RE: Editing issues

**m*@tagoresmith.com**

I've been wanting to get into this discussion, but have been too busy
editing to take the time to do it.

I am both an editor and a writer, so this discussion fascinates me. At
present, I edit more than I write. However, I do put out a book every
few years. I've had a long interval between books recently--from 2000 to
2004--but generally take only two years or so between books. 

At any rate, I have few observations from each side of this
relationship.

Editors have taught me a great deal. Yes, I've suffered from a few
howlers, but on balance, I appreciate what they do. I am still learning
from them, too. 

I came to writing with a strong sense of cadence as well as excellent
grammar. However, I was frequently long-winded and indirect. I'm sure I
had a million other glaring habitual flaws, too, but have forgotten what
they were. My education came from comparing an edited version with my
original. If I didn't understand a change, I asked about it. And lucky
for me, I had great editors who were patient, kind, and instructive. 

I recall getting testy with only one editor; during the worst of the
"dumbing down" period, her publishing house was attempting to limit the
number of "three syllable words." They were also trying to find "reader
friendly" synonyms for terms such as vascular bundles. The term "reader
friendly" made me feel like throwing up and because my primary motive in
writing about horticulture was to instill appreciation for the workings
of the natural world, the idea of limiting what the reader could learn
also made me ill. It still does. And I'll still fight for the correct
technical term. I like glossaries and detailed indexes, too.  

As an editor, I try to do as much for the authors with whom I work as my
editors have done for me. 

As often as not, non-fiction authors are selected because of their
subject expertise, not because of their ability to write. I'm presently
struggling through a couple of books that fall into that category. It's
difficult for everyone; I have to make changes that the author does not
understand. If I have a lot of time, I explain the changes in a note.
But if I'm rushed, I don't. I will explain and discuss them if asked,
however.

But because it's a book, not an article, the author gets to see it at
two stages: after I've gone over it in manuscript form and again when
it's in pages. If the author is writing captions, he or she may see it a
third time as well.

When a book is in manuscript, I edit for structure, continuity,
accuracy, grammar, and style. And yes, I sometimes slash and burn.
Ideally, an editor retains the author's voice. But there are times when
you can't. If prose is so purple that meaning gets buried under
adjectives and adverbs, you have to rewrite. --You are unhappy, the
publisher for whom you are working is unhappy, and the author is
miserable. But it's gotta be done.

Similarly, if a manuscript has more than a couple of sentence fragments,
if nouns and verbs don't agree, and so on and so forth, you have to
rewrite. 

You also have to query. There are times when the writing makes the
meaning ambiguous. You have to query to clarify. There are times when
you disagree about a factual matter, too. Out of deference to the
author, who very well may know more about the subject than you do, you
need to query rather than simply change the text. 

These are the reasons that the author gets to see the edited version
before it goes into pages. You incorporate his or her changes before
sending the book to the designer. 

Once you are in pages, you have to edit to fit. The design may demand a
large photo on a spread for which the text is also extensive. You have
to make a call on how much of what to eliminate. If you are working
directly with the designer (ah, lucky you!), you can often reach a
compromise. But that's not always possible, so you sometimes have to
tighten text more than you want to. If you are eliminating information,
you work like crazy to figure out how to get that information into a
caption on the page, a side-by-side illustration series, or another
section of the book. With enough thought, you can generally do that. If
you can't, you have to cut something else on the page and, dollars to
donuts, you'll choose the author's favorite sentence.

As a general observation, I have to say that writing is changing. The
curmudgeon in me says that no one knows how to write anymore. (Are you
out there, Peter? I know you have a similar gripe.) But the realist in
me says that the language is changing and that writing is reflecting
that change. I am paying attention to this. I make it a point to read
young writers--fiction as well as non-fiction--to attune my ear. 

I would be wringing my hands and wailing if they all wrote badly. But
they don't. Cadence, flow, and such subtleties as careful placement of
masculine and feminine endings still mark the writing of the best of
them. So the language is changing, but the important parts are still
there. 

However, it isn't canonized yet. So my job as an editor is to make
fragments into complete sentences and clean up the sloppiness that seems
so prevalent among the worst of them.

--Whew!

I have lots more to say on this topic, but I notice that it's time to
get back to the book at hand.

Miranda Smith 

_______________________________________________
gardenwriters mailing list
gardenwriters@lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/gardenwriters

GWL has searchable archives at:
http://www.hort.net/lists/gardenwriters

Send photos for GWL to gwlphotos@hort.net to be posted
at: http://www.hort.net/lists/gwlphotos

Post gardening questions/threads to
"Organic-Gardening" <organic-gardening@lists.ibiblio.org>

For GWL website and Wiki, go to
http://www.ibiblio.org/gardenwriters