OF RAGS AND RICHES

The Harvard Advocate, founded in 1866, boasts the distinction of being the nation’s “oldest continuously published college literary magazine.” Along with similarly historic student-run publications such as The Harvard Crimson and The Harvard Lampoon, the Advocate has proven its tenacious staying power. Having weathered both time and numerous editorial changeovers, it seems likely that many new names will grace the Advocate’s masthead in years to come. This may not be the case for a generation of undergraduate magazines that has sprung to life in the past few years.

At first glance, publications such as The Goose, an absurdist magazine detailing the life and adventures of a fictional Latin translator, may seem to fall under the looming shadow of the venerable “Big Three” of Harvard Publications. Unlike the Advocate, Lampoon, or Crimson newer magazines face the threat of extinction following the graduation of their founding members.

But in the meantime, longevity isn’t a primary concern. Publications like Tract Magazine are kept alive today by readers and contributors who are drawn to them because of the specificity and diversity of their content. Their goal isn’t to outlast their more prestigious predecessors; it’s to fill what many current editors-in-chief call “holes” in the campus media coverage.



FIXING A HOLE

The first issue of Tract Magazine, which aspires to innovatively unite art and science, appeared last fall. “The hole here is not due to The Advocate or The Crimson being at fault,” says Henry M. Cowles ’08, an inactive Crimson arts editor and Tract’s outgoing editor-in-chief. “Tract is not going to rise to the prominence or readership or recognition of these ‘Big Three.’ That’s not really the goal. We’re just providing a venue for people to think in this particular way on campus.”

H–Bomb editor-in-chief Martabel Wasserman ’10 holds similar sentiments for her own magazine. “We are filling a hole in the media of the college,” she says. “We are not trying to compete with any existing voices.” The relatively recent appearence of the Cinematic, Freeze, and Present! can be explained by similar desires to satisfy niche markets with their exclusive coverage of—respectively—film, fashion, and anarchist art.

This is not to say that content and interests between underdog magazines and the Big Three do not occasionally overlap. The Advocate, for example, is only one of four different on-campus publications to which aspiring writers or poets may submit. Tuesday Magazine, along with the Gamut, an annual poetry journal, distinguishes itself with an effort at diversity.

“Tuesday was supposed to capture a slice of intellectual life here at Harvard.” says Caroline A. Bleeke ’10, co-editor of the magazine. “It’s catered to people with good ideas: we edit works to create publishable pieces.” Its annual issue hovers around 30-40 pages, which means The Gamut can similarly afford to publish a wide variety of poetry. Co-editor of the journal Liza D. Flum ’10 refers to her publication as less a competitor and more a supplement to the existing opportunities for publication. “There are a lot of really good poets who simply can’t get published in the Advocate because they have a limited number of slots,” she says. “There’s a lot of really good writing that’s just not going to get printed on campus… We try and represent a variety.”

The Harvard Book Review (HBR), currently in its ninth year, may occasionally have overlapping content with The Crimson or The Advocate. However, the HBR was not strictly established as a forum for literary criticism but also as a community for writers. “One thing we try to foster is a wide variety of styles,” says Marta M. Figlerowitz ’09, the former fiction editor of The Advocate and current HBR editor-in-chief. “We are aiming towards something that can be read leisurely but that isn’t too compressed. The niche between purely academic and purely creative is a good one to explore.”

COLLEGE APPLICATIONS

Though interested readers may find similarities between the content covered in various underdog magazines and what appears in the pages of the Big Three, those looking to contribute to the publications are quick to discover a striking contrast between the two spheres. The abandonment of the “comp,” or requisite trial period for prospective members, presents a notable distinction.

Often, the lack of a comp is a deliberate decision, a reaction to the Big Three’s notoriously long and sometimes grueling try-out processes. “The general feeling with us is that the comp process is rather sadistic. [It] makes things too regimented,” says Tim R. Hwang ‘08, who would be executive president of Present! if such a title existed. “The only requirement is to find us.”

Most often, the absence of a comp is simply a result of the realization that, with small membershipd, many publications simply cannot afford to discourage would-be contributors. “It’s only when you start growing as a larger organization that you have to start doing cuts,” says Thea L. Sebastian ‘08, founder and president of Freeze Magazine. “Before, we couldn’t really afford to have a comp at all. We are now transitioning into a full-fledged institution.”

Some groups prefer to offer truncated versions of a comp that resemble applications and institute a faster selection process that culls the best prospective members without overtly discouraging participation. “We do not believe in subjecting potential editorial board members to a ‘comp,’” states the introduction to the online application for Tuesday magazine. This particular verb choice indicates just what the Editorial Board thinks of a comp.

Following this declaration however, the Tuesday magazine “application” asks a series of questions aimed at identifying “qualified candidates”—though a tone of self-derision is apparent in questions such as, “What is the capital of Papua New Guinea?”

Despite its various reinterpretations, the application process cannot be fully eradicated. In addition to the three-part application, prospective contributors to Tuesday Magazine must also attend an interview and submit two sample writing pieces in an echo of the comp processes used by the Big Three.



COMMENCEMENT

Even with a steady influx of new members, smaller magazines can face dissolution for reasons beyond human factors. All of them have in recent history dealt with difficulties threatening their livelihood. Most small publications don’t have rich alumni, making it difficult to solve financial dilemmas such as: from where do we get money? And, later on: from where do we get more money?

Generosity on the part of various departments, the Undergraduate Council, and institutions like the Harvard Women’s Center can occasionally provide financial salvation. Freeze has resolved the their insufficient funding by making the jump to the Internet. “I would recommend this transition highly to anyone else—not a person on the board regrets this decision,” says Sebastian. Some publications such as Cinematic and Tuesday prefer to solicit advertising from local businesses, though this is easier said than done.

“The main thing I am focusing on for the next semester at least is getting people to advertise with us,” says Rich S. Beck ’09, a Crimson arts editor and editor-in-chief of Cinematic. “It’s hard to get started, when you bring them [the advertisers] an issue with no ads in it. We need to convince them that we are going to be around.” In order to stay competitive, Cinematic sells advertisements on its back cover for half as much as The Advocate.

But most of all, extinction is a constant worry because of the simple and irreversible passage of time. Many of the founders of recently-founded magazines are now seniors and have had to face the issue, at one point or another, of finding someone just as passionate about their projects as they are. Many magazines thus insist on the immediate immersion of new members. “It’s a matter of raising a profile, but also keeping a constant influx of interested people and making room for new young members,” Cowles says.

Despite this long list of hurdles, hazards, and hardships, underdog art publications have found their niches on campus. Unlike the Harvard of 1866, today’s campus is characterized by diversity—and that extends not only to its undergraduate population, but to the words those students print.

—Staff writer Anna I. Polonyi can be reached at apolonyi@fas.harvard.edu.