"... that place is Participant, where his unassuming, heartfelt exhibition 'A Green New Deal'... includes a working greenhouse filled with a hodgepodge of succulents, bonsai, and carnivorous plants.... Ventur is best known for his indelible portraits of the late Warhol superstar Mario Montez, but an earthier muse is the scene-stealer here: the pathbreaking lesbian filmmaker Barbara Hammer, who looks elated, shortly before her death, early last year, to be climbing a tree."
So writes Andrea K. Scott in The New Yorker, where the copy editing is supposed to be rigorous. It's one reason I subscribe, and I have read the book "Between You & Me: Confessions of a Comma Queen" by Mary Norris, the eminent copy editor of The New Yorker.
Do you see the egregious error in the quoted passage?!
There is at least one other thing that needs better editing.
January 15, 2020
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
52 comments:
is the image of not her not from early last year?
>> death, early <<
Was the only thing that gave me pause.
“To be climbing”
You can lead a horticulture...
Taking a Whole-2-culture is like showing a Democrat common sense.
This sounds a little better: "who, shortly before her death early last year, looks elated to be climbing a tree."
1/15/20, 3:57 PM
I'd remove that comma too.
Indelible?
It should say "who looked" instead of "who looks" since the event happened before her death in 2019.
Did she fall out of the tree?
Might want to clarify that she did not die due to falling out of the tree.
Unless she did.
If I hadn't added my postscript I would have gotten in ahead of you Freeman. Curses.
I'll add that all commas give me pause. Some unnecessarily.
Avoid run-on sentences they are hard to read.
Never use no double negatives.
Use the semicolon properly, always where it is appropriate; and never where it is not.
Reserve the apostrophe for it's proper use and omit it where it is not needed.
Verbs has to agree with their subjects.
No sentence fragments.
Proofread carefully to see if you any words out.
Avoid commas, that are not necessary.
When you reread your work, you will find on rereading that a great deal of repetition can be avoided by rereading and editing.
A writer must not shift your point of view.
Do not overuse exclamation marks!!! (In fact, avoid them whenever possible!!!)
Place pronouns as closely as possible, especially in long sentences (as of ten or more words) to their antecedents.
Hyphenate only between syllables and avoid un-necessary hyphens.
Write all adverbial forms correct.
Don't use contractions in very formal situations.
Writing carefully, dangling participles must be avoided.
It is incumbent on us to avoid archaisms.
Take the bull by the hand and avoid mixed metaphors.
Avoid modernisms that sound flaky.
Never, ever use repetitive redundancies.
If we've told you once, we've told you a thousand times: avoid hyperbole.
Also, avoid awkward or affected alliteration.
Do not string a large number of prepositional phrases together unless you are walking through the valley of the shadow of death.
Always pick on the the correct idiom.
"Avoid overuse of 'quotation' 'marks.'"
Never use more words than are necessary to get your point across: be as concise as possible.
Awayz check you're spelling. (Some spellcheckers would only cathc one of the two errors here.)
Every sentence a verb.
Last but not least, avoid cliches like the plague: seek viable alternatives.
A four-dot ellipsis.
Oh, that wasn't in the original. That one's on Althouse!
Must be the comma between death and early.
Who writes like that?
I liked the Dutch painting by Gerard Ter Borch further down in the article. Had to go looking for information on his sister Gesina, the model for that painting as well as many of his other works.
Barbara Hammer, who looks elated in her portrait taken shortly before her death early last year from falling out of a tree.
who looks elated to be climbing a tree in her portrait taken shortly before her death early last year.
No comma after death.
Proofread carefully to see if you any words out.
How's that working for you??
Better to just leave out all the tree stuff anyway.
Freeman's comments are always a joy to read. Pithy and fun.
Personally, I see absolutely nothing "egregious" here. Of course, I must confess I am NOT a comma-freak. And I am egotistical enough to admit feeling extremely literate in educational and personal terms...or, if nothing else, I call 'no damage, no foul'. I wait breathlessly to hear of the 'egregious'......
Mr Duncan.
It's been a long time since I laughed that hard
Thank you.
"Did she fall out of the tree?"
This identifies the problem that made me sat "There is at least one other thing that needs better editing."
The egregious error has not yet been mentioned.
"A four-dot ellipsis."
No, there is no four-dot ellipsis. There is a period followed by an ellipsis. I'm following the law review Blue Book form. Where I have only 3 dots in a row, it's an ellipsis in the middle of a sentence. An ellipsis at the end of a sentence looks like 4 dots because there's also a period.
I've been consistent following this rule for 16 years.
Hahaha! That made me sat! Proofreading!
The comma in the middle here:
"shortly before her death, early last year"
The very first word of the article is incorrect. "Horticulturalist" like saying economicalist, botanicalist, and chemicalist.:
"Horticulture is a noun and horticultural is an adjective. Specialty titles, like economist, botanist, or chemist, are based on nouns, not adjectives. Otherwise we’d have economicalist, botanicalist, and chemicalist."
And don't tell me you've seen it in a lot of places. You're seeing it in The New Yorker. It's still wrong.
"Hahaha! That made me sat! Proofreading!"
I don't have a copy editor, but do proofread and I proofread and correct my posts all the time. With comments, unfortunately, there is not way to edit (unless you delete and repost, which I would do, except then I'd have to delete your making fun of me).
How about a semicolon or a period between "Montez" and "but"?
There's also an error in my comment at 6:58: " chemicalist.:" (an extra period, and it's not long after I made a big deal about the correctness of my ellipses). It's just impossible to edit comments. You have to proofread before hitting publish, and I'm very impetuous about hitting publish and continually editing after publishing. I've tried to stop that, but it's part of what keeps me going here... the endless hope that first drafts will be just fine.
"there is not way to edit"
See?
"the pathbreaking lesbian filmmaker Barbara Hammer, who looks elated, shortly before her death, early last year, to be climbing a tree"
The information that Hammer died shortly after the photo was taken should not be part of describing a picture of her looking elated as she was climbing a tree! She's not smiling because she's about to die. She's smiling (presumably) because she's enjoying climbing the tree. Her fast-approaching death has nothing to do with her elation... unless it does. It's possible that she's elated because she knows she's about to die and she's feeling especially happy to still be alive. But if the later interpretation is correct, it should have been stated more clearly. As it stands, it seems like the sentence writer just wanted to include more information in one sentence. The New Yorker used to have a copy editor who made a very sticklerish point about not adding extra-information phrases like that — even when no confusion was caused.
"The New Yorker used to have a copy editor who made a very sticklerish point about not adding extra-information phrases like that — even when no confusion was caused."
To make that sentence into an example of the thing she disapproved of:
"The New Yorker used to have a copy editor with long black hair who made a very sticklerish point about not adding extra-information phrases like that — even when no confusion was caused."
"Also, avoid awkward or affected alliteration."
Not so clever when alliteration is mixed up with assonance!
“And you know? If that’s what the copy editing law is — I like to obey the law. But think of it, they kill our people, they blow up our people, but then we have to be very gentle with their horticulturalist institutions.”
“...their imminent horticulturalist institutions. For example: their covfefe plantations.”
Funny, we don't say environmentist, globist, nationist or minimist
“Horticulturalist” is not in the OED.
Blogger jimbino said...
“Funny, we don't say environmentist, globist, nationist or minimist”
Good counter-argument against the reason I quoted, but I still think “horticulturalist” is wrong.
Go Green, clear the woods, the land, the flora, the fauna, and the birds, too, with carnivorous blades.
There is a period followed by an ellipsis.
Or an ellipsis followed by a period, since the elision occurs before the end of the sentence.
"Or an ellipsis followed by a period, since the elision occurs before the end of the sentence."
Yes, and you may know that the Blue Book (at least when I was in law school) required a space separating the period from the ellipsis and that does, as you indicate, convey additional information that I am depriving you of. I think the extra space looks fussy and I adapted the Blue Book rule for my use. I've been consistent with my approach all along.
What does Mead the horticulturist think?
My approach lets me ignore whether the elision was before or after the period, and I really should have checked before writing "There is a period followed by an ellipsis." Sorry if to have written it that way and thanks to Ralph L for bringing out such a fine point!
@Ryan
I only ever noticed this fine point because of Meade.
Horticulturist can fairly describe a professional gardener who is also a scholar of the science of horticulture.
Horticulturalist describes someone who subscribes to the ideology that says arranging fruits and vegetables and making a salad is Art.
Right plant, right place is a good mantra for gardeners, garden designers and even tenured professors of horticulture.
Writers, copy editors and even tenured professors of linguistics could adapt the gardener's mantra: right word, right place.
Post a Comment