FW: [PrintOwners] Tote Bags

Carole M. Rike
Word Catering, Ltd.
PRINTING SOLUTIONS
48299 Stafford Road . Tickfaw, LA 70466

-----Original Message-----
From: printowners-bounces@...
[mailto:printowners-bounces@...] On Behalf Of Nancy
Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 7:17 AM
To: Discussion List for Printing Business Owners Only
Subject: Re: [PrintOwners] Tote Bags

***** This is a PrintOwners List Message *****

We use Vitronic and they have lots of specials.
4680 Parkway Dr. Suite 200
Mason, OH 45040
www.vitronic promotional.com
877-844-5032
888-442-8788 fax
Rory Campbell is our Sales Manager. and Amdrw :amdri, the inside Rep.
(extension 314)
They are a great co. to work with.



----- Original Message -----
From: <StevePrint@...>
To: <printowners@...>
Sent: Monday, July 28, 2008 8:07 PM
Subject: [PrintOwners] Tote Bags


> ***** This is a PrintOwners List Message *****
>
> Looking for low priced vendor that has Tote Bags. Any suggestion on
> vendors
> you have worked with?
> Thanks,
> Steve Salstrom
> Bay Business Printing
> _www.iorderprinting.com_ (http://www.iorderprinting.com)
>
>
>
>
> **************Get fantasy football with free live scoring. Sign up for
> FanHouse Fantasy Football today.
> (http://www.fanhouse.com/fantasyaffair?ncid=aolspr00050000000020)
> _______________________________________________
> PrintOwners Discussion List
> Post: PrintOwners@...
> Info: http://rb.enter.net/mailman/listinfo/printowners
>

_______________________________________________
PrintOwners Discussion List
Post: PrintOwners@...
Info: http://rb.enter.net/mailman/listinfo/printowners


__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature
database 3304 (20080728) __________

The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.

http://www.eset.com



__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature
database 3304 (20080728) __________

The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.

http://www.eset.com

Sorry, wrong posting.

Carole M. Rike
Word Catering, Ltd.
PRINTING SOLUTIONS
48299 Stafford Road . Tickfaw, LA 70466


_____

From:
[mailto:] On Behalf Of Carole M. Rike
Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 10:38 AM
To:
Subject: FW: [PrintOwners] Tote Bags





Carole M. Rike
Word Catering, Ltd.
PRINTING SOLUTIONS
48299 Stafford Road . Tickfaw, LA 70466

-----Original Message-----
From: printowners- <mailto:printowners-bounces%40printweb.org>
bounces@...
[mailto:printowners- <mailto:printowners-bounces%40printweb.org>
bounces@...] On Behalf Of Nancy
Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 7:17 AM
To: Discussion List for Printing Business Owners Only
Subject: Re: [PrintOwners] Tote Bags

***** This is a PrintOwners List Message *****

We use Vitronic and they have lots of specials.
4680 Parkway Dr. Suite 200
Mason, OH 45040
www.vitronic promotional.com
877-844-5032
888-442-8788 fax
Rory Campbell is our Sales Manager. and Amdrw :amdri, the inside Rep.
(extension 314)
They are a great co. to work with.

----- Original Message -----
From: <StevePrint@aol. <mailto:StevePrint%40aol.com> com>
To: <printowners@ <mailto:printowners%40printweb.org> printweb.org>
Sent: Monday, July 28, 2008 8:07 PM
Subject: [PrintOwners] Tote Bags

> ***** This is a PrintOwners List Message *****
>
> Looking for low priced vendor that has Tote Bags. Any suggestion on
> vendors
> you have worked with?
> Thanks,
> Steve Salstrom
> Bay Business Printing
> _www.iorderprinting.com_ (http://www.iorderpr
<http://www.iorderprinting.com> inting.com)
>
>
>
>
> **************Get fantasy football with free live scoring. Sign up for
> FanHouse Fantasy Football today.
> (http://www.fanhouse
<http://www.fanhouse.com/fantasyaffair?ncid=aolspr00050000000020>
.com/fantasyaffair?ncid=aolspr00050000000020)
> _______________________________________________
> PrintOwners Discussion List
> Post: PrintOwners@ <mailto:PrintOwners%40printweb.org> printweb.org
> Info: http://rb.enter <http://rb.enter.net/mailman/listinfo/printowners>
net/mailman/listinfo/printowners
>

_______________________________________________
PrintOwners Discussion List
Post: PrintOwners@ <mailto:PrintOwners%40printweb.org> printweb.org
Info: http://rb.enter <http://rb.enter.net/mailman/listinfo/printowners>
net/mailman/listinfo/printowners

__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature
database 3304 (20080728) __________

The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.

http://www.eset <http://www.eset.com> com

__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature
database 3304 (20080728) __________

The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.

http://www.eset <http://www.eset.com> com






__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature
database 3304 (20080728) __________

The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.

http://www.eset.com

Hi

I visited the Richard III museum in York and Tony Blair is a leading
candidate for killing the princes. Oh well.

I also purchased The Maligned King (Richard III) by AnnetteCarson. So far
it is an excellent read and very impartial while making it quite clear that
non contemporary sources are rubbish


On 7/29/08, Carole M. Rike <carole@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> Carole M. Rike
> Word Catering, Ltd.
> PRINTING SOLUTIONS
> 48299 Stafford Road . Tickfaw, LA 70466
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: printowners-bounces@...<printowners-bounces%40printweb.org>
> [mailto:printowners-bounces@...<printowners-bounces%40printweb.org>]
> On Behalf Of Nancy
> Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 7:17 AM
> To: Discussion List for Printing Business Owners Only
> Subject: Re: [PrintOwners] Tote Bags
>
> ***** This is a PrintOwners List Message *****
>
> We use Vitronic and they have lots of specials.
> 4680 Parkway Dr. Suite 200
> Mason, OH 45040
> www.vitronic promotional.com
> 877-844-5032
> 888-442-8788 fax
> Rory Campbell is our Sales Manager. and Amdrw :amdri, the inside Rep.
> (extension 314)
> They are a great co. to work with.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <StevePrint@... <StevePrint%40aol.com>>
> To: <printowners@... <printowners%40printweb.org>>
> Sent: Monday, July 28, 2008 8:07 PM
> Subject: [PrintOwners] Tote Bags
>
> > ***** This is a PrintOwners List Message *****
> >
> > Looking for low priced vendor that has Tote Bags. Any suggestion on
> > vendors
> > you have worked with?
> > Thanks,
> > Steve Salstrom
> > Bay Business Printing
> > _www.iorderprinting.com_ (http://www.iorderprinting.com)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > **************Get fantasy football with free live scoring. Sign up for
> > FanHouse Fantasy Football today.
> > (http://www.fanhouse.com/fantasyaffair?ncid=aolspr00050000000020)
> > _______________________________________________
> > PrintOwners Discussion List
> > Post: PrintOwners@... <PrintOwners%40printweb.org>
> > Info: http://rb.enter.net/mailman/listinfo/printowners
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> PrintOwners Discussion List
> Post: PrintOwners@... <PrintOwners%40printweb.org>
> Info: http://rb.enter.net/mailman/listinfo/printowners
>
> __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature
> database 3304 (20080728) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
> __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature
> database 3304 (20080728) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
>

C Nelson wrote:

> I visited the Richard III museum in York and Tony Blair is a leading
> candidate for killing the princes. Oh well.
>
> I also purchased The Maligned King (Richard III) by AnnetteCarson.
So far it is an excellent read and very impartial while making it
quite clear that non contemporary sources are rubbish

Carol responds:

I just joined the group and haven't yet had time to read all the back
posts. Also, I don't yet feel comfortable expressing my views (I do
have them!) with regard to Hastings' motives and similar topics yet.

I thought that this post would be a good one to respond to because I
recently read the blurb for "The Maligned King" and it sounded
intriguing. I'm wondering whether there's anything *new* that we
haven't heard rehashed by various authors multiple times. new sources?
new topics? I hear that she seriously discusses the topic of Elizabeth
Woodville's (make that Dame Elizabeth Grey's) use of sorcery, or
perhaps seriously considers the possibility would be more accurate.

Anything of interest there?

Carol, hoping that you don't mind my posting below the message I'm
responding to as I find it easier to follow the thread that way

--- In , "Carol"
<justcarol67@...> wrote:
>
>
> I just joined the group and haven't yet had time to read all the back
> posts.

Welcome to the group, Carol.



I
> recently read the blurb for "The Maligned King" and it sounded
> intriguing. I'm wondering whether there's anything *new* that we
> haven't heard rehashed by various authors multiple times. new sources?
> new topics? I hear that she seriously discusses the topic of Elizabeth
> Woodville's (make that Dame Elizabeth Grey's) use of sorcery, or
> perhaps seriously considers the possibility would be more accurate.

That would be a new topic for discussion -- at least I don't recall it
being given serious consideration before. The subject always seems to
be brushed aside with barely a glance.


> Carol, hoping that you don't mind my posting below the message I'm
> responding to as I find it easier to follow the thread that way


Putting commentary below what is being commented upon seems the
easiest way to follow the thread, as far as I'm concerned.

Katy

Not at all. This is one of the best books I have read on the subject (I
even managed to read the Crowland Chronicles many many years ago. It cost
£19 but I will happily supply the ISBN number. Every angle is investigated
and impartially looked at which is very rare about Richard III. Take Care
Coral
i
On 8/4/08, Carol <justcarol67@...> wrote:
>
> C Nelson wrote:
>
> > I visited the Richard III museum in York and Tony Blair is a leading
> > candidate for killing the princes. Oh well.
> >
> > I also purchased The Maligned King (Richard III) by AnnetteCarson.
> So far it is an excellent read and very impartial while making it
> quite clear that non contemporary sources are rubbish
>
> Carol responds:
>
> I just joined the group and haven't yet had time to read all the back
> posts. Also, I don't yet feel comfortable expressing my views (I do
> have them!) with regard to Hastings' motives and similar topics yet.
>
> I thought that this post would be a good one to respond to because I
> recently read the blurb for "The Maligned King" and it sounded
> intriguing. I'm wondering whether there's anything *new* that we
> haven't heard rehashed by various authors multiple times. new sources?
> new topics? I hear that she seriously discusses the topic of Elizabeth
> Woodville's (make that Dame Elizabeth Grey's) use of sorcery, or
> perhaps seriously considers the possibility would be more accurate.
>
> Anything of interest there?
>
> Carol, hoping that you don't mind my posting below the message I'm
> responding to as I find it easier to follow the thread that way
>
>
>

Coral Nelson wrote:
> Not at all. This is one of the best books I have read on the
subject (I even managed to read the Crowland Chronicles many many
years ago. It cost £19 but I will happily supply the ISBN number.
Every angle is investigated and impartially looked at which is very
rare about Richard III. Take Care

Carol responds:

Thanks, Coral. I don't need the ISBN number as I've found the book at
Amazon (I think it's also available through the RIII society, but I'm
not sure). I just want to know the details. What, exactly, is
different about this book? What new materials does the author present?
What does she say about that usually ignored subject, charges of
sorcery against Elizateth Woodville (and Jacquetta, dowager Duchess of
Bedford, possibly)? Can you give me any specifics since I don't, as
yet, have access to the book and am not sure whether it's worth
buying? (I checked the price in American money at Amazon--oddly, it's
$39.72. Possibly, that unusual price reflects the current exchange rate.)

Carol, wh would appreciate some juicy quotations from the book if
they're allowed on this site

Hi,

It goes into the sorcery charges in a sensible way. All in all it examines
every angle and ends up concluding that the primces death was unlikely and
gives reasons for this. i couldn;t really afford it but am glad I read this
book as it looks at all angles without being biased and concludes like me
that the princes were probabaly alive when the usurper took the throne. God
knows he didn't know what had happened to them and lives in fear of their
appearance. What I loves best about this book is that it makes quite clear
that Tudor had no right at all to the throne and was crueller than any
Yorkist. Chivalry for that family was unheard of, note Margaret Saliisbury,
that was the most shocking thing I ever heard

On 8/6/08, Carol <justcarol67@...> wrote:
>
> Coral Nelson wrote:
> > Not at all. This is one of the best books I have read on the
> subject (I even managed to read the Crowland Chronicles many many
> years ago. It cost £19 but I will happily supply the ISBN number.
> Every angle is investigated and impartially looked at which is very
> rare about Richard III. Take Care
>
> Carol responds:
>
> Thanks, Coral. I don't need the ISBN number as I've found the book at
> Amazon (I think it's also available through the RIII society, but I'm
> not sure). I just want to know the details. What, exactly, is
> different about this book? What new materials does the author present?
> What does she say about that usually ignored subject, charges of
> sorcery against Elizateth Woodville (and Jacquetta, dowager Duchess of
> Bedford, possibly)? Can you give me any specifics since I don't, as
> yet, have access to the book and am not sure whether it's worth
> buying? (I checked the price in American money at Amazon--oddly, it's
> $39.72. Possibly, that unusual price reflects the current exchange rate.)
>
> Carol, wh would appreciate some juicy quotations from the book if
> they're allowed on this site
>
>
>

Carol to Annette et al.:

I finally received my copy of "The Maligned King"--postmarked, appropriately enough, Gloucester. A few comments to begin with (I'll add more after a second reading): First, the font (which doesn't seem to be identified) is small but not so small that I (with my imperfect vision) couldn't read it in a good light. I noticed that a number of sentences, possibly all of them, seem to have no space between the period (full stop) and the capital letter, which I found mildly distracting. However, the illustrations, both the color plates and the black-and-white illustrations sprinkled throughout the text (such as the three signatures) are marvelous, and I loved seeing genealogical tables other than the usual York/Lancaster/Tudor genealogies. I never knew, for example, how closely related Richard was to the Earl of Essex, or, more important, how many people were ahead of the Tydder (I like that spelling, sorry) in the female Lancastrian line.

I found one or two lines wickedly humorous, one confusing sentence that I had to read three times to understand, and one possible typo (a missing "not"), all of which I'll quote when I find them (offlist if you prefer, Annette). I found your arguments against the Duke of Buckingham as murderer (assuming that the boys *were* murdered) fairly convincing and your arguments that they weren't murdered even more so, and I especially like your responses to the likes of Hicks, Pollard, and Ross, all of whom are too often taken as "definitive."
Putting Richard into the context of his times, paying careful attention to chronology, and attempting to analyze people's movements objectively without preconceptions is a refreshing change from historians who assume that they know Richard's character and motives, making all his actions dependent on ruthless ambition, greed, and hypocrisy.

What disturbed me most was the knowledge that Bishop Morton (God rot his soul) had the ear of the new pope for almost nine months. Edward had praised Richard to the previous pope, Sixtus IV, and presumably, Richard had sent that pope a copy of Titulus Regius (or at least the petition by the three estates electing him king), but it's yet another of Richard's misfortunes that the pope who knew of his good reputation died and the next pope, Innocent (or should we call him "Gullible") VIII was so easily persuaded by the egregious Morton of Richard's depravity. It makes me wonder whether "Innocent" would have granted him a papal dispensation to marry Joana of Portugal (a brilliant choice of wife from a political standpoint) had Richard won Bosworth.

Carol, who thinks that your publisher should send a courtesy copy of your book to all the tour guides in the Tower of London

Annette Carson, Communications Officer
Karoo Animal Protection Society (KAPS)
www.kaps.org.za
info@...
Tel: 028 572 1717
Cell: 072 277 1056
Fax: 028 572 1717 or 028 551 1261

----- Original Message -----
From: justcarol67
To:
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 12:09 AM
Subject: "The Maligned King"



Carol to Annette et al.:

I finally received my copy of "The Maligned King"--postmarked, appropriately enough, Gloucester. A few comments to begin with (I'll add more after a second reading): First, the font (which doesn't seem to be identified) is small but not so small that I (with my imperfect vision) couldn't read it in a good light. I noticed that a number of sentences, possibly all of them, seem to have no space between the period (full stop) and the capital letter, which I found mildly distracting. However, the illustrations, both the color plates and the black-and-white illustrations sprinkled throughout the text (such as the three signatures) are marvelous, and I loved seeing genealogical tables other than the usual York/Lancaster/Tudor genealogies. I never knew, for example, how closely related Richard was to the Earl of Essex, or, more important, how many people were ahead of the Tydder (I like that spelling, sorry) in the female Lancastrian line.

I found one or two lines wickedly humorous, one confusing sentence that I had to read three times to understand, and one possible typo (a missing "not"), all of which I'll quote when I find them (offlist if you prefer, Annette). I found your arguments against the Duke of Buckingham as murderer (assuming that the boys *were* murdered) fairly convincing and your arguments that they weren't murdered even more so, and I especially like your responses to the likes of Hicks, Pollard, and Ross, all of whom are too often taken as "definitive."
Putting Richard into the context of his times, paying careful attention to chronology, and attempting to analyze people's movements objectively without preconceptions is a refreshing change from historians who assume that they know Richard's character and motives, making all his actions dependent on ruthless ambition, greed, and hypocrisy.

What disturbed me most was the knowledge that Bishop Morton (God rot his soul) had the ear of the new pope for almost nine months. Edward had praised Richard to the previous pope, Sixtus IV, and presumably, Richard had sent that pope a copy of Titulus Regius (or at least the petition by the three estates electing him king), but it's yet another of Richard's misfortunes that the pope who knew of his good reputation died and the next pope, Innocent (or should we call him "Gullible") VIII was so easily persuaded by the egregious Morton of Richard's depravity. It makes me wonder whether "Innocent" would have granted him a papal dispensation to marry Joana of Portugal (a brilliant choice of wife from a political standpoint) had Richard won Bosworth.

Carol, who thinks that your publisher should send a courtesy copy of your book to all the tour guides in the Tower of London

So sorry that I have been absent lately, owing to multiple pressures in my 'real' life. To Carol, humble thanks for your kind comments and many apologies for anything that had to be read three times - a major sin by my standards. Do by all means let me know what the offending passages were, and you can cite them on the forum if you like, I'm always grateful for corrections because that gives me the opportunity to amend the next edition if there is one, or circulate corrections to friends if there isn't.

I'll also be happy to chat to you (or anyone) off-list. I've been advised to write my email address as follows: ajcarson AT telkomsa.net. Many thanks to Joan et al for the alerts about Yahoo snooping, and belated congrats to Joan for her triumph with "This Time".
In haste, Annette (who twice wrote to the Tower bookshop asking them to consider stocking "Maligned King" but never got a reply!)


----- Original Message -----
From: justcarol67
To:
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 12:09 AM
Subject: "The Maligned King"



Carol to Annette et al.:

I finally received my copy of "The Maligned King"--postmarked, appropriately enough, Gloucester. A few comments to begin with (I'll add more after a second reading): First, the font (which doesn't seem to be identified) is small but not so small that I (with my imperfect vision) couldn't read it in a good light. I noticed that a number of sentences, possibly all of them, seem to have no space between the period (full stop) and the capital letter, which I found mildly distracting. However, the illustrations, both the color plates and the black-and-white illustrations sprinkled throughout the text (such as the three signatures) are marvelous, and I loved seeing genealogical tables other than the usual York/Lancaster/Tudor genealogies. I never knew, for example, how closely related Richard was to the Earl of Essex, or, more important, how many people were ahead of the Tydder (I like that spelling, sorry) in the female Lancastrian line.

I found one or two lines wickedly humorous, one confusing sentence that I had to read three times to understand, and one possible typo (a missing "not"), all of which I'll quote when I find them (offlist if you prefer, Annette). I found your arguments against the Duke of Buckingham as murderer (assuming that the boys *were* murdered) fairly convincing and your arguments that they weren't murdered even more so, and I especially like your responses to the likes of Hicks, Pollard, and Ross, all of whom are too often taken as "definitive."
Putting Richard into the context of his times, paying careful attention to chronology, and attempting to analyze people's movements objectively without preconceptions is a refreshing change from historians who assume that they know Richard's character and motives, making all his actions dependent on ruthless ambition, greed, and hypocrisy.

What disturbed me most was the knowledge that Bishop Morton (God rot his soul) had the ear of the new pope for almost nine months. Edward had praised Richard to the previous pope, Sixtus IV, and presumably, Richard had sent that pope a copy of Titulus Regius (or at least the petition by the three estates electing him king), but it's yet another of Richard's misfortunes that the pope who knew of his good reputation died and the next pope, Innocent (or should we call him "Gullible") VIII was so easily persuaded by the egregious Morton of Richard's depravity. It makes me wonder whether "Innocent" would have granted him a papal dispensation to marry Joana of Portugal (a brilliant choice of wife from a political standpoint) had Richard won Bosworth.

Carol, who thinks that your publisher should send a courtesy copy of your book to all the tour guides in the Tower of London

Annette wrote:
>
<snip> To Carol, humble thanks for your kind comments and many apologies for anything that had to be read three times - a major sin by my standards. Do by all means let me know what the offending passages were, and you can cite them on the forum if you like, I'm always grateful for corrections because that gives me the opportunity to amend the next edition if there is one, or circulate corrections to friends if there isn't. <snip>

Carol responds:

You're very welcome. I just wish the book were longer! It's so refreshing to find a post-Charles Ross book written from a pro-Ricardian perspective, especially one that critically examines the sources.

I found the sentence that I think has a missing "not": It's in the next-to-last paragraph on page 78: "We need suppose Grafton had any special knowledge of what happened in 1483. . . ." Should be, "We need *not* suppose," right? Also, John Alcock, Bishop of Worcester, is listed in the index as Thomas Alcock. (I caught that one accidentally because I was looking for additional references to Alcock; I didn't examine the index in any detail.) I didn't mark the page with the sentence that required multiple readings, but if I come across it again, I'll let you know.

Carol, whose spell-check wants her to change Alcock to Alcott or Ballcock!

You're dead right, it should read "We need not suppose". That one slipped past me in the proof-reading. Apologies for "Thomas" Alcock, too - however, references to him in the text are correctly given as "John" (phew!).

I must admit the publisher's copy-editor was worse than useless in this regard: not only did he miss some easily checkable typos, but he went through the entire typescript making pettifogging changes at a rate of about half a dozen per page - altering punctuation (sometimes to change the meaning) and substituting things like "however" for "but", presumably because he wanted it to read more like a history text-book. He didn't seem to like semi-colons, or understand how they work, and didn't recognize well-known sayings. He even altered quotes! At one point where I mentioned halberds, he asked me to explain what they were. Worse still, ninety per cent of the niggling changes he made were without consulting me, which made proof-reading a total nightmare.

Speaking of editing, I read some correspondence recently in the Times Literary Supplement after a reviewer had slammed the abysmal standard of editing in a particular book, and it seems that many publishers are now outsourcing it to freelancers who are working without contracts or job-security, and some without any known qualifications. Also, it appears publishers are now resisting allowing authors to proof-read corrections that have been made to proofs. I suspect this may have something to do with the length of time authors take: I am often regarded as freakish for the alacrity with which I do proof-reading, which leads me to suppose that others are a lot slower.

The bottom line is that authors are responsible for what appears in their own books, but sometimes this can come at a price. You might be amused (or shocked) by the latest letter on the subject in the TLS correspondence (14 May): "My brother Robin Robbins ... once told me that he corrected innumerable errors at the proof stage of his magisterial edition of Thomas Browne's 'Pseudodoxia Epidemica', only to find that the 'corrections' introduced many new errors. Oxford University Press charged him £1,500 to have these blemishes removed, quite a sum of money in 1980. It seems this may have been the last text to be set in metal by OUP." Thank goodness for digital!
Regards, Annette


----- Original Message -----
From: justcarol67
To:
Sent: Monday, June 21, 2010 2:20 AM
Subject: Re: "The Maligned King"





Annette wrote:
>
<snip> To Carol, humble thanks for your kind comments and many apologies for anything that had to be read three times - a major sin by my standards. Do by all means let me know what the offending passages were, and you can cite them on the forum if you like, I'm always grateful for corrections because that gives me the opportunity to amend the next edition if there is one, or circulate corrections to friends if there isn't. <snip>

Carol responds:

You're very welcome. I just wish the book were longer! It's so refreshing to find a post-Charles Ross book written from a pro-Ricardian perspective, especially one that critically examines the sources.

I found the sentence that I think has a missing "not": It's in the next-to-last paragraph on page 78: "We need suppose Grafton had any special knowledge of what happened in 1483. . . ." Should be, "We need *not* suppose," right? Also, John Alcock, Bishop of Worcester, is listed in the index as Thomas Alcock. (I caught that one accidentally because I was looking for additional references to Alcock; I didn't examine the index in any detail.) I didn't mark the page with the sentence that required multiple readings, but if I come across it again, I'll let you know.

Carol, whose spell-check wants her to change Alcock to Alcott or Ballcock!

I am a copyeditor, proofreader and indexer. I am
horrified by the description of what the
copyeditor did - I am usually instructed to Keep
Off unless I have good reason not to, and anyway
to run everything past the author for approval.
(Not that authors always appreciate this.)

The History Press (and, previously, Sutton's) is
local here. At the time of its launch, I heard it
said that copyediting would be outsourced to
Bulgaria. They were never generous to freelances.

Copyediting has been largely outsourced for many
years, and you need to get jobs from various
publishers in order to convince the tax people
that you are really freelance. Responsible
publishers check that the freelance is sufficiently familiar with the subject.

Authors who introduce new material at proof stage
deserve all the penalties thrown at them. They
should have written the right manuscript in the
first place. Actual corrections are a different
matter, and are charged to the typesetter (not
usually the same as the publisher). Changes are
cheaper now than they were in the days of hot
metal, but it is still a huge headache; it can
change pagination and thus the number of pages
(does the number still divide by 16?) and the
index, and have a horrible effect on printing and binding costs.

Now, back to that Russian grammar I was proofreading.
Best wishes
Christine

At 10:03 21/06/2010, Annette wrote:
>I must admit the publisher's copy-editor was
>worse than useless in this regard: not only did
>he miss some easily checkable typos, but he went
>through the entire typescript making
>pettifogging changes at a rate of about half a
>dozen per page - altering punctuation (sometimes
>to change the meaning) and substituting things
>like "however" for "but", presumably because he
>wanted it to read more like a history text-book.
>He didn't seem to like semi-colons, or
>understand how they work, and didn't recognize
>well-known sayings. He even altered quotes! At
>one point where I mentioned halberds, he asked
>me to explain what they were. Worse still,
>ninety per cent of the niggling changes he made
>were without consulting me, which made proof-reading a total nightmare.
>
>Speaking of editing, I read some correspondence
>recently in the Times Literary Supplement after
>a reviewer had slammed the abysmal standard of
>editing in a particular book, and it seems that
>many publishers are now outsourcing it to
>freelancers who are working without contracts or
>job-security, and some without any known
>qualifications. Also, it appears publishers are
>now resisting allowing authors to proof-read
>corrections that have been made to proofs. I
>suspect this may have something to do with the
>length of time authors take: I am often regarded
>as freakish for the alacrity with which I do
>proof-reading, which leads me to suppose that others are a lot slower.
>
>The bottom line is that authors are responsible
>for what appears in their own books, but
>sometimes this can come at a price. You might be
>amused (or shocked) by the latest letter on the
>subject in the TLS correspondence (14 May): "My
>brother Robin Robbins ... once told me that he
>corrected innumerable errors at the proof stage
>of his magisterial edition of Thomas Browne's
>'Pseudodoxia Epidemica', only to find that the
>'corrections' introduced many new errors. Oxford
>University Press charged him £1,500 to have
>these blemishes removed, quite a sum of money in
>1980. It seems this may have been the last text
>to be set in metal by OUP." Thank goodness for digital!

Christine H wrote:
>
> I am a copyeditor, proofreader and indexer. I am horrified by the description of what the copyeditor did - I am usually instructed to Keep Off unless I have good reason not to, and anyway to run everything past the author for approval. (Not that authors always appreciate this.)

Carol responds:
I'm also a freelance copyeditor (and, occasionally, proofreader. The level of copyediting I do always depends on instructions from the managing editor, and the manuscript is *always* submitted to the author for approval. However (as Christine obviously knows), certain changes, such as serial commas and the use of figures vs. spelled out numbers, are usually matters of house style (the publisher uses the same "style" in all its books), and the copyeditor needs to be sure (among other things) that spelling is correct and consistent (except in quotations). Some publishers require copyeditors to change the passive voice to the active voice when possible. In the case of the missing "not," either the copyeditor or the proofreader should have queried it. "Thomas" for "John" should also have been queried.

Christine H:
> The History Press (and, previously, Sutton's) is local here. At the time of its launch, I heard it said that copyediting would be outsourced to Bulgaria. They were never generous to freelances. <snip>

Carol:
Outsourced to Bulgaria? Why? It's bad enough that so much copyediting and proofreading is now being outsourced to India.

Carol, who just finished copyediting a novel about the horrors of Somalia (riddled with second-language errors) and is now happily working on a travel memoir about Argentina