Although I have heard about this editorial malpractice for many years, it was only about half a decade ago that I knew that there is a word for it: grangerize.

grangerize: to mutilate books, especially by cutting out their illustrations.

Grangerism is the pernicious vice of cutting plates and title-pages out of many books to illustrate one book.

Although grangerism is not officially condoned in most publishing quarters, however, there had been instances where local ethically challenged editors (who are today disturbingly occupying managerial positions in their respective organizations) probably resorted to this quick-and-dirty technique for one or two of the following reasons:

1. The book from which the picture was cut off was out of print.

2. The copyrights for the illustrations cost exorbitantly.

3. The copyrights holder couldn’t be contacted.

4. The copyrights owner might be in “heaven” (or “hell”).

5. The deadline for the project was just days or hours away.

6. The editor believed she wouldn’t get caught.

7. The project director kept mum about the practice.

8. The budget for illustrations had busted.

9. The available title was a photocopy of photocopies.

10. The editor planned to leave after the submission of the manuscript to the Singapore’s Ministry of Education (MOE) for approval.

11. The editor wanted to get even with her mean publisher.

12. The copyrights process (or clearance) would be delayed until the MOE granted a provisional approval (PA) for the submitted manuscript.

13. The editor’s dog ate the copyrights page.

14. The copyrights owner couldn’t be Googled.

15. The editor scapegoated the Middle East war!

16. The word doctor had little faith in the book being reviewed.

17. The editor anticipated an unavoidable merger prior to any MOE approval.

18. The senior editor crystal-balled that the title would be axed by the MOE.

19. The copyright holder was rude towards the editor.

20. The copyrights officer-in-charge had recently resigned.

21. The grey publisher belittled or offended the green editor.

22. The editor was simply disillusioned about her monotonous editorial life.

23. The copyright owner was spotted with the editor’s lover.

24. The rich editor secretly desired to be fined or jailed.

Let’s not grangerize, unless we don’t mind becoming “editorial gangsters,” not matter how high the temptation, or how low the risk, is.

Ethically yours

With some training, almost anyone can be a decent editor, but few can be good editors. Being a good editor requires something special—that X-factor which we all need to pray for. Ask and it shall be given unto us. Yes, let’s ask Him for editorial knowledge and wisdom.

Editing is like striking a balance between forest and trees. Most of us focus on the trees, but the good ones specialise in the forest, too.

An average editor uses mostly her left brain (an eye for logic and organisation), but an above-average editor uses her right brain as well (the ability to read the manuscript while not actually reading it). Indeed, the dozen odd family-owned publishing houses in Singapore need editors of the second kind.

You might be an editor if…
• you couldn’t resist pointing out grammatical errors in your colleagues’ “edited” titles;
• you used mark-up symbols when you read a periodical;
• when reading your church bulletin every week, you found yourself thinking, “This could be tighter”;
• you knew the names of the big shots of your competitors;
• you complained of the poor quality of a preface or blurb;
• you felt sex ranks a distant second to the thrill of editing your Acting CEO’s e-mail;
• you unfailingly read the imprint pages of every new book you find in your local bookstore;
• in a fire, you would save your complimentary copy of your edited textbook, then your travel document;
• you could recite the rules of punctuation like the catechism or the national anthem;
• you decided a few sentences on any manuscript that the writer is bogus;
• you could tell which similar title your “writer” had plagiarised;
• you got upset when a semi-colon should have been used instead of a comma;
• you could still copy-edit your company’s newspaper advertisement for a new managing editor;
• your spouse sent a long-winded email which could have been tightened in five sentences;
• you nearly fell off your chair when you read the formal correspondence of your seniors;
• you were shocked at the kind of “editorial pornography” seeping your company’s published titles;
• you refused to resign even though you’re working for a socially irresponsible publisher;
• you had complained for the nth time about the questionable quality of your company’s writers;
• you still dreamed of working under a capable managing editor and an ethical general manager in a-not-too-distant future;
• you would rather read “How to Speed-Edit”* than watch “Singapore Idol”;
• you have spotted at least three linguistic faux-pas while reading this post.

The art and science of editing

Editing is both an art and a science. The mechanics of editing may take a year or two to master, but the aesthetics of editing is a lifelong learning journey. Until Singapore maths editors consciously use their right part of the brain to nurture their creative side, Singapore will continue to have a second-class educational publishing industry in a first-class economy.

* Speed-Edit may sound like an oxymoronic, editorial activity; but rest assured, cohorts of “moronic editors” have almost perfected this grey art of editing.

MathPlus Publishing

Fear not math, fear God.

Tag Archives: editorial humor

To Grangerize or Not to Grangerize

grangerize: to mutilate books, especially by cutting out their illustrations.

You Might Be an Editor if …

The art and science of editing

* Speed-Edit may sound like an oxymoronic, editorial activity; but rest assured, cohorts of “moronic editors” have almost perfected this grey art of editing.