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

Who's in the March 2011 Magazines due out on 6th February?

edited January 2011 in - WM and WN
Who's in March's 2011 WM/WN issues?

The magazines are due out soon.

(Not sure if the 6th Feb as listed in the magazine is correct as the 6th is a Sunday...)

If you spot yourself, please let us know which magazine and which page; and the name the article appears under if it differs from your Talkback name. If you spot someone else, PLEASE LET THEM post the details here.

Remember: if mentioning a story, don't give the ending away.

(When the magazines arrive please use this thread- it will drop down the pages in the meantime.)


  • No one else seems to have posted this yet, so I thought I'd start the ball rolling. My 200 word story about Royal Ascot, which won a copy of The Oxford Dictionary of Modern Slang, is on page 25 of WM.
  • Well done to you, montholon.
    My magazines came today - I spotted another tber's book cover and article about her publisher in it too, but will leave her to say ;)
  • Well done, montholon! Off to find the other thread now :)
  • edited February 2011
    I posted on the other thread but will say it again here - congratulations on your story, Montholon! Perhaps you'd like to post the details again on this thread?

    Daisy, not sure if I'm the person you mean, but on p.11 of the Writers' News Section there's an article about my publisher, Phoenix Yard Books, with the cover picture of 'Coping with Chloe'. A complete surprise to me - I'm delighted!

    (Think the threads may now have been combined!)
  • Have merged two threads and deleted a couple of comments relating to the existence of two threads!
    Apologies for any inconvenience.
    Well done Montholon, Rosalie (Phoenix Yard seem a lovely bunch), and everyone else.
  • Well done Montholon and Rosalie
  • Rosalie, yes, you're the person I meant! Well done :)
  • well done Montholon and Rosalie, will have a look at my copy later on
  • I saw that Montholon and read it to my OH. We both loved it. Well done and well done Rosalie.
  • now we know Big Brother is watching us ... Webbo, whatever possessed you to put that appalling photograph of Sarah Paretsky on the cover??? she looks like a ghoul of some kind, about to consume whoever comes near her! I am writing a lot of horror these days, I might copy that and use it for inspiration ... truthfully and seriously, it is awful. I would never allow a pic of me to go out looking like that!

    Now I can go look at the rest of it, perhaps. Talk about off putting ...
  • dorothy there have been worse covers

    I thought I once saw Marcus Brigstocke in drag staring out at me from a WMag cover
  • Oh dear! Your comments about the covers, Dorothy and Dora, made me laugh so much :)
  • I missed quite a few 'covers' when I stopped subscribing for a while ... hopefully I missed a lot of bad 0nes then. Heaven help us, what else is to come???????????????????????
  • I don't think it is the lady on the cover that's the problem, it's there is too much writing, cramming her face into a small space

    wouldn't have thought having WRITING tattooed on your forehead helps much either, the photographer, or whoever sets the cover, has not taken into account the fact there'd be so much surrounding writing. The title cuts the face off at the wrong point
  • edited February 2011
    I agree the cover is VERY badly laid out but the trouble is, she is just as scary on page 18 without the writing stamped on her forehead.
    Congratulations to all TBers who are in this issue.
    I have not read all of it - looked through it over tea, read a few items and it will be on its way tomorrow to someone else. No need to clutter up my home with it. Anyway, I want that woman gone. She's scaring me.

    PS: still can't see the point of two magazines in one. Make them one magazine and done with it. Otherwise it is bitty and rather silly, yes?
  • [quote=dorothyd]Make them one magazine and done with it[/quote]

    Perhaps that's the idea and the 2 in 1 is the start of it.

    CONGRATULATIONS Montholon and Rosalie.

    I DO have to agree with people about the cover. It is hardly a flattering pic of the lady, but if that is what she supplied then obviously she thinks it looks great!
  • I am looking forward to receiving my copy so I can see this picture...:)

    Congratulations Montholon and Rosalie.
  • Just read your story, Montholon (p.25 of WM). Liked it a lot! (Added a new word to my vocaublary, too :) )
  • got my copy yesterday, well done ladies
  • Which word was that, Rosalie?
  • I will have to wait until tomorrow now to see if mine turns up.
  • Congratulations Montholon - made me giggle. Well done Rosalie and any other TBers not spotted yet!
  • tit for tat = hat
    changed to titfer over time!
  • Wow. Let's try to be a little bit respectful please. Otherwise, I think it's only fair to ask Sara Paretsky to come on here and critique all your profile pics! We all age differently, but I'd expect better from intelligent, supportive, writers than to attack a mature woman who looks a good deal younger than her years.
    Would you have been any less critical if we'd used a promo pic from twenty years ago, or touched it up?
  • edited February 2011
    I am sure she is a lovely lady, but she/you could have found a better picture of her, is all! Not attacking a woman at all, Webbo, I wish I knew where you got your ideas from!
    What I said was ... what possessed you to use such a terrible photo of her? and then Dora pointed out that having WRITING stamped on your forehead didn't help - and the comment was made, there have been worse covers ... hard to believe!
    Now, if you interpret that as an attack on a mature woman, you are definitely misreading the threads! I was attacking the photo! and its choice as your cover. It is NOT a good photo.
    I'm 67 and don't photograph that well, but the studio portrait I had done is at least half flattering. I do not look as if I am about to eat whoever looks at it. Is all.
    Sara, if you read this, forgive me, but you need a better photographer! I can recommend mine, she is a wonder.
  • To me, this is not a reasonable or constructive criticism:
    [quote=dorothyd] she looks like a ghoul of some kind, about to consume whoever comes near her![/quote]

    Perhaps you would have laid out the cover differently – that's a matter of taste – but I am very happy with the work of our designers, and thought it made a strong cover.
  • Well I am certainly intrigued and it will be the first thing I look at when my copy arrives.

    I do think that sometimes magazine covers try to squeeze in too much text- like the February issue did.
    Last month Andrew Motion had Writing Magazine covering his head and text from his shirt collar down, not good. (Sorry Webbo)

    Obviously we're looking at it in a different way to editors and cover design artists...
  • It's funny I don't really look at the cover much I just want to delve in to the magazine and read all the articles and interesting snippets. I don't think there is anything wrong with this month's cover.
  • You're quite right Carol, we do try to squeeze in as much text as possible... the cover is trying to grab the attention of shoppers on overcrowded newsstands, not necessarily the subscribers who we would hope would be turning inside anyway.
  • [quote=Webbo]trying to grab the attention of shoppers on overcrowded newsstands[/quote]

    Sometimes, less is more.

    In my opinion, the photo is squashed in, and maybe the lighting isn't right, or something. I'm sure I've seeen WF's mag, with a bright yellow background, even white.

    Sorry to be negative.
  • and seeing as you're here Webbo, any idea when the subscription department will be replying to my email please or should I send my message about my subscription to you instead, so it does get actioned?
  • Don't be sorry Dora - constructive input is what we need.
    Here are a few things every cover should have:
    • a nice bright background (but nothing too fussy)
    • an attractive subject
    • eye contact and a smile
    • space for all the cover lines
    • a variety of messages: encouraging, authoritative, factual, etc
    • space
    In practice, we nearly always end up compromising on at least one of those features!

    (Our next cover is very bright background, nearly all white... wish you could see that now!)
  • Please send me the details Dora: [email protected]
  • I do feel like I'm being negative so, out of interest I've just had quick shufty through my 2010 mags and you'll be pleased to know, IMO, generally the covers are okay.

    Think I may have just learned something today to, that is, it seems the author's genre is brought out into the photo too. Only one or two I looked and thought,"Ooer", but then read what type of writing they produced and the photo seemed to fit. For example August 2010 "King of Crime" he may have a grey face but it's obviously done that way on purpose.

    There are also others with dark backgrounds, but one guy has a blue shirt which brings colour into it.

    I think if you're going to put so much writing on the cover,might be sensible to make the person/subject smaller/further away.

    That's me done on this now.

    Thank you and goodnight.
  • VivViv
    edited February 2011
    I have just put the March covers of Writing Mag and Writers Forum side by side and there's really very little difference. Both have lots of text (WM is all white as the background is darker, WF uses 3 different colours of text)and both have their title going right across the 'model's' head. Both use a small bright circle to emphasise a particular selling point - WM's is the value for money of the 2 mags in one, and the prize money on offer (i.e. two circles), WF is just the prize money on offer. I don't think the actual beauty or otherwise of the cover lady is important - If I was browsing in a shop, I would want to find out at a glance what is in the mag and if I want to buy it. To me, the contents page -and then the articles themselves- are much more important than the cover.
  • Yay, thanks Dora!
    [quote=dora]Think I may have just learned something today to, that is, it seems the author's genre is brought out into the photo too. Only one or two I looked and thought,"Ooer", but then read what type of writing they produced and the photo seemed to fit. For example August 2010 "King of Crime" he may have a grey face but it's obviously done that way on purpose.[/quote]
    Quite right Dora. Sometimes we aim for that sort of thing, sometimes they do! Elmore Leonard (the King of crime one), and most other crimewriters, tend to aim for a moody atmosphere. And romance authors are nearly always smiling, in a garden!
    Thanks for your insight too Viv. I'd be very interested to see everybody's ideas of other mags' really strong or really weak covers, but that's for another thread. (and apologies for derailing this one already, where's a moderator when you need one! ;) )
  • I have some cover photographs to my credit, work done over the years. The photographs was allowed to stand intact and the 'leaders' were put in a bright coloured box down the side. No one put anything across my photos. Worth thinking about, perhaps? Rather than smothering the cover with words and swamping the subject? I like Dora's idea, make the person smaller. I'll check out the psychic magazines next time someone gives me a copy to see what they do. Usually the smiling lady but I don't recall them swamped in words yet the leaders are all there.
  • Sorry to grab you as well, Webbo, but do you know when I'll be getting my Writers and Artists Yearbook for having the star letter a few months ago?

    I thought the mag was good this month - as usual I skim read it and will be going back over it in more depth. I liked the more unusual articles like the one about writers' residences and also the Wordpress one was really useful - I know understand how you can use categories and posts but create a website appearance. A lightbulb moment!
  • I'll chase it up tomorrow Lou, and let you know.
    Thanks for the Wordpress feedback - that's exactly what the article aimed to do, so it's good to know it wasn't too advanced or too basic!
  • Congrats to those who were published. Well done. I enjoyed reading the Ascot one too. I'll look for the other one.
  • Well done Montholon and Rosalie.
  • edited February 2011
    Well done, Montholon and Rosalie (and the person whose letter appears on page 34 of Writers’ News).

    I’m not over-keen on having the two magazines stapled together, especially when the Writers’ News contents page comes after page 36 of Writing Magazine (and Members' News pages 1-4 come after WN page 18). It doesn’t help, either, when the wrong page is quoted (the Editorial calendar is on page 22, not page 23; and the solutions to Red Editing Pen are on page 31, not page 45).

    Red Editing Pen sentence 2 omits the final full stop.

    Your writing critiqued: I wonder why people get palate/palette/pallet muddled up. There were a lot of “look” words. “… to dispose bodies” sounds odd. Do they call it “health & safety” in America?
  • Yes, I noticed one of those wrong page quotes. The proof-reading standards of WM/WN are not always as good as they could be, though as a trainee proofreader I know how hard it is to spot every mistake.
  • Jay, our local Italian offered 'food for all pallets' recently. I debated whether to go tell them but decided against it, I saw people smiling as they went by, thought, let them find out themselves.
Sign In or Register to comment.