The publishing business is a funny thing... for months we have breathed, dreamt, wrestled, wept and celebrated the first edition of VOX magazine within our small team - revelling in shared secrets and fragile hopes.
Suddenly, the landscape has changed. VOX is "out now"... it's a paper-and-ink reality and no longer our private domain.
Taking that first copy in my hands was a special experience. But then came a weird reaction. Not disappointment, it's still pretty exciting actually, but an odd, what-do-I-do-now feeling. After all, I've read ever word, agonised over every page, watched as the magazine took shape from blank screen to full-colour final proof. There is nothing left to read that I don't know, if not by heart then close to it.
Other memebers of the team shared a similar feeling. It's a good thing too. Now I'm totally motivated for edition two while the rest of you (hopefully) enjoy digesting the first.
And so it begins again. This time the blank screen is filling rapidly. Ideas take shape. New contributors are lining up. Watch this space... edition two will be "Out Now" on April 6. Bring it on!
RGW (aka The Editor)
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Friday, January 9, 2009
Proof Reading
VOX magazine finally goes to print this weekend after weeks of tweaking the design and the painful process of proof-reading.
I'm always amazed (and a little horrified) by the number of mistakes that slip through the cracks. Thankfully, we have a great team of proof readers - so if one person misses a mistake, another one is sure to pick it up.
I've been intrigued by the difference between proof readers. Some people always spot problems with punctuation (missing commas or rogue apostrophes). Others notice a typing error or grammatical mistake. Still others are concerned about design issues and images.
Those same people can be blind to the other mistakes. How can one person spot a missing comma but miss a misspelt word?
(I onced worked for a newspaper that ended up with a mistake in the banner headline on the front page!!)
Anyway, all this proof reading (nit picking?) has got me thinking. What would happen if I began proof reading my life? What mistakes or problems would I notice? What would I miss?
Would I ever dare asking anyone else to evaluate my life? The thought it pretty scary because the chances are they would spot something I missed.
How's this for an invitation from Psalm 139:23-24 (The Message)?
"Investigate my life, O God, find out everything about me; Cross-examine and test me, get a clear picture of what I'm about; See for yourself whether I've done anything wrong — then guide me on the road to eternal life."
RGW (aka The Editor)
I'm always amazed (and a little horrified) by the number of mistakes that slip through the cracks. Thankfully, we have a great team of proof readers - so if one person misses a mistake, another one is sure to pick it up.
I've been intrigued by the difference between proof readers. Some people always spot problems with punctuation (missing commas or rogue apostrophes). Others notice a typing error or grammatical mistake. Still others are concerned about design issues and images.
Those same people can be blind to the other mistakes. How can one person spot a missing comma but miss a misspelt word?
(I onced worked for a newspaper that ended up with a mistake in the banner headline on the front page!!)
Anyway, all this proof reading (nit picking?) has got me thinking. What would happen if I began proof reading my life? What mistakes or problems would I notice? What would I miss?
Would I ever dare asking anyone else to evaluate my life? The thought it pretty scary because the chances are they would spot something I missed.
How's this for an invitation from Psalm 139:23-24 (The Message)?
"Investigate my life, O God, find out everything about me; Cross-examine and test me, get a clear picture of what I'm about; See for yourself whether I've done anything wrong — then guide me on the road to eternal life."
RGW (aka The Editor)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)