The Letters to the Editor department is intended to be a forum for our readers to express their own opinions and ideas. While we appreciate the many complimentary letters we receive each day, you won't find them on this page. Instead, you will find letters that go beyond or even contradict what we have written, letters that offer a different perspective and provide a different view of science fiction. If you would like to submit a letter, please use our feedback form or send a message to scifiweekly@scifi.com.
-- Craig E. Engler, Editor
Crusade Has Possibilities
was very glad to see Crusade come on. What with the summer reruns, and Star Trek: Deep Space Nine leaving the air, good programs are hard to come by. I certainly hope Crusade finds a home, because I thought it was worth watching and will be interesting. The characters are good, the mission has all sorts of possibilities, and the ship--well, we don't know much yet. Didn't another famous ship make a five-year journey of exploration? Yes, sounds familiar, but there are so many stories to be told.
Judith Page
judithzu@psnw.com
Jettison Crusade
was sadly disappointed by Crusade. Don't get me wrong: I have been a staunch fan of Babylon 5 ever since the pilot, but this just seemed so divorced from B5. Where are the Rangers? Where are Sheridan and the other aliens? Why is an Earth senator in charge of manning an Alliance craft?
Sure, these answers may be found in the 13 episodes, but it really seems
that B5 has been jettisoned. The set up of Crusade did not seem to fit with the origin of Excalibur as told in the last B5 episode.
Also, Gary Cole is cold. Sometimes he sounds like Sheridan, sometimes like
his character from American Gothic. And his telepathic sidekick? How'd
Bester let that one happen?
I just don't like it. It made a thunderous thunk!
Jettison it into space.
Lawrence Cooper
LawrenceCooper@prodigy.net
Crusade Is Real Science Fiction
t's a shame that a series with such promise, such an incredible fan-base, and such a rich history as Crusade will be shelved because TNT thinks the world revolves around wrestling and Westerns. Crusade and Babylon 5 are the only things I
watch on TNT.
Crusade was wonderful. Thought-provoking, intense, not the "glossed over"
SF Gene Roddenberry's crew parcels out--but real, truly science-engendered
fiction. You don't hear ships swooping around. You don't hear space
explosions. This is real science fiction.
The characters seem real--they have real motivations, conflicting
ideologies, each has his own agenda. Only a couple of things do I consider
to be a bit out of place in the premise...
Earth is dying--but we send only one ship? Yes, I know, the Rangers are
finding the leads and the Excalibur is following them up. Also, it was a
little too "convenient" that they just happened to need a linguist and an
archaeologist which they discover in their first encounter. Just a bit contrived.
Still, compared to the science fiction drivel cranked out by the
Roddenberry grave-robbers, this is high drama.
Evan Moore
evanmoore@aol.com
The Differences Behind The Similarities
'm surprised it took this long before something like August Ragone's letter
pointing to the similarities between Crusade and Starcruiser
Yamoto/Starblazers appeared. The similarities have been discussed by SF fans ever since the premise of the new series was first revealed. Interestingly, it has been Babylon 5 fans like Mr.
Ragone who have done most of the discussing!
Mr. Ragone's letter is exceptional, however, in that it gives a rather
detailed description of the Yamoto/Starblazers plot. This is helpful because it points up the vast differences which lurk behind the
similarities. In Yamoto/Starblazers, the attack on Earth has done its worst, and only a remnant of a nearly extinct humanity remains; in Crusade, Excalibur is racing against time to prevent the destruction of an Earth and a human race which, though infected by the Drakh plague, is as yet very much intact. Yamoto/Starblazers is a quest to receive a gift from benevolent aliens, who are curiously capable of delivering an advanced star drive but not the gift itself; Crusade is a search for a cure which may or may not be out there somewhere. One similarity which he omitted: I believe that Yamoto, as well as Excalibur, had a "super weapon" of alien origin which, when used, left the ship defenseless for a minute or so until its energy reserves were built up again!
Robert Waters
revh2o@pcpartner.net
How Can TNT Cancel Crusade?
just watched the premiere of Crusade and had to say it was very good and looks very promising, but what I don't understand is how TNT could cancel a
series before it has even aired. I mean, thank God Babylon 5 didn't start its first season on that station because it would've never made it to a second season let alone its five-year story arc (same as Crusade is supposed to have).
Mike Compton
coaxacotl@aol.com
Crusade Dialogue Is Appalling
watched Crusade and was appalled at the dialogue. "If the ship is
destroyed they'll dock my pay"? Where on "Earth" did that come from? Too
much character building without substance. Also not enough Babylon 5 "backup" to make the story plausible. Not a mention of Sheridan or Delenn or even the Shadows as the real reason behind the new enemy.
Harry Silva
Holehndymn@aol.com
Crusade Should Live On Forever
rusade is fantastic! I do not know what problem TNT had with the series, because this is true SF that only J. Michael Straczynski could create. The special effects were great, except in one scene where a Drahk shoots down a
ship. Galen and Dureena are my favorite characters so far, for they seem to offer a new perspective to see from. I also especially liked the opening title/credits where it asks "whom do you serve?" and "whom do you trust?" Thank you, Mr. Straczynski. May Crusade live on forever!
Josh Spencer
csc@zoomnet.net
Set Course For Babylon 5
nd so it begins...
With those words I felt a small chill as they harkened me back to
Babylon 5 and the great stories and characters that that series created.
Now with Crusade I think we are in store for more of the same. I liked the first episode of the new series. It was good to be
back in the B5 universe with familiar characters, and new ones too. Sure, the acting seems a bit stilted and the lines a bit tinny, but
B5 was the same at the start and some of those lines stand out in your mind
for each episode, cornball factor not withstanding. All told I'm looking forward to the next 12 episodes and I truly
hope that the series gets picked up by either TNT or SCI FI or someone so
that we can continue to enjoy this on-going story.
Of course the next line I'm waiting for, and you know it's
coming..."Set course for Babylon 5."
Harold M. Birn
HMB3223@aol.com
Crusade Drew Me In
watched the Crusade premiere and was surprised.
Most of the previews and reviews (including my local paper's) talked about
the show being slow and tedious in places... I felt the opposite. The show
had a lot of speed and really drew me in, even if it was just back story. I watched B5 occasionally, but
started too late in the arc to truly understand it, but Crusade is fully
understandable and TNT's playing B5: A Call to Arms afterward helped give even more of the back story.
This made me also surprised to learn that TNT was hesitant to play the full
five-year arc (I guess that's why in the previews they said "Crusade, a limited mini-series"). I shall watch every one in the 13 and shall be saddened by the loss of a great series because then we shall never know what happens afterward.
Max Battcher
world_maker@yahoo.com
DS9 Ended Well
Editor's Note: The following letter contains information that may give away some important plot elements of the final episode of Star Trek: Deep Space Nine. Please read at your own risk
would be interested in hearing from fans of Deep Space Nine as to their opinions of the final episode. I felt it was much, much better than the last Next Generation--especially the flashbacks.
I liked the Klingon vs. Human response to the end of the war and the fact
that Murdock did not apologize for his non-human views.
The resolutions were good, O'Brien to Earth, Worf as an ambassador fit with
the end of Next Generation, Bashir and Dax together okay, Garret's future as unknown as it was at the beginning of the series was a great twist, the Ki and DuKat getting theirs (I'm so glad he didn't die with poison--that would have been a cop-out!), but I really, really hated the end of Sisko! If he is dead, the Prophets cannot bring him back to life! Is this saying they are in fact gods and not aliens? I have serious trouble with that idea.
I don't like Odo leaving, but I guess if and when there is a movie they can
bring him back. I am hoping against hope that Voyager (which did not appear in the final DS9 as Internet sites hinted) rejoins the Alpha quadrant at the start of the next season and the producers explore picking up the tattered pieces of the Federation post-war.
Gloria Hoffner
Gloriah@phillynews.com
What about Star Trek's Future?
agree with the general comments of Greg Hignight's letter "DS9 Finale Was Somber, Gripping." Sadly, here in the United Kingdom (unless you have access to cable or want to buy the videos) we are stuck somewhere in the middle of season six. At the moment the BBC is repeating DS9 from the start, so God only knows when we will get to season seven.
The comparisons between DS9 and B5 were often just. I think generally that B5 was more interesting over a long period (the "Arc"), whereas DS9 tended to have peaks and troughs. DS9 had by far and away better single episodes than B5 and in my opinion the acting
was generally much better. J. Michael Straczynski was also unable to write comedy (the number of cringe-worthy attempts at it in B5 make my skin crawl), whereas there were several amusing DS9 episodes. Though I agree with Greg that DS9 did benefit from having B5 around
(though I am not so sure of the reverse--I think that Straczynski was too arrogant for that), at least in terms of having continuity, and "mini-arcs."
Peter Knight
godlikegenius@breathe.co.uk
Mourning For Morn
he series ender for DS9 wrapped things up fairly nicely on most counts.
However, one small point for viewers out there who have been with the
series since the beginning: Wouldn't it have been a nice coda to have given
a line, or better yet, the last line, to Morn? The payoff to this running gag of having him never heard but spoken of as a real blabber mouth was sadly lacking. A real opportunity was missed here!
Charles Yearsley
cyears@chesco.com
The Pot Calling The Kettle Black
read with some dismay the name-calling that erupted last week over Suzy McKee Charnas' recent novel, The Conqueror's
Child. Mr. Gray basically accused both Ms. Charnas and your reviewer,
Tamara I. Hladik, of "gender McCarthyism" and determinism. In doing so, he
adopted the same tactics that he decries as "certainly" being in a book
he admits he has not read.
Anyone who has been through a book-banning battle at a local school or
library should have little difficulty recognizing Mr. Gray's tactics. For
example, there was an attempt in my community to ban Richard Wright's
Native Son from a high school advanced placement English course a couple
of years ago. I opposed the ban. Not one of the opponents of the book had
actually read it. The opponents uniformly claimed that the book should be
banned because it described a rape. Had they read the book, they would
have discovered that the book is about the consequences of violence, and
hardly encourages it.
Mr. Gray has done the same thing. I admit to having a Y chromosome. I
also admit to being heterosexual. I further admit that some radical
feminists believe that a Y chromosome and heterosexuality are birth
defects. However, Mr. Gray has no basis for making the same assumption
about Ms. Charnas' novel. His condemnation of so-called "lesbian
literature" uses the same name-calling and bigotry
that he decries in (what he calls) "lesbian literature." The pot calling
the kettle black indeed!
Mr. Gray doesn't have to read the same books as everyone else. He doesn't
have to read any book he doesn't want to. Even an archly anti-male book
won't slide up his leg and mutilate his genitals when he's not looking.
A book can only poison minds that are already open to the poison.
Critical reading will keep the poison out. Mr. Gray's letter advocates
not critical reading, but no reading at all.
By Mr. Gray's reasoning, we should never have books about scientists, or
naval captains (sea or space), or computer programmers, since each group
is certainly less than 2.5 percent of the world's population. They just don't
deserve to have books written about them. One of the positive aspects of
speculative fiction--one that makes it often superior to mainstream
commercial fiction--is that speculative fiction is not afraid to take on
exceptional people as central characters. A dedicated scientist or
military officer can be just as obsessed and controlled by his or her
chosen career as others can be by sex. Obsession often makes for
fascinating characters--not least in studying our own reactions to them.
Finally, a comment on Mr. Gray's personal attack on Ms. Hladik: She's
right. The female characters in Lucifer's Hammer are, in fact, shallow.
But the fact that she criticized that novel for allowing its authors'
overt politics to overcome their ability to tell a story does not mean
that she "is intent on recommending books that are rad-fem based." Based
on your comment, should I assume that you are intent on recommending
books that glorify macho militarism to the exclusion of reason,
compassion, or thinking for one's self? I don't; Lucifer's Hammer fits
some people's taste better than others. Of course, that is the whole
point of reviews.
John Savage
john.savage@juno.com
Conqueror's Child Is A Sad Read
have read The Conqueror's Child, and found it to be
a pretty sad read. The writing is great, but the plot, the treatment of
men, and the obvious bias toward women was horrid. And highly inaccurate.
It's the last such novel I will read.
James A. Ritchie
jritchie@iei.net
Let's Not Quarrel Over Books
read the letters by the two people disagreeing about Suzy McKee Charnas' book The Conqueror's Child. One says that it is radical feminist lesbian propaganda and the other says that it is filled with good writing etc. I have only one thing to say to them. It is a book for heaven's sake! Get over it and relax. There are better and more important things to worry about than whether or not a fantasy book is feminist lesbian literature. Who cares? If you liked the book, great then say so and shut up. If you don't want to read it, don't and shut up! This planet is not a utopian society. Let's not quarrel
over books okay?
Aaron Perkins
darth-arn@mailcity.com
Donkeys Learn To Send E-mail
burst out laughing when I read T. Hannibal Gay's wacky letter about Suzy McKee Charnas' book The Conqueror's Child. I thought, "Wow! Science fiction becomes reality: donkeys learn to send e-mail!" Amazing.
Nicola Griffith
http://www.sff.net/people/Nicola
30 Years May Be Too Little For Lucas
hile recently reading the published letters about The Phantom
Menace, I thought about the conclusions my wife and I had drawn after
seeing it. We both considered it an adequate 2-1/2 hours of entertainment,
but we both also saw some of the inadequacies of the movie. Some of the computer-generated effects were overproduced and even a
little bit forced or stiff (Jar Jar and the Gungans, the droid armies, the
Trade Federation characters), and seemed as if they might have been better
done using less technology. As for setting up the story line for the remaining movies, Mr. Lucas has created a fairly substantial challenge for himself. By giving himself only 30 years between Episode I and Episode IV, he may be hard pressed to incorporate some of the elements (the clone wars, the hiding of Luke and Leia, the duel between Obi-Wan and Anakin/Vader)
mentioned in Episode IV, V, and VI without glossing over some other material which may be equally important to character development.
Thomas Mentrak
trak@dpnet.net
Enjoy The Mystery Of A Good Story
Editor's Note: The following letter contains information that may give away some important plot elements of the new Star Wars series. Please read at your own risk.
n response to Jim James' letter "Feeling Cheated By Lucas" concerning the plot holes in The Phantom Menace, I understand his frustration. When so
much insider information is discussed online, it tends to rob one of the
mystery of a good story. Which addresses Mr. James' dilemma: I was aware of the Palpatine issue, once the film had ended,
mostly from a lifetime of reading the original stories and a few
supplemental books like The Force of Star Wars, likely no longer in
print, about the philosophical allegory of Star Wars.
The point is, however, that Mr. James appeared frustrated that the unspoken
elements of the story were not revealed. I believe that is simply good set
up for the trilogy. A half-noticed mention of Antilles, for instance, is
more powerful in the long run, as his relationship to Leia Organa will be revealed in future episodes. That is the beauty of well written and well planned serial literature and film. Imagine yourself 10 years from now viewing your video collection of the Republic Trilogy, discovering things in the various episodes, and in the episodes of the Empire Trilogy, for
the first time. You will say "Wow, I never got that the first time." That
makes these "holes" in the plot so cool.
Scott Filgo
dimension_boy@hotmail.com
Darth Binks: Why Didn't We See It Before?
veryone seems to love to hate Jar Jar Binks. Every review and letter I
read has someone ranting about how much they hate Jar Jar. About how big a
mistake Lucas made with Jar Jar. After all, in classic story telling you're
supposed to love the heroes and hate the villains and Star Wars is nothing if it's not classic storytelling. But did Lucas really make a mistake? Or do I sense the makings of a "Jar Jar Conspiracy"? Think about it. The reason we hate Jar Jar so much is obvious. Lucas is setting us up for the next "Dark Lord of the Sith" to be "Darth Binks." It's the perfect coup. Already everyone seems to hate him more that Darth Vader. Not to mention, "How do you top a double-bladed light saber?" Why, with a double-bladed light saber in the hand and a second light saber in the tongue. It's all so obvious people. Why didn't we see this before?
Bill Baldwin
TrollBill@AOL.com
Discuss The Good And The Bad
hy is it the avid supporters of The Phantom Menace resort to attacking the film's critics rather than addressing the issues the critics have raised?
Since when has the intelligent response to criticism been "If you didn't
like it, shut up?" This is a forum dedicated to discussing science fiction, both the good and bad aspects of it, and not a fan club devoted to shallow "atta boys" and empty praise. I enjoyed The Phantom Menace and hated Jar Jar Binks in the same way as I enjoyed Return of the Jedi and loathed the Ewoks. Just as I think Return of the Jedi was the weakest movie of the previous three, so I hope that The Phantom Menace turns out to be the weakest movie of the current three.
The Star Wars movies were never intended to present deep meanings to
ponder, and so I don't mind the simplistic plots and, at times, mediocre
acting because the movies do deliver on action, visually stunning effects,
and even grandiose themes. Unfortunately, the plot of The Phantom Menace was not only minimal, but many aspects of it did seem contrived (oh look, Anakin built C-3P0) and much of the
dialogue was embarrassingly flat (the real Jedi council members appear to
have been replaced by the Stepford Jedi, for example).
Leonard Bottleman
leonard@teleport.com
New Characters Are The Problem
saw The Phantom Menace for the first time last week. And yes, there will be a
second time. I was very impressed with the special effects and loved the
space scenes. Much better than the original three episodes. I also think the
aliens were very much in line with the Star Wars universe.
I think the reason some people were disappointed in the The Phantom Menace is
because of the unfamiliar characters. People saw Star Wars many times
because of the novelty of the movie at the time. By the time the other two
movies came out, the characters felt like part of the family. Now, with The Phantom Menace, the characters are
either new, or unrecognizable at a much younger age. By the time the next
episode is made, we will be ready to re-visit these characters and eager to
find out "what happens next."
If you watch the original Star Wars from a purely objective view, it would not be considered in the running as a classic. But as the first episode in a trilogy, it holds up well as the introduction. Also, the original
Star Wars is not a "hard science fiction" movie; just good entertainment. The Phantom Menace is also good entertainment.
Lisa Burkmier
Lisa60@carolina.net
Brainy Stuff Isn't Dull
read the letter "Grown-Ups Only Want 'Brainy' SF" by Fred Sciarratta with some amusement--oh, okay, and a little bit of offense. He wrote "The main problem is that most of the people seeing it are now adults and not kids anymore. Their minds change and they become dull and boring. They only want to see 'brainy' SF. They don't open their minds and remember how it
felt to be a kid."
Whoah, Fred, I hope you never have to hear yourself or your mind being
called dull and boring because you want to see "brainy" stuff. Can you
actually be saying that if something makes you think, it's dull?
I've seen The Matrix several times and never once fallen asleep no matter how sleep deprived my "dull and boring" self was at the time. I've also
seen The Phantom Menace twice (the second time because my daughter, who thinks the movie is awesome, put up with seeing The Matrix with me so many times.) Sadly, I must admit that twice I woke up because my head jerked down while "watching" The Phantom Menace that second time. It's got glitz, tech and glam--just no story, which isn't to say it wasn't pleasant and amusing, just too dull and boring to stay awake at late at night. I fully intend to see the next two episodes--the stage has been set and I'm sure Mr. Lucas will not leave us without a story much longer.
P.J. Weber
pjweber@erols.com
Episode I Is Just Good. So What?
'm so sick of everyone bad mouthing Episode I. So it wasn't the best movie ever? So what? It wasn't that bad. I didn't like Jar Jar, but I could live with him. I think the people that I can't stand the most are those whose
lives revolve around Star Wars. I think the problem is that all the adults who were amazed by Episode IV are expecting to be equally amazed by Episode I. It turns out that it's just a good movie, and they freak out.
C. Dylan Ramey
dyl@n-link.com
Ban All Sidekicks!
his is in reference to the letter from Dennis Gaynair, about "amusing
sidekicks." I remember quite clearly amusing sidekicks from all sorts of movies and TV shows, and I can only say one thing about them--I loathed them. If anyone as stupid as, say, that irritating little robot in Buck Rogers attached themselves to me, I would do whatever was in my power to get them gone. Having some fumbling, ignorant, obnoxious and/or whiney person bumbling about in the background (or usually foreground) so that somebody out there gets a few laughs is irritating in the extreme. Consider how a cool a movie Stargate could have been if it hadn't included annoying children running around pretending to be soldiers (and getting stupidly blown to bits) so there was some sort of "tearjerk" effect. Well, I didn't cry, and I never laugh at the antics of those hideous sidekicks. I say, ban them all!
Carla Spencer
changeling@catbones.com
Kickstart Forever Knight
noted with interest your mention in Issue No. 102 and No. 104 of Daily Variety ads placed by fans of Brimstone hoping to save the series. I am a fan of the series Forever Knight and a member of the Kickstart the Knight organization which has a goal of bringing back Forever Knight in the form of one or more made-for-television movies, and of getting more officially licensed Forever Knight merchandise put on the market. I would like to point out that the Kickstart the Knight campaign has placed several large ads in major trade publications, SF magazines, and even TV Guide.
Our most recent ads were run at the end of May in Weekly Variety and in the June 1, 1999, issue of The Hollywood Reporter. We have a number of other ads planned in the near future. We also have a very informative and free quarterly newsletter sent via e-mail and regular mail to any fan who requests to be on our mailing list. Forever Knight fans have been working hard to let "the powers that be" know that they exist and that they want more Forever Knight--that they want to spend their money buying officially licensed merchandise and in support of sponsors who would advertise their products during a Forever Knight movie. I feel it is vitally important that SF fans be made aware of campaigns such as Kickstart the Knight and Save Brimstone. As more and more fans join these efforts, it becomes more difficult for "the powers that be" to ignore us!
Becky Demrow
BJDFKFan@aol.com
