Today was perhaps the most important day of the Columbia Publishing Course for me. And I’m not sure quite what that means. I came here because Lotus Magazine inspired me, taught me that being an editor and developing those relationships with writers and readers is intoxicating. It’s satisfying. It’s soul soil for the happy heart worm. I loved it. Every day was spent thinking about those 60 writers (many of whom I still miss) and the 30,000 readers, fighting for content that best represented and served them. It was, in the words of my father, Good Work. I felt as though I was reaching, helping, teaching. It felt, well, important.

I came to the Columbia Publishing Course to find out if that importantness was a magazine thing or something else (heaven forbid it be something else–the process of elimination could take a long time). The last three weeks has been all about wading through the book half of the course to reach today. Because today we met in small groups with editors of prominent magazines (Esquire, Vanity Fair, Atlantic Monthly, etc) to discuss editorial processes. I signed up with Will Dana from Rolling Stone.

“Writers are people who can’t DO anything else,” Will explained at one point. “These are the people who, for whatever reason, can’t work 9 to 5 jobs. They just don’t fit in cubicles. They’re motivated and driven and determined to do something else.”

I had to put my head down and laugh. It’s sort of funny to hear yourself described by someone who doesn’t know you.

Later, during the panel with all seven of the amazingly impressive magazine editors (Allure, The Source, Glamour, etc), I listened intently to the excitement of working on a story with a writer, the thrill of hearing someone mention something and it turning into an article, the pride of editing work that changes people’s lives, and I wondered which side of the words I want to be on.

I still can’t decide.

Will Dana also reminded us that these days many large magazines “just become vehicles to deliver eyeballs to advertisers.” Did I love Lotus because it was a magazine, or did I love Lotus because it was a small magazine with the readership’s best interests in mind (or at least in the executive editor’s–aka MY–mind)? Please add this to my East Coast/West Coast dilemma, and get back to me if you have any thoughts.

Photo here.