[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
aquarium magazines
Its not just a "youth culture thing" responsible for our poor quality fish
magazines. As Al Klee pointed out years ago in his landmark history of the
early years of our aquarium hobby, hardly anyone ever made a dime on
publishing a fish magazine or even a fish book. I don't even think Innes made
any money on Exotic Aquarium Fishes and it had 19 editions and he owned the
publishing company. Like 10 gallon tanks, they are there to lead to other
purchases and deeper involvement.
American aquarium magazines from the 30's until the 60's are to be
treasured and deserve to be. Old Innes magazines are truly lovely and full of
good stuff. The Aquarium Journal was the prototype of the early AKA
publications -- it was fantastic.
Wright's theory of something being a drag on society and a waster of
resources is ideology not analysis. A library is nothing more than a drain on
resources if judged by "the market" and "profit" as the defining principles
of all life and culture. Some things are good because they are good and
should be supported for no other reason. Innes knew this. The San Francisco
Aquarium Society with it's Aquarium Journal new this. Audrey Roth with his
wonderful Aquatic Life knew this (what a magazine!). The AKA knows this since
it has never made a profit and helped change the whole fish hobby by laying
the basis of a hobbyist/scientific approach, along with Sterba and The
Aquarium Journal.
We have crappy magazines because magazines are no longer seen as sources
of real information supported by ads, but like TV, radio, movies and soon the
internet, are seen as sources for ads with some filler (articles, shows, etc)
to make you look at the ads. Ads were always there in their capitalistic
glory but they used to not be the defining purpose and sole reason for a
magazine's existence. Since the Reagan Devolution, America has thrown over
any principle or reality of life that does not add up to profit and has
altered every action to fit a narrow and destructive "Market" definition of
the world. We have a totally commercialized world becaue we have decided that
the market and profit are truly god. When we return to Innes' world and see
service, sharing, truth, real information and art as meaningful BEYOND and
ABOVE their relationship to growing bank accounts, then we might see real
magazines again.
As far as movies, since film and theatre is my background, they are
no longer made for the American public, but for the world market. They have
stopped being art or even just talent and have become simply focus group
tested, what is hip at the moment, what will sell in China, pieces of market
driven and profit defined crap. Of course, since they use their resources
well in that they make money as defined by a "market is all" world view, they
certainly could never be accused of wasting resources. If you want to know
the true definition of total waste -- work on a movie set for a month. It is
obscene.
Robert E.
---------------
See http://www.aka.org/AKA/subkillietalk.html to unsubscribe
Follow-Ups: