DIY History | Transcribe | Hevelin Fanzines | Phanny, v. 3, issue 3, December 1944

Transcribe
Translate

Phanny, v. 3, issue 3, December 1944

Page 7

7                P H A N N Y                7
______________________________

"By Their Works, Ye Shall Know Them"

   I like Chauvenet's suggestion that alphabetic ratings be used in placing each item in the mailing. I also like the suggestion that each member should select his own "Laureate Awards" on each Mailing, as a means of simplifying the Laureate Committee's work. So I'm adopting both suggestions. But I also like to write and to read reviews, and they are here, too.

Laureate Suggestions:
  PUBLISHING -- 1, Watson ("Mad Muse" and Sappho). 2, Shaw (Banshee #5) 3, Purdue (Elmurmurings #3)
  FICTION -- 1, none. 2, Lowndes ("Trigger Talk at Green Guna" in Agenbite of Inwit). 3, Wright ("Spawn of the Gods," Beyond).
  ARTICLE -- 1, none. 2, Chauvenet ("The World of John Bristol Speer," Sardonyx). 3. Moscowitz ("Forgotten Fantasies," Fantasy Commentator, Sept.).
  HUMOR -- 1. Washington ("Raymeses," Banshee #5). 2, Spencer ("The Metamorphosis of John Q. Spingtumper," Banshee #5). 3, Speer ("Peril in Pentagon," Yhos).
  ART -- 1, Watson (cover, Sappho). 2, Wiedenbeck, (cover, Beyond). 3, Wilimczyk (cover, Banshee #5).
  POETRY -- 1, Gray ("The Mad Muse"). 2. Nuttall ("Succubus," Sappho). 3, Lowndes ("Demi-World," Agenbite of Inwit).
  BEST IN MAILING -- 1. "The Mad Muse" -- Gray and Watson. 2. Fantods, -- Stanley. 3. Banshee #5 -- Shaw.

Individual 'zine Reviews:

   Ratings follow the Chauvenet values fairly closely. "A" occurs five times, which seems to me to be a reasonable number. Quality, appearnance, and quantity of worthwhile material, in that order of importance, are the criteria I use. A mess of junk beautifully presented will never make the grade in my book; on the other hand, it is possible for material which is very good, even though it is more legible, to gain the highest rating. Unlikely though; usually, there is plenty og good material well presented. A single sheeter has very little chance; there are too many good mags of from six to thirty pages.
   The "B" group contains most of the publications, and represents considerable spread. For this reason, it has been divided into "B+" and "B-" groups. Yah gotta be purty durn good to rate "B+". Most of the "C" ratings go to good single sheet publications; often these are excellent as to quality, but just too brief for a full meal. As for the ratings lower than "C", well....

FANTASY FICTION FIELD PRESENTS (B-) Worthwhile material well presented. At least part of it is reprint material, however, and none of it interested me particularly.
JANUS -- I'm sorry, Paul, but only the editorial was legible, so I'm skipping the rating. Too bad you changed typers.
BROWSING, #7 and #8 (B-) The material in this continues to interest me more than that in other mags devoted primarily to fantasy books. I especially enjoyed the low-down on the child-hood hero, Robin Hood, and the half-page illustration on the back page of #8 was a pleasant surprise; excellent stencilling on this.
BY AN ANONYMOUS CIVILIAN (C-) Why, Willie; how bashful of you! At any rate, you have made a good point about the Wait-Lister problem. Something ought to be done, but I dunno what. Accepting resignations from disinterested members might help.
THE MAD MUSE (A) Without disparaging previous collections of verse circulated throughout the FAPA, I unhesitantly declare that this is my favorite so far. Occasionally, Gray has used a trite figure of speech where a fresher one might have been devised; but such instances are rare, and even the trite ones seem to fit in very well, with his smooth phrasing and pleasing rhythms. My own taste in poetry is not especially modern; perhaps, in stead, it is very old fashioned.

Saving...

7 P H A N N Y 7 ______________________________ "By Their Works, Ye Shall Know Them" I like Chauvenet's suggestion that alphabetic ratings be used in placing each item in the mailing. I also like the suggestion that each member should select his own "Laureate Awards" on each Mailing, as a means of simplifying the Laureate Committee's work. So I'm adopting both suggestions. But I also like to write and to read reviews, and they are here, too. Laureate Suggestions: PUBLISHING -- 1, Watson ("Mad Muse" and Sappho). 2, Shaw (Banshee #5) 3, Purdue (Elmurmurings #3) FICTION -- 1, none. 2, Lowndes ("Trigger Talk at Green Guna" in Agenbite of Inwit). 3, Wright ("Spawn of the Gods," Beyond). ARTICLE -- 1, none. 2, Chauvenet ("The World of John Bristol Speer," Sardonyx). 3. Moscowitz ("Forgotten Fantasies," Fantasy Commentator, Sept.). HUMOR -- 1. Washington ("Raymeses," Banshee #5). 2, Spencer ("The Metamorphosis of John Q. Spingtumper," Banshee #5). 3, Speer ("Peril in Pentagon," Yhos). ART -- 1, Watson (cover, Sappho). 2, Wiedenbeck, (cover, Beyond). 3, Wilimczyk (cover, Banshee #5). POETRY -- 1, Gray ("The Mad Muse"). 2. Nuttall ("Succubus," Sappho). 3, Lowndes ("Demi-World," Agenbite of Inwit). BEST IN MAILING -- 1. "The Mad Muse" -- Gray and Watson. 2. Fantods, -- Stanley. 3. Banshee #5 -- Shaw. Individual 'zine Reviews: Ratings follow the Chauvenet values fairly closely. "A" occurs five times, which seems to me to be a reasonable number. Quality, appearnance, and quantity of worthwhile material, in that order of importance, are the criteria I use. A mess of junk beautifully presented will never make the grade in my book; on the other hand, it is possible for material which is very good, even though it is more legible, to gain the highest rating. Unlikely though; usually, there is plenty og good material well presented. A single sheeter has very little chance; there are too many good mags of from six to thirty pages. The "B" group contains most of the publications, and represents considerable spread. For this reason, it has been divided into "B+" and "B-" groups. Yah gotta be purty durn good to rate "B+". Most of the "C" ratings go to good single sheet publications; often these are excellent as to quality, but just too brief for a full meal. As for the ratings lower than "C", well.... FANTASY FICTION FIELD PRESENTS (B-) Worthwhile material well presented. At least part of it is reprint material, however, and none of it interested me particularly. JANUS -- I'm sorry, Paul, but only the editorial was legible, so I'm skipping the rating. Too bad you changed typers. BROWSING, #7 and #8 (B-) The material in this continues to interest me more than that in other mags devoted primarily to fantasy books. I especially enjoyed the low-down on the child-hood hero, Robin Hood, and the half-page illustration on the back page of #8 was a pleasant surprise; excellent stencilling on this. BY AN ANONYMOUS CIVILIAN (C-) Why, Willie; how bashful of you! At any rate, you have made a good point about the Wait-Lister problem. Something ought to be done, but I dunno what. Accepting resignations from disinterested members might help. THE MAD MUSE (A) Without disparaging previous collections of verse circulated throughout the FAPA, I unhesitantly declare that this is my favorite so far. Occasionally, Gray has used a trite figure of speech where a fresher one might have been devised; but such instances are rare, and even the trite ones seem to fit in very well, with his smooth phrasing and pleasing rhythms. My own taste in poetry is not especially modern; perhaps, in stead, it is very old fashioned.