Editorial Notes = clarifying information, additional insight, annotations

Hiya Reader,

A dear friend of mine once observed that "there are really only 600 people in the world; the rest is done with smoke and mirrors." The older I become, and the more people I meet and talk to, the more this quip seems somehow true, even if not literally. Where would all that smoldering glass come from?

I prefer my friend's observation to the more prosaic theory of six degrees of separation, though I have always found the hyper-specific Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon to be a more amusing version of the concept. (Incidentally, I am just one degree of separation from Mr. Bacon, making you, my friend, just two degrees. If you've never heard this, see why Kevin Bacon was dubbed "the center of the universe.")

The Network of Time website (lots of bonus links this week!) provides "photographic evidence of actual meetings in physical space and not other documentation of associations" between any two public figures. It's in beta, so the list isn't exhaustive, but what's there is super fun. And users are encouraged to submit their own photos to add themselves to the visual map.

Who's the most interesting person you've been photographed with?

For my money, this Chinese couple has the best story of them all.
​

Think a friend would appreciate Editorial Notes?

Send them this link to sign up:

(And if you’re the appreciative friend, you can subscribe at the same link.)

​

Example of the Week

Sometimes this is a good example—or a great one. Sometimes this is a bad example—or just a funny blooper. Sometimes a combination. You never know.

Imagine an attorney general sitting down for coffee. Another attorney general approaches the table and joins the first in a cup of joe. You then have two attorneys general, not two attorney generals, sipping hot, caffeinated beverages. (If they were each a distinguished professor emeritus, we'd have not just two professors emeritus but professors emeriti!)

Following this rule, my family identifies the plural version of a particular grocery store known for its amazing prices and teeny-tiny parking lots as Traders Joe's.

Yes, I know it's wrong.

Yes, I know why.

Along these lines, we recently decided that if there is one My Pillow plus another My Pillow, it's more fun to pluralize the pair as Our Pillow instead of My Pillows, even if both belong to the same person.

You know me — I love rules! Love them! Ell oh vee ee them.

But it's okay to break writing rules sometimes, especially if you make a conscious choice to do so and can defend and explain the reason. (In this case, it's just a joke.) Just make sure you first clearly understand and can articulate the rule you are breaking.

(See also this week's reader question!)

Actionable Tip of the Week

A trick to add to your self-editing toolbox right now!

The supposed last words of the soon-to-be-hanged Marquis de Favras after reading his death sentence in 1790:

"I see you have made 3 spelling mistakes."

Whether or not the Marquis actually said this before execution, here's this week's relevant actionable tip, so obvious as to be exactly the thing that we often skip:

Check your spelling. Again.

How many times have you carefully composed and rewritten and edited a document, only to see a spelling error the moment AFTER you click send on the email?

Yes, of course we all know that spell check is flawed. See, for proof, the following verse, a literally nonsense rhyme that would nevertheless pass an automated spell check with flying colors:

But just because the tool is imperfect does not mean we should not use it to supplement our own thorough reviews.*

We need to be reminded of the obvious...because we forget! Consider the "Ebbinghaus Forgetting Curve," in which the psychologist who lended the term his name found that people can forget up to 50% of new information within an hour and 70% within 24 hours.

True, the necessity of faithfully and systematically working on all steps of the editing processes as we check and polish our drafts can't possibly be new information. But is it something you always do on everything you write?

*Thanks to reader Katherine for alerting me to a typographic error in last week's newsletter! Proof that perfection is impossible.

Reader Question of the Week

Sheila wrote: Recently I was asked which is the correct way: I can't hardly wait or I can hardly wait. What are your thoughts?

Sheila! The correct version is "I can hardly wait." Here's why:

"Hardly" already carries a negative meaning—it means "almost not." When paired with "can't" (another negative), you’ve created a double negative.

Instead of emphasizing how excited you are, "I can't hardly wait" ends up sounding like you can wait just fine, which is probably not what you meant. Same with phrases like “Joanne don’t know nothing” or “Jerry can’t do nothing about it” and the like.

Unless you're going for a certain dialect or colloquial charm, double negatives serve to cancel each other out.

​

Want to Submit a Reader Question to Helene?

Give in to the urge.

​

Link of the Week

For the armchair travelers and generally curious among us: ascend to the snowy peak of Mount Everest via breathtaking drone footage from Chinese drone maker DJI. "The drone ascended 3,500 meters from the base camp to the summit." Much safer (and better views) than making the climb yourself.

​

I ❤️ Hearing from You!

Comments? Just reply to this email or click this link. I respond to every email—that's a promise.

Thanks for reading!

~Helene, your writing sherpa

​

P.S. Last Call for Preorder Discount!

The window to preorder the course First Impressions: Craft Irresistible Beginnings that Grab Readers and Make Editors Say Yes! at a deeply discounted rate is closing soon.

Master those openings to hook and keep your readers (and help attract editors and agents!)

With hands-on exercises, examples from standout writing, and live feedback sessions, you’ll leave with practical tools to make your all-important "firsts" (sentences and pages) irresistible.