Commentary

Night Sky

Manhattan is no place for a stargazer, what with the skyscrapers and pollution (light and otherwise) and such. Heck to Betsy, we're not even supposed to look at the real stars: when I happened upon Diane Keaton at a secluded bistro the other week, my fellow diners were so resolute in their reluctance to gawk that they gave off a borderline hostile vibe. Poor, sweet celebrities--shine on, you crazy diamonds.

Despite my lack of ready access to ideal heavenward-gazing venues, I've always fancied myself somewhat of an astronomy fan. Mind you, I don't know the difference between a Big Dipper and a Big Gulp; I just think the stars are pretty. That's right--I said "pretty." I am very secure in my selection of adjectives.

For me and my fellow astronomy tenderfoots, Night Sky is the best primer available on newsstands today. Though it occasionally stumbles from a design perspective--and could seriously use a paper-stock upgrade so as to render its images more lifelike--the mag rarely misfires tonally. Hints of personality flash here and there, but for the most part Night Sky gets its points across with a minimum of garnish.

Helpfully appended with maps and diagrams, "The Sky Tonight" offers a no-BS guide for stargazers during March and April. It is neatly complemented a few pages later by the "Constellation Close-Up" on Cancer, which alternates between personal recollections and historical context. Both items work because they present information in a clear, concise manner, avoiding the gratuitous sidebar silliness that often befouls enthusiast titles. I'm repeating myself, but this bears mentioning.

The March/April Night Sky may veer into duh-really? territory with its piece on ideal weather conditions for stargazing--clear nights, apparently, are better than cloudy ones--but it more than makes up for that lapse with a trio of smart, accessible features. Best is "The Mini Messier Marathon," which not only precisely outlines a night-long object-sighting extravaganza, but also offers gear and snacking suggestions. A photography primer eschews technicalities in favor of practical tips, while "The Equinox and the Egg" cleverly shreds the myth that an egg can only be balanced on its end on the first day of spring.

Night Sky doesn't let up toward the back of the book, either. In "Success Stories," an astronomy sort details his quest to pimp up his telescope (okay, mostly he just tightens bolts and replaces scopes and stuff). Plus the mag blatantly tosses a bone to newbies with a three-page glossary, quite handy for that awkward cocktail-party moment when somebody mangles the pronunciation of the Bo"tes constellation.

As for the aforementioned design issues, my concern centers mostly around the mag's tendency towards hyper-literal interpretation of story subjects. Night Sky accompanies its story on the constellation Gemini (which includes Castor and Pollux) with--what else?--a ham-handed shot of twins gazing through binoculars and a telescope. Its star-gazing marathon piece, on the other hand, features a sprawling illustration of an astronomy all-nighter, complete with pizza boxes and alarm clocks. Such gimmicks are about as subtle as a fart in a spacesuit, as my dad used to say.

Like I how I tied in the space/astronomy angle there? Anyway, Night Sky works for novice morons like me; I'd guess from its wealth of astronomy-gearhead ads that it works for legitimate buffs as well. Other publications struggling to appeal to two differently situated audiences ought to take note.

Next story loading loading..