Log in

No account? Create an account

Earlier | Later

endangered editors

Back over a year ago - wow, I didn't realize it had been that long - I wrote about my job history and my desire to work as an editor. The post was spurred by an article from USA Today, which Alkelda had sent me, that declared, "blue-pencil editing is becoming a lost art."

Earlier this week, I found a link on The Morning News to an article in UK paper The Guardian that also declares, "editors are now an endangered species."

Unfortunately, I don't really have time right now to write out some thoughts about this article and what it's saying, but it's worth a read. And I need to post now because I won't have another chance to get my post for the week done - my younger sister and her girlfriend are here for a visit, and tomorrow we're celebrating my sister's birthday.



( 6 have written — Write )
Aug. 20th, 2005 01:14 pm (UTC)
yeah and tell her happy birthday from me since she isn't home
Aug. 21st, 2005 02:50 pm (UTC)
no kidding
Yes, editors are becoming an endangered species, especially since the big publishing houses are "letting go" some of the superb ones and replacing them with SpellCheck. Aren't they?--Alkelda
Aug. 22nd, 2005 08:22 pm (UTC)
when everything is about deadlines and turn around time...
how can you argue with spellcheck, really? my editor, when I was publishing more regularly, never worked to my desired time schedule. *giggle* his schedule was lets just say best described as last minute. I always felt the long portion of the project should the writing, or the creative part of the process. making it readable should've taken no where near as much time. but maybe I am just that bad a writer. : )
Aug. 25th, 2005 07:52 am (UTC)
Re: when everything is about deadlines and turn around time...
I don't recall you often setting a specific time schedule, and when you did it was very clear - we picked a weekend and did the bulk of the work. As for the long/creative part of the process, because your writing was often "creative," the editing necessarily took long.
Aug. 23rd, 2005 12:25 pm (UTC)
Can you argue with SpellCheck?
Dear Coleridge,
Here are your revisions.
Love, SpellCheck

In Canada did Keble Khan
a stately pleasure-dome decree:
Where Ralph, the sacred river, ran
through caverns measureless to man
Down to a sunless sea.


SpellCheck mucked up a paper of mine in college (early days of MS Word). I was writing a paper on Moll Flanders. SpellCheck asked, "Do you want to change DeFoe to Defog?"

I replied, "No, because the author's last name actually is DeFoe."

SpellCheck countered with, "No no no! Let me change it for you ANYWAY. You've only got a half hour left before the paper is due, and you don't have time for a real editor."


Aug. 25th, 2005 07:56 am (UTC)
Re: Can you argue with SpellCheck?
Don't even get me started about Word's spelling and grammar checkers. A grammar checker that has, on multiple occasions, insisted that I should use a plural verb for a clearly singular subject is not one that I would call robust, to say the least.
( 6 have written — Write )

Latest Month

July 2018

The List: June 2011

List of tasks or activities I need or want to do this month.


Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Lilia Ahner