@@@@@ @ @ @@@@@ @ @ @@@@@@@ @ @ @@@@@ @@@@@ @@@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @@@@@ @@@@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @@@@@ @ @ @ @ @@@@@ @@@@@ @@@Mt. Holz Science Fiction Society
07/12/13 -- Vol. 32, No. 2, Whole Number 1762
Table of Contents
The Truth about the World of Harry Potter:
Buzzfeed "blows the lid off" the world of Harry Potter:
Sample: "The government spies on citizens, keeps records."
How Do You Eat Lobster? (comments by Mark R. Leeper):
If you want to know if you are eating lobster correctly, let a
child see you eating it. If the child does not get nightmares, you
are not eating the lobster right. [-mrl]
Classics Illustrated (comments by Mark R. Leeper):
I have written in the MT VOID and talked at conventions about the
early science fiction television shows and a few books and, of
course, films that hooked me on science fiction. It occurs to me
that there were two major influences I have rarely if ever
mentioned. I think you have to be close to my age for either of
these to ring any bells, but there was Winston Science Fiction
Books and "Classics Illustrated" comic books. I will have to hold
off on Winston for another time. "Classics Illustrated" was what
hooked me on science fiction as genuine literature.
Back in the 1940s, before I was born, there was a line of comic
books called "Classic Comics" that was sort of a plot to get
children to be interested in classic literature. Each month they
took a classic novel or two and adapted it as a comic book. And I
can honestly say that kids were finding stories like THE COUNT OF
MONTE CRISTO, MOBY DICK, and THE THREE MUSKETEERS to be
entertaining. Sadly, the company folded. They sold their
copyrights, and another company bought them up and republished the
same or minimally modified versions under the name "Classics
Illustrated". What do I mean by minorly modified? For example,
"Classic Comics" had adapted Mary Shelley's FRANKENSTEIN. The
monster was drawn as a large man with grayish pallor and electrical
bolts in his neck. Universal Pictures claimed copyright for the
idea of the bolts in the neck so the comic that was released was
identical to the original but every frame that showed the bolts had
been retouched to remove them. You could tell that many of the
comics had a more intricate and florid style. Those were the
comics that went back to the "Classic Comics" days. Those in which
the art was simpler were newly drawn.
In their time these comics probably got more kids interested in
classic novels than film adaptations did. For one thing,
filmmakers like to try to improve on the story or make it more
compact. "Classics Illustrated" and "Classic Comics" before them
were generally very faithful to the source novels. And probably a
few students tried to get by reading the comic book when they were
supposed to be reading the novel.
"Classic Comics" had dabbled a little in fantastic stories. They
had adapted 20,000 LEAGUES UNDER THE SEA and, as I said,
FRANKENSTEIN. I would guess from the art style that FROM THE EARTH
TO THE MOON dated from the earlier days. Apparently they
recognized that the science fiction titles were the most popular.
Then one fine day "Classics Illustrated" started adapting science
fiction novels by H. G. Wells. "Classic Comics" had adapted some
Verne, but no Wells. Before they were done they had adapted five
of Wells's novels: THE WAR OF THE WORLDS, TIME MACHINE, FIRST MEN
IN THE MOON, THE INVISIBLE MAN, and FOOD OF THE GODS. (FOOD OF THE
GODS and FIRST MEN IN THE MOON are novels I had never even heard of
until I saw the "Classics Illustrated" adaptations.)
The real crown jewels of "Classics Illustrated" comics were the
adaptations of WAR OF THE WORLDS and THE TIME MACHINE. I have seen
Martian war machines depicted on book covers, in movies, in other
comics, etc., but to me the "Classics Illustrated" visualization is
what a war machine should look like. I have seen for sale even
three-dimensional models of that version of the war machine so it
obviously is memorable to someone other than me. The cover picture
of the comic is a classic of itself. It shows in realistic detail
artillerymen of the British Army late 19th century facing off
against a line of gleaming, futuristic Martian war machines. It is
a beautiful piece of science fiction art.
How to design a Martian war machine was, of course, the outstanding
challenge for the artist when adapting WAR OF THE WORLDS.
Similarly when visualizing THE TIME MACHINE, the major challenge is
how to make the machine itself look. The adaptation of THE TIME
MACHINE is almost as fondly remembered as THE WAR OF THE WORLDS. I
have seen the cover illustration frequently reproduced often
without credit where it came from. It is not quite so cozy as the
time machine designed for the George Pal film, but it is not a bad
concept. The time traveler sits astride a wooden horse style box.
To set him within a separate space he is surrounded by a horizontal
and a vertical ring.
Every once in a while a "Classics Illustrated" pulled out a novel
to adapt that I had never heard of. As I said I had never heard of
THE FOOD OF THE GODS or FIRST MEN OM THE MOON until I had the
"Classics Illustrated" comic book version of each. Also one month
they published the adaptation of a Jules Verne's ROBUR THE
CONQUEROR (aka CLIPPER OF THE CLOUDS). That was a new title to me.
The next month they published a sequel, MASTER OF THE WORLD, timed
to be released just at the same time that AIP was releasing their
own film MASTER OF THE WORLD, an adaptation of the two novels.
http://tinyurl.com/void-rob1
One personal memory: Somewhere along the line my father, who must
have approved of us reading "Classics Illustrated" comic books had
a change of heart. He decided that kids should be reading the
original novels, not comic book adaptations. The publisher did
make sure to end every comic with the message "Now that you have
read the "Classics Illustrated" edition, don't miss the added
enjoyment of reading the original, obtainable at your school or
public library." And for every title I mentioned I did.
Other favorites:
I have to admit on the last one the artist should have depicted the
Nautilus on the cover.
[-mrl]
A PEOPLE'S CONTEST (letter of comment by Gregory Benford):
In response to Evelyn's comments on A PEOPLE'S CONTEST in the
07/05/13 issue of the MT VOID, Gregory Benford writes:
Always enjoy your VOID...
Evelyn's remarks on the reverse symmetry of parties of now vs. 1860:
Twice introduced in the Senate were bills to solve slavery by just
buying the slaves and setting them free. Both defeated by the
Republicans. Cost of doing so: half of 1% of the War. [-gb]
Mark responds:
But for it to work there would have to be no right of refusal to
sell. Would there have been something like an eminent domain
restriction so that slaveholders could not refuse sale? I would
assume some slaveholders were still highly dependent on their
slaves. [-mrl]
This Week's Reading (book comments by Evelyn C. Leeper):
ROBINSON CRUSOE by Daniel Defoe (ISBN 978-1-593-08360-1) was the
companion book to the movie shown by our book/movie discussion
group for July. (The movie was ROBINSON CRUSOE ON MARS.) The
edition I read was published in the 1940s by Garden City Publishing
Company, a Scribner's wannabe, with a cover by D. Cammerota and
illustrations by Noel Pocock, who are N. C. Wyeth wannabes.
ROBINSON CRUSOE (often considered the first novel in the English
language) was published in 1719, when knowledge of Africa was
fairly sparse among the reading population, so the fact that Defoe
(in the character of Crusoe) keeps talking about tigers in Africa
probably would not have bothered the general public at that time.
(Or, come to think of it, even now.)
On the other hand, Defoe is constantly excoriated for having Crusoe
take off his clothes, swim out to the wreck, and fill his pockets
with bread. But Crusoe says, "I pulled off my clothes ... and took
the water." He does not say that he took off all his clothes, and
indeed if someone said that today, we would not think it strange if
they retained, e.g., their underwear. And indeed later, Crusoe
says, "I had the mortification to see my coat, shirt, and
waistcoat, which I had left on shore upon the sand, swim away; as
for my breeches, which were only linen, and open-kneed, I swam on
board in them and my stockings." Given that later he also says
that even if the sun and weather were not a problem, he would not
feel comfortable going about with no clothes, I think we can agree
that by his initial statement Defoe never meant to include all
Crusoe's clothing. [pages 62, 64]
This is not to say that Defoe does not have inconsistencies.
Crusoe initially says he had nothing but a knife, a tobacco-pipe,
and a little tobacco. Then, after a few years, Crusoe muses "how
[he] must have acted if [he] had got nothing out of the ship." He
concludes, "... if I had killed a goat or a fowl, by any
contrivance, I had no way to flay or open them, or part the flesh
from the skin and the bowels, or to cut it up..." He also says,
"The second thing I would fain have had was a tobacco-pipe..." So
he has managed to forget two of the three things he specifically
mentioned having before he went back to the ship. [pages 61, 155,
129]
He claims that after four years, "My ink ... had been gone for some
time, all but a very little, which I eked out with water, a little
and a little, till it was so pale it scarce left any appearance of
black upon the paper." But many years later he has enough ink to
draw up a contract. [pages 157, ???]
The Biblical quotes are probably intended to be from the King James
translation. What Defoe renders as "Call on Me in the day of
trouble, and I will deliver, and thou shalt glorify Me," is Psalm
50:15 ("And call upon me in the day of trouble: I will deliver
thee, and thou shalt glorify me," in King James.) I cannot find
"He is exalted a Prince and a Saviour" at all, though Acts 5:31 is
close: "Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and
a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of
sins." [page 114, 116]
Most people probably think of Crusoe as being shipwrecked somewhere
in the south Pacific, but in fact he is somewhere in the western
Caribbean. (He gives some description of his position, but what
with two storms driving the ship, it is not possible to figure out
exactly where.) [page 55]
Crusoe originally observes the Sabbath (Sunday) by marking it
specially on his notched calendar and by not working, but says, "I
soon neglected my keeping Sundays; for, omitting my mark for them
on my post, I forgot which was which." He does seem to know the
date, though, even after losing track of Sundays, so you would
think it would be easy enough for him to count out days to
determine when the Sundays would fall. [page 89]
The earthquake Crusoe experiences, and his later thoughts of it and
religion, might seem to be inspired by the Lisbon, but that did not
take place until 1755, almost forty years after ROBINSON CRUSOE was
published. Defoe probably drew upon the (now) less well-known Lima
earthquake of 1687, which destroyed the entire city. [pages 98-99,
109]
J. Donald Crowley claims that a he-goat changes into a she-goat,
but again I think this is just reading too much into the words.
Crusoe says, "In this journey my dog surprised a young kid, and
seized upon it, and I running in to take hold of it, caught it, and
save it alive from the dog. I had a great mind to bring it home if
I could, for I had often been musing whether it might be possible
to get a kid or two, and so raise a breed of tame goats... I made
a collar to this little creature, and with a string, which I made
of some rope-tarn, which I always carried about me, I led him
along, though with some difficulty, till I came to my bower, and
there I enclosed him and left him..." Through most of this, the
kid is merely an "it", and the three references to "him" seem more
like the off-hand male default than a specific gender. The
references to "her" later, in reference to catching three more
kids, seem more likely to be accurate, since they follow a long
acquaintance. [pages 133, 171]
On a more serious level, one must recognize that by modern
standards, Robinson Crusoe is a real sh*thead. He is captured by
pirates and enslaved, but manages to escape with the help of
another slave, a boy named Xury. When they are rescued by a
Portuguese ship, the captain offers to buy everything Crusoe has,
including sixty pieces of eight for what Crusoe terms "my boy
Xury." (When did he become *his* boy?) Crusoe hesitates, saying,
"I was very loth to sell the poor boy's liberty, who had assisted
me so faithfully in procuring my own." However, when the captain
said that he would set the boy free in ten years if he converted to
Christianity, Crusoe decides this is very reasonable, and so
agrees. I cannot help but feel that if it were Crusoe's ten years
and a requirement for him to convert to some other religion, he
would be less sanguine about it. [page 46]
And after Crusoe has lived in Brazil a while and owns a plantation,
his neighbors suggest they all take a ship to Africa to acquire
some slaves without going through the government monopoly. This is
the voyage during which he is shipwrecked (and all his shipmates
killed), and it is hard not to feel there is some justice in this.
[page 52]
Crusoe spends twenty-five years on the island before Friday shows
up, and somehow retains his sanity and manages to do everything:
make pottery, grow grain and turn it into bread, build huts and
furniture, etc. I understand that a man of that period was more
capable in basic tasks--I have no doubt he knows how to make fire
from a flint, for example--but a lot of what Crusoe does is a bit
more specialized. And it does seem unlikely that someone living in
isolation for decades would not have gone "around the bend." In
this regard, CAST AWAY is probably much more accurate. (And most
imitations do not put a solitary person on an island. THE
MYSTERIOUS ISLAND by Jules Verne has a group of castaways. THE
SWISS FAMILY ROBINSON by Johann David Wyss has a family. And so
on. ROBINSON CRUSOE ON MARS has one castaway, but he finds a
companion much sooner than Crusoe.)
Defoe must have been paid by the word--after a twenty-five-page
account of his shipwreck and first days on the island, he gives us
eight pages of journal which basically just repeats what he has
already said.
FIRST ON MARS by Rex Gordon (known in Britain as NO MAN FRIDAY by
Stanley Bennett Hough) (1957, no ISBN) might have been a better
companion book to the film ROBINSON CRUSOE ON MARS. However, it
has two drawbacks. The first is that it is not easily available
(not impossible to find, but fairly pricey for a book that crumbles
as you read it). The second is that the John C. Higgins and Ib
Melchior almost definitely based their film on Defoe's novel rather
than on Gordon's. (For just one example, in both Defoe and the
film, the Friday character is brought there as a captive/slave. In
the Gordon, there is not even a real Friday character. (Not
exactly a surprise, given the British title.)
One characteristic of all these versions is that the Robinson
Crusoe character is amazingly capable. In FIRST ON MARS, Gordon
Holder is able not only to distill water and oxygen, but also to
build a motorized tricycle to carry his equipment around, and so
on. It is understandable that Robinson Crusoe could survive on an
island, since even when he was at home, much of his activities were
no more advanced (for example, making fire with a spark from flint
and iron). But by the time we have achieved rocket flight, living
at a most basic level is not something with which most people are
familiar. Gordon Holder (and Christopher Draper in ROBINSON CRUSOE
ON MARS) just seem a bit too knowledgeable in too many fields:
chemistry, physics, botany, mechanics, etc. [-ecl]
Go to our home page
http://tinyurl.com/void-rob2
http://tinyurl.com/void-verne1
http://tinyurl.com/void-verne2
http://tinyurl.com/void-verne3
Mark Leeper
mleeper@optonline.net
Quote of the Week:
A book exists on many different levels. Half the
work of a book is done by the reader the more he can
bring to it the better the book will be for him, the
better it will be in its own terms.
--Gore Vidal
Tweet