For this post, I want you to think about editing and what you read over the weekend and what you are reading for homework tonight as well as what you know about it from previous experience. Use the following questions as a springboard to discuss, reflect and theorize about editing. Your post should be about 500 words, connect back to the readings, and you need to comment back to others who post before you.
Questions to think with:
*What does it mean to "edit" and where do you edit/what do you edit?
*What are some principles of editing that you believe in and use yourself?
*Does genre and/or audience affect how you edit?
*How do you approach editing peers' compositions?
*How is editing different/similar to revising?
*Where does editing fit into the EWM major? Why would it be included?
*Benefits of editing? Negatives of editing?
*How does editing enhance your theory of composing?
Before I read the assigned readings, I asked myself what I believe editing is. Off the top of my head, I figured it is reading line by line, trying to find grammatical and spelling errors. After reading the articles, I realize there is a much deeper level of editing that I hadn’t thought of before. Sullivan and Eggleston say that “Editorial tasks fall on a continuum, with proofreading at one end and substantive editing at the other” (3). There is “standard proofreading, editorial proofreading, copyediting, and substantive editing” (3). It can go from proofreading, to the overall reworking of a piece of writing. I think anything and everything can be edited. I believe in all steps of editing-“standard proofreading, editorial proofreading, copyediting, and substantive editing” (Sullivan and Eggleston 3). Genre and audience affect how I edit. Like we discussed in class earlier with the Twilight example and from Eggleston and Sullivan’s reading, “it is vitally important for an editor to know the intended audience for a piece of writing” because we need to keep the audience interested, and it needs to be appropriate (5).
ReplyDeleteWhen I approach editing peers’ compositions, I want to help them and offer constructive criticism. I will do the “preliminary skim” of their work in order to get an overall idea of what I am editing (Sullivan and Eggleston 21). I will then get into line by line editing- looking at spelling and grammar. Then I will look at the piece as a whole. I offer positive feedback first, then suggestions on improving the piece.
I think editing and revising are connected. Editing is looking at a draft and revising is the process of going back into the work with new ideas for how to improve it. Editing fits in the EWM major and is included because as writers we need to first be able to look at our own work and honestly point out things that we can improve on. Also we need to do this with others work. It is necessary that our EWM teachers critique us on our compositions, because it reinforces for us to do these skills when looking at our own work. Sommers notes that teachers “comment on student writing to dramatize the presence of a reader, to help our students to become that questioning reader themselves, because, ultimately, we believe that becoming such a reader will help them to evaluate what they have written and develop control over their writing” (Sommers 148). Our teachers have edited and graded our writing in an effort to make us “evaluate” our work, to become critical of what we write so we can edit it. Editing is beneficial because it takes the raw work of a composer and carves it into a diamond. I think editing has enhanced my theory of composing. Now I will take a second look at what I think is a finished project of mine, and try to work on enhancing it. Also I will note how editing my peers papers will enhance my skills and benefit their work. Editing has expanded my theory of composing.
Some people when composing might believe that the writing alone is the most difficult process when composing. Truth be told, this isn’t necessarily the case. Clicking the spell check button is no longer the only answer when editing a composed piece. It now brings up many questions on how exactly to edit, what is the right way, and what is the wrong.
ReplyDeleteNancy Sommers states, “Most teachers estimate that it takes 20 to 40 minutes to time 20 students per class, times 8 papers, more or less during the course of the semester adds up to an enormous amount of time.” You might be wondering, what in the world could a teacher/editor possibly find to edit that much? Part of the answer to this, is there is so much more to editing then just correcting spelling and grammar. Sommers also says, “As writers we need and want thoughtful commentary to show us when we have communicated our idea’s and when not, raising questions from a readers point of view that may not have occurred to us as writers.” I believe that this is a very valid example as to what we as writers can sometimes forget about when lost with our heads buried in our composing world. Where you edit and what you edit is simple in my opinion: all over the written word.
It is very rare that a paper can be perfect the first time it is written. There is a reason that teachers assign “rough drafts” and then ask for a final copy. They provide criticism and also praise to assure the writer that they are heading in the right direction for addressing the audience. I believe that all types of editing are necessary. Every single time I have a paper, I always make sure to run it by my professor to make sure it is what he/she is looking for. It’s good to have an outsider looking in on your composing because sometimes what we writers might find adequate, our teachers and audience may not. Genre also has a big affect in editing. Not every composed piece is on paper, but it can also be digital media. This brings in many other forms of editing; what is correct digital media, and what is not. It is also very similar to revising, as it creates opportunity for feedback. However, I believe it to be a bit different in the sense that revising is more of just taking a ‘glance’ if you will, where as editing is really digging in between the lines. Editing fits in perfectly with the EWM major. After all, it does stand for Editing, Writing, and Media.
Without knowing how to edit it could be very difficult to pursue this career without knowing the proper way to do so. I believe there are more benefits with editing, then not. It helps a student create a ‘perfect composing piece’ for their teachers and audience. I believe that the only downfall from editing is sometimes things are edited so much that it then can take away the meaning of what the writer intended. Editing enhances your theory of composing a lot, creating multiple opportunities to perfect the written word. Without editing, composing could be a little bit sloppy.
I get tired of hearing people say “being an English major is simple.” If you really think about it, it is so complex. There is so much we need to know as students, learners, and composers in the world of editing.
Before reading Sullivan and Eagleston and also Sommers, I couldn’t really give you a clear defention of what editing exactly is. Like Alexis, I just figured whenever I went back and corrected mistakes, I was editing. This is true of editing, but I didn’t realize that there was so much more to it. Sullivan and Eagleston say that, “Generally, in proofreading, the goal is editorial accuracy; in editing, it’s accuracy and improvement” (1). Editing is not just adding commas and rearranging sentences. We have to make sure our point is clear and organize it so that our writing is as effective as we intend it to be. It’s usually hard to see this in our own writing because we already know what we are trying to say. It’s already semi-organized in our heads so we need an outsider to tell us where things are unclear.
ReplyDeleteI thought Sullivan and Eagleston’s piece made the editing process more clear to me. I now know that there is step by step process that I can follow. But what really stood out to me was when Sommers talked about how vague editing can be. “The comments are not anchored in the particulars of the students' texts, but rather are a series of vague directives that are not text-specific” (152). Not only did this make me say “Ahh! So true! I hate it when teachers do that!” but I also thought, “I do this all the time in class workshops.” Unlike Alexis, it’s always been difficult for me to critique other’s work. She seems to have a step by step process and I don’t. I can spot grammar mistakes like nobody’s business and I know when something doesn’t seem clear to a specific audience, but I don’t really know how to give good suggestions for improvement. I was really interested in Sommers’ piece because it gave some useful tips on how to be more specific. It’s hard to be text-specific but in order to be a good editor, we need to be. There is no improvement unless the writer knows where improvement is needed. A comment that says “Be more specific” is too vague for a student to know where specificity is needed. A better comment would be “The part about solar wind power needs more research to back it up.”
Reading this gave me so much more insight into the big E in the EWM major. I never really thought about being an editor, but after today’s class and then reading Sommers, I think it might be a good field for me. The email we read in class today gave me so much information, because like I said, I’m pretty bad at saying something sucks. But the email and the reading showed constructive ways to tell people that parts of their writing...well, suck. I liked how the editor gave suggestions so that she could lead the writer in the direction she thought the piece needed to go. I think there’s a reason why the E comes first in EWM. We never write our winning, publishing-worthy piece with our first draft. We always need to edit. In english, it’s important to learn how to be specific and how to fix something so that it is clear and effective to the intended audience. I’m excited to learn more about editing because I really do want to learn how to give good, constructive feedback and bring out the best in a piece of writing.
When I thought about what the term “editing” means before reading, I thought of mainly grammar issues. I thought editing was pretty much the Spelling and Grammar Check for Microsoft Word. Editing meant to correct any grammar mistakes or spelling mistakes and to revise another’s paper or whatever writing it may be. However, after reading both Sullivan and Eggleston, and Sommers, I have come to realize that there is much more that goes into editing than I realized.
ReplyDeleteI didn’t realize there were different types of editing. According to Sullivan and Eggleston, types of editing include standard proofreading, editorial proofreading, copyediting, and substantive editing. Standard proofreading used to be the only definition I used for editing. As I think back to previous English classes, my teachers would always tell us not to focus as much on the mechanical errors, but more on the content and what ways can improve it. All of these definitions and ways in which to edit incorporate with each other to form the overall process of editing. Basically, editing includes fixing grammatical errors, improving phrasing and word choice, and suggesting new ideas and ways to make a composition sound better and flow better. The overall list and subjects of what can be edited is very broad in my opinion. Anything written can of course be edited but any type of media can as well, for example a movie. Whenever you buy a DVD, there are always special features that include deleted scenes. The producers and editors edited the scenes out of the movie. Editing can be found everywhere, but mainly probably in newspaper offices or other things of that nature.
The only times that stand out to me that I have experienced “editing” someone else’s work is through English or writing classes on workshop days. I remember in high school, we were all afraid of hurting someone’s feelings, so we would solely fix grammatical and spelling errors. Near the end of high school, actually senior year, I had a teacher named Ms. Hill who broke us out of that shell. We had different assignments every week or two and would do three workshops. While keeping the mechanical issues on mind, I would also analyze ways to make their paper sound better or suggest ideas to add to make it more detailed. Throughout my college English and writing courses, I have had to edit or workshop on numerous occasions, thinking of editing and revision as a whole and trying to get as much out of their paper as possible to help them. Editing can even be found in something as simple as a text. For example, you type something you want to say to a guy you really like and go back and change words or phrases to make it just right.
Genre and audience definitely affect editing. Audience is what any composition is based on. A writer has to make their piece attractive and appealing to their audience, so when editing, it is important to keep that in mind. Genre is as well. Different aspects and characteristics involved in different genres call for a need of differences in editing when compared to one another. Approaching peer’s compositions can be as easy or as hard as someone wants to make it. More often than not, they have to be doing the same thing, and you both aren’t professionals, so some mistakes are understood. I would approach the composition with an open mind and maybe read it more than once to get what he/she is trying to say and get out of the story. Make corrections where needed and make suggestions where you think they would need it.
(too long to fit in one comment)
ReplyDeleteEditing is very important to the Editing, Writing, and Media major. First off, it’s part of the title of the major. Second, editing is a very critical process that is part of producing a final composition. After something has been edited, it has reached its full potential to be produced. The writer may even get suggestions that they had never thought of themselves, but got them out of editing. I think it’s important for professionals to see your work before it’s published to ensure to get the full effect of the composition.
I agree with Alexis in her paragraph when she talks about approaching peer’s compositions. We have the same idea of “constructive criticism” in peer editing. I think this is the best way. This way, you can help them think of new ideas and fix any problems you see without hurting their feelings or making them think that their work isn’t good. I also think it’s good to read the composition before focusing on editing to get a feel of what the writer is trying to say. I also am in agreement with Grace when she discusses that a paper is never perfect. I think to get it to be as perfect as possible; others must edit and revise it to get the maximum amount out of it.
Editing
ReplyDeleteWhen we were first introduced to editing, right off the bat, I automatically thought of spellchecking, grammar problems and rewording sentences like many of my classmates did. After the readings, I know that editing is much more than that. For example, Sullivan and Eggleston say that there are in fact four types of editing: standard proofreading, editorial proofreading, copyediting, and substantive editing which range from reading over, to minor changes, to major rewriting and organization(3). Now, I feel that editing is the refining of ideas, and looking at a work as a whole to see what could be improved. As far as what is considered a work that can be edited, I agree with Alexis—“anything and everything.” If you really think about it, anything that we create can be modified—not just traditional papers but anything with words.
I also feel that editing is closely linked to revising; once again, I had that as my word for the newsletter project. Though the two words are different, I encountered the same kind of lesson that remains true with both; editing and revising are more than just making surface changes like one word vocab tweaks to a text, but also making overall meaning changes that enhance the depth and effectiveness of the work. During research, Faigley and Witte taught me that this could be by clarifying illogical sentences, adding details, or reorganizing whole chunks of work. Sullivan and Eggleston verify the idea of both surface and meaning changes when they say, “in editing, its accuracy and improvement”
(3).
As a student in the EWM major, I obviously have to deal with editing since it’s a third of the title, and I definitely think it is an immense help in every aspect of our class work. Everything we work on can and ideally should be edited. Gbyrne4 makes a great point when he/she says that, “there are more benefits to editing than not.” The only downfall to editing that I can come up with is that through multiple revisions some of the original theory and ideas could be lost in translation. (Also, in response to gybyrne4’s closing statement, I’ve never heard anyone say being an English major was simple—just that it is useless, which always makes me mad). However, I believe editing is beneficial throughout the writing process, not just at the end as many would hastily assume. I always get better results when I look at my text several times and take the time to refine everything throughout different stages of the process. In some ways, good work results from hard work at revising and editing than it does from actual ideas. Even if they are good ideas, they cannot be properly communicated without the clarity and finesse that editing strives to generate. I agree with Sam when she says that editing “helps you finalize a work”, and I believe that is the main goal of editing—getting a work to its final stage of completion and to ensure that the audience is properly targeted with the work so the message gets across.
Because of this, I feel that audience and genre make a difference when editing. It could mean the difference between the word ok and okay, as Sullivan and Eggleston mention. They also say that when you know who the reader will be you can gauge whether the vocabulary, style, and depth are appropriate, or if different words, explanations and presentation are needed” (5). If the audience is young, then you want to correct a work with that in mind— always asking who is reading this? and will they understand/appreciate the references? After all, an editor is responsible for keeping the author on track for the final revised work, and therefore how the work is received.
(Mine didn’t fit in one comment either)
ReplyDeleteAs far as approaching editing a peer’s work, I think its important to remember, as Sullivan and Eggleston said, that the nobody benefits from harsh criticism. I feel that I can only make only helpful suggestions so I don’t frustrate anyone.—because I know that’s how I would react if someone bashed my ideas. I would use the process Sullivan and Eggleston laid out to keep from neglecting any mistakes: the preliminary skim, the first pass, second pass, and final pass. When peer-editing I will also keep in mind what my peer is hoping to get from having me look at their work; Sommers explains the goal when she says, “We want to know if our writing has communicated our intended meaning and, if not, what questions or discrepancies our readers see, that we, as writers, are blind to” (148). Therefore, a second set of eyes will help in providing suggestions for an overall stronger piece.
Like some of the other posters mentioned, before reading these pieces, I had a very general and non-specific definition of editing. Mostly I thought of it in the very narrow sense that Sommers’ article discusses, mostly as a relatively simple process of making small corrections to individual fragments of the piece. But both articles helped to expand this idea for me to a much more broad process that should really be more about revising content and the ideas being expressed rather than changing a few wordings or sentence structures.
ReplyDeleteHaving read these articles, I would now define Editing as a comprehensive process of evaluating writing throughout its development and treating early drafts as being more about discovery and developing ideas rather than treating them as finished products. As Sommers notes, early draft feedback should focus on bigger picture issues like missing information, lapses in logic, or disruptions in meaning. Also, some of the points Sullivan and Eggleston make, such as emphasizing the importance of ideas like thinking of the intended audience and the style the entire piece is intended to have also add breadth to the sometimes narrowly defined process of editing.
I think that genre and audience have a huge effect on how we edit though. Different genres require different emphases or structures, and editing a multimedia blog post isn’t the same as editing a strictly written document because they use different means to communicate. Similarly, not all writing has the same audience, and to me, a focus on the intended audience is one of the fundamental aspects of effective writing. Thus, it’s hard to deny the importance of audience when editing because what might be a well-structured or worded piece for one audience may be too imprecise or unprofessional or even too complicated or in-depth for another audience.
Editing certainly has an important place in the EWM major as well. I agree with Kayla’s point that “everything we do can and ideally should be edited”. No writing is perfect at first, and effective writing requires the diligence necessary to go back and rework the writing to clarify ideas and ensure consistency and coherence. I also thought her point that good writing is the result of diligent editing and revising more so than the original quality of the ideas was a good one. Even a good idea can fail to live up to its potential if it isn’t properly developed, and at the same time an idea that isn’t outstanding could be revised and strengthened if well edited. Thus I think that editing is key to EWM because of the way that editing is a fundamental aspect of a good writing process.
As far as positive and negative outcomes of editing, I can’t really think of many potential negatives when it comes to editing. I think the approach of leaving no stone unturned in the writing process is a good one, and the more editing is done, the more likely a piece is to reach its potential. While I suppose editing could be a negative thing if the feedback given is unhelpful or confusing, such as the examples given by Sommers, generally even comments lacking in depth and mostly focusing on improving small fragments of a piece can ultimately help the piece, even if only on a surface level rather than improving the ideas behind it.
At first, before we started discussing the topic of editing, I thought that editing was simply checking for grammar and punctuation. But, I have come to learn that it is so much more than that! According to Sommers, editing is “identifying all spelling and punctuation errors, isolating problems with wordy or misused phrases, and suggesting alternatives, offering a stylistic analysis of sentence types, sentence beginnings, and sentence lengths…”(Sommers 149). Editing can be done anywhere really, as long as you can focus and concentrate. Also, it does depend on if you need to edit on your laptop and have to have an outlet. Editing consists of all different types of writing. A student paper, an established author, a newsletter, etc are just a few examples. I agree with Alexis that anything that is written can essentially be edited. Some principles of editing I use are the fact that when I edit, I don’t assume I am finished with the piece. I always go into the process with the mindset that there are still things that can be changed. Even with a seemingly “final” draft, I still make sure I am willing to make changes. Gbyrne4 says, it is “very rare that a paper can be perfect the first time it is written.” I find that to be very true, so I will try and look for things that make it better. My audience most definitely affects how I edit. I agree completely with what Sullivan and Eggleston say about audience: “when you know who the reader will be, you can gauge whether the vocabulary, style, and depth of the material are appropriate or if different words, explanations, or presentation are needed” (Sullivan and Eggleston 5). For me, I find it somewhat difficult to approach other’s work. You see, I can be as critical as I want with my own work, but I find it hard to criticize, although constructively, others work when editing. When I edit, I like to give feedback from a perspective of a person who is completely clueless about the assignment or topic and see if anything needs to be clarified.
ReplyDeleteEditing helps facilitate revision. According to Sommers, “comments create the motive for doing something different in the next draft; thoughtful comments create the motive for revising. Without comments from their teachers or from their peers, student writers will revise in a consistently narrow and predictable way. Without comments from readers, students assume that their writing has communicated their meaning and perceive no need for revising the substance of their text” (149). Revision is simply what comes out of the writer after their piece has been edited.
Of course there are many benefits to editing including the fact that it’s a necessary part of making a piece get a message across and for engaging your reader as well as letting your reader know you are educated and actually know how to write. But then there are some negative side effects. For example, Sommers makes the argument, “if paragraphs must be restructured for logic and clarity, then many sentences are likely to be changed or deleted anyway. There seems to be no point in Responding to Student Writing [because] …students correct usage errors or condense sentences that are likely to disappear before the next draft is completed” (154-155). Much emphasis is on the grammar and punctuation of editing, when in fact, in the early stages, the ideas just need to flow out. The work needs to be completely restructured to get the big picture clarified, not the small details. Kayla says, “good work results from hard work at revising and editing than it does from actual ideas.” How true is that! I like to just write without editing or worrying about the construction of my piece so I will throw all my ideas out on paper. Therefore, the editing process is the hardest part and most important, I feel. Through this class, I will have a better view of how to edit and will pay more attention to my classmates work so I can learn from it and essentially become a better writer.
To me, to edit is to perfect. Editors don’t just fix grammatical errors and misspelled words like everyone thinks. Editors turn a rough draft into a work of art, something that considers the audience and format and delivery! Editors make writing concise and to the point, cutting out all the unnecessary sentences and making sure everything is consistent. Spell check could never compete with a human editor because a computer can’t rewrite or reorganize text to make a paper flow better. Spell check can’t suggest new ideas or figure out what should be cut out.
ReplyDeleteIn high school, editing meant proofreading other student’s work and correcting their mistakes. It was rare for any student to take it farther than correcting misspelled words, but that’s when I realized how much I enjoyed reading other student’s work and actually making changes that would improve the overall quality of their composition. Like Sam says in her blog post, I also have had to edit papers in other English classes and that’s when I feel free to actually make improvements that go farther than just grammar because I probably don’t know the person personally.
When it comes to editing principles that I use in my editing, I agree with Sullivan and Eggelston when they say “ It’s vitally important for an editor to know the intended audience for a piece of writing.” Without knowing the audience, the editor cannot know whether something should be simplified or made more detailed, cut short or made longer. Something that I learned when I read the assigned reading that I never used before was the use of the style sheet. A style sheet is a list of “anything an editor wants to remember and keep consistent while working through a piece of writing” according to Sullivan and Eggleston. I want to use this technique in my future editing work because it makes so much sense. I have noticed before in the books I read that some authors are not consistent such as when they use O.K and okay. I think it makes more sense to stick to one spelling of a certain word especially when it’s used a lot in the piece. It makes it seem neater.
Editing is a big part of the Editing and Writing in Media major. That’s why I chose it. With this major one can edit any type of media such as songs, videos, and magazines and that opens us up to a lot of opportunities. The classes that we take as part of this major teach us so much that we can use in the real world. For example we have learned about so many new programs and how to use them and we can take that knowledge and use it in the workforce. I’m sure the average Joe doesn’t know about a program like Prezzie but now I can use it to present ideas to my employers and hopefully make a great impression.
The benefits of editing are endless. Editing turns songs into symphonies, rough drafts into works of art! Editing helps make your point, reach your intended audience, and clean up the way it is presented. Its only negative would be that sometimes its possible to lose the creativity of something once its been edited. For example, the way you had to cut out the twilight references when making the handbook. Why can’t you be original and fresh? Why must you use commonplace language and be a conformist? But that is the reality of editing sometimes. If your audience is everyone, your references to pop culture must be widely known, or you’d waste too much space being specific enough for others to understand.
It was very interesting to read an article that seemed to know just what students were thinking when they receive their papers back from a professor. So often students wait with dread when teachers hand back the paper that they thought was some of their best work. When they get the paper back all bloodied up with red slashes and comments, they feel discouraged from creativity and feel as if they are being pushed back into a little box. Sommers hit the nail on the head when she said that the perspective of a student changes from the first to the second draft of a paper. Their “attention shifts from ‘This is what I want to say’ to ‘This is what you the teacher are asking me to do’”. It is sad but so true that when being edited, writers often take the critiques to the extreme when they begin to only gear what they are saying to their one audience member, their professor. The editing process is one that is in place to make one’s writing more cohesive, concise, expanded and/or overall just a better piece of work.
ReplyDeleteMost people think of editing as simply checking facts or grammar mistakes. This is a mistake that I myself am guilty of as well. After entering the creative writing major I became aware just how pivotal editing and revising are key to the success of a piece of work. Not only that, but we I have learned how to workshop a piece. Not simply to say, good, bad or “that flowed nicely” but to really give the writer feedback that will help them make their piece better. I feel like that is more the job of an editor over nid picky problems like commas and periods. This is especially true for professors. Less and less do professors respond with grammar mistakes and focus more on the overall piece, which I think is what they should do. This is a new addition to the editing we have learned in high school and I for one greatly appreciate the change. It enforces that yes grammar is important, but how you say something is more important.
By learning how to edit yourself and edit other’s papers I believe you become a better composer yourself. By knowing what you would tell someone else to do with their work, you will most likely do the same for your work. The whole “practice what you preach” thing really kicks in here. If you correct someone enough for not writing to their audience, you are bound to consider your audience before beginning your next paper. By implementing editing into this class we will not only learn how to edit for a future employment opportunity, but will also be more aware of the editing process when composing our own work. We will be more equipped with the tools needed to improve our writing and will know what editors can and will say if our work was to be submitted to one. This skill I think can and will be extremely beneficial.
Editing is not as simple as some people think it is. If you were to surrey the general public, they would probably tell you that editing is simply mending the grammatical and spelling errors in a work of writing. Before Writing and Editing in Print and Online, I probably would have been one of these people. Just as Alexis stated, most of us thought that editing was, “...trying to find grammatical and spelling errors.” I was never forced to look at editing in a deeper way, aside from a few occasions in high school, until taking this course. Over the course of this class I have learned to grow comfortable with making mistakes in order to release all of my ideas. I have adapted the philosophy that in order to write anything truly compelling I just have to let go. I have to write out everything I am thinking and edit later.
ReplyDeleteSo, to me, the process of composition is to get all of my ideas written out, then to revise my thoughts into a cohesive work. Once I have revised a cohesive draft, I like to have someone else to look it over. I agree with Sommers in the sense that, “comments create the motive for doing something different in the next draft; thoughtful comments create the motive for revising” (149). When I am reviewing over someone else's work I try to give constructive criticism that is direct, but not too specific. I am no grammar Nazi, so I usually steer clear of making grammatical corrections and lean toward giving creative advice. Sometimes comments that are too direct can lead to a draft that was worse then the one before it (153). Sommers showed us an example of an essay that a teacher had editing and pointed out that, “One could easily remove all the comments from this paragraph and rubberstamp them on another student text, and they would make as much or as little sense on the second text as they do here.” (153).
Editing is an art that is tedious and proves to be difficult, as Sommers points out to us. As noted in the article by Sullivan and Egglestone, there are many different levels in editing. When I edit a paper, I like to print out a hard copy of my writing and do it on my own. The genre that I am writing for effects the way that I compose my work and edit my work. Editing is beneficial because I can write out all of my ideas and then shape them into a genre appropriate fashion. When I am editing something it is nice to get feed back from an outside source so I can get a fresh opinion, but also test their reaction to my writing (especially if he or she is in the audience my piece is intended for). Editing is important key to any successful composition.
As an EWM student editing is important because we all want to be polished rhetoricians. We need to master each step of editing to reach our full potential. As Sullivan and Egglestone noted, we are constantly editing. We edit as we write each sentence, when we reread each paragraph, and also in an overall sense of what we are trying to say. Editing is directly correlated with composition, so one skill cannot be fulled understood without the other.
Editing has several meanings depending on what it is that you are editing. From what we read in Sullivan and Eggleston’s article, editing is a multi-step process that involves knowing what is expected of you as the editor. Editors deal with format, grammar, structure, detailing and audience. When I begin editing a paper, story or poem, I start by reviewing things like grammar and spelling that the writer may have overlooked. Next, I read the piece looking for problems with flow or structure. Things that may not sound good, or characters that need more development. Sometimes writers work on a piece for so long that they miss essential things that most people will catch the first time they read it. These are the types of mistakes that are important to catch before you even begin rearranging the format or structure. Genre is extremely important when editing a piece. If you don’t know what genre the work is supposed to fit into, how can you help it fit? Its like reading a romance and thinking its a horror, so as you edit you tell the writer to add more suspenseful plot twists or mysterious characterization. Knowing the genre can make or break the editing process. Same goes for audience. Just like every other aspect of rhetoric and composition, audience is key. We learned a lot about this when doing our newsletter. A writer needs to write to relate to a certain demographic, and the editor is in charge of making sure the writer hits that demographic. If the editor is unsure of the audience, how can they help the writer?
ReplyDeleteBecause we are not experienced, published writers, its a difficult task to edit a peer’s composition. Although constructive criticism is essential for them to make any fixes, students at our level don't appreciate it as much coming from a peer. When I took fiction technique last spring, I mostly focused on helping the writer break down the things they seemed to have trouble on. If I noticed that the characters where bland, or not developed enough I would help by asking questions about each one so that the writer would know how to develop them further. Simply telling your peer that their characters need work isn't enough and is really unhelpful. I think that editing and revising are extremely similar, to the point that its hard to distinguish their differences. But I would say editing is more of taking the final product and cutting out things that don’t work or helping the writer find things they need to fix. Revising is taking the unfinished product and adding on to what worked and getting rid of what didn’t. I would also say that proofreading is more of a revising step than an editing step. You cannot have editing without writing, and you cannot have writing without media. Editing, whether its editing a video or editing an article, are essential steps in the EWM major because they are part of one another. It also helps for EWM students to learn about these three fields together because most likely they will need to know how to use all three no matter what job they have. The benefits of editing are that it helps you realize the things that are necessary for writing. Ultimately it helps you become a better writer because you have seem the other side of the spectrum. Its a lot like when actors become directors. The transgression is easy because they know what it is like to write, and they know what it is like to direct. The negatives of editing would have to be that because you now know the tediousness of an editors job, writing will seem that much more impossible. Every time you compose a story, you’ll revise it fifteen times yourself to avoid the editor notes that you know are coming.
How does editing enhance your theory of composing?
ReplyDeleteTo edit something is to take a completed work and comment on possible improvements depending on what draft of editing one might be concentrated on. I personally have edited a number of papers belonging to my peers since I have been and currently in a work shopping class. After reading Sommers, I felt guilty in the fact that I have given some of the “stamped” comments to my peers even though I myself have also been a victim. I personally believe in one of Sommers principals that, “the teacher [editor] must anchor that strategy in the specifics of the student's text.” I too often have been written vague comments on how I should improve something, and it honestly doesn’t really help when still writing a draft. I also agree with the principal that comments should be relevant to what draft one is editing. When I receive feedback for a 1st draft from a workshop, I tend to completely ignore the grammatical comments because I end up shifting around paragraphs, rewriting and even completely deleting sentences.
I used to approach editing peers’ compositions as a combination of several “trivial activities,” such as correcting grammatical errors while also commenting on how a certain aspect of a story needs to be developed more—mostly because that is what I’ve been accustomed to. Sommers states that as editors, one must break up the criticism in several parts. In my workshopping class we only get to see the first draft of a project. I know that I should stray away from grammatical criticism when reading these first drafts and only focus on, “breaks in logic, disruptions in meaning, or missing information.”
I believe that editing fits into the EWM major because its in the title. Haha. Jk. In all honesty, I believe that learning to write is just as important as learning how to edit. As writers and composers, we need to be able to provide constructive criticism to others and ourselves. By having the ability to point out certain problems in a text, we in effect become better writers; we try and avoid the same mistakes in our own writing. Kayla’s comment about harsh criticism ties in well to my point. Yes, its true that no writer likes to have his or her ideas bashed. Nothing comes out of directing negative criticism without reason.
There aren’t really any negatives of editing. The only negatives that can apply to editing is if it is done poorly. However, the benefits are almost immeasurable. By having one’s work edited, the author is able to view his or her work from a different perspective. This different perspective is important, because the writer isn’t necessarily writing for himself. All in all, editing is needed to create a coherent and understandable piece of work.
Like everyone else said, originally I viewed editing as a tedious job that consisted of managing grammar and punctuation. After reading the Beltway piece, I now understand that editing is a lot more than I previously thought. It is everything from focusing a concept, to revamping a whole piece, and then of course checking grammar.
ReplyDeleteA major factor of editing that I really had not thought of before was the audience and how editors must take them into account. Of course one of the difficult parts of editing is trying to change things around without losing the voice of the speaker and avoiding straying from their focus. But, it is also important to remember the audience that the speaker is zoning in on. There may be some type of component that the speaker uses that is not typical of the writing world, but it is important to pay attention to the audience the speaker is reaching out to because it might make more sense when it is viewed through the audience point of view.
When approaching a colleague’s paper the first thing to think about is objective. What are they trying to say and who are they speaking to. The next step is to make sure of the coherency and fluidity of the work. Are they saying what they want to say and is the message made clear to the audience? Once the paper is structurally sound and runs smoothly, then and only then, is it time to start looking into the fine details like grammar and punctuation. While doing all of this it is important not to taint the voice or individuality of the speaker which can pose challenges if a lot of changes need to be made.
Editing and revising are the same on the structural level. They go hand in hand when making sure that the work if fluid.
Editing is a major part of EWM; for one it is in the title of the major, but also editing jumps from medium to medium. Whether a piece is a written work or some type of digital media, there is always a form of rhetoric that speaker is creating. It might be the text in some sort of image or even the image its self. Every work uses revising techniques which is much the same as editing so yes, Editing is a major part of this major.
As Sommers talks about in College Composition and Communication, the benefit of editing is that the perspective of the audience can be brought to the attention of the composer if they lose sight of it. Another benefit would be to make sure that the message is drawn up clearly. A drawback that editing has is that is might cause the composer to lose sight of what they are really trying to say. For example, Sommers talks about how in a teacher student environment, when a teacher writes commentary on the draft of a paper, the student tends to lose sight of what they were trying to say and focus on following through with the teacher’s wishes.
Finally, editing contributes to the theory of composing because it is part of the composing process.
“Editing, it’s accuracy and improvement (Sullivan and Eagleston 1).”
ReplyDeleteBefore the readings, I was aware that editing could be more than grammar and spelling. Rewording, reformatting, and changing things around so that they make more sense or are more appealing are apart of this process too. Editing is the recognition of a reader and an audience (Sommers 148). I think this is why it is important to our major. A lot, if not all, of the work we have to do depends on audience. We make a decision on what a piece is, then decide what audience it would reach. There is a similar process in editing. Audience is the first thing that comes into question in the Sullivan and Eagleston article. Sommers shows the importance of giving specific information for revision (153). As shown in class, precise instructions are what help us produce the best final product. She notes that many teachers’ comments could apply to many papers. When teachers tell a student to be more specific about an idea, it’s possible that the problem is that the idea needs to be expanded on. I agree with Amanda, in that it is extremely frustrating when you don't know what a teacher wants from their comments and they often don't have a better answer when you ask. It is an enormous "guessing game".
After the readings, I learned that audience and client are very important factors in editing. The writing has to be effective toward a geared audience without taking away from what your client is trying to communicate or taking away from there style. Dialogue, for example, may not need to be edited. Because, when a person is speaking, it is more appropriate for the person to use slang. I never realized the amount of time that would have to be put into thoroughly editing a piece. If you were editing a manuscript, you would probably have to read through it at least a couple of times before you could make some important decisions about the format of it, as well as deciding which type of editing you would need to utilize. There are several questions you would have for your client as well, because if something was not clear you would need to ask what they were trying to say so that you can come up with a way to articulate the thought better.
I have read some books that seem to be resentful of editing. Authors, and any artist for that matter, do not like it when you try to correct their work, especially in light of appealing to more people. In one of my classes last semester, we read Lolita. Nabokov seemed to bring up the issue of editing in this work by adding a letter to the beginning of this “memoir” saying that the information may have been changed to take out some of the more disturbing scenes. A characteristic of postmodernism is writing without caring who the audience is and being frustrated with those who try to make it more able to be widely distributed. The negatives are that if editing is taken too far there is a question of the originality of the work and the audience and the client may prefer the most original and untouched piece.
When someone approaches editing, they can look at it in a positive or negative light. On one hand, editing can be a negative aspect of the composition process because it can be a complicated process and points out all the mistakes you made as a writer. There are so many different forms of editing, as Sullivan and Eggleston point out in our assigned reading, that the process of editing one piece can become a lengthy and tedious process. An editor also has the ability to highlight and correct any part of your composition, from grammar and syntax to overall messages and themes. This makes it difficult as a composer to feel content with your original work when you think it may be near perfect, only to be shown all of its flaws.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I have always looked at editing in a positive light because I think editing enhances the composer’s overall message and contributes to the continuation of the composing process. Firstly, writers can be biased towards their own works and in that mindset; they may miss simple but necessary corrections. Without editing, the writer assumes that there is no need for revision of their work and that everything may be clear and concise, for that was their intention when composing. In this case, an editor serves as an objective third party and/or the prospective reader. The editor can see grammatical or structural issues of the piece that the writer may have missed. This obviously leads to a better edition of the composition. Editors also contribute in this light by directing the writer in consolidating any unnecessary parts of the composition in order to clarify the purpose of the writing. Just as Sam said, “it’s important for professionals to see your work before it’s published to ensure to get the full effect of the composition.”
Also, I think that editing contributes greatly to the continuation of the composition process because through their commentaries, editors inspire writers to create improved versions of their original compositions as well as create new parts to be added to the whole. I think Alexis said it better when she wrote, “Editing is beneficial because it takes the raw work of a composer and carves it into a diamond.” As Nancy Sommers said in her address, “comments create the motive for doing something different in the next draft; thoughtful comments create the motive for revising. Without comments from their teachers or from their peers, student writers will revise in a consistently narrow and predictable way” (149). It is through editing that we broaden the proverbial horizons of composition; therefore it should be appreciated and not dreaded.
Something I have always admired about good editing is its specificity. Whereas Sommers pointed out that vagueness is one of the problems with teacher’s comments, it is an editor’s job to be relentlessly specific, from overall themes to the words in a sentence. This is an asset to the writing world because if a writer can see what exactly has to be improved, they can do so without affecting the rest of the piece.
Originally I never gave much thought to the editing stage of writing and I always had this vague idea in my head about what exactly editing meant. Editing meant grammar and spelling correction, line by line stuff. Maybe you added or gave suggestions with concepts our looked out for misinformation but the general idea was that editing didn’t involve much of an actual process and could be quiet boring and tedious. Now, I know that editing is an actually process, with different variations and an need for attention to detail, only to grammatical concerns but also to concepts like audience relevance, genre the person you are editing for is writing it needs to be maintained and if they fall off track at some point an editor had to point that out and get them back on it. Editing takes a lot of knowledge on the subject and that you’re editing as being able to give the client what they are looking for and at the same time being very outright with the things they need to add or correct. It may still be as tiresome as I originally thought but editing is not altogether boring either.
ReplyDeleteWhen editing a peer’s work I think it adds a certain amount of pressure to the situation. It’s important to not be bias or too hard on the other person when you’re reviewing their work. When talking about her experience in another course Gabbi said that “Simply telling your peer that their characters need work isn't enough and is really unhelpful.” I have mixed feelings about this comment to be honest. Like Sommers says, comments are a way to encourage a student to want to keep writing more which is part of the reason teachers give feedback on student papers. In my creative writing classes I’ve had in the past, I loved the criticism. In fact, I lived for it those semesters. But I can see where Gabbi is coming from because I didn’t always follow the advice of my reviewers and sometimes acted as if they simply did not “get the message.”
As most everyone has pointed out and I would agree with, editing and writing are both similar processes but they each differ in key place, one being that editing is more of a finalized stage in writing. You may go through a draft or two with editing ( in fact I’ve some authors personal complaints before about the long editing and proofreading cycle) but it’s not like revision where the piece can still be said to be in it’s infancy in terms of form and idea. When you edit you are pretty much done with altering major parts of yours or someone else’s work. The concept most likely will not be changed but you can still add or take away parts if needed. In revision you are still forming ideas and key concepts. Editing is more about changes in style and format. The questions become ‘how is the way this work is presented going to work out with the audience or the particular genre It is written for?’
In my opinion, editing is the process that attempts to bring a text to perfection. The editor has an image of what the completed product should look like, so overlaying it with the unfinished product, they are able to recognize errors in language, grammar, and context, and are able to point them out to the writer. In regards to principles of editing, I believe in scrutinizing every word and asking "Why?" Why did the writer to choose to say this? Why did they choose to say it this way? Although I do agree that "every editing project is different, and each has its own needs and constraints" (Sullivan and Eggleston, 4-5). While some texts may require a great deal on concentration such as the manuscript for a novel, others allow less scrutiny, such as a letter or a memo. In this sense, genre and audience definitely influence the editing process. The audience will, in the end, be the true judge of merit in regards to a text. Therefore, they should be considered priority in the revising of a work. "When you know who the reader will be, you can gauge whether the vocabulary, style, and depth of the material are appropriate" (Sullivan and Eggleston, 5).
ReplyDeleteWhile reading Sommers essay, and hearing her talk about editing done by teachers, I'd have to agree that not enough guided peer revision was present for me growing up. In fact, there are times where we did peer revision and I would be upset at the comments made on my paper because I did not believe they helped to make my paper any better and I think they took the individual student's opinion into account instead of considering an audience larger than themselves. I also agree with Sommers discussion of contradictory comments. Sommers says "Students are commanded to edit and develop at the same time; the remarkable contradiction of developing a paragraph after editing the sentences in it represents the confusion we encountered in our teachers' commenting styles" (Sommers, 151). Alex Aaron also touched on this notion in her response to the blog. I know it's probably difficult with such a heavy work load and certain time constraints for teachers to perfectly edit every student paper, but I think it would be beneficial not only for them but also for the students if they guided a peer review in class and instructed on the proper methods to edit a text, such as those presented by Sullivan and Eggleston.
Editing is vital to the EWM major because even if one intends to enter a career in writing, being able to personally edit their own text is a crucial part of the composing process. A good writer should always be taking their audience into consideration as they write, they should always be looking at the most effective way to get a message across, and they should be trying to avoid grammatical errors along the way. Editing is a contribution to the theory of composing. If our writing is an attempt at conveying our dogma, than editing is the means by which we pull it even closer to truth. In the same way that composing perfects our ideas and beliefs, editing perfects our composition.
To edit, in my onion, means to change the grammatical or linguistic characteristics of a work to better enhance its message and clarity. To do this means editing words or phrases that aren’t grammatically correct or in some cases, like we talked about in class on Monday, for editorial purposes. Our reading from this weekend, highlighted that one can edit a composition for different purposes. In Sullivan and Eggleston’s "Before You Begin" for example, there are different types of editing process for a work; standard proofreading, editorial proofreading, copyediting, and substantive editing. Each of which has an increasing level of editing, from the latter to the former, needed to correct the errors in the writing. Personally, when I edit a paper, I do so by looking at the grammatical errors first, I dissect their meaning and insert its correct usage; I tend to do editing in “passes”. I proofread the paper noting anything I missed and then move forward to make not of anything that doesn’t make sense to me or could be misinterpreted by the reader. I believe that thorough editing is essential to convey a clear message to your intended audience.
ReplyDeleteSince we all know that the audience determines the language of a work, it is important to understand that both audience, and what I’m about to discuss, genre considerably affect how we edit. For example, to a reader, any error that is made by a writer can tangle their conversation. As Williams points out, we cannot solely edit on the basis of seeing errors as “detestable”, we must edit on the basis of continuing a clear, understandable conversation between a reader and his or her audience. The first draft of a thriller novel should not be edited to concise, short sentences without long drawn out detail, because then, in my opinion, it would read as follows: “ Jack the Ripper killed her and stole her purse”, instead of, “Jack the Ripper, all six feet and seven inches, stood over her, shaking with anger and rage. He picked up the gun, pointed it at her and fired; taking her purse with him as a memento.” Granted, this is a very extreme example of a an editor who is a coma stickler, but to me, this is what editing can do to a piece when someone goes ape over grammar and punctuation, the conversation with the audience can be minimalistic and overtly robotic.
When engaging in peer to peer editing, it’s important to realize that everyone is still learning and editing by his or her own beliefs.
I focus on maintaining the conversation and content, rather than focusing on every incorrect usage that I can find. Williams makes this clear when he says, “...When we do not make error a part of our conscious field of attention… we read for content, letters- for the most part- recede from our consciousness.” Therefore, I believe editing is a part of the process of revision, rather than something completely separate.
Editing, besides, making up one third of our degree’s title, is important to our major because it teaches us to be critical of error, but also engage the best parts of any content. Its should be included, because we’ve all had that experience of reading the good and bad parts of novels, article, journals etc that could have been worked on a little more but weren’t; the conversation is blurry, and I’d like to think that by adding editing to our theory of composition, we’re making the world a little less blurry. Call me the Eye Doctor of Composition :)
Editing...I cannot stand editing, for the reasons stated in the article I read last night. To me, editing is when you have someone look over your work and molds your writing to be the masterpiece it can be. I feel that most students have their idea of the perfect paper on their specific topic. I know that when I get a topic and begin to brainstorm on how I am going to compose the piece, I begin to get the vision of this perfect paper, with little to no flaws. But after I get finished composing and I hit the spell check button on the Microsoft Word toolbar, and re-read my work (sometimes). I feel a sense of accomplishment, for I have took the thoughts, ideas, and views that I was once thinking about in print format.
ReplyDeleteIn the article it says that teachers tend to be vague while they are asking students to be specific. I hate that that, like really. How are you going to tell me to use a different word selection. When, I am a person who does not like to use big words that makes a person rethink the way that they pronounced it and if it flows with that sentence that it is a part of. I feel that a teacher is taking away from the voice or the expression of a student, while they are editing their work. As, the article that was read over the weekend, I believe it was Sullivan and Eggleston stated that the editor should be on the same page as the composer. Basically thinking and feeling the same way that the composer feels about the topic. So, in order for a teacher to avoid distracting a composer from their main point of concern they should try and find a way to bring it out of the composer in a direct manner. Also, stated in that article was that the editor should take notes, and place page numbers down with their comments how it can and will be easier for a composer to follow or find the justification of the editors remarks and comments.
Being a student I have had many occasions of having to change my train of thought and way of composing for the likes of teachers, which is basically bs. I say this for in English classes, students should be allowed to express themselves and get their point across in such a manner that will help improve them as a writer. A teacher should take their own thoughts out of the composer's paper and try to aid the student to fulfill their dreams of having that perfect paper. Teachers should stray away from having composers or students from thinking that being a composer is all about following the rules. Yea, I know that rules are there to provide order and stability for a specific cause, but it should not be used as a restraint for different composers.
As stated, the problem is the confusion of process and product. For the process is always going to be different to get to a particular product. For example, tying your shoelaces. There are different ways to tie your shoes, but the overall "product" is that your shoes will be tied at the end. I believe teachers/editors should keep that in mind when they are editing the papers of students and just plain old composers.
Editing is necessary for every composition. To edit is to make it better, whatever it may be. Editing is getting a constructive critique on your work so that you can make sure that it is going to fulfill its purpose and be the best composition it can be and receive the best response from the audience. Editing is dissecting all of the work that is already composed and looking for better ways to improve it. You can edit for errors in spelling, grammar, and punctuation, and you can also look at ways to improve the sentence structure and flow. There is an endless list of things that you can edit. Basically, you can edit any form of composition. Even if it does not include writing, editing can be working with other forms of media. For example, in music you can improve the lyrics and music in a song, or in a video you can edit by taking out pieces of the film that are not necessary to make the film better.
ReplyDeleteI believe that editing is a necessary process for writing. In each piece I have, I reread it several times. I look for mistakes, and I fix them. When I am comfortable with my piece I share it with others for their feedback. It is this critique that makes by piece even better.
Genre and audience both affect how one edits. As I said before, editing can be working with all forms of media. Whenever there is a composition, there is a piece to edit. Genre affects editing because a written composition and a musical piece are two different situations. In a written piece, editing would be critiquing the written work, checking the piece to grammatical errors and making sure the piece flows right and would make sense to the intended audience. In a musical composition, editing would be correcting the lyrics or flow to get the best response. Editing the length, tone, music and language is also a part of a musical composition.
When I approach other’s compositions I try to be as detailed as I can be. I always want to make sure that I give back constructive advice so that the author will be able to publish the best result in the end.
“As writers we need and want thoughtful commentary
to show us when we have communicated our ideas and when not,
raising questions from a reader's point of view that may not have occurred to
us as writers. We want to know if our writing has communicated our intended
meaning and, if not, what questions or discrepancies our reader sees
that we, as writers, are blind to”(Sommers 148).