Article
0 comment

Why Correctly Identifying the Metatopic Matters

I have been reluctant to write about metatopics. It is already extensively discussed by Do Mi Stauber, Janet Perlman, and Margie Towery in their books, as well as, I assume, elsewhere. Appropriately handling the metatopic is also one of the trickier aspects of indexing to master. I am not sure what I can add to the discussion that is new. I also suspect that reading about the metatopic only goes so far. The best learning comes from taking theory and applying it to real books, though perhaps that is simply how I learn best.

Still, I was recently talking with a new indexer who was struggling with the metatopic, and a misconception came to light that might be worth highlighting. Specifically, this new indexer was feeling overwhelmed by the multiple metatopics which she had identified in the book. The misconception was that the metatopics identified were actually main topics, or what Margie Towery might call supermain headings. These are clearly important topics that need to be in the index, but they do not encompass the whole book, which is what differentiates main topics from metatopics.

I like what Janet Perlman says about the metatopic in her book, Indexing Tactics & Tidbits (Information Today, Inc., 2016):

“…The metatopic is intertwined with aboutness. When the indexer can make a cogent statement of what a book is about, whether it be a word, a phrase, or a sentence, he has identified the metatopic of the book.”

There is usually only one metatopic in a book, sometimes two if a book has dual subjects. It may be a complicated metatopic, requiring a sentence or three to explain, but it should still be a single topic or concept that encompasses the whole book.

Correctly identifying the metatopic is important because this impacts how the metatopic is handled in the index and how the whole index is structured. This new indexer was having trouble because she was trying to follow the advice to disperse information away from the metatopic entry. This is generally good advice, and the reasoning is, since everything in the book, theoretically, falls under the metatopic, all main topics should stand on their own as main entries. In this approach, the metatopic should be a signpost to the main entries via cross-references, and should only gather general information that are not able to stand alone. It is usually not a large entry. This approach works fine when there is a single metatopic, but not if you are trying to disperse information for multiple topics. As this indexer learned, if you are trying to disperse all of the information from all of the main topics, the index quickly loses all sense of structure and some information simply does not stand alone very well. 

The flip side to dispersal is gathering, and while gathering the whole book under the metatopic entry is not practical, gathering under individual main topics is. This is why we need to distinguish between the metatopic and supermain headings, because these different types of information and entries are handled differently. As I have discussed previously, entries should contain or direct readers to everything they need to know about that topic. Overly large entries can be split up into smaller chunks that are still meaningful, but we should see dispersal and gathering as complementary techniques for structuring the index. They each have their role, and the starting point is correctly identifying the different components of the book and how those components translate into the index.

The metatopic plays key role in the index, but only if it is first correctly identified.

Article
1 comment

Indexing Basics, Reflections on

Photo by Daniel Cheung on Unsplash

Last Saturday I presented my first webinar on indexing, hosted by the Writers’ Guild of Alberta. A couple of weeks ago I gave a similar presentation to the Editors Canada twig here in Edmonton. Many thanks to both groups for allowing me to present. I learned a lot, both about presenting and about indexing, as I reflected on my practice. Whoever said that teaching is the best way to learn was right.

As I thought about how to present indexing in under an hour, with time for introductions and questions, two themes kept reappearing.

The first is that indexing is about analysis. What is the text about? You cannot write a good index without understanding the text.

The second is audience. Who is the index for? How will they be using the index? How familiar are they with the subject? Do they typically use indexes? If the index is not written with the audience in mind, the index will also probably be poor.

These two themes are closely linked. I think that indexing can be described as analysis on behalf of the reader. In a way, both the text and the audience needs to be analyzed. As the indexer, we need to do some of the heavy lifting for the reader, so that using the index is a pleasant and easy experience. The index should also help guide the reader to what the text is about.

Ultimately, if the participants in both presentations took nothing else away, I hope they remember analysis and audience. If both are front of mind when indexing, I think the index has a decent chance of succeeding. Everything else is just detail and polish.

To close, I will leave you with my new favourite quote on indexing, from a recent issue of The Indexer (vol. 36 no. 1, March 2018). It is by Mary Coe, an indexer from Australia. I think she really nails what we attempt to do as indexers, bringing together both analysis and the reader, and the risk that we might get it all wrong. This is also what helps to make indexing so satisfying. Mary writes:

“As indexers, we have the very difficult task of putting ourselves in other people’s shoes (or heads). Sometimes we get it right and sometimes we don’t; however, I think it is inherently our job to try.”