4 ms·

I don't see anything in the piece about simplification, just the the trouble of tracking changes across two editions while still finishing the edit for each.

by crtasm 5y ago

LatteLazy 5y ago
Well Mitchell claims it was the other way around: the copy editor made it more complex for the UK but the US version was unedited. I haven't reviewed the (pages and pages apparently) of differences, but the example they give is this: >In the UK text, for example, Mitchell writes at one point that: “Historians still unborn will appreciate your cooperation in the future, Sonmi ~451. We archivists thank you in the present. […] Once we’re finished, the orison will be archived at the Ministry of Testaments. […] Your version of the truth is what matters.” >In the US edition, the lines are: “On behalf of my ministry, thank you for agreeing to this final interview. Please remember, this isn’t an interrogation, or a trial. Your version of the truth is the only one that matters.”
- crtasm 5y ago
  It sat unedited for some time, then they got a new editor (next paragraph).
  - LatteLazy 5y ago
    Doesn't actually say they did any editing though, does it? I ask because I thought the point was it was a simultaneous release and that they ran out of time in the US? Sorry if I've read too much into that...
    - etrevino 5y ago
      I think you did. The article makes it sounds like there were more or as many changes to the US version: "Mitchell was presented with a substantial list of changes for the US edition". And the article makes clear that the author was uninterested in tracking the changes: "'It’s a lot of faff – you have to keep track of your changes and send them along to whichever side is currently behind – and as I have a low faff-tolerance threshold, I’m still not very conscientious about it, which is why my US and UK editors now have their assistants liaise closely.... I really never dreamed back then that anyone would ever notice or care enough to email me about it, or that the book would still be in print 13 years later, let alone sell a couple of million copies and be studied or thought about by academics.'"

I don't see anything in the piece about simplification, just the the trouble of tracking changes across two editions while still finishing the edit for each.

by crtasm 5y ago

I don't see anything in the piece about simplification, just the the trouble of tracking changes across two editions while still finishing the edit for each.

LatteLazy 5y ago

Well Mitchell claims it was the other way around: the copy editor made it more complex for the UK but the US version was unedited. I haven't reviewed the (pages and pages apparently) of differences, but the example they give is this: >In the UK text, for example, Mitchell writes at one point that: “Historians still unborn will appreciate your cooperation in the future, Sonmi ~451. We archivists thank you in the present. […] Once we’re finished, the orison will be archived at the Ministry of Testaments. […] Your version of the truth is what matters.” >In the US edition, the lines are: “On behalf of my ministry, thank you for agreeing to this final interview. Please remember, this isn’t an interrogation, or a trial. Your version of the truth is the only one that matters.”

crtasm 5y ago
It sat unedited for some time, then they got a new editor (next paragraph).
- LatteLazy 5y ago
  Doesn't actually say they did any editing though, does it? I ask because I thought the point was it was a simultaneous release and that they ran out of time in the US? Sorry if I've read too much into that...
  - etrevino 5y ago
    I think you did. The article makes it sounds like there were more or as many changes to the US version: "Mitchell was presented with a substantial list of changes for the US edition". And the article makes clear that the author was uninterested in tracking the changes: "'It’s a lot of faff – you have to keep track of your changes and send them along to whichever side is currently behind – and as I have a low faff-tolerance threshold, I’m still not very conscientious about it, which is why my US and UK editors now have their assistants liaise closely.... I really never dreamed back then that anyone would ever notice or care enough to email me about it, or that the book would still be in print 13 years later, let alone sell a couple of million copies and be studied or thought about by academics.'"