DIY History | Transcribe | Hevelin Fanzines | Voice of the Imagination, whole no. 25, October 1942

Transcribe
Translate

Voice of the Imagination, whole no. 25, October 1942

Page 6

VOICE OF THE

I never did anything worse than the protagonists in the de Camp stories and wasn't even as successful as they were. The only thing you could hold against him was that he played chess (a failing of my own) -- otherwise there was a pleasant story that he used always to take two taxis, the second being for his astral body, with which presumably he wasn't on good terms. But having quarreled with one's astral body is a purely private matter and there is no need for Mr. K to apply terms like Degraded Cultus to it (I suppose he knows what that means) I imagine the Petrol Control here has now enforced a reconciliation, in any case. '' Tigrina's backward-sloping handwriting is very revealing to a graphologist -- means she's firmly fixated in infancy and, in fact, showing off like a kid. If she'd like to try and prove her worth we'll send her any quantity of the hair of a guy we don't like, payment by results, but we don't believe there will be any results."

COLIN RODEN, 115 Bondi Rd, Bondi, NSW, Australia, answers fandom's Confirm or Deny cry: "Hold on for a surprise. I -- and every other active member of the F.S.S. (Futurian Soc'y of Sydney) -- have SEEN and heard & talked to ALAN P. ROBERTS!! He's in Sydney, & is the most solid-looking pseudonym or myth that I have ever seen. Actually we have known that for a long time -- he has had correspondence with some Sydney fans. But certain Americans seem to doubt his authenticity, so this should clear things up."

Eric C. Hopkins from 6, Elm Park Ave, Elm Park, Romford, Essex, Eng: "The August (41) number is more than usually interesting, 'Den Ver De Days' being the spur of my delight. I'm years past the stage of gurgling with happiness at the mere mention of fan's names (perhaps because I know the British species personally!) but hell! what times you have out there. I have only one impulse comparable in strength to my desire to be kept in England for the duration, and that is that I should be sent to the U.S.A. for training! Particularly California around about next summer! But what a hope. I wonder if there are any S.F. fans in Russia! Surely the viewpoint of S.F. -- when & where it exists -- is in line with materialist theory. '' Amidst all the rich and startling occurrences of the Denvention, two of your reminiscences arise with a stinging effervescence to smite me in the eye. (I) your 'dubl-rich choclit spiked with egg' (Great stuff: if you can get it!). -- and -- (II) your description of Robert Heinlein as 'the American W. Olaf Stapledon' (Good Lord! -- if you mean that). I have read a number of Heinlein's opi -- 'If This Goes On' and etc. -- but I have certainly never remotely compared him with Stapledon. Of course, I am unacquainted with any works (if they exist) which prove Heinlein to be a prominent philosopher, and you are probably unacquainted with Stapledon's non-fictional writings -- which leaves us ill-informed of each other's premises -- and I realize the importance of personal acquaintance in the formation of opinion (for you have been in contact with Heinlein): but even a comparison of Stapledon's popular works with Heinlein's stories must surely eclipse the latter to a certain extent. Perhaps I should make clear the sad fact that S.F. now holds little fascination for me and one of my main contentions -- intending to be illustrative of the worthlessness of S.F. as compared with the more permanent literature -- is that, whereas literature (meaning, let us say, the novel of Sterne, the essay of Hazlitt, the poem of Eliot) is essentially a continuous struggle to relate man to man and his environment (a most inadequate description, by the way). S.F. is -- to be iconoclastic -- a method of making money in the provision of entertainment. Of course, a small minority of writers do create S.F. purely for their own enjoyment and regardless of editorial policies, but these are mostly to be numbered amongst fans. But regardless of whether Heinlein writes for profit or pleasure, or both (it doesn't really matter) his aims, compared with Stapledon's, sufficiently prove him to be the lesser writer. And I do not mean the aims which may be found, for instance, in the 'Story behind the Story' in "T.W.S.", but rather the illumination a person's writings throw upon human nature and human affairs. I remember that Campbell particularly praised Heinlein's "psychology", police force (I think), and the names of his land cruisers, etc., in the serial 'If This Goes On'. Granted that Campbell is selling a magazine and must be the possessor of a capacious check (for I have a greater respect for his intelligence than to believe he wholly endorses every word of his editorial writings), there was nothing unusual or deep about Heinlein's psychology, or police force (?), or the names of his cruisers (which was a bathetic touch on the part of Campbell, I thought): it was just another "revolt against tyranny" story (which, incidentally, was achieved by Campbell himself with great superiority some years ago, i.e. 'Contest (Conquest?) of the Planets': Campbell is a far better psychologist than Heinlein) with a cute selling "blurb". No offence to Heinlein or Campbell but I like to register my view of these matters, idiotic and erroneous though it may be. '' Skipping much that is interesting and controversial, I find your stirring address to the guzzlers of old Los Angeles (!) of moment to British fandom as well as to Phil Bronson and the Californian bars. In fact, the split you describe between the science-fictional S.F. fans and the non-science-fictional S.F. fans (!) is very true of affairs in Britain. Personally speaking, the older old guard -- Ted, Ken, Wally, for instance -- are still very true to the appeal of S.F.: and the younger young guard - Art.Williams, Renny Rennison, etc. -- too, are intensely enthusiastic in their pursuance of S.F. and fanning matters: but we middle-aged blokes of about 20,21,22, and thereabouts -- well! we seem to be a cynical crowd of blighters. There's that fellow Youd, as you doubtless know, and ole man Burke, plus young Hairy. Besides George ("Jeyes Fluid") Medhurst and the repugnant -- I mean, redoubtable Smith, and ooh! scores of 'em! Orl wise and nasty. Do you still want 10 days amongst us? (Yes, if I can get the furlo!)

Dennis TUCKER comes down from 108 Abercromby Ave, HIGH WYCOME, Bucks, Eng: "Perhaps you can imagine my surprise when I opened my FIDO packet for March to find several items therein earmarked for me by you! VoM for January, and unfinished Damn Thing and FFF number 69. A few days after, Mike (Rosenblum) sent me the February VoM, all of which seems

Saving...

VOICE OF THE I never did anything worse than the protagonists in the de Camp stories and wasn't even as successful as they were. The only thing you could hold against him was that he played chess (a failing of my own) -- otherwise there was a pleasant story that he used always to take two taxis, the second being for his astral body, with which presumably he wasn't on good terms. But having quarreled with one's astral body is a purely private matter and there is no need for Mr. K to apply terms like Degraded Cultus to it (I suppose he knows what that means) I imagine the Petrol Control here has now enforced a reconciliation, in any case. '' Tigrina's backward-sloping handwriting is very revealing to a graphologist -- means she's firmly fixated in infancy and, in fact, showing off like a kid. If she'd like to try and prove her worth we'll send her any quantity of the hair of a guy we don't like, payment by results, but we don't believe there will be any results." COLIN RODEN, 115 Bondi Rd, Bondi, NSW, Australia, answers fandom's Confirm or Deny cry: "Hold on for a surprise. I -- and every other active member of the F.S.S. (Futurian Soc'y of Sydney) -- have SEEN and heard & talked to ALAN P. ROBERTS!! He's in Sydney, & is the most solid-looking pseudonym or myth that I have ever seen. Actually we have known that for a long time -- he has had correspondence with some Sydney fans. But certain Americans seem to doubt his authenticity, so this should clear things up." Eric C. Hopkins from 6, Elm Park Ave, Elm Park, Romford, Essex, Eng: "The August (41) number is more than usually interesting, 'Den Ver De Days' being the spur of my delight. I'm years past the stage of gurgling with happiness at the mere mention of fan's names (perhaps because I know the British species personally!) but hell! what times you have out there. I have only one impulse comparable in strength to my desire to be kept in England for the duration, and that is that I should be sent to the U.S.A. for training! Particularly California around about next summer! But what a hope. I wonder if there are any S.F. fans in Russia! Surely the viewpoint of S.F. -- when & where it exists -- is in line with materialist theory. '' Amidst all the rich and startling occurrences of the Denvention, two of your reminiscences arise with a stinging effervescence to smite me in the eye. (I) your 'dubl-rich choclit spiked with egg' (Great stuff: if you can get it!). -- and -- (II) your description of Robert Heinlein as 'the American W. Olaf Stapledon' (Good Lord! -- if you mean that). I have read a number of Heinlein's opi -- 'If This Goes On' and etc. -- but I have certainly never remotely compared him with Stapledon. Of course, I am unacquainted with any works (if they exist) which prove Heinlein to be a prominent philosopher, and you are probably unacquainted with Stapledon's non-fictional writings -- which leaves us ill-informed of each other's premises -- and I realize the importance of personal acquaintance in the formation of opinion (for you have been in contact with Heinlein): but even a comparison of Stapledon's popular works with Heinlein's stories must surely eclipse the latter to a certain extent. Perhaps I should make clear the sad fact that S.F. now holds little fascination for me and one of my main contentions -- intending to be illustrative of the worthlessness of S.F. as compared with the more permanent literature -- is that, whereas literature (meaning, let us say, the novel of Sterne, the essay of Hazlitt, the poem of Eliot) is essentially a continuous struggle to relate man to man and his environment (a most inadequate description, by the way). S.F. is -- to be iconoclastic -- a method of making money in the provision of entertainment. Of course, a small minority of writers do create S.F. purely for their own enjoyment and regardless of editorial policies, but these are mostly to be numbered amongst fans. But regardless of whether Heinlein writes for profit or pleasure, or both (it doesn't really matter) his aims, compared with Stapledon's, sufficiently prove him to be the lesser writer. And I do not mean the aims which may be found, for instance, in the 'Story behind the Story' in "T.W.S.", but rather the illumination a person's writings throw upon human nature and human affairs. I remember that Campbell particularly praised Heinlein's "psychology", police force (I think), and the names of his land cruisers, etc., in the serial 'If This Goes On'. Granted that Campbell is selling a magazine and must be the possessor of a capacious check (for I have a greater respect for his intelligence than to believe he wholly endorses every word of his editorial writings), there was nothing unusual or deep about Heinlein's psychology, or police force (?), or the names of his cruisers (which was a bathetic touch on the part of Campbell, I thought): it was just another "revolt against tyranny" story (which, incidentally, was achieved by Campbell himself with great superiority some years ago, i.e. 'Contest (Conquest?) of the Planets': Campbell is a far better psychologist than Heinlein) with a cute selling "blurb". No offence to Heinlein or Campbell but I like to register my view of these matters, idiotic and erroneous though it may be. '' Skipping much that is interesting and controversial, I find your stirring address to the guzzlers of old Los Angeles (!) of moment to British fandom as well as to Phil Bronson and the Californian bars. In fact, the split you describe between the science-fictional S.F. fans and the non-science-fictional S.F. fans (!) is very true of affairs in Britain. Personally speaking, the older old guard -- Ted, Ken, Wally, for instance -- are still very true to the appeal of S.F.: and the younger young guard - Art.Williams, Renny Rennison, etc. -- too, are intensely enthusiastic in their pursuance of S.F. and fanning matters: but we middle-aged blokes of about 20,21,22, and thereabouts -- well! we seem to be a cynical crowd of blighters. There's that fellow Youd, as you doubtless know, and ole man Burke, plus young Hairy. Besides George ("Jeyes Fluid") Medhurst and the repugnant -- I mean, redoubtable Smith, and ooh! scores of 'em! Orl wise and nasty. Do you still want 10 days amongst us? (Yes, if I can get the furlo!) Dennis TUCKER comes down from 108 Abercromby Ave, HIGH WYCOME, Bucks, Eng: "Perhaps you can imagine my surprise when I opened my FIDO packet for March to find several items therein earmarked for me by you! VoM for January, and unfinished Damn Thing and FFF number 69. A few days after, Mike (Rosenblum) sent me the February VoM, all of which seems