{"id":101,"date":"2017-08-02T17:46:12","date_gmt":"2017-08-02T17:46:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.tees.ac.uk\/tjuthompson\/?p=101"},"modified":"2017-08-02T19:23:52","modified_gmt":"2017-08-02T19:23:52","slug":"there-are-two-typos-of-people-in-this-world-those-who-can-edit-and-those-who-cant","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.tees.ac.uk\/tjuthompson\/2017\/08\/02\/there-are-two-typos-of-people-in-this-world-those-who-can-edit-and-those-who-cant\/","title":{"rendered":"“There Are Two Typos Of People In This World: Those Who Can Edit And Those Who Can\u2019t”"},"content":{"rendered":"

I\u2019ve been spending a bit of time this week working on Science & Justice<\/a>. We\u2019ve had some interesting new papers come in, there have been some useful reviewers comments to read through, and some decisions to make on manuscripts. Regardless of whether the decision is Accept<\/em> or Reject<\/em>, I never take these decisions lightly. I\u2019m an academic myself, and I know what it\u2019s like being on the receiving end of Editors\u2019 decisions. Anyway, this post isn\u2019t about editorial decision-making (as enthralling as that sounds…), but rather looking back at a previous post. I\u2019m coming to the end of my tenure as Editor-in-Chief of Science & Justice<\/a>. It\u2019s been a wonderful journey (oh yes, I went there…), but it made me think of a post I put on our other (now defunct) blog. I wrote that when I had recently started the role, so I thought I\u2019d dig it out again, and look back over it now that I\u2019ve done this for three years, to see if I was talking bollocks or not…<\/p>\n

I\u2019ve been doing a lot of Editor-y things this week. Today I\u2019m compiling the next issue of Science & Justice<\/a>, and a couple of days ago I signed off the final proofs for my next book, The Archaeology of Cremation<\/a>.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Nice – I started off with a shameless plug for my new book. Classy move, Thompson… Although saying that, it is still available for purchase…<\/span><\/p>\n

Have a vision<\/strong>. As the Editor of a book or journal, you set the tone, remit and scope of the publication. Before you start, you need to be crystal clear about what you want the thing to say, and who you want to say it to.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Okay, so this is definitely true. If you don\u2019t have a sense of the end point for your book or whatever it is, you\u2019ll get lost along the way and the chapters will seem disjointed and won\u2019t relate to one another. This is fine for some books (for example, the latest edition of Blau and Ubelaker<\/a> covers a vast range of subjects, and works really well) but if you want to make something that pushes specific boundaries or philosophies, you need to be focused.<\/span><\/p>\n

Have a narrative flow<\/strong>. Yes each chapter or paper is a piece of work in its own right, but so is the overall volume. The papers need to flow logically from one to the other. For The Archaeology of Cremation<\/a> the flow is temporal (Neolithic to modern), or the last S&J<\/a> the emphasis was biology and each paper linked to the next by method or topic.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Another plug! Subtle. Actually, this one says more about me than anything else. I\u2019ve realised over the years that the need for structure and organisation is my personal need! There are very many books which don\u2019t have a rigid structure, and work out fine. Likewise issues of journals. In fact, I still feel guilty now for inadvertently imposing a rigid structure onto a colleague\u2019s book when it wasn\u2019t necessary. And this need for a narrative structure got me into a bind when working on our latest book (Human Remains Another Dimension<\/a>). So, this is not a hard-and-fast rule. Also, I\u2019ve just realised that I\u2019ve managed to plug a new book in a written criticism of plugging my old book…\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

You have a voice, but so do your authors<\/strong>. You will inevitably have to edit the work of your contributors, especially if English isn\u2019t their first language. But you must be careful to maintain the way the authors say things, not just what they say. I can give you a long list of friends who have had their identities rubbed\u00a0out of their work by over-zealous editors.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

This is important, but hard to manage – but I have friends who won\u2019t contribute to certain editors because they don\u2019t want their voice trampled on.<\/span><\/p>\n

Just because you\u2019re not writing every page, doesn\u2019t mean it is easier<\/strong> than being a sole author. It\u2019s just different, but still a horrifying experience…<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Oh my God, it\u2019s totally easier. Why did I say that? Idiot.<\/span><\/p>\n

Everybody, I repeat everybody, will be late<\/strong>. All of your contributors will have the best of intentions, but they will all miss the deadlines you set! So factor in some extra time for this, and don\u2019t wait around for the really late papers – it\u2019s not fair on the others.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

This is one of the three truths of life – the other two being death and taxes. But seriously, give yourself some wiggle room and lie to your contributors about when the ‘real\u2019 final deadline is. Also, I realise now that you\u2019ll lose chapters in every edited volume you do. This is one of my regrets of my cremation book (have I mentioned that one before..?) – it\u2019s a chapter or two shorter than I\u2019d like because some contributors pulled out and I hadn\u2019t given myself some extra ones as a cushion.<\/span><\/p>\n

Peer review is so important<\/strong> to help maintain the quality of your publication. This is especially true if you are editing a book which is a pet project, or contributions are being written by friends – you can become a little blind to any weaknesses.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

It is really important – but what is also really important is how you, as Editor, handle those peer review comments. Give your authors a chance to respond, and remember that you don\u2019t have to agree with your reviewers – it\u2019s just their opinion. With S&J, there have been a few times when I have intervened because I felt that the peer review comments were too personal, or biased, or a bit bonkers. I\u2019ve even had to black-list some reviewers.<\/span><\/p>\n

The end product will never be quite what you expected<\/strong>, but that\u2019s not necessarily a bad thing. Remember that every project gives you the chance to hone your skills (especially organisational and diplomacy skills!) for the next one.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Definitely! Each issue of the journal, and each edited book, has been easier than the previous one.<\/span><\/p>\n

You\u2019ll vow never to do it again<\/strong>. And yet you will. Being an Editor is a lot of work, more so than people realise, but it gives you a wonderful opportunity to create something novel and exciting, and to say the things that you want to say.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Basically I\u2019m saying that Editors are heroes and you should never forget that…<\/span><\/p>\n

So, I wasn\u2019t too far off then. Would I add any others to this list? Maybe. I think it\u2019s also really important to maintain a good relationship with those you\u2019re working with in the publishing company. The people at CUP were very understanding of the shocking, staggering lateness of Human Identity & Identification<\/a>, while those good folks at Elsevier have allowed me to try some off-the-wall initiatives with S&J. These are all because of good personal relationships. As an Editor of a journal, I also think it\u2019s really important to be visible and to make sure people can talk to you about their work and what you\u2019re trying to do with the journal. For me, this has meant doing training events and conferences, but as a result we\u2019ve had some wonderful submissions in. Oh, and make a timetable and stick it to your wall!<\/p>\n

I hope some of this helps. I learnt through mistakes, so hopefully I can help you avoid some of those. You\u2019ll probably make new ones though…<\/p>\n

The title, by the way, is from\u00a0Jarod Kintz<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

I\u2019ve been spending a bit of time this week working on Science & Justice. We\u2019ve had some interesting new papers come in, there have been some useful reviewers comments to read through, and some decisions to make on manuscripts. Regardless of whether the decision is Accept or Reject, I never take these decisions lightly. I\u2019m an academic myself, and I know what it\u2019s like being on the receiving end of Editors\u2019 decisions. Anyway, this post isn\u2019t about editorial decision-making (as enthralling as that sounds…), but…<\/span>Continue Reading ““There Are Two Typos Of People In This World: Those Who Can Edit And Those Who Can\u2019t””<\/span> →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":144,"featured_media":167,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"footnotes":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[6],"tags":[18,35,14,11,21,36],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/blogs.tees.ac.uk\/tjuthompson\/files\/2017\/08\/StockSnap_J8HP1PXSEJ.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p5ogem-1D","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.tees.ac.uk\/tjuthompson\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/101"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.tees.ac.uk\/tjuthompson\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.tees.ac.uk\/tjuthompson\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.tees.ac.uk\/tjuthompson\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/144"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.tees.ac.uk\/tjuthompson\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=101"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.tees.ac.uk\/tjuthompson\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/101\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.tees.ac.uk\/tjuthompson\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/167"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.tees.ac.uk\/tjuthompson\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=101"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.tees.ac.uk\/tjuthompson\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=101"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.tees.ac.uk\/tjuthompson\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=101"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}