Article
October 8, 2024
0 comment
by Stephen

My Index Editing Process

Last time I wrote about reading like an indexer and what it is I do and look for when reading a text and writing the rough draft of an index. Today I’d like to reflect on my editing process.

A few months ago I started tracking my time when I index. I had previously done so, but not effectively and I eventually gave up. This time, I’ve created a new system and a new spreadsheet that is much easier to use, and I am a lot happier with the results.

One of my insights so far is that I spend about an equal amount of time drafting and editing. I have to admit that this surprised me. I knew that editing took up a fair amount of time, but I didn’t realize that the time spent is often about 50/50. For some indexes, I actually spend a little more time editing, making the time split closer to 45/55 or even 40/60.

Reflecting further on my process, I tend to spread drafting the index over 3-6 days, depending on the length of the book. Whereas I tend to edit within 2-3 days. When drafting, I am learning what the book is about. When editing, I am fully immersed in the index and I treat it more like a sprint. It probably also helps that by the time I get to editing, the deadline is looming.

I’m realizing that I also tend to draft quickly. I do try to write a fairly clean draft, taking into account context, clarity, and relevance, as I previously discussed. I believe in trying to set myself up for an easier edit. But I also know that this is not my final draft and that some things won’t become clear until I’ve read the whole book, and so I also try to keep moving.

Editing an index, for me, is both seeing the index as a whole and going through the index line by line. I like to give myself space between drafting and editing, which usually means sleeping on the draft and beginning to edit the next day. This helps to give me some distance so I can more clearly see the whole index with fresh eyes.

I usually begin by skimming the index, making note of the larger arrays for the metatopic and supermain discussions. This reminds me of the structure I am aiming for, and is a chance to consider if I want to make any major changes. I then start at the top of the index and work my way down, line by line. I know some indexers edit using multiple passes, each pass looking at a different element. I think I would go utterly cross-eyed and unable to make sense of the index if I tried multiple passes. Instead, my goal is to fully edit the array in front of me before I move on to the next. This may mean jumping around the index to also edit related arrays, and sometimes I will go back to re-edit an array if I change my approach, but generally speaking, I systematically move through the index.

With each array, I am first of all looking for clarity. Does the main heading and any subheadings make sense? If there are subheadings, I look to see if any can be combined or reworded, or if subheadings need to be added for unruly locators. I consider if anything needs to be double posted, and check to make sure that is done properly. I consider and check cross-references. I investigate any notes I may have left for myself. I also spot-check a few locators to make sure I understood the text properly. I may also run a quick search of the PDF to see if I missed any references. I don’t check every locator, which I think would be very time-consuming—to a certain extent, I need to trust that my drafting process was thorough and accurate—but these spot checks do provide peace of mind and I do sometimes find errors.

Reviewing arrays with no subheadings is usually quick, unless I’ve left a note for myself or I decide to spot check. Arrays with subheadings take more time. If an arrays has 20+ subheadings, I may spend as much as twenty or more minutes making sure that the array is in order. I often find the larger the book, the larger the index, the more subheadings there will be, and the longer editing will take.

Considering my process, I do wonder if I can shave off time. I could spot check a little less, especially for simple arrays with no subheadings, trusting that I picked up what was necessary. I can also pay more attention, when drafting, to larger arrays, so that editing them isn’t so onerous. I could also explore using more macros and patterns for batching tasks such as double-posting or removing subheadings. What I like about my process, though, is that it is thorough and I can clearly see what is completed and what is still to come. Editing line by line helps to keep my thoughts in order.

Other Approaches to Editing

My approach to editing is not the only approach, of course. I’ve mentioned making multiple passes. I also know of indexers who do a quick edit at the end of each day, while drafting, so that the draft is cleaner. I’ve also heard indexers who say that they do such a thorough job drafting that the editing process only takes them a couple of hours. I don’t know how that works for them. I seem to need a lengthier editing process for the index to gel and come together. And that’s okay. We are all different. What matters is that you find a process that works for you.

I find it interesting to hear how others index, even if it is not something I would do myself. I hope this glimpse into my process gives you something to think about.

Article
September 17, 2024
0 comment
by Stephen

Reading Like an Indexer

So you are sitting down to write an index. You scroll to the first page in the PDF, or, if you’ve printed out the proofs, you place the first page on the desk in front of you, and then…what? What is your thought process? How do you decide what entries to extract? How do you read?

Reading to index is different than reading to edit, reading to learn, or reading for pleasure. I think of reading to index as a process of disassembly. I try to identify how the author has written and structured the text, and I then pull apart all of those pieces, big or small, and reassemble them into the form of an index. This is very much an active reading, in which I am identifying, analyzing, and making decisions. 

I generally look for two types of information when I draft an index.

  • Specific details. These are names, places, companies, concepts, etc… that are explicitly mentioned and discussed. These are usually fairly obvious. If there are a lot of names or other such details, I may index a few pages, pick up these details, and then go back and re-read to make sure I also understand the larger discussion.
  • Broader topics. These range from the metatopic—what the whole book is about—to supermain and regular discussions—both themes spanning the book and what specific chapters or sections are about. It is important to have index entries which correspond to these broader discussions, and so in addition to picking up specific details, I try to also understand the big picture. These broader topics are also tied to the structure of the index, as I consider how best to reflect the book’s structure in the index, and as I anticipate that these large discussions will become large arrays, anchoring the index. Depending on the book, as mentioned, I may need to read a section two or more times to properly mine all relevant entries. 

Once I have identified the large and small pieces that the book is made of, I need to decide how to translate that into the index. Here are a few tips I find helpful to keep in mind.

  • Understand what you are reading. This may seem obvious, but I think it is worth stating. The temptation, at least for me, is to guess if I am unsure and to create an entry anyway. And sometimes guessing is the best I can do in that moment. I flag the entry for revisiting later and I move on. What can be more effective, though, is to read ahead a few pages until I do understand, and then go back and create the entry. It’s okay to be patient. Taking the time to understand can pay off later with better understanding of what comes next in the text and with less editing due to a stronger draft. 
  • Place the information in context. Are you looking at a specific detail or a broader topic? How does the detail or topic relate to other details or topics? Can this be turned into a subheading? Should it be double-posted? Is a cross-reference necessary? What other entries does this suggest? While subheadings, cross-references, and double-posts can all be revisited later, when editing the index, I like to start thinking about them while writing the rough draft. The information in the book is an interconnected web, which the index should reflect. So as part of your thought process, get in the habit of looking for these connections. 
  • Filter for relevance. In addition to understanding the larger context, also pay attention to relevance. Think about the audience before you begin writing the index. Consider how much space is available for the index. What should the index focus on? Sometimes I am not sure if an entry is relevant and so I pick it up anyway, labeling it for possible deletion later. But the more I can filter out now, the less I need to cut later. 
  • Communicate with clarity. This is especially true for subheadings. Make sure that readers understand what this entry means. Be concrete and, where relevant, link back to the larger context. You don’t want to leave readers guessing, nor do you want to leave yourself guessing when you come around again to edit.

All combined, this is a lot to do while reading and indexing. It can be difficult to identify both specific details and larger discussions, while also weighing relevance, and paying attention to the context, and thinking about related entries, and thinking about how best to phrase for clarity. Reading to index is a skill that takes practice.

Remember too that the rough draft does not need to be perfect. My drafts are certainly not perfect, and while I am thinking about all of this while drafting, I spend about an equal amount of time editing. 

How you read is up to you. I tend to start reading and I type entries into Cindex, the indexing software that I use, as the entries come to mind. Other indexers prefer to first mark up the proofs, identifying what is indexable and making notes for themselves, before they go back and type up the entries. There is no right or wrong approach, so long as you are paying attention to all aspects of the text, both big and small.

If you are newer to indexing, you may find marking up the proofs to be a good way to visualize or make concrete this thought process. I marked up proofs the first 3-4 years that I indexed, which in hindsight was necessary for me to engrain this way of reading. Once indexing started to become habit, I stopped marking up, though I still read ahead sometimes to better understand what the text is about. 

Writing an index is a unique way to interact with the text. It does require a shift in how you read and see the text. Once you make that shift, indexing becomes easier. 

Article
August 13, 2024
0 comment
by Stephen

Is AI Indexing Nearly Here?

No surprise, publishing continues to react and interact with artificial intelligence. A couple of colleagues recently raised AI on a couple of indexing email lists. I get the sense that many indexers are concerned about the potential for AI to replace us, or at least that publishers will believe that AI can replace a human-written, thoughtfully constructed index. I have to admit I also feel uncertain about what the future holds. I wrote about AI and indexing last year, and I think it is worth considering again. 

Is Indexing by AI Nearly Here?

One colleague flagged this article from The Scholarly Kitchen, “AI-Enabled Transformation of Information Objects Into Learning Objects,” by Lisa Janicke Hinchliffe. Hinchliffe reviews three new AI tools which purport to help readers access and understand academic writings. Of particular interest to indexers is what Hinchliffe writes about Papers AI Assistant: 

When exploring the functionality as a beta tester, I was curious how the results compared to my pre-AI tool practice of making heavy use of CTRL-F to locate keywords in lengthy texts. I found that, not only did the Papers AI save me a great deal of time by providing me with an overview annotated with links to specific sections of the text, it also often alerted me to places in the text where my topic of interest was conceptually discussed without the use of the specific keywords I would have searched.

Did you catch that last bit? Papers AI Assistant can apparently identify discussions of interest without the use of a keyword search. That is what a good index is supposed to do. Is this the beginnings of an AI that can replace indexers? Hinchliffe also writes that, “I am excited by the possibilities these AI tools offer for moving the focus from access to information to comprehension of it.”

A few thoughts: I have to admit that I am skeptical of the claim or hope that Papers AI and similar tools will help readers comprehend information. My sense is that AI works best as a tool, with the user clearly understanding its strengths and limitations, and with the user making the final decision on the quality of results and how best to use the results. That is similar to how I use the search function when indexing. Search is useful for double-checking facts and mentions, but I know that it doesn’t catch everything and isn’t good at providing context; I still need to read and understand the book. My fear is that many users will uncritically accept whatever the AI tool tells them, turning a program like Papers AI into glorified CliffNotes and enabling an even shallower engagement with the text. 

I think it is also worth pointing out that what is described here is not an index. An index is a static document that is browsable. That is very different from an AI highlighting a handful of potentially relevant passages. Browsability is key to an index because it allows the user to serendipitously find information they didn’t know they wanted to find. Being handed a few options leaves the rest of the text opaque and unaccessible. I imagine a user can keep asking the AI new questions, but that puts the onus on the user to know what they are searching for and how to ask relevant questions. 

Of course, if an AI can identify concepts and discussions in the absence of clear keywords, then a logical next step could be to ask that AI to generate an index. I can see value in the ability to create an index on the fly, for any document. I don’t know how much I would trust such an index, though. Hallucinations is one issue. Another is that AI, essentially, is built upon algorithms. Answers are always going to be follow a certain pattern. While indexing is built upon rules and conventions, the indexer also plays a key decision-making role as they shape the contents, phrasing, and structure. These judgement calls extend beyond the formal rules of indexing to take into account elements such as the audience and usability. I am skeptical that an AI would be able to understand and produce these nuances.

Another issue is that these AI tools are entirely digital. They will not work on a print book, though, of course, an AI-generated index could be published in print. Is the future of publishing and of engagement with texts entirely digital? Perhaps in academia and other specialized fields, in which there is so much information to access and consume. Print sales remain strong, however, and I am hopeful that there will continue to be a place for print indexes. Perhaps the future—finally arrived?—is what embedded indexing has long promised, which is one index capable of being used in multiple formats. 

Besides AI replacing indexers, I think it is also worth considering how we as indexers can use AI in our own work. I am aware of one colleague who uses ChatGPT to summarize complicated books and to answer queries about the text, which helps that indexer comprehend the book more quickly. Which sounds very similar to what Papers AI claims to do. I think that is a legitimate use of AI. So long as the indexer is in control—using the AI as a tool, understanding both indexing best practices and the contents of the book, and is actively shaping the index—then why not use AI? I’m also open to having AI index elements which are time-consuming to pick up, such as scientific names, so long as the indexer is providing quality control. What I don’t want to see are indexers—or anyone else—passively accepting an AI-generated index, assuming that it is accurate and functional when it is actually not. That is my worse nightmare about AI, that we abdicate our critical thinking and decision making skills, potentially leading to errors and disasters because we have lost the ability to assess what AI is telling us.

Author Pushback

In contrast to the gold rush to embed AI into publishing, another colleague pointed out that some books are beginning to be published with prohibitions against AI and machine learning listed on the copyright page.  I also recently noticed this in a book I am indexing.

I’ve also heard from a trade client that their authors are starting to insist that book contracts include a clause that their books will not be uploaded or otherwise used to train AI. By extension, this means that all freelancers hired by this press, including myself, are not allowed to use AI tools while working on their manuscripts and proofs (which isn’t a problem for me, since I wasn’t doing so anyway). 

Will authors and publishers win against AI? Will publishers find ways to enforce their contracts and prohibitions? Will publishers change their minds, or will AI developers sufficiently address the fears that authors have? I suspect this may be an area where the publishing industry goes in two different directions: some segments, such as academic publishing, which prize easy access to information (provided you can get behind the paywall), will embrace AI, while other segments, which care more about the author and which sell directly to readers, will reject AI. 

Or, maybe AI in publishing is a bubble and these new applications will fail to live up to their hype. 

I still think that someone will try to develop an AI capable to writing an index. Some publishers will probably adopt it for the sake of saving time and money, even if the resulting indexes are useless. I am also hopeful that the value of the human touch will remain. Even if AI is incorporated into our work, I think there is still place for human guidance and discernment. Machines may be capable of generating an approximation, but only humans can create what is truly useful for other humans.

Article
June 25, 2024
0 comment
by Stephen

When Subheadings Are Not So Useful

I love subheadings. They add so much to an index, breaking down long strings of locators into smaller chunks, highlighting meaning distinctions, and gathering related entries into lists so readers only need to search in one place. As I discuss in my last reflection, subheadings can also reflect the story that the text is telling. Well-written subheadings are clear, specific, and meaningful.

But…in indexing there is always a but. Occasionally, a project comes along that proves the exception. 

This happened with a recent index I wrote, for To See What He Saw: J.E.H. MacDonald and the O’Hara Years, 1924-1932, by Stanley Munn and Patricia Cucman (Figure 1 Publishing, 2024). J.E.H. MacDonald was a Canadian painter and a member of the Group of Seven. He fell in love with the landscape around Lake O’Hara, in the Rocky Mountains, and spent several summers there painting. This book takes an interesting approach to MacDonald. Over the course of almost twenty years, the authors sought to identify the exact locations where MacDonald painted. The bulk of the book is composed of a brief discussion of each of the O’Hara paintings, alongside a photograph of what the scene looks like today. The rest of the book is composed of an introduction, an overview of each of MacDonald’s eight trips, and excerpts from MacDonald’s diaries and other writings. The result is a beautifully illustrated coffee-table book. 

The instructions from the press were to only index the paintings, people, and places. While narrow in scope, there isn’t too much else discussed, and these are what readers are most likely to want to find, so I thought the instructions reasonable. Figure 1 Publishing is also very good at providing clear specifications for how long the index can be. For this book, the specs were 55-60 characters per line, for 675 lines total. 

I quickly realized that the book mentions a lot of paintings and places. The book discusses 226 paintings, almost all of them by MacDonald. With each painting taking up at least a line, some of them more, the paintings alone fill up about a third of the index. The rest of the index is mostly places—mountains, lakes, creeks, trails, huts—in and around Lake O’Hara that MacDonald either painted or visited. In comparison, only a few people are mentioned.

I also realized that the book contains a lot of repetition. For example, the same mountain may appear in a couple dozen different paintings. That mountain is mentioned again in the overviews of MacDonald’s trips, and then again in MacDonald’s diaries. This kind of repetition makes sense given how the book describes the same events and paintings from different angles, but it does mean that the mentions add up. Arrays with especially long strings of locators include Cathedral Mountain (49 page references), Hungabee Mountain (39 references), Odaray Bench (34 references), Lake McArthur (32 references), and Lake Oesa (27 references).

Normally, I would add subheadings to these arrays. Asking readers to look up each page reference is a big ask. But for this index, I left those strings, for paintings and places, intact. 

Not using subheadings was a conscious decision, and one I didn’t make lightly. My initial instinct was to find subheadings. But as I indexed and considered the entries, I also realized that subheadings would not be so useful in this particular index. Wanting a second opinion and to avoid surprising the press with a departure from my usual approach, I also queried the editor I was working with and got their approval.

I decided to not use subheadings for two reasons. One, I realized that too many subheadings would quickly make the index too long. Unfortunately, space constraints can sometimes mean putting aside the index that you want to write for the index that fits. In these situations, I need to be strategic about picking and choosing the subheadings that will have the biggest impact, while also being okay with other arrays not having subheadings. 

More importantly, though, for this book, I couldn’t think of subheadings that I was satisfied with. For subheadings to be effective, they need to clearly articulate additional information that readers can use to narrow their search. But what if there are no clear distinctions between locators? In that case, I think the long strings of locators should be left alone. It is not helpful to introduce artificial distinctions or to get so granular that context is lost. 

As I mentioned, this book contains a lot of repetition. Places either appear in MacDonald’s paintings, are places that MacDonald visited, or both. This doesn’t provide much to hang a wide range of subheadings. 

I briefly considered listings all of the paintings that each mountain or other feature appears in, along with a subheading for MacDonald’s presence at. For example, 

Cathedral Mountain: MacDonald at; in painting 1; in painting 2; in painting 3; in painting 4; in painting 5; etc…

But this approach presents a few problems. Some arrays would have been enormous, with a dozen or two subheadings for each of the paintings. Besides the space issue, I’m not convinced that listing each painting would have been meaningful to readers. Would readers remember the titles of individual paintings? In many cases, multiple paintings shared the same title. Thankfully, the authors give each painting a unique alphanumeric code, which I included in the index to differentiate. For example, “Lake O’Hara (25-1.3(S))” and “Lake O’Hara (30-3.1).” But I imagine it would still be difficult remembering which is which. Alternatively, I could have created a subheading for “in paintings,” but that would have still resulted in a long string of locators, as would the subheading “MacDonald at.” “MacDonald at” also isn’t very useful since readers can presumably assume that MacDonald was there, as that is the focus of the book. 

Given the space constraint and that either way—with a couple of generic subheadings or without subheadings—the arrays would have long strings of locators, I decided it was best to keep the arrays simple and to forego subheadings. This does mean that readers will need to search through each locator, though readers should also quickly notice the repetition, and it is all there for the dedicated searcher. 

This isn’t to say that I avoided subheadings entirely. I did use them in a few places, mostly for people, though even with people I found it difficult to avoid longer strings of locators. Many of these references are brief mentions and again reflect the repetition throughout the book. For example, here are two arrays for MacDonald’s friend, George Link, and wife, Joan.

Link, George K.K.
     about, 234, 343n83
     Lake O’Hara Trails Club and, 340n25
     MacDonald and, 82, 91, 104, 107, 113, 114, 143, 215, 224, 233, 234, 239, 243, 249, 252, 253, 254, 256, 258, 264, 294, 301, 307, 308, 310
     photographs, 246, 260

MacDonald, Joan
     encouragement from to travel west, 13, 202, 205
     letters to, 93, 96, 115, 120, 121, 122, 131, 167, 175, 200, 203, 204, 205–6, 211–12, 229, 230–31, 236, 240, 256, 265
     Links and, 341n47
     MacDonald’s departure west and, 250
     mentions in MacDonald’s diary, 304, 308
     O’Hara trip with MacDonald, 36, 123, 191, 217, 221, 222, 223–24, 259
     photo album, 224

While I highly encourage you to include subheadings and to make sure that subheadings are clear, specific, and meaningful, I think it is also worthwhile considering the exceptions to the rule. I hope that my approach to the index for To See What He Saw, about J.E.H. MacDonald’s paintings in and around Lake O’Hara, is helpful for considering when subheadings may not be useful. If there is a lot of repetition in the text, if it is difficult to find meaningful distinctions, and if there is a hard space constraint, then it is okay to have long strings of undifferentiated locators. It is not ideal, but it may still be the best solution for that particular text and index.

Article
January 24, 2024
0 comment
by Stephen

Indexing Local History: Stories I’ve Been Told Series

Front cover for the book Stories I've Been Told, Vol. 3, by Elaine Thomas.Local history can be both a joy and a challenge to index. It can be deeply personal, both for those telling and writing the stories, and for those reading, as it reaffirms our bonds with each other and with the places we belong. The index is often the first point of contact with the text, as readers search for the people, places, and memories that they hold dear—or even search for themselves.

Over the last few years, I’ve had the honour and pleasure of working with Elaine Thomas, an author and storyteller. Elaine is an Albertan transplanted to Fayette County, Texas. She regularly writes for a local newspaper, The Fayette County Record, including, for several years, a column profiling a wide array of locals, especially senior citizens who reminisce about their lives. Elaine is now collecting and self-publishing these columns in the Stories I’ve Been Told series. I have indexed all three volumes published so far, as well as three other books of local and family history that Elaine has written. Today, I want to discuss how I approach indexing the Stories I’ve Been Told series, drawing examples from the third volume that was launched last November.

I love Elaine’s work for a couple of reasons.

Elaine has a knack for finding and telling incredible stories of everyday life. These are ordinary, everyday people, and yet dig beneath the surface, as Elaine does, and extraordinary accomplishments and joy shine forth. It is an excellent reminder of the wealth of knowledge and experience that surrounds all of us, if we only pay attention and listen. Elaine’s books epitomize the value and importance of preserving our local history. 

I also love reading these profiles of people in Fayette County, Texas, because it is a completely different world than what I am familiar with. Add in the fact that many of the people profiled are reminiscing about life during the Depression, World War II, and postwar, and it is a whole other world yet again. Rural farm life among Czech and German immigrants is about as far away as you can get from the concrete Taiwanese city of a million people that I grew up in, except, maybe, for the shared summer heat. I get to explore a different perspective and way of life as I index these books, a way of life that is slowly becoming more familiar with each book.

From an indexing standpoint, there are a couple of challenges which I find are common to indexing local history. The first is, what in indexable?

Details

Local history books often contain a lot of detail. Because there is so much that could potentially be picked up, it is a good idea to decide ahead of time, as much as possible, what is indexable and what can be left aside. I find my approach often evolves as I work and better understand the text. The plan does not need to be rigid. But starting with a plan does help to avoid being overwhelmed by the sheer number of potential entries, and to avoid adding, and then later deleting, irrelevant entries.

For the Stories I’ve Been Told series, I make a distinction between Fayette County and the rest of the country and world. The people profiled are all from and live within Fayette County. I assume that readers of the book also have a connection to the area. So information about Fayette County forms the bulk of what I pick up. I index somewhat less detail about the rest of Texas, with most such entries being about neighbouring counties and cities that readers are likely to be familiar with, and where the people profiled may have studied and worked. I index the least amount of detail about the rest of the country and world. If someone spent part of their career in Virginia, for example, I will likely include that as a subheading, but I probably will not create main headings for places and businesses within Virginia, as I don’t think that readers will be searching for Virginia-related details.

I index all of the local people. This can lead to long lists of family members, if a person profiled mentions all of their grandparents, parents, siblings, spouse, children, and other relatives. But since this is intended for a local readership who may be searching for their families and friends, I think it is important to pick up all of the names, even minor mentions. This can also mean double-checking surnames with Elaine, to make sure I am properly identifying people.

I also pick up places. This includes all of the cities and towns within Fayette County. I also pick up churches, schools, local businesses, significant geographic features, and any other place that seems important. These are often minor mentions, but again, this is a book for local readers. There are memories attached to these places, and local histories can be an aid for people to access their own memories.

I also pick up details for various activities. These can be memories about Christmas or attending dances, childhood memories of working on the farm, or about people’s careers, such as delivering mail or running a flooring business. I also create arrays for local events, like the Fayette County Fair.

Several of the people profiled are veterans who reminisce about their wartime experiences. I’ve learned that honouring vets is important, in a way that seems more strongly emphasized than in Canada. I include several arrays for the different branches of military; the military bases where these veterans served, especially those nearby within Texas; and the wars, which is mostly WWII, along with a few mentions for the Korean and Vietnam wars. 

Basically, if someone or something happened or existed within Fayette County, I index it. Elaine and I want local readers to be able to find their family and friends, and places and events, that are significant to them.

Structure

With so many details, structuring the index is also important, to ensure that the index is easy to search.

I build the index structure around the book’s structure. Stories I’ve Been Told, Vol. 3 contains 30 profiles, with each profile about 8 pages, give or take. This includes 1-3 pages of photographs. Because it is these people who form the core of the book, I use subheadings for each person, focusing on what that person chooses to discuss. I also include a range, at the top of the array, for the whole profile. Photographs are indicated in italics. 

Kea, Arleas Upton, 1–9

career with FDIC, 1, 7

childhood, 2–3

education and desegregation, 3–4, 9

family, 3, 7, 8, 9

photographs, 7–9

prayer and worship, 3

reflections on life and success, 6

at University of Texas, 5–6

I also do a lot of double-posting. All of the churches, for example, are both indexed as standalone entries and are gathered together in a single array. Gathering together does mean that the index will be longer, but I think it is helpful to provide a place for readers to scan if they can’t remember the name of a specific church or if they want to see which churches are mentioned. It is also generally a good practice to provide multiple access points, if there is space, to accommodate how different readers choose to search. If the community that the church is in is not obvious from the church’s name, I also include that detail in parentheses. (I also include the community in parentheses for main headings if the community is not obvious from the name of the church, school, or business.)

churches

Bethlehem Lutheran Church (Round Top), 189

Big Spring Hill Baptist Church, 79

Elm Creek Baptist Church (Seguin), 179

Holy Cross Lutheran Church (Warda), 143, 147, 149

Prairie Valley Lutheran Church, 181

prayer and worship, 3

Queen of the Holy Rosary Catholic Church (Hostyn), 89, 92, 217

Sacred Heart Catholic Church (La Grange), 36, 91

St. James Missionary Baptist Church (Plum), 79

St. James Missionary Baptist Church (Schulenburg), 3

St. John the Baptist Catholic Church (Ammannsville), 83

St. Mary Catholic Church (High Hill), 40

St. Mary’s Catholic Church (Ellinger), 125

St. Paul Lutheran Church (La Grange), 27, 220

St. Paul Lutheran Church (Serbin), 97–98, 99

St. Rose of Lima Catholic Church (Schulenburg), 54, 56–57, 101

Sts. Peter and Paul Catholic Church (Plum), 32

Swiss Alp Lutheran Church, 112

Trinity Lutheran Church (Black Jack Springs), 12, 154

I also double-post for significant events and memories that have enough entries to warrant subheadings, such as Christmas:

Christmas

Alvin J. Anders’ memories, 101–2

Christmas trees, 54, 57, 138, 143, 153

Frances Pietsch Schumann’s memories, 143–44

gifts for WWII soldiers, 51

Gracie Loessin Taylor’s memories, 153

Kahlich family traditions, 54–57

mail delivery and, 134

Santa Claus, 54–55

St. Nicholas (St. Nicholas Day), 53–54, 58

For military arrays, such as the wars and branches of the military, I suspect that some readers would like to see who else served, and so I double-post names in these arrays as well, in addition to double-posting military bases. For example,

U.S. Air Force

Bien Hoa Air Force Base (Vietnam), 225, 227–28

Eugene J. “Gene” Wessels, 177, 178–79, 183

Fort Francis E. Warren Air Force Base, 178

Harry Richard “Dick” Peck, 223–28, 231, 232

Lackland Air Force Base, 61

Laredo Air Force Base, 223–24

For Stories I’ve Been Told, Vol. 3, thanks to a suggestion from Elaine, I’ve also included cross-references from the various towns to the people profiled who are from those towns, so that readers can more easily see the connections between people and places. I should have thought of this for the earlier volumes, and I’m glad Elaine noticed this possibility. For example,

Rutersville (TX), 69, 89–90. See also Dixon, Richard; Fietsam, Lydia Eberenz

Working with the Author

Especially if you are not familiar with the area or history, take advantage of the author’s knowledge. When I first started indexing this series, Elaine’s insights were invaluable as I made my plan for how to index, as well as helpful feedback on the draft index. This can be a fruitful collaboration to serve the readers.

Indexing local history can often be more work than it initially appears. All of those details and entries can add up, and then you need to decide how best to organize. Indexing local history can also be satisfying, helping readers remain engaged with their history and community, as well as the reminder that each of us live extraordinary lives, if only we can see ourselves, and each other, from the right angle. 

If you would like to see the full index for Stories I’ve Been Told, Vol. 3, you can find it on Amazon, using the “Read Sample” feature. The indexes for the first two volumes are also available for viewing.If you would like to buy a copy, proceeds are being donated to assist struggling students at Blinn College, Schulenburg campus. Elaine also writes a lovely blog, Stories From the Slow Lane, where you can enjoy more stories about the past.

Article
August 23, 2023
0 comment
by Stephen

East Asian Names, Deep Dive

If you’ve been reading this blog for a while, you are probably aware that indexing can get pretty technical. Details matter. Creativity works best when interwoven with the rules and conventions that make an index tick.

All that to say, today’s reflection is going to get geeky.

East Asian Names

I just finished indexing a book within the field of Asian studies and literary criticism. Asian studies—especially East Asia and history—is one of my favorite areas to index in. I grew up in Taiwan and I still speak and understand Mandarin and Taiwanese to varying extents.

I have also, in the past, fielded questions from other indexers on how to index Chinese names. Chinese names, as well as Korean and Japanese names, follow a different naming convention than English or other Western names. If you are not familiar with these names, they can be confusing to index. I was reminded of that on this index I just finished, so I thought I’d write a quick primer.

To start, be aware that there may be more than one naming convention at play in the book. The Western convention is to write names in the format of First name Surname (or, using different terms, Given name Family name). In China, Korea, and Japan, that format is reversed. To use my own names as an example, in English my first name is Stephen and my surname is Ullstrom, written as Stephen Ullstrom. In Mandarin, my surname is Ou 歐 and my given name is Shijie 士傑, written as Ou Shijie 歐士傑.

My experience with the English-language books that I index is that both formats can appear in the same book. People discussed who are from within China, Japan, or Korea—such as historical figures, politicians, or scholars—are often presented with their names in the traditional format, with the surname first. People who are Korean American or Japanese Canadian, for example, or scholars who are published by Western presses and journals, will probably have their names written in the Western format.

Don’t assume that all of the names in the book follow the same naming convention. They might, if the author and/or press made that decision. But there is also a good chance that the names reflect how those people prefer to be known or are typically known.

Identifying the Surname

Since names are typically sorted in the index by surname (assuming the name has a surname), the key to correctly indexing East Asian names is to first identify the surname.

This is not always easy, especially if you are not familiar with the language or what constitutes a typical surname. But, if you can identify the surname, most of your work is done.

If I see a name that I am not sure about, I do a few minutes of research using one or more of the following methods.

  • I look to see how the author refers to the person, especially in subsequent mentions. The usual convention for subsequent mentions is to use the surname, so look to see what the author uses.
  • If a scholar, I also try to find the person in the bibliography, as the bibliography should also be sorted by surname.
  • I try to find the person online. If a scholar, I look for their faculty webpage or for citations to other books or articles they have written, which may indicate to me their surname. If a cultural, historical, or political figure, Wikipedia often states, at the top of the page, which part of the name is the surname.
  • I also look at the name itself. Chinese and Korean names, for example, are often written, in roman script, with a space between the surname and the given name. This doesn’t help for a name like Hao Wang (Chinese American mathematician and philosopher, surname Wang), but does for the Taiwanese writer Pai Hsien-yung (surname Pai).
  • If I am still not sure, I ask the author.

Comma Necessary?

Once the surname is identified, it is time to add the name to the index.

Because Western names are written in the format First name Surname, names are inverted, with a comma, so that the name can be sorted by surname. But what if the name does not need to be inverted?

I have seen indexes and bibliographies where a comma is inserted anyway. Pai Hsien-yung is written as Pai, Hsien-yung. But to me that implies that the name is properly written as Hsien-yung Pai, which is incorrect. I much prefer to omit the comma. Since the name already leads with the surname, I simply index it as Pai Hsien-yung.

Alphabetical Sort

The last consideration—and this is getting geeky—is how to sort the names.

Most of my clients prefer letter-by-letter alphabetical sort, which can cause some problems. Having some names with a comma and some names without interferes with the sorting. Surnames can also be short and can intersperse with other entries, which makes the list of names difficult to scan. This is especially true when there are several people with the same surname, which is fairly common.

So, if letter-by-letter sorting is specified, I force-sort to make these names easier to scan. This means both ignoring the comma when alphabetizing and making sure that like surnames stick together.

In this example from the index I just finished, without force-sorting, the names with commas rise to the top and there are a couple of other subject-matter-related main headings mixed in.

Liu, Jianmei
Liu, Lydia
Liu Denghan
Liu Jiang
Liushou nüshi (Those Left Behind; film)
Liu Weihua
liuxuesheng
Liu Yiqing

Force-sorted, with the commas ignored and the names brought together, this series of main headings makes more sense alphabetically and is much easier to scan.

Liu Denghan
Liu Jiang
Liu, Jianmei
Liu, Lydia
Liu Weihua
Liu Yiqing
Liushou nüshi (Those Left Behind; film)
liuxuesheng

Indexing names from another language can be intimidating. The key is to understand how those names work, and to not assume that they follow Western conventions. For Chinese, Japanese, and Korean names, first identify the surname. From there, determine if the name needs to be inverted. When editing the index, consider whether the names need to be force-sorted for alphabetization and ease of reading.

The goal, as always, is an index that is easier for its user.

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
July 12, 2023
0 comment
by Stephen

Publication Day! And Why I Wrote a Book About Indexing

My book is officially launched!

It is a surreal experience to put the book out into the world. Today, I am still sitting at home, writing an index for a client. Not much has changed in my day-to-day life. Most of the work of finalizing the book and uploading the files happened a couple of week or more ago. And yet anyone can now buy and receive this thing that I have created. 

I am nervous, wondering if the book is going to be a complete flop or if it has a fatal flaw that I missed. But mostly I’m excited. This feels like an end to all of the work of writing and publishing, and the beginning of both marketing and supporting the book, going forward, as well as an opportunity to start a new writing project. I am excited to see how this book is received and what comes next.

I’m not very good at celebrating, but I did want to mark the occasion. My caffeinated beverage of choose is loose leaf green or oolong tea, and I recently bought some Japanese sencha green tea from a local tea shop. I decided to save it until this morning, and I enjoyed a cup as I got the day rolling.

I have also been reflecting on why I have written this book.

The original impetus was noticing that I would occasionally receive queries from authors who ultimately decided to write the index themselves. I respect their decision. It can be difficult trusting someone else to do a good job, or the price may be higher than their budget, or indexing just seems like such an intriguing puzzle. But I did feel bad that there were not better resources to help authors tackle this task.

Writing Book Indexing: A Step-by-Step Guide, I have tried to balance being thorough with also being practical and accessible. By the time you finish this book, you should understand the fundamentals of indexing, and—if you’ve been doing the exercises—you should have a solid head-start and plan for writing your own index. I have written the book so that each chapter builds on itself, so that there is a step-by-step progression. I have also tried to keep the language and descriptions simple, so that the concepts are not too difficult to understand, and so that the book can be read fairly quickly, if the reader is in a hurry. I believe that indexing is a skill that can be taught and learned. 

If you read the book, you can let me know how I’ve done!

Accessibility has also informed my publishing strategy. I’ve decided to publish wide, which among indie authors means that I am not exclusive to Amazon. Instead, the book is mostly being distributed through Draft2Digital, and for the ebook, direct with a few retailers, such as Amazon, Google Play, and Kobo. Through Draft2Digital, the book is available from retailers around the world, including ones that I had never heard of before. For example, with Vivlio, a major book retailer in France, and with Librerías Gandhi, one of the largest bookstore chains in Mexico.

This is in contrast to most books on indexing, which I’ve noticed can be both very expensive and can be difficult to find. They are not always even available on Amazon.

Do I expect to sell a lot of copies in France or Mexico? No, not really. But that is not the point. The point is that the book is available. The point is to make it easier for people to learn about indexing, regardless of where they live. The point is to help improve the quality of indexes, whether by authors, newer indexers, or people exploring indexing as a career. The point is to help editors and others within the publishing industry better understand what is required for an excellent index, and how to work with indexers. Maybe even readers who appreciate a quality index can grow in their appreciation and understanding.

Indexing is poorly understood, even within publishing. And lack of knowledge tends to lead to poor indexes. I want to make indexing more accessible and more easily understood. I believe that the more authors, editors, readers, and even indexers understand the mechanics of indexing and the qualities of an excellent index, the better books will be, and the better it will be for all of us. 

So, big dreams for indexing and indexes. Maybe more than this book can shoulder. But this book is a step, at least, towards making indexing accessible and making indexing known. 

PS. If you haven’t picked up a copy yet, you can find your preferred retailer here. If you’d like to learn more about what is in the book, please click here.

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.