Monday, June 24, 2013

Archaic magazine title terms are too "fancy" for me


Two of the strangest survivors of an earlier era in speaking and publishing are Cat Fancy and Dog Fancy magazines.
  • In the 1880s, a thirsty cowboy might stroll into a saloon and say "I'd fancy a sarsaparilla" (pronounced "sasperilla").
  • In the 1970s I attended an "invention expo" at the New York Colosseum. The inventor of a weird hi-fi gadget gave me a business card that identified him as a "fancier in audio sound."
Well, fancy that!

Obviously he was not a fancier in the removal of redundancies. 

In the 21st century, does anyone fancy anything? Is this usage officially dead? 



When I was a teenager, I subscribed to Popular Science, Popular Mechanics, Popular Photography, Popular Electronics and many similar mags. 



Some publishing competitors favored the "Illustrated" term. I subscribed to Electronics Illustrated, Mechanix Illustrated and Sports Cars Illustrated (which later became Car and Driver). Apparently, 50 years ago it was important to point out that a magazine contained pictures.

Some magazine publishers thought it was important to include "magazine" or "monthly" in their titles. I thought it would be fun to publish Popular Illustrated Monthly Magazine.


Few print magazines are started now, but if one was, would it be called "Popular" anything?

People are popular, but People magazine doesn't have to be called Popular People. Politics is/are very popular. But instead of Popular Politics, we have HuffPost and Mother Jones.

Fancy that!

1 comment: