Article
November 5, 2024
0 comment
by Stephen

Paying Attention to Terminology

I am writing today about some decisions that I needed to make on a recent index. In the grand scheme of the index, these decisions only affected a few entries. I am tempted to brush these off as not very important and not worth discussing. Yet much of indexing is about paying attention to the details without getting lost in the details. And I think this is a unique situation that illustrates an important point about term selection. At least, it made me sit up and think carefully as I was working.

A good index encapsulates two different goals, which can sometimes seem like they are in opposition to each other. The index needs to be both a reflection of what the author has written and be an attempt to clearly communicate with the reader. Lose one of these aspects, and the index ceases to function.

Term selection is key to achieving both of these goals. The terms used in the index need to both match the text and how the reader is likely to search. Ideally the author and the reader are in alignment, but sometimes the author uses different language than what the reader might expect. In those situations, the index may need to bridge the gap.

I recently ran into this issue when writing the index for Saint Paul the Pharisee: Jewish Apostle to All Nations, by Father Stephen De Young (Ancient Faith Publishing, 2024).

If you are familiar with Christianity, the title may be a hint that the author is taking a different tact with terminology. While Paul was a pharisee prior to his conversion, he is now more commonly known as the Apostle Paul, or Paul the Apostle. Yet here Fr. Stephen is emphasizing Paul’s Jewishness.

In the book’s Introduction, Fr. Stephen addresses this question of terminology:

Throughout this book, I have deliberately eschewed certain language. This language is certainly acceptable and has become the usual language of the Church. However, familiar terminology can sometimes be misleading. By using the word Messiah instead of Christ, community instead of church, or Torah instead of law, I hope to unsettle commonly held notions and help the reader reassess Paul in his historical context, rather than project the experience of present-day Christians into the past.

 

This shift in terminology also extends to names, which is where I noticed the biggest difference in regards to the index.

In addition to “Paul the Pharisee,” Fr. Stephen also frequently refers to Paul by his former name, Saul of Tarsus. Jesus is referred to as “Jesus of Nazareth,” rather than Jesus Christ. A figure such as the Apostle John, also known as John the Evangelist, John the Theologian, or John the Divine, is here referred to as John, the son of Zebedee. None of these names are incorrect, but they are names that are less commonly used. They support the author’s focus on Paul and the early Church’s Jewish context and alerts readers that the author is taking a different approach.

From an indexing standpoint, do I follow Fr. Stephen’s lead? By using these names, I would provide continuity with the text and reinforce the point that Fr. Stephen is trying to make. But will readers still recognize these names in the index, outside of the context of the text? I am not helping anyone if I include names and terms that readers are unlikely to recognize.

In the end, I decided to lean into the author’s terminology. Christians form the primary audience for this book and, I assume, are familiar enough with with these Biblical figures, even if these are not the names typically used.

Paul I simply indexed as “Paul.” As the subject of the book, I decided a gloss was unnecessary. I also included a See cross-reference from Saul of Tarsus, for any readers looking under Saul and to keep all discussions of Saul/Paul in a single array.

I indexed Jesus as “Jesus of Nazareth,” with a subheading for “as Messiah,” to reflect how the author discusses Jesus. I indexed the other Biblical figures as is (“Peter,” “Silas,” “Timothy,’ etc…) except for when a gloss or tag was needed to disambiguate (for example, “James, brother of the Lord’ and “James, son of Zebedee”). This is again following the author’s approach and trusting that readers will recognize these names.

I did, however, include glosses for several of the provinces and cities discussed, such as “Achaia (province)” and “Perge (city),” especially the less well-known places (I didn’t include glosses for cities like Athens and Rome). This may not have been necessary, but I personally like knowing where things are and what things are, so as a reader I would have appreciated the differentiation.

As I wrote at the beginning, these names form a small proportion of the overall index. Was it really worth spending time considering how best to balance the author’s approach versus reader expectations? There are plenty of other discussions in the book, such as discussions about Paul’s missionary journeys, the history of the early Church, and theological issues that Paul addresses in his epistles, that I also wanted to get right.

And yet names matter and terminology matters. The index would have presented a different message if I had used more conventional names for these figures and the index would have appeared disjointed from the text. Writing a good index is often about paying attention to the details so that the entire index works together as a whole and in conjunction with both the text and readers. The trick is to see both the details and the whole. It can be easy to lose sight of the big picture.

For this book, while the author opted to shift the terminology to make a point, I decided that most readers would still be able to follow along in the index. I didn’t need to include much in the way of signposts and clarifications. But for other books, extensive use of cross-references and glosses may be necessary. While reflecting the text and the author’s intentions, the index also needs to be responsive to readers. Thankfully, we have tools to bridge that gap.

The first step, though, is paying attention to the language used by the author. The next step is considering the audience. Do the two match? From here you can select terms and write an index that is clear and recognizable to all.

Article
May 14, 2024
0 comment
by Stephen

Indexing Yellowstone’s Wolves

It is not too often that I have the privilege of indexing an entire series. It is also not every index in which structure plays such a prominent role. I mean, structure—deciding which entries and arrays to create, where to place them within the index, and how they relate to each other—is always important, but for some indexes structure can play a heightened role.

I recently indexed the fifth volume in the Alpha Wolves of Yellowstone series, written by Rick McIntyre and published by Greystone Books. Rick has been observing and studying the wolves at Yellowstone National Park for about 25 years. His books are an intimate portrayal of the lives of the wolves, beginning with the first generation that was reintroduced into Yellowstone and continuing up to the present day. Each book typically focuses on one or two key individuals, and from there explores the dynamics within packs, between packs, and the role that wolves play within the Yellowstone ecosystem. I indexed the first volume, The Rise of Wolf 8, in 2019, and the latest volume, Thinking Like a Wolf, will be released later this year.

I highly recommend the series if you are interested in wolves, Yellowstone, or animal conservation. My Grandpa even enjoyed the first couple of volumes, when he was still able to read. I remember visiting and discovering the books in his home. He was pleasantly surprised to learn that I had indexed them, though to be honest, I don’t know if Grandpa ever fully understood what it is I do.

Indexing Wolves

From an indexing standpoint, the books present an interesting puzzle. The focus is squarely on the lives of the wolves, though with a few dozen wolves discussed and mentioned in each book, it can be difficult to remember which is which. Most of the wolves are radio collared and assigned a number (wolf 8, wolf 480, wolf 996, etc…). While the numbers make it easier to differentiate, they can also be difficult to remember. There are also a few wolves without radio collars who are referred to by nicknames, such as Big Blaze, Medium Gray, and Slant.

Another challenge is that while the author does an excellent job of weaving a narrative, there are also a lot of elements in the lives of the wolves that are repetitive. The wolves grow up, they find mates, they raise pups, they hunt, and the next year, if they survive, they do it all over again. They also frequently interact with other packs and other animals, such as bison. Each book typically spans several years, following the lives of the featured wolves. How best to index all of that without making the index too repetitive?

Both of these challenges have to do with structuring the index, which proved to be the biggest challenge. The structure should be meaningful to the subject matter and easy to use. Though once I figured out my approach, I used the same approach across all volumes. For a series, it helps to have the same indexer throughout to maintain consistency, so that readers know what to expect in each subsequent volume. 

In this index profile, I am going to outline how I approached the structure, using examples from the third volume in the series, The Redemption of Wolf 302, which was published in 2021. 

Placing Wolves in Context

As I mentioned, it can be difficult to remember which wolf is which. It can also be difficult to remember which wolf is part of which pack. So, I decided to use the em-dash-modified format to place all of the wolves together within their respective packs.

The value of this approach is that it keeps each pack together. Readers only need to look in one place to see all of the details about that pack. The downside is that this can lead to large arrays. One of the largest in The Redemption of Wolf 302 is for the Slough Creek pack, with 36 subheadings under the main heading and 16 members listed using em dashes.

To give a shorter example, here is the main heading and 4 of the 11 wolves listed under the Agate Creek pack:

Agate Creek wolf pack: background, xxii; Blacktail pack formation and, 200, 201–2; breeding, 108, 160, 207–8; confrontation with Druid Peak pack, 20–22; confrontations with Slough Creek pack, 35, 96; grizzly encounter, 135; humans encounter, 136–37; injured pup, 158, 165; membership changes, 214; pup rearing, 136; size, 23, 206–7; Slough Creek pack’s territory and, 139; visits between related females from other packs, 218; wolf 302’s interest in females, 162

—Big Blaze (alpha male), 197, 201, 206, 208, 209, 214

—wolf 06: introduction, 85, 92, 141; Blacktail pack and, 200–201, 208–11; future of, 245; hunting abilities, 211; independent living, 214, 220; interest in wolf 302, 163; photographs, plate 7, plate 8; relationship with sister, 136; return to Agate pack, 207–8

—wolf 471. See under Lava Creek wolf pack

—wolf 472 (alpha female): avoidance of Slough Creek pack, 35; breeding, 108, 160, 207–8; confrontation with Druid Peak pack, 21; disturbance from humans, 137; pregnancies and pups, 85, 92–93, 135, 214; relationship with wolf 113, 106–7

Individuals vs. Packs

Using this structure, I also differentiate between discussions about the pack as a whole and discussions about the individual members within that pack. In the example above, the initial set of subheadings under the “Agate Creek wolf pack” main heading are about the pack as a whole. Those discussions generally involve multiple members of the pack or, in the case of the injured pup, an unnamed member. Those subheadings also provide an overview of the pack’s activities.

Specific discussions and mentions about each member are found under each specific wolf. There is some overlap between the pack-level subheadings and the specific members. For example, under the alpha female wolf 472, the subheadings for “breeding” and “confrontation with Druid Peak pack” are also under “Agate Creek wolf pack.” This reflects the fact that pack-level activities involve specific wolves, which are often mentioned, and so double-posting is necessary. Though I also try to honor this distinction between pack and individuals, and not everything needs to be double-posted. 

Directing Readers

With so many wolves, and with the wolves indexed under their respective packs, it is also important to clearly direct readers to where the wolves can be found. I’ve done this in two ways.

One, all of the wolves are listed (not double-posted) as a main entry with a cross-reference to their respective pack. With 45 numbered wolves in this volume, this makes for a very long list of cross-references in the W section of the index. While it looks awkward, I think it is the clearest way to direct readers. For example,

Big Blaze. See under Agate Creek wolf pack

wolf 21. See under Druid Peak wolf pack

wolf 629. See under Slough Creek wolf pack

Two, some of the wolves leave their birth packs and either join a different pack or help establish a new pack. Some wolves move multiple times. For these wolves, I also include cross-references from their former packs to their new pack. For example,

Agate Creek wolf pack

—wolf 590. See under Slough Creek wolf pack

—wolf 642. See under Blacktail wolf pack

I chose not to double-post the wolves because I think the wolves make the most sense within the contexts of their packs. I want readers to be able to see the full picture. With so many wolves, I think it also helps readers if the wolves are handled consistently, so readers come to expect that the wolves will always be in a certain place. Also, with such a long list of wolves in the W section, I think that list is easier to scan if they are all cross-references, instead of cross-references mixed with page numbers.

Labeling the Alphas

To further differentiate the wolves, especially the leaders, I also decided to use glosses to label the alpha males and females. These wolves tend to be discussed more, and I thought a gloss would help readers identify them more easily. For example, under the Blacktail pack:

Blacktail wolf pack

—Big Brown (alpha male): as beta male, 207; Blacktail pack formation and, 206, 215; breeding, 203, 208, 209; mention, 218; name, 201; as new alpha male, 241; pup rearing, 228

—wolf 693 (alpha female): introduction, 92; aggression against sister, 136, 200, 211; Blacktail pack formation and, 201, 215; breeding, 203, 207, 208–9, 212; denning, 218; photograph, plate 8; pup rearing, 219, 222, 224, 225, 227; in Quadrant pack’s territory, 235, 236, 238, 241; relationship with wolf 302, 214, 237; unpopularity, 216

Indexing Repetitive Elements

As I also mentioned, one of the challenges of indexing these books is that wolves tend to do the same sorts of things throughout their lives. If all goes well, the wolves will breed and raise a new litter of pups every year. The wolves also hunt, encounter other animals, and interact, sometimes aggressively, with other packs.

I decided that it did not make sense to organize the arrays chronologically, as in a new subheading for each litter of pups. That would greatly lengthen the index and make it more difficult to read. Instead, I decided to gather like happenings together, regardless of year or the number of times it happened. For example, under Agate Creek’s wolf 472, above, I include all references to her pregnancies and pups into one subheading. 

I also use similar wording for subheadings throughout the arrays. As seen for the Agate Creek pack, above, I have subheadings for “confrontation with Druid Peak pack” and “confrontation with Slough Creek pack,” as well as “grizzly encounter” and “humans encounter.” This helps to signal to readers that something similar is happening in each subheading, and it helps to keep double-posts, such as under the Druid Peak and Slough Creek packs, consistent throughout the index. 

To give another example, elk are among wolves’ preferred prey, with the book describing multiple hunts. In the array for elk, I differentiate the hunts by pack and by wolves, which are also double-posted under those packs and wolves.

elk: breeding season and, 65; calves, 222; conflict between packs over, 22, 98, 202; hunting by Druid Peak pack, 38, 88, 112, 141, 142, 143–44, 149, 151, 163–64, 176–77, 179–80, 185–86, 222, plate 4; hunting by Slough Creek pack, 16–17, 45, 53, 57, 120–21, 127–28, 165, 176–77, 191, 195; hunting by wolf 06, 211; hunting success rate, 185; injuries from, 180–84; near den sites, 41, 187–88; scabies, 149–50; shortage of, 217; wolf 302’s fear of carcasses, 112–13

 

When structuring an index, every entry has its place. 

This is especially true for the books in the Alpha Wolves of Yellowstone series. Containing a lot of wolves, and a lot of details about wolves being wolves, the index entries needed to be structured in a way that made sense for the subject matter and was easy for readers to navigate. 

I hope I have accomplished that with my approach. While every index has a structure, I needed to think more deeply and be more creative in my approach for this series. I also hope that these examples give you some ideas for what is possible and for how to approach a book with unusual needs.

Article
August 2, 2023
0 comment
by Stephen

Index Profile: Placing (Hiding?) Sensitive Entries

Where do you put potentially embarrassing or upsetting information in an index? The information is true. It is discussed. It qualifies as indexable. But where and how should it appear?

I faced this question when I received feedback last year from Adele Weder, the author of the biography Ron Thom, Architect: The Life of a Creative Modernist (Greystone Books, 2022), about the Canadian modernist architect, Ron Thom. My original array for Thom, for which I used the em-dash-modified format (which I like to use for biographies), looked like this (for space and the sake of this example, I am only including the first three subheadings for each section):

Thom, Ron (Ronald James): Adelaide Street apartment, 255–56; alcoholism, 34, 212–13, 214, 239–40, 255, 257, 259–60, 272–73, 275; art and, 17, 288n20;…

—ARCHITECTURE CAREER: apprenticeship, 46–47; on architects, 208–9; on art and architecture, 38, 133, 200, 211–12, 243–44;…

—ARCHITECTURE PROJECTS: Atria North, 246–47; Banff Centre’s Thom Studio, 254, 254; B.C. Electric Building, 87–88, 90–92;…

—ARTWORK: At the Fair Grounds, 37, 38; Seated Figure, 41–42, 42, 290n2

—FAMILY AND RELATIONSHIPS: children, 54, 57, 101, 102, 172, 234, 237–38; courting Chris, 26; divorce from Chris, 113–14, 295n6;…

Do you see the problem?

Alcoholism is the second subheading. While acknowledging that alcoholism was a significant problem in Thom’s life, the author was concerned that having the subheading so early in the array overshadowed Thom’s architectural accomplishments.

Which I think is a fair point.

When I use the em-dash-modified format, I usually treat the first section as a catch-all for the subheadings that don’t fit anywhere else. These are often subheadings for childhood, death, miscellaneous jobs, hobbies, personal quirks, and, in this case, alcoholism. I think I did notice that alcoholism fell at the front, which struck me as unfortunate while also part of the vagaries of the alphabetical sort. So, I didn’t put too much more thought into it. 

The author was not so quick to let the index—and me—off the hook. I am glad she pushed back. After some back-and-forth discussion, I revised the array:

Thom, Ron (Ronald James)

—ARCHITECTURE CAREER: apprenticeship, 46–47; on architects, 208–9; on art and architecture, 38, 133, 200, 211–12, 243–44;…

—ARCHITECTURE PROJECTS: Atria North, 246–47; Banff Centre’s Thom Studio, 254, 254; B.C. Electric Building, 87–88, 90–92;…

—ARTWORK: At the Fair Grounds, 37, 38; Seated Figure, 41–42, 42, 290n2

—FAMILY AND RELATIONSHIPS: children, 54, 57, 101, 102, 172, 234, 237–38; courting Chris, 26; divorce from Chris, 113–14, 295n6;…

—PERSONAL LIFE AND VIEWS: Adelaide Street apartment, 255–56; alcoholism, 34, 212–13, 214, 239–40, 255, 257, 259–60, 272–73, 275; art and, 17, 288n20;…

That catch-all section is now labelled “personal life and views,” which sorts it to the very end of the array. The alcoholism subheading is still present, but it is no longer the first thing that readers see. Instead, Thom’s architecture career and projects play the starring role.

I took away three lessons from this experience.

One, it is a good reminder that alphabetical sorting isn’t everything and it is possible to manipulate where entries appear. The goal should be to make entries visible, of course, rather than burying entries. But depending on the material and the needs of the audience, it is possible to move entries around and to highlight or deflect attention as needed.

Two, sensitive information should be handled sensitively. I am not a fan of using the index to ignore or whitewash uncomfortable or difficult information. If there is a significant discussion in the text, then it should also be in the index. But I am open to considering how and where it appears in the index. In Thom’s case, what is the focus of the book? What are the elements of his life which should be celebrated? What are readers looking for, and what should readers be presented with first? The array can be structured accordingly. 

The last lesson is that feedback from authors can be invaluable. I don’t always agree with the feedback, and I may explain my approach if I think the index is misunderstood. But there are also times when I have made a mistake, or I didn’t consider other options, or fully think through the implications. I want to be someone who takes feedback seriously. Even if I disagree with the author’s solution, there may still be something there that I need to reconsider. For this Thom array, I am thankful that Adele Weder, the author, explained her concern and pushed me to look further for a better solution. I think the array and the index are better for it.

Article
May 24, 2023
0 comment
by Stephen

Index Profile: Tracing Complicated Relationships in Main Headings, in The Other Great Game

What can main headings be composed of?

Main headings, which kick off an entry or array, usually describe a single person or thing. It could be a name, or a government agency, or a physical object, or a concept. It is concrete and identifiable. Which is what we want in a main heading. Readers need to be able to clearly identify what it is they are searching for.

But sometimes the thing that we are trying to describe is complicated, and it is okay for the main heading to expand and help carry the weight of the text.

I ended up taking this approach for the index for The Other Great Game: The Opening of Korea and the Modern East Asia, by Sheila Miyoshi Jager (The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2023). This is a delightful history, squarely within one of my favorite areas to index—East Asian studies—while also quite challenging in its scope and length, at about 570 indexable pages.

This book is about the colonial jockeying for power and control over Korea, with Korea ultimately becoming a protectorate of Japan. One of the challenging aspects was all of the intertwined relationships. Korea is a key player, of course. Japan is also involved, and wanting to be taken seriously as a great power. Russia also has its interests and influence. China is a waning influence, though still trying to exert itself. Though less involved, the other Western powers—US, Britain, Germany, France—all played a role as well.  Much of the book covers the diplomatic back-and-forth as all these powers try to figure out what to do with Korea (instead of respecting Korea’s independence). From an indexing standpoint, what is the best way to index all of these relationships?

Most of these relationships, say between Korea and Japan, or Japan and Russia, are too large to be contained within a subheading or two. These are relationships that span decades, and include wars, lengthy negotiations, and shifts in the balance of power. With so much material to cover, double-posting these relationships under each respective country would have led to enormous, unwieldy arrays.

The solution I landed on was to make the relationship itself the main heading. So, “Korean-Chinese relations,” “Korean-Japanese relations,” “Japanese-Russian relations,” etc… I still had arrays for each country, for subheadings specific to that country, but the bulk of the entries fell under these various arrays for these relationships. This meant that under Korea or Japan, for example, there are several arrays, which break down the discussions into manageable, yet still clearly defined, portions.

This also raised the question of which country to prioritize in the main heading. Should it be “Japanese-Russian relations” or “Russian-Japanese relations”? Because Korea and Japan were the two biggest actors, I decided to let them take the lead, so to speak,, with the Western countries generally being listed second.

These main headings also required a lot of cross-references from the other countries. As I mentioned, double-posting wasn’t a viable option due to the sheer number of entries. Better to pick a single array to place entries under, and then use cross-references to point readers in the right direction. For example, “Russian-Korean relations. See Korean-Russian relations.”

If you are interested in seeing all this in action, you can view the index here, on Amazon, using the Look Inside feature.

The number one goal for main headings is that they be clear. A confused reader is less likely to find what they are looking for. But while keeping clarity in mind, you can also play with main headings to better match the discussions in the book. Some subjects and relationships are more complicated, and a longer, multi-part main heading may be the clearest and best option.

Article
April 26, 2023
0 comment
by Stephen

Index Profile: Untangling Terms in Rediscovering the Goodness of Creation

Ever struggle to find the right term to use in the index? I do. From an indexing standpoint, ideally the vocabulary used in the book is clear and consistent, making it easy to extract terms and phrases to use as main headings and subheadings. Bu not all books are so clearcut. Some books require more thought and even, dare I say, improvisation when selecting terms. 

I don’t mean to suggest that such books are poorly written, though that may sometimes be the case. English is blessed with a multitude of expressions and synonyms, and an author may choose to use terms interchangeably. What works in the text, though, may not work in the index. The vocabulary used in the index should be controlled, with discussions gathered in a single location or with cross-references between similar discussions. When there are multiple terms to choose from, you need to make a decision about which terms to gather under

I faced this challenge a few months ago when indexing Rediscovering the Goodness of Creation: A Manual for Recovering Gnostics, by Robin Phillips (Ancient Faith Publishing, 2023). While beautifully and thoughtfully written, making full use of the language available, I did have several moments, while indexing, when I thought to myself, “Is the author writing about this, or that? Or both?”

First, what the book is about, which is the starting point for determining appropriate terms. Here is the synopsis I wrote for myself after I finished the rough draft of the index. I find that writing a brief summary can clarify the metatopic and the main points of the book, and focus my attention on the most important elements which need to be in the index.

This book is about rediscovering a Christian appreciation for creation/the world/our bodies/culture—how the redemption of all of these is part of God’s plan and work. An emphasis on the implicit Gnosticism in much of modern Christianity, manifested in a matter-spirit dualism, in which the physical is denigrated or ignored. Also frames creation as “already” and “not yet”—the tension between what God has done, and what is to be completed in the eschaton. 

Right from the start, I have a series of related terms that I am struggling to differentiate. I know that these terms are distinct, but how, exactly? What does “creation” encompass? Is “creation” different from the “world” and/or “earth”? Are “world” and “earth” distinct from each other? “Bodies” also seems distinct, though are they also part of “creation” or the “world”? And what about “culture”? An easy solution would be to have a massive main heading for “creation/world/bodies/culture,” but I don’t think that would be helpful for readers. It is better to have separate arrays for each of these concepts. The question then becomes, how to differentiate the discussions, and which references go under which?

Reading the book more closely, I realized that creation is the metatopic—the overarching concept tying the whole book together. The world, bodies, and culture are all different aspects of creation. So, I created an array for creation with a number of subheadings that speak to creation at a higher, more general level, with cross-references to specific elements of creation and related concepts that are discussed in more detail. (And, looking at this now, I realize I should have included a cross-reference to the “body, physical” array.)

creation: introduction, 7–10, 49–50; Augustine on goodness of, 231–34; coherence with heaven, 325–27, 327n7, 333n28, 334; continuity between present age and age to come, 173–76; Gnosticism on, 69; God working through means, 269–72; goodness of, 59–60, 220; participation of in God, 247–49, 247n5; redemption of, 60; sacramentalism and, 299–300; vs. sacred-secular dualism, 304–5; teleology and, 152; use in worship, 281–86. See also arts; beauty; coherence; culture; dominion (cultural) mandate; earth; Genesis Creation narrative; matter-spirit dualism; new creation theology

In addition to figuring out how creation is related to the other concepts, the book also seemed to use several terms interchangeably. The question I needed to answer was, are these terms synonymous (or close enough that they can be indexed together) or are these distinct concepts that need to be indexed separately? For example, is it the world or the earth? Eden or Paradise? The Church or the Kingdom of God? The dominion mandate or the cultural mandate? 

I eventually decided that it made the most sense to index these pairings together, and so created the following main headings: “earth (world),” “Eden (Paradise),” “Church (God’s Kingdom),” and “dominion (cultural) mandate.” I included the alternative term in a gloss so that readers understand that these are the same thing, more or less, and that either may be found on the page. I also included cross-references from the alternative terms. I also tried to be alert to other synonyms and create appropriate cross-references. For example, from “natural world” to “earth.” The alternative—having separate or duplicate main entries for earth and world, for example—seemed unnecessarily complex, and at times impossible to decide which subheading belonged under which term. 

A similar issue was how to index the various dualisms discussed in the book. The main one, mentioned in the synopsis, is the matter-spirit dualism, thought the book also discusses the grace-nature dualism and the sacred-secular dualism. The clue is the term “dualism,” which indicates that each of these is a single concept and should not be split into separate entries, such as for matter and spirit. I did, however, include cross-references, such as “spirit. See matter-spirit dualism,” for readers who might search otherwise. 

Term selection can be tricky. When writing a book, it makes sense to use the full range of language available, to create engaging prose, to dialogue with other literature and discussions, and to reflect nuance. The index, on the other hand, is a deconstruction of the text. Discussions need to be gathered and sorted into distinct arrays and organized in a way that facilitates search. When indexing some books, such as Rediscovering the Goodness of Creation, this means taking all of the terms available, understanding how the terms relate to each other, and then choosing to prioritize certain terms over others (while still including cross-references from the other terms), as it is not practical for all terms to have full arrays.

The goal, as always, is a clearly written index that points readers to the information that they want to find.