@@@@@ @   @ @@@@@    @     @ @@@@@@@   @       @  @@@@@ @@@@@ @@@
         @   @   @ @        @ @ @ @    @       @     @   @   @   @   @  @
         @   @@@@@ @@@@     @  @  @    @        @   @    @   @   @   @   @
         @   @   @ @        @     @    @         @ @     @   @   @   @  @
         @   @   @ @@@@@    @     @    @          @      @@@@@ @@@@@ @@@

                        Mt. Holz Science Fiction Society
                    Club Notice - 01/19/90 -- Vol. 8, No. 29


       MEETINGS UPCOMING:

       Unless otherwise stated, all meetings are on Wednesdays at noon.
            LZ meetings are in LZ 2R-158.  MT meetings are in the cafeteria.

         _D_A_T_E                    _T_O_P_I_C

       01/24   LZ: "The Borribles" Trilogy by Michael de Larrabeiti (Urban Fantasy)
       02/14   LZ: Science Fiction and Romance
       03/07   LZ: THRICE UPON A TIME by James Hogan (Affecting the Past)

         _D_A_T_E                    _E_X_T_E_R_N_A_L _M_E_E_T_I_N_G_S/_C_O_N_V_E_N_T_I_O_N_S/_E_T_C.

       01/20   NJSFS New Jersey Science Fiction Society: James Morrow
                       (phone 201-432-5965 for details) (Saturday)
       02/10   Science Fiction Association of Bergen County: Ellen Steiber
                       (editor from Cloverdale Press)
                       (phone 201-933-2724 for details) (Saturday)

       HO Chair:      John Jetzt     HO 1E-525   834-1563  hocpa!jetzt
       LZ Chair:      Rob Mitchell   LZ 1B-306   576-6106  mtuxo!jrrt
       MT Chair:      Mark Leeper    MT 3D-441   957-5619  mtgzx!leeper
       HO Librarian:  Tim Schroeder  HO 3D-225A  949-5866  homxa!tps
       LZ Librarian:  Lance Larsen   LZ 3L-312   576-3346  lzfme!lfl
       MT Librarian:  Evelyn Leeper  MT 1F-329   957-2070  mtgzy!ecl
       Factotum:      Evelyn Leeper  MT 1F-329   957-2070  mtgzy!ecl
       All material copyright by author unless otherwise noted.

       1. This next book for discussion in Lincroft is _T_h_e  _B_o_r_r_i_b_l_e_s,  of
       which Rob Mitchell has the following to say:

       They live in the back alleys and  abandoned  buildings  of  London.
       Except  for their pointed ears, they look like children, but that's
       deceptive -- they are as feral, as territorial, and as  tribal,  as
       wolves.   With  their  ears  covered  by stolen caps, they rove the
       streets, appropriating food and evading their two main  enemies:  a
       Special  Group  of  the  London  Police,  and the Rumbles (humanoid
       rodents of nasty  temperment).   They  are  Michael  deLarrabeiti's
       Borribles.













       THE MT VOID                                           Page 2



       Borribles were once children who were outcast or runaways, but whom
       quickly  develop  pointed  ears  as  a  sign  of  "independence and
       intelligence."  The Special Borrible Group  of  the  London  Police
       seek them out, for Borribles who are caught get their ears clipped,
       and henceforth are doomed to grow  up  into  adventureless  adults.
       Borribles never age, but death is quite familiar to them...

       THE BORRIBLES is the first book in a trilogy (although  the  latter
       two  were  clearly  afterthoughts  once  the  first  was  written).
       Followed by  THE  BORRIBLES  GO  FOR  BROKE  and  ACROSS  THE  DARK
       METROPOLIS, the series follows a "family" of Borribles as they deal
       with the grim-and-gritty underbelly of London.   Their  culture  is
       sophisticated  and  consistent, centering on protecting each other,
       maintaining  oral  traditions,  earning  an  Honorable  Name,   and
       following  the  guiding  principle  of  Borrible  life:  "Don't get
       caught."

       deLarrabeiti does an excellent job of painting the  scenes  of  the
       shadowy  parts  of  the  city.   He  is  equally good at portraying
       credible and distinguishable Borribles, although the  villains  are
       somewhat   two-dimensionally   evil.    Although  the  topic  being
       discussed is Urban Fantasy, the Borrible books are  only  tenuously
       fantastic  --  with the exception of the Rumbles in the first book,
       and the ears throughout, the series has a  real-world  feel  to  it
       reminiscent  of  the Conan Doyle's Holmes stories.  I recommend the
       first book for its imagination and clarity of  vision;  the  latter
       two  books  are  more  of  the same and hence come across almost as
       formula.  [-jrrt]

       2. One should be comfortable with technology without  becoming  too
       comfortable  with  a  level  of technology.  Consider the Japanese.
       They were the best swordmakers in the world.  They  built  a  whole
       culture  around the sword.  When the gun came along they considered
       it, but when they saw what it would do to their established  order,
       they  decided it would shake up too much.  Power was having skilled
       swordsmen and to be a swordsman did take great skill.  It  did  not
       take such skill and certainly not the same skill to shoot a gun.  A
       very unskilled man could kill a highly skilled swordsman by keeping
       his  distance  and  shooting  a  gun.   So  using a gun became very
       dishonorable.  This is well illustrated in Musaki Kobayashi's  film
       _S_e_p_p_u_k_u  (a.k.a.,  _H_a_r_i  _K_i_r_i)  in  which  a very good swordsman is
       attacking a castle and has killed single-handedly perhaps twenty or
       more  defending  swordsmen.  Finally the lord of the castle decides
       he cannot afford to lose more  men  so  he  does  the  dishonorable
       thing.   He  must,  he reluctantly decides, bring out the gun.  The
       lord kills his foe, but he had to give up his honor.  Now this  was
       always  a  puzzle  to  me.   Why resist the best tools for the job,
       particularly when it could  mean  death?   How  do  you  stop  your
       second-rate fighters from using the best weapons they can get?













       THE MT VOID                                           Page 3



       Eventually the gun did get accepted in Japan when everyone else had
       them  and  Japan could resist no longer.  And they paid a price for
       resisting as long as they did.  And a lot of other  technology  was
       accepted  as  well.  If the Japanese had any lingering doubts about
       the importance of being  at  the  forefront  of  technology,  those
       doubts  died  in  August  of  1945.  Today the Japanese are vitally
       fascinated with the latest developments in electronics,  in  super-
       conductivity,  in cold fusion, and in just about anything else they
       think they can apply.  Their world and their plans for  the  future
       adapt to each new development in technology.

       And what  of  the  country  who  taught  Japan  the  importance  of
       forefront  technology  in  1945?  These days we seem to want to shy
       away from competing technologically  with  the  Japanese.   Detroit
       resisted  building cars to compete with the economical and feature-
       laden cars of the Japanese.   Japanese  cars  adapted  to  people's
       needs  year  by  year--I  could see it in my Toyota--while American
       cars stayed much the same.  Innovation was adding  fins  or  taking
       them  off.   Detroit  fought for import restrictions and admonished
       the public  to  "Buy  American."   My  understanding  is  that  the
       Japanese  were  ready  to  ship  us  digital tape recorders and our
       government requested that they do not consider us a market.  I keep
       hearing  stories  about how the United States will compete with the
       Japanese in high-definition television.  We do  not  want  to  have
       another  embarrassing  technological  gap such as we had with VCRs.
       But everyone admits the Japanese have a big headstart on  us.   And
       the headstart is not because they had access to any technology that
       we did not.  We were just comfortable with our level of  technology
       in  that  area while the Japanese were getting their foothold.  Now
       we are running a losing race with them.

       Now granted there is  a  big  difference  between  a  digital  tape
       recorder  and  a  gun.  But I wonder if it is not the same attitude
       behind giving both up.

       3. Correction to last week's issue: The book by Poul  Anderson  was
       _T_h_e  _B_o_a_t  _o_f _a _M_i_l_l_i_o_n _Y_e_a_r_s, not _T_h_e _B_o_o_k _o_f _a _M_i_l_l_i_o_n _Y_e_a_r_s.  My
       typo, not Dale's.  [-ecl]


                                          Mark Leeper
                                          MT 3D-441 957-5619
                                           ...mtgzx!leeper



            A belief is not true because it is useful.
                                          -- Henri Frederic Amiel


















                          FOUCAULT'S PENDULUM by Umberto Eco
                            (translated by William Weaver)
             Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1990, ISBN 0-15-132765-3, $22.95.
                          Short comments by Evelyn C. Leeper
                           Copyright 1989 Evelyn C. Leeper



            Umberto Eco, author of the very popular and very successful
       medieval mystery _T_h_e _N_a_m_e _o_f _t_h_e _R_o_s_e, has returned with another novel,
       this time only semi-medieval.  _F_o_u_c_a_u_l_t'_s _P_e_n_d_u_l_u_m is about ... well,
       it's hard to say what it's about.  A vanity press publisher decides to
       produce a book detailing a secret plot by the Knights Templar, the
       Rosicrucians, and several dozen other groups to control the world.
       Along the way, Eco mixes in Brazilian religion, occultism, politics, and
       just about everything else.  (There's probably even a kitchen sink in
       there somewhere.)

            This book is so chock-a-block full of ideas, references to other
       works, and in-jokes that it is really impossible to describe it or do it
       justice.  Rather than try, I will just say that if you enjoyed _T_h_e _N_a_m_e
       _o_f _t_h_e _R_o_s_e for its complex plotting, you will probably enjoy this.  If
       you enjoyed it for its medieval setting, you may still enjoy this,
       because although the setting is modern, there is much discussion of
       medieval events.  But _F_o_u_c_a_u_l_t'_s _P_e_n_d_u_l_u_m is a much more heavily layered
       book than _T_h_e _N_a_m_e _o_f _t_h_e _R_o_s_e, and requires much more concentration.
       Several people have asked for my opinion on this book, and I wish I
       could be more coherent, but at least this may give you some idea of
       whether you might enjoy it.





































                   WHAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN, VOLUME 2: ALTERNATE HEROES
                   edited by Gregory Benford & Martin H. Greenberg
                   Bantam Spectra, 1990, ISBN 0-553-28279-4, $4.50.
                          A book review by Evelyn C. Leeper
                           Copyright 1990 Evelyn C. Leeper



            This is the second (last?) of a series of alternate history short
       fiction.  As with the other, _W_h_a_t _M_i_g_h_t _H_a_v_e _B_e_e_n, _V_o_l_u_m_e _2: _A_l_t_e_r_n_a_t_e
       _E_m_p_i_r_e_s, the pieces here were commissioned for this volume but have
       appeared elsewhere between the time of their writing and their
       publication here.  At least this volume indicates where they have been
       published previously, but in both cases one is left with the feeling
       that the publisher was trying to convince the buyer the stories were all
       new, when in fact the buyer may very well have most of them already.

            Be that as it may, this book examines the "great man" theory of
       history--the idea that history is made by "great men" rather than by the
       "tide of events."  The "great man" theory says that if Hitler weren't
       around, the Nazi Party would not have developed as it did; the "tide of
       events" theory says that if Hitler weren't there, someone else would
       have taken his place.  Michael Moorcock's _B_e_h_o_l_d _t_h_e _M_a_n is perhaps an
       extreme example of the latter.  (Strangely enough, the first volume was
       not "tide of events" stories, but "failed events" stories--what if X
       hadn't happened?)

            Unfortunately, many of the authors in this volume make their
       stories fit the "great man" theory by picking a great man, having
       something different happen to him, or having him do something different,
       though the "great man" usually seems to be more acted upon than acting
       in this anthology, and then stopping.  There _i_s no alternate history,
       just a suggestion of how one could write one.  (Note: in discussing the
       stories, I will be often be telling what the change was.  For some of
       the stories this might be considered a spoiler, so reader, beware!)

            For example, Harry Turtledove's "The Last Article" postulates that
       Hitler's armies made it to India and were controlling it when Gandhi
       tried to use his policy of non-violence against them.  This sounds more
       like an alternate event ("Hitler conquers India") than a "great man"
       story, and is fairly predictable.  But it ends at this point.  What
       happens next?

            In "Lenin in Odessa" George Zebrowski postulates an early
       confrontation between Lenin and Stalin.  But just when history changes,
       the story ends.  What happens next?  No answer.  Harry Harrison and Tom
       Shippey's "A Letter from the Pope" has the same problem: just when
       Alfred changes his plans because he receives the chastising letter the
       Pope sent him (instead of not receiving it), the story ends.  (This
       "great man" is so obscure to most readers that an introduction was
       included explaining what the story was about.)  What happens next?  We











       Alternate Heroes            January 19, 1990                      Page 2



       aren't told.  (The back blurb promises "a Europe converted to Viking
       paganism"--it isn't delivered.)  "Loose Cannon" by Susan Shwartz has
       T. E. Lawrence surviving his motorcycle accident to take a role in the
       African campaigns of World War II.  But just after he talks to Rommel,
       the story ends.  What happens next?  Who knows?  In Judith Tarr's
       "Roncesvalles," when Charlemagne discovers Ganelon's treachery was
       bought by Christians, he decides to convert to Islam and side with the
       Moors.  What happens next?  We never find out.  These all read like
       introductory chapters to alternate history novels that the authors might
       be planning, rather than full-fledged alternate history stories.  The
       characters are well drawn in all the stories here--they just don't go
       anywhere.

            Two stories deal with Abraham Lincoln.  Michael Cassutt's "Mules in
       Horses' Harness" assumes Lincoln's death in 1863; James Morrow's "Abe
       Lincoln in McDonald's" includes time travel (Lincoln somehow travels
       forward in time to see the results of making a particular decision).  I
       feel the use of time travel _a_n_d alternate history lessens the latter,
       but perhaps I'm just a bit of a purist.  I also find the alternate
       history set forth a bit unbelievable, but I would be willing to suspend
       disbelief for one change--but not for two.  Cassutt's story has a couple
       of variations on the usual "what if the Civil War turned out
       differently?" theme, but nothing startling, not even his "surprise"
       revelation at the end.  Neither one, by the way, is a present of "a
       Confederacy that won the Civil War," which the back cover touts.  In
       this, at least, they show originality.  "No Piece of Ground" by Walter
       Jon Williams is another Civil War variation, with Edgar Allan Poe a
       general in the Confederate Army.  Marc Laidlaw's "His Powder'd Wig, His
       Crown of Thornes" deals with George Washington as the Savior of the
       Indians, though with a twist.  We don't see enough of the alternate
       world to judge the reality of its texture, though the main character is
       well-drawn and draws the reader into what we do see of his world.

            Barry Malzberg's picture of Hemingway as a hack science fiction
       writer in "Another Goddamned Showboat" is at least a change of pace.  It
       was not quite as gimmicky as the similar story "Ike at the Mike" (by
       Howard Waldrop, not included in this volume).  In common with the
       earlier discussed stories, was more a character study than a story,
       Malzberg picked a "great man" whose displacement would not leave one
       asking, "Okay, but what happened next?"  Hemingway's shift to science
       fiction would not be expected to produce the same sort of drastically
       alternate history that Charlemagne's conversion to Islam would, so
       Malzberg leaves his readers satisfied with the picture he draws.

            Sheila Finch's musical Albert Einstein in "The Old Man and C" had
       nothing to hold my interest--even Einstein's musings on light seemed
       forced in the context of the story.  "A Sleep and a Forgetting" by
       Robert Silverberg had an interesting premise (communications through the
       center of a star may get warped in such a way as to allow communication
       with the past/alternate worlds).  But after hooking up with a world in
       which Genghis Khan did not become ruler of the Mongols, Silverberg's









       Alternate Heroes            January 8, 1990                       Page 3



       characters don't seem to know what to do with it, and the ending makes
       no sense at all.

            Harry Turtledove's second story in this collection, "Departures,"
       is the base story of his "Byzantium" alternate history series in which
       Muhammed becomes a Christian monk rather than founding Islam.  Again, it
       shows the split point and then drops it, but at least here there is
       already a milieu drawn with which readers of this collection are
       probably familiar.

            I found Rudy Rucker's story about William Burroughs, Von Neumann,
       and the atomic bomb unreadable, except for the last couple of
       paragraphs, which deliver their message with all the subtlety of a
       sledge hammer.  (In fairness I must say that I generally find Rucker
       unreadable, and this may be just one of my quirks--certainly other
       people whose opinions I respect like his writing.)

            Of the fourteen stories in this volume, six are based on Twentieth
       Century men.  Four more are based on men from American history.  None
       are based on women.  None have the richness of detail I found in several
       stories in the first volume (even though many of the authors are the
       same).  Only the Harrison-Shippey, the Malzberg, and Turtledove's
       "Departures" seemed more than merely adequate, and several were below
       average.  It may be that "great men" are less interesting than "failed
       events."  But it is more likely that the apparent constraint of having
       the "great man" on stage throughout the story made it impossible to show
       the effects of the change in detail.  Much as I liked the first _W_h_a_t
       _M_i_g_h_t _H_a_v_e _B_e_e_n, I can't really recommend this one.

       [Note: After writing the above, I ran across the following quote from
       a letter from Olaf Stapledon to Naomi Mitchison written on 10 July
       1940: "My (qualified) pacifism has been put in cold storage.  But how
       loathsome it all is!  An of course I remain fundamentally just as much
       pacifist as before.  But at present pacifism simply won't work.  I note
       in Gandhi's autobiography that his non-violence movement's success
       depended on the fact that some officials were decent folk.  It would not
       have worked against a Nazi regime."  I doubt Turtledove knew of this
       letter, since the observation is obvious, but who knows?]





























                                        GLORY
                           A film review by Mark R. Leeper
                            Copyright 1990 Mark R. Leeper



                 Capsule review:  Excellent Civil War film of the
            first black regiment and the prejudice they faced.  At
            times it seems a little over-idealized, but no more so
            than most films about World War II.  Realistically
            photographed by Freddie Francis and well acted,
            particularly by Morgan Freeman.  Rating: +2.

            At a time when Hollywood is simply not making many films set in
       previous centuries, perhaps even the novelty of Edward Zwick's Civil War
       film _G_l_o_r_y might carry it.  However, Zwick's film goes beyond that to
       being one of the best Civil War films ever made.  _G_l_o_r_y tells the story
       of the U. S. Army's 54th Massachusetts Regiment, the first black
       regiment in the Army's history.  The 54th had two enemies it had to
       fight.  The Confederate Army was second.  First they had to fight the
       Union Army for the privilege of being treated as soldiers.  From the
       start, the all-black regiment--with two white officers--was an
       experiment programmed for failure.  Command was given to Robert Gould
       Shaw, a 23-year-old inexperienced at command.  Further, they were
       criminally under-provisioned, having to battle the army for such basics
       as uniforms, shoes, socks, and guns; one scene shows a black soldier
       standing guard duty with a spear.  They have to fight for provisions,
       they have to fight to be sent to the front, and finally they have to
       fight to fight.  Their training was by--among others--an Irish racist
       who apparently thought that blacks were Hindus.  In spite of this, and
       in spite of the army cheating them out of their fair salary, they
       distinguished themselves sufficiently to become cannon fodder.  _G_l_o_r_y is
       their story.

            Or more accurately, it is the story of the white officers who led
       them and the story of five soldiers who shared the same tent upon
       enlisting.  All the other blacks in the film are effectively spear-
       carriers (in some cases literally).  Even given that Colonel Shaw was
       supposed to be young, Matthew Broderick seems a little too boyish for
       the role.  He carries too much baggage from previous roles in which he
       always played the role of the "wise-guy kid."  He is a little hard to
       take seriously as the committed idealist, though he does much better in
       Shaw's moments of self-doubt.  Much better is Morgan Freeman as Rawlins.
       Freeman could easily have carried the film as the main character and as
       it is he is likely to get an Oscar nomination as Best Supporting Actor
       (as well as a nomination for Best Actor for _D_r_i_v_i_n_g _M_i_s_s _D_a_i_s_y).

            One of the unsung stars of the film is Freddie Francis, director of
       photography.  Francis was director of photography on such films as _T_h_e
       _I_n_n_o_c_e_n_t_s, _T_h_e _F_r_e_n_c_h _L_i_e_u_t_e_n_a_n_t'_s _W_o_m_a_n, _T_h_e _E_l_e_p_h_a_n_t _M_a_n, and _D_u_n_e.
       Francis is superb at creating a period feel.  From his visualization of
       the battle of Antietam, the viewer realizes that he is going for
       authentic feel rather than dramatic effect.  His view of a Civil War
       surgery is somewhat harrowing, to say the least.  His photography rounds
       out the film and makes for a very satisfying view of history.  My rating
       is a +2 on the -4 to +4 scale.











                          HOLIDAYS IN HELL by P. J. O'Rourke
                      Vintage, 1989, ISBN 0-679-72422-2, $8.95.
                          A book review by Evelyn C. Leeper
                           Copyright 1990 Evelyn C. Leeper



            If your idea of a fun vacation is Beirut, you could be another
       P. J. O'Rourke.  On the other hand, if you wouldn't be caught dead there
       (you'll pardon the expression), you should probably just stick to
       reading _H_o_l_i_d_a_y_s _i_n _H_e_l_l.

            P. J. O'Rourke managed to convince _R_o_l_l_i_n_g _S_t_o_n_e magazine to
       bankroll his travel to such vacation spots as Beirut, Seoul, Manila
       (post-Marcos), Warsaw (pre-Walesa), Johannesburg, Heritage U.S.A., and
       the Epcot Center.  If the last two don't sound so bad, wait until you
       read O'Rourke's descriptions.  For example, of the Epcot Center, he
       says:
            Today the future is a quagmire of micro-chips.  They'll
            connect your television to somebody's typewriter, and if
            you can't score a million at Donkey Kong, you'll be out
            of work.  Meanwhile, the rest of the world has become a
            jumble of high-rises, from which pour mobs of college
            students headed for our embassies with kindling and Bics.
            Mickey, Donald, Goofy to the rescue!  Give us hope!  Give
            us joy!  Give us funny mouse ears, anyway, to wear while
            we man the ramparts of civilization.  Alas, it's not to
            be.  Walt is dead.  And, after a couple of hours at
            Epcot, you'll wish you were, too.

       (Mark once described the Epcot Center as follows:
            "[If the] 'Experimental Prototype Community of Tomorrow'
            really is a prototype community of tomorrow, we have a
            pretty weird future ahead of us!  After working all day
            under a beautiful dome--where your job is sitting on a
            sort of open train listening to some industrial giant
            tell you everything it's doing for you, you'll return
            home to your modest half-scale mock-up of China's Temple
            of Heaven, pick up the spouse and kiddees, go out for
            some really bad Japanese food, and take in a show about
            the wonders of Canada that will completely surround you,
            but you will have to stand up through.  George Orwell in
            his worst nightmare never...  Well, you get the idea."
       so you can see where I might think O'Rourke was right on the money!)

            It is the Beirut piece that is the jewel of the book.  O'Rourke is
       full of useful information, just the sort of thing one expects from a
       guidebook:
            "There are a number of Beirut hotels still operating.
            The best is the Commodore in West Beirut's El Hamra
            district.  This is the headquarters for the international











       Holidays in Hell            January 19, 1990                      Page 2



            press corps.  There are plenty of rooms available during
            lulls in the fighting.  If combat is intense, telex
            Beirut 20595 for reservations.  The Commodore's basement
            is an excellent bomb shelter.  The staff is cheerful,
            efficient and will try to get you back if you're
            kidnapped."

            This section describes hotels and restaurants, as one would expect
       from a travel guide.  Many of the sections do not--on the whole one
       would have to say that this is less a guide for the traveler as a log
       for the non-traveler, or at least the non-traveler-to-these-places.
       O'Rourke describes rioting in Seoul, Christmas in El Salvador, chasing
       illegal aliens at the Mexican border, night life in Warsaw, watching the
       America's Cup Race (when you don't know anything about boats, including
       the front from the back), Harvard's 350th anniversary, and driving
       anywhere in the Third World (which from his description could easily
       include Manhattan).

            In case it isn't obvious: I loved this book!  Of course, it is true
       that O'Rourke's writing verges on bad taste, but it's not clear how one
       writes about travel to the places he is describing _w_i_t_h_o_u_t being in bad
       taste.  What can one say about tourism in Beirut that would pass muster
       with Miss Manners?











































                                      ROGER & ME
                           A film review by Mark R. Leeper
                            Copyright 1990 Mark R. Leeper



                 Capsule review:  A biting documentary about the
            destruction GM does by closing plants in Flint, Michigan.
            It is razor-sharp and bitter.  Moore's film is a
            compilation of footage he took and pieces from stock
            footage, documentaries, television, etc.  Moore rarely
            has to use narration to tell the audience the point of a
            sequence; the point is clear from the footage he chooses.
            The film has a very effective documentary style.  Rating:
            high +2.

            Michael Moore will likely turn out to be a flash in the pan.  He
       has a lot to say about a subject he has been intimately involved with,
       but it seems unlikely there is any other subject he will be able to make
       another film about with such wit and insight.  But the film he did make
       may be a real shot in the arm for documentary filmmaking.  How long has
       it been since a documentary has made it to first-run popular (as opposed
       to art) theaters?  _R_o_g_e_r & _M_e has, and with very few overt jokes, it is
       one of the funniest films of the year.  It seems amazing that by filming
       a true story as it actually is happening Moore could have come up with a
       film at once as funny and as sad as _R_o_g_e_r & _M_e, but that is the power of
       the documentary film maker and editor.

            _R_o_g_e_r & _M_e is Moore's funny, bitter account of the decline of
       Flint, Michigan, due to its plant closings, and of Moore's own attempts
       to interview Roger Smith, the chairman of General Motors.  Smith clearly
       did not want to be interviewed by Moore and it is easy to understand
       why.  Moore's interviews turn everyone he talks to into pate'.  So time
       after time, Smith--or people who work for Smith--foil Moore's attempts
       at an interview and they become the film's running gag.  Happening once
       or twice it would look like daily business, but when Moore is foiled
       time after time Smith just ends up looking worse and worse.  And just as
       surely as we occasionally have national heroes, Moore has succeeded in
       making Roger Smith a national villain.

            But the film is more than just an indictment of Smith or even of
       the auto industry.  Moore has captured on film Middle America with every
       pimple and pore showing.  He shows hare-brained schemes for reviving
       Flint, such as the GM-built theme park Autoworld, built under the
       assumption that if GM is in love with cars, the whole country is in love
       with cars.  It featured a puppet auto-worker singing love songs to a
       robot assembler which Moore notes will replace him.  GM brought in
       celebrities such as Pat Boone, Anita Bryant, and Robert Schuller to
       spread messages of silly optimism.  "Turn your hurt into a halo,"
       Schuller advises with as straight a face as Schuller ever has.  When
       people are in real trouble there is little that can be said to make it











       Roger & Me                  January 14, 1990                      Page 2



       better and Moore's camera zooms in on the foolishness of trying to fix
       things up with mere words.  One woman becomes an Amway distributor and
       seems to have gone off the deep end on somebody's theory that everybody
       has a "season of color" like a zodiac sign, and you must get cosmetics
       and clothing in colors determined by your season of color.  The theory
       sounds like Elizabeth Arden meets New Age thinking.  Another woman goes
       into raising rabbits for pets or meat and cheerfully kills and flays a
       rabbit for the camera.

            GM also gets "The Newlywed Game"'s Bob Eubanks, who fails from
       Flint, to come to town and tell people how great Flint is.  While Moore
       is doing a number on Roger Smith, Eubanks is doing a number on himself
       that could be just as bad.

            While I do not have any particular respect for somebody who is a
       black belt at karate, I can respect a perfectly placed karate kick.
       While I do not always respect Moore's methods, his film is a perfectly
       placed kick to the auto industry and all those who support it.  This is
       not fair documentary filmmaking, but it is entertaining and it is
       effective.  It has precisely the effect on the audience that it was
       intended to have.  I would give it a high +2 on the -4 to +4 scale.