DIY History | Transcribe | Hevelin Fanzines | Fantasite, v. 2, issue 2, May-June 1942

Transcribe
Translate

Fantasite, v. 2, issue 2, May-June 1942

Page 20

20 THE FANTASITE

one s-f mag regularly and has no use for the rest -- or doesn't know they exist. He is definitely not a fan, but he has just as much to say about the policy of his favorite mag as the fan has. That's another thing wrong with the Jacobi proposal. The fans do not have enough influence to boycott a promag. Can you imagine RAP, for example, bowing to the demands of the fans in such a situation? Why, he'd chuckle in his coffee! AMAZ has been reviled and criticized by fankind for years -- and yet that mag boasts the largest subscriber list of them all. The readers of AMAZ rule it -- and those readers aren't in sympathy with fans' opinions. The same situation exists at all other mags, though perhaps less obviously. Fandom's influence is more widespread than the one-mag readers', but is not as strong as the latter's in any one place. MFS Members: I must admit. I've never read a yarn by Carl Jacobi, not even the Simak collab of last year. Of WT, I own but five issues! -- and only half of them are fully perused. Best tale I've seen in WT so far is "Unhallowed Holiday" -- but apparently few others agreed with me on that. (To keep the records complete, Jacobi's favorite stf-tale was written by Williamson. I'm talking about "The Meteor Girl".) MFS Notes: This was the best write-up of any meeting so far. The Sonnet wins admiration. No juggling of phrases to provide a wanted rime-word, no archaic word-forms, no prosy passages. But it has no title -- it's obviously a sonnet, but that's not a name. The page of MFS Fotos gets, quite naturally, 10 points. As neat a lay-out as you'll find inside or outside of Life. And the photos themselves are clear and distinctive. Only things missing are a large (half-page) portrait of Saari, and a pic of your new Associate Editor. Next comes a much better story by Basil Wells than anything I've seen under his by-line in the promags. "Recommended Reading" hasn't been one of my favorite depts. much as I enjoy Tucker's other stuff, but I sorta liked it this time. Especially the "Passionate Witch" review, which was more sensible than the Wollheim review of it in one of the pros. Don't like that "logo"-heading, however. Sam Russell's "S-F Book Reviews" sort of stole Bob's thunder, but it was intelligent criticism and well-written. I am glad someone has given "The Hopkins Manuscript" a plug. It's one of my favorites among the fantasies between hard covers. "Among the Hams and Pros" disappointed. For one thing, it was too long, and I also disliked the conflicting reviews of one magazine. I like to be able to agree or disagree with the reviewers' opinions and leave it at that. Frankly, I'd like to see ATHAP once again exclusively the Columbia Camp's. This is not to be taken as a slam at the MFS reviewers --far from it. In fact, I thought Sam Russell and John Chapman made some very sensible diagnoses. But, after all, this was Gilbert's and Jenkins' column and I enjoyed their obviously prejudiced and amusing opinions fully as much as more astute criticisms. ((Explanation re ATHAP: The deadline for the Annish had passed, and the Campers still hadn't sent it in, so we frantically requested that the MFS help us out, not wishing to exclude the column. After dummying the "guest-installment" contributed by Sam and John, and just as we were ready to being stenciling, the Columbia Camp sent in their installment, so we re-dummied, with the conflicting reviews, which had been requested many times.)) I was a little surprised at Sam's analysis of WT's poetry which I believe is the top attraction of the mag. I especially liked Francis Flagg's "Dreamer in the Desert". Trite theme -- agreed, but much made of it. Lew Martin's Doc Smith commentary was well written and very revealing. Good phrase: "--the change in style with the alternation of the two writers is like a red-letter edition of the Bible to him." The slams at the editors were amusing. The unanimity with which they cut the Smith spies makes one wonder if they weren't right. After all, among Gernsback, Sloane, and Tremaine, you should find one blue-pencil wielder who knows his business. (Not that I wouldn't like to see the Skylark Trilogy published in full.) "They Come!" rouses a strong prejudice of mine against contracting words to fit the

Saving...

20 THE FANTASITE one s-f mag regularly and has no use for the rest -- or doesn't know they exist. He is definitely not a fan, but he has just as much to say about the policy of his favorite mag as the fan has. That's another thing wrong with the Jacobi proposal. The fans do not have enough influence to boycott a promag. Can you imagine RAP, for example, bowing to the demands of the fans in such a situation? Why, he'd chuckle in his coffee! AMAZ has been reviled and criticized by fankind for years -- and yet that mag boasts the largest subscriber list of them all. The readers of AMAZ rule it -- and those readers aren't in sympathy with fans' opinions. The same situation exists at all other mags, though perhaps less obviously. Fandom's influence is more widespread than the one-mag readers', but is not as strong as the latter's in any one place. MFS Members: I must admit. I've never read a yarn by Carl Jacobi, not even the Simak collab of last year. Of WT, I own but five issues! -- and only half of them are fully perused. Best tale I've seen in WT so far is "Unhallowed Holiday" -- but apparently few others agreed with me on that. (To keep the records complete, Jacobi's favorite stf-tale was written by Williamson. I'm talking about "The Meteor Girl".) MFS Notes: This was the best write-up of any meeting so far. The Sonnet wins admiration. No juggling of phrases to provide a wanted rime-word, no archaic word-forms, no prosy passages. But it has no title -- it's obviously a sonnet, but that's not a name. The page of MFS Fotos gets, quite naturally, 10 points. As neat a lay-out as you'll find inside or outside of Life. And the photos themselves are clear and distinctive. Only things missing are a large (half-page) portrait of Saari, and a pic of your new Associate Editor. Next comes a much better story by Basil Wells than anything I've seen under his by-line in the promags. "Recommended Reading" hasn't been one of my favorite depts. much as I enjoy Tucker's other stuff, but I sorta liked it this time. Especially the "Passionate Witch" review, which was more sensible than the Wollheim review of it in one of the pros. Don't like that "logo"-heading, however. Sam Russell's "S-F Book Reviews" sort of stole Bob's thunder, but it was intelligent criticism and well-written. I am glad someone has given "The Hopkins Manuscript" a plug. It's one of my favorites among the fantasies between hard covers. "Among the Hams and Pros" disappointed. For one thing, it was too long, and I also disliked the conflicting reviews of one magazine. I like to be able to agree or disagree with the reviewers' opinions and leave it at that. Frankly, I'd like to see ATHAP once again exclusively the Columbia Camp's. This is not to be taken as a slam at the MFS reviewers --far from it. In fact, I thought Sam Russell and John Chapman made some very sensible diagnoses. But, after all, this was Gilbert's and Jenkins' column and I enjoyed their obviously prejudiced and amusing opinions fully as much as more astute criticisms. ((Explanation re ATHAP: The deadline for the Annish had passed, and the Campers still hadn't sent it in, so we frantically requested that the MFS help us out, not wishing to exclude the column. After dummying the "guest-installment" contributed by Sam and John, and just as we were ready to being stenciling, the Columbia Camp sent in their installment, so we re-dummied, with the conflicting reviews, which had been requested many times.)) I was a little surprised at Sam's analysis of WT's poetry which I believe is the top attraction of the mag. I especially liked Francis Flagg's "Dreamer in the Desert". Trite theme -- agreed, but much made of it. Lew Martin's Doc Smith commentary was well written and very revealing. Good phrase: "--the change in style with the alternation of the two writers is like a red-letter edition of the Bible to him." The slams at the editors were amusing. The unanimity with which they cut the Smith spies makes one wonder if they weren't right. After all, among Gernsback, Sloane, and Tremaine, you should find one blue-pencil wielder who knows his business. (Not that I wouldn't like to see the Skylark Trilogy published in full.) "They Come!" rouses a strong prejudice of mine against contracting words to fit the