DIY History | Transcribe | Hevelin Fanzines | Fandemonium, issue 2, Summer 1948

Transcribe
Translate

Fandemonium, issue 2, Summer 1948

Page 6

THE SOPHISTRIES OF SERGEI

In the last issue of FANDEMONIUM I included a short piece about the rather sudden retirement from fandom of Fred Ross Burgess; the response to it was interesting enough that I am prompted to enlarge upon the theme a bit. To resume the subject, a synopsis will be in order. In the first article I started off by saying the Burgess had rejected fandom, going into the terse, arrogant manner in which he informed me of his intention to abscond with the funds of our almost extinct state club. By the time I finished the article I apparently was raving at fandom to see to it that Burgess never had a chance to re-enter actifandom again after his callous treatment of it.
Frankly, I started the thing off merely to fill an extra half page, but after laying down the bare facts, I felt it would not be proper to stop there, so I continued in some detail. Then too, I felt it was only just that fandom should know exactly what had happened, including Burgess' defiant appropriation of the funds for his own use. Up to this point everything was straight fact, but then, the dramatic side in me took over (I had a few more lines left, anyway). Warming up to the sound of my own rantings, I decided it would be funny to end the thing in grand style, so I proceeded to denounce Burgess thoroughly and plead with the others to keep him out of fandom forever in case he ever came around again. I wrote this last part mostly in jest,  feeling sure that most of you would see through it, and partly hoping that it would lure Burgess back into the fold.
The reactions were surprising; most everyone took the thing seriously and either branded FRB as a blackguard or took me to task for such violent beliefs. Walter Coslot hinted that my attitude wasn't above reproach. Harold Cheney, adopting the smugly self-righteous attitude he usually does toward controversial affairs, missed the point entirely and primly inquired if it wasn't a bit silly "rising" such a fuss over such an inconsequential thing. Joe Kennedy came close to catching the general spirit of the matter, and made some pretty sensible comments. For everyone's information, Lionel Inman is not a penname of FRB; I merely stuck that in as a joke, and as a sort of clue to the fact that tomfoolery was afoot and that the latter half should be taken w with a grain of salt.
To make my attitude clear, I would like to say that the facts as given in that article and this one are true in every detail, and on the basis of such facts, I can only feel disgust toward any such unresonable, uncouth attitude as Burgess adopted; I still maintain that some semblance of ethics is required even in a hobby such as fandom, and regard any breach of the code as much an affront as in actual business. However, that part that I wrote about wanting to keep Burgess out of fandom for good was just so much writing; even if I could do so, I would never want to deny him the right to come and go just as he pleases, and if he ever decides to come back (as I feel he will), I'll probably regard this whole incident as one of the mistakes anyone could make. Right now, it might be that a little more data on the matter, along with a few more quotes from various notes of his would shed some light for the uninformed.
I haven't the space to give an accurate description of Fred Burgess, but for one that fits pretty good, investigate Laney's Memoirs and read "Burgess" for Daugherty. Burgess contacted me first in early '46, and an expose of some of his misdemeanors up to his retirememt includes: (a) He took it upon himself to issue out-of-state memberships in our club, receiving dues for a good many fans who never even got any benefits (?!) from the club, (b) He moved the date of the Norcon up so that for lack of proper plans and program it was a fluke.
(See last page)
6

Saving...

THE SOPHISTRIES OF SERGEI In the last issue of FANDEMONIUM I included a short piece about the rather sudden retirement from fandom of Fred Ross Burgess; the response to it was interesting enough that I am prompted to enlarge upon the theme a bit. To resume the subject, a synopsis will be in order. In the first article I started off by saying the Burgess had rejected fandom, going into the terse, arrogant manner in which he informed me of his intention to abscond with the funds of our almost extinct state club. By the time I finished the article I apparently was raving at fandom to see to it that Burgess never had a chance to re-enter actifandom again after his callous treatment of it. Frankly, I started the thing off merely to fill an extra half page, but after laying down the bare facts, I felt it would not be proper to stop there, so I continued in some detail. Then too, I felt it was only just that fandom should know exactly what had happened, including Burgess' defiant appropriation of the funds for his own use. Up to this point everything was straight fact, but then, the dramatic side in me took over (I had a few more lines left, anyway). Warming up to the sound of my own rantings, I decided it would be funny to end the thing in grand style, so I proceeded to denounce Burgess thoroughly and plead with the others to keep him out of fandom forever in case he ever came around again. I wrote this last part mostly in jest, feeling sure that most of you would see through it, and partly hoping that it would lure Burgess back into the fold. The reactions were surprising; most everyone took the thing seriously and either branded FRB as a blackguard or took me to task for such violent beliefs. Walter Coslot hinted that my attitude wasn't above reproach. Harold Cheney, adopting the smugly self-righteous attitude he usually does toward controversial affairs, missed the point entirely and primly inquired if it wasn't a bit silly "rising" such a fuss over such an inconsequential thing. Joe Kennedy came close to catching the general spirit of the matter, and made some pretty sensible comments. For everyone's information, Lionel Inman is not a penname of FRB; I merely stuck that in as a joke, and as a sort of clue to the fact that tomfoolery was afoot and that the latter half should be taken w with a grain of salt. To make my attitude clear, I would like to say that the facts as given in that article and this one are true in every detail, and on the basis of such facts, I can only feel disgust toward any such unresonable, uncouth attitude as Burgess adopted; I still maintain that some semblance of ethics is required even in a hobby such as fandom, and regard any breach of the code as much an affront as in actual business. However, that part that I wrote about wanting to keep Burgess out of fandom for good was just so much writing; even if I could do so, I would never want to deny him the right to come and go just as he pleases, and if he ever decides to come back (as I feel he will), I'll probably regard this whole incident as one of the mistakes anyone could make. Right now, it might be that a little more data on the matter, along with a few more quotes from various notes of his would shed some light for the uninformed. I haven't the space to give an accurate description of Fred Burgess, but for one that fits pretty good, investigate Laney's Memoirs and read "Burgess" for Daugherty. Burgess contacted me first in early '46, and an expose of some of his misdemeanors up to his retirememt includes: (a) He took it upon himself to issue out-of-state memberships in our club, receiving dues for a good many fans who never even got any benefits (?!) from the club, (b) He moved the date of the Norcon up so that for lack of proper plans and program it was a fluke. (See last page) 6