First Person: Dogged by Controversy

006

I admit I like a little controversy. On the other hand, I also like the serenity of unusual insight. On the third hand (I sometimes wish I had three hands), I also admit that there is such a thing as too much controversy.

People think we control the amount of controversy in the magazine. Yes and no. Or rather, no and yes. I like to say that I do not court controversy, but I do not shrink from it either. In our pages we do take up controversial matters, like the Dead Sea Scrolls. We invite articles on which scholars disagree. We even write articles ourselves about scholarly disagreements, like the article in this issue about whether or not two sites in the Holy Land are indeed synagogues, as claimed by their excavators.

But there are other controversies that we do not seek out and that surprise us when they surface.

I was moved to these thoughts on reading the letters to the editor in this issue, chosen for publication by managing editor Steven Feldman. “Queries & Comments,” as we call our letters section, is the most popular department in the magazine. The letters published in this issue are certainly interesting. I do want to read them. Many bring a smile to my lips. Others make me a bit angry. Still others puzzle me. But I also have another thought: Is there nothing that the great scholars say in this exciting magazine that some other scholar does not take issue with? It sometimes seems that we can’t rely on what we are told by even the most eminent, knowledgeable experts. It’s one thing to air different viewpoints among readers who write letters, but another when one scholar says that another scholar really does not know what he or she is talking about. And you will have to trust me when I tell you that more of that is coming up in future issues: I have already edited some of their manuscripts.

So to this extent we do not control the amount of controversy in the magazine.

Something else demonstrates that this is the case, and that raises a fascinating question. Four years ago, we launched a new magazine called Archaeology Odyssey. Its subject is archaeology from Spain to Persia, largely the Mediterranean world and Mesopotamia. It has been enthusiastically received in the marketplace, already enjoying the largest circulation of any magazine of its kind. It has many of the fine qualities of BAR—fascinating articles by leading scholars, beautiful design and gorgeous color pictures. The articles are on the same intellectual level as BAR (the managing editor of Archaeology Odyssey, Jack Meinhardt, is a former associate editor of BAR; incidentally, about two years ago he married Molly Dewsnap Meinhardt, now senior editor of BAR and managing editor of our third magazine, Bible Review). The only major difference between BAR and Archaeology Odyssey is that one deals with archaeology as it relates to the Bible and the other deals with archaeology without regard to its relationship to the Bible. There is some overlap both in geographical coverage and in subject matter. Sometimes we have 068difficulty deciding whether a particular article should go into one magazine or the other.

There is one other difference between the magazines: Archaeology Odyssey is almost free of controversy. Nothing like the fisticuffs that sometimes characterize BAR are to be found in the pages of Archaeology Odyssey. This is true not only with regard to the articles themselves, written by eminent scholars, but also with regard to readers’ letters. (Our editorials in Archaeology Odyssey, however, are sometimes controversial.) You have a good chance of having your letter printed if you write to Archaeology Odyssey. You have a much smaller chance if you write to BAR, simply because of the large volume of letters BAR receives (but do keep writing; we read every letter).

The more interesting question is why this is so: Why is there so much controversy in BAR and so little in Archaeology Odyssey? Just compare their letter columns. Does it have anything to do with the fact that one focuses on the Bible and the other does not? Personally, I don’t think so. Yet I don’t have another explanation. Maybe you do. If so, let us hear from you.

Oh, by the way, if you can’t really opine on this subject because you do not yet subscribe to Archaeology Odyssey, you can easily correct this by sending a note to Archaeology Odyssey’s circulation department (P.O. Box 7654, Red Oak IA 51591) with your name and address, and a check for $13.97 for a one-year introductory subscription (six issues).

I admit I like a little controversy. On the other hand, I also like the serenity of unusual insight. On the third hand (I sometimes wish I had three hands), I also admit that there is such a thing as too much controversy. People think we control the amount of controversy in the magazine. Yes and no. Or rather, no and yes. I like to say that I do not court controversy, but I do not shrink from it either. In our pages we do take up controversial matters, like the Dead Sea Scrolls. We invite articles on which […]