Transcribe
Translate
Vulcan, whole no. 5, January 1944
Page 19
More information
digital collection
archival collection guide
transcription tips
Adequate Judgment? By Art R. Sehnert It would be wise, I think, if some Eager Beaver in fandom did a little research to help fan-eds to get a more accurate picture of the reactions to their magazines. I feel pretty safe in saying that reactions, as they now stand, are far from adequate. For instance: Here's a fanzine I have conjured for this article. It's a small hecto'd affair, maybe seven, eight or even twelve pages. It contains one piece of fiction, poetry, articles, columns, and an editorial. In other words, a straight mag. Circulation runs to maybe fifty copies. Average reaction letters are of four types: the answer from the thirty year old fan, the answer from the new fan, the answer from another fan editor, and the answer from the fan that hates everything, AMAZING included. Taking the four types in order we have: the thirty year old fan, chronological, gentleman, not mental, with his older, (maybe) wiser, more worldly outlook. This gentlemen is like most working men, in a hurry. Since the mag is hecto'd and usually unreadable without effort, he doesn't like the mag as a whole because it takes a lot of his time perusing the thing. Consequently, with this dislike already in mind, he judges everything from that viewpoint. Now, the new fan. This boy is ecstatic simply because it is something done by guys like himself, and because he hasn't gotten over the daze which first enveloped him at his first contact with fandom. We come to the other fan editor. He coats his criticisms with saccharin because he wants praise in return for his own magazine. Yes, you fellow eds, you do. Remember, praise builds reputations, and reps build circulations, and cir...well, why go on. Now we come to the guy who hates everything. If I go into this I'll end up writing a treatise on the bigotry of the human race, so I'll dissuade and allow you to draw your own conclusions. Here we have four types of answers. Four utterly unlike reactions. Reactions based on a set of true, unbiased standards, but a set of standards that run from tolerance to contempt. Some of you readers may be tempted at first thought to want to inform me that the system of judging by numerical standards takes care of this. Not so, boys, not so. The same bias enters into this type of judging. Without attempting to offer any means of rectifying this, we'd like to suggest the origin of a committee of fans to review and pass a true judgment on all fan stuff printed. THE END CANADIAN FANDOM With the sixth number, Canadian fandom will pass into its second year, bigger and better than ever. Watch for the big foto cover of the Canadian fans. Featured also will be material by such as: Swari, [illegible], Younge, Hurter, and Croutch, Smarje and Nanek. All this and more for bc from: Beak Taylor, St. Andrew's College, Aurora, Ontario, Canada
Saving...
prev
next
Adequate Judgment? By Art R. Sehnert It would be wise, I think, if some Eager Beaver in fandom did a little research to help fan-eds to get a more accurate picture of the reactions to their magazines. I feel pretty safe in saying that reactions, as they now stand, are far from adequate. For instance: Here's a fanzine I have conjured for this article. It's a small hecto'd affair, maybe seven, eight or even twelve pages. It contains one piece of fiction, poetry, articles, columns, and an editorial. In other words, a straight mag. Circulation runs to maybe fifty copies. Average reaction letters are of four types: the answer from the thirty year old fan, the answer from the new fan, the answer from another fan editor, and the answer from the fan that hates everything, AMAZING included. Taking the four types in order we have: the thirty year old fan, chronological, gentleman, not mental, with his older, (maybe) wiser, more worldly outlook. This gentlemen is like most working men, in a hurry. Since the mag is hecto'd and usually unreadable without effort, he doesn't like the mag as a whole because it takes a lot of his time perusing the thing. Consequently, with this dislike already in mind, he judges everything from that viewpoint. Now, the new fan. This boy is ecstatic simply because it is something done by guys like himself, and because he hasn't gotten over the daze which first enveloped him at his first contact with fandom. We come to the other fan editor. He coats his criticisms with saccharin because he wants praise in return for his own magazine. Yes, you fellow eds, you do. Remember, praise builds reputations, and reps build circulations, and cir...well, why go on. Now we come to the guy who hates everything. If I go into this I'll end up writing a treatise on the bigotry of the human race, so I'll dissuade and allow you to draw your own conclusions. Here we have four types of answers. Four utterly unlike reactions. Reactions based on a set of true, unbiased standards, but a set of standards that run from tolerance to contempt. Some of you readers may be tempted at first thought to want to inform me that the system of judging by numerical standards takes care of this. Not so, boys, not so. The same bias enters into this type of judging. Without attempting to offer any means of rectifying this, we'd like to suggest the origin of a committee of fans to review and pass a true judgment on all fan stuff printed. THE END CANADIAN FANDOM With the sixth number, Canadian fandom will pass into its second year, bigger and better than ever. Watch for the big foto cover of the Canadian fans. Featured also will be material by such as: Swari, [illegible], Younge, Hurter, and Croutch, Smarje and Nanek. All this and more for bc from: Beak Taylor, St. Andrew's College, Aurora, Ontario, Canada
Hevelin Fanzines
sidebar
