DIY History | Transcribe | Hevelin Fanzines | Fantasy Aspects, issue 1, May 1947

Transcribe
Translate

Fantasy Aspects, issue 1, May 1947

Page 7

finally worked its way out of bondage. It had its ups and downs in the years that followed. Every so often it would appear bi-monthly, presumably to sell out more of a printing, but there were never any rate cuts.
For some reason never made clear, WT had the lousiest, the most unspeakable, the gawd-awfullest illustrators available. Their intelligence was on a par with their art. In one of my early yarns, oriental stuff, a scene depicted an executioner wielding a two-handed sword was to be illustrated. Wright latter explained why this picture didn't appear : he said "Would you believe it, the son of a bitch drew a sword that had two handles, like scissors or a water witching rod! And it was delivered so near the deadline that I couldn't get another in time!"
The covers were as bad as the interior stuff. To say that willie watson's artists are infinitely better would be damning the diablerie crew with faint praise. Just look at those old files and see. I can't to this day explain it.
Then came Hughie Rankin, in 1927, doing "grease pencil" work, lovely stuff, especially the originals, several of which I still have, framed: though bum reproduction sometimes murdered the effect. And he did some good covers. In the fall of 1926, a passably competent chap had done an oil for my first cover feature yarn, Peacock's Shadow, but they fired him, and went back to that master-assassin, Senf. I don't know how they tolerated anyone but Rankin once they found he was the best yet.
It was during these years that Seabury Quinn blew the lid off, and Robert E. Howard sky-rocketed to popularity. How these two quantity producers compared with Lovecraft in dwawing (sic) powep (sic) is beyond my appraisel (sic): for quantity outstrips quality, and HPL produced only sporadically, despite the wailings and pleas of his admirers. Frank Belknap Long, Jr. was going like a house afire for a while, and I understand that he, and Lovecraft also, got a bonus of a half cent above the standard rate. Otis A. Kline had quite a following. There is a yarn extant to the effect that one of his jungle fantasies, a serial pulled sufficient circulation to keep the outfit from folding in one of its numerous crises. Edmund Hamilton, too (sic) rode high, wide and handsome.
No quantity producer, if he is at all realistic, pretends that each yarn is distinctive; it simply can't be. There were many of the once-in-a-whiles, which hit the ceiling, but didn't in the long run draw like the heavy volume steadies.
Wright was universal in his tastes. Some yarns he published because he liked them; other yarns, though he didn't care for them, would according to his hunches or experiences, appeal to many readers, so he ran them. He had no taboos other than that common decency should not be affronted. He was a pioneer and a brave man when the pulps were sticky with taboos.
If a manuscript appealed too (sic) him, despite its ungainly technique and handling, he would go to any length to imduce (sic) the author to whip it into suitable shape. I re-wrote on a fifty-fifty basis, at Wright's suggestion, a number of such mass during the years 1927-30, taking my cut, and giving the original author the sole by-line. 
It is interesting to compile a list of the writers who, either novices, or obscure semi-

Saving...

finally worked its way out of bondage. It had its ups and downs in the years that followed. Every so often it would appear bi-monthly, presumably to sell out more of a printing, but there were never any rate cuts. For some reason never made clear, WT had the lousiest, the most unspeakable, the gawd-awfullest illustrators available. Their intelligence was on a par with their art. In one of my early yarns, oriental stuff, a scene depicted an executioner wielding a two-handed sword was to be illustrated. Wright latter explained why this picture didn't appear : he said "Would you believe it, the son of a bitch drew a sword that had two handles, like scissors or a water witching rod! And it was delivered so near the deadline that I couldn't get another in time!" The covers were as bad as the interior stuff. To say that willie watson's artists are infinitely better would be damning the diablerie crew with faint praise. Just look at those old files and see. I can't to this day explain it. Then came Hughie Rankin, in 1927, doing "grease pencil" work, lovely stuff, especially the originals, several of which I still have, framed: though bum reproduction sometimes murdered the effect. And he did some good covers. In the fall of 1926, a passably competent chap had done an oil for my first cover feature yarn, Peacock's Shadow, but they fired him, and went back to that master-assassin, Senf. I don't know how they tolerated anyone but Rankin once they found he was the best yet. It was during these years that Seabury Quinn blew the lid off, and Robert E. Howard sky-rocketed to popularity. How these two quantity producers compared with Lovecraft in dwawing (sic) powep (sic) is beyond my appraisel (sic): for quantity outstrips quality, and HPL produced only sporadically, despite the wailings and pleas of his admirers. Frank Belknap Long, Jr. was going like a house afire for a while, and I understand that he, and Lovecraft also, got a bonus of a half cent above the standard rate. Otis A. Kline had quite a following. There is a yarn extant to the effect that one of his jungle fantasies, a serial pulled sufficient circulation to keep the outfit from folding in one of its numerous crises. Edmund Hamilton, too (sic) rode high, wide and handsome. No quantity producer, if he is at all realistic, pretends that each yarn is distinctive; it simply can't be. There were many of the once-in-a-whiles, which hit the ceiling, but didn't in the long run draw like the heavy volume steadies. Wright was universal in his tastes. Some yarns he published because he liked them; other yarns, though he didn't care for them, would according to his hunches or experiences, appeal to many readers, so he ran them. He had no taboos other than that common decency should not be affronted. He was a pioneer and a brave man when the pulps were sticky with taboos. If a manuscript appealed too (sic) him, despite its ungainly technique and handling, he would go to any length to imduce (sic) the author to whip it into suitable shape. I re-wrote on a fifty-fifty basis, at Wright's suggestion, a number of such mass during the years 1927-30, taking my cut, and giving the original author the sole by-line. It is interesting to compile a list of the writers who, either novices, or obscure semi-