From: Hannon <othonna at gmail.com>
on 2012.04.06 at 18:31:05(22674)
Christopher's message is very well stated. It reminds me of the position the Cactus & Succulent Society of America (CSSA) has found itself in for many decades. Its Journal has a similar division of content by scientific and horticultural (and other popular) interest, and not a few articles that are semi-technical. The latter incorporate elements of science and horticulture together and I think help to bring readers from different backgrounds together. Some of Josef Bogner's early pieces in Aroideana with their iconic photos of rare aroids-- including photos of seedlings or plants in cultivation-- are examples of this type of writing. They helped stoke my interest in aroids at a time when all I had was a copy of Exotica (7th Edition).
Even though it may be difficult to maintain, the balancing act is a great strength for both of these societies. Regardless of how it may be formatted in the future, we have all been introduced to ideas and information that we might never have discovered without the open approach that has been taken. The history of Aroideana must be taken into account as well and I think it was satisfying to the science-minded and to collectors then as now.
To partly answer Jason's question, any botanist who is searching for information on aroids will find the IAS and Aroideana. Modern information systems tend to be focused on hyper-efficiency (cost and otherwise) but this does not preclude other means of searching the literature. For a variety of reasons a more pertinent question might be, how can we increase our visibility among those who have any interest in aroids at all yet do not know about the IAS? In this context the possibilities with Brill vs. Allen seem very intriguing.
Dylan Hannon
| 
IAS on Facebook
IAS on Instagram
