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
Perplexed By River Of Souls Review
fter watching River of Souls last night, I was a little perplexed. The review I read was way off base. This was another enjoyable, moral learning episode (movie). I have never missed an episode. I have never been afraid to let my six-year-old grandson watch B5 with me, and every episode is a learning experience for him. Morality is at an all-time low, and it is truly wonderful to be able to share this show without fear.
This two-hour episode was totally in keeping with B5's original genre idea. My only regret is that this is the last season. It's been a enjoyable and enlightening five years. But B5 will be in my memory and my grandson's for many a year to come. My only consolation is that there will be movies to come.
Susanne Leandre
calliecoe6@aol.com
Straczynski Needs An Editor
have to agree with Patrick Lee: Babylon 5 is wildly uneven in quality. River of Souls underscores this beautifully. I admire J. Michael Straczynski's talent as a writer, but I have felt for a long time that the one thing B5 needed was a good story editor.
His explanation for writing every script for the past two seasons and more is that it would take as much of his time to rewrite others' scripts as it would to just write his own. But I think that if others had contributed more, we would have seen many more innovative ideas, and the pacing would have been tighter. For whatever reason, JMS set himself above the usual standards for any kind of professional writing by not employing an editor. It reminds me of the situation with Robert Heinlein in his later years, or Stephen King now: no matter how good a writer you are, you can stand to have someone looking over your shoulder at least doing a sanity check.
Norman Cook
unclescrooge@hotmail.com
Pleased To Say We Were Wrong
was quite worried that Patrick Lee would be right and that the Babylon
5 movie River of Souls would be disappointing. I'm quite pleased to say that I think he was off the mark this time.
Mr. Lee objects to the lack of some rather superfluous things: Narns,
Centauri, huge spaceship battles, that sort of thing. I like these
things, too, but if that were all there was to B5, I don't think I'd be
watching it today. There was a story, and there were even many special
effects, but it could have progressed just fine without most of them.
I have to respectfully disagree with Mr. Lee on this one. I found that
it moved along quite well, the story was engaging, and I didn't find
some of the lengthy dialog to be boring at all. There were plot twists
that I didn't see coming. There were fundamental questions of
spirituality raised. We even got to see a lawyer tortured.
All in all, I think this is one of B5's better stories. Most certainly
better than Thirdspace, maybe even better than In the Beginning. About the only objections I could raise at this point would be that the movie
was ill-timed (it refers to events that have not happened yet in the
series)... and those stupid "love bats". Oh well. Can't have it all,
where would I keep it?
Jeff Grimmett
dlg@maximumaccess.com
B5 Can Survive Without The Regulars
liked B5 River of Souls. The sets remain more than adequate, and to-the-point (not "cheesy"). After having read your review, I was expecting to be less than satisfied by RoS. However, I am pleased to report that I enjoyed it every bit as much as I have enjoyed all of B5 to date!
Even without most of the regulars I feel RoS is an excellent addition to the B5 saga!
Randy M. Gaudian
r12347@aol.com
Gives River Three Stars
just finished watching B5 River of Souls and thought it was entertaining and much better than the last movie, Thirdspace, which I thought was very weak. Even though I am not fond of Captain Lochley the rest of the cast was good. Even though the transformation of the soul hunter was too quick, and the ending was very convenient, overall I would give it three stars out of five.
James Nason
jimbon@loganrec.com
Calls Varley's Work "Drivel"
urge any readers of this page to consider the possibility that Tasha Robinson's complimentary review of John Varley's work is mistaken. By all means read Varley: I am confident that once you have dragged your gaze across a few of the fetid porn outtakes he calls "chapters," you will shun his writings for all time. But by no means pay for this trash. There is a great deal of out-of-print SF treasure going for $.25 a book at flea markets--do not pay money for Varley's drivel.
Richard Michael Romanowski
rmr@digicon.net
Where Would SF Be Without Mythology?
n regards Joseph Allen's denunciation of the book Legend in his recent letter, I just couldn't sit by. While I have not read the book myself, his comments deserve a reply which has nothing to do with the book.
He basically criticizes the book for not adhering to his Christian version of good storytelling, and notes that the genres of science fiction and fantasy often promote "shallow humanism" and refute or ignore the place of God in the universe. Aside from the debatable description of humanism as "shallow" I think his argument is seriously flawed. One of the main tactics SF and fantasy writers use is to take current or past human beliefs and extrapolate from them.
Fantasy especially has flourished by delving into mythology. Where would the fantasy publishing industry be without Celtic and Nordic myths? Is it reasonable to expect a book set in a mythic Celtic milieu (for example) to adhere to a Christian view of the universe? Mr. Allen is criticizing the genre for choosing to explore mythologies other than his own. For an imaginative writer, all myths are fodder for stories. Imaginative fiction is about exploring ideas, not simply reinforcing the ones the reader already has.
Jon L Davis
jon@connectexpress.com
SF Needs The "What If...?"
egarding Mr. Joseph Allen's concerns about the lack (to him) of the existence of God in science fiction, and specifically in Legend. I have not read this book, but I recognize the argument. What Mr. Allen seems to be doing is confusing belief in a higher power with the organized religion he is familiar with. One is not necessarily the other. Cultures on this planet have existed for generations with a spiritual framework (i.e., North American and Australian natives, some Polynesian tribes) that did not require the creation of dogmatic literature, the building of structures that limited worship to those sites and nowhere else, or a mindset that forbade any variation of a standard tenet and encouraged violence against those who did not hold the exact same beliefs. He overlooks the fact that the Abrahamic traditions (Judaism, Christianity and Islam) are not the only religions on Earth, and expects us to do likewise.
He also seems to ignore the fact that moral relativism has long existed in the history of those self same religions, where slaughter and oppression of the outsider was raised to a fine art, and those in positions of authority often looked the other way when one of their own succumbed to corruption. The "bedrock values" he refers to have many cracks, exploited frequently by those in power, and to a lesser extent by those who think they can "get away with it" if they hide their transgressions well or are heard to repent loudly enough.
Mr. Allen is concerned with what he sees as the elevation of man to the status of godhood. In many religions, this is an active goal, and is not forbidden, as people of such religions consider themselves a part of God, striving to rejoin that totality. In others, man is considered a lesser creature, freely choosing a slave-master relationship with his deity in hopes of gaining rewards and avoiding punishments. The former is a mature, life-affirming quest; the latter, a co-dependent relationship.
One of the stones that make up the foundation of science fiction is the suggestion, "What if...?" Writers and readers explore the ramifications of how people act within or outside of their culture when confronted by new stimuli. This is called "conflict and resolution." Such conflict can be physical, emotional or spiritual, and should not be stifled because some readers do not wish to be challenged to think beyond the indoctrinations of their childhood.
Linda Stoops
jassmoris@yahoo.com
So What If SF Is Godless?
usually don't bother to write letters to magazines, but Joseph Allen's letter concerning Legend and God really got my mojo going.
First of all, Mr. Allen is going on the assumption that his beliefs are the "correct" ones. There are more than 3,000 religions in the world, and every last one of them insists that it is the "correct" one and you'll burn in hell if you believe any of the others. The most brutal wars in history sprang from this conflict, such as the Crusades. Which brings me to my second point: Mr. Allen shouldn't assume that everybody believes as he does, and shouldn't push his beliefs on other people.
Third: So what if a lot of SF is "Godless"? The key word in science fiction is science. Most of SF tends to deal with technological advances in one way or another, although the film Contact dealt with God vs. Godlessness ... but left the question unanswered. As it should be. God means different things to different people, and for some the whole concept means nothing at all.
Finally, if you don't like it, don't read or watch it. But don't try to prevent other people from enjoying something just because you disagree with its point of view. If the "absence of God" in speculative fiction causes you so much anguish, maybe you should just stick to a nice, safe Pat Robertson book or the latest Awake! magazine.
Fred T. Kerns
pistoff@anti-social.com
