To greater and lesser degrees, magazines aimed at a female demographic exist to make those same female readers feel bad about themselves. Cosmopolitan breaks us down, and builds us up with makeovers for our wardrobes. House Beautiful breaks us down, and builds us up with makeovers for our décor. Gourmet breaks us down, and builds us up with makeovers for our dinner menus. On every front, the raison d'être for women's magazines is to point out failings we never knew we had, and show us how to correct them.

O, the new magazine named after its Editorial Director Oprah Winfrey, stakes out territory rarely attempted by chick rags: It proposes a makeover for the reader's very soul. Of course, it also covers beauty, fitness, fashion, food, and home décor, because it wouldn't be a mainstream women's magazine if it didn't. But the position of O (both the woman and the magazine) is that a woman's interest in superficialities can be channelled into the service of her greater goal -- namely, to be a better person, by being more like Oprah.

"This magazine is about spirit," Oprah tells us in "Let's Talk," her editor's letter. Yes, she admits, "You will also find articles about looking good and feeling fit. We live in a world that observes our external selves. What's significant, however, is finding a deeper meaning so that your life has a sense of balance and wholeness." Oh. Is that what we'll get if we buy the $110 pyjamas or the $140 Burberry dog leash on "The O List" (products Oprah particularly enjoys) -- "a sense of balance and wholeness"? Are we supposed to glean any insights on balance and wholeness from the published excerpts of Jewel's journal? If the main purpose of the magazine is to nurse the reader's spirit, why are so many pages given over to hairstyles and potato salad recipes? Why not choose to make the magazine either about superficialities (fine fodder for a magazine, as the readers of InStyle would be happy to attest), or about serious issues? Why must they try to make it about both?

This month's mission, we're told, is to "Tap Your Personal Courage." By means of an annotated calendar more than a little reminiscent of the one which has appeared for more than five years in Martha Stewart Living, Oprah (or her acolytes) sets out action suggestions, apparently with the presumption that all the magazine's readers are spineless victims. "Practice saying no without feeling guilty. Start with small issues and graduate to bigger ones." "If someone upsets you today, don't seethe; tell her openly how she has hurt you." Perhaps I was raised differently than is the case for the average Oprawn, but it seems to me that those are lessons one learns as a matter of course in becoming an adult, and that very little courage is required to say "no" when a "no" is called for. Is this the sort of personal development that really merits being set out in in a "courage journal"? Would it not be better suited for a "no-duh sheet of looseleaf"?

Fametracker doesn't object to O on the basis of its stated mission. To wish to improve people's lives is certainly a laudable goal. Where O fails, though, is in attempting to fulfill that wish by means of what boils down to a truly colossal ego trip for Oprah herself. For one thing, there's the fact that she named the magazine after herself. Believe me, I'm an egomaniac, too. However, none of my sites is called Wing. And then there's the fact that Oprah appears in over ten photographs within the magazine (three photos of her accompany her interview with Camille Cosby), and on the cover, and has announced that she will appear on the cover of the magazine EVERY MONTH. Even Jane Pratt hasn't sunk to that level. And even Jane Pratt hasn't claimed that her magazine "will help you lead a more productive life, one in which you feel a sense of vitality, cooperation, harmony, balance and reverence within yourself and in all your encounters." Really, it's this kind of talk that has led critics to compare Oprah's cult of personality to a religion. L. Ron Hubbard had Dianetics, and he got pretty far with it, even without its coming out every month, featuring his mug on the cover, and getting an in-book endorsement from a retailer like Borders. Oprah is a demagogue -- perhaps not one as dangerous as, say, Dr. Laura -- but a demagogue nonetheless. As if her daily talk show weren't platform enough for her to inflict her opinions on a gullible public, now she offers them a monthly workbook, complete with clip-and-save inspiration cards and blank pages allowing for readers' "reflection."

We do give the magazine credit for using models of various sizes and ethnicities, and for including a brief fashion feature specifically highlighting affordable outfits. But on the whole, O marries the look of Living with the tone and advice of a particularly ham-handed high school guidance counselor. If that sounds like a satisfying read, have at it. And if Oprah is your hero, you'll have plenty of opportunities to learn about the various ways in which she claims to live her life. However, when Fametracker is in the market for enlightenment, we'll get it the old-fashioned way -- from Dr. Joyce Brothers.