Letters to the Editor
-
So true
Funnily enough, I was just in the middle of reading this piece, sitting at my desk in the newsroom while I wait for my noon phone interview to call, and my editor came up to my desk.
She wanted to know if the cover story I had turned in yesterday was supposed to be in the present or past tense. A fevered re-write just before deadline to make the story more "feature-y" had left it with a mish-mash of tense, something I had not noticed before I dropped it onto the server with 30 seconds to spare.
Thank god for good editors. They save writers from looking like illiterate jackasses a hundred times a day, me included!
Thanks for the lovely ode, it was a pleasure to read.
-
I'm a little disappointed
It wasn't all Israel's fault this time?
-
Author shows need for quality editing of his piece
It is clear that the author, Kamiya, proved the need for quality editing of inter-net as well as standard press articles. He could have cut the first four or five paragraphs down to about three strong sentences. Maybe he is getting paid by the word. Be that as it may, he did have some good points. Many of his points are really "on the mark" or "on the money."
Too much, in any mode of communication, gets by without the touch of the quality editor. Like this letter, as an example.
I suggest that everyone go back to the article, -7-24-2007 and review it in detail before writing. Good luck and be sure to follow the advice given.
-
Merci, Gary.
I am the senior editor slash proofreader slash merde slinger ("Where's that document? Isn't she done with it yet? Wasn't he done with it this morning? Aren't you done with it? I have to get it to the printers in 10 minutes!") of a French publishing house in Montréal, Quebec, and I enjoy reading about my trade so much, because writings about editing happen so rarely. Plus, your article is perfect. My team--those poor three other ghosts lurking in the shadow of recognition--and myself thank you.
-
Note in basket left by writer: "Please, Mr. Editor, I ain't growed up enough to raise no baby. Please take him and show him right."
Writers are constantly being asked or made to alter their work like no other artists of which I’m aware. (Of course, I’m speaking here of writers who are artists, which doesn’t seem to have entered much into Gary Kamiya’s thinking, citing, as he does, bloggers and reporters and “culture writers" -- and that would appear to be a kind of blogger-reporter, or an antiquated version thereof.)
I can tell you this from firsthand experience:
No play is complete till actors, dramaturges, directors and artistic directors have all had a say. (Not even Shakespeare is spared. His "extraneous" bits are forever being amputated according to the whims of the theater producing him.)
No screenplay is complete till stars, producers, directors, development execs and sometimes even their secretaries and temp staffs (“I would never go out with a guy like that!”) have all had a say.
No novel is complete till publishers, agents, lit profs, editors and their various consultants, including husbands/wives/lovers (“Terry agrees with me it’s too long”) have had all a say.
Sure, most, and perhaps all, writing can be improved. But I’m terrified to think what might have become of some of the world’s most treasured works of literature in the hands of those seeking to “sharpen" them. “Hamlet,” “Moby Dick,” “Ulysses,” “The Sound and the Fury,” “Don Quixote” – none are “clean” in the way that contemporary, unreflective audiences are prone to demand. But sometimes it's the very imperfection of writing, its shagginess and groping for mysteries it can't fully grasp, that reflects back our alleged (and increasingly absent) humanity.
Oh, and Gary? Editors aren’t violin makers. When you say that kind of thing, you remind me of film editors who somehow have the idea they directed a movie when all they did was fit it together. And, even then, the true director was always beside them in the cutting room, not to mention a full committee, sans writer. No, I can promise you the writer never had a say.
Apologies to would-be editors for any grammatical, punctuation or content errors.
-
Overlooked editor's quote
Kamiya is obviously a talented writer and likely a solid editor... it is a mystery however that such a fine craftsman and storyteller in the western tradition failed to offer up the most salient quote on editing from none other than Mark Twain himself when he said (and I paraphrase): "I would have written less if I had had more time." Selah
-
Halleluja
You, sir, have bared my soul and restored my belief in sanity.
As a once-managing editor and now editor-in-chief for a print magazine (circ ~ 100k), I know from experience the truth of your words.
Much thanks from a beleaguered, mostly unappreciated, and definitely underpaid editor.
-
Writer-Editor joke
A writer and editor are lost in the desert. After many hours of walking, finally they stumble upon an oasis.
"At last, we're saved! We're saved!" says the writer, who begins drinking the water.
The editor wades out into the oasis, unzips his fly and begins urinating into the water.
The writer, incredulous, asks: "What are you doing?"
The editor says: "I'm making it better."
-
What's patently obvious...
Is that most people have no idea what (good) editors actually do. And yes, there are good and bad editors—it's like any other profession.
Some random and rambling thoughts:
I'm managing editor of a global business trade magazine. I'm responsible for basically everything that gets printed. I fix terrible writing (by knowledgeable and wonderful writers who are dear friends) to serve readers and make the writers look better than they otherwise would. I select photos, lay out articles, and pay attention to every detail from the cover lines to the ad index. If it came off the press, I approved it. And I'm ultimately responsible if anything isn't right. I traffic all the articles, select photos, direct re-designs, argue with the bean counters over book size and ad-edit ratios, and scheme constantly to create a better product in every dimension. I try to encourage and nurture the best from our graphic designer, and yes, the writers. I placate advertisers and our sales staff. I go to dinner, I glad-hand. It's a lot of fun, and a lot of work. A publication's success or failure rests squarely on the shoulders of its editors.
The idea that editors are out there to keep someone from finding an audience is silly. So, too, by and large, is the idea that editors are frustrated writers. I was a writer who would much rather be an editor. It's a much bigger challenge and responsibility, and therefore, to me, a more rewarding role. Many is the time I've longed momentarily to return to the simple, single focus of writing. Until I remember all the things about magazine and newspaper writing that I don't like.
Magazine/newspaper editors exist because someone has to take all the disparate elements and assemble a cohesive whole.
A single blog is not part of a greater whole. The sad truth is that just because one can publish doesn't mean one should—practically speaking. A blog is akin to a column. Which, if you look at a newspaper or magazine, is just one tiny bit of a much larger publication.
The appeal of blogging is that anyone can just start in. Sure, that's democratic, and I've no problem with it. But I find more value in picking up publications that contain a rich mix of content than in trying to assemble all that content myself, piecemeal.
If you set up a browser page to bring you various content feeds, play with the layout to suit your tastes and priorities, change the colors and whatnot, you're doing some of what an editor does. Now, pretend that it's a business, and that not just your tastes prevail. You have to appeal to enough readers to attract advertisers and bring in the money to pay everyone necessary to create all that content. And you have to manage the creation and presentation of all that content.
Kamiya's point about editors online is that as content volume increases, the need to aggregate increases. Salon is an example of such an aggregation, just like any print publication. Aggregation is supposed to add value. When it doesn't, the publication (digital or print) dies.
I've worked as both a reporter and an editor. And here's a basic fact all good writers accept: Everyone needs an editor. There are some gray areas involving columns, and obviously, some writers are very, very good, making most editing superfluous. But most writers are not very, very good.
If you've ever seen Ezra Pound's editing of an early draft of T.S. Eliot's The Wasteland you'll know that even towering geniuses (if they're not egomaniacs) solicit and welcome input from those they respect.
The trick to being a good editor is having applied oneself to learning all the bits and pieces necessary to command a good writer's respect. Someone likened it to being a DJ. That's apt, as is also comparing a good editor to a good music or film producer.
Anyway, blah, blah, blah. And thanks, Gary.