The Editor's Companion: An Indispensable Guide to Editing Books, Magazines, Online Publications, and Mor e

Reviewed by C J Singh (Berkeley, California)An Excellent Book on Editing BasicsIf your interest is in learning editing basics using Associated Press (AP) Stylebook, this book is an excellent introduction.(However, if your interest is in learning editing basics using The Chicago Manual of Style, Amy Sohn's book on Copyediting would be my recommendation -- see my review on amazon.)Steve Dunham is a highly experienced editor, thoroughly familiar with the yearly updates of the Associated Press Stylebook. The preface opens: “Editing—Who needs it? As a writer I write things that I think will be clear to everybody, but an editor says, ‘No, no, Steve,’ and I realize my error. Thank God for editors.” I like his voice already. In the next sentence Dunham quotes Laura Moyer, a copy editor: “Nobody loves a copy editor, but everybody needs one." "Even though we make errors seven days a week,” she noted on another occasion. Moyer’s sentences appeared in her blog dated six months apart and Dunham accurately marked them as endnotes 1 and 2. This inspires confidence in the accuracy of his 220 endnotes.The 242-page text is presented in 11 chapters:1. Marks of Good Writing;2. Editing for Content;3. Editing for Focus;4. Editing for Precise Language;5. Editing for Grammar;6. Typography;7. A Few Tips;8. Editorial Relationships;9. The Editors Tools;10. Samples of Editing;11. One’s That Got Away.I enjoyed reading these chapters. Here are some examples. In the second chapter, Dunham agrees with The Associated Press Stylebook’s” advice on “obscenities, profanities, vulgarities: Do not use them in stories unless they are part of direct quotations and there is a compelling reason for them.” (p 25; citation 25)In the fourth chapter, Dunham cites Michael Gerson of the Washington Post “lamenting a decline in media standards”: Cable and the Internet now allow Americans, if they choose, to get their information entirely from sources that agree with them –- sources that reinforce and exaggerate their political predispositions.” (p 59; citation 102)In the ninth chapter, the 22-item annotated list of the editor's tools includes: “ ' The Dictionary of Misinformation' by Tom Burnham. Why would you want books of misinformation? Not so you can repeat it, but so you can eradicate it from the documents you edit.” (p 153). “ 'The Quote Investigator' by Garson O’Toole, exhaustively investigates the sources of quotations, which are indexed by author or purported author.” (p 156).An enjoyable introduction to AP Stylebook basics.

Great guide for future editors. I will be referring back to it even after I graduate.

As an editor myself, I really appreciated Steve's conversational, personable tone throughout the book. It made it very easy to read in a few sittings and really retain the information presented.This book is not meant as an "end-all" "one-stop", but rather a helpful guide and refresher on some of the most common issues editors will run across in their day-to-day dealings with manuscripts and publications.Overall, a quick read that doesn't stink of the overly-technical language of style manuals or other editorial guides. Highly recommended.

7.5/10This is a basic introduction to editing, no matter you are a beginner editor, a peer-reviewer or just want to edit your own texts.One expects the book of a professional editor to be good, easy to understand, and well organised, and, generally speaking, this is the case.Although many of the things Dunham recommends are a bit too obvious (especially if writing is part of your job or just your job) they should never be forgotten. At times, it is painful seeing academics doing the sort of mistakes that Dunham mentions in this book. Actually, these are some of the mistakes I do make while writing for work, or writing a review.The book is clearly written, without any pomposity or technical jargon. A priori, I thought this would be a dry book, but I found it to be not only useful and practical, but an enjoyable light reading as well.The chapter I find most interesting and useful is chapter 9 (The Editor's Tools), which not only provides us with a commented bibliography and list of online resources, but also an example of check-list. I also enjoyed Dunham's comments on the relationship with editors and authors in chapter 9, which are great to level your head when correcting somebody else's work, something that I find difficult because I get exasperated by some people's "crappola". And also all his comments on the use of Wikipedia.Some of his comments on common grammatical and orthographical mistakes are spot on and very easy to understand, therefore, very useful. I also like some of the explanations Dunham gives about confusing (fusing) words. I noticed that, while he explains the rule on how to use brackets, for example, he says it in a way in which brackets are used and incorporated into the explanation without the need of any example. Cool, even tubular ;)The examples Dunham uses come from different mediums (newspapers, Government reports, novels and monographs, among others) and show, not only that there are too many crappy texts out there, but also that a good editor can morph an ugly text into something correct, intelligible and even elegant. On that regard, chapters 9 (Samples of Editing) and 10 (The ones that got away) are especially entertaining and self-explanatory.Yes, editing is the make-up artistry of the language -- It turns anything average into a beautiful looking thing.I find great that a professional editor reminds us that spell-checking is not a sin, or something just for foreigners.The end-noting system is great, very academic, and it is perfectly linked back and forward in the Kindle edition.EDITING THE EDITORThe book examines and includes all types of editing. You will find similar challenges and methodical approach to editing any type of text. However, editing for a newspaper, or for an academic journal or the Government are intrinsically different as they target different readers, and they do so in different ways regarding language used and length and depth of the text. You cannot expect the general reader to understand technical stuff, but you expect academics working on a given discipline to deal easily with it. So, I would have liked a chapter devoted to the challenges that different publications and texts demand from the editor, and the way editors face them.Some of the explanations about punctuation were just sketched, too general, and not clear enough, for example, the use of Em and En dashes.I would have placed chapter 9 after chapter 10, included some of the subjects mentioned in the appendix in chapter 10 and enlarge them, and offer a separate bibliography and resources section. Besides, the bibliography mentioned is a bit old. Even though the books are classics, or manuals that any editor should have, there must be most updated improved editions., And why not including some other specialised books?I found odd that the pages of some articles mentioned in the endnotes have no pages mentioned. They come from newspapers and other periodical publications. I was taught, that even when the article comes from a newspaper, you provide the reader with the page where the article is found. There must be a reason why pages are not mentioned with those articles. Were they retrieved online? Is there an rule about this that professional editors follow?Now, how much quoting is too much? Well... too many quotes are always too much. Elements of Style and Words into Type are mentioned ad nauseam, so I ended wondering, if these books are so great, why bothering writing anything else? Dunham is a professional experienced editor, so I wanted to hear his voice loud and distinctly clear, even if he shares the same opinions and approaches to work with other editors. In fact, Dunham shines when he does so, when he is his own self, and speaks from his own experience without paraphrasing or quoting anybody.Most of the grammar elements and common mistakes he discuses in his book are great, but we can find that sort of information in any basic grammar book, like Practical English Usage or a Practical English Grammar, just to mention two examples of exhaustive reliable books coming from Oxford University. However, I missed a chapter on footnoting or endnoting; too many writers and academics do not use notes properly, they do not know where to place them, or what sort of information to include in them. The same can be said of creating indexes, bibliography and glossaries, or your own style sheet. Said differently, how would an editor approach endnotes, footnotes, bibliography, indexes and glossaries in a given text? How to edit those?IN SHORTI found the reading good and entertaining, and, as a first good approach to editing, a great book with plenty of useful items of advice. I was expecting an ABC of editing, but for that you have to go elsewhere.

I agree with the 5-star ratings and comments given for Steve Dunham's "The Editor's Companion: An Indispensable Guide to Editing Books, Magazines, Online Publications, and More." I do not know what more I can add other than giving my own 5-star rating. I like the book because it is presented in an easy-to-understand way. Also, I like how Dunham includes the wisdom of the editors that he knows. The "look inside" should give the buyer a good idea of the book layout. I found the book well designed--not crammed with information. Dunham provides good leads to additional resources on editing.

As an author—not a trained editor—this work has helped me improve my written communication. Every piece of advice is backed up by numerous, clear examples. It is also entertaining to read, with the bubbling humour found in the best of American writing whether fiction or non-fiction. For an Australian, some of the style rules are not applicable. However, the author provides many links to style manuals. The book was expensive for an Australian to buy, but worth it.

This is an excellent book for both novice and experienced editors alike.

This book really delves into how an editor should approach editing. It's not a "how to" guide but more of a "how to be" guide. It gives some good advice so I recommend it.

I disagree with the title: this book is dispensable. It mainly focuses on newspaper stories and US government documents, with guidelines around grammar and lots of examples. Use of Microsoft Word is assumed. I felt there was insufficient attention to the process of editing and to the context of finding work and remaining active. There’s also a lot of repetition. Maybe the book needs a good editor :) but as it stands it’s not got enough in it to justify the price.

An essential book for any editor