Ionospherics 101

There's a new saying about. I've heard more than one person utter it. Nothing unusual in this, but I mention it here because it gave me pause to consider what it means to be an editor. The saying is this: "It's all good."

Sorry. Beg to differ. But it's not all good. Don't read me wrong. I'm not complaining here. It's just a simple fact — dealing with authors who have spent precious hours and sweated blood from their fingertips to write a story isn't always a positive thing. Fact is, editors have opinions that sometimes clash with those of writers. Writers and editors alike get stuck on minor points of style, wording, story form and other aspects of narrative. Both of them want the same thing — that is to present the best story possible to the readers. How that's achieved is an oft-disputed point.

And yes, before you ask, let me answer. I've had my so-called "run-ins" with authors. Those who've taken my editorial suggestions, flung them back at me and said, "I'm never dealing with you again," or worse...

Thing is, though, while it's not all good, it's not all bad either. I hear a murmur. Very Buddhist? Sure. Not the middle road, though. What emerges from positive and constructive entanglements with authors is just that — overwhelmingly positive.

Ultimately, the proof is in the magazine — its quality, its readability, its popularity.

Eventually the judgement passes along the chain.

Now, dear reader, what the Hell do you think?

Nuke (editor).