Good books on sub-editing (plus general question)

books on good english:
"strunk and white" is nice and short
"fowler's modern english usage" is hefty and a fair bit contrarian -- i love it bcz he is pragmatic and sensible abt shifts in usage
i also like eric partridge's "usage and abusage", tho it's really just an update fowler lite

*if you have a test, it will probably be about whether you are fast and have a good eye -- mark things you think are wrong even if you don't know what the "right" house style is (put an instruction like "check for house style", then they'll know you've spotted it)

if they give you a rewrite job, don't be afraid to be aggressive -- if your version reads better than the original, then it's an improvement, even if the original was by haha john updike)

You'll be cool. I wouldn't worry too much about books. They're handy as reference tools, but I don't think you really need to gen up for your interview.

this is good to hear because i am similarly lousy - purely because i have forgotten everything i ever learnt at school! I USED TO KNOW ABOUT PAST PARTICIPLES and even the ABLATIVE ABSOLUTE but no more :(

I bought an expensive book called Copy Editing or something, but I have never used it. It is quite nice to fondle though.

I quite like the idea of rewriting everything in tabloid style.

Fire up Quark CopyDesk (a stripped down version of Xpress for subbing copy) and pick up stories that are in the queue, which will usually be a few lines too long for the box and need a headline/strap/standfirst/caption whatever.

There's no set time, but unless it's huge then you'd probably be expected to do it all and send it back to whoever (maybe the chief sub, in your case?) within an hour. Everyone knows that when you're new you take longer. Don't spend too much time worrying about a brilliant headline - they often get changed several times as they go down the line. Just get something vaguely sensible in there. On tabloids, the design of certain pages is headline-led, so it could well be in there already.

Captions may well involve asking someone on the picture desk about the picture and what the credit is.

Do reading of proofs if they're handed to you. This involves picking up typos/"literals" that have slipped though as well as questioning anything that doesn't make sense to you. If you know all the proper proof-reading marks, great, but I don't and it's never been a problem.

It's also a bit about noticing things like odd spacing, bad line breaks, widows and orphans etc. But what counts as odd will vary between publication. It's more the typos and sense, really. Plus, if it's a full page, glaring errors like wrong date, missing page number, dummy text left in places etc.

When you hand it back, don't spend forever going through all your marks, just the ones that involve a bit of explanation.

House stlye is obviously a big thing in all this. They won't expect a casual to pick it all up instantly, but at least be consistent within your own subbing. If you're lucky, there will be a full style book you can consult. More likely, there'll be a dog-eared sheet or two of key points. This should include typographical stuff like how much you're allowed to squeeze text/adjust tracking in copy and headlines, as well as house spellings and capitalisation rules. Oh, and things like at what point numbers get written as digits rather than being spelt out (usually 10 or 11) and whether "million" always gets written in full, just on first mention.

The best preparation for house style would be to get a copy of the paper and read it carefully. If you can drop into your interview, when asking about house style and whether there's a style book, something like "I've noticed you cap up home secretary" then it looks like you're on the ball.

I know i much prefer to give shifts to the entertaining fun people than the pedants who mope over to tell me a story 'must be' wrong because it 'seems so', despite all the facts, or who write a shit headline just to keep the grammar right.

otm. nothing like wasting 20 minutes trying to make your beautiful idea fit the space only to have the whole thing chucked for the next editor's beautiful idea.

but for some reason i still love it.

so please. for the sake of your sanity. don't become a sub. otherwise you'll end up a twisted misanthropic masochist like wot i am.

still with us? oh well.

basically (this might answer ailsa's question too) i got my first subbing break in exactly the same way you seem to be doing, ie i went from churning out student-newspaper stuff to doing wee bits and bobs for "real" papers and magazines to actually getting paid for writing features for said papers and magazines to going: "see that subbing? i could do that. gizza job."

and a very kind gentleman at the sc0tzman deigned to give me a try-out.

the advice you've been given by alba is OT fucking M. basically, the key thing is attention to detail. nothing should be passed over. never think, fuck it, not sure: i'll just leave that. many times, i've picked up a piece to revise and found something in it - be it dodgy grammar, syntactical nonsense, dubious facts, something unexplained, something that just makes no sense in some way, shape or form - and gone back to the sub.

"what does this mean?"
"oh, i don't know. i thought other people would."

why would they? if you don't understand it, assume your reader won't. (this used to land me in shitloads of bother with the business desk at a previous job, but they did eventually accept that there is a case for, you know, just taking two or three words to explain a difficult concept the first time it crops up.)

basically: be swift, be accurate, be meticulous. don't sweat the headlines and the sells ... i mean, don't just turn in any old shit, but don't waste time sitting there going "oh fuck, oh fuck"; it takes a while to get the hang of thinking in each publication's headline style, then suddenly you just click and do it.

pay attention to everything. CHECK EVERYTHING. especially names. and if you're in any doubt, ask. the good subs are frequently the ones who ask you questions - "could i have a look at the style book?" being a superb ice-breaker - and then make a little note about it on their handy pad. (take a pad. write shit down. it always looks good.)

i doubt you'll be expected to do much rewriting to start with; however, do check this. red-top-esque writing takes a long time to get right (everybody thinks they can do it, but they're wrong) but - you'll see a pattern emerging here - ask if you think something needs tickling into shape. DON'T, whatever you do, zoom in there and start rewriting everything you touch, no matter how good you might be at it.

also: establish where the duty lawyer fits in to the equation. is the copy you're going to be working on automatically going to be legalled? do they expect you to flag up potential legal problems? if you're proof-reading a page, can you assume it's already been legalled? (in which case you surely have to flag up anything that worries you!) again: ask questions. show interest in the workflow, the system, how the picture desk works, etc. the chief sub will love you for this.

you'll almost certainly have some downtime when there's nothing in the queue. don't start reading ILX: ask what you can do. (i know, i know: sounds self-explanatory, but really ...) if there's nothing you can do, ask if you can watch somebody else drawing a page. just be interested. we're easily flattered :)

where i nearly fucked up a bit was by being a bit cocky at the start: i mean, all newspapers have mistakes in them, and i genuinely did think that i was the fucking d00d who was going to come in and ensure that nary a literal would ever sneak in to a british newspaper again. so although you know you're good, be humble.

i mean, you're dealing with a bunch of pedants who spend their entire life either pontificating or taking pelters from everyone else: reporters/writers moaning about changes you've made; editors moaning about pages you've drawn; money-men going: "do we really need these people? can't the reporters just read each other's (others'? still not 100% sure about that. gypsy mothra?) stories and type straight on to page templates?" yet we see what we do as highly skilled - arcane, even - and ... well, if it looks like someone, somewhere actually appreciates it then we're delighted.

there must be more to say but i think that'll do for now. nick covered so much upthread that i'm just wittering now.

as always, i'm e-mail-able off-board (use the webmail link; the BT one is prone to spam-trapping EVERYTHING these days) if there's anything else you want to ask. nick has my mobile number (i'm guessing you've got his) if you want to call me. hell, i'm not hard to track down. but TBH i can't think of a single useful thing i can add, except: good luck! knock 'em dead, etc.

Surely it should be the former, since you don't use the phrase each others, do you? Phrasing it differently, you would say "Can't the reporters just read the stories written by each other?" - actually, that looks shit, but probably correct.

it was weird tho, there were 2 others doing a trial too, but afterwards he said their sub positions were very full, and he'd contact me this week to see what he had...kinda left me wondering why call in 3 people when this is the case...unless they have a high turnover of people in subbing...overall it went well tho and what's more I enjoyed it

all my pages are done and i'm sitting here waiting for a fucking cartoon to drop. i've even done the TV for tuesday and the fashion page for wednesday, FFS.

Can you all get together and do something about the internet next, please?

i also became distracted by a picture of cate blanchett in the magazine process queue.

bah....a bit later and I haven't had a shift in a few weeks. the boss told me a few weeks ago they have kind of a full team of people and so shifts aren't that common but that in the summer there'd be more. the problem is I'm still learning so these huge gaps between shifts seem to affect the standard of my stuff.

today when he emailed me about shifts etc he said that the last day my stuff had a lot of mistakes in it which would need to be tightened up in future. that shift was about 3 weeks ago. it's so hard to learn without being in regularly.

I really fucking need this job too.

hang in there, ronan - is there anywhere else you can get shifts in the meantime?

also, dom, aren't you meant to be in our office today?

haha oh look, there he is indeed :-)