Book Indexing, An Art

I’ve been doing a lot of book indexing recently, which is something I fell into unintentionally and have enjoyed immensely. I love developmental and copy editing with my whole heart, and have to also admit that indexing has become a favorite of mine as well.

Who knew? Life twists and turns in weird ways, and then you’re 38 with a PhD in German Studies and have your own business where you work with authors at (now literally) every stage of manuscript development.

Indexing is not just about ctrl + F-ing for certain words and writing down the page numbers where these words appear, though I certainly have experienced indices that have been constructed in this manner. It’s super annoying because you want information related to that word, that concept, that person, that event, and what you get is, in most cases, a passing mention with no context or elaboration. It wastes your time.

A good index is one that directs the reader to the main ideas of the book in various ways: use of synonyms, field-specific terms and concepts, cross-references, and the inclusion of references to further information related peripherally to the topic are used to make sure that every entry is a helpful and useful one.

It takes A LOT of time to create a good index. A recent academic book manuscript I worked on took me upwards of 30 hours to construct, refine, and perfect. You must read the text in its entirety and take scrupulous and detailed notes before you even begin. Then, you must go back through each and every paragraph to determine what useful information is there, and how it relates to the various main ideas of the text. You have to discern who and what is important enough to index, and what and who is not. You have to put yourself in many readers‘ shoes and consider how they might use the index, what words they will search for. It’s an exercise in considering many perspectives, in determining the relationship between all sorts of information, and in weighing comprehensibility with utility and thoroughness.

It’s a marathon of a project and takes a great amount of patience, and I really wasn’t sure I’d like it, to be honest.

But I really really do. It’s an intellectual endeavor unlike any other, and learning how to do it has been a great challenge for me. Turns out, maybe I’m an indexer as well as an editor. We certainly do contain multitudes, I suppose.

So, if you need someone to index your next book, you know who to reach out to now :)

Finding Balance in Business

As I build and grow Frazier-Rath Editing, I’ve struggled with how I can balance my need for an income and my desire to value my own time and skills in ways that companies and colleges I’ve worked for have not,…

…with my deeply-held belief that the amount of money you have access to should never determine how you’re treated, nor the quality and care you should expect.

I’m very uncomfortable with the world of transactions, especially monetary ones, considering the devastating consequences of capitalism. (That’s a topic for our book discussion in April, to which all are welcome.)

I much prefer operating on the principles of collaboration, community, as well as mutual support and respect.

So, I’ve decided that although I set my rates in accordance with the guidelines put forth by the Editorial Freelancers Association, I will always offer a “pay-what-you-can” option, accompanied by the trust in my clients that they will pay what they can, and the promise that I will never ask questions, nor pass judgment.

And I really, truly mean it.

This will allow me to do what I really love doing, while supporting anyone who is trying to get their ideas out there, no matter how much they can pay.

(I also decided that I’m ok with the idea that there will be people who find this naive, stupid, or bad business. I don’t really care. I live very seriously by the idea that you should live the way you want the world to be.)

So, if you think you can’t afford someone to…

• help you fix your resume;

• support you as you write that article or book you weren’t sure you could write;

• perfect that last draft;

• strengthen that proposal;

…

think again.

Generative AI Will Never Produce Good Writing

I worked in generative AI for as long as I could take it, and I just think it's very empty, ultimately.

It doesn't do empathy. There are no feelings there.
It doesn't exist in the real world. There are no experiences there.
It doesn't have relationships. There are no connections there.
It doesn't have subjectivity. It isn't "subjected" to subjecthood--it doesn't live (period.) under a government (it's not interpellated), in the world (it doesn't experience weather, climate, the rotation of the Earth, the revolution of the Earth around the sun), or among people, animals, nor plants.
It doesn't emote.
It doesn't get tired.
It doesn't get hungry or thirsty.
It doesn't crave.
It doesn't remember, memorialize, get nostalgic, recall, nor does it forget.
It doesn't laugh, cry, yawn, stare, blink, get sick.
It doesn't get violent, it's can't be cruel.
It doesn't get angry, nor does it seek revenge.
It doesn't touch, see, smell, taste, or hear.
It doesn't read. It doesn't think. It doesn't listen. It doesn't "do."
It doesn't play.
It doesn't (despite what certain people invested in generative AI might think or want others to think) do art. It can't do art.

My adult life has been devoted to the humanities, and I think what keeps drawing me in is that the core questions we continuously explore within the frameworks and through the lenses of the humanities are ultimately unanswerable.

What's so addicting about it, though, is that in every conversation, in every reading of some work, in every viewing of a film or a painting, in every interaction between a human and anything, in every moment---there is something new, something expansive, and something that adds to our overall understanding of humanity.

Generative AI produces boring stuff. Sure, when it's correct, it could be informative, but it won't explore with you...

it won't go on tangents, or go down rabbit holes, or make random associations.

If you want an empty essay, a polished article with no soul, a seminar paper that proposes nothing new, a resume that doesn't speak to humans (idk--I don't want to work somewhere that will only consider my resume if it has certain keywords that feed the bots), then generative AI is fine. It's a tool, but it's not your friend, your confidant, your collaborator, your conspirator.

If you want to write something that's intense, deep, thought-provoking, powerful, persuasive, and emotional, then find a human editor with whom you can...
collaborate
experiment and test out ideas
articulate and rearticulate to get to what you mean to say
learn
relate
connect
share
build trust.

For another take, see Joanna Bryson’s work, including this recent post on their blog, which includes further resources.