Article
0 comment

Business Changes Ahead

Last week in my recap of the Indexing Society of Canada/Société canadienne d’indexation conference I alluded to business change, which is a difficult subject to write about. Change is inherently disruptive, as it usually involves some kind of ending as well as a new beginning. Change also affects the web of relationships with colleagues and clients that I exist in. It is also often personal, especially in a single-person freelancing business, as I am the one making the change.

At the same time, I think that change is natural and even necessary in a business. I change as a person, in my interests, goals, experience, and circumstances. The publishing industry around me is also always changing. I believe that a successful business requires a certain amount of mindfulness and self-reflection in order to know when to change and when to hold the course. It may be that not changing is the right decision—I certainly do not believe in change for the sake of change—but that decision to not change should still be a conscious choice. 

I mention all this because I am feeling myself to be at a point of change. Really, to be honest, I feel like this whole year so far, and part of last year, has been a gradual reorientation in what I want to do for work.

 Being a freelance indexer, for me, has never really been about indexing. The original purpose was to create a more flexible schedule and an income to support my writing. Ironically, in doing the hard work to establish a freelance business, and then keeping up with the increasing requests for my services, I really have not done much writing. I have not put the time into writing, like I have for indexing, to become a published author, which is still a goal of mine. I have been feeling this discrepancy more acutely in the last couple of years, which is leading me to wonder: Can I change my business to incorporate more writing? Should I change and trade (some) steady income for a risky venture? What if I completely fail at being an author?

These are not easy questions to answer. The ideal scenario, at least as I envision it now, is to write part-time and index part-time. But cutting my indexing work in half overnight is not practical or sustainable. 

This year I have made a renewed effort to blog every week, and have also started to write a weekly reflection on indexing. Even committing to this has felt at times like a struggle, in relation to my indexing work, but I think it is also proving helpful for establishing a regular writing habit, and to orienting my focus more towards writing.

For fiction, I am trying to commit to one half-day a week, which is really a struggle, akin to drawing my own blood sometimes, in the face of looming indexing deadlines. But I do enjoy those mornings when I show up to write, and I feel like progress is being made, even if just in very small increments. My goal is to eventually work on fiction two mornings a week, and perhaps work up from there. 

I am writing this because I want to let you know of this change that I am trying to make. You will probably see more posts about writing, mixed in with the posts about indexing and freelancing. Eventually–hopefully–even some stories and news about publications.

I will still index, of course, though instead of using the lessons learned at the ISC/SCI conference to expand my indexing business as far as it can go, I am hoping to create more time to write—to index the same amount, or maybe a little less, in less time, essentially. I am excited to see what results from these changes, and I am also a bit scared. It will also mean a lot of work, starting with trusting myself that this is the right decision to make at this time. Thank you for following along. I do appreciate it.

Article
0 comment

ISC/SCI Ottawa 2019 Indexing Conference Recap

I am home from the Indexing Society of Canada/Société canadienne d’indexation’s conference in Ottawa, back to working on an index that is due ASAP while also trying to recover from a few packed days at the conference and a late flight home Sunday night. I do enjoy the conferences—one of the best ways to gain a sense of community, in my opinion—and the conferences are exhausting, for this rather shy person. More so this year, perhaps, due to a busy couple of weeks in the lead up. For the first time ever, I skipped out on a session for some alone time. 

Still, I thought I’d jot down a few highlights while the conference is still fresh in my mind.

  • One of my key takeaways was to better learn how to vet books (to use Enid Zafran’s term) prior to indexing, and to get a much better handle on the index structure at the beginning of the indexing process, as per Fred Leise’s excellent presentation. This feels like a natural next step in improving how I index.
  • I also have much food for thought on how to run my business from Pierre Joyal’s presentation on incorporation, as well as from conversations with another more experienced indexer. I feel like I have to be very careful in how I grow my business, as I don’t want to focus on growth to the exclusion of writing. If anything, I want to index less so that I can write more. At the same time, I expect that I will index for many years to come, so I do need to pay attention to the business side of things. I think what I need is a business that grows in such a way to support the work and life that I want, rather than growth at any cost. 
  • I am very thankful to have attended Enid Zafran’s all-day workshop on indexing names, especially as Enid announced that she is slowing down and that this might be her last workshop. She is a masterful teacher and indexer, and I definitely learned a few things about names that I did not know before. 
  • Kate Mertes is also an excellent presenter, and her talk on index locorums was illuminating. That said, outside of Biblical citations, I don’t feel at all qualified to take on an index locorum. Kate definitely has a unique set of skills.
  • This conference felt like the beginnings of a generational turnover. There are a number of indexers in both the Canadian and American societies who have decades of experience, and who have done so much to teach and mentor. It seems like more of them are starting to either slow down or retire. I am glad that they are still with us, but this conference did seem to be a reminder that a new generation will need to step up in the next few years. 
  • I am no longer a coordinator for the Mary Newberry Mentorship Program. That responsibility is now passed on to Linda Christian and Alexandrea Jory. I think they will do an excellent job, and after two years of putting the program together, I am ready to pass it on. Still, letting go is bittersweet. 
  • For a door prize I picked up a hard copy of the manual for the new Cindex 4.0. I guess this means I better upgrade. 
  • The biggest surprise of the conference was being given the Tamarack Award, which is for volunteer service “above and beyond the call of duty.” In my case, so I was told, largely for putting together the mentorship program. I was also told that my face turned several shades of red while receiving the award. Many thanks to all present for your kind words and acknowledgement. If you are interested in knowing what the award looks like, here it is perched on one of the bookshelves in my living room.
Article
0 comment

Index Live-Tweet Debrief

As you may have noticed, two weeks ago, on May 6, I started live-tweeting my indexing process, as I indexed the trade book Almost Human: The Story of Julius, the Chimpanzee Caught between Two Worlds. Those tweets are now compiled, with some additional commentary, which you can find here. I also want to take a moment to reflect on the experience.

First of all, I am glad that I did it. I have had the idea for at least a few months, wondering what live-tweeting an index would be like. Now I know, and it feels good to put the idea in action and see it to its conclusion. 

I am also very thankful for everyone who took the time to follow along, and to comment, ask questions, retweet, and like specific tweets. It was encouraging to know that I was not tweeting into a void. The indexing community on Twitter is supportive and positive, so I am glad to have you all with me. I hope the experience was interesting for you as well. 

As for my goal of raising the profile of indexing, even if just in a small way, and of reaching authors, editors, and publishers—I don’t really know how that went. As I learned, Twitter provides limited data. I was able to see how many impressions each tweet received, and of total impressions over the course of a day, but an impression simply means, if I understand it correctly, that someone saw the tweet. It could have been someone scrolling through their Twitter feed without really reading the tweet, or it could have been someone who was actually interested and following along. So while the live-tweets apparently got several thousand impressions over the course of the week, I don’t know how engaged those impressions where. Also, unless someone took the time to comment, retweet, or like, I don’t know who those impressions are from. So, maybe I met my goal? I don’t really know. All I can really go on is the feedback I receive from people who noticed and took the time to say something.

As for the indexing itself, I would make a couple of changes if I did this again. I found that I had less to tweet about as the index progressed, so I would put more effort into pre-planning some topics and making sure tweets were spaced out. I would leave room for spontaneous tweets as well, of course, but I think having a rough plan or outline ahead of time would have been helpful. I would also try to ensure that I was only working on that one project, so that I could finish the index in 3-4 days. I think having the indexing spread over seven days, due to a second project I also needed to finished, resulted in some live-tweeting fatigue. It is too bad how the scheduling worked, though that is also an insight into how I work, with overlapping projects when deadlines demand. 

I am not sure if I will do this again. As I mentioned above, I think it is a fun idea, but it is hard to tell how effective it is for reaching people. To switch things up, I wonder how it would be to live-tweet with someone else, so that there is more of a conversation throughout. That might be interesting to try. At the very least, I am glad that I tried something new and pushed myself out of my comfort zone. And thank you again to everyone who followed along.

If you are interested in reading the book, Almost Human, by Alfred Fidjestøl, it is forthcoming later this year by Greystone Books. You can learn more about it here. Many thanks again to Greystone for giving their permission for this live-tweet. They are a fantastic publisher and a pleasure to work with. 

Article
0 comment

Internal Consistency in Indexes

Consistency is key in the quest to provide a smooth user experience. How the index works should be largely invisible to the reader. What we do not want is the reader to find errors or inconsistencies which cause them to question whether their interpretation of the index is correct or whether they are finding everything that should be available. 

In this post, I am going to write about internal consistency, which is making sure that the index is internally consistent with itself. Imposing consistency begins at the start of the indexing process, with selecting which formatting conventions to use and making initial decisions about what kinds of entries to capture. It then continues to be applied during the editing phase, when decisions are reaffirmed and double checked. 

Wording

Consistent wording is a subtle way to add consistency. This is part of gently shaping the reader’s expectations around preferred terms and how to recognize similar information.

If two or more synonymous terms are available, pick one as a preferred term and use it consistently, with a cross-reference if necessary. For a recent book I indexed on the annual encampments of the American Canoe Association, I choose to consistently use the word “meet” for each individual encampment, as in Jessup’s Neck meet and Grindstone Island meets. I could have chosen the terms “camp” or “encampment” instead, which were also used in the text, but I thought meet gave a better sense of community (an important theme in the book), it was short, and by using the same term I hoped to indicate to readers that these dozen or more entries throughout the index were all the same kind of thing. If I had also used the term camp, as in Jessup’s Neck camp, I was concerned that some readers might have questioned how a camp was different from a meet. 

Consistent wording can also be used in subheadings to indicate similar content. Using the same subheading across several entries, as such “accommodation” in a guidebook, indicates to the reader that the same kind of information is provided for all of the locations discussed. Within a single entry, similar wording can gather subheadings so that the reader can easily see all of the related information. For example,

Los Angeles: population growth; population projection

Glosses

A variation on consistent wording is being consistent with glosses. An index can have glosses for different types of entries. Within each type, though, try to provide the same information in the same order. Otherwise, I think inconsistency is visually disruptive and can cause the reader to spend too much time rereading entries to make sure it says what they think it says. For example, the following is not a good idea. Pick a style and stick to it.

Henry VIII (king of England)

James II of England

Louis VI (French king)

Louis XIV (king of France)

Victoria, Queen

Locators

Another basic place to impose consistency is with locators. Are ranges consistently identical, if used at all? Are typographical elements, such as bold or italics, used consistently to indicate figures, tables, or other illustrations?

Treatment of Topics

The last area I will discuss is the treatment of main headings and topics. Consistency here can happen in a couple of different ways. The first is to make sure that all examples of a certain type of information is picked up. To give a simple example, if I decide to index dog breeds, then I should make sure to pick up all breeds mentioned, so that the reader is not wondering, “I see the entry for Dalmatians, but what about Labradors? I am certain I saw Labradors mentioned in the book.”

Another way to be consistent is to treat similar topics similarly. If I decide that some supermain headings should have subheadings to indicate their importance and to break down a longer range, then ideally all supermain headings should have subheadings, even if some ranges are shorter. This is not always possible, if a topic is important but only discussed on 2-3 pages. But I think that consistent treatment is important, when possible, to help the reader identify similar topics and relative importance. 

These are the main areas for internal consistency that I think about when indexing. This can appear to be nit-picky, but I do think that it is the small details that can elevate an index and make for an easier user experience, without the user necessarily knowing why it is a nicer experience. When you index, what areas of internal consistency do you pay attention to? Feel free to reply and let me know. I am curious to know what other areas we should pay attention to.

Article
0 comment

Index Entries, Reconsidered

First, a definition. An entry, sometimes also called an entry array, is a single unit comprised of the main heading and everything that goes with it, which can include subheadings, locators, and cross-references. It is complete unto itself.

Yet though complete unto itself, a single entry is not an index. An index, rather, is formed by multiple entries—often hundreds or even thousands of entries—placed together. It is this unity out of many that allows an index to point readers towards so many different pieces of information in the text.

To succeed in its function, an entry needs to be clearly written. The user of the index should understand exactly what they can expect to find if they go to where the entry points. Subheadings and cross-references are tools that can be used to achieve this clarity. 

The entry also needs to contain the sum total of everything the reader needs to know about that specific subject. There is no ideal length for an entry, so long as the entry contains everything it needs. Each entry will be unique. 

Having said that, since an index consists of entries in aggregate, there should be consistency in how entries are written and formatted. Subheadings should be written in a similar style and used for similar reasons, for example. Exceptions can exist, so that each entry can be the best that it can be, but overall there should be a sense of unity to the index, which stems from the entries working together.

It is also important to recognize that not all entries are equal. Metatopic and supermain heading entries, for example, will likely be expansive, reflecting the role of those topics in the text. Regular main headings and other lesser details will likely have simpler entries. If index length is an issue, some entries may have to be prioritized over others, by way of elimination or brevity.

An entry is quite elemental and basic to the index; it hardly seems worth talking about. Yet it is also the building block out of which the index is constructed. It is possible to write a poorly written entry, which obscures and confuses rather than illumines, which in turn will lead to a mediocre index. So I think it is worth asking, what makes a good entry? Get the basics right, and the rest of the index will follow.

Article
0 comment

Mastery Before Speed

Photo by CHU TAI on Unsplash

I have been reminding myself recently to not get frustrated over my slow progress writing fiction. 

It has been a dream of mine since I was a kid to be a writer. In grade four I managed to turn a two-page story assignment into an epic that was at least ten pages long. I am not sure now if it was ever finished, as I remember hiding on the top floor of our house the morning it was due in a frantic last-minute attempt to finish.

Yet I have to remind myself that I still have a lot to learn about how to tell a good story, and that I do have a day job, after all. I am not going to publish a book overnight. 

And yet, I get frustrated.

If I can lean into the frustration, though, it is a good opportunity to focus on mastery. 

The need for mastery was first drilled into me my first summer tree planting. Tree planters are paid by the tree, and since prices averaged ten or eleven cents, it was in our best interest to plant fast. Yet speed without proper technique (by which my foreman meant planting a tree in a single fluid motion before striding three steps to plant the next tree) and the ability to read the ground (to find the best spot to plant the tree in) isn’t really speed. Sure, you’d be faster than someone who was slow and had poor technique, but the best combination was technique first and then speed. 

I see this too with indexing, both in my own career and in some of the new indexers I talk to. Since freelancing is (usually) for employment and income—and for some people, they do not have a backup source of income—speed is often seen as key to success. But attempting to go fast without mastering the basics is usually going to lead to greater stress and more time wasted trying to fix errors made in haste. I do believe that newer indexers are capable to writing great indexes—it is just going to take a little longer, most likely, and that is okay. Taking the time is part of making a new skill second nature. 

Bringing this back to writing, part of my frustration is that I can see that I have a much higher mastery of indexing relative to writing fiction. This makes sense, because I have spent most of the last nine years focused on indexing. I realize that I need to put the same time and focus into writing as well. And yet I wish I could just transfer mastery from one domain to another and bypass the work. Especially as making time for writing is, well, another issue. 

Still, mastery before speed.

I have to keep reminding myself of this order. I can see how it got me through tree planting and then indexing. Now, I need to put in my time with writing, to accept this time of learning the craft and becoming grounded in the basics. Speed will come soon enough. 

Article
0 comment

Choosing Appropriate Depth for an Index

Early in my indexing career I indexed a gardening book. In trying to follow the principle of specificity, I decided to create an entry for each tool which was discussed within a brief section on gardening tools. In her review, the client, who was also the managing editor for the book, commented that a single entry for gardening tools would have been sufficient. I can’t remember now, but she might have changed the index to reflect her point of view.

Regardless of who was right (I am willing to believe she was), this feedback alerted me to the issue of depth in an index. By depth I mean that there can be different layers in an index, which often reflects the types of information in the book, and which exists in a continuum from general or broad information to more and more detailed. The question is, which layers should be included in the index and which can be left out. 

Conceptualizing Depth

Let’s look at a couple of examples of how depth can manifest. 

The first, as mentioned, is to consider the different types of information in the text. For example, a book on transportation might have the following layers:

  • transportation (metatopic)
  • motor regulations (main topic)
  • taxies (subtopic)
  • Yellow Cab Company (example)
  • Jean the Taxi Driver (example/passing mention)

Each of these provides a different point of view and point of entry to the subject. An index should probably have entries for most, if not all, of these levels. 

Depth can also be shown through the use of subheadings and cross-references. In the following example, the subheading and cross-reference reveal a set of relationships, at least one of which is clearly hierarchical. 

  • motor regulations: taxies. See also Yellow Cab Company

Finding the Sweet Spot

The opposite of depth is a flat index, which I think is rarely helpful for the reader. By flat, I mean an index with no or very few subheadings, which means relationships are not indicated. Most terms also seem to come from the same level, likely on the upper, conceptual end, and subtopics and examples may not be present. While such an index gives a broad sense of the book, it does not facilitate more precise searching and much of the text remains opaque or hidden.

Yet, it may not be appropriate to include every level in the index. For the gardening index I wrote, the client clearly thought that having individual entries for each tool was a step too deep. It was enough to have a single, more general entry for tools. Going deep in this instance likely bloated the index. 

We can also question if the uppermost level—the metatopic—should be included in the index, or at least whether the metatopic entry should be prominent. The metatopic entry can often serve as a signpost to direct readers through the index, and while this can be helpful in many books it is not true for all. To use gardening again as an example, many gardening books clearly state the metatopic on the front cover and the reader likely has a clear idea of what they want to find. Signposting from the metatopic, while possible, is probably not necessary, and so that top level can be eliminated or reduced. 

In a way, depth in an index is about finding the sweet spot between too general and too detailed. It is about finding the right amount of detail with which to communicate to the reader. 

Tips for Choosing Appropriate Depth

So, how do we decide which layers to include?

One way is to consider the audience. I think most scholarly indexes should be deep, reflecting the level of thought that scholars put into their work. Readers of trade books, on the other hand, may not want to spend as much time searching in the index. For them, more general entries may be sufficient, leaving the reader to discover the finer details on their own.

We can also consider how the item is discussed in the text, as well as how the audience might perceive the information. If we can understand how that piece relates to its context, it can be easier to see its relative importance.

A last consideration is space. If there is a page or line limit for the index, then a decision will have to made about which entries to keep and which to cut. In this situation, I usually skew towards a shallower index, cutting out more specific detail so that at least the reader can get a broad overview of the book from the index.

In the end, decisions about depth will probably involve all three of these aspects. Trade-offs may have to be made, and clients or other indexers may have different opinion about what is appropriate. But I think these decisions will be easier if we can see and understand depth in an index, including how we can manipulate depth and how depth affects the index and the readers’ experience.

Article
0 comment

Five Steps to Writing an Excellent Index

Photo by Jo Szczepanska on Unsplash

Happy National Indexing Day! 

This is a celebration started in the UK by the Society of Indexers and is starting to spread around the world. From across the pond in Canada, I thought I would join in the fun too. 

The question I get the most from non-indexers is, how is the index written? Though people are often enthusiastic about using indexes, the actual writing process remains mysterious. You don’t have to read the whole book, do you? That sounds like work. 

Well, yes, the whole book needs to be read, and today, in honour of indexes everywhere, I would like to share the five steps to writing an excellent index.

Step 1: Lay the Ground Rules

Indexes are governed by conventions. You might be able to tell that from the alphabetical ordering of entries and by how neatly indexes are arranged in columns. The twist is that there are different conventions to choose from. Since changing conventions mid-process can cause all sorts of pain and anguish—chiefly from the tedium of having to go back and change what was previously done—it is best to decide from the start which conventions you want to use. So,

  • Run-in format or indented format?
  • Letter-by-letter alphabetical sorting or word-by-word sorting?
  • Should page ranges be abbreviated, and if so, how?
  • Should figures, tables, and other illustrations be indicated in some way, and if so, how?
  • How will cross-references be formatted?

These are the main conventions that you should establish from the start. It often does not matter which you choose so long as you are consistent. 

Step 2: Read the Book

This step may seem obvious, but then again, many people seem to assume that indexing can be automated by a computer. Yes, you do need to read the book, every single word, from cover to cover. So far humans are better than computers at pulling out implicit arguments and references, at discerning relevance, and at understanding how the index should be written to meet the needs of different audiences. An index should be more than a list of keywords.

Step 3: Create the Index Entries

The next step, once the text is read, is to create the actual entries that will be in the index. There is no right or wrong way to do this, so long as terms are selected and written down with page numbers (or other locators) to direct readers to the information. 

I usually create entries as I read the text, so I will read a paragraph or a page, write down the entries that I see, and then move on. This approach does take practice, however, and it helps to already have a sense for what the final index should look like. If you are new to indexing, I suggest a second approach, which is what I used in the first few years of my career.

In this second approach, mark up the text as you read but don’t worry about making the entries, yet. You can do this on hard copy or on a PDF. The goal is to highlight, underline, circle, scribble in the margins, and otherwise identify potential entries. Once you have marked up a significant chunk of text, which could be a chapter or the whole book, then go back, review the entries you have identified, and write down the entries in the index that you still agree with. This method works because by marking up the text first, you can more easily see the context that your entries exist in, which can provide clues for what is important and for how to structure the index, such as determining which terms should have subheadings.

Step 4: Edit the Index

Once you have completed the hard work of reading the book and creating the index entries, the index needs to be edited. You may realize in hindsight that some entries are missing or should be fleshed out. Conversely, you may realize that some entries are not relevant after all and should be removed. Some entries with long strings of page numbers may need subheadings to provide clarity. Or maybe cross-references need to be added to help guide the reader. At the very least, proofreading for spelling, punctuation, and grammar is always a good idea. An index is most useful if it is easy to read and navigate, and if it points to relevant information. A thorough edit should ensure that this is true.

Step 5: Solicit and Incorporate Feedback

So far writing the index has been a solitary endeavour. But you are, after all, writing the index for your readers, so you want to make sure that your index can be used and understand by others. If you are an author writing the index yourself, send the index to beta readers and get their feedback. If you are an indexer, send the index to the author or to the editor or publisher. Thoughtful feedback will likely improve the index, so don’t be afraid to ask for a second opinion. Based on the feedback you receive, revise the index as needed.

So there you go, the five steps to writing an index. This is what every indexer does, in one form or another, often behind the scenes. It is a process that requires time and, yes, work. 

So happy indexing, everyone! Here’s to excellent indexes in every nonfiction book.

This five step process is adapted from my free mini course, Indexing Decoded. If you would like to learn more about how to index, you can learn more and register by clicking on this link.

Article
0 comment

Why Hire an Indexer?

Photo by Clem Onojeghuo on Unsplash

A couple of months ago I wrote a free email course on indexing. It provides an overview for how to write an index, from start to finish, as well as pointers for what makes an excellent index. 

When I first announced this project, I got a few puzzled reactions. One friend commented, “That is either a great idea or you are completely undercutting yourself.” I understand what he is getting at. My work as a professional indexer depends on authors and publishers hiring me. Why give people the tools they need to avoid hiring me or another professional indexer?

This also raises the question of why pay? While I recognize that there will be a subset of authors and publishers who will not want to hire an indexer no matter what (these are some of the people I hope to reach with my course), I also believe that there are at least three good reasons for hiring a professional. These are not specific to indexing, as I also consider these factors if I need to hire an accountant, mechanic, or plumber, for example. But I think these are still worth being reminded of all the same. 

Expertise

The reason I most hear from other indexers and indexing societies is that the professional has the expertise. Most indexers have received specialized training, usually through a course, and have years of experience. This is certainly an important reason. I have been indexing books since 2011, for example, and have written over two hundred indexes. I believe that someone indexing for the first time can certainly learn, but they will not have this body of experience. Unless one plans on indexing several books, it might just be easier to hire someone than to struggle through the learning curve.

Interest

Another reason for hiring a professional, which I also think is important, is that of interest. There are many tasks that I could do, but I am just not that interested in them. Doing my own car repairs would fall in this category. Lack of interest can make a task seem tedious, and will probably make procrastination much more likely. If indexing feels like a chore, maybe delegate it instead and spend your time more productively on something else. 

Time

This leads us to what I think is the most compelling reason for hiring a professional, which is to buy time. I spend about twenty hours, on average, writing an index (length and complexity of the book are the main variables). If you hire me, you are not just buying my time, but you are also buying yourself time to do something else. Ideally, you will spend that time doing what you are an expert in, which will maximize the value that you present to the world. 

What Does Hiring an Indexer Enable?

Ultimately, the question is, what does hiring an indexer, or any other professional, enable? Yes, hiring an indexer can be expensive. You may have fears that the job will be poorly done. You may feel like you don’t have time to find an indexer. But if you did hire an indexer, what could you be doing instead? Answer this question, decide which of the two—writing the index yourself or doing that other thing—adds more value to your work, and you might have your answer for whether or not to hire a professional.

Article
2 comments

Book Review: Ten Characteristics of Quality Indexes

Ten Characteristics of Quality Indexes: Confessions of an Award-Winning Indexer, by Margie Towery (Medford, NJ: Information Today Inc., 2016)

I must confess that while I bought my copy of Margie Towery’s book shortly after it was published, and while I have dipped into it occasionally, I had not actually read it all the way through until now. That was an oversight on my part, and now that I have read the book, I will be returning to it much more frequently.

I was first introduced to Margie Towery at the first indexing conference I attended, in Toronto in 2014. Towery gave an excellent presentation, in which she covered a lot of the same topics that are in this book. That presentation had an immediate impact on how I indexed, and it was actually just after that conference that I wrote the index for Strange Visitors, which later won the Purple Pen Award for new indexers. 

In this book, Towery goes much deeper into the how and why of indexing. Throughout the book, she proves that indexes and indexing are endlessly fascinating. Her enthusiasm is infectious, and her dedication to understanding the text and creating the best index possible is inspiring. I think she has the most thorough pre-index preparation routine that I have heard of, and I readily believe that it shows through in the indexes that she writes.

One of the running themes throughout this book is that of usability and accessibility. How to make the index easy to use for the reader? That, really, underlies the whole purpose of the index, which is to serve the reader as a finding aid. I wonder sometimes how often we simply follow a convention because it is in whatever guideline we are following, and we don’t think about whether it is the right convention for this particular audience. What makes Towery’s book particularly valuable is that she does discuss the why, and how it ties back to the reader. 

I was also glad to see a discussion of the em-dash-modified format. I think I first learned this format from Thérèse Shere on an email list, but it was good to be reminded of how it works and to see so many good examples of its use. The chapter on reflexivity was also thought provoking, especially the discussion on elegant additions that Towery sometimes adds to an index. This gave me a new way to approach the text as I consider what is indexable. I also appreciated her terminology for the different types of entries, particularly supermain headings and regular main headings. Having a framework for sorting through the masses of information in a book, and how that information relates to each other, is very helpful when putting the index together. Towery’s framework definitely helped mine.

Towery was also generous and extensive in her use of examples from her own indexes, which I think really adds to the value of this book, especially in the chapter on metatopics and index structure. I know I often learn best from being able to see and do, rather than just reading and hearing, so I am glad that Towery was willing to be so transparent about her own practices. 

Margie Towery is, unfortunately for authors and publishers, retired from indexing. But her book will be a lasting legacy and will be of benefit to indexers for a long time to come. It may not be the best starting point for those who are just starting to learn about indexing, as the discussions are more advanced. But for anyone wanting to improve their indexing skills, I highly recommend it. Do buy a copy if you haven’t already.