The Contents of LINKS
Like any other journal, Homoeopathic Links has a certain signature defined by
the articles published. Who decides on this signature, this concept? It seems
obvious that the editorial team determines the contents of LINKS, but is that true?
Clearly, we can decide whether or not to accept an article, and through the editing
process influence the contents of an article. That certainly leaves a stamp, but how
significant is it?
If I look back at my own experience of editing LINKS for almost seventeen years, my
impression is that my influence on the contents of LINKS is actually not that much.
Why do I believe that?
One reason is that most of the articles come to us unsolicited, so the initiative was
with the author – you. This autumn issue is a good example of that. Sometimes, the
author has been invited by a guest editor, one of the strong aspects of LINKS, as it
involves more homeopaths and more schools of thought with the contents of LINKS.
Even in the selection of guest editors our influence is not as much as you might
believe. They have often been suggested by others, invited after they brought up a
topic they felt would be interesting for LINKS, or were happily welcomed after
offering themselves to be guest editor for an issue.
Another reason is that of all the articles offered for publication the vast majority
are accepted. The amount of changes we and the authors make to the original articles
varies a lot, but ultimately probably close to 90 % of all submitted papers are
published. Together with the author, we certainly try to raise the quality of each
and every article as much as we can, but the bottom line is that we accept what is
being offered to us as representing what moves the homeopathic community – you – at
that point in time. Authors will write about what is close to their heart and on
their mind, and – as they are us and we are them – I trust the result is that you
can read what is close to your heart and mind.
Iʼll spare you the philosophy that the whole concept of being a doer is false and
that ultimately everything happening in life is determined by infinite influences.
Although true, that is not the point I wish to make here.
The point I do wish to make is that you are the one that can shape the contents of
LINKS and I strongly feel that is how it should be. This editorial is intended to be
an open invitation to you to exert your right to shape the contents of LINKS and to
determine its future course. There are many ways in which you can do that. Let me
mention a few:
-
Write the kind of article you would love to read.
-
Send a letter to the editor or a contribution for LINK & LEARN, give us
your opinion and invite others to answer your queries, comment on your
points of view, share their opinion and experience, etc.
-
Use the same to LINK with others that are interested in working on a certain
topic with you, which can then culminate in a joint article so others can
enjoy the fruits of your work.
-
Send in small news items we can publish in the next issue.
-
Inform all of us about interesting developments in your country or field of
work.
-
Offer yourself to be guest editor on a topic you and we would love to read
more about and invite those authors you think we would all be interested
in.
In conclusion, if you enjoy the current course of LINKS you can contribute to it in
many ways, and if you feel we now publish too much of this or too little of that,
you are the one that can change it; you are entitled to change it and most welcome
to change it. After all, it is your journal.
With warm regards to all of you,
Harry van der Zee, editor
