@@@@@ @ @ @@@@@ @ @ @@@@@@@ @ @ @@@@@ @@@@@ @@@
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @
@ @@@@@ @@@@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @
@ @ @ @@@@@ @ @ @ @ @@@@@ @@@@@ @@@
Mt. Holz Science Fiction Society
Club Notice - 04/27/90 -- Vol. 8, No. 43
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
05/09 LZ: Incarnations of Immortality Series, by Piers Anthony
(Mythology as Science)
05/30 LZ: L. RON HUBBARD PRESENTS WRITERS OF THE FUTURE #5 (New authors)
_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.
05/12 Science Fiction Association of Bergen County: Joe De Vito (artist
with a slide show of his work) (changed from previous guest)
(phone 201-933-2724 for details) (Saturday)
05/19 NJSFS New Jersey Science Fiction Society: Saul Jaffe (editor of
SF-LOVERS DIGEST (phone 201-432-5965 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. I recently saw something I never thought I would ever see on
television or could ever see anywhere. It was an ad and as far as
I am concerned it summed up in two sentences the entire fate of the
world, no easy feat. It is a justification for every cynical,
nihilistic thought I think I have ever had. Years ago, George
Carlin satirized television with the lines, "Giant cracks are
forming in the earth; rocks are falling from the sky. Details at
eleven." I admit at the time that it sounded far-fetched that the
world would be coming to an end and some television station would
just go right on oblivious.
Well, actually, I was right. Things aren't that bad. They're
worse. The media would commercialize it. These people must have
THE MT VOID Page 2
experts on how to take disaster and turn it into money. While I
have chuckled at Howard Ruff's book's title, _H_o_w _t_o _P_r_o_s_p_e_r _i_n _t_h_e
_C_o_m_i_n_g _B_a_d _T_i_m_e_s; these guys are really taking it a step farther
and figuring how they can grow rich for the world coming to an end.
And with that build-up, let me tell you the ad copy. Now I know if
you have not heard it yourself you are not going to believe me, but
ask your friends and neighbors. There must be someone else out
there who has heard this ad. It is for an Earth Day benefit being
put on by Billy Joel and the ad goes:
"The Earth is dying. Can Billy Joel
save it?"
What we have here is the fate of the Earth reduced to cheap
television melodrama. It's sort of "Let's all watch and see if
Billy Joel can save the planet" like "Let's all watch and see if
B.J. can escape from the Bear." Of course, every darn week
B.J. escapes from the Bear so maybe Billy Joel can save the planet.
All he needs is the same writers. Right.
Mark Leeper
MT 3D-441 957-5619
...mtgzx!leeper
A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing
its opponents and making them see the light, but
rather because its opponents eventually die out, and
a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.
-- Max Planck
THE COOK, THE THIEF, HIS WIFE & HER LOVER
A film review by Mark R. Leeper
Copyright 1990 Mark R. Leeper
Capsule review: HBO is hiring established directors
to do segments of its "Tales from the Crypt" series.
Peter Greenaway didn't wait to be asked. He lovingly made
a two-hour horror comic story with some hilarious detail.
Somehow it is being treated as an art film. A unique
film that certainly will not be for all audiences.
Rating: +2.
Peter Greenaway's most famous film to this point was _T_h_e
_D_r_a_u_g_h_t_s_m_a_n'_s _C_o_n_t_r_a_c_t. On the surface that was a mystery set at a
country estate. Its subtext was that beneath the affected surface of
the upper class there is mischief and dirt. The style was, however,
very affected and uninvolving and bloodless. To be frank, I could not
wait for the film to end. In _T_h_e _C_o_o_k, _T_h_e _T_h_i_e_f, _H_i_s _W_i_f_e & _H_e_r _L_o_v_e_r,
Greenaway seems once again to have it in for the upper classes (or at
least for the nouveau riche) who dine at a very fine French restaurant
(as well as for the people who put up letters on theater marquees). But
this time around the cold and uninvolving style is gone. Really gone.
The film starts like a Monty Python sketch that goes on a bit too long,
then it fades to John Waters, then Herschel Gordon Lewis, and when it is
all over we find we have been watching an intricately mounted
E.~C.~Comic and a story that could have been taken from the pages of
_V_a_u_l_t _o_f _H_o_r_r_o_r or _T_a_l_e_s _f_r_o_m _t_h_e _C_r_y_p_t. I laughed my way through the
film, was delighted by every ghoulish turn, but I have to say that I
cannot recommend this film to most of the people I know. I do not
remember when I have seen a film that more people walked out on.
What we have here is one week behind the scenes at The Restaurant
From Hell. Actually, the restaurant is "La Hollandaise"--soon to be
known as "Spica and Boarst's." Richard Boarst is a superb Cordon-Bleu-
class French chef whose restaurant was taken over by gangster Albert
Spica. Spica does not live by halfway measures. He is extremely
violent, exceptionally loud and rude, and supremely vulgar. Night after
night he holds forth at his restaurant, piling vulgarity on vulgarity
and often savaging his customers. We are led to assume that the cuisine
must be very, very good for anyone to be willing to sit in the same
restaurant as Spica. The gangster repeatedly brutalizes his wife
Georgina, whom he virtually holds prisoner. Georgina, however, is able
to sneak away from Spica occasionally to rendezvous with a rather
studious, quiet customer, Michael, with whom she makes passionate love.
Greenaway, who wrote as well as directed, has written what could
well have been a stage play. There are only a very limited number of
sets, and the sets are designed for use of color and for effect rather
than for accuracy. First we see the parking lot infested with a
Cook/Thief/Wife/Lover April 23, 1990 Page 2
veritable army of stray dogs. The kitchen is a hilarious revelation of
what goes on behind the scenes at a fancy restaurant. What goes on in
the kitchen is unbelievable. The transition from this kitchen that you
would not feed a dog from to the ultra-posh dining room stuns the
viewer. And so it goes, from one room to the next.
Michael Gambon plays Spica and must speak two-thirds of the lines
in the film. He never shuts up and he never says anything you want to
hear. Gambon was good in the BBC drama _T_h_e _S_i_n_g_i_n_g _D_e_t_e_c_t_i_v_e but his
Albert Spica will easily eclipse that role. Helen Mirren is usually
good and this is probably a role that will get more attention than her
(perhaps better) films such as _T_h_e _L_o_n_g _G_o_o_d _F_r_i_d_a_y.
_T_h_e _C_o_o_k, _T_h_e _T_h_i_e_f, _H_i_s _W_i_f_e & _H_e_r _L_o_v_e_r is not really an art film
but a ghoulish horror comic book with art film trappings. If you see
it, I cannot promise you will like it, but I can promise you that you
have not seen any other film like it. I give it a +2 on the -4 to +4
scale.
HYPERION by Dan Simmons
Bantam Spectra, 1990 (1989c), ISBN 0-553-28368-5, $4.95.
THE FALL OF HYPERION by Dan Simmons
Doubleday Foundation, 1990, ISBN 0-385-24950-0, $19.95.
A book review by Evelyn C. Leeper
Copyright 1990 Evelyn C. Leeper
What we have here is a glorious failure.
You may notice that I have labeled this "a book review," not "two
book reviews" as you might have expected. That is because, physical
reality notwithstanding, this is a single book. I cannot imagine any
reason, other than greed, for not publishing it as a single volume.
Yes, I know publishers claim that they can't publish a book of a
thousand pages because 1) no one will buy it, and 2) it is physically
difficult to produce. Yet New American Library has published the 1000-
page _D_o_n _Q_u_i_x_o_t_e and the 1400-page _L_e_s _M_i_s_e_r_a_b_l_e_s, people do purchase
them, and they haven't fallen apart, even after repeated readings. The
final death blow to this argument, of course, is that Doubleday is
producing a book club edition with both "novels" in a single volume!
Rumor has it that book stores don't like thick books because they can't
display as many in the same volume. Life's tough.
Issuing this novel as two volumes is doubly annoying because the
second half is so long and drawn-out that I found myself saying, "Why
didn't Simmons just add another hundred or so pages onto the first half
and wrap the story up there?" (I am not the only person to make this
observation.) Because it came out as a separate volume it had to be
about the same length as the first half and this means padding, padding,
and more padding.
The first half (to begin at the beginning, as they say) has been
compared to Chaucer's _C_a_n_t_e_r_b_u_r_y _T_a_l_e_s in that it is a group of pilgrims
telling stories. But there is a basic difference. In _T_h_e _C_a_n_t_e_r_b_u_r_y
_T_a_l_e_s, the stories are about other people; in _H_y_p_e_r_i_o_n they are about
the story-tellers themselves. And in this area, Simmons does very well,
managing to have each story _s_o_u_n_d as if the teller were telling it: the
story told by the priest sounds the way a priest would talk, the story
told by the soldier sounds the way a soldier would talk, etc. In
addition, each story is interesting in itself. Each story is also
almost novel-length in itself; any one of them, with an ending added on,
could have been published as a stand-alone novel. (Why do I even
suggest this?! Next we'll have _H_y_p_e_r_i_o_n: _T_h_e _S_p_e_c_i_a_l _E_d_i_t_i_o_n, redivided
and sold as six novels!)
The basic story begins with seven pilgrims traveling to the "Time
Tombs," odd structures on the planet Hyperion which are traveling
backwards in time and somehow connected with the Shrike. The Shrike is
a monster that appears to be a humanoid made up of a large collection of
Hyperion April 24, 1990 Page 2
knives and razor blades, leading a friend of mine to describe _H_y_p_e_r_i_o_n
(the first half) as "Freddy Krueger on Mars." It turns out (in the
second half) that there is a very good reason for the Shrike and its
presence, and that this is more than just a desire to put in a slasher
monster, but many people may be so turned off by the concept in the
first half that they will not buy the second half and find out (never
mind reading a thousand pages).
In order to figure out what the Shrike is and the secret of the
Time Tombs, the pilgrims tell their stories of how they are connected
with Hyperion. Of these stories, I found the most interesting to be Sol
Weintraub's (the philosopher's) story, full of questions about God and
the nature of sacrifice. Sol's daughter Rachel has been caught in a
"backwash" at the Time Tombs and is now living backwards. This is
difficult to make consistent (Philip Dick didn't quite succeed in
_C_o_u_n_t_e_r-_c_l_o_c_k _W_o_r_l_d either), and Simmons makes a few slips. To solve
the problems of day-to-day living, Rachel's memory regresses only during
sleep, so at least conversations can flow forward. But when towards the
end Sol notices that Rachel's hair is getting shorter and thinning out,
I found myself wondering, "But what about all those other years she was
regressing? Wasn't her hair (and for that matter, her fingernails)
getting shorter then?" And somehow the whole rationale Simmons had
built up seemed to collapse.
While the first half is the pilgrims' stories, the second half is a
single story (though told from many points of view), full of space
battles, politics, philosophy, poetry, and anything else Simmons had
handy--as I said, it's heavily padded. Without giving too much away, I
have to say that the religion expounded in the second half seems too
trinitarian to me, given its origins. (You'll probably have to read the
book to understand what I mean.) The padding becomes particularly
evident in Sol and Rachel's story. Sol is convinced that the Time Tombs
hold the answer to Rachel's problem, and therefore they must reach them
before Rachel regresses to her "birth." So we hear him think, "Now
Rachel is one day old." A few chapters later, he thinks, "Now Rachel is
eight hours old." Then a few chapters more, "Now Rachel is two hours
old." Then, "Now Rachel is one hour old." Then, "Now Rachel is thirty
minutes old." And so on and so on. Like Zeno's arrow, we seem to be
forever approaching the moment of Rachel's birth without actually having
any chance of getting there.
Simmons does have the ability to write in many different styles.
(His _P_h_a_s_e_s _o_f _G_r_a_v_i_t_y, a much better work in my opinion than this, is
written very differently than any of the pilgrims' stories here.) And
he has a sly sense of humor. The interstellar society that exists in
_H_y_p_e_r_i_o_n is the result of the Hegira--humanity's outpouring from Earth
when it was destroyed. Throughout the novel, Simmons speaks of "pre-
Hegira" and "post-Hegira" events, and so it is only a few lines later
that you realize his reference to "pre-Hegira Muslims" on page 199 is a
sort of historical pun.
Hyperion April 24, 1990 Page 3
Simmons also seems to have a real understanding of how electronic
bulletin boards work in his description of the All Thing, a
communications network joining all of the Hegemony (also page 199 of
_H_y_p_e_r_i_o_n):
Days and nights would pass with me monitoring the Senate
on farcaster cable or tapped into the All Thing. Someone
once estimated that the All Thing deals with about a
hundred active pieces of Hegemony legislation per day,
and during my months spent screwed into the sensorium I
missed none of them. My voice and name became well known
on the debate channels. No bill was too small, no issue
too simple or too complex for my input. The simple act
of voting every few minutes gave me a false sense of
having _a_c_c_o_m_p_l_i_s_h_e_d something. I finally gave up the
political obsession only after I realized that accessing
the All Thing regularly meant either staying home or
turning into a walking zombie. A person constantly busy
accessing on his implants makes a pitiful sight in public
and it didn't take Helenda's decision to make me realize
that if I stayed home I would turn into an All Thing
sponge like so many millions of other slugs around the
Web.
If Simmons himself has made an awkward structure for his novel, the
publisher has gilded the lily by managing to leave page 305 out entirely
from both the hardcover and trade paperback editions of _T_h_e _F_a_l_l _o_f
_H_y_p_e_r_i_o_n, and instead to provide _t_w_o copies of page 306! Naturally, a
major plot element is revealed on the missing page (or would be
revealed, were it there), so after reading eight hundred pages over a
period of a year, the reader is _s_t_i_l_l left in the dark. And don't try
blaming this on computers: back when a publisher set a book for
publishing in the traditional way, s/he double-checked the films before
sending them to the printer. S/he should still do this, computers
notwithstanding. I think it's evident that this was not done in this
case.
This book is an example of a work in which the whole is less than
the sum of the parts. This leads to an odd paradox: the first half has
been nominated for a Hugo and may well win, though had the whole book
been nominated, it might not have. It is only in the second half that
the story becomes tedious. As far as its competition, one of the other
nominees is volume three of a six (or seven) volume series of which the
first two were both nominated for Hugos but didn't win, and another is
volume two of a three-volume (at least) series of which the first one
was nominated for a Hugo but didn't win. (Do you detect a pattern here?
Norman Spinrad, in his column in the June 1990 _I_s_a_a_c _A_s_i_m_o_v'_s, has a lot
to say about "seriesism," and much of it applies here.) In this sort of
field, it wouldn't surprise me at all to see the first half of a book
win a Hugo.
THE PUNJAT'S RUBY by Marian J. A. Jackson
Pinnacle, 1990, ISBN 1-55817-338-2, $3.50.
A book review by Evelyn C. Leeper
Copyright 1990 Evelyn C. Leeper
Abigail Patience Danforth has read Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock
Holmes stories and decides to become the world's first _f_e_m_a_l_e consulting
detective. Of course, in Victorian England this is a bit of a problem,
women's rights being what they were (or weren't), and things are not
much better when she returns to her home in New York City. She does
conveniently (for the author, anyway) manage to get thrust into the
middle of a theft and murder, though, and soon the game is afoot.
Danforth appears to be the latest in a series of Victorian female
detectives designed to appeal to modern female sensibilities, with their
struggle for acceptance and respect, their 1980's (1990's?) attitudes,
etc. (Elizabeth Peters's Amelia Peabody is another.) Unfortunately,
this book goes a bit overboard, with Danforth frequently (and
unconvincingly) disguising herself as a man, complete with moustache,
and everyone else acting in a stereotypical manner, and constantly
patronizing her. Amelia Peabody had someone who understood her! The
negative portrayal of Asians in the book, while perhaps accurate to the
Victorian novels that it is copying, seems out of place in a work
written now. One might argue that a pastiche should copy all the
attitudes of the original, but then we wouldn't have the liberated
female lead in the first place.
Of some interest to Sherlockians (Doyle is a minor character) and
fans of female detectives, but not highly recommended.
SLAVES OF THE VOLCANO GOD by Craig Shaw Gardner
Ace, 1989, ISBN 0-441-76977-2, $3.95.
A book review by Evelyn C. Leeper
Copyright 1990 Evelyn C. Leeper
Roger Gordon is leading a very boring existence in our world.
Suddenly his girlfriend is kidnapped by a couple of thugs who disappear
in a puff of smoke. With the aid of his handy Captain Crusader Decoder
Ring (which just happens to be the key to the universe, or one of the
thousands, at any rate), he follows them, only to find himself in the
movies. No, I don't mean he ends up an actor in Hollywood; I mean he
finds himself in the universe of the movies (the "Cineverse" as Gardner
calls it). Most of the story is spent in a bad Western--Roger doesn't
get to the South Seas island until almost the end of the book.
What is the Cineverse like? Well, for one thing we find out why
cowboys always carry guitars. You see, if they had to ride in the
normal fashion to the outlaw's hideout, it would take days and days, but
with the guitar, they just sing a song and when they finish the last
chorus, presto! the hideout comes into view. You also discover some of
the pitfalls the movies gloss over. You know how the bad guy's
sidekicks have names such as "Tex" and "Dakota." Well, when the gang
gets too large, the late-comers apparently end up with names such as
"Idaho" and "District of Columbia." (For some reason, Gardner avoids
bringing a sidekick named "Georgia" on-stage for the usual bad jokes.
Given the rest of the book, it's difficult to attribute this to a sense
of subtlety and refinement.) You learn under what conditions a six-
shooter can have more than six bullets (whenever it is necessary to the
plot) and when a gun will misfire (whenever it is necessary to the
plot).
This book is, of course, totally ridiculous. It also has a
wonderfully tacky cover by Walter Velez--perfectly in keeping with the
spirit of the book. And, again in keeping with the spirit of the old
movie series and serials, it is book one of a series (book two, _B_r_i_d_e _o_f
_t_h_e _S_l_i_m_e _M_o_n_s_t_e_r, has just come out, and book three, _R_e_v_e_n_g_e _o_f _t_h_e
_F_l_u_f_f_y _B_u_n_n_i_e_s, is threatened, I mean promised, soon). But if you're
an old movie fan, this is a golden opportunity to find out what the secret
rules of moviedom really are.
BRIDE OF THE SLIME MONSTER by Craig Shaw Gardner
Ace, 1990, ISBN 0-441-07950-4, $3.95.
A book review by Evelyn C. Leeper
Copyright 1990 Evelyn C. Leeper
This is the second book in the "Cineverse Cycle," Gardner's look at
what might happen if someone from our universe suddenly found himself
living in a movie world--literally. In the first volume (_S_l_a_v_e_s _o_f _t_h_e
_V_o_l_c_a_n_o _G_o_d, reviewed earlier) Roger Gordon found himself traveling
between the worlds of western movies, pirate movies, and South Sea
island movies, all with the aid of his Captain Crusader Decoder Ring.
_B_r_i_d_e _o_f _t_h_e _S_l_i_m_e _M_o_n_s_t_e_r takes place mostly in the world of beach-
party movies, and since I have never been a big fan of beach party
movies, and find them even more ridiculous than formula westerns, I
found this book less interesting than the first. In addition, since
this is the middle of the trilogy (_R_e_v_e_n_g_e _o_f _t_h_e _F_l_u_f_f_y _B_u_n_n_i_e_s,
promised soon, is billed as the conclusion, though one suspects if the
first three are successful, more will follow--that is one of the laws of
the "Biblioverse"), it suffers from providing neither the background nor
the conclusion of the story.
In short, I can't recommend this if you haven't read the first one
or don't intend to read the last one. And since the last one isn't out
yet, I can't give an overall recommendation. Stayed tuned for the next
exciting chapter in:
"Review of the Cineverse Cycle!"
Readercon 3
Con report by Evelyn C. Leeper
Copyright 1990 Evelyn C. Leeper
(Part 2)
_T_h_a_t'_s _I_n_c_o_m_p_r_e_h_e_n_s_i_b_l_e: _I_m_a_g_i_n_i_n_g _t_h_e _T_r_u_l_y _A_l_i_e_n
Alexander Jablokov (moderator), Jeffrey A. Carver,
James Patrick Kelly, Paul Park, Steven Popkes
Saturday, 4:00 PM
Jablokov opened this panel by saying that authors who tried to
write about the truly alien had a difficult task, because they had to
write about people "even weirder than the people they meet on the
subway."
Kelly talked about how he uses stylistic tricks to try to make the
aliens "different." For example, in his latest book, one race uses no
contractions in its speech (shades of Data!) and another uses only words
derived from Anglo-Saxon, which he also expressed as having no Latin or
Greek roots, but the two are not truly identical. Put another way, what
he said was not quite kosher, if you catch my drift. Kelly also
recommended Julian Jaynes's _T_h_e _O_r_i_g_i_n_s _o_f _C_o_n_s_c_i_o_u_s_n_e_s_s _a_n_d _t_h_e
_B_r_e_a_k_d_o_w_n _o_f _t_h_e _B_i_c_a_m_e_r_a_l _M_i_n_d.*
Popkes felt that the key to writing alien aliens was to realize
that they had their own agenda. Where humans put food and shelter high
on what they want, aliens might have a different set of priorities (but
it better make sense from an evolutionary and survival point of view, in
my opinion, or readers will not be convinced). Kelly thought it would
be helpful if there were a "periodic chart of emotions" so that you
could describe alien emotions better ("fear-2-dread-unhappiness-4"?).
By the end of the panel, the conclusion seemed to be that you could
not make the truly alien comprehensible or it would not be alien. On
the other hand, it is much more acceptable to give aliens problems than
to show humans with problems. A book depicting racism in aliens will be
understood (one hopes) to be a parallel for racism in our world, and
will be easier to get published and be read by a lot more people.
__________
* An interesting note here: I did not get the title quite correct in
my notes, but could not find it in _B_o_o_k_s _i_n _P_r_i_n_t to fix it. Then,
less than 12 hours later, I ran across it in one of the
introductions in Harry Turtledove's new collection. Synchronicity!
Readercon 3 April 13, 1990 Page 2
_Z_e_n _a_n_d _t_h_e _A_r_t _o_f _A_n_t_h_o_l_o_g_y _E_d_i_t_i_n_g
David G. Hartwell (moderator), Kathryn Cramer, Jack Dann,
Jeanne Van Buren Dann, Terri Windling
Saturday, 5:00 PM
Naturally the first editor mentioned was Martin H. Greenburg, the
most prolific editor currently working in the genre (or just about any
genre, come to think of it). The panelists claimed only one other
person had ever achieved his entire reputation in the science fiction
field as an anthology editor. The only catch was they did not say who
this was. Mark and I were sure they meant Groff Conklin, but what they
were saying did not sound like they were talking about Conklin, so
finally we asked just who they did mean. "Roger Elwood." "What about
Groff Conklin." "Oh, no, he made his reputation [somewhere else--I
forget where they said]." I still think Groff Conklin fit their
description--after all Elwood and Greenburg have both done other things
as well.
Anyway, Roger Elwood apparently sold two hundred anthology
contracts in eighteen months, buying up the complete short fiction
output of several prolific authors. Before Elwood came along,
anthologies were rare, and generally high-quality. Readers had come to
expect they would be worth buying and reading. The enormous number of
mediocre anthologies Elwood produced resulted in readers becoming
extremely skeptical of anthologies. So for a long time anthologies were
anathema--they are only now recovering.
Cramer claimed that in a discussion of how good a job Greenburg was
doing she said that even if he did nothing else, the mathematics say
that he could not possibly be spending enough time on each anthology to
be doing a good job. To me, this is not a convincing argument. You
need to look at the finished product. If it is bad, then even if he
spent six years on it alone, it is bad. And if it is good, claiming
that it could not possibly be because he did not spend enough time on it
is ridiculous. ("I don't care what pictures you took, Mr. Wright; man
cannot fly in a heavier-than-air machine.")
The panel claimed that Greenburg's method, at least for anthologies
co-edited with Isaac Asimov, is that his researchers pick 120,000 words
on a topic. Then Asimov selects 100,000 words of this. Greenburg (or
his staff) then tracks down the necessary permissions, etc. Sometimes
these are unobtainable, so some stories can still get dropped. Then
Asimov writes a short introduction to each story and presto! a new
anthology.
Actually, of course, the term "new" anthology is ambiguous. In
order to avoid confusion between anthologies of never-before-published
stories and anthologies that have never been published before in that
form, though the individual stories have appeared previously, science
fiction calls the former "original anthologies" and the latter "reprint
anthologies." (And single-author "anthologies" are called
Readercon 3 April 13, 1990 Page 3
"collections.") Reprint anthologies are much easier to do--the stories
are already written. For original anthologies, the editor has to keep
"hocking the author's chineks," as Jack Dann said (badgering the
author). _I_n _t_h_e _F_i_e_l_d _o_f _F_i_r_e, which he and Jeanne Van Buren Dann co-
edited, was conceived by accident at a Boskone when Jeanne casually said
something to Beth Meacham's husband about doing an anthology of Vietnam
War stories. (Beth Meacham is an editor at Tor Books.) It took about a
year of hard work to put together--very different from the amount of
effort that goes into the average Greenburg reprint anthology. And even
so, I believe that some of the stories in _I_n _t_h_e _F_i_e_l_d _o_f _F_i_r_e were
reprints.
Anthologies such as the various _Y_e_a_r'_s _B_e_s_t are done on a less
intensive schedule. Rather than having to read a hundred stories on a
single topic in a short period of time, the editor has the "luxury" of
reading a range of stories over the entire year.
When the panel was asked what they thought of shared-world
anthologies, Terri Windling responded that they could be enjoyable and
show an author's ability to work in a very structured framework, but
that she did not go to them for literature. Since she is the
originator/editor of the "Bordertown" shared-world series, her opinion
carries some weight, I should think. (I asked later if _I_n _t_h_e _F_i_e_l_d_s _o_f
_F_i_r_e was a shared-world anthology, since it had many of the same
characteristics. The panel did not think so, but I do not think they
could explain exactly why not. Maybe they just did not have time.)
Someone mentioned the Australian anthology _E_x_p_r_e_s_s_w_a_y, based on a
painting around which various authors wrote stories. This reminded me
of Hal Clement's novel _O_c_e_a_n _o_n _T_o_p, also inspired by a painting. This
seems like a very promising idea--as someone pointed out, for a change
this lets the _a_r_t_i_s_t have free rein and the authors have to write to fit
the picture.
Since we had eaten so much at lunch we skipped dinner and sat
around waiting for the evening's events to begin. The Green Room was
closed (luckily I had time to go in and change into my more formal
attire for the awards ceremony before they locked it). We tried
dropping into the con suite, but it was empty. So we sat around on the
couches outside the main room and read--we did have books! At 8:00 PM,
Eric came into the main room and announced that since the restaurant
where John Crowley went to dinner was very slow in serving, the
question-and-answer period would be moved to Sunday, and everything else
would be a half-hour late. At 9:00 PM, Crowley arrived, very
apologetic, and read an excerpt from _L_o_v_e _a_n_d _S_l_e_e_p, the unfinished
sequel to _A_e_g_y_p_t.
Readercon 3 April 13, 1990 Page 4
_R_e_a_d_e_r_c_o_n _S_m_a_l_l _P_r_e_s_s _A_w_a_r_d_s
Co-ordinators: Robert Colby, Eric Van
Judges: Thomas M. Disch, John Shirley, Kathryn Cramer,
Paul Chadwick, Jerry Kaufman, Greg Ketter, Evelyn Leeper
Saturday, 10:00 PM
In November 1989 I was asked to be one of the seven judges for the
Readercon Small Press Awards. (The other six were Thomas M. Disch, John
Shirley, Kathryn Cramer, Paul Chadwick, Jerry Kaufman, and Greg Ketter.)
As a result, I found myself reading seven novels, three chapbooks, six
original collections, five reprint collections, three original
anthologies, one reprint anthology, sixteen non-fiction works, six
miscellaneous works, and 66 volumes of 29 different magazines from the
"small press"--113 items in all. (A full report on what I discovered
will probably appear shortly in _O_t_h_e_r_R_e_a_l_m_s.)
John Shirley and Jerry Kaufman were unable to attend Readercon 3,
but the other five of us were all there to present the awards. Kathryn
Cramer, apparently styling herself after Vanna White or whoever the
current bimbo is, wore a bright green swimsuit. Her job in the
ceremonies was to present the envelopes containing the winners' names to
the actual presenters. Now maybe I'm just an old fuddy-duddy, but to me
this sort of thing cheapens the awards. (I would note here that several
of the men I was with said that they were not particularly thrilled with
Cramer in a high-legged swimsuit, so it is not just me.)
And the winners were:
- Novel -- No Award
- Short Work -- _A _D_o_z_e_n _T_o_u_g_h _J_o_b_s, Howard Waldrop (Mark V. Ziesing)
- Single-Author Collection -- _R_i_c_h_a_r_d _M_a_t_h_e_s_o_n: _C_o_l_l_e_c_t_e_d _S_t_o_r_i_e_s,
Richard Matheson (Scream/Press)
- Anthology -- _W_h_a_t _D_i_d _M_i_s_s _D_a_r_r_i_n_g_t_o_n _S_e_e?: _A_n _A_n_t_h_o_l_o_g_y _o_f
_F_e_m_i_n_i_s_t _S_u_p_e_r_n_a_t_u_r_a_l _F_i_c_t_i_o_n, Jessica Amanda Salmonson, ed.
(Feminist Press)
- Non-Fiction -- _T_h_e _D_a_r_k-_H_a_i_r_e_d _G_i_r_l, Philip K. Dick (Mark
V. Ziesing)
- Reference/Bibliography -- No Award
- Reprint -- _T_h_e _A_n_u_b_i_s _G_a_t_e_s, Tim Powers (Mark V. Ziesing)
- Jacket Illustration -- J. K. Potter, _T_h_e _A_n_u_b_i_s _G_a_t_e_s (Mark
V. Ziesing)
- Interior Illustration -- Mark Ferrari & Tom Sullivan, _S. _P_e_t_e_r_s_o_n'_s
_F_i_e_l_d _G_u_i_d_e _t_o _C_r_e_a_t_u_r_e_s _o_f _t_h_e _D_r_e_a_m_l_a_n_d_s (Chaosium)
Readercon 3 April 13, 1990 Page 5
- Value in Bookcraft -- _R_i_c_h_a_r_d _M_a_t_h_e_s_o_n: _C_o_l_l_e_c_t_e_d _S_t_o_r_i_e_s, Richard
Matheson (Scream/Press)
- Magazines (Fiction) -- _I_n_t_e_r_z_o_n_e, David Pringle, ed. (Interzone)
- Magazines (Criticism) -- _S_c_i_e_n_c_e _F_i_c_t_i_o_n _E_y_e, Stephen P. Brown &
Daniel J. Steffan, eds. (Science Fiction Eye)
- Magazines (Design) -- _S_c_i_e_n_c_e _F_i_c_t_i_o_n _E_y_e, Stephen P. Brown &
Daniel J. Steffan, eds. (Science Fiction Eye)
As you may have noticed, Mark V. Ziesing got _a _l_o_t of awards. (I
think he had nine certificates by the end of the evening, some for him
and some for the various authors and artists.) In general, I was
pleased with the choices. The "No Award" categories deserve some
additional comment. In the novel category, there was a three-way tie
for first place, with one of the three being "No Award." Clearly, this
sort of result really means that there is no clear award, though it does
not mean, as is often the case, that nothing was worthy of recognition.
At 10:30 PM the infamous Kirk Poland Bad Prose Competition took
place. Kate and Pete wanted to stay for this, so we looked for
something else to do. There was nothing else to do. Even the con suite
was closed. To keep harping on bad prose is bad enough, but to make
this the featured jewel of the convention, against which there is no
opposition programming, seems totally contrary to the spirit of
Readercon. (End of soapbox.)
At 12:30 AM or so, the Kirk Poland ended and given the late hour,
people decided _n_o_t to stay for the film. Yes, Readercon was showing a
film! In this case, they justified it by saying that their policy
allowed showing documentaries written by their guests of honor; this
year is was _W_o_r_l_d _o_f _T_o_m_o_r_r_o_w, a documentary about the 1939 World's
Fair. (Mark and I had already seen a sixty-minute version of it.) This
"policy" sounds as if it was made up on the spot. While this may not
mean that Readercon is on the slippery slope to media fandom, this
gradual erosion (rock 'n' roll the first year, now films, next year
maybe an art show) needs to be carefully watched. (This is semi-
humorous, but only semi.)
We did not get lost driving to Pete's house this year, but we did
cheat and use walkie-talkies.
Sunday morning we arrived about 10:30 AM and hung out in the
Dealers' Room for a while. We also had a long debate in the con suite
about the Kirk Poland Competition. The main argument people give in
favor of it seems to be, "But everyone enjoys it so much!" Then we sat
outside where we talked to various passersby. Laurie Mann stopped by
and asked how I was enjoying Readercon. I said it was so depressing--no
one had congratulated me on my Hugo nomination! She and I agreed that
we probably should have brought the full list of nominees to be posted
Readercon 3 April 13, 1990 Page 6
on the bulletin board since it seemed that most people had not heard
them yet. (Well, they had been on Usenet for a week and a half, so we
just sort of assumed _e_v_e_r_y_o_n_e knew.)
_T_h_e _D_o_g _T_h_a_t _W_a_g_s _t_h_e _T_a_l_e_s: _S_F _a_n_d _F_a_n_d_o_m
Fred Lerner (moderator), Greg Cox, Janice M. Eisen,
Scott E. Green, Evelyn Leeper
Sunday, 12:00 PM
This should have been subtitled "The Peripatetic Panel." The sign
outside the assigned room redirected us to another room. It turned out
that room was scheduled for a reading, so we were then sent to a third
room. Here Eric said that we should start in the third room and after a
half-hour move into the _f_i_r_s_t room, which would then be free, because
the third room was needed for something else. At this point, we put
our collective feet down and said we were not going to start in one room
and then move--we wanted a room that we could keep for the entire time.
After about five minutes, we got our original room and stayed there the
whole hour.
We started by going around the room and introducing ourselves.
After I had introduced myself, Laurie said, "Tell them what happened to
you last week!" I felt a little strange saying that I had been
nominated, but luckily Mark announced it for me.
Teresa Nielsen-Hayden described herself as having tested "skiffy-
positive" and claimed this was a "textually transmitted disease."
Fred Lerner then appointed himself moderator, which was okay,
except for his tendency to say things merely to be provocative without
thinking if they could withstand even the smallest attack. He started
by asking people to define fandom, and this consumed most of the hour.
Scott Green claimed that fans are wannabe writers, and also insisted he
was not a fan. When we discovered he actually bet on boxing matches,
many of us then agreed that he was not a fan after all. After all, as
someone said, fans are usually participants, not spectators. (Or as
someone said, "I came, I talked, I fought.")
regarding the wannabe writers, someone observed that "fanzines are
not prozines with training wheels" and that fans should not consider
that their experience in fanzines improves their qualifications for
prozines."
It was observed (by Fred?) that "fandom is an organism with an
infinitely short attention span and an infinitely long memory." Lerner
also defined fans as including all those who "publicly consort with
known fans."
There was much comparison with other sorts of fandom (crossword
puzzle fandom, railroad fandom, etc.). Fred said that he distinguished
between "fandom" and "Fandom," the latter being strictly connected to
Readercon 3 April 13, 1990 Page 7
science fiction. Later he said that science fiction deals with
everything, and I pointed out that by transitivity (or maybe it's
associativity) that meant that "fandom" was the same as "Fandom."
I gave a variation of Damon Knight's definition of science fiction:
"Fandom is what I point to when I say it." This is obviously more
descriptive than proscriptive, but few people argued with it.
People tried approaching this from the point of view of "fannish
sensibilities." Whereas most people in social situations make small
talk, in fandom people talk about "facts." This is often carried to the
extreme that you can have a very long and detailed conversation with
someone and never know their name, their occupation, or anything else
about them except their opinion on what color the ancient Greeks painted
their houses. Someone said that a fannish gathering consisted of people
reciting facts to each other. The ultimate fannish activity ever
observed was Terry Carr and Ted White sitting in a bar and reciting
addresses (not names!) of fans to each other and reminiscing about them.
Fans also collect things--everything, and obsessively.
No true conclusions were reached, though "Smoffing 101" and
"Trufans Versus Fans: An Advanced Panel" were suggested for future
conventions.
After the panel, most of us continued talking by the couches
outside the room for another hour about fans and fandom. Teresa
Nielsen-Hayden said that when she first saw my name listed as a Hugo
nominee for fan writer, she thought, "But she only writes things
electronically." Then she said she thought about it and decided that it
was okay after all. And certainly I would think it should be. But is
it?
When I got home I looked up the qualifications for eligibility.
The definition for a fan writer for the Hugos this year is: "Any person
whose writing appeared in semiprozines or fanzines during 1989." It
would appear that people might claim that electronic fanac (fannish
activity) would not be enough to qualify me. However, since I did
appear in _L_a_n'_s _L_a_n_t_e_r_n, I definitely am eligible, although what I was
nominated for was probably not what appeared in _L_a_n'_s _L_a_n_t_e_r_n. Of
course, my appearances in the _M_T _V_O_I_D would also make me eligible.
Since that particular fanzine is circulated pretty much just within
AT&T, it is unlikely anyone used it as a basis, but even without
appearances in "external" fanzines, I could claim eligibility. And this
does not even involve deciding whether SF-LOVERS DIGEST is a fanzine!
As I said (at great and boring length in my Boskone con report),
the whole issue of electronic fandom is a real can of worms that the
World Science Fiction Convention will have to deal with eventually. For
now, they can avoid the issue somewhat by giving SF-LOVERS DIGEST a
"special" Hugo, but maybe this is just postponing the inevitable.
Readercon 3 April 13, 1990 Page 8
Her comments got me to thinking, though. She apparently gets my
convention reports (Hi, Teresa!) and gets them electronically, but I do
not have her on my mailing list. So people must be forwarding them
around. That is okay, but I am curious who _i_s getting and reading them.
So if you got this from someone other than me, please drop an e-note to
me at ecl@mtgzy.att.com and let me know. Thanks!
After the overflow discussion wound down, I talked to someone about
Arisia. Apparently it was successful, although the film program was
somewhat spotty, and the book presence was minimal.
I dropped by the Dealers' Room and talked to a few people there.
Jerry Boyajian was sitting behind Mark Ziesing's table and said he had
been pressed into service for the "Comics Discussion Group." I talked
to Greg Ketter about the Small Press Awards and some of the problems.
Greg feels that seven judges is too many just because of the logistics.
It is a large financial drain on small presses to send out seven
complimentary copies of a book that may have had a press run of only a
few hundred, yet unless they send them out they have little chance of
winning. Also, with reference books (and others) priced at $50 and
above, it is a problem to ask a publisher to send out several hundred
dollars' worth of books. Charnel House did not send out any copies of
their $150 _T_h_e _S_t_r_e_s_s _o_f _H_e_r _R_e_g_a_r_d and also did not get a lot of votes-
--judges tend not to vote on what they do not see. I commented that
having fewer judges might make the awards too susceptible to favoritism
and cliquism. Greg said that one suggestion made by the committee was
to ask for one copy of each eligible book and have the judges route
them. Even with Readercon picking up the shipping tab, this is just not
workable. I do not have time to re-package books--more to the point, I
do not have time to drive to someplace to ship them when I have finished
repackaging them. And when the final ballot rolls around, I would want
to be able to go back and compare the finalists again. (This was
especially valuable for the jacket illustration category, where I laid
all seven books out and could rank-order them fairly quickly. Without
the books in front of me, forget it!) If all the judges were in the
same geographical area, _m_a_y_b_e it could be done by having all the books
available at one place and people could examine them there (the NESFA
clubhouse or the back room at the Science Fiction Shop, for example),
but even this sounds like a disaster in the making. I am sure the
Readercon committee would appreciate any ideas you have along these
lines.
(to be concluded)