When I recently listened to an audiobook of Kafka's ‘The Process’ in English, it turned out to be based on a new edition, which explained that Max Brod originally applied some of his own editing to Kafka's manuscripts before releasing the books. And that the proper order of the chapters is currently unknown—whether because of Kafka or of Brod. Plus, apparently old translations of the book to English also mangled the words plentifully, introducing even more confusion. So there was some effort by modern editors to at least put the chapters in the order that makes more sense, and translate the text more straightforwardly.
The tragic rape of Charles Bukowski’s ghost by Black Sparrow Press (2013)
51–60 of 112 posts
Re: The tragic rape of Charles Bukowski’s ghost by Black Sparrow Press (2013)
#52I'm not a Bukowski fan in particular, but I have worked as an editor, and I can't imagine any writer I've worked with accepting that kind of heavy-handed rewriting of their works. For myself, I never tried to rewrite an author's work, generally the idea is to try to get the writer to do the work and follow your feedback willingly. When the writer is deceased you have fewer options, but I think you pretty much have to…
Is it common for editors to add to a writer's text? My naive assumption was that they often cut and re-structure and maybe suggest re-wording, but I'm surprised to see an editor actively add content that wasn't there at all
Re: The tragic rape of Charles Bukowski’s ghost by Black Sparrow Press (2013)
#53This is extraordinary. The sample edits given at the end of the article go far beyond normal editorial changes. They completely change the meaning and content of the poem. It is a _different poem_. This comment about the editor struck me: > "Now, when I bring this subject up among a certain crowd, they bristle. They become very defensive of Martin and downright antagonistic toward me while they list the many ways in…
>The sample edits given at the end of the article go far beyond normal editorial changes. Right, as I was reading along, I thought how bad could this possibly be. But they changed: >I lost $40 >at the track >today >so I'm somewhat >bitter. To this: >and I won $400 >at the track >today >so I'm somewhat >pleased. Not that I've ever been a reader of Bukowski, but this is just changed into something that he simply didn't…
Now I'm wondering what other books of poetry this has happened to and I didn't know it?
Altering a poem is a whole different animal than editing a book or a movie, for instance.
Re: The tragic rape of Charles Bukowski’s ghost by Black Sparrow Press (2013)
#54Perhaps John Martin thought he was doing Charles Bukowski a favor with his educated corrections but I find them atrocious. The publishing world is rife with this type editing work. The film world is replete with changes that butcher the original work and intent of the original creator. When watching a movie look for the director's cut if multiple cuts exist.
Re: The tragic rape of Charles Bukowski’s ghost by Black Sparrow Press (2013)
#55For those who do not know Bukowski's work and wonder why a drunk post office worker gets so much attention, check out Bluebird: https://allpoetry.com/poem/8509539-Bluebird-by-Charles-Bukow...
Re: The tragic rape of Charles Bukowski’s ghost by Black Sparrow Press (2013)
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The sample edits given at the end of the article go far beyond normal editorial changes. Right, as I was reading along, I thought how bad could this possibly be. But they changed: >I lost $40 >at the track >today >so I'm somewhat >bitter. To this: >and I won $400 >at the track >today >so I'm somewhat >pleased. Not that I've ever been a reader of Bukowski, but this is just changed into something that he simply didn't…
Now I'm wondering what other books of poetry this has happened to and I didn't know it? Altering a poem is a whole different animal than editing a book or a movie, for instance.
> Altering a poem is a whole different animal than editing a book or a movie, for instance.
I don’t know about that. George Lucas has managed to butcher his own movies after the fact, and newer audiences would never know.
Hundreds of thousands of people still believe that “Go Set a Watchman” is a new book as opposed to the first draft of “To Kill a Mockingbird.”
Re: The tragic rape of Charles Bukowski’s ghost by Black Sparrow Press (2013)
#57Perhaps John Martin thought he was doing Charles Bukowski a favor with his educated corrections but I find them atrocious. The publishing world is rife with this type editing work. The film world is replete with changes that butcher the original work and intent of the original creator. When watching a movie look for the director's cut if multiple cuts exist.
I mean...it kind of depends. As a history buff, I love the French plantation scene in the long version of Apocolypse Now Redux... I totally understand why it was removed from the original theatrical release, though. I think director cuts tend to play to the more 'hardcore' fans of a piece, and sometimes serve to make the work less accessible to more casual viewers.
Re: The tragic rape of Charles Bukowski’s ghost by Black Sparrow Press (2013)
#58People are rightfully pointing out how ridiculous some of the overt substantive changes in that end poem are, but I was pretty amazed by how even the quite minor changes totally alter the feel of the thing too. "Sit on a couch and look at a wall" to "Laying on the couch and looking at the wall" loses a lot somehow in a hard-to-pin-down way. It's almost an impressively efficient butchering
"Sit" is from Middle English sitten, from Old English sittan, from Proto-West Germanic sittjan, from Proto-Germanic sitjaną, from Proto-Indo-European *sed- (“sit”).
"Lay" is from Middle English lay, from Old French lai, from Latin laicus, from Ancient Greek λαϊκός (laïkós).
In English, "sit" feels immediate and active where "lay" is passive and indirect. The distinction is both important and rooted in history.
It is incredibly stupid that we still have editors trying to force English poetry into Latinate forms almost a millenium after the battle of Hastings and all the consequent Anglo/Norman jockeying for position.
Re: The tragic rape of Charles Bukowski’s ghost by Black Sparrow Press (2013)
#59I'm hardly a SJW but it's 2022, can we stop equating rape which is a shockingly violent violation/assult of a real a human being with anything less. I'm sure I'm gonna get slammed for this but whatever.
You don't get it, do you? This asswipe, Martin. He fucked up Bukowski's poems. With his mincing, middle-class stink. Oh, it's not a dirty poem anymore, it's a vulgar one. By the time he's done, it sounds like Bukowski went to Vassar. Now you? You're going to mince around like this too? But Michael Phillips -- he respects Bukowski. He knows how to write. He uses the right goddamn word in the right goddamn place. Like:…
But what about all the ghosts who're reading this who might have also been victims of tragic sexual abuse?
Re: The tragic rape of Charles Bukowski’s ghost by Black Sparrow Press (2013)
#60I'm not a Bukowski fan in particular, but I have worked as an editor, and I can't imagine any writer I've worked with accepting that kind of heavy-handed rewriting of their works. For myself, I never tried to rewrite an author's work, generally the idea is to try to get the writer to do the work and follow your feedback willingly. When the writer is deceased you have fewer options, but I think you pretty much have to…
Is it common for editors to add to a writer's text? My naive assumption was that they often cut and re-structure and maybe suggest re-wording, but I'm surprised to see an editor actively add content that wasn't there at all
Editors do participate in revisions quite a lot and for them to suggest additions is probably common. To take a writer's work posthumously, change it so drastically that you've reversed the meaning of paragraphs ("I lost at the track" -> "I won at the track"), and then publish it as that author's work without their involvement, I think that's beyond the pale.