INTERACTION

_________________
http://jimsteel.wordpress.com/

Thanks for this.

Evaluating a magazine is tricky but one criterion might be the authors 'discovered'/'groomed' who go on to successful careers.

Interzone has done, and is doing, its share but perhaps it's too soon to compare New Worlds with IZ yet.

I think Colin Harvey rightly points out the difficulties of making comparisons on any criterion apart from 'bean counting'. Magazines aren't static things. For example, New Worlds, when I wrote for it in the late sixties very much reflected a rebellious New Wave writing approach that wasn't there in earlier periods.

It seems to me that IZ is in a similar position to a small independent film production company trying to get product out against the power of the major distributors. There will be thousands, perhaps tens of thousands, of SF readers who have never heard of it because it's not on the shelf at WH Smith etc. The fact that it has survived so long in this climate should be a very strong positive in any comparison.

Let's hope the superb design values of the last three issues will help it to persuade the dimwitted distributors to replace one of the hundreds of rubbish computer magazines, lipstick advisories, and horoscope weeklies with IZ.

_________________
Jim