HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: esr@snark.thyrsus.com (Eric S. Raymond)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: John Woods Campbell (was: Re: Political Correctness + Sci-fi)
Date: 30 Dec 92 05:28:02 GMT
Back-References: <1992Dec28.071215.9001@math.ucla.edu>

In <18945@mindlink.bc.ca> Crawford Kilian wrote:
> For that matter, John Campbell's political values hindered the literary
> evolution of American SF very severely indeed. When the present generation of
> Campbell's authors finally dies out, I think critical opinion of Campbell
> will be deservedly harsh. He was a crank and a bigot, and he demanded stories
> that reflected his half-bubble-off-plumb viewpoint. For every young 50s kid
> he got interested in space technology, he probably sent another three off in
> search of psi talents and other power-fantasy delusions. (Never mind idiocies
> like the Dean drive and the boost he gave to Hubbard's Dianetics...)

Was this a try at packing the most possible error and offensiveness into one
paragraph?  Campbell liked to yank peoples' intellectual chains, sure, but he
was no bigot --- Isaac Asimov has written eloquently on this point.  And
`crank' translates as `his apparent obsessions don't agree with mine'.  If
you'd ever read the published volume of his letters you'd know that a lot of
this was showmanship, intended to jar people into thinking outside their
preconceptions.

For that matter, the final verdict on the Dean drive isn't in yet; the research
that would have done so was defunded for political reasons in the early 70s and
never resumed. There's an extension of Newtonian mechanics that adds a `surge'
term reflecting the fact that objects don't respond instantaneously to applied
force --- the pressure wave needs time to propagate from point of application
across the object, and this can interact with velocity and elasticity in some
ways that conventional theory does not predict.  This extension (the "Davis
Mechanics" of Heinlein's _Podkayne_Of_Mars_, named after the developer, Greg
O. Davis) actually predicts and models the Dean Drive.

Could the Dean effect have been large enough to be useful in the real world?
No one knows --- but Davis's theory did solve a long-standing puzzle.  Did you
know that, on the evidence of high-speed films, AP shells actually *hammer*
their way through armor?  No joke.  Davis mechanics explains it.

Finally, about `political values'.  When SF loses Campbell's commitment to
individualism, freedom, competence, and rationalism, it will be dead.  The
New Wave tried jettisoning these supposed archaisms twenty years ago, and
produced mostly garbage.  The SF mainstream he defined outlasted them; it will
outlast the current `PC' furor; and it will almost certainly outlast *you*.

`Critical opinion' has already *been* harsh on Campbell, it was never anything
else.  He never cared --- he *delighted* in smashing this week's icons.  Be
thankful that spirit is still alive in SF.
-- 
					Eric S. Raymond <esr@snark.thyrsus.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
From: prs9k@brain.med.virginia.edu (Phil Scarr)
Subject: Re: SF + PC
Organization: Neuroclinical Trials Center, University of Virginia
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 15:38:15 GMT

In article <1992Dec30.182321.14512@linus.mitre.org> ptrei@bistromath.mitre.org (Peter Trei) writes:
> 
>    The Huckleberry Finn business is a classic example of the
>intellectual poverty of the the whole "politically correct" movement.
>PC allows one to replace thought and consideration of complex issues
>with litmus tests.

Actually I find that the situation is an exact opposite.  Rather than
intellectual poverty, we have an abundance of intellect and a lack of
good sense on the part of the radical reform fringe.  But that doesn't
mean that we should throw the whole thing out.  Reforming the canon is a
good thing, a healthy thing for academe to endure.  It shakes some of
the dust free and cleans out some of the cobwebs which have grown over
the years.  Tossing out the whole idea of reformation would be akin to
never buying gasoline again because of the Exxon Valdiz (now, never
buying gas from Exxon is a healthy response...).

>
>    							Peter Trei
>							ptrei@Mitre.org
>
>"Things are almost always more complex than they appear". 

No kidding!  :)

>
>Disclaimer: If you think I'm representing my employer in this post, you  

	-Phil
-- 
PHIL SCARR        \      We are Microsoft...     /          (o) 804.243.0229
 University of    /     OS/2 is irrelevant.      \          (f) 804.243.0290
 Virginia,        \     UNIX is irrelevant.      /        prs9k@Virginia.EDU
 Neurosurgery     /     Openness is futile.      \     prs9k@Virginia.BITNET
 HP-UX is my life!\ Prepare to be assimilated... /   ...uunet!virginia!prs9k

Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
From: STOWEJM@JCCW22.CC.SUNYJCC.EDU
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: SF-LOVERS Digest   V17 #652
Date: 24 Dec 92 04:14:00 GMT

From:	NAME: Jim Stowe                     
	FUNC:                                 
	TEL: (716) 372-1661                   <STOWE, JIM AT A1 AT JCCV03>
To:	NAME: IN%"SF-LOVERS-WRITTEN@rutgers. <IN%"SF-LOVERS-WRITTEN@rutgers.edu"@MRGATE@JCCW22>


UNSUBSCRIBE SF-LOVERS
From: urf@icl.se (Urban F)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: Niven/Mote in God's Eye
Date: 22 Dec 92 08:25:44 GMT
Organization: None. On USENET I speak only for myself.
X-Alt.reply-Address: n.g.u.fredriksson.swe2001@oasis.icl.co.uk

harit@kripalu.com writes:


>Check out the other Niven/Pornelle colaborations: Lucifer's Hammer, Legond of  
>Herot (If you are willing to be scared), Footfall.

Personally, I feel that Lucifer's Hammer is the weakest Niven/Pournelle
collaboration. Now I'm not i my library, but I'm quite sure that
Legacy of Heorot is a Niven/Pournelle/X collaboration, where I 
think X=Steven Barnes. It's not good. In the beginning, they give
away too much by referring to that frog, and it's badly edited,
for example they never agree to whether the aerodynes they brought
with them are autogyros or helicopters, among other things.

One of my favourite N/P books is Inferno, and I do think Oath of
Fealty deserves a mention too. Footfall I like.
--
 Urban Fredriksson  urf@icl.se  
 Asteroids: It's probably one we don't see that will get us.
From: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com (Jim Mann)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: The Cold Equations (Was: Re: Political Correctness + Sci-fi)
Date: 29 Dec 92 15:41:03 GMT
Reply-To: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com
Organization: Stratus Computer Inc, Marlboro MA
NNTP-Posting-Host: gondolin.pubs.stratus.com

In article <1992Dec29.133740.17181@math.ucla.edu>  
dstein@charon.math.ucla.edu (David Stein) writes:
>   The core of the moral of the story is "stupid kids die".  One of
>   the reasons it is a classic, I suspect, lies in the fact that it 
>   is not customary, even today, to kill kids for stupidity in the
>   SF/Fantasy genre.  

No, the "moral" of "The Cold Equations" is in the title itself:
the universe doesn't care.  The laws that govern the universe
are "cold" and don't care about human feelings.  The girl
dies, not because she is stupid, but because the laws of the
universe can't be changed, no matter how much our emotions
want them to in this case.  

The power of the story (which, though flawed, does have an
emotional impact) is that Godwin doesn't cop out. The pilot
doesn't pull a rabbit out of his hat (as most readers of the
time no doubt expected, because in such stories that is what
usually happened). 

--
Jim Mann            
Stratus Computer   jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com
From: CDOMS@VAX1.UMKC.EDU
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re:Tom Goodwin
Date: 29 Dec 92 03:13:14 GMT

I have and read both _Space Prison_ and _Space Barbarians_ by Goodwin.
It took my husband and I at least 2 years and several SF cons to find.
We eventually found more copies at the larger conventions (World Con,
etc.).  I enjoyed both books.  In _Space Prison_ "Ragnarok" is a 
perfect name for that planet.  And I hope I am not spoiling anything
by commenting that I liked how the prisoners "plotted their revenge"
against their captors :) :).

You should be able to find the paperbacks for $1 or under at any con
(use persistence).  The hardback entitled _Survivors_ was about 40 bucks
at World con in 1989, last time we looked it was double that.  Good
luck.

Carol Doms
University of Missouri-Kansas City
cdoms@umkcvax1
cdoms@vax1.umkc.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
From: wrr3118@tamsun.tamu.edu (Rick Russell)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: John Woods Campbell
Date: 2 Jan 1993 21:51:31 -0600
Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station, TX
NNTP-Posting-Host: tamsun.tamu.edu

In article <1993Jan2.150849.12185@math.ucla.edu> dstein@oak.math.ucla.edu (David Stein) writes:

>  I can see that Campbell had influence, and that many of those whose
>  respect and money came in part from their association with Campbell
>  had a high opinion of him, though just how high seems to change from
>  a person to person, and even from time to time (Asimov).
...
>  Why is it so difficult to communicate just what did Campbell do
>  beyond the lifting of general literary and plausibility standards?

I'm no expert in science fiction or magazine editing, but I would say
that any professional editor who causes 'the lifting of general
literary and plausibility standards' has done a great deal more for
his or her field than a few hundred other mediocre editors.

It would be difficult to suggest that Campbell had a *bad* influence
on SF... after all, look at the changes that occurred in almost every
part of the field during his editing tenure. He's not responsible for
all of the changes, certainly, but he was responsible for some. I
personally prefer higher literary standards, so I'll keep my
anthologies of Campbell-selected work, thanks.

-- 
#      Rick Russell | TAMU Meteorology | wrr3118@tamsun.tamu.edu       # 
#     "I am Elfy of Atlantis." "I am Jo-Jo of Munchkinland."           #
#     "We are Elfy and Jo-Jo!"                                         #
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
From: D. Jay Newman <dn5@apix.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: Macavoy
X-Xxmessage-Id: <A75B8963D9013BCA@magic.psu.edu>
X-Xxdate: Mon, 21 Dec 92 14:46:59 GMT
Organization: Penn State
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1.1d12
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 92 19:49:45 GMT

In article <9212161036.AA01294@rutgers.edu> Sara Beck,
BECKS@TAUNIVM.TAU.AC.IL writes:
>This is an unabashed rave for R.A. Macavoy and the "Lens of the World"
>trilogy, of which the second book , "King of the Dead", is out in
hardcover.

Actually, I bought and read the paperback last month!  I truely feel that
R. A. Macavoy is one of the best authors of this century!  I can't rave
enough about her writings.

Its not your basic fantasy novel, but then I've come to expect much more
than that from her.  I started with _Tea with the Black Dragon_, and was
extremely pleasantly surprised at how good it was, despite the fact that
it followed NONE of my expectations.

()()()()()()()()()()()()() CBEL--Teaching & Learning Technologies ()()()
D. Jay Newman     !  Cautious, careful people always casting about to
dn5@psuvm.psu.edu !  preserve their reputation and social standing never
dn5@apix.psu.edu  !  can bring about a reform.  -- Susan B. Anthony
From: seth@cie.uoregon.edu (Seth Scott)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Wanted:  _Bad Voltage_
Date: 31 Dec 1992 21:25:20 GMT
Organization: University of Oregon Network Services
NNTP-Posting-Host: cie.uoregon.edu
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5

I'm looking for a copy of _Bad Voltage_ by Jonathan Littell.  I borrowed
a friend's copy, searched for it, and found that it is out of print
here in the USA, though it was only published in '89.  Anyone who has
a copy and is willing to part with it, or knows the whereabouts of such,
I would appreciate feedback.  seth@cie.uoregon.edu   -- thanks!


Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
From: disaacs@pietrzak.carleton.ca (Dave Isaacs)
Subject: Re: Jack the Bodiless: Where is it?
Organization: Carleton University
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 04:27:52 GMT

In <1992Dec30.180658.22666@noao.edu> jean@noao.edu (Jean Goodrich) writes:


>	Ok. Now I'm gettiing really impatient.
>	I haven't seen _Jack the Bodiless_ anywhere.
>	Is it really out, or are you guys pullin'
>	my leg? Is it hardback (of course) or paper?
>	Is it out in the US, or just the rest of the
>	world, or what?

>	jean

I have had my copy for quite some time now.  I got it at a regular book
store (as opposed to a SF bookstore) here in Ottawa.  According to the jacket
it is published by Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., and I assume it is available in the
States since the jacket lists the price in the U.S.A as $20.

I here that the next book _Diamond Mask_ is due out Mayish.

Dave

-- 
__________________________________________________________________________
 ____  ____  __  David Paul Isaacs ________________________________________
 _____ _____ __  Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering ________
 _____ ____  __  Carleton University ________________________________________
 ____  __    __  Ottawa, Ontario ___________________________________________
_________________disaacs@ccs.carleton.ca __________________________________
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
From: mfterman@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Mutant for Hire)
Subject: Re: Heroic Fantasy: Jordan vs Williams
Originator: news@nimaster
Reply-To: mfterman@phoenix.princeton.edu (Mutant for Hire)
Organization: Mutant for Hire, Inc.
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1992 07:21:42 GMT

In article <1hdpfrINN17h@darkstar.UCSC.EDU>, rod@cats.ucsc.edu (Rodrick Su) writes:
>
>	Actually, it really depends on whether you wants a book on the
>	scale, detail,  and approaching the quality of Tolkien, which would be
>	William's trilogy, or something like Edding's novel, which is
>	what Jordan is doing.  Make no mistake, I read both.  I need
>	mind candy even more than mind nurishment.  If you want more than
>	Eddingesque mind candy, then Williams is for you.  If you don't want
>	to be mentally challenge, but just to be entertain, then, get 
>	Jordan.

Hmm. I'd disagree with you on the mental challenge bit. Look at all the
threads where people have been trying to puzzle out exactly where Jordan
is going next. Tad William's series is presumably going to conclude this
spring, so I'd recommend reading Jordan's books on the grounds that soon
one will be able to read William's books all at once.

I agree that William's world is more textured and interesting, and that
his prose is of higher grade. On the other hand Jordan does weave a
larger and more complicated tapestry, full of cross paths. Jordan's stuff
is just a tad too large and complex to be called mind candy in my book.
Considering the obscure prophecies and dream sequences, its certainly
not mind candy to me.

-- 
    Martin Terman, Mutant for Hire, Mean Ol' Top, Priest of Shub-Internet
    Disclaimer: Nobody else takes me seriously, why should you be the first?
mfterman@phoenix.princeton.edu mfterman@pucc.bitnet terman@pupgga.princeton.edu
"Sig quotes are like bumper stickers, only without the same sense of relevance"
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
From: mcmahan@cs.unca.edu (Scott McMahan -- Genesis mailing list owner)
Subject: Re: Auto-buy lists 
Organization: University of North Carolina at Asheville
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1992 22:20:20 GMT

I don't think any author is good enough to buy automatically.
The new books need a careful once over to see if they are any good or
not.

David Eddings used to be, but his latest books just don't cut it
anymore. Terry Brooks' Shannarama series is automatic, not that
any are ever released anymore. His other stuff is less wonderful.
I like Magic..Sold, but the followups were not great. Melanie
Rawn is pretty much automatic, since she consistently puts out
great books. 

About the only auto-buy author I get is Joe Dever -- I don't think
I've ever waited to pick up one of his new ones.

When is Elf Queen going to come out in paperback?

Scott


Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
From: Crawford_Kilian@mindlink.bc.ca (Crawford Kilian)
Subject: Re: SF + PC
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 06:26:07 GMT

Thanks, Michael LaB., for stirring us out of our torpor!

A couple of points: I'd define literary value as either the skill with which
a writer addresses the anxieties of his or her culture, or plain craft. In
both cases political/cultural values come in, and they're hard to
disentangle. The pure-craft, ignore-the-politics attitude is likely to come
apart if the writer chooses flayed human skin as the medium of
expression--even if the writer's ostensible message is "People are basically
good at heart."

But value defined as "saying what I think needs saying" amounts to giving the
work a limited shelf life. Someone observed that The Day the Earth Stood
Still has enduring value because it obliquely criticized the red scare of the
1950s; well, it might have interest as part of the history of American pop
culture in that regard, but whether the *story* has merit is, so to speak,
another story. Judged by modern standards, we might find Klaatu's spacecraft
appallingly non-ergonomic...

As for the issue of the "canon" of literature expanding to include less
well-known writers who happen not to be dead white males...the Books
newsgroup had a wonderful time chewing its collective tail about that one. As
far as I can tell, a book is in the canon because it usefully elaborates on
the books that went before it, and clearly influences the books that come
after it. I happen to think James De Mille's utopian satire, A Strange
Manuscript Found in a Copper Cylinder (first published in 1888) is a hell of
a good novel and everyone ought to read it (it's still in print, by the way).
But is it part of the canon? Nope--while it enjoyed some success and went
into numerous reprints, it doesn't seem to have influenced later writers in
the genre (too bad for them).

Non-canonical writers may still deserve serious attention, but to include
them in a reading list is to address the anxieties of modern readers rather
than the demonstrable influences that have shaped a literature.


--
Crawford Kilian   Communications Department   Capilano College
North Vancouver BC Canada V7J 3H5
Usenet: Crawford_Kilian@mindlink.bc.ca
Internet: ckilian@first.etc.bc.ca

Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
From: harit@kripalu.com
Subject: Re: Niven/Mote in God's Eye
Reply-To: harit@kripalu.com
Organization: Kripalu Center
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 92 17:53:06 GMT

In article <21DEC92.08445097@wums.wustl.edu> w95_cook@wums.wustl.edu writes:
> On the advice of several individuals here, I recently
> finished my first Niven novel - The Mote in God's Eye.
> I was highly impressed with the book.  It's been one of those
> things I've been meaning to get around to reading for a long
> time.  Anyway, can anyone suggest other Niven novels I might
> want to check out?
[deletion]
> _______________________________________________________________
> 
> Jim Cook
> W95_COOK@wums.wustl.edu
> 
> _______________________________________________________________
> 

Check out the other Niven/Pornelle colaborations: Lucifer's Hammer, Legond of  
Herot (If you are willing to be scared), Footfall.
-- 
Michael Allen Latta
Kripalu Center
harit@kripalu.com
(413)448-3288
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
From: pnh@panix.com (Patrick Nielsen-Hayden)
Subject: Re: Title of "Short-short" story collection?
Keywords: Asimov, 100 short-short stories
Organization: fwa
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 03:12:12 GMT


100 GREAT SCIENCE FICTION SHORT SHORT STORIES, eds. Isaac Asimov, Martin
Greenberg, and Joseph D. Olander.  Doubleday hardcover, 1978.  Avon
paperback, 1980.  ISBN of the Avon edition: 0-380-50773-0.  I don't know if
it's still in print.

-----
Patrick Nielsen Hayden       :      senior editor, Tor Books
pnh@panix.com * CIS: 72701,1344 * GEnie: PNH * opinions mine
Xref: sparky rec.arts.sf.written:16874 rec.arts.books:23687
From: curtis@cs.berkeley.edu (Curtis Yarvin)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written,rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: SF + PC
Date: 2 Jan 1993 06:11:29 GMT
Organization: CS Dept. Snakepit - Do Not Feed.
NNTP-Posting-Host: cobra.cs.berkeley.edu

In article <C019FL.L1z@watserv2.uwaterloo.ca> msmorris@watsci.UWaterloo.ca (Mike Morris) writes:
>
>  And for that matter, can any of you poxwit pundits give me a definition of
>  "literary merit" that isn't circular?
>
>But, I suppose there's also a little of the skeptic's scoff at the
>possibility of objective aesthetic judgment in what you say, that
>you are assuming there can be no objective criterion for grounding
>such judgment. I think this scoff is simplistic.

Objective criterion?  Well, it depends, don't it, on what we mean by
'objective.' 

Certainly you can't make an algorithmic criterion.  But at the same
time it'd be the act of a snogglehead to deny that one can construct
consensus criteria of a vaguely constructed but vaguely useful fibre.
Round characters, and rich prose, and so forth, and if two may not
agree exactly on what is round and what merely ovoid, their darts
should at least fall upon the same target.

The problem, though, the nut of the matter, the slug within the nog,
is who decides which of these criteria constitute the big L, Literary
Merit, and how we add them up.  

It's easy to say, "Round characters is meritorious," "Lots of meaning,
yeah, real meritorious, yep," but it's not so easy to say _why_ such
things should be counted meritorious.

"Because it makes really really cool people like Ezra Pound and
Mortimer Adler and Allan Bloom and Kenneth Rexroth smile, and tap a
little jig," is not, in my perhaps-jaundiced opinion, the best approach.

c
From: w95_cook@wums.wustl.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Niven/Mote in God's Eye
Date: 21 DEC 92 08:44:50 GMT
Organization: MIT PLASMA FUSION CENTER
NNTP-Posting-Host: msnews.wustl.edu

On the advice of several individuals here, I recently
finished my first Niven novel - The Mote in God's Eye.
I was highly impressed with the book.  It's been one of those
things I've been meaning to get around to reading for a long
time.  Anyway, can anyone suggest other Niven novels I might
want to check out?

I've also been talking with some of you about C.S. Friedman's
_The Madness Season_ on another thread.  I can't help but wonder
if her aliens were not inspired by those in Mote.  Rather than
one species evolving subspecies, each with one characteristic
and function, she used identical beings with a collective 
consciousness.  Sort of the farthest opposite extreme.
Whoops.  I'm rambling.

Thanks!



_______________________________________________________________

Jim Cook
W95_COOK@wums.wustl.edu

_______________________________________________________________
From: pashley@sdcc13.ucsd.edu (Montykins)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: Wild Cards in January
Date: 3 Jan 93 21:40:11 GMT
Organization: University of California, San Diego

In article <C07v5n.9tp@griffin.cuc.ab.ca>, kerry@griffin.cuc.ab.ca (Kerry Lee) writes:
>all new stories from the regular authors.  I was just wondering what
>exactly Card Sharks was, and if it ment we'll have the next TWO books
>of the series in our hands by the end of January.
>

I knew this would happen. Wild Cards is now too big for just one
publisher. In a year, every book published will be Wild Cards. By
'95, Huckleberry Finn will be fleeing opression with his Joker
servant Jim. By the turn of the century, Wild Cards will be the only
text readable. Even road signs and business contracts will have to
be approved by George R. R. Martin.

It may already be too late! Hide the children!

 -Paul "Monty" Ashley
   (OTOH, maybe they just changed the name of the book.)
-- 
I'll be in San Francisco in early January. What shouldn't I miss?
E-mail suggestions to the address cleverly hidden in the header.
From: Nick.Allan@f503.n635.z3.fidonet.org (Nick Allan)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: the river world series
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 13:56:42

Hi all

Can anyone tell me if there is a continuation to the river world series
by Philip Farmer after the book called "The Magic Laberenth"

Thanks in advance.

Regards Nick


... Security, confine Ensign  to the brig.
 * Origin: Andy's BBS: Melb Australia - 61-3-357-3414 (3:635/503.0)
Xref: sparky rec.arts.sf.written:16851 rec.arts.books:23619