Through the years we've rarely printed letters to the editors, mostly because the majority of our e-mail is less than 30 words, usually just saying "cool interview with (insert band name here). Thanks." If you have something (longer than 30 words) on your mind that you'd like to share with our readers, or questions you would like answered openly, please share them with us by sending e-mail to letters@cosmik.com. Thank you.

WHO YOU JIVIN' WITH THAT TRASH TALKIN' DEBRIS?

I have noticed that there is a wide range of writing styles in your review department, which I suppose is a good thing. I'd like to know why there is also a range of vicious attack to overly kind. I can tolerate overly kind as long as information is correct but the nasty thrashing Jason Thornberry gives 9 out of 10 CD's seems unnecessary and unsettling. It begs the question: does a man who hates everyone but Wu Tang Clan have any value as a reviewer?

Cathy Leffert
Kansas City, MO


Thank you for your comments. First I'd like to answer the "overly kind" charge. Some of us may get pretty gushy about CDs we really like, and it may seem like we don't often slam any. Those of us who fit that description have a semi-policy to just ignore most of the ones we don't like and move on, the philosophy being that there are too many deserving CDs to write about to be wasting space on crap. As for Mr. Thornberry, or anyone else at Cosmik who may take a hatchet to a CD from time to time, remember that it's just their opinion. If you find you don't agree with a writer on the whole, don't base any of your shopping lists on their words. Find the writer(s) that you agree with most often. And for the record, Jason only hates EIGHT out of ten. But that's neither here nor there.


COSMIK AND THE STATE OF THE WORLD
Dear Cosmik Debris:

Nice interview and coverage of Transglobal Underground. Yet another gem that I might have missed were it not for Cosmik Debris. For some reason, reading the interview in general, and Cosmik Debris in particular, tonight has brought out some feelings and observations about the state of the world, especially in relation to the web, what it means now, and where it started. I've been a faithful reader since the beginning. Forgive the assumed familiarity, but I'm going to speak in terms of "we," where "we" are the ones who got to know each other on BBSs, MUDs, chat rooms, mailing lists, and so on.

Lately, I've been noticing how the WWW landscape has changed. I was lamenting the seeming demise of Suck.com (I'll really miss Filler), and it seems like something's missing. Remember the powerful excitement when the web was just starting to boom? When it felt like we had lightning in a bottle, with technology providing a new frontier where we were able to make up our own rules, and the stale trappings of mainstream society not only didn't apply, it didn't even speak the same language. Back when you still had to say "double-you double-you double-you period blah blah blah" to your parents and family, because they wouldn't know what you meant by "dot." There was a "knowing" then, knowing something that not everyone else knew, and knowing that it was going to change the entire planet. And we were there at the start. And it did change the world, in both good ways and bad.

Well, it's still there, the technology's still growing, and there's still always something amazing to be found. But I guess it's become so assimilated into society that it doesn't feel unique anymore, at least not like it did back then. This is not to say that I'm dissatisfied - I guess it's just become such a big part of my life that I suppose I'm starting to take it for granted. Maybe it's merely a post-boom depression. Things have moved so fast the past few years that it seems like just now I'm able to sit back for a moment and look around.

And when I looked around, Cosmik was still right where it was supposed to be. I know you just celebrated 6 years in June, but I guess I took that for granted at the time. But after I finished reading the Transglobal Underground interview tonight, I realized how grateful I am that Cosmik Debris is still here. And I was pleased to realize that it's as fresh as it was back when the world was on fire. So I guess this is a belated congratulations for Cosmik's 6th birthday, and a heartfelt thank you for maintaining a link to that time when we all knew the world was changing.

Keep up the good work,

Dan Lynch

That's an amazing letter, Dan. Thank you from all of us. For the "old timers" in the Internet community, your words bring back a lot of fond memories: a favorite BBS, a gaming spot, and most of all the excitement of discovery when it was all brand new. Thank you for your kind words about Cosmik Debris, too, Dan. We actively avoid jumping on every high-tech bandwagon (many of our readers complain that we have no Flash features) and hope we're doing okay. Letters like yours keep us pumped. Did I remember to say thanks?

WHERE FOR ART THOU, MOZART?
The site that linked me to Cosmik Debris advertised your magazine as "covering every genre on the planet", You're good, but where is the classical and opera? I enjoy your reviews a great deal because of the diversity, but I can't help noticing the enormous hole where Mozart should be. Is there a reason for not including such fine, important music?

Stephan J. Zicari

Yeah, see, it's like this. We had this great classical and opera critic named Robert Cummings. In fact, we had a second magazine called Classics@Cosmik and Robert became the editor for the duration. It was brief - only about 6 months - but not due to lack of success. In fact, it was quite popular right out of the starting blocks, but Robert had too many irons in the fire and had to give it up, and Cosmik Debris with it. That was two years ago and, frankly, we've yet to find anyone else who writes classical reviews in an informative (as opposed to stuffy) style. Someday, we promise.