Summary of the Text: The paradox of the Editor
This text explores the often-contradictory role of the editor,drawing parallels to other skilled trades like plumbing. It highlights the editor’s position as both needed and resented by those who employ them. Here’s a breakdown of the key points:
* The Editor’s Dilemma: Editors are expected to fix problems but are often treated as mere time-savers and blamed for issues they didn’t create. Clients frequently undervalue their services.
* Client Types & Editing Friction: The most difficult clients are those with moderate talent who overestimate their abilities. They perceive editing as interference with their “originality” rather than helpful refinement. Pragmatic copywriters and authors aware of their limitations are more receptive to editorial guidance.
* Historical Context & Karl Kraus: The text connects this dynamic to the historical role of editors as censors,referencing Karl Kraus,a critic who vehemently opposed the superficial division of labor in journalism.
* Kraus’s Argument: Kraus didn’t oppose the idea of a division of labor, but the pretense of solitary genius. He believed authorship requires multiple stages of refinement and that collaboration should elevate the work,not dilute it.
* The Ideal Editor: A good editor balances respecting the author’s ownership with acting as a facilitator, a “midwife” to the text. They are a skilled craftsman, an assistant, not a creator.
* The Importance of Collaboration: the text concludes by emphasizing that a text reaches its full potential through a collaborative process between author and editor – a blend of understanding and constructive criticism.
In essence, the text argues that the editor’s role is a delicate one, requiring skill, tact, and a clear understanding of the collaborative nature of creating quality work.It’s a profession often undervalued despite its crucial contribution.
