HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dyer@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer)
Subject: Re: SF + PC
Organization: S.P. Dyer Computer Consulting, Cambridge MA
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 00:40:48 GMT

In article <1i7j2qINN2sd@agate.berkeley.edu> curtis@cs.berkeley.edu (Curtis Yarvin) writes:
>That's right.  And if that's what they like, so what?  Or are you
>prepared to say that you know their tastes better than they?

That's what school is for.

>If a person pays $20,000 to attend classes for the sole purpose of
>enjoying himself, is it honest to give him anything other than what
>he wants?

Goodness, what degree granting institution represents itself as pandering
to rich kids with money to burn so that they can enjoy themselves?
Was this what Brown was like?

Yarvin confuses the role of student with the role of customer.  The customer
is always right; the student isn't.

-- 
Steve Dyer
dyer@ursa-major.spdcc.com aka {ima,harvard,rayssd,linus,m2c}!spdcc!dyer
From: ekho@cybernet.cse.fau.edu (amanda rothman)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: Paranoia novel?
Date: 30 Dec 92 17:23:28 GMT
Organization: Cybernet BBS, Boca Raton, Florida

gt6249c@prism.gatech.EDU (The Corinthian) writes:

> 
> Does anybody know if there's ever a novel based on the Paranoia game?
> One of my friends assures me that he saw one, but he doesn't recall
> the title or author. 

  Yes, there is.  It is called _Extreme Paranoia_ if I am not mistaken, 
and it is very good for those who like the Paranoia universe.  There are 
also Paranoia comic books, but they have not been coming out regularly- 
up to issue #4 or 5... Well written and drawn.  Enjoy!

            Yours in Time and Space,

                   Ekho
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written,rec.arts.sf.science,sci.physics,sci.skeptic
From: dstein@charon.math.ucla.edu (David Stein)
Subject: Re: John Woods Campbell
Organization: UCLA Mathematics Department
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 92 13:02:40 GMT

esr@snark.thyrsus.com (Eric S. Raymond) writes:
 
>Among other things, Campbell was the first editor in SF to insist on plausible
>science and *good writing*.  He did not merely `influence' SF, he *defined*
>SF as we know it today --- as a literature of plausible extrapolation centered
>on human reactions to technological change and challenge.  

  Sounds just like J. Verne's idea of science fiction.

>Even Campbell's most vociferous critics are operating, more than they realize,
>within the conceptual framework Campbell created.  His reinvention of SF was
>so sweeping, so complete, that it became invisible.  

  A completely sweeping assertion, but the argument is invisible.

  Can you show some evidence?

[on reading pre-Campbellian "scientifiction":]
>I've done a good bit of this.  Not many people persevere at it, because the
>stuff, in general, is bloody awful.  And *that* fact, if you think about it,
>is all the `rescue' JWC's reputation needs.

  Wrong, even if you don't think about it.  

  First, the pulpish "scientifiction" was not the sole manifestation of SF 
  at that time period, nor was it the only known form of SF when Campbell 
  started.  So its choice for a comparison has unclear implications even if 
  Campbell strogly influenced the field.

  Second, the comparison does not prove that Campbell _did_ influence the 
  quality of SF decisively and positively.

  Third, if only quality improved, perhaps that was to be expected when
  pulp SF matured as its readers turned writers.  This happens in many 
  fields.  The improvement might have occured without Campbell, and may
  have actually occured in spite of Campbell.

  You do not explain how Campbell redirected the thinking of SF writers so 
  as to "reinvent" SF.  You do not even show that without Campbell we would
  not have good writers like Heinlein, Asimov, Simak, Sturgeon.  Were they
  writing SF only because of Campbell?  Would they have a difficult time
  being published elsewhere if Campbell were not an editor?  Would they 
  write bad SF without Cambell? 

  And yes, I would prefer some evidence rather then just "yes yes yes".

 - David

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I'm not a native speaker of English, so I'm not sure what I wrote.
Flames will be ignored unless you post them in perfect Czech.
================================ - David (the metamathician) - ===
From: whheydt@pbhya.PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: SF + PC
Date: 31 Dec 92 18:36:48 GMT
Reply-To: whheydt@PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt)
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA

In article <1992Dec31.160110.11152@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> prs9k@brain.med.virginia.edu (Phil Scarr) writes:
>In article <1992Dec31.145319.29772@bnlux1.bnl.gov> weiner@bnlls1.nsls.bnl.gov (Gary Weiner) writes:
>>>
>AAAAARRRRRRGGGGHHHHH!  ExCUSE ME?  YOUR heritage might be European, but
>what about the millions and millions of African-Americans?  Chinese?
>Koreans?  Muslims?  etc, etc etc.  What you are saying is that because
>the guys who originally settled here (after trashing the original
>inhabitants thoroughly) were of European origin, America is for ever and
>ever a Eurocentric country?  I think not.  Our history may be European,
>but our future is international.

Hmmmm....  How do you feel about the Athabascans?

>>Perhaps, but most of those influences are European.  The USA is, by and
>>large, a mix of European cultures.  The non-Euro cultures are here, but
>>their influence on the US culture and mind is minimal.
>
>My point exactly.  The reason their impact has been minimal is because
>of racist, sexist, etc. eclusionary tactics practiced by the
>powers-that-be (either intentionally or unintentionally).  The outcome
>of this exclusion is the appearance of a Euro-dominated history,
>despite the fact that much of this nations wealth is built upon the
>labor of slaves and the children of slaves.  Just because it isn't in
>the history books, doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.  Check out a book
>by Eric Wolf: _Europe and the People Without a History_.  It's about
>just this very topic.

It appears, Mr. Scarr, that you agree with Mr. Weiner.  I don't read
him as saying that this is Right and Proper, but that it is a
contingent fact of history.  Your own statement supports that
conclusion--as does the very title of the work you cite.

>>And, the fact is, we are a Christian Country, and I say this as Jew who
>>can see these things pretty clearly.
>
>We are a country with a lot of Christians, but we aren't a Christian
>country.

Yes and no.  A large percentage of our culture bears the stamp of a
Christian heritage (again--not arguing that this is good or bad, just
that it is *so*).  Think about what you say in surprise, hurt or
anger.  Our language is not only Christian in content--but
specifically Protestant.  Christian terminology and forms run strongly
through our culture.  It is realy just in the last few decades that
this yoke has been even partially thrown off.

>A little revolution now and again is a good thing.

But which side of that revolution do you wish to be on?

	--Hal
-- 
Hal Heydt                    |    
Analyst, Pacific*Bell        |            You!
510-823-5447                 |    Out of the Gene Pool!
whheydt@pbhya.PacBell.COM    |
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
From: mwiz@cia.austin.ibm.com (Marc Wiz)
Subject: The fourth Chtorr book is out!
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 00:09:16 GMT
Organization: IBM, Austin

I just picked up "A Season for Slaughter" at a local bookstore in Austin.
I'm sure it's available elsewhere.  What's interesting is that it has
a January 1993 copyright.  Perhaps the book did a little time traveling? :-)

Marc

mwiz@eureka.austin.ibm.com
(512)823-9330
Yes, that really is my last name.
I speak for myself.
From: ojvind@chagall.cns.caltech.edu (Ojvind Bernander)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: F&SF, Asimov's
Date: 3 Jan 1993 01:42:51 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology
Distribution: rec
NNTP-Posting-Host: chagall.cns.caltech.edu

This might have been discussed on the newsgroup before I joined it,
but anyway...

Asimov's SF Magazine centers on character-oriented stories, rather
than hard-core SF.  This seems to go well with a lot of readers,
since they outsell and out-Hugo all the other magazines.

It seems that F&SF with K.K. Rusch as new editor is following the same
trend:  many of the stories are not recoginizable as S.F., though they
are still interesting stories.  This is in sharp contrast to the few
issues I picked up 2--3 years ago.  I wonder if this is why suddenly
SF Age and Tomorrow and others spring up to fill in the void.

Any comments out there?  Do you like the new F&SF better than the old one?
   _
-- Ojvind
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
From: pnh@panix.com (Patrick Nielsen-Hayden)
Subject: Re: F&SF, Asimov's
Organization: fwa
Distribution: rec
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 13:33:12 GMT

ojvind@chagall.cns.caltech.edu (Ojvind Bernander) writes:

>Asimov's SF Magazine centers on character-oriented stories, rather
>than hard-core SF.  This seems to go well with a lot of readers,
>since they outsell and out-Hugo all the other magazines.

>It seems that F&SF with K.K. Rusch as new editor is following the same
>trend:  many of the stories are not recoginizable as S.F., though they
>are still interesting stories.  This is in sharp contrast to the few
>issues I picked up 2--3 years ago.  I wonder if this is why suddenly
>SF Age and Tomorrow and others spring up to fill in the void.

Actually, your first premise is wrong: ANALOG substantially outsells all the
other SF digests, including ASIMOV'S, and has done so for decades.

As for SF AGE and TOMORROW, well, TOMORROW was given its start by Pulphouse
Publishing, of which Kris Rusch is a co-owner, so I doubt very much its
agenda is to correct the deficiencies in SF resulting from the editorial
practices of Kris Rusch.  And SCIENCE FICTION AGE's first two issues
evidence an editorial taste very much on the ASIMOV'S/F&SF side of the
fence.

If there's really a fence.  These divisions and distinctions are overrated,
imho; it becomes a kind of stereotyping, and ultimately a self-fulfilling
prophecy.  (Overheard from the mouth of Stanley Schmidt: "Let _me_ decide
what's an 'ANALOG story', dammit!")

-----
Patrick Nielsen Hayden       :      senior editor, Tor Books
pnh@panix.com * CIS: 72701,1344 * GEnie: PNH * opinions mine
 
Xref: sparky rec.arts.sf.written:16902 rec.arts.books:23735
From: curtis@cs.berkeley.edu (Curtis Yarvin)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written,rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: SF + PC
Date: 3 Jan 93 20:42:02 GMT
Article-I.D.: agate.1i7j2qINN2sd
Organization: CS Dept. Snakepit - Do Not Feed.
NNTP-Posting-Host: cobra.cs.berkeley.edu

In article <1993Jan2.173555.11515@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> pciszek@nyx.cs.du.edu (Paul Ciszek) writes:
>curtis@cs.berkeley.edu (Curtis Yarvin) writes:
>
>>Hmm.  How about:
>
>>	Expose students to whatever the hell they want to read.
>
>In some cases, this will mean a student reads nothing but Harlequin romance
>novels or you-can-hear-the-dice-roll fantasy RPG novelizations the whole
>time they are in school.

That's right.  And if that's what they like, so what?  Or are you
prepared to say that you know their tastes better than they?

If a person pays $20,000 to attend classes for the sole purpose of
enjoying himself, is it honest to give him anything other than what
he wants?

c
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
From: solovay@netcom.com (Andrew Solovay)
Subject: Re: SF + PC
Summary: No longer much to do with SF, but...
Organization: People's Front of Judea
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 23:21:15 GMT

In article <1992Dec29.210507.41979@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu> jahb@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (JENNIFER A. HEISE) writes:
>By the way, being influential is NOT the sole criterion for the canon--
>otherwise we'd still be reading Kipling.  (Good characterization, but rather
>Huckleberry-Finnish in its lack of PC.)

I shouldn't be joining this thread, but...

How can Huckleberry Finn possibly be non-PC or anti-PC? It was,
and is, one of the most strongly anti-racist books in American
literature. I would think Huck Finn would be the one part of the
canon the PC types were happiest with.
-- 
Andrew Solovay    

"I is not now, nor has I ever been, a Human Bein'!"
                ---Pogo Possum
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
From: jhildeb1@cc.swarthmore.edu (Jeff Hildebrand)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: Complete Ace Science Fiction History (Re: New Ace SF Specials)
Date: 21 Dec 92 17:38:07 GMT
Reply-To: jhildeb1@cc.swarthmore.edu (Jeff Hildebrand)
Organization: Don's Merry Horde of Topologists

ecl@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (Evelyn C. Leeper) writes:
> New Series
> 
> 1986
> ----
> THE WILD SHORE, Kim Stanley Robinson
> NEUROMANCER, William Gibson

	These two at the very least came out in 1984. I think the entire set
listed for 1986 here actually came out in 1984.

-Jeff
-- 
Jeff Hildebrand, The Shaggy TA		       	   hildebra@math.wisc.edu
"The following statement  is an editorial viewpoint  and does not reflect 
the views of WSRN-FM, its employees, or mutant drosophila" - Off the Cuff
"You can't confuse us; we're not listening to you!"  -  topology students
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
From: jdnicoll@prism.ccs.uwo.ca (James Davis Nicoll)
Subject: Re: Sci-Fi & Merit
Organization: University of Western Ontario, London
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 22:56:06 GMT

In article <1992Dec29.224458.10531@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> mlabossi@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Michael C LaBossiere) writes:

>     First, we must determine whether merit is subjective or objective. It is 
>clear that the entertainment value of a work is highly subjective: for x to be 
>entertaining is for x to entertain a certain person, at least in most case. 
>What I find entertaining is likely to be quite distinct from what others find 
>entertaining. Merit, in part, does seem to be subjective in some degree. 
>However, it seems that there is at least a degree of objectivity in the merit 
>of a work. After all, we would want to say that someone who said that 
>Shakespeares works lacked merit was making some sort of mistake.

	I seem to recall Tolstoy thought just that. Just another data
point to consider.

								James Nicoll
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
From: lmollett@lunatix.uucp (Laura Mollett)
Subject: Re: SF + PC
Organization: Lexington Public Access Unix. -KY- (606) 255-9121
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 17:10:21 GMT

In article <1992Dec29.222336.29666@cbnewsj.cb.att.com> ecl@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (Evelyn C. Leeper) writes:
>
>If one of Aeschylus's lost plays or a 38th play by Shakespeare were unearthed
>tomorrow, these would be canonical, even though they had *no* influence on
>shaping literature.  So it seems as though more is involved here than meets
>the eye.

Well, you probably couldn't say that a "new" Shakespeare play had no influence
on literature.  While it may not have had much _recent_ influence, those
authors and playwrights who had access to it before it was "lost" might have
been greatly influenced, and thus the newer ones could have been without even
being aware of the work in question.  Since the distance to Aeschylus' original
works is so much longer, that is even more possible/probable for him. 

Further Shakespeare's influence extends to much more than shaping literature.
Somewhere or another, I have a list of the _words_ invented by him which shape
our everyday language.  I don't mean quotes ("to be or not to be"), but the
invention of new terms for almost everything.  There were so many.  (I could
look up the list and post it if anyone is interested).  Anyway, if you found
a new play I imagine you could just add 20 or 30 words to the list that we
hadn't previously attributed.  The man shaped our _language_ to a large extent
and that is a much greater/more widespread influence than shaper our literature.
			     
(Sorry for rambling...I'm really impressed with Shakespeare, along with Poe
and Lovecraft <grin>)
			Laura Mollett
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
From: doug@UC780.UMD.EDU (Deac Moo of the UGC)
Subject: Re: War World: Blood Feuds
Reply-To: doug@UC780.UMD.EDU
Organization: The University of Maryland, University College
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 19:46:16 GMT

In article <1992Dec21.215539.5522@netcom.com>, dani@netcom.com (Dani Zweig) writes:

>second two thirds.  At which point we find out that "the first...novel"
>is an ambiguous phrase: There's a sequel for those who want to know how
>the story comes out.

A sequal? Hmm. I though Shwartz muttered something about 3-4 books in the arc.
Couple of references to GEnie people buried in there too if you remember 
nicknames.


                               ******
   Net postings: Demonstrating the lack of quality psychotherapy in the world.

Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
From: kasprj@jec310.its.rpi.edu (Jim Kasprzak)
Subject: Re: 2001, 2010, 2061 [SPOILERS]
Reply-To: kasprj@rpi.edu
Organization: The Big Wedge 
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 14:28:35 GMT


 This article contains spoilers for the endings of _2010_ and _2061_.
Consider yourself warned. I can't get the control-l to work on my 
newsreader.
 
In article <urf.725698915@sw2001>, urf@icl.se (Urban F) writes:
|> (about Arthur C. Clarke)
|> >|> these two are very different from most of his other novels, as most
|> >|> of them are set up so that it is impossible for them to be sequels
|> >|> to each other.
|> > 
|> > Well, actually, so are _2001_, _2010_ and _2061_. They're sequels of 
|> >alternate-universe versions of each other.
|> 
|> I'm quite aware that _2010_ is a sequel to the movie _2001_, not the
|> book, but I didn't notice anything of the sort with _2061_. Maybe I
|> didn't read it carefully enough.
 
 In the last chapter of _2010_, Clarke implies that the lifeforms on 
Europa will last until 20,001 and beyond, and that the humans will not
be able to get any probes down to the surface. In _2061_, the humans do
make it to the surface of Europa, and the Lucifer system turns out to 
be unstable and only lasts another thousand years or so. 
 
 If you ignore the last chapter of _2010_, then _2061_ works as a direct
continuation.
------------------------------------------------------------------
     __  Live from Capitaland, heart of the Empire State...
 ___/  | Jim Kasprzak, computer operator @ RPI, Troy, NY, USA
/____ *| Sam Adams,Spaten# Life is too short #Hudson Lager,Beck's 
     \_| Pilsener Urquell#to drink cheap beer#Pete's Wicked Ale
      ====  e-mail: kasprj@rpi.edu or kasprzak@mts.rpi.edu 
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
From: dstein@charon.math.ucla.edu (David Stein)
Subject: Re: Political Correctness + Sci-fi
Reply-To: dstein@charon.math.ucla.edu (David Stein)
Organization: UCLA, Mathematics Department
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 92 07:12:15 GMT

In article <18945@mindlink.bc.ca>, Crawford_Kilian@mindlink.bc.ca
(Crawford Kilian) writes:

|> End of self-quote. I agree that the story's political values should have
|> nothing to do with the story's literary merits (and may not even reflect the
|> author's values, since this is after all a branch of satire). But political
|> values can hinder a story's literary qualities, as I think they did in
|> Godwin's case.
|> 
|> 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...)

   I must protest against the turning of everything into 'politics'.
   Neither the shortcomings of the Godwin story, nor the low-points 
   of J. Campbell's career strike me as political in nature.

   I understand that many view every aspect of life as a part of politics.
   But in my opinion this attitudde seldom adds much clarity to issues that
   are only border-line political at best.  The arguments in your article 
   were valid without the need to group them under the heading of (wrong)
   "political values."  How far must one go to make sense of labeling 
   crankiness, bigotry and "girls are emotional and dumb" attitudes as 
   political?

  - David
    (Just trying to protect the sanity of a foreign language :-)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I'm not a native speaker of English, so I'm not sure what I wrote.
Flames will be ignored unless you post them in perfect Czech.
================================ - David (the metamathician) - ===
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
From: phaedrus@halcyon.com (Mark Phaedrus)
Subject: Re: Paranoia novel?
Organization: The 23:00 News and Mail Service
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 04:34:11 GMT

In article <78827@hydra.gatech.EDU> gt6249c@prism.gatech.EDU (The Corinthian) writes:
>
>Does anybody know if there's ever a novel based on the Paranoia game?
>One of my friends assures me that he saw one, but he doesn't recall
>the title or author. 

     It's Extreme Paranoia: Nobody Knows the Trouble I've Shot, by Ken
Ralston, and put out by West End Games, ISBN 0-87431-162-4, $4.95.  (Ain't
databases wonderful? :) )  I didn't think it was particularly good, but it
certainly wasn't bad either.
-- 
\o\ Internet: phaedrus@halcyon.com  (Seattle, WA Public Access Unix)     \o\
 \o\ "How'd you like to move a few steps down the food chain, pal?"       \o\
  \o\ If you enjoy fantasy/SF stories with transformation themes, email me \o\
   \o\ for a copy of the Transformation Stories List.                       \o\
From: SAUNDRSG@QUCDN.QUEENSU.CA (Graydon)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: War World: Blood feuds
Date: 30 Dec 92 04:11:00 GMT

Well, Dani is most definately correct that the re-telling of the
Oedipus ledgend is laboured, but I really liked the rest of this book.

I like Drake/Stirling flavour stuff in general (Pournelle is a different
flavour; maybe only the difference between raspberry and raspberry ripple,
but I'll take the raspberry, thanks), but this one has some *good*
scenes and images in it.

It is also (I hope!) leading up to the Citadel falling in the next book
(If the Greek Myth parrallel holds, the 'Seven Against Thebes' don't actually
take Thebes, that happens a little later when the seven hero's sons and an
ethnicly different army get into it, which certainly seems feasible...)

Graydon
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
From: kt1@herahera.cc.bellcore.com (tellefsen,karen a)
Subject: New Jersey Science Fiction Society
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 92 14:44:25 GMT



The New Jersey Science Fiction Society (NJSFS) is a group of
shy, quiet people who like to read. It is a non-profit, literary
organization registered in the state of New Jersey. SMOFs, while 
not excluded, are not encouraged. NJSFS generally meets the third
Saturday of the month at the Belleville Masonic Temple, and features 
writers, artists, editors and other pros in the field.  Its newsletter, 
THE INTERGALACTIC REPORTER, is published monthly, and is available 
with membership or by subscription at $12.00 per year.  Memberships 
can be had at $4.00 per meeting, or $40 per year (11 meetings).

For more information, call:

Nancy Denker    201-507-5685

or write to: 

NJSFS
PO Box 65
Paramus NJ 07653-0065
  
or send e-mail to:

Karen Tellefsen  kt1@cc.bellcore.com
From: drg@biomath.mda.uth.tmc.edu (David Gutierrez)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: SF + PC
Date: 29 Dec 1992 19:15:46 GMT
Organization: Univ. Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center

In article <1992Dec28.101746.16258@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>, by
prs9k@brain.med.virginia.edu (Phil Scarr) writes:
> While you make some good points (and as we stray farther afield here...)
> I think you are missing a fundamental point about cannon versus
> non-cannon works

What is this literary cannon I keep reading about? Is it the one Jules Verne
invented to fire a projectile to the Moon? Maybe it's the one Wells' Martians
used to invade the Earth.

David Gutierrez
drg@biomath.mda.uth.tmc.edu

"Only fools are positive." - Moe Howard

Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written