|
|
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 5,279
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 5,279 |
...and the main point is always self-editing and rewriting. Ain't none of us good enough to write perfect copy on the first draft. But we can try! I've always said that good writing is 80% re-writing, and that's what I have said in the writing classes I've taught. Few have the stomach for that much re-writing. Then, there's the issue of knowing when to stop re-writing. Steve.
"I was a deerhunter long before I was a man." ~Gene Wensel's Come November (2000)
"A vote is like a rifle; its usefulness depends upon the character of the user." ~Theodore Roosevelt
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,213 Likes: 26
Campfire Kahuna
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,213 Likes: 26 |
Yep!
Eileen got her MFA in creative writing from the University of Montana in the early 1980's. One of the guys who'd gotten his MFA a few years before was still working on the SAME SHORT STORY, and reading it at gatherings in Missoula when we moved away in 1986. The story definitely hadn't been improved with all that rewriting....
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.”
John Steinbeck
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 38,934 Likes: 11
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 38,934 Likes: 11 |
The absolutely worst thing that any writer (or editor) can have happen is the acquisition of a thesaurus.
Not a real member - just an ordinary guy who appreciates being able to hang around and say something once in awhile.
Happily Trapped In the Past (Thanks, Joe)
Not only a less than minimally educated person, but stupid and out of touch as well.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 13,000
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 13,000 |
The absolutely worst thing that any writer (or editor) can have happen is the acquisition of a thesaurus. +1. There is something to be said for elegant variation, but excessive use of synonyms where the writer is expressing the same point multiple times tends to obscure the point rather than emphasize it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 241
Campfire Member
|
|
Campfire Member
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 241 |
I disagree with the thesaurus statement.
I did a good deal of writing for a local daily in the early 80's. I used the thesaurus key a good bit. I often couldn't find just the word that seemed appropriate. The thesaurus often didn't give me what I wanted - but it made me think of something I did want that worked better: maybe with a bit of rewriting.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 20,944 Likes: 3
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 20,944 Likes: 3 |
Proofreading's overrated... ![[Linked Image]](http://l1.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/aIdZwd1o8YaMz_1PI.zoww--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7cT04NTt3PTMxMA--/http://media.zenfs.com/en/blogs/thesideshow/LBJ.jpg) Don't want anything to do with any pubic affairs in public.
By the way, in case you missed it, Jeremiah was a bullfrog.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 20,944 Likes: 3
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 20,944 Likes: 3 |
Reliance on computer programs and calculators has also contributed to an inability of many people to do simple math. My kids were taught math estimation. When I confronted the teacher concerning this concept, she explained that it is hard for kids to gain the rudimentary skills of actual mathematics. As long as the students gain the "general concept" of math they will do fine. These kids today can't even give me change for a dollar without a register or calculator.
By the way, in case you missed it, Jeremiah was a bullfrog.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 29,348
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 29,348 |
The absolutely worst thing that any writer (or editor) can have happen is the acquisition of a thesaurus. Such inanity! The acquisition of a thesaurus is no worse than the acquisition of a gun, for the same reasons. Foolish, careless, improper use is the culprit that a good writer avoids very carefully. I have several, and have had at least one handy since 1953. They're dang useful when the only word that I can think-of right then is too top-heavy for what I want to say, and at the moment I can't think-of the simpler word that I'm thumping my forehead for. And the older I get, with the tread wear that comes with the years, I find 'em more and more useful to remind me of the simpler words. Hardly a post here gets on-line without the help of a thesaurus � but never to find a fancy word to replace a country-boy word that does what I want it to do.Synonyms are not all precisely equivalent. Very often, I can think-of the almost right word but need a thesaurus to remind me of the right word. Mark Twain said it best � "The difference between the almost right word and the right word is a large matter � 'tis the difference between the lightning-bug and the lightning."
"Good enough" isn't.
Always take your responsibilities seriously but never yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 13,123 Likes: 2
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 13,123 Likes: 2 |
I can't disagree with anything that has been said here. The blame is primarily a dependence on computer spell-check programs and cost-cutting on smaller publications. As Mule Deer said, the big magazines are very thorough. My articles in the New York Times Magazine and Reader's Digest put me and my subjects through the ringer. But, my little local newspaper -- where my career began -- is atrocious. Every issue has a list of corrections from the previous issue. For them I will add one more category of blame: LAZINESS. Just flat lazy. I don't think we can blame it completely on computers. A couple of the textbooks that I am using right now are in 5th or 6th editions. I find wrong or misspelled words on every other page; many of the words are not even words! Pathetic!
NRA Benefactor Member
Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 615
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 615 |
As has been stated, computers are just a tool. Even when they mess up it is the writer's responsibility to get things right.
The really good editors, in my opinion, are really left-brained technical people. I am severely right-brained. Almost dysfunctionally so. There is nothing I value more than a good editor. I got a great one at 17 when I went to work for a man who had been managing editor of the Denver Post and went from private to captain on a battlefield commission and promotion in Europe during WWII. He would not tolerate mistakes, sloppiness, or a lack of attention to detail. My most successful article was made so by the editors. I owe them for the fact that it went world-wide and appeared in two editions of a collegiate textbook. My best novel was largely the result of the editor. She was terrific and I've yet to find another like her. But many writers don't want an editor. They think everything they write is divinely inspired and shouldn't be touched. This is especially true in Christian publishing where I have done about half my work.
But, I still say that at the core, technology is most to blame. People are impatient. Some schools are no longer even teaching cursive because they say there is no need for it. We're sacrificing beauty and discipline for the instantaneous.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,120
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,120 |
My first novel, "Sniper's Eyes" was a mess until Mule Deer made magic and edited it. As good a writer as he is his editorial skills shine. I can never repay him for his kindnss as well as his inspired expertise.
Terry
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 748
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 748 |
Im a time served printer having completed a 4 year apprenticeship (20 years ago).
Things have come along a bit from the old days of "comps" putting together every sentence, one letter at a time, now anybody can string a few words together put it through spell checker and call them selves what ever title they wish. I remember when I first started, the comps and proofreaders were very much revered (and also very highly paid) and things like grammar? were of the utmost importance. I think its just one of the many signs of the time and the importance has been lost to "productivity" and has also been pointed out the educational system has alot to answer for
Canada by choice, British by Blood
People think there's a rigid class system here, but dukes have been known to marry chorus girls. Some have even married Americans.
HRH Prince Phillip
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 11,523 Likes: 3
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 11,523 Likes: 3 |
Some grammar rules make no sense to me. Two examples come to mind.
If I type, "...the cartridge which I selected...," the Microsoft Word grammar check wants me to change it to "...the cartridge that I selected..."
Second, why do we have the rule about not ending a sentence with a proposition?
"Never end a sentence with a preposition unless you have to!"
Don't blame me. I voted for Trump.
Democrats would burn this country to the ground, if they could rule over the ashes.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 615
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 615 |
We can't change anything but we can list our pet peeves in the changing of the language. Mine are simple and commonly seen or heard:
1 - "your" when it should be "you're"
2 - "I seen" rather than "I saw"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 29,348
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 29,348 |
� why do we have the rule about not ending a sentence with a preposition? � That's not a grammar rule and never was. It comes from the old-time rhetoricians' advice against "wasting" the last word's strong position on a weak word. Ending a sentence with a preposition has always been a legitimate practice in English. I like to quote what is probably the record � a tad's sentence that ends with no less than five prepositions with completely correct grammar. The boy's father had brought the wrong book upstairs to the boy's bed room, and the boy asked � "What did you bring the book that I don't want to be read-to out of up for?" Could've been said somewhat more elegantly, perhaps, but perfectly legitimate grammatical construction. Which and that have to do with meaning and punctuation. "The cartridge that I selected" refers to the cartridge in a significantly different sense from "the cartridge, which I selected" (notice the comma). The technical terms are "restrictive clause" for that and "nonrestrictive clause" for which. I'm too tired tonight to explain fully, and I doubt that many here would care to hear the full explanation. But there's the crux of the matter � distinguishing between two different meanings.
"Good enough" isn't.
Always take your responsibilities seriously but never yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 615
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 615 |
I'm not sure that fulltime proofreaders even exist today. They certainly don't at smaller publications. Years ago a proofreader was a proofreader and nothing more. They didn't edit and they certainly didn't write.
The proofreader was eventually replaced by technology and editors.
But, in book publication, the editor position is now replaced by the writer's agent. This isn't true yet with all publishers, but basically speaking publishers now want the writer's agent to do the proofreading and editing. The in-house editors are now called "packagers."
(There is a dilemma here, of course, because you can hardly get an agent unless you've been published and you can hardly publish unless you have an agent.)
Electronic publishing changes everything again as "packaging" is not as difficult.
The blurring of roles hasn't helped writing standards in my opinion. True editors love to edit. They don't want to be packagers and the best ones don't want to be writers. Many young college English grads seek editing positions dreaming of working with good writers only to find themselves the slaves of packaging schedules.
True writers want to write. They can edit to some degree, but basically they want to write, they want to create.
In my experience in the book world, editors who want to be writers usually make for poor editors.
In the magazine world, where articles may run from only 500 to 3000 words, it is easier for a writer to be an editor or for an editor to also write.
Years ago the fulltime proofreader carried a lot of weight. He or she was a staunch perfectionist and writers and editors quaked when the proofreader left the back shop and entered the newsroom.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 29,348
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 29,348 |
During my stint at Wolfe Publishing, the "proof-readers" (all women) were the secretaries, book-keeper, type-setter, and make-up assistants whose secondary job was "proofing" galleys while they watched their soap operas on the TV that the boss had provided in the common room for them.
So at night, I spent several hours reproofing the "finished, camera-ready" boards. The next morning, the gals'd have to redo every "camera-ready" board to eliminate the dozens of typos that I'd found. One result was that I was decidedly unpopular among those gals � all of whom were divorc�es with an indelible dislike for men, anyway.
"Good enough" isn't.
Always take your responsibilities seriously but never yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 28,605
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 28,605 |
I'm not sure that fulltime proofreaders even exist today. They certainly don't at smaller publications. Years ago a proofreader was a proofreader and nothing more. They didn't edit and they certainly didn't write.
The proofreader was eventually replaced by technology and editors.
But, in book publication, the editor position is now replaced by the writer's agent. This isn't true yet with all publishers, but basically speaking publishers now want the writer's agent to do the proofreading and editing. The in-house editors are now called "packagers."
(There is a dilemma here, of course, because you can hardly get an agent unless you've been published and you can hardly publish unless you have an agent.)
Electronic publishing changes everything again as "packaging" is not as difficult.
The blurring of roles hasn't helped writing standards in my opinion. True editors love to edit. They don't want to be packagers and the best ones don't want to be writers. Many young college English grads seek editing positions dreaming of working with good writers only to find themselves the slaves of packaging schedules.
True writers want to write. They can edit to some degree, but basically they want to write, they want to create.
In my experience in the book world, editors who want to be writers usually make for poor editors.
In the magazine world, where articles may run from only 500 to 3000 words, it is easier for a writer to be an editor or for an editor to also write.
Years ago the fulltime proofreader carried a lot of weight. He or she was a staunch perfectionist and writers and editors quaked when the proofreader left the back shop and entered the newsroom. that is pretty well what i have seen in the newspaper world......you have editors, writers and proofreaders and being good at one doesnt make you good at another......we have tried to hire a dedicated proofreader that would do nothing else we even found one semi-locally that was computer literate enough we could have made it work with the internet.....however she wanted more money than i think even the Gazette could have paid.....she prolly would have been worth every penny but we couldnt have afforded it..... my wife is a good enough editor that she picked up some attention from one of the big national dailies but we had zero interest in moving to the east coast.....while she is a real good editor she is only a decent writer and while better than most these days at proofreading she does not consider herself a proofreader cause she has seen real good proofreaders and she knows she doesnt come close to ranking in their group.....
A serious student of the "Armchair Safari" always looking for Africa/Asia hunting books
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 56,220 Likes: 25
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 56,220 Likes: 25 |
Think I got if figured out now. "Proof Reading" isn't the same as Poop Reading is it? Or Poof Reading, depending on diet.
This is a thundering epiphany!
I am..........disturbed.
Concerning the difference between man and the jackass: some observers hold that there isn't any. But this wrongs the jackass. -Twain
|
|
|
|
|
588 members (1minute, 1234, 117LBS, 06hunter59, 10gaugemag, 1badf350, 54 invisible),
2,477
guests, and
1,265
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,193,875
Posts18,518,107
Members74,020
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
