Comments on: Do editors need government subsidies?

By: Andrew Leigh

Andrew Leigh — Mon, 10 Sep 2007 06:03:08 +0000

“I’m sure they must contribute to the significantly higher standard of writing found in US books and magazines compared to their Australian equivalents.”

Perhaps, but I also suspect that a bigger contributor is the fact that the US is 14 times the size of Australia, so its top tier in almost any field will likely be better than ours.

By: derrida derider

derrida derider — Sun, 09 Sep 2007 10:46:41 +0000

Well it’s the right time to try and get your snout in the trough - an election coming, with a cashed-up goverment behind in the polls and having a well developed instinct for the pork barrel.

He needs to find some editors who live in Coalition marginal electorates, though. And he should claim that they’re all conservative family men (sexism is alive in the Coalition) on AWAs.

By: Sinclair Davidson

Sinclair Davidson — Sun, 09 Sep 2007 04:02:47 +0000

This is a very ‘producer-orientated’ approach. What he is saying is Australian book consumers should substitute local reading material for whatever it is they currently read. As a reader, I prefer to read the very best the world has to offer, not just local. My leisure reading is science fiction and the best work (IMHO) at the moment is coming from British authors (Banks, Hamilton, Mieville, Morgan, Reynolds). I can imagine that my purchases of Australian published books will decline over time. Why wait 30 days and buy it from the local book store when Amazon can deliver close to the international publishing day?

By: Stephen Lloyd

Stephen Lloyd — Sun, 09 Sep 2007 03:52:40 +0000

First step is to stop shovelling money into Bryce Courtenay’s pocket. They could use the savings to do what they ask.

By: Andrew Norton

Andrew Norton — Sun, 09 Sep 2007 03:18:16 +0000

Tony - I was reading things into Heyward’s article, based on many years reading of similar requests for cash. The feds don’t support overseas branches of universities, though they do assist with international marketing. I don’t support that, but as with tourism there is an argument that if we are selling ‘brand Australia’ there will be no one commercial operation in Australia with sufficient incentive to fund it, and therefore there is a case for government funding.

As an editor myself, I think the part of the job relating to finding and preparing good work, to use your expression, is the part that is very hard to train anyone to do - and what works overseas may not work here. Around the world, a small minority of books generate most of the profit for publishers, so even those who are good at ‘picking winners’ are likely to get it wrong much of the time. By contrast, finalising a work for publication involves technical skills that can be taught, and presumably are taught in editing courses at universities.

I agree re ARC.

By: Tony Healy

Tony Healy — Sun, 09 Sep 2007 02:38:59 +0000

Andrew, I think you’re misreading Michael Heyward. I don’t detect any celebration of government funding for its own sake.

Rather, he’s raising a possibly legitimate case for business development, citing the success of the book industry in Australia and Canadian successes in aiding the editing role. His case is probably at least as good as that for other bodies that enjoy substantial government support, including Invest Australia, NICTA, the tourism industry and overseas branches of universities.

Also, he seems to be talking about editors in the sense of those who find and prepare good work, rather than people who finalise work for publication. Again, the focus is on business development and expanding markets.

I think this also raises an interesting question about ARC funding. A significant amount of so-called research these days is pretty dubious, especially in fields like “new media” and “creative industries,” and even in areas that probably seem more respectable, such as information systems.

It would be appropriate for some of that funding to go into proven successful sectors, instead of pretentious projects run by academics.

By: Rafe

Rafe — Sun, 09 Sep 2007 02:15:35 +0000

Yes there seems to be a body of opinion that a dollar that has passed through the hands of the government to some worthy cause like education is somehow better than a dollar spent on the same thing by a voluntary buyer. Very strange!

On writing among uni students, from my limited experience of uni teaching some of the students were barely literate and when I spent a little time talking to each of them one on one it appeared that this was the only input of that kind that some of them ever had.