Wordsmiths
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1050729/asp/opinion/story_5041140.asp
WORDSMITHS AT WORK
Teaching people how to write is a mammoth growth industry. It extends all the way from media studies to postgraduate courses in creative writing, while in between there are crash courses in the summer holidays run by publishers’ associations. Backed by the explosion of media companies and new publishing houses, “How to Write” books have become a distinct list with many publishers.
The question is, what do readers or potential editors gain from these books? Ernest Hemingway once famously said that “every writer should have a built-in shit detector”, implying that writing skills cannot be taught. If you have “it”, the skills can be chiselled over time by trial and error; otherwise not.
Yet it isn’t as simple as that. Writing courses and books proliferate for the obvious reason that there are people who want them. Hence two questions arise. First, what do these books and courses teach? Second, if these exercises don’t teach anything extra, do they, at the very least, help to land a job in a publishing house or the media? What, in other words, are the qualifications necessary for a young editor who wants to enter today’s world of information over-kill and technological change?
What these books teach is the basics of narrative and dialogue, and in cases, the basics of grammar and usage. Also, they drill into you that all writing, whether books or feature articles, are for the reader, whose profile must be kept in mind. The profile includes linguistic abilities, interests and needs. This is an instinct and comes from years of experience and working in the field.
These skills should be taught in school, but in many cases they aren’t. Above all, the feel for language needed by a writer is independent of anything that can be taught. Yet something sticks, provided there is passionate motivation. Writing is a solitary, obscure way of making a living and it has to be driven by commitment, or an instinct to discover and explore the world and human nature.
If you can’t make it as a writer, does it mean that all the efforts have been wasted? If basic writing skills have been learnt, then there is scope for editorial work either in publishing houses or the media. There is a dearth of good editors who can straighten out sentences, cut out the fat and re-shape, revise or rewrite copy. But to do this, day after day, requires the following qualifications: (a) consistency, because all jobs become routine and dull; (b) the ability to get along with others because all good publishing is the product of team work; (c) the curiosity to “check out” facts, and keep abreast of current trends in different fields; (d) some familiarization with computer applications, because a great deal of work is done on computers; and (e) a few academic qualifications across a broad range of subjects. Publishing today is a hands-on job; it has little to do with degrees and PhDs. Simply put, if you know it, just do it.
Ravi Vyas
WORDSMITHS AT WORK
Teaching people how to write is a mammoth growth industry. It extends all the way from media studies to postgraduate courses in creative writing, while in between there are crash courses in the summer holidays run by publishers’ associations. Backed by the explosion of media companies and new publishing houses, “How to Write” books have become a distinct list with many publishers.
The question is, what do readers or potential editors gain from these books? Ernest Hemingway once famously said that “every writer should have a built-in shit detector”, implying that writing skills cannot be taught. If you have “it”, the skills can be chiselled over time by trial and error; otherwise not.
Yet it isn’t as simple as that. Writing courses and books proliferate for the obvious reason that there are people who want them. Hence two questions arise. First, what do these books and courses teach? Second, if these exercises don’t teach anything extra, do they, at the very least, help to land a job in a publishing house or the media? What, in other words, are the qualifications necessary for a young editor who wants to enter today’s world of information over-kill and technological change?
What these books teach is the basics of narrative and dialogue, and in cases, the basics of grammar and usage. Also, they drill into you that all writing, whether books or feature articles, are for the reader, whose profile must be kept in mind. The profile includes linguistic abilities, interests and needs. This is an instinct and comes from years of experience and working in the field.
These skills should be taught in school, but in many cases they aren’t. Above all, the feel for language needed by a writer is independent of anything that can be taught. Yet something sticks, provided there is passionate motivation. Writing is a solitary, obscure way of making a living and it has to be driven by commitment, or an instinct to discover and explore the world and human nature.
If you can’t make it as a writer, does it mean that all the efforts have been wasted? If basic writing skills have been learnt, then there is scope for editorial work either in publishing houses or the media. There is a dearth of good editors who can straighten out sentences, cut out the fat and re-shape, revise or rewrite copy. But to do this, day after day, requires the following qualifications: (a) consistency, because all jobs become routine and dull; (b) the ability to get along with others because all good publishing is the product of team work; (c) the curiosity to “check out” facts, and keep abreast of current trends in different fields; (d) some familiarization with computer applications, because a great deal of work is done on computers; and (e) a few academic qualifications across a broad range of subjects. Publishing today is a hands-on job; it has little to do with degrees and PhDs. Simply put, if you know it, just do it.
Ravi Vyas
posted by bitandpieces at 7:51 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home