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.
— 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). If you would like to submit a letter, please use our feedback form or send a message to scifiweekly@scifi.com.
hanks for the obituary on [R.A.] Lafferty ("Farewell to Two Masters"). One of my treasured stories is "Continued on the Next Rock" and I'm glad someone remembers him well. I appreciated the memory.
I often have trouble explaining to people the kind of sci-fi that I enjoy most. Lafferty's is a good example. Less gunfire. More wit. More surprises. I started reading sci-fi directly after reading all the Alfred Hitchcock stories back in the '60s. There is a genre of thinking that really has no
classification and I've enjoyed it for so long.
Thanks again.
Gail
gnash52@7662www0.nyc2.aens.net
eferring to the recent Cassutt Files ("Farewell to Two Masters"): I'd like to say that although he has become obscure, some people do remember [R.A.] Lafferty. On several of the SF
forums I go to they had a topic for his death. Sadly, these topics often veered because so few remembered him, but they were there. Growing up Catholic, the idea there was a staunch old-fashioned Catholic writing SF pleased me. Perhaps I'm not the best person to write this as I have not read
much of his work, but intend to try a collection of his this summer.
One thing that has always kept his work rare is it's so odd. It is also what has made him remembered by the few who enjoyed his work. It's said you can always tell if you're reading one of his stories whether you see his name anywhere or not. I remember I read a story of his called "Interurban Queen"
which had people chasing anyone who used cars because they were selfish and arrogant. As I recall, it was told in a pretty straight manner and almost made you wonder if he agreed.
Sadly, I feel I should end this by mentioning that another well respected SF author recently died, Damon Knight ("SFWA's Knight Dies At 79"). Better known than Lafferty because he wrote The Twilight Zone episode "To Serve Man," much of his more respected work in the field has also become obscure. Still, his main contributions to SF might be as editor, critic and workshop founder. He anthologized the early stories of many authors, including Lafferty.
Anyway, if you want to read the works of these two, I think the best bet would be to look for their short stories. It may be work finding them, but for many of you, it'll be worth it.
Thomas Rogov
Trogov@sciam.com
agree with the other letter writer that if, over all, you want good SF, you have to read it ("Good SF Is In Books, Not TV"). The best science-fiction stories, in my opinion, are the ones that apply their ideas to the human condition. Unfortunately, films such as this don't currently appeal to the mass public. A couple of examples are Gattaca and A.I., both well done but weakly accepted by the average movie-goer.
I'm hoping that this will change over the coming years. After all, we're seeing the implications of past SF affecting our lives today with the Internet and cloning. SF up until the '60s and the New Wave movement mostly dealt with hard science extrapolated on future society, if you discount a few writers such as Bester. SF literature has slowly evolved into the spectrum it is today and hopefully movie producers and viewers will begin to follow suit and see the value of a good story, well told, versus the action movie with a thin veneer of sci-fi painted on it.
Brett Bowles
Brettb4842@aol.com
egarding Dave Campanas' letter "Good SF Is In Books, Not TV". ...
I read between four and five books a month, sometimes more when I can spare the time from homework and my job. I can't sleep without reading for a while. That said ... get over it.
This superior attitude fellow bibliophiles display towards those who mainly watch SF television disturbs me. How is that attitude any better than those who decry that we who read SF should stop "wasting our time" and read "real" literature? (Never quite realizing we do that, too!)
I would also caution Mr. Campanas to remember a crucial fact—while his opinions of genre TV and movies are fine, that's all they are—his opinions, not universal facts.
Michael Atreides
atreidesmr@attbi.com
ammy Smith was right in her letter, "SF Is Only a Legend On SCI FI." I
do not watch stories about vampires, horror or anything not SF or SF related fantasy (where did this SCI FI come from—from non-SF fans). I had quit watching Lexx after two episodes. I would like to keep the SCI FI Channel for family fare as many youth watch the channel including my grandchildren.
I would like to see more of the oldies, i.e., When Worlds Collide, War of the Worlds, through the latest blockbusters such as E.T., Star Wars, etc., on the SCI FI Channel instead of on MoviePlex, AMC, TNT or even on the Disney Channel.
I thought Legend of the Rangers was to be a series. And what happened
to Crusade? I want to know if Earth had found a cure within the
five-year deadline. We are left hanging and dangling. And can the SCI-FI Channel pick up the UPN canceled Roswell? [It's] guaranteed to keep the teens [tuned in to] the SCI-FI channel.
Dick Mann
dimann@planetkc.com
am writing to clarify Stewart Tame's response ("Rings Statues Only Warned of Danger") to Michael Kroll's comment ("Fellowship Is Fantastic Fantasy") that the statues of the Argonath held Nazi symbolism. Tame's reply suggested Peter Jackson included the Pillars of the Kings as "an homage to symbolist painter Arnold Bocklin's famous painting, Isle of the Dead." I don't know if Tame meant to imply the pillars were Jackson's idea or not, but the statues are described in detail in Tolkien's book:
Upon great pedestals founded in the deep waters stood two great kings of stone: still with blurred eyes and crannied brows they frowned upon the North. The left hand of each was raised palm outwards in gesture of warning...
(The Fellowship of the Ring, Ballantine Books, 1965, page 462.)
I will not conjecture whether Tolkien may have been influenced by Bocklin's painting, but I do not want to give Jackson too much credit for creating the image. For transforming that image from the page to the screen, however, Jackson deserves high praise.
Christy Earp
christy_earp@hotmail.com
egarding Michael Kroll's comments ("Fellowship Is Fantastic Fantasy") in the last issue: If I recall correctly, the Nazi salute involved holding the hand in such a way that the fingers were on the same diagonal plane as the arm, not parallel to it. I could be mistaken—it's been a while since I've seen any footage featuring that salute.
In any event, Tolkien was most assuredly not a Nazi sympathizer. There is a book out there—I can't recall the title, but it may simply be The Letters of Tolkien—which is quite simply a compilation of J.R.R.'s correspondence, with some commentary by his son Christopher. One of the letters included in the collection is a scathing reply to a German publisher who wished to translate Lord of the Rings for his audience but wanted to be sure that Tolkien was "Aryan" enough. (This, incidentally, is why you'll hear a derisive snort from me should you try to read prejudiced attitudes into Tolkien's work in my presence.)
As for Peter Jackson—I can't say what his political views are, but I
somehow doubt that he would sympathize with the Nazi regime either.
The statues' arms are obviously meant—to me, at least—to convey a message of "stop" or "hold." "Hold, trespassers, for you are entering the realm of Gondor." "Stop, for a vast waterfall lies just beyond us." "Hold, for this land is under our protection." They might also be meant to convey a
greeting, but I doubt it. In any event, even if I have misremembered the Nazi salute, I feel that the position of the arms is at worst an unfortunate coincidence. Tolkien certainly did not hold such a repugnant view of others, and I don't believe that Jackson does either.
Spencer M. Lease
beyond@gamingadvocacy.org
y letter last week you titled "Rama Must Rendezvous With Quality" was not a "quality" issue, but one of science fiction itself. Revelations Studio, headed by Morgan Freeman, is a highly professional organization dedicated to creating worthwhile films. Unfortunately, like too much of Hollywood, it's going in the wrong direction: Backwards.
A Hugo and Nebula Award winner, Rendezvous with Rama is hardly a "classic." Frankenstein, Time Machine, Jekyll and Hyde, Brave New World and very few groundbreaking novels have earned that title. "While a fun book," one longtime SF editor said, "Rama is little more than a high-tech schoolboy's exploration of a very fancy treehouse."
Been there on Star Trek, Babylon 5 and others. Let's move on.
Hollywood prefers not to. Ray Bradbury's novels Fahrenheit 451, Martian Chronicles and his short story "Sound of Thunder" are also in the works. Why? 451 was a good book for its time, but in the light of the information superhighway, it's at best quaint, if not irrelevant. The same might be said for Chronicles. Both were filmed and neither worked. "Thunder," a clever reworking of the time-travel theme, has already been done for TV. It's as if Hollywood thinks it can go back in time and correct the mistakes and injustices done to science fiction.
Sorry, but the genre doesn't work that way. In print or on the screen, science fiction is a "cat in the bag" show. Once the beast comes bursting forth, now matter how big and ferocious and fancy of fur, if it's a cat we already know, the show is over ... because there is no show.
Science fiction is about new ideas and insights on humanity's place in the universe. Remade or "re-imagined" for the new millennium, it's like going to an auto show and unveiling a high-tech stage coach pulled by Triple-Crown winners.
Michael Bay doesn't seem to think so. He sending out Will Smith in the well-worn footsteps of Vincent Price and Charlton Heston for a "three-make" of Richard Matheson's 1954 novel I am Legend, the story of one man against a humanity turned into vampires. Blade with an A-List cast? How original!
Not to be outdone, the SCI FI Channel is bringing back that "classic" TV series Battlestar Galaxative (As nicknamed by Arthur C. Clarke himself in an OMNI article many years ago) and yet another go at Bradbury's Illustrated Man, which fared poorly as a major film the first time around.
Nearly a century ago, in the wake of Jules Verne's stunning run of novels, H.G. Wells was told that there was no sense in writing speculative fiction any more because it had all been done. Wells didn't agree—now let's try persuading Hollywood and the SCI FI Channel.
Kevin Ahearn
KEVTOMA@aol.com
n Diane Catanzaro's letter recently "SF Should Leave the Shocks to Horror", she made a
couple of comments about When Worlds Collide that I must take issue with. First, it was written by Philip Wylie and Edwin Balmer, not John Wyndham. Second, who [knew] the principal character who was a bimbo? The closest thing to this would be Shirley, who proved herself to be brave, observant, and more able to put two and two together than her more educated comrades. Too many people are so concerned with stereotypes that they tend to see them everywhere. While When Worlds Collide was written with '30s sensibilities, the female characters get a fairer shake for their abilities than in most books of the period.
Greg Crider
criderjg@bellsouth.net
he only qualm I have with the [Tron] soundtrack is the inclusion of the rock group Journey. Their music style does not mesh with the arcade motif of the rest of the album. They should have been left off the disc entirely. Other than that, the Tron CD is excellent.
Owen Weston
westonowen@hotmail.com
was just wondering why the upcoming On The Seventh Day series is being described as "original." In the '80s, Phillip Jose Farmer wrote a trilogy about a futuristic world where people are only allowed to live one day out of the week due to an oppressive government. Coincidence?
Anna Snyder
pixel_89@hotmail.com
egarding Jason Greenwood's complaint ("DS9 Gets Trek's Cold Shoulder") about Star Trek producers not including more characters from Deep Space Nine ... While I agree that DS9 was a better show than Voyager, I can see why more characters aren't included.
Don't forget, the current run of movies deals with the life and times of the starship Enterprise and its crew. Worf is the connection between DS9 and The Next Generation, so he's the natural choice. Here are a couple of other thoughts: Sisko is gone. Odo has returned to his people. Bashir, Kyra, Jake, Nog and Quark aren't, I don't think, strong enough characters to warrant inclusion in a movie that, otherwise, has no connection to DS9. If the movie were to deal with the Cardassians or the Dominion war, then including DS9 characters would be mandatory, but in this case, they are not. To include Janeway, I think, is just a way to acknowledge Voyager as part of the family the way including Worf does for DS9.
And let's be honest, we've already got enough cast members who have to have speaking parts. They can't include many more without diluting the whole movie. Remember Generations?
Dan Ware
Ware.Dan@aaa-newmexico.com
Back to the top.
