 |
Examples of intelligent editing
"Intelligent editing" means Will thinks more deeply about what he reads than most copyeditors and proofreaders. Intelligent editing goes beyond merely ensuring correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation. A good editor must consider, "How does this fit into the reader's existing knowledge (or information available about the subject), and does it fit with the rest of the author's message? Does this make sense right away to a careful reader?" Will catches subtle errors that others miss, and he clarifies writing that is more or less correct but can lead to confusion. It can make a big difference to your readers!
He also makes a point to check proper names, facts, technical terms, and abbreviations—you can't afford to gloss over even a passing reference and risk seeming ignorant. Even if you're an expert in really only one area, you must seem to be an authority in any area you mention, to ensure your readers perceive you're well-informed and meticulous.
The original:
|
Declutter your future from sentimental dust.
|
The edit:
|
Keep your future free of sentimental clutter.
|
Sure, you can declutter, but it's really an activity strongly tied to a present sense, isn't it? You could declutter something (a room), or you could declutter at some time (in the future), but how do you declutter the future? What the author is really talking about, it seems, is preventing clutter from building up at all. And the idea involving dust seems only half-formed; let's keep it simple—we're either dusting or decluttering.
* * *
The original:
|
When unemployed on a reservation, a Pima Indian becomes obese and diabetic. His forefathers in Arizona and Mexico scratched and hoed the earth all day to grow corn and beans and were thin and normal weight without diabetes.
|
The edit:
|
Years ago, members of the Pima tribe (of modern-day Arizona and Mexico) had no weight problems; they scratched and hoed the earth all day to grow corn and beans. Today, with little work to be had on reservations and easy availability of processed foods, their descendants are prone to obesity and diabetes.
|
The way in which the original was worded was problematic; it may seem that the Pima people are being stereotyped. Even if research supports certain generalities, you want to be careful to recognize that there are individual variations in any population. (With that said, looking back at the edit now, I would probably insert "most" in front of "members." —Will) You certainly also want to avoid insinuating (or being accused of insinuating) that any group suffers negative circumstances such as unemployment or obesity through their own fault. For this reason, the edit hints at historical and environmental contributing factors. It also does not associate the Pima with the larger group "Indians." Lastly, the edit makes it clear where the Pima live today, not merely where their forefathers lived.
* * *
The original:
|
Possible prescriptions may include antibiotics (ciprofloxacin, levofloxin, trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole, doxycycline, azithromycin, erythromycin, vancomycin)
|
The edit:
|
Possible prescriptions may include antibiotics (ciprofloxacin, levofloxacin, trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole, doxycycline, azithromycin, erythromycin, vancomycin)
|
When different medications have a similar function or derivation, their names often share a common ending (as you can see with the "-mycins" above). The difference between "ciprofloxacin" and "levofloxin" prompted me to check these two names in particular. It turned out "levofloxin" should be "levofloxacin."
* * *
The original:
|
Most people who actually won't wake up tomorrow morning assume when they go to bed that they'll wake up as they always have.
|
The edit:
|
Most people who will die in their sleep will go to bed that final night believing and assuming that they'll wake up the next morning, as always.
|
At first glance, you may ask, what was wrong with the original? But there are many ways that this sentence could be clearer. Tomorrow morning sounds like it might mean a specific date—is that tomorrow from when this was written, or tomorrow from when it's being read? When they go to bed when? Every night? Tonight? What does it mean to wake up as they always have—or does the author mean they will assume as they always have? And why be vague about what it means to not wake up? Yes, such an analysis is nitpicky, but if you really want great writing to come through, that's what you need! Does the edit sound morbid? If so, it's only because the idea was rather morbid to begin with—only now the idea is better expressed.
* * *
The original:
|
You might have picked up your coffee cup from your desk without interrupting your eye contact with your customer and brought the cup with surgical precision to your lips a thousand times.
|
The edit:
|
You may have picked up your coffee cup from your desk without even looking and brought the cup with surgical precision to your lips a thousand times.
|
As this book was written for a general audience, the percentage of readers who ever had a "customer" come to their desk might be very small. Maybe the reader is a schoolteacher, for instance. You could change "customer" to "visitor," but what if the reader is one of the many people who do not even have a desk at work (like a chef or a pilot) or any place where they might have had a visitor a thousand times? You will probably agree that most readers do have a desk somewhere, at home if not at work, where they might drink from a coffee cup. What was most important was the author was trying to draw a picture of an automatic behavior that didn't require conscious attention; the desk, although unnecessary, wasn't getting in the way, but the third party was.
* * *
The original:
|
They may not remember the symbols for oxygen and carbon dioxide on the periodic table of elements, but they are very curious and interested and typically try to come up with solutions to problems in creative ways.
|
What's the problem? Carbon dioxide does not appear on the periodic table of elements—because it's a compound, not an element. OK, so just say "carbon." Or instead of referencing the periodic table, just talk about chemical symbols. But the symbols for carbon (C), oxygen (O), and carbon dioxide (CO2) are all straightforward and thus easy to remember. We want something at least a bit harder, right?
In a query it was suggested that oxygen and carbon dioxide be changed to sodium (chemical symbol Na) and potassium (chemical symbol K).
|
