Transcribe
Translate
Fanfare, v. 2, issue 1, whole no. 7, August 1941
Page 28
More information
digital collection
archival collection guide
transcription tips
xviii fanfare STRANGE INTERLUDES on a guy when you're publishing his first contributions to your rag. But I suppose they all came out like that, eh?) Follows now a set of ratings, keeping in mind Chauvenet's little pedagogy. "for earl singleton" (10). Mainly because I consider it among my top effusions, and, after seeing it in print, am not struck by that feeling I often do get upon seeing my work published. It has to be good to please me after it's printed. THE EMPTY CUP (8). Misko expresses himself well even if I cannot in any way agree with him; in this instance however, more restraint should have been used. Which is why it's only an eight for Jack this time. I usually rate him higher. ASTOUNDING THINGS ABOUT STYLE (7). Just a bit above the dead mean. Which means I read it through carefully. And in these days when most fanzines bore me, & I rarely read an issue thru, that must mean something. (Gad, the cosmic importance seemingly attached to these remarks; maybe I should be more careful; don't want any more suicides now, do we? -- Faint answer of why not from a source we shan't mention.) But 'tis a fact, from my platform, damned few fanzines measure up. FANFARE, I'm happy to say, is one of them. I AUDIT THE CHICON (10). A timely and well taken piece. About time some one exploded the myth set in motion by the Nycon committee. SLAN!DER (9). I'd heard about this issue of the column and expected too much perhaps. Certain sections are excellent, but others are just stuff. However, this does represent an improvement over the first installment, which was to my mind, painfully close to Trudy Kuslan's impression of it. IN REPLY TO MISKE (10). Perhaps I'm too generous with my tends, but this earned it, I think. Rothman is among the top fan-writers these days, when it comes to thoughtful items. STARDUST (5). A terrible let-down. Really, it reads as if it were something composed of bits crowded out from Warner's columns. Tho, of course, some of the items are a bit too recent. The remarks upon Rosenblum are despicable. One might add, in addition to the British "traitors" also excluded from receiving BIZARRE are loyal Americans who have paid good money for this matter. It (to get back to the subject of British fans' pacifism) is in cases like this where so-called "supermen" show their utter mental bankruptcy. For all his pretenses, Miske is just one of the crowd, yelling jingoist phrases along with the rest of them. Where is the "super" sensitivity, the colossal understanding when it comes to the case of a fan whose sense of hear, humanity, and devotion to his ideals would not permit him to take part in warfare under any circumstances? Or perhaps Miske thinks that is easy? I might add here that I am not so much in agreement with Rosenblum's stand, that I think there might be occasions where it is not a betrayal of one's humanism and pacifism to participate actively in a particular war, but that does not alter my admiration for Rosenblums unflinching stand. It is an easy thing to be loyal-to-something amorphous, conventional, and present -- particularly when everybody else around you is cheering. That does not take even simple courage. You just check your brains in the nearest ashcan and let the hysteria ride you. It's another thing to be true to oneself. That is the course Mike Rosenblum took. But then, I wouldn't expect a phoney "slan" to understand it. STRANGERS IN BOSTON (8). I enjoyed re-reading it. POLL (10). After all, could it be improved? GEMS (7) You should
Saving...
prev
next
xviii fanfare STRANGE INTERLUDES on a guy when you're publishing his first contributions to your rag. But I suppose they all came out like that, eh?) Follows now a set of ratings, keeping in mind Chauvenet's little pedagogy. "for earl singleton" (10). Mainly because I consider it among my top effusions, and, after seeing it in print, am not struck by that feeling I often do get upon seeing my work published. It has to be good to please me after it's printed. THE EMPTY CUP (8). Misko expresses himself well even if I cannot in any way agree with him; in this instance however, more restraint should have been used. Which is why it's only an eight for Jack this time. I usually rate him higher. ASTOUNDING THINGS ABOUT STYLE (7). Just a bit above the dead mean. Which means I read it through carefully. And in these days when most fanzines bore me, & I rarely read an issue thru, that must mean something. (Gad, the cosmic importance seemingly attached to these remarks; maybe I should be more careful; don't want any more suicides now, do we? -- Faint answer of why not from a source we shan't mention.) But 'tis a fact, from my platform, damned few fanzines measure up. FANFARE, I'm happy to say, is one of them. I AUDIT THE CHICON (10). A timely and well taken piece. About time some one exploded the myth set in motion by the Nycon committee. SLAN!DER (9). I'd heard about this issue of the column and expected too much perhaps. Certain sections are excellent, but others are just stuff. However, this does represent an improvement over the first installment, which was to my mind, painfully close to Trudy Kuslan's impression of it. IN REPLY TO MISKE (10). Perhaps I'm too generous with my tends, but this earned it, I think. Rothman is among the top fan-writers these days, when it comes to thoughtful items. STARDUST (5). A terrible let-down. Really, it reads as if it were something composed of bits crowded out from Warner's columns. Tho, of course, some of the items are a bit too recent. The remarks upon Rosenblum are despicable. One might add, in addition to the British "traitors" also excluded from receiving BIZARRE are loyal Americans who have paid good money for this matter. It (to get back to the subject of British fans' pacifism) is in cases like this where so-called "supermen" show their utter mental bankruptcy. For all his pretenses, Miske is just one of the crowd, yelling jingoist phrases along with the rest of them. Where is the "super" sensitivity, the colossal understanding when it comes to the case of a fan whose sense of hear, humanity, and devotion to his ideals would not permit him to take part in warfare under any circumstances? Or perhaps Miske thinks that is easy? I might add here that I am not so much in agreement with Rosenblum's stand, that I think there might be occasions where it is not a betrayal of one's humanism and pacifism to participate actively in a particular war, but that does not alter my admiration for Rosenblums unflinching stand. It is an easy thing to be loyal-to-something amorphous, conventional, and present -- particularly when everybody else around you is cheering. That does not take even simple courage. You just check your brains in the nearest ashcan and let the hysteria ride you. It's another thing to be true to oneself. That is the course Mike Rosenblum took. But then, I wouldn't expect a phoney "slan" to understand it. STRANGERS IN BOSTON (8). I enjoyed re-reading it. POLL (10). After all, could it be improved? GEMS (7) You should
Hevelin Fanzines
sidebar
