In the United States
when they give you a green card, they make it a point to stress, ‘this is not a
right, this is a privilege we are giving you to live and work in this country.’
What they mean is that since it is a privilege, one should learn to respect it.
We all know what happens when people start taking everything as a right,
everything for granted. Additionally, since it is a privilege, one has to be
aware that if not treated with the deference it deserves, it can also be
rescinded.
Similarly, when writers submit their work, editors
should consider it a privilege allowed them to consider for publication if found
suitable and they should treat it with the utmost respect. An editor does not
necessarily have the right to do as he/she pleases with the submitted work even
if the fine print in the agreement says otherwise. Writing and editing are
subjects that are more tightly bound by high ethical standards than perhaps
anything else in a civilized world.
Yes, an editor has the right to point out specific
instances in any given work and suggest changes. Yes, an editor is expected to correct
spelling mistakes and put the commas and full stops in the correct places. Yes,
an editor should divide lengthy articles by way of appropriate sub headings. Yes,
an editor has to cross check facts and figures. Yes, an editor must insist on
originality of the submissions. Yes, an editor can ask for a rewrite if
justifiable. Yes, an editor may even reject any work if found unsuitable
(however, this will never happen if the editor knows his/her job and assign the
suitable writer to the appropriate work). But, these are not rights as one
should understand them; these are the duties of editors. That’s what they are
responsible for.
But, no, an editor cannot play around with the
writer’s work in a whimsical fashion. No, an editor is not permitted to slip in
his/her own opinions or what he/she believes to be his/her fine prose in
between a writer’s finished product. No, an editor is not allowed to change
whole sentences because he/she thinks it can be written in another way (Of
course it can. English is that kind of language where the same thing can be
described in a hundred different ways. Question is – how can you claim yours to
be better than mine?). No, an editor has no leeway in giving less than his/her
fullest attention to the work he/she is editing (there are too many cases where
one will find an editor busier writing his/her own latest magnum opus than
doing what he/she is there for – editing). No, an editor should not change the
order of the paragraphs as he deems fit, or the title. No, an editor must not split
hairs regarding things like ‘between’ and ‘in between’, ‘nevertheless’ and
‘however’, ‘usually’ and ‘normally’, and so on. No, an editor cannot always
claim to know best.
A Rembrandt portrait is art that is best admired
from a distance. Monet, Matisse, Renoir, Van Gogh, Gauguin, Picasso – works of
masters such as these are to behold and not to be held. Imagine what would
happen if a curator were to put a wet brush on Mona Lisa and make just a
miniscule change to the nose in the belief that she could craft it more to her
liking. The masterpiece would be no more the
Mona Lisa the world regards with such high esteem. In a similar vein, an editor
must appreciate that every work submitted by capable writers is a work of art
and even the tiniest bit of altercation could ruin it.
So, in the best interest of everybody concerned, it
is imperative that editors take a fresh overall look at their role and
responsibilities. Writers must always get precedence and the benefit of doubt,
because they, after all, are the creators. Writers must be consulted even when making
small changes particularly regarding transposition of words in the prose. And,
perish the thought that a feature is the result of co-operation between a
writer and an editor – it is first and always, about the writer alone. The
editor’s role can only be appreciated if he/she succeeds in adding a glossier
sheen to the work, or more usually, if the work sees the dawn of day,
untarnished. In most cases, if editors would only remain faithful to the adage,
‘leave well enough alone’, much harmony could be achieved and much acrimony,
avoided.
Finally, a word to the reader - without whom neither
the writer nor the editor has any value. A reader should know that if an
article is found to be very good, it is the writer who must be given full
credit. If, on the other hand, the write up is bad, then of course it is the
editor’s fault!
No comments:
Post a Comment