[This article from Arthur S. Hoffman originally appeared in the February 1, 1927 issue of Adventure magazine. I thought it was an interesting behind the scenes look at how the magazine worked.
If you worked on a magazine, let us know what you saw.]
LOOKING ABOUT
IT MAY be that some of you think our asking so often for
your suggestions on the making and shaping of our magazine is only an empty
performance. Here is exactly what is done in the office:
First, there are your letters that come in because of no
specific request made to you but merely as a result of the general reader
interest in our magazine, of the friendly, active, we-are-part-of-Adventure feeling that has grown up
through the years. Those letters are read word for word. One editor is
especially assigned to the duty of keeping an exact card-index record of every
single comment on any of our writers or any of their stories, even a mention of
such, favorable or unfavorable. Every six months he makes out a carefully
tabulated, detailed report, ranking our whole list of authors on the basis of
our readers’ ‘Votes.” Every member of the staff pores over that report.
Allowance must be made for the number of times an author
appears during the six months’ period covered, for serials or novelettes versus
shorts, and so on. But the ranking of authors from that summary of readers’
votes becomes at once a guide in the buying of manuscripts during the next six
months. Also it brings about a new assessment of our writers as to their
relative values to this particular magazine and consequently as to the rate of
payment each should have.
General comments on other phases and features of our
magazine are not card-indexed. The multiplicity and variety of points commented
upon, from typographical details to the general policy of the magazine, make
this impracticable. But it is the duty of the editor in charge to note down any
pronounced amount of comment on any one point and, if comment continues heavy,
to begin tabulating “votes” on that point, meanwhile of course calling the
attention of the rest of us to the point on trial.
Comments on any particular department—"Camp-Fire,” “Ask
Adventure,’’ "Information services", “Travel,” “Straight Goods,”
“Books,” “Old Songs,” “Lost Trails,” “Trail Ahead,” “Looking About” —are turned
over to the editor in charge of that department, to be read, summarized, filed
or used in his department.
Any reader’s letter claiming one of our authors has been
inaccurate or incorrect in the use of any of the fact material in his fiction,
or any of ourselves or our service editors in anything printed in the magazine,
gets particular attention. If a final verdict on the claim, for or against, can
not be authoritatively given in the office, the letter is mailed or turned over
to the author or editor involved and it’s up to him either to confess error or
to convince the reader the criticism was not soundly taken.
The results in this case are apparent. Adventure prides
itself on an earned reputation for accuracy and reliability in the local color,
setting and atmosphere of its stories, in all fact material, historical or
otherwise, used in its fiction. It wasn’t the editors who earned that reputation
for our magazine. It was the readers who earned it. And they did it by the
method above. No set of editors in the world could be final authority on all
the subjects and places covered, but, whatever the subject, there are always at
least a few among our readers who are very competent authorities. Writers and
editors have learned that it is not healthy to come before Adventure's audience
with fact material that isn’t bullet-proof. None of us is infallible, but when
we slip we acknowledge it frankly in type so that there can be no uncorrected
misinformation laid before our readers.
Another result is interesting topics, investigations and
discussions for Camp-Fire. Will older readers ever forget the argument royal
that arose among Camp-Fire over Talbot Mundy’s interpretation of the character
of Julius Caesar in the Tros stories? Had to stop it finally because it wasn’t
leaving space for much else, but I think most of us learned more about Julius
Caesar than we had ever known before. We’re still getting occasional requests
to have the contributions to that argument issued in book form. Well, maybe we
can some day.
Of such results as the above you will be finding plenty of
proof in the magazine as you go along, but another result is not so obvious.
Nearly all the comments and criticisms are in friendly spirit and the replies
are in kind. Therefore in hundreds and hundreds of cases real personal
friendships have grown up between readers and writers, or among readers, and
the real fellowship of Camp-Fire is very appreciably promoted.
All the foregoing applies to general letters from readers.
Your letters not read? All of them are read. At the top of some will be
penciled three or four names— authors or editors—which means that the owner of
each name must see that letter.
As to opinions on specific points, specifically asked for.
Well, take the request for readers’ suggestions and advice on the new form of
our magazine.
The response from readers in this case has been splendid.
Our summary of your suggestions has now been put into final and complete form.
Not only has every one of the active editorial staff studied it thoroughly but
carbon copies have been passed on to each of the following for his equally
careful study—the publisher, the assistant publisher, the heads of the
Circulation and the Promotion Departments.
We’re going to give you an exact copy of that report in
full. With one exception. Some of the information you have given us is much too
valuable and important to broadcast for the benefit of other publishers.
Accordingly in at least one place we’re going to scramble the report a little,
but any such places, and the nature of the scrambling, will be indicated for
your benefit. Other publishers of course get an occasional formal referendum
from readers, get questions for specific answer. No other magazine gets from
its readers anything like such a response of voluntary, independent opinions
and suggestions as Adventure’s readers give to it. We do not see why we should
hand over to other magazines all of the valuable information thus received,
information meant for us, not for them.
I think we can give you the report in “Camp-Fire” of the
issue following this one. If not, as soon as it can be done.
And to the very sincere thanks of my own department I am to
add those of all the other departments cooperating in making Adventure a magazine that meets the
desires of the majority of its readers as closely as is humanly possible to do.
Oh yes, we really want your suggestions and criticisms! And
we really read and consider them when we get them. If you don’t like this or
that in the magazine, tell us so. We can’t please everybody on every point, but
we can please the majority and so far as it’s at all possible we naturally want
to do just that.
Lots of people never write to any magazine about anything.
But this is different. Adventure isn’t
just a magazine. It’s Camp-Fire, readers, writers and editors working together
to make for themselves the best magazine and clearing-house of ideas and
information that they can, and to have as good and friendly a time as possible
while they’re doing it. Do your part. Don’t just take from the rest of us
without contributing your share in return. There’s always a bit of time now and
then when a letter or post-card and a few marks with pen, pencil or typewriter
can send in a criticism or suggestion that may bear good fruit for all who
gather around the Fire. You’re not writing to a magazine—you’re writing to Adventure.—a. s. h.
