I'm feeling kinda depressed all of a sudden.

I'm in a discussion on a list for judges of a particular writing contest. I happen to be both an entrant and a judge, though not in the same category, since that would be massively unethical.

The topic is how to handle recurring grammatical errors--how to offer suggestions without line-editing, how much to mark down the score, etc. And MANY judges, some of them published, are saying that poor grammar just doesn't matter that much--the copyeditor will fix that.

AmyLiz, Deb, anybody, please tell me they're wrong. I know the most impeccable, beautiful prose in the world won't sell if the underlying story is dull. But surely it gets you somewhere, right? Because, dammit, grammar matters. I recognize that it doesn't come easily for everyone, but it's a fundamental building block, and IMO not taking the time to get it right is just plain sloppy.

I know I'm all ranty, but it's to keep me from saying all this on the judges' list. But, dammit. To be all mememe, I don't like being told something I'm naturally good at isn't even important!

please tell me they're wrong

Wrong like very wrong things. Of course grammar is important! And assuming a copyeditor will fix what -- to me -- would be a fundamental flaw is asinine. Every manuscript has a typo here or there, but if a writer doesn't know how to stop switching from past to present tense or consistently misuses punctuation, for instance? She's not writing on a level I would be willing to buy -- and there were manuscripts I turned down for that very reason.

Aimee, wonderful drabbles! It's so nice to see you in here -- and this topic obviously tapped into something big for you. Yay!

Deb, I love the Hall of Fame drabble. I have to go back and read the others...

Susan, I'm personally of the opinion that there is a good clear middle ground. If someone has the language that hits me viscerally when I'm wearing my editor's cap, I'm not all that worried about where, in any given sentence, they put a preposition. It's also possible, in my view, to kill your (as in, our, the writer's) own voice by insisting on perfection.

I got a pissy letter from a PhD from a midwestern private school somewhere. Her main bitch was that the Chaucerian-era language used in Famous Flower should have been actual Middle English. How does one explain to someone that arse-sticked that forcing the reader to set the book aside in mid-read to hunt up a Middle-Modern dictionary qualifies as a boat anchor and a story killer?

I make the occasional grammatical snafu myself - not that often, but sometimes. I will say that if there's too much of it in a sample of writing, I gert very suspicious of said writer, unless there's a voice coming through at me. If the voice is there, I'll fix grammar or their breakfast.

if a writer doesn't know how to stop switching from past to present tense

Ah - see, I don't class that as a grammar issue at all. That's a visual for me, not a linguistic; that's a writer so deep into their own story that they describing with an inner eye, and sometimes that jumps. It makes me nuts, and I'll always point it out, but it does make me grin, too.

Wrong like very wrong things. Of course grammar is important!

Thanks, Amy, I thought so. If nothing else, it's not like an editor has no other choice but Story A, which is dull but impeccably written, and Story B, which is exciting but riddled with grammatical errors. I've seen pictures of slush piles. There's got to be more than enough books that are strong on both levels.

I will say that if there's too much of it in a sample of writing, I gert very suspicious of said writer, unless there's a voice coming through at me. If the voice is there, I'll fix grammar or their breakfast.

You're right about this -- although in my experience, reading ms. after ms. from the slush pile, most writers with really strong voices don't mangle the language *too* often or too egregiously. (Or they do it on purpose, which is a whole different thing.)

And my grammar isn't perfect by a long shot, nor my punctuation. Even when copyediting, I check my sources to be sure about some things. But the author in particular I was thinking about with the past/present thing? Didn't have a particularly strong voice *or* story, and clearly just wandered in and out of tenses without realizing there was a difference. In the same sentence, sometimes! Drove me batshit.

Deb, FWIW, I'm talking about issues like multiple run-on sentences per page, or people who have no grasp on basic rules of punctuation.

I'm more tolerant of it than I used to be, because I've come to realize in working with critique partners that not everyone just picks it up naturally from reading. I just happen to have an ear for it myself, but lack of such an ear is no more a failing than not being able to easily match a pitch in singing. Or, to name something I'm bad at, than being unable to watch a dance step and replicate it without detailed, patient instruction.

But I still feel like if you're going to enter contests or submit to editors and agents, you ought to have enough respect for the craft to polish your work first, and part of that is getting the little details right.

Many would-be writers don't have the self-awareness to realize that their craft needs work.

I'll fix grammar or their breakfast

Dibs on breakfast.

Her main bitch was that the Chaucerian-era language used in Famous Flower should have been actual Middle English. How does one explain to someone that arse-sticked that forcing the reader to set the book aside in mid-read to hunt up a Middle-Modern dictionary qualifies as a boat anchor and a story killer?

It's for that same reason that Stephen J. Hawkings only put something like four mathematical equations in "A Brief History of Time." Only what he felt was absolutely necessary to illustrate relativity.* It was a popular science book and a well-known fact that the more equations you put in a book of that sort, the fewer people would read it.

*relatitivy is not the same as relativity.