Pat Johnson's editorial problems
Pat Johnson
Hello to anyone reading this thread:
It has been several weeks since I have had time to even look at mw,
which of course I regret. One of the reasons is that I am in the midst
of putting out my quarterly newsletter for the British Society of
Enamellers. In this twelve page A4 magazine, I write quite a few of the
articles myself, but obviously I ask other members of the BSOE to
contribute articles and very often they do.
The problem is that many of these enamellers write in a very colloquial
style, to say the least. Here are a few examples:
'Everyone but everyone was willing to share their time...'
'To quote Harlan's figures at you....'
I have tended to let this sort of thing alone, i.e. I don't re-write it,
because I think the articles need colour to distinguish one contributor
from another and also to liven up what can be some pretty dreary
material. But my husband says I am letting down the standard of my
newsletter. Does anyone here have any opinions which could help me
decide what to do?
--
Pat Johnson
Bjorn Pedersen
[ cc:ed ]
Hello Pat,
You Johnson wrote in message ...
[ snipped preamble <g> ]
>I have tended to let this sort of thing alone, i.e. I don't re-write it,
>because I think the articles need colour to distinguish one contributor
>from another and also to liven up what can be some pretty dreary
>material. But my husband says I am letting down the standard of my
>newsletter. Does anyone here have any opinions which could help me
>decide what to do?
Now, you'll have to take what I say with a grain of salt since I don't have
that much professional editing experience. I publish a small garage news
feed called FlashNews, but I write 99.5 percent of the material myself.
However, on the two or three occasions where I have used others, I've been
pretty tough.
I pay them money, so I expect top quality. So, on one occasion the
contributor wrote back to me... You know how you can't shout in email, but
that email shouted. 'What kind of darned nitpicky stuff is that?' He
charged.
Back to the point. Since I'm responsible for FlashNews, I want it to rank up
there with Reuters or UPI or The Washington Post. I think that if you are
willing to put your name on something, then that had better be as good as
you could possibly make it.
You just have to decide whether the "colloquial colour" adds to the quality
of the newsletter, or if it detracts from it. Does it give you an
informality, or does it hurt the credibility of the newsletter? Only you can
decide that since you work on it every day.
Pat Johnson
In article <66v7ko$m1t$1...@bone.globalone.no>, Bjorn Pedersen
<Anon...@Nowhere.net> writes
>[ snipped preamble <g> ]
>
>>I have tended to let this sort of thing alone, i.e. I don't re-write it,
>>because I think the articles need colour to distinguish one contributor
>>from another and also to liven up what can be some pretty dreary
>>material. But my husband says I am letting down the standard of my
>>newsletter. Does anyone here have any opinions which could help me
>>decide what to do?
>
>Now, you'll have to take what I say with a grain of salt since I don't have
>that much professional editing experience. I publish a small garage news
>feed called FlashNews, but I write 99.5 percent of the material myself.
>However, on the two or three occasions where I have used others, I've been
>pretty tough.
What is a newsfeed? Are you supplying material to a larger news network?
What kind of news.
>
>Back to the point. Since I'm responsible for FlashNews, I want it to rank up
>there with Reuters or UPI or The Washington Post. I think that if you are
>willing to put your name on something, then that had better be as good as
>you could possibly make it.
Yes, I am responsible, but I actually am responsible to the members of
the BSOE and I also represent them. Therefore I have to let them have a
look in where their newsletter is concerned. That's the rub. I must
confess, however, I did not realise what rare birds writers are until I
took this job on. It amazes me how good artists and apparently
intelligent people can't put odwn anything interesting on paper. If I
could find some enamellers who were also writers, I would stick to them
for my articles and my problem would be solved.
>
>You just have to decide whether the "colloquial colour" adds to the quality
>of the newsletter, or if it detracts from it. Does it give you an
>informality, or does it hurt the credibility of the newsletter?
Well, I have gone for local colour in this issue, but if someone would
write me something serious, I would love to up the stakes.
> Only you can
>decide that since you work on it every day.
Not exactly. I produce an issue every three months. Lets face it - there
is not that much happening in the enamelling world.
Bjorn Pedersen
Pat Johnson wrote in message ...
>What is a newsfeed? Are you supplying material to a larger news network?
>What kind of news.
Yesss! Free ad! :-)
No, seriously. FlashNews is a wee, embryonic newspaper that I publish over
the net. I write short articles about things that happen around the world,
collect market data, collect some news about online-events, and then send
them out to the people in my FlashNews email group.
It's very low key, very sparse, and free -- but they seem to enjoy it. I
haven't had any defections yet :-).
It's like a small newspaper, except people get it article by article.
I'm going to expand it, though, and do something like Infobeat. I'm going to
hook up either Reuters or UPI, and get myself some freelancers in the big
centres of the world. I'm already talking to one person I found in here.
Grand plans, idn't it?! :-) Unfortunately it means I'm going to have to
charge people for it, because there's no ad-content to be found on the net.
Not even huge services like Infobeat get much ads, and they go out to over a
million people. Hopefully people will appreciate that I'm completely
independent, and that I can can really get out the news first without
worrying about print/TV/radio editions, and that this will outweigh the fact
that my service costs money while other services don't.
>Yes, I am responsible, but I actually am responsible to the members of
>the BSOE and I also represent them. Therefore I have to let them have a
>look in where their newsletter is concerned. That's the rub. I must
>confess, however,
What do they think about it?
>I did not realise what rare birds writers are until I
>took this job on. It amazes me how good artists and apparently
>intelligent people can't put odwn anything interesting on paper.
How do you go about finding writers?
Writing articles requires training. It's like any other job. You get better
the more you work at it. And there is a definate technique to writing
articles. When you sit down to read these articles, what is your favorite
disposition? What makes you think: Boy, that one was good? And, what do you
want to see in these articles?
If you try to put down these things on paper, you can issue a Writer's
Guidelines that your writers could follow.
>Not exactly. I produce an issue every three months. Lets face it - there
>is not that much happening in the enamelling world.
:-)
There are always articles to write. It is never *only* news. What about
profiles of enammelers? What about how-tos on technique? What did the
masters of earlier times do? Are there any success stories in the business,
and are there any failures?
Take care,
Bjorn
---
My website:
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Olympus/1822
Have you heard the trade news? Read all about it in FlashNews.
Subscribe by writing to bjo...@trollnet.no
Do your bit for Jayne Hitchcock, won't you?
http://members.tripod.com/~cyberstalked/
A Rotten Brain
>Hello to anyone reading this thread:
>
>It has been several weeks since I have had time to even look at mw,
>which of course I regret. One of the reasons is that I am in the midst
>of putting out my quarterly newsletter for the British Society of
>Enamellers. In this twelve page A4 magazine, I write quite a few of the
>articles myself, but obviously I ask other members of the BSOE to
>contribute articles and very often they do.
>
>The problem is that many of these enamellers write in a very colloquial
>style, to say the least. Here are a few examples:
>
> 'Everyone but everyone was willing to share their time...'
>
> 'To quote Harlan's figures at you....'
>
>I have tended to let this sort of thing alone, i.e. I don't re-write it,
>because I think the articles need colour to distinguish one contributor
>from another and also to liven up what can be some pretty dreary
>material. But my husband says I am letting down the standard of my
>newsletter. Does anyone here have any opinions which could help me
>decide what to do?
Yep. Turn the whole enterprise over to your husband for a month, then
stand looking over his shoulder with "helpful" advice and see how HE
likes it.
agb (You'll have it back in two weeks...)
Dick Harper
Pat Johnson eloquently commented in misc.writing
> >>I have tended to let this sort of thing alone, i.e. I don't re-write it,
> >>because I think the articles need colour to distinguish one contributor
> Yes, I am responsible, but I actually am responsible to the members of
> the BSOE and I also represent them. Therefore I have to let them have a
> look in where their newsletter is concerned.
The editor's job --whether paid or voluntary-- is to produce clear,
lively, well written articles. I believe that _does_ mean working
with your writers to rewrite until the articles shine.
The arts council has a newsletter for which, I am very pleased to
report, I have found another sucke^H^H^H^H^Hdarling editor to manage.
It has always been readable, because we take the time to make sure the
content is well written as well as useful.
Anne's a member of BPW. Each local chapter produces a monthly
newsletter. In year's past, their newsletter was pretty good: nice
layout, good printing, and moderately good articles. The current
editor doesn't have those skills and the newsletter is not as good as
it once was.
A publication does more than simply inform. It also colors, guides,
and maintains the language. I believe it is important that any
publication, whether the simplest of church bulletins, the smallest of
newsletters, or the best of the literary or professional journals, is
responsible for good use of language.
--Dick
Pat Johnson
In article <3495665b...@news.together.net>, Dick Harper
<rbha...@together.net> writes
>The editor's job --whether paid or voluntary-- is to produce clear,
>lively, well written articles. I believe that _does_ mean working
>with your writers to rewrite until the articles shine.
The problem is with content as well as style. I simply cannot find
anyone with anything interesting to say. My writers can only come from
the British Society of Enamellers membership because we do not have
enough money to pay anyone to review exhibitions and very few people
outside us practitioners know much about enamelling. Or care. The Crafts
Council occasionaly reveiw our exhibitions, but they seem to chose a
writer who has a particular dislike of enamelled artifacts and we get a
right royal drubbing every time.
This is a shame, because enamelling is an exciting medium. But we do
achieve mediocre results with most of our work and need some help to
attract brighter artists. A well written publication would assist us
greatly, and that is what I orignally set out to do with my newsletter,
but I simply cannot find the writers to help me raise the stakes. In
fact, the standard of writing about enamelling is deplorable world wide.
No doubt professional arts and crafts writers would say we don't produce
anything worthy of their attention, but that is not entirely true. Its
just hard to find. I know and write about various enamellers whom I
consider important, but I only publish the articles in my newsletter,
where no one reads them except us chickens.
Because I can't attract good critics, I am left having to rely the
individual writing styles of our members for variety. If their ideas
were interesting, then I would polish and make perfect, but in the
circumstances I feel I have no choice other than to leave them be.
>
>The arts council has a newsletter for which, I am very pleased to
>report, I have found another sucke^H^H^H^H^Hdarling editor to manage.
>It has always been readable, because we take the time to make sure the
>content is well written as well as useful.
>
>Anne's a member of BPW.
What is this?
Each local chapter produces a monthly
>newsletter. In year's past, their newsletter was pretty good: nice
>layout, good printing, and moderately good articles. The current
>editor doesn't have those skills and the newsletter is not as good as
>it once was.
>
>A publication does more than simply inform. It also colors, guides,
>and maintains the language. I believe it is important that any
>publication, whether the simplest of church bulletins, the smallest of
>newsletters, or the best of the literary or professional journals, is
>responsible for good use of language.
>
Yes, I do have to agree with you here. (Head hanging) I will try harder
next time. And it will be easier because I know there are a few good
articles coming in.
Regards, Pat.
--
Pat Johnson
Pat Johnson
In article <671em7$kus$1...@bone.globalone.no>, Bjorn Pedersen
<Anon...@Nowhere.net> writes
>
>Pat Johnson wrote in message ...
>
>>What is a newsfeed? Are you supplying material to a larger news network?
>>What kind of news.
>
>Yesss! Free ad! :-)
>
>No, seriously. FlashNews is a wee, embryonic newspaper that I publish over
>the net. I write short articles about things that happen around the world,
>collect market data, collect some news about online-events, and then send
>them out to the people in my FlashNews email group.
This sounds interesting. I will write to your trollnet address.
Hopefully people will appreciate that I'm completely
>independent, and that I can can really get out the news first without
>worrying about print/TV/radio editions, and that this will outweigh the
fact
>that my service costs money while other services don't.
I do hope that you are right in this and I wish you every success. The
problem is that there is so much to read these days that the competition
to disseminate news is very great. Can you be truly independent? Its
almost impossible to present all sides to a story. But perhaps your
strong point, your 'hook', will be that you are faster. At any rate, I
will be very interested to have a look and see what you are doing.
>
>>Yes, I am responsible, but I actually am responsible to the members of
>>the BSOE and I also represent them. Therefore I have to let them have a
>>look in where their newsletter is concerned. That's the rub. I must
>>confess, however,
>
>What do they think about it?
As far as I know they are very pleased with what I am doing, but then I
don't have any competition. The good sign is that now some of the
members are beginning to make sure that I take an interest in what they
are doing so that I will put an article about them in the newsletter.
This means that at least in our small group I am being taken seriously.
>
>>I did not realise what rare birds writers are until I
>>took this job on. It amazes me how good artists and apparently
>>intelligent people can't put odwn anything interesting on paper.
>
>How do you go about finding writers?
If I hear of anything interesting happening in enamelling, I contact the
person involved. If they don't want to write about their work, then I
will do it, either by interviewing them or producing an article in
rather standard format. I always try to emphasis the unusual and the
unique when I write about a person's work. This is easy to do with
enamelling because it requires a great deal of ingenuity to do well.
>
>Writing articles requires training. It's like any other job. You get better
>the more you work at it. And there is a definate technique to writing
>articles. When you sit down to read these articles, what is your favorite
>disposition? What makes you think: Boy, that one was good? And, what do you
>want to see in these articles?
The same thing I want to see in a good enamel - something new. And a bit
of a dig below the surface. I think the members of our group who also
write in the newsletter have set ideas about what is appropriate to put
in newsletters, and they are afraid to break out of the clichés. It was
made quite clear to me by the executive that nothing offensive should
ever appear in the newsletter, since we are trying to stick together and
help each other. I fear I have to agree with this, but I am trying to
become adept at making my points with carrots rather than sticks.
>If you try to put down these things on paper, you can issue a Writer's
>Guidelines that your writers could follow.
I just ask them to say something 'unusual', but so far this approach has
not worked.
>
> Lets face it - there
>>is not that much happening in the enamelling world.
>
>:-)
>
>There are always articles to write. It is never *only* news. What about
>profiles of enammelers? What about how-tos on technique? What did the
>masters of earlier times do? Are there any success stories in the business,
>and are there any failures?
>
A man after my own heart. Yes, I can always find something intriguing
about enamelling to discuss. For example, in my current issue I have
piece about an artist who was asked to do some enamel murals for a
hostel of recently homeless people. He was asked to consult with the
residents about the subjects they wanted and got into quite a tangle.
The men would not let him photograph them, but they said he could use
pictures of their hands. Later, when the artist showed these chaps his
designs, they said the hands looked like they were begging. At the point
the artist lost his patience and said no they didn't, they were waving
in victory. And he refused to adapt his designs any further. But he knew
he was in a tight spot because any one of those men would have loved to
have the money the artist was earning by making pictures for their front
hallway.
Anyway, obviously I can't write the whole newsletter myself. Actually,
my orginal question was about certain colourful colloquialisms, i.e.
people using spoken forms in an article rather than formal English. If
you can find my original post somewhere, perhaps you could tell me what
you think of those specific examples.
Regards, Pat.
Dick Harper
Pat Johnson eloquently commented in misc.writing
> >Anne's a member of BPW.
>
> What is this?
Business and Professional Women. It's a social/educational/networking
group -- sort of an "old girl nework" but more inclusive than the "old
boys" have. Nice, supportive organization.
--Dick
James E Naylor
Pat Johnson <pat.j...@enamel.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>Hello to anyone reading this thread:
>It has been several weeks since I have had time to even look at mw,
>which of course I regret. One of the reasons is that I am in the midst
>of putting out my quarterly newsletter for the British Society of
>Enamellers. In this twelve page A4 magazine, I write quite a few of the
>articles myself, but obviously I ask other members of the BSOE to
>contribute articles and very often they do.
>The problem is that many of these enamellers write in a very colloquial
>style, to say the least. Here are a few examples:
>
> 'Everyone but everyone was willing to share their time...'
> 'To quote Harlan's figures at you....'
>I have tended to let this sort of thing alone, i.e. I don't re-write it,
>because I think the articles need colour to distinguish one contributor
>from another and also to liven up what can be some pretty dreary
>material. But my husband says I am letting down the standard of my
>newsletter. Does anyone here have any opinions which could help me
>decide what to do?
>--
>Pat Johnson
Pat,
Your concern is noteworthy. Many editors rewrite the life out of
pieces by making them all sound the same. As a writer, when that
happens, I ask to have my byline removed from the piece. When I'm the
editor, my own rule of thumb is to edit for length, edit for content,
but never,never, never edit out the writer's voice.
In the interest of professionalism, edit judiciously. I suggest
changing the first example to "Everyone was willing to share their
time . . ." and the second to "To quote Harlan's figures . . ." These
small changes tighten the writing, making it sound more professional,
while leaving the voice behind.
The exception would be if the writer is a respected expert whose
speech patterns are well known amongst your readers. Then leaving them
alone adds "color" to an authoritative piece.
Hope this helps.
Romayne
Pat Johnson
In article <67662m$v8$1...@pigpen.csrlink.net>, James E Naylor
<jena...@csrlink.net> writes
>Pat Johnson <pat.j...@enamel.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>
>> 'Everyone but everyone was willing to share their time...'
>
>> 'To quote Harlan's figures at you....'
>
>>I have tended to let this sort of thing alone, i.e. I don't re-write it,
>>because I think the articles need colour to distinguish one contributor
>>from another and also to liven up what can be some pretty dreary
>>material. But my husband says I am letting down the standard of my
>>newsletter. Does anyone here have any opinions which could help me
>>decide what to do?
>>--
>>Pat Johnson
>
>Pat,
>
>Your concern is noteworthy. Many editors rewrite the life out of
>pieces by making them all sound the same. As a writer, when that
>happens, I ask to have my byline removed from the piece. When I'm the
>editor, my own rule of thumb is to edit for length, edit for content,
>but never,never, never edit out the writer's voice.
>
>In the interest of professionalism, edit judiciously. I suggest
>changing the first example to "Everyone was willing to share their
>time . . ." and the second to "To quote Harlan's figures . . ." These
>small changes tighten the writing, making it sound more professional,
>while leaving the voice behind.
Nice and neat. Perhaps I would have thought of it myself if the whole
article hadn't been so vacuous that the style was the only interesting
thing about it.
>
>The exception would be if the writer is a respected expert whose
>speech patterns are well known amongst your readers. Then leaving them
>alone adds "color" to an authoritative piece.
>
>Hope this helps.
Yes it does. In fact all the advice has helped me clarify my thinking
about how to approach my newsletter. Yes, I must try to get better
writers, at the same time raising the standard of the language used.
That will be my main aim. But on the occasions when I can't reach this
ideal, I will stand by the efforts of the people who at least took the
trouble to contribute an article.
Pat
--
Pat Johnson
Dick Harper
Pat Johnson eloquently commented in misc.writing
Bjorn:
> >If you try to put down these things on paper, you can issue a Writer's
> >Guidelines that your writers could follow.
Pat:
> I just ask them to say something 'unusual', but so far this approach has
> not worked.
Bjorn had the right idea, particularly since you are dealing with
novices. Look up some guidelines for other news oriented
publications; you can model yours after theirs.
> The problem is with content as well as style. I simply cannot find
> anyone with anything interesting to say.
Most new writers don't know about "Who-What-When-Where-Why" or about
the pyramid style preferred by most newspapers. Explain those
briefly. Discuss length. You could even prime the pump with a step
by step outline of what you want a "first" article to include:
How did s/he start
When did s/he start
What is the enameler's philosophy
What's different in the design
Where are the pieces on display
Compare to other earlier artisans
What level of production
How do they choose the images
Where do customers come from
Notice that the outline covers the 5 Ws (Who-What-When-Where-Why-How)
pretty specifically. It will also lead the writers to an idea of
what's interesting.
--Dick
Bjorn Pedersen
Dick Harper wrote in message <3496b746...@news.together.net>...
Dick wrote:
>> The problem is with content as well as style. I simply cannot find
>> anyone with anything interesting to say.
>
>Most new writers don't know about "Who-What-When-Where-Why" or about
>the pyramid style preferred by most newspapers.
To Pat,
If you don't know what the Pyramid style is, it's just that you tell the
news first. Say that you are a reporter, and you are sent to cover a bad car
crash.
You don't start like this:
The most godawful things happened today. There were bodies strewn
everywhere. The local policeman said we couldn't come near, but we snuck
around some cars. A guy tried to stop us, but we kept going to bring you
this news --
You tell the news first:
At 10.05 this morning there was a serious car crash on M1 outside London. A
lorry skidded across the road and five other cars crashed into it. With 3
dead and 11 seriously injured, it was the worst accident in the last 10
years.
Here you have What, Where and When in the first sentence. The how and the
why is in the second.
This is the pyramid style. Tell the main thing first, then progressively
less important things further and further into the article.
Dick wrote:
>Explain those
>briefly. Discuss length. You could even prime the pump with a step
>by step outline of what you want a "first" article to include:
There's a Kipling quote that I memorized that deals with this:
I keep six honest serving-men
(They taught me all I knew)
Their names are What and Why and When
And How and Where and Who
Bill Oliver
In article <f8oELAAg...@enamel.demon.co.uk>,
Pat Johnson <pat.j...@enamel.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>I have tended to let this sort of thing alone, i.e. I don't re-write it,
>because I think the articles need colour to distinguish one contributor
>from another and also to liven up what can be some pretty dreary
>material. But my husband says I am letting down the standard of my
>newsletter. Does anyone here have any opinions which could help me
>decide what to do?
My wife edits a newsletter in a technical field, and I occasionally
assist her. We have the same discussion. I write for medical
journals and proceedings, and fall into that stilted formal style
quickly (though I have recently been taken to task for being too
colloquial since I used "I" instead of "the author" and "you"
instead of "the reader" or "one" in a chapter).
I think it depends on your audience. Some groups *are* very
chatty and colloquial, and a newsletter that reflects that
orientation may be doing the appropriate thing. I don't particularly
think that the newsletters for, say, the local Folk Harp
Society or my local church *should* read like the
American Journal of Forensic Medicine and Pathology or the
front page of the New York Times.
To me, the question is whether or not the emphasis in "newsletter"
is on "news" or "letter." If you want it to be a "real" newspaper,
then you should be more strict I suppose. If the emphasis is
on "letter," then perhaps you should allow more informality.
billo
Pat Johnson
In article <3496b746...@news.together.net>, Dick Harper
<rbha...@together.net> writes
>
>Most new writers don't know about "Who-What-When-Where-Why" or about
>briefly. Discuss length. You could even prime the pump with a step
>by step outline of what you want a "first" article to include:
> When did s/he start
> What is the enameler's philosophy
> What's different in the design
> Where are the pieces on display
> Compare to other earlier artisans
> What level of production
> How do they choose the images
> Where do customers come from
>Notice that the outline covers the 5 Ws (Who-What-When-Where-Why-How)
>pretty specifically. It will also lead the writers to an idea of
>what's interesting.
>
where I keep all the material for the next issue. People have asked me
for advice like this; now I will have something to give them.
Regards, Pat
Pat Johnson
In article <677foq$33s$1...@bone.globalone.no>, Bjorn Pedersen
<Anon...@Nowhere.net> writes
>If you don't know what the Pyramid style is, it's just that you tell the
>news first. Say that you are a reporter, and you are sent to cover a bad car
>crash.
>
>You don't start like this:
>
>The most godawful things happened today. There were bodies strewn
>everywhere. The local policeman said we couldn't come near, but we snuck
>around some cars. A guy tried to stop us, but we kept going to bring you
>this news --
>
>You tell the news first:
>
>At 10.05 this morning there was a serious car crash on M1 outside London. A
>lorry skidded across the road and five other cars crashed into it. With 3
>dead and 11 seriously injured, it was the worst accident in the last 10
>years.
I still can't believe you are tucked far away up north. How do you know
all these things, like about the M1?
>
>Here you have What, Where and When in the first sentence. The how and the
>why is in the second.
>
>This is the pyramid style. Tell the main thing first, then progressively
>less important things further and further into the article.
>
My son the former newspaper editor (now doing a travel magazine in
Yellowknife, Canada) says you can count on most people not getting past
the first two paragraphs, if that.
I have also printed out your letter, to remind me to remind people to
put the good stuff in first.
But just let me show what I am dealing with here. A lady phoned up an
offered to review an exhibition by two of our members. She subsequently
sent me:
'This was a tour de force by both artists.
'Ann's spacious, light and elegant studio provided an
excellent venue for her sixteen enamels, plus pastels
and water colours. Ann lives in Bristol. After training at the
Art Students League in New York, she went on to paint still
livess in oil, pastels and watercolour. Her introduction to
enamelling on copper in 1977 lead her to explore similarities
in these media.'
She follows this will a quote from the exhibition handout, which
discussed why one of the artists likes to work in enamel. Not a word
about the work on display. And I had to print it because I had said
'yes' when she offered.
As I have said in this thread before, I will have to develop a knowledge
of who can write and who can't. Or maybe I can raise standards by,
whenever these admittedly kind offers come along, having a word with the
person and telling them about the pryamid and the five w's. In other
words, get them to aim a bit higher. Hmm. This idea rather appeals to
me. But I will have to be careful because these volunteer writers often
care very deeply that put in their words exactly as I received them.
Pat Johnson
In article <679jh2$m...@saltmine.radix.net>, Bill Oliver
<bi...@saltmine.radix.net> writes
>
>To me, the question is whether or not the emphasis in "newsletter"
>is on "news" or "letter." If you want it to be a "real" newspaper,
>then you should be more strict I suppose. If the emphasis is
>on "letter," then perhaps you should allow more informality.
It has to be a newsletter because it contains information about
forthcoming exhibitions and opportunities. And I do want people in the
society to know more about each other, i.e. about their enamelling
activities. But underpinning that is my desire to raise the quality of
writing and thinking about enamelling. I guess it amounts to a juggling
act, trying to make the best of my material and having something that
fulfills each of the functions. Perhaps in the end these inconsistancies
will create a kind of variety which will keep the newsletter
interesting.
Actually, I try to do a great deal with layout to bridge the gaps and
keep people reading. Good layout can cover a multitude of sins, don't
you think?
--
Pat Johnson
Tetractys
Pat Johnson wrote:
<Snipped a sample of rambling writing from a contributor>
>She follows this with a quote from the exhibition handout, which
>discussed why one of the artists likes to work in enamel. Not a word
>about the work on display. And I had to print it because I had said
>'yes' when she offered.
I beg to differ, Pat. You could have taken her information and edited it
to conform to your publication's style. There isn't a writer here who
hasn't had their work cut up, pasted and reworded. If you don't feel
qualified to do it yourself, you can always get a local university to
supply some talent from their English or journalism departments, usually
for free, sometimes for a nominal fee.
-Dave Vaughan, aka Tetractys
d...@bigfoot.com
twi...@worldnet.att.net
Pat Johnson <pat.j...@enamel.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <677foq$33s$1...@bone.globalone.no>, Bjorn Pedersen
><Anon...@Nowhere.net> writes
>She follows this will a quote from the exhibition handout, which
>discussed why one of the artists likes to work in enamel. Not a word
>about the work on display. And I had to print it because I had said
>'yes' when she offered.
>
>As I have said in this thread before, I will have to develop a knowledge
>of who can write and who can't. Or maybe I can raise standards by,
>whenever these admittedly kind offers come along, having a word with the
>person and telling them about the pryamid and the five w's. In other
>words, get them to aim a bit higher. Hmm. This idea rather appeals to
>me. But I will have to be careful because these volunteer writers often
>care very deeply that put in their words exactly as I received them.
One of the best things that ever happened to me in a writing
class was when the professor said: "Don't give me
generalities. Give me specificities." I still don't think
there's such a word, but even if there isn't, it tells you
what you need.
You want this writer to tell the reader whether Ann had a
particular group of colors that she's favored in her work,
for example, and whether the work in the show followed this
theme or showed that she'd entered a new phase. Then when
it comes to Ann's background, which should either be woven
into the text or placed at the tail of the article, again
the specifics should be given. What brought her to live and
work in the UK? What sort of pieces do others expect from
her? Again, does the exhibition show that she's following
her normal flow, or is she developing a new vision?
What I'd do with the folks you're trying to work with is
give them not only the Who, What, When, Where, Why, How
questions, but some specifics to ask for. Such as has the
enamelist found a new working method or an adaptation of an
old one? Is there anything different or unusal about the
colors, etce.? In other words, things that apply to both
the art and craft of enamelling, things the writer assumes
s/he knows without asking about them. The answers may
surprise them and you.
Have I been specific enough?
Sharon AKA Sarah Edwards
Pat Johnson
In article <67c6p2$7ss$1...@nntp3.interaccess.com>, Tetractys
<d...@bigfoot.com> writes
>Pat Johnson wrote:
>
><Snipped a sample of rambling writing from a contributor>
>
>>discussed why one of the artists likes to work in enamel. Not a word
>>about the work on display. And I had to print it because I had said
>>'yes' when she offered.
>
>to conform to your publication's style.
How could I? I didn't see the exhibition and I have no idea what kind of
work was in it. If the writer had described the pictures, then I could
have edited away to my hearts content.
>There isn't a writer here who
>hasn't had their work cut up, pasted and reworded. If you don't feel
>qualified to do it yourself, you can always get a local university to
>supply some talent from their English or journalism departments, usually
>for free, sometimes for a nominal fee.
I do feel qualified to edit, especially now that I understand more
clearly what I am trying to do in the newsletter. But your suggestion
gives me an idea - perhaps I can approach some writing courses to send
me along some people to review our exhibitions. Just imagine, fresh
blood at last. Of course they would no doubt slate us, always a risk
when asking for people's opinions.
Dick Harper
Dave eloquently commented in misc.writing
> I beg to differ, Pat. You could have taken her information and edited it
> to conform to your publication's style. There isn't a writer here who
> hasn't had their work cut up, pasted and reworded....
Dave's right, but beware of repercussions. I've edited pieces from
amateurs-who-believe-themselves-gifted, and the resulting, ah,
discussions ain't pretty. Be sure to advise your writers up front
that you'll need to edit for space and content, then, with their first
"new" pieces, do just that. You may lose some writers after that
issue hits the street, but your newsletter will be a better
publication.
--Dick