DIY History | Transcribe | Hevelin Fanzines | Voice of the Imagination, whole no. 30, March 1944

Transcribe
Translate

Voice of the Imagination, whole no. 30, March 1944

Page 10

10 VOICE OF THE equal ilk. Does not that hardened heart beating in your manly breast cry aloud in sorrow at the insults offered those innocent creatures by the suggestive pictures drawn by your consorts and printed in your foul organ? ((Dear Prof: Vile, I'll tell U! The only consorts I lisn to are Brahm Stone's blas-famous rendition of Tigrina's "Hymn to Satan", Anirgit's virtually unnoen but equally brilliant "Her to the Devil" & the damoniacal "Knight on Bare Mountain". These are sponsord on the radio locally sundays by the One Tract Mind Socy or sometimes I tune in to Shirley Temple MacPhearsome & Jehovah's Witlesses. Y'see, Prof, in branding Vom a "foul organ", I figure it's all accordion to how U look at it. U quote from the Book of Revile-ations; my source of rebuttal is Ack-clesiastics, where Uncle Psalms says for instance: "Blessed is he who exalteth the feminine form, for yea, tho he be but an ape, yet shall he inherit the monkey-wench." The translation is from the original lost Phoenician version, which has never been found; &, as anyone shoud be able to see with half an eye, is enuf to make a Phoenician blind. Hoping this finds U the same, Prof, I remain, Cynosurely yours, F. Jesus Ackerman.)) CONCLUDING HARRY WARNER's 3-pt serialetter: I'm annoyed with the way BEB thinks of and refers to the "future" throughout her "broadside" (#27). The future is meaningless, to me, except as a continuation of the present, and I'm veryfirmly convinced that fandom and the world will get nowhere if they continue to prate about what must be done for the future. Oddly enough, BEB seems to realize this, and contradicts herself by admitting that "we build from the top down instead of from the bottom up" and "We are sobusy constructing houses on the sand...". I'm not speaking here, of course, about something such as Slan Center, which can't be thought of as anything but a future hope, because of present conditions. But I am referring to changing the world, as some fans seem to think fandom is destined to do. I don't think it can, no matter how it goes about it, but I am positive it won't, if it continues ignoring the present, which is the only thing that itcan change. For until we invent time travel, the future is as unalterable as the past: it's the result of everything that happens, and happenings occur only in the present tense, in their pliable form. And so the paradox: in BEB's attempt to get fandom to do something to disprove its escapist, impractical stigma, she's just falling into the fallacy in the worst way, herself. I have spoken. Russell Mitchell Box 35, Duvall, Wash, postcards: Read with considerable amusement Mr. Elder's letter in Vom, and, my curiosity aroused, borrowed a set of Space Tales. Quotation from Mr Elder in Space Tales No. 5. [... you'r magazine is lowsy ... . I dare you to print this ..] If those statements aren't. childish and immature, what are they? Deer Mr. Palmer. I am 12 years old and have been reading your magazine for 15 years & I writ in to tell your your mag is lowsy & I dare you to print this. haw haw Frank PARKER, sparking-plug of the COSMOS CLUB, sparkles from 6 Greytiles, Queen's Rd, Teddington, Mid'sex, Eng: Three or four days ago, a parcel erupts into my household, smoking slightly and sparking somewhat between the poles. The familiar manifestations make the Parkerian eyes become a trifle B.E.; mouthing strange exorcisms he runs a trembling thumb through the paper wrappings, brings forth with bated breath the bundle of mimeo'd MSS, and fumbles through the pile until a violent shock jolts his wrists up through his elbow. 'Tis true. VoM is once more with us! Particularly pleasing to your humble servant was the fact that the Cosmos Club was lucky enough to be favoured with one of the Wright reproductions (a rightreproduction, too, if I may say so), and luckier still, to have one of the original written Tigrina envelopes. Maybe we can dig up a handwriting expert amongst the Cosmopolites to do a reading on that orthography. Seriously, I think that would be interesting; there's a good deal of character in that hand unless I'm much mistaken - and don't crack that every letter's a character, willya! - and that in conjunction with the lass's published effusions would surely shed a good deal of light on the psychology of one of fandom's mysterious albeit misguided misses. And whilst on the subject of misses, let us cast an optic at the art work of the ish (#27). The cartoons were all funny to this guy's warped sense of humor, with the exception of the ghosts on p. 15, which didn't click at all. As for the noods, they're okeh, I guess; the funny ones are good, but oh, my, the proportions of the Gibson gel - shewer-ly, Mr. Gib, that isn't quite the shape of any femme, past present or future, unless they're ones that have run to seed from the waist down. And one other thing do I note in re the drapeless ones, and that is the innovation of hirsute verisimilitude. Well, that gets by, too; but for the luvva Pete, avoid the toothbrush effect next time, on account of it shows an appalling ignorance of the subject, see ... Now let me plunge into this perrennial argument of the Materialists versus the Churchgoers. Me, I'm neither, so it looks as if I've got an angle on this question. After perusing the arguments pro and con religion in the recent numbers, I've come to the conclusion that both sides are right! Yeah, I mean it. The M's say that the Churches stink, and so they do; I've had a bellyful of them myself, and they're rank with hypocrites and self-seekers. Not one percent of the Churchgoers I ve met were real practising Christians, following the teachings of Christ. They each and every one had their own idea of what religion was and what they thought ought to be the law, and they were all at each other's throats trying to get everybody around them to accept their own personal ideas. The result was that there wasn't a single atom of concordance in Church affairs - and I've been within the workings of more than one. On t'other hand, the C's are just as right, or so it seems to me, when it comes to saying, "Well, whether you choose to call It God or anything else, you've got to admit that there must be some causative Force which gives rise to existence

Saving...

10 VOICE OF THE equal ilk. Does not that hardened heart beating in your manly breast cry aloud in sorrow at the insults offered those innocent creatures by the suggestive pictures drawn by your consorts and printed in your foul organ? ((Dear Prof: Vile, I'll tell U! The only consorts I lisn to are Brahm Stone's blas-famous rendition of Tigrina's "Hymn to Satan", Anirgit's virtually unnoen but equally brilliant "Her to the Devil" & the damoniacal "Knight on Bare Mountain". These are sponsord on the radio locally sundays by the One Tract Mind Socy or sometimes I tune in to Shirley Temple MacPhearsome & Jehovah's Witlesses. Y'see, Prof, in branding Vom a "foul organ", I figure it's all accordion to how U look at it. U quote from the Book of Revile-ations; my source of rebuttal is Ack-clesiastics, where Uncle Psalms says for instance: "Blessed is he who exalteth the feminine form, for yea, tho he be but an ape, yet shall he inherit the monkey-wench." The translation is from the original lost Phoenician version, which has never been found; &, as anyone shoud be able to see with half an eye, is enuf to make a Phoenician blind. Hoping this finds U the same, Prof, I remain, Cynosurely yours, F. Jesus Ackerman.)) CONCLUDING HARRY WARNER's 3-pt serialetter: I'm annoyed with the way BEB thinks of and refers to the "future" throughout her "broadside" (#27). The future is meaningless, to me, except as a continuation of the present, and I'm veryfirmly convinced that fandom and the world will get nowhere if they continue to prate about what must be done for the future. Oddly enough, BEB seems to realize this, and contradicts herself by admitting that "we build from the top down instead of from the bottom up" and "We are sobusy constructing houses on the sand...". I'm not speaking here, of course, about something such as Slan Center, which can't be thought of as anything but a future hope, because of present conditions. But I am referring to changing the world, as some fans seem to think fandom is destined to do. I don't think it can, no matter how it goes about it, but I am positive it won't, if it continues ignoring the present, which is the only thing that itcan change. For until we invent time travel, the future is as unalterable as the past: it's the result of everything that happens, and happenings occur only in the present tense, in their pliable form. And so the paradox: in BEB's attempt to get fandom to do something to disprove its escapist, impractical stigma, she's just falling into the fallacy in the worst way, herself. I have spoken. Russell Mitchell Box 35, Duvall, Wash, postcards: Read with considerable amusement Mr. Elder's letter in Vom, and, my curiosity aroused, borrowed a set of Space Tales. Quotation from Mr Elder in Space Tales No. 5. [... you'r magazine is lowsy ... . I dare you to print this ..] If those statements aren't. childish and immature, what are they? Deer Mr. Palmer. I am 12 years old and have been reading your magazine for 15 years & I writ in to tell your your mag is lowsy & I dare you to print this. haw haw Frank PARKER, sparking-plug of the COSMOS CLUB, sparkles from 6 Greytiles, Queen's Rd, Teddington, Mid'sex, Eng: Three or four days ago, a parcel erupts into my household, smoking slightly and sparking somewhat between the poles. The familiar manifestations make the Parkerian eyes become a trifle B.E.; mouthing strange exorcisms he runs a trembling thumb through the paper wrappings, brings forth with bated breath the bundle of mimeo'd MSS, and fumbles through the pile until a violent shock jolts his wrists up through his elbow. 'Tis true. VoM is once more with us! Particularly pleasing to your humble servant was the fact that the Cosmos Club was lucky enough to be favoured with one of the Wright reproductions (a rightreproduction, too, if I may say so), and luckier still, to have one of the original written Tigrina envelopes. Maybe we can dig up a handwriting expert amongst the Cosmopolites to do a reading on that orthography. Seriously, I think that would be interesting; there's a good deal of character in that hand unless I'm much mistaken - and don't crack that every letter's a character, willya! - and that in conjunction with the lass's published effusions would surely shed a good deal of light on the psychology of one of fandom's mysterious albeit misguided misses. And whilst on the subject of misses, let us cast an optic at the art work of the ish (#27). The cartoons were all funny to this guy's warped sense of humor, with the exception of the ghosts on p. 15, which didn't click at all. As for the noods, they're okeh, I guess; the funny ones are good, but oh, my, the proportions of the Gibson gel - shewer-ly, Mr. Gib, that isn't quite the shape of any femme, past present or future, unless they're ones that have run to seed from the waist down. And one other thing do I note in re the drapeless ones, and that is the innovation of hirsute verisimilitude. Well, that gets by, too; but for the luvva Pete, avoid the toothbrush effect next time, on account of it shows an appalling ignorance of the subject, see ... Now let me plunge into this perrennial argument of the Materialists versus the Churchgoers. Me, I'm neither, so it looks as if I've got an angle on this question. After perusing the arguments pro and con religion in the recent numbers, I've come to the conclusion that both sides are right! Yeah, I mean it. The M's say that the Churches stink, and so they do; I've had a bellyful of them myself, and they're rank with hypocrites and self-seekers. Not one percent of the Churchgoers I ve met were real practising Christians, following the teachings of Christ. They each and every one had their own idea of what religion was and what they thought ought to be the law, and they were all at each other's throats trying to get everybody around them to accept their own personal ideas. The result was that there wasn't a single atom of concordance in Church affairs - and I've been within the workings of more than one. On t'other hand, the C's are just as right, or so it seems to me, when it comes to saying, "Well, whether you choose to call It God or anything else, you've got to admit that there must be some causative Force which gives rise to existence