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 send a message to scifiweekly@scifi.com.
here seems to be a lot of discussion and crying about the cancellation of Enterprise. I'm not the least bit surprised that show was canceled. My husband and I stopped watching shortly after they introduced the storyline about the Xindi. The writing was never up to the standards of Next Generation or Deep Space 9. The writers seemed to think that having scantily clad women and lots of action was adequate. They never bothered to develop the characters. And Archer was certainly no Picard. The only way that show is worth all the anguish is if the writing improved immensely after we stopped watching. Thank goodness we still have Stargate SG-1.
Beverly Byrum
bbyrum(at)ka.net
admit it. I killed off Enterprise. I am one of the reasons why UPN is canceling this show. No, I do not want it saved and returned to TV in any format. Enterprise was a pathetic excuse for a Star Trek show, let alone a science-fiction show. You can go back to my earlier letters to this forum to find out how I felt last year and the year before that. I
simply stopped watching. The writing was terrible, and although I, unlike others, will not accuse Rick Berman of being the mastermind behind the show's ineptness the first three years, he probably has some responsibility. The idea for the show was good, but rehashing everything that went on in other Trek series was bad. The actors were decent, but the character development was lackluster. And it was character development that ruined this show. It is hard to believe a Vulcan with emotions, even if they were caused by a disease? (Again, I admit, I did not watch that much.) The show should have been about Earth's first exploratory trips out into the galaxy and eventually the establishment of the Federation—apparently, some of this has gone on this year, but I have only watched an episode and a half. And what was up with all the time travel? Time travel has been overdone in the Star Trek universe.
Ultimately, what killed Enterprise was a lack of vision. [J.] Michael Straczynski had a vision and he brought forth Babylon 5, to this day still the best example of what (good) can happen with science fiction on TV. Which brings me to the second point of my letter: Battlestar Galactica. Over a year ago, I wrote to this forum to say that the new BSG was a sacrilege and a stain on the good name of a decent series from my childhood. Then again, that series wasn't that good, but what kept me fascinated with it back then was the vision of the writer(s) and where that might lead. If you really want to know, my best friend and I, in all of our 13 years of life at the time, even wrote three stories continuing the story of Galactica and the "ragtag fleet on its lonely quest." That much we loved that show.
So yes, I wasn't really happy when Galactica was slated to come back—in whatever incarnation. (I had read Richard Hatch's comic-book treatment, and I was not impressed). Plus, the changes I had heard about were, to say the least, abhorrent to me (just as Stargate SG-1 would be without Richard Dean Anderson) ... but. Ah yes, I have changed my mind!
BSG in its current incarnation is a decent show. Oh, there are lots of things I do not like about it (for example, all of Baltar's fantasies—they are wearing very thin right now). I won't rail about all the sex (you can tell a good story without so much of it), or all the smoking (lots of people in lots of cultures do lots of bad things—and if you people have not noticed, this is not a show for kids—I would not let anyone younger than 16 watch it, and even then, there will be a discussion so that they understand the whys of characters' actions). What does bother me about BSG is the same thing that excites me about the show's future. The idea that a sentient race created by human beings can help these same human beings find themselves. Because as Mr. Moore has written them so far, humans are lost. They are way out there, and I am not just talking about lost in space. They have been portrayed as a
race needing (seeking?) redemption, and maybe, just maybe Mr. Moore can pull it off. And that's my fear about this show. Can he pull it off? Or will he get tired of the attempt, or might the powers that be (ala UPN with Enterprise) lead him astray? The only thing that can really be said is that he has a vision, and I hope that his vision stays true, makes sense, but also rewards the viewer. Redeeming human beings is a hard thing to do, and normally, we humans like to kill the redeemer rather violently (Christ on the cross, etc.)—actually, that's what our counterparts are doing to the Cylons—of course, they do not know, yet, why the Cylons attacked. Like I said, a vision exists. Good luck with it.
Michael Papagermanos
makedonia(at)earthlink.net
think both Marc Wane-Schenkel ("BSG's Second-Hand Smoke Is Minor") and Scott Johnson ("Smoking Isn't a Second-Hand Issue") are correct. There are more pressing things to worry about on BSG than second-hand smoke when the last of their race could be blown out of space by Cylons attacking with spaceships or destroyed by Cylon infiltrators from within their convoy. But the last thing I would want to worry about in that situation is walking into a smoke-filled mess hall or a hanging cloud of leftover smoke when I turn a corner on the way to my post.
How about this: In their struggle to survive and conserve the resources they have, including fresh air, there should be a total ban on cigarette smoking in the fleet because it's taxing the air filtration systems, which are in dire need of an overhaul. With that done, there can be stories about the addictions, withdrawals and the struggles of pilots, technicians and civilians that now have to quit cold turkey.
Would that make those of us that don't smoke, have had loved ones die from lung cancer or throat cancer more appreciative of BSG's understanding of how bad the habit is? Or would the writers make the mistake of having 45 minutes of an episode depicting the horrors of withdrawal and cancer only to have Baltar come up with a McCoy cure that fixes everything? After that the subject will never be revisited again, like it never happened.
Why do we need television to teach our kids what is right or wrong? So what if they smoke on BSG? Tell your kids not to. But if the show's producers are going to show folks with a nasty, smelly habit—they should show the bad side as well. We don't have magic cigarettes that don't cause cancer in the real world. BSG needs to clearly say that they do in more than one show—for those impressionable minds that want to "be like their television heroes" instead of their real-life heroes—their parents.
Sash Scott
cptsscott(at)aol.com
n Juan Cox's letter on March 15, ("Galactica's Cursing Is Frakked"), he writes that the word "frak" seems like a bad idea in a show with so many clever and well-conceived ideas.
Perhaps Mr. Cox has forgotten that this show has many thematic ties to the original Battlestar Galactica, even though it is most definitely not that series. (Starbuck a woman, names are suddenly call signs, Cylons are humanoid.)
Besides the wonderful Viper design, and the overall look of the Galactica, as well as the many ships in the fleet that remain completely unchanged from the original series, one long-lasting reference to the show remains intact. The use of "frak."
Frak was used in the original series, and is well placed in today's series.
If the situation warrants it, I'd rather have the uncensored "frak" from the original series than a beep or a lame word that just doesn't capture the feel of, as he calls it, the F-bomb that real people use in times of tension.
To me this is one of many great homages to the original series. I think it's frakkin' great.
Sean Huxter
sean(at)turbine.com
uan Cox ("Galactica's Cursing Is Frakked") is just not getting it. I get the impression from his letter that he was a fan of the original Galactica series, or, at least, had some decent amount of familiarity with it. Yet he did not object to its
use of pseudo-curse words. Seems I recall Dirk Benedict's Starbuck being particularly fond of
"felgercarb," the equivalent of horse pucky, mule muffins, buffalo bagels ... you know ... bat guano.
And what of Farscape, a magnificently conceived and executed series? They had more substitute curse words than anybody can readily recall ("frell" being probably the most common).
Did the usage of any of these make those programs seem childish and less enjoyable? Not to me nor anyone else, as far as I know. Were these things an end run around the censors? At least partially. Maybe even primarily. But they were more than that. Just as Farscape told time in microts and arns (forgive the spelling errors, if I didn't guess correctly), these deviations in the language help to establish details of the alternate reality ... of life in these other universes. You get to absorb a bit of the culture.
But it goes still further beyond that obvious point. The use of these terms let the viewers be in on the joke. We know something of what's going on without having to be taught. We don't have to be told that an "arn" is possibly the rough equivalent to an Earthly "hour." The show's creators allow us to fill in those blanks so that we feel, if only temporarily, more a part of that universe. It's the same for all of the other substitute terminology, including "frak." A heck of a lot easier than learning to understand Klingonese.
Bottom line is that "frak" will likely stay a part of BSG for a long frelling time. Ya might as well get used to it.
Bill B.
rdcuer00(at)yahoo.com
he first decent superhero motion picture of the modern age was Superman. It was done with extreme taste. After Superman II, all comic-book-based films and TV shows stunk. Spider-Man was good with the exception of the Green Goblin's suit; it looked like something designed while high on crystal meth! Hulk could've been better. Let's hope Fantastic 4 succeeds. Lord knows we need something rather than mutants! Other than Spider-Man, that's all Marvel's about now. The only thing good about the X-films was Famke Janssen as Dr. Jean Grey! Truly one of the most beautiful women on Earth. Say, when are Ghost Rider, Man-Thing, Thor, Iron Man, Flash, Black Panther, Captain America, and the classic Captain Marvel getting their turns on screen? Great characters worth seeing!
Wade Carmen
wolverwade8(at)yahoo.com
agree with the underlying sentiment of what A.K. Cardinal was saying ("Chyna Is a Wonder-ful Woman"), that Wonder Woman should be a tall, athletic actress ... but Chyna? I could agree if she could act. I might even agree if she still looked like she did in her Playboy pictorial.
But just one viewing of the current Surreal Life on MTV shows that neither of these are true anymore.
Rob McNay
CptMatt(at)ameritech.net
ith the latest incarnation of Dr. Who ready to hit the airwaves in Britain within a fortnight (thats two weeks to us Yanks), I am stunned that I haven't seen any word about it from SCI FI! So what's the word?
Am I destined to climb on my roof and fashion a coat hanger and tin foil antenna in the hopes I can catch the signal from our neighbors to the north (or Canada, as I've heard them called)?
Greg Hall
corridorg4(at)chartermi.net
n his recent column ("The Soundtrack of Your Future Life"), Michael Cassutt wrote: "In an ideal world, of course, there would be a link here that would allow you to play a fair-use bit of these. But we are limited to words and pictures."
(sarcasm)
What would it be like? Some service that would allow you to listen to a sample of music and maybe, if you liked it, actually purchase that piece of music, to be downloaded directly to your computer for a nominal fee. Why, one day when the price and size of hard drives shrink enough, one could even carry an entire music library in some sort of pod-like device ...
(end sarcasm)
And I can't believe that he left out the seminal work of Figrin D'an.
Alex [last name withheld]
al_x(at)mac.com
wan McGregor, returning this year as Obi-Wan Kenobi, has proven his wisdom for choosing science-fiction roles again with the lead voice in Robots. The comedic talents of Robin Williams and Mel Brooks are not put to waste either. Halle Berry (supposedly preparing for Catwoman 2) bounces back from her Catwoman disappointments with her voice as McGregor's leading lady. Robots deserves Oscar recognition next year. This is the best artificial-intelligence comedy flick since Short Circuit and Weird Science.
Michael Anthony Basil
mike.basil(at)sympatico.ca
Back to the top.
