DIY History | Transcribe | Hevelin Fanzines | Ad Astra, v. 1, issue 5, January 1940

Transcribe
Translate

Ad Astra, v. 1, issue 5, January 1940

Page 18

Page 18.     AD ASTRA

fiction,and also dabble in fantasy more or less extensively. Like F. A. Kummer, for instance.
Naturally, you can't expect a writer to sell---not write---at least three or four thousand words a week of pulp fiction, and still turn out masterpieces every time. There are bound to be a bunch of bad stories; but at the same time, conditions are usually pretty favorable for some good ones too. For an author who writes extensively has one big advantage--he has experience. Which is something the ones in my first group don't have, and the ones in the second to a limited extent only, most of the time. But the trouble is that most of those who write for a living fall into a rut. Given experience and a modi-cum of sense, a writer who gets the breaks sooner or later comes to the place where he can write almost mechanically. Some of the Western authors, for instance, have almost unbelievable production rates. One Western hack writer, it is said, can turn out a full novelette in a morning's work, a novel in several days, and is not even forced to write,re-draft, and copy his work! Instead, he writes and submits just as it first flows from his typewriter. But this is nearly impossible in the fantasy field---there is too much need of decent plots there, fairly strong characterization, scientific accuracy, and a good power of description to allow such hasty work.
It would seem,that the place to look for masterpieces is from those who don't take their writing too seriously; spend plenty of time on a story; and don't worry too much over whether their work will go for nothing or not. The perfect example of this, I think, is E.E. Smith. He has a good position with (of all things) a doughnut factory; and writes only when the time is to be had.He spends two years on a story; more or less--Bloch wrote one in eight days of Smith's average length, but maybe there's a difference in the quality!---and it's about as good when it's in print as it's humanly possible to make it. An author whose existence depends on his typewriter can't afford to waste this much time, so perhaps it's best not to censure some of the hacks for not writing like Smith or Merritt. Even though they are usually capable of better work than they ordinarily produce.
A perfect example of the writer-who-writes, and the writer-who-writes-for-livelihood;and the way they'll attack a given framework, is to be had by comparing Stanley G. Weinbaum's "Black Flame" and Eando Binder's "Lords of Creation". It is said that Weinbaum wrote "Black Flame" and other two yarns in that huge novel for the love of his putting himself on paper and with no view of ever seeing it in print. Though I'm inclined to doubt that, it's very probably that SGW [[underline]]didn't[[end underline]] expect to sell the novel, at least for years. If he were still living no one would be likely to know it existed, even. But his death brought it about. On the other hand, "Lords of Creation" is a typical Binder story.
Both deal with a man who is put into suspended animation and awakens in the future. The means of doing this are different; one is aware and the other is not. But they awaken alone, and set out to explore the world of the far future. They find it vastly different--in rather similar ways in both stories--a queen, or near-queen, fascinates them, and their love for a girl of a low caste holds both. The solution is different in the two yarns; but need I say which is better...?
Weinbaum, to follow up the comparison, was of course a much better writer than Binder is. Few can doubt the truth of that statement: even in Binder's earlier days he never turned out a true masterpiece of fantasy, that will be forever remembered. But supposed Weinbaum had been a hack--in a way he has, naturally, but not in this case--and had set out to write "The Black Flame". And suppose Binder were a chemist or bookkeeper, or an editor, still had the ability to write, and set out to write "Lords of Creation"?
Don't blame the hack you're always censuring too much until you investigate! He might be just a lousy author--but then again--?

Saving...

Page 18. AD ASTRA fiction,and also dabble in fantasy more or less extensively. Like F. A. Kummer, for instance. Naturally, you can't expect a writer to sell---not write---at least three or four thousand words a week of pulp fiction, and still turn out masterpieces every time. There are bound to be a bunch of bad stories; but at the same time, conditions are usually pretty favorable for some good ones too. For an author who writes extensively has one big advantage--he has experience. Which is something the ones in my first group don't have, and the ones in the second to a limited extent only, most of the time. But the trouble is that most of those who write for a living fall into a rut. Given experience and a modi-cum of sense, a writer who gets the breaks sooner or later comes to the place where he can write almost mechanically. Some of the Western authors, for instance, have almost unbelievable production rates. One Western hack writer, it is said, can turn out a full novelette in a morning's work, a novel in several days, and is not even forced to write,re-draft, and copy his work! Instead, he writes and submits just as it first flows from his typewriter. But this is nearly impossible in the fantasy field---there is too much need of decent plots there, fairly strong characterization, scientific accuracy, and a good power of description to allow such hasty work. It would seem,that the place to look for masterpieces is from those who don't take their writing too seriously; spend plenty of time on a story; and don't worry too much over whether their work will go for nothing or not. The perfect example of this, I think, is E.E. Smith. He has a good position with (of all things) a doughnut factory; and writes only when the time is to be had.He spends two years on a story; more or less--Bloch wrote one in eight days of Smith's average length, but maybe there's a difference in the quality!---and it's about as good when it's in print as it's humanly possible to make it. An author whose existence depends on his typewriter can't afford to waste this much time, so perhaps it's best not to censure some of the hacks for not writing like Smith or Merritt. Even though they are usually capable of better work than they ordinarily produce. A perfect example of the writer-who-writes, and the writer-who-writes-for-livelihood;and the way they'll attack a given framework, is to be had by comparing Stanley G. Weinbaum's "Black Flame" and Eando Binder's "Lords of Creation". It is said that Weinbaum wrote "Black Flame" and other two yarns in that huge novel for the love of his putting himself on paper and with no view of ever seeing it in print. Though I'm inclined to doubt that, it's very probably that SGW [[underline]]didn't[[end underline]] expect to sell the novel, at least for years. If he were still living no one would be likely to know it existed, even. But his death brought it about. On the other hand, "Lords of Creation" is a typical Binder story. Both deal with a man who is put into suspended animation and awakens in the future. The means of doing this are different; one is aware and the other is not. But they awaken alone, and set out to explore the world of the far future. They find it vastly different--in rather similar ways in both stories--a queen, or near-queen, fascinates them, and their love for a girl of a low caste holds both. The solution is different in the two yarns; but need I say which is better...? Weinbaum, to follow up the comparison, was of course a much better writer than Binder is. Few can doubt the truth of that statement: even in Binder's earlier days he never turned out a true masterpiece of fantasy, that will be forever remembered. But supposed Weinbaum had been a hack--in a way he has, naturally, but not in this case--and had set out to write "The Black Flame". And suppose Binder were a chemist or bookkeeper, or an editor, still had the ability to write, and set out to write "Lords of Creation"? Don't blame the hack you're always censuring too much until you investigate! He might be just a lousy author--but then again--?