Adding the Publishing Contrarian. Smart lady, but something of a “witch,” I hear. Once again, I have to ask: what is it about editing and publishing that brings up this image of cranky, contrary, grumpy and curmudgeonly book people? Editors, critics, publishers, agents, they are all, whether they like it or not, associated with shaping, maintaining and promoting literary reputations — and perhaps this does result in occasional grumpiness. And perhaps the image is maintained because authors want their editors and publishers to be picky. But contrary? Oppositional? I wonder.
The writers I’ve worked with seem to require a combination of buddy and taskmaster, and sometimes comforting mid-wife/healer. So from whence does this archetype of the snarly editor arise? From the 17th century, I’d guess. 
Samuel Johnson, for example – that old scrofulous (literally) wit, lit. crit. extraordinaire, notoriously obessive and compulsive son of a bookseller. Here he is (left) looking dyspeptic. And half-blind, no doubt, from peering at books in the half-light, and deciding their worth. Obviously, there was, and still is, some sense of virtue associated with such crabby devotion to the written word.
No, I don’t really think that the assorted blogging grumps and contrarians of the editing world are necessarily hard-hearted and cynical. Certainly not moi. Still, maybe I should tap into the archetype if it makes my clients feel more secure. Perhaps I should change my blog moniker to something a little more…contentious. How about “Crabgrass”? The Publishing Contrarian has already cornered the “Wicked Witch” title. Darn, that was a good one.
