Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2002 17:46:22 -0500 From: "Michael Walsh" <MJW at mail.press.jhu.edu> To: <WSFAlist at keithlynch.net> Subject: [WSFA] A Short Editing Screed . . . [WSFA] Re: Anvil & Flint Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at keithlynch.net> > kfl at keithlynch.net 03/24/02 02:50PM >Sam Pierce <scpierce at alum.mit.edu> wrote: >> Speaking of Anvil, Baen has issued "Pandora's Legions" edited by >> Eric Flint. The new version inserted three stories published Analog >> prior to the original novel (also serialized in Analog.) Did Flint >> "update" these stories as he did with Schmitz's work? > >I will let Eric reply to this one. (He evidently has a time machine, >as he replied last January.) Please note that I am not necessarily >agreeing with him. He posts fairly often in the rec.arts.sf.written >newsgroup, and yes, he always takes this snide tone. > >If anyone wants, I'll also post his defense of his alterations to the >Schmitz works. > >From: eflint46312 at aol.com (Eflint46312) >Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written >Date: 27 Jan 2002 11:15:08 GMT >Subject: [WSFA] Re: QuickReview -- Pandora's Legions by Christopher Anvil > >This strikes me as a bit silly, but since it's been raised... > >My involvement with the Anvil reissue is as follows. First, I took the >initiative in proposing the idea to Baen Books and convincing them to let = me do >one volume. (I hope to do more Anvil reissues, but you've got to take = these >things one step at a time, or the publisher will usually just say "no.") = I >specifically advanced the proposal to do a complete collection of all the >stories which Anvil ever wrote in the Pandora's Planet setting. Then I = got in >touch with Anvil, discussed the proposal with him, and closed the deal. Vast amounts of Eric Flint's verbiage snipped Other than Flint's construction of literary snob straw men to defend = himself, I really have no quarrell with his handling of the Anvil = material; working with an author to make sure that the text published is = accurate is one of the most important things an editor can do. "This is a good yarn, I want it. I'm sending it back for some minor = changes, if you agree with me. As you may know, I don't believe in = changing a man's sttory, he made it, and it's his, and editing changes are = for him to make or it wouldn't remain his story." But none of his actions happened with the Schmitz stories. Dead author. = Ouija board broken. Correcting typoes fine. Correcting text which makes no sense can be = justified, see Algis Budry's essay "Non-literary influences in science = fiction" (in: Outposts: Literatures of Milieux. Borgo Press, 1996) which = looks at what can - and has - happened to a manuscipt from tyewriter to = typesetting. Trying to undo damage done by bad editing in ther past, bad = typesetting, and the like are all Worthy Things To Do. Rewriting a dead author is bad enough, but not letting the reader know = that they are reading corrupted text is just plain dishonest. & putting = the original text on a web site don't count, no sirree. A Good Editor is a writer's friend. And if you're wondering about the quote above, it's from a letter by John = W. Campbell (Campbell Letters, Vol. 1, 1966, page 66) who garnered for = Astounding/Analog 6 Hugo wins for Best Magazine. But what would JWC know = about about editing . . . mjw Who Won't Let Flint Near Edgar Pangborn . . . >-- >Keith F. Lynch - kfl at keithlynch.net - http://keithlynch.net/ >I always welcome replies to my e-mail, postings, and web pages, but >unsolicited bulk e-mail (spam) is not acceptable. Please do not send me >HTML, "rich text," or attachments, as all such email is discarded unread. >