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

                        Mt. Holz Science Fiction Society
                    Club Notice - 09/20/91 -- Vol. 10, No. 12


       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

       10/09   LZ: THE QUIET POOLS by Michael Kube-McDowell (Hugo nominee)
       10/30   LZ: MINDBRIDGE by Joe Haldeman
       11/13   MT: THE RED MAGICIAN by Lisa Goldstein (Jewish SF)
       11/20   LZ: EON by Greg Bear
       12/11   LZ: MIRKHEIM by Poul Anderson
       12/18   MT: "The Star" by Arthur C. Clarke (Christian SF)

         _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.
       09/21   NJSFS: New Jersey Science Fiction Society: TBA
                       (phone 201-432-5965 for details) (Saturday)
       09/25   Readings: Richard Curtis, Sharon Jarvis, Barry Malzberg
                       (Barnes & Noble, Route 17, Paramus, 7:30 PM) (Wed)
       10/12   Autographing: Margaret Bonanno, Michael Friedman, Janet Kagan
                       (B. Dalton, Willowbrook Mall, Wayne, 1-5 PM) (Sat)
       10/12   SFABC: Science Fiction Association of Bergen County:
                       (phone 201-933-2724 for details) (Saturday)
       10/29   Readings: Michael Flynn and two other authors TBA
                       (Barnes & Noble, Route 17, Paramus, 7:30 PM) (Tue)
       11/09   Autographing: Ellen Datlow, Janet Kagan, Ellen Kushner,
                       Melissa Scott, Jack Womack (B. Dalton, Willowbrook
                       Mall, Wayne, 1-5 PM) (Sat)

       HO Chair:      John Jetzt         HO 1E-525   834-1563  hocpb!jetzt
       LZ Chair:      Rob Mitchell       LZ 1B-306   576-6106  mtuxo!jrrt
       MT Chair:      Mark Leeper        MT 3D-441   957-5619  mtgzy!leeper
       HO Librarian:  Rebecca Schoenfeld HO 2K-430   949-6122  homxb!btfsd
       LZ Librarian:  Lance Larsen       LZ 3L-312   576-3346  mtunq!lfl
       MT Librarian:  Mark Leeper        MT 3D-441   957-5619  mtgzy!leeper
       Factotum:      Evelyn Leeper      MT 1F-329   957-2070  mtgzy!ecl
       All material copyright by author unless otherwise noted.

       1.  I know that you folks depend on me to keep you  informed  about
       what  is happening in the real world.  You live your wretched lives
       oblivious to what is _r_e_a_l_l_y happening until I come  like  the  pony











       THE MT VOID                                                  Page 2



       express  bringing news from the _r_e_a_l American culture.  Well, there
       is what could perhaps be construed as good news this time.   I  see
       it  as  an  optimistic sign; let me see what you think.  For a long
       time, the general public has had a diminishing interest in history.
       Perhaps  that  is  not  quite  accurate.   Perhaps  it  is  more  a
       refocusing of historical interest.  There is less  of  a  focus  on
       "What  was the Hundred Years War and why didn't people get tired of
       it sooner?" and more of an interest in "How did the Rolling  Stones
       come  to  be formed?" and "What was it like in the formative period
       of the Grateful Dead?"  The historical films being made  were  less
       in  the  spirit  of, say, _A_n_n_e _o_f _a _T_h_o_u_s_a_n_d _D_a_y_s and more like _T_h_e
       _D_o_o_r_s.  People used to be interested in "How did the world  get  in
       the  awful  state  it's in?" and now it is more "How did rock music
       attain its current state of such unexcelled perfection  that  every
       music  store  wants to play it at sound levels usually reserved for
       taxiing 747 engines?"

       Well, anyway, that was I felt yesterday.  What a difference  a  day
       makes!   There  was  an  ad  on  television that totally changed my
       viewpoint.  Can you imagine, it was an  ad  on  regular  commercial
       television  and it opened with pictures of people like Napoleon and
       Tutankhamen.  These are  people  you  haven't  seen  on  commercial
       television for the last decade or so.  And now they are featured in
       a commercial!  How edifying!  This is the reincarnation  line.   It
       is a 900 number that you call and answer questions with a Touchtone
       (tm) phone and it tells you who you might have been in  a  previous
       life.   At  least it can be an educational medium.  If I was told I
       was a reincarnation  of  somebody  named  Moliere  (I  wish!),  I'd
       probably  make  sure  I  knew who that was.  Of course, it would be
       somebody famous, because why be a reincarnation  of  somebody  non-
       famous?   Actually,  I  was intrigued and discovered I was actually
       someone fairly obscure in my last life.  At least the  encyclopedia
       didn't  list him.  Maybe someone out there could help.  Anyone know
       who Jim Morrison was?


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



            A man has generally the good or ill qualities which he
            attributes to mankind.
                                          -- William Shenstone





















                        23RD INTERNATIONAL TOURNEE OF ANIMATION
                            A film review by Mark R. Leeper
                             Copyright 1991 Mark R. Leeper



               Since 1969 the International Tournee of Animation has been an
          annual event produced by a company that calls itself Expanded
          Entertainment.  A very limited number of theaters will get this
          feature-length compilation of animated films as short as a few
          seconds long or as long as this year's 22-minute "Grey Wolf & Little
          Red Riding Hood."  Usually the films are winners of obscure prizes
          like "First Prize at the Hiroshima Animation Festival."  As the
          years have passed the technique has improved, but there but there
          have also come to be several competing compilations each year.  At
          the same time the _2_3_r_d _I_n_t_e_r_n_a_t_i_o_n_a_l _T_o_u_r_n_e_e is playing in New York,
          so is the _F_e_s_t_i_v_a_l _o_f _A_n_i_m_a_t_i_o_n _1_9_9_1 (at another theater).  A few
          months earlier, the _B_r_i_t_i_s_h _A_n_i_m_a_t_i_o_n _I_n_v_a_s_i_o_n was playing in New
          York and there is also something called the _A_n_i_m_a_t_i_o_n _C_e_l_e_b_r_a_t_i_o_n.
          Sad to say, this much demand for animated films means that more
          mediocre films get shown.  Usually the International Tournee would
          have the Oscar-winning and the also-rans.  Invariably, there would
          be some nominated film that would seem (to me at least) more
          creative and better than the actual winner.  Ironically, this year,
          when I think the Oscar winner is really excellent, it showed up in
          both the _F_e_s_t_i_v_a_l _o_f _A_n_i_m_a_t_i_o_n and in the _B_r_i_t_i_s_h _A_n_i_m_a_t_i_o_n
          _I_n_v_a_s_i_o_n, so "Creature Comforts" is not included in the _T_o_u_r_n_e_e.
          And it is sadly missed, being far superior to anything in the
          _T_o_u_r_n_e_e.

               As is usually the case I throw out my usual scale and rate the
          animated films poor, fair, good, very good, or excellent.  This year
          the _T_o_u_r_n_e_e had nothing poor, but nothing excellent either.  Now to
          the individual films.

             - "Fast Food Matador" (Vincent Cafarelli & Candy Kugel; U. S. A.;
               4:15): This is a continuation of the trend towards including
               animated music videos.  It is unclear whether what we should be
               reacting to is the music or the animation.  Neither was greatly
               noteworthy.  The song seems to be about a deli delivery boy who
               either is metaphorically a matador or imagines himself to be a
               matador.  Though there is a humorous note at the end, overall
               this one is just passable.  Rating: fair.

             - "Getting There" (Paul Driessen; Canada; 1:36): This seems to
               come down to a homily that being home is better than travel.  A
               man inspired by a travel poster actually travels but keeps
               ending up where he started.  Rating: fair.

             - "At One View" (Paul & Menno de Noojier; Holland; Grand Prize--
               Stuttgart International Animation festival; 6:27): This is a











          23rd Int.Tour.Animation  September 16, 1991                   Page 2



               Dutch film that combines animation with live action somehow
               modified to look like animation.  It is a little long at six
               and half minutes of technique, and while it is not a story with
               a plot, it does say some interesting things about animation.
               Rating: very good.

             - "Big Bang" (Bruno Bozzeto; Italy; 4:10): This piece, by the
               animator of _A_l_l_e_g_r_o _n_o_n _T_r_o_p_p_o, is a message story telling of
               the evils of pollution.  The story is trite and didactical
               (unless you think that any anti-pollution message is deep).
               The cartoon builds to a pun in English, which leads me to
               wonder how the end was handled in the original Italian.
               Rating: good.

             - "The Breakdown" (Klaus Georgi; Germany; Audience Award--
               Stuttgart International Animation Festival; 3:25): This is a
               short little blackout sketch that may or may not have an anti-
               government sentiment.  It does not work very well on the most
               obvious level.  Rating: good.

             - "Arnold Rides a Chair" (Craig Bartlett; U. S. A.; 1:00): This
               is a very short piece done for "Sesame Street," though Arnold
               seems to be dressed in the uniform and cap of an English
               school.  Also, Arnold looks a little half-witted, which works
               against the point.  Arnold sits in his chair and imagines it
               takes him to a magical land.  Rating: good.

             - "The Lift" (Alexander Tatarsky/Pilot Studios; U. S. S. R.;
               First prize--Hiroshima Animation Festival; 9:00): One of the
               more amusing pieces of the _T_o_u_r_n_e_e is for the U.S.S.R.,
               surprisingly.  I say "surprisingly" because it has been
               suggested that the Soviet Union's only Twentieth Century sense
               of humor left the country with Yacov Smirnov.  This is a set of
               short and often fairly funny blackout sketches seen from the
               inside of an elevator.  Each time the doors open we see one of
               the six or seven pieces.  Rating: fair.

             - "I Should See" (Paul & Menno de Noojier; Holland; 2:00): This
               is more of the same things the de Noojiers did with "At One
               View."  Not very interesting this time around.  Rating: fair.

             - "Photocopy Cha-Cha" (Chel White; U. S. A.; First Prize--USA
               Film Festival; 3:30): Everything here is made on a photocopy
               machine.  This is an entirely new technique in animation and in
               210 seconds we see this new medium pioneered, mature, and
               become over-used and finally exploitative.  Now that this
               medium has been fully explored, new filmmakers can move on to
               something else.  Rating: fair.

             - "The Potato Hunter" (Timothy Hittle; U. S. A.; Most Popular
               Film--Seattle Film Festival; 7:11): A little man, animated in











          23rd Int.Tour.Animation  September 16, 1991                   Page 3



               clay, lives a life like a lone American Indian, hunting the
               herds of buffalo-like wild potatoes.  It is, of course, a
               dangerous life battling these huge and mean potato beasts.  You
               can never be sure when a tormented tuber will turn on you.
               This one is quite enjoyable and one of the better pieces, even
               if it is reminiscent of a film done several years ago about a
               fork catching wild peas.  Rating: very good.

             - "Slow Bob in the Lower Dimensions" (Henry Selick; U. S. A.;
               5:30): A three-legged girl with two heads looks through a
               keyhole to see Slow Bob go off on a weird adventure that does
               not make a whole lot of sense.  There are more weird images
               than logic, well-suited to MTV (for which it was made).
               Rating: fair.

             - "Capital P" (Stephen Barnes; Canada; 3:30): Probably the best
               piece in the _T_o_u_r_n_e_e is a contribution from Canada.  "Capital
               P" brings back all those terrors we felt as children and have
               since forgotten.  Our only character is a little boy who on a
               dark and stormy night must walk down a long and scary corridor
               to get to a toilet.  It walks a very fine line between comedy
               and horror.  Rating: very good.

             - Luxo Jr. in "Light & Heavy" and "Surprise" (John Lasseter &
               Andrew Stanton/PIXAR; U. S. A.; 1:15): [Personal note: This is
               the first time I have ever reviewed the work of an actual
               acquaintance.  Many of you on Usenet will recognize the name of
               Craig Good.  I was even fortunate enough to have dinner with
               him after he saw for the first time _W_h_o _F_r_a_m_e_d _R_o_g_e_r _R_a_b_b_i_t?  I
               would have liked to have been more positive here.]  This piece
               was done for "Sesame Street" and is intended to teach basic
               concepts of reality to children.  Those of us who already know
               the difference between "light" and "heavy" will find this fare
               pretty light.  "Luxo, Jr." a previous effort, entertained
               mostly because of its technique.  "Light & Heavy" just repeats
               that technique.  I think this piece was appropriate for "Sesame
               Street" but not entirely appropriate for the _T_o_u_r_n_e_e.  I think
               that is more a reflection on the people who did the choosing
               than it is on the piece itself.  Rating: fair.

             - "Oral Hygiene" (David Fain; U. S. A.; Winner--Sinking Creek
               Film Festival; 3:17): This is a fairly funny piece of tongue-
               in-cheek about teeth.  It is essentially a music video for
               ... well ... oral hygiene.  It will show you several good
               reasons to keep your teeth clean, saving the best for last.
               Rating: good.

             - "The Wrong Type" (Candy Guard; U. K.; 4:14): Candy Guard
               features what sound like very ordinary people in very ordinary
               situations and then draws bird-like people (or perhaps just
               people with huge noses) as her characters.  Several of her











          23rd Int.Tour.Animation  September 16, 1991                   Page 4



               pieces showed up in the _B_r_i_t_i_s_h _A_n_i_m_a_t_i_o_n _I_n_v_a_s_i_o_n.  This one
               deals with a woman failing to learn to type and failing to hold
               onto a good job as a result.  Rating: good.

             - "Ode to G. I. Joe" (Gregory Grant; U. S. A.; Student Academy
               Award Winner; 4:55): The title is the cleverest thing about
               this stop-motion story of toy G. I. Joe dolls having a party
               and dancing. The same dancing was a lot funnier in "Electric
               Funky Disco Chicken." It combines that with the old idea that
               toys are only themselves when nobody is around.  That one goes
               back at least as far as "The Gingham Doll and the Calico Cat."
               Rating: fair.

             - "Grey Wolf & Little Red Riding Hood" (Garri Bardin; U. S. S.
               R.; Grand Prize--Annecy International Animation Festival;
               22:00): This is about the longest piece I have seen in a
               _T_o_u_r_n_e_e.  It is a retelling of a fairy tale (guess which
               one!) as a sort of elliptical allegory.  What it is
               allegorizing is less clear, though these days it is safe to
               guess it is anti-totalitarianism.  Little Red Riding Hood (who
               is _n_o_t a Little Red) wants to take a Russian pie to Paris.  The
               wolf wants to eat Riding Hood.  Riding Hood sings a Russian
               song.  The wolf sings a charming "Mack the Knife."  It is all
               reasonably enjoyable to watch, but the political message is
               muddled and open to conjecture.  Rating: good.

             - "Push Comes to Shove" (Bill Plympton; U. S. A.; Best Short--
               Cannes Film Festival; 4:41): Bill Plympton's blackouts often
               are funny.  This set of blackouts did not appeal and has a sort
               of "Three Stooges" quality.  Two stodgy-looking men take turns
               doing violent things to each other.  The victim just stands by
               passively and lets the violence be done.  Then he retaliates
               while the first stands by stoically.  The sort of attack is one
               drops a cat and mouse inside the victim's mouth and they fight
               it out inside the victim's head.  It all does build up to a
               point, albeit a banal one.  Rating: fair.

               Overall, I would have to say this was a below average _T_o_u_r_n_e_e.
          Rumor has it that the _F_e_s_t_i_v_a_l _o_f _A_n_i_m_a_t_i_o_n _1_9_9_1 is better and I
          will be seeing that soon.


























                                      BARTON FINK
                            A film review by Mark R. Leeper
                             Copyright 1991 Mark R. Leeper



                    Capsule review:  Very strange but supremely
               well-crafted film from Joel and Ethan Coen.  The Coen
               Brothers have the best batting average in Hollywood.
               They have made four films and each of the four is
               highly recommended.  During a bout of writer's block
               (which they obviously got over) writing _M_i_l_l_e_r'_s
               _C_r_o_s_s_i_n_g they wrote this strange film about a young
               playwright facing writer's block in Hollywood.  Great
               performances, great photography, strange film.
               Rating: +3 (-4 to +4).  (Spoiler follows the main
               body of this review.)

               Joel and Ethan Coen have managed to do what no other American
          film makers have been able to do.  Even Woody Allen turns out the
          occasional misfire.  Allen is extremely creative and the really
          creative take chances.  Sometimes they win, sometimes they lose.
          The Coen Brothers have made four films: _B_l_o_o_d _S_i_m_p_l_e, _R_a_i_s_i_n_g
          _A_r_i_z_o_n_a, _M_i_l_l_e_r'_s _C_r_o_s_s_i_n_g, and now _B_a_r_t_o_n _F_i_n_k.  Each has been a
          totally original film and each has been spell-binding.  They have
          made four winners out of four.  If they made _T_e_x_a_s _C_h_a_i_n_s_a_w _M_a_s_s_a_c_r_e
          _6, every tuxedoed film critic in the country would be waiting in
          hushed excitement to see _T_e_x_a_s _C_h_a_i_n_s_a_w _M_a_s_s_a_c_r_e _6.  Well, the
          concept of a chainsaw film at least sounds like it might have some
          action.  But the idea of a comedy-drama about writer's block sounds
          like it is asking too much of even the Coen Brothers.  What could be
          less cinematic than writer's block?  It is something that is
          internal and creates no visual sparks for the viewer.  Well, believe
          it or not, the Coen Brothers have made a fascinating and
          entertaining film about writer's block.

               In the early 1940s, a great new social playwright, Barton Fink
          (played by John Turturro) has had his first play produced.  It is a
          moving story about the sort of fishmongers he saw around his home on
          Fulton Street in New York.  For a moment he has fame and that is
          just what he does not need.  A Hollywood studio chief who has never
          seen his play wants the status of having Fink writing his pictures.
          With the force of big money he plucks Fink out of New York and lays
          him down in Hollywood.  Fink has a tremendous fire in his belly to
          help humanity ("What do you do for a living?"  "I try to make a
          difference.").  But instead of a social drama he is given the task
          of writing a wrestling film for Wallace Beery, much like Clifford
          Odets wrote _G_o_l_d_e_n _B_o_y.

               Fink looks at Hollywood like a baby looking through the bars of
          a crib, with a combination of amazement and a lack of comprehension.











          Barton Fink              September 18, 1991                   Page 2



          It was as if he had suddenly been transported to another world.  So
          that he will not lose touch with the common man he decides not to
          stay in glitzy Hollywood hotels, but at the economical and just
          slightly sleezy Hotel Earle.  The Earle is just beginning to fall
          apart and boasts a staff that looks like the living dead.  There in
          his room Fink sits trying to write a great film to make a difference
          for the common man--which will also be a wrestling picture for
          Wallace Beery.

               One paragraph comes out of his typewriter and then nothing.
          His overwhelming drive to write is blocked by a symphony of
          minutiae.  His room seems to become a living breathing creature.
          Some law of conservation maintains always exactly one mosquito in
          the room. The walls digest the glue that holds on the wallpaper.
          Then there is Charlie Meadows.  John Goodman plays Charlie Meadows,
          who starts as a distraction, a noisy neighbor, and becomes Barton's
          only friend and confidante.  Barton writes about the common man, but
          we get the feeling he has never really known one, in spite of his
          Fulton Street origins.  Barton's play was literary and eloquent, but
          not very realistic.  Charlie _i_s the common man.  The two make a
          stark contrast.  Barton pulls everything he has inward in a tighter
          and tighter ball--even his hair seems tense.  In contrast, Charlie
          lets everything out.  He is outspoken; he oozes sweat and
          occasionally pus.  His belly bulges and casually rolls out and over
          the top of his pants.  And Barton is fascinated by the casual,
          unashamed animalness of his new friend.  The scene shifts from his
          hours in the hotel trying to write and talking to Charlie to the
          weird alien world of the Hollywood studio.  The studio life is
          back-stabbing politics (it is Barton's bad luck that the studio boss
          likes him, we are told and later come to believe).  At the studio we
          meet weird people with whom Barton hilariously fails to connect.
          And Barton meets W. P. Mayhew, one of America's great writers, who
          has in recent years been sucked dry by Hollywood like a fly in a
          spider web.  He meets and is attracted to Audrey Taylor, Mayhew's
          highly personal secretary.  And thereby hangs a tale.

               Many of the faces in _B_a_r_t_o_n _F_i_n_k will be familiar to most
          viewers.  Turturro is here in his second Coen Brothers film.  His
          role as Bernie in their _M_i_l_l_e_r'_s _C_r_o_s_s_i_n_g will probably be the one
          for which he will be best remembered in years to come, though this
          performance probably equals that one.  Another respected film maker,
          Spike Lee, has featured Turturro in no less than three films.  John
          Goodman is also a repeat Coen Brothers actor, having played Gale
          Snopes in _R_a_i_s_i_n_g _A_r_i_z_o_n_a.  He is, of course, well known for
          theater, film, and television work.  Michael Lerner and John Polito
          (the latter of _M_i_l_l_e_r'_s _C_r_o_s_s_i_n_g) are incredibly boorish and weird
          as the studio chief and his favorite yes-man.  Judy Davis of _M_y
          _B_r_i_l_l_i_a_n_t _C_a_r_e_e_r, _A _P_a_s_s_a_g_e _t_o _I_n_d_i_a, and the recent _I_m_p_r_o_m_p_t_u plays
          Audrey Taylor.













          Barton Fink              September 18, 1991                   Page 3



               Coen Brothers' films are strong on good dialogue, but they also
          have a marvelous visual style that perfectly creates an atmosphere.
          As with _M_i_l_l_e_r'_s _C_r_o_s_s_i_n_g, their period feel in _B_a_r_t_o_n _F_i_n_k is
          almost too rich to be believed.  Here they bring us a  sepia-toned
          1940s worlds.  The credits are shown over brown 1940s wallpaper that
          prepares us for the claustrophobic story to come.  When we see the
          hotel room itself, it is decorated with perfectly placed slabs of
          light--sunlight reflected off dust in the air.  It is a pleasure to
          watch a film as carefully crafted as this one.  Peculiarly, there is
          one very bad continuity error and one it is hard to imagine was
          missed in the editing.  Toward the end of the film we see a man in a
          military uniform.  The ribbons on his chest seem securely in place
          and falling off in alternate shots.  That one surprising fluff
          aside, this film is a visual marvel.  Academy Awards are really
          deserved here.

               _B_a_r_t_o_n _F_i_n_k really is the best new film I have seen this year
          and well worth seeing.  I give it a +3 on the -4 to +4 scale.

               [SPOILERS FOLLOW.]

               My first reaction after seeing Barton Fink was that watching
          this film was like watching an expert gymnast on a trampoline who
          jumped just perfectly but came down wrong.  When this story seems to
          be slowing down late in the film, it is only to allow it to make an
          acute left turn, one shockingly unexpected.  On consideration, I
          think that is a sort of self-referential touch.  The most common and
          banal of genres in Hollywood today is the psychotic killer film.
          _B_a_r_t_o_n _F_i_n_k is a psycho-killer film as it would have been written by
          Barton Fink.  Fink knew he was writing a wrestling film all along
          but kept the wrestling to a minimum and even then wanted to do a
          different take on wrestling.  That is just what the Coen Brothers do
          with the psycho-killer plot.  Alfred Hitchcock showed a psycho-
          killer film could become a genuine classic.  It took the Coen
          Brothers to make one good enough to win the Golden Palm at Cannes.































                         SPECTREWORLD by Isadore Haiblum
                      Avon, 1991, ISBN 0-380-75858-X, $3.95.
                        A book review by Evelyn C. Leeper
                         Copyright 1991 Evelyn C. Leeper



            There is no evidence on the cover that this book is a sequel or
       part of a series, but it certainly reads like one.  Characters are
       introduced as if we had met them before, and halfway through the
       novel a totally bizarre invention shows up which is either a very
       bad example of _d_e_u_s _e_x _m_a_c_h_i_n_a or something from a previous novel.
       (I had this awful feeling it was the former, but actually it was the
       latter; shortly after finishing _S_p_e_c_t_r_e_w_o_r_l_d and a first draft of
       this review I went to Chicon V and ran across _I_n_t_e_r_w_o_r_l_d at a used
       book dealer's table.  _S_p_e_c_t_r_e_w_o_r_l_d is the sequel to _I_n_t_e_r_w_o_r_l_d which
       is, naturally, out of print.)

            The story itself is a hard-boiled detective yarn, though in
       this case the detective is actually the head of a robotic security
       force.  Someone is attacking all the sites they guard and the robots
       turn out to be fairly useless, being mostly cowards who seem
       remarkably like Marvin of _T_h_e _H_i_t_c_h_h_i_k_e_r'_s _G_u_i_d_e _t_o _t_h_e _G_a_l_a_x_y.  It
       turns out that this is all leading to an attack from parallel
       universes, but given the bizarre Balkanization of our own into rival
       city-states, this twist seems superfluous by the time it is
       introduced (along with the aforementioned invention allowing travel
       between universes).

            I really wanted to like this book.  But the annoying robot
       portrayals, combined with my having come into this series in the
       middle, prevented me.

            (I would like to mention a note placed on the copyright page
       stating that if you bought this book without a cover, you were
       purchasing stolen property.  Whether this will cut into coverless
       book sales remains to be seen, but at least it is informing more
       people--I hesitate to say "the average reader"--about where
       coverless books come from.  I have since seen at least one other
       publisher put in a similar notice, so this could be a new trend.)


























                                     Chicon V 1991
                             Con report by Evelyn C. Leeper
                            Copyright 1991 Evelyn C. Leeper


                                     (Part 1 of 3)

               Chicon V, the 1991 World Science Fiction Convention, was held
          August 29 through September 2 in Chicago, Illinois.  The attendance
          was quoted to me by Registration as approximately 5500, with a
          registration of about 6400.  This is just a rough estimate; at no
          time did the convention newsletter announce the figures, nor did the
          information desk have any idea, and other sources have claimed that
          only half of the 5200 pre-registered members attended, plus 400 at-
          the-door members (totaling 3000, for the mathematically impaired).
          The latter figure sounds far too low, but the state of the economy
          certainly made a dent in attendance.  (And in sales--Andy Porter
          said that I was the only person to buy a _t_w_o-year subscription to
          _S_c_i_e_n_c_e _F_i_c_t_i_o_n _C_h_r_o_n_i_c_l_e rather than a one-year.)  The lack of
          information is a far cry from last year's convention when the
          statistics by country were in the daily newsletter.  The European
          contingent was much less in evidence than at last year's convention
          in the Hague, which shouldn't surprise anyone.  One attendee from
          the U.S.S.R. said he left there the day of the coup and in fact
          spent the first night of the coup in the Moscow airport.  The
          U.S.S.R. fan table was selling science fiction buttons and also old
          Lenin and Communist lapel pins.  I think everyone is trying to
          unload those.

               We arrived in Chicago Wednesday morning and spent Wednesday
          afternoon at the Oriental Institute and the Museum of Science and
          Industry, as well as in a couple of bookstores.  Thursday morning
          was the Field Museum of Natural History.  However, I will confine my
          description to the convention itself.  But I will mention that the
          "five blocks" mentioned in the progress reports from the rapid
          transit to the hotel was really eight--directions should be double-
          checked and miles or kilometers are a much more universal measure.

                                       Facilities

               The convention facilities were quite reasonable.  I don't know
          about the overflow hotels, but the two main hotels and main
          convention facilities were all connected by tunnels, malls, etc.,
          meaning one never had to go outside.  (As someone pointed out, the
          domed city of the future _h_a_s arrived.)  If you did go out, there
          were many restaurants within a fifteen-minute walk, so even though
          most of the mall's restaurants were closed Sunday and Monday, there
          was no problem eating.

               My only major complaint would be that a ballroom was used for
          the masquerade and the Hugo ceremony rather than a theater-type room











          Chicon V                 September 1, 1991                    Page 2



          (which provides much better visibility).  Yes, the two were
          broadcast into the sleeping rooms in the Hyatt, but I sort of felt
          obliged to be physically present at the Hugo ceremony. :-)  Having
          the events broadcast is a good idea; the line waiting for the
          masquerade Saturday night convinced me I didn't want to stand in it
          to see the masquerade and so I could go back to my room and watch in
          comfort.  But more about the masquerade later.

               Another complaint was that although the Dealers' Room and Art
          Show adjoined, the connection was blocked off (except for
          handicapped access) and to get from one to the other required going
          up an escalator, down a hallway, through the main programming area,
          and down another escalator.  The plus side was that the Art Show was
          easy to get to from the programming, which may have helped boost
          attendance.

                                      Registration

               We registered Wednesday night and got our Program Books and
          Pocket Programs.  Chicon used the now-standard technique of putting
          program participants' schedules on labels on the backs of their
          badges, but for some reason did not have ribbons for Hugo nominees
          (and the pins weren't available until the next day).  Staff and
          program participants both had red ribbons; dealers and artists both
          had green.  Staff had red borders on their badges instead of white,
          but it was still confusing.

               Registration managed to run out of Program Books for several
          hours on Thursday (the books were locked away somewhere), and
          friends said the procedure was somewhat slow.

               Other odds and ends: the badges had clips only--no pins.  This
          is fine for shirts with pockets or lapels, but not so great on T-
          shirts.  The newsletters were late--Thursday's came out between
          midnight and 3 AM Friday morning and was gone from most spots by 10
          AM.  Even skipping one of the issues in an attempt to catch up
          didn't help.  The drop-off points seemed to be at the freebie tables
          which were quite a ways away from all the programming, etc. (though
          near the Con Suite) and mixed in amongst all sorts of other flyers
          which were on high counters wrapped around pillars in registration,
          high enough that I couldn't just glance over but had to make a real
          effort to see what was what.

               There were lots of flyers on the freebie tables, but the days
          of freebie books and magazines seems largely to have passed, no
          doubt a victim of the current economic conditions.

                                     Program Books

               The Pocket Program, though done by computer, had no index by
          participant.  (Funny how something can become expected only two











          Chicon V                 September 1, 1991                    Page 3



          years after its introduction.  This was specifically mentioned in
          last year's gripe session and ConFiction's excuse was a database
          crash shortly before the convention.  Wasn't Chicon listening?)  In
          keeping with last year's convention, the descriptions of the various
          panels were not in the Pocket Program, though at least the titles
          were a bit more descriptive than last year.  The descriptions in the
          Program Book were not in alphabetical order, but in semi-
          chronological order(!), making it almost impossible to find a
          description for a given panel, or the time when an interesting
          sounding would happen.  And, of course, since the Program Book went
          to press a while ago, some of the described panels had been canceled
          and others added in the interim.

               In addition, there were other, more substantive errors.  The
          "Phantom of the Opera" panel was listed as "literary" in the Pocket
          Program, but its description in the Program Book made it clear it
          was intended as "media" (about the Lloyd Webber play, of course)--or
          at least that's what the Programming Staff thought.  Of course, even
          there, it was listed as "illusion" (the only item on the "illusion"
          track, in fact).  When I got to the panel, it turned out that they
          didn't understand the description at all ("The play-within-a-play
          philosophy of the show and its SFX, physical (real) and
          psychological"), so it turned out to be somewhat about the book
          after all.  Of course, one panelist wanted to talk about the many
          versions, several about the many different Lloyd Webber versions
          only, and one was on because he knew about the special effects in
          one production!  But more of that later.

               On the plus side, all major tracks were collated within the
          Pocket Program (unlike last year, when there was no easy way to see
          the primary track and the secondary tracks side by side); only
          children's programming and gaming were separately listed.  Most
          items occurred as scheduled, though items scheduled for two of the
          six sections of the main ballroom for Saturday and Sunday had to be
          canceled or moved when those sections were "commandeered" for
          technical run-throughs of the masquerade and Hugo ceremonies.

               On the other hand, some people thought there were more problems
          with scheduling, cancellations, and maps than I did:  Alayne
          McGregor asked, "Has anyone else noted the similarities between
          Connie Willis' story 'At the Rialto' and the meeting room
          assignments at Chicon?  I'm thinking particularly of the
          disappearing L2 floor in the Swissotel."

               The maps were adequate, though the print was very tiny, and the
          connecting path between the two main hotels not shown.

                                       Green Room

               The Green Room at Chicon was perhaps the convention's worst
          feature (though the masquerade runs a close second).  It seemed to











          Chicon V                 September 1, 1991                    Page 4



          in the morning; at no time after 10 AM could one find all three of
          lack everything a Green Room needs: a complete schedule, an informed
          staff, refreshments, organization.  Coffee was set out first thing
          coffee, cups, and cream (though sometimes you could get two out of
          three).  When one participant told the staffer there were only two
          cans of soda left in the tub, the staffer brought out _o_n_e six-pack
          of cola!  (Consider that there were supposed to be a couple of dozen
          people in there each hour preparing for panels, as well as the usual
          other participants looking for a quiet place to think.)  The Con
          Suite, on the other hand, was amazing well stocked.  If they had
          just brought some of the stuff from there....  (I'm all for giving
          the convention at large the goodies rather than hoarding them for
          the participants, but when I arrived for a late-night panel and
          couldn't get a cup of coffee to improve my alertness level while con
          goers in the Con Suite were sucking down the suds non-stop, I think
          that's carrying it a bit far.)

               There was no master schedule indicating what panels were when
          or where (O NESFA, where are you when we need you?), and the staff
          said that wasn't their bailiwick--ask program operations (in a
          different, locked room).  Name cards also came directly to the rooms
          from program operations, so it was always in doubt whether they
          would arrive either.  (They were nice name cards though.)

                                     Dealers' Room

               The Dealers' Room (a.k.a., the Hucksters' Room) was very large,
          with a lot of books, but also a lot of non-books.  Most of what I
          found, though, was for friends rather than off my own want list--
          maybe I'm just too selective or something.  It was somewhat off the
          beaten path, being a level down from the Hyatt programming and two
          levels down from the connecting corridor between the two parts of
          the Hyatt, but it was centrally located rather than off to one end.
          The aisles were large enough that you could walk around (and
          wheelchairs could negotiate as well).  I found one book I was
          looking for, but it was $100.

               Someone pointed out that the index to the Dealers' Room was by
          dealer's name, not by business' name, so you couldn't look up
          "Hippogriff, Inc.,"--you needed to know it was owned by "Wu,
          Juanita."  (I made these names up as examples--can't you tell?)

                                        Art Show

               Many people liked the art show a lot.  I found that as usual,
          there was too much cutesy fantasy and "humor" for my tastes (maybe
          they should set aside a separate area for Star Trek cartoons with
          punch-line captions, and then I won't go there).  The room was large
          enough though, and it was possible to see the art without tripping
          over everyone else.  The bidding seemed very light (the economy
          strikes again!) and the auction scheduled for Saturday was cancelled
          (but that may have been because of the function space muck-ups--see
          my comments under "Programming").









          Chicon V                 September 1, 1991                    Page 5



                                 Con Suite and Exhibits

               As I said before, the Con Suite was well stocked with soda and
          beer, as well as chips, pretzels, and popcorn.  They sometimes had
          coffee, and occasionally brought in surprise treats (petit fours and
          such).  It was, however, noisy, crowded, and pretty messy--which
          probably means it was a success.  Rumor has it that the free beer in
          the Con Suite kept the crowds down at the open parties.

               The exhibits (History of World Bidding, SF Around the World,
          and History of the Worldcon) were down the escalator from the Con
          Suite, near the bidding tables.  The Message Board was conveniently
          located near the main programming area.

                                      Programming

               Given that it's impossible to see everything at a Worldcon, I
          will cover just the programming I attended.  I hope I got all the
          panelists right, but I foolishly failed to write down the names in
          the rooms, trusting I could get them from the Program Book later.
          Bad move--I _k_n_o_w the "Phantom" panel had closer to seven people than
          the four listed in the book.

               For comparison, the Pocket Program lists about 520 program
          items, while ConFiction had 337 and Noreascon 3 had 833, not
          counting films or autograph sessions.  The breakdown by type would
          be roughly 25% readings (123) (honest!), 20% science (102), 17%
          literary (90), 15% art (73), and the rest distributed among fan
          (29), academic (18), filk (14), costuming (13), late night (12),
          media (11), cities (8), and trivia (3), as well as WSFS, SFWA, and
          other meetings, various ceremonies, and other special events.

               There were also 86 films and a full schedule of television
          programs in their television retrospective (which claimed to have an
          episode from every televised science fiction show--it didn't, but it
          was very close).

               By the way, this analysis would not be possible (or would be
          much more difficult) without the help of Bill Higgins, who sent out
          an electronic copy of the schedule to people a week before the
          convention.  Thanks, Bill!

                                   Opening Ceremonies
                                     Thursday, 3 PM

               These were well-attended, but considerably less classy than
          last year's (when classical music was played as a platform rose from
          below the stage revealing the Guests of Honor).  Instead, they
          decided to do the whole thing in a very large ballroom with no
          microphones (or only one badly placed microphone).  They may have
          tested the acoustics first, but what may have been audible from the











          Chicon V                 September 1, 1991                    Page 6



          back of an empty, silent room was inaudible even part way back in a
          room full of moving, talking fans.  Since the visual part consisted
          of half-naked men carrying people in on litters, I decided to leave
          early.

           Panel: SSSSeeeeeeee YYYYoooouuuu oooonnnn tttthhhheeee NNNNeeeetttt:::: CCCCoooommmmppppuuuutttteeeerrrr CCCCoooommmmmmmmuuuunnnniiiittttiiiieeeessss TTTTooooddddaaaayyyy aaaannnndddd TTTToooommmmoooorrrrrrrroooowwww
                                     Thursday, 5 PM
             Evelyn Leeper (moderator), Chris Dunn, Michael Kube-McDowell,
                    Robert Sawyer, Clifford Stoll, Chuq Von Rospach

               Official Description: "Thanks to computer networks, millions
          now participate in social and professional exchanges using
          electronic mail.  What effect is this having on society?  What will
          happen when the Net is available to almost everybody?"

               I was the moderator of this and had contacted most of the
          panelists ahead of time (via electronic mail, of course), but was a
          bit worried when four of the five panelists hadn't checked in
          shortly before the panel and three didn't show up in the Green Room.
          When we arrived at the room, two of the three missing panelists were
          there, and Chuq Von Rospach had already sent his regrets because he
          was arriving too late.  Well, we were (mostly) all there, but the
          microphone wasn't working.  I announced finally that the loudest
          panelists would introduce themselves while we waited for the
          microphone to get fixed.  Someone called out to me, "Use the mike!"
          so I grabbed the dead microphone, lifted it to my mouth, and said
          loudly, "Okay.  Is this any better?" which got a big laugh.  This
          helped put me much more at ease about moderating a panel.

               Well, eventually we got everything working and proceeded with
          the panel.  Though the description said we would be discussing what
          happened when almost everyone had Net access, we agreed this was
          unlikely on a global scale--most people don't even have telephones
          (or television).  But we thought it likely that most people who have
          things like VCRs today would have Net access soon.  Stoll described
          the Net as being populated by people "all the way from chemists to
          physicists" (which reminded me of "she runs the gamut of emotions
          from A to B").  This got a laugh--Stoll seemed to have intended it
          seriously--but it isn't far off in the sense that people with Net
          access do form a less than totally diverse class (just as the
          literate did several hundred years ago).  Even the non-scientists
          among them tend to embrace science and technology rather than reject
          them.  Within this subclass, however, there is a diversity of
          personalities, cultures, and perspectives.  We agreed that one of
          the advantages of the Net is how it provides the ability to
          communicate with all sorts of people all over the world.  (The
          telephone doesn't do that, especially considering the time
          differential--when _d_o you call someone ten time zones away?  And the
          telephone is intrusive, while bulletin boards and electronic mail
          wait for you.  The postal service is too slow, and neither the
          postal service nor the telephone has the broadcast capabilities for











          Chicon V                 September 1, 1991                    Page 7



          you to meet these people in the first place.)  Stoll, for example,
          said he received 10,000 to 20,000 messages in response to his book
          _T_h_e _C_u_c_k_o_o'_s _E_g_g.

               Wider Net access, then, would seem to imply fewer voice phone
          calls (though more data calls), and fewer pieces of paper mail (even
          now, fax is cutting into this area).  By not having to handle paper,
          more information can be transmitted faster.  For example, Mark and I
          do a weekly fanzine with an average of 6 pages a week and a
          distribution of over two hundred.  On paper, this would involve
          collating, stapling, mailing, etc.  Electronically, it's much
          easier, not to mention the trees being saved.  And for those who
          want a paper copy, they can print it at their end rather than our
          having to mail the paper.  Saul Jaffe does three issues of _S_F-_L_o_v_e_r_s
          _D_i_g_e_s_t a _d_a_y, a number I think would be impossible if he had to
          print them, especially considering its circulation.  (By the way,
          Nick Simicich (scifi.uucp) has announced a general availability
          service for _S_F-_L_o_v_e_r_s _D_i_g_e_s_t; he will send you paper copies of the
          digest for postage and copying fees; send a check of at least US$10
          to Nick Simicich, P.O. Box 1214, Peekskill, NY 10566 USA and he will
          send you the Digest until your account runs out.  Non-USA residents
          should send at least US$20.  Get further details from him.)

               Given the conclusion that Net access would not be universal
          soon, we talked more about the pros and cons of life on the Net now,
          along with some problems of scale.  As you might expect, all this
          has its bad side too.  The Net can be a real time sink, especially
          for authors making their own schedules (according to Kube-McDowell).
          And the quantity of data--particularly on the unmoderated part of
          Usenet--can be overwhelming, or as Stoll put it, "a firehose in
          [your] eyes."  Were this all useful data, it would be bad enough,
          but the signal-to-noise ratio is nearer 10% than 100% (some might
          say 1% is even closer).

               In addition, the relative anonymity of the Net makes "flaming"
          (violent or abusive criticism of an individual) easier.  Even the
          traditional print media include a columnist's picture at the top of
          a column or an author's photograph on a dust jacket.  This serves to
          make the author a person and probably tones down the sorts of
          letters received.  The Net has no such capability yet.  (One can
          transmit pictures, but not easily and not in a format everyone can
          use.)  But every cloud has a silver lining and this lack of visual
          cues also makes the Net very egalitarian.  Age, race, sex, handicap-
          --all are unknown (many users use "handles" similar to CB radio that
          conceal any clues a name might give.).

               However, before we all become one big happy Net community, we
          still have to overcome a few obstacles, such as multiple
          inconsistent and incompatible networks (people on GEnie can't send
          electronic mail to people on the Internet, and vice versa) and what
          one person described as "lousy user interfaces."  In regard to the











          Chicon V                 September 1, 1991                    Page 8



          latter, Stoll said his biggest problem was that he used six
          different networks, each with a different interface.  An analogous
          situation would be if you owned six VCRs, three Beta and three VHS,
          and all had different ways to program and use them.  (Come to think
          of it, that's not far off the mark.  We have three: one requires
          on-screen programming, one has both on- and off-screen, and one uses
          a display screen in the hand-held control.  One has a timer button;
          the other two use the on-off button to activate the timer.  On one
          (two?) a second press of the fast-forward button returns the tape to
          normal speed; on the other(s) you need to press the play button.
          And so on.)

               Of the three hundred or so in the audience, about 60% had
          "free" access to networks through school or work and about 60% used
          a pay network such as CompuServe or GEnie.  Obviously some had both-
          --20%, since everyone seemed to be hooked up somehow.  This was not
          the case at all panels, though, and a convention with a lot of
          programming about networking might do well to schedule a "Electronic
          Networks 101" panel early on to define such terms as "modem,"
          "bulletin board," "sys op," and so on.

               It must be mentioned that whatever the limitations of
          networking may be, the Internet and Usenet were instrumental in
          helping defeat the recent coup attempt in the Soviet Union, so
          networking affects even those who are not directly hooked in.

                    Panel: HHHHoooowwww ttttoooo UUUUnnnnffffaaaaiiiirrrrllllyyyy JJJJuuuuddddggggeeee aaaa BBBBooooooookkkk bbbbyyyy PPPPaaaaggggeeee 111111117777
                                    Thursday, 11 PM
               Theresa Nielsen-Hayden (mod), Evelyn Leeper, Laurie Mann,
              K. Massie-Ferch, Robert Reed, Amy Thomson, Chuq Von Rospach

               Official Description: "Would your favorite novel hold up if you
          judged it by the first page?  How about page 117"  (By the way, this
          description appeared on page 117 of the Program Book!)

               There was some discussion beforehand about whether the title
          meant judging a book on the basis of what was _o_n page 117 or what
          was up to and including page 117.  Luckily one person had been on
          the original Readercon panel which inspired this and was able to
          confirm it was the former.  The technique used was to read all of
          page 117 of a book and then let the audience and panelists make
          observations about the book: category, quality, etc.  The fact that
          none of the six of us (alas, I cannot remember which of Massie-
          Ferch, Reed, or Thomson was not present) had a book with us meant
          that we had to borrow books from friends in the audience.  We
          started with a couple of mysteries, William Marshall's _T_h_e _F_a_r_a_w_a_y
          _M_a_n and Sara Paretsky's _I_n_d_e_m_n_i_t_y _O_n_l_y.  Next was Dave Wolverton's
          _S_e_r_p_e_n_t _C_a_t_c_h, which did not fare as well in the quality area.  I
          think it was the reference to the Mastodon Men that lost it points.
          (This was lent to me by a friend whose name will be concealed to
          protect the innocent--he bought it in the airport and decided early











          Chicon V                 September 1, 1991                    Page 9



          on it was pretty bad.)  After I returned home I read that Wolverton
          had just handed in the _s_e_c_o_n_d _h_a_l_f of the novel--not a sequel--to be
          published soon.  I wonder if this was the book that Budrys was
          talking about in his recent _F&_S_F column.

               Then came Eluki bes Shahar's _H_e_l_l_f_l_o_w_e_r, written in an odd
          mixture of high-flown language and colloquial dialogue.  Full of
          words such as "baldric," it prompted me to reminisce that when I was
          in school we used to get twenty "Word Wealth" words a week and we
          had to write a story using all of them--I hadn't realized these
          stories were getting published now.

               Jennifer Roberson's _S_w_o_r_d-_B_r_e_a_k_e_r was described as reading like
          a high school production of a Shakespeare play, or as Theresa
          Nielsen-Hayden described it, it had too many speeches of the type "I
          say thee, nope!"

               The question of whether all this was a valid way to judge a
          book was raised.  The consensus was that you have to have some way
          to judge a book in the bookstore (unless you have infinite money to
          buy everything and infinite time to read it) and that page 117 was
          at least as reliable as trusting the cover blurbs or the critic's
          quotes.  I pointed out that this method was only valid with novels,
          not with non-fiction and not with anthologies or collections.  We
          suggested that if page 117 looked bad, pick another page at random;
          assuming that page 117 is about one-third of the way through, try
          one at about 234 or so.  I said that there was a series that started
          out good, but by book seven or so I could pick up a volume, read ten
          pages at random, and not find the plot being advanced on any of
          them.  (After the audience tried unsuccessfully to guess the series,
          I admitted it was John Norman's "Gor" series.)

             Panel: PPPPrrrroooojjjjeeeecccctttt CCCCaaaannnncccceeeelllllllleeeedddd:::: GGGGlllloooorrrriiiioooouuuussss TTTTeeeecccchhhhiiiieeee DDDDrrrreeeeaaaammmmssss ooooffff YYYYeeeesssstttteeeerrrryyyyeeeeaaaarrrr
                                     Friday, 10 AM
                    Arlan Andrews (mod), Laurie Mann, Ken Meltsner,
                     John F. Moore, John Maddox Roberts, Dave Stein

               Official Description: "'A man's reach should exceed his grasp,
          or what's a heaven for?'  A look at what might have been, from the
          Analytical Engine to damming the Mediterranean to the nuclear
          airplane."

               The panel started by having the panelists list their "favorite"
          failed dreams--the ones they would most have liked to see come true.
          Moore stuck close to real-life projects: MISS (Man in Space Soonest)
          and a space program called "Dinosaur." Roberts said he missed
          holograms and "the city of the future" (though as someone pointed
          out, we were in it in the Illinois Center, what with the Hyatt's
          skylight lobby and the enclosed mall surrounding the hotels).
          Andrews (a former Bell Labs person) wanted fusion power, which the
          papers had said was forty years in the future.  The problem was that











          Chicon V                 September 1, 1991                   Page 10



          it was _a_l_w_a_y_s forty years in the future (though someone said that
          now they were saying it was twenty years in the future).  Meltsner
          missed robots, especially the "man-mate" sort, including a centaur-
          like one in which you stand in the front and the back half is
          robotic.  Mann, ever the activist, missed good, reliable, safe birth
          control.

               Stein yearned for walking machines (which he remembered being
          described under the slogan "Wheels Are Dead!").  Of course, the ones
          built needed a semi-trailer full of hydraulics to run and could only
          be operated by women experienced in balancing on high heels
          (probably even stiletto heels at that time).  Even then, they were
          extremely tiring to use.  All sorts of investigations were made for
          them.  For example, the walkers tended to sink into the walkways, so
          a team was sent out to study moose in the north woods and why they
          don't sink in the mud.  The answer?  The moose don't sink in the
          mud, because the moose don't walk in the mud--they walk around it.

               Other failed dreams mentioned included underwater cities
          (Stein), cities on Mars (Mann), and Arctic cities under glass.
          Meltsner mentioned cheap and efficient air travel, but said even
          cheap and efficient postal service would have been nice.  (Andrews
          wanted efficient and swift elevators.)  Meltsner also mentioned
          someone's idea to recycle manure into cattle feed, an idea that
          failed when the bad bacteria tended to overwhelm the good bacteria
          used in the process, resulting in a large, smelly mess.  Large
          atomic aircraft failed when not only did the radiation make the
          entire plane radioactive, but no one would let them land anywhere
          either.  Solar energy and artificial intelligence were also
          mentioned as dreams of yesterday that did not blossom as people
          expected.  But Mann pointed out that even though traditional AI has
          failed, almost every home has a computer (if one includes all the
          electronic watches, calculators, etc., that people of yesterday
          would certainly have called computers).  Maybe it is true: "You
          can't always get what you want, but sometimes you just might find
          that you get what you need."

               Roberts mentioned the Picturephone (is that still an AT&T
          trademark?).  Others pointed out that video-conferencing is
          basically Picturephone, and Andrews said that Picturephone itself
          was making a comeback.

               What were the panelists' techie dreams of today that they
          thought would fizzle out in the next nine years?  Moore named the
          super-conducting collider, and Stein named fusion power.  Roberts
          cited "wetware," and Meltsner thought nanotechnology in general
          would not achieve expectations.  Mann thought the biosphere
          experiment in the Southwest would not achieve its goals.  Everyone
          agreed that all these failed projects would have spin-offs that we
          couldn't even dream of now--every cloud has its silver lining.












          Chicon V                 September 1, 1991                   Page 11



               There was also a discussion of failed economic and political
          systems (I wonder why?).  That Raisa Gorbachev spent twelve years
          getting a Ph.D. in Marxist/Leninist philosophy was taken as an
          example of how the future can make obsolete political training as
          well as scientific training.  What else has appeared to fail (or
          failed to appear)?  Controlled anarchy said Stein, and Communism on
          a large scale said Mann (that's too easy, Laurie).  Moore said that
          the current breakdown of Communism seemed to be the "people
          asserting their fundamental right to kill other ethnic groups."  It
          was pointed out that the techie dream of networking was part of what
          killed the coup: the Soviet Union can't shut down just the civilian
          phone lines, because they are inter-connected with the military
          ones, so all the networking traffic couldn't be stopped.  And hand-
          held video cameras can be expected to bring about more cases such as
          that of Rodney King in Los Angeles.

               Andrews pointed out some interesting things about _S_t_a_r _T_r_e_k in
          this context.  It had been claimed to him that science fiction on
          television was making people more liberal or even libertarian, but a
          close examination of _S_t_a_r _T_r_e_k showed him that:

             - everyone works for the government,
             - everyone wears uniforms,
             - no one votes in any sort of elections,
             - there is no money, and
             - the examples of free enterprise (no pun intended) we see are
               Harry Mudd and the Ferenghi, neither held up as great examples
               to follow.

               In short, _S_t_a_r _T_r_e_k was reactionary rather than revolutionary.

               Returning briefly to the issue at hand (from which we had
          clearly drifted), two more failed techie dreams of today were
          mentioned: body sculpturing and major changes in family structures.
          Though some change in the latter area is in progress, it seems
          obvious that major changes involving the recognition of group
          marriages, marriages for a limited time period (at least officially
          recognized as that from the start), etc., are not in the near-
          future.

               The panelists' want list for future techie dreams was
          intelligent conversational computers (Stein--I suppose the
          observation that it's getting harder to find intelligent
          conversational _p_e_o_p_l_e would be considered catty), matter
          transmission (Mann--especially for transporting equipment to a con),
          decent apartment heating and a moderated Usenet (Meltsner),
          nanotechnology (Andrews--though on another panel someone said they
          wouldn't trust nanotechnology because "would you want a hardware
          crash in your pancreas?"), a weight loss pill and a baldness cure
          (Roberts), high efficiency recycling (Moore).  Moore also wanted
          involuntary education, possibly by injection, which led another











          Chicon V                 September 1, 1991                   Page 12



          panelist to comment that aside from all the civil liberties issues,
          you would have scenarios where the teacher calls the parents in and
          says, "I'm sorry, but little Billy is allergic to
          mathematics" ... and means it!

               The mention of L5 colonies led one panelist to observe that
          most of the people pushing for them, especially at conventions,
          would never qualify, because in such a small space colonists would
          need to be clean and polite.

               Afterwards, I asked if the modified SCUD missile was a failed
          techie dream of (Saddam Hussein's) yesterday.

                  Panel: FFFFaaaannnnzzzziiiinnnneeeessss oooonnnn tttthhhheeee NNNNeeeetttt???? ((((TTTThhhheeee FFFFuuuuttttuuuurrrreeee ooooffff FFFFaaaannnnzzzziiiinnnneeeessss))))
                                    Friday, 12 noon
                     Tony Ubelhor (mod), Evelyn Leeper, Dick Smith,
                          Leah Zeldes Smith, Chuq Von Rospach

               Official Description: "Alternatives to the written word for fan
          publications."

               (What a silly description!  Fanzines on the Net are done almost
          entirely in the "written word," as artwork is still difficult to
          transmit.  Of course, if they mean _r_e_a_l_l_y written, as with a pen and
          ink, no fanzine is done that way that I know of.)

               Someone on this panel referred to "organized fandom," which was
          immediately leapt upon as an oxymoron, but it seemed as if the major
          objection to fanzines on the Net was that fandom there was even less
          organized than outside the Net.  But the major obstacle to
          communicating on this panel was that the non-net people seemed to be
          talking about newsgroups, bulletin boards (BBs), special interest
          groups (SIGs), and so on--not about fanzines.  It was difficult to
          explain in this setting that there were _f_a_n_z_i_n_e_s--magazines edited
          by someone, having distinct issues, sent out on a schedule, and so
          on.  I tried to use the _M_T _V_O_I_D (our clubzine) as an example: I
          produce some paper copies for those who have no computer access, but
          mostly I send out electronic copies that people can print at their
          end (if they want) rather than having me print them at my end and
          sending them the paper.  The end result is the same, only faster and
          more convenient.

               Newsgroups, on the other hand, are on-going discussions with no
          deadlines, no editing, and often no content.  They merely serve as a
          useful way to divide up the discussions by topic.  I described them
          as a sort of Dewey Decimal System; Von Rospach said they were more
          like Dewey Decimal on Drugs.

               All this confusion between newsgroups and fanzines merely
          underscores the need for the "Electronic Networks 101" panel I
          mentioned earlier.











          Chicon V                 September 1, 1991                   Page 13



               When we finally did get down to brass tacks, there were a
          couple of issues raised.  One was the motivation for writing in a
          fanzine.  We all agreed, I think, that many people on the Net write
          more for quantity than for quality, but those of us familiar with
          electronic fanzines believe (I think) that in the _f_a_n_z_i_n_e_s the
          quality is basically equal to that of "traditional" fanzines.  (I
          would observe in passing that two of the six nominees for Hugo for
          Best Fan Writer this year are known for their electronic writing as
          much as for their writing for "traditional" fanzines.)  The other
          problem raised was that of archiving electronic fanzines.  But I
          pointed out that first of all, many are designed to be printed--the
          electronic medium is only for the faster transmission and the
          fanzines are unreadable unless you actually print them.  Second,
          many paper fanzines probably suffer the fate of being lost because
          no one has saved a copy.  (Okay, I have the first issue of the
          UMassSFS fanzine, but I'm an unrepentant pack rat.  How many other
          copies are there around?  Yet I suspect that between disk archives,
          and people who archive paper copies, there will be a lot of
          electronic fanzines around.  The _M_T _V_O_I_D is two-thirds electronic,
          yet there are at least four sets of full archives of it.)

               I think a more real (and usually unspoken) concern is that now
          that networking is so wide-spread, electronic fanzines may
          completely overshadow "traditional" fanzines.  Yet no one (well,
          hardly anyone) objected when photocopying replaced mimeo or even
          hectograph.  It is much easier to distribute several hundred copies
          of a fanzine electronically than it is using hard-copy, and
          circulations in the thousands are not unheard of.  It is also true,
          however, that many of these recipients are not currently in fandom,
          so fears of electronic fanzines "taking over" the Hugos are, as yet,
          unjustified.  I see these fanzines as enlarging fandom and the
          fannish community, and I think this is a good idea.  I suspect there
          are those who want fandom to remain small enough for everyone to
          know everyone else, but I'm afraid it's too late for that.  But
          there will be more commentary on this as this report proceeds.

                           WSFS Preliminary Business Meeting
                                      Friday, 1 PM

               This began with a lot of procedural stuff, followed by a long
          apology from D A. Martin about why the ballot got released in two
          pieces.  (A preliminary ballot with only three names in most
          categories was released to _L_o_c_u_s and CompuServe, then a subsequent
          ballot with five entires on all categories (and six in one) was
          released.)  The explanation seemed to boil down to the committee
          saying they gave the preliminary ballot to _L_o_c_u_s so that Charlie
          Brown could verify that all the candidates were eligible, but it
          wasn't made clear this was only a preliminary ballot.  Then someone
          explained to the ballot-counters that they had misinterpreted the
          rules and there were really more eligible candidates than they said,
          but by then the news was out.  Why the ballot was posted to











          Chicon V                 September 1, 1991                   Page 14



          CompuServe, and why it is necessary to have an outside source--which
          as a news magazine has an interest in publishing the list of
          nominees as soon as possible--verify the ballot was not at all
          explained, and I hope that in future the committees get their act
          together on all this.

               The meeting then proceeded to set discussion times for various
          motions, which would actually be discussed at the business meeting
          on Saturday.  First were five amendments passed on from ConFiction
          (amendments must be ratified by two consecutive worldcons before
          taking effect).  There were also eleven proposed constitutional
          amendments submitted this year and six standing rule amendments.
          The debate time for the old amendments was set at times varying from
          six minutes to thirty seconds (well, they were already debated at
          great length last year).  Of the new constitutional amendments
          proposed, several were killed outright (including the "Life Hugo for
          Non-English Language Writing," "A Year Delay on the Hugos," and the
          "Hugo Fanzine Proposal" regarding electronic fanzines); others had
          their debate times set for the next day's meeting.  Several of the
          standing rule amendments were also killed ("Partiers' Rights,"
          "Defining 'Session,'" "Editorial Changes," and the "Shut Up
          Amendment"--don't ask).  I didn't stay for the whole session; when
          the "Hugo Fanzine Proposal" was defeated, I decided to skip the rest
          and see something besides a business meeting.

               This seems like a good place to comment on the "Hugo Fanzine
          Proposal."  It is spoken of as allowing electronic fanzines, but in
          actual fact the amendment would also have extended fanzine status to
          audiocassette fanzines for the blind, videocassette fanzines, and so
          on.  The wording, we realize now (and knew even at the time) was
          awkward, and tried to do too much in one stroke.  So next year we
          will probably try again.  To the argument that an electronic fanzine
          would require a recipient to buy special equipment, I would reply
          that the same is true of an audiocassette fanzine, a videocassette
          fanzine, or for that matter a paper fanzine that the publisher would
          only fax, not mail.  You can rent a fax machine at the library or
          the corner drugstore these days, true, but you can also rent a
          computer at many libraries.  Where does one draw the line?  I think
          most fans would say that an audiocassette fanzine for the blind
          should be eligible.  This alone means that terms have to be
          redefined.  For example, "professional" versus "non-professional"
          publications are defined strictly in terms of "press run," a concept
          meaningless when applied to an audiocassette.  One part of the
          proposal, which probably should be split off, would have defined
          "professional" as having a _c_i_r_c_u_l_a_t_i_o_n of over 10,000, and in
          addition paying either its contributors or its staff in other than
          copies of the publication.  (This is in line with the SFWA
          definition of "professional.")  Stay tuned for further developments.


                                   (To be continued)