Blog

 

January 28, 2011

“The Overton Window” by Glenn Beck

Filed under: Book Reviews,Essays — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , — Thomas Hauck @ 3:37 pm

Totalitarianism is bad. Freedom is good. You can’t argue with the message that FOX television personality Glenn Beck expertly delivers in “The Overton Window.” Modern industrialized democratic societies are capable of embracing dictatorships, as Germany and Italy did in the in 1930s. Can it happen in America? Never say “never.”

The central and most useful idea put forth in “The Overton Window” is one of political relativism. That is, when presented with a given set of choices, when one possible solution is extreme, a less extreme outcome will seem more acceptable. This idea is not Beck’s; according to Wikipedia, “The Overton window, in political theory, describes a ‘window’ in the range of public reactions to ideas in public discourse, in a spectrum of all possible options on a particular issue. It is named after its originator, Joseph P. Overton, former vice president of the Mackinac Center for Public Policy.”

For example, if the government threatens to ban all firearms in private hands, a less extreme ban on automatic weapons seems more reasonable. To a libertarian, which Beck sounds like, this type of compromise moves the Overton window along the sliding scale toward totalitarianism. A government ban on automatic weapons, which should be unthinkable, is accepted by the masses only because the other choice, a total ban on all weapons, is a possibility. This is how Big Brother conditions citizens to meekly accept government control over the lives of its citizens.

Unfortunately, you don’t need four hundred pages to figure this out. “The Overton Window” is not so much a thriller as a political science lesson. The characters, which are expertly drawn, deliver endless lectures to each other. The evil public relations genius Arthur Isaiah Gardner pontificates about how the United States is a failed experiment in democracy that needs totalitarianism. The good guys lecture each other about how the government plans to institute totalitarianism. As it turns out, the paranoia of the good guys is based on reality. Terrorists will detonate a nuclear bomb in Las Vegas, and the blame will be put on the Founders Keepers, a group that resembles the Tea Party. The scheme echoes the Reichstag fire of 1933, which Chancellor Hitler was quick to blame on communists and which he used as an excuse to suspend civil liberties.

The protagonist and bad-guy-who-becomes-good is Noah Gardner, son of the evil Arthur Gardner. Noah is paired with Molly Ross, an activist with the Founders Keepers. (Presumably other Founders Keepers gals might be named Betsy Madison or Dolly Washington. Beck makes it easy for the reader to get the point.) Beck takes pains to avoid bashing Democrats; in his world, no matter who is in charge the government literally does nothing good or moral. Nothing. At one point Noah, in a lengthy political discussion with Molly, asserts, “I care about the environment more than most, I want clean energy….and Saddam Hussein was a legitimate monster.” But after this tiny window of rational discussion is cracked open, it is slammed shut again and Beck takes us back to paranoia. The problem is that “they” (the promoters of totalitarianism) are undefined. Presumably it is everyone in government (although Beck expressly excuses local law enforcement and those engaged in “public safety” – no sense in making the local cops and firefighters mad) and every corporate type. And there are no solutions offered, only a bleak and horrifying future ushered in by a guy who evokes Lionel Barrymore’s portrayal of the evil Henry Potter in “It’s a Wonderful Life.” Even the GM bailout, which in retrospect seems like a fantastic deal for the U.S. taxpayer and for our standing in the increasingly competitive global marketplace, is seen as evidence of the nanny state meddling in our freedom.

The challenge for anyone who might be critical of this book is that people who love the book can retort, “So! You are in favor of dictatorship! You hate freedom!” Sorry – no. I’m not paranoid and I am not afraid of complexity. As communication and mobility improve, the trend towards increased federalism is inevitable. It’s something that we have to manage, not run away from.

January 27, 2011

Thomas Hauck, Editor: Quotes, Italics, Boldface, and Capitals

Filed under: Essays,Uncategorized — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , — Thomas Hauck @ 2:05 am

Every writer wants his or her words to leap off the page. We all experience the anxiety that the reader will lose interest or will fail to grasp a particularly important point or word. And so many writers resort to four popular devices to draw the reader’s attention: quotes, italics, capitals, and bolded type. Use of these literary spices must be judicious, or else the recipe will taste like a jumble of accents and no substance. At worst they can be an irritating turnoff.

Quotes

Aside from indicating direct quotations of speech, quotes should only be used to either indicate that it is the word itself that is under consideration, or to indicate the unusual or non-standard usage of a word. Here are two examples.

1. When you see the word “elephant,” you should say it out loud.

2. The gangster’s “defense” consisted of the ridiculous assertion that the bloody knife got stuck into the victim’s back by accident.

In the second sentence, you might have said, “The gangster’s so-called defense consisted…” You are indicating to the reader that the word is being used sarcastically. Don’t use quotes around a word unless you are really and truly using the word in some unusual way. Overuse of quotes around single words quickly becomes tiresome.

Italics

Italics are good way to add emphasis to any word. Italicized words are easy to read and you can use them liberally.

1. You need to differentiate between good cholesterol and bad cholesterol.

2. The aircraft hit turbulence. Really rough turbulence.

Capitals

Putting ordinary words in caps for emphasis is never a good idea. It is tiresome and confusing. Take a look at this paragraph:

1. In the USA, President Ronald Reagan established the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDIO), which was later changed to the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO). In 2002, BMDO’s name was changed to its current title, the Missile Defense Agency (MDA). The MDA is a POWERFUL deterrent to Russian or North Korean missile attack.

When you get to the word “powerful,” the effect is bewildering. The use of caps should be reserved only for acronyms.

Bolded type

Bolded type is useful in a non-fiction document when you are introducing a word or phrase for the first time, and you want to make sure the reader sees it. It’s also used for live links to website pages. Here is an example:

1. For a non-profit organization, a successful capital campaign is the result of many constituencies working together for a common goal, including the board, staff, volunteers, donors, and community representatives. As the project grows from an idea to a proposal to reality, a campaign plan is key to success. A comprehensive campaign plan provides a framework for action and a template that is transparent and universally accepted

We’ve introduced the term “campaign plan,” which we intend to discuss in the document. Subsequent occurrences are not bolded.

A word about ellipses

Ellipses (…) should only be used when a part of the sentence or dialogue is truly missing, not simply to indicate a pause. To indicate a pause, use a dash.

1. But wait – there’s more! I want you to see – to hear – and to truly believe!

2. Everyone knows how the Gettysburg Address begins: “Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth…the proposition that all men are created equal.”

Thomas Hauck – ghostwriter, editor, proofreader. From my office in Gloucester, MA, which is an hour north of Boston, I provide professional book editing, ghostwriting, and proofreading services for authors in the Boston area, New England, the United States, and worldwide. For unsurpassed personal service, contact Thomas Hauck book editor today.

January 2, 2011

“Life” by Keith Richards

Filed under: Book Reviews,Essays — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , — Thomas Hauck @ 4:45 pm

There are many reasons why I would want to read “Life,” the new memoir by Keith Richards. I’ve been Rolling Stones fan since I was a kid back in Cincinnati and I first heard “Satisfaction” and “Last Time” on WSAI-AM, our local top-forty station. As a guitar player and songwriter, Keith is probably my number one musical inspiration. And of course the news reports and Stones press releases about his drug-fueled exploits have always been fascinating.

I actually made it through to the end of this 547-page tome. This is unusual because with the exception of the great Russian novelists, classics, and a few others, I have no patience to wade through 547 pages of anything. Most often I get a novel and read the first fifty pages to get a feeling for how the author writes, and then I’m bored. So the first thing I can say about “Life” is that it is surprisingly well written. It’s hard to say how much of this is attributable to James Fox, who does not receive credit on the cover, only on the title page. My guess is that the writing is Keith’s. He deftly moves back and forth in time, throws in asides, adds colorful commentary, and glides through his story with a combination of detail and big strokes that reflects how he approaches his music.

The guitar and songwriting info is useful for any musician. The drug advice and escapades become tedious, and I have to admit that after 1980 or so I started to scan paragraphs and skip the redundant drug discussions.

But for me the most interesting theme of “Life” is that it is about a creative and business partnership: Keith and Mick Jagger, the Glimmer Twins. This is the theme that anyone can relate to. Most everyone has a job with co-workers, or is married, or is involved in some type of long-term partnership. Keith and Mick (and of course Charlie) have hung together for nearly fifty years, which is an extraordinary record. According to Keith, the relationship between himself and Mick was solid until the beginning of the 1980s, when Mick became “unbearable.” Memoirs tend to be self-serving, and from “Life” one should not expect anything different, but I had hoped for more insight from Keith. For their estrangement he basically lays the blame on Mick, whom he accuses of Lead Vocalist Syndrome (LVS) and of wanting to jump on every passing musical trend, such as disco. Mick is shallow; Mick is endlessly calculating.

Keith could have seen Mick’s side. As the 1980s approached the Stones were a multimillion-dollar global enterprise and Mick was at his performing peak. Yet Mick’s songwriting and musical partner was mired in drug addiction and endless bouts with the law. It is reasonable to think that Mick would not know from one day to the next whether wild & crazy Keef would get busted and be incarcerated, or simply drop dead. And for years Keith had had trouble getting visas for tours. Would it not be unreasonable for Mick to hedge his bets and develop his solo career, even if it seemed to be nothing more than a reproduction Stones? Keith bitterly accuses Mick of disloyalty, but an argument could be made that Mick was as loyal as any human could be expected to be.

Mick is not the only one who can be calculating. I was interested to see that in the endless revelations of nearly every aspect of Keith’s private life, he did not discuss his famous teeth. There are photos from the seventies showing Keith and his rotten teeth, and then suddenly he’s got brand-new, white, shiny choppers. I guess that being a heroin addict is cool; wearing dentures at the age of forty is not so cool.

As for music, there was a time in the early 1960s when the Stones were at the very cutting edge of pop music. They bridged black and white musical universes. They pushed the envelope and blazed new trails, both culturally and musically. With the advent of the hated disco musical form in the mid-1970s (which also helped launch punk rock), the Stones began to lose their spot on at the edge. They slowly became traditionalists. To Keith this was fine. Mick saw it differently. He wanted the Stones to remain identified with the avant-garde. Mick was responsible for “Miss You,” the disco-influenced song from “Some Girls” that was a huge hit and helped maintain the Stones’ position as cultural nomads. The restless Mick is always shopping around for new sounds and new styles. To Keith this is evidence of a shallow artistic ethic, but perhaps it’s a continuation of what the Stones were always about.

“Life” is a fascinating glimpse into the life of a man who has against all odds remained a towering musical talent. Luckily, most readers won’t be able to directly relate to the chaotic lifestyle and drug culture (sometimes it seems as though Keef and his entourage are living on Mars), but his journey both as a creative individual and as a collaborator with his partners speaks to us all.

"Life" by Keith Richards

December 19, 2010

Mayflower Creationism

Filed under: Essays,News,Uncategorized — Tags: , , , , , , , , , — Thomas Hauck @ 9:24 pm

In the modern era, the discussion of how we humans have come to exist on earth has assumed a familiar form: creationism versus evolution. Creationists argue that at a particular time in history a divine entity, God, created human beings and all other creatures. Evolutionists argue that over the course of millions of years all life forms emerged and, even today, continue to evolve.

In the past several years we have seen the creationist argument applied by political conservatives to the birth of our nation. On blogs and on the editorial pages of newspapers there appear impassioned letters from Tea Party types and other individuals who put forward the following assertions:

1. The United States of America was founded, more or less single-handedly, by a group of white males whose names are familiar (Washington, Adams, Hancock, and others) and who are collectively referred to as “the founding fathers.”

2. The founding fathers were practicing Christians.

3. The founding fathers intended that the United States be forever identified as a Christian nation.

The arguments of these “Mayflower creationists” parallel those of Biblical creationists. They say that the world as we know it was conjured from nothing by an all-powerful deity (or in the case of the Mayflower creationists, deities) whose beliefs and commandments are set down in scripture and represent an enduring template from which deviation is dangerous and immoral.

If you accept this deeply flawed argument as an axiom, then to decide the important questions facing us today you need only examine and parse every word spoken by, and every sentence written by, the creator(s), whether biblical or constitutional. As a result we see creationists digging through the recorded statements and writings of the founding fathers, seeking proof that these men were Christian and that they intended the United States to be a Christian nation.

To recall that the founding fathers owned slaves and that they lived in era of brutal inequality will make no difference to the Mayflower creationists, and so I’ll forgo that exercise. The deeper point is that while it is good to remember and respect the wisdom of earlier ages, it is foolish to seek advice from men who have been dead for hundreds of years. We cannot ask them directly; we can only sift through historical records and try to interpret what they might say to us today. But when confronted with difficult choices, it makes no sense to point to some long-dead deity and say, “This is how the deity said it had to be done hundreds of years ago, and therefore I am not required to think for myself.”

The founding fathers deserve our admiration and respect. They dared to think for themselves. But in the centuries since they lived, the world has changed. And if you believe in evolution, you know that any species that remains the same is doomed to perish. We live in a world where only the fittest survive. To refuse to adapt is dangerous, and to claim that the ghosts of the past speak to us is folly.

December 11, 2010

Letter to the Gloucester Daily Times 12/9/10

Filed under: Essays,News,Uncategorized — Tags: , , — Thomas Hauck @ 5:10 pm

The First R Foundation, a Gloucester charitable organization, buys books to give to first graders in Rockport and Gloucester. In early December, First R chose “It’s a Book” by Lane Smith. The book has been favorably reviewed in the “New York Times” and features three characters — a monkey, a mouse, and a jackass (not a donkey – a jackass) — who discuss the merits of old-fashioned paper books. It’s a good idea but the final words “It’s a book, Jackass!” caused the Rockport schools to say, “Thanks, but no thanks.” Here is my slightly abridged letter to the “Gloucester Daily Times.”

To the editor:

As a Gloucester resident who is both an author and a parent, I’d like to offer my viewpoint on the controversy surrounding the choice of “It’s a Book” by the First R Foundation.

The foundation’s mission and activities are to be applauded. But in deciding to decline “It’s a Book” as a gift given to all Rockport first graders, Dr. Susan M. King made the correct decision. The quality of the book is not the issue. The issue is whether it is age appropriate. The world is full of wonderful books that, because of language or content, are simply not meant for first graders. Just because the author or the publisher says the book is appropriate doesn’t necessarily make it so.

It may be tempting to blow this decision out of proportion. One of the foundation’s board members is quoted as saying that “the greatest books in history usually caused some sort of disquiet.” This has nothing to do with the issue at hand and to claim that “It’s a Book” has literary significance is at best premature and at worst, laughable. Meanwhile, the foundation’s chairperson claims that the word “jackass” is a “rather out-of-date minor insult.” As the parent of two children who were once in first grade, I can tell the chairperson that nothing would drive a parent crazier than a child running around the house yelling, “It’s a book, Jackass!” Believe me, this is precisely the kind of thrillingly naughty phrase that kids repeat endlessly. My guess is that the book’s author, Lane Smith, knows this and included the phrase as a punchline that would excite young readers.

It was suggested, apparently by the foundation, that the final word “jackass” be obscured in each copy given away. As an author, I find this idea to be repellent. Either read the book or don’t read it. Crossing out offensive words is silly. Just give the kids a different book.

“It’s a Book” is not a literary masterpiece that first graders must read. There are thousands of wonderful age-appropriate books available for kids of all ages. What’s the big problem? I see no reason why the First R Foundation can’t simply choose a different book and let everyone get on with their lives.

It's a Book

November 23, 2010

“Perfect Day” – From Lou Reed to Susan Boyle

Filed under: Essays,Uncategorized — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , — Thomas Hauck @ 3:01 pm

As a longtime fan of Lou Reed, I was amazed and astonished to turn on the TV this morning to see Susan Boyle standing majestically on the Today Show plaza with a white-robed children’s choir behind her, singing Reed’s 1972 song “Perfect Day.” The song sounded airless, pristine, and wholly artificial, as if it were made of shiny plastic like a Jeff Koons sculpture.

When I first heard this song I was a sophomore at Tufts University in Medford, Massachusetts, just outside of Boston. It was the immediate post-Woodstock era: the cool artsy kids (which I saw myself as trying to be) had disavowed hippies and were looking for something darker and tougher. My suitemate and pal Howard Rutkowski, who hailed from Cabot, Vermont, had much more advanced knowledge than I did of all things musical and cultural. He turned me on to the Velvet Underground, the MC5, Iggy Pop, and the New York Dolls. Now this was rock and roll as it was meant to be – loud and fast and brazen, but with an edgy pop-art sensibility.

“Perfect Day” appeared on Lou Reed’s great album “Transformer.” The themes of the songs included transsexuality and drug addiction. If  there was a “hit” on the album it was “Walk on the Wild Side,” which reached #16 on the Billboard charts. The album reached #29.

Generally, while in cities like Boston Lou Reed found an audience, his brand of cutting-edge art was anathema to radio. In Cincinnati, my home town, he was regarded as a dangerous freak. “Progressive” FM stations that had embraced the lovey-dovey hippie culture recoiled against what came next as being too aggressive, too unschooled, and not adult enough when compared to respectable, grownup bands like Yes and Emerson, Lake, and Palmer.

“Perfect Day” was one of the reasons we liked Lou Reed. The song has real musical credibility and a great melody that is as good as any mainstream product. But there is a subversive element to the lyrics. Is it about drug addiction? Why does it seem so oddly dreamlike? And why the sinister Biblical reference in the coda – “You’re gonna reap just what you sow”? We thought it was a delicious poke at traditional pop songwriting, a subversive little poison pill that said, “You want craft? I can beat you at your own game.”

But now the song, like  so many works of art, has a life of its own. What was subversive and commercially unsuitable in 1972 is now mainstream. Not just mainstream – it has been embraced by the very class that Reed was presumably rebelling against back in 1972. The prodigal song has returned and has been welcomed with open arms.

It’s happened before. Back in 1976 the Ramones were radio poison. Even in progressive Boston, you had to tune into Oedipus’s show on WMBR to hear them. As late as 1979, when the Atlantics were briefly signed to MCA Records, MCA exec Russ Mottla held up the Ramones to us as an example of a band that was doomed. Their cartoon-like songs would never survive against “quality” rock acts like the Eagles or Steely Dan. Twenty years later, “Blitzkreig Bop” was used on TV commercials for Budweiser and AT&T. The Ramones have achieved iconic status. It just goes to show that what is revolutionary today may be mainstream tomorrow.

September 20, 2010

“VmusicBook”

Filed under: Book Reviews,Essays,Uncategorized — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , — Thomas Hauck @ 1:25 pm

Recently released on Amazon.com is the “VmusicBook,” which I had the privilege to edit earlier this summer for an Elance client.

“VmusicBook” has been specifically created for urban musical talent and aspiring entrepreneurs. The music industry today is very different from what it was five or ten years ago. Thanks to the emergence of the Internet and other technical advances, not only have business models changed but ways of recording music, distributing music, and marketing music have evolved. We are now experiencing a digital music revolution, which has opened the doors for almost everyone with a dream to succeed in the music industry.

“VmusicBook” demonstrates how to protect your intellectual property and retain 100% copyright ownership of your musical works, ensuring that you will earn full value for your creative products. You’ll learn how to use your skills, abilities, knowledge, and understanding, and even other people’s resources, to establish a viable music-based business.

Whether you’re a singer, a songwriter, a rapper, a Grime MC, a musician, a music/beat producer, a manager, a promoter, or a marketer, “VmusicBook” will guide you through the entrepreneurial process for setting up your own business venture. The book also includes a comprehensive list of industry contacts revealing the contact names, addresses, phone numbers, fax numbers, emails, and websites of music industry professionals.

VmusicBook

- From our offices in Gloucester, MA, an hour north of Boston, editor Thomas Hauck provides professional proofreading, ghostwriting, and book editing services for authors in the Boston area, New England, the United States, and worldwide. For unmatched personal service, contact Thomas Hauck book editor today.

September 17, 2010

Thomas Hauck, Editor: Notes on Capitalization

Filed under: Essays,Uncategorized — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , — Thomas Hauck @ 6:41 pm

The rules of capitalization—when to capitalize words and when to write them in lower case—are complex and can seem baffling. Inconsistencies abound, even in professional publications and major media sources. In business writing, though, there is a general tendency to overuse capitalization. Business writers like to capitalize common nouns based on their perceived importance. There is a great deal of confusion about job titles, corporate division identifiers, and all the other elements that comprise a business operation, and the default choice seems to be to capitalize.

Here is a sample of the usage you’ll see in business writing:

“The Division Manager spearheaded the Company’s Downsizing Initiative (DI) by outsourcing all Call Center operations, trimming Health Care costs, and establishing a Human Resources website for job pre-screening. John Jones, XYZ Company Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, applauded the efforts.”

It should be:

“The division manager spearheaded the company’s downsizing initiative (DI) by outsourcing all call center operations, trimming health care costs, and establishing a human resources website for job pre-screening. John Jones, XYZ Company chairman and chief executive officer, applauded the efforts.”

You know that when CEO John Jones sees this in print, he’s going to want to see his job title capitalized!

When I edit, I try to adhere to the Chicago Manual of Style as much as possible, keeping in mind the business client’s attitude towards capitalization. Generally, in any document the only words that are capitalized are proper nouns. These include specific proper names of people or things.

Words that can be capitalized include:

· Job titles when used as part of a proper name, such as President Helen Jones.

· A specific proper name, such as the Arizona Public Welfare Project.

· Acronyms, such as WIC, USA, R&D.

· A specific document, such as the 2010 Annual Report.

· Headline capitalization should be applied consistently. Generally, freestanding headlines should be capitalized:

CEO Susan Morlock Attends Trade Show in South America

Subheads, where there isn’t an extra line between the subhead and the next line of text, need not be capitalized.

Here are nouns that are not capitalized:

· General terms like annual report, cost-benefit analysis, project management, income statement.

· Job titles including chairman, division manager, bank teller, janitor.

· Divisions such as call center, marketing division, board of trustees, research & development.

· The Chicago Manual states that college and university degrees are not capitalized: bachelor’s degree, master of business administration (MBA). But you do capitalize proper names: bachelor’s degree in French. This rule is routinely broken on résumés (Jenny earned her Bachelor of Arts degree in Fine Arts).

Business writers tend to capitalize common nouns when they refer to a specific noun previously cited. In a company document, The Smith Project may be referred to as the Project. The Ford Motor Company is referred to as the Company. This seems to be a practice borrowed from legal documents and contracts. It’s not correct, but it’s very common.

The most important thing is to be consistent. If you choose to capitalize Company, for example, make sure that you apply your rule consistently throughout your document.

Thomas Hauck – ghostwriter, editor, proofreader. From our offices in Gloucester, MA, an hour north of Boston, editor Thomas Hauck provides professional proofreading, ghostwriting, and book editing services for authors in the Boston area, New England, the United States, and worldwide. For unmatched personal service, contact Thomas Hauck today.

 

July 23, 2010

Thomas Hauck, Editor: Should Proofreaders Perform Research?

Filed under: Books Edited by Thomas Hauck,Essays,Uncategorized — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , — Thomas Hauck @ 1:53 pm

A client recently asked me whether a freelance proofreader should be expected to verify matters of content in a report or article. For example, a report may claim that “studies indicate that college-educated people have fewer children.” Is the freelance proofreader required to verify this statement?

The answer I gave was that freelance editors and proofreaders are generally responsible for correcting obvious visible mistakes, such as the spelling of a well-known person’s name. This is the kind of thing that can be verified in seconds by using Google or Wikipedia, and we all do it routinely.

When I work for Target Direct Marketing, one of my long-term and valued clients, we proofread direct-mail letters several times. As part of the process we are often required to verify phone numbers, URLs, addresses, and other specific content. This is usually a simple matter: you just dial the phone number or go online to the URL.

Matters of non-specific content are very different. To verify what studies may or may not have produced certain results can take hours of research. Most freelance proofreaders are not paid by the hour, they are paid a flat rate. So you can see how this presents a problem. Unless you agree to pay an hourly rate for research, it’s not something that an ethical proofreader will agree to do. And even if the proofreader claimed to have done the research, you, the client, have absolutely no guarantee that the work was done reliably. A proofreader could say, “I spent three hours verifying these statements,” but you have no guarantee unless the sources are provided.

The only difference is in academic or peer-reviewed papers, where the research is fully cited.

If you hire a ghostwriter to produce a report, then you have some expectation of veracity, but as always, buyer beware.

And, not to sound cynical, but everyone knows that a “recent study” can be found to prove just about anything!

Thomas Hauck – ghostwriter, editor, proofreader. From our offices in Gloucester, MA, an hour north of Boston, editor Thomas Hauck provides professional proofreading, book editing, and ghostwriting services for authors in the Boston area, New England, the United States, and worldwide. For unmatched personal service, contact Thomas Hauck today.

July 19, 2010

Thomas Hauck, Editor: Ghostwriting, Editing, and Proofreading

Filed under: Essays,Uncategorized — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , — Thomas Hauck @ 4:49 pm

This post is a reprint of a short guide to hiring a ghostwriter, editor, or proofreader that I send to many of my clients.

Your Guide to Ghostwriting, Editing, and Proofreading

Since the days when monks wrote on parchment, people have needed documents to be written. You may require a full-length book, a business white paper, or text on your company website. Perhaps your book or report must be written from scratch, or you may have existing text that needs improvement. You may be an accomplished writer who needs a second set of eyes on your document. But in every case, you want your words to be the very best they can be. You need to find a professional who can help you.

Here’s a quick guide to ghostwriting, editing, and proofreading that can help you to determine whom you need to hire and what you can expect.

Ghostwriter

When you either don’t have the time or the expertise to write a lengthy document such as a book, you can hire a ghostwriter. This skilled professional collaborates with you to bring your ideas to the printed page. The ghostwriter will write the book based on your input, and depending upon the agreement you will retain full copyright. The book may be sold or offered under your name alone, or you may choose to credit your ghostwriter.

Ghostwriters are usually hired on the basis of a word count. For example, if you were to hire a ghostwriter to write a book about how to start a law firm, you would need to specify the word count. Non-fiction books, such as self-help books and memoirs, can be nearly any length above 25,000 words. E-books can be as few as 10,000 words. For fiction, a short novel is generally between 50,000 and 80,000 words. A full-length novel is above 80,000 words.

Specifying the number of pages can be difficult, because the page count will vary depending upon size of the text, margins, and chapter breaks. However, for a typical document in 12-point Times New Roman with one-inch margins, you can expect to get about 500 words per page. So a document of 200 typewritten pages would be about 100,000 words. But when hiring a ghostwriter, it is always better to agree on a word count. It is measurable and there is no ambiguity.

A ghostwriter may give a price estimate based on a flat rate for the project, or based on a price per word (say, ten cents per word, which is average). Good ghostwriters do not get involved with graphics or cover art; writing is a highly specialized occupation and most good writers just write.

Editor

You hire an editor when you have a complete or nearly complete book or report. The editor reads the entire document and helps you to organize and present your thoughts as effectively as possible. The editor may suggest adding material or deleting passages that aren’t effective. In this process it pays to have an open mind, because many authors are sensitive about their work and it can be difficult to be objective. You want an editor who is easy to work with. You do not want an editor who is bossy and won’t explain why he or she favors certain changes. It’s your book and your name on the cover!

Editors can be paid a flat rate for the project, or can be paid by the hour. A good editor will gladly give you an estimate in advance. Then, as the work progresses, you should review the results and only when you know you are in agreement should you continue. There should never be any surprises. Ask your editor to use the “track changes” feature on your word processing application.

A line edit is in between a full edit and proofreading. In a line edit, the editor will ensure that every sentence reads properly, but will not address larger issues of theme or continuity.

When deciding questions of grammar and punctuation, I use the Chicago Manual of Style. It is a highly regarded industry standard. But there are others, and you may specify to your editor which style you want to follow. No matter which style you choose, the key is consistency. For example, if you choose to write out numbers below ten (one, two, three, as opposed to 1, 2, 3), this should be done consistently throughout the document. But in cases where there is some ambiguity, the bottom line is always readability: does it make sense?

At the end of the process you can expect a polished document. But if the work is substantial (say, over 5,000 words), minor mistakes may remain. This is because no matter how skilled, human beings tend to read what they expect to read, and will miss mistakes. Quality documents, such as published books, professional websites, and business reports, are often read by several different people.

A professional editor will always work closely with you to preserve your voice and your personal vision. Your story is unique, and whether your style is chatty or hard-boiled or academic, your editor should always be in tune with your expressive voice.

Proofreader

When you have a finished book or document, you hire a proofreader to check for mistakes of grammar and spelling, to fact check, and to correct typographical errors. A proofreader will not interject his or her editorial opinion about the content of your work.

Do not think that proofreaders are not highly skilled. A good proofreader will know correct punctuation (when to place a semicolon instead of a comma, for example). A good proofreader will have a thorough knowledge of English vocabulary and grammar (when to say “ensure” rather than “insure,” or “farther” rather than “further”). In addition, if your document is industry-specific, such as a financial advisor website, your proofreader must be familiar with the technical language. These details are very important to any professional document. One needless mistake on your business website or in your book may cause a reader to go elsewhere.

Like editors, proofreaders can be hired on a per-word basis or by the project. You should get a firm estimate in advance. Unlike editing, which can be highly subjective, proofreading is more straightforward and therefore it’s easy to give an accurate estimate.

 

A word about typos

Your professional proofreader will make every effort to correct every typo – spelling, punctuation, capitalization, quotes, apostrophes, dashes, and spacing. But I always tell my clients that no human being, no matter how much you pay them, can catch every typo, even seemingly obvious ones. You need multiple sets of eyes. In offices where I work on key documents we always have at least four people sign off on each page of text. And person number four always finds mistakes! If your document or book needs to be perfect, you owe it to yourself to have it proofed by at least two people other than yourself.

 

What you can expect

The most important thing to remember when hiring a ghostwriter, editor, or proofreader, is that the job will go much more smoothly if you are very clear in your instructions and expectations. Agree on the word count. Do not ask an editor to “add something if you think it needs it.” The fact is that any document of any length can be expanded into a book. And any book can be made into a longer book.

An editor is like a taxi driver. You get in the cab and the meter starts running. When you arrive at your destination you pay the agreed-upon price. If you say, “Can you drive me another ten miles?” that’s fine, but the cabbie will keep the meter running. It’s only fair.

Choose a provider who has a flawless working knowledge of American and/or U.K English. You get exactly what you pay for. Countless clients have hired cut-rate editors and writers only to receive poor-quality work that is riddled with elementary mistakes. Then they have to hire a professional to do the work again, and the job ends up costing more than if they had hired the pro in the first place.

PDF or Word file?

When you hire an editor or proofreader to work on your document or manuscript, there is one ironclad rule:

No one can edit a pdf file.

You must provide the editor or proofreader with a text document such as a Word document. The less formatting in the document, the better.

The ONLY exception to this is when you have a finished product ready to print and you need a proofreader to proof it for minor typos or production mistakes prior to publication.

 

One final note about formatting for publication

Today, books can be released in various formats: as e-books, print-on-demand (POD), as pdfs, or other formats. Generally, the fee that you pay to an editor or ghostwriter does NOT include final formatting for publication. This is because there are dozens of elements that need to be coordinated, including headers, page numbers, margins, section breaks, indexes, and tables of content.

When the editing or proofreading job is complete, most editors will deliver to you a standard letter-sized Word document with one-inch margins. All the internal features, such as headlines and subheads, will be in place. Their job is done. If and when you need your document formatted for publication, then this is a separate job with a separate fee. You can negotiate this with your editor.

Remember that your website or report or book may be read by thousands of people. It’s your reputation and your name on the cover. It’s worth it to make sure that every word is perfect.

Thomas Hauck, Editor. From our offices in Gloucester, MA, an hour north of Boston, editor Thomas Hauck provides professional proofreading, ghostwriting, and book editing services for authors in the Boston area, New England, the United States, and worldwide. For unmatched personal service, contact Thomas Hauck book editor today.

« Newer Posts — Older Posts »