I’m Sorry–June Who?

Christopher Hitchens begins his review of Elizabeth Edwards’ latest book (which reminds me–you stay classy, John Edwards), by complaining about the condescending fingerprints of her publisher on the text. “On page 88, [Broadway Books] makes Elizabeth Edwards tell us something that ‘Edmund Wilson, the incomparable twentieth-century literary critic, said.’” Like Hitchens, I hate the fact that so many publishers don’t think readers are smart enough to know who you’re talking about. This was one of the ongoing battles in the editing of my book–my editor would ask me to identify a source and I would complain that breaking in with an explanatory clause would disrupt the flow of the narrative, and would insult the intelligence of the reader, besides.

It came to a head when I was reading through the editing notes on a draft and came to a passing reference I’d made to June Cleaver, next to which was scribbled the words “We need to ID.” I’ll admit I’d become pretty bull-headed about such requests by then, but this one had me completely dumbfounded. What exactly would that look like? “June Cleaver, fictional mother of Wally and the Beav on the popular 1950s television show Leave It To Beaver,…”? I mean, seriously. That’s when I knew I was defeated. In the end, I simply took out the reference.

Of course, I could be wrong. Maybe we’ve been doing you readers a disservice with sloppy blog posts that lack the specificity of: “At a town hall this morning, President Barack Obama, the forty-something 44th president of the United States, answered questions about…” If so, our bad.

Related Topics: Uncategorized
  • Latest on Swampland

    Morning Must Reads: Secret

    Obama Administration Blocks Global Health Fund To Fight Disease In Developing NationsHuffPost Politics

    SAUL LOEB / AFP / Getty Images

    A Tale of Two Economies: Mitt Romney vs. Republican Governors

    The great recession has left the state of Ohio battered and bruised–and Mitt Romney would have you believe it’s Barack Obama’s fault. Writing in the Cleveland Plain-Dealer on May 4, Romney advised Ohioans that the President has delivered them “paltry results,” and that their state is in need of “a fundamental change in direction.”

  • palininatowel

    My guess is that more people know who June Cleaver is than know who you are. And no one knows who I am.

  • spob

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/13/books/13book.html?_r=2
    .
    Maybe the religion commentator could do a post on this instead of a rant about references.

  • dunedweller

    Since you mentioned Hitchens, I’m compelled to ask what you think about his writing / views on religion? I know you won’t comment here, but it might make an interesting blog topic for you sometime.

  • hellslittlestangel

    I, which is a pronoun indicating, me, the first person, but not in the creationist sense, agree, which is an English word meaning to share the same belief or opinion.

  • grape_crush

    Dirtiest thing ever said on network teevee:

    “Ward, you were a little hard on the Beaver last night.”

  • themaverickformerlyknownasbasilbrush

    Hellslittelangel – we need a footnote on “English”.

  • palininatowel

    Barbara Billingsley’s most famous line (from “Airplane”):

    “I Speak jive!”

  • grape_crush

    Footnote, hell. As long as we are electronic, use a link.

  • deconstructiva

    Amy, thanks for this change of pace from the health care mobs. Briefly OT, can we have a risible “1000 words” photo tomorrow with KT out? Back on topic, I don’t assume others are stupid; let ‘em prove it. I was not around (literally) when “Beaver” was on the air and even I know that show. Imagine if YOU had referenced Barbara Billingsley. Of course, you could’ve snapped back, “Excuse me? How dare you question a leading American TV and stage actress? Go away already and let me write.” Without dropping names, who was the ignorant party that questioned Beaver – editor, copy, or research? That clueless person needs to watch more retro TV. When can we expect upcoming books from YOU, Karen, and Michael? BTW, are the Cleaver house and street used in “Desperate Housewives”?

  • stuartzechman

    Amy Sullivan:

    …we’ve been doing you readers a disservice with sloppy blog posts that lack the specificity of…

    No, you have been doing a disservice to journalism with sloppy blog posts like

    A questioning faith is a much better fit for a society like ours than one that allows for no challenge or reflection. It also acts as a check against liberals who would appropriate God for their own purposes, declaring Jesus to be the original Democrat and trotting out New Testament verses to justify their own policy programs. Liberals don’t have the answer key to divining God’s will any more than conservatives do.

    that lack the specificity of quotes and links to actual God-appropriating liberals, their purported New Testament-based policy programs, and the “Jesus is a Democrat” advocacy groups representing this supposedly widespread political movement.
    .
    To be that sloppy in sourcing your claims is to create out of thin air an equivalency between Concerned Women for America, Focus on the Family, or the Christian Coalition and unnamed liberals who may or may not represent anyone in the real world.
    .
    Such sloppy, shoddy work may fit the Conventional Wisdom and currently accepted storylines of the Village you inhabit, Amy Sullivan, but it does do your readers –and ultimately your profession, given balance sheets as of late– a grave, stupid, pointless disservice.

  • Exiled_At_Home (formerly Neo)

    I’m sorry–Amy who?
    ~
    Seriously, Amy, you get a paycheck for this? This might pass for light conversation between two published friends, but what exactly was your motive for posting such inane ranting in lieu of using your TIME platform for reporting actual relevance?

  • deconstructiva

    …that jive scene was delightful. One of the best “change of pace” roles / moments since Julie Andrews defiantly ripped off the top of her dress in “SOB”.

  • destor23

    I’m a big fan of Edmund Wilson but I’m pretty sure that at some point when I read a reference to him that the author explained who he was. Intrigued, I went on to read more. Saying who Wilson is doesn’t count as talking down to the reader and, darn it, on the web his name would probably be hyperlinked to a wikipedia entry and nobody would complain about that.

  • deconstructiva

    exiled,
    ~
    Please read comments to KT’s july 8 post http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2009/07/08/health-care-most-important-meeting-to-watch-today/ …specifically pirate wench’s comment #19. Yes, I was involved there too, thank you for noticing if few others ever do, but pirate drove that debate over levity…and won it. She’s still right, especially this week. I was honored to help her, but no, I did NOT write #20. Don’t blame me for that.

  • grape_crush

    Andrews in SOB was a suprise, yes. Another was a post-Doogie Houser, MD Neil Patrick Harris in Harold and Kumar Go To White Castle.

  • deconstructiva

    Yes! Harris was sheer ecstasy…if only moderation would let us post quotes.

  • constantweader

    It depends. If you’re doing straight reporting, you have to ID everybody, including Barack Obama & Abe Lincoln. If you’re writing commentary, IDs are optional & may be informal. Even tho I’ve seen every single “Leave It to Beaver” episode, I might have to stop & think if you introduced June Cleaver into a discussion of, say, the Christology of Kierkegaard. But that doesn’t mean you have to do a full-blown description; you might write, “he sees the Virgin Mary as a sort of June Cleaver, the perennial perfect 50s mom.”

    As for Edmund Wilson, I’d always have to stop & think who that guy was — tho I’d describe him like this when I got a fix on him: “one of the many lovers of poet Edna St. Vincent Millay.”

    The Constant Weader at http://www.RealityChex.com

  • destor23

    Oh and you’re linking to the National Enquirer to ridicule John Edwards about what is basically a personal matter? You stay classy too, Amy Sullivan!

  • grape_crush

    Moderation? We don’t need no steenki…

    Kumar: Do you know what the h3ll we had to go through after you took the car?
    .
    Neil Patrick Harris: Yeah, it was a d!ck move on my part. That’s why I’m paying for your meal. Pr!ck.
    .
    Neil Patrick Harris: [looks down to count money] Here’s 50 for the meal, and 200 for the car.
    .
    Harold: What did you do to my car?
    .
    Neil Patrick Harris: I made some love stains in the back. You’ll see…

  • bobell

    Can’t remember any longer where I read what follows. It has to do with a gent by the name of George William Russell, Irish writer (1853-1919), who used the pseudonym A.E. (or perhaps the digraph of the same two letters), to whom someone indebted to him once wrote “A.E.I.O.U.”
    .
    Well, anyway, there was this book, see, and A.E. was mentioned, and perhaps quoted, with no further identification — in the manuscript. But in the published version, it came out “Housman.” You see, one editor, thinking it an error to have used only Mr. Housman’s initials, generously supplied the surname. Then a second editor, seeing “A.E. Housman,” decided the surname would suffice. Voila!
    .
    I swear I am not making this up. Whether the now forgotten source from whom I got the story (via reading the book in which it appeared) was making it up, I cannot tell. It certainly does ring true.

    And if you care, Amy, I’m with you. Edmund Wilson, no less! Did they make you also include “Bunny” in parentheses?

  • Dee in Columbia MD

    I’m with you on this one Stuart, because I would actually like her to fill in those blanks.

  • http://ktheintz.wordpress.com/ kth

    Elizabeth Edwards will sell more copies of this book than Chris Hitchens will sell of everything he will ever write in his entire life. When you are moving units in multi-million quantities, it is indeed safe to assume that most of your readers have never heard of Edmund Wilson.

    Also, “1950s sitcom mom June Cleaver”; how’s that?

  • Exiled_At_Home (formerly Neo)

    Oh, dear, dear Pirate. I think she loves me, for she never fails to mention me. Now I’m blushing.
    ~
    Seriously, though, I get levity. I enjoy many of the Scherer posts. However, this just seems to be entirely irrelevant. I can’t see any reason for this post whatsoever. I’m sorry.
    ~
    P.S. I always notice you…

  • deconstructiva

    Thanks…hmm, now I’m curious about the “hidden story” / motive: what else from Elizabeth’s book / review triggered Amy’s memory for this post?

  • http://www.simonvinkenoog.nl/beeld/Yogi%20-%20Annelies%20Rigter.jpg yogi

    Guys you’re missing the main point in this post:

    “It came to a head when I was reading through the editing notes on a draft…”

    So she DOES read comments! And just chooses to ignore them, well played Amy, well played.

  • Exiled_At_Home (formerly Neo)

    To be honest, I am all for the TIME staff to having discretion over their content. It is their blog, they will choose to post what they will. With that said, though, there should at least be some sort of point, some relevance, something important to them, at least, that they would like to bring to light. This, however, is merely venting about burdensome publishers. I simply don’t get it. Oh well, it matters not, I suppose.

  • cfukara

    Hey, spongy, don’t you just hate it when we want to verify your purported references?

  • nickelking

    if you’re looking for a story on that I’d suggest you check out http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/13/books/13book.html?_r=3 (not everybody has to cover everything.)

  • spob
  • rose83

    Did you really just link to a story that’s 100% National Enquirer-sourced? I assume they’re right in this instance but that’s not the point.

blog comments powered by Disqus