All this talk of writing specifically towards markets leaves a bitter taste in my mouth. Cynical, corporate manouvering, manufacturing a product for a specific demographic. It's supposed to be art. Just write! If the story is compelling, original and well written then a readership will be there for it.
The OP asked about "writers who send manuscripts to publishers in both Canada and the US." He wasn't asking about self-publishing. Stop muddying the waters, please.
OK, so to answer the OP, I personally would send the manuscript the way I'd written it, regardless of whether the publisher's were in Canada, the US or the Highlands of Scotland. Yes, let the story speak for itself and worry about future arguments with publishers if and when they decide to take it on board.
Nonetheless, publishing houses have to meet payrolls, pay rent, buy office equipment, etc. The only way they can do that is to sell a product in a competitive market. If they go out of business, to whom are you going to submit your great work of art?
Yes. There's been so much irrelevant drivel in this thread, we ought to return to your straightforward and original question.
Don't tell me about your opinion of the book publishing business. Tell it to the book publisher when you submit your work of art.
Agents and publishers have to want to read it before it gets near any customers. What I'm saying is that an American author using American English, or a Canadian author using Canadian English, or a British author using British English, is not a reason any decent publisher is going to turn down an ms. Exactly. And although the OP was about submitting to publishers in different countries, I think the same thing applies. They're not going to publish in just one country, so a lot of language changes are going to be made regardless of the original.
I've never considered it "art", actually; more a craft, though there are definitely artistic aspects to any craft. But it's also a business - for both publisher and writer (unless you don't want to make any money so then you can just pop it up for free on the internet). Let's face it - even Michelangelo demanded payment.
Okay, perhaps I was being overly simplistic but I certainly would never compromise my stylistic approach to become more saleable. As I said, a good plot will shine through irrespective of whether or not I use trash can or dust bin, flat or apartment, trunk or boot. . . You get the idea. I'll remain true to myself. If America doesn't want to read it due to such inconsequencial disparities then so be it. I sincerely doubt that this is the case though.
No. You're still missing the point. Editors who evaluate manuscripts aren't paid to indulge their personal tastes in reading. They're paid to spot submissions that fit the current acquisitions goals of the publishing house. Those goals change continually and reflect shifts in market demand; they don't necessarily track with an individual editor's personal preferences in books. It's analogous to a buyer at a clothing store. The buyer is paid to know what styles will be hot sellers next fall or next spring, and it doesn't matter whether he personally likes those styles or not.
I agree insofar as a writer not changing the way they write simply to make a book more saleable in one country or another. I have to admit, that is something I never thought about when I began writing and to a point, I never really concentrated on a particular set of people apart from women over 18 so it makes me quite happy to know that men read my books too, both here and overseas. I just wanted to tell the story. On a personal preference though, I prefer to read a book that, if it's set in the US, then it has US spellings and dialogue in it regardless of where the writer comes from. In all honesty, of all the books I've read, I couldn't tell you the nationality of even 1% of the authors. Where I live, the English language has almost been replaced by a language local to the area, consider the following sentence: "This geet walla queue's got wor lass propa radgie like. I'm gan yem." Which actually means: "This really big queue is really annoying my wife. I'm going home." I can't imagine an American character in the middle of Tiffany's piping up "this geet walla queue's got wor lass propa radgie like, I'm gan yem!"
I didn't say they indulge their personal tastes. I said: "I would much rather read a submission by an American about an Englishman who used America English than to read the same story butchered by the author trying to speak a language they were not conversant in." Editors don't want to wade through butchered language to find the story. They want to read the story and determine if it's a viable choice for publication.
You also said: "Agents and publishers have to want to read it before it gets near any customers." That's what I replied to, and that's what you got wrong. Agents and publishes must no more want to read a MS than a clothing store buyer must want to wear the styles she buys. Both are hired to understand and respond to markets, not to indulge their "wants" as to what they read. When you aim to make a point, pause and choose your words more carefully. I don't want to read anymore of your evasions, and post what you may, I won't read them.
If an agent/publisher doesn't want to read an ms, it's for professional reasons, not personal. You think they read through entire manuscripts that suck? No. They don't want to read manuscripts that suck and they don't have to and they dump them after the first few pages. And that happens long before any marketing considerations come into play. Geez... And if you don't want to read any more of my comments, great. Then I won't have to keep trying to explain things to you.
