Hello Innana~ I am your editor yet again and so again I would like to apologize for doing my edits at the very last minute (I’m good at this time management thing).
Firstly, eating disorders are a hard topic to handle, and I think you did it well. This piece is tenuous in a good way, and I have a few very broad suggestions to make.
Firstly, since the story is dealing with the beginnings of recovery from what I assume is anorexia, though bulimia is also a possibility, I think it would be extremely interesting to see the prosaic style reflect that through eliminating any extra words, especially in the beginning. By paring the piece down stylistically in the beginning, I feel that it would reflect the thinness of Amy. Since the piece is pared down already, I feel that world-choice becomes even more important. Sharp-sounding words may fit better in the piece in order to create a sense of tension and the illusion that Amy is thin (utilizing a conceptual pattern that thin people are sharp and less-thin people are “round and soft”)
Finally, I personally have some issue with your details in the piece. Details such as “size 0 pants” are a little bit too concrete for me, and I’m not sure if it’s just my own personal preference, but you may want to consider how your details work in the piece. I think numbers to reflect weight are good, because they are concrete details that the narrator and the reader can focus on, but in that case I feel that the other details (the color of her eyes, the size pants that she’s wearing) can be stripped out to make the weight stand out more.
Lastly, I just wanted to talk a bit about the weight. To be completely honest, I found the fact that 111 (I am assuming pounds) equating to smaller than size 0 pants unrealistic. This is because I am 5’4” and 100 pounds and I wear size 2 pants. Obviously size and frame differ between people according to muscle-to-fat ratios and height, but I did not find this situation that realistic because if it’s gotten to the point that she’s smaller than a size 0, then she should probably be less than 111 pounds.
Overall, I think this is a good piece. Thank you for sharing it! :)
I really like your suggestions about word-choice and the details. I'll definitely work those in (or out). :)
I generally don't make it a point to counter an editorial point. I am not defending the size-0 in the sense I think you were wrong as an editor. You were totally right as an editor. :)
I am going to edit the detail out because I don't want people to get hung up on whether or not it is realistic and because, as you mentioned, I agree that it is unnecessary (thank you for helping me see this!), but it is important to me to make this point in an educational sense, because I think that weights and body size is something that the media has severely misconstrued and I think it is dangerous:
My size 2 pants fell clear off of me at 116 pounds. I'm someone who is a size 4 at 128 (still too thin) and looks fantastic and extremely fit at about 135-140.
You're right in that frame and proportions factor in considerably. I'm guessing that your bones are probably much smaller than mine and you are two inches shorter. The point I was trying to make (and didn't succeed in making) by including it, was that it concerns me that numbers between 110-120 are often touted as 'ideal weights', especially in the media. They might be for some, but for others, like my extremely athletic 5'4" sister and I, they are size-0 or below and very unhealthy weights. My body was starting to shut down on me at that point; I was no longer menstruating.
Like I said, I agree that that detail detracts from the rest of the piece, but unfortunately, it is not remotely unrealistic. Thankfully, that struggle is a good seven years behind me.
Hello Innana~ I am your editor yet again and so again I would like to apologize for doing my edits at the very last minute (I’m good at this time management thing).
Firstly, eating disorders are a hard topic to handle, and I think you did it well. This piece is tenuous in a good way, and I have a few very broad suggestions to make.
Firstly, since the story is dealing with the beginnings of recovery from what I assume is anorexia, though bulimia is also a possibility, I think it would be extremely interesting to see the prosaic style reflect that through eliminating any extra words, especially in the beginning. By paring the piece down stylistically in the beginning, I feel that it would reflect the thinness of Amy. Since the piece is pared down already, I feel that world-choice becomes even more important. Sharp-sounding words may fit better in the piece in order to create a sense of tension and the illusion that Amy is thin (utilizing a conceptual pattern that thin people are sharp and less-thin people are “round and soft”)
Finally, I personally have some issue with your details in the piece. Details such as “size 0 pants” are a little bit too concrete for me, and I’m not sure if it’s just my own personal preference, but you may want to consider how your details work in the piece. I think numbers to reflect weight are good, because they are concrete details that the narrator and the reader can focus on, but in that case I feel that the other details (the color of her eyes, the size pants that she’s wearing) can be stripped out to make the weight stand out more.
Lastly, I just wanted to talk a bit about the weight. To be completely honest, I found the fact that 111 (I am assuming pounds) equating to smaller than size 0 pants unrealistic. This is because I am 5’4” and 100 pounds and I wear size 2 pants. Obviously size and frame differ between people according to muscle-to-fat ratios and height, but I did not find this situation that realistic because if it’s gotten to the point that she’s smaller than a size 0, then she should probably be less than 111 pounds.
Overall, I think this is a good piece. Thank you for sharing it! :)
Reply
I generally don't make it a point to counter an editorial point. I am not defending the size-0 in the sense I think you were wrong as an editor. You were totally right as an editor. :)
I am going to edit the detail out because I don't want people to get hung up on whether or not it is realistic and because, as you mentioned, I agree that it is unnecessary (thank you for helping me see this!), but it is important to me to make this point in an educational sense, because I think that weights and body size is something that the media has severely misconstrued and I think it is dangerous:
My size 2 pants fell clear off of me at 116 pounds. I'm someone who is a size 4 at 128 (still too thin) and looks fantastic and extremely fit at about 135-140.
You're right in that frame and proportions factor in considerably. I'm guessing that your bones are probably much smaller than mine and you are two inches shorter. The point I was trying to make (and didn't succeed in making) by including it, was that it concerns me that numbers between 110-120 are often touted as 'ideal weights', especially in the media. They might be for some, but for others, like my extremely athletic 5'4" sister and I, they are size-0 or below and very unhealthy weights. My body was starting to shut down on me at that point; I was no longer menstruating.
Like I said, I agree that that detail detracts from the rest of the piece, but unfortunately, it is not remotely unrealistic. Thankfully, that struggle is a good seven years behind me.
Reply
Leave a comment