Re Note 4: In fairness to the copy editor who didn't correct the varying titles of the Sigmund Freud essay, it's possible they couldn't determine which title was correct or preferred, and instead flagged the instances for the author's attention. What happened after that would be out of the copy editor's hands.
I'm more agnostic about whether a list of illustrations page (as increasingly rare as those are) should be titled Illustrations or List of Illustrations.
"Remember the Rhine?"--took me back decades to high school music class or choir, where I first heard Anna Russell. Maybe we were studying opera. Maybe our choir director--a man who swore at us in German and kept a bottle of Maalox on his desk--wasn't feeling well. So I just found it on YouTube and enjoyed it again. Thank you!
The kerning on the drop cap D on the Roberts spread is tighter than a Champagne cork (the first non-R-rated comparison that popped into my head). And the same graf ends with a broken final word resulting in runt. Maybe not the best page to show as an example.<grumble /> Also, I know you're using chicago's nomenclature regarding frontmatter, but can I recruit you in my campaign to retain the traditional name—bastard-title—for what you're calling the "first half-title"? Then the "second half-title" becomes just the "half-title," which seems a more elegant solution.
You’re seeing a slightly distorted/curved image of the drop cap D, as I’m sure with your precise eye you’re already well aware. And the paragraph is set fine as it is. And: No.
I'm sure you will explain this in detail in your continuation of this series, along with widows and orphans (or I hope so). The "hood" looks wrong to me too (but still non-professional).
The preview of coming attractions is that five characters concluding a paragraph is utterly standard. The further preview of coming attractions would be to wonder what precisely should be done to that paragraph to make it more visually pleasing?
I have been searching, in a lazy way, for a World War II film I saw on Channel 9 (or could it have been Channel 11?) in the New York area, in the 70s. An enlisted man, possibly in the Pacific Theatre, had had a brilliant battle plan that he offered up to the beleaguered captain, one that could turn the battle around, in favor of the Americans. How could he have ever had this original thought? It turns out that in his civilian life the enlisted man had been a typesetter, and he remembered the idea from a book he had typeset. Did you see this movie? What a hero. This is pretty obscure, but I thought you, of all people, would like to see someone would made books help the good guys triumph. Thanks!
This is absolutely delightful, but after footnote 6 all I can hear is that perfectly timed pause followed by, "I'm not making this up, you know!" Have you ever read Anna Russell's autobiography? It's quite entertaining. Oh no, my brain just got to the bit where Gutrune was "the only woman [Siegfried] had ever met who wasn't his aunt!"
Having now quoted her various sketches, three different ones to three different people in three different situations since reading this last night, I can now assure you that I caught the Anna Russell from you.
(Maybe I caught it so easily because I have quotes where my brains ought to be instead of resonance? I'd rather have the glorious voice, in all honesty, but I do have a lot of quotes in there.)
I did not know that about the half-title and part-title pages (interesting that a half is a part, but not here); but I didn't go to copy-editing school, after all. I had to pick up all my knowledge in the gutter.
I'm sure you have a list of things, including alliterations, which copy editors and/or proofreaders are required to note and pick off, but surely there's nothing wrong with occasionally using one of or two of these devices. I am not a professional copy editor or proofreader, but I thought the use of the phrase with your first footnote was a pleasant inclusion which, in retrospect, added to the sentence even before you pointed it out. Are professional copy editors and proofreaders completely against such grace notes in writing?
The point is not to exterminate alliterations, possibly inadvertent rhymes, etc. The point is to call attention to things a writer may not be aware that they have done so that they have the opportunity to knowingly retain or rework their text. I’ve worked with a writer who was always keen to get rid of inadvertent rhymes and was grateful to me for calling them out; I’ve worked with a writer who often finds them amusing, even admitting that they were unintentional, and will retain (some of) them.
This appeared within the prose of a nineteenth century textbook, quite by accident. I have seen it attributed to the early nineteenth century Cambridge mathematician William Whewell. When it was pointed out to the author he was quite upset.
"There is no force however great
Can stretch a string however fine
Into a horizontal line
That shall be accurately straight."
A version of this was commonly quoted in books by people in the '40s and '50s who liked wordplay (malapropisms, spoonerisms, palindromes and the like). One of these identified the book, which I found and photocopied the page concerned. Unfortunately this was at least 55 years ago and I have lost those papers.
I had that collection in high school. It's very possible that's where I saw it, or maybe something by Martin Gardner or George Gamow or someone like that.
The Bacon imitation is marvelous.
Had not considered the purely visual/graphic component of proofreading, but of course—it is ripe for error.
1992? Had I known you could have taken my one-bedroom railroad flat on East Third! Plenty of room for a pen sharpener … but not much else.
All that work! At least you were a proofreader in a time when people still read …
“Alliteration alert” — O wondrous pun.
Fewer workhouses than -horses.
The Cow Palace story is amazing and funny. "Grislily" is hi-larious.
As usual, Dorito-crisp, illuminating, and entertaining. Mille grazie!
Prego!
[photo of spaghetti sauce jar goes here]
Re Note 4: In fairness to the copy editor who didn't correct the varying titles of the Sigmund Freud essay, it's possible they couldn't determine which title was correct or preferred, and instead flagged the instances for the author's attention. What happened after that would be out of the copy editor's hands.
I have just made clearer what I thought I’d sufficiently implied. Fair is fair, sure.
Thank you for saying it should be "Contents" and not "Table of Contents."
I'm more agnostic about whether a list of illustrations page (as increasingly rare as those are) should be titled Illustrations or List of Illustrations.
"Remember the Rhine?"--took me back decades to high school music class or choir, where I first heard Anna Russell. Maybe we were studying opera. Maybe our choir director--a man who swore at us in German and kept a bottle of Maalox on his desk--wasn't feeling well. So I just found it on YouTube and enjoyed it again. Thank you!
"She's his aunt!"
You are the best !😂❤️
The kerning on the drop cap D on the Roberts spread is tighter than a Champagne cork (the first non-R-rated comparison that popped into my head). And the same graf ends with a broken final word resulting in runt. Maybe not the best page to show as an example.<grumble /> Also, I know you're using chicago's nomenclature regarding frontmatter, but can I recruit you in my campaign to retain the traditional name—bastard-title—for what you're calling the "first half-title"? Then the "second half-title" becomes just the "half-title," which seems a more elegant solution.
You’re seeing a slightly distorted/curved image of the drop cap D, as I’m sure with your precise eye you’re already well aware. And the paragraph is set fine as it is. And: No.
I'm sure you will explain this in detail in your continuation of this series, along with widows and orphans (or I hope so). The "hood" looks wrong to me too (but still non-professional).
The preview of coming attractions is that five characters concluding a paragraph is utterly standard. The further preview of coming attractions would be to wonder what precisely should be done to that paragraph to make it more visually pleasing?
I have been searching, in a lazy way, for a World War II film I saw on Channel 9 (or could it have been Channel 11?) in the New York area, in the 70s. An enlisted man, possibly in the Pacific Theatre, had had a brilliant battle plan that he offered up to the beleaguered captain, one that could turn the battle around, in favor of the Americans. How could he have ever had this original thought? It turns out that in his civilian life the enlisted man had been a typesetter, and he remembered the idea from a book he had typeset. Did you see this movie? What a hero. This is pretty obscure, but I thought you, of all people, would like to see someone would made books help the good guys triumph. Thanks!
Sounds intriguing, but alas not striking any bells with me!
Thanks. It was back in the dark ages with few channels and I’d watch almost anything on the 4:30 movie…
This is absolutely delightful, but after footnote 6 all I can hear is that perfectly timed pause followed by, "I'm not making this up, you know!" Have you ever read Anna Russell's autobiography? It's quite entertaining. Oh no, my brain just got to the bit where Gutrune was "the only woman [Siegfried] had ever met who wasn't his aunt!"
I seem to have Anna Russell on the brain right now!
Having now quoted her various sketches, three different ones to three different people in three different situations since reading this last night, I can now assure you that I caught the Anna Russell from you.
(Maybe I caught it so easily because I have quotes where my brains ought to be instead of resonance? I'd rather have the glorious voice, in all honesty, but I do have a lot of quotes in there.)
I did not know that about the half-title and part-title pages (interesting that a half is a part, but not here); but I didn't go to copy-editing school, after all. I had to pick up all my knowledge in the gutter.
...with the orphans.
I'm sure you have a list of things, including alliterations, which copy editors and/or proofreaders are required to note and pick off, but surely there's nothing wrong with occasionally using one of or two of these devices. I am not a professional copy editor or proofreader, but I thought the use of the phrase with your first footnote was a pleasant inclusion which, in retrospect, added to the sentence even before you pointed it out. Are professional copy editors and proofreaders completely against such grace notes in writing?
The point is not to exterminate alliterations, possibly inadvertent rhymes, etc. The point is to call attention to things a writer may not be aware that they have done so that they have the opportunity to knowingly retain or rework their text. I’ve worked with a writer who was always keen to get rid of inadvertent rhymes and was grateful to me for calling them out; I’ve worked with a writer who often finds them amusing, even admitting that they were unintentional, and will retain (some of) them.
This appeared within the prose of a nineteenth century textbook, quite by accident. I have seen it attributed to the early nineteenth century Cambridge mathematician William Whewell. When it was pointed out to the author he was quite upset.
"There is no force however great
Can stretch a string however fine
Into a horizontal line
That shall be accurately straight."
A version of this was commonly quoted in books by people in the '40s and '50s who liked wordplay (malapropisms, spoonerisms, palindromes and the like). One of these identified the book, which I found and photocopied the page concerned. Unfortunately this was at least 55 years ago and I have lost those papers.
I believe that I read that passage in the anthology _Fantasia Mathematica_, edited by Clifton Fadiman. You might find an accurate citation there.
I had that collection in high school. It's very possible that's where I saw it, or maybe something by Martin Gardner or George Gamow or someone like that.