Copyeditors are like movie directors – sitting silently behind the scenes with power at their fingertips to make someone a star.
But unlike the Steven Spielbergs of this world, copyeditors and subeditors rarely see the glory or recognition of their work. Editors are more likely to be forgotten and cast aside than even the folk selling overpriced popcorn in cinemas.
But that’s all right. No one becomes an editor to seek fame and fortune. No one pictures themselves on stage before thousands of adoring fans, with keyboard in one hand and dictionary in the other.
If truth be told, most copyeditors don’t grow up dreaming of desk-bound days reading through other people’s work, checking facts and correcting bad grammar.
It’s probably fair to say the vast majority of subs don’t set out to edit books or magazines or newspapers or packaging or whatever it is they edit; they usually just find they’re good at it during the course of a different job. Sometimes it’s while studying our wonderful English language, but it could reasonably be argued that the best subs often come from journalistic backgrounds.
Why? Well, simply because the best editors are generally great writers too. The best editors know how a sentence should look, how a phrase should sound, how a headline should sit across a page – purely because they know how to write it themselves.
The best editors know linguistic laws, and they know which rules can be broken. They know when to cut away crud, and when to embellish a detail. They know when the words on their screen have the makings of greatness, and when it’s a battle to simply convert a load of verbose guff into something remotely readable.
A good subeditor can hack away copy with a giant machete. A good sub could massage every sentence with a lover’s gentle touch. A good sub should leave a writer’s words looking like he’s never even been there.
A good editor should perform surgery under a cloak of darkness. A good editor should be as capable of perfecting a recipe with a pinch of pepper as he is of stirring a pot of soup and turning it into a stew.
An editor’s role could even be compared to that of a political advisor, changing the face of a nation’s government with a few swift and well-considered moves.
Like Blackadder to Prince George, like Gromit to Wallace, an editor should be the smart sidekick who’s happy to shun all the credit while his brilliant writer basks in wordy limelight.
A good editor should sit back and grin, taking pride from his role, and maybe even a little comfort from being in control.
And, like any great movie director, an editor should know when to keep the cameras rolling, and when to shout Cut!
