And the fact that I am still serious about pursuing that teaching career, (the implications that this decision has for my relationship is currently being ignored for now) makes me less stressed and more cheerful about my current work scope than most of my friends.

However, being the fantastically fastidious Virgo that I am, I�m getting annoyed. I�m no longer even sure if the fault lies with me because I am an over-domineering, opinionated, egoistic, critical person with blinkers on, or if there is a justifiable reason to start getting annoyed.

I have no problems with my editor deleting huge chunks of my articles, rewriting whole paragraphs to add interesting deviations to them or even change the focus of my article to her specifications. Simply by virtue of the fact that I�m new, inexperienced and am just bumbling around in the publishing industry, I take everything as a learning experience. (Well, except the last, but I will go into later.)

What I do resent is when she rewrites them in this over-embellished, ornate, melodramatic style that I absolutely detest. To add salt to injury, she prefers long complex sentences with so many clich�s and mixed metaphors that strike me as absolutely over-the-top and distracting. I had to retrain myself years ago to stop writing that way because of helpful criticism from past experience with my professors, readers (nope, not just blog readers; I did some writing in university) and helpful friends. Simplicity, I was told, is the key to good writing.

A discerning reader would be able to spot the differences in style immediately. I am not sure if her writing style is correct for me. It feels unnatural after so many years. As I�m trying to earn a living in writing, (for now at least), I am seriously considering compromising by imitating her style. This serves a couple of purposes.

One, she will quit re-writing huge chunks of my articles, and minimise changing the direction of the articles. This happened recently and I�m kind of worried about it, because the article in question is an informative one with crucial facts and figures. I�m not sure if she realised (even after I tried tactfully pointing it out) that by rewriting that crucial paragraph, she has created a potential minefield of misinformation.

But hey, she�s the editor, and has the final say in everything. Still, I�m worried. I can�t help it.

The other problem with her rewriting my articles is best explained with this analogy. It�s like sticking a dragon�s head onto the body of a rabbit. She mostly rewrites my introductions because they aren�t �flashy� or �eye-catching� enough, and occasionally trims excess information in-between. A discerning reader will see the incongruity of the style in the whole article and wonder at my competency.

Two, I won�t get criticised for writing in a �dissertation� style, which is dull and boring and puts people off from reading my article.

Well, hopefully I find a solution soon, so as to ensure peace of mind and getting my editorials approved more often by my editor. That would be nice.

She is planning to bring me up to task for magazine writing. Now, I�m just wondering if people prefer reading more embellished writing. I know style is subjective with the target demographic, but I always thought the English-educated demographic would prefer articles that played up to their intellectual capacities and not patronise them with flamboyant OTT stuff.

My mom suggested that perhaps it is the difference in the university education between my editor (the U.K.) and me (Australia).

And my aunt tells me that in business and work, it is not what you think that is important; it is anticipating what the customer wants. So for now, I shall assume that people prefer that which feels stiff and unnatural to me.

Speaking of my aunt, that�s another �work-related�entry.

Sigh. And yes, I have decided to move to LJ for work-related blog entries. There is something to be said about security.

Edit:

Upon retrospection, the fault lies with me. I�m just inflexible and slow to change.