Theos-Talk Archives (August 2004 Message tt00306)

At 02:40 AM 8/17/2004, you wrote:

> Hi Norm,
>
> Thanks for that. Most theosophists I've met are also wonderfull people
> (and most don't presently study Leadbeater). Still, like many on this
> list, I share a certain impatience with what we read or rather don't
> read in the magazines. There is a lot of controversy around a lot of
> subjects in spirituality-land. So why isn't it discussed in those
> magazines? Isn't that partly what the second object of the TS is about?
>
> Katinka
Katinka:

Magazines have a particular focus. They are designed to consistently 
provide a certain content. A magazine on new cars, for instance, would 
include car reviews, but would not have articles on vegetarian cooking or 
computer programming. It's up to the publisher to decide what the magazine 
is about and the editor to gather and present materials consistent with 
that direction.

A magazine published by a theosophical organization would follow the 
guidelines of that group's current leadership, presenting materials 
consistent with what that group thought of Theosophy and what was 
considered proper by those people. Based upon their answer to the question, 
"What is Theosophy," the materials would differ between journals of the 
United Lodge of Theosophists, Pasadena Theosophical Society, and Adyar 
Theosophical Society.

Some magazines may be for the general public, and not mention the 
theosophical doctrines much. Others may be technical, and be almost 
unreadable to someone with prior training in the terminology and core 
concepts. Yet others may deal with history, but still adhere to the 
official view of history of the organization that publishes them.

Independent magazines are free of organizational constraints. They don't 
have to deal with theosophical politics and having to adhere to a 
particular party line. Even so, they too are not free of bias. Each such 
magazine is put out by one-or-more people and those people operate from 
their own ideas about Theosophy and what is good theosophical material as 
opposed to unacceptable nonsense.

I don't think that we can expect any particular theosophical publication to 
accept materials that are inconsistent with the magazine's editorial policy 
regarding content. That's not a bad thing. It just means that if a certain 
type of material isn't being covered in existing magazines, there's a need 
for something new. Sometimes a magazine may change its stated purpose and 
take in different materials even though it may lose a portion of its 
current subscribers. More often, the solution is to start something new, a 
magazine dedicated to the neglected topic, in this case, to questioning 
current beliefs in the doctrines and ideas about historic figures.

-- Eldon