h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Hey B,

what happened to my title? 'Rainbows End' is a true statement that I stand by!

'The End of a Rainbow' is not the same thing.

Please give me my title back!

~Recumbentman

I didn't change the title.

This is the evilness of the h2g2 Editors already at work. Run! Run away while you still have your life...

I'll drop them a line.

B

Is there some person I should write to on this? It's okay to change unwitting variants of 'normal language' but surely not all intentional ones.

The thing about 'simply: conical. Part of a cone.' bugs me still. I wrote it without thinking much of the special syntax, but when it's censored I think 'what _is_ the special resonance I want there?' and on a lot of reflection I think it echoes a central moment in Joyce's Ulysses, where a nationalist asks Leopold Bloom, "What is your nationality?" to which Bloom replies "Irish. Ireland. I was born here." The tension comes from the fact that Bloom was of Jewish extraction, which remains attached to him despite multiple baptisms.

(My quotes above may be inaccurate, I haven't a copy to hand.)

Because the entry is now out of my hands, it should all go to <./>Feedback-Editorial</.>

B

Hey Recumbentman, Hey Master B,

I've just had a look at this entry, so if you want to ask anything, I'm happy to help.

Anna

It now reads 'Rainbow Ends'; but that is not a sentence, at least not so grammatically correct as 'Rainbows End'. Come on guys, this is my baby, can't I name it?

Hi Recumbentman,

Okay, not 'Rainbow Ends' then. However, titles should
accurately describe what is in the entry (see <./>SubEditors-Style</.&gt and we often change titles to accurately reflect what's in the Entry. I'm not sure that 'Rainbows End' does that. On reading your piece (which I liked very much) for me, it was more of a philosophic/scientific examination of how rainbows are perceived, literally and (touching on) figuratively.

Anna

My thesis is, that rainbows really do end.

Okay. What would you suggest for a title that accurately reflects what's in the entry?

Anna

'A Scientific and Philosophical Essay on Rainbows in which it is irrefutably demonstrated that they really do have a single End and that Fabulous Wealth is to be found there'. No that's rather cumbersome . . . actually I've thought about this a long time now (I think it's over a year since I first sketched it) and in my opinion a good eye-catching title, that sets out the subject concisely, and on re-reading it after going through the article aptly reveals itself to contain the hidden treasure of being a two-word precis of the whole piece, would be 'Rainbows End'. Would that meet the requirement?

Dear Recumbentman,

Re Rainbows - a Reflection. I understand that you have put a lot of thought into this Entry and title. Do remember that the Edited Guide version is a copy of the original. The original can be found in the Search engine and it will remain just as you wrote it for as long as you wish.

In addition, in <./>/SubEditors-Process</.> we say:

'It's important to remember that Peer Review is not a final proof of an entry and changes will be made to fit in with editorial and style guidelines.'

We have to work in a framework, so we can ensure consistency. I would very much regret it if you were to take this out of the Editorial process, but if you would like a platform for your writing, perhaps the Underguide would be an alternative?

Anna

'changes will be made to fit in with editorial and style guidelines.'

I tried finding the relevant guidelines but my first searches have turned up nothing about titles. Where should I look?

4th bullet point, third paragraph: " changes will be made to fit in with editorial and style guidelines"

I had a good look at the 'SubEditors-Style' page, but nothing there shows me what might be wrong with 'Rainbows End' as a title, that would be in any way mitigated by 'Rainbows - a Reflection' (or even 'Rainbows&mdash;a Reflection).

It's not going to set the third world war in motion, but I do not like to see my brainchild genetically altered; it is painful to me.

If there is a higher authority to which I can appeal, please put me in touch.

If that is not possible, please consider the entry hereby withdrawn from the editorial process.

I can see that 'Rainbows End' is a good title. There are a number of reasons why it fits:

- It causes you to stop and look at it twice, because at first you think there should be an apostrophe there, then you figure it out;

- It is vaguely like Finnegans Wake, (possibly through the medium of Finian's Rainbow), so this gives it a sort of Irish literary feel, which prepares us for the leprechaun in the first paragraph, and the philosophical feel of the entry;

I can also see that Anna wants to have a title that gives some information on what the entry is about. Can we come to a compromise, where the original title 'Rainbows End' is included in a longer title:

Rainbows End - The Eyes Have It
Rainbows End - Reality is in the eye of the beholder
Rainbows End - Photons are forever
Rainbows End at the Round Earth's Imagined Corners
Rainbows End - the effect of Dew on Brains

(think about that last one, Recumbentman)

I'm there are much better ones than I've come up with here, but let's not end with Anna insisting and Recumbentman refusing. That way, nobody will be happy.

Thanks Gnomon,

Oooo, I like 'Rainbows End - Reality is in the eye of the beholder' very much. What do you think Recumbantman?

Anna

Anna

I feel like the old curmudgeon in "Green Eggs and Ham".

I do not like it with The Eyes Have It
I do not like it with Reality is in the eye of the beholder
I do not like it with Photons are forever
I do not like it with at the Round Earth's Imagined Corners
I do not like it with the effect of Dew on Brains

-- though that is clever and nice, Gnomon, it is ever so slightly not what it is about. The story is, rainbows end in consciousness where everything begins and ends. I feel tempted to settle for Rainbows End Here or Rainbows End In You, but at the same time I can't for the life of me see that they are any improvement in the way of pointing out the subject matter, which is, and remains for my poor brain, Rainbows End.

I'll come back later, right now I have to wash up.

Washed up and ready to think.

1 Anna, you didn't do what I asked, put me in touch with a higher authority if there is one.

2 Gnomon, though 'Reality is in the eye etc' seems relevant, it is specifically denied in my entry: "another level of seeing must be admitted, _beyond_ eyeball projection".

3 I will offer one compromise, though God knows why I should: I will accept the title "Rainbows End: Fact and Fiction" on condition that the text is copied exactly, with no further edition, from the current version of A908147. I have put fullstops at the end of the footnotes, and added a new one, but I have also reinstated (with improvement) my verbfree sentence "Part of a cone." This stays. I like it exceedingly.

4 Otherwise we are at the position of posting 14 above.

I'm glad you used the word 'curmudgeon' because I would have had to look up the spelling.

You wonder why you should compromise? Because for this entry to be an Edited one, it has to have a vaguely explanatory title, which it doesn't at the moment. The reason for submitting the entry to Peer Review in the first place was so that it should become an 'official' Edited Entry, so presumably you want this to happen. If you just want the entry to sit in the Guide for people to stumble across you could leave it where it is. Being 'Edited' makes it easier to find, because it is put in the Contents Index which appears at all times on the Front Page. The entry itself appears on the Front Page for one day and the 'official' status gets attached to the entry.

Anna is doing her job in asking you to provide an explanatory title. I don't think there is a higher editing authority, but I'll leave Anna to answer that one.

Dear Recumbentman,

I understand your frustrations about the changes. Right at the very beginning of h2g2 we understood that writing is precious to authors which is why we only make changes to the *copy* of the Entry. We also decided that it was important to let Researchers know in advance that their writing would be changed to fit in with house style which is why we state on the <./>SubEditors-Process</.> page:

'It's important to remember that Peer Review is not a final proof of an entry and changes will be made to fit in with editorial and style guidelines. Sub-editors and inhouse Editors will often make changes: they will correct grammar and spelling, will tweak GuideML, may change the style and may add in information.'

With Peer Review and the volunteers schemes, collaboration of this sort is central to the ethos of h2g2. Changing text is commonplace in the publishing industry, which all of us on the Editorial team have experience of, and I would prefer the text to remain as it is in A954759. The title 'Rainbows End - Fact and Fiction' is a good one and I'm happy to change that too.

However, if you would like to withdraw the Entry from the Editorial process then I understand completely, though I think it would be great shame.

(All of the italics who work on the Edited Guide - Sam, Ashley, Jimster and myself - have equal value, but, without wanting to denigrate the great work of my colleagues, I've been here longest and, in response to the Community, am most practised in formulating policies regarding submissions to the Edited Guide.)

Anna