Of human errors

[justcarol67]

Julie Borgmann wrote:
>
> I forgive all people of errors based on the fact they're human.  I
feel its more the job of the editor to find these errors than it is
the author.  Its hard to be critical of ones creative work. ,snip>
> 
Carol responds:
Thanks, Julie. You're absolutely right that it's hard to see the
errors in our own creative work because we're so close to it, which is
why editors have jobs. But I think it's important to realize that
editors are just as human as authors and working to a tight deadline
and that the content of a book is ultimately the author's responsibility.

Speaking as a copyeditor, one of the primary considerations of an
editor at any level is to respect the substance of an author's work. A
copyeditor has to retain the author's voice to the extent possible
while, for example, eliminating mechanical errors, changing passive
voice to active voice, and editing out wordiness and
awkwardness--maybe not so much with an established author like JKR as
he or she might have done with an unknown author, in part because the
wording of the American and British editions has to match as closely
as possible. Typos and other errors have to be corrected (I spotted
one, "here" for "there" in a bit of dialogue spoken by Ron, which
should have been caught by the proofreader if the copyeditor missed
it, but no one is perfect.)

The American copyeditor would Americanize the punctuation and
spelling. The continuity editor creates a style sheet to make sure
that spells and names are spelled and capitalized consistently,
probably specifying, at least in the Scholastic edition, that that
incantations should be italicized (e.g., "Avada Kedavra") while the
actual names of the curses (e.g., "Killing Curse") are not.

It appears that Scholastic at one point spotted the change of Moaning
Myrtle's, er, home from a U-bend to an S-bend, investigated British
plumbing, and decided that the Hogwarts "bathroom" should have both.
Personally, I would have suggested changing "S-bend" to "U-bend" to
match CoS and queried JKR as the final authority.

It is not, however, the continuity editor's job to point out the
improbability of a letter written to Sirius Black at another address
showing up at 12 GP. *If* an editor spotted that (and I doubt that the
same copyeditor has been used for all the books, and the current
Scholastic continuity editor only started working on the HP books with
OoP), he or she would query JKR. It is the author's responsibility to
read the edited manuscript and accept or reject corrections, as well
as to act on or ignore queries.

A senior editor like Arthur Levine looks at the book as a whole, not
the individual words or sentences or scenes, and makes suggestions
which the author acts on--or not. I don't know what his working
relationship is with Bloomsbury, the primary editor. In any case,
Levine was too busy reacting emotionally to the book to make
productive suggestions, as I would have been. I could *not* have
edited this book on any level, especially with a deadline to meet.
Only a non-HP fan who didn't care about the fates of the characters
could have copyedited it. And such a person would not have spotted
inconsistencies like the letter (which serves other purposes in the
plot besides having its signature torn off by Snape) or Muggles on
Platform 9 3/4 in "The Prince's Tale."

The American continuity editor seems to be in charge of which
Briticisms to retain and which to change. I would question her use of
"bathroom" in earlier books for what the British call a "toilet" since
no one bathes in a "restroom" (U.S. usage). "Lavatory" (washroom)
might have been better. I would have changed "S-bend" (in HBP?) to
"U-bend" with a query. And I would not have changed "pants" (or
whatever the British original was) to "underpants" for Ron's underwear
in an early chapter (possibly "The Ghoul in the Attic"). "Boxers,"
"briefs," or even "underwear" would have been better.

But those are minor matters, related to readability. (Well, I take
readability seriously, but it's my job!) The story itself is the
author's responsibility. (*I* would have queried Harry's use of a
Crucio with "But aren't the Unforgiveable Curses unforgiveable?" It's
quite possible that an editor did as well. But whether anyone did so
or not, the decision to have Harry use that curse, and the existence
of any plotholes or other inconsistencies other than, say, the effects
of a particular spell) is JKR's.

I used to think that I'd like to have been JKR's editor. Now I'm
thankful that she's never heard of me. I could have eliminated some of
her misplaced modifiers and awkward repetitions and changed "due to
the fact that" to "because," but only after a cooling-off period to
recover from my emotional reactions to the books. And by the time I
could point out some of the consistency errors (those apparent on a
second reading focused on matters of style and Americanization), it
would probably be too late. The book was on a set production schedule
that a mere copyeditor had no authority to alter, and JKR would have
been focused on the big picture, not on continuity errors that only
she could fix.

BTW, did anyone read Stephen Kings's review, pointing out the
continuity error in "Robinson Cruseoe," who swims out naked and comes
back with supplies in his pockets? Oops. Happens to the best of us.
And Shakespeare is notorious for certain anachronisms, such as clocks
and bound books in ancient Rome.

Carol, who thinks it's remarkable that JKR has brought everything from
Gringotts and Griphook to Hagrid and Harry full circle and would
rather see the diamond than its flaws