Editing Tips from Douglas Gibson (#23)

In this recurring feature, we’re sharing tips for editors from the desk of Douglas Gibson. Good for those starting out or old hands who need a reminder, these reminders form an engaging guide for sharp-eyed wordsmiths.

Tip #23
Another hat that the ideal book editor wears is the Marketing Specialist’s Hat. Even a literary novel allows possible special markets. A central character’s interest in bird-watching, for example, opens up prospects of attention, even reviews, in birders’ magazines or websites. A story set during the Canadian advance in Italy during the Second World War provides gives the publisher the chance of a market among veterans, the Legion Magazine, and fans of military history. The editor, as the first reader of the finished book, should be the spearhead of the attack on these special markets. Or, if you prefer the bird-watching analogy, should be the one to tweet the news around the publishing house.

Federer, Murray, and Gibson

In September 2008 I was driving across Scotland after a day at St. Andrews when I realised that I was only ten minutes away from Dunblane. That set me thinking. I was aware that Andy Murray came from that little town, which I know very well, since my brother’s funeral was held in the cathedral there. And I realised that in just two hours Andy Murray would be playing against Roger Federer in the final of the U.S. Open Tennis Championships in Flushing Meadows, New York, in the biggest game of his life.

Time for a spot of enterprising, you-are-there reporting, on Watching Tennis in Andy Murray Country as Local Boy Makes Good or Disappointment Hits Home Town.

I rushed to grab a notepad and pencils, gulped down a sandwich then drove to downtown Dunblane.

“Where can I see the Andy Murray match?” I asked a group lingering outside a pub.

“Yer best bet would be the Community Centre . . . they’ve got a special screen set up doon there.”

I found the centre, parked boldly in the Bowling Club lot, and strode in doing my best Canadian sports reporter imitation. “Hi, I’m from Canada.” (Ok so far.) “I’m with the Toronto Globe and Mail,” I went on, brandishing my notebook (well, I had written a number of articles for the Globe over the years, and I did plan to submit this unexpected tennis article to them). “Who’s in charge of this event?”

So I was promptly introduced to Nora Dougherty, and asked her a few questions, taking ostentatious notes. She in turn introduced me to others, including old friends of the Murray family. When David McFarlane told me, “No matter what happens, Andy will still be just a wee laddie from Dunblane,” I had to stop myself from punching the air in glee. Unprofessional. But I knew that I had my lead.

I pounded it out the next morning and fired it off to the Globe’s Jerry Johnson (a very surprised man, but calm under fire), who ran it in the Focus section on Saturday, September 13, 2008. You could look it up, as they say.

Here, however, is my original version:

A WEE LADDIE FROM DUNBLANE; Watching Tennis in Andy Murray Country

by DOUG GIBSON

“No matter what happens, Andy will still be just a wee laddie from Dunblane.” It’s a very unusual evening in Dunblane, and David McFarlane (“I used to play tennis against his grandfather”) is clearly speaking for the 70 or so diehard Andy Murray fans gathered in the Dunblane Community Centre to watch the local laddie play for the U.S. Open Tennis Championship in far-off Flushing Meadows, New York.

Until recently Dunblane was famous for two things. Set in the heart of Scotland, 10 kilometres north of Stirling, thanks to its grand mediaeval Cathedral it qualified  for the title of “city,” although it can still only muster about 10,000 citizens. Its second claim to fame was a tragic one. In 1996 its name rang around the world when a madman invaded the primary school and wiped out a class of five-year-olds and their teacher; that incident changed Britain’s laws on handguns.

In the past few years, however, Dunblane has acquired a proud new claim to fame as the birthplace and home of Andy Murray, the 21-year-old thin white hope of British tennis. In Scotland, despite a curt and combative interview style and a scraggly beard that sets matronly fingers reaching for scissors from coast to coast, he has become a national icon.

Dunblane knows him well. As Nora Dougherty, the Community Centre trustee who helped to organise this evening’s event, puts it, the Murrays are “a well-known local family,” with relatives who excelled in sports ranging from soccer to golf, and Andy’s tennis career began at the Dunblane Tennis Club. His mother, Judy, is a well-known tennis coach and encouraged her talented son to go off to tennis school in Barcelona. Dunblane watched proudly as he won junior championships and then earned a place on the professional tour, racking up enough victories to arouse unrealistic expectations for the teenager among the success-starved Wimbledon crowds.

For all of his excellence as a shot-maker with a shrewd tactical brain, young Murray was built along the lines of a long-armed stick and his stamina tended to let him down in long matches, while injuries interfered with his progress. Hard work in the off-season with his support group (a coach, a fitness coach and a physiotherapist) added pounds to his frame and helped to produce a string of good wins, until on his day it seemed that he could beat anyone, twice managing to defeat the legendary Roger Federer, the perennial world Number 1.

What has the  crowd buzzing tonight in the square room hung with two blue Scottish saltire flags and a series of hand-lettered youth club signs (“C’mon, Andy,” “Go, Andy, Go,” even “Andy Rules”) is the Federer back-story. Described by no less an authority as John McEnroe as the best tennis player of all time, the Swiss has for years seemed invincible, except on clay, where the muscular young Spaniard, Rafael Nadal, reigned supreme. Then this year Nadal crushed him easily on clay in Paris and beat him on the grass at Wimbledon. Was this a changing of the Guard, as Federer’s loss of the top ranking implied? Certainly Federer’s confidence seemed to have melted into the Wimbledon grass, so that soon he was losing to second-raters. Yet now, here he was in the U.S. final, trying for his fifth successive championship. Was Federer on the way down, or was he on the rebound?

As the crowd shuffle their seats and tables around for the best view of the large Sky TV screen, they watch a replay of the dramatic semi-final, when Murray did Federer the enormous favour of removing his nemesis, Nadal, from the tournament. While beer and potato chips are stockpiled on tables, the crowd delights in watching their Andy play the best tennis of his life to defeat the all-conquering Nadal. Wise heads (and this is a sports-conscious crowd, including, visitors are informed, a world junior curling champion) opine that Murray will have to serve at his best to beat Federer.

The players appear to a roar from the crowd in the Arthur Ashe stadium that is almost matched by the somewhat smaller Dunblane group. “C’mon, Andyyyyy!”

The match begins, with Federer serving. Serving well. So well, in fact, that a distressing pattern soon emerges. He is holding his serve with ease, while Murray, as early as his second serve, is flirting with break points. Soon Federer does break him, to go to 4-2. The Dunblane crowd is being taken out of the game, with nothing to celebrate. When Murray hits a net cord that luckily drops over to win the point he waves a formal apology to his opponent, but in Dunblane the crowd goes wild.

The pattern continues, with Federer in supreme form, running around his backhand to blast forehand winners to both corners. He is playing very well, not letting Murray, who is not, into the game. First set to Federer, 6-2, in just 26 minutes. The calls of “C’mon, Andy” take on a plaintive note

In the second set Murray’s serve improves, and the games go with service. Now at 2-2 Federer is at Love-40 on his serve. A shot of Federer wiping his face on a towel has David McFarlane joking, ”C’mon, Andy, you’ve got him sweatin’!” Love-40! Surely this will be in every sense Andy’s big break. But the Swiss fights back to deuce with the aid of some baseline calls that have David commenting indignantly, “That was oot!” Unexpectedly the match’s Hawkeye camera – not called upon in this case — confirms David’s judgement, as Sky informs us, but the point goes to Federer. So, in the end, does the game, to general dismay.

The contest is more even now, with Murray trying more ambitious shots, although Federer’s anticipation and gliding speed around the court allow him to hit winners off what would have been winners against other mortals. But with Federer serving first and holding, Murray is always playing catch-up. A shot of Murray wincing as his right knee gives a twinge provokes worried headshakes all round. “Aye, that’s his bad knee.”

Murray’s returns have been improving, and he’s been gaining a couple of points on each Federer serve. But never enough. Suddenly, it seems, after a close-fought 5-5 , it’s 7-5, to Federer. Significant looks are exchanged in the centre. “Ah well,” says one man in a resigned sort of way.

The people in the Dunblane crowd know this sort of feeling. Scottish sports supporters are connoisseurs of losing. The role goes with being an underdog nation, used to being outnumbered, and reminders of the exceptions (like the successful battle of Bannockburn, just 15 kilometres down the road) are greatly cherished. The trick, for the supporter, is not to get hopes up unreasonably high. For the player, the key is never to give up, to lose gallantly, fighting to the end. Scots study these matters.

In that light, the third set is shaping up as a disaster. Federer is in superb form, covering the court with ease, hitting winners from all angles, making the fast and nimble Murray look almost slow. “Virtually flawless” is how the Sky commentator describes Federer’s performance, and as he racks up the points he nears 4-0. A 6-0 loss would be terrible. “ It looks like an early night,” says a woman in the quiet Dunblane hall, an odd comment for 11:45 pm.

In despair a TV cameraman covering the event pleads with the subdued crowd to start demonstrating filmable enthusiasm. The younger members react obediently: “C’mon Aaandy!” is followed by rhythmic chants and clapping, “Andy! Andy! Andy!”

In the din Andy loses five points in a row. The law of unintended consequences seems to have kicked in. “Shut up!” cries an older fan, to general delight. The silent treatment seems to work. At 5-0 down, just one game away from losing the match, Murray holds his serve 5-1. “That’s more like it, let’s go!” cries the crowd.

After being two points away from final defeat, Murray breaks Federer’s serve for the first time in the whole match. Bedlam in Dunblane. David McFarlane has a wonderful joke for the situation. “Andy was just gie’in him a start!” It’s an interesting theory, but now two sets down, at 2-5 with Federer to serve, Andy may have left it a little late. And so it proves. Federer nails down the game. 6-2. Andy went down trying.

It is 12:06 and the crowd starts to file out into the night, some helping with the stacking of chairs. But not before there have been “Three cheers for Andy Murray” and general delight at the prize-giving announcement, where Andy is gracious in defeat, that he will be leaving New York with $1 million — whistles, and pleased smiles. As Margaret McFarlane, who taught Andy at Dunblane Primary, said, the evening was “a wee bit of history.”

Perhaps the Dunblane reaction was caught best by the pre-game poster on the wall: “ Good luck, Andy. Well done.” This was an honourable sports loss, in no way a tragedy. Dunblane knows the difference.

 Special to the Globe and Mail. Publisher and editor Doug Gibson is both a former Scot and a former tennis player.

I enjoyed my brief career as the Globe’s Special Tennis Correspondent. It all came back to me on Sunday, July 8th when Federer and Murray had a rematch in the final at Wimbledon, and Britain closed down to watch this historic game. It produced the same result as the 2008, but Andy  Murray played well against the sublime Federer and lost narrowly, wryly summing up, “Well, I’m getting closer.”

I waited in vain for the call from the Globe that would whisk their Special Tennis Correspondent Doug Gibson to Wimbledon. Maybe next year.

Book Writing Is Not an Easy Job

In response to Mark Medley’s July 13, 2012, Afterword piece, “Who Edits the Editors?”, Doug offered his experience of editors becoming authors in a letter to the editor, which was published July 17, 2012. Doug writes,

Mark Medley’s fine column catches most of the problems facing people who work in publishing, yet boldly decide to write fiction. The matter of divided loyalties — and divided imaginative time — is central, of course.
But I especially liked the account given by the distinguished British publisher and poet, Robin Robertson, of the depressing reality in publishing offices of what happens to most books: “All those ashen faces among the glossy displays; all those unsold, unsaleable books; all that crushed hope underfoot.”
In my days as a publisher, dealing with writers’ hopes and dreams, I would sometimes gloomily describe myself as being in the business of disappointing people — the authors we decided not to publish, and , in too many cases, the authors we did publish.
In this case, Mr. Medley does not extend his research to include non-fiction writing by people in publishing. I know something about this, and its pitfalls. My recent book of publishing memories, Stories About Storytellers, has produced a rueful confession, under the subtitle: “Harder Than I Thought — A Publisher Tries to Write a Book.”
Is it possible that many wise people in publishing shy away from writing books simply because they know how hard it is?
Douglas Gibson, Toronto.

Editing Tips from Douglas Gibson (#22)

In this recurring feature, we’re sharing tips for editors from the desk of Douglas Gibson. Good for those starting out or old hands who need a reminder, these guidelines form an engaging guide for sharp-eyed wordsmiths.

Tip #22
Recently I came across a carefully printed sign in the well-known educational establishment OISE.  It invited patrons who had used its services to pass along comments, including “criticisms” and “complements.” My comments were not complimentary.

Should this sort of spelling error matter? My response is that this was not a scrawled sign in a small-time grocery (“Cabages”), but a designed, carefully printed sign that had gone through several stages of checking by educated professionals. The resulting error reflected badly on them, and thus on OISE. I’m certain that you don’t have to be a professional editor to have this reaction. Spelling still matters to a large proportion of readers, which means that it still matters.

Editing Tips from Douglas Gibson (#21)

In this recurring feature, we’re sharing tips for editors from the desk of Douglas Gibson. Good for those starting out or old hands who need a reminder, these guidelines form an engaging guide for sharp-eyed wordsmiths.

Tip #21
One of the many hats that a book editor should wear is that of Title-spotter. Sometimes a manuscript with a bland, khaki title will reveal a blazing, technicolour title in its pages, one that will bring the book major attention. One example. Harry J. Boyle wrote a novel named “I Am Shane Donovan” about a successful Toronto advertising man who wanted to quit his job in order to write “The Great Canadian Novel.” Guess what we called the book.

Ghost Writers

It was early in 2011.The Toronto theatre was almost full, buzzing with the low-key chat of people about to watch the new movie The Ghost Writer. Some, no doubt, were there because they knew that Roman Polanski had directed it, and were intrigued by his personal difficulties. Others in the audience may have been attracted by good reviews. Others perhaps were fans of Ewan McGregor or Pierce Brosnan, two Celtic actors playing English archetypes. Since this was a Friday night, some popcorn-munchers were simply out on a date, hoping to hold hands and perhaps more. As for me, I was there because of Robert Harris, the screenwriter and the man who had written the brilliant book, The Ghost, on which the movie was based. And before the lights went down, I was craning around, scanning the Toronto audience, looking for ghosts.

As a publisher I have often sought out ghost writers, professional wordsmiths who were willing to write a book, secretly, in the voice of a celebrity (“As I raised the Stanley Cup above my sweat-soaked head, I felt . . .”). The celebrity, of course, was the author of record, and I can recall uncomfortable conversations with celebrities about to tour to promote “their book” where I emphasized how important it was for them to, er, become familiar with the book they would be discussing. The anonymous ghosts are a hard-working and time-honoured part of publishing, and I have often offered up devout prayers of gratitude to not especially holy ghosts for delivering a competent manuscript, on time. Indeed, some of my best friends are, or have been, ghosts. And in my presence the description “hack work” was warmly embraced by the Saskatchewan Writers Group discussing a ghost-written book about curling.

In my experience, ghosts – men and women, old and young — come in all shapes and sizes, but all of them are defiantly corporeal. They all have, at least at the outset, a firm belief in the merit of writing for pay rather than fame. Their experiences drawing out a subject’s life (“How did you feel?”; “Can you describe the room in the Kremlin?”) over many hours spent together, can leave them with a deep respect and affection for the subject celebrity. Or by contrast, since famously no man is a hero to his valet, sometimes the ghost finds that long-term proximity leads to boredom, dislike, even disdain, or at least deep exasperation. (“What do you mean, I can’t use that? It’s a great story!”) It is a fascinating role, and it often turns a supportive publisher into a psychiatrist. So I was disappointed that none of the many ghosts I have encountered over the years were in the theatre that night.

This was too bad, because Robert Harris knows about ghost writers. To be fair, the remarkable Harris, a highly respected British political journalist (the former Political Editor of The Observer, and the 2003 Columnist of the Year in the British Press Awards) seems to know about everything, including how to turn out internationally successful novels. It’s as if the admirable Jeffrey Simpson, for example, took a little time off from Ottawa politics to write best-selling fiction about, say, post-war Berlin long after Hitler’s victory (Fatherland), modern Moscow enlivened by a search for Stalin’s diaries (Archangel) ancient Rome falling apart (Pompeii), and the life of Cicero, as told by his slave, Tiro (Imperium) — although Tiro, no novice at telling a story, writes in his own voice.

In fact Harris is so interested in the art and science of ghostwriting that each chapter of his latest book, The Ghost (which the movie wisely follows very faithfully until the final, Polanski-inspired seconds, where good old Roman earns his screen-writing credits) begins with a quote from a genuine handbook, Ghostwriting, by Andrew Crofts. I especially enjoyed the following warning to working ghosts seeking details from their subjects: “’What if they lie to you?’ ‘ Lie’ is probably too strong a word. Most of us tend to embroider our memories.” Spoken like a true ghost. You can see how the tactful Mr. Crofts came, literally, to write the book on this subject.

The quote Harris selects to precede the very first chapter sets the right tone. “Of all the advantages that ghostwriting offers, one of the greatest must be the opportunity you get to meet people of interest.” The phrase “people of interest” has interesting echoes of police investigations, which may in this case not be accidental. Because in the book and the film the ghostwriter, played on the screen by Ewan McGregor, is being approached to write the first-person memoirs of no less a figure than Adam Lang, the recently retired British Prime Minister with the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan on his docket. Harris is able to bring his deep knowledge of British politics at the highest level into fascinating play here. And the PM, as played by Pierce Brosnan, will be recognised by roughly 99% of Canadian movie-goers as a Tony Blair character.

With Prime Ministerial memoirs the stakes go up. I have been involved in editing and publishing the memoirs of Pierre Trudeau, Brian Mulroney, and Paul Martin, and I know that the stakes are high for the author; this is their chance to get their version of events during their administration on the record. For his Hell or High Water, for example, Paul Martin took this task so seriously that with the help of the National Archives he convened meetings where the several officials involved in, say, drawing up the 1995 budget, thrashed out a version improved and corrected by the individual memories of all the participants.

The stakes are also dangerously high for the publisher, who has usually made a large investment in the author’s advance royalty payment to secure such a major book. Selling enough copies to recover the advance money can be a challenging salvage operation.

In the book/movie the optimistic publisher has paid Adam Lang/Tony Blair an advance of $10,000,000. The company desperately needs Ewan’s services because the previous ghostwriter, a man named McAra, is now an ex-ghost. He drowned off Martha’s Vineyard, where Adam/Tony is now holed up with his team. This includes his fierce wife Ruth (played by the whip-smart Olivia Williams) and a security and secretarial staff led by Amelia, played by a restrained Kim Cattrall, who has left her New York sex-cougar days far behind her, although she still knows how to precede a male visitor up a flight of stairs in a memorable way.

One of the many joys of The Ghost Writer is that in his screenplay Harris gives a realistic (give or take $10,000,000) look at the world of publishing. Usually Hollywood (from which Mr. Polanski is now detached) shows book editors occupying elegant paper-free offices so large that they could play badminton there in the lunch hour. In this case the five potential ghostwriters (up for the role of saving a $10,000,000 investment, remember) must take turns cramming into a London editor’s galley-sized office. In a very realistic scene, we see it containing the tweedy English editor, the tough New York publisher, Adam Lang’s Washington lawyer (hello, Timothy Hutton, it’s been a while!) and young Ewan, practically sitting on his agent’s lap. Which itself is an interesting metaphor.

At this so-called “beauty parade” Ewan wins the assignment by claiming utter ignorance of politics, but a shrewd knowledge of what ordinary people really want to know. (His previous ghostly subject was a famous magician, and he hit number 1 on the best-seller list with the memoir I Came, I Sawed, I Conquered. Obviously Harris’s research into Ancient Rome comes in handy at unexpected times). The book world realism continues as his agent, Mr. Fifteen Percent, says, yes, his client can do this. As the book puts it: “I could feel him willing me to say yes, but all I was thinking was, A month, they want me to write a book in a month.”

When the agent later extracts a fee of $250,000 there’s a fine exchange, with the agent saying “And you’ll get a collaborator credit.”

(Ghost writer, automatically). “On the title page?”

(Agent) “Do me a favour. In the Acknowledgements.”

This is familiar territory for me. In match-making any deal involving a celebrity and a ghost, experience taught me that personal chemistry was almost everything, but the details of appropriate recognition could later become the cause of nuclear war. Assuming that the pair could tolerate the idea of, in effect, living together for some time, I found that it was vital to set down in writing for both parties an agreement on just how ghostly the author’s presence was going to be. No “with Ewan McGregor” on the cover? Or on the title page inside (as Ewan’s character hoped)? No mention in the flap copy? Not even a reference in the author’s Acknowledgements to “my old friend Ewan McGregor, who helped me to shape my thoughts on paper etc.”? Total anonymity? Even from drinking pals? Not even a discreet appearance at the launch party for the book?

In the film our boy does turn up at the launch party, remarking wittily to his companion that a ghost is about as welcome at a book launch as a mistress at a wedding. Since the recipient of this little joke is . . . er . . . a notable mistress, it’s yet another example of Ewan’s ghost writer character blundering into something he’ll regret.

And that, of course, is the theme of a very good book and a fine movie. Ghost writers, I think, will especially enjoy two scenes. In one the ghost is hanging around with Adam/Tony and his crew as a very bad piece of news about him breaks, involving a charge so grave that his ability to travel freely is threatened. (Director Polanski treats this theme sympathetically.) Clearly Adam/Tony must come up with a response. Ewan is pushed forward for the job (“He’s supposed to be the writer”). Soon, to his surprise, he’s crafting the official press release, “with a curious bashful pride.” As he hears his words replayed to him and the world on CNN we can see Ewan’s mixed emotions. It’s exciting to be creating a huge news story in this way, but he knows that he has crossed a line. Without even asking if his man is innocent of the charges laid against him, he has been sucked into Adam/Tony’s world. Always a hazard, as alert ghost writers know.

The second incident is a major artistic triumph. Ewan becomes interested in learning more about exactly what happened to his drowned predecessor, McAra. He decides to take McAra’s dusty rental car for a drive to the ferry (the publisher in me silently shouting at the screen; “ No, no, for God’s sake, get back to your manuscript!”). On the Massachusetts mainland the car’s GPS system offers him a menu that includes REMEMBER PREVIOUS DESTINATION. So with the aid of a disembodied female voice — “In two hundred yards turn right” – he is able to follow his dead forerunner’s last journey on this earth. Ghostly indeed, and in every sense a turning point.

It’s a fine piece of symbolism in a highly intelligent political movie. Tony Blair could sue Pierce Brosnan for his portrayal of an insecure charmer who is much more than a caricature. I’ve never seen Tony Blair jogging, but Brosnan jogs in just the right fussy “look at me being healthy” way that Blair surely must display. McGregor is appealing as a blunderer. “Bad idea,” he says to his bathroom mirror, before stumbling much deeper into Adam/Tony’s life than he should. Kim Cattrall, as I noted, is recovering nicely from Sex and the City and is an effective English chief of staff. And the star of the show is the PM’s wife Ruth, played unforgettably by Olivia Williams, an actress to watch.

The movie deserves to be seen, just as the Robert Harris book deserves to be read. I hope they may even raise questions in Canada about celebrity books and our assumptions that a ghostwriter must inevitably be involved.

In the world of sports stars such low expectations are perhaps understandable. Publishing legend has it that one company’s Christmas sales hopes centred around the memoirs of a famous Original Six NHL star. Just before lunch the Great Man made a loudly applauded entrance to the room where the Sales Reps had gathered from across the country. With order restored the reps were invited to ask him questions. One nervous salesman asked him how he liked his book. “How the hell should I know, I haven’t read the censored thing,” replied the star, and the book’s authenticity took a dent, along with the book tour plans. Lunch, too, was less of a success than planned.

Dave Stieb, the former Blue Jays pitcher, may have published his memoirs, but he was not a man of the book. After a signing session at the University of Toronto Bookroom, the grateful manager explained to him that the store had a policy of allowing a signing author (he might usefully have described it as a signing bonus) to choose any book in the store, free. Dave didn’t think he wanted any for himself, no, or his wife, no, not even an atlas or a fine book of photographs. The astonished staff indicated the rich array of possible books for his children, but Dave waved them off. Books, no thanks.

At the other end of the athlete-writer scale is Ken Dryden. When I published Ken’s book about his life in hockey, The Game (“The sports book of the century,” as one understated Globe writer described it), I spent hours explaining that, no, there was no ghostwriter involved, Ken really did write it himself – despite, I might have added, having graduated as a lawyer.

Captains of industry — successful business leaders — are not often literary types, so ghost-writers tend to be in demand when the leaders feel that it is time to impart their accumulated wisdom. Sometimes the chemistry is wrong for a successful blending of their talents. McClelland & Stewart chairman Avie Bennett and I once watched with keen interest as a contracted author and his ghost stood nose to nose and screamed into each other’s faces, the ghost telling him to come back when he had learned how to become a human being. As the screaming continued in duet form, Avie whispered that perhaps we were wasting our time, that this was never going to work. Toughened by previous author-ghost experiences — not to mention husband and wife collaborations that led to divorce – I suggested that we should keep going. Avie was right, of course.

Speech writers have a lot to answer for here, for diluting the idea that a person might have had a role in, you know, creating the words that come out of his or her mouth. Yet when it comes to speeches, audiences lap up the most appalling nonsense.

Case in point. Some years ago I attended a full house Canadian Club luncheon speech in Toronto where the speaker was John Roth, the proud head of the impregnable Nortel. When he was introduced with reverence he read — with what struck my ears as a remarkable degree of unfamiliarity – a speech that had, I believe, been written by an anonymous speechwriter. Its message, however, was entirely satisfactory to him, since the gist was that the Canadian government should lower its tax rate on enormously rich Canadians like, well, John Roth, or they would go to live and work elsewhere, hint, hint. It’s interesting to reflect that at the time Nortel was drifting towards a Niagara-like plunge that would rob many of its employees of their pensions. Since Mr. Roth later confessed to the Toronto Star that latterly he was too busy with his own post-retirement financial arrangements to keep his eye on the ball, it was a memorable speech. But at the time the rubber chicken crowd applauded the speech politely. After all, this was the head of a hugely successful company and he was speaking in his own words. No and No.

Our expectations for politicians are equally low. Here again the dead hand of the speechwriter has lowered political literacy — and, more important, the expectations for political literacy among our leaders, so that when Brian Mulroney wrote his own Memoirs, by hand, it was a major surprise. In fact, to emphasise that he really did write his book himself we ran some of the hand-written pages on the end-papers containing the book. “No ghostwriters here” was the implicit message.

Canadian ghostwriters will enjoy this book and movie about their profession. But even the most experienced among them will wince at some of the dialogue, as when Ewan’s character is asked when he’s going to write “a real book.” Zing! At some level it is simply normal to write for recognition (“These are my ideas, in my own words!”) and in my experience it seems to cost even the most professional ghostwriters a lot to turn their back on that recognition. Perhaps, to wean them off their habit, they need a self-help organisation of some sort. I may even have a title for such a group — Ghostwriters Anonymous.

 

Editing Tips from Douglas Gibson (#20)

In this recurring feature, we’re sharing tips for editors from the desk of Douglas Gibson. Good for those starting out or old hands who need a reminder, these guidelines form an engaging guide for sharp-eyed wordsmiths.

Tip #20
Make sure that lists are in a consistent form. All too often we find published lists that provide, for example, a list of aims as follows:
“ a. to entertain
b. to instruct
c. to inform
d. guidance
e to provide a model.”
Clearly, this is a very sloppy form of guidance, but a keen-eyed editor will find inconsistent listing everywhere. It’s almost as worrying as spotting a listing ship.

A Fine New (Oh, All Right, Not So New) Book About Publishing

We all have authors we know about whose books we plan to read “some day.” That was the case for me with the English author Anthony Powell, who lived from 1905 to 2000, and is best known for his 12-volume series of novels entitled A Dance to the Music of Time.

This series remains a treat in store for me, because I took the Powell plunge by diving into his 1939 book What’s Become of Waring. It is a brilliant satire of the London world of book publishing, and it is very, very funny.

Our narrator is an editor for the old firm of Judkins and Judkins. “It was a small business with two partners, Hugh and Bernard Judkins, who were partners.” Hugh, the younger brother, joined the firm later, and “threw himself heart and soul into a profession which provided boundless scope for the intellectual fussing that he had found so congenial as a schoolmaster. . . .

“From the day that Hugh entered the office, Bernard, never over-addicted to optimism, became increasingly embittered. He dated from the period when a reasonable standard of honesty and good manners were the best that any writer could hope for from his publisher – and even these were hard enough to obtain. . . . ” |

I should interject here that Powell worked in the 1930s in the world of publishing, and his weary knowledge shines through every line.

“Bernard” our narrator tells us, in a book where every paragraph begs to be quoted “began to loathe books, so that it seemed that he had only entered the trade to take his revenge on them.” His life “became one long crusade against the printed word. Every work that appeared under the Judkins & Judkins colophon did so in the teeth of Bernard’s bitter opposition.”

As you can imagine, this makes life hard for our narrator as he tries to find books for his firm  to publish. His major, immediate problem is to find an acceptable author to write an authorized biography of the recently deceased travel writer, T.T. Waring, the big star on the Judkins list. The search does not go well. When finally, miraculously, a man named Hudson (a good chap, an officer in the Territorial Army with no writing experience) is accepted by both brothers, his research goes badly. It produces proof that the shadowy Waring plagiarized all of his most successful titles from hidden travel tales published in French and never translated.

This news does not go down well with Judkins and Judkins. But Hugh is philosophical about it because at this point he is so madly in love with a young journalist named Roberta Payne that he has signed up a collection of her newspaper articles, although he knows that the book will sell, in his editor’s words “no more than a dozen copies.”

And so it goes, in a book full of characters like the man whose face “had the open, appealing frankness of expression of those who live by their wits.” When another man, a general, leaves a house wearing an opera hat and a black overcoat, “He looked like an immensely distinguished conjuror.”

Powell’s women are equally memorable, such as Beryl, Hudson’s fiancé: “Like so many girls whose lot had been to lead dull lives, her manner implied that all men were her slaves.” Or Beryl’s sister Winefred “all teeth and badly cut brown hair,”  whose approach was “threatening” and who had a “goatish” laugh. When she went to a military ball “she said at the top of her lungs that she thought middle-aged men looked silly in short red coats and tight blue trousers.”

Powell reminds me of his contemporary Evelyn Waugh, but with a little less acid in the mix. (Waugh was, famously, such a nasty man in real life that he once gloatingly sat and ate the first banana his war-starved children had seen, as they sat drooling.) I can see why the critic V.S. Pritchett said, “Anthony Powell is our foremost comic writer. ” And from reading What’s Become of Waring, I can see why William Trevor, no less, wrote, “In his ability to capture and control the imagination of his readers through his characters, Mr. Powell is the most subtle writer now performing in English.” I’m glad that I finally caught up with him. I hope that you will, too.

Editing Tips from Douglas Gibson (#19)

In this recurring feature, we’re sharing tips for editors from the desk of Douglas Gibson. Good for those starting out or old hands who need a reminder, these guidelines form an engaging guide for sharp-eyed wordsmiths.

Tip #19
Care should be taken with adverbs, and editors should hunt down and kill surplus adverbs, taking an especially hard look at those that tell us how a line of speech is delivered. In my book I take a chance and offend against this rule. See if you think that I was right.
In the chapter on Val Ross (page 342) she is dying, and we both know that she will not live to see her book come out. “Val remarked on how many Robertson Davies books had come out since his death. “Yes,” I said, carefully, “and books do live on.”
I suspect that “carefully” has never been used more carefully.

A Triumph at Ridgeway

On June 1, I had the honour of appearing at the very first Ridgeway Reads Literary Festival, held in the delightful little town just west of Fort Erie. It’s so attractive that it just might prove to be a southern bookend matching Niagara on the Lake at the other end of the Niagara Parkway. (And the Farmers’ Market offers great pies!)

For this inaugural event Mary Friesen and her Ridgeway team had put together a sparkling series of authors, including Charles Foran (Mordecai: The Life and Times), Andrew Westoll (of Taylor Prize-winning fame), Olive Senior (Dancing Lessons), Richard Wright (Clara Callan, etc.) David (D’Arcy McGee) Wilson, and Phil Hall, whose book Killdeer was up for this year’s Griffin Poetry Prize.

I had the pleasure of giving my show on the opening Friday night, introduced by Rhyming Barb, who concluded her vote of thanks by asking me for another “chapter,” because to provide it no one would be “apter.” Ogden Nash clearly did not live in vain.

We had to leave after Charlie Foran’s marvellous Saturday morning talk on my old sparring partner Mordecai (his letters to me would continue our duel more in sorrow than in anger, wearily beginning, “Gibson, Gibson”) because Jane had a high school reunion to attend in Cambridge. This meant that we missed the following wonderful event in Ridgeway, closely described by an anonymous observer very similar to my friend David Wilson.

Later on Saturday there was a formal unveiling of a mural celebrating the 1866 Battle of Ridgeway, against Fenian invaders from the south. A high point of the official speech (by, I believe, the Minister of Justice, Rob Nicholson) was when he praised the literary festival: “This is a wonderful event, with some of Canada’s best-known writers. One of them, who gave a most enjoyable talk last night on stories about storytellers, was [short pause] none other than [slightly longer pause] Doug Wilson.”

Several people in the crowd shouted out, “No, no, Doug Gibson.” But my triumphant role (as in “Fred Gibson”) was established once again.

Stephen Leacock was apparently directing the events around the formal unveiling of the mural. First, the procession to the mural was delayed because the two regiments involved in the original battle (or, more correctly, the original headlong retreat) were unable to agree on which of them should lead the way. The gallant men of the Queen’s Own Rifles stood firm against the equally determined soldiers from the 13th Hamilton Regiment. After a long stand-off (possibly longer than their appearance in the actual battle, before both regiments ran away) the Hamilton men picked up their marbles and went home.

My anonymous observer’s account continues: “Second, the Town Crier immediately led the parade through the back alleys of Ridgeway, without waiting for the dignitaries to arrive, and without paying any attention to the prescribed route along the main street; deaf to all cries to wait, he pressed on fearlessly and relentlessly.”

“Third, when the Queen’s Own and the dignitaries finally made it to the mural, it turned out that the cover over the mural had been tied down so tightly that it couldn’t be removed. Eventually, the ropes were cut,  and someone leaned out from the window above the mural to catch the cover as it billowed in the wind, and to haul it in like a ship’s sail.”

Where, I want to know, were the Knights of Pythias in all this?