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.
— Scott Edelman, Editor-in-Chief
Send us your letters!
Got a gripe about something going on in the science fiction world? Want to call attention to an overlooked genre gem? Do you disagree with one of our reviews? Would you like to tell the editor of Science Fiction Weekly what a great job he does? Write a letter to the editor and send it in! You'll have the satisfaction of knowing that your letter will be read by thousands of SF fans. Doubtless, fame and fortune will follow (fame and fortune not guaranteed).
This, Too, Shall Pass
appreciate your editorial comments ("Looking at the World with Alien Eyes") on the tragedy that struck our nation on 9/11/01. I felt, as you did, that our nation and this world was on the verge of putting the petty differences of the old political systems behind us and would soon be able to truly embrace the one world concept already envisioned by those who've flown and dreamed in space. However, there are still too many of this world that can only see through the eyes of the old ways; eyes that fear what is beyond the horizon and hate what is unknown. As a nation we dare to reach, and for that we are demonized by those that cannot or will not. That day, 9/11/01, they attempted to bring us back down to Earth, but in the coming days they will know they have failed. Such is our national spirit, and in our triumph the world will be cleansed and the bright future we all hope for will surely be ushered in. (Hey, I was born in '60. Hope wasn't just the proprietary of the college crowd back then—trickle down was more than an economic concept.)
As far as the present, I could have used the NASA channel that day. But I made do by watching a beautiful sunset and reminding myself that this too shall pass. Thanks again for the peaceful image your editorial inspired.
Chris Qualls
RChrisQualls@netscape.net
WTC Stories Should Not Be Altered
s am American I do not think it is right to remove the twin towers from any program or show that is in progress. These buildings are, and were, part of our lives. To remove them, to me, is a slap in the face to those that died there. Did they exist? Can we erase them as easily? Please don't do this. ...
Pete Kertzman
wizard@dmcom.net
SF Visions Provide Comfort
just want to share a few words with other science-fiction fans like myself. Yesterday, we became a vulnerable nation. Yesterday we lost lives and some say we lost hope. Yesterday will live on forever, but as a science-fiction fan I couldn't help but overhear commentary ranging from ideas of super missiles to futuristic fighter jets capable of invincibility, etc. What did all of this impress on me? First off, it gave me a secure sense of who I am as a sci-fi fan, because it gave me hope that if I can read a book or see a film in which we are threatened so badly that we pull together, become one
and fight back, then science fiction is not the ridiculous genre that some believe it be. In fact, some will even let slip that they wish sci-fi were sci-fact, because then maybe we could've avoided yesterday's tragedy.
I had faith yesterday and I have faith today that we will see justice served,
because that is what I have been lead to believe from every aspect of science fiction I have ever been lucky enough to experience in my life. I just had to say this because the next time I get knocked for being a sci-fi fan I won't be upset and I won't feel inadequate. I'll have a sense of relief at the realization that someday, in the distant future, we will not be so vulnerable and the very things we use to protect ourselves will have been the very same things I read about in an Asimov story. I will feel relieved that I have a way of coping that keeps me going and I am sure I am not alone.
Tina Sena
Tina_Sena@abtassoc.com
Editorial Offered Different Outlook
hank you for "Looking at the World with Alien Eyes." I didn't lose friends or family in New York or Washington, but I felt a need to bear witness to events, if only to be able to attach a face to prayers. The images took me back to April of 1995, yet in the absence of being able to do anything else, I continue to hold vigil in front of the television—our "campfire" as Peter Jennings put it.
Your piece gave me a much-needed break and a change of perspective.
Jo Ellyn
jwheeler@att.net
Enterprise Must Uphold Tradition
've been thinking about Enterprise for several months now and am finally ready to comment. (I would have commented sooner, but a virus whacked Win-Doze 98 on my computer and it took a day or three to get everything re-installed!) First, I hope the producers of Enterprise actually answer mail from their viewers. I wrote the producers a number of emails about parts of Voyager that bugged me, and never got a reply. I also sent several faxes and letters with SASEs attached. Well, my wife is convinced that since the Voyager producers will be working on Enterprise, I can forget about ever getting my questions answered! As an aside, the producer of Babylon 5 not only answered his email but had regular columns in a fanzine. They at least respected their fans!
Enough of my ranting screed ...
I've been thinking of what type of sublight drive StarFleet would be using at the time of the Enterprise series. If Enterprise is one of the first starships with impulse drive, then the previous ships probably had "Orion" class drives. One of The Next Generation episodes featured aliens who claimed that humans had come to their planet in an "Orion class ship." Given that Z. Cochran had to ride a retired military missile into space before he could use his warp drive, I'm guessing that the early StarFleet ships might have been hard pressed for a sub-light drive. The most efficient and effective sub-light drive would be the "Orion Drive."
An "Orion Drive" consists of a pusher plate, a shock absorber and a payload. An explosive detonated behind the pusher plate rams the plate into the shock absorber; the shock absorber then somewhat more gently pushes the payload section. This concept was tested in the mid 1950s. I saw a tape of this on PBS: the prototype literally "putt-putted" up the sky!
In the Enterprise series, the producers could show the older starships still using their Orion class drives for sub-light travel. The visual special effects of starships "running" ahead of anti-matter explosions could be spectacular!
The first series made a big deal of Spock being the first Vulcan to graduate from StarFleet Academy. Thus, the Vulcan First Officer of the Enterprise should be an officer who transferred from the Vulcan fleet to StarFleet. Said First can not be a graduate of the Academy or logically, even have been a student.
StarFleet has a Naval structure, not a civilian structure; the initial officers, chief petty officers and enlisted must have come from various militaries. Thus, the new personnel would still honor military customs. Saluting should still occur on the show. Since it is normal for militaries to award medals or ribbons for valor, superior job performance or participation in military campaigns, the first StarFleet personnel should wear ribbons or medals on their uniforms.
Naval officers work very long hours. Officers of the three U.S. Naval Forces (Navy, Coast Guard and NOAA Uniformed Officer Corps) work rotating duty shifts (i.e. 4 hours on, 8 hours off) and normal business hours (0730 to 1600) and turn to for special evolutions. In other words, these officers get very little sleep at sea! I'd find it very believable if the StarFleet officers were similarly overworked. (However, the various Star Trek series act as if officers only work their duty shifts (or watches) and have a lot of time off! OK, so they do turn to for emergencies.)
I served on the U.S.S. FORRESTAL (CVA-59) many years ago. Most of the work was done by sailors and most of the management was done by Chief Petty Officers. I know the officers had important jobs to do, aside from my Division Officer, I just never saw them around "the shop" much. Enterprise should acknowledge this and have more of the action done by either the Chief Petty Officers or the enlisted troops. (Yes, I know that Chiefs are enlisted; there is a gulf between Chiefs and other enlisted that has to be lived with to be believed. Chiefs rule!)
My one claim-to-fame was in asking Colm Meaney (who played "Chief O'Brien") why his Enterprise didn't seem to have any enlisted people on it. I mentioned that my ship had been run by Chiefs and the work was done by sailors; this was during the summer of 1990 or 1991 (I don't recall which). When Next Gen came back, O'Brien was a Chief!
Being close to their roots, I can see a situation where the newly formed "Section 31" might feel free to operate almost openly. After all, the "Prime Directive" would still be very new and many officers would be acting on a daily basis as if they were in Section anyway. (If Janeway and Picard though Kirk and Sulu violated the StarFleet standards of the 23rd century, the original StarFleet officers would have to have been less polished than Kirk, et al and would have broken the rules more often!)
Picard called Kirk "a cowboy" (as I recall). Historically, "cowboys" were fairly law abiding folks who worked hard. On the other hand, it was sometimes very hard to tell the difference between cow town law enforcers and law breakers. They often worked both sides of the law ...
Mike Bell
mwbell@pld.com
Potter Defines the Magic of SF
was offended by [Kevin V. Fifield's] letter "Potter's Hugo Win Under Fire" (September 10, 2001, Issue 229).
Webster's New World Dictionary defines science fiction as "highly imaginative fiction typically involving some actual or projected scientific phenomenon." Tell me, is magic not "highly imaginative?" Is Hogwarts not a "projected scientific phenomenon?"
As for Harry Potter being "drivel" ... If the Harry Potter series were "drivel" as you say, then why do so many people buy them? Are we bewitched by her book? No. We just recognize the potential and the imagination behind each one of them. How could millions of people be wrong?
Harry Potter was aimed originally for the children's age group, not adults. The fact that adults like it only proves that she has the ability to spellbind people with her imagination and wit.
I am proud that Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire won! It is creative, funny and enchanting. It should be held as a standard for science fiction from now on.
Katie Newton
DarkAgent222@netscape.net
Harry's Hugo is More Than Hype
eid Babbitt ("Potter Is For Children, Not Hugo") writes that he was disappointed that a book in the popular Harry Potter series has won some influential awards. He claims that Harry Potter is written for 8-year-old children, and not for adults.
First of all, I see no reason why a so-called children's story should be overlooked for such awards. I also object to the elitism that often appears around awards, that a popular book should not win such honors. This is of course ridiculous. A good piece of work should be popular. It is a sad
fact, however, that often, the best books are not read by nearly as many people as should read them. But when a good book is discovered by the masses, how in any way does this diminish the quality of the work?
I mostly take exception at the point he tries to make that the books are intended for 8-year-old children.
Perhaps that was the publisher's target audience, though I doubt J.K. Rowling had thoughts of demographics or target marketing when she wrote what must have been, for her, just a good story.
The themes of Harry Potter can be compared to works by such noted childrens' authors as Roald Dahl or C.S. Lewis, or even J.R.R. Tolkien. There are many similarities between Harry Potter and some of Dahl's works, including Matilda, and James and the Giant Peach, and to Narnia, and even The Hobbit, written by Tolkien more for children than his later work The Lord of the Rings.
While some similarities are alarming, (in Matilda, Matilda is a downtrodden young child who discovers when she attends school that she has a hidden gift of magic, and in James and the Giant Peach, the main character, also an abused orphan raised by uncaring guardians, is named James Trotter, while Harry's name is Potter, and his father's name was James) something else is similar as well.
All of the above works, while perhaps written with children in mind, are very good literature, and as endearing, enduring and appealing to adults as to children.
I have to confess that the first time I read Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone I was rather reluctant to do so because it came at the time of the launch of her fourth book that had people lining up at stores the day before release, just waiting for their copy. This is the kind of hype I see usually only for Star Wars releases, and it usually turns me off.
However, at the same time, many of my co-workers had told me that it was not all hype, that the books are very enjoyable. So I picked up the first in the series in paperback, and read it, expecting not much more than a childrens' story.
I was astounded to find that I really really liked it! I found that the story, the characters, the settings, the situation extremely likeable. I found the pacing magnificent, and the resolution completely and wholly satisfying!
I then picked up the second book, as it was also available in paperback, and liked it even more! The additional character development was well done and the situations quite exciting and again, a very well-paced story with a completely satisfying ending! I liked the pair so much, I immediately went out and purchased the next two in hard-cover, because there was no way I was waiting another year for a paperback.
The third book (Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban) is arguably as good as the first two.
However I found Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire to be a major shift in that the books, while increasing in thickness, were also increasing in maturity, complexity and in character. The fourth book is quite densely packed with characters, situations (including prejudice and racism), plots and sub-plots that there is no way she was writing merely for children anymore. She was now writing for a global audience.
Many co-workers who had not yet read the series borrowed my copies, or bought their own, and read the entire series with as much enthusiasm as I had.
After re-reading Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone again, in anticipation of the up-coming film, I realized that I was wasting my time reading it only to myself. And as my daughter was now five years old, I began reading it to her as well.
I am now five chapters into reading the fourth, and much more complex book, to my daughter, and I find her relating to the characters beyond anything I had expected, and I even find her anticipating what's about to happen. She will soon be six, but apparently she has a greater capacity for comprehension than I had anticipated, which delights me greatly.
My wife sits and listens as I read as well. She enjoys it as much as my daughter and I. She had read the first book, and delighted in hearing my readings of the next three. (I do the voices, accents, and intonations well, apparently.)
I understand Mr. Babbit's reluctance to accept the Harry Potter phenomenon based solely on the hype it has generated. I personally despise hype myself, unless it is well deserved. In this case, any award Rowling achieves for this series of books is not only well deserved, but hard-earned.
So please don't be so snobbish. Just because a book sits in the childrens' section of a book store doesn't mean adults can't enjoy it. That's where you'll find Roald Dahl, C.S. Lewis, J.R.R. Tolkien, and many other fabulous writers who just like to write a good story, not to fit a target market group.
Sean Huxter
sean@turbinegames.com
Award Winners Often Hard to Find
was equally surprised about The Goblet of Fire being voted the Hugo winner this year ("Potter's Hugo Win Under Fire"). While I think it's an original and well-written series, I don't see it as science fiction material. True, Hugos and Nebulas have been awarded to fantasy-based novels in the past I never expected the Hugo voters to be swept up in Harry Potter mania. I don't want to disqualify the
quality of the book but I almost perceive it as a move to validate sci-fi to the mass public. By taking in this novel perhaps they want to steer readers to other sci-fi and fantasy classics. This may be a cynical statement because, either way, it's a well-written book and has introduced tons of new readers to the genre.
A gripe I do have is that whenever a Nebula is awarded it seems almost impossible to find the novel in a bookstore or library. It took me years to find Stations of the Tide and several other of the awardees over the past years. Why is it so hard to come across these novels? Most of them have been excellent and deserving of the award but it almost seems to guarantee limited publication. Swanwick had to come out with Iron Dragon's Daughter before I saw a reissue of the other aforementioned novel. Sci-fi seems to be veering more towards quality novels than the TV-series-based
stuff, which is a good sign. However, I hope they continue and make more of the Nebula and Hugo winners available.
Brett B
Brettb@aol.com
Potter For Children of All Ages
n your most recent letter column, one Reid Babbitt ("Potter Is For Children, Not Hugo") opted to state the following:
"It's the fact that Harry Potter is written for 8-year-old children and not adults."
To which I'd like to note that anyone who has bothered to read the series (and of course this reader has not, thereby all but acknowledging his ignorance), than it would be pretty abundantly clear that the Harry Potter books are written for any human with a pulse, regardless of age.
Just because they are written in such a fashion as to make them more accessible to young adults (and Goblet of Fire really was aimed a bit more at the pre/early teen crowd than anything), ought not disqualify it from merit, consideration or recognition. Regardless of what some snobs (and yes, I do consider Mr. Babbitt to be just that—anyone who pillories someone without the benefit of knowing what the heck he's talking about is just nothing less) might want to say, I personally enjoyed all four Potter books (and I'm in my 30s) and thought the last one was a very fine and well crafted story.
These books haven't gained so much fame and popularity due to some odd-ball CIA-backed conspiracy, after all. They start off by simply being fundamentally well-executed and well-written stories that are accessible to all ages. Is that wrong? I think not.
In closing, I'd like to note two things: if a young adult target audience is a criteria for dismissal as a serious work of fiction, than please—let's dispense with any more dealings with that infamous young adult writer Robert Heinlein, who wrote so many stories for that market segment in the '50s and '60s (including Starship Troopers, for one).
Lastly, I'd like to make a personal observation. When I was 7 years old, I had something happen that changed my life. This event made me want to go out and see more of the world, read more about epic struggles of good vs. evil and the resulting tales. Soon I was consumed by the tales of King Arthur,
the myths and legends of Europe and the history of World War II (among many, many others). It kindled a life-long interest in science fiction and fantasy within me—as well as History, Mythology and Philosophy.
The event I refer to was the first time I saw Star Wars.
As a 7-year old, the themes of that movie were such that they were easy to pick up on, grasp and assimilate. Such was the beauty of this movie—you did not need to be an adult to understand it's message.
I suppose I was lucky that I parlayed my Star Wars epiphany into a lifelong relationship with books (which, as I type this all but dominate my residence. I have thousands of them). How fortunate the kids of this age are that they have a literary hero who can start them off on the same type of
journey I had back in 1977.
Who knows, 25 years from now some folks will recount how they first got introduced to the genre via Harry Potter and from there went to read "fill in the blank."
If and when that happens, in terms of sheer lasting quality, the Harry Potter series will have accomplished more than any and all of of the recent Hugo winners combined. That, too, is a mark of quality—and cannot be simply explained away by calling the vote a popularity contest.
Good for all the voters who saw the real class of the field and shame on any nay-sayer who can't even be bothered to study the subject before rendering a judgement.
Kurt Roithinger
gren99@hotmail.com
Harry Potter is Formula Fiction
have obviously let myself get disconnected from the SF world, because I did not know that it had recently lost its mind. I am still not completely sure if the letter from Reid Babbit ("Potter Is For Children, Not Hugo") in this forum was not a joke: the one in which he grieved that Goblet of Fire was awarded. My God! Goblet of Fire? Harry Potter may be a little fun, but they are gigantically formulaic, morally simplistic and have characters with all the depth of DNA molecule.
Quite aside from that, they are, as Mr. Babbit correctly pointed out—for children! I have been reading my little girl Lewis Carroll's Alice stories and the Narnian Chronicles; my wife has been reading her the Oz books. She is only four years old, but is loving all of them. We are both dreading the moment that she insists that Harry Potter be added to her literary pantheon. My nephew has already been sucked into the Potter plot pit.
Oh, well. I probably would have voted for Foundation over Lord of the Rings, too.
David Taylor
dgtaylor@powersurfr.com
Fantasy is Central to SF Stories
hile I am largely in agreement with Michael Cassutt's recent words ("Ordinary People, Extraordinary Events") on adolescent power fantasy being central to the telling of science fiction stories, I wanted to expand it a bit.
First, that there is power fantasy and there is informed power fantasy. Stranger in a Strange Land is the former, Dune an example of the latter: the book was explicitly about the uses of power and its consequences. It was spectacularly popular because the moral examinations never overwhelmed the galumphing action (unlike in most of his other novels) and is important because Herbert knew that power, perhaps especially the mythic variety, cuts and burns all it touches. Gene Wolfe made the bestseller lists with the most subtle, dense riffs on power fantasy (and most everything else central to the genre) ever written.
Dune (somewhat awkwardly, with its "whiff of fascism") bridged the guns and xenophobia of Analog and later writers' nuanced examinations of power fantasy. Silverberg and Malzberg's '70s output applied mainstream techniques and mordant flare to power fantasy curdled in middle age in such works as "Shadrach in the Furnace," Herovit's World and Beyond Apollo. In the '80s and '90s, writers like Gene Wolfe and John Crowley wrote novels that could only appear in a mature genre, symphonies built on the old melodies.
It is worth considering the typical SF power fantasy—young boy (most often) discovers he is secretly ruler of the world/world's last hope (also big in mass-market fantasy)/has all sorts of nifty powers—alongside those of other genres: the vampire (empowerment/self-hatred), the "horse book" a la Black Beauty, etc. If you can with verve and honest enthusiasm hit a couple at once you've got it made. Or, there's a reason Anne McCaffrey's science-fictionally magical horse books are still selling. In reply to the letter concerning children's books free of real conflict, I think we can lay much of the blame for the insipid pap shoveled at our children directly on Disney's doorstep. Go read Peter Pan; Tinkerbell tries to kill Wendy. Faerie was very dangerous. And in the tale of a certain girl with glass slippers ... suffice to say the pre-Disney versions have rather a lot of blood.
Ethan Sicotte
silt@maine.rr.com
Back to the top.
