Editing and clutch hitting

Regarding editing: The only serious editing I’ve ever received has been for my New York Times op-eds and my article in the American Scientist. My book editors have all been nice people, and they’ve helped me with many things (including suggestions of what my priorities should be in communicating with readers)–they’ve been great–but they’ve not given (nor have I expected or asked for) serious editing. Maybe I should’ve asked for it, I don’t know. I’ve had time-wasting experiences with copy editors and a particularly annoying experience with a production editor (who was so difficult that my coauthors and I actually contacted our agent and a lawyer about the possibility of getting out of our contract), but that’s another story.

Regarding clutch hitting, Bill James once noted that it’s great when a Bucky Dent hits an unexpected home run, but what’s really special is being able to get the big hit when it’s expected of you. The best players can do their best every time they come to the plate. That’s why Bill James says that the lack of evidence for clutch hitting makes sense, it’s not a paradox at all: One characteristic of pros is that they can do it over and over.

1 thought on “Editing and clutch hitting

  1. There's a big difference between CUP and FSG in terms of the amount of editing, production and marketing going on. And I'm not just saying that because Jonathan's our neighbor.

    I had a great experience with CUP — my copy-editor was a genius as were the typesetters who helped me generate top-quality LaTeX. MIT just made my life miserable for my second book and insisted on retypesetting it all from scratch.

    I wonder how big textbooks are made. The cell biology book I read (Alberts et al.) required more effort to generate a single figure than it takes me to write half a chapter in computer science.

Comments are closed.