T

he developments of the Internet and how we use it have been tremendous over the last 15 or so years, but more remarkable, is how accustomed we have become to its presence and constant morphing. In fact, this article can only be found on the Internet, which ultimately legitimizes the Internet as an independent and viable source of information, knowledge, and opinion. 

This, of course, doesn’t mean that this article or any others on the web are necessarily good writing, worthwhile, or informational; it only means that the web has become a medium equivalent to (or perhaps superior to) others such as radio, print press, and television. So what can we expect from the emergence of the Internet as the new powerhouse in the presentation of information? Is it simply another form, which eventually produces the same results, or does the medium within which something is presented affect what is actually conveyed? A caveat: this short article can only be considered as notes towards something larger, something that will inevitably develop, and regardless of whether or not anything I have to say holds true, the points are factors to think about.

Economic changes are the obvious element of the Internet in the publishing field. Equally apparent are the seemingly infinite possibilities of incorporating multimedia elements along with the written word. All of a sudden the integration of images, sounds, video clips, animation, and so forth is not only possible, but also desirable. In terms of the written word, the options are innumerable as well—words can be made to dance on the screen, novels can be written/read by the reader through hypertext—literally, the text can become more pleasurable. It is clear that these enhancements (and many others unforeseen) will change the editor’s job immensely, and how we appreciate and work with these changes will only become evident with time. I will leave these considerations up to your imagination. Instead, I would like to focus on the shifting triangular relationship between the writer-editor-reader in light of the Internet and the subsequent shrinking of time and space in a multicultural world.

My life up until this point has been unusual compared to most people. I grew up in various countries in Asia, Europe, and North America, and was thus exposed to many cultures from a young age. I didn’t know any better—difference in culture, tradition, and appearance was just the way the world was. Now, after having lived in the USA for five years, I have come to realize that most people don’t share my views, and this is, undoubtedly, due to circumstance. What most people take for granted, I tend to question and for good reason. There simply isn’t one way of presenting something, and with the world opening up along with technology, editors need to take this into account.

The process of identification is performed primarily through a self/Other differencing. I know that I am who I am because I am not you. It is through the economics of difference that we identify and form groups. However, the trouble with this has been the necessity of assumptions, and as the saying goes, "To assume makes an ass out of u and me." The Internet has caused the caving in of time zones in the sense that the (virtual) world is accessible at all times from essentially anywhere. To me, this indicates that the differing of the Other needs to be reconsidered.

No longer are the borders of self and Other clearly marked. No longer can we assume that we target a particular audience at the exclusion of another. No longer is there the dominance of Prospero at the expense of Caliban. The distinction between self and Other has collapsed and there is an increased need for responsibility, sensitivity, and respect.

Well, what does this have to do with the publishing industry, editing, or writing? I think that it is precisely this area of identity that demands the attention of the writer, editor and publisher. It is true that books have been available from all over the world and that much written work has been translated, but with the Internet dawns a new era of speed which will ultimately change the relationship between the reader and the author. Now, information and the ability to learn about other cultures is just a couple of clicks away and this makes fact checking and having your sources correct imperative. One can’t simply assume that a vague or ambiguous statement about a culture far in distance but not in time is okay.

As most people will know, particularly editors, editing is much more than just proofreading. Undoubtedly, it has its tedious moments that sometimes make one feel like a machine—the proofreading, grammar, punctuation, word choice, and sentence structure—but this work needs to be done and simply requires discipline and dedication. Equally important is the part of editing that deals with content, style, and composition, all of which are derivatives of the author’s personality. The author is entitled to her opinion, judgment, and personality, and while the editor may not be in agreement with them, she must respect the work that she is editing, as long as the work doesn’t infringe upon or inaccurately assumes aspects of other people’s cultures. This is where the difficult and challenging element of editing surfaces. The editor must fuse reading and writing, simultaneously placing herself in the more passive position of a reader and the more active position of a (re)writer, while also relaying these insights effectively to the author. It is not an easy job to do, but if we now throw in the added element of anticipating the worldly reader, it becomes far more difficult. The editor becomes the link tying it all together, placing herself between the author and the reader.

Now I need to somehow connect all of the above. Essentially what I am getting at is that the world is getting smaller, faster, and more intricate as our technology advances, and this is particularly evident with the advent of the Internet. These technological advances have changed much of what we do and how we go about doing them, and this will most certainly be the case within publishing and editing as well. Since the world has become smaller and the distinctions between self and Other have to some degree collapsed (that is, where it is no longer sufficient to simply and somewhat arrogantly assume that you know what you are talking about), authors need to be wary of what they say and how it might be interpreted in different cultures, times, races, traditions, religions, and other groups. This goes double for editors. The editor must attempt to understand what the author is saying, decide whether or not they are indeed saying it, and finally make sure that it isn’t offensive, crude, derogatory, or assumptive. This means that the editor must be generally knowledgeable, inquisitive, and willing to question the obvious; a good principle to follow might be: make the strange familiar and the familiar strange. The Internet is providing the written wor(l)d with increased opportunities and an abundance of excitement, but along with that come additional complexities. While some might claim that text as a self-sufficient body is being corrupted through the Internet, I think that these are exciting times. I only advise both writers and editors to exercise caution with any assumptions, regardless of how insignificant they might appear.