When the Editors Goof While Lecturing About Proofreading

[Ken, Moderator]

While preparing a submission for the poetry magazine, Rattle, I came across this sentence in the submissions guidelines:

"Note that typos and minor changes never effect our decisions—proofreading is what editors are for."

Is it me, or does the editor who wrote this need an editor?

[Ruth]

Oh dear. Poor Tim. That’s embarrassing.

[Ken, Moderator]

It could be that someone other than Tim wrote it, too. You know. Delegating.

[Ruth]

If so, it was probably his wife, whose name escapes the brainbox right now, so it's almost equally embarrassing.

[Ken, Moderator]

Maybe someone should tell him. Then again, maybe not. Tim is notoriously touchy and defensive when he sniffs a criticism of any sort--even when it's not.

[Doug]

That -- I am deeply affected by.

[Ken, Moderator]

One poet friend wondered if it might be a joke, maybe. Ha-ha.

[Doug]

Poetry doesn't require common understanding.

[Sally]

Doug wrote: "Poetry doesn't require common understanding."
I would hope that it requires some kind of understanding, common or uncommon, provided that the poet isn't trying deliberately to be cryptic.

[Doug]

Sally wrote: "Doug wrote: "Poetry doesn't require common understanding."
I would hope that it requires some kind of understanding, common or uncommon, provided that the poet isn't trying deliberately to be cryptic."

I don't like being whizbanged either, but not everyone will understand what any particular poet writes because we are all different and have different experiences. If the poet wishes to expound some philosophy then he is not going to reach everyone.