Column:
Editor's note ruined column
Published April 18, 2006
"In following days, I would call her a few times, not because I care about either the 50.7 percent that wanted to get down or the 48.9 percent that knew better, but because I want to fuck her again. [Ed note: The percentages correspond to the 2004 presidential election. Get it?]" — My column, from The Maneater's April 11 issue.
One would think an editorial staff would seek to maintain the integrity of a contributor's vision and writing. I can only assume that is how things work in the world of professional journalism. Not at this paper. No, sir.
During the past two semesters I have attempted to write a humorous column. Sometimes the humor is based wholly on penis jokes. Other times, such as the one quoted above, there is a little subtlety and veiled language.
On March 7, I included a potentially offensive joke about a particular violent crime in this column. It was removed and, though I was not thrilled with the decision, I understood where the editors were coming from.
I wouldn't make a joke about someone being raped. That is in horrible taste. I will, however, compare something as minor as not seeing someone nude to something as horrible as rape to make an absurd juxtaposition — thereby highlighting the severity of rape. I am OK with this, but if The Maneater would rather censor than risk offending, I suppose that is its prerogative.
Last week's addition is another matter altogether. I cannot imagine what the motivation was for it. My earnest attempt at subtle symbolism and political humor was metaphorically raped.
Is it possible that the editors thought no one would pick up on the subtext? Do they really think their readers are that dense? I would argue that there would be a small population of idiots reading who wouldn't get the joke and that we shouldn't care. If you aren't intelligent enough to put the pieces together, fuck you. I don't want you to get it. You aren't worth it. Go read the Greek Chronicle.
Maybe the editor in question had a different motivation. Perhaps he or she thought people would get it and just threw that in to show that the editorial board is right there with you. Maybe he or she thought it would be funny.
My only other thought is that he or she is tying to sink my ship and just shit all over my offerings. I guess after all the grief I have given the editorial board, I might deserve that. But the readers don't. I can't count the times this week that people have come up to me and apologized for the editor's note, saying that it completely ruined the column. The folks who run the paper are in the business of getting people to read their paper, thereby increasing circulation, which the advertising department can use to sell more ads. I am not sure if slaughtering humor and implicitly insulting a columnist is the best way to do that. All that is going to do is get said columnist to dedicate his remaining columns this semester to airing grievances he has with the staff.
Please understand this: Whichever editor saw fit to insert that little note owes me and all of you an apology. Also, in the future, for the love of God, limit the notes to factual clarifications and covering your ass when you think I've gone too far.
Whichever editor is at fault: I anxiously await an e-mail from you.
