love that you've broached this topic.

the link between writers and editors is simple: a love of words (aka a love of books). but is there a danger of spreading oneself too thin, of utilising this love of (and talent with) words for too many hours of the day?

for me, still hovering (argh) in the early stage of whatever wordy career is in my headlights, this is a debate i often have with myself. should i focus completely on my own writing, making sure that any other work i do is away from words? or will working as an editor (or any other job in writing/publishing/etc) strengthen my relationship with text?

i do agree with you that any practical knowledge of the industry can only be a good thing...i think.

While I do think having knowledge of the industry and of editing, can be incredibly useful, I would, if I had my time over, have pursued a different craft. Editing and writing use the same side of the brain. Working in the industry drains you before you get to the writing. IN this fantasy parallel world I have a job which uses physical skills - gardening, for eg. Another issue is that publishing is a hard industry to make a living in if you work part time because the pay rates are low.

Couldn't agree with you more, Sophie. Anyone who wants to be a writer should avoid working in publishing. When I try and find part-time work, I want that work to buy me as much writing time as possible. And being an editor or publisher really doesnt buy you much at all.

Jess - it's a really interesting topic. Sophie, in some sense I agree with you but I think that working in the industry can also motivate and stimulate you to a degree. I find that I feel much more excited about writing when I am immersed in reading manuscripts than I ever did when I did data entry or any of the other horrible jobs along the way. But, yes, maybe something both creatively engaging and not writing-side-of-brain-draining is the answer, like gardening as you say.

I agree with Nicola wholeheartedly. A lot of my undergrad involved creative writing where the workshopping experience gave me confidence in my worth as a writer and the faith to carry on. But it was my postgrad study in editing and working as an editor that really improved my writing on the page. While the content of what I edit in my day job (articles on architecture and design) is very different to my fiction writing, it has taught me to be more self-critical, particularly in terms of structure, and I think my writing has benefited immeasurably as a result.

Editing has made me a lot more aware of the deficiencies in my own writing, and for that I am grateful. I used to knock stories out in a few days then sit back and feel very pleased with how clever I was. Now I might only write 2 or 3 stories a year and spend months refining them, and even then not be completely satisfied.

I do lean more towards HTML Giant's viewpoint than Nam Le's on this matter. Whilst self-belief is important to a degree, there's no real replacement for hard work in writing. A lot of writers seem to think that by virtue of having written something, praise and adulation is automatically deserved when really, there's a lot more writing out there that doesn't work than writing that does. I think humility is vital (and often lacking), as is the willingness to accept that none of us are geniuses, that our writing doesn't instantly qualify for classic status, that we won't all win awards and prizes and that ultimately, all you can do as a writer is try to make your work as good as you possibly can without expecting the world to fall at your feet. A stint in editing can certainly help bring you down to earth, but injecting any form of realism into the often abstract world of writing is priceless.

This is such an interesting post and topic. I'm of two minds on it. On one hand, I wrote constantly from the age I could form words until ... I started working in publishing, age 20. And have slowly, painfully starting writing again in the last year or so. Editing as a day job definitely gets in the way because it's so hard to turn those critical faculties off in order to write and to push through the inevitable crap that you have to write to get to the good stuff. On the other hand, it has made me a better writer for the reasons you and Nicola cite - that I can turn those critical faculties on my work and analyse it usefully. (And I can recognise the crap, or at least I hope I can.) Then again, there is that brain drain Sophie talks about - finding the time and mental energy to write at the end of an editing day (or a day doing critical or copy writing). But I can't think what else I would do for a living and be satisfied.

I totally agree that learning to edit improves one's writing. And Nicola, you are right that working with good writers can be inspiring, especially compared to jobs that deaden you. My point was more that if you edit other people, every day, for most of your writing life, it can compete - and you don't earn much money. If, as Georgia says, you see working time as a way of buying writing time.

Yes, Sophie, you are absolutely right about that last point. You could probably work part time in another industry, write part time, and still earn enough to live; but you would be hard pressed to do that in publishing.

Chris - I couldn't agree more. Before I started working in publishing, I used to pen plenty of stories and hardly redrafted at all. Needless to say, they were pretty awful. Editing or even reading subs brought me down to earth with a bang - thankfully - and showed me just how much more critical I needed to be.

Perhaps in the long term, being an editor and a writer doesn't match up well, but some knowledge of the 'other side' I think can clear up a lot of mystery, as well as teaching some of that much-needed humility that you mention.

Yes - I cringe to think of that writing I did before I entered publishing. There was so much of it and I enjoyed it so much - but most of it wasn't very good (to put it mildly), or at the least was woefully underdeveloped.

Maybe the answer is to be an editor or work in publishing for a while, to get that perspective, then find something else to do.

While I'm more of a reader than a writer, I agree with Nicola that being exposed to great writers through working as an editor has inspired me to both read and write more than ever.

But I also agree that working in a particular area can drain your energy for it: I work mostly on non-fiction and academic books, and as a result read (and write) almost exclusively fiction. So perhaps it's just about finding the right balance to maintain your creative energy, both professionally and personally.

i have definitely become a better writer through critiquing and editing other people's work. and sometimes reading their stories inspires me to write, although at other times it can act as a block.

from the above comments it seems it's pretty much agreed that working with words (as editor, publisher, etc) will augment your own writing, but it will also drastically reduce the amount of time you have to write, as well as draining your energy/inspiration levels.

q: would a compromise be to work part-time in editing/publishing? does anyone here do this?

The issue of working part-time is where the poor pay rates come into it. It becomes hards to live on what you can earn that way. As well, the jobs tend to bleed into full time jobs. This is a struggle lots of women in publishing have if they have children and want to come back to work part time.

Reading this post I read back to the earlier posts on writing and the day job, and writing full time.

Last year I did some research on artist numbers & incomes in the visual arts. I think there are proably some similarities with writing.

This quote is from a piece I published in Art Monlthly last year - "Of course, we do know that many artist's operate within a portfolio career paradigm, mixing a range of working modes and activities. In fact, Throsby's studies [Such as Don't Give Up Your Day Job (2003) ... the original research source for the $11,000 income figure for writers] have shown that over 60% of professional artists work at other jobs in addition to their main artistic occupation. This is a very much higher proportion than for the general workforce, with the most recent ABS statistics indicating only 6.4% of workers hold down two jobs or more (ABS 6361.0)." Art Monthly (Australia) September 2009 (issue: 223) pp. 34-36.

My piece was about the decline in numbers in key artist occupations shown in the 2006 census ... "between 2001 and 2006 there was a 12.5% decline in music professionals, a 20% decline in actors, dancers and related professionals, an almost 6% decline in authors, and an 18% decline in visual arts and crafts professionals."

So another issue might be ... do writers who work as editors list the job of 'editor' on their census form, or 'writer' ... and what about writers who work in other unrelated occupations? In other words, how do we understand our occupation (our 'main job') ... and how do the statistics that emerge from this determine how government understands the cultural sector?

Very interesting comment, Peter. I don't know about others, but it took me a long time before I put 'writer' down as my occupation - and then it was only because I was doing it full time. NOw I put editor again. That is, I list the occupation that earns me money. What do others do?

Brilliant post Jess - and funnily enough I've also been thinking a lot about that two headed beast (great image) as I edit my manuscript while preparing to go to Varuna as an editor/mentor for the REP for a week in May.

I agree wholeheartedly with you and all those who suspect that their experience as editors has helped them inordinately as writers - in the essential standing-back/ability to be objective that editing other people's work gives you with your own writing, and also I think it helps you to learn that writing is a long process, that books start out as fragments of disconnected blabber with some treasure and you have to keep writing and working at it, keep the faith you mention, to find out what the hell you're writing. I learnt this through watching other writers working on their novels from scratch.

For me editing and writing come from two very different parts of my brain and I'd previously have said the growth of my editing/logical/analytical brain hindered the expression of my creative/suggestive/dreamy writing brain. But now I've got my writing brain going a little (and it's still learning), I'm finding my editorial experience invaluable.

I would thoroughly recommend all aspiring writers to get a grounding in editing - but not necessarily to make a career of it, because I agree with Sophie, Georgia and the others who say editing all day leaves little head space for writing all night.

I'm opting for editing snappy sporting books by day - can no longer immerse myself in other people's imaginary worlds (novels) and keep true to my own.

Yes I agree - a great point. I usually put down student/ed assistant, though the last time I had to fill out that green form at customs I did try out 'writer'.

I wonder how much the pressure to do 'other work' influences our creative output. Conversely, other comments have noted that it is helpful to at least get some experience in publishing. Yet if many writers are already working another day job in a sep industry, how realistic is this? Esp for women, perhaps having to look after families/on low pay. Or if one does already work as an editor/publisher, how easy is it really to realise when this is encroaching on your writing time and pull back?

I'm interested in another aspect of the two-headed beast: how does being a writer impact on our role as editor? I'm thinking here not so much of editing manuscripts, as the role editors play in assessing and selecting. We all have our war stories (of the short story that was rejected in a national comp only to be picked up, unchanged, by a national lit mag. And the other way around. What I'm pondering is: what are the conditions that editors/judges are asked to work under in these days of high volume competitive culls? how do their experiences as writers impact on this role? are there some practices which could be improved, what is considers 'best practice'?

I certainly think being a writer has made me a better editor of manuscripts. I'm not sure it has made a difference to how I assess things - it might have perhaps made me tougher on people. I don't think it is possible to have a 'best practice' with competitions. There are usually hundreds of entries and the judges are unpaid. To be honest it's the same with literary journals. That said, you should make an effort to stay fresh and not to keep reading when in a cynical or negative frame of mind. If you hate everything you read, you have to stop. It's a sign you've lost perspective.

One other question, how does being an editor - as opposed to a gardner say - influence what you write about?

I see editing, teaching (of literature) and research as activities that require constant reading, which can only be good for literary judgement. But from what I gather other professions, like medicine and law, require intense contact with people and provide access to stories in a raw form (coming from patients or clients). I'm sure there's a reason (besides disciplined writing) why there are several outstanding doctor- and lawyer-writers in this country. And it must be nice, maybe even productive, to spend part of your time in profound solitude, in a room before a screen, and part of it talking to people (in a consulting room, prison or court).

But many of you are editor-writers, so it must be workable!

I can't really speak for how editing might influence what you write about but it's interesting to think how other professions, particularly the two you mention can come into fiction. Having studied law I'm not sure that it's something I'd want to include in my writing, but I think that being in touch with these areas is probably a plus simply because you have access to a wealth of knowledge/characters and don't have to do too much additional research. Karen Hitchcock's Little White Slips is a fantastic example of blending a background in medicine with short stories.

It's a never-ending discussion this one, isn't it?

I wanted to be an editor to learn how to write. But then editing took over. And as Sophie and Georgia have pointed out, the money from editing's not good enough to buy you time to write. And I do think editing overwhelms that subconscious part of my mind where ideas and stories and the motivation to work on them come from.

One important thing for me about editing less is that I enjoy reading for pleasure more - and I'm reading what I choose to read, not what I'm being paid to read.

And I write 'Editor/writer' on those forms you fill in. Hard to put down 'writer' with all its vagaries!

I was listening to an interview with Peter Goldsworthy the other day and he talked at length about how working as a doctor has helped his writing - in terms of the people he meets and the stories he hears. .

Yes, maybe now doctors have a similar role to the one priests had at one stage - that relationship of trust, learning very intimate things about such a range of people. And some forms of medicine are so visceral - bodily fluids and body parts. Not like the disembodied world of words. But for me it would take such conviction and commitment to be a doctor - it's a job that matters so much - maybe I'd have no energy left for writing.

Lately, in the last 10 years or so, I've thought having a more thorough knowledge of the law would be great for life and writing, not that I ever wanted to study law or practise it. But now I see how the framework of the law overspans people's lives and materially affects them - not just relating to extremes of criminality but ordinary family relationships, divorces, wills, disputes with neighbours...

Still, I can't imagine what I would have done if it wasn't working with words. I've met some great people in publishing and there's the satisfaction of making something. Also, and this might be just theoretical now I'm not so much at the coalface of editing fulltime, I like that it's a business with many different aspects to it.

I think I caught that interview with Peter too Sophie, if it was the one on ABC radio. I think he was featured in an anthology of poetry called 'Verbal Medicine', published a couple of yrs ago, which showcased the work of medico-writers (poets) from Australia & NZ - so there are a few of them around.

Jess, I was thinking more of certain aspects of legal practise - as Rowena said, mediating conflicts & helping people in fraught situations. Your comment got me thinking about studying law though. I've heard legal texts are word puzzles (i.e. really hard to understand). I think the study of Latin used to be a requirement as well? Those strike me as being good for a writer to study but maybe I'm just being romantic (I've never done law). I think people fall into these professions anyway, I can't imagine someone planning to be a doctor so they can write. Planning to be an editor so you can write sounds more plausible to me!

Oh & going back to Sophie's idea of using working time to buy writing time - there was an article in ALR a while ago on a similar theme. It was an excerpt from Alain de Botton's 'The Pleasures and Sorrows of Work'. Have a look, I think it's relevant to this thread in a roundabout way: http://www.alaindebotton.com/pages/content/index.asp?PageID=201

Yes I imagine that practice would open up all kinds of things in terms of people and situations to draw on. But that's only if you have a vested interest in such conflicts in the first place. I read an interview with Nam Le a while back where he said something (vaguely) along the lines of writing for law being helpful because it taught you how to construct a narrative that was both extremely precise yet open ended. That really hits the nail on the head.

Funnily enough a small part of me always wishes I had done medicine (not that I would have got in) because it would save so much in terms of research.

It is not suprising that editors have contributed a great deal to the writers who have so far commented in this thread. If the publishing profession is to retain its integrity, editors and subeditors are also skilled writers and journalists. In many cases they have had far more than their 15 minutes of fame as writers and are resigned to being byline free as editors. However, given that the editor’s ability is intrinsic to the author’s published work and reputation, the proficiency of an accredited or professionally trained editor, combined as it is with unusual humility, deserves much higher status and a commensurate salary.