I thoroughly enjoyed most of David Henige’s article, “Indexing: A User’s Perspective” (JSP, July 2002, 230–247). His passionate and eloquent argument for the inclusion of good indexes in scholarly books is most welcome. That Henige also appears to understand the qualities of a proper index adds even more weight to his fascinating article.
However, as a book author (Indexing Books, University of Chicago Press, 1994), a professional indexer (18 years), and former teacher of book indexing (15 years) I must take exception to Henige’s cavalier treatment of professional indexers. Henige writes (p. 234):
Professional indexers are well trained in isolating subjects, devising relevant sub-headings, noticing and querying discrepancies, and the like. What they are less good at is reading the minds of their authors to the degree that they understand the proportionalities involved, the crucial connections to be made, or alternative nomenclatures that are not specified in the text. In short, they cannot do as good a job as any author who is intent on providing good access and who might also, through experience, be as aware of the tricks of the indexing trade.
I will admit that it is not our job to read the minds of authors, nor is the audience for the book expected to read an author’s mind. It is part of the job of a professional indexer to understand the proportionalities involved in the text, to make crucial connections, and provide access to alternative nomenclatures. There are no “tricks of the indexing trade.”
In the years that I have taught university-accredited indexing courses, I have come to one conclusion: few people (10% or less) demonstrate an ability to index well (see N.C. Mulvany, ‘Teaching Book Indexing: A Curriculum,’ The Indexer 23:1(2002), 11–14.). I have had many book authors in my classes. I can assure you that they do not bring any special abilities to the task of indexing. This is not to say that authors can never index their own books well. Certainly a few are up to the task. This has been demonstrated over the years by the occasional awarding to author-indexers of the Wilson Award (American Society of Indexers) and the Wheatley Medal (Society of Indexers) for excellence in indexing.
Henige’s dismissive treatment of The Indexer as an “advocacy publication” (p. 238) deserves comment. In addition to the British, American, and Australian Societies, the Canadian, Chinese, and South African Societies should have been included in the roundup of professional organizations that sponsor The Indexer, a peer-reviewed publication that has been in circulation since 1958.
Again, returning to dismissing professional indexers as well as our journal, Henige adds “professional indexers, whose role, I have already argued, should be no more than fallback for authors who will not or cannot accomplish the index themselves.” He then cites (note 19) an article about indexing fiction, calling it “counterproductive.” How odd. The indexing of fiction is not counterproductive nor is it new. Samuel Richardson indexed his own novel, Clarissa, in the mid-1700s. Clarissa is considered by some to be the first English novel and it was indexed by the author. In 2000 AMS Press published Samuel Richardson’s Clarissa: An Index written by Susan Price Karpuk. The entire 476-page, large-format book is an index to that novel.
With good cause Henige bemoans the lack of indexes in scholarly books. I, too, am always surprised when university press books lack an index. The cases I have inquired about all resulted from the author attempting to write the index. I have been told that the author’s index was “too embarrassing” for the press to publish, that “the author became overwhelmed with the indexing task and did not let us know in time to contract with a professional indexer.” Just last year, I submitted to the author and the university press an index. The author proceeded to “edit” (I say, “butcher”) the index to the extent that I asked that my name in the credits be removed. The resulting index was a professional embarrassment, the editor agreed and kindly removed my name from the credits.
On page 235 Henige discusses publishers and space allotted for the index. Some authors specify in their contracts that a certain percentage of book pages be reserved for the index. Professional indexers who are asked to provide an index to a book that lacks room for a proper index often turn down those jobs. In addition to adding a signature of pages – which does happen – there are other ways to copy fit an index. When space is tight and the integrity of the index is jeopardized, the professional indexer will discuss various options with the production editor.
Wearing yet another hat, I have reviewed many book contracts from academic/scholarly publishers as a Contract Advisor for the National Writers Union (UAW Local 1981). As a rule these contracts are abysmal in many regards. In particular the “standard” clause that states “the author shall provide the index” should be negotiated. While not perfect, my contract with my publisher specified that the cost of indexing would be shared equally, with my portion charged as an advance against future royalties. This allowed me to contract with an excellent professional indexer. Yes, it’s true, the author of Indexing Books did not write the index to her own book.
My publisher and I agreed that a well-written index for my book was essential. As the author I needed someone, not to read my mind, but read my words with fresh eyes. Someone who could understand the proportionalities involved in the text, make crucial connections, and provide access to alternative nomenclatures. Someone who could do all of this within three weeks and do it well. In short, I needed a professional indexer.
Nancy Mulvany
www.bayside-indexing.com
September 30, 2002