I can't seem to stop thinking about our last discussion in class, about the huge role editors have in the process of making a book publishable. For me, this whole notion of the "behind the scenes" of all forms of art has been lurking in my head for a while now, and with our last couple discussions in class, I just keep thinking about the extent of what is considered original. Who really has talent? Is it fair to believe that if you received more help than others your art has less merit?
I started to think about this when I became I tiny bit obsessed with Marvel movies back in 2009. Iron Man came out in 2008, but only one year later my cousin would make me watch this "really cool superhero movie", and the rest, as they say, is history. Since that moment, I've been going to the cinema to see every single one - shout out to the new Avengers: Endgame trailer coming out today during the Superbowl, I don't personally care about American football but this game has become special to me just because of the new preview - and as you might now, Marvel is quite famous due to its post-credits scenes. I had to make my whole family and/or friends stay until the last very second of every movie we saw to watch a short clip that might reveal important information about the next coming movie, or just show a funny irrelevant scene (still worth the wait, of course). During those minutes watching the credits, which let's be honest, no one really ever watches after finishing a movie unless is Marvel, I realized the huge amount of people that are needed to do a movie. I was mind blown. Every single person shown in the endless credits contributed to making a two-hour movie, where the only praise would be received to the cast and maybe, to the director. No one thinks of those whose task was to create the perfect setting decorating a room for a scene that might be used for maybe 5 minutes. Or the people catering the set. Food is so important, yet no one thinks of those who put time and effort feeding Robert Downey Jr. or Chris Hemsworth. Thanks to this movies, I've become really appreciative of the people behind the scenes. Their contribution, smaller or bigger, was essential for the creation of art such as filmmaking.
I know movies and books go through completely different processes to reach the final product, they are even two completely different galaxies in the realm of art, but since the beginning of this class, I just can't stop making comparisons with the people working making movies. To finish up a book and get it ready for the public needs another army behind it to make it possible. The editor is essential, and he or she can play a role in even how the book might end. Who dies, who survives. It is the role of a small God, guiding the writer sometimes towards a fanatism making him or she follow his word too strictly or hopefully simply establishing some guidelines but giving freedom and space because the editor believes that the author's free will can be trusted. It also all depends on the type of person they both are because we are at the end more complex than a simple metaphor and circumstances can be sometimes bigger than our good intentions. To conclude, the editor is essential and has a bigger role than I ever imagined before taking this class.
There is a quote from the Art of Editing that has been stuck in my mind since we read it. Joseph Heller explains how he was going to be interviewed by the New York Times, and that day he received a call from Gottlieb to let him know how "he didn't think it was a good idea to talk about editing and the contributions of editors, since the public likes to think everything in the book comes right from the author". I could not believe how true that was! I've genuinely believed for so many years that a person just writes a bunch of words, makes sense of them, sends them to a publisher house, gets picked out for the originality and voila, your idea gets published! Now I feel really naive for thinking that way. As we have read, some authors need more editing than others, but for me, the biggest question I kept asking myself was that if any author receives more edits, then the book might be seen as less pure, hence it should receive less merit. Is it fair to think that way? My reasoning at the moment is that indeed that is an unfair point of view. If I think about songs, for example, nowadays most of the biggest hits are not solely written by the singer. Nonetheless, I will keep loving the song and singing along. Those who helped any singer write a song are those I consider working behind the scenes, the secret heroes whose sole purpose is to create art people can enjoy without receiving any credit for it. They are doing it because they are passionate about it. Yes, they are also making a lot of money if they are perhaps helping Beyoncé write a song, I'm aware not all the motivation is coming from a selfless motive. Regardless, with movies, books and music I've learned to appreciate the ones working endless hours on the process of making art. Every single person involved has talent, and what they contribute to the final product does not make it less pure. In the end, it is not a matter of purity, but of the basic human instinct of making art as a way of survival.
No comments:
Post a Comment