When I think of correctness, I still find myself going on feel and intuition as much as rules. And rules there are plenty. Spelling is straightforward. For the most part, grammar brings order to chaos. But punctuation, the comma in particular, is not something I would set my watch by. Comma usage often varies according to style, who is writing, and who is editing. I tend to be an underuser, preferring syntax and diction to do most of the heavy lifting in a sentence. Some of the texts we've edited recently have had many. Sometimes commas keep us on the right path like the arrows at IKEA. But when the path is straight, unnecessary commas become obstacles for the eyes—distractions that give the reader pause. Even worse are the missing commas that force the reader to stop or reread passages because they're confused.
My hope, as I know it is with the other editors here, is that I’ve developed a greater appreciation for when certain punctuation is necessary. The last thing I want to do is impose my distaste for too many commas on a writer whose personal style welcomes the extra signposts. Flexibility is a necessary quality for any editor who hopes to make a living working with authors. The goal is to make things clear for the reader and keep the author's vision true. Above all, we must do no harm and blend into the background so the reader never knows we were there.
Comments