Letter of Comment

A Letter of Comment, or more commonly, a LoC or LOC, was originally a letter written by a fan and sent to a professional SF magazine or to a fanzine and published in a lettercol. Frequent contributors of LoCs were called letterhacks, and the act of writing the LoC was called letterhacking. The term LOC was in use as early as 1961. See Science Fiction Citations.
In media fandom, where zines contained a lot of fanfiction, LOC became synonymous with feedback sent to the creator of a fanwork. A LoCer is one who writes the letter.
The term was carried over to the Internet, with LOCs transitioning to mean the feedback email that an author, zine publisher, or archivist received.For example, Sandy Herrold's Big List of Fanfic Peeves (1999) contains the following end note: And if you're thinking..."who in the hell is she to say all this -- I bet her fiction ain't all that great," all I can say is, feel free to check it out and send me a LOC telling me what you think. (LOC is a mailto: hyperlink). However, there is no evidence that the term ever caught on with fans who discovered fandom online in the 21st centuryA fan on dreamwidth who wrote a 2015 post reminiscing about discovering fannish mailing lists in the 1990s references the term loc, but then defines it for fans who are not "dinosaurs". , posted by turps on January 5, 2015.; communities with a higher proportion of pre-internet fans saw a few uses in the 2010sFor example, a few uses turn up in a search of a Pros fandom livejournal community. See , posted in the_safehouse 14 June 2012., but as fannish feedback more commonly takes the form of "comments" or "reviews" published directly to sites like Fanfiction.net, AO3 or Wattpad, the term "Letters of Comment" has fallen out of use.
==Debate on Pronunciation==
Fans often discussed the correct way to say "LoC." 
From Jundland Wastes Roll Up:
The newsletter The Propagator called its lettercol "LoCSmith" (a pun on the term "lock smith") which suggested how at least that editor felt the word was pronounced.
In a letter to Southern Enclave #2, a fan wrote about the name of a column: ""LoCs and Bagels"... At least it tells people how to say LoC correctly."
==Their Purposes==
Letters of comment served as a reminder of the interconnectedness of fandom. They were also part of the unspoken agreement that LoCs were a form of payment for the work that went into producing fanworks. They were also used in a practical way to determine what sort of material fans really wanted. 
In 1990, a long-time fan wrote a letter with a focus of the purpose of LoCs and reviews: 
A fan in 1994 wrote: 
From a fan in 1998: 
Another 1998 comment: 
The public LoC was a form of payment. Sometimes personally providing private feedback wasn't enough. A fan in 2001 explains in The K/S Press: 
 
A fan in 2010 remembered a zine she wrote to: 
Also from 2010: 
Letters of Comment were also used as a tool for content. One definition of a letter of comment from an 80s zine: "A letter sent to the editor to let her know what you did/didn't like about the zine. Very helpful in getting zines to be the way you want them. Also a great way to encourage writers you like." source unknown From Jacqueline Lichtenberg: "In ST fanzine fandom, the feedback was immediate and detailed because every fiction 'zine carried LoCs that made it very clear what readers were looking for -- and often spurred writers to writing the next story." from Alien Romance From the editor of the zine In a Different Reality #2: "I would like to thank all of you who have sent us your comments and suggestions... Since we are not into market research, etc., you letters are the best guide to how well we are doing and to what you really want." And from the same zine, issue #11: "I fully expect anyone with comments on any story in this issue to send them along to me. I can't print what you want to read if you don't tell me what you like - and don't like."
==Publishing Letters of Comment==
Many zine editors published all of their letters of comments in a section of the zine called a lettercol. 
The Starsky and Hutch letterzine S and H's editors were adamant in that they printed every one received, and without any editing. The Star Wars letterzine Southern Enclave printed most, but sometimes edited them for repetitious content. The Star Trek: TOS letterzine The K/S Press also printed all letters received, though in at least one editorial admitted it wished it hadn't, as it was felt the previous issue had included some needlessly hurtful ones. 
Other letterzines did more editing. There was much discussion in Halkan Council on this subject after Connie Faddis wrote: "I note from having seen a copy of some of the complete, undiluted letters sent to HC, that there has been some editing." The editors responded: "Neither of us, until receiving Connie's letter, was aware that any contributors were dissatisfied with the quality of our editing...we retain the right to edit out statements which could be detrimental to ST fandom or revival."
It was common for LOCs to publish the letter writer's full address with the letter. Other editors published only the fan's name and city or state, and some just the fan's name. Many fans first found other fans by writing to a LOC writer near their area.
Letter columns in letterzines (or non-letterzines that ran many LOCs), could be contentious, providing the pre-internet version of flame wars. They also provided community -- giving information on deaths, on professionals sales by zine writers, on fannish and canon news. Many early media fen, such as Leslie Fish, were as well-known for their participation in letter columns as they were for their fiction. 
Some editors made a point of not forwarding, or even mentioning, negative LOCs to their authors. If a zine didn't print its LOCs, then the editor forwarded any comments about specific stories onto the individual authors. From the editor of the zine, In a Different Reality: "I will faithfully forward any comment to any author, and if you don't want to discuss something or start an argument with him/her/them I'll also send the author your address, at your request. I will not become a clearinghouse for any lengthy correspondences, not because I'm not interested in eavesdropping but because I can't afford that much postage!"
Other editors printed and forwarded whatever came their way stating: ""Write and scream and write and say well done to the writers, please. All LoCs become property of ITTOI, and will be shared with the authors, printed in part or in whole in the next volume." It Takes Time on Impulse #1.
==Fans Comment on the Lack of LoCs==
Much fannish time -- from the first Star Trek zine, Spockanalia, until most fanfic moved to the internet -- was spent by editors complaining that they didn't get more letters of comment. 
In 1980, Leslye Lilker comments on the decline of LoCs: 
Another fan comments in 1980: 
A fan in 1981 writes that one reason there are fewer LoCs is that just as the art of the LoC has become a lost one, so has the response to the LoC, something that probably discourages feedback: 
A fan in 1984 has this opinion:
From a letter in 1985: 
In 1991, Maggie Nowakowska wrote: 
In 2000, Flamingo got some insight into why fans don't write LoCs:
==Please. Send Only the Positive Ones==
In 1984, a prominent and prolific zine ed, Dovya Blacque, gave some stern, discouraging, and sometimes conflicting advice regarding LoCs in the editorial of As I Do Thee #2, 
==The Value of the Public LoC?==
Not everyone was a fan of public LoCs printed in zines. 
Dovya Blacque, commented in 1989: 
==Too Many LoCs!==
Not everyone felt a dearth of Letters of Comment.
A writer and zine ed, Dovya Blacque commented in 2001: 
In 1976, Gerry Downes wrote that she is overwhelmed with LoCs: 
In 1989, a zine ed, Kathy Cox, said: 
==Fannish Myths Regarding LoCs==
There are plenty of urban zine myths about the amount of comments printed zines generated, many of them contradictory. Many blanket statements about the number of LoCs received by fans in the past were pushed through a very rosy filter, one that lauded the good old days.
Reporting amount of LoCs fans received can be a bit of a moving target. Some fans could be less-than-upfront about the number of LoCs they reported to have received. This was due to ego, how they defined a letter of comment, forgetfulness, and other factors. 
In 1998, this zine publisher told "newer" fans: 
In reality, LoCs were often thin on the ground, and almost everybody wanted more, regardless of the venue or decade.
For more on this topic, see Feedback.
==Fewer LoCs as a Reason for the Decline of the Number of Zines Published?==
Less LoCs, less zines? Less zines, less LoCs? And where does the Internet come into play?
Jacqueline Lichtenberg blames the decline of the LoC as one reason fewer zines were being issued. She has a long letter in 1988 commenting on rejected fan fic, LoCs and the difference between letterzines, review zines and LoCs: 
A 1991 comment: 
One fan felt it was the Internet that killed feedback, and by default, print zines: 
For more on the decline of the print zine, see: History of Media Fanzines
==Meta and Further Reading==
* Tell me again how much you love me by The Divine Adoratrice (January 1998)
* Letter of Comment by Susan Garrett on FanHistory
==Notes==
==References==
✪ This article was featured on the Fanlore main page in 2020How To & About
*About Featured Articles
*How to Nominate
Past Featured Articles
*2024
*2023
*2022
*2021
*2020
*2019
*2018
*2017
Featured Article Nominations
*2024
*2023
*2022
*2021
*2020
*2019
*2018
*2017
Category:2020 Featured Articles
Category:Non-fiction Writing
Category:Zine Glossary
Category:Science Fiction Fandom Glossary
Category:2020 Featured Articles