{"id":143,"date":"2009-12-16T16:37:00","date_gmt":"2009-12-16T16:37:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/johnpicacio.com\/onthefront\/2009\/12\/16\/the-magazine-of-the-sff-field\/"},"modified":"2014-12-14T18:45:25","modified_gmt":"2014-12-14T18:45:25","slug":"the-magazine-of-the-sff-field","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/johnpicacio.com\/onthefront\/2009\/12\/16\/the-magazine-of-the-sff-field\/","title":{"rendered":"The Magazine of the SF\/F Field"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/p> $\"\"$ <\/a>That\u2019s what LOCUS MAGAZINE<\/a>\u2018s masthead says at the top of every issue. Over the last year or so, I\u2019ve been wondering if that\u2019s really true. Or should the word \u201cField\u201d be replaced with the word \u201cWriter\u201d? Reason: virtually every LOCUS interview for the past decade has been writer-centric. I mentioned on Twitter and Facebook today that I wondered if subscribers would stop buying if LOCUS did full-length interviews with illustrators as frequently as they do with writers. There\u2019s already been several comments and I thought I\u2019d bring the discussion over here where it\u2019s open to everyone and comments don\u2019t have to be limited. A few points:\n

1. I\u2019m currently a subscriber to LOCUS MAGAZINE. Have been for the last several years. <\/p>\n

2. The people that publish LOCUS are amongst my favorites in this business. They\u2019re fun, smart, insightful, and amongst the hardest-working folks in our field.<\/p>\n

3. They\u2019ve had a tough year with the death of LOCUS founder Charles N. Brown. It\u2019s a credit to Liza, Amelia, Kirsten, Tim and everyone over there that the magazine has not missed a beat. LOCUS is clearly in the best hands possible.<\/p>\n

4. Here\u2019s what bothers me though \u2014 if LOCUS is indeed the magazine of our field (the sf\/f field), then why do virtually all of its regular interviews focus on writers? Doesn\u2019t \u201cthe field\u201d encompass more than just writers? What about illustrators, editors, and art directors as well? Aren\u2019t their processes and opinions also an integral part of what advances our field? And if so, then why don\u2019t we see more interviews with those folks in LOCUS? In the last decade, to the best of my recollection, the only illustrators interviewed for LOCUS are Shaun Tan, Bob Eggleton, and Kinuko Craft. If LOCUS runs two full-length interviews per issue, then that\u2019s 240 interviews over a decade, and only three artists (or so) represented in the last ten years. Fair to say that those are three excellent choices, but three out of 240 possible interviews is a staggeringly low figure, to say the least.<\/p>\n

5. In fairness, I\u2019ve spoken to editor-in-chief Liza Trombi twice this year about this very subject, and without disclosing private details, I think it\u2019s fair to say that LOCUS is in a tough position. Think about this question from their standpoint \u2014 they\u2019re a business, and quite frankly, these tough financial times aren\u2019t easy for ANY print magazine business. Change is especially risky right now. LOCUS only has so many pages and adding page count is expensive, if not prohibitively so. They\u2019re used to being a writer-centric magazine and have been lauded for it time after time (see their 29 Hugo Awards). Under those circumstances, I think I can understand their position to \u201chold the line\u201d and not change their formula. At the same time, they are a print magazine that (like all print magazines) is always looking to increase its subscription base, especially in these challenging times. <\/p>\n

6. Thus my question \u2014 if LOCUS were to publish more full-length interviews with illustrators, editors, and art directors in addition to their already-outstanding writer interviews, would they diminish their base? Or possibly grow it?<\/p>\n

7. Here\u2019s another question \u2014 I wonder if perhaps LOCUS is completely justified to continue as they have (except perhaps change their masthead to \u201cThe Magazine of the Science Fiction & Fantasy Writer\u201d). Perhaps I\u2019ve been slow to understand that I\u2019m NOT the audience for this mag because I\u2019m not a writer? Perhaps their magazine is purely a magazine about the sf\/f writer and for the fans of those writers, and that\u2019s the way it always has been and should be? Maybe LOCUS and I disagree that the art of sf\/f is a significant part of \u201cthe field\u201d and therefore of genuine interview interest to its readers? If so, then I\u2019d have no problem wishing them continued success, and subscribing instead to another magazine like ImagineFX<\/a>, where I would learn more about my sf\/f art peers and their craft, in the same way that writers learn the same from LOCUS\u2019 interviews. <\/p>\n

Last thought \u2014 LOCUS doesn\u2019t exist to make artists, editors, or art directors happy. They\u2019re a business, and if indeed their audience doesn\u2019t want interview coverage of those communities, I\u2019m fine with that. But I\u2019m curious to hear people say that\u2019s true or not. For LOCUS\u2019 sake, please keep comments productive here. If you\u2019re getting ready to launch slings and arrows at them, don\u2019t even think about it. I don\u2019t have time for that. This post is not about that. For the time being though \u2014 I\u2019m just curious if I\u2019m alone in my observations. Remember \u2014 it\u2019s their magazine. They\u2019re the ones doing the heavy lifting. \ud83d\ude42<\/p>\n<\/body>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"