Analog SFF, April 2012
Page 23
Campbell's salary, however welcome in 1937 in providing what had been up to then a month-to-month uncertainty about food and housing during the Depression, was insufficient to meet Campbell's hopes to buy a house and a new car (a Ford), and he published his own stories in Astounding and elsewhere, even sending stories off to new magazines rumored to start in England. He soon got rewarded by Street & Smith with a raise to fifty dollars a week and gradually his own work trailed off into promotional efforts for science fiction itself. One striking example of how a published story conceals its troubled origins is the classic “Who Goes There?,” which began with a humorous story called “The Brain Stealers of Mars” that Campbell wrote for Weisinger's Thrilling Wonder Stories. Campbell thought he could adapt the idea of imitation of life forms for a story called “Frozen Hell,” about imitation in the Antarctic rather than on Mars, which he wanted to sell to Argosy. The editorial staff there was excited about it but thought it didn't have any “major characters.” Campbell rewrote the story, which eventually found its way to Tremaine and Astounding and got its final name.
The origins of the legendary fantasy magazine Unknown are recounted here, and like everything else its beginnings were far less confident than the impression offered by its realization. One interesting aspect was the way in which Campbell tried to get fantasy stories from his SF authors without telling anyone that a new magazine was in the works. Unknown was going to be named Strange Worlds until Standard Magazines announced that it was bringing out a new magazine called Strange Stories.
Lots of inside stories are recounted in these letters, with appraisals of stories and authors, including Edmond Hamilton, Henry Kuttner, Jack Williamson, L. Sprague de Camp, Theodore Sturgeon, and particularly L. Ron Hubbard and Robert Heinlein. Campbell admired Hubbard as a writer and as a person with a fascinating life story and talents other than writing. The letters also give some insight into the science-fiction social life that often centered around Campbell's home in New Jersey. When Hubbard produced his book on Dianetics in 1950, Campbell published a sizable portion of it in the May 1950 Astounding and his letters are filled with enthusiasm about its efficacy for several years, including a reference to his wife Dona's fear for him embedded in her “engrams” that led to their divorce. But by February 1953 Campbell had become disenchanted. He explained his earlier belief in Hubbard's methods because of the way Hubbard had restored himself from a psychological wreck in 1935 to a confident, sparkling person four years later.
The issue of Fantasy Commentator could more accurately be described as a large-size, 159-page soft-cover book. It contains a lot of typographical errors, and Moskowitz's comments and editing are of mixed value. Moskowitz's critical judgments were never his strong suit, and neither was his style, but he does provide context from his encyclopedic knowledge of the scene and the publications of the period. He is able to supply details of material that may be only ambiguous references in the letters. But he is not always trustworthy and provides no documentation. One example: A letter refers to Lloyd Eschbach's interest in “Frozen Hell,” and Moskowitz commented that Eschbach published this (for Fantasy Press) in 1951 as The Moon Is Hell. But “Frozen Hell,” as we have already noted, was the early name for “Who Goes There?” and The Moon Is Hell is a novel about a spaceship being wrecked on the moon and the crew having to find ways to survive (incidentally by heating water out of moon dust.)
But no matter. The work is a fascinating insight into how the Golden Age got going and the man who got it going.
Copyright (C) 2012 James Gunn
[Back to Table of Contents]
* * *
Reader's Department: BRASS TACKS
Dear Dr. Schmidt,
Congratulations to Alistair Meyer for beating me to publication of a solid, testable hypothesis regarding the phenomenon of disappearing socks. [October 2011.] For years I have pondered this very mystery and was just about to publish myself.
Of course, in order to publish, I would have to launch my own venue, UCO Review, a peer-reviewed forum for serious papers discussing Unidentified Creeping Objects, a sister science to the study of UFOs and USOs.
In said publication, my opening salvo was to be: “ITBEs and Podiatric Protection Protocols: Recovering Fabric Footwear From Intra-Terrestrial Biological Entities, Commonly Known as ‘Sock Gnomes.'”
My hypothesis regards minute nocturnal creatures, sock bandits of the species Gnomus pinchsocketus, that emerge from mini-wormholes in the Earth's crustal plates, crawl into dryer exhaust tubes, then shimmy into dryer drums to make off with their prized loot.
Alas, Mr. Meyer's alternative hypothesis, tested in the time-honored tradition of “Oops, I made a mistake and discovered a fundamental truth,” puts my cherished contemplation on the lint heap.
Darn! Their socks have returned with more? Maybe mine? Gee. Perhaps when the Meyer Hypothesis receives the Nobel Sock Recovery Prize, due to be awarded in 2012 in Gnomeville, Wishconsin, he will be provided enough funds to send out all the lost socks that are returning to Earth via his reverse-drum-vortex. I really miss the one with the rainbows and sparkles that matched my hat and gloves. Well, the one glove . . . the other disappeared in the dryer—
Glove Gnomes! All hope is not lost! Look for the launch of UCO Review any day now.
Amy Dunn
Hilo, Hawaii
* * * *
Dr. Schmidt,
Hello. I'm a new subscriber to your magazine and I'm really very glad I decided to purchase the subscription. My interest in your magazine began with Brad Torgersen's “Outbound” story after I picked it up at a B&N. Then I decided to purchase a subscription when I heard that he had a new story this month [December 2011], even though I had read it before (I participated in the Dean & Kris workshop that Brad originally wrote it for back in February.) The November 2011 issue was my first delivery and Castro's story “With Unclean Hands” was my favorite, though truth be told, I enjoyed them all.
Thank you again for running such a wonderful magazine and I'm looking forward to my next issue. I think I'm going to be a long-term subscriber.
With warm regards,
Thomas K. Carpenter
* * * *
Dear Dr. Schmidt,
As a long-time subscriber, I feel I finally have to give my first opinion about your magazine in general and the Brass Tacks contributors in particular.
I look forward to each issue and enjoy almost every article/story. I will admit that some (most) of your science facts are way over my head, but I'm glad they are there nonetheless. After all, your magazine is named Analog SCIENCE FICTION AND FACT and it seems to be blazoned on every cover I have seen. You are doing a great job.
So the reason for this epistle is to ask the question: Do the contributors to Brass Tacks not know the difference between fact and fiction? You do label the fact articles as fact—so one must assume all the rest of the stories are fiction. Why must they (the contributors) feel they must correct the authors on some obscure point of physics that does nothing to change the world, other than to give the contributor a feeling of self-aggrandizement? ("Ah-ha! Caught you, you ignoramus! See how smart I am?") I wonder how their parents ever got away with the story about the three pigs and the big bad wolf.
I suggest those folks buy more trade magazines for chemistry, physics, astronomy, etc. and do some good for mankind in general.
I really don't care that we can't actually go faster than light. In my imagination we can, and it makes for a great story. That's what your selling, isn't it?
Best regards,
Jim
* * * *
Certainly there's a lot more leeway in fiction than in a fact article, and readers need to make some allowance. At the same time, there's also something extra special about a story that's not only fantastic but just might be possible. So a lot of readers and writers like to play “the game": writers try to get the details in their stories as right as they can (consistent with telling a good story), and readers like to tr
y (sometimes less tactfully than they might) to find ways they could have got it even better.
* * * *
Dear Dr. Schmidt,
Just a note to thank you for yet another outstanding issue of Analog. [December 2011] Of the several stories I've read so far, two in particular stand out: Brad R. Torgerson's “Ray of Light"; and Kristine Kathryn Rusch's “The Impossibles.” Perhaps because I'm a divorced dad, (or not . . .) I could relate to the dad in the story and his struggles of the heart, especially with his wife and daughter. The idea of a freeze-over (regardless of its source) was a nice change from gloom-and-doom global warming. The teens weren't simply cardboard, much less sitcom characters that make adults look dumb. I cheered their initiative and got a kick out of the story's resolution (sorry, I'm a photographer . . .). Ms. Rusch's tale also struck a chord. Having been on a few court dates with my ex, seeing three different judges, (and their approaches to Family Court) and having a caring if somewhat busy-with-other-cases attorney, this one hit home. Donatella and her legal dilemma (falling through the cracks) were especially poignant and believable, as was her newbie attorney. That one's a keeper. I hope Ms. Rusch gives her another shot.
Thanks much for your time and attention.
Regards,
EW “Whit” Knight, H.D.D.
* * * *
Dear Mr. Schmidt,
As a long time subscriber and admirer I was quite disappointed by your “Outliers, Evil Spirits, and Perspective” editorial on nuclear power.
Juxtaposition of the number dead from the tsunami with estimated numbers from the massive release of nuclear contamination is a false argument. The impact of the nuclear accident needs to be assessed in it own terms. For generations after the tsunami's damage has passed, the radiation will bedevil the people of Japan and perhaps the world.
The tsunami was not caused by humans; it was not a human decision. Building nuclear plants is a decision made by society.
Also, you apparently did not update your facts. Since initial reports, new evidence shows that the nuclear failure began with the earthquake, before the tsunami hit. Last week, news reports suggest that fission is still taking place.
To suggest the severity of the contamination, but not to equate the value of things with lives, may I point out that nearly 1,000 square kilometers of Japan has been deemed uninhabitable?
Over a hundred nuclear plants in America are generating nuclear waste for which there is no permanent disposal technology. No economically feasible approach has been identified. America keeps the extremely radioactive waste in containers that require constant circulation of water to prevent overheating and near certain thermal explosion. The power to cool must be uninterrupted for the next 1,000 years or longer. Yes, perhaps a few hours or days of interrupted power are tolerable, but any longer outage risks near certain catastrophe.
Given the arc of human history this may be the ultimate hubris of our society. To imagine that we can guarantee future generations will keep these hundreds of tons of radioactive waste from overheating for centuries to come is absurd. Wars and natural disasters, indeed, the inevitable fall of empires, makes it extremely likely that someday the power will be cut off for far too long. When that happens, radioactive cesium and plutonium will spread across the land and water and seep into the water tables. There it will remain a steadfast and powerful force against human life for millenniums.
Perhaps this scenario is an entertaining topic for science fiction writers, imaging how humans migrate, evolve, or adapt. Yet the very real people who experience the pain and death of the radioactive poison will not be entertained. If they can remember who perpetrated this folly, they will surely curse them.
I call on you to reexamine your position and revisit this issue. A good place to start is with Arnie Gundersen at Fairewinds. I urge you to write a new editorial and set the record straight. You owe it to your readers and the human species.
Sincerely,
Mark Coats
Austin, TX
* * * *
First of all, my editorial was not about nuclear power, though people's attitudes toward nuclear power provided one of my main examples of my real subject. My real subject, as I explicitly stated, was the tendency of people to view certain topics, including but not limited to nuclear power, in much the same way as their ancestors viewed evil spirits: a way more superstitious and hysterical than analytical and rational. That point remains valid and important.
I also explicitly acknowledged that the Japanese nuclear problems were very large (though not, I think, as large as you claim; “bedevil the world” strikes me as extreme hyperbole and a good example of what I was talking about), and that I was not arguing for or against the continued use of nuclear power. I was merely pleading (probably in vain) for a more reason-based consideration of that and similar questions.
As for not updating my facts, you and anyone reading any Analog editorial needs to be aware that, because of the limitations of our production methods, they're written at least five months before they appear. So adjusting them to take into account something released “last week” is not even remotely in the realm of possibility. What I say always includes the implicit disclaimer, ‘As of this writing . . .'
Why does production take so long? Because faster methods are much more expensive, and since science fiction magazines tend to have low circulations, we would have to charge an unrealistically high price for the magazine to produce it with high-speed methods.
* * * *
Dear Dr. Schmidt,
You asked how the word “nuke” came to be used for the process of heating food in a microwave oven. [January/February 2012] It is very simple: the electric power in the house comes from a nuclear power plant. We are acknowledging the source of the power when we use the oven. The microwave generator in the oven is not nuclear, of course, but the North Anna power plant is.
Elin Larson
* * * *
A cute theory, but it's farfetched and holds no water at all. It could equally justify saying we nuke our laundry in electric washers and dryers, or nuke our copies of Analog with the electric lights we use to illuminate them. And how does it apply to the many, many microwave ovens using power not generated by nuclear power plants?
* * * *
Dear Dr. Schmidt,
Triggers [January/February 2012] started off with a bang. A great choice and a real page-turner. I really enjoy the serials. They make me look forward to the next issue. I can't wait to open the magazine when there is a serial. Keep them coming. Edward Lerner's serial started great but lost some steam. Still good, but the end did not match the level of excitement of the beginning. Thank you and the staff for all your years of service.
Warmest wishes,
Steve Sterling
[Back to Table of Contents]
* * *
Reader's Department: UPCOMING EVENTS
by Anthony Lewis
20-22 April 2012
ODYSSEY CON 12 (Madison WI area SF conference) at Radisson Hotel, Madison, WI. Writer Guests of Honor: Larry Niven and Steven Barnes; Game Designer Guest of Honor: Kenneth Hite. Memberships: (until 7 April 2012) Adult $35, Student $25, Youth (6-12) $15; (thereafter and at the door): Adult $45, Student $35, Youth (6-12) $25. Info: www.odysseycon.org; Odyssey Con, PO Box 7114, Madison, WI 53707
25-27 May 2012
ALABAMA PHOENIX FESTIVAL (The Arts, Science Fiction, Fantasy, Gaming, etc.) at Hilton at Perimeter Park, Birmingham, AL. Membership: $50 until 27 April 2012, $55 thereafter. Info: www.alabamaphoenixfestival.com /index.html; info@alabamaphoenixfestival. com; PO Box 359, Helena, AL 35080.
25-28 May 2012
BALTICON 46 (Baltimore area SF conference) at Marriott's Hunt Valley Inn, Baltimore, MD. Guest of Honor: Jody Lynn Nye; Artist Guest of Honor: Jim Odbert; Music/Filk Guests of Honor: Heather Dale & Ben Deschamps; Science Guest of Honor: Dr. William D. Phillips, N.L. Membership: $50 adult/$25 (6-12) until 29 February 2012, $55/$28 1 March to 30 April 2012; $62/$31 thereaft
er. Info: www. balticon.org/; balticoninfo@balticon.org; P.O. Box 686, Baltimore, MD 21203-0686
25-28 May 2012
BAY CON 30 (San Francisco Bay area SF conference) at the Hyatt Regency, Santa Clara, CA. Writer Guest of Honor: Brandon Sanderson; Artist Guest of Honor: Stephan Martiniere; Fan Guests of Honor: Scott & Cathy Beckstead; TMs: Dani & Eytan Kollin. Membership: $60 as of 11 November 2011, more later. Info: www.baycon.org/2012/; info12@baycon.org; P.O. Box 62108 Sunnyvale, CA 94088-2108
25-28 May 2012
WISCON 36 (Feminist-oriented SF conference) at Concourse Hotel, Madison, WI. Guests of Honor: Andrea Hairston & Debbie Notkin. Membership: Age 18+ $50; Age 7 to 17 $20. Membership is capped at 1,000; there is no guarantee of at-the-door memberships. Info: www.wiscon.info/; concom36@ wiscon.info; WisCon, c/o SF3, P.O. Box 1624, Madison, WI 53701-1624.
30 August-3 September 2012
CHICON 7 (70th World Science Fiction Convention) at Hyatt Regency Chicago, IL. Writer Guest of Honor: Mike Resnick; Artist Guest of Honor: Rowena Morrill; Astronaut Guest of Honor: Story Musgrave; Fan Guest of Honor: Peggy Rae Sapienza; Agent Guest of Honor: Jane Frank; TM: John Scalzi. Membership from 1 October 2010 until some later date (see website for latest details): Attending through Spring 2011: Adult (22+): $125; Young Adult (17-21): $100; Child (5-16): $75; Kid-in-tow (0-4): FREE; Supporting: $50. [Ages as of 30 August 2012]. This is the SF universe's annual get-together. Professionals and readers from all over the world will be in attendance. Talks, panels, films, fancy dress competition—the works. Nominate and vote for the Hugos. Info: chicon7.org/; info@chicon.org; Post Office Box 13, Skokie, IL 60076.