DIY History | Transcribe | Hevelin Fanzines | Voice of the Imagination, whole no. 20, January 1942

Transcribe
Translate

Voice of the Imagination, whole no. 20, January 1942

Page 4

4   New Yr 42
Art Widner JR, Bx 122, Bryantyille, Mass, sets the tempo for the bomby days ahead with some down-to-earth diagnosing of  Vom's diabeticondition: "The reason I deplore the present insipidness of Vom is because it could be a highly interesting and significant forum of the imagi-nation. Something like Doug Webster's Gentlest Art. "Scotland's sole stfanmag) As Fortier hints, VoM has become involved in a vicious circle. Since nearly all the letters are mere prattle, those readers capable of writing on "serious" subjects think they are not welcome and refrain from writing or merely add a bit more prattle. Prattle can be intersting but it is not satisfying. On such a diet of wind pudding and air sauce, thinking in fandom has become anemic from intellectual malnutrition. " Proof of this is suprisingly healthful state of English fandom, in spite of the adverse conditions that would likely put a stop to US fandom altogether. Compared to them we are a bunch of old women in a sewing circle chatting pleasantly about the weather. Of course it's entirely your business whether you wish to have a light, frothy, 'purely-for-entertainment' fanzine, or a serious digest of leading fan opinions, and it's not my place to dictate your policy. As a reader, I'll say what I would like to see, and make suggestions. " True, the lack of serious material in VoM is not entirely your fault, or even the larger percent your fault. Yet you are partly to blame, became of your policy of printing everything that comes along. I think Strange Interlude's popularity is due to my editing, at least partly.  Nor some cases I have been complimented by the 'cut' party himself: The way I look at it is: What the devil is the use of being an editor if you don't edit? I belive that is the trouble with most of our US fanzines. The so-called fan editors are not editors at all, but merely material-gatherers and and printers. "  As the editors, I think you should do something to encourage those in fandom who could write the letters and discussions that ought to be. You know who they are: Milty, Speer, the subconscious Tucker, Lowndes, Warner, Evans, Heinlein, and quite a few more I can't think of offhand. (QX; consider yourselves encouraged, stfilosofers!) "If fandom is not entirely divorced from the prozines, at least they are living separately. Have you ever stopped to think why this split has come about? My idea is that the fans want to do something more than gabble about stories and authors perceptible, the fans will have to substitute something else for their main interest in keeping together. " I think the thing that interests every fan of which lies back on his being a fan at all, is a dissatisfaction with the world as it is, and a conscious or subconscious desire to improve those conditions. I suggest this be made a basis for future discussions in VoM. What's to be done? How is it to be done? What can we do to help?  " I can see the sneers on the faces of La Kuslan and other cynics, at this lofty idealism, but I stick to my guns. I am opposed to a pessimistic, degeatist attitude at all times, not because I am an optimist, but because pessism has no utility beyond a check on over-uxuberant dreamers and visionaries. " Understand, I do not advocate the absolute censorship of prattle, humor, and just plain foolishness. Such things are the spice and flavor of any publication, but who wants to sit down to dinner of salt, pepper, and ketchup? "VoM is the natural selection of all the f'nz to contain these 'serious' discussions. It's a lot easier to sit down and ramble thru a letter than to try a finished, polished article, and VoM's wide popularity makes it ideal for the efficient dissemination of such propaganda. "  I'm afraid I've been redudant and discursive in this epistle, but you are welcome to cut it if you think it's necessary. Naturally, I'd like it all printed (from notation to preceding paragraph) but if you must cut, let Art Joquel go to work on it. He seems to have the best idea of that business of anybody in fandom." (And Joquel has retired! But we hope U like the editing of your letter undetaken by the Efjay, mainly a matter of rearranging a couple paragrafs in the intrest of Unity, Coherence & Emfasis. This does not indicate an alteration of policy, however: We continue to copy correspondence as it is sic't onto us.)

FORTIER, from the "Tight Lan Shottlo Bop". 1836 - 39 Ave, Oakland Cal-- "The last issue of Voice raised me right out of chair. It got a rise out of me-- a pleasant one-- while I was looking at the mag from a prejudiced point of view. " Voice of the Imagi-Nation has hit a now mental maturity, or should it be that the readers have hit a new stride? Perhaps I'm not the one to judge, but those are my peculiar sentiments. The cover was very, very nice, though not as fine as the previous. The titling is the most dignified; please retain this form of printing all future issues. " Milty and '2j4' were answered in noble fashion by the mighty FandM and I imagine that the conclusions go for the whole of fandom. Also, I've changed my mind in radical fashion by agreeing that you should print those 'lousy' illustractions. It reveals what fan considers good art (but, o-lawd, what some of them draw). However, let's have fine front covers all of the time. " Ed Connor has made a regrettable mistake: 'It ((Tomaiden)) closely resembles some of Lou Goldstone's work. I think.' is what he has to say. Now, this is hardly possible inasmuch as Tom was developing this style before my friend Lou began drawing for stfandom. Wright has a year's start on Goldstone, and Lou's present style was not presented until some seven months ago. No arguement intended; just wish to make an apparent correction. "  Next to enter the ring (ah, "The Fan in the Golden Atom"!) is Rothman. I realize that you jokingly called it a Finlay by Wright in half-commendation. But Milty seems rather serious as have other fans. Virgin Finlay is a grand artist (my favorite for covers, interios, anything), but he is not original unfortunately. His name is stolen from Varga, his style is stolen from Clarice, his poses are stolen from movie stills and classical art, and his technique is the most elementary of any. In his illustration, Tom employed stiple, which, next to cross-hatch, is the most fundamental of methods. Show me a Finlay employing pure stiple in black, let alone white ink. Moreover, there are none of Virgil's bursting stars and floating bubbles

Saving...

4 New Yr 42 Art Widner JR, Bx 122, Bryantyille, Mass, sets the tempo for the bomby days ahead with some down-to-earth diagnosing of Vom's diabeticondition: "The reason I deplore the present insipidness of Vom is because it could be a highly interesting and significant forum of the imagi-nation. Something like Doug Webster's Gentlest Art. "Scotland's sole stfanmag) As Fortier hints, VoM has become involved in a vicious circle. Since nearly all the letters are mere prattle, those readers capable of writing on "serious" subjects think they are not welcome and refrain from writing or merely add a bit more prattle. Prattle can be intersting but it is not satisfying. On such a diet of wind pudding and air sauce, thinking in fandom has become anemic from intellectual malnutrition. " Proof of this is suprisingly healthful state of English fandom, in spite of the adverse conditions that would likely put a stop to US fandom altogether. Compared to them we are a bunch of old women in a sewing circle chatting pleasantly about the weather. Of course it's entirely your business whether you wish to have a light, frothy, 'purely-for-entertainment' fanzine, or a serious digest of leading fan opinions, and it's not my place to dictate your policy. As a reader, I'll say what I would like to see, and make suggestions. " True, the lack of serious material in VoM is not entirely your fault, or even the larger percent your fault. Yet you are partly to blame, became of your policy of printing everything that comes along. I think Strange Interlude's popularity is due to my editing, at least partly. Nor some cases I have been complimented by the 'cut' party himself: The way I look at it is: What the devil is the use of being an editor if you don't edit? I belive that is the trouble with most of our US fanzines. The so-called fan editors are not editors at all, but merely material-gatherers and and printers. " As the editors, I think you should do something to encourage those in fandom who could write the letters and discussions that ought to be. You know who they are: Milty, Speer, the subconscious Tucker, Lowndes, Warner, Evans, Heinlein, and quite a few more I can't think of offhand. (QX; consider yourselves encouraged, stfilosofers!) "If fandom is not entirely divorced from the prozines, at least they are living separately. Have you ever stopped to think why this split has come about? My idea is that the fans want to do something more than gabble about stories and authors perceptible, the fans will have to substitute something else for their main interest in keeping together. " I think the thing that interests every fan of which lies back on his being a fan at all, is a dissatisfaction with the world as it is, and a conscious or subconscious desire to improve those conditions. I suggest this be made a basis for future discussions in VoM. What's to be done? How is it to be done? What can we do to help? " I can see the sneers on the faces of La Kuslan and other cynics, at this lofty idealism, but I stick to my guns. I am opposed to a pessimistic, degeatist attitude at all times, not because I am an optimist, but because pessism has no utility beyond a check on over-uxuberant dreamers and visionaries. " Understand, I do not advocate the absolute censorship of prattle, humor, and just plain foolishness. Such things are the spice and flavor of any publication, but who wants to sit down to dinner of salt, pepper, and ketchup? "VoM is the natural selection of all the f'nz to contain these 'serious' discussions. It's a lot easier to sit down and ramble thru a letter than to try a finished, polished article, and VoM's wide popularity makes it ideal for the efficient dissemination of such propaganda. " I'm afraid I've been redudant and discursive in this epistle, but you are welcome to cut it if you think it's necessary. Naturally, I'd like it all printed (from notation to preceding paragraph) but if you must cut, let Art Joquel go to work on it. He seems to have the best idea of that business of anybody in fandom." (And Joquel has retired! But we hope U like the editing of your letter undetaken by the Efjay, mainly a matter of rearranging a couple paragrafs in the intrest of Unity, Coherence & Emfasis. This does not indicate an alteration of policy, however: We continue to copy correspondence as it is sic't onto us.) FORTIER, from the "Tight Lan Shottlo Bop". 1836 - 39 Ave, Oakland Cal-- "The last issue of Voice raised me right out of chair. It got a rise out of me-- a pleasant one-- while I was looking at the mag from a prejudiced point of view. " Voice of the Imagi-Nation has hit a now mental maturity, or should it be that the readers have hit a new stride? Perhaps I'm not the one to judge, but those are my peculiar sentiments. The cover was very, very nice, though not as fine as the previous. The titling is the most dignified; please retain this form of printing all future issues. " Milty and '2j4' were answered in noble fashion by the mighty FandM and I imagine that the conclusions go for the whole of fandom. Also, I've changed my mind in radical fashion by agreeing that you should print those 'lousy' illustractions. It reveals what fan considers good art (but, o-lawd, what some of them draw). However, let's have fine front covers all of the time. " Ed Connor has made a regrettable mistake: 'It ((Tomaiden)) closely resembles some of Lou Goldstone's work. I think.' is what he has to say. Now, this is hardly possible inasmuch as Tom was developing this style before my friend Lou began drawing for stfandom. Wright has a year's start on Goldstone, and Lou's present style was not presented until some seven months ago. No arguement intended; just wish to make an apparent correction. " Next to enter the ring (ah, "The Fan in the Golden Atom"!) is Rothman. I realize that you jokingly called it a Finlay by Wright in half-commendation. But Milty seems rather serious as have other fans. Virgin Finlay is a grand artist (my favorite for covers, interios, anything), but he is not original unfortunately. His name is stolen from Varga, his style is stolen from Clarice, his poses are stolen from movie stills and classical art, and his technique is the most elementary of any. In his illustration, Tom employed stiple, which, next to cross-hatch, is the most fundamental of methods. Show me a Finlay employing pure stiple in black, let alone white ink. Moreover, there are none of Virgil's bursting stars and floating bubbles