Sunshine, Cross-Referenced to Amen Corner

My colleague (not that I have just the one, only that he is the colleague with whom I work most closely these days) sent me this, a post by Roy Peter Clark on William Zinsser's On Writing Well: The Classic Guide to Writing Nonfiction.

I must go now. I feel inspired to delete extraneous words from a recent essay.

Would that I remember this and apply the knowledge to my emails.

Topical Applications

We're (I've been using the editorial "we" freely this past week, not to be confused with the majestic plural, which I also quite like) launching a passage-writing project, which means, among other things, that the coffee cup is never empty and the day is never done.


A new passage project also means a marshaling of the brain cells and assorted Inner Resources for my favorite of all possible types of work: thinking of topics. In the past week I've offered up 35+ topics for reading passages. It's a barrel of monkeys.


I'm working with a few veterans, some intermediates, and some writers so new to assessment they are a bit dazed by the change in the atmosphere. And in working with new writers, I'm answering the kinds of questions new writers would have--which is all to the good. The best of all possible worlds, in the immortal words of Voltaire.






A question that should come up, at least in the writers' minds, is "What makes a good topic?"


The writers on this project are fortunate because rather than simply saying no when we reject a topic, we're explaining our decisions, thus providing a level of training that isn't typically offered in this business. We're also letting them see all of the topics that are approved by the client: even more training, especially for those possessing a willingness to perform a tiny bit of pattern analysis.


So if the writers do wonder about what makes a good topic (and I hope they do), they can look at the list, see everything that's been approved by our client, and then draw conclusions.


Some basic criteria used to evaluate topics include (but not necessarily in this order)

• relevance and/or practical use
• interest level to students at grade level
• content value
• general alignment to academic subject(s), if applicable
• heft--I can't think of another way to say this, but I mean whether the topic is big enough to carry a work of writing in its entirety

There's also the glitter factor. Some topics are just so perfect that you can't believe someone thought that angle up all by his or her own self.


And then there is the most wonderful surprise of all, when you give a writer a topic that is all right, you think, but nothing to throw a party for, and she writes a passage that she must have dipped in glue and rolled in crushed diamonds before she sent it in.


Sometimes the topic itself is secondary to the skill of the writer. A great writer can write about almost anything in an interesting way.

Why I Love Writing for NGEE

This weekend I had that experience that brings joy to all writers, that of seeing my name in print. There is my byline in nice big letters in the January issues of both National Geographic Explorer and National Geographic Extreme Explorer. I've written four articles for National Geographic Extreme Explorer, at which publication the editors are extremely likable. Extremely likable, and extremely good editors.

Where I come from, educational assessment and curriculum publishing, there's not a lot of editing (of stories and articles, anyway) for the sake of art and language. There is editing to get your word count, and editing to achieve a target readability, and editing to make sure the vocabulary is appropriate to the grade level. Before working with the NGEE editors, I'd been accustomed to writing my piece, turning it in, and getting paid. Once in a rare while, an editor might want this or that minor change to accommodate this or that project specification (or client preference or even whim), and of course I would make such changes with nary a grumble, but I was unused to revising according to direction.

Of course I revised on my own. I wrote and revised, wrote and revised, drank a glass of wine, slept on it, and revised again. Revising according to editorial direction is a whole nother matter. It takes a good editor, and by that I mean not just someone who edits well, but someone who is capable of clearly expressing his or her vision of the final piece, and making specific suggestions about what should be added, deleted, or changed to create that vision. Someone who can express and suggest in such a way that does not encourage the writer to curl up into a little ball of snottification and anxiety, as writers are sensitive souls and prone to weeping and moaning and gnashing of teeth.

And then the editor does even more magic before the issue goes to print, with the result that when I see my story, I hardly recognize it, because it is so much better than it was before.

Dear NGEE editors, I am your big fan.

UPDATE: Fixed a typo. If only I had the luxury of a good editor for ALL my writing. Blogs. Emails. Etc.