|
< we've come a long long way together | posted at 8:51 pm on July 10, 2003 > it's dead(fucken)line again tomorrow, but this will be an oh-so pretty issue, oh, oh-so pretty. )rose by-rne is all over the place!friends and romans - bend me your tears! although i've published articles in the magazine before, this is the first that has gone relatively untouched, which makes me feel proud. and more confident in my editor's belief in me as a writer and respect as a person, etc etc. i'm always so nervous in that area, in the creative area. i hate people i respect seeing work that i don't necessarily believe is perfect. i have some sort of need that people i respect must think (or, rather, know) that i am utterly immaculately perfect. part of the reason my family has never seen my four unit english major work of two years ago - because i hate it now. i think i need thicker skin, more confidence in abilities etc. might put that on my shopping list. hunh, today i lamented that i needed a haircut (which i do), and former work infatuation (i say former in anticipation of future formerdom) comments 'no, you don't. you look good - you don't look like a cartoon, but you look good.' cartoon comment was in regards to the previous day's comments of me indeed looking like a cartoon by wearing a beanie (which i've taken to). he asked about my love life the other day, too. yeah. the day after the whole 'incident' occurred. had not the heart nor the inclination to tell friend who rang a few times today that old acquaintance had rung and we had spoken, not least because she knows him through university. and through a mutual friend, before that, even. gargh. it has been a hellish issue in terms of advertising as we have just not got the editorial content to sell pages. and therefore had to give one away back to editorial - which is great in terms of integrity - but not so great in terms of financials. it is very interesting, seeing editorial rub against advertising in those respects. utmost editorial integrity must be maintained, however, there has to be a certain ratio of advertising to fund such integrity. and a controversial story got pulled due to threats of legal action, but if that story had run, an advertiser would have pulled out. which would have meant great discussions between the two departments. especially since it was i who booked the ad in the first place - and a day before we go to print is not a great time to be trying to find new advertisers, not to mention obtain artwork. a rant that is surely not all that interesting to those not of the publishing or journalistic inclinations - however, something i find incredibly fascinating. i can imagine in other magazines seeing those two departments bang heads frequently. not in ours, though. ours is one big happy family. those last five |