The Mechanic & the Muse

The mechanics of good prose: In praise of copyediting

Serendipity is one of the most enjoyable by-products of reporting,writing and reading and writing.

Over the weekend, I picked up a hardcover version of "Defining the Wind: The Beaufort Scale, and how a Nineteenth-Century Admiral Turned Science into Poetry" by Scott Huler. Lined up on a bargain shelf, it sold for just $5.98.

With Ernesto unable to decide whether it's a tropical storm or a hurricane as it bears down on Florida, my choice might have seemed timely. Actually, my purchase reflected an ongoing interest in the natural world, and its place in good writing. Also, I just like trying to learn about elemental forces that have always fascinated man—specifically the wind and clouds.

It's a fascinating account of his exploration of wind and the British naval officer who created a simple way of observing and measuring its strength--a contribution  that meteorologists rely on to this day. You can also hear about it in this interview on National Public Radio. 

(The impact of wind on a house, according to the Beaufort scale; click image to enlarge.)

But who would have guessed I'd come upon an unexpected writing treasure as I began reading Huler's  book.

A single paragraph on page five, it's Huler's homage to his days as a copy editor. The discovery pleased me for two reasons: over the years, copy editors have saved my butt more times than I'd like to admit, and secondly, as you'll see, it reinforces one of this blog's twin identities.  Huler writes:

"For many years I was a copy editor. That’s good honest work and underappreciated, but above all it’s a great place to learn how writing works. From character—is this the right punctuation mark? is this word spelled correctly?—to clause, from sentence to paragraph, from passage to complete manuscript, a copy editor tinkers with prose like a jeweler with a watch. It’s great experience, and great training for a writer. Learning to copyedit before becoming a writer is like being a mechanic before learning to drive a race car. The understanding of the secret processes behind the magic can only help, especially when the handling gets rough."

My plan is to someday produce a book about the art and craft of writing, one that will in all likelihood bears the same title as this blog. I guarantee that Scott Huler's observation about the way copyediting puts a writer under the hood will have a place in it.

(Image of Beaufort scale illustrated from United States Search and Rescue Task Force)

Coming soon: The marriage of narrative and climatology.

 

Her 15 percent's worth

Finally, we hear from James Frey's agent. In an exclusive interview with Publishers Weekly, Kassie Evashevski reveals she's dropped faux-memoirist Frey as a client. She also wonders now if what we need is a "nonfiction memoir," and adds:

"One can fact-check facts, but how do you fact-check memory and perception? I'm less clear on whether or not I think publishers have a responsibility to carefully check nonfiction works of a journalistic nature.Ultimately, I feel an author should be responsible for his or her own work, but I leave that to the legal minds."

The whole experience "will definitely make me more cautious," Frey's agent said. "But, at the end of the day, I guess I hope I'll still be able to take people at their word--even while I'm checking out their stories."

Editors taking writers at their word is where the newspaper and magazine industries got Stephen Glass, Jayson Blair and a host of serial plagiarists and fabricators. Now it's dumped "A million little pieces" of distrust on the book publishing industry.

During the 2003 Blair brouhaha, I took this stand on the question of trust:

"Journalism, even the creative kind, is built on lots of things, but trust wouldn’t top my list. Good journalism is built on passionate inquiry, indefatigable pursuit of evidence, healthy skepticism, obsession for accuracy, and a near-pathological fear of error—a determination to get things right no matter what it takes.

"Jayson Blair was wrong. As was Stephen Glass. Patricia Smith and Mike Barnicle too.

"But so were editors who trusted them. If anything good can come from this, it won’t be pretty, but it will be good for journalism.

"It's an editor's job to vet stories. To role-play the reader. To have the dirty mind and see the double-entendres the writer is blind to—or perhaps thinks would be cute to get past the desk."

"It’s not an editor’s job to trust a reporter."

Or in light of James Frey's self-admitted liteary deceptions, here's a mashup of my thoughts in 2003 and today's reflections on his agent's remarks:

It’s an editor’s job (or for that matter, maybe an agent's too, at least if neither wants to end up staring into the business end of a smoking gun or a steely-eyed Oprah) to challenge, to probe, to prosecute a story, to be the ally, not of his or her colleague, (or client) but ultimately the advocate for readers who deserve to get what they think they're paying for.