Fantastic – and I’ll bet nobody in their office calls it “unconstructive” or “inappropriate”. This is how people really talk, at least over here.
Via the inestimable Kevin.
Read Giles Coren’s letter to Times [subeditors]
Comments
15 responses to “Read Giles Coren’s letter to Times [subeditors]”
-
That is wonderful and so, so right …
Craig
-
The one time I ever got some fiction published, the sub-editor sneaked a spurious word in because they didn’t parse a sentence properly, and they joined two paragraphs together for length.
I was quite cross. Not as cross as Giles Coren, but cross nonetheless.
-
I hate this. It smacks of arrogance and aggression by someone who probably thinks he is above the ‘annoying little’ editors who read his copy . Writers are great at doing this – taking themselves and their copy far too seriously and forgetting that they too are paid (like their lowly and harangued editors) to deliver clear, amusing and accurate copy on time.
If Mr Coren was so attached to his indefinite article (and it is hard to see why given that he had to explain the innuendo it carried) he could have quite easily written a note to the effect that there was a dual meaning to the phrase ‘a nosh’ which an ordinary layman might overlook and perceive as an error – this would not only have protected the artistic integrity of the piece but would also have prevented a bout of editor bashing which I personally find stomach turning.
Editors, unfortunately, are not mind readers and cannot perceive or know absolutely everything about a writer’s intent. This is where good communication and a few manners helps. -
@bridget: I wondered if you would have a different take on it than I
That said speaking as a programmer I can be very nitpicky about how i say or express things, so I would expect a “check copy” cycle for this sort of thing?
>Editors, unfortunately, are not mind readers and cannot perceive or know absolutely everything about a writer’s intent. This is where good communication and a few manners helps.
So you suggest authors try to forward-guess their sub-editor mis-corrections (mal-corrections?)
-
Coren is clearly an arrogant nobface. Firstly, he should have written a note explaining the dual meaning, because most people wouldn’t know the other meaning of the word ‘nosh’. Also, unless he retains copyright of his articles, the publisher (and its employees) can edit his work however they please. Even if the editor had understood the joke anyway, it should have been removed, as it was puerile at best, and some might consider it offensive.
Editing other people’s work isn’t easy, as a lot of writers make mistakes, and there really isn’t time to contact the writer every time there’s a small ambiguity. Coren should understand this, and should grow up.
-
No, I think that when you are writing for a national newspaper which is read by (for want of a better term) the ordinary ‘layman’ and you use a phrase like ‘ a nosh’ which could be misconstrued or read as a mistake ( not only through lack of linguistic awareness on the reader’s part but also because people writing newspaper copy work to very tight deadlines and make slips all the time which editors are employed to spot) it would make sense to raise awareness.
As he seemed to have time to vent his bile against the subs over three pages, writing a note to say ‘btw ‘ a nosh’ needs to be left as is because of dual significance’ might have been a small price to pay to ensure he slept easy at night.
I agree you can’t anticipate what an editor will do with your copy and, unfortunately , because of time pressures when producing newspapers it’s pretty impossible for editors to check every correction or change they make with the writer. In addition, they are frequently required to cut articles to fit a required space at the last minute. From a writer’s point of view, ‘to hack their article to death’.
My point is that the writer must be
aware of this as he has been writing for 15 years for the same national newspaper so one would have expected a bit more understanding of the editorial process and less of the foot stamping. -
>Firstly, he should have written a note explaining the dual meaning, because most people wouldn’t know the other meaning of the word ‘nosh’.
…although oddly I have always spoken directly (in a food context) of “a nosh” or described something as “nice nosh”, so Coren is spelling out clearly something which I had previously done but not understood…
-
Don’t you love it? The foot-shooting, ferret-faced little fuck aired his spleen and venom because he was afraid his subs might make him look….foolish. Oh, the irony.
For a start, it’s catering copy, not WRRRRI-TING, dear. Sure it’s irritating when people mangle your words, but I don’t recall Andie McDowell getting a roasting from Richard Curtis when she famously gang-banged his script for Four Weddings.
But that’s hardly the point. The immediate assumption that subs never make honest mistakes is low enough, but to stamp a little red dancing shoe and shriek and scream at people who can’t ordinarily answer back leaves a snake’s ringpiece towering over Coren’s unlovely head.
Bullies must always and everywhere be FACED DOWN
-
Bravo Mr Harris! Couldn’t have put it better myself!
-
@LouisHarris:
I’ll agree that Coren comes off a bit precious but there’s something in what you say that gets my back up; it’s the term “catering copy”, and for me the problem is this:
The paper could do like The Economist where everyone is anonymous or on rotation behind a nom-de-plume, requiring for correspondents to cite conflicts of interest etc but otherwise remain hidden. But they do not.
As such, Coren is a “brand”. He simply must be. The paper uses his name on the column, presumably they believe he draws an audience who read because of him. Thus what he writes has got his name against it for perpetuity, and to my mind this behooves him some respect for what he produces since presumably the paper benefits that way.
If a restaurant hires a chef who brings a signature dish with him, it’s hardly up to the sous-chefs to poke the dishes before presentation to the customer – at least, not without checking with the chef.
So when you say “it’s catering copy” that smacks to me of a 1970s mindset which might go on to say something like:
…and you’re nothing without this newspaper, duckie; we are the channel for your voice to the public, you’re nothing without us and there’s nothing you can do about it, and if you don’t like it you can fuck off and become a blogger
…only to turn around and start ranting about “where are all these bloggers coming from?” and how sales are down.
Adriana linked to this lovely piece recently, the bullet points pertinent to this discussion being numbers 5 and 6:
5) Newspapers were a nice business. Publishers could make the product insanely cheap (remember the penny press), and the advertising would cover the expenses, plus generate fantastic profits. However, this is clearly over. It’s done. It worked for a long time, but now, like trans-Atlantic leisure travel in big passenger ships, it will never work again.
6) No one today goes to one spot online as the trusted information source. People don’t even go to five or six. Everyone goes to dozens, hundreds — more. A subscription scheme is therefore not workable. (Update: Many people worldwide are not online. I know that. Many people are illiterate and cannot read newspapers. Let’s move on.)
Hence my opinion of “catering copy” mentality – unless you are a product without a diffuse, aggregate brand that is dependent upon independent columnists, perhaps it is unwise to treat your writers as cattle.
Yes that means dealing with pretentious little shits occasionally, but that’s the work.
Bottom line: The masthead doesn’t carry the weight any more – eg: the Times is no longer the “Thunderer” – Google is.
Actually, no, scratch that. People are. Google is just the printing press.
-
Coren is undoubtedly a celebrity hack who merits extreme kow- towing and over-indulgence on the part of hapless newspaper subs however Louis is right about his piece being ‘copy’ rather than ‘writing’ . When someone writes a book, there is time to consult, show proofs and discuss changes. When you write copy for a newspaper, the process is contracted into production hours/minutes rather than production months or years.
The moral is: don’t write for a newspaper if you want absolute control over what you write.
PS Can’t say I’m convinced about the demise of the newspaper at present even if we are living in GoogleWorld. -
Just a little additional, As I understand it this e-mail in question was dated 10 August 2002, a fact that a number of the papers don’t seem to be sharing! Giles certainly wasn’t a well known then!
-
Actually the review in question dates from April 2008, but Coren has a history of these things going back to 2002. Original link, below.
-
Sadly, the rant was better than his normal, crappy, self-congratulatory copy. His father must be spinning in his recent grave.
Subs do the best they can with the umbles most writers call prose.
Giles, you are a total corent. -
How unfortunate that he included bad English in his rant! But more so, as an Irish person, he uses an Irish-is-stupid joke to make his point? that casts him in the 1980s thinking-wise, if that is the simile he grasps for. Less a fighter than a wanker. And of course financially all is changed utterly. His father has lately died and God knows that causes a burning boat mentality, but it also should cause a reassessing of what is important in life.Don’t go the racist way.
Leave a Reply