"Too big to edit" is a real problem in literary world: star writers start writing longer, more sprawling, ill-conceived & undisciplined works: King, Ellroy, Rowling. Now also a problem in journalism!
-
Show this thread
-
The writers who bristle most at editing, who see it as censorship, are usually the writers who need editing most: who need to be told that their unvarnished thoughts need to take into account obvious objections & try to win over readers who don't already agree.
7 replies 47 retweets 460 likesShow this thread -
In psychological terms, an editor is the super-ego that provides the necessary navigational skills to the id & ego. But some writers (usually guys) see the super-ego only as censorship & not a necessary voice in constructing complex arguments.
16 replies 19 retweets 313 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @HeerJeet
Surely you don't think that having an editor is the only difference between being part of a newsroom and being on one's own?
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
-
Replying to @HeerJeet
Dara Lind Retweeted Dara Lind
For sure. But I can also certainly imagine weighing the pros of having an editor against the cons of, like, this sort of thing https://twitter.com/DLind/status/1327327089113096199 … and having the cons outweigh the pros. Doesn't mean the editing is what's being rejected.
Dara Lind added,
Dara LindVerified account @DLindReplying to @DLindOne example: in 2019 there was a rotation of Vox politics writers to watch candidate town halls on cable news and find posts to write about them. It was part of the job, and dickish to try to wiggle out of, but it didn't overlap at all with the work I wanted to do.2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes
Agree that going on you own lets you specialize and focus. I appreciate substackization as way to get good beat writing.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.