Letter from the Editor
We live in a world subject to technology. Where Facebook, Ipod’s, and Blackberries reign, society appears to promote homogeneity. But while technological gadgets and the explosion of the internet satisfy our appetite for easier, quicker forms of communication, they inherently set us further apart from the next person. Contrary to their intent, technological innovations and advances permit us to cluster in groups that endorse exclusivity. In Facebook, groups are privatized to students within a particular college, essentially making “clubs” based on educational backgrounds. A Northwestern student, for instance, can not belong to the Loyola network.
As a result, social “togetherness,” particularly amongst young adults, is dissipating. Relating to others outside of your community, emotionally and mentally, has become a challenge and requires sacrificial effort beyond our willing capacity. In my hopes, the launching of “Rain” magazine will aid this fragmented situation. The intent to ubiquitously share information lends the magazine its metaphorical title. The magazine will primarily focus on controversial issues and events encircling the art realm. It will provide thought-provoking material and ample space for readers to agree or disagree, thereby, promoting interactive discourse. Furthermore, the concentration on art-related subjects will bring to light an area much too ignored by society.
“Rain” magazine will be geared towards the twenties generation. To clarify, narrowing the magazine’s perspective to this specific range of individuals, is not intended to recommend exclusivity, but to impact a generation most disunited by technology. In order to hasten the synergy of this generation, “Rain” will be a weekly magazine, accumulating in a total of 48 issues per year. Approximately 50,000 copies will be produced per issue. Circulated to all fifty states, a majority of issues will be released near college campuses. With regards to the intended audience, “Rain” acknowledges that “time is of the essence.” Readers of this generation, immersed in their studies and/or careers, more often than not prefer quick reads. The composition of the magazine will address this concern by consisting of roughly 70% images (photographs and illustrations) and 30% text. Rather than extensive essays, the editorial content will be structured around concise discussions and excerpts.
Each issue will investigate artistic debates, past and present, within film, music, literature, and undoubtedly, the visual arts. Given the intention to make the magazine a time-efficient read, there will only be three sections (each section devoted to one of the four previously mentioned spheres of art). The first section of the magazine will be dedicated to an interview. The mid-section, covering the most pages, will showcase one selected work. No analysis will accompany the works in this section, for the purpose of the reader to examine and make conclusions about the work himself. The final segment will include two reviews as well as announcements for upcoming film, album, book, and exhibition releases.
The very first issue is to include an interview with the indie band “The Virgins,” Sally Mann’s photographic works from “Immediate Family,” and reviews of Vladimir Nabokov’s novel “Lolita” and Mel Gibson’s film “The Passion of Christ.” Contributors are the deli’s Erin Roof, NY Times’ Sarah Boxer, writer Graham Vickers, and film critic Roger Ebert. For example, Sarah Boxer and Graham Vickers will delve into the taboo subject of child sexuality. Boxer will provide a short summary on Mann's provocative photographs of her children in the nude. Vickers, the author of "Chasing Lolita," will open up debate about Nabokov's novel "Lolita," concerning adult-child sexual relationships. A sample cover of the first issue to be released is attached. In great eagerness, we welcome and encourage support for the birth of “Rain” magazine.
Sincerely,
Lauren Choi
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
You say that technology inherently sets us further apart from the next person. That it permits us to cluster in groups that endorse exclusivity, citing facebook networks as an example. I see your point, in that technology allows communication without face to face interaction with those we might normally interact with. At the same time, doesn't technology infinitely expand the opportunity for connecting with people who we would never otherwise? With facebook in particular, I actually think it breaks down some of the exclusivity of groups. The fact that a Northwestern student cannot belong to the Loyola network is true... but this isn't really a result of technology, its simply a fact that I go to Northwestern, not Loyola. Using technology, I can now "friend" and interact with Loyola students in a way that wouldn't have been possible previously precisely because we go to different schools.
ReplyDelete