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
SF Has Lost Its Edge
am a major in English literature. I read SF, fantasy, and "mainstream" literature. I study it, I have to write on it, and I think I can recognize when someone is doing something "cutting edge" in fiction. SF is not usually what I would show as the best example of it. Like everything else, there is a lot of drek out there in SF. Some of it is pretty good, but as far as literature is concerned, I wouldn't write home to mommy dearest. Sure there are writers who mess with the format, and the fans usually don't support them so they have to wander off elsewhere, or die nearly broke. Some of them buck the odds and become successful both within the genre and outside it. Some will even enter into the canon of Western literature, but this is an infinitesimal number, and some of the best won't even receive a nod from the literary community when they die. Why? Because they wrote SF. They were part of the ghetto, so no one will ever take them seriously again. It's a shame too, because there are some "cutting edge" writers in SF, and most of them don't write SF anymore. They don't restrict themselves. So the "fans" complain, don't buy their stuff, simply ignore them. They have left the field for greener pastures, so now they are dead to us.
I may sound bitter, because I am. Why can't I find stuff by Harlan Ellison when I look in the SF section? Because he is good. He is the edge that everyone gets cut by. How about Disch? Must be off writing a book on poetry. How about Le Guin, she still writes SF doesn't she? Naw, they take her seriously now. Buy her old stuff. It has spaceships and things. Nifty.
The only edge I can see in SF now is the one fans use to cut the throats of any author that tries to experiment with "literature" and all its evils.
Joseph Ives
aegir@geocities.com
Today's SF Is Unmatched
here's been some discussion lately about whether good, real SF is still being written, whether the current stuff measures up to the old. In reality, the current stuff is better. SF is the newest literary genre there is, with fewer roots than any other. The early efforts were pretty primitive. The so-called Golden Age was the first time at which people started getting some things right, notably the science, and taking the whole thing a little seriously. Then there was a reaction where some writers started concentrating on the social and humanist and literary sides of things, but again kind of one-sidedly for a while. Generally, throughout these periods, even the best writers only combined a couple of the elements that make the best SF and the best stories; what they were good at, they were very very good at, but the rest they ignored. The earliest pulp SF tended to have exciting plots and very little else. Typically, hard SF writers did excellent science, cardboard characters, and ignored social aspects. The reaction wave of soft SF tended towards in-depth characters, excellent social implications, attempts at stylish prose, but lousy science and poor plots. Starting I would say sometime in the eighties, there have been a crop of excellent writers who have profited from the progress made before them and have for the first time put it all together.
C.J. Cherryh, David Brin, Dan Simmons, Orson Scott Card, Lois McMaster Bujold, William Gibson, Neal Stephenson, Allen Steele, Bruce Sterling, Melissa C. Scott, Nancy Kress, James P. Hogan, Joan D. Vinge, the list goes on. These people have varied writing styles, different themes. One thing they have in common is that all of them combine most of the elements that make great SF. Our best current writers have good plots and good characterization and good science and intelligent social implications and some concern with good writing and even some relationship to non-SF writing traditions. And the sheer ambition, scope, and sense of wonder that can characterize good SF has not been lost, either. As Orson Scott Card would argue, a spiritual dimension is being intelligently explored, too. Some of what is being written now is unmatched by anything that has gone before. The real Golden Age of SF is now.
Rufus Polson
dpolson@sfu.ca
We Must Support Quality SF
hile I agree with Gary Barnes' assessment of the sorry state of American SF television (well, SF TV in general), I disagree with where the blame should go. Hollywood may be "creatively bankrupt, cowardly and essentially greedy and grasping," but then again, they can afford to be, can't they? After all, they're powered by the almighty dollar, and we're the ones who keep giving it to them.
Why is that? We all complain about the crappy TV we get: for every show like Babylon 5 or Space: Above & Beyond there are 10 like My Favorite Martian (coming to a theater near you) or Homeboys in Outer Space. And TV is better than the movies; you know there's a problem when you feel good about a movie like Deep Impact because it at least makes an attempt to be believable, as compared to true pieces of garbage like Godzilla or Armageddon. In both cases, the science was lousy, the plot was ridiculous and the overall effect was mind-numbing. As mindless entertainment, they may have made the grade, but they don't represent SF worth a damn, and that's the problem.
When a Hollywood studio decides to make a movie, the primary question is, will it make money? Despite tremendous drop-offs in box office sales after the first week, both Godzilla and Armageddon made tons of bucks. So, when it comes time to drop the next round of bombs on the public, Hollywood is going to go with what they know works: lots of effects, loud explosions and to hell with the story. They're going to do that because they know we'll pay for it. We did last year, and the year before that, and every year before that since George Lucas released Star Wars (which is no more SF than Star Trek, despite the trappings).
In order to get quality product out of Hollywood, We The Public have to show them we'll pay for it. We have to show them that there is indeed an audience out there that is willing to be challenged and enthralled by what the best of what SF cinema and TV has to offer. One thing's for sure: we haven't done it so far. Quick, name three quality SF films that have succeeded at the box office. While you're at it, name three quality SF TV shows that weren't faced with cancellation or schedule changes repeatedly during their run. Movies like Solaris or Blade Runner fail to do well on first-run, so Hollywood doesn't repeat that experiment. Shows like Space: Above & Beyond--same story.
Not every show or movie is worth a Bjo Trimble campaign to save it, but SF overall is. If we want the best films and shows that SF can provide, then we have to go to the theaters and bang the drum afterward. We have to watch those few good shows we can find and write the networks if they take them down (hey, it worked for The Sentinel). Most of all, we have to support the best SF we can find, when we find it. Just remember where Hollywood gets its motivation.
Brandon Nolta
opusdei@hotmail.com
SF Isn't Just For Guys
his is regarding the letter (SF has a macho image) about Nalo Hopkinson's review of Flying Cups & Saucers.
I wish other women and girls who read science fiction would weigh in on this issue; I'm a woman, I've been reading SF since high school, and I'm getting pretty snarked off at the attitude of fans who are men and male writers who seem to believe that only men read science fiction. And on the other hand, I don't like fantasy; it's too fuzzy, illogical and inconsistent (which doesn't mean that I didn't love Nalo's book Brown Girl in the Ring, but I was interested in it because it used voudoun).
I'm a member of an SF readers' group, and I spent the last three months being bored out of my gourd reading books the guys had picked because they had "cool science." Cardboard characters, but cool science, and each telegraphed the ending by the middle of the book (and only the aliens in Rocheworld by Robert L. Forward made it at all interesting).
Perhaps it's just me, but I like stories about people--they don't even have to be human people, but they do have to be intelligent, interesting, and complex, like The Left Hand of Darkness by Ursula K. Le Guin and the Uplift books by David Brin.
If I must confess an illicit addiction to something out of character, it's cyberpunk--you can't believe how happy I am that Bruce Sterling has a new hardcover (Distraction) out, as well as another collection of shorts coming out in June; Neal Stephenson has a new hardcover coming out in May, and the Author Who is the Foundation of Cyberpunk, William Gibson, has a new book coming out in August. How cool of a summer is this going to be?!
For the guys out there who think that SF is just for guys, think again--if you really want to write/read about rockets and solar sails and space stations, fine, but don't expect me to buy your book/s. If I want to read about these things, I've got a subscription to Scientific American, and if I want to see space stations, I can tune in CNN and NASA-TV, and see a real space station. If I want to get excited about the possibilities of the future, it's in my computer--code and codons, computers and genetic engineering, at least in my humble opinion.
Stephanie M. Kwandrans
smkwandr@ma.ultranet.com
Maybe SF Is Just For Guys
n the observations of Tim Rimes and Nalo Hopkinson about gender differences (or preferences) between male and female writers in your Letters forum: Perhaps some of the difference lies not just in "macho" pursuits in "golden age" science fiction such as war, battles, more war, conquest, revolution, war, and sometimes war (from E.E. "Doc" Smith through Heinlein and on even to the Star Trek mythos), but in the lure of technology as savior: hard calculations and solid, no-nonsense technical prowess will guarantee our species' future survival and expansion. Fantasy, on the other hand, is magical, intuitive and often romantic: technology is as likely to be the problem as it is the solution. Given the popularity of Defending the Caveman and the Men Are from Mars, Women Are from Venus theories that abound, there must be some resonance in these views with the popular mindset. If this is the case, then it seems perfectly natural that there would be a tendency, whether "genetic" or as a function of "the market," for male writers to drift toward science fiction and female writers toward fantasy.
Steven Chostler
pepperpack@webtv.net
Pokemon Is A Welcome Anime Addition
'd like to add something to the brief Pokemon debate...being a Japanese enthusiast, I've studied the language for some years now, as well as the culture, and although I'm a fan of anime and manga, I'm by no means any "otaku." However, I was very surprised when an apparent "anime fan" was saying in a letter that Pokemon was an insult to anime.
I'd like to make some points, if I might, about the aforementioned Pocket Monsters cartoon series:
1) It's for a specific age group, namely young children, and not aimed at adults or teenagers.
2) It most certainly is a welcome and innovative addition to the world of anime, because while it does have many "cute" elements and others popular in anime, it also creates a wide variety of likable characters with whom children can identify.
3) Although some may think it's a silly show, it does actually do very well in covering very difficult and abstract concepts that most children's cartoons simply do not address.
4) Its success has already been proven, so there's really no use in arguing over its validity. It is incredibly successful in Japan and has also topped the ratings in America.
Pokemon, or Pocket Monsters as it is known in Japan, is an undeniable part of the anime culture and, to most, is a very welcome addition to the world of Japanese animation. Many truly great anime series have been sometimes thought of as "bad" or "silly," but that's really just in the eye of the beholder.
How many times have we seen Sailormoon, a truly great series, denigrated due to its feminine appeal? Or perhaps Speed Racer for its premise? Ranma 1/2 for its strange humor? Let us remember that not every anime enthusiast has the same tastes, and hopefully we will become more open to new experiences. None of us is qualified to judge what is "worthy" of becoming anime or not...none can make that kind of call for all anime fans, and indeed it is an insult to the fans, not to anime, when such a presumption is made.
Paul J. Roberts
phoenixxx@hotmail.com
Pokemon Is Not Acceptable
okemon is an insult to children. Over 10 years ago I was captivated by Voltron, a show with multi-dimensional characters and captivating story lines. While there is a story line to Pokemon, it is so bogged down in politically correct dribble that any interesting story line is ruined. The animation is sub-par. And there is only one story line. It is not an acceptable show for the audience it is aimed at. It might be suited for the Barney group, but that is it.
David A. Burns
dandl@global2000.net
Pokeman Is Warm And Fuzzy
ashing on Pokemon? What are you heartless? I usually don't care for anime, but this I like! I can sit down and watch cute little animals with my two-year-old little buddy and not have to worry about what most of you "people" look for in anime sex and violence. Now don't get me wrong, I like a good explosion as much as the next guy, but after a day of arresting people and putting up with the worst of the worst, I need a little warm n' fuzzy cartoon like this. Give it a chance.
Andy Hinrichs
Nyuckit@aol.com
Why Travolta For Battlefield Earth?
am really looking forward to the movie for Battlefield Earth, one of my all-time favorite SF novels. It's a fresh take on Earth/alien relations, where the greatest threat is not always posed by alien armies. One question, though--John Travolta? Why?!? I sincerely hope he isn't playing the role of Johnny. I just don't see it.
Here's hoping that all turns out well...
Jenny Topp
vorzheva@yahoo.com
Editor: According to Variety, Travolta will be playing the leader of the extraterrestrials.
Battlefield Earth Should Not Be Filmed
see that Battlefield Earth is about to become a movie. I must say, I'm concerned that this is just too much story for one movie. I read the book several years ago. The tale is some of the best in SF, but it is so detailed that it cannot be cut to two or even three hours, and still make any sense. Battlefield Earth is an epic that would require no less than a mini-series to tell a comprehensive story, and it should not be made into a movie.
Edward Toler
edmale1@yahoo.com
A Call To Arms Was Great B5
noticed that there was no review of the most recent Babylon 5 movie A Call To Arms, so I thought I should put in my two cents. I must say that this had to be the best B5 TV movie to date, and it returns to the reason we have all come to love this show so much...a great plot and an in-depth story that doesn't always have a happy ending. I must say that knowing that this movie is the lead-in to the upcoming B5 series Crusade. I just can't wait till June when it premieres.
V. Alvarado
vca1360@webtv.net
Editor: Our apologies to readers for missing this one...with all of the schedule changes going on at TNT, we simply lost track of it.
What 'Huis Clos' Really Means
n response to your readers' many attempts to translate "Huis clos": I just want to let you all know that this French term means "behind closed doors," and the expression is used mainly in meetings (meaning here "held in private"), in parliamentary language, news and journalism (meaning a closed-door information session arranged prior the presentation of a major initiative such as a budget--journalists are not permitted to leave the briefing room until the official presentation of the initiative has begun), or, in court hearings, the ban by a judge of cameras or journalists from the courtroom.
Sylvie Gagne
sylvie_gagne@hotmail.com
Check Out Subspecies 4
just wanted to let any vampire fans know that Full Moon Entertainment has released Subspecies 4 and you can see some behind the scenes footage on my Web site. Check it out and drop me a line!
Denice Duff
http:// www.deniceduff.com
Disappointed With SFWeekly
haven't been disappointed with Science Fiction Weekly before, but there's a first time for everything. I received my copy online today, January 19, and read about Fox's contest to name a ship for one of their upcoming films. I went to the Web site, looking forward to trying my luck--and found the contest already closed. The end date for the contest was January 18. I'm a bit surprised, actually--SF Weekly usually gives pretty up-to-date information, and I've been impressed overall, especially with its timely coverage of the recently discovered Doctor Who episode. But it seems that, as far as time-sensitive events like contests are concerned, this magazine is past its sell-by date.
Tony Whitt
supremedalek@earthlink.net
Editor: Somehow we missed the expiration date on this one. My apologies.
