Edit Edit Edit

Editing, I have decided, is an art. I tend to not want to read other people’s work on subjects I write about because I don’t want undue influence, but as I write creatively that isn’t a problem because at my age reading children’s books is something I should not admit to anyway.

But editing a magazine I tend to want to keep the voice of the writer and in so doing have a light touch but I may not be doing the writers a service as some should actually change their sentence structure and even their vocabulary. I am getting feedback from readers who find the differing styles ok but the phraseology leaves them cold, sometimes.

So my new rule is to edit anything I think someone will have to read twice to understand. This means downgrading my own understanding, as I have read the Faery Queen (littered with Saxon English) and never had a problem reading Shakespeare fluently.

The Amount is Everything

We have worked, out of a belief that what we are doing is worthwhile, for three years mostly as volunteers. It saddens me when people write to us saying they want to write reviews about art but won’t do it for nothing. This is why it saddens me.

We want to pay but we can’t yet as we are not solvent enough. It’s a long road to reinvigorate a magazine and pay people properly. More importantly we appreciate beyond words all those who have written for us without pay because they share our belief that the art world is broken with money making and that the creative worth of an individual is beyond money’s ability to comprehend. To put a price on communication, on philosophy on what a culture means, is absurd. They are priceless things.

To keep out of the discussion because you won’t be paid for your words goes against everything education should teach us. Life is hard in the capitalist system, you don’t have money you have nothing. You silence yourself because you don’t get paid, you are a prisoner of that system.

What Makes A Thief?

In one key area we are all thieves. There is no country left in the world that has not been fought over and taken from peoples who previously thought it was their own. Especially those who did not realise this ‘ownership’ tribal tradition was growing among the human community.

Given that it is in us to steal, why do you think, Michel Segard, Michael Ramstedt, Tom Mullaney and Thomas Feldhacker are thieves? Why would they take the New Art Examiner and put their names on the official registration papers leaving Derek Guthrie’s, the co-founder, out? These men want status in Chicago and that city, like many another, teaches thievery.

I don’t know what will happen to this cabal of nobodies but I would ask people not to support them. Derek Guthrie is alive, still publishing, and his magazine is far better financed and supported than the cabal’s.

New Art Examiner

I am editing a magazine.

It after all, a writing skill I have never cultivated before.

The magazine is a journal of art criticism but as editor I have to ensure I have one skill above all others. I must never takes sides. No matter the feelings I may have about an artwork or a philosophy or about the general milieu i must never allow my thoughts to skew the fact that we comment and discuss with reasons.

Giving reasons is the most telling thing a thinker can do. It shows all our weakness and all our strength. It also makes us face our own self and our own assumptions on a daily basis. No one can ever be wholly right, or completely wrong and a magazine that purports to be international must be ethical in its dealings with its contributors and its readers.

It’s a good way to be. It will improve my own writing, sharpen my mind and illuminate my society for me.

I have no idea what it will do for you.

Site Footer

Sliding Sidebar


December 2018
« Aug