The Clairvoyant Zoopraxiscope

ah...the comments were free from any intent of "bullying." They honestly were just silly..

Looking over them,
the quality does seem to wane.
Feel free to edit the anyonymous comments..it was a friendly joke..
with a b-movie sensibility..but they are a bit tawdry. So, the one that made them (the comments) is fine with them being edited.

*

Editorial pragmatism..would seem to have more to do with personal gain above the work...i.e. decisions based sole on monitary or hierarical assertions of "power" as opposed to the longevity of the form...

from the decisions in fence those seem to be other than the sole concern in your choices (the comments really were just silly)..
 

you seem to hold back..were those hypothetical questions, though?

The issue seems to be..is the editor injecting themself into the work (i.e. re-writting lines, changing the tone and structure?)..

fair to the author (named on the work) if the changes alter the content or intent of the piece?

When one considers that many of the journals are already placing the works in sequences that may affect the reader's perception of the piece, and when one considers that some journals disallow statements of purpose?

Then it seems like a "gray" area. Of course, the reader's understand that facet of publishing.

Feel free to edit this comment as well, but fence seems to let the writers have their space, which seems fair in some regards.
 

This is, again, to many posts, and one would ask for your forgiveness.

As a post-script to that thought, and example of how editing might affect tone, might be a passive piece being "edited" to the point of becoming sensationalist.

Say, the author were to use passive or static terms, and then the work were to be re-contextualized, even re-written by an editorial staff into being provocative, or even pushed more into the category of "agit-prop".

If done with malice(to make the person with the name on it look "bad")due to some sort of personal gain on the editor's part, as opposed to genuinely looking out for the quality and content of the publication, in that sense, the decision would seem to be going a bit far.

That's the negative; the positive example (and the one you seem to be considering) is editing or sprucing up, to prevent the author making themselves look "bad."

Of course, in the realm of publications, the author usually is one that agrees to the changes, before the publication is seen by others.
 

Take for example, nightmarish, hypothetical edtiorial abuses, such a sincere set of folks songs, packaged with the word "hate" across the front, without the author's consent. It seems unfair to the artist within?

Of course, that would differ from somebody else writting an original set that catered to the sensationalist draw? Though it would give the other folkers quite a pickle if the styles, were editorially equated to being the same statement?

Fence seems to steer clear of that one.
 

What is said folkers in the context were poets that wrote a series of non-racist works?

However, what if...ah..what if they could only get published (though the skills and ability were the same) if they played into the other type of context for the works?

It isn't anything objectivitely determined, so it's a gray area, but as an esoteric consideration,
is it fair (overall) editing, to only accept those works?

I imagine editors have a lot of sleepless nights weighing over which works, by which artists, are accepted.

But, perhaps, this is an advanced editing class concern, and the blog is an innapropriate context for discussion; I apologize.

As a reader of the blog, those are the issues that immediately came to mind when considering the topic of editing and pragmatism.
 

Certainely, one would feel that, though it's an awful place, it would noble for the author to turn down the slot of sensational works, as opposed to placing the blame on the editor-- I forget which logical fallacy that would be.

However, considering the issue in the realm of "editorial ethics" would it be fair for the editor to only assign one role to the writer in terms of the type of works?

I'm thinking only in terms of the creative scene, as opposed to "real, everyday daily life, where all of us are faced with the questions of "compromise" on a daily basis.

I trust you will forgive me for the indulgence of multiple posts, but if you do wish to edit the content to maintain the quality of the blog, I do understand. And I'm a bit ashamed of the garrulous quality and the syntax (should have revised the comments before posting).
 

Legally, it would probably be a "fine line." Those are subjective issues, and especially in the case of works that go outside of the legal defination of overly "derivative" works (or one might say work within the legally accepted bounds of significant derivation) it would be an abusrd argument (some sort of variation on "common cause" or?....

However in the abstract, as an esoteric concern, it would seem to reflect.."corruption"?

Of course, it might be unfair to lable a work of art (which might be elliptical and free to interpretation) "racist"?
 

Pardon another comment (and other than offended if you revise!)...

i guess...attacking the person, appeal to authority, non-support and untenstability is what i was thinking of...

of course, if one hestiantly worded things allowed the possiblity of mis-judgement and qualified...a discussion over whether or not that was unfair...

could be discussed as adults..

(i intened that in other than a way of charging yourself with those things..as the blogs are sympathetic and genuine..)
 

It was other than my intent, so the argument is irrelevant, but I had intentionally done any of those things, mr. winter, looking over the posts on this blog, it would be especially unfair as it would be other than the attitude you yourself has ever had in regards to myself, or others. I lack any knowledge as to whether or not you'd ever had that attitude towards anybody else. But even if you had, forgiveness is a virtue. And I trust that you would forgive me, as from the quality of your posts, you, yourself, seem to possess virtue.

We all make mistakes (its human) and healthy to move on (holding grudges over long periods of time, being a schizophrenic trait, after all). Again, I've seen quite the opposite of a grudge mentality in your regards, so that comment was made with other than an intent to..imply.

I'm sorry for getting carried away and commenting like this, even if it is as form of compliment (which just seems like "good manners", in regards to the social graces).
 

One would wish to qualify, however, that "holding a grudge" over long periods of time, would be a different matter, than continuing to protest, an unjust law that remains on the books etc.

Of course, that's an issue the readers might be able to get to one thier own, and I apologize if I'm "hogging" the conversation, though there certainly aren't any particular laws on the books, governing conversational graces.

Laws or not, it still affects things.

Again, I hope one might accept the apology, with the explanation, as opposed to justification, that having few coversations with poets, the "give and take" that seems to be a standard, is a new process for myself, and something to which I'm becoming accustomed. My commenting habit, is other than done with malicous intent (possibly I'm from an enviroment where talking about whatever, at length is more common...or used to be..these are strange days indeed!)...

I would say in the matter of one that, as opposed to having acted out and left out of conversation, one might be one left out conversation that then acts out..it still a really thin excuse..

but i the person hasn't acted out really awfuly (or its harmless) one might find the room to forgive.

Of course, the commenting is taking place in a social context (a commenting section) and in the context, of a scene that has some intellectual stuff going on..as opposed to a job where one is paid to refrain from commenting. Though one respects that (and greatly). I meant that other than in a disrepectful way. These comments lacked a wisdom in their method of articulation, but I would argue that as the wisdom has been obtained, so it won't happen again..

ah..i'm sorry..won't happen again..hope you can forgive.