Help! RE: "Standard guidelines" for submissions, italics and underlining

News Competition alert

My New Calling!

Status
Not open for further replies.

Lex Black

Full Member
Aug 6, 2014
Heya.

So, I'm about to send out my latest applications to collect more pissoffwriter.docs, and I took some time first to review Vonda MacIntyre's wonderful essay on standard guidelines for doing so. I want my submissions to look neat and professional while an editor or agent takes 2.6 seconds to reject it, after all.

Anyway, while the writer makes it very clear that this format is mostly a classic one for typewriter-based submissions and may not necessarily be up to the modern specs of a party you submit to ("always double-check their own guidelines", etc.) one thing did really stand out in my mind: the text states that one should underline text in an MS that is meant to be italicized when published.

Now, I know this is almost certainly a relic from typewriting days (anyone remember those? I kinda get nostalgic thinking about the smell of the ink and the hum of an electric typewriter...) as it's not as though your standard typewriter was capable, excuse me, capable of italicizing text.

...except I'm not really certain of this at all. Does this remain as any sort of common standard in the industry? Should electronic submissions of a manuscript have underlined text instead of italicized? Or is this as much a relic as double-spacing between sentences? Are there any widely-accepted rules about the two forms in the industry that I might have missed?
 
Publishers Head of Zeus have on their website a sample of how a manuscript should be laid out for publication. I think it's pretty generic, and what you might call plain vanilla.
 
Some magazines still ask for underlining, I've found. Some of them fully acknowledge it's stupid and anachronistic, but ask for it anyway 'because that's the way we've always done it'. Most are fine with italics.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

News Competition alert

My New Calling!

Back
Top