Kung Fu Magazines

[Zhang Yong Chun]

What's the forum's opinion on:

* Kung Fu Magazine
* Journal of Asian Martial Arts
* Inside Kung Fu
* Black Belt Magazine

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

The first two Rock, the others suxorz.

[doug maverick]

i agree with RD(can't believe i'm saying that)

[golden arhat]

kungfu magazine is awesome

dunno about JOAA

black belt and inside kung fu suckkk

[SPJ]

I think he meant journal of asian martial arts

or JAMA.

[B-Rad]

I'm not a big fan of JAMA. It has the occasional interesting long in depth article, but a lot of filler crap to (like the other magazines... just longer and more pompous )

[Zhang Yong Chun]

I think he meant journal of asian martial arts

or JAMA.

Absolutely right. Missed the letter. I'll edit the original post.

As for me, I think many magazines, either by design or necessity, are catalogues. Not a big fan of "Kung Fu Panda" being a cover story, but I see why publishers need to move paper, especially in the age of the internet when all sorts of stuff is available online.

The challenge is, how to make something interesting and worthwhile, on deadline, that trumps the stuff you can find online. A magazine has editors and professional journalists while websites can have all sorts of quality control problems, but in each case, the information you get...caveat emptor.

Kung Fu Magazine is one of the better of the print mags. That's all I'll say about that...

[GeneChing]

Gosh, thanks, Zhang Yong Chun.

We appreciate the props from the rest of you as well.

For the record, we're Kung Fu Tai Chi in print and KungFuMagazine.com online.

[lkfmdc]

Journal of Asian Martial Arts PRETENDS to be an academically rigorous journal but the reality is that they are no better than all the other martial arts related magazines, maybe even worse. Their pursuit of pseudo intellectualism only results in dry, completely uninteresting pieces, most of which simply rehash what has already been published 1000 times before

True academic journals wouldn't accept as footnotes an unsourced vanity book

true academic journals wouldn't shy away from subjects just because they are controversial

and most importantly, true academic journals don't pick their subject matter based upon who places ads in their magazine

[SimonM]

KFM / Kung Fu Tai Chi rocks.
Never read journal of Asian Martial Arts.
IKF is undiluted sewage interspersed by the lady with the book on using cleevage to distract your opponent during a knife fight.
I wouldn't even bother opening Black Belt.

[cjurakpt]

Journal of Asian Martial Arts PRETENDS to be an academically rigorous journal but the reality is that they are no better than all the other martial arts related magazines, maybe even worse. Their pursuit of pseudo intellectualism only results in dry, completely uninteresting pieces, most of which simply rehash what has already been published 1000 times before

True academic journals wouldn't accept as footnotes an unsourced vanity book

true academic journals wouldn't shy away from subjects just because they are controversial

and most importantly, true academic journals don't pick their subject matter based upon who places ads in their magazine

I agree 100%; first off, academic journals are refereed by acknowledged experts in the field; I don't believe that JAMA does that, they just edit for content in-house (I could be wrong on that); second, if it's called Journal of ASIAN Martial Arts, why do they frequently have articles on non-asian MA? I mean, call it the Journal of Indigenous MA, or the Journal of World MA, whatever; third, the quality of writing varies greatly, from well-organized research (a recent article by Doug Wile on taijiquan origins was worth the price of the mag alone) to first-person "here's-what-happened-to-me" anecdotes that have no business being in an academic journal;

Black Belt is...odd;

IKF...well, suxorz, aside from being my new favorite word, is about as pithy as one could be descriptively speaking; with one caveat, noted below...

KFTC: in general, I think that the content is great, and the articles are well written and thankfully are not always PC BS; however, I would offer one suggestion, and this is just my opinion: the layout; it often is very...cluttered, making it at times difficult to follow; the use of white type on a black background especially can be distracting; and the way the pics are often at an angle with the text running around them also makes it look at times disorganized; now, I am not complaining - I am simply giving an opinion, others may or may not share it, no offense intended; personally, while I think that the content of IKF is abhorrent, I have to say that the actual layout makes it somewhat more appealing to read; anyway, it's not a major issue, just a perspective

[SimonM]

See I disagree. IKF certainly has more flash than KFTC, greater numbers of coloured pictures and such, but I find it to be actually more distracting than KFTC's layout.

[kal]

I preferred IKF when it has black-and-white photos.

It looks a mess now with the whole thing full of glossy colour pictures.

And the covers really suck nowadays as well. I liked the covers in the 1980s and early 1990s when they looked more subtle and even arty.

But now the covers are too in your face and you can't tell them apart from Black Belt mag's covers anymore.

[SimonM]

I lost hope in IKF when I saw the same guy with shock blond eighties rocker hair wearing a red "silk" uniform with leopard spot trim and a leopard spot sash grimacing in photos in two issues in a row.

One was a "ain't my 5ty13z0r teh d34d1y" article and the other was photographs of him supposedly getting pummeled with sais wielded by the stunt double who stood in for Uma Thurman in Kill Bill.

[cjurakpt]

See I disagree. IKF certainly has more flash than KFTC, greater numbers of coloured pictures and such, but I find it to be actually more distracting than KFTC's layout.

as i said, just an opinion, no better or worse than another