{"id":3040,"date":"2008-07-04T23:16:20","date_gmt":"2008-07-04T17:46:20","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.ravikiran.com\/blog\/classic\/200807\/on-editing\/"},"modified":"2008-07-06T11:46:55","modified_gmt":"2008-07-06T06:16:55","slug":"on-editing","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.ravikiran.com\/blog\/classic\/200807\/on-editing\/","title":{"rendered":"On Editing"},"content":{"rendered":"

Most of my readers should have already downloaded and read the July 2008 edition of Pragati<\/a>. <\/em> If you have been remiss, please do so now. It is focused on India’s foreign policy and contains many high-quality articles, as Pragati always does.<\/p>\n

Here are some thoughts on writing and editing, based on the few months of poring over submissions and editing that I have done as an editor of Pragati:<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. \n

    If you are a novice writer, the \tword limit is your friend. Virtually every tenet of good writing \tthat you follow will result in a reduction in your word count. If \tyou approach the problem from the other end, i.e., if you set your \tfocus entirely on reducing your word count, you will find that you \tare writing well.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  2. \n

    Following the principles of good \twriting will make you a good writer, but it will not make you a \tgreat writer. Great writing requires that extra \u201csomething\u201d \twhich cannot be stated in terms of principles.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  3. \n

    But \tthat extra \u201csomething\u201d is not extra word count. Great \twriting is enjoyable even when it is long; one should not conclude \tfrom this that it is enjoyable because<\/em> \tit is lengthy.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  4. \n

    If you think that you have written \ta great piece even though it is long, you can verify its greatness \tby trying to reduce the word count. If it is really good, you will \tfeel the pain when you try to cut. If you are too softhearted, you \tshould give it to someone who is more brutal with his knives. That \tperson does not have to be a better writer than you. He just has to \tbe a different person from you.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  5. \n

    Virtually anything that is \tsuitable for Pragati can be made really short and convey the \t\u201cessence\u201d of the information. This is not to say that \tthe shortest version is the right version \u2013 you will want to \tconvey much more than the bare essentials. The point is that this is \tin contrast with a well-written travelogue, a \u201cfeature\u201d \tor a novel, where cutting out the descriptive details can destroy \tthe piece.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  6. \n

    That you are writing a travelogue \tis not an excuse to abandon brevity. If you are writing a 1000 page \tnovel, there is more reason to be brief.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  7. \n

    Point no. 5 suggests that writing \tthe precis first and then expanding upon it is a good way to write \tan article. I am not sure, though, because I never do it that way. \tHowever, I never have a problem keeping within a word limit. In \tfact, when I am writing under word limit constraints, I tend to \tfinish with hundreds of words to spare and then worry about what the \thell I can add more.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  8. \n

    The extension of point no. 5 is \tthat if you cannot convey the essence of your article in 200 words, \tit should probably be more than one article.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  9. \n

    It is a lot easier to edit a \tclumsily written article than a well-written article. I can make \tindiscriminate cuts to the former and rewrite whole paragraphs. I \tcannot do this for well-written articles. My worst fear is that I \twill get a well-written article that is way over the word limit. The \tcuts I need to make will cause me physical pain.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  10. \n

    The second worst fear is that I \tget a well-written article written in a substantially different \tstyle from mine (or Pragati’s). When editing that, there is a \tsubstantial risk that I will make it worse.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  11. \n

    Surprisingly, editing an article I \tutterly disagree with is not very difficult.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Finally, one opinion on writing that I have changed my mind about during my editing tenure is on the value of the personal pronoun. Nitin wanted \u201cI\u201d to be avoided. I didn’t see the point of opinion<\/em> pieces forcing the writer to avoid using \u201cI\u201d. Now, enforcing the guideline on multiple articles, I see that it does improve the writing. In an opinion piece, the \u201cI think\u201d is assumed, and is therefore redundant. The only purpose it serves is as a disclaimer. You are saying, \u201chey, I <\/em> think so, but I may be wrong.\u201d The disclaimer is useful if your opinion is a matter of taste or preference, but readers of Pragati don’t care about your tastes or preferences. They will agree or disagree with your views based on how soundly you back it with reasons. Avoiding the \u201cI\u201d will force you to give those reasons.<\/p>\n

    The only exception to this norm that I can think of is when you have to talk of your personal experiences. There you may need to use the \u201cI\u201d.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    Most of my readers should have already downloaded and read the July 2008 edition of Pragati. If you have been remiss, please do so now. It is focused on India’s foreign policy and contains many high-quality articles, as Pragati always does. Here are some thoughts on writing and editing, based on the few months of […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[2],"tags":[54,24],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ravikiran.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3040"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ravikiran.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ravikiran.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ravikiran.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ravikiran.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3040"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.ravikiran.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3040\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ravikiran.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3040"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ravikiran.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3040"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ravikiran.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3040"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}