*
1. What made you decide to be involved in the Willow Patterns project?
The sheer craziness of writing, editing and publishing an anthology in 24 hours was a big drawcard for me getting involved in the project. The fact I’d worked with teams of student editors on anthology projects before through the University of Sydney meant I felt I had the additional skills necessary to manage such an unusual project from the editing point of view. But really, I just couldn’t refuse such an audacious proposal?
2. Did you have any prior relationship with any of the authors? Was this an additional factor to doing to the project?
Rjurik Davidson and I are in the same writing group, and I’d heard of some of the other authors involved. But I was quite happy to work with any authors who came aboard. I’ve worked with a lot of different authors as editor for Aurealis Magazine in the past, and working on anthologies for coeur de lion, my publishing company, so I was ready for anything.
3. Why was the symbol ‘Willow Patterns’ chosen as the link within the book – what is the significance there?
I can’t remember who exactly suggested it, but the idea was to have a linking object that would tie the anthology together. I think in the morning everyone was a bit worried about whether the whole thing would hang together, so the Willow Pattern Vase was a bit of a safety blanket for the authors. Something they could each incorporate. It could have been anything really, but as it happened, it was an inspired choice.
4. As editor, your role was slightly different to that of the authors; could you run through the tasks you had to complete during the process?
During the actual writing part, a lot of my time was spent working with the book software, just to make sure that the conversion was going to work properly. So I was playing with generating ebook files and then viewing them on a reader to make sure the various formatting elements were displaying properly. In the evening I also briefed the editing students because this was a very unusual situation for an editor. I’ve said before, you can’t edit a book in 24 hours. All you can do is your best to ensure the manuscript is free from spelling and grammatical errors and the story makes sense eg any plot inconsistencies are cleared up. Because the editors were not going to be able to start until the authors were finished – and off to bed for a well-earned rest – the normal back and forth querying between editor and author couldn’t take place. As a result I had to brief the students to be a bit more autonomous in terms of decision-making about the manuscript, while still preserving the authors’ intentions and voice. I was available for emergencies, but thankfully none occurred during the night. And in the morning I had a few short hours to go over the edits and address any major problems before publication deadline.
5. Did you have any ideas/plans on what to do coming into the project? Were there meetings beforehand?
I met with Simon Groth the project coordinator and we emailed back and forth about how the project should be run, how the editors would work and what needed to be done to make sure it – hopefully – went smoothly. I also had a few email exchanges with the student editors to explain the process beforehand and talk through any issues. After that we just crossed our fingers.
6. Was there a point during the 24 hour time frame, were you felt you didn't have enough motivation to finish the project by the deadline? If so, what did you do to re-motivate yourself?
No. Failure was not an option. We said we’d do it and we knew when the 24 hours clocked over ‘something’ would be published. It’s great that it turned out so well.
7. As editor, did you feel any added pressure to ensure the stories were all proofread and cohesive with one another? How did you ensure this was done effectively in such a short amount of time?
Like I said I knew up front that a full edit job was not possible given the project constraints. We could only do our best to address the most glaring errors. In terms of consistency between the stories that was really down to the authors, and they caucused a couple of times just to talk about how the stories were developing and where there were areas that one story could leverage off another. The authors were completely focused and very professional in their approach to the work. The cohesiveness of the finished article is really down to them, because with a team of editors and a short timeframe it wasn’t possible to form a comprehensive editorial view of the book.
8. When editing the authors work, were there any significant commonalities you discovered between stories eg. a particular word frequently used, a common grammar mistake, a certain time people would send their drafts?
No, there wasn’t time to review the work that closely and the editing was spread over several different editors. We were just focused on getting the basics right.
9. Were there any memorable moments from the project you would like to share?
The caucus meetings were a high point, and pizza and beer J. It was a real pleasure to meet the student editors in the flesh and feel their enthusiasm for the project. They did a great job. And of course when Simon pressed the publish button and we cracked the champagne, there was a huge sense of relief and accomplishment.
10. Would you ever do something like this again?
Sure. Where do I sign up?
No comments:
Post a Comment