.png)
As I enter the workforce after college, I will use my degrees in English and communications to find a career that I believe I will excel in and enjoy. Reading is my passion. I will use this as my motivation to excel in my field. My goal is to incorporate the knowledge I have obtained from my college experience and classes into my career as an editor. My dedication to literature will be communicated through my thorough work ethic. Different theories and cognitive thinking processes can be used to help create positive, effective relationships with the authors that I will be working with at the publishing companies. English and communications are vast fields where I can explore different jobs and opportunities to use my skills of critical thinking and theory of mind. By acknowledging how other people think or function, I can implement better strategies to convince authors that they need my particular skills to assist them when they are writing their book.
English classes have provided me with a vast knowledge of different genres of texts and time periods. I have experience with older texts, such as Beowulf from the Medieval period, to modern texts that were written such as The Sun Also Rises by Ernest Hemingway or Native Son by Richard Wright. I have read over 2,000 texts and my experience with these diverse works has allowed me to develop a different perspective. Literature is immensely different with millions of different texts. With knowledge of these different styles, I can be open minded to different ideas and concepts. The genre that authors choose will depend upon the time period they wish to write in and the concept of their novel. I can better assist them with my previous knowledge of the area that they would wish to write their book about.
I also have an understanding of basic structure and grammar through my writing classes. I know to look for things that are misspelled, misplaced, or misused in their narratives. These mistakes will be edited and I will offer suggestions on how to improve their writing. I can suggest to authors different ways for them to develop their scenes. They could possibly implement this into their book in order to add another aspect or perspective.
Communications has shown me different fields that I can work in with my degree. There is journalism, media, public relations, publishing, and more. Because my area has many opportunities, I have been trained in multiple disciplines. I have learned AP style and how to write articles for newspapers. There is also magazine writing, advertising, and investigative journalism. Communications majors are taught how the media frames events and controls how the population perceives these events. This knowledge will help me when I am applying for jobs or if I decide to enter different occupational fields.
My specialization will be in publishing. I will become an editor and work at publishing companies such as Random House, Penguin, HarperCollins, and Simon & Schuster. The role of an editor is most aptly applied to the metaphor of a broker. An editor is someone who, “. . . is to act as an agent for others and to bring people and things together toward achieving desired ends” (Alvermann 9). My goal is to create the best possible book to be published in a manner that everyone who is concerned is content, including the readers. My job is to help the author create something worthy of being published and sent for mass consumption. Literature should be readable and enjoyable for those who decide to pick up that book.
Some authors may see my suggestions as harsh criticism. This issue can be combatted with my explanation that I am trying to assist them, not destroy their work or ideas. It is suggested by Donovan that some authors will not comply with all my suggested revisions and instead, will ignore my comments (Donovan 240). This will create conflict regarding the relationship between author and editor. Both parties need to understand that they have a symbiotic relationship. In order to publish a book, first an idea needs to be formed, by an author, and then the editor has to help create the best narrative possible. Difficult authors, even those who are veterans in literature, who refuse to work with editors, will only be harming themselves (Donovan 242).
Editors are said to pledge a commitment to, “. . . integrity, respect, evenhandedness, efficiency, diplomacy, confidentiality, courtesy, and constructiveness (Alvermann 10). There are many expectations that are placed upon editors. We are expected to be all these things while making authors and our company content at the same time. While these values are important, some cannot always be pleased. An author will have to make tough decisions regarding who gets their work published and who does not. If the work is unacceptable, the author must be rejected.
Authors may call into question your ethicacy or accuse bias. Editors must be prepared to defend themselves and their reasoning. The broker must act professionally and protect the interest of their company as well as the authors they sponsor (Alvermann 10). It will be a hard task when separating the two; but, in order to be successful, feelings of guilt toward unpublished authors must not be realized.
Editors will submit multiple suggestions for revision to authors. One editor wrote, “Part of the editors’ wisdom is that the revise letter is crucially important” (Schneider 90). Authors may see this task as inconvenient and tedious, but it is essential to the writing process. As Donald Murray said, “writing is rewriting” (Haugen 322). In order to produce something distinctive that people will want to read, one must go through multiple revisions.
Revisions may be as simple as tense or grammar. In other instances, revisions may include the structure and outline of their text. Regardless of the severity, authors should consider the editor’s position and perspective. They should take into account their suggestions and feedback and if they have any concerns, address those with their editor. Creating a book is a collaboration. The editor wants to help the author, not change the meaning of their text or hinder them.
Writing is a cognitive process (Hulle 35). For a writer, the extended mind is a piece of paper (Hulle 31). Writing is an expressive process that comes from someone’s experiences, thoughts, and beliefs. Hulle writes:
the material aspect of the writing process—is something we . . . can draw literary critics’ attention to, by arguing that it is an inherent part of the “extended mind”, and by showing that this material aspect can contribute to a better understanding of the Modernists’ literary attempts to evoke the workings of the mind. (35)
The extended mind is how people express their ideas. Authors do this by writing. Thus editors must understand that when we are criticizing their work, we are criticizing the author which may unintentionally cause offense. Editors should interact with authors in a way that they feel they need their experience and skills instead of being disgruntled.
Authors may feel that if the editor changes too much, they are no longer the author of their own story. Haugen writes, “If editors tamper too much with the text, authors sometimes complain that they no longer “own” their own writing” (323). Editors should be sure to consult the author before making any major changes. Editors are responsible for maintaining the meaning of the text while also proofreading and assisting in the organization of the text.
While editors have these responsibilities, authors are accountable for, “. . . technical content, for identifying the audience and purpose, and for “learning to employ editing skills, developing the ability to look with a cold eye at all those golden words, and to revise, revise, revise, and revise again . . .” (Haugen 327). Authors must not be bias toward their own writing and accept constructive criticism when needed. It was written that, “. . . drafts can help us understand both the workings of authors’ creative minds and their literary evocations of characters’ minds” (Hulle 28). Drafts and revisions are a part of the publishing process to help create the best result. These drafts allow editors to further develop ideas and concepts and help authors create distinctive works. Authors should develop these skills to make the publishing process easier and improve their writing. They must realize however, that they need the editor as much as the editor needs the writer.
There are five priorities an editor must acknowledge when editing a piece of literature. These priorities are, “checking integrity, deleting unnecessary information correcting mechanical errors, revising format, and reorganizing” (Haugen 328). The editor however, must be vigilant in determining whether they are being excessive or performing unneeded editing (Lanier 526). The editor must recognize when they are being helpful and when they are being detrimental. Excessive editing can harm your relationship with the author and thus create a negative partnership. The author would be less likely to adhere to all the revisions you have suggested or feel as if the editor is unreliable. Editing is a necessary process to publishing; however, some instances require smaller modifications.
There will be occasions where editors will have to interact with difficult authors. When editing, “Authors may easily become offended and feel that they are being criticised rather than helped by the editors. Making sure that authors are content with the editing process is important for establishing a good collaborative relationship” (Lanier 526). Editors should consult the author before making any major changes to their work. The meaning should be in no way changed, simply improved. The author should be deeply involved in the process and explain their reasoning for their diction. The author should not feel as if their work is being attacked by the editor. To create a positive relationship, the editor and author should work in harmony and be open to different suggestions and alternatives.
If the author is clearly wrong, “. . . editors approach the situation by providing proof of whatever “rule” the author may have broken . . . as well as by proposing various alternative solutions that would fulfill the author’s intent” (Lanier 528). Editors have a set of rules for grammar, spelling, and structure. There are books that have designed a list of rules for specialized formats in the English language. There are multiple styles such as MLA, APA, AP etc. Regardless of the style, there is a certain way things are to be utilized and organized. Lanier writes, “If the author still refuses to accept the editor’s correction, . . . the editor can either publish the document without fixing the mistake or can refuse to publish the document altogether” (528). Editors sometimes have to make difficult decisions. Authors who refuse to constructively work with them and accept the changes they have suggested must acknowledge that they could be rejected for publication. This is a consequence that some editors will have to implement toward difficult authors despite their reluctance to negatively impact the partnership.
When drafting their narratives, authors should be aware of three ideas. These include primacy versus recency effects, the repeated name penalty, and schemas. Primacy and recency effects refers to the idea that people memorize the first and last pieces of information they receive (Greene et al. 48). Rather than remember the middle events, readers will easily remember the beginning and end of the novel that they are reading. This will influence how a book is structured or organized. Authors should structure their narratives congruent to this theory. Important events in their text should be placed in the beginning and end with a climactic, memorable scene toward the middle of the story. This will allow readers to easily recall key events in the plot that the author had emphasized, thus benefiting the readers and author.
The repeated-name penalty reflects the idea that the limited used of pronouns will affect the reading time by increasing the amount of time required for people to comprehend the text (Shapiro and Milkes 162). In a study, researchers found, “They reported only an increase in reading time associated with repeated names and no main effect of pronoun manipulation on their comprehension measure” (Shapiro and Milkes 173). The use of repeated-names in a text will influence how an author’s readers approve of their book. If readers feel the book is tedious, they will be less inclined to finish the book or buy another by that author. Authors should be aware of this circumstance and avoid repetively writing character’s names in their text. Pronouns should be used properly and names sparingly. If there is an issue, an editor can help the situation by addressing the issue and reconstructing the sentences surrounding the repeated-name penalty in order to create a better sounding work.
Schemas help people relate to what they are reading through their own experiences. It was stated that, “. . . in literary discourse, the use of distinctive linguistic patterns typically facilitates the ‘refreshment’ of reader’s existing schemata” (Semino 142). This suggests that readers would be able to use their own experiences to relate to characters or events in the narrative. The authors’ choice of language can impact how people respond to their text. Repeated language can increase the reader’s understanding of the text. The author can also attempt to connect with their audience through carefully chosen language for their demographic. Editors can acknowledge the genre that the author is writing about and suggest ideas to implement into their narrative in order for them to connect with their audience. Schemas are a practical way for authors to create a narrative for their readers to understand, relate to, and evoke emotion.
Authors do receive final approval for their work. They have the last review of whether they approve of the result that the collaboration brought (Lanier 528). If the author is unhappy with the work, there are other alternatives that can be suggested. This partnership should be beneficial for both parties and thus if one is not content with the outcome, there should be something done to improve any misgivings or concerns.
Editors will have to interact with difficult authors and professionally manage certain situations. Editors can try to reason with the author through multiple reasoning skills and theories. These strategies include the self-awareness, free will, acknowledgement of overconfidence, the backfire effect, and utilitarianism. By helping authors achieve self-awareness, they can better understand their self and those around them. By writing, “And, ultimately, through language a human being is able to share insights into life and his identity with others” (Gebhardt and Smith 22). Exploring self-awareness can lead to deeper insight and understanding of why an author chooses a certain diction or perspective.
Authors should be disciplined and try to communicate their ideas in a clear way to their unknown audience. Gebhardt and Smith write, “So the writer should consider his audience and the clarity of his expression, exercise compression of detail or expansion of ideas, and anticipate the further rewriting and editing” (23). These statements validate the fact that writing is a cognitive, personal process that needs guidance in order to create notable work.
Free will is argued to potentially be a biological process and that it is preceded by unconscious neural activity (Soon et al. 1). Authors who are unconcerned with deadlines and refuse to work with editors may be experiencing a preconceived bias toward editors. Their negative reaction could be due to a previous event that has now influenced their opinion. The authors’ reaction could become unconscious to themselves which ultimately hinders their progress as a writer trying to be published. By understanding free will and its biological function, I can find different strategies to work with difficult authors. I can also have authors acknowledge that they have the choice to work productively with editors in order to obtain their goal, or they can choose to search for other alternatives at a different publishing company.
Authors may be overconfident in their abilities as a writer. It is the job of the editor to make them aware of their mistakes while also encouraging them to improve their skills. Kruger and Dunning argue, “. . . that when people are incompetent in the strategies they adopt to achieve success and satisfaction, they suffer a dual burden: Not only do they reach erroneous conclusions and make unfortunate choices, but their incompetence robs them of the ability to realize it” (1121). Authors will argue that their text does not need the changes that I suggest even when I provide evidence. I will acknowledge this as a symptom of overconfidence and try to communicate to the author why my changes are correct. I will educate them about the overconfidence effect through evidence and reasoning to help them understand their cognitive process which could potentially help in future situations.
The Backfire Effect refers to the idea that people are susceptible to be overconfident about the time they have for their assignment (Schwarz et al.132). The further away the deadline, the more confidence the person will have. The closer the deadline, the more anxious the person feels about the assignment. When deadlines are made I will insist to the author that they get started relatively soon. As deadlines approach, editors must make the limited amount of time obvious to the author. Editors must insist that if their work is not completed by the deadline, they will not be published.
Utilitarianism could potentially benefit all parties involved in the publishing process. This includes the author, editor, and publishing company. It was written that, “Utilitarianism argues that what is morally required is best determined by one simple rule--whether or not an action bring about the greatest total well-being” (Bartels and Pizarro 155). There are many requirements for a book to be published and with these requirements comes deadlines. In order to complete a work by the deadline, people must agree upon the final narrative. Communicating this problem to the author could potentially incite them to get their text finished whether they are in the writing stage or revision stage. When faced with potential consequences for many people other than themselves, authors may feel more inclined to act or work together in a productive manner.
If I decide not to become an editor, I can use my degree in a vast amount of ways. One option would be for me to become a paralegal. As an English major I have many of the skills that are required for this occupation such as research, communication, writing, and organizational skills. By utilizing my English and communications skills I can implement these ideas into my work as a paralegal.
The process of editing plays an important role in the creative process. Eisner writes, “Inscribing, editing, and communicating are three cognitive processes used in the act of representation” (7). Authors take ideas and thoughts from their consciousness and apply them to paper. This is representative of the arts in society which are respected throughout history. Authors needs editors in order to create literary esteem in their field as a writer. Editors aspire to help create an exceptional narrative that they, along with millions of other people, would enjoy reading.
References
Alvermann, Donna E., and David Reinking. “Editorial: On Metaphors and Editing.” Reading Research Quarterly, vol. 38, no. 1, 2003, pp. 8–11. Web. 16 Nov. 2016. Bartels, Daniel M., and David A. Pizarro. "The Mismeasure of Morals: Antisocial Personality Traits Predict Utilitarian Responses to Moral Dilemmas." Cognition121.1 (2011): 154-61. Print. Donovan, Stephen K. "How To Alienate Your Editor: A Practical Guide For Established Authors." Journal Of Scholarly Publishing 36.4 (2005): 238-242. Web.16 Nov. 2016. Eisner, Elliot W. The Arts and the Creation of Mind. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2002. Print. Gebhardt, Richard C., and Barbara Genelle Smith. “‘Liberation’ Is Not ‘License’: The Case for Self-Awareness through Writing.” College Composition and Communication, vol. 27, no. 1, 1976, pp. 21–24. Web. 16 Nov. 2016. Greene, Anthony J., et al. "Primacy Versus Recency in a Quantitative Model: Activity Is the Critical Distinction." Learning & Memory 7.1 (2000): 48-57. Web. Haugen, Diane. “Coming to Terms with Editing.” Research in the Teaching of English, vol. 24, no. 3, 1990, pp. 322–333. Web. 16 Nov. 2016. Kruger, Justin, and David Dunning. "Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties in Recognizing One's Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-assessments." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 77.6 (1999): 1121-134. Print. Lanier, Clinton R. “Electronic Editing and the Author.” Technical Communication, vol. 51, no. 4, 2004, pp. 526–536. Web. 16 Nov. 2016. Schneider, Joseph W. “The Case of the ‘Unfair’ Review: Ethical Issues from an Editor's File.” The American Sociologist, vol. 21, no. 1, 1990, pp. 88–95. Web. 16 Nov. 2016. Schwarz, Norbert, et al. "Metacognitive Experiences and the Intricacies of Setting People Straight: Implications for Debiasing and Public Information Campaigns." Advances in Experimental Social Psychology Advances in Experimental Social Psychology Volume 39 (2007): 127-61. Print. Semino, E. "Pragmatic Failure, Mind Style and Characterisation in Fiction about Autism." Language and Literature 23.2 (2014): 141-58. Web. Shapiro, Amy and Amy Milkes. “Skilled Readers Make Better Use of Anaphora: A Study of the Repeated-Name Penalty on Text Comprehension.” Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology. No 2 (2), 161-180. Psychology Department, University of Massachusetts. Soon, Chun Siong, et al. "Predicting Free Choices for Abstract Intentions." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 110.15 (2013): 6217-222. Print. Van Hulle, Dirk. "The Stuff Of Fiction: Digital Editing, Multiple Drafts And The Extended Mind." Textual Cultures: Texts, Contexts, Interpretation 8.1 (2013): 23-37. MLA International Bibliography. Web. 14 Nov. 2016.