This week in class, we talked about e-mail consultations. I’m really excited to get started with e-mails. I have a feeling that it’ll be something I easily take to. My best friend, Lisa, lives in Florida, and she frequently sends me things that she writes. (She is a Creative Writing major at University of Central Florida). So I have gotten in the habit of doing a sort of e-mail consultation, at least with Lisa. But because I only spend four hours a week in the Center, I don’t want to do too many- maybe one a week. Otherwise, I’m sure I’d miss the face-to-face interaction that e-mails can’t provide. Anyway, I think I’ll probably be the type of e-mail consultant that uses smiley faces. :) :) :)
Lately, I have been thinking a lot about editing as a potential career. I think I might like being a magazine editor. These are all relatively new thoughts, but I can’t help but draw comparisons to the work I do in the Center. It is the same idea in many ways: helping improve writing and develop ideas for an intended audience. But it’s different in that I think editing is less-collaborative. Not that I know for sure, but I view editing as a more linear process: a writer turns in an article to an editor, who corrects and edits it to prepare it for publication. There is less back and forth, less interaction, less conversation. Am I off-base about this?
This editing thing gives me another potential article topic for later in the semester. Is there much written about this connection? Do writing center consultants often end up as editors? Or is it disappointing to them because the interaction factor is missing?
An unrelated concern: we are reading so much writing center literature; it is almost overwhelming, because we are supposed to come up with our own ideas based on all of these readings, and our own observations and experiences. (For the articles we write, and our consulting philosophy). I guess I just worry that since there is so much out there, that we can’t necessarily contribute new ideas to the conversation. And what if we think they’re new ideas, but they’re not?
This week in the Center, I had a consultation with a graduate student who was writing a journal abstract. She asked to set up another appointment with me for next week to brainstorm ideas for an environmental paper she is going to write about feedlots. That means I will be getting my first repeat! I was looking forward to this a lot. Not only do I get to establish more of a relationship with this student, but this also means that I must be doing something right. It’s nice to have that extra reassurance!
Oh, somewhat related to this: I had two consultations this week that answered a question I have had for several weeks now. I wondered if many people actually read our little bios that we have on the online scheduler. I included in mine that I am pursuing an Environmental Studies minor, in hopes that I’d attract environmental papers. And so far, it’s worked twice, to my knowledge. Very cool.
Yet another productive week in the Center!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Hi, April.
ReplyDeleteIn answer to your question about whether or not editing is a collaborative process, I would have to say that it depends on two things: the editor and the publishing venue. One of my favorite fiction writers, the late Richard Laymon, wrote a book called A WRITER'S TALE, in which he discusses his experiences being a professional writer. In the chapter that addresses dealing with publishers, he says that the editors at some of his American publishers gave him very little say in what they did when the edited his work, but other American editors and all of those at his British publishers would dialogue with him about suggested changes or revisions and let him have some input. He also says that some of the small-press periodicals that published his short stories would publish them without any changes whatsoever, whereas the larger presses would make "suggestions" about changes and alterations. So I guess that's sort of my long-winded way of saying, "It depends."
That's cool that you've had a few students set appointments with you specifically because you mentioned your minor in Environmental Studies on the scheduler bio. I actually had a similar experience a few weeks ago. One student that I tutored told me that she was specifically looking for a consultant who could help her with CMS (Chicago) citation, and since my bio on the scheduler mentions my background in art history and my familiarity with Chicago style citation, she picked me. It's a pretty awesome feeling to know that somebody deliberately picked YOU out of the list of consultants, eh? And it's good to know they actually do read the bios.
Have a great weekend.
Michael
Hi, April!
ReplyDeleteI'm glad to hear you'll be whipping out the :) when working with writers. I like that our consultants have different styles and personalities and how it comes through even when we're not working face-to-face with writers. Embrace it. I have. :)
So, you've mentioned something pretty dang interesting here. Yes--you are absolutely right that we've done a lot of reading (and we've really only scratched the surface). However, the whole point behind participating in academia is that you're looking to add to the conversation, which means you first need to figure out what has already been talked about. This definitely takes time, but you will eventually figure out the gist of the conversation (without having to have read every word out there), and you'll be able to add something new to the pile. Is this what I'm expecting from you in a 300 level course? Not exactly. But you just might. For example, I don't recall any writing center literature discussing the consultant/editor relationship...
I'm glad to hear your bio is paying off! Pretty nifty, no?
I'm looking forward to reading your first email consultation, April--I hope you have fun writing it!
Enjoy your weekend!
mk