Editing and proofreading

[Ken Dryden]

I reviewed an Orrin Keepnews book back when I first started writing for the newspaper here and careless editing by the book editor left a review that made no sense.

Other howlers: the misidentification of Denny Zeitlin as Lew Tabackin, plus Jaco Pastorius and Tabackin being listed as unknown in the photo published in the Wayne Shorter bio a few years ago. If the author had bothered to check with real jazz journalists, they would have had no problem identifying them, as many of them likely owned a copy of the 2 LP set Jazz at the Opera House, which featured the very same backstage photo she used.

The bio of Grant Green that appeared around 2000 was dreadful: full of mistakes, incorrect dates, with an obvious lack of jazz knowledge on the part of the author and an amateurish, fawning discography/critique by a young fan.

[Ken Dryden]

The hardback edition of Ben Sidran's Talking Jazz consistently refers to pianist "Denny Zeitland" thoughout his feature. I presume someone else transcribed this interview and Sidran never reviewed it, or else some bozo changed it after he had.

Note: This error was fixed for the paperback edition.

I reviewed that book for The Saturday Review — it was riddled with inexcusable factual mistakes, spelling mistakes, etc.

'Talking Jazz' and 'Black Talk' are two different books. Your review was of his thesis based piece - a very tuff read. The book 'TJ' was a compilation of interviews that have since appeared in full on NPR etc.

errors about errors about error seems redundant. Ben has taught me lots as have you, tho.

Actually, Talking Jazz was first an NPR radio series first, I think it was called Sidran on Record, though I believe the reviews were edited somewhat to allow for music excerpts and to fit the 59 minute time frame. Since the book has been issued, I believe there is a CD boxed set of the unedited interviews for sale at a hefty price.

[umum_cypher]

All the editors I've ever had have been wonderful individuals.

Edited October 26, 2009 by umum_cypher

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

The bio of Grant Green that appeared around 2000 was dreadful: full of mistakes, incorrect dates, with an obvious lack of jazz knowledge on the part of the author and an amateurish, fawning discography/critique by a young fan.

I tried to put Sharony right on the discography before it was published, but she simply couldn't understand me.

MG

[doneth]

Had a weird situation with the Ornette Coleman book. The American and British publishers published it simultaneously but used different copy editors, Ben Ratliff in the US and the late Chris Parker in the UK. Naturally, I thanked both editors in the book introduction. But the British edition deleted my thank you (the American edition kept the thanks). Chris wrote to me about how cruelly I had hurt his feelings by not crediting him -- like me, he gigged as a free-lance copy editor, a highly insecure occupation, so those thanks would have gone on his resume -- and since I lost his address, I never get to explain that it was his London employer who had fouled up.

Chris is a pal of mine, and I hope to heaven he is not 'late'!

He edited some novels by Jeffery Archer, who makes a lot of money spinning stories but is a terrible writer, and will not allow anything to be changed, including nonsensical errors of chronology, like having a character 28 years old and 34 two pages later.

[Larry Kart]

Had a weird situation with the Ornette Coleman book. The American and British publishers published it simultaneously but used different copy editors, Ben Ratliff in the US and the late Chris Parker in the UK. Naturally, I thanked both editors in the book introduction. But the British edition deleted my thank you (the American edition kept the thanks). Chris wrote to me about how cruelly I had hurt his feelings by not crediting him -- like me, he gigged as a free-lance copy editor, a highly insecure occupation, so those thanks would have gone on his resume -- and since I lost his address, I never get to explain that it was his London employer who had fouled up.

Chris is a pal of mine, and I hope to heaven he is not 'late'!

He edited some novels by Jeffery Archer, who makes a lot of money spinning stories but is a terrible writer, and will not allow anything to be changed, including nonsensical errors of chronology, like having a character 28 years old and 34 two pages later.

Hey -- a lot can happen in two pages.

[Chuck Nessa]

Or with two pages. Just ask some congressmen.

[papsrus]

My rule of thumb is to go over changes with the writer. Simple. They appreciate it and everyone gets the desired result. There may be a very good reason for a writer to have written something that seems to me to be incorrect.

[Big Beat Steve]

There may be a very good reason for a writer to have written something that seems to me to be incorrect.

If it is fiction - yes. Otherwise - no (virtually every time anyway).

[papsrus]

There may be a very good reason for a writer to have written something that seems to me to be incorrect.

If it is fiction - yes. Otherwise - no (virtually every time anyway).

Editing fiction would be a challenge, I would think. But given that I'm certain I don't know all things, I stand by my assertion.

In any case, if there's any doubt, discussing a questionable passage with the writer is always safest, in my view. It is the writer's name, not mine, on the article, after all.

Now, there are writers who overwrite terribly, basically dressing up flimsy reporting. I make no apologies for slashing and burning at will in these cases. But the red flags are usually so well-worn and obvious, you could do it in your sleep.

[Brad]

I'm also a reader not a writer but I am an attorney and with proper proofing and spellcheck typos shouldn't happen although they do. If I happen to review a contract that I wrote months or years after it was signed and notice a typo, I find that pretty annoying. You don't want to be in the same room with me when that happens

It's all about pride in your craft and the quality of your work.

[Tom Storer]

with proper proofing and spellcheck typos shouldn't happen although they do.

Typos are the least of it.

Here's a good one: I once talked to someone at a French subsidiary of an American company. They produced their own documentation, written in English by native English-speakers, but were required to have it all looked over by editors in the States, who were anxious to prove their worth by finding as many problems as possible, even imaginary ones. The person showed me an example: the US editor had circled "45°" and queried in angry red pen in the margin: "Fahrenheit or Centigrade??"

It was an angle.

[johnlitweiler]

editors in the States, who were anxious to prove their worth by finding as many problems as possible, even imaginary ones.

Tom, this may explain the Chicago Reader editors who, over 20-odd years, inevitably managed to mangle and insert complete falsehoods into my articles and Critics Choice paragraphs (which of course were always clean copy).

[JSngry]

I once talked to someone at a French subsidiary of an American company. They produced their own documentation, written in English by native English-speakers, but were required to have it all looked over by editors in the States, who were anxious to prove their worth by finding as many problems as possible, even imaginary ones. The person showed me an example: the US editor had circled "45°" and queried in angry red pen in the margin: "Fahrenheit or Centigrade??"

It was an angle.

Indeed it was. And everybody's got one...

[Nate Dorward]

Speaking as someone who's done a fair bit of writing & also editing, thus seeing both ends of this particular dialectic or rivalry, I'd say that the main thing that's important is communication. It's very frustrating for an author to see major changes made without being given any chance to correct or stet them; & it's very frustrating as an editor to feel that you can't check with the author about anything or that the least change will piss them off. The whole process, in other words, requires an intelligent intermediary--i.e. the editor of the press or magazine in question who will relay questions, cast an extra eye over the original text & over the edited text & list of queries, & provide the copyeditor with clear directions about house style & any other imperatives. A budget for fact-checking is nice, too, if it's that kind of text.

But as I'm sure most people here can affirm, these things are often rarities given budgets, production schedules & the general belief that proper editing is unnecessary if the author is simply asked to check the proofs extra-carefully (with some authors that's true, but with many definitely not). Lately I've noticed that even proofreading by someone other than the author or editor seems to be considered optional--I was surprised e.g. how many typos I was picking up in Lopate's anthology of American film criticism for LOA.

Re: Sidran: Talking Jazz is full of abominably misspelled names, a hazard of transcribed interviews. It's still a great resource.

I do think that unedited books are often an insult to the reader, but agree that there are certainly an alarming number of copyeditors out there prone to nitpicking & making arbitrary off-the-wall changes just for the sake of showing that they're "doing their job". One book I worked on for OUP was supposedly copyedited by someone at Oxford--they did exactly 2 things: (1) switching "that" and "which" about (stupid copyeditor's bugaboo); (2) capitalizing "he" and "him" when they referred to Jesus or God. Even obvious typos were left untouched.

[Hoppy T. Frog]

(2) capitalizing "he" and "him" when they referred to Jesus or God. Even obvious typos were left untouched.

I was told, by a religion teacher no less, that capitalizing "he" or "him" when referring to God was lame.

[Black Pearl]

Believe it or not, the german edition of Ashley Kahn’s book on Impulse turned Tina Brooks (Blue Note) AND Juno Lewis ("Kulu se Mama") into women.

[Christiern]

I remember a time when one had to go to Copenhagen for that.

[gmonahan]

I remember a time when one had to go to Copenhagen for that.

I do a fair amount of academic writing, so I have a lot of respect for editors and have always appreciated their efforts to clean up some of my more embarrassing mistakes. Communication definitely IS the key.

gregmo

[Big Beat Steve]

Believe it or not, the german edition of Ashley Kahn’s book on Impulse turned Tina Brooks (Blue Note) AND Juno Lewis ("Kulu se Mama") into women.

Not that I am really surprised ...

Having had somewhat so-so previous experience (see my comments on the Kenny Clarke bio translation above) I was VERY wary and really would not have wanted to touch that Impulse book at Zweitausendeins with a ten-foot pole - though it sat there for an uncommonly long time and at an attractive price (and probably still does, so it must be hard to shift, maybe because others fear the same annoying translation screwups).

[Guest Bill Barton]

Speaking as someone who's done a fair bit of writing & also editing, thus seeing both ends of this particular dialectic or rivalry, I'd say that the main thing that's important is communication. It's very frustrating for an author to see major changes made without being given any chance to correct or stet them; & it's very frustrating as an editor to feel that you can't check with the author about anything or that the least change will piss them off. The whole process, in other words, requires an intelligent intermediary--i.e. the editor of the press or magazine in question who will relay questions, cast an extra eye over the original text & over the edited text & list of queries, & provide the copyeditor with clear directions about house style & any other imperatives. A budget for fact-checking is nice, too, if it's that kind of text.

You and Pete are doing an excellent job with this at Signal to Noise, Nate. My experience with CODA when both Andy Scott and Daryl Angier were editors was very similar, though not quite as "hands on." It's now been over a year since I've heard a peep out of the CODA office, so it looks like I can forget about ever getting anything published there again. Sigh... It was a good "gig" while it lasted.

But as I'm sure most people here can affirm, these things are often rarities given budgets, production schedules & the general belief that proper editing is unnecessary if the author is simply asked to check the proofs extra-carefully (with some authors that's true, but with many definitely not). Lately I've noticed that even proofreading by someone other than the author or editor seems to be considered optional--I was surprised e.g. how many typos I was picking up in Lopate's anthology of American film criticism for LOA.

Re: Sidran: Talking Jazz is full of abominably misspelled names, a hazard of transcribed interviews. It's still a great resource.

I'd tend to agree that Sidran has produced some valuable resources. His work as a writer and radio host/producer has always struck me as way more interesting than his music, which annoys me nine times out of ten.

I do think that unedited books are often an insult to the reader, but agree that there are certainly an alarming number of copyeditors out there prone to nitpicking & making arbitrary off-the-wall changes just for the sake of showing that they're "doing their job". One book I worked on for OUP was supposedly copyedited by someone at Oxford--they did exactly 2 things: (1) switching "that" and "which" about (stupid copyeditor's bugaboo); (2) capitalizing "he" and "him" when they referred to Jesus or God. Even obvious typos were left untouched.

Years ago I wrote a profile based on an interview with musician James Harvey that was published in Seven Days, the weekly alternative newspaper in Burlington, VT. This was my first - and to date only - experience with having an editor completely rewrite my copy. And I'm not talking about minor changes. She even added cutesy little tidbits in "alternative newspaper-speak" style that I would never have written in a million years. In the final version, she added a line about "Harvey's trademark half-gloves" that was pretty hilarious, taking into consideration the fact that it had been at least three years since James had sported this sartorial "trademark." When I finally saw the thing in print I was floored. Instead of crediting it as written by Bill Barton it should have been bylined "written by Pamela Polston with research by Bill Barton."

[papsrus]

If she was going to completely rewrite your piece, she should have at least had the decency to tell you and offer you the option of having your byline removed.

[paul secor]

a book written about a season with a female high school basketball team from Amherst, Ma. Archie Shepp is mentioned at least a couple of times in the book

Forgive me if I'm missing something obvious here, but - why?

Archie Shepp was mentioned as a part of the milieu of Amherst, Ma. The writer wanted to show that Amherst wasn't a typical American town.

[Guest Bill Barton]

If she was going to completely rewrite your piece, she should have at least had the decency to tell you and offer you the option of having your byline removed.

Oh yeah, oh yeah, no question there!

[Guest Bill Barton]

a book written about a season with a female high school basketball team from Amherst, Ma. Archie Shepp is mentioned at least a couple of times in the book

Forgive me if I'm missing something obvious here, but - why?

Archie Shepp was mentioned as a part of the milieu of Amherst, Ma. The writer wanted to show that Amherst wasn't a typical American town.

"A typical American town." ? ? ? What a ton of balderdash! You've got J.D. Salinger and David Budbill living in "typical American towns" too. Sheeeeeeeeeeesh... These people need to get a grip on reality.