Not my story

By Rebecca Blakeney

I recently edited a photo book created by a Taungurung photographer. The book documented the finding and unearthing of Aboriginal artefacts on Taungurung country, undertaken as part of an Aboriginal heritage project. This work was meaningful to the photographer, who described the process as “a journey of growth and a defining experience.” It was also culturally significant to his mob, for whom the book was made.

I felt privileged to be able to work on this project, yet as an Anglo-Australian, I was aware that there may be much for me to learn in the process.

With the growing movement of “own voices” — the push for diverse and marginalised people to be represented in stories by writers from these groups—there is also increased awareness of the need for editors from diverse backgrounds to edit these works. Best practice suggests an Aboriginal editor would be the best person to edit Aboriginal work, but unfortunately this isn’t always possible.

But, as a non-Aboriginal person editing an Aboriginal work, there are some key points to keep in mind.

This question is important for any writing, and is fundamental when editing the work of someone whose cultural identity differs to your own. It is easy to fall into the trap of making the unconscious assumption that the intended audience is someone like you. Understanding who the audience is will impact numerous decisions that are made in the editing process. Therefore, it is vital that the editor be aware of any internal bias, and work with the writer to understand their true audience.

Identifying the audience was an essential step in editing the photo book. After my first conversation with the photographer, I initially thought the book should include a glossary. But once it was established that the primary audience for the work was the photographer’s mob, I realised it may not be needed. It was also unnecessary to include definitions of words or phrases that were generally understood by his mob, even if they were less widely known by other people.

English words may also have a different usage in different cultures, so it’s important to establish what that usage is and how it affects the rules around grammar. As Anita Heiss notes in Dhuuluu-Yala: To Talk Straight — Publishing Indigenous Literature, “The meanings of standard and Aboriginal-English words may be lost on an inexperienced editor who may not know the oral and cultural traditions on which the work rests.”

During the editing process I needed to check on the meanings and use of several words. We chatted about the use of “country” and I double-checked the use of capitals in a sentence written in Taungurung. It was also important to establish whether some of the terms he used were commonly understood by Taungurung people, or if they needed to be explained.

At times I needed to do more research, other times I simply asked the photographer. For one query, he checked with his mother who he felt had a greater understanding of the language. When there was no clear ‘right’ way, I left the final decision with him, noting: “If that seems more in keeping with the way your mob would use it, leave it that way.”

This is a key point to editing any work, but is especially important when editing works of underrepresented or marginalised people who historically haven’t been given a voice. It’s beneficial to also remember that flawless grammatical structure and an impressive vocabulary do not always equal better writing. Instead the editor should focus on helping the author find their voice and use it.

The photographer was quick to point out that writing had never been his strength. It was messy, riddled with spelling errors and misused words, and did not always follow grammatical conventions. Yet some simple line editing allowed his voice to emerge, and it quickly became clear that he had an in-depth knowledge of the subject and a knack for communicating complicated processes in a simple, reader-friendly way. I aimed for consistency in this, drawing his attention to places where his writing had become overly technical or confusing.

Aboriginal people may have particular processes when it comes to publishing, especially when works have cultural significance. This might include work being sighted and approved by a particular person or group of people, such as Aboriginal elders or a representative from the relevant mob. These processes can take time, so it’s important to ensure this is considered when drawing up timelines for editing and publishing.

In the case of the photographer I was working with, material needed to be run past his mob for fact-checking and to ensure it was presented in an appropriate way. We were lucky that the photographer was working on the heritage project as well as documenting it, and therefore had regular contact with members of his mob who were able see his work at various stages.

Ownership and control are also important. Much has been stolen from Aboriginal people, who, as the traditional owners of the land, should be given control over their cultural heritage. For example, the locations of the digs and uncovered artefacts in the photo book needed to be protected — something I only became aware of when I asked where the photos had been taken.

If in doubt, check in with the writer. Ask if there are any protocols to follow. Find out how they feel about the process and if there is anything else they’d like you to be aware of. And respect the fact that you are not the expert; as an editor there is always plenty to learn.

Related posts:

Franmande is a Swiss-born musician who is quickly making a name for himself in the hip hop music scene. Not only is he a rapper, but he is also a singer, showcasing his versatility and creativity as…

Traffic accidents killed over 34,000 and injured more than 1.8 million individuals in 2017 alone (NHTSA, 2017). These casualties have financial repercussions into the billions ($44 billion; CDC…

Among all the bad advice out there, one article stands out in my memory. It was an article in The Chronicle telling grad students how to be more responsible with their money. There was one problem…