Caught It (A Little Late)
Being a one-man shop, I can always look forward to seeing some dumb editing problem in a newly published book. It's due to a sort of word-blindness, where I can look at a phrase, read it, and completely overlook an incongruency. Usually, it involves prepositions on my covers. I'll put one preposition on the title page, and a different one on the cover. Almost put "Sightings and Stories" on the new Boss Snakes cover, when it was "Stories and Sightings." Quickly caught that before I sent it. But, last night, several days after uploading the book to the printer, was going over a few things in my head, and thought, 'I did use Mark Chorvinsky's name, right?' I mention the late Strange Magazine publisher briefly... and a quick check confirmed I had, of course, inserted Mark Opsasnick's name instead. Well, they're both from Maryland. A few choice words, a quick change and re-upload, another $40 down the drain, and the book will be bumped back a few days, but will have the correct name in it.
And, noting some odd little comment elsewhere about the use of a black racer on the cover of Boss Snakes, it's a bit sad to see that cryptids as social (ethnozoological) constructs has taken such a turn in popular culture that we are so certain that they must in fact be strictly based on unknown species. That's one reason I dislike over-generalizations in the attempt to name or describe a mystery animal prior to physical confirmative evidence. (Or rather, the effort to make specific claims about a generalized far-flung topic.) The giant snake phenomena in North America is based on a wide range of folklore: hoaxes, misidentifications, exaggerations, tall tales, as well as credible sightings involving larger than expected specimens of native species, introduced or feral exotics, and maybe (just maybe...) unrecognized variations or species.
And, noting some odd little comment elsewhere about the use of a black racer on the cover of Boss Snakes, it's a bit sad to see that cryptids as social (ethnozoological) constructs has taken such a turn in popular culture that we are so certain that they must in fact be strictly based on unknown species. That's one reason I dislike over-generalizations in the attempt to name or describe a mystery animal prior to physical confirmative evidence. (Or rather, the effort to make specific claims about a generalized far-flung topic.) The giant snake phenomena in North America is based on a wide range of folklore: hoaxes, misidentifications, exaggerations, tall tales, as well as credible sightings involving larger than expected specimens of native species, introduced or feral exotics, and maybe (just maybe...) unrecognized variations or species.
Labels: book, cryptozoology, publishing, reptiles

1 Comments:
Been there! I self publish but still, I bothered the heck out of my printing company (and spent some reimposing fees) each time I found an "oops".
Post a Comment
<< Home