Talk:The New Age

Inconsistency with Holbrook Jackson and Alfred Richard Orage
The para here:
 * The magazine was bought in 1907 as a going concern by a group of backers, among them Shaw and Holbrook Jackson. Orage's predominance on the editorial side took a little time to emerge. The early days were also marked by a kind of schism, in which the future founders of distributism (notably Hilaire Belloc, G. K. Chesterton and Arthur Penty), split away from the Fabian socialists who remained with Orage.

contradicts the section in Holbrook Jackson
 * Later they [Orage and Jackson] separately moved to London as journalists. In 1906, shortly after arriving in the capital, Jackson suggested the founding of the Fabian Arts Group. This led to a split from the Fabian Society, and Jackson and Orage subsequently bought The New Age...

and this in Alfred Richard Orage
 * In 1906, Orage attempted to form a league for the restoration of a guild system, much as described by William Morris. The failure of this spurred him in 1907, supported by George Bernard Shaw, to buy the weekly New Age magazine, and turn it into his conception of a forum for politics, literature and the arts. Although many contributors were Fabians, he was quick to distance himself from their politics, and a wide range of political viewpoints were represented.

Anyone know which is correct? --Squiddy 15:46, 20 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I think the Holbrook Jackson page mis-says this, a little. Jackson and Orage ran The New Age, and there were a few outside backers, namely Shaw (a leading Fabian then), and Lewis Wallace who was a connection of Orage from theosophical circles. Jackson may well have had some money - he was the businessman of the two. Anyway, you are correct that the composite impression is less than clear. Charles Matthews 16:29, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I have done something about the Orage article, which glossed over too much (needs further work). Charles Matthews 16:34, 20 December 2005 (UTC)