Sunday, October 5, 2008
Editor and presence of mind
Being an editor, I am fond of using the phrase, 'clarity of thinking'. I strongly believe that one should always have clarity regarding what one is thinking and doing. The person with confused mind can never make an impression. You can observe it in great leaders--they seem to be lot confident about themselves and know what they are doing at that particular moment. I call it the 'presence of mind'--being aware of every moment of their lives.
The writings that are written without any clear purpose or clarity regarding intended message are very difficult to edit. Quite often I come across such writings in my profession. What can hapless editor do when he comes across such writing where the author himself is not sure of what he really wants to convey to his readers.
In these circumstances, I generally refer back to the author stating the nature of ambiguity in the text. The problems would generally be sorted out if writer clarifies his stance and justifies it. But on the contrary, if he commands to retain the original passage without providing any justification, the editor is doomed. His credentials as a quality editor gets affected by such actions and no editor likes this to happen to him. Some writers look at editors with suspicion and never feel right to provide justifications to what they write forgetting that editor is trying to enhance quality of their own work. Editors on their part have to be sensitive to the egos of writers. They should not hurt them by directly stating the errors. Who likes to be pointed at? Instead of pointing the mistakes/errors, editors should politely recommend necessary changes to be incorporated explaining them the reason for it. Editors should also keep in mind that they are not experts in concerned domain writer is dealing with and should respect his/her opinion. If the correction to be incorporated falls in their domain, i.e. language, structure, flow of thought or punctuation, they have every right to take a call on the issues.
Could any one suggest any other ways we could deal with the problems I referred above.
I welcome suggestions from the fellow editors on improving our professional standards.
Read this blog to know some common writing errors.
The writings that are written without any clear purpose or clarity regarding intended message are very difficult to edit. Quite often I come across such writings in my profession. What can hapless editor do when he comes across such writing where the author himself is not sure of what he really wants to convey to his readers.
In these circumstances, I generally refer back to the author stating the nature of ambiguity in the text. The problems would generally be sorted out if writer clarifies his stance and justifies it. But on the contrary, if he commands to retain the original passage without providing any justification, the editor is doomed. His credentials as a quality editor gets affected by such actions and no editor likes this to happen to him. Some writers look at editors with suspicion and never feel right to provide justifications to what they write forgetting that editor is trying to enhance quality of their own work. Editors on their part have to be sensitive to the egos of writers. They should not hurt them by directly stating the errors. Who likes to be pointed at? Instead of pointing the mistakes/errors, editors should politely recommend necessary changes to be incorporated explaining them the reason for it. Editors should also keep in mind that they are not experts in concerned domain writer is dealing with and should respect his/her opinion. If the correction to be incorporated falls in their domain, i.e. language, structure, flow of thought or punctuation, they have every right to take a call on the issues.
Could any one suggest any other ways we could deal with the problems I referred above.
I welcome suggestions from the fellow editors on improving our professional standards.
Read this blog to know some common writing errors.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
