DIY History | Transcribe | Hevelin Fanzines | Mahope, v. 1, issue 1, Summer 1946

Transcribe
Translate

Mahope, v. 1, issue 1, Summer 1946

Page 2

For instance: Moskowitz and Saari would not be considered experts on the growth of the LASFS. But Moskowitz would be more familiar than Joe Kennedy with events of the 30's. Harry Warner would probably do a more than capable job on fan fiction. And local clubs and regional groups should be covered by members, ex- or otherwise.

Fandom's sages may question the need for an editorial board with a seemingly unworkable number of subcommittees. Some of these subcommittees might be done away with if the board could recognise and carry through separately the tasks which faced it; others might be limited in membership to fans residing not more than 500 miles from each other, to cut down time lost due to postal delays. 

One of the tasks which the editorial board would have before it--perhaps the first--would be the analysis of the Speer [underlined] Fancyclopedia [/underlined] and reorganization of whatever contents were saved from the shears for the paste pot. A lot of the material relating to nicknames, minor organizations, and confabs, ktp, should be gathered into sections and thoroughly indexed. Many articles which seemed important from 1944's vantage point will not be worth a fraction of the space in 1948's perspective. And there is, I believe, a lot of research to be done on trends and influences in fandom and fanzines. (But this would be the job of another subcommittee.)

Yet another group would be concerned with locating fans who were experts on various aspects of fan history or fan life, and securing articles from them. Periods like the "second interregnum" or "fourth fandom" should not be handled by one wirter, however, unless he has considerable data on events in areas he is not personally familiar with. Something wil have to be done about geographical as well as chronological assignments.

Lynn Brdige's [sic] survey of the prozines before 1941-42 is a comprehensive and praiseworthy effort but I'm not sure than an issue-by-issue review, limited by the scope of one fan's collection, would be best suited to [underlined] Fancy Jr [/underlined].  More in line with the long-term viewpoint would be a summary outlining the major literary and editorial trends in fanctasy and stf, and in each prozine. This survey should also spotlight important stories, issues, and periods for the discriminating collector and anthologist.

Trends and development in fanzines and fan fiction should get the same treatment as the prozines, although perhaps on a less extensive scale.

Short who's-who-ish articles on pro authors, setting forth their fields statures, major works, and idiosyncrasies (Cummings frinstance) would seem to be musts, prices for the early prozines are going up, and the neofan is likely to learn about Heinlein, van Vogt, and Smith (EE, not GO) before Olsen, Breuer, and Keller.

Fantasy fandom is an international body, and [underlined] Fancy Jr's [/underlined] editorial policy should recognise that fact. British fandom stands on its own feet. It should therefore have its own editorial board to handle such matters and Anglofandom(s history, prozines, fanzines, ad nauseam, if only for the reason that transatlantic mail would slow proceedings. Also, I can think of no American fan with the knowledge of British fandom that would be needed to handle the editorial duties associated with complete British representation in Fancy Jr.

Saving...

For instance: Moskowitz and Saari would not be considered experts on the growth of the LASFS. But Moskowitz would be more familiar than Joe Kennedy with events of the 30's. Harry Warner would probably do a more than capable job on fan fiction. And local clubs and regional groups should be covered by members, ex- or otherwise. Fandom's sages may question the need for an editorial board with a seemingly unworkable number of subcommittees. Some of these subcommittees might be done away with if the board could recognise and carry through separately the tasks which faced it; others might be limited in membership to fans residing not more than 500 miles from each other, to cut down time lost due to postal delays. One of the tasks which the editorial board would have before it--perhaps the first--would be the analysis of the Speer [underlined] Fancyclopedia [/underlined] and reorganization of whatever contents were saved from the shears for the paste pot. A lot of the material relating to nicknames, minor organizations, and confabs, ktp, should be gathered into sections and thoroughly indexed. Many articles which seemed important from 1944's vantage point will not be worth a fraction of the space in 1948's perspective. And there is, I believe, a lot of research to be done on trends and influences in fandom and fanzines. (But this would be the job of another subcommittee.) Yet another group would be concerned with locating fans who were experts on various aspects of fan history or fan life, and securing articles from them. Periods like the "second interregnum" or "fourth fandom" should not be handled by one wirter, however, unless he has considerable data on events in areas he is not personally familiar with. Something wil have to be done about geographical as well as chronological assignments. Lynn Brdige's [sic] survey of the prozines before 1941-42 is a comprehensive and praiseworthy effort but I'm not sure than an issue-by-issue review, limited by the scope of one fan's collection, would be best suited to [underlined] Fancy Jr [/underlined]. More in line with the long-term viewpoint would be a summary outlining the major literary and editorial trends in fanctasy and stf, and in each prozine. This survey should also spotlight important stories, issues, and periods for the discriminating collector and anthologist. Trends and development in fanzines and fan fiction should get the same treatment as the prozines, although perhaps on a less extensive scale. Short who's-who-ish articles on pro authors, setting forth their fields statures, major works, and idiosyncrasies (Cummings frinstance) would seem to be musts, prices for the early prozines are going up, and the neofan is likely to learn about Heinlein, van Vogt, and Smith (EE, not GO) before Olsen, Breuer, and Keller. Fantasy fandom is an international body, and [underlined] Fancy Jr's [/underlined] editorial policy should recognise that fact. British fandom stands on its own feet. It should therefore have its own editorial board to handle such matters and Anglofandom(s history, prozines, fanzines, ad nauseam, if only for the reason that transatlantic mail would slow proceedings. Also, I can think of no American fan with the knowledge of British fandom that would be needed to handle the editorial duties associated with complete British representation in Fancy Jr.