DIY History | Transcribe | Hevelin Fanzines | Imagination, v. 1, issue 11, whole no. 11, August 1938

Transcribe
Translate

Imagination, v. 1, issue 11, whole no. 11, August 1938

Page 17

IMAGINATION! #11  38 AUG   17

quite good, although I disagree with the final paragraph. Commercialization on a large scale has scarred and charred him; science-fiction, of all places, should be one field where no one is afraid or ashamed to discuss anything in their magazines.  ~~Shroyer's column 'Resurrection' is quite good, and shall be looking forward to it in future issues of Madge. Ditto for Dr. Acula's stuff. 'Who is Daw' is [rarthaw? acrusing?], but then, God has never denied he is Comrade Stalin, either. Yaaah!  ~~In bidding farewell to Michelism from the pages of MADGE, it might be a good idea to find out what Michelism is, so you can be sure what you are trying to eliminate. Don't ask Michel; it's merely named after him. Seriously, though, every fan who is an Esperantist is a Michalist; whether you like it or not. Why? Because Esperanto is essentially an attempt to unite the world on a common ground; a goal definitely science-fictional, in that it is scientific, and, as yet fiction. The Fan Esperantist believes that the spreading of Esperanto is a worthy goal for the science-fiction fan and ian some measure a justification for his being a fan. Understand: all lMichelists do not work along the same lines. But all do believe that science-fiction means nothing unless it is a stepping-stone to some practical, scientific, and essentially idealistic means of furthering man's progress."

FREDERICK POEL, who signs himself "⏀"living at 677 Lincoln Pl, Brooklyn/NY, lets us know: "Vol 1 No 10, just received, is first issue of MADGE I ever read all the way through. Congrats on improvement in makeup and content. If I might suggest . . . evening of right-hand margins by  judicious spacing would improve appearance, also streamlining contents page (see latter issues of 10), publishing on heavier paper to combat irritating translucence, and ommission of that annoying continued on page five-continued from page four business, which is annoying and unnecessary. (Should be one less m in omission.)  ~~ Think, of course, that you err in not publishing Michelist articles, as same are most interesting and worthwhile items appearing in fan mags today -- to me. Would like to write some for you myself, but, if not permissible, please advise by return air mail special delivery (done) what is permissible, as I would dearly love to shake off my torpor of some months by writing something for some fan mag again.  ~~ Wilson's 'Way Down East' took top honors in the July issue (though the reference to the Young Communistic Leage outraged my sense of concinnity (migawd! a federal offense? Madge); it should be Young Communist League), closely followed by 'Mathematica Minus'. 'MM'would have been best if not so spotty, but as it was it was swell in parts but elsewise just dumb.  ~~ Moskowitz's outgushing was in usual place for Samuel -- bottom of the list. I ofttimes wonder why his stuff is published--after all, few science fiction fans are actually three years old and after that age one is supposed to be able to comprehend the English language sufficiently that mere use of words isn't enough: they ought to mean something..  ~~ We now come to the voice of the fan body politic, which is by all odds my favorite regular feature of any fan mag. Passing lightly by the contributions of Messrs. Baker & Hart, I ran smack up against Derwin Lesser's statement: 'The true scientifictionist is not a radical in the political sense.' Evidently CDH's contact with fandom has been extensive rather than intensive, for I know personally at least twenty well-known --I mean WELL-known -- fans and authors who are Reds of the reddest. Including several old pals of Hornig himself. (Names on request.)  ~~ Also in same letter, CDH takes up the cudgels on behalf of Fred Shroyer, whom Michel attacks as being anti-progressive, etc. Charley says Shroyer is a nice fellow and a very interesting chap, which may be very true for all I know but doesn't alter Michel's point in the slightest, We have in NYC a gentleman yclept J. Harry Dockweiler, whom I would recommend unhesitatingly as a boon companion and three-bottle man, but who is nevertheless, as he proudly boasts, a weevil in the boll of society.  ~~ Then pass I gently over Dick Wilson and Azygous (whom I know who is, heh-heh) (Oh, us too, but we just like to humor junior), to reach the wondrous words of Robert Lowndes, with whom I agree completely and in fact incessantly.  (Oh-oh! that's all the "evidence" Baltadonis & Madle require to deduce "Lowndes" is a pseudonym for Pohl, or viceversa. Woud U believe those boys still remain unconvinced Forry Ackerman is not only not me but my son Vodoso as well?!! --Myself, Morojo) But following him and breathing hotly down his neck is our old fiend Moskowitz again,

Saving...

IMAGINATION! #11 38 AUG 17 quite good, although I disagree with the final paragraph. Commercialization on a large scale has scarred and charred him; science-fiction, of all places, should be one field where no one is afraid or ashamed to discuss anything in their magazines. ~~Shroyer's column 'Resurrection' is quite good, and shall be looking forward to it in future issues of Madge. Ditto for Dr. Acula's stuff. 'Who is Daw' is [rarthaw? acrusing?], but then, God has never denied he is Comrade Stalin, either. Yaaah! ~~In bidding farewell to Michelism from the pages of MADGE, it might be a good idea to find out what Michelism is, so you can be sure what you are trying to eliminate. Don't ask Michel; it's merely named after him. Seriously, though, every fan who is an Esperantist is a Michalist; whether you like it or not. Why? Because Esperanto is essentially an attempt to unite the world on a common ground; a goal definitely science-fictional, in that it is scientific, and, as yet fiction. The Fan Esperantist believes that the spreading of Esperanto is a worthy goal for the science-fiction fan and ian some measure a justification for his being a fan. Understand: all lMichelists do not work along the same lines. But all do believe that science-fiction means nothing unless it is a stepping-stone to some practical, scientific, and essentially idealistic means of furthering man's progress." FREDERICK POEL, who signs himself "⏀"living at 677 Lincoln Pl, Brooklyn/NY, lets us know: "Vol 1 No 10, just received, is first issue of MADGE I ever read all the way through. Congrats on improvement in makeup and content. If I might suggest . . . evening of right-hand margins by judicious spacing would improve appearance, also streamlining contents page (see latter issues of 10), publishing on heavier paper to combat irritating translucence, and ommission of that annoying continued on page five-continued from page four business, which is annoying and unnecessary. (Should be one less m in omission.) ~~ Think, of course, that you err in not publishing Michelist articles, as same are most interesting and worthwhile items appearing in fan mags today -- to me. Would like to write some for you myself, but, if not permissible, please advise by return air mail special delivery (done) what is permissible, as I would dearly love to shake off my torpor of some months by writing something for some fan mag again. ~~ Wilson's 'Way Down East' took top honors in the July issue (though the reference to the Young Communistic Leage outraged my sense of concinnity (migawd! a federal offense? Madge); it should be Young Communist League), closely followed by 'Mathematica Minus'. 'MM'would have been best if not so spotty, but as it was it was swell in parts but elsewise just dumb. ~~ Moskowitz's outgushing was in usual place for Samuel -- bottom of the list. I ofttimes wonder why his stuff is published--after all, few science fiction fans are actually three years old and after that age one is supposed to be able to comprehend the English language sufficiently that mere use of words isn't enough: they ought to mean something.. ~~ We now come to the voice of the fan body politic, which is by all odds my favorite regular feature of any fan mag. Passing lightly by the contributions of Messrs. Baker & Hart, I ran smack up against Derwin Lesser's statement: 'The true scientifictionist is not a radical in the political sense.' Evidently CDH's contact with fandom has been extensive rather than intensive, for I know personally at least twenty well-known --I mean WELL-known -- fans and authors who are Reds of the reddest. Including several old pals of Hornig himself. (Names on request.) ~~ Also in same letter, CDH takes up the cudgels on behalf of Fred Shroyer, whom Michel attacks as being anti-progressive, etc. Charley says Shroyer is a nice fellow and a very interesting chap, which may be very true for all I know but doesn't alter Michel's point in the slightest, We have in NYC a gentleman yclept J. Harry Dockweiler, whom I would recommend unhesitatingly as a boon companion and three-bottle man, but who is nevertheless, as he proudly boasts, a weevil in the boll of society. ~~ Then pass I gently over Dick Wilson and Azygous (whom I know who is, heh-heh) (Oh, us too, but we just like to humor junior), to reach the wondrous words of Robert Lowndes, with whom I agree completely and in fact incessantly. (Oh-oh! that's all the "evidence" Baltadonis & Madle require to deduce "Lowndes" is a pseudonym for Pohl, or viceversa. Woud U believe those boys still remain unconvinced Forry Ackerman is not only not me but my son Vodoso as well?!! --Myself, Morojo) But following him and breathing hotly down his neck is our old fiend Moskowitz again,