Transcribe
Translate
En Garde, whole no. 9, March 1944
Page 4
More information
digital collection
archival collection guide
transcription tips
page 4. MATTERS OF ETHICS There has developed in Fandom a general recognition of certain ethical concepts pertaining to fans and their activities. But the actual degree of their acceptance is open to question. The ideas of most fans on this subject seem to be rather vague and uncertain. Generally speaking, while they may violently disagree, most fans are inclined to be tolerant of the rights of other fans to their own ideas and peculiarities. When some individual fan has violated some point of Fandom's unwrittten Code, several of his fellow-fen have jumped him verbally, pointing out the error of his ways. The erring fan, whose mistake was usually an unthinking or unknowing one, has thereupon avoided repetition of his error, with the result that the incident was soon forgotten. However, recent happenings have thrown the situation into a different light. A number of years ago, a certain minority group of fans set about an attempt to control all Fandom. Whether they might possibly have ever succeeded is doubtful. In any event, they incurred the censure of Fandom when they forcibly ejected from a meeting several fans who objected to their methods. As a result of this act, while still active to a limited extent, they were, to all effects and purposes, banished from Fandom. More important, however, was the general agreement among fen that, hereafter, no fan should be refused participation in any fan activity or gathering. On a number of occasions, and in a number of ways, this agreement has been circumvented, but the methods of doing so have been devious, inconspicuous, and often unconscious. Outwardly, Fandom has remained adamantly determined on this one point. Yet, today, one might be justified in wondering how much that agreement was based on emotion, and to just what extent logic played a part. Today, we are faced with a fan who has violated not one, but most rules of fan-ethics. He appears to have acted under the assumption that the end justified any means, and his apparent goal (not necessarily his announced one) seems to have received no more approval than his means of attaining it. What is probably a good majority of Fandom feels we would be better off without this individual. But due to this "Anti-Exclusion" complex, there has been largely confusion about just what action should be taken. Several ineffectual or unacceptable methods for eliminating this fan have been suggested. But, as Fandom in general cannot make up its mind what course is proper, it is not surprising that no acceptable method of dealing with the situation has been forthcoming. It becomes increasingly obvious that the time has arrived to consider codifying our accepted rules of ethics. We need to examine anew our ideas of proper fan behavior. We need them before us in black and white so there can be no doubt about what we mean, and no room for hedging. We need a printed, generally accepted code of ethics, available to the new fan, to better enable him to avoid mistakes. Does unauthorized use of another fan's name, fanzine or organization title, etc., constitute a breach of ethics? When, if ever, do personal attacks on another fan become libelous, and therefore unethical? Are there, or are there not, conditions under which
Saving...
prev
next
page 4. MATTERS OF ETHICS There has developed in Fandom a general recognition of certain ethical concepts pertaining to fans and their activities. But the actual degree of their acceptance is open to question. The ideas of most fans on this subject seem to be rather vague and uncertain. Generally speaking, while they may violently disagree, most fans are inclined to be tolerant of the rights of other fans to their own ideas and peculiarities. When some individual fan has violated some point of Fandom's unwrittten Code, several of his fellow-fen have jumped him verbally, pointing out the error of his ways. The erring fan, whose mistake was usually an unthinking or unknowing one, has thereupon avoided repetition of his error, with the result that the incident was soon forgotten. However, recent happenings have thrown the situation into a different light. A number of years ago, a certain minority group of fans set about an attempt to control all Fandom. Whether they might possibly have ever succeeded is doubtful. In any event, they incurred the censure of Fandom when they forcibly ejected from a meeting several fans who objected to their methods. As a result of this act, while still active to a limited extent, they were, to all effects and purposes, banished from Fandom. More important, however, was the general agreement among fen that, hereafter, no fan should be refused participation in any fan activity or gathering. On a number of occasions, and in a number of ways, this agreement has been circumvented, but the methods of doing so have been devious, inconspicuous, and often unconscious. Outwardly, Fandom has remained adamantly determined on this one point. Yet, today, one might be justified in wondering how much that agreement was based on emotion, and to just what extent logic played a part. Today, we are faced with a fan who has violated not one, but most rules of fan-ethics. He appears to have acted under the assumption that the end justified any means, and his apparent goal (not necessarily his announced one) seems to have received no more approval than his means of attaining it. What is probably a good majority of Fandom feels we would be better off without this individual. But due to this "Anti-Exclusion" complex, there has been largely confusion about just what action should be taken. Several ineffectual or unacceptable methods for eliminating this fan have been suggested. But, as Fandom in general cannot make up its mind what course is proper, it is not surprising that no acceptable method of dealing with the situation has been forthcoming. It becomes increasingly obvious that the time has arrived to consider codifying our accepted rules of ethics. We need to examine anew our ideas of proper fan behavior. We need them before us in black and white so there can be no doubt about what we mean, and no room for hedging. We need a printed, generally accepted code of ethics, available to the new fan, to better enable him to avoid mistakes. Does unauthorized use of another fan's name, fanzine or organization title, etc., constitute a breach of ethics? When, if ever, do personal attacks on another fan become libelous, and therefore unethical? Are there, or are there not, conditions under which
Hevelin Fanzines
sidebar
