• Forums Software Updates

    The forums will be undergoing updates on Sunday 10th November 2024.
    Little to no downtime is expected.
  • We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Suggest Improvements To The Fortean Times

David, what's the state of the submissions slush pile at FT?

Adi, a friend of Mark Pilkington's, has been telling me I should send something in for ages, but I haven't had the time to do anything on spec. What would you like/need to see in order to solicit an article? Is it a case of sending in a fully polished piece, or could I pitch something without it being completed?
 
Alistair - first of all email in a submission query along the lines of:

hi, I have written/am thinking of writing an article on/about XXXX in which I will be (say what your article will be about basically, what you will be saying). I was wondering if you might be interested in including it in the magazine.

Then they should get back to you and tell you if they are interested, in which case they will ask you to send them the article itself to look over.

There is no reason why you cant pitch something before you have written it, in which case all you have to do is start writing it after they have expressed an inteest.


That is the way it has been with me and I dont see any reason why it would differ for anybody else.
 
Often things crop up on the board which would sit nicely as half page features in FT. The Urban crop circle springs to mind. Our fault for not drwing them to anyone's attention though.
 
Many_Angled_One said:
Alistair - first of all email in a submission query along the lines of:

hi, I have written/am thinking of writing an article on/about XXXX in which I will be (say what your article will be about basically, what you will be saying). I was wondering if you might be interested in including it in the magazine.

Then they should get back to you and tell you if they are interested, in which case they will ask you to send them the article itself to look over.

There is no reason why you cant pitch something before you have written it, in which case all you have to do is start writing it after they have expressed an inteest.


That is the way it has been with me and I dont see any reason why it would differ for anybody else.

Yep - that was exactly the way it worked for me. E-mail with suggestion for article - got the nod - wrote the article etc.

As for the magazine -

1. I really do not see the "dumbing down" of the content. The more professional (and, indeed commercial) look of the magazine has perhaps altered some people's perception of the content. Exactly the same content, photocopied onto A5 paper with no illustrations would give a different impression and perhaps lead to some of the detractors feeling that it had become "high brow" again.

2. The magazine being commercial (as though that is a dirty word) and actively taking steps to promote itself to a wider audience is to be applauded. The world of Forteana is not the exculsive preserve of anyone and I always fear that people who complain at "dumbing down" are actually afraid of losing exclusivity on their interest. There is a large difference between "popular" and "populist."

3. I really do like the ideas earlier on in this thread relating to a series of "how to......" guide items. Excellent idea.

I have thought long and hard for some constructive criticisms or ideas to improve the mag - but have failed to come up with anything of any substance. Don't want to appear to be a brown-noser - but it is great stuff.
 
I'd enjoy more weighty pieces on the more historical esoterica and weird science end of things - for instance I really enjoyed the recent(-ish) stuff about the god machine, Paracelsus, the pig-faced woman, life reviews, to name a few.

How about some big features on Tesla, Schauberger, Keely and all that lot? I think FT could really do some good stuff there, because much of what you find on the internet is either a bit wild or so technical you can't evaluate it without specialized knowledge. It'd be good to have something to distinguish the useless ranting from credible science that was somehow suppressed or forgotten. Perhaps even a few experiments to get to the heart of the matter? Test Schauberger's claims about vortices, for instance...
 
The best issue in recent years was the death issue, covering an interesting subject from a few diffrent angles works well IMO, another good idea was the stigmatics issues it's rare that FT takes a look at relegious mithologys and lets face it weather you subscribe to the religion in question or not it always makes interesting reading as another example there was the article on Ron Wyatt (personaly I think he was B.S.ing but still an extreamly interesting article) and that on Chase.

Basicly theough I'd like to see more single topic issues (except when they are blatent cash ins on a very small topic eg Mothman where a single article and/or round up would have been perfect).

It would also be nice that the size of the mag could be increased by 4 pages or so to fit in these crummy rushed latest film/book tie in articles and posibly space for one more ad as insentive for ifg to do this rather than wasteing valuble feature space (we only get a maximum of 3 you know) with throwaway crap.
 
I'd like to see it being sold in the Netherlands again. It was on the shelves when I first got here.

Subscription? Don't you need to pay lots of money, all at once, for that? :rolleyes:
 
AndroMan said:
Subscription? Don't you need to pay lots of money, all at once, for that? :rolleyes:
Nope, you can pay quarterly, by direct debit. The more subscriptions they get, the easier it is for them to sell advertising, and hopefully get something better than the drugs and porn.
 
In depth interview with Patrick Harpur. Daemonic Reality is coming back in print.
 
Dark Detective said:
(2) a whole page for a Hunt Emerson cartoon? It's not even funny. I suspect he got the gig from being good mates with the eds. .



:furious: :furious: :furious: Hunt Emerson is great.
 
Mike P said:
:furious: :furious: :furious: Hunt Emerson is great.
Here! Here! His cartoons are just the right kind of surreal for the mag! :p
 
I like Hunt Emerson too. I love the expressions he gets on the cartoon characters' faces.
 
Keep Hunt Emerson, no need to 'improve' anything in that department.
 
I love Hunt Emerson, I just don't like the Gully Bull character. When he does other stuff I just keep looking at it over and over, the expressions are so funny. The best one ever was the sub atomic particles one.
 
Hi everyone,

Sorry, I've been too busy/ill to post over the last week, but I have been following the continuing discussion and noting all the suggestions. Briefly, I'll respond to the latest batch:

1) "more about fortean philosophy": You'll be pleased to see Colin Bennett's back in issue 168, sharing his views on NASA. Will upset and annoy quite a few people I think, but that's partly what we're here for. A piece on Synchronicity will be coming soon - might appeal. Yes, it's an element we shouldn't ignore, even if it's not everyone's cupppa.

2) "more historical type articles": Griffins, Vespasian, the Necropolis railway - I hardly know where to begin! Fear not, historical pieces galore are waiting in the wings.

3) "more IHTM material": We've started using IHTM in the mag, but on reflection you're absolutely right. The material generated on the site is too good to not make more use of and share with more people - especially as the letters pages are many folks' favourite part of FT. I'll report back on this.

4) "appreciate articles on paranormal investigations" - agreed, and kind of discussed already. FT should perhaps be forging closer links with research bodies and individuals out in the field and getting them to report in FT. What do you think? Suggestions?

5) "state of the submissions slush pile at FT?" Big, ever-growing and messy; but don't let that put anyone off submitting stuff. What would be particularly welcome at present are Forum-length pieces - so get writing and send themn in.

6) "two longer features instead of three shorter ones?": Page increase should solve this - three longer features! Or two long and two short! But, more stuff, anyway.

7) "more single topic issues": I agree, the Death issue was on eof our favourites too. We have got some more ideas for themed issues, but if anyone has some good ones of their own, please share them. The only worry with single-topic issues is that if someone isn't interested in the topic there's no reason for them to pick up the issue. What do you think? Death was a pretty universal theme, so perhaps that's why we got away with it.

8) "Hunt Emerson is great" etc: Well, support for Hunt seems strong on the board. There are those who find him old-fashioned, not funny or a bit tired and those that love him it seems. More feedback on this would be useful - would anyone rather see a new cartoonist? Or a mixture? Do you think someone's work would be good in FT? For me, Hunt gives us a feeling of continuity going right back to the 1970s, and I like having Phenenomix for that reason, but I can understand that's not everybody's opinion.


Take care everyone,

David
 
I love Hunt Emerson's stuff, but I'd like to see more cartoons in there.

Phil Bond doing a Hierophant strip, maybe?
 
Let me qualify things a bit: I think a page of H.E. cartoons is excessive. Something like a four panel strip is enough. If I want full pages of mediocre cartoons I'd buy the Beano. If people want more content, presumably something else has to give way, so that's one solution. I'm not suggesting we get rid of the frivolous stuff (harks back to a major debate we had on this very MB!), I just find an entire page of something not very good is a waste of space. Some of the single panel stuff is actually pretty good.
[Edit] Wasn't there also a "serious" comic (or graphic novel) about Charles Fort reviewed in FT some time ago? Maybe a serialisation of that would be good. [/edit]
On the single topic issue subject, I think it's a great idea (didn't see the Death issue though) but obviously it's dangerous waters. I will not be pleased to see a whole issue devoted to Crop Circles for example. Keep the single topic general enough to appeal to many different aspects of Forteana.
 
Dark Detective said:
On the single topic issue subject, I think it's a great idea (didn't see the Death issue though) but obviously it's dangerous waters. I will not be pleased to see a whole issue devoted to Crop Circles for example. Keep the single topic general enough to appeal to many different aspects of Forteana.
I completely agree with this.
I think its true to say that each one of us has individual "pet" Fortean subjects, and although I personally am quite eclectic in my reading habits, the same can't be said everyone. If the mag becomes too exclusive in its monthly output it risks losing potential, regular readers. And that would be a shame.

A big YES to Synchronicity as far as I am concerned.
And I'd definitely like to see more paranormal reporting. ;)
 
beakboo said:
I love Hunt Emerson ... The best one ever was the sub atomic particles one.
Is that the one where it kept zooming in? That was my fave too :D
 
I have always enjoyed the Hunt Emerson cartoons. Long may they continue, is my shout.

PB
 
Alistair P said:
I love Hunt Emerson's stuff, but I'd like to see more cartoons in there.

Phil Bond doing a Hierophant strip, maybe?

I agree! I'd love to see more of the Hierophant in general, but I imagine there's only so much gossip on the go.

Cujo
 
Hunt Emerson's page is the star of the magazine for me, don't ever consider dropping it!
 
hehe.

I guess you don't have to read that page...

I know I never read any of the Crytpozoology stuff...
 
stevo said:
hehe.

I guess you don't have to read that page...

I know I never read any of the Crytpozoology stuff...

Same here, extremely boring.
 
i feel the same about UFO articles... crypto wise I found that otter piece really fascinating
 
Back
Top