Transcribe
Translate
Fantascience Digest, v. 2, issue 2, January-February 1939
Page 22
More information
digital collection
archival collection guide
transcription tips
Page 24 FANTASCIENCE DIGEST read. I hope that when you mimeograph the next issue you will continue to use hektographed illustrations. (Sorry, no can do--RAM) Conover's "Looking Around," Reinsberg's "Behind the Scenes at 'Amazing'," and Dale Hart's "Who's Who in the Clayton 'Astounding' " were the best ones in Volume 2, Number 1. I'd been waiting for an article such as Hart's for a long time. Anytime you wish to discontinue the review of the professional magazines, it's all right with me. i get all those anyway & it's just so much repeat material to me. A book, movie, or even other fan mags would be more interesting. Even better would be a review of the [[underline]]back issues[[end underline]] of the professional magazines. I think that article titled "Whiher Wollheim" was the most deceptive and worst I have seen in FD. i am surprized that you even published it. JIM AVERY: Words can hardly express how much I think of the cover. That chap Giunta really has something there. His style is very nearly that of Jack Binder. It's what I call a masterpiece of hektographing. Sorry I can't so much for Rothman's picture of MARS. Simply too much for my feeble intellect to comprehend. For the best interests of all, you should cut this series right now! "The Road Back" was my idea of real fan fiction. Whatever I may think of Moskowitz's methods and activities, I still consider him one of the best of the many good fan writers. Maybe I'm just an old sentimentalist, but his writings always seem to strike some long lost responsive cord in my somewhat spare and windy frame. Hope you have some more of him on file. (How do you like "Keller the Great" in this issue?--RAM) JACK CHAPMAN MISKE: Just think, it's over a year ago since I received the first copy of FD, the first fan magazine I ever bought 'cept a couple of old FANTASY's I picked up in a second-hand store. And here you are in your second year, with a content that's doubled, avowal of duplication by mimeo...and, too, a nickel up in price. But it's worth it. In view of your obvious improvements, it would be hardly the thing to criticize you overly much; so I won't. However,Othere are a couple of things needing comment. First, a couple of your items were being printed for the second or third times. Second,this five pages of reviewing the pros. Even if Whiteside's views tallied precisely with mine (and they don't, emphatically!), I'd be against the department 'cause it's not worth all the space. I'm against anything other than a letter rating, etc., as was used in FM. But these reviews of Whiteside's are the most ludicrously funny things I've ever read. He gives us the impression he considers "G minus" to mean an excellent story, 'cause he says so twice. Then, of thirty-five items, he rates only six lower than G minus. He says "The Eternal Man" is worth being reread, and then gives it his damned G minus. That means thirty stories of every thirty-five pubbed are good enough to be read twice. Then he gives Kuttner's hack mess, "The Star Parade," the same grade as his excellent "Hands Across the Void." He calls those premier hacks, the [[underline]]Messers[[end underline]] Binder, equal to the best in the field!! CHAOS save him in his ignorance! He calls that Kellerian masterpiece, "the thirty and One," a weird tale! .........Either get a reviewer who has ready fantasy for some time and knows what it is all about, or else do away with it entirely. White-
Saving...
prev
next
Page 24 FANTASCIENCE DIGEST read. I hope that when you mimeograph the next issue you will continue to use hektographed illustrations. (Sorry, no can do--RAM) Conover's "Looking Around," Reinsberg's "Behind the Scenes at 'Amazing'," and Dale Hart's "Who's Who in the Clayton 'Astounding' " were the best ones in Volume 2, Number 1. I'd been waiting for an article such as Hart's for a long time. Anytime you wish to discontinue the review of the professional magazines, it's all right with me. i get all those anyway & it's just so much repeat material to me. A book, movie, or even other fan mags would be more interesting. Even better would be a review of the [[underline]]back issues[[end underline]] of the professional magazines. I think that article titled "Whiher Wollheim" was the most deceptive and worst I have seen in FD. i am surprized that you even published it. JIM AVERY: Words can hardly express how much I think of the cover. That chap Giunta really has something there. His style is very nearly that of Jack Binder. It's what I call a masterpiece of hektographing. Sorry I can't so much for Rothman's picture of MARS. Simply too much for my feeble intellect to comprehend. For the best interests of all, you should cut this series right now! "The Road Back" was my idea of real fan fiction. Whatever I may think of Moskowitz's methods and activities, I still consider him one of the best of the many good fan writers. Maybe I'm just an old sentimentalist, but his writings always seem to strike some long lost responsive cord in my somewhat spare and windy frame. Hope you have some more of him on file. (How do you like "Keller the Great" in this issue?--RAM) JACK CHAPMAN MISKE: Just think, it's over a year ago since I received the first copy of FD, the first fan magazine I ever bought 'cept a couple of old FANTASY's I picked up in a second-hand store. And here you are in your second year, with a content that's doubled, avowal of duplication by mimeo...and, too, a nickel up in price. But it's worth it. In view of your obvious improvements, it would be hardly the thing to criticize you overly much; so I won't. However,Othere are a couple of things needing comment. First, a couple of your items were being printed for the second or third times. Second,this five pages of reviewing the pros. Even if Whiteside's views tallied precisely with mine (and they don't, emphatically!), I'd be against the department 'cause it's not worth all the space. I'm against anything other than a letter rating, etc., as was used in FM. But these reviews of Whiteside's are the most ludicrously funny things I've ever read. He gives us the impression he considers "G minus" to mean an excellent story, 'cause he says so twice. Then, of thirty-five items, he rates only six lower than G minus. He says "The Eternal Man" is worth being reread, and then gives it his damned G minus. That means thirty stories of every thirty-five pubbed are good enough to be read twice. Then he gives Kuttner's hack mess, "The Star Parade," the same grade as his excellent "Hands Across the Void." He calls those premier hacks, the [[underline]]Messers[[end underline]] Binder, equal to the best in the field!! CHAOS save him in his ignorance! He calls that Kellerian masterpiece, "the thirty and One," a weird tale! .........Either get a reviewer who has ready fantasy for some time and knows what it is all about, or else do away with it entirely. White-
Hevelin Fanzines
sidebar
