Welcome to Writers Talkback. If you are a new user, your account will have to be approved manually to prevent spam. Please bear with us in the meantime

New look - cannot make my mind up about it

edited August 2006 in - WM and WN
«1

Comments

  • What does everyone think of the new format in the latest edition of the Writing Magazine. I cannot make my mind up about it - dare say it will grow on me - I would be interested to hear what others have to say. Woll52
  • I like it.  I was getting to the point of thinking about cancelling my subscription as it was all getting very samey - same themes, same look.  I haven't read this month's edition yet, but I feel excited about the new format.  Not that looks are everything of course, but the first impression is 'Mm.  A bit different."
  • I've only managed to see the cover on the website, I'm sure it will grow on me, but it looks like Writer's Digest, and I didn't like that at all, the quality of writing was atrocious. 

    Glad to see the self-publishing guide, it's about time they started writing more on self-publishing (and if Writers' Forum could do the opposite . . .)
  • I'm not sure yet. In fact I haven't had the time yet to sit down and seriously look and consider it. But the brief look wasn't too bad.
  • Haven't had much time but have leafed through it.  Like it.  (At first thought you were referring to the shop with that name.  I think if you went in you'd make your mind up pretty soon.)
  • I like the new layout, but I don't know if I've read it unusually quickly this month or if there is less actual reading.  It normally takes me more than 2 evenings to get through it.  Perhaps it's me, racing through the pages too fast.  Liked Jean Saunders's article on seasonal stories for the women's mags.
  • I certainly recognise things we have talked about. Consider,they have a varied group of writers from all over the country and world- so we must be a representative sample.
    It's good we can provide the basis of these items. If they interest us, it will probably interest other readers.
  • Well if WN are taking note of what we say on here: I'd like a present of free beer for life with my next issue please!

    Ta very muchso.
  • A month's supply of Green and Black's chocolate would be acceptable. (I'm not greedy!)
  • That's hoping for too much!
  • Carol - I wanted to boycott Cadbury's after the recent scandal, but it proved impossible because they've taken over Green and Black's. There's a limit to protest, isn't there?!!
  • WHAT DO WE WANT

    BEEEEEEEEEER

    WHEN DO WE WANT IT

    NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOW
  • I could tell you my thoughts, when I get it in about November! The wait is painful!
  • Hey nenastew, if I get to England, i'll buy two copies of the current issue of WM and I'll post one to you. Then we'd get to read them and know what everyone is talking about.
  • Why does it take so long for WN/WM to reach people not in the UK?
  • I LIKE the new look WM - brilliantt! Now be careful what you say about Outer Mongolia - the Kool Kat has several cousins living there.
  • Stan - Are Kool Kat's kousins likely to become kontributors to Talkback? (We kan only hope!!)
  • Looking at Woll's first post to this thread, I wonder if you tried mimicking Bucks Fizz's song and dance "Making your mind up", it would help you reach a decision?
  • Isn't that the Bucks Fizz number with the ripping off of skirts?!
  • Oh no not nudity again!!!
  • I didn't like the Contents page - it 'shouted' but wasn't clear. And I found the clock overprinting My Writing Day distracting.
  • When I finally sat down to read it, I ended up with no clear conclusion. The text against the very white page made it easier to read, but I didn't like how some of the pages came out. I found some of them harder to get into.
    It will definitely before a few months before I finally decide whether I like it or not.
  • But stop subscribing Carol! (Do I get commission Webbo?).
  • Stan - should there be a "don't" in there somewhere?!! I don't think Webbo hands out commission if you encourage people to stop subscribing!!!!
  • Poor Stan, must be the ripping of skirts that has befuddled him.  And by the way Stan, ripping off a skirt doesn't necessarily result in nudity. Some people still wear big knickers you know!
  • I'm glad I wasn't the only one who wondered about the missing 'don't'.
    Yes, all us women with big hips or past the very thin and youthful stage have no choice but to resort to big knickers.
    Block your ears Stan, cover your eyes, we don't want to shock you!
  • The pages seem a bit glossy now. Haven't read it properly yet though. :D
  • Better let Stan know when we've finished talking about big knickers, otherwise he won't know when to stop covering his faculties!!
  • I'm not sure about the new look, either.  I think I preferred it the way it was.
  • Okay Stan you can join in again!
  • I was a bit gobsmacked when I opened this month's WM. Still not sure about whether I like it or not - maybe they've gone overboard with the different title fonts on each article?  And the clock is definitely a distraction!
  • Where has the scriptwriting feature gone? I'm alarmed! I hope it's back next month...do you have any inside information Webbo?
  • No, I'm definitely unsure about the new look.  Gaudy was quite a good word to describe it.  Maybe it will grow on me, but that clock on My Writing Day was a big mistake.
  • Come come, a change is as good as a rest (so my old Mum used to say)
  • yes, you're probably right, Betsie.  I think we've all just got used to how things were.  But the clock still has to go!
  • Yes, of course, there should have been a 'don't' in my previous posting. Having grown up in London, from a non-chapel going working class family, and having spent 9 years as a pastor in East London, there is not much that shocks me. Though the thought of Talkbackers in big knickers is rather disturbing!!!!!
  • Just been flicking though again, and I came across something that really narks me...  On page 16, it's headed (and I quote), "Value for mon£y".  Am I the only person who gets really hacked off with people who use symbols as letters?  The clock didn't bother me that much, I just ignored it.
  • I've only flicked through it so far but it seems to me the changes really highlight the ragged right-hand column edges.  I admit I'm a bit of a neat freak and prefer to see columns fully justified.  It's often stressed that presentation is important when submitting manuscripts - you know, clean, clear print, no dog-eared or coffee-stained pages etc.  Surely, layout matters too?
    As it's "our" magazine, so to speak, maybe we should put this to the vote?
    Hands up all those who want to see neat, straight-edged fully justified columns?
  • Here here.
  • Me too.  It's quite off putting - almost like it's sliding off the page.  Neat edges please!
  • Firstly, I admit to being incredibly grumpy when it comes to any sort of change but I immediately noticed the changes with the mag and wasn't keen.  'Gaudy' is a good word to decribe it, along with 'untidy' and I agree about the £ in the word money; considering the aim of the magazine, that just looks downright unprofessional. 

    Sorry to be a mizzmog! I didn't like it, but maybe I just need to get used to it. To be honest I didn't even notice the clock and had to go back and have another look.  I didn't like that much either (although I agree with June Hampson about Nigel Harman!)
  • Do you think the Ed really is taking note of our comments?
  • Someone will be!!!
  • And to bring back the regular scriptwriting articles?  Please???
  • I know someone who started buying it because of the scriptwriting articles.
    But have to admit the clock is a stinker!
    Having looked at the magazine a few times to get used to it, when the second issue in the new design (Oct) came in, reading it wasn't too bad.
    Something I didn't like in the October issue like the clock,was on page 51- the blue coloured laptop behind the text. It made it hard to read the words fluidly, you really had to slow down and concentrate on each word- I gave up reading the article.
    Whether it was due to my eyes or the varifocals I don't know. I've just had another look and no I can't cope with it.
  • I agree Carol, and with everybody else who DIDN'T LIKE THE CLOCK, and the blue laptop had exactly the same effect.  'My Writing Day' used to be one of the highlights but I had to force my way through it this time.  I don't think pictures under text are a good idea, far too distracting.  I look to the magazine to be informative and am not impressed by arty gimmicky bits, especially as the accepted form is to submit work in simple font.  Also, they have taken to printing whole columns directly taken from Talkbackers threads, this means that they're filling up their pages with free stuff and not only that, we've already read and digested it!  It's a cheap way of padding it out. One more thing (I'll stop moaning shortly) that annoys me is 'tips from the top' pages which are just snips of old articles rehashed and reprinted.  I know that we are encouraged to rewrite/rehash successful work for a DIFFERENT outlet/market but I can't believe they think they can get away with it for their own  readership month after month. Do they think our memories are that bad?  I realise that 'originality' is an endangered species but they could at least try harder. 
  • I found "My Writing Day" hard going to read for the same reason. 
  • My initial reaction was a definite no-no but I thought I'd see how I felt when the next one came along as these things can grow on you. I came back off holiday to the current copy, opened it and.... no sorry. Felt the same. It's all so harsh. The text is too bold, it isn't 'calm' to read, the pages feel too 'in your face' and 'busy' and so are uncomfortable to look at. Perhaps if the print could be toned down it wouldn't feel so hard on the eye. Once you get into the content you notice it less so perhaps I'll get used to it...
  • I got the new look WM today. I see what you mean. It looks a bit too busy, doesn't it?
Sign In or Register to comment.