I've subscribed to The Writer for several years. Each month I look forward to receiving my copy in the mail. The first thing I do is flip to the Markets section. After that I read the How I Write page at the back of the magazine. I've found The Writer not only informative and useful, but also inspirational. I believe that subcribing to The Writer has been a good investment for my writing career.

Am I happy with <i>The Writer</i>?<br>
<br>
Yes. I've had a subscription since 1986, and I own copies dating back to the first issue in April, 1887.<br>
<br>
One of the things I like about the magazine- and something I've
repeatedly said about it- is that it has the unique quality of not
becoming dated. Oh, there are specific topical references- such as a
present-tense reference to president Grover Cleveland in the first
issue; but in terms of the <i>context</i> of the articles, just about any one of them could be transplanted to the present day.<br>
<br>
Consider the following, written by the <i>Writer's</i> founder and first editor, William H. Hills in the Nov., 1913 issue (page 164-165):<br>
<br>
<i>Unnatural dialogue in a novel is a serious defect. A conspicuous
example of it is found in Hamlin Garland's melodramatic story,
"Cavanagh: Forest Ranger." The hero of the story is reporting to his
superior by telephone the discovery of a particularly brutal murder.
His chief asks: "Is that you, Ross? What's the matter? Your voice
sounds hoarse." Ross, the book says, composed himself and told his
story briefly. "I'm at Kettle Ranch post-office. Now listen. The limit
of the cattlemen's ferocity has been reached. As I rode down here, to
get into communication with a doctor for a sick herder, I came upon a
scene of another murder and burning. The fire is still smoldering; at
least two bodies are in the embers."<br>
<br>
Perhaps this explains incidentally why Hamlin Garland's house burned
down. He may have made a stump speech when he should have hollered:
"Fire!"<br>
<br>
</i>It's an amusing little story, which was probably more amusing to
the readers of the day, who would (presumably) have been more familiar
with Garland, his writing style, his implied penchant for long-winded
speeches, and the fate of his house. But the <i>subject</i> of his
brief- that unnatural dialogue is a serious defect- still remains
topical. Ross could easily have imparted the same information by saying
something like this:<br>
<br>
<i>"There's been more murder and burning, chief. At least two people
dead. You ask me, the limit of the cattlemen's ferocity has been
reached."<br>
<br>
</i>Then the chief would ask some questions, and Ross would relate where he was and why he was there.<br>
<br>
But, however we might edit Mr. Garland's story after the fact, it
remains that unnatural dialogue still takes place in stories- and that
writers should be aware of it, and eliminate it. Mr. Hills reminds us
of that,&nbsp; 92 years after that brief piece appeared in <i>The Writer</i>.&nbsp; <br>
<br>
And 92 years from now, the information imparted in that article (and
other articles along the same theme over the years since 1913) will
still be relevant to writers.<br>
<br>
To any and all: as an experiment, go to a library that carries back issues of <i>The Writer</i>
for several decades (a city's main library and many university
libraries are good bets). Pick an issue at random off the shelf, or
choose something like the issue from the month of your birth. Read it.
I'm confident you'd find at least <i>one</i> thing in that issue that
you could apply to your own writing. Maybe not in the way you'd have
expected, but it'd be information you could actually use.<br>
<br>
Rick<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>

My vote is a resounding yes for the magazine.

I always start at the back and work my way forward. I usually read it on my exercise equipment and post stickies on the places I want to revisit.

Actually it was in reading the last page of author interviews that spurred a bug in me to research the effects of time on our lives and how we do respond positively and negatively to time, and how we can use time more effectively. It happened when I noticed that every writer had some kind of formula and/or reason why he or she wrote at such and such a time. The times and reasons were as varied as the authors. This intrigued me to investigate why it would be like that.

This has been a very lucrative and interesting project for me and now I use it in my lectures and my writings. So, thank you very much Writer Magazine. I am sure many other people have been pricked with writing inspirations through your pages.

Definitely worth the paltry subscription fee.  I've been subscribing since the mid-1970s, and I read it cover to cover every month.  It doesn't matter if the subject for any given article is about a genre I have an interest or not; I learn something from every article whether it is about writing non-fiction for flight magazines or screenwriting tips or tightening the structure of a poem.  Even the letters to the editor often have useful ideas and tips.

Not that there are a lot of writer's magazines out there, but I think The Writer is unique in its attitude towards its subscribership.  They exhibit no snobbery - they engender a real feeling of the fact that none of us - novice or veteran, unpublished scribbler or NY Times bestselling author - has all of the answers, and what I learn from one experience may be beneficial to you as you work on your project.  The Writer also does not foster an attitude that editors are the scum of the earth, with no other purpose than to rob you of your manuscript or publish your stuff without paying.  They instead promote the idea that you and an editor work together to bring a finished product to a reading public.  I have picked up a negative attitude from other magazines, and it turned me off entirely.  We don't need to be naive, but approaching an editor with an attitude that he is out to bilk you isn't a good idea either.

One thing I appreciate especially, though it probably not very important, is that The Writer never breaks an article with "continued on Page 48."  Maybe I just get too passionate with my reading, and I find the interruption to find the rest of the article too intrusive.  But most magazines do this.  Several years ago, I noticed that The Writer doesn't break the article, and I like being able to read the whole story without having to go on a hunting expedition.

I was a little unsure at first about the format changes that The Writer underwent a few years ago, but have come to appreciate that these changes gave The Writer a more polished look, without sacrificing the invaluable contents in the least. Indeed, The Writer has more features and departments than it did before.

It's the only magazine in my house that gets read cover to cover, without fail.

I absolutely love this magazine!  I am just a beginning writer and I think it provides a great and irreplaceable tool for me, and I can see how it would be a great tool for even experienced writers.  I know the subscription seems like a lot, but it's worth it.  Another option that I have explored is that most public libraries have subscriptions to this magazine that you can check out for free.  The only downside to that is that they don't let you check it out until a new issue has come out so a lot of the dated material in the magazine is old by the time you get it, but it saves you the cost of subscriptions.

 I definitely think that this magazine is worth it.  In fact I think that if you check out their website you can usually sign up for a free issue to help decide if you want to subscribe.

I love, love The Writer. It has minimal advertising, every department is helpful AND they cater to older and younger writers. I have every issue stored from 2002ish and still refer to old issues now.

I'm a new member of this forum.  I subscribe to Writer's Digest, and just last week I subscribed to Writer's Magazine.  I had read some of these issues (Writer's Magazine ) at the library, and was so impressed that I had buy it.

Most definitely the best writing periodical on the market today. I have to agree with everything I've read so far on this thread. WD is way too commerical. The advice in The Writer has improved my skills as a writer and as an avid reader. I am much more productive since I read every issue of The Writer from cover to cover. The only problem is, when I read the magazine, I drop everything else and write, non-stop. Good for my career, bad for my day job, nbad for my family, bad for my pets, the garden goes to seed and my friends wonder where I went.