Skip to main content

We are a Muse (d)

I've been members of several forums for writers and would-be writers. Some provide superb opportunities to discuss the trials and tribulations of the writing life with fellow authors. Others are more like an X-Factor holding pen of hopefuls. But something they've all had in common is not really producing anything of value for the outside world... until now.

The Litopia forum has produced an ezine by the name of Muse.

When this was first proposed, to be honest, I envisaged one of those rather tatty self-produced 'magazines' that clubs knock out. A bit like the Bulletin of the British Conker Enthusiasts (apologies if BBCE exists - I was making it up). The sort of thing that tends to appear as a 'guest publication' at the end of Have I Got News For You, so everyone can sneer at it. How wrong could I be.

In practice, Muse has superb production values - much better than some professional ezines I've seen - and lots of great content from author interviews to articles, fiction and reviews. And, yes, there's an interview with me - but this hasn't biassed me in any way. Really.

So run, don't walk, over to Litopia and take a look. Or just download your copy by right clicking here and selecting 'Save link as...' or 'Save file as...' I recommend downloading rather than reading in your viewer as some viewers (certainly the Firefox PDF plugin) slightly mangle it.
Labels:

Comments

  1. Sue Guiney25 May 2010 at 09:49

    To be honest, I had the same initial reaction as you to the news that there was yet another new magazine to download. But I trust your judgment (and would love to read your interview), so I'm off to download now.

    ReplyDelete
  2. laurasdad26 May 2010 at 10:18

    Brian

    Thank you for pointing out this e-mag which, like you, I think is well designed, with a but....

    ..which is that (call me old fashioned) I don't like white type on a black background because although it looks good is hard for me to read for any length of time. I prefer black on white with a plain font.

    Then I'll read all day.

    Probably a red rag to a designer but I'm only a customer/consumer/purchaser

    PS Liked your piece even though I found it hard to read

    ReplyDelete
  3. Brian Clegg26 May 2010 at 12:25

    Hope it wasn't a disappointment, Sue.

    Fair point L'sdad - it looks gorgeous that way, but it isn't optimal for readability. I guess the best thing would be to do title pages like that, but have most of the 'reading' pages on a white or off-white background.

    Takes me back to doing software usability reviewing in my BA days...

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why I hate opera

If I'm honest, the title of this post is an exaggeration to make a point. I don't really hate opera. There are a couple of operas - notably Monteverdi's Incoranazione di Poppea and Purcell's Dido & Aeneas - that I quite like. But what I do find truly sickening is the reverence with which opera is treated, as if it were some particularly great art form. Nowhere was this more obvious than in ITV's 2010 gut-wrenchingly awful series Pop Star to Opera Star , where the likes of Alan Tichmarsh treated the real opera singers as if they were fragile pieces on Antiques Roadshow, and the music as if it were a gift of the gods. In my opinion - and I know not everyone agrees - opera is: Mediocre music Melodramatic plots Amateurishly hammy acting A forced and unpleasant singing style Ridiculously over-supported by public funds I won't even bother to go into any detail on the plots and the acting - this is just self-evident. But the other aspects need some exp...
118 comments
Read more

Is 5x3 the same as 3x5?

The Internet has gone mildly bonkers over a child in America who was marked down in a test because when asked to work out 5x3 by repeated addition he/she used 5+5+5 instead of 3+3+3+3+3. Those who support the teacher say that 5x3 means 'five lots of 3' where the complainants say that 'times' is commutative (reversible) so the distinction is meaningless as 5x3 and 3x5 are indistinguishable. It's certainly true that not all mathematical operations are commutative. I think we are all comfortable that 5-3 is not the same as 3-5.  However. This not true of multiplication (of numbers). And so if there is to be any distinction, it has to be in the use of English to interpret the 'x' sign. Unfortunately, even here there is no logical way of coming up with a definitive answer. I suspect most primary school teachers would expands 'times' as 'lots of' as mentioned above. So we get 5 x 3 as '5 lots of 3'. Unfortunately that only wor...
25 comments
Read more

Why backgammon is a better game than chess

I freely admit that chess, for those who enjoy it, is a wonderful game, but I honestly believe that as a game , backgammon is better (and this isn't just because I'm a lot better at playing backgammon than chess). Having relatively recently written a book on game theory, I have given quite a lot of thought to the nature of games, and from that I'd say that chess has two significant weaknesses compared with backgammon. One is the lack of randomness. Because backgammon includes the roll of the dice, it introduces a random factor into the play. Of course, a game that is totally random provides very little enjoyment. Tossing a coin isn't at all entertaining. But the clever thing about backgammon is that the randomness is contributory without dominating - there is still plenty of room for skill (apart from very flukey dice throws, I can always be beaten by a really good backgammon player), but the introduction of a random factor makes it more life-like, with more of a sense...
6 comments
Read more