Transcribe
Translate
En Garde, whole no. 14, July 1945
Page 8
More information
digital collection
archival collection guide
transcription tips
page 8. RAINBOW TRAIL: Sorry, not qualified, hence no comment. However, the hectographing is distinctly legible, and that's certainly something after some efforts I've seen. INTRODUCING "DUNK": Hi, Dunk. Your background begins to emerge. A good start. Now just let yourself go and give us something bigger and better next time. FAN-TODS: You certainly manage to dream up some simple but unique covers. Liked Gardner's short article, and the heading was clever. Whose idea, yours or his? You certainly have a long review section this time. It's getting mighty close to being the best one in the mailing. However although I thoroughly enjoyed reading it, I don't feel impelled to review it in part or otherwise this time. The parts that could inspire lengthy comment happen to scare me a little with their abstruseness --- comparatively speaking. Your Countless Yesteryears column continues its high standard of interest. EN GARDE: No comment. BEOWULF: Apology for single-sheeter accepted. Will look for something better next time. PHANNY: Portraits on cover truly astounding. Particularly liked the elephant-regarding-his-gluteus-maximus, and created-spoor-detective best, though dance-of-the-cornucopia had its points. Of course, something like the "Intromorph" at the right falls into a different category. In fact, a comparative study brings to light an intriguing psychomeric morbidity of the latter as opposed to the aesthetic abandon of the former. I am sure you readily grasp the distinction and the significance thereby implied. "Sell Me A Ticket, Mister" was good. One of the few poems I've really liked. Reviews lengthy and quite, quite interesting. Langely seems to hate 'em, but I love 'em. Regarding the quality of art and material in En Garde, I'm now trying sincerely to maintain the best standard of both that I can. So if you want to be helpful, don't hesitate to tell me when I'm slipping, and where. READER AND COLLECTOR: Glad to see R & C back again. Regarding your remarks on my V-P ruling on the Fantasy content of FAPA publications, I appreciate your viewpoint but fail to find that a reason why the ruling should be otherwise. Somehow I feel the V-P's job is to interpret the constitution according to what it says, not what one might happen to like it to say. If those members who feel the fantasy angle should be played up more than it is would incorporate their ideas into an amendment, the whole matter could be settled once and for all. Personally, I favor a requirement that all publications deal partly with fantasy in some form. That seems to be the best compromise solution. It strikes me that "only fantasy" would become slightly boring in a short time, and such a narrowing of interest would tend to make the organization become sterile. On the other hand, obviously
Saving...
prev
next
page 8. RAINBOW TRAIL: Sorry, not qualified, hence no comment. However, the hectographing is distinctly legible, and that's certainly something after some efforts I've seen. INTRODUCING "DUNK": Hi, Dunk. Your background begins to emerge. A good start. Now just let yourself go and give us something bigger and better next time. FAN-TODS: You certainly manage to dream up some simple but unique covers. Liked Gardner's short article, and the heading was clever. Whose idea, yours or his? You certainly have a long review section this time. It's getting mighty close to being the best one in the mailing. However although I thoroughly enjoyed reading it, I don't feel impelled to review it in part or otherwise this time. The parts that could inspire lengthy comment happen to scare me a little with their abstruseness --- comparatively speaking. Your Countless Yesteryears column continues its high standard of interest. EN GARDE: No comment. BEOWULF: Apology for single-sheeter accepted. Will look for something better next time. PHANNY: Portraits on cover truly astounding. Particularly liked the elephant-regarding-his-gluteus-maximus, and created-spoor-detective best, though dance-of-the-cornucopia had its points. Of course, something like the "Intromorph" at the right falls into a different category. In fact, a comparative study brings to light an intriguing psychomeric morbidity of the latter as opposed to the aesthetic abandon of the former. I am sure you readily grasp the distinction and the significance thereby implied. "Sell Me A Ticket, Mister" was good. One of the few poems I've really liked. Reviews lengthy and quite, quite interesting. Langely seems to hate 'em, but I love 'em. Regarding the quality of art and material in En Garde, I'm now trying sincerely to maintain the best standard of both that I can. So if you want to be helpful, don't hesitate to tell me when I'm slipping, and where. READER AND COLLECTOR: Glad to see R & C back again. Regarding your remarks on my V-P ruling on the Fantasy content of FAPA publications, I appreciate your viewpoint but fail to find that a reason why the ruling should be otherwise. Somehow I feel the V-P's job is to interpret the constitution according to what it says, not what one might happen to like it to say. If those members who feel the fantasy angle should be played up more than it is would incorporate their ideas into an amendment, the whole matter could be settled once and for all. Personally, I favor a requirement that all publications deal partly with fantasy in some form. That seems to be the best compromise solution. It strikes me that "only fantasy" would become slightly boring in a short time, and such a narrowing of interest would tend to make the organization become sterile. On the other hand, obviously
Hevelin Fanzines
sidebar
