Transcribe
Translate
Fantasite, v. 1, issue 2, February 1941
Page 7
More information
digital collection
archival collection guide
transcription tips
7............. THE FANTASITE ies perhaps is the unconscious imitation of one or more highly successful stories, the writers following, for the moment, the dictates of the fans. As the fans tire of one kind of story, the writers gradually forsake it, turn to something else. One or two of them hit a jackpot and bingo! a new trend has started. With more magazines in the field, the trend is going to be increasingly harder to follow. One of the magazines at the moment is publishing stories which are almost impossible to define as to type, all of them realistic, many scientific. Another magazine has returned to the simpler type of story, calling for substantial science, swift action, good characterization. Still another relies upon the old popular romantics ( not a love story ) with science added to provide motive, throwing in some real humor as a pace breaker. And yet another seems to be re-setting the stage for the "big idea" yarns of a few short years ago. We may be sure of this, however: All literature follows certain broad trends and science fiction will be no exception. The direction in which science fiction is moving may be obscured by the number of magazines and the correspondingly larger number of writers in the field, but the direction will be there, although it probably will spread over wider ground. Henceforward we probably will get more of every kind of story and the development of any particular type will be slower as a result. Most of us can remember the time when the hero invariably carried a ray. More of us can remember the day when an author who didn't bust a solar system or two wide open was a panty-waist. Too, there was the time when the future was [underlined] the [/underlined] future and not [underlined] a [/underlined] future. And Venus was always a jungle and the only thing the asteroids were good for were to hunt gems on or harbor outlaws. The hero usually was a scientist. Today few ray guns are packed, mighty few solar systems are busted up. Characters now run rampant through many futures instead of a single future. Venus needn't be a jungle (probably isn't) and asteroids can be used for lots of things. As well as scientists, heroes can be handy men, newspapermen, farmers, football players, old soldiers, deep-sea divers, historians, librarians ... almost anything. Perhaps today we have formulae which we do not even recognize, but which in a few years will be as outdated as the ray gun. Perhaps we'll come back again to the idea of spattering star streams all over the place and cracking open universes. It wasn't a bad idea. A fellow could have a lot of fun with it. There were so few limitations. Probably we'll come back to a lot of the old basis ideas. I have a hunch we will ... and soon. But we'll come back to them because we liked them and don't want to get along without them. The ray gun probably won't come back because, as a weapon, it was a sort of silly thing to lug around. And in the meantime we'll go ahead to new ideas and new ways of presenting them. We'll eventually have so many different types of stories that we can afford to weed out the ones we don't like, keep the ones we do. The fans will take care of that. Unquestionably science fiction has developed. Throughout this article I have referred to it as a literature, which probably isn't correct, but seemed a handy term to use. Excellence in writing, careful delineation of character, superb plotting and definite story value, however, have put some of the science fiction yarns of the last few years very close to literature. Probably no accredited critic would recognize them as such...but what do we care for critics. I think that we can expect it to continue its development. It seems to have won a secure place with the American reader. It is no longer on the tottery basis which almost enabled the depression of the early 30's to virtually knock it out. Each year that goes by will see it winning itself even a more se- (continued on Pge. 21)
Saving...
prev
next
7............. THE FANTASITE ies perhaps is the unconscious imitation of one or more highly successful stories, the writers following, for the moment, the dictates of the fans. As the fans tire of one kind of story, the writers gradually forsake it, turn to something else. One or two of them hit a jackpot and bingo! a new trend has started. With more magazines in the field, the trend is going to be increasingly harder to follow. One of the magazines at the moment is publishing stories which are almost impossible to define as to type, all of them realistic, many scientific. Another magazine has returned to the simpler type of story, calling for substantial science, swift action, good characterization. Still another relies upon the old popular romantics ( not a love story ) with science added to provide motive, throwing in some real humor as a pace breaker. And yet another seems to be re-setting the stage for the "big idea" yarns of a few short years ago. We may be sure of this, however: All literature follows certain broad trends and science fiction will be no exception. The direction in which science fiction is moving may be obscured by the number of magazines and the correspondingly larger number of writers in the field, but the direction will be there, although it probably will spread over wider ground. Henceforward we probably will get more of every kind of story and the development of any particular type will be slower as a result. Most of us can remember the time when the hero invariably carried a ray. More of us can remember the day when an author who didn't bust a solar system or two wide open was a panty-waist. Too, there was the time when the future was [underlined] the [/underlined] future and not [underlined] a [/underlined] future. And Venus was always a jungle and the only thing the asteroids were good for were to hunt gems on or harbor outlaws. The hero usually was a scientist. Today few ray guns are packed, mighty few solar systems are busted up. Characters now run rampant through many futures instead of a single future. Venus needn't be a jungle (probably isn't) and asteroids can be used for lots of things. As well as scientists, heroes can be handy men, newspapermen, farmers, football players, old soldiers, deep-sea divers, historians, librarians ... almost anything. Perhaps today we have formulae which we do not even recognize, but which in a few years will be as outdated as the ray gun. Perhaps we'll come back again to the idea of spattering star streams all over the place and cracking open universes. It wasn't a bad idea. A fellow could have a lot of fun with it. There were so few limitations. Probably we'll come back to a lot of the old basis ideas. I have a hunch we will ... and soon. But we'll come back to them because we liked them and don't want to get along without them. The ray gun probably won't come back because, as a weapon, it was a sort of silly thing to lug around. And in the meantime we'll go ahead to new ideas and new ways of presenting them. We'll eventually have so many different types of stories that we can afford to weed out the ones we don't like, keep the ones we do. The fans will take care of that. Unquestionably science fiction has developed. Throughout this article I have referred to it as a literature, which probably isn't correct, but seemed a handy term to use. Excellence in writing, careful delineation of character, superb plotting and definite story value, however, have put some of the science fiction yarns of the last few years very close to literature. Probably no accredited critic would recognize them as such...but what do we care for critics. I think that we can expect it to continue its development. It seems to have won a secure place with the American reader. It is no longer on the tottery basis which almost enabled the depression of the early 30's to virtually knock it out. Each year that goes by will see it winning itself even a more se- (continued on Pge. 21)
Hevelin Fanzines
sidebar
