Browsed by
Author: Rich Horton

Fantastic, November and December 1963: A Retro-Review

Fantastic, November and December 1963: A Retro-Review

fantastic-november-1963-small fantastic-december-1963-small

I recently looked at a couple of issues of Fantastic with a Brak the Barbarian serial by John Jakes, and here’s another pair with a Brak serial. Indeed, this was Jakes’ first SF/Fantasy novel, and his second Brak story.

The editorials cover first, Freeman Dyson’s ideas about using gravity as an energy source (for transportation), and second, the notion of having astronauts use crayons in orbit. The covers are by Alex Schomburg (November) and Paul E. Wenzel (December), in neither case, perhaps oddly, illustrating Jakes’ novel. Interiors are by Lee Brown Coye, Virgil Finlay, and Peter Lutjens (each of them appeared in both issues). (I will note that I find Coye okay as a pure horror illustrator, which seems to have been his forte, but I thought his illustration for Jack Sharkey’s “The Aftertime” just terrible.)

There is a letter column in November (Fantastic’s lettercol, which only appeared occasionally at this time, was called According to You ...). The letters this time are by David T. Keil, Paula Crunk, and Dennis Lien. I’ve known Denny online for quite some time, first on Usenet and later via email, so that was interesting. Keil has praise for Keith Laumer and Brian Aldiss and Thomas Disch, some (generally positive) discussion of Fritz Leiber, and scorn for David R. Bunch. Paula Crunk is happy with Leiber and Laumer, but complains about some of the other dreadful stuff the magazine published. And Lien disputes a claim in an earlier letter that fantasy has gotten short shrift in Hugo nominations relative to SF. (He notes the several examples of fantasy that were nominated — 3 at least of the five short fiction nominees the previous year — and also notes that, after all, the Hugos are given at a “Science Fiction” convention.)

Read More Read More

Amazing, May 1963: A Retro-Review

Amazing, May 1963: A Retro-Review

amazing-science-fiction-may-1963-smallThis is one of the best issues of Cele Goldsmith’s Amazing I’ve encountered. Only four stories, but all decent, one really good.

The cover is by Ray Kalfus, illustrating Henry Slesar’s “Jobo” in a fashion that gives away one of the story’s secrets (not that it’s that big of a secret). Interiors are by Leo Summers, George Schelling, and Virgil Finlay.

Norman Lobsenz’ Editorial opens thusly:

The New Yorker magazine, which normally does not care to admit of the existence of such a literary form as science fiction (probably because sf stories have plots with beginnings, middles, and ends, which the New Yorker fiction editors abhor)…

Plus ça change! The occasion is an approving New Yorker review of Arthur C. Clarke’s Tales of Ten Worlds, and in particular their praise for the story “Before Eden,” which was first published in Amazing in 1961.

“… Or So You Say”, the letter column, is mostly occupied with complaints about a letter in the January issue from Lorne Yacuk, which apparently complained about the “new” type of stories published in those days, particularly that they featured dull “common men” instead of “supermen.” The writers are James C. Pierce, W. D. Shephard, and Gil Lamont. In addition, Paul Gilster (from St. Louis!) praises Albert Teichner’s “Cerebrum” (mentioned in these reviews some time ago).

The Spectroscope, S. E. Cotts’ book review column, covers The Space Child’s Mother Goose, by Frederick Winsor; Moon Missing, by Edward Gorey; They Walked Like Men, by Clifford Simak; and Anything You Can Do…, by Darrel T. Langart (Randall Garrett). The only one he really approves of is the Simak.

There are two “fact” articles. One is called “A Soviet View of American SF,” by Alexander Kazantsev. It’s a reprint (translated by John Isaac) of the introduction to an anthology of American SF published in the Soviet Union. The author (Kazantsev) is said to be famous for suggesting that the Tunguska event was caused by the explosion of a Martian spaceship. His views of the stories mentioned are politically tinged to the point of parody. The other article is by Ben Bova, “Where is Everybody?”, and it’s a look at the Fermi Paradox.

Read More Read More

Gamma 3, 1964: A Retro-Review

Gamma 3, 1964: A Retro-Review

Gamma 3-smallHere’s a bit of a curiosity — a magazine I had not heard of until quite recently.

Gamma was a short lived digest magazine published out of North Hollywood, CA, between 1963 and 1965. Five issues total were published, the first three edited by William Nolan (best known, probably, for writing Logan’s Run with the recently late George Clayton Johnson, but an active writer since 1956 and still publishing new stuff now, age 88). Because of its location*, perhaps, they attracted some writers associated with the movie business, and in general published a mix of SF and Fantasy, and of writers both from within and without the genre, that reminded me of F&SF, especially in its first few years.

*(Indeed, of the 9 writers in this issue, 7 (as far as I can tell) were based in California, and those who weren’t (Malamud and Highsmith) are the most prominent and the only “non-genre” writers.) The interior art is by Luan Meatheringham, an LA artist active in the ad industry and as a freelancer, who seems to have disappeared from notice.

The cover is called “Expedition to Jupiter,” by Morris Scott Dollens, and it depicts a spaceship and a couple of astronauts on what I take to be Ganymede or Callisto, with Jupiter in the sky.

There is one feature, an interview with the editor (using a false name) of a Soviet publishing house, discussing the state of Soviet SF. (By coincidence, I just read a similar piece in Amazing.)

Read More Read More

Fantastic, August and September 1964: A Retro-Review

Fantastic, August and September 1964: A Retro-Review

Fantastic Stories of Imagination August 1964-small Fantastic Stories of Imagination September 1964-small

My most recent forays into Cele Goldsmith Lalli’s editing career have concentrated on Amazing, so here’s a look at a couple of issues of Fantastic. These two issues include a complete John Jakes serial, so I’ll consider them together.

During this period Fantastic was subtitled “Stories of Imagination,” and though it concentrated on fantasy it also published some SF. (The letter column, when one existed, occasionally included complaints about this, to which the response was “sometimes there just isn’t enough good fantasy.”) Fantastic was also thin on features, usually the only one being an editorial from Norman Lobsenz and a brief Coming Next Month blurb. The August editorial is about psychic research, particularly that of the Greek scientist Angelos Tanagras. I thought Lobsenz was a bit too credulous. The September issue’s editorial complains about the quality of SF on TV: instead of adaptations of Isaac Asimov’s robot stories we got Living Doll, and instead of The Martian Chronicles we got My Favorite Martian.

August’s cover is by Ed Emshwiller, with interiors by Emsh, Virgil Finlay, and George Schelling. Robert Adragna does the September cover, and the interiors are by Adragna, Finlay, Emsh, and Schelling.

The stories, then.

Read More Read More

The 2016 Hugos: Short Fiction Ballot Thoughts

The 2016 Hugos: Short Fiction Ballot Thoughts

The Builders Daniel Polansky-smallHere are my compiled thoughts (as promised) on the stories nominated in the short fiction categories for the 2016 Hugo.

(Versions of these posts appeared earlier on my blog, Strange at Ecbatan.)

A quick word on my voting philosophy: I am not planning to reflexively rank Rabid Puppy entries below No Award. I am of course disgusted by the Rabid Puppy antics, and I feel that many more worthy stories were kept off the ballot by the Rabid choices. And if a story is bad enough, it will certainly be off my ballot, with No Award the last choice. (That’s always been my approach.)

But, this year in particular, many of the nominees supported by the Rabid Puppies were either unaware of that, or aware and quite clearly not happy with that. Also, I don’t want to reduce the meaningfulness of the win for those worthy winners – if they finish first and No Award is second, to my mind it to some extent delegitimizes their wins, through no fault of their own. Better to have been chosen the best with everyone voting on merit than voted best simply because all the other choices were automatically rejected regardless of quality.

I’m going to comment only on the short fiction. In the other categories, I mostly don’t know enough about the nominees. All the novels look worth reading, but I doubt I’ll finish them all by the deadline.

I have seen four of the movies, and two of them I think are excellent, in very different ways. These are The Martian and Mad Max: Fury Road. I still need to see Ex Machina. I thought The Force Awakens and Age of Ultron were both OK, but not much better than that.

Read More Read More

Thrilling Wonder Stories, April 1951: A Retro-Review

Thrilling Wonder Stories, April 1951: A Retro-Review

Thrilling Wonder Stories April 1951-smallI felt like looking at a classic pulp from the great late stages of the true SF pulps.

A moment of definition is in order here: I consider a true pulp magazine to have been printed on pulp paper, in approximately the traditional pulp size (7″ by 10″), during the heyday of the SF pulps (say, 1926-1955). This is meant to exclude digests (like Astounding after about 1943; and most SF magazines after 1955), and of course slicks. The great pulps (in my opinion) of the early 1950s were the Standard Magazines companion pair, Thrilling Wonder Stories and Startling Stories, and Planet Stories (published by Love Romances).

So this is Thrilling Wonder Stories for April of 1951. Thrilling began publication in 1936, though it was essentially a direct descendant of Wonder Stories, which was founded by Hugo Gernsback after he lost control of Amazing, first as two magazines, Air Wonder Stories and Science Wonder Stories, that soon merged into one. The editor is uncredited but at this time was surely Sam Merwin, Jr., who took over the magazine in 1945, and who left at the end of 1951, Sam Mines taking over. Sam Merwin, little enough celebrated at the time, was actually a quite effective editor, raising the quality of Thrilling Wonder Stories and Startling Stories to at least shooting distance of Astounding – perhaps the quality at the top wasn’t as good, but the vibe was a bit more entertaining, less didactic.

Indeed, I discussed this premise – that Thrilling Wonder and Startling were nearly the equal of Astounding – with a few other folks who know the magazines of that time as well or better than I do, and we came to the conclusion (some holding this view more strongly than others) that in about 1948-1950 that was a very defensible statement, but that by 1951 they were falling behind. And the reason seemed obvious once suggested: the appearance in late 1950 of Galaxy (not to mention the appearance slightly earlier of F&SF) provided a new market that quickly attracted most of the best stories that Campbell didn’t or couldn’t buy.

Read More Read More

Amazing Stories, October 1962: A Retro-Review

Amazing Stories, October 1962: A Retro-Review

Amazing Stories October 1963-small Amazing Stories October 1963-back-small

Back to Cele Goldsmith’s Amazing. This is a minor issue in context.

The cover is by an artist I’m not familiar with, Bill Conlon. The interiors are by Virgil Finlay, Austin Briggs, George Schelling, Lloyd Birmingham, and Dan Adkins. Norman Lobsenz’ editorial is about science vs. the humanities. The science fact article is called “The Nuclear Putt-Putt,” by Frank Tinsley, and it’s about Project Orion (the notion of propelling a spacecraft by nuclear bombs). Sam Moskowitz contributes a profile of the late Henry Kuttner, reflecting the view that much of what he wrote under his own name was garbage, so no one could believe he was behind the Lewis Padgett stories.

S. E. Cotts’ book review column covers Great Science Fiction by Scientists, edited by Groff Conklin; The Long Tomorrow, by Leigh Brackett; Return to Otherness, by Henry Kuttner; Telepath, by Arthur Sellings; and The Super Barbarians, by John Brunner. He praises the Conklin anthology for its off-center focus — the fiction of actual working scientists — less than for the quality of the actual stories. The review of The Long Tomorrow is an out and out rave (with an apology for having taken so long to get around to it).

Read More Read More

Science Fiction Stories, January 1955: A Retro-Review

Science Fiction Stories, January 1955: A Retro-Review

Science Fiction Stories January 1955-smallMuch has been made, justifiably, of Robert A. W. Lowndes’ habit of making bricks without straw over decades with Columbia Publications’ magazines, mostly Future and Science Fiction Stories. He fought tiny budgets and ridiculously irregular publication schedules to produce credible issues time after time.

This issue appeared during a fairly prolific time for the magazines, though. Science Fiction Stories was now bimonthly, and, shockingly enough, 6 issues did appear in 1955. For that matter, 4 more issues of Science Fiction Quarterly also appeared. Only one issue of Future, but that makes 11 issues total for Lowndes that year — almost as many as John W. Campbell!

This issue of Science Fiction Stories is light on features — only one is listed, “Voyage to Nowhere,” by Wallace West, but Lowndes notes “Twenty years ago, this would have been presented to readers as a story.” Not to put too fine a point on it, but 60 years later, I still say it’s a story, and I’m not quite sure why Lowndes wants to call it “a speculative essay.” So I’ll list it with the fiction.

The cover is by Ed Emshwiller, not too typical of his best work (and not illustrating any of the stories). Interiors are by Emsh, Freas, and Orban.

Read More Read More

The Hugo Nominations, 2016; or, Sigh …

The Hugo Nominations, 2016; or, Sigh …

2007 Hugo Award-smallI wasn’t sure I should bother writing this this year, as I’m not sure I have anything new or interesting to say that hasn’t been said, but I feel like getting some thoughts off my chest. This isn’t, I should add, my detailed analysis with voting thoughts … that will come later, after I’ve read the stories.

As most of you know by now, the Hugo Nominations for 2016 were dominated to an even greater degree than last year by the Rabid Puppies slate, organized by Theodore Beale (“Vox Day”). The Sad Puppies also put forth a recommendation list (“Not a Slate™”), and indeed they seem to have done so in good faith – openly gathered a set of recommendations from readers, and using that set put together a list of the most-recommended items in each category, a list longer than the nomination ballot. I don’t see anything whatsoever wrong with this. That said, their direct influence on the final ballot seems to have been minimal – which is, or should be, just fine: so was Locus’ influence, so was mine, etc.

The Rapid Puppies slate took over 75% of the ballot, and apparently the percentage would have been higher except that some nominees withdrew. There are very interesting analyses at Greg Hullender’s Rocket Stack Rank and Brandon Kempner’s Chaos Horizons. Using slightly different statistical models, they came up with estimates of 200 or so to 300 or more Rabid voters. (Vox Day claimed 750 adherents.) It seems likely that the Rabid nominators were much more disciplined in sticking to slate voting this year.

A cursory glance at the fiction entries on the ballot shows that there are some worthwhile, Rabid-supported, entries on it. In Best Novel, for instance, the two Rabid choice, Neal Stephenson’s Seveneves and Jim Butcher’s The Cinder Spires: The Aeronaut’s Windlass seem pretty reasonable. Likewise in Best Novella, all four of the Rabid entries are at least decent.

Read More Read More

Analog, February 1972: A Retro-Review

Analog, February 1972: A Retro-Review

Analog February 1972-smallNot long ago I wrote about one of the last issues of Analog with John W. Campbell’s name on the masthead, along with a fairly early Ben Bova issue (November 1971 and October 1972). Here’s another issue from that period, officially Bova’s second. But Bova started work in November (I am told), so in all likelihood none of these stories were chosen by him. They must be among the last Campbell selections. (By the way, I earlier speculated that Kay Tarrant or someone else might have chosen a few stories from the slush pile between Campbell’s death in July and Bova’s hiring, but Mike Ashley assures me that no stories were bought in that interregnum.)

This issue has a cover by John Schoenherr. Interiors are by Schoenherr and Kelly Freas. The editorial is by Bova – his first. (The January issue, officially Bova’s first, had a guest editorial by Poul Anderson.) It’s called “The Popular Wisdom,” and it celebrates Campbell’s tendency to dispute conventional answers.

The Science article is also by Bova, “When the Sky Falls,” about exploding stars and even galaxies, and neutron stars, quasars, and black holes. P. Schuyler Miller’s Book Review column, The Reference Library, begins by discussing the increased attention academia was paying to SF, and recommends Thomas Clareson’s collection of non-fiction about SF: SF: The Other Side of Realism. The other books he covers are Isaac Asimov’s second Hugo Winners anthology, Abyss by Kate Wilhelm, Android at Arms by Andre Norton, and Gray Matters by William Hjortsberg. He liked them all, but chides Hjortsberg a bit for his lack of knowledge of real SF. The letter column is absent.

Read More Read More