All regular readers (all 3 of you?) know that I like popular science magazines. I see a new Aussie one has started, called Cosmos. Unfortunately, the website is nothing but an index to their first edition, and the "news" section is just all of the company's press releases about the magazine.
I have not (yet) bought the first edition, but from my quick browse of it in the newsagent, its style reminds me very much of the dear departed Omni magazine. For the first few years, I really liked Omni. (I think I still have a cardboard carton's worth, waiting for the day I need to find some old half remembered article.) I enjoyed its short fiction, its speculative science, and (most importantly) its optimism.
An optimistic view of the potential for science and technology to solve many of the problems of the world is now sadly lacking. Know-nothing (or know-very-little) teachers from the 1970's onwards have trained young students to be pessimistic, aided and abetted by an environmental movement with a romantic and completely incorrect belief that, left alone, the world would never change and be perfect. Indeed, there is little optimism for the potential of human kind to even be around for any cosmologically significant time.
Anyway, no magazine keeps the same quality forever, and Omni gradually became worse and finally died.
I wish Cosmos some luck if it is going to go with an optimistic world view. But I guess one thing I am pessimistic about is the limited potential readership for a glossy science magazine in Australia.
Incidentally, while I have not really thought this out very extensively, I am of the view that the modern conservative is well and truly the optimist compared to those on the left of politics. Optimistic that people can treat each other well without the need for over-regulation by government or thought police. More optimistic on technology and science too. Certainly, it is less beholden to the environment movement, for which the only approved technology seems to be noisy ugly wind mills.
Hi Steve. Thanks for the nice comments about Cosmos magazine, we were chuffed that you liked it. My name's Wilson and I am the editor.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the comments you make about Omni, I thought it waas an excellent magazine and well ahead of its time - in design and production as well as content. Unfortunately, it had this annoying element of pseudo-science (crystals, pyramid power, UFOs, etc); and over time, this type of content grew and it lost its soul. It's best years were from 1978 to 1981.
I note that you say "... one thing I am pessimistic about is the limited potential readership for a glossy science magazine in Australia." I agree with you. But then earlier in your post, you say that you haven't bought one yet, and expected content to be available on our website, http://www.cosmosmagazine.com.
Isn't this part of the problem? If potential readers - who like popular science magazines - don't buy Cosmos, then won't its demise be a self-fulfilling prophecy?
We've taken the risk that there are people out there who will buy such a qualiy magazine, and have put our money behind it. But if people who would read it don't buy it because they expect it won't last - then it won't last!
Anyway, thanks again for your support and keep blogging the good stuff.
:-)