Transcribe
Translate
The Reader and Collector, v. 2, issue 2, June 1941
Page 5
More information
digital collection
archival collection guide
transcription tips
5. ANOTHER MAN'S VIEWPOINT (The January, 1941 issue of Spaceways had an article entitled "One Man's Viewpoint" in which "The Professor", an unknown in the fantasy field, gave his views on science fiction and weird fiction and of the group of people known as "fans". It gives me considerable pleasure to print below an abstract from a personal letter which I recently received. The writer is also unknown in the fantasy field; but has established an enviable reputation in other fields as a critic, litterateur, editor and writer). "---My knowledge of the fantasy field is limited to occasional reading of Amazing and Astounding; the discussions revealed in their forums seem to be conducted by two groups, one rather literate and concerned with the likelihood or validity of quasi-scientific assumptions, and the other made up largely of goops, morons and assorted nuts. I think that the latter group is by far the larger. But perhaps I don't read the right magazines. The fantasy fans seem to be a close corporation of enthusiasts, who write a queer jargon, quarrel bitterly over their favorite authors and illustrators, and apparently haven't reached any general agreement as to science-fiction fundamentals. One thing strikes me as being particularly strange. Stories of space travel assume speeds comparable with the speed of light, in order, I suppose, to justify the ability of mere human beings to survive journeys to the galectic universe, or what not. Now in the realm of pure fairy tales such as an assumption would be quite all right; but if scientific plausibility is supposed to be a sine qua noo[[?]], how in hell do these writers get away with it? I know next to nothing about scientific possibilities, but I should think that stories of this sort, depending for their main interest on the projection of scientific discoveries, ought to stick pretty closely to developments that are in the light of present knowledge just around the corner, or at least remotely possible. What I am getting at in my dumb way is that science- fiction ought to be based on some sort of plausible principles, in order to avoid being ridiculous. The scientific projections of Jules Verne were rather clumsy, but even in his time they weren't absolutely implausible, whereas even in the best science fiction of today is distressingly childish in its attempts at verisimilitude. Perhaps the point is unimportant, since most of the readers are mentally adolescent, but if one likes to read fictional treatments of possible scientific achievements, either in hypothetical civilizations of the past or future, or one has a right to expect something a bit more convincing than mere wand-waving, lamp- rubbing and hocus- pocus. Someone competent to deal with this matter of scientific limits, - that is, the utmost that our present science will grant as being barely possible - ought to write a paper setting forth the metes and bounds of fictional
Saving...
prev
next
5. ANOTHER MAN'S VIEWPOINT (The January, 1941 issue of Spaceways had an article entitled "One Man's Viewpoint" in which "The Professor", an unknown in the fantasy field, gave his views on science fiction and weird fiction and of the group of people known as "fans". It gives me considerable pleasure to print below an abstract from a personal letter which I recently received. The writer is also unknown in the fantasy field; but has established an enviable reputation in other fields as a critic, litterateur, editor and writer). "---My knowledge of the fantasy field is limited to occasional reading of Amazing and Astounding; the discussions revealed in their forums seem to be conducted by two groups, one rather literate and concerned with the likelihood or validity of quasi-scientific assumptions, and the other made up largely of goops, morons and assorted nuts. I think that the latter group is by far the larger. But perhaps I don't read the right magazines. The fantasy fans seem to be a close corporation of enthusiasts, who write a queer jargon, quarrel bitterly over their favorite authors and illustrators, and apparently haven't reached any general agreement as to science-fiction fundamentals. One thing strikes me as being particularly strange. Stories of space travel assume speeds comparable with the speed of light, in order, I suppose, to justify the ability of mere human beings to survive journeys to the galectic universe, or what not. Now in the realm of pure fairy tales such as an assumption would be quite all right; but if scientific plausibility is supposed to be a sine qua noo[[?]], how in hell do these writers get away with it? I know next to nothing about scientific possibilities, but I should think that stories of this sort, depending for their main interest on the projection of scientific discoveries, ought to stick pretty closely to developments that are in the light of present knowledge just around the corner, or at least remotely possible. What I am getting at in my dumb way is that science- fiction ought to be based on some sort of plausible principles, in order to avoid being ridiculous. The scientific projections of Jules Verne were rather clumsy, but even in his time they weren't absolutely implausible, whereas even in the best science fiction of today is distressingly childish in its attempts at verisimilitude. Perhaps the point is unimportant, since most of the readers are mentally adolescent, but if one likes to read fictional treatments of possible scientific achievements, either in hypothetical civilizations of the past or future, or one has a right to expect something a bit more convincing than mere wand-waving, lamp- rubbing and hocus- pocus. Someone competent to deal with this matter of scientific limits, - that is, the utmost that our present science will grant as being barely possible - ought to write a paper setting forth the metes and bounds of fictional
Hevelin Fanzines
sidebar
