muse,
https://davehood59.wordpress.com/2012/07/03/the-ethics-of-writing-creative- nonfiction/
 Neff 23

Hylton, H. (2007). Oprah vs. James Frey. The Sequel. Time Inc.
http://content.time.com/time/arts/article/0,8599,1648140,00.html

Italie, H. (2006). Frey Admits Memoir’s Alterations.” Chicago Tribune.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/sns-ap-books-disputed-memoir-story.html

Klems, B. (2013). Memoir vs. Autobiography. Writer’s Digest, F+W.

https://www.writersdigest.com/online-editor/memoir-vs-autobiography-2

Miller, B., Paola, S. (2012). Tell It Slant: Creating, Refining, and Publishing Creative
Nonfiction. Pennsylvania: McGraw-Hill.
Norton, S. (2009). Developmental Editing : A Handbook for Freelancers, Authors, and
Publishers. Illinois: University of Chicago Press.

Peretz, E. (2009) James Frey’s Morning After.Vanity Fair. https://www.vanityfair.com/

culture/2008/06/frey200806

Silva, J. (2016) How are Editors Selected, Recruited and Approved? Crossmark.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11948-016-9821-y

Wolfe, T. (1929). Look Homeward, Angel. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.

Wolfe, T. (1935). Of Time and the River. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.

Young, T., Hadaway, N., Ward, B. (2013) The Role of Design in Nonfiction Books.
The ALAN Review, 41(1), 16-23.