- Email: [email protected]
Our brave new world
218
SurvOphthalmol 22 (3) November-December 1977
The answer to Duke-Elder’s question is that future writers of textbooks will require the availability of detailed literature reviews and monographs. On these structures are built the textbooks which should emphasize a critical approach to the literature to provide the perspective that the clinician requires. Because of the ever increasing amount of information, the role of the textbook is not to list all the work done, but to emphasize the comprehensive organic whole. Thus, good text-
800K
REVIEWS
books or systems rest on human minds that can survey a field of human knowledge and communicate that critical perspective. The System or a series of textbooks is therefore the peak of evolution of a continuous process of development of the ophthalmic literature and such it will remain. It is our hope that others with the same analytical scope of mind as Sir Stewart Duke-Elder will take up the task. BERNARD SCHWARTZ
Our Brave New World The completion of Duke-Elder’s System of Ophthalmology quite naturally focuses attention on the future of the written word, not only in ophthalmology but in all science and even in the broad world of literature and writing in general. The question simply put is how books and periodicals will survive in a generation raised on Sesame Street. I recall that in 1945 and 1946 when the army of the United States returned from foreign shores, magazines and newspapers were full of predictions of a brave new world: new and efficient housing, rapid transportation, elimination of slums, and a world tilled with Mother’s apple pie and big league baseball. Alas, Mother’s apple pie is prepared on a continuous mile-long baking strip attended by workers dressed as laboratory technicians, and one seeks the latest on big league baseball from the financial pages. The failure of these dreams and the harsh realities of the energy shortage, urban problems, and our defiled star make me wary to predict the course of ophthalmic writing. Turning back 25 years in the American Journal ofOphthalmology. one finds there has been but little change. The price of a subscription has increased from $10 to $16 but the format has remained unchanged. Indeed, the format is not particularly different than it was with Volume I in 1862. Today there are more original papers and fewer abstracts. The number of pages of advertising has increased, but the number of drug companies advertising has decreased. I anticipate that with the advent of any form of national health insurance many companies will find it advantageous not to advertise inasmuch as the Federal government will limit the number of products available. Conversely, if the Federal Trade Commission has its way concerning advertising the editor may have to choose between the conflicting claims of specialty surgeons and the like. The volume of material printed has increased markedly in the past 25 years. We see it in periodicals that do not charge for subscription and in the printed transactions of innumerable meetings, symposia, and conferences. Much of this material is published without scientific review, it is repetitive, some of the conclusions cannot even be confirmed, and distribution is so limited that the
average reader is unaware of its existence. I believe that with passing time, increasing costs of printing and distribution will cause these alternative publications to disappear. Possibly advertisers too will be unwilling to see their product associated with the unproven, the untrue, and the unimportant. Our habits will change most markedly with computer retrieval. Now one can easily search the Medline file and pinpoint articles of interest. However, one must have the resources of a major library if the Medline file is to be of value. It is but an easy although unrealized step to have Medline provide a summary of the article or the complete article itself. I do not believe that such a service would eliminate the written word, however. Someplace, somehow, specialists in the field will still have to decide what is to be printed and what is not. We are close to having typescripts submitted ready for photocomposition. Many newspaper offices already use video devices for editing and some scientific periodicals have experimented with central editing terminals. This step will not change the nature of the editing process, but it may reduce the time between submission of a paper and its eventual publication. With this in mind, though, I am reminded of a paper being held in the Journal office which has been delayed 12 weeks awaiting a revision of the author’s summary. Thus, I am not convinced that immediate composition will give rise to immediate action. Conversely, some institutions that prepare many papers may find it feasible to compose and print their own material inasmuch as they would need but limited circulation to use a central computer facility. Having learned that Sir Stewart Duke-Elder has begun revision of Volume I of the System of Ophthalmology, I anticipate that in the year 2,002 we will be writing about completion of edition 2 of the System, pleased that it has been held to but 37 volumes. Although there will be a large group deploring the failure to use the modern automation with audio-visual aids, our medical students will still be using textbooks and patients will still be seeking compassionate, understanding physicians to sustain them and cure them. FRANKW. NEWELL
SurvOphthalmol 22 (3) November-December 1977
The answer to Duke-Elder’s question is that future writers of textbooks will require the availability of detailed literature reviews and monographs. On these structures are built the textbooks which should emphasize a critical approach to the literature to provide the perspective that the clinician requires. Because of the ever increasing amount of information, the role of the textbook is not to list all the work done, but to emphasize the comprehensive organic whole. Thus, good text-
800K
REVIEWS
books or systems rest on human minds that can survey a field of human knowledge and communicate that critical perspective. The System or a series of textbooks is therefore the peak of evolution of a continuous process of development of the ophthalmic literature and such it will remain. It is our hope that others with the same analytical scope of mind as Sir Stewart Duke-Elder will take up the task. BERNARD SCHWARTZ
Our Brave New World The completion of Duke-Elder’s System of Ophthalmology quite naturally focuses attention on the future of the written word, not only in ophthalmology but in all science and even in the broad world of literature and writing in general. The question simply put is how books and periodicals will survive in a generation raised on Sesame Street. I recall that in 1945 and 1946 when the army of the United States returned from foreign shores, magazines and newspapers were full of predictions of a brave new world: new and efficient housing, rapid transportation, elimination of slums, and a world tilled with Mother’s apple pie and big league baseball. Alas, Mother’s apple pie is prepared on a continuous mile-long baking strip attended by workers dressed as laboratory technicians, and one seeks the latest on big league baseball from the financial pages. The failure of these dreams and the harsh realities of the energy shortage, urban problems, and our defiled star make me wary to predict the course of ophthalmic writing. Turning back 25 years in the American Journal ofOphthalmology. one finds there has been but little change. The price of a subscription has increased from $10 to $16 but the format has remained unchanged. Indeed, the format is not particularly different than it was with Volume I in 1862. Today there are more original papers and fewer abstracts. The number of pages of advertising has increased, but the number of drug companies advertising has decreased. I anticipate that with the advent of any form of national health insurance many companies will find it advantageous not to advertise inasmuch as the Federal government will limit the number of products available. Conversely, if the Federal Trade Commission has its way concerning advertising the editor may have to choose between the conflicting claims of specialty surgeons and the like. The volume of material printed has increased markedly in the past 25 years. We see it in periodicals that do not charge for subscription and in the printed transactions of innumerable meetings, symposia, and conferences. Much of this material is published without scientific review, it is repetitive, some of the conclusions cannot even be confirmed, and distribution is so limited that the
average reader is unaware of its existence. I believe that with passing time, increasing costs of printing and distribution will cause these alternative publications to disappear. Possibly advertisers too will be unwilling to see their product associated with the unproven, the untrue, and the unimportant. Our habits will change most markedly with computer retrieval. Now one can easily search the Medline file and pinpoint articles of interest. However, one must have the resources of a major library if the Medline file is to be of value. It is but an easy although unrealized step to have Medline provide a summary of the article or the complete article itself. I do not believe that such a service would eliminate the written word, however. Someplace, somehow, specialists in the field will still have to decide what is to be printed and what is not. We are close to having typescripts submitted ready for photocomposition. Many newspaper offices already use video devices for editing and some scientific periodicals have experimented with central editing terminals. This step will not change the nature of the editing process, but it may reduce the time between submission of a paper and its eventual publication. With this in mind, though, I am reminded of a paper being held in the Journal office which has been delayed 12 weeks awaiting a revision of the author’s summary. Thus, I am not convinced that immediate composition will give rise to immediate action. Conversely, some institutions that prepare many papers may find it feasible to compose and print their own material inasmuch as they would need but limited circulation to use a central computer facility. Having learned that Sir Stewart Duke-Elder has begun revision of Volume I of the System of Ophthalmology, I anticipate that in the year 2,002 we will be writing about completion of edition 2 of the System, pleased that it has been held to but 37 volumes. Although there will be a large group deploring the failure to use the modern automation with audio-visual aids, our medical students will still be using textbooks and patients will still be seeking compassionate, understanding physicians to sustain them and cure them. FRANKW. NEWELL