Editor's Introduction

T dictionary defi nes “retrospective” as “1. directed to the past; contemplative of past situations, events, etc. and 2. looking or directed backward.” I can’t help but think the word merely establishes a foundation to accurately describe the work we’ve done here this year. Indeed, we have spent much time looking backward: our staff has scrutinized at minimum 244 journals (though I suspect the actual number is much higher) of approximately 60 volumes, each read twice in their entirety by two groups of genre readers, over a three-month reading period.* While in our most frantic moments this process manifested as an impending duty, it ultimately resulted in a unique and spectacular immersion in the history and voices of the journal that certainly could not have otherwise been experienced and almost undoubtedly, precluding the unforeseen release of some future retrospective issue, will not happen again. Looking backward, we notice acutely what has evolved: variations of texture and dimensions from year to year have been subsequently standardized. An emphasis on artwork has been replaced by photography. Th e radical undertone of pieces from the 60s and 70s has decrescendoed. We are, however, inclined to resist considering these original characteristics as the traits of outdated tomes, and begin instead to internalize a convincing and vibrant persona in place of the text. As you read this retrospective issue, you will perhaps fi nd as we did that the pieces do betray their era, and function as a testament to the psyche of their respective decades. But here is another defi nition, which I’m sure is closer to what the MSU Press had in mind when they proposed a retrospective issue, and is in fact surprising in the specifi city of what it actually implies: Retrospective