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.
'm becoming increasingly aware of the "fluff" bulking the networks these days. At any given time, I can turn on the tube and take my pick from hundreds of programs in which good writing and skilled execution of an interesting story are gladly given up for all the obvious elements that stress the accuracy of the term "boob tube."
With this outlook on the television industry in general, I flip on my 14-year-old console TV, and with this feeling I tuned in religiously to Witchblade. Refreshing lemon sorbet after a nauseatingly overcooked and heavily sauced meal, I, along with a million of other viewers, gulped
Witchblade down greedily. And, just like my crazy Uncle Louie—who always cleared the table before anyone was actually finished eating—TNT cleared its table and we are now left wanting.
Witchblade is an artfully written show, skillfully pieced together and placed intelligently before its faithful audience. Witchblade gives its viewers everything they want in a package that doesn't feel "packaged." The cast is brilliant. I can even overlook David Chokachi's ex-Baywatch babe status. He plays Jake McCarty, ex-professional surfer turned detective, with just the right amount of sex appeal and intelligence. Whereas this casting choice could appear to be The Power That Be's need to add the proverbial beefcake to an otherwise non-conforming show, McCarty's pretty-boy good looks are recognized for what they are—superficial, and this makes this casting decision absolutely uncontrived.
I also find it refreshing that after two seasons, the police precinct hasn't turned into the Melrose Place courtyard. Again, artfully, an underlying sexual charge has been ignited, but so far the typical slow-moving orgy has not taken place. Sure, people are having sex, but our beloved Witchbladers haven't taken the plunge (with each other), and our story hasn't been trivialized to the gutter variation of Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon in which viewers can connect characters by who has swapped spit with whom.
With all the commercialized junk so prevalent these days, I'd like to think that there are still those in the entertainment industry who believe in the skillful execution of a quality story, and the long-term value in a large and loyal fan base built of viewers who recognize quality programming.
The ratings were good, even on a rerun-happy network, and in spite of short seasons (only 13 episodes this last), and nearly no attempt at marketing to help ensure success, millions of viewers tuned in each week. Fans attended Witchblade parties and conventions, and are now spending time and money in a campaign to find the show a new home. It seems to me that all Witchblade needs is a supportive base that will put full effort behind marketing, gaining viewers and giving it the recognition it deserves.
Witchblade averaged over 26,000,000 [viewers] this last season. Not only will a new network gain a talented cast and wonderful writers in an established story line, It will also gain fans so loyal that over $3,000 was spent to place an ad in Variety magazine seeking a new home for our favorite show (see the September 16th issue).
Witchblade is just too good in every way to be ended so early in the game. There is more story to tell and innumerable chances for the talented writers, actors and the geniuses behind the special effects to give it all they've got.
Please help spread the word. It's not over yet.
Shannon Jacobs
shannon@verk.com
n a surprising (or perhaps not so surprising) turn of events, network executives are distancing themselves from the viewing public. It is no wonder that the selection of quality programs has greatly diminished in recent years to contain only rehashed legal and medical dramas, and over-the-top reality TV, while highly acclaimed science-fiction fan favorites such as Witchblade and Farscape are pushed aside to make more room for mediocre programming. It is apparent that money talks, not talent, imagination or creativity.
It was not too long ago when networks solicited viewer feedback in an effort to provide quality programming that would meet the needs of the viewing audience. However, in recent months, networks such as TNT have virtually isolated themselves from the viewers by shutting down all forms of communication. E-mail is returned stating that "e-mail attacks" have prevented e-mail from being read, letters are returned unopened, fan mail is not delivered and viewers are directed to message boards that are not
moderated or maintained.
As fans, we do not fool ourselves into thinking that every letter written is read by the addressee, but at the very least, we hope that someone is keeping count of the correspondence and treating it with all seriousness. However, it is an insult to the fans that have taken the time and the effort to send
a letter or postcard only to receive the mail back with "refused" stamped on it. What kind of message does this send to the general public?
The last time I checked, we lived in a democracy where every citizen had the right to freedom of speech. Perhaps network executives need a lesson in history or perhaps just a lesson in etiquette.
Natalie G.
ngilmore3@yahoo.com
thoroughly enjoyed A&E's version of Lathe of Heaven. I read one viewer's opinion of the message being obscured ("Lathe of Heaven Loses Message") and I didn't find that to be the case. It was a great take on the playing-God theme. The obvious answer to that question is painfully revealed, although things seem to work out in the end. The story itself poses all kinds of metaphysical and ethical questions which, I think, the adaptation dealt with masterfully. I loved the mood of the movie, beginning with dystopian fatalism to a hopeful, optimistic ending.
I thought it was interesting how the main character placed all the characters in his final dream vision, kind of a bittersweet redemption. One of the messages to me was that nothing comes without a price and that we're not so easily extricated from the dilemmas we present ourselves with. I hope that more of the great sci-fi classics begin to show up in the mainstream. This shows nonfans what they've been missing over the years.
Brett B.
Brettb@aol.com
ne thing I've always loved about watching sci-fi movies: learning new facts and scientific concepts. Terminal Invasion was no exception. At the climax of the SCI FI Channel's original movie, Bruce "Evil Dead" Campbell and Chase "Deep Space Nine" Masterson are working together to save a group of stranded passengers and themselves from sinister aliens who've invaded a
remote airport in the middle of a fierce snowstorm.
Things are looking ugly when Bruce discovers a way out—not a helicopter with skis—a small plane with pontoons. Yeah! And it's only two hundred miles to freedom.
Unlike Chase and the other earthlings, Bruce is a convicted murderer. (His wife? His bookie? A troop of Girl Scouts? We never find out.) He knows if the aliens don't get him, sooner or later, the American cops will.
[Warning: Spoilers follow.]
Without spoiling this incredible movie for anyone, at the very end, Chase and Bruce fly away to Canada where they'll live happily ever after.
Now, I know that snow is really water and six inches of the stuff on a runway makes it impossible for a regular plane to take off. But a small, single-engine seaplane—a stroke of aeronautical genius!
Just one tiny problem remains: announcing to the world that convicted American murderers are safe in Canada ... that could get around.
Kevin Ahearn
KEVTOMA@aol.com
hen I first learned that [the SCI FI Channel was] making a movie, actually a sci-fi series of Frank Herbert's Dune, I was ecstatic. I loved it very much. It was a masterpiece. I own the DVD and plan to buy the director's cut as well. I then learned [the SCI FI Channel was] merging the next two books into one movie ... an acceptable abridgement—it will probably move the story along.
Then I found out the unthinkable—[the SCI FI Channel] is turning my favorite series of all time, The Chronicles of Amber, into a movie ... but only one! One four-hour movie cannot truly embody the masterful 10-volume series. It would take 20 hours, or at least 15. I understand [the SCI FI Channel] has to make certain choices, but please don't abridge the Amber movie. Treat it the
same as Dune, so all can revel in its magnificence.
Mike Haddaway
robhunter_vtm@hotmail.com
have a suggestion for the producers of Enterprise: please put it on another channel, in addition to UPN. I have been a science-fiction fan since the original Star Trek, and remember it in black and white. I waited for the premiere [episode] of Enterprise last year and loved it.
After boasting of it to friends that are Trekkie fans, I had to tape episodes for them to watch because their TV could not pick up UPN. This season, I cannot even pick up UPN. They are losing viewers in the rural settings, like myself, who rely on satellite to watch TV. The choices currently on for entertainment is boring, so I just do not watch TV. I am waiting for the reruns of Farscape to watch something entertaining.
Ruth Huggins
hugshogs@intrstar.net
evin Ahearn struck the nail on the head when he said in the last issue of Science Fiction Weekly that the future of science fiction is on the Web ("The Web Is the Future of Fiction"). But it isn't just floating about for anyone to grab for free ... that is where the unedited stuff comes from that he speaks of. The professional stuff is in eBooks available from small publishers such as RFI West.
If you look at
www.rfiwest.com you'll find scores of professionally-edited science-fiction books available for download at a very reasonable price. And there are dozens of other ePublishers out there, many with large science-fiction catalogs.
Stephen LaFevers
stevelafevers@atari.net
think that Joe Schembrie ("Star Trek Wouldn't Survive Reality") needs to takes a step or two back and examine the basis of his rationale for the supposed liberalism of Star Trek. He compares the starship Enterprise to the modern aircraft carrier Enterprise. Yes, this is a TV show in which almost all of the characters are military officers, traveling around in a heavily armed spacecraft enforcing the will of the Federation. Time and again, the point is made that they are only able to accomplish their missions of peacekeeping and humanitarianism because they are backed up by the armed might and technical prowess of Starfleet. One of the best examples of this is the classic Trek episode in which Kirk ends a senseless decades-long cold war by threatening to use the Enterprise's fire control systems to destroy the entire inhabited surface of one of the planets involved. Peace though strength, in other words. Doesn't sound particularly liberal to me.
As for the examples he cites, of officers with suspicious associations and gross derelictions of duty on their records being allowed to maintain their standing in Starfleet, this is part of the curse of the weekly TV series. Writers have to place recurring characters in enough peril to make their plight interesting in spite of the fact that everyone knows they will be back next week. Remember the old private eye shows were the main character gets clubbed over the head or beaten half to death in almost every episode, yet someone manages to avoid turning into a scarred, brain-damaged vegetable? There may be some examples of the liberalism of Star Trek out there, but these don't quite cut it.
As for Brad Torgersen's claims ("Sci-Fi Should Not Sermonize") that he is being preached at excessively, I wonder by whom? Most of the sci-fi shows on TV today seem to be fairly
politically neutral, unless you count a preponderance of butt-kicking women as a political statement. And for balance, how about the anti-big government paranoia of The X-Files and its offshoots, or the straight-ahead militarism of shows like Space: Above and Beyond? I think that conservatives tend to take the liberalism of Hollywood as a given, and never really stop to examine the issue too closely.
Matt Frey
mattgfrey@aol.com
ust a brief note regarding politics in SF and objections to same: In the theatre class I've been taking this semester, I've had to sit through several rants delivered by one student in particular who objects to even the slightest hint of liberal sentiment in the plays we're assigned. I've also had to listen to people on my side of the fence whine about the slightest hint of conservative sentiment in just about anything, even if the conservatives happen to have it right. (And I admit that it's been known to happen.) Frankly, it makes me sick.
Politics have their place in science fiction; they have their place in the virtual pages of Science Fiction Weekly. I freely admit that as well. However, I feel that they have been assuming too prominent a place. I remember reading letters that really made me think about what the author was saying. Now we have far too much hollow political banter.
So, I'm going to propose a revolutionary new concept. Many of you have said that you have the right to stop watching something you object to. You do indeed. Might I suggest that if you, as a conservative, as a liberal, as a purple duck, whatever, object to a given show's apparent political leanings, you not only stop watching but stop whining as well?
Spencer M. Lease
beyondzine@softhome.net
h frell! How can John Crichton get out of this one? I mean, he's been shot out of wormholes, chased mercilessly by the Peacekeepers, been poisoned, shot, left hanging in space more than once and now he's come up against an adversary far more dangerous than anything the Peacekeepers can muster: The SCI FI Channel itself!
It's almost inconceivable that the SCI FI Channel could shoot itself in the foot in this manner, but they have managed it. With the cancellation of Farscape, the programmers of the SCI FI Channel have joined those who worked at NBC in 1969 when Star Trek was canceled, simply because Farscape is the
Star Trek of its time.
While there are many genre shows airing, only one or two actually come close to the level of excellence set by the writers, producers and cast of Farscape. Only Stargate SG-1 and, perhaps, Enterprise come close. Farscape
encompassed the best of science fiction by being excellent fiction.
I have often written about how many programmers do not understand science fiction, but I must admit that I did not see this coming. Farscape made Friday night on the SCI FI Channel. Series came and went, but Farscape stood above them, beckoning us to follow where Moya and her crew would go.
I can only hope that in the years to come, as Farscape conventions begin to convene and thousands upon thousands of fans congregate to discuss what could have happened and fan fiction begins to appear, that the programming executives responsible for canceling this superior series hide their heads in shame, then go back to their new jobs of flipping burgers and asking, "Would you like fries with that?"
Keith Kitchen
BoyoKlaatu1@aol.com
Back to the top.
