Article
April 10, 2019
0 comment
by Stephen

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
March 28, 2019
0 comment
by Stephen

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
March 24, 2019
0 comment
by Stephen

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
February 24, 2019
2 comments
by Stephen

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.

Article
February 8, 2019
0 comment
by Stephen

Indexing as Deep Work

Photo by Nathan Ziemanski on Unsplash

Deep work, as defined by Cal Newport in his book of the same title, is “professional activities performed in a state of distraction-free concentration that push your cognitive capabilities to their limit. These efforts create new value, improve your skill, and are hard to replicate.”

As I was reading Newport’s book on this topic, it struck me that indexing is ideally suited for deep work. Especially as I work as a full-time indexer, with often a handful of deadlines in a month, I need to spend several hours every day, sitting at my computer, indexing. I need to be able to see, understand, and hold in my mind both the overarching argument or structure of the book (as well as the overarching structure of the index) as well as the smaller details that flesh out that argument and structure. I am creating a document from scratch that to some extent is unique to me, in that other indexers would write their own variations. And the index will, I hope, add value to the book and for readers. It is not something that is easy to replicate. 

Newport identifies shallow work as being the opposite of deep work. This is work that is low value, non-cognitively demanding, and easily done by someone else. The trick, to reach professional goals or to simply stay on top of deadlines, is to focus on performing deep work—what does drive value—and to minimize or eliminate shallow work. 

I think this distinction between deep and shallow work also applies to indexing, and is highlighted by the contract nature of freelancing. Being a freelancer gives me a lot of freedom in how I use my time—which can be used poorly to read the news or watch Youtube videos. It also means that I need to be aware of and responsive to my email inbox, both for new project offers and to be responsive to existing clients. I would say this is all shallow work, because while I do need to communicate with clients and have a method for accepting new projects, I don’t get paid for checking email. While I do need some breaks throughout the day when I index, news and Youtube can serve as distractions and prove to be less effective as breaks if they are taking me away from indexing. While shallow work is not necessary bad, if we do not prioritize deep work and find ways to keep shallow work at bay during those times, then deep work is unlikely to happen.

So how to prioritize deep work?

Newport’s book has challenged me to rethink how I work. In particular, what are my distractions and how do I handle them? Distractions, even ones that seem fairly innocuous, pull you out of a state of concentration and it can take several minutes to return to the task at hand. This happening once isn’t too bad, but if it is repeated throughout the day those minutes can add up. In my experience, distractions also build upon each other. If I follow that sudden urge to check a fact on Wikipedia, I am likely to have subsequent sudden urges that will be harder to resist. I find distractions can also cause a lot of stress and anxiety, because while a part of me is enjoying the distraction, another part is aware that I am falling behind on the task I should be focused on, which creates a vicious cycle. The more anxious I become the more I seek distractions to sooth the anxiety.

As I have come to realize, the costs to the quality of the indexes I write, how quickly I can index, and the stress I inflict on myself through distractions are too high. At least, I do not want to pay them anymore. I know I can’t eliminate every single distraction, but I can do a lot to eliminate most of them, at least the ones that are self-inflicted. 

So far, I’ve come up with a few strategies to better facilitate deep work. Here are three of them:

  • I use the Freedom app to block myself from most news sites and blogs that I typically frequent. The only day I allow myself to browse these sites are Sundays. I have a different block for social media. This does not work perfectly as there are, of course, other news sites and blogs that I have not yet discovered (and which I subsequently have to block), but overall I do feel much more focused and less anxious. And to be honest, I find I don’t really miss the news. I still get a general sense of what is happening in the world from talking to other people and hearing snippets on the radio, and I have enough interesting things to focus on among my own work.
  • I have stopped checking email in the mornings, and I try to only check email twice in the afternoon. I have been surprised at the results. I have come to value my distraction-free mornings, which is when I can create my best and most important work. So far clients have not noticed or commented on slower replies.
  • I take a long break in the middle of the day. I go to the local YMCA, and depending on the day I either join a circuit training class or I swim. I also eat lunch. All of this takes about an hour and a half. What makes this work is that if I get out of bed on time, I have three hours of deep work in the morning, and then another three and a half hours of deep work in the afternoon. The exercise gives me a chance to rest my brain and recharge for the afternoon session.

These new habits do, I realize, introduce some inconveniences for myself and others. I am not likely to reply immediately to an email. There have been times my wife has forwarded me an interesting news article which I cannot read because of the internet blocks I have in place. Last Sunday, I was surprised to learn that the Super Bowl was happening, and realized I had completely missed the buildup. 

I think the trade-offs are worth it, though. If my clients are hiring me to index, and if indexing requires long periods of concentration, and if I want to produce quality indexes while also preserving time for rest in the evenings and on weekends, then I need to structure my workday and put safeguards in place to make sure that indexing happens in the scheduled hours. I wish I could say that I did not need these safeguards, but I have come to realize that I do. 

The questions are fairly simple: What are my priorities? How do I create lasting value for myself and for others? What do I need to do to make sure these happen?

Article
October 28, 2018
0 comment
by Stephen

Freelance Anniversary Reflections

Photo by picjumbo.com from Pexels

This is my sixth anniversary as a freelance indexer! It was the end of October, 2012, that I left my job at Harbour Publishing and moved back to Vancouver with the intention to work for myself. That first year I received only a few projects, which I have to admit I used as an opportunity to travel. Since I have started, though, I have worked on (or will, once I finish what is currently on my desktop) 224 projects. Work certainly picked up, especially starting my third year. I don’t have an exact count of books indexed, but including books from when I worked in-house, I think I am somewhere in the range of 210-230 indexes written. Someday it would be really neat to be in a room with all of the books I have worked on. For the most part I work on the computer with digital files, so to see the actual physical product all around me would be amazing.  

I’ve been doing some reflection on my business. When I started, part of the motivation was to see if I could start a viable business. I think I can now say, with the support of all of the publishers, editors, and authors who have entrusted their books to me, that I have. I am thankful for the relationships that I have built with clients and colleagues. It is a great little community that I had no idea existed when I started. 

Recently, I’ve been asking myself, “What’s next?” I don’t see this as a negative question, and for the time being I plan to continue in this work. I think every business changes over time, either in response to the market or due to changes in the people working in the business. I know I have definitely changed in the last few years. Some of my reasons for freelancing have either been fulfilled or are no longer applicable, which I think is worth reflecting on. I have also been feeling like the pace I have been working at over the last few months is unsustainable. Being a one-person business, I am not doing myself, or my clients, a favour if I burn out. 

I have decided to take January and maybe February (I’ll see how I feel when I get there) off as a sabbatical. I am a bit nervous as I have never done this before. This is not intended to be a holiday, and for the most part I will stay in Edmonton. I am still working on the details, but I hope to use the time for a mixture of rest; reflection and strategizing for the next few years, both in business and in life (which are very much intertwined, especially as a freelancer); and to get caught up on some projects and tasks I’ve been neglecting. I hope to emerge with a renewed sense of purpose and a more sustainable approach to work and life. I see the sabbatical as an opportunity to grow.

I am sure that I will have more to write later on the sabbatical, as I continue to prepare and then once I’ve completed it. For now, I am looking forward to it. It does feel like the right time. When indexing, it is easy to get caught up in the small details of each project and to not see the big picture of my business and life. I look forward to taking a step back and getting a sense for what the next six years might look like.

Article
September 22, 2018
0 comment
by Stephen

Indexing Fiction: The Lord of the Rings

Happy Hobbit Day!

September 22 is apparently the shared birthday of Bilbo and Frodo Baggins. I wonder how old they would be.

Today is also a good excuse to examine the index for the Lord of the Rings (LOTR) trilogy. I was quite surprised to notice, a couple of years ago, that my omnibus edition has an index. Thanks to a comment from a colleague, I have learned that the box set also comes with an index, or at least some of the box sets do. 

To back up a moment, and briefly recap, last month I reviewed an online index for The Wheel of Time series. The indexing issues I raised for fiction included spoilers, the scope of the index, locators, and differentiation, for example if the reader has forgotten which is a person, place, or thing. I will not repeat my full discussion of these issues in this blog post, but I will be examining this index with those issues in mind. So, on to the LOTR’s index.

I am curious to know when this index was originally written. My omnibus edition is from 1995, though the copyright page states that the three volumes were first published together in 1968. Does the index extend that far back? I was able to find a copy of the index in a box set on Amazon, using their Look Inside feature. That version is from a mass market paperback edition from Del Ray, apparently from 1986. I do not know if that index is the one reproduced in other box sets as well. In any case, the two indexes are extremely similar. The box set edition appears to have been shortened, which I think makes it less comprehensive and useful, but otherwise I am willing to believe that it is simply a shortened version of the original. In this review, I will mostly be commenting on the longer version found in the omnibus edition.

The index itself is actually a set of four indexes. There is an index for songs and verses; persons, beasts, and monsters; places; and things. There is a fifth section in the box set, with the title of “Supplement: Persons, Places and Things appearing only in Songs and Poems,” only a page long. I am not sure why this fifth index is included, as it is very specific. What audience or need is it seeking to meet? Otherwise, I think splitting the index is a helpful decision on the part of the indexer. It directly addresses the issue of differentiation, and of informing readers what kind of entry they are looking at. Splitting the index also means that each section is not too long, which I think also makes the index easier to search. 

Splitting the index also speaks to the scope of the index, which is what does the index cover. Related to scope is also the use, or not, of subheadings, which also leads to the issue of spoilers. Can we get a sense of the story from the index entries? In this index, the focus of the index is on the tangible. As far as I can tell, there are no conceptual entries, nor do the entries give a sense of plot. There are a few subheadings, but they are mostly of alternative names or terms, such as “the Grey” or “Stormcrow” for Gandalf. I am glad that these alternative terms are included so that the reader can find all of the relevant entries (and I noticed that several of them were removed in the box set edition), but these don’t tell us much about the character, place, or thing. 

Also on scope—and an aspect of this index that I find frustrating—is that the index does not attempt to be comprehensive. The places index, in particular, has a headnote explaining that in most cases only the first mention is indexed, except for where the indexer thought there were other significant mentions. In the box set edition, the headnote actually admits, “This [index] is rather more arbitrary than the last.” The headnote for the persons, beasts, and monsters index simply tells us that “references are selective” (though this headnote is missing from the box set). Still, there are far more locators in the persons index than for places, giving me some confidence that I will at least find all of the major scenes or chapters for a character. I do not know why the same was not done for places. For the things index, there is no headnote, and relatively few locators. This is also the section that appears to have been shortened the most between the two editions. The songs and verses index is short, split between first lines and titles, and seems comprehensive. Overall, it seems like each section was given different treatment, without a lot of explanation to the reader as to why. This makes me doubt the usefulness and reliability of the index. Can I trust that I am being directed to all of the relevant entries? Part of the indexing process is determining what is relevant for the reader, especially if there is a space constraint, so I do not want to fault the indexer for making decisions that we all have to make. In the absence of more information, though, the discrepancies do seem arbitrary, which is not the impression that an index should give.

The locators are also worth commenting on. With no subheadings to indicate plot, there are long strings of undifferentiated locators. These are usually not ideal, but given that this index is trying to avoid spoilers and is only trying to direct readers to the relevant pages, I think the undifferentiated locators are understandable.

 One aspect I found interesting were the extremely long page ranges for main characters. Locators for Frodo, for example, included 21-145 passim, 148-86 passim, 190-209 passim. The term passim, not commonly used, is meant to indicate that the subject is discussed throughout the range, but not necessarily on every page or in a continuous discussion. I think the use here is unnecessary as the reader will probably figure that out from the ranges. Still, these ranges are an interesting solution for how to index main characters who are the focus of the book. The ranges allow those entries to be relatively short, compared to how much of the book the locators cover. 

The locators also, of course, have to be changed for the different editions. For the box set, the index seems to only appear in the third book, The Return of the King, and locators include the volume number, so readers know which book in the trilogy to refer back to. I see value in having the (mostly) same index across all editions, so readers will find the same kinds of information regardless of the edition they are using. It must be a tedious task, though, for whoever given the job of adjusting the locators for each new edition. 

All in all, I think that the LOTR index is decent. Its best feature is having separate indexes for the different types of content. The part of me that likes to be organized and thorough wishes that the index was more comprehensive, in both entries and number of references picked up. At the very least, a longer headnote would be helpful to explain the differences between the sections and what we can expect to find. I also wonder how this index would be different if the plot was at least hinted at, but I respect the decision to not include spoilers. For the reader, I think this index is certainly a vast improvement over having no index, and I am grateful for whoever had the foresight to create it and to keep it in publication.

 My apologies for irregular blogging over the last couple of months. I have had a lot of work this summer, which is continuing into the fall. More to the point, I’ve been away for about a week for each of the last two months, and I have another trip planned starting next week. I don’t usually stagger my holidays like this, and while I have enjoyed the people and places my wife and I have visited, I have also found it difficult to maintain routines in this pattern of intense periods of work interspersed by travel. I look forward to returning to a more settled schedule, including more blogging, when I return in October. 

Article
August 26, 2018
0 comment
by Stephen

Indexing Institutional Histories: A Case Study

This last week I finished the index for a large institutional history, 550 pages, including endnotes. It was one of the more challenging books I have indexed. I will not yet reveal the name of the institution, or the title or author, as the book is not yet published, but I am still interested in exploring what made this project unique while it is fresh in my mind. You see, while the institution described is currently a single entity, the book actually discussed three institutions. Let’s call them the museum, the archives, and the library.

The first set of intertwined institutions are the museum and archives. About fifteen years ago they were formally amalgamated, and so they are, now, a single entity while retaining their distinctive spheres. For most of their history, though, going back 100+ years, they were separate institutions, yet often shared the same building. So in a sense this book is really a story of parallel, yet conjoined, histories. Part of my job, as the indexer, was to reflect both histories in the index, and to make it clear when each was being discussed.

The second set of intertwined institutions are the library and the archives. The library was actually established first, before the archives, and part of its mandate was to collect archival records. A few years later the archives were created as a separate entity, and yet for decades not only did the two share a building (with the museum), but they also shared a single administration. The head archivist was concurrently the head librarian. This mixing of roles continued until separate administrators were finally appointed, and until the archives moved out, with the museum, into a new building. At that point the library drops out of this particular story. Yet the library still needed to be addressed in the index. Its presence added yet another level of complexity, made even more so as it was often not clearly differentiated from the archives. The text usually treated both as a single entity, with a focus on archival work, probably because the same staff were involved in both. Because of that, while I had separate main entries for each, for when the difference was clear, I also tended to assume, when the difference was not clear, that the archival side was being discussed.

A temptation for this kind of book is to essentially write two, possibly three, separate indexes, one for each institution. In practice, because separate indexes are not very practical, this would probably look like massive entries for each within a single index, in which the whole history of each institution is clearly delineated. I don’t think that this approach works either. Overly large entries, with long lists of subheadings, or even multiple levels of subheadings, are often difficult to read. This also relates to the concept of the metatopic—the overarching topic of the book to which everything in the book relates. While I take the view that the metatopic should be present in the index as a starting point for the reader—in this case, the metatopics would be the museum and archives—I also agree that the information which form the metatopic should be broken down into their different components and scattered throughout the index to give the reader smaller chunks of information to digest. 

That still leaves the question, though, of how to differentiate between information that is related to the museum and information that is related to the archives and library. Ideally, if the reader is only interested in one institution or the other, the reader should know which they are getting. My overall strategy was to be clear in the language I used. I also dealt with this on a case-by-case basis, as I was afraid that if I was too rigid following a particular strategy or formula, I would end up with too much repetition between the entries, and an index that was longer than necessary. To give a few examples…

There were a number of areas in which both the museum and the archives had similar programs or issues. Both, for example, published books, reports, and magazines or journals. In order to differentiate, I decided to have parallel entries of,

publishing program, archives 

publishing program, museum

Other topics, I felt, did not make sense to differentiate, either because the same issues applied to both, or because it was primarily only one institution that dealt with that issue. An example would be the buildings these institutions occupied, which in most instances were shared. Another instance was finances, a lot of which were about government budget cuts which affected both equally. I thought that I would have a lot of duplication if I had separate entries, which seemed to me to add limited value. 

In these cases, I also sometimes use subheadings to highlight one or both institutions where it made sense to do so. This would usually be a situation in which the entry was primarily about one institution, but for which there were a couple of locators for the other as well. For example, exhibitions and displays was almost entirely about the museum, as I think most people would expect. Yet the archives had a small gallery that was also referenced a couple of times, so “in archives” became a subheading. For the entry for collections, which was about collections in general with numerous cross-references to specific collections, most of the subheadings were applicable to both institutions, but I also had the following two subheadings for the one instance I thought differentiation made sense:

collection policy for archives

collection policy for museum

Another issue was how to differentiate the staff, particularly the administrators who tended to have the most lengthy entries. I decided that I would not try to differentiate staff who did not have enough entries to merit subheadings, but for staff with subheadings, I tried to insert the term museum or archives somewhere near the top of the entry. This usually meant a subheading along the lines of,

appointment and departure from archives and library

This usually sorted to be the first or second subheading in the entry, which I hope will help orient readers to where this person worked, and what kind of information they can expect from this entry. I think this is preferable to giving no clue, and leaving the reader to possibly waste time on the wrong person.

All told, this was quite a dense text, though well-written. I did find the book interesting, especially as I have done some research myself at this particular archive. Now that I understand its history and collection better, I kind of want to return, though I don’t know what I would research. The index was also quite the challenge. I hope that the decisions I made make sense, especially to the readers who will be using it.

Article
August 13, 2018
0 comment
by Stephen

Indexing Fiction: The Wheel of Time Case Study

Indexes for fiction seems to be a recurring topic among indexers. I do not know of anyone who has actually written an index like this, but we sure like to talk about it. Someone recently raised the issue again on one of the indexing email lists, and it just so happened that shortly before that exchange, I found an online index for the fourteen-volume fantasy series by Robert Jordan and Brandon Sanderson, The Wheel of Time, which is one of my favourite fantasy series.

So, here are some thoughts to join the conversation, first on indexing fiction, in general, and then on The Wheel of Time index specifically.

Issues in Indexing Fiction

One of the biggest concerns in indexing fiction is spoilers. How much of the plot should be revealed? Should the ending be included, even if buried in a subheading? Or should nothing about the plot be revealed, with the index consisting of  undifferentiated locators (no subheadings) for people, places, and things?

To help discern an answer, we should consider who is most likely to use the index. Is it a new reader or is it a repeat reader? Repeat readers may actually want spoilers, because they already know what happens anyway, and they may be searching the index for specific information or scenes that they recall, which would require a fairly detailed index. 

I think it is also helpful to consider other supplementary material that can accompany fiction, like wikis and companion books. For The Wheel of Time, the “A Wheel of Time Wiki” has on its home page the following statement: “This wiki contains spoilers for all books in the series! Read articles at your own risk.” The Wheel of Time Companion: The People, Places, and History of the Bestselling Series, also states in its introduction that the book contains spoilers. It seems reasonable to say that spoilers are inevitable, and often expected, in supplementary material, including, I would say, indexes. A certain amount of information needs to be included in order for that resource to serve its purpose. Perhaps spoilers are not as big an issue as we may think, though again, this circles back to the purpose of the index and its audience.

A related issue, focusing on the index content, is the scope of the index. Should the focus be solely on people, places, and things? What about the culture, technology, or social issues described in the book? Should major themes be picked up? Should the index attempt to break down the plot, or follow character arcs? Should subheadings be used, which can facilitate breaking down the story, or should locators be undifferentiated, which could lead to long strings of page numbers but at least the plot is safely hidden. In writing the index, of course, the book should not be rewritten, but I think that there are still degrees of complexity and scope that can be considered. A good novel should be multifaceted and immersive. Should the index be similar?

The last main issue that comes to mind is that of locators. Fiction, especially popular fiction, can often be reprinted in multiple editions over time. Which edition should the index be keyed to, or will the index have to be adjusted for each edition? If the index is for a series, like The Wheel of Time, for which I think an index would be most useful, there is the added question of how will the index be published? Will it be a standalone volume? Published online? This logistical issue is not insurmountable, but it should be considered from the outset.

The Wheel of Time Index

I have actually thought about an index for The Wheel of Time for many years, though partly for the issues outlined above and partly for lack of time and pay I have not followed through on the idea. So I am really excited to find this online index, which you can view here. It is part of the larger website Encyclopedia WoT, which is one of several fan-created The Wheel of Time websites. 

As you can see when you browse the main page, the main headings focus on people, places, and things. There are a few concepts, such as agelessness and channelling, which are specific to the world, but otherwise conceptual entries are not included. Still, given the parameters I am impressed by how thorough the term selection is. Even characters and places with very minor references are included. 

Interestingly, names are not inverted and are alphabetically sorted by first name. Perhaps readers are more familiar with first names than last? A more serious issue, I think, is that terms are not differentiated or explained. There are a few instances of two minor characters having the same name but no indication of which entry is for which. There are also a lot of terms which I simply do not recognize, probably because it has been a few years since I have read most of the books, and probably because some of these references are quite minor. I think simple glosses would be helpful. For example:

hedgehog (ter’angreal)

Mehar (Saldaean town)

Sarand (Andoran noble house)

Glosses like these would make the index much easier to browse. In its current state, the index requires the user to recognize all of the terms and to already know what they want to find, while glosses would make searching easier for the casual browser. 

My last critique about the main headings is the lack of cross-references. This lack is particularly noticeable as some of the entries do not have their own page. For example, the entry for Mondel Gate automatically redirects to the page for the city of Caemlyn, within which are references to Mondel Gate, but the user has to search for those references. It is not obvious why I was sent to a different page than expected, or where the relevant information is. Some sort of cross-reference could explain where the information actually is or why I am being redirected, and give direction for how to use the index.

The individual entries are also quite interesting, and show how much more information can be included in an online index compared to a back-of-the-book index. The entries definitely contain spoilers, as they contain extensive information about what the reader can find. For example, the following subheadings, we will call them, appear in the entry for Basel Gill:

Gill is very upset that Maighdin has disappeared.

Gill and his companions reach the Jehannah Road. Travelers report that the way north is impassable so they head east.

Rand tries to remember what Gill told him about Galad.

Elyas scouts the Whitecloak camp and recognizes Gill. Perrin begins planning how to free them.

The information provided is split into a number of different sections. The first is a brief explanation of the entry, such as this one for Basel Gill: “The innkeeper of The Queen’s Blessing in Caemlyn”. If the entry is a person, there is usually then a physical description, including locators for where the person is described. Next is a list of actions and events the character appears in, in chronological order, followed by other mentions. 

Entries for places, things, and groups follow a similar structure, and may also include a list of related entries (a form of cross-reference), such as everyone mentioned from a particular village.

As mentioned, a lot of information, in sentence format, is given in the description for each locator. The entries also appear to be in chronological order, so similar entries are not grouped together. While this means that readers have to search to find the specific information they want, the entry does provide a comprehensive overview. 

I find the locators to be one of the most interesting aspects of this index. The locators bypass the issue of which edition of the series to use by linking to chapter summaries instead of page numbers. This provides context for the entries, but if the reader still wants to find the specific mention, they will have to reread the chapter. Perhaps this is why so much description is given within each entry, as the chapter summaries are fairly brief. This makes the entries, in a way, more important than the locators. Still, I think this is quite an ingenious solution.

In addition to the index, at the top of each page there are a number of links to pages on each of the books, history, geography, characters, items, etc… Some of the information listed in these pages overlaps with the index, while others, such as history and geography, in a way serve as conceptual entries, gathering together relevant subheadings. The index is integrated into the larger website, blurring the lines between the website as a whole and the page that is formally labeled “Index.”

All in all, I am very impressed by this index for The Wheel of Time. I cannot imagine how much work must have gone into its creation. I think there are some ways to make the index easier to search and use, and more could be done to expand into more conceptual entries, but these are fairly minor quibbles compared to what this index actually does achieve. This is a fantastic resource for fans. I wish that similar indexes were available for other series as well.

Article
July 10, 2018
1 comment
by Stephen

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.”