![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
prusikWhat do short SF and American musical theater have in common?
They are both increasingly marginalized art forms. People have panicked about their death for decades. In the case of musical theater, I wonder if there has ever been a sustained period of time when people haven't panicked about its death. It's funny to realize that back around 1910-1920, musicals on Broadway were predominantly British. Producers only hired American composers to interpolate the occasional song. Obviously, things have changed. The modern American musical is not what you would have put on stage in 1910 (although there are still elements in common).
When writers write about the so-called death of short form SF, most of the time we're writing about the so-called impending death of the short SF digest. Their readership has declined over the years. However, they still dominate the short SF conversation. (How many awards as Asimov's been nominated for?) Also, they aren't the only outlet for short SF. The original anthology is making a come back of sorts. There are a plethora of magazines in other formats. There is a diversity, and that's a good thing.
[We're much more interesting when we talk about the state of short form SF rather than its impending death. However, Elizabeth Bear has already made the point that short SF is evolving into form by writers primarily for writers. This makes it oddly ok that no short SF magazine has a large circulation.]
This is just a really long set up to what Asimov's announces on the last page of its Oct/Nov 2008 issue: They're switching to "a new format with fewer but larger pages." I think those who know magazine publishing better than I do have predicted this for a while now. TV Guide did this a while back. Rolling Stone (not a digest, obviously) is also moving to a larger format. It's cheaper to produce. I suspect that larger pages may also give them more room for ads? I've always wondered why the digests have very few ads. (I'm not saying I want more ads. I'm just curious.)
I don't think I'll miss the digest format very much. With my previous jacket, it fit into its pocket when mass market paperbacks couldn't. (i.e., the digest folds.) However, my current jacket will deal with a larger format just fine. I guess Asimov's will lose its distinctive look. However, my experience is that people see the digest and tell me, "Hey, I used to read Asimov's when I was a kid." Never hearing that again is just fine by me.
Honestly, since I never keep issues around, my preferred format is probably electronic. (Yes, I know they do e-subscriptions.) However, I don't have anything pocket sized that does ebooks yet. Also, due to a clerical error on my part, my current subscription doesn't run out until 2013. (I lost track and accidentally renewed my subscription twice.) Unless Asimov's becomes a solely electronic publication, I don't think I'll be reading it on my iPod touch/iPhone/Kindle/OQO/Mobile Internet Device any time soon.
(For the record, I don't own any of those although tech lust demands that I buy an iPhone and an OQO. Apparently, I'm only interested in small mobile devices that do Chinese handwriting recognition. The Kindle would be more appealing it were pocket sized. The pictures don't get across how small it actually is, but I want something even smaller. Of course, the new models are supposed to be larger.)
Anyway, at least one of the big 3 will no longer be a digest. Nifty.
[This isn't so much the death of a digest as much as the transformation of one. But we all knew that was how it would go, right?]
They are both increasingly marginalized art forms. People have panicked about their death for decades. In the case of musical theater, I wonder if there has ever been a sustained period of time when people haven't panicked about its death. It's funny to realize that back around 1910-1920, musicals on Broadway were predominantly British. Producers only hired American composers to interpolate the occasional song. Obviously, things have changed. The modern American musical is not what you would have put on stage in 1910 (although there are still elements in common).
When writers write about the so-called death of short form SF, most of the time we're writing about the so-called impending death of the short SF digest. Their readership has declined over the years. However, they still dominate the short SF conversation. (How many awards as Asimov's been nominated for?) Also, they aren't the only outlet for short SF. The original anthology is making a come back of sorts. There are a plethora of magazines in other formats. There is a diversity, and that's a good thing.
[We're much more interesting when we talk about the state of short form SF rather than its impending death. However, Elizabeth Bear has already made the point that short SF is evolving into form by writers primarily for writers. This makes it oddly ok that no short SF magazine has a large circulation.]
This is just a really long set up to what Asimov's announces on the last page of its Oct/Nov 2008 issue: They're switching to "a new format with fewer but larger pages." I think those who know magazine publishing better than I do have predicted this for a while now. TV Guide did this a while back. Rolling Stone (not a digest, obviously) is also moving to a larger format. It's cheaper to produce. I suspect that larger pages may also give them more room for ads? I've always wondered why the digests have very few ads. (I'm not saying I want more ads. I'm just curious.)
I don't think I'll miss the digest format very much. With my previous jacket, it fit into its pocket when mass market paperbacks couldn't. (i.e., the digest folds.) However, my current jacket will deal with a larger format just fine. I guess Asimov's will lose its distinctive look. However, my experience is that people see the digest and tell me, "Hey, I used to read Asimov's when I was a kid." Never hearing that again is just fine by me.
Honestly, since I never keep issues around, my preferred format is probably electronic. (Yes, I know they do e-subscriptions.) However, I don't have anything pocket sized that does ebooks yet. Also, due to a clerical error on my part, my current subscription doesn't run out until 2013. (I lost track and accidentally renewed my subscription twice.) Unless Asimov's becomes a solely electronic publication, I don't think I'll be reading it on my iPod touch/iPhone/Kindle/OQO/Mobile Internet Device any time soon.
(For the record, I don't own any of those although tech lust demands that I buy an iPhone and an OQO. Apparently, I'm only interested in small mobile devices that do Chinese handwriting recognition. The Kindle would be more appealing it were pocket sized. The pictures don't get across how small it actually is, but I want something even smaller. Of course, the new models are supposed to be larger.)
Anyway, at least one of the big 3 will no longer be a digest. Nifty.
[This isn't so much the death of a digest as much as the transformation of one. But we all knew that was how it would go, right?]
