326

Moxon's notions about copy

In a firit fence, a good Compofiter need be no more than an English Scholler, or indeed scarce fo much; for if he knows but his Letters and Characters he shall meet with in his Printed or Written Copy, and have otherwise a good natural capacity, he may be a better Compofiter than another Man whofe Education has adorn'd him with Latin, Greek, Hebrew, and other Languages, and fhall want a good natural Genius: For by the Laws of Printing, a Compofiter is strictly to follow his Copy, viz. to obferve and do just so much and no more than his Copy will bear him out for; fo that his Copy is to be his Rule and Authority: But the carelefness of fome good Authors, and the ignorance of other Authors, has forc'd Printers to introduce a Custom, which among them is look'd upon as a task and duty incumbent on the Compofiter, viz. to difcern and amend the bad Spelling and Pointing of his Copy, if it be English; But if it be in any Forrain Language, the Author is wholy left to his own Skill and Judgement in Spelling and Pointing, &c. his Copy, and Correcting the Prooves, unless they be Latine, Greek or Hebrew, for to thofe Languages there is generally a Corrector belongs to the Printing-Houfe: And how well other Forrain Languages are Corrected by the Author, we may perceive by the English that is Printed in Forrain Coun

tries.

Therefore upon confideration of these accidental circumstances that attend Copy, it is necessary that a Compofiter be a good English Schollar at leaft; and that he know the present traditional Spelling of all English Words, and that he have so much Sence and Reafon, as to Point his Sentences properly: when to begin a Word with a Capital Letter, when (to render the Sence of the Author more intelligent to the Reader) to Set fome Words or Sentences in Italick or English Letters, &c.1

1 Moxon, Mechanick Exercises, pp. 197, 198.

ABOUT COPY

OXON has defined the compositor's duty as largely but not entirely that of the copyist. The author may tell him to follow copy literally, but the master printer tells him to maintain uniformity. These orders often conflict. How can agreement be had?

When copy has been negligently prepared by a careless writer who sometimes spells incorrectly and capitalizes and italicizes without system, it is the duty of the compositor to correct these faults according to the style prescribed by the office in which he works; but when copy has been carefully prepared by a disciplined writer, who plainly shows that he has a style of his own, that copy should be followed faithfully, even if it does conflict with the system of the office. It is the author's right to

328

Negligence in preparation of copy

go before the public in his own way; to show his own notions about italic, punctuation, and capitalizing, and to follow the spelling of Webster, Stormonth, or Dr. Johnson. All that the printer asks of the author is that he shall spell uniformly and put his capitals, points, and other peculiarities of style in their proper places, so that there can be no misunderstanding about his intent. If he has not done this thoroughly (even a careful writer cannot be consistent always), he should prepare a written code of his style, plainly indicating the spellings he prefers and making clear his system for the use of italic, points, quotation-marks, references, compound words, abbreviations, etc. When the master printer has this code put in type, and provides a fair proof of it for every compositor on the work, the irregularities of style that deface a first proof and make the alterations expensive are largely prevented. When the writer does not provide this written code, the compositor should try to make the style uniform, according to his understanding of the author's unexpressed wishes. There the compositor's duty ends, even if he does not correctly guess an unexpressed intent, and does not maintain in all points the author's notions about uniformity. It is not his fault if copy is misleading or if instructions are insufficient.

The art of preparing copy for a printer is not taught in schools, and the authors are few who have devised and adhere to systems of their own.

Many compositors needed for a book 329

Much of the copy sent to a printing-house seems to indicate on the part of the author his indifference to all typographic niceties: a strange proper name may be spelled in two or more ways; punctuation may be excessive in one paragraph and scant in another; italic may be marked for one quotation, quotation-marks for another, while a third of the same class may have no marks of distinction; arabic figures and spelled-out words for numbers may appear upon the same page. These are some of the many inconsistencies of the ordinary manuscript, which the writer fails to see in his own writing, but they are glaringly offensive when they reappear in the proof. Good copy and bad copy are easily distinguished, and the compositor knows almost at a glance that he must follow the first and correct the last. Between these two extremes is a much larger quantity of copy that may or may not require correction. The common belief that the correction of these lapses is the compositor's duty is based on the assumption that the compositor is a qualified corrector. This is a grave error. If he were a corrector, it is probable that he would have the much better paid position of proofreader or assistant editor.

It is another mistake to assume that the work of composition is always done by one compositor, who can and will correct errors with uniformity. A long manuscript is always set by many compositors; if it is required in haste, or even if its

330 Compositors not qualified correctors

composition is protracted over many months, it may be set and read by many compositors and readers. In our present condition of conflicting authority, compositors and proof-readers must have different opinions about correct composition, and it is not reasonable to expect that all the workmen will agree on every point. The uniformity desired by an author should begin with himself in the copy, even if he finds it is necessary to have the copy type-written and approved by a qualified corrector before it is sent to the printer.

Too much dependence should not be placed on the corrections that are hoped for in the printinghouse. It is unsafe for the master printer to allow the compositor to make a material change in copy without positive authority. He may correct plain faults according to the system provided by the author or by the office, but he must do no more. Even when he finds in the copy what may seem unauthorized errors of spelling or grammar, he is not justified in correcting them without a special order, for the supposed errors may not be errors. In extracts, testimony, or documents intended to be literally exact, faults of grammar or spelling are presumptive evidence of painstaking accuracy. The writer or speaker, not the printer, is responsible for the errors. The compositor should have small license for correction; he is safe only when he literally follows copy, or obeys a distinct order to change. He should not alter properly prepared