Unca Harlan's Art Deco Dining Pavilion

Archive - 5/28/2004 to 7/20/2004

Unca Harlan's Art Deco Dining Pavilion

Uh, sorry Abe, you get an "F" and that doesn't stand for anything gratifying or pleasurable.

Cookie actually = Cool beyond your ken, buddy o' mine. In FACT Cookie is probably the coolest most secure person who posts here next to HE.

Don't be talkin' smack about my pal, big guy-- she's revered in these parts. I'm not tryin' to be a smart ass, I'm just telling you for your own good.

Be sweet! We respond to that so warmly!
:)
Cindy

Violet monkeys are sliding down the refulgent moon as the cows watch and applaud. The clackclackclack of their hooves irritate the lemon yellow pringle tingles who flingle lit sparklers at the horned bovines who trample the rocking horse people as they flee from what they think are falling stars.

Peter Max shouts, "HUMM-HA-HUMM! HUMM-HA-HUMM!!" as the pringle tingles ruin yet another virtual painting he was slathering on the burbling LCD screen. "WHAT HO!" he shouts as he dances the fandango and tramples the melting picture.

Tumbling starfishmen sing out rainbow sprays of color, cooling down the overheated artist as they shout, "HUP-HO! HUP-HO! HUP-HO!" and toss lemon heads at the lemon yellow pringle tingles who trudge away, muttering, "Misp, misp, misp."

Brought to you by the Magic Mushroom Council.

Void where prohibited. Some restrictions may apply. Adults prohibited unless accompanied by a child. Some side effects such as a mild rash and extreme flatulence may occur.

The Mark of the Beast may be upon us.
This is a copy of an email I sent just now to some friends. As I know most of them only online, I thought it just as well I'd send it to an old book-writer I used to like, the quickest way I could find possible, and I see now he has a chat place here, and he is amongst much of his worshippers who have constructed an idol in his name. So this is addressed foremostly to you, Mr Ellison, as I hope you keeping abreast of the startling, and as I see it, utterly frightening pace of technological adoption by common folk, which most of us indeed are, including you and I:



The following video frightens me and I wish to share it to you all in an act of goodwill in the hope that you'll take the information seriously, read between the lines in concerning what it is talking about, and more importantly in what manner it is talking of it, and think on your own by the likelihood of the diabolical consequences of a microchipped population on the rise in which powerful and typically unknown persons have magnificient access to your daily lives like never before:

http://prisonplanet.tv/articles/july2004/200704abcmicrochips.htm

Thinking of me as a mad-man now, are you? Well I will make it clear now that I do not mean this email in jest, nor as hyperbole. I mean this as RED ALERT. What can I say? It is Peter Jennings himself in this video here, who addresses and concludes the topic, with utter phoniness and madness, as if he had just shown a video of some good news about dairy farms in Idaho, or a boom in the stock market, or some other such idle talk.

Well this is a serious matter. Not only are a mexican immigrants getting microchipped, and not only did weirdo conspiracy theorist whackos say this would happen some years ago, like as early in the 60s and the 70s with their blabber of Manchurian Candidates and Aliens from planet X, but now we have the TOP NATIONAL TV NEWS giving a broadcast TO THE WORLD that it is okay and wonderful and even GOOD that people are now becoming microchipped en masse. This is serious, cultural upheaval business here. We're not talking some obscure reference in the "New Age" or "Political Science" section of Barnes and Noble.

I am a Christian now, I wish to make that clear to some of those I'm sending this to who may not understand. Or at least I am trying to be one now, but by no means am I insinuating that this email is an "act of lovingkindness" exemplifying some good works or somesuch. I would've said such things even before as an atheist, or an agnostic. And my reference in the header to the Book of Revelation in our Bible is not to be regarded flippantly either.

SO ANYWAY, IF MY MESSAGE IS NOT CLEAR, HERE IS THE CAPSULE SUMMARY: DON'T YOU EVEN DARE GET ONE OF THESE CHIPS, NOR BEGIN ENDORSING THE IDEA, AND JOKING OF IT AMONG YOUR FRIENDS. THOUGH MANY CHIPS PEOPLE ARE GETTING NOW ARE JUST MEDICAL RECORDS, COURT RECORDS, VOTING RECORDS, AND OTHER RELATIVELY UNSCARY THINGS, THESE CHIPS WILL INDEED BE USED FOR HARM, FOR DEADLY HARM TO YOU, OR YOUR LOVED ONES, SOMEDAY IN THE FUTURE, WHEN THIS HAS TRANSCENEDED ITS FADDISM, AS CELL PHONES AND VIDEO GAMES HAVE ALREADY, AND JUST ABOUT EVERYONE HAS ONE OF THESE DEVICES IN THEM AND TAKES THEM FOR GRANTED. DO NOT EVEN BE ONE TO GET ONE IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Love, really, love,

Matthew

In his essay "How to Justify a Private Library," Umberto Eco answers the query and statement "What a lot of books! Have you read them all?" in different ways. One way is "I haven't read any of them; otherwise, why would I keep them here?" Eco also recommends Roberto Leydi's "And more, dear sir [or madam], many more."

I don't recall anyone ever asking me if I've read everything on my shelves. Most people just say something like "Geez, you sure have a lot of books." And I say "that's because they make my life immeasurably more enjoyable."

I love to read, and I love to collect and read books in my areas of interest: science and nature, atheism, weird fiction, mystery, history, biography, SF, and more. So, I have lots of books by Aldiss, Asimov, Ballard, Beaumont, Bloch, Bradbury, Caidin, Ramsey Campbell, Phil Dick, The Durants, Loren Eiseley, HE, Richard Feynman, Martin Gardner, Gould, Robert E. Howard, Robert Ingersoll, Shirley Jackson, S.T. Joshi, Steve King, Paul Kurtz, Lansdale, Leiber, Lovecraft, Matheson, Mencken, Bill Pronzini (Nameless Detective series), Spider Robinson, Bertrand Russell, Sagan, Sheckley, Silverberg, George H. Smith, Dan Simmons, the weird and wonderful Klarkash-ton (Smith), Robert Anton Wilson, Gene Wolfe, etcetera, ad infinitum, adios.

I've often thought that my ideal job would be as live-in caretaker of a large university or public library. If you're offering, I'm available. I don't need much space and I'd be really quiet, honest.

(Before I forget, a great essay on the value of books and reading is Harlan's "Revealed at Last! What Killed the Dinosaurs! And You Don't Look so Terrific Yourself.")

IN OTHER NEWS,

We celebrate the anniversary of the Eagle's landing on the moon. Do y'all remember what Nixon said in his congratulatory call to the astronauts?

"THIS IS THE GREATEST WEEK IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD SINCE THE CREATION."

Ugh. Just plain ugh.

Frank,

On what planet is that an insult? None.

Ted Nugent's board banned me. lol.

Too Many Books
Harlan's pat response (which is also Gaspar's), is no damn good in my case, since I accumulate books faster than I read them and indeed DO have many shelves of books I haven't already read.

However, I did come up with a good response to a related question, a bunch of years ago, when an idiot co-worker (one of many, unfortunately), found out I was a writer and began attacking me on the grounds that books were a waste of time. Why would anybody stick his nose in a book? Weren't people who read books nerds? The only thing worse than somebody who reads books is somebody who writes them...etc, etc, etc.

I swallowed this for a long time, refusing to respond.

Until one day, I was observed lugging around my latest reading material, and this person started in on the theory that nobody of worth reads anything.

THIS time there was a substantial audience.

Her rant ended with, "Whenever I go to somebody's home and see bookshelves all over the place, it's a great sign they don't have a life!"

"Really," I said. "Well, when I go to somebody's house and don't see any books anywhere, it's a great sign they're not worth talking to."

Exeunt.

(The main problem with this retort, I'm told by friends who read but don't accumulate, is that it assumes aliteracy on the part of those who obtain all their reading from the library...or who don't have the collecting bug that prompts them to hold on books they've already completed. And it's also true that I know some total non-readers who are nevertheless fun folks to be around. But strict accuracy was not the objective, here.) A-TC

Book lovers and questions for Harlan
The best response to the phrase "Have you read all these books?" I've yet seen or heard comes from Harlan's character Gaspar: "Hell no. What's the use in reading books you've already read?" Well, that's the gist of it anyway.

Harlan, I hate to combine questions, but I'm trying to abide by Rick's one post a day edict. First off, a couple of weeks back you recommended a great place to eat at the Marriott for those of us gathering for Dragon*Con, and I was wondering if you have ever eaten at The Varisty and what you thought of it. Also, I was browsing the Books A Million Website for titles of yours that they carried and happened upon an item called Children of the Streets, to be released in August. Is this a combination of of Memos From Purgatory/The Deadly Streets? Can you give us a taste of what this book is?

"You have too many books!"

Yep, and not enough time to read them.

"You have too many books!"

The shelves help hide the holes in my walls where lie within the bones of my ex-friends.

"You have too many books!"

Sorry, did you say something? I'm trying to finish this last chapter.

"You have too many books!"

I try to give them away, but no one I know has the intelligence to want to read.

"You have too many books!"

Yeah, thanks, so what's good on TV Land Network tonight?

"You have too many books!"

Yeah. Someday I'll learn to read.

"You have too many books!"

Those aren't books. Those are thousands of pages of bound paper. I like paper.

"You have too many books!"

Books? Did you say books? Slooowly I turned....step by step.....

"You have too many books!"

Fuck you.

-TODD

Hear, hear, on the recommendation of Tom Reamy. Brilliant stuff, though sadly not enough of it.

Damn the turdpedoes and fill your space with books


Damn straight, Georgie. Having too many books is akin to having too many good friends. What a pouchful of dark matter.

The only problem I run into with all these books (besides moving them--which I ALWAYS do myself) is duplication of titles. I haven't catalogued my library, so that is a frequent mistake; one that my bookloving friends benefit from.

Have I read them all? What the heck kind of a question is that? hell no, I only read Harlan and John D. MacDonald. (With a little gene wolfe and richard grant and jack cady and james tiptree, jr. and pkd and sturgeon and bradbury and george rr martin and raymond chandler and richard brautigan and charles bukowski and john fante and geoff cooper and caitlin r kiernan and neil gaiman and john mcphee and alan grant and joseph conrad thrown in now and again for good measure.) So kiss my asphalt proboscis.

The rest of these books?.....ballast.

And, hey, if anyone wishes to read a couple authors who Harlan adores, check out Robert Stallman and Tom Reamy.

Who was looking for the Edgeworks volume containing "Love Ain't Nothing..." and "The Beast..."? I'll help ya find a copy. I am the BookSleuth ("B.S." to my fiends). Someone gave me that book for Valentine's Day once, how cool is that?

[i've been wondering if it is bogus to swap Harlan titles here? i would never want to detract from the Man's sales. Harlan, is it kosh to let Webderlanders know that I have an extra copy of one of yours to give to a good home? forgive me if this is a dumb question, please.]


good golly! this entry has grown Rob-like appendages!

respectfully,

Neal

Smartass answer to booklover georgie
Tell them to suck your poop chute.

The only way you can have too many books is if you're struggling to keep them above water after having abandoned ship, and that's a R-E-A-L judgement call that could go either way.

-Keith

re: Science Man Blusters On!
> To experience loss, you have to lose. No delusions are allowed to mitigate the pain.

I've got a bit bleeding-heart-whatever in me and so I tend to allow people all sorts of ways of coping, or mitigating the pain...and I confess to being called on the carpet decades ago in a Boston bookstore by ah, someone who I'm sure has forgotten it, for trying to allow moral space for delusions and other bad habits. But, I agree, and I work to deny them for myself (particularly those chemical forms), because many of them do stop thought in their blunting of the experience of loss.

Still, it's a marvellous thing too to watch what the human mind will invent to protect itself. Much of our best mythologies come from dealing with death and loss; these I can admire without danger of converting. And, I think, if I keep experiencing, and thinking, and watching, I'll learn something just as marvellous that I would have missed if I'd been stopped by some premature ghost.

As a concrete example of the inventiveness of coping, I like Paul Barber's _Vampires,_Burial,_and_Death_
http://catalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?Search_Arg=vampires%2C+burial+and+death&Search_Code=TALL&PID=24188&SEQ=20040720160503&CNT=25&HIST=1
although it probably won't impress chicks at parties--based on my reaction, and I've never been a "chick".


But! I do have a question which I thought would be safe to ask here, since I guess that some here are similarly challenged: what's a good response when friends tell you,

"You have too many books!"

(It's one thing if I've asked them to help me move them, and then the only thing I can do is smile sheepishly and thank them for helping, but sometimes it's just offered upon a visit. They're all on shelves, mostly, well, except for the one or two under my pillow for bedtime reading. The followup question of, "Have you read them all??" I think I finally have a good rejoinder for: "No, no, there's some I don't ever intend to read!")

Proteges of Harlan
Harlan,

As someone who is about to become a father for the second time, the subject of leaving a legacy is on my mind a lot lately.

While you have influenced multiple generations of writers, I was wondering if there were any writers you, and the people who post to this board, consider to be proteges of yours.

I apologize if this question has been answered in a previous posting, I searched the archives for an answer, but the closest I could find was the 1992 list of most admired writers.

Thanks,

Mark

Science Man Blusters On!
Eric,

Thank you for that complimentary e-mail. Yes, I do find the universe and reality far more beautiful than the things human beings make up out of painfully limited knowledge.

But I will tell you what scares me most: the silence that all the great ideas are falling into. No astrologer ever imagined the cosmos we have seen through the Hubble. No religioso ever imagined deep time and the endlessly varied processes of evolution.

You think believing in superstition gets you chicks? Makes them think you're the sensitive, mystical type? Well, go for it, guy. Nothing's more important than getting laid--not truth, not beauty, not justice.

You may rut as much as you like, Eric. I give you full permission. And you--in the haze of your latest orgasm--can rest easy afterward knowing that you have personally advanced civilization by your rutting. Or to quote Spenser, "Let Grille be Grille."

However, people can also love you for honesty and for poetry. Shelley was an atheist. Tell me he didn't get laid. How about all those French Symbolists and existentialists? You think Rimbaud, Sarte, and Camus didn't get laid? You mistakenly assume that participating in the vacuousness of American culture is the only way to get a girl to drop her knickers. Others have solved this problem in far better ways.

Lastly, if I may be honest. When you watch your mother waste away with colon cancer, as I did--watch her spit up coffee grounds and die weighing 56 lbs--you're just not too scared by vampires, ghosts and goblins anymore. They don't have any power over you.

Nor would I ever let the religious fantasists rob me of the sacred truth of my mother's death, nor blaspheme her passing with their vain and hollow promises of consolation.

To experience loss, you have to lose. No delusions are allowed to mitigate the pain.

Steve Dooner

again and again and again
Fifty tedious years of these snipe artists. It is truly a wonder to me that Harlan's head doesn't explode sometimes. The only thing of genuine interest to me was the timing. Harlan secures a promise from another snipe artist of some 20 years to cease and desist and low and behold, a week later two new ones take that persons place. New anonymous posters. Two more cowards with keyboards. Like frogs from swamp water they manifest.

TLDV wasn't the only hot button word. Let's try substantive and Stalin. Since Hitler comparisons are now passé and since "Abe" and "Ezra" know exactly what they are doing, by all means let's trot out the other famous despot of the 20th century famous for outliving friends and enemies alike. Ah, what clever clever swordplay. Is that you Vivian? 2002 seems just like yesterday.

As for Stephen King, I suspect if he wanted to get that story published, that is, if his FAITH in Harlan and his judgment had lapsed, I suspect he might have just enough literary pull to get that story you pine for published somewhere. Look at it this way. Now you have something to live for.

Oh yes, "substantive". Like a Hugo nomination and his 9/11 essay and his recent Modern Library work have no gravitas. You folks feel free to ante up your substantive work 10 or 15 years from now when your 70 or in the ballpark - or at play in the fields of the Lord. Whichever. I'll be waiting.

- Barney Dannelke

*laughing*
The horse, the glue.

Alright, alright - thanks for the nose wiping. I'm good now, honest. The obsequious humours have been leeched, the leeches burned, and their ashes scattered to the four winds.

>Miss the Magellantic Cloud and the rings of Saturn and pulsars and giant gaseous star factories. Miss the complexity of the chysalis, the lightning bug, the plenarian and DNA molecule.<

Like I said, boring at parties. The bluster of Science Man, which sadly never gets the chicks. Make mine witches.

And Mr. Dooner, I'm sure we could find something that might raise your hairs, out in the dead of night.

Grateful thankings
HE wrote: "You... act as if we had stood off the world's schoolyard bullies together, as pals."

And already I'm bawling here. Oh sure, it may be because I'm so overwrought that a kind word and a harsh word reduce me to the same embarrassing state.

But it's more likely because I'm in the middle of a two-year grind-down that's unlikely to arouse much sympathy--I've been looking for work (roughly) that long and, by my estimate, as a writer, HE has been engaged in that slog since before I was born, and I'm sure others of you here can outpace me--and it gives me hope to know that these storms can be weathered.

Maybe hope should never elicit tears; I don't know. But for today, that's how it is. But tears don't drown out hope, I know that for damn sure.

Tweaker
Beyond the Ali G syntax, there is a buzzword in Ezra's post that let's you know he is intent on causing some trouble, and the buzzword is TLDV.

Mark

Pick on Frank???
It was suggested that perhaps we should try beating up on Frank, as opposed to drubbing someone who steps in for a moment and says, "You suck. You're like, totally bogus. Huh-huh. Huh-huh-huh."

What are you talking about? Beating up on Frank is our local pastime. It's like throwing rocks at a rhino. He visits the Ted Nugent web site and posts criticisms and counterpoints there, with all those black helicopter pry-my-dead-fingers-from-my-truck-bomb loonies. I swear, the guy is Iron Man.

In fact, he IS Iron Man. Forget that Tony Stark guy, he's just Frank's sponsor. How about that? Frank an armored lackey of a running-dog captialist.

Learn sumthin' new every day.

Chuck

Interpreting the Sphinx Harlan

Eric et al:

I'm not sure you folks have it right. My guess is that it's not Harlan's atheism that is the literary metaphor but rather any semblance of a theistic belief that you might interpret in his works. You see, brownies and bogilies are simply a metaphor for the spooks within our own psychology. That's how its always been, and religion, gods, demons and souls are simply metaphors, whereas death is a reality.

Life would have little meaning without death, and young people would be really pissed off at all the 164 year olds still holding the jobs if there were no death.

But folks (Eric especially), I will spend any night in a cemetery, walk under any ladder and bear what curses you may wish to throw at me before I accept superstitious beliefs as valid interpretations of the universe. And I promise you, I will not to be harmed by your voodoo dolls or your magic spells--C'mon! Throw your ju ju powder at me, right now!

What saddens me is that there are enough flat earthers out there who are still afraid of the dark. Go ahead! Miss the real show. Miss the Magellantic Cloud and the rings of Saturn and pulsars and giant gaseous star factories. Miss the complexity of the chysalis, the lightning bug, the plenarian and DNA molecule.

What life after death could not be a hell! The Struldbruggs can have their immortality. I know the end will be hard, and I will fight for my last breath even when utterly immersed in the humiliation of paper johnnies, operating tables, stainless steel bed rails, feeding tubes and hideously beeping monitors.

I imagine the long dark look will only get more bitter as the years go on. But a sterile heaven where everything is perfect and nothing grows, where we meet again Aunt Midge without her alcohism, Granddad without his wife-beating and cousin Chester without his weird sexual proclivity would be a sad waste of eternity. I can think of nothing less human.

So go to heaven all you saints. I wish it on you. I like life.

Steve Dooner

Keith Cramer


Right fucking on, man.

laughing my ass off

respectfully,

Neal

P.S. For what it's worth (not a gah-damn thing) I read Harlan's "One Life..." at a pivotal moment in my teens. Discovering that and a world of other great stories and essays and etc. has made all, and I mean ALL, the difference. Hyperbole does not become me.

Repent!
I'm still in paroxysms of laughter. I initially sought out this site out of mere curiousity. A co-worker had recently read an article that mentioned Mr. Ellison and asked if I had ever heard of him (I, in turn, loaned her my copy of "The Essential Ellison"). A couple of days later, Mr. Ellison answered a question I had concerning the editing of "Repent, Harlequin." It came full-circle today. I'm a counselor at a drug and alcohol treatment facility which is blessed by an incredible library. Unfortunately, most of our clients don't read much, preferring to spend their off-hours drooling in front of MTV or BET or reruns of "Cops." However, I do have one (very young) client who loves to read and has (blessedly) taken full advantage of our lovely library. He approached me today, eyes sparkling. "Hey, Todd! I came across a great book the other day!" My interest was piqued; although this 19 year-old is a drug addict, he's very bright and has good taste. "It's by some guy named Harlan Ellison, and it had a great story in it called, "Repent, Harlequin!" Said the Ticktockman." I'm still laughing so hard I can hardly see my monitor...

Tons of Tone

Harlan, as one you have chastised in the past, I thought your TONE came through loud and clear and with a raised brow and a swat to the back of the head. (I didn’t wash my hair for DAYS!)

ALL:

The board has been good for laughs lately, what with all the knee-jerk attacks and name-calling. It makes me think back to the unhalcyon days of elementary school, when playground bullies roamed the yard and picked on those of us who were more successful dealing with our peers. Singled out by success.

If I want to get a rise out of Harlan, I’ll ask him a question. I’ll try to ask him a question he’s never had before. Like “Hey, Harlan, do you experience weekends differently than everyone else?” Or something. But to come to the man’s dining pavilion and behave like an untrained dog is so rude it’s actually funny. Not funny in a “Ha-Ha-someone-farted-in-the-Pavilion” kind of way, but funny in a “Hey, look at the social deficient” kind of way. Like staring at a bad car wreck of a human.

Once you stop laughing you have to wonder who breeds these beasts. And then you ask: am I any more enlightened than I was prior to reading the comment? Or was I just entertained? All too often, it’s the later. At least after reading Rob or Frank or Cindy or Dorie or Eric or Brian or DTS or Elijah or Washu or ATC or Todd I feel rewarded, frustrated, enlightened or …well, you get the picture. I can’t go on enough in praise of those whose contributions here are worth reading. And then we get the human detritus, like a turd washed up on the beach. I just walk away. I do not touch it and I do not acknowledge it. It will not ruin the brief time I spend here.

-Keith

>Harlan Ellsion is not only conservative but believes in life after death as well<

Good for him. Although I'm guessing Ellison was speaking metaphorically, it's worth noting that the older you get, the more you realize that those precious little rational certainties that we all bored people with at parties are not so certain anymore. Ghosts, evil, bad karma, vengeful gods, and other assorted demons in our science-haunted world start to look possible, at least as possible as Einstein's General theory.

You can write it off as burbles from your bicameral brain, Ezra, but spend a night or two alone in a graveyard, or some ruined house were someone was murdered, and see if you ain't visited by something, even if it's just your own sense of dread.

Cookie = defending someone she admires, which is not the same thing as "defensive". A lot of us do that, Abe. Sure we all know that of everyone here, Harlan is least in need of a champion, but it's kind of a reflex. I expect Cookie jumped in and said something because she would have felt remiss if she hadn't. It's the thought that counts :)

Well, Cookie, CJ, I don't see how Ezra is "skewering" HE. He obviously admires him enough to be familiar with the Dangerous Vision books and wants to see more things published by this author. I think he meant something substantive, not the odd magazine piece. As for the political thing Frank Church goes on and on about leftism & liberalism so much that one would get the impression that HE is the reincarnation of Joseph Stalin. So why not pick on Frank? Same goes for atheism. I'm familiar with the citations Ezra brings up and they were not "literary" and if they were then HE's "atheism" could be said to be "literary" as well. As for The Last Dangerous Visions, this book was supposed to be published YEARS ago, so it is not "erroneous" to think it never will be published.

Cookie = Defensive & Insecure.

Que?
Who out there said "Solaris" was better than the Russian version? My God that was one of the dullest remakes I've ever seen, I tried to watch it on a plane and looked out the window instead. At least I could sit throught the Russian one.
And "Bad Santa"? Nearly puked. Skewering beloved icons does not make for cleverness.

I'm glad to see I'm not the only one who didn't like "Blade Runner". Put me to sleep. Dull! Dull! Dull!

And I liked "Van Helsing"! Sue me!

-Steve

I know it's wrong to feed a troll with attention, but the first line of "Ezra's" screed belies an idiot who didn't *even* read halfway down the Pavilion's first page. I see that TODAY (today!) DTS points out that a NEW (new!) HE story will be published in a newly revived AMAZING STORIES.

After the first sentence, which was so erroneous as to be laughable, I just skimmed through to see what the rest of the paragraph said. It was more laughable. People, of course, don't have to fit neatly into "liberal" or "conservative" categories. Many people who don't literally believe in "the other side" make literary references to such.

And why does it matter anyway? I honestly don't understand people who seem to make skewering Harlan Ellison (or any other person they don't *really* know) their hobby. It's pathological. If not sick, it's just plain lame.

There was a similar post to this a few days back and I let it pass, but the one today was just so stupid I had to respond.

"Ezra"=putz. Now go away.

hey ezra
what? is there some kind of point in your post that i am missing here?

who cares if harlan beleives in the afterlife or not? what difference does it make?

same goes for harlan as a conservative or liberal. until he becomes a lawmaker, his political leanings have no bearing on anyone's lives.

as for his creative juices...i wouldn't count on them being dried up.

Harlan Ellison hasn't published any thing new in a long time has his creative juices dried up? I really want to read the Stephen King story "Squad D" that's trapped inside The Last Dangerous Visions manuscript, apparently forever. Harlan Ellsion is not only conservative but believes in life after death as well. Read the dedication to the book Mind Fields or Harlan Ellison's Dream Corridor, when he's ruminating about his friends who have died recently. "They're waiting for us on the otherside" he says.

Frank moving to Phoenix?

Say it ain't so, Joe! Say it ain't so. I knew I was in trouble when Napalitano was voted in as Governor less than one month after my arrival.

Debbie has her mace ready, and I'm checking my ammo for expiration dates.

-TODD

Bolivia just nationalized its natural gas industry. I expect an American Coup any minute now.

------------

Harlan, that's a big chunk of change you gave back fella. There aint no way in hell this man is conservative. Conservatives usually sleep with their change purses under their pillow at night.

You are a good man Mr. E.

------------------

Todd, I may be moving to Phoenix. Yes, your best buddy will be within earshot of you and the lovely Debbie. No, don't reach for that trusty hand gun, I aint there just yet. Hold on, just wanted to give you advance warning. Maybe we can go out for a drink or something. Kisses.

Maybe I will give you a Chomsky book as a gift.

>the coming war against the rich

K.B.I.S.F.B.

M. Ellison:

Since apologies seem to be the theme of the day, I'm sorry.

As to the reason, well, your choice. Please us this apology as you will, to abet some small or large misdeed on my part anon or hence. There will be no refunds or exchanges, all apologies must be used as is.

Rose: Think of my interpretation of your comments as this; often, when an outsider comes into our neck of the woods, especially from more urban settings, there's often this air of condescencion that pervades their contact with us, almost as if they are surprised that we have progressed to the point of mastery of light and fire. I'm serious, it does happen.

Now, out of politeness, we don't take too harshly to this, but size up the visitor with a shrug, a laugh, and the comment; "Don't mind us, we're just iggerant backwoods folk.".

Their future treatment depends on how much they laugh and agree with us.

As for "Bladerunner", there was no prejudgment of the film, at least as much of memory serves (the film was released in 1981, if I recall). In fact, I do believe I was looking forward to it, especially under the new title. I thought that the efforts of the director of "Alien" to create a possible fusion of Dick's novel with themes of Burroughs would really trigger something esoteric, perhaps even a more daring interpretation. I was sadly diappointed at what I got; a simple "hunt the androids" detective picture, garishly clothed in rain, garbage and neon.

As to the larger issue of "I, Robot", "Do Androids..." and other attempts at SF cinema adaptation (a fine film in its own right) I've got precious little problem with directors and writers taking works and reinterpreting them. Hell, I was astounded that Cronenberg actually made a work out of "Naked Lunch" that was a comprehensible narrative, let alone a fascinating look at the process of creativity and intellect as perversion and taboo. Interesting, considering Cronenberg's next film "Crash" as a near perfectly faithful adpatation of the Ballard novel.

The concern for me is whether or not the interpretation brings something of interest to the tale, rather than feed the money mill of Hollywood. I've yet to hear anything about "I, Robot" that indicates it is any better than "The Matrix", "Hulk" or "Independence Day"; just mindless, predictable popcorn films. In my case, considering I'm paying not only for the film, but twenty bucks in gas to go see it and the cost of a babysitter, the cost of dinner, etc., I do demand more.

BTW all,do rent or buy "The Leopard". Mel and I loved it.

Scott

Harlan's new short-short in "Amazing Stories"
ALL: Harlan's got a new short-short in the forthcoming, premiere issue of "Amazing Stories" (which is, I think, their 6th or 7th rebirth). The issue number is 603, and it is dated September (it should be on the stands in August). It's a big, slick magazine and the cover of the issue sports everyone's current favorite superhero, Spiderman. The title of Harlan's short-short (wait for it) is: "Loose Cannon or Rubber Duckies From Space: A thrilling two-part serial of exactly 100 words each." Neil Gaiman contributed an introduction and the artwork (by Jim DiBartolo) is perfect.
HARLAN: Loved the new story. It is (dare I say it?) amazing.
--Dorman

ROSE & ELIJAH:

What I most lament as regards posting these replies, is that neither of you can get the TONE of what I'm saying. Particularly when a sincerity, a gentleness, is the subtext I'm striving for.

Each of you, in your way, has reacted to my responses as if I were somehow offended. Not so. It is just my way, to eschew lachrymose and pro forma drooling. I tend to affect a Lollipop Guild street urchin toughness in my replies, to prevent others from toadying. But it takes MUCHO MUCH actually to piss me off. A Russian lady did it recently. But neither you nor Elijah came anywhere near. And absolutely not-so as regards Rose and her conveyance of the David Silver mot. My reply was intended seriously lighthearted. I did not think you rude, I did not rank him a dolt. You are overthinking this. Everything is copacetic, and I would hope your first venture into dialogue here has seemed neighborly enough for you to soar unencumbered for future exchanges.

As for Elijah, kiddo, loosen up. You asked a question that seemed simple to you, a few words: but like most questions that can be asked in a few words, the PROPER, the uSEFUL answer requires a lot more work. Well, I'd done that work several times in this outpost, over a period of years, and I may have been a squidge testy the day I first replied to you, and I advised you to go check out the archive. Then, somehow, you must've missed that reply, and you came back and hit me a second time; and by then I was otherwise inclined, and you were a gnat I had thought packed its duffle and migrated to Costa Rica or somewhere. So I gave a mildly snappish answer, suggesting a second time that you go find someone to help you with the archive, where the answer to your question lies in fulsome perfection.

Now, here you are, back again; no wiser as regards the ORIGINAL query, but dragging your ass in unnecessary apologia. So I have to take the time to balm you and pat your head and tell you I am NOT pissed at you, annoyed by you, hateful toward you, or pretty much ANYthing negative toward you, Elijah. But we manly studly guys shouldn't have to keep wiping each other's nose. Same goes for the rest'a ya.

Just stop beating this cayuse. It's glue, already.

And that does go for the rest of you. I'll LET YOU KNOW if I've got a bone stuck in my craw. Until then, shoot off your faces any way you feel like. How many times, in how many ways, must I say that?

Yr. pal, Harlan

the penitent, back from the archives...
...Mine eyes cry out for cold compresses.

Hi all - I've got to try and to clear my name. When Unca Harlan was kind enough to cast his gaze my way I was obscurely referential and then too hastily deferential, so nothing's really come of our exchange beyond a sense that I've irritated our good host. I'd like to at least affirm that I wasn't out to waste his time with redundancy or idle queries. I can only hope this attempt to rebuff my status as a non-observant ingrate won't backfire and paint me as a solypsistic buffoon.

April 7th was a long time ago, and that's the day I asked my question the first time 'round. I don't think it's been answered, but rather than require anyone else to dig through the archives I'll summarize that original post in the next paragraph. Incidently, I certainly don't think Harlan's obligated to answer me, and if any of you good forum folks know of a time he's addressed this sort of thing feel free to point me in that direction. Or just chime in with your own two cents if you're so moved:

Harlan: After seeing you with Gaiman and Davis at MIT, I got a chance to speak with you but was stricken with fanboy lockjaw and so said little of consequence. I wanted to thank you for the rare virtue of being pissed off all the time, because I believe it stems from the unrelentingly high standards you have for humanity. I feel like I have those standards and that reaction, too - the world makes me restless and disgusted and furious and joyous, though I worry that one day I'm going to forget people's potential to be more than they are. So the question at the heart of my question is, "What can I do to keep from giving up?" But I know you can't speak for me, so I turn the question around: "What's kept you going lo! these many years in the face of a world so full of crap?"

Pleas for personal validation sound pathetic, so permit me to narrow this down a little. I'm an aspiring scribbler, but I am the only person among my otherwise beloved friends who writes - so when it comes to feeling low and wondering if I'm wasting my time, I'm on my own. Harlan does not exist to be my literary Ganesh; I don't expect him to remove all doubts and obstacles. I'm just looking for an outside voice, no matter what it says, and I'm looking here because Harlan holds a great deal of weight with me.

Eh, so anyway. Those are my cards out on the table. Appy polly loggies to thee and thine if it's been naught but wasted time.

To Rose, who wrote:

"In answer to Brian Siano, who wrote: "I got to do Novels, which meant I got to praise...Lois McMaster Bujold... I kept waiting for someone to write something that would truly ASTONISH me."

I'm sorry, but I don't think ANYTHING written by Lois McMaster Bujold fits the definition of "astonishing". Just the opposite, I find her work utterly boring. Paper thin characterizations, predictable plotting, juvenile settings and situations. I've read six of her novels, including two Hugo winners, so I've given it a fighting chance. I know she has quite an active fan following, and plenty of ballot box stuffing goes on for her, but what's the fascination? Brian, I'm not looking to debate, but I'd honestly like you to tell me. What is so fabulous about her work? What makes it better than the rest? What am I missing?! Thanks."

Well, Rose, one thing you're missing is a sense of context: nowhere did I say that Bujold's work is "astonishing," and dragging disparate phrases of mine together doesn't make it so. I said I praised her book, and I said that there was little in the nominees which I found "astonishing." It's difficult to see how this equates to "Bujold's book is astonishing." (And since I wrote that I kept _waiting_ for astonishment, doesn't that imply that I never _got_ it, even from Bujold?) So I'd strongly recommend developing the habit of reading closely and reporting accurately.

But if you want a defense of Bujold, here it is. I normally don't enjoy her style of fantasy. But, I'd agreed to read the Hugo nominees, so I gave her her day in court. And I was pleasantly surprised. Her characters weren't romance-novel mannequins; they had some depth to them. There were some genuinely clever plot twists that didn't seem out of left-field, and they flowed naturally from the fantasy-world she'd sketched out. (I also admired the fact that her heroine was middle-aged, and _NOT_ a magically-talented Britney waif.) I wouldn't call it a classic, and I'm not likely to read more of Bujold's stuff except as a change of pace from my regular tastes. But in these respects, _Paladin of Souls_ was better than three of the other Hugo nominees.

Now, you may wonder; given _your_ dislike of Bujold's work, were the other Hugo nominess really worse? Apart from Dan Simmons' _Ilium_, which I thought was better, I think I can explain why the other three were worse in important respects. (I posted similar comments here months ago, but I don't mind spewing more opinion boluses.)



Charles Wilson's _Blind Lake_ wasn't a bad book. Wilson has a terrific prose style, with a knack for poetic observation. But he really didn't have much of a story going on here; it was sort of like reading Michael Crichton's _Sphere_, only Wilson's a better writer. If he had a better plot, he'd be fabulous.

Robert Sawyer's _Humans_ wasn't very good, either. The plot involves a parallel earth where Neanderthals dominate, and the establishment of a tunnel-bridge-thing through which we visit each other. Biggest problem-- apart from there not being much of a story-- is that Sawyer's Neanderthals are, basically, uninteresting. They're well-adjusted, bisexual, and live by decently Green politics, and the main Neanderthal spends his time being shocked at how violent and gun-addicted and polluting we humans are. What do you call bad preachiness when the _critic_ is a straw man?

And Charles Stross's _Singularity Sky_ was just terrible, for reasons I outlined in my previous note. If you want a more detailed discussion, check the archives here. I think I vented about it before.

Tales to Astonish
Reading the magazines on a monthly basis, I encounter a number of stories by folks other than The Usual Subjects which irritate me by NOT making it onto the ballots at year's end. So it's not that the year was bad; it's that the nominations often reflect the popularity of authors and not the worth of stories.

An apology to Harlan; a question; replies for Scott & Brian...

In answer to Harlan, who wrote: "If I have any cavil with anything in your post, it would be that "he shits like the rest of us, kid" may not be the sagest response to a forensic debating assertion of Recourse to Authority. Reducing everyone's credentials, no matter how lofty or minuscule, to a matter of defecation, pretty much puts every creature that ever walked the Earth on the same level as Eleanor Roosevelt, Albert Einstein, Savanarola, and Pliny the Elder."

Harlan, I must apologize for dashing off such a misleading quote without providing the MUCH needed surrounding context. What David Silver said was in no way intended to reduce your credentials, or further imply that ANYBODY's credentials could be so haphazardly dismissed! You don't even know the man and here I've made him seem to you as a simple intellectual thug! David himself used to repeatedly drill into the nonfiction writers in his workshops that a quote taken out of context was the mother of rhetorical irrelevance and misinterpretation. Yet here I did it myself! I'm sorry, that quote had a LOT of backing context, and it was hilarious in the moment of that context, but I didn't realize until reading your response tonight how utterly stupid it sounded by itself. Like a rebellious child in a christian catechism class, screwing up his angry little face and demanding of the teacher, "Did Jesus pee like the rest of us?!" Please understand, that was NOT the intention. Rather than sticking my foot deeper into my mouth by trying to reconstruct the context and make the quote more palatable, let me just say that in the flow of David's conversation it was VERY evident that he holds you in the highest regard yet wanted us to realize that any author, no matter how great or decorated, would logically expect their work to be a matter of debate and occasionally speculative revision. The better the work, he believes, the more it evokes such a response because of its very success. So when I questioned his own personal "rewrite" of an important transitional juncture in your screenplay, he humorously reminded all of us (through the spontaneous uttering of that quote, which was honestly quite funny and innocent in the middle of all the surrounding context) that you were not some sort of god on the mount who was uniquely immune to such speculation, AND you wouldn't expect to be treated like one. Heaven help me, I hope I cleared that up. Here it is, the first time I've ever left a message on this forum, and I actually get a response from you, but I learn I've insulted you AND misrepresented another person through the careless use of a single quote. Once again, I sincerely apologize to you, and to poor David if he ever sees this!

On another note, one night in David's workshop many years ago he played for us an audio tape from a 1970's convention where you spoke about one of your stories. You had submitted the work to Playboy, but the editor sent it back for revision, insisting that you were not telling the "truth" of the emotional impact of the story. You said you realized there was indeed a lack of sincerity or integrity in your handling of the material, that you were avoiding the wounds of your own personal experience, yet THAT was what the story was really about. So you sweated through the horrors of revisiting those emotions, finished the rewrite, and Playboy published it as "All the Birds Come Home to Roost". After speaking about the story, you do a fabulous, and chilling, job of reading it aloud. David used this recording to reinforce an important interpretation of the concept that writers must write what they know. In this case, it was an issue of authorial honesty and integrity. The entire workshop was mesmerized by your talk about and reading of the manuscript. Do you recall when and where you gave this particular talk? Are recordings still available somewhere? And did this story or editorial encounter represent a change in your narrative vision or creative process? Thank you.

**********

In answer to Scott, who wrote: "Nicely backhanded insult, to both the denizens and the patron author. I rarely get condescended to in such polite fashion. I can't think too much of your assertions over "Bladerunner", however. If you could stand a little "rampant negativity and pseudo-intellectual posturing", I'd happily discuss why I still abhor the reduction of Dick's masterful tale of entropic dehumanization and paranoia into what is little more than an A-B-C plotted pulp detective story."

Scott, there was no insult intended, for either the entirety of the "denizens" here or the "patron author". If for some reason you personally identified with any aspect of my message that led you to believe you were a target of such an insult, I apologize. Regarding your opinions of "Bladerunner", no, thanks, I read them thoroughly when you first expounded them, and I think it is better to simply say that I respectfully disagree and let that dead horse die again. I have no interest in beating it! However, I do think your views are more expressions of disppointment that the movie did not meet your own preconceived expectations, rather than that the movie was inherently bad. As such, you were preadapted to "abhor" it, no matter how good a film it may have been. By the way, I made no "assertions" about the movie. My comments were not attempts to state universal truths, but simply expressions of my own values and opinions. Based on those, I thought "Bladerunner" was a wonderful film. There are no grounds for debate here. I liked it for what it was, and you disliked it because it was not something else. We will never agree, and that's just fine with me. However, there will certainly be many other films that we will both enjoy, and I would MUCH rather share those views of delight and discovery.

**********

In answer to Brian Siano, who wrote: "I got to do Novels, which meant I got to praise...Lois McMaster Bujold... I kept waiting for someone to write something that would truly ASTONISH me."

I'm sorry, but I don't think ANYTHING written by Lois McMaster Bujold fits the definition of "astonishing". Just the opposite, I find her work utterly boring. Paper thin characterizations, predictable plotting, juvenile settings and situations. I've read six of her novels, including two Hugo winners, so I've given it a fighting chance. I know she has quite an active fan following, and plenty of ballot box stuffing goes on for her, but what's the fascination? Brian, I'm not looking to debate, but I'd honestly like you to tell me. What is so fabulous about her work? What makes it better than the rest? What am I missing?! Thanks.

Richard Shaver and Ray Palmer
Dear Mr. Ellison,

Am I correct in understanding that years ago you had some interaction with Ray Palmer or Richard Shaver? Did you ever submit work to Palmer? Have you written about them anywhere? I may write a book about Shaver--I'd be very interested in any thoughts you have about those guys or their milieu. (I realize this is a topic from left field. For anyone reading this who doesn't know, Ray Palmer was the editor of the first fanzine, editor of "Amazing Stories" during the 1940s, and the man largely responsible for the popular idea of Flying Saucers. At Amazing, he published stories by Shaver--marketed as "The Shaver Mystery"--that claimed that the world is controlled by sadistic creatures living inside the earth.)

Thank you.

I, Robot, and other Sf films
I haven't seen the film yet, and it may be one of those whose release on DVD will be the viewing occasion. Even if I hadn't read Harlan's script, the previews don't make it look like something for which I'd shell out ten dollars. (_Slate_ has a nifty essay on how the film goes against the themes in Asimov's original work.)

Anyway, I doubt it'd be as fine a science-fiction film as _Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind_, which, I've said before, was the closest to an actual Phlip K. Dick novel that's ever made it to the screen. Unless something truly brilliant comes out in the next six months, I'd give _Eternal Sunshine_ the Hugo.

I've been thinking about this a lot lately, mainly because this past Friday, the Philly SF society's Hugo panel gave its report. I got to do Novels, which meant I got to praise Dan Simmons and Lois McMaster Bujold, explain why Robert Sawyer and Robert Charles Wilson shouldn't get the award, and why Charles Stross may be one of the worst SF writers I've ever come across.

But I plowed through the novellas, novelettes and short stories as well. Was this a bad year, gang? Because there was precious little that really hit me as a major, intense, original, or truly compelling piece of work. There were fine stories here and there. Walter Jon Williams had a neat thriller about a plague that cures world hunger, with a nasty twist at the end, that I found genuinely satisfying. James Patrick Kelly had another about a smart house with some truly baroque features that worked really well. Neil Gaiman had a neat Holmes/Lovecraft pastiche that had a genuinely original take on the legend (especially compared to the others in the Holmes/Lovecraft anthology).

But beyond that, well, the stories just struck me as the products of a slow year. Some were well written, but didn't surprise or astonish me. Take "The Empire of Ice Cream" by Jeffrey Ford, or "The Tale of the Golden Eagle" by David Levine. Both begin with a wonderful story idea, both demonstrate evocative writing (and synesthesia sort of demands good, evocative writing), but the endings are as much anti-surprise as one could imagine. ("Into the Gardens of Sweet Night," another richly-written fantasy, just sort of _ends_.)

Mike Resnick's "Robots Don't Cry" was a decent, sentimental Asimovian piece, but it wasn't anything special. Michael Swanwick's "Legions of Time" starts promisingly, but turns more and more incoherent, and by the end I wondered if Stross had hacked Swanwick's word processor. "The Empress of Mars" read like good Heinlein, but the story could just as well have been set in the 1849 gold rush. "Walk in Silence" was either a Star Trek episode (the other panelists' opinion) or furry porn without the porn (my opinion).

But really, the bottom of the barrell was Charles Stross. I'd thought _Singularity Sky_ was a dreadful mess. Remember that Monty Python sketch about the playwright whose plays were filled with train schedules? Charles Stross is like that: he'll rattle off volleys of big-time SF ideas, but there's no dramatic impact. Cumulatively, it reads like word salad.

His characters are like _bad_ Heinlein. The bad characters are blunt-minded bureaucrats with all the imagination of a Czech employment officer. The beroes are are competent engineers or kickass babes, and because they always have some nanotech-quantum-whatever trick up their sleeves, they tend to stand around, make ironic comments about the doofuses around them, and make their escape quickly.

"Nightfall" is even worse. It takes place almost entirely in a virtual reality construct, among computer recreations of people's minds, so the entire Universe basically runs by TCP/IP. And since it's virtual reality-- with the hero characters able to "hack" it arbitrarily-- the story amounts to a long argument about Unix system protocols. (The same thing happens to Verner Vinge's _The Cookie Monster_. The characters get an Email, and deduce from its content (and other clues) that that they're virtual people in a virtual simulation. They also deduce that they'll be rebooted the next day and forget everything they've figured out.)

As David Cross put it in another context: I'd rather listen to my only child's death rattle than read another Charles Stross book.

But in summary, I was pretty disappointed. I liked doing the work of reading the stuff, and evaluating it, but I kept waiting for someone to write something that would _truly ASTONISH me_. And with the volume of SF and fantasy published in any given year, you'd think that there'd be more than two novels and maybe three or four shorter works that managed to do this.

THE MANIFESTO -- CLIP & SAVE
Susan and I are well into the process of returning everyones' KICK contributions (if they want 'em). Turned out to be an immense chore, just the mechanics of it.

First, the message I wanted to include on the double-postcard just wouldn't fit. Oh, the actual information fit just fine; but no matter how carefully I phrased the point that we were not trying to sleaze out of paying back every cent by guilt-tripping anyone, well, it just didn't seem STRONG enough. I needed all of you, and all of the members of HERC, and all casual droppers-in, to really really REALLY know that I'm happy as a bug in a bagel to repay your goodness and support with full remittance.

So, well, it meant writing a longer note than would fit on the card. So we did it up as a separate flyer, with the return card and its choices, in an envelope. (Also, because Susan neeeded to check on a lot of 1/2/3/4-year-old addresses.)

That means over 300 separate envelopes. Anyone who put in a grand or more, I didn't want to give them a chance to be noble; so we're returning all of Fred Pohl's and Anne McCaffery's and Kevin Anderson's and Janet Asimov's and you and you and you, all of your money. Looks to be about 82 grand going out.

It'll take us a week or two. But we're on it. Keep watching the skies! Or the mailbox, whichever is more low-carb and closer.
--------------------------------------- AND ---------------------

I figure, as long as I'm here, and I haven't done it as I said I would, permit me formally to thank you. All of you as a dear and succoring gestalt; and each of you individually as a stand-up mensch.

You simply cannot know how much your contributions and goodwill stood us in noble stead. I know you have an inkling of the opprobrium and meanness of spirit this crusade brought down on me -- even now, even after we won -- but unless you had been the much-vaunted "fly on the wall" for four years, you could not even begin to comprehend how distasteful and unrelenting has been the shitrain. But, as I expected it, I was able to weather it. In fact, it was a lot harder on my sweet honey Susan; she just ain't used to people behaving that badly, that randomly.

But every time I was feeling battered and sad and just ready to take the gaspipe, one or another of you would send ten bucks, or a sweet message, or a card. And though I am loath to engage in sentimentality, for the most part as bogus as Bush flagwaving, I need to make it clear to you, as a gestalt and as individuals...

We likely would have made it, notwithstanding...

But a lot less easily, a lot less supportedly, a lot less comradely, a lot less with the retention of our sanity. You have been just peaches, all of you. And I am in your debt. You overlook my vast store of flaws and foolishness, and act as if we had stood off the world's schoolyard bullies together, as pals.

You have my, and Susan's, unfettered gratitude.

Respectfully, Harlan

!!!!
Listened to the NPR report (and the much lengthier Ellisonian comments that accompanied it), and must comment on the scariest reference --

-- the revelation that the same screenwriter is tackling THE FOUNDATION TRILOGY next.

Dear Rose:

I see no reason why anyone here would attack your opinions, nor David Silver's opinions. They seem perfectly acceptable to me.

If I have any cavil with anything in your post, it would be that "he shits like the rest of us, kid" may not be the sagest response to a forensic debating assertion of Recourse to Authority. Reducing everyone's credentials, no matter how lofty or minuscule, to a matter of defecation, pretty much puts every creature that ever walked the Earth on the same level as Eleanor Roosevelt, Albert Einstein, Savanarola, and Pliny the Elder.

As a hopeless Elitist, I'd have to look askance at that one.

Apart from that glibness, which maybe shouldn't have impressed you as much as it seems it did, I guess we'll never know if you're right or not about how well MY version of Asimov would've done, because the Proyas/Will Smith version got made, and mine didn't. So you can surmise to your heart's content, without, I hope, anyone here going after you.

Respectfully, dear Rose, yr. pal, Harlan

Thou Canst Judge Yonder Flick Before Seeing

J L W,

"Damn I admire you Eric Martin"

An epiphany is important and I'm very happy Eric has brought such change in your life. But before we're all asked to make Eric our Great Shepherd, let me offer a few points for your scrutiny.

First of all, if you commit yourself to see EVERY movie before making SOME type of judgement on it you better have one helluva budget to cover those tickets and rentals or you'll be singing "Pennies from Heaven" at the welfare office. Not to spoil the new bonding you have with Eric, but there ARE ways to make a fairly confident call on what a movie has in mind - at least with SOME movies - without our need to see it. You HAVE to acquire some sense of where you want to risk your money and you can do it with SOME confidence.

In a landscape of movies that copy each other in style and little substance, it becomes quite easy to spot the slick, safe formulas that have proven successful staples of major studio films (and Indies trying to play it safe as well; plenty of rip-offs in that crowd). To detect the predictable, condescending shit, it helps to have background information. If you'd been keeping up on the "making of", fer instance, and you have some knowledge about the people behind a production, their credit history, their philosophy about content, and whether or not they'd habitually pushed for an easy buck, your guess about the outcome for this new flilck will have been sound. We KNOW an intelligent 'I, Robot' script had been discarded. If you know what this signifies in Hollywood, when finally a movie comes out sporting the same title, you know by historical pattern a formula cash-in has replaced the original property. Also, the previews, believe it or not, often - not ALWAYS, mind you but OFTEN - give us clear clues as to how "safe" the movie is going to be, the degree to which it will pander. The uniqueness of the images and editing style can tell you a lot. My feeling has come to be if I see lotsa speeding cars in a preview and get these generic "tin can" explosions on the track, and splices of cliche dialogue, THAT'S a movie I'm not going to pay for. I KNOW it's going to be predictable, pandering, condescending shit. And I can tell you, there has been no exception I can recall where my prediction had been wrong: reviews - if that's what you want to gauge it by - would echo by-and-large precisely what I thought the movie was going to be (examples off the top of my head include PEARL HARBOR, INDEPENDENCE DAY, ARMAGEDDON, THE PUNISHER). When you recognize the elements in flicks from practically every other movie you've seen, you can "sniff" out the movies you'd best not risk your cash on.

Although I've had it with critics, they do serve ONE practical purpose if you use them properly as a resource in order to save your money. When a film is released I tend to stick with the same critics, the ones I consider more substantive. I'll skim ALL the reviews to look for common observations, pro or con. I am not trying to find out if these critics LIKED the movie - since it's all subjective bullshit opinion - so much as whether or not it does what I want a movie to do for me. I look for criticism like cliche lines and performances, the same action scenes we've seen everywhere else, weak narrative and character development, implausible characterization, flat dramatic pacing, a stupid premise, and so on. I consider any of these points sound and cogent. Any movie that takes these knocks I'll either avoid or rent sometime when I'm in the mood for something stupid and campy (I did that with EVENT HORIZON). So, ideally, that's what critics are for. You need SOME kind of radar to know where to risk your cash.

Speaking for myself, I've studied film since my early teens with a desire to one day MAKE films (I'm one of these freaks, though, who jump between drawing, in which I've had pronounced skill since the age of six, photography, animation, and writing; probably because of powerful subconscious connections, I am viscerally obsessed with images - at times to the point of distraction). I see film as a medium and I usually watch films in this spirit. My background has sharpened my eye so that, for example, I can recognize camera styles - sometimes even distinct editing (montage, Steenbeck non-linear, cross-cutting, etc) - and often tell you who made the movie without having seen the credits (OR whose style they're copying). I can also tell when a director is evolving or just "losing it", or is just in it for the easy buck (the Michael Bays of the world). This, and knowing ample film history, has enabled me to fairly often assess a flick before its release with the confidence of a metal detector, and ferret out the losers. Of course, that's based on what I, myself, like to see. There are plenty of fuckin' crappy flicks that raked in big box office, no matter HOW bad they were (I learned from experience by eventually renting some of these and regretting it big time; now, I don't do that so often).

You don't have to be into it THAT much, of course. You only need to know what YOU want in a film. Then you'll know what to look by way of b.g. data and word-of-mouth. On the other hand, if your standards aren't particularly THAT rigorous and "formula" doesn't bother you, by all means, Eric's is probably the way to go. My argument is, before giving Eric the Metal of Valor, you should consider the question in more detail.

Frank:

"Rob, ya cyborg, let the man speak for himself. "

Replies in no conscious order:

1) I think you realize that's not in my nature. You should know better than that. I don't let NOBODY speak fer himself.
2) I haven't a single mechanical part attached to my body. I am an all-natural, god-spawned dynamo, out-Narcissusing Narcissus.
3) I sent Frisco one of the files I have on you so he'll understand the implosion he's dealing with.

Just one question, M. Ellison, regarding the NPR piece. I'm wondering if you felt that stating your side of the experience of working to get a much more Asimov-inspired version of "I, Robot" was adequately expressed in the report. My own perception is that you were edited to little more than a sound bite, one that made you sound somewhat like an impertinent jackass.

If past experience has been any judge of you, you likely gave the reporter in question a small (say, twenty minute) audio essay that explained to near total completion the process of the screenplay of "I, Robot", from writing to final rejection by the suit at Warner Bros.

Rose: Nicely backhanded insult, to both the denizens and the patron author. I rarely get condescended to in such polite fashion. I can't think too much of your assertions over "Bladerunner", however. If you could stand a little "rampant negativity and pseudo-intellectual posturing", I'd happily discuss why I still abhor the reduction of Dick's masterful tale of entropic dehumanization and paranoia into what is little more than an A-B-C plotted pulp detective story.

Scott

I, Robot: Haven't seen it. Plan to; probably next weekend (we saw Anchorman this weekend then went to see the local T-Ball Diamondbacks hand a game over to the Dodgers...again.

Read Asimov's book many a decade ago. Read Harlan's screenplay many a year ago. They both exist. No need to cry. If you don't want to see Mr. Smith run around with CGI robots, you don't have to. But if you do want to see it, you don't have to lament the book and screenplay to your dying day. I'm sure there are many Ellison screenplays that have not been filmed. He's placed his widdle toes into the stagnant Hollywood waters before. He's placed his index finger into the boogery teevee universe before. He's a big boy; you need not cry so.

What's getting a bit sad is how this I, Robot debate is turning into whining and moaning and the gnashing of teeth over how good movies don't get made anymore. Yes, the theaters are full of the schlock that common America wants to see; especially in the summer. Yes, surprised as you may be, though it's been happening since Jaws raised it's wonderful head one exciting summer, as surprising as it may appear to many of you....it's true, the summer is full of blockbuster action special effects noisy silly movies. Some are a blast (Spider-Man 2) and some are Fleet induced watery shit (Van Helsing).

But good movies are still made. Stop crying. Some are big movies, some are small movies, but movies of high quality are still making it into the theaters. I, Robot will not destroy America. Keep cool; every week is a new attempted blockbuster in the summertime, and yet those very same weeks can deliver some films of high quality like The Clearing, if you can find them.

There is much at the movie theaters that suck balls. After you shake off the obvious flics aimed at the kiddies and teens, there is still a lot of shit. But there is much quality out there too. Why, in just the last couple years there has been: Supersize Me, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, The Lord Of The Rings Trilogy, Lost in Translation, Master and Commander, American Splendor, The Human Stain (fuck you all, this movie is splendid even if miscast), 21 Grams, Big Fish, Pirates of the Carribean, Bad Santa, Solaris (it's better than the Russian snorefest), Punch-Drunk Love, The 25th Hour, About Schmidt, The Pianist.........And these are movies that made it to your local multiplex! Imagine what you can find if you have an art theater near you.

I, Robot opened this week, folks, and it stars Wil Smith and it may or may not suck but it sure as shit ain't gonna be Isaac's book or Harlan's screenplay. And the Earth will still rotate, and fun can still be had in the cinema.

Ciao. -TODD

Oh my Non-Existent Deity!

I just heard the NPR piece and am sick. They slanted it! They slanted it toward Proyas and his schlock fest, as surely as any piece was ever slanted. What could have been the reason? Do they really believe that there is an audience out there listening to NPR who simply doesn't want to hear negative things about a big summer robot movie.

The biggest insult was that they twisted an Irving Kirshner quote to make its sound like I RObot was killed by Harlan and not by the ignorance of those well-meaning Hollywood producers.

Way to go NPR. You fill me with disgust as once more you went out of your way to support the Overdog.

When did NPR get so bad. If you have Real Audio, you can listen for yourself through the link below.

http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=3444025

Steve Dooner

Rob, ya cyborg, let the man speak for himself. As for you, you give me your take about what is wrong with San Francisco. In 200 words or less.

-------------

One more crack about Chomsky and it's helter skelter up in this cut.

I Robot, You Jane,
Rationalist: You are not very rational. You clearly have never read Chomsky, and you apprently have missed all of Mr. Ellison's works championing civil rights, a far more important test of one's liberalism (itslef a meaningless term). You're grammer is sketchy as well, but I'm not going there.

Rose: If you liked the movie that's cool. Persnonally it doesn't interest me. I just find it sad that a movie can't be made at all nowadays unless it has someone like Will Smith toting a gun.

-STeve E.

Breaking my hiatus for a few precious moments

HARLAN & SUSAN,

Dear kind Sir & Madam,

IT'S HERE! IT'S HERE! IT'S REALLY, REALLY HERE!

The Hebrew edition of DANGEROUS VISIONS arrived last Friday, and it is BEAUtiful. The cover is incredibly ethereal, and immensely eerie - far more appropriate for the book's material than any other cover I've seen.

You should have seen me during the first five minutes right after opening the package. Being the Christian maroon that I am, I kept turning the book upside-down and right side-up, trying to figure out how I was exactly supposed to read it. Not that I could even read it in the first place. My Hebrew is about as good as my Spanish. And my Japanese.

But hell, it's HEBREW! A language that's beautiful just to LOOK at! If I can't meet the book's expectations, then it's ME who should start learning the damn dialect!

A truly wonderful gift. Thank you, thank you, thank YOU. The $100.00 is on its way, 2you, 2day.

>I think Harlan's "I, Robot" would have been a poetic masterpiece, a moving tribute to the REAL world of science fiction, and a hot point for critical debate, but probably a "failure" at the box office.<

While it will probably never get made as a feature film, I wonder if Ellison's screenplay couldn't be done as an animated film. With the new animation technologies, and the growing interest and respect for animation (it's not just Disney anymore), good scripts that take advantage of the medium are in short supply.

Harlan on NPR

Here's the URL: http://www.npr.org/display_pages/features/feature_3444025.html?place=home02

The "I, Robot" movie; and the elusive David Silver...
I only lurk on this forum. In fact, I've been watching all of you for several years now. It's a dirty job, but SOMEBODY has to do it!

Just kidding! Yes, I lurk, and I learn quite a bit as well, but in all this time I never had a reason to add my two bits worth of commentary. Today, however, I had one of those moments of synchronicity that both informed and entertained me, and it all relates very nicely to this forum, the apparent subject at hand, and a question from the past.

I saw "I, Robot" today...and I liked it! I have no intention of defending my point of view from the inevitable attacks I'm going to receive from many others on this forum (most of whom will probably never bother to see the film, but will say whatever they feel necessary to further ingratiate themselves to Harlan), but I found the film to be exciting, tightly scripted and directed, smoothly acted, well paced, full of properly applied yet never overbearing special effects, and generally a ripping good yarn with enough cerebral energy to lift it far above other more typical Hollywood science fiction "blockbusters". No, it is NOT "Citizen Kane", but it doesn't pretend to be. Yes, I have read ALL of Asimov's robot stories and novels, and I fully understand that this film is not "accurate" in terms of established plots, characters, and motivations. However, I still LIKED it, I felt it was a darn good movie, and it made enough of a limited homage to Asimov's work to make me VERY happy. The three laws are there, much is made of the seeming perfection of those laws, there's the inevitable logic of the robots eventually taking control of humanity for its own sake, and all of this played against the many fascinating little evolving personality quirks of Sonny, the robot that marvels at its realization that it is "unique". My two friends liked it as well. Very much! Whether any of YOU like it or not, it's going to be a hit anyway. I am sad, sad, sad that the breadth and depth of Asimov's actual stories and vision were not realized on the screen, but I truly understand why this film was done this way. Harlan's screenplay was spectacular, I've read it from cover to cover twice, and I've forced it upon several of my friends, but there's no way it would have been as much of a commercial success as THIS film will be. Instead, much like "Bladerunner" (a remarkable and stylish telling of the heart of a darkly perplexing and difficult book) or "Gattaca" (a passionate vision of the power and integrity of the individual spirit), I think Harlan's "I, Robot" would have been a poetic masterpiece, a moving tribute to the REAL world of science fiction, and a hot point for critical debate, but probably a "failure" at the box office.

After the movie, my friends and I sat for a leisurely lunch and I spent half an hour telling them about the real robot stories, the real characters, Asimov's writing, and Harlan's script. When things got quiet for a bit, while we paid attention to our food, I suddenly heard a familiar voice at my back. When I turned around to look, there was David Silver at the next table, talking away to a rapt group of his own. Apparently they had all just seen the film as well. I'm bringing this up because about a year ago somebody on this forum was trying to locate David Silver, they had participated in one of David's writing workshops, and they were worried something might have happened to him since he seemed to just fall off the map. Well, I found him! I, too, had been in a workshop moderated by David many years ago, only for about two months, but long enough for him to thoroughly kick my ass into getting several short articles published in the newspaper during that time! The man is amazing! So here I was, all these things on my mind, Asimov, Ellison, robot movie, thinking about this forum, and then there's David, and I remembered the concerned inquiry.

In a nutshell, David is still in San Francisco, a rare native of the city, and doing fine. I won't tell you his life story from the past five years, but it's been a VERY winding road for him, he's suffered much during that time, and he's only now getting back on his feet. People are hounding him again about doing workshops, but he says he wants to devote time to his own projects and only handle small select groups on occasion if he has the time. Anyway, we compared "notes" on the movie, and he also liked it, but not as enthusiastically as I did. He acknowledged that Harlan's script was a vastly superior concept, but that this film was a "better" choice for the box office without "pandering to the lowest common denominator of pointless action for action's sake". He did, however, express his own persuasive criticisms of Harlan's script, things I have never thought about, and in particular deconstructed an important juncture in the screenplay where a lapse of logic and dynamicism deflates a vital transition. When I respectfully reminded him that he was "rewriting" Harlan Ellison, he replied, "He shits like the rest of us, kid!" Oh, how I missed that man!

If the person wanting to locate David is still on this forum, David says he'll come out of hiding if you explain why you want to find him. In fact, he says he came on this forum once, about two years ago, and asked a single question of Harlan...involving the screenplay for "I, Robot"! David says Harlan never answered, which was fine, but he was turned off by the rampant negativity and pseudo-intellectual posturing he perceived in much of the group, and he stopped lurking after only a week. He loves Harlan, however, and I may have convinced him to come back, but he wants to know who's looking for him first. Whoever you are, please respond and I'll hook you up.

In the meantime, hello to Harlan. David actually turned me on to you many years ago, but I don't regret a single nightmare! Thank you for revealing the truth about the many manifestations of the human condition, and please never stop!

Getting bad vibes about a movie


I remember when I made my decision not to see EVENT HORIZON in the theaters. I saw the promotional the studio did on E! Entertainment Television (aka the whore of Babylon). Lawrence Fishburne and Sam Neil were the hosts. It was not only obvious, but incredibly obvious that this movie was going to suck. Neil and Fishburne were just trying too hard to make the movie sound scary. They came across like the Count Floyd character on SCTV. "Ooooohhhh, it's a verry scary movie, kids! Blood sucking monkeys from outer space! Ooooohhhh!"

That, and the profound theme they were beating half to death: "There are some things man was not meant to know."

How original.

I didn't need to see this stinkburger to know I'd be wasting my money. I finally saw it a couple of years later in the Sci-Fi Channel. I'm glad I saved my money. An infinite number of Bonobos banging on an infinite number of word processors could have come up with a commercial jingle that was better than this cinematic abortion.

I, Robot is actually getting somewhat decent reviews, even from the Rocky Mountain News reviewer, who is nicknamed Mikey because he's such a tough grader. I think he gave it a b-minus.

Still, I think I'll save my scarce dollars and see Spiderman 2 instead. I'll catch it later. I just don't like the smell of hucksterism that surrounds the use of the title and Asimov's name. It's so P. T. Barnum.

I understand sales of Dr. A's book are up though. More converts to the cult.

Chuck

Warren Ellis has a bit in his latest Brainpowered column that may tickle Harlan's (and everyone else's) fancies. It's at www.artbomb.net/brainpowered.jsp Scroll down and look for the bit that starts with "Free Culture." In the event that Ellis has updated his column between my post and your reading, it's column 36. I think. I'm not paging back to check, anyway.

Cheers, Jon

Harlan Ellison's liberalism is overestimated his all to true attacks on the Common Man/Woman is antithetical to someone like Noam Chomsky's pandering to the ignorant herds of fast food bloated illiterates pushing prams deep in the heart of America. Corporate delinquents are birthed in the same cesspools. Viacom CEO Mel Karmazin for example was born in a public housing tenement and brought Don Imus and Howard Stern to prominence. Americans are the problem. That empirical observation can't be escaped. Where do all the cops and military enlistees come from? Lower middle America. And they believe in their jobs 100%. Like Jack Finney, Ellison's references are often to a more elegant period of time, his automobile is a Packard, he stockpiles discontinued confections saying today no one knows what real chocolate tastes like, and almost all his film writing lambastes current trends in that increasingly corrupt industry. Sounds like a conservative to me.

Damn I admire you Eric Martin
Its hard not to discuss a film like I, Robot if you're interested in Asimov's work. So much has been written about how I, Robot came to be made into a movie (or should I say how a B-movie script called Hardware came to be made with I, Robot as its title). So many reviews have discussed what sort of a film it is. And there's been quite a few comments made by people who have seen it, and who's opinion many of us have an interest in (like Mr. Ellison's). Considering all this, its not surprising that some have given into the temptation to discuss, or even form a preliminary opinion.

Not you though. You've risen above the fray.

I salute you, and in the future will try to refrain from ever saying anything about a film, even one that's been followed as closely for as long as this one has, at all, ever, until I've seen it in full. And in the interest of absolute fairness, I'll be using a random number generator to decide what I see in the future. If I end up going to an Olson Twins flick as a result, so be it.

You are an example for us all.

Hello and welcome William!

I, Robot
I can't imagine what could possibly compel me to see "I, Robot." I've read tons of Asimov and Mr. Ellison's screenplay. Studio lackeys can do better? Please. Do yourself a favour, instead of shelling out $10 to see "I, Robot," go to your local video store and rent "Bubba Ho-Tep." Sure, it's low budget, but Bruce Campbell is more Elvis than Elvis was, and it's a great, twisted little story.

I Robot
Hi everyone,I just wanted to say a few things.
First, that film burns my ass worse than a mdget with a lighter.
Second, this is a wonderful site.
Third, I am greatful to have found this site and wanted to thank Mr. Ellison for the rants he did on the Sci-Fi channel(especially the one on Dachau).
I appolgise in advance for spelling or grammar errors.

Forgive Me, For I Have Sinned

It would be truly cool if, but once, pampered white collar transgressors like Martha Stewart, Kenneth Lay, Jim Bakker, et al, would suppress the tears of self-pity once indicted for their crimes and take accountability.

Yet...I feel such a close connection with them!

Frisco,

Take it from me as a specialist on Frank (I have a cabinet CRAMMED with files on him and a dartboard displaying his puss)...do NOT try to REASON with him, do not try to introduce linear logic to his dead-end hyperbole, do not try to debate his idees fixes. He holds this iron-weight notion that if you aren't flawless you amount to a sanctimonious, hypocritical fuck, and assumes you make no REAL efforts on the issues at all.

Simply resort to threats and insults. It wraps the whole thing up so much more quickly!

Now that WAS a question, or sort of an interrogatory remark, so I think get to post twice...

Harlan, the short answer is, I'll see it when it gets to the cheaps. My evenings are scheduled enough that if I'm going to take the three hours and plunk down the nine bucks required for a first-run film here in the Chicago Morass, it has to be one I really want to see.

But in the interest of keeping the so-called lackwits (your affectionate term, not mine) apprised of what shines true and what just stinks in the Will Smith summer funfest, I will pick it up the moment it raises its haunches in the second-runs, and give a most-objective review on this board that very night. That's not a breath-holder, but there it is.

Sedulously, Eric Martin

THE SEDULOUS INTEGRITY OF ERIC MARTIN

I presume, Eric, now that the Proyas/Smith version of I,ROBOT has been available onscreen for two full days, that you will have been one of the first in line to plonk down your fee to see it, and to return at your convenience not only to review it for us first hand and impartially, rather than on such insufficient evidence as the lackwits here have been using for days...but to enhance with rigorous evidence your mild yet forceful chiding of the Webderlander Mafia for its egregious assumptions.

I, for one, expect big things from you.

Respectfully, yr. pal, Harlan

Jesus Christ in hot sauce, Frank: you are one t e d i o u s fan boy.

Mark

"I'm just wondering how a group of people who consider themselves, usually with some justification, on being intellectually rigorous can so easily trash something they haven't bothered to see."

Easy, considering the nature of how films are made, marketed, and consumed by the audience. You yourself know the corporate mentality that goes into the creation of cinematic culture. The Oz-like journey Mr. Ellison took trying to get the screenplay he loved made should be enough of caution for any who would consider themselves neophytes to get an inkling of the process.

That doesn't mention the efforts of marketing, the often completely dishonest representation of a film to the public. The specific editing of scene and dialog into a baiting package that often shows how much sizzle you get compared to steak. Do you recall the recent film "The Girl Next Door", where a movie about teenagers getting involved in the porn industry was advertised as a harmless teen coming of age romantic comedy? The use of pet critics who wouldn't give a bad review to an outbreak of Ebola Marburg. The exhaustive cross-marketing with other corporate outlets, restaurant chains and the like, a media-wide saturation bombing to almost force you into the theatre to get some relief.

And that doesn't cover the film itself. The movies are made mostly with the philosophy of target audience and demographics, not for the idea of good acting, direction, or interesting story. How many "Godzilla"s "White Chicks", and "Thunderbirds", their inane and formulaic plots do we have to tolerate before the studios get the message that fans want something where talent and craftsmanship have come to be put in play?

You talk of intellect, and dismiss the lessons learned from being repeatedly intellectually insulted by the studios that continue to promote such dreck without any consideration that most here are simply smart enough to see through their salesmanship, and decent enough to demand better than what's being served as first-rate entertainment. It's too easy to argue that saintly point of judging only the product, without any consideration of how tawdry the process is that delivers it.

I'm not saying cinema's problems display in toto, but one would think that "Spiderman 2", the recent Harry Potter films and the triumph of LOTR should show how it can be done. And we, the audience do respond to the effort with our viewing dollars.

Think of me as an intelligent entertainment consumer, who's gotten the shuck-and-jive once too often.

Melissa

So far, only Harlan has seen the film. I'm not defending the movie, which I have not seen, or the producer's decision to use an action-script over Ellison's, which I have read, and effusively praised here in an earlier post.

I'm just wondering how a group of people who consider themselves, usually with some justification, on being intellectually rigorous can so easily trash something they haven't bothered to see. Allegiance to Harlan is one thing. But I remember when everyone pilloried Last Temptation of Christ without bothering to see it, and I don't see much difference here.

Hey, pound those nails slower, Mr. Frisco man. So you say the homeless harass little old ladies, well, I'd think all the slum landlords and major corporations situated on those misty shores do a better job harassing everyone--even little old ladies.

Defecating in the streets you say. So we should kick them in the teeth, because some of their brethren haven't been properly house trained? You do know many of them are mentally ill? Can a person off his or her nut be as responsible as a pampered yuppie pet? You do the math.

I think the main problem with Frisco is that their brand of liberalism is way too secular. I don't mean secular in the good sense of separation of church and my dick, but the kind of bohemian selfishness that exists in high rent party towns like your esteemed Frisco.

They have no sense of humanity; their liberalism is more of an artistic conceit. They prescribe to the secular religion of eat, drink and be fucked. Yes, there are good radicals there, like my good buddy Jello Biafra, but even those radicals sometime get lost in their nit picky little issues--and they fail to see the big picture.

And, Sir. no more babbling about the reality of the market. People have to live somewhere; whatever needs to be done to give low income dwellers places to call their own, I'd think, you would think that it was worth it. It is called Socialist reform. No Gulags or funny name tags needed. Sweden is a model.

And sorry about the use of the Blair Witch Project like term, 'Frisco.' I just don't give a shit about minor word quibbles. You need to worry more about what can be done to make San Francesspool a nicer place for everybody. Everyone deserves their own patch of turf. Better then the coming war against the rich, if things don't improve.

Not a warning, but a fact. Ticklin your toes.

-----------

I won't say any more to him, Rick and Harlan. Please be gentle.

The night Martha Stewart didn't meet Harlan
The one and only time I ever saw Martha Stewart was a dozen years ago at a book publication party for MURDER PLUS, a collection of true crime stories which featured a 1956 article by Harlan - he'd asked me to go in his stead since I live in NYC. The fest was held at a now-defunct TriBeCa topless strip bar called the Baby Doll Lounge (it's where Woody Allen talks to Mira Sorvino's pimp in MIGHTY APHRODITE) - and Martha Stewart was gleefully tipping the girls like a sailor. My point being:

NOBODY likes to see a good tipper go to jail.

Seeing the movie
Eric: true, the trailer is no substitute for the film, and there are times when the trailer and reviews provide a misleading indication of a film's quality (in both directions).

However...

...they are the best guides available SHORT OF seeing the film, and my dismay at the mistreatment of Asimov is sufficient that I have no interest in pursuing a personal investigation.

Yes, Eric, >I< have.

Harlan Ellison

Has anyone actually SEEN the movie? Not to put a fine point on anything, but that usually supports an argument more then reading critics or watching trailers.

Dear Mr. Ellison,

David Gerrold had some very kind and gracious words to say about you and your writing in his interview on the recently released "Land of the Lost" Season 1 DVD. Among the things he mentioned were your championing of getting quality writers to produce quality scripts which in turn make for quality shows and one amusing story involving an evening with Gerrold, Ben Bova, and you in which you produced a teasingly incomplete story idea for "Land of the Lost" (Gerrold still misses not getting a contribution from you on the series).

A bit of a treat:

http://www.npr.org/display_pages/features/feature_3461066.html

NPR is putting forth a replay of an 1987 Asimov interview concerning his writing. Quite interesting to listen to.

I've emailed USA Today, mentioning the last chapter of Philip K. Dick's "Do Androids...", with Deckard's wife discovering how the toad he found in the woods of Oregon turned out to be synthetic, and she calling to order flies for the animal as Deckard slept. Made a rather snide and unprofane comment about how someone who writes for a newspaper might want to check the end of a book, or at least try to get the research department to check the article's facts.

Then again, it is USA Today. The hamster's busy enough already keeping the wheel running to power their four-color mimeograph.

A rather amazing book, that one; one of the first books of Scotty's I'd read and liked.

As for "I, Robot", we're not wasting the money. Joel said it best: "It's one of those movies where you watch the ad, and you know how the movie was. As soon as you see the commercial is all explosions and crashes and fights, that's all the movie is. Why waste ten bucks on it when you can rent a cool Playstation 2 game that's got explosions and crashes and fights you can play for five bucks and get some chips and junk, too?"

He loved Spiderman 2. To tell the truth, so did I.

He's playing "Transformers" right now. He's mad because Mom can still kick his butt at "Godzilla: Monster Melee".

Melissa

The I, Robot article
"Harlan's literal retelling of a collection of short stories didn't make for an exciting movie," Rothman says.

This tells me two things:

1) Rothman's never read Harlan's script. It is not a "literal retelling" of Asimov's book at all. As Isaac noted in his introduction to Harlan's script, Harlan kept to the spirit of the story, not the plots of several different yarns.

2) Rothman is trying the same crapola we saw from Roddenbury and company, in the attempts to claim credit for Harlan's "City on the Edge of Forever" script. It boils down to, "Wonderful writer, but he just doesn't know how to write for the medium." And, as Harlan noted in his delightfully acidic essay in the White Wolf edition of the script, the charge doesn't hold water. Harlan's won four WGA awards for best script. Has anyone else ever matched that total?

Okay, I'm preaching to the choir here, but, Jesus von Jesus, don't these guys ever learn anything _new?_ I realize they can't just say, "We preferred to go in a different direction." Harlan's script is so well-known, so widely available, that they can't ignore it. They feel like they have to cut it off at the (figuratively speaking) knees, because interviewers are going to bring it up. But the same old drivel? Again? No wonder Hollywood so rarely generates new ideas. They can't even come up with new attacks.

Ah, well, it's not like the papers are doing any better. Contrary to the USA Today piece, Deckerd does not commit suicide at the end of Philip K. Dick's "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?" He doesn't even die.

HE name-drop in CNN 'i robot' article
FYI,
HE is briefly name-dropped in a CNN "Eye on entertainment" article about the robot film (http://www.cnn.com/2004/SHOWBIZ/07/14/eye.ent.scifi/index.html). I was happy to see HE acknowledged as a writer who places "humanity over technology", and to see his name dropped, unfortunately no mention was made of the screenplay. I'll never forget seeing the trailer for this film for the first time, my stomach hitting the floor with a splat when I realized that the schlock-o-the-week that they were shoving at me was somehow being peddled with an Asimov title. Very disappointed that the HE screenplay seems even farther from any hope of production in light of this junk. Yuck. Go see F-9/11 instead.
-Jim

Just making conversation. . .
"Ontario is not Ultima Thule."

Sometimes I wonder.

" You're not in the fuckin' Gulag with a home-made crystal radio secreted under your pillow."

Funny you should mention that acutally. . .

Response from a San Francisco native:

>Here is a question: What the fuck is wrong with San Francisco?

Nothing that you can't fix, Frankie, so try running for mayor. We've had worse. Which could account for the problems you cite.


>Here you have the enclave for progressive, radical politics, but at the same time the city has these outragious [sic] rents,

It's a small, beautiful city and everyone wants to move there. Big demand and small supply mean outrageous rents. Despite its best efforts SF cannot opt out of the laws of the market.


>huge homeless population, that are treated like refuse,

Welcome to urban America. It's not as if SF politicos haven't done their best to protect the homeless from such barbarous measures as might deny them their god-given right to shit in the streets and harass little old ladies. Maybe that's why they gravitate to fog city. See also: Santa Monica and Venice.


>and cops that make the Gestapo flinch.

San Francisco tradition. Maybe if the sons and daughters of the enlightened bourgeoisie decided to join the ranks things would change, but I'm not holding my breath in antcipation of a huge rush from from Cal to the SFPD.


>With all those lefties in once place, why isn't there better activist tendencies there?

Because they're all preoccupied with crimes against grammar.


>This is why I don't like liberals much.

We're not too keen on you either.


>So, once again I ask, through wind burnt lips--What the fuck is wrong Frisco?

That sound you hear is an internet bitch-slapping for use of the forbidden "Frisco".

Todd:

Futurama was truly underrated and sadly remains somewhat ignored within the SF genre. Somehow humour and rocketship fuel don't seem to mix well, I guess. Would go some distance to explain why Sheckley and Malzberg don't get their do.

Methinks those who can fuse funny to future are uniquely skilled. Either that, or geeks have no sense of humour. When I think of those who ponderously waste their lives making that idiocy known as "Star Trek" into a mainstream representation of the genre, in light of those who've done the genre better service...

Leads me to my one complaint about M. Ellison: No collection of his works has contained humour as its main theme. Damn shame to that.

Anyhow, completely disagree. Yes, have seen the episode mentioned, but still find "Roswell" and "Godfella" funnier and more pointed. In "Godfella" I see real poignancy to Bender unintentionally shepherding a miniscule species to its doom, then trying to sort out the mistakes created in good intentions, and it's made even better by not forswearing the irony and broad humour that can be used. A very deftly handled script, which never gets maudlin or preachy.

As for "Roswell", it's simply a great little time travel tale; Fry's paradox of existence providing a great joke alongside Zoidberg's literal nature and complete ignorance of his situation in the hands of the military brings down the house for me. I love the bit with the good doctor asking the President if Truman is hitting on him. The visual image of Farnsworth in a zoot suit alongside Leela's poodle skirt: just great stuff.

Zapp Brannigan -- "Amazon Women In The Mood", after much Snoo-Snoo: "Stop! The spirit is willing, but the flesh is spongy and bruised!"

Scott, proud owner of a Squishy Brain Slug.

Harlan, short, but nice comments in the USA Today story. Too bad Asimov's daughter is cheerleading this film. I know you probably love the girl, but she needs a good talking to.

That fucking Roth guy needs his knees broke.

--------------

Here is a question: What the fuck is wrong with San Francisco? Here you have the enclave for progressive, radical politics, but at the same time the city has these outragious rents, huge homeless population, that are treated like refuse, and cops that make the Gestapo flinch. With all those lefties in once place, why isn't there better activist tendencies there?

This is why I don't like liberals much. So, once again I ask, through wind burnt lips--What the fuck is wrong Frisco?

Now back to your I Robot circle jerk.

Comics on the net.
www.comics.com have quite a large selection of stuff that might be of interest, if you haven't tried that site already.

Comic book webs
Can anyone and all direct me to some of the better comicbook related webs? I am working on some stuff and would like to narrow my focus a tad. Where do you guys congregate for your comicbook fix?

Thanks.

Heather

I suspect Tom Rothman is daunted by Harlan's vocabulary and the epic scope of the screenplay. This is, after all, the man whose studio brought us that recent intellectual masterwork, "Garfield: the Movie".

Perhaps it's just me - and I never had the pleasure of meeting Isaac Asimov, so it's hard for me to put into context - but with all of the written words, everything he put to page regarding the subject of robots, all of the dramatic tales he told, is it possible that maybe...

just maybe...

perhaps...

given his interest in robotics and humanity...

if he'd WANTED to write a tale about robots running amuck in massive numbers against mankind that he WOULD HAVE?

Nah. That's just crazy talk...

"Harlan's literal retelling of a collection of short stories didn't make for an exciting movie," Rothman says.

Now, now. This Tom Rothman is obviously using the word exciting to mean "to produce a magnetic field" as in excite a dynamo. He was by no means talking about compelling, emotional, engaging, stimulating work. But he is correct that the screenplay cannot produce a magnetic field.

He's chairman of 20th Century Fox. He knows what he's talking about. He's smarter than all of our toes put together. And that's a lot of toes.

>The interviewer was Ms. Neda Ulaby, a very nice woman.

I've been wondering how that was spelled. Probably my favorite NPR reporter name. Alongside the Thai woman whose moniker I won't even try to reproduce here. And Syliva Poggioli, just because I love the way she draws it out.

No, I do NOT have too much time on my hands.

Scott, though I commend your appreciation of Futurama, I must advise everyone that the best Futurama episode in its sadly short run is not yet available on DVD:

Aired during it's final season (if you can call all those spotty airings a 'season') was an episode called Jurassic Bark, which should have been called A Boy And His Dog.

The final 30 seconds showing Fry's dog as he waits loyally for his master to return to him might be the only time in the history of Matt Groening cartoons that the viewer will break into tears.

One of my favorite moments in television history.

-TODD

Ah nuts - I'm really sorry Harlan. I can't believe I missed it, but I must've. Many inadequate apologies for pestering.

Beating a red-faced retreat into the archives,
Elijah

(to the recommended regulars: I'll throw a query out when I've got a better handle on what I missed. too embarassed to risk another question o' ignorance right off the bat.)

I'm with you ATC: I did not appreciate how the typist of the USA Today article reduced Harlan to the loyal opposition.

Mark

This seems to be the link to the USA Today story on I, Robot:
http://www.usatoday.com/life/movies/news/2004-07-15-sci-fi-main_x.htm

Adam,

Yeah Roth's comment chilled me too. This is a guy who decides what gets made and this is what he thinks we want.

Most of the reviews I read so far seem to have seperated the book form the movie. Only USA Today and Ebert have referred to Harlan's screenplay. At least the reviewers are doing their homework.

Adam,

Yeah Roth's comment chilled me too. This is a guy who decides what gets made and this is what he thinks we want.

Most of the reviews I read so far seem to have seperated the book form the movie. Only USA Today and Ebert have referred to Harlan's screenplay. At least the reviewers are doing their homework.

USA TODAY article
Especially irritating was the comment by the studio head, to the effect that Harlan's screenplay wouldn't have worked as a movie. (Sure. No explosions.)

Noting that Roger Ebert mentions Harlan's screenplay in his own (negative) review of the Proyas I, ROBOT; he doesn't seem to have read Harlan's screenplay himself, but he does take pains to separate it from the one used for the film.

Dorie and Patchouli
Thank you, Dorie. Finally, someone who agrees with me and my wife. I know it's not just SF fans. My wife and I found this out when we attended a Renaissance Festival. Even outside, the stench was nigh unbearable.

James

Best wishes for the surgery next week--make sure they shine the light of a red sun down on you, so you don't break the vitrector...

ELIJAH:

Oh, if THAT'S what you're talking about, I already answered it; not only to you, personally, back when you asked it (how did you manage to miss it? are you just not paying attention?)...but in general, as I said in my reply to your query, some while ago, in detail and exhaustively. I urged you to go to the archives or to ask for help from the regulars here. But no matter how much you nuhdz me, I'm not going to continue answering over and over and over, every primary-level question asked by every querulous latecomer. And that's the name'a THAT tune. Finis.

STEVE EVIL: Ontario is not Ultima Thule. You're not in the fuckin' Gulag with a home-made crystal radio secreted under your pillow. Unless you live far beneath the mantle of the Earth, you get the radio broadcasts of NPR via American stations that leak over from New York. As for getting tomorrow's USA TODAY, go to a newsstand nearby that handles "furrin" newspapers. USA TODAY is omnipresent. I'm sure it's available to you. If not, ask an American friend to buy an extra copy and ship it to you. Or read it online. Geez Louise! You guys...!

Harlan

Gary Paulsen and others
Sort of threw me to see Gary Paulsen's name virtually alongside Fred Pohl's, not least because I'd just spoken to Pohl (albeit very briefly, setting up an interview about his new HeeChee book). Mayhap Paulsen has confused "Harlequin" with another story. He's a very prolific writer, heaven knows. I interviewed him a few times. The guy's had a hard life, particularly in childhood, being brought up by alcoholics in a very rural area. Paulsen learned all that woodcraft in his books the hard way.

But Harlan, your remarks on not remembering Paulsen ever editing you touched a memory or two here. I've occasionally had something edited by one person, only to see another person credited. The editor "of record" as it were.

Back when I was writing horror comics for TSR, everything I did was edited by Steve Gerber (whose new title, "Hard Time," I recommend highly). Six stories in all. And when they appeared in print, Steve's name never appeared on them. Instead, Flint Dille's name did. Now I've nothing against Flint, but I never spoke to him, never even met him until long after the last one appeared. My edited manuscripts confirmed my experience, with the "editor: S.G." under my name.

This happens a lot. I once had a conversation with Virginia Kidd where she suggested I put together an anthology on a particular theme. She wanted to sell it as edited by "Big Name Author and Alex Krislov." Just a way of selling it. I demurred--not because I thought it unusual, but because I simply didn't feel the need to advance myself in that manner.

I know I'm not telling you anything you don't already know here. But I suspect most people don't realize how misleading the "edited by" credit can be.

For all who are foreign, to themselves, each other, or to existence in general:

NPR is available to you if you have Windows Media Player, the upgraded 9 version (Windows 98 or more recent OS). Click on the "RADIO" message, and a NPR link should show up on the screen.

Weekend Sunday edition starts at 14:00 EST Sunday, or 2 pm for those who prefer people time. Go to the NPR website or use the link through the Media player ON Sunday (unlike CBC International, NPR doesn't post the lineup until just prior to broadcast). There gives you the order of broadcast.

If you miss the interview, no biggy. Simply keep the NPR site in your Favorites scroll down menu, and go to the site later the following week. The audio is archived for your listening pleasure, 24-7.

I now leave to watch Futurama, Vol. 3: "Tales of Interest, Vol. II", "Roswell That Ends Well" (the best episode in the series run), and "Godfella" (almost as good).

This post was brought to you by Glagnar's Human Rinds: It's a buncha muncha cruncha human!

Scott, who dances like a monkey.

INterviews. . .
MR. Ellison;

Any way for us foreigners to aquire the gist of these interviews/articles? We get everything second hand up here.

Is there any hope for the future?

-Steve E.

THIS JUST IN:

The NPR interview is scheduled to run Sunday on Weekend Edition. I'm told there will be a web edition, as well. The interviewer was Ms. Neda Ulaby, a very nice woman. Arts Fest is the title of the section. I don't know at what hour.

Harlan

Harlan,

I believe Elijah is referring to my post and your decision to not comment about knowing a story’s ending when you start. For myself, I completely understand if you don’t want to revisit a question someone else may have asked you (perhaps many times) in the past. The question wasn’t so much directed at you per se, as it was at writers on the board in general. Sort of a conversation starter.

Other than the question I asked last month (which you answered, thank you), I can’t think of anything writing- related that I’d have to ask specifically to you. A question such as “is there any genre, media, format or venue that you haven’t yet written in but would like to try?” would be thrown out to anyone who feels like responding. For myself, maybe on day, I’ll try my hand at a TV script. I can think of a few shows in recent years that could’ve done with better writing.

On another note, a few years ago, I had problems with an editor who really shouldn’t have been an editor (nice person, otherwise). Fortunately, I was able to restore my articles to their original form before they were published; but at the time I’d told myself that they insisted on publishing the article with the “improvements” made, I’d replace my name with “Cordwainer Snerd.” A reference, of course, to both your pseudonym and Mortimer Snerd.

Like I said, I never had to do that, but I hope that if it’d been necessary, you’d have appreciated the slight homage.

I wonder how many people would’ve gotten both references?

Slightly related to that, I keep waiting for the moment when I can emulate Gaspar in “Paladin” and throw someone’s cigar or cigarette butt back in their car when I’m crossing the street. Trouble is, they always toss them out when I’m in the car behind them. Doesn’t seem wise to do it when their car would be in front of mine and thus blocking my escape.

Speaking of “I Robot”, two words come to mind when I think of both that title and “I, Claudius”

You Jane.

Rick.

I wouldn't worry about missing the interview. NPR archives all audio segments for online listeners, so it's easy to get the file needed at a later date. I'd be curious to know which NPR journalist did the interview, so I could target the individual show.

Things go well here, with the small exception of a youngest daughter's annoying repeated requests for a GIR dog and the kids howls of laughter at Scotty's spot-on imitation of Zim bellowing "O-bey me!!!".

Love to all, Melissa

Hey, Harlan: this might be moot by the time you read it, but do you know if NPR was planning to air the interview on Morning Edition or on All Things Considered? Or perhaps another NPR show?

At any rate, I'll keep my ears pricked up for it.

BTW, family note: my husband is MOST upset about the new I-Robot. He's been ranting about it for weeks. "They should have produced Harlan's script" has been heard out of his mouth several times in several conversations. While I enjoyed it, he REALLY enjoyed it. Though the kids have expressed some interest in the new movie, my husband refuses to spend our money on it. In fact, he pointed them to the original Asimov stories and to your screenplay. Let's hope they might actually pick one of them up and read it between Sonic comicbooks, Goosebumps, and Captain Underpants.

ELIJAH: Damned if I can make heads or tails of your post. You're too obscurely referential for my poor memory to grasp a meaning, much less a context. I have no idea to which Rick you're refering, nor a glimmer of a recollection which response to whatever query. Sorry.

TO ALL: Since you've caught the I,ROBOT reference in The New York Times, I suppose I should mention (and put you on the alert, if you're so inclined to be interested) that I've given extensive interviews via telecon, last week and the week before, to USA TODAY, National Public Radio, and assorted newspapers, on this topic. The USA Today piece should be in tomorrow's paper, I have no idea on what show, nor on what day, NPR will air my long interview about me'n'Isaac ... but it oughtta be today or tomorrow, since the movie open wide tomorrow, Friday. The NPR interviewer was going to send me an aircheck of the broadcast, but nothing's surfaced yet.

This has been a public service announcement.

Yr. pal, Harlan

James, I had to laugh about the patchouli thing....attended the North American Folk Alliance conference in Nashville last year and that was my only complaint about the whole deal. It's not just the science fiction fans.

Why would anyone want to smell like that? Patchouli isn't even nice on someone who HAS bathed!!!

quick bits
Harlan:
I've no desire to be a niggling and tedius pest, but reading your response to Rick's query left me wondering if you've given any thought to my question from early April. (very briefly: "what the why was") At one time it sounded as though you had a response in mind, and I just wanted to let you know that if you inclined to write it, I'm as interested in reading it as I ever was. It should go without saying, though, that I know you're busy, so no worries if you don't get around to it.


Steve J and Brian Siano:
Just a quick update regarding G.E.B. - I was making pretty steady progress until page 140 or so, reading a couple times a week. I get hung up on the "--p--q----" examples... they were plain enough initially, but they've progressed to a point where I'm having trouble sussing out just what he's trying to say with them. Or rather, I read his explainations and think I understand them until I fail to successfully apply them to the "--p--q----" examples he provides. Drove me nuts. Anyway, I put it down for awhile, will likely pick it up again soon.

Adam-Troy and Dragon*Con
Adam-Troy: that's too bad you won't be able to make it down her for Dragon*Con. You'd make an excellent addition to the rather impressive cadre of writer's on tap this year. You are wise to deduce the meaning of your wife's doublespeak. I know from my own experience, when a spouse says she doesn't mind, she really does. Dragon*Con is rather large and crowded and can be a bit overwhelming to someone not used to it. I'm not a big fan of crowds myself, especially crowds composed of people who think that hosing themselves down in patchouli oil is substitute for bathing, but I've never been to anything smaller. I've been wanting to try a new smaller con in the Atlanta area called Sci-Fi Summer (www.sfscon.org), held each June. I'm sur they'd love to have you. Think about it.

James

I, Robot
Meanwhile: noted blurb whore Joel Siegel, who doesn't even have the excuse of not knowing Asimov's original stories -- who indeed, writes that he devoured them as a kid -- burbles that the movie, with its army of rampaging mechanoids, absolutely "captures their spirit."

Urrr.

Like a movie about a murderous demon horse captures the spirit of Walter Farley.

As comforts go, this is definitely a fart in a hurricane, but I should report that the local fan group is rejecting the film sight unseen, citing Harlan's neglected screenplay and the actual film's mistreatment of Asimov. (Means little, in the scheme of things. But it's there. Shrug.)

Harlan's I, Robot script mentioned in New York Times
I hate using up my one-message quota on one-shot items, but here goes. The New York Times, in an article about robots, Asimov, and the new movie, includes the following paragraph:

"The movie, as if troubled by its innocent origins, even tries to leave the book behind. (A more faithful adaptation is in a published screenplay for "I, Robot," written in the 1970's by Harlan Ellison.) Any similarities that remain are on the surface.
"

The article's datelined July 15th. The URL is
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/15/movies/15NOTE.html

Will the Real I, Robot, please stand up?
Sitting on my big den bookshelf, side-by-side-by-side, are three of my prized possessions: An autographed 1963 Science Fiction Book Club edition of Isaac Azimov's "I, Robot," a copy of Harlan's "I, Robot the Illustrated Screenplay" (which I really _must_ get autographed someday, and a bound volume of the first 15 issues of Warren Publications "Creepy" magazine, featuring adaptations of Eando Binder's Adam Link tales (the first of which is, of course, _also_ entitled "I, Robot." When this new film of the same name is released (or did it escape?), I think I'll take the time I would nornally be sitting in a movie theater and re-read all of this marvelous literature. I think my own mind's eye, and the illustrative works of Mark Zug and Joe Orlando will be far more stimulating than the assault on the senses I've seen in recent previews. But, to each his own. As far as "I,Robot" is concerned, these versions are mine.

Ich bin ein Berliner.

bag of sausages.....heeheeeeeeee

OFFICIAL APOLOGY, etc.
----------------------------------------------------------

I've always suspected that Harlan is merely the The Beast of Exmoor in disguise.

Now get in your jammies, Harlan, and go straight to bed. No dinner for you.

I am a doughnut.

DC

Hide the good china!
Harlan, Susan...consider this your fair warning. Ingersoll will be in Los Angeles as of Thursday or Friday.

I wish I was able to travel and see your bright shining faces, but it's not gonna happen this year.

But we'll always have...ah...Columbus?

Man, I've got to get out more.

Love to you both. If you see Bob while he's in your neck of the woods, try to return him to Ohio as undamaged as possible.

Tony

Shatner's second album.

You all understand that we deserve this, right?

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story?id=6235555&pageid=rs.NewsArchive&pageregion=mainRegion&rnd=1089847067834&has-player=true&version=6.0.11.847

Of course, he will be nominated for a Grammy.

DeGuere gets no money?

Damn, he got fucked in the ass...

OFFICIAL APOLOGY --- ABJECT RETRACTION ---- CRAVEN CRAWL!!

Within the past half hour, I received a phone call from my former boss at The Twilight Zone, the estimable and sage Phil DeGuere, voicing his heartbreak, his bewilderment, his deep and justifiably deserved umbrage, at an innocent (but nonetheless hurtful) dollop of misinformation I inadvertently promulgated at this venue. Thus, I come before you, humbled and contrite, tugging my forelock in abnegation, seeking your (and the fine Mr. DeGuere's) forgiveness for my infraction.

Fer crissakes, the man was CRYING!

Mr. DeGuere, a gentleman and a staunch friend during my time in his employ at TZ, now a ramrod at CBS's 10-year-hit show JAG, does indeed own the production entity Persistence of Vision, but does NOT -- according to Mr. DeGuere's telephonic assurances -- does NOT -- contrary to my recent assertion here -- does NOT get a cent from the sales of the forthcoming Image Entertainment boxed set of 1985-era Twilight Zone shows on which we worked for CBS. Not a sou. Not a farthing. Not a kopek. Not a grumpkin.

Not only did I misspell his name (BAD Harlan! BAD Harlan!), but I posited that everyone associated with the project was getting a taste, save those who were appearing gratis on the collection as oncamera commentators, which I thought was wildly fucking unfair and cheesy; and I lumped the impeccable DeGuere in with the Image bloodsucker mooches (schnorers we call 'em in Yiddish) without having exhaustive facts at hand.

And so, as I promised Phil: I crawl, I slither, I offer oblation at his altar, in abject humility for my uninformed act of terminal stupidity. I am a bag of sausages. An anvil of ignorance. Coproliths on the road to wisdom. Unworthy, am I!

I will shrive myself in hopes it restores Mr. DeGuere's affection for my humble, despondent self.

Selah.

Harlan Ellison, the meek and mild

Sigh
...and then I looked at the current price of flights to the US and decided heavy-heartedly that I can't afford $1000 + accomodation + daily costs of living.

Oh well.

Harlan: There's a new website dedicated to Robert E. Howard. At this point, I know very little of his work, but have been impressed with his energy and imagination in the handful of stories I've read. I'm curious - what's your opinion of Howard? Is he a writer who inspired you?

Respectfully,
Mark

I don't know if you've got the same tv ads for this back pain medication in the US, but from Canada, let me tell you -- the movie looks like it should be called _I, Robaxicet._

Cheers, Jon

Frank Church writes, "How fucking cheesy is I'Robot? The robots look like K-Mart blue light specials. And, in fact, it is now reported that Proyas stole the robot's look from a recent Bjork video."

Funny you should say that. The robots in the Bjork video were created by Chris Cunningham, and they were variations on designs he did for Kubrick when he was prepping _A.I._. Not much new under the sun, eh? (Either that, or everything springs from Stanley Kubrick.)

At least the movie's put Asimov's collection on the best-seller list again. But I'm not rushing out to see it.

Dragon*Con
Financial reversals have made a trip to Worldcon impossible, so I thought Dragon*Con a possible substitute...but the wife is a little overwhelmed by the epic size of that convention and has declined. (She did the standard thing wives do, of course, which is say, "You can go by yourself if you want to, I won't mind," which is to say she would mind, which doesn't matter all that much because I'd mind too. Thus we forge our chains.)

Dragon Con
I should note that I *live* in Atlanta and anyone seeking advice on places to eat, travel, etc. is welcome to e-mail me.

I have little desire to invest any money in attending Dragon Con as I generally like Harlan a lot more when he's relaxed, doesn't have myriad demands on his time or attention, and doesn't feel like he has to be "on" for thousands of fans. However, if some of you want to meet for a bite somewhere, even in the lobby (the philly cheese steak IS pretty good), I'm game - just set it up.

Food and Dragon*Con
Sorry for the seeming non-sequitur, but I'm trying to abide by Rick's one post a day edict. Harlan, I was wondering, since you recommended a good place to eat at the Marriott, if you had ever sampled the Varsity and what you thought of it.

Steve Dooner: Hate to disappoint you, Steve, but Harlan's coming to Dragon*Con, which is always, always, always, held Labor Day Weekend, the same weekend as WorldCon. That's great that you can be there, though. I'd love to go myself someday.

James

To Chuck Young
Chuck,

I believe the piece you refer to is 'Repent, Harlequin!' Said the Ticktockman, and according to the site's bibliography database (link above - "his work") it is indeed collected in The Essential Ellison.

(I love the simple questions...)

Peggy

Showdown

Alright, Ellison...

I think I've shown a LOT of patience.
Now I'm going to tell you where it's at, see?
Somebody told me that it's just a waste of my time.
That you don't care what ANY of us have to say about this little matter.
But that's OK, see? I'm going to say it, ANYWAY.
Something no one else in this room has the GUTS to say.
You've had this coming for a LONG time!

I'm goddam proud of you, man! KEEP that tread spinnin'! Way ta fuckin' go! You're gonna get that weight exactly where you want it.

(Shit, I can hear the Six Million Dollar Man theme)

(N' if it should ever come to yer dislikin' y'might want t'be switchin' to a cycle)

Harlan,

Are you planning to come out to Noreascon for the Hugos this year?

Boston's got some great Italian restaurants in its Northend, and its got a pretty good Chinatown too. There are some fanatstic places for Vietnamese soup, and some great seafood possibilities--ever eat black squid ink pasta topped with ground squid? Or if you like meat, perhaps a nice stuffed braciole?

Well?

Steve Dooner

Hi all,

Found the site just now and have a quick question. I am currently about 1/3 the way through the "Essential Ellison" and am enjoying it immensely. I even showed a portion of one article to my wife since I was so impressed - and in agreement - with your view on the matter. My question relates to a short story you wrote and which I read so very long ago that I no longer remember the title. Set in the near future it involves a man who is a jokester and prankster and tries to pull other people out of their drudgery using his public pranks as motivation. I can't remember the title but I enjoyed it enough that it still surfaces in my mind from time to time over a decade later and I am hoping I'll run into it within the aforementioned book.

Thank you for continuing to "fire the pistol",
Chuck

The future is folly...the past jello..
Thank you Sir Ellison for the welcome, and cindy I am a bi/tea drinker...I enjoy it both ways.Depending on my state of madness and anger at this world,I will be civil.Now a joke from a ZEN master:
In bed together are a chicken and an egg,the chicken is smoking a cigarette with a broad smile on his face.The egg is very unhappy and she turns to the chicken and says.."well.. now we know the answer to THAT question !"Peace..ziggy

G. Paulsen
Mr. Ellison,

Your remarks are comforting. Mr. Paulsen is a talented writer. While children's books aren't very satisfying to me, I must say that his book, "The Monument," is quite touching. Despite my skepticism, I really didn't want to accuse my friend of being a liar. He is, I believe, a good man. Even if he never met you, he considers you his teacher; not such a bad thing, I think. Merely allow me to say (in a moment of blatant hero worship) that "Jeffty is Five," even after numerous readings, continues to touch me. When I was in college, I desperately wanted to make a short film of it.

MR> BOUGHN:

Yes, I do remember Gary Paulsen's name. Dimly and distantly. But I have no recollection of his having edited me. Not impossible, however. But ... since Frederik Pohl was the editor to whom I sold the story in 1964, if Mr. Paulsen's remembrance is true, it would've had to've been some sort of anthology reprint on which he worked. But as for "editing" the story, well, it's been set in amber since soon after the magazine 1st publication. I've changed a word here, a typeface there, in more than forty years, but NO ONE has "edited" that story.

Harlan Ellison

Gary Paulsen
Sorry to post more than one today, but I forgot to mention it in the first post. I am friends with Gary Paulsen, a children's writer who lives not far from me. He tells me that he was once your editor; he claims that he even edited "Repent, Harlequin!" True? He tells me that you taught him to be prolific. Want to believe him, but....

Big Honking Movie Memorabilia Auction

This isn't earth-shaking or of great political/societal import, but I thought Webderlanders might get a vicarious thrill here:

http://pages.liveauctions.ebay.com/catalogs/catalog6069.html

For instance, under the Movie Memorabilia link, check out the original Flash Gordon stuff! Costumes and posters and props and lobby cards! A Bela Lugosi lifemask! Stuff from Errol Flynn’s “The Adventures of Robin Hood!” The original Ten Commandments! (The prop from the 1950’s movie, that is – not the *actual* Moses-held stone originals, which would probably be worth a lot more, but hey, whattaya gonna do...?) 1940’s era ray guns! And a whole lot more!

-- Jon

Glass Teat
'tis a shame the Edgeworks project failed...I was ecstatic to finally get NEW copies of your older work. I was especially looking forward to the volume with the "Glass Teat" books. I have paperback copies of them that a friend gave me, but nothing beats a good, solid hardcover. Incidentally, congrats on shattering a hypodermic needle. I had to go to the hospital today (my blood sugar dropped to almost nothing and I collapsed at work), and I cringed when the paramedic was digging around my hand trying to put the IV in....

BARNEY: We have it. But thank you for asking.

Harlan

Susan: But the real question is whether Harlan failed the eye exam due to inadvertantly using his X-ray vision to read the eye chart in the next room. On the other hand, he has already done his hitch in the Army, which is what the aforementioned got Clark Kent out of.

Harlan: A Philadelphia quality cheesesteak in Atlanta sounds just wrong to NC-native and former Philly resident me. Basically, my reaction is similar to yours when I told you in Ann Arbor that I was taking you to a world-class deli for lunch. But then, you did admit after lunch that I was right and it was world-class, so I'll have to try the cheesesteak next time I'm in Atlanta.

Btw, don't know if anyone else is tracking Jeopardy!'s current champion, Ken Jennings. Currently up to 29 straight wins (they changed the rules this year to remove the five time champion limit) and just shy of a million bucks, it turns out that he's a comics fan. Asked him about something on the J! message board, and it turned out that he played in a quiz bowl tournament I helped out back in the late 90s and recalled my Suicide Squid t-shirt, an in-joke for Usenet's rec.arts.comics newsgroups which he'd posted to. Needless to say, in the last week he's run a Marvel Comics Heroes category and a Comic Strips category, in addition to not only getting a Superman related Final J! but drawing the S-symbol under his answer.

Double points to Floyd, that was good :)

The needle breaks
I have to wonder what they were expecting to happen. They are going to try and take the humor from his vision.

I'll be here all week. Please tip your waitress.

Floyd

Huzzah!
And I thought I'd have to wait till Debbie returned to the forums to learn where the good eats are in Atlanta. (Please note that residing in northern Canada only increases one's appetite for large American sandwiches.) Harlan, please tell me the coffee's decent.

Fellow con attendees, might I suggest we meet over at the other board under Debbie's Dragon*Con topic in the General forum? That way we can arrange a lunch meeting without stirring envy in the luckless non-attendees who pass through the pavilion.

Dreaming of the South,
D.

Weird Kryptonian Moment, Etc.

Ms. Susan,

Sounds perfectly appropriate that if t'were to happen to anyone, it should happen to HimsElf. Thank you for sharing that event.

RE: White Wolf Volume IV
(Eye-Vee for 4, not much of a tie-in, but there it is)

There was nothing quite like the experience of purchasing that book at one of Harlan's lectures, asking him to sign it, hear him exclaim, "Holy shit, they put it the binding upside down," then see him sign both front and back. You little Escher.

Best wishes to da bot' o' youze,

Forrester

Edgeworks
First, yes, it's not hard to find a copy of EDGEWORKS 4. A visit to http://www.abebooks.com reveals fully fourteen copies for sale at prices ranging from fifteen to seventy dollars. Buyers should read the book descriptions carefully in order to get either the most bang for their bucks, or the book in the best condition available.

Harlan: Good luck with the vitrectomy.

Susan, regarding the story of the needle: Ew, gross.

browsing and pasting away the hours...
*** Harlan ***

Do you have a copy of "Det Tysta Ropet"? This is the Swedish - The Silent Scream aka. I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream. PRESSING Vänersborgs Boktryckeri AB, Vänersborg 1978.
ISBN #9172281790. This is that Sam J. Lundwall series.
Titles are;
1.] Det Tysta Ropet = The Silent Scream = I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream.
2.] Store Sam var min van = Big Sam Was My Friend
3.] Ogon av Damm = Eyes of Dust
4.] Mytens varld = World of Myth
5.] Ensamhetsvark = Lonelyache
6.] Drakdraparens drom = "Dream of the dragon slayer" = Delusion for a Dragon Slayer
7.] Vackra Maggie Penningblick = Pretty Maggie Moneyeyes

I’m NOT selling this as it was gifted to me from a friend BUT if you don’t have one, well, you should have the only copy on US shores. And I stuck all the extra information in on this and the subsequent links so Tim can just copy paste any tweaks he needs to make without me scrambling up and down the stairs.

*** Everybody else ***

Here are some new Harlan things I’ve just come across. I freely give permission to edit this if any of it’s wrong or tips any hands or is just too pro-Amazon…

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0727861050/qid=1089739934/sr=2-3/ref=sr_2_3/002-3469379-7048808

Children of the Streets by Harlan Ellison
192 pages - Severn House Publishers; (August 1, 2004) – ISBN #0727861050

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0743479890/ref=pd_rhf_f_1/002-3469379-7048808?v=glance&s=books&no=*&st=*

Strange Wine [Ibooks – October 1, 2004] ISBN#0743479890
As a trade paperback – 352 pages.

All this browsing brought this to my attention;

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/157453534X/qid=1089739934/sr=1-9/ref=sr_1_9/002-3469379-7048808?v=glance&s=books

Apparently Harlan does voice work for Terry Pratchett’s NIGHT WATCH. This was probably mentioned in a Rabbit Hole but I’ve fallen a little behind on this front. Ok, I also see voicework for Jupiter by Ben Bova, Demons by John Shirley and 3 study guides (Jeffty/ A Boy and His Dog / I Have No Mouth) in the Gale’s Short Stories for Students series [PDF format], all of which are “new” to me. Tim!!! All of this because I went looking for the Edgeworks Volume 4 combo to settle a question in my own mind. Namely, was there ever a trade paperback of volume 4? I’ve never seen one, which means nothing, but Amazon only lists the HC. So I’m GUESSING maybe just the HC for V4. At any rate, here’s the link if somebody still needs one;

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1565049632/qid=1089741516/sr=1-86/ref=sr_1_86/002-3469379-7048808?v=glance&s=books

I see the TPB of the screenplay of Harlan’s version of I, Robot has taken a 3 screen bump up on the Ellison/Amazon menu which I presume means a jog in sales. “Oh, hell yes!” Hope that translates into new printings. I hope that Preiss or whoever is on the tip with this.

- Barney

*** Susan *** As urrrp making as your description was, it's a sunny day compared to the description of the eye surgery I just Googled. Thanks!! - B.

Shelfspace, PA.

REPLIES TO BOUGHN, K., DRAGON*CON-ATTENDEES, & (!!!!!!!)

To H. TODD BOUGHN:

We actually did FOUR volumes in the uniform White Wolf double-book series. The 4th volume contained the long-out-of-print LOVE AIN'T NOTHING BUT SEX MISSPELLED and the only slightly less long-out-of-print THE BEAST THAT SHOUTED LOVE AT THE HEART OF THE WORLD collections. Gorgeous cover by John K. Snyder III, plus a long new introduction. It was released in November 1997, in hardcover, and sold out immediately. Shortly thereafter, as a result of technical problems--nothing rancorous--Stewart Wieck and his brother, who run White Wolf, were peaches with me--we parted ways. I believe there was, in fact, a trade paperback edition (same huge size as the hc) of volume 4 released after the separation; and I believe it also sold out. Then I started my own imprint, EDGEWORKS ABBEY, and I've been co-publishing with three or four other houses since then. Volume 5 would have been the long-awaited THE GLASS TEAT and THE OTHER GLASS TEAT books of tv essays, with a nifty Jill Bauman cover. It's in the chute, though, and I'll be getting around to it sooner rather than later. Perhaps with White Wolf, perhaps with someone else, but either way under the aegis of Edgeworks Abbey. I shouldn't think it would be too hard, however, to find a copy of Volume 4. Possibly one of the Webderlanders here can direct you to a source.

To RICK K.:

In response to your request that I "weigh-in" (185 today, ought to be 165, but I'm on the treadmill daily, so stop nagging) on the topic of Do You Know the Ending of a Story You're Writing When You Start It? pardon me for sounding perfunctory, kiddo, but this is an oat I've chewed at least four times over the course of years, here in this enclave. I choose not to do it yet again; but I suggest that all the answers you could ever want from me already exist here. Try the archived material, or beg nicely and one of the native inhabitants will dredge up the long essays already extant at this oasis.

RE: DRAGON*CON & WEBDERLAND DENIZENS:

In the lobby of the Atlanta Marriott, where Susan and I will be staying during the days and nights of the Dragon*Con in early September--there is a pleasant little garden cafe separated from the milling throng and the thronging millions by a low planter divider. This boite serves a not-particularly-innovative-but-nonetheless-creditable breakfast buffet BUT it also serves, throughout the day, a truly magnificent Philly Cheesesteak Sangwidge. Among the very best I've ever tasted, including in Philadelphia.

Now. Should it chance to pass that were Susan and I sitting in that li'l cafe, having a bite, and were denizens of this website ALSO there, should we be invited to join the meshbuchah (a Yiddish word, you could look it up), the glorious Susan and I might very well consider breaking bread and pinching claws for a brief nonce.

Yr. pal, Harlan

-------------------------AND NOW---------------------------------

A SPECIAL REPORT FROM WEBDERLAND'S OWN LOIS LANE,

SPECIAL REPORTER SUSAN ELLISON

ON A WEIRD KRYPTONIAN MOMENT, DATED YESTERDAY, 12 JULY 04:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Harlan is going in for a vitrectomy on his right eye next week. But before the Assil-Sinskey Institute will perform the surgery, they have to cover themselves with a "clean bill of health" from the patient's GP. Blood pressure test, X-rays, eye-ear-nose-throat checkup, EKG, the usual nuts and bolts. So we went in to see Harlan's long-time doctor, John Romm in Beverly Hills, and we spent an hour and a half with tests and checkups. Then the RN, Rhonda, a large and salty black lady who enjoys giving Harlan a hard time, took over from John to administer a tetanus shot and something called a pneumovac innoculation.

Needles are among my least favorite things, but for some reason they don't faze HE. He has a very high pain threshold, and he tells me he barely feels the sting as the needle penetrates. So Rhonda gets out her barrel and plunger, and she swabs his upper left arm muscle to make the injection, and she tries to grab a chunk of flesh between thumb and forefinger to alleviate the sting (as if he needed that courtesy), and she sticks the needle against that muscle, and she pushes his arm...and the whole needle just crumples. It doesn't just bend...it crumples. It breaks. It shatters. "I've never had a patient break a needle, in all my years," Rhonda says, awed. I couldn't believe I'd seen it happen. I WAS IMPRESSED! Very Superman. Very Sexy. The bad news: the nurse, after examining HE's arm and the shards of metal, brings out "The Piercer 3000." She drilled into him and through the wall next door. My hubby was very, very brave. Didn't scream like a girl. I love him...then in came another guy, and he stuck ANOTHER needle into Harlan's inside-elbow axial, and he proceeded to fill four large vials with lots of very dark blood!

Not a sound out of the Writer. I would've been in tears.

Susan

Edgeworks
I'm seconding H. Todd Boughn's question about the Edgeworks series (by the way, Mr. Boughn, four volumes were released, not three--I hope you can track numero quatro down). Is there someplace in Webderland that speaks to the current state of this project; do any of you folks know something about it; would Mr. Ellison care to comment? I'm not slobbering all Pavlovian over it, but I do think Edgeworks is a wonderful way to get the backlist out in peachy new hardcover editions that, all together, would look like a veritable Encyclopedia Ellisonica on a bookshelf, and so I'd really like to see it continue, particularly since the next one due out was both GLASS TEATs.

Cheers,

Paul

"If you could get away with killing somebody, would you do it?"

Sure.

The real question though is, "COULD you do it?"

on robots and killing
frank..it would really depend on who i was killing. actually i prefer the game of "if you could go back in time, who would you hit with a sack of doorknobs?"


rick...100 million dollar art movie? will smith is a very funny man.

To: Frank Church.
The Israelis do it all the time by classifying it as ‘Targeted Assassination ’ and we all know what a high moral high-ground they occupy :-)

C'mon Bob Denard, leave Harlan alone with that--I say buttfucked and imply that stuff all the time, and no one says that I am homophobic--At least, they better not. Joking is joking. In the realm of the funny, nothing is off limits. George Carlin taught us that. So, are you saying that the Eddie Murphy, Ed Norton, Ralph Cramdon buttfuck joke from Delirious is homophobic? Sure, hateful stuff is hateful stuff--but ya gotta lighten up, man. If you want to see full-on homophobia, go to the Ted Nugent site; where you see the real naked thing.

Just leave it be guy. Sheesh.

----------------

How fucking cheesy is I'Robot? The robots look like K-Mart blue light specials. And, in fact, it is now reported that Proyas stole the robot's look from a recent Bjork video.

Killer robots--how lame. I bet you are all ashamed now, for dissing AI. At least that is an interesting take on robots.

------------

Here's a moral question for the room: If you could get away with killing somebody, would you do it?

Speaking of "I, Robot", here's an interview with Will Smith about the film, in which he says he saw it as a "$100 million art film about relationships, prejudice and technology", and wanted to do something else than just another summer action film.

http://www.freep.com/entertainment/movies/will13_20040713.htm

That may have been the intent, but will the finished product have something of substance, or like a lot of summer blockbusters, be full of sound and fury, signifying nothing?

Addendum to yesterday's post. When I write on my computer, I use Power Writer, a software program I bought for myself last Christmas. It lets you move among composition, outline and notes frames without having to switch to separate files. I like that feature, since I don't have to keep multiple files open and/or refer to print-outs of character histories or plot points. It's more efficient that way. For older stories I used Works. Before that I used a Smith-Corona PWP 4500 plus word processor; and before that, the Commodore.

Rick

I learned to type two-finger on a Sears portable. Happy with Word now. Word Perfect 5.1 was the Word Processor of the Gods.

But I'm happy today. Yesterday, the Postal Service issued a stamp in honor of the great and one-and-only R. Buckminster Fuller. Inventor of the Geodesic Dome, comprehensive thinker, philosopher, engineer, Mr. Dymaxion, visionary, and one of the true originals of our age. (I got to meet him briefly about three months before he died.) A true inspiration.

http://www.usps.com/communications/news/stamps/2004/sr04_043.htm

To: Erik K.
Interesting to read your piece about ending stories and the ways to get them written.

Because I live way out in the sticks - in Northern Ireland - I found getting to grips with writing stories - both long and short - tended to be a subconscious expression of what I already had read by Fritz leiber, C. J. Cherryh, Iain M.. Banks, and Harlan Ellison, etc. This worked out comparatively well enough, but I felt it could be done better. After Googling for some information about the three-act-story form with respect to screenplay and story writing, I came across Dramatica 4.0 Pro. I find this to be a useful way to approach my current writing, and acts as an indicator about what has been and what needs to be done., with respect to whether the ending and precursor material is consistent with the initial intentions, or what would need attended to, if I want to go in another direction.

Microsoft Word 85/97/2000, etc. is about as good a word processing package as is going, and is very flexible, given some study of its capabilities. My only complaint is its lack of good compatibility between versions. Another solid performer is Textmaker, which is available for Windows, Linux, and FreeBSD, to give cross-platform compatibility. It’s also a good DTP package, unlike Word, and runs well on older laptops that have less than stunning resources.

I never used a typewriter for anything serious. Mostly because I’m a poor typist, and creating piles of scrap paper is wasteful. I was tempted once in London when I spotted an Immaculate Royal portable, like they used in the fifties, but thought about it too long, and it sold to someone else.

Dragon*Con
Gunther: I don't know about hotels, since the wife and I just drive down for the day, but Atlanta's transit system, MARTA, has a train that runs from Hartsfield Airport directly to the Hyatt, where Dragon*Con is held. You can get more info by going to http://www.dragoncon.org and clicking on Location/Travel. It has information about the host hotels and overflow hotels. For info on whether or not those host hotels are worth the price of admission, a good guide from people who go to Dragon*Con a lot and use the hotels can be found at http://groups.msn.com/dragonconrocks by clicking on Hotel Information, or go into the message boards and I think there is a thread regarding which hotels are the best/worst etc. Be sure to mention Dragon*Con when you're booking a room.

Hope this helps,

James

My intellectual debt to science fiction
As a sixteen year old schoolboy sitting my English 'o' grade examination in 1980 (unsure as to what the US equivalent is) I chose to answer the 'short story description' question with a precis of 'I have no mouth...' rather than anything I'd read in class. I got an A pass for that exam.
More sci-fi in British schools NOW

Dragon*Con
Man, I'd love to come to Dragon*Con. The one problem I foresee, however, is finding a place to stay; while I have friends in several parts of the USA, I don't have any in or near Atlanta.

So... does anyone have experience with this, and suggestions for a cheap-yet-not-too-crummy hotel? Or is that entirely blue-eyed?

Also, is there public transport in Atlanta, or will I need to rent a car?

Cluelessly yours, Gunther

In reference to I, ROBOT:

To quote Will Smith, "Oh, HELL No!"

As for Harlan's brilliant adaptation: "Oh, Hell YEAH!"

I won't even blow the buck at the video store to see it (Smith's version, Harlan, not yours--I'd pony up gold bars to see your vision of Asimov's dream).

Take Care.
Todd

Comment On My Previous Post

I was trying to cover a lot of turf yesterday in as little time as possible. Subsequently, I spotted some horrific gaffes straight out of Grammar 101. Too many even for ME.

Let's at least try and make this one work a little better: "The gay jokes were not meant to amuse but merely to make a point."

Bonne soiree, and remember, regardless of the gender you prefer, experience is the name every one gives to their mistakes

Hola!
Good evening, Harlan. I have been an admirer of your work (not fan, hate the implication of being a fanatic) since the halcyon days of high school (circa 1987). While a bit of a novice when it comes to the internet thing, I happily stumbled upon your website. I have a quick question: What happened with the White Wolf Ellison books? While I live in the sticks, I find it hard to believe they finished up with Volume 3 (the latest I've seen). While I have most of your work in paperback, I bought most of them at used-book stores (the only place I could find a lot of stuff). I prefer to buy new books, so that the author profits....

Inquirer


"Geezer" doesn't mean the same thing on that side of the pond....in parts of England and especially in Ireland, "geezer" just means "guy". As in "he's a brilliant geezer".

But "aging gent" is snotty, and "trekkie" is unforgivable.

>The image of the naive or the ignorant artist being willingly buttfucked by big business interests (or, to further enhance your completely subjective interpretation), commonly refered to as "The Man," is a metaphor. It is, in fact, a unisex metaphor.

In strictly physiological terms it's unisex. But if we were just talking nuts and, er, bolts, it wouldn't be a metaphor. To say someone takes it up the ass, in this context, is to say that he is a weakling, that he knuckles under to the stronger party. I think this traditionally falls into the same category as calling someone a fag. E.g., Jake to Joey in 'Raging Bull': "You throw a punch like you take it up the ass". By extension, certainly in Harlan's use of it, it equates being a "passive partner" with being a moral coward, unwilling to stand up for one's rights. I know this was not your intent, Harlan, and I can't claim to have taken offense at your words, but the very expression remains tainted with anti-gay bigotry.

I, Robot
I (gradually) read I, Robot, Harlan's version ... there are some obvious quirks (MS Word scan-and-replace could fix some; but not his "artichoke brains" comment*) foremost the word, PASSED, gets spelt as, PAST, consistently: I tried to imagine what the camera instructions would mean if he really meant PAST: -a most-curious angle-... there were a couple other minor, items:- the very last Calvin-recall of Lanning canning Edward, didn't fit quickly:- It must have been -after- she found Robbie working in the factory,- was the only situation that makes sense....

Overall I enjoyed the story Asimov liked to tell....

I think Harlan's version should be done, too,... I mean, How many, I's, are there?... I know one, but so does every-one-else ... I think it would be inspired for every good screenwriter to do a version of I, Robot, and, they all get produced....

Thanks: I'd never read any of the I, Robot,-type stories, though I read of Daneel and Vors Denabli and all the FOUNDATION TRILOGY and the QUA-trilogy, and the Bear-Benford-Brin-sub-seque-trilogy [=septilogy] ... I even got an inspiration that these would make a good story ... well, I'm a mathematician from UCSD-1973, and I do hard-science-fiction screenplays ... how hard? My Professors' Spring Break, trilogy, is out-of-this-world,-universe-cosmos and back, and out again, and all their university friends chase them in the third; all talking hard science along the way, explaining everything like nobody ever knew how the cosmos really works ... lots of fun but I digress**. The best way to do FOUNDATION is in Hari Seldon's final years: the garden grounds setting, beginning with some Hawaiian-lore yodeling [one piece in particular, would be ideal] ... so like a Stranger In Paradise music-theme....

/rkp

* (And, I was gladdened to read where Harlan, finally, explained his "artichoke brains" comment ... about the last act, -if there is such a thing in a screenplay,- (Harlan's) Bratenahl refers to Susan Calvin, saying he's been trying to unpeel her secrets that she's like an artichoke ... now WE UNDERSTAND his comment, about Shapiro: Harlan was trying to unpeel Bob's secret brains.)

** (I also notice, Harlan spent almost a year on, I, Robot,... that's about my speed, too: 9 months on a good screenplay of any length, is about right ((I do 100-180-240-minute screenplays in the hard science fiction, genre)).)

To Nick, about the Inquirer
Nick is referring to two stories, June 11 and 13, at The Inquirer's website. When the reported the AOL settlement, the story referred to Harlan as a "trekkie" in the headline and in the story itself. Harlan objected, and they responded with a juvenile retraction calling him a "geezer" instead. Oh dear.

This kind of schoolyard trash talk probably does more damage to the Inquirer's image than anybody else's. They use a colloquial term ("trekkie") without understanding what it means. Frankly, I was struck much more by the malicious references to age in both of these stories. Tamlin Magee referred to Ellison as “the aging gent” and Mike Magee addresses him as “geezer.” Ellison may be one of about six people in southern California who does not lie about his age. The notion that survival and the advent of white hairs about the temples are grounds for ridicule is a bit juvenile but, after two sentences of the Magees's insightful prose, there ought not be any surprise there.

When children poke fun of the elderly, it’s not the latter who looks shamed.

Most Sincerely,
33 years old and aiming to be around for the Tricentennial

Inquirer
What in hell was up with those assholes at "the inquirer" being so disrespectful to Harlan? Did anyone see that nonsense where they called him a "trekkie"...and then a "geezer"? What the hell was that all about? I've never visited their site before (and won't again), is that just their schtick? Are they disrespecful to everyone?

i usually have an idea how a story ends when i start it. generally it doesn't end the way i intended though. the story decides what kind of ending it wants.

Some thoughts
Some thoughts.
I’m curious whether Harlan (and any other writer who cares to weigh in) tends to start a story knowing how it’s going to end; or starts with an idea and discovers where the story is ultimately going via the process of writing it. Or both. For myself, I do both. With the novella I finished last week, I knew from day one how it would end. On the other hand, I have no idea how the short story that’s just starting out will end. I’ll figure that out, as I write it.
If Harlan (and/or others) prefers one style over the other, is there a specific appeal to it. Again, for myself, I seem to be evenly divided between the two. With the novella, since I knew the ending, I looked forward to writing everything that leads up to that ending, and thus seeing how that inevitable conclusion comes about (Kinda like a “Columbo” “How’s he gonna catch him?” It’s a given that he will, but how?).
On the other hand, with short story I’m working on, the creative excitement I feel is in discovering, as I go along, where the story will ultimately lead. Of course I know the protagonist’s and antagonist’s goals and attitudes (and thus the raison d’être of their conflict), so that gives me a general direction in which to “travel.” But I can still get to Scotland whether I take the high road or the low road; so the route isn’t set in stone.
The curious thing (or maybe not so curious) is that I don’t have a preference between the two styles. Both have their challenges. Knowing the ending limits you in some ways. If your characters start going in a different direction, you either have to change the characters or change the ending. Either way, it’s not the same story.
Yet, not knowing the ending can cause a story to wander, resulting in more rewriting time than a more focused story would require.
On another note, a while back, I asked Harlan when he knew a story was “done”-- that point where even if it came back, there wouldn’t be some part of him reconsidering a scene, line of dialogue, whatever (unless an editor specifically requested it, of course). He’d simply send it out again, satisfied that it was ready to face the world. I sometimes wonder whether I made something clear in that question, and that is this: Do you sometimes find yourself reflecting on a story you’ve recently sent out and find yourself wondering (for example) if a character should’ve said A instead of B? I ask because I had just such a thought yesterday about the above mentioned novella (which I mailed out last week). I’m satisfied with the ending. It’s a logical conclusion to all that went before. Yet, I had this idle “what if” thought about the protagonist’s final thoughts before that last statement that ends the story.
I guess I wonder if Harlan and/or other writers have these occasional “what if” thoughts, and how they react to them. For myself, if it’s just an idle thought, I’ll let it go. But if it really makes me stop and think, then I’ll consider making the change if the story comes back.
Finally, I know Harlan prefers an Olympia typewriter. I’m curious whether that preference is the result of having tried various brands and settling on Olympia as the best of the bunch, or because it was the typewriter he first used and has stuck with it out of brand loyalty.
Myself, I use both typewriters and computer. I prefer manual typewriters (I have 12) over electric, but I wrote the first draft of my first novel back in 1985 on a Smith-Corona electric, so that machine retains a special place of honor.
Similarly, my first computer was a Commodore 64. I used a great little program called Word Writer, and wrote early drafts of two novels, some short stories and newspaper articles on it. I don’t use the Commodore anymore, but it also retains a place of honor (even though I had to split a novel up among three disks and “trick” the printer into thinking it was all one document (to avoid page numbering snafus).
My typewriters include Olympia, Remington, and Royal (among others), but I’ve bought a few Smith-Coronas simply because of the name, and the connection with the machine on which I’d written my earliest stories. Likewise, if Commodore was still around, and had programs compatible with today’s technology, I’d probably still be using that brand. Word Writer was a great program. It had 38 of 55 features the MUCH more expensive Word Perfect had.
My preferred writing tool today, when I’m out and about, is my AlphaSmart. This thing is great. It’s lighter (and less expensive) than a laptop, and the batteries (three AAA) are fantastic. I’ve used it daily since Christmas Eve, 2002 and I still have 10 percent of battery power left. True, the screen only shows four lines, and each of the eight files can only hold about 10 pages single spaced, but you can download to and upload from a computer with ease. Plus, I can write in quiet spots where a typewriter might not be as welcome.
Still, I have to say I like the elegant simplicity of the typewriter. It doesn’t need batteries or electricity; and it’s portable. Plus, you do your word processing and printing simultaneously. The words go straight to the paper as you type. Simple and direct.
Rick

Barney and Dragon*Con
Barney, I had no idea there were other webderlanders who were also regular Dragon*Con attendees. I'll be there this year on Saturday and Sunday, this time as a guest doing a few panels. It's always a hoot, even if there's nothing to do but people watch. And Harlan's gonna be there, which more than makes up for any deficiencies.

I Robot
Looks like sci-fi channel got one of their movies in
theatrical distribution;^)

Seriously, i saw the outer limits episode with leonard
nimoy which sucked, but even that version seems far
superior than the mangled crapola emerging on the big
screen.

Has anyone seen a trailer for Denzel Goes to Washington..
er..i mean "The Manchurian Candidate" yet? Yikes...

Barney, the link didn't send me to a relevant story. But does this one work?
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-07-12-postpone-elections_x.htm

"Counterterrorism officials look to postpone elections
From staff and wire reports
WASHINGTON — Counterterrorism officials are looking into the possibility of postponing the November presidential election if there is a terrorist attack at election time, Newsweek reported Sunday."

An endgame strategy

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?
tmpl=story&cid=578&ncid=578&e=5&u=/nm/20040711/ts_nm/politics_election_terror_dc

I've been saying they would float this balloon since early last year but even my paranoid friends didn't believe me. Let's see how they like me now.

I see people were asking about Dragon*Con. I just made my non-refundable flight reservations and will be there from early on 09/03/04 until late afternoon on 09/06/04. I have my membership AND hotel reservations so I'm going now unless Ridge declares Marshal Law. I haven't sprung for banquet tickets yet although I probably should. Kramer's people double dipped me the last time and after spending hours of my life trying to re-coup $35.00 or whatever the hell it was I don't trust these folks enough to do that again via long distance.

Other than that it's going to be a blast. The lobby of the Marritt on Peachtree alone is like looking up God's own poopshoot and well worth the trip. Last time they had GWAR and a bunch of centerfolds who got lost on the way to the carshow I suppose. Who knows what new horrors we'll get this time.

If it's really lame I'll just stand outside CNN with a sign saying "CNN - The most trusted name in fascist propaganda" and see how long it takes for the Atlanta P.D. to arrange three hots and a cot for me.

- Barney

Ohcanada, PA.

Asimov/Ellison as stage play
Y'know...that's an interesting idea. If nothing else, special effects wouldn't be an issue: on the stage, it's a *given* that you have to use your imaginations.

(musing furiously)

Even if I had no knowledge of Asimov's stories (which I do), and not the merest smidgen of familiarity with Harlan's screenplay (ditto that), the bottom line is that I haven't seen one trailer that makes me want to see I, ROBOT. The previews for this turd are the Crunchy Frog of eye candy: too much brainless plot and witless dialogue and cudgel-force digital SFX crammed into a two minute window that appears to give away much of the film. The entire Hollywood process has rendered this film inert and wholly uninteresting to me, even without factoring in fore-knowledge of its namesake material.

Now, what WOULD be interesting would be finding capable performers, technical personnel (lighting, sound fx, music, etc) and a venue willing to donate their time and energy, and mounting a one-time only, charitable, publicly staged reading of Harlan's screenplay adaptation. Yes, it would be a logistical nightmare and potentially butt-numbing, given the length - but to get THAT interpretation out there, brought off the page just once, would be worth the effort. Hell, I'd bankroll it for kicks, except, alas, I'm not a MA based cleaning woman, so I didn't recently win $280+ million dollars - but isn't it fun to dream?

And the rights and permissions person at Doubleday who handled the HARDWIRED/I, ROBOT matter may not have been completely ignorant, Harlan - after all, each and every one of those high-profile, on-every-sales-rack movie tie-in paperbacks with Will Smith on the cover contains Isaac Asimov's text, and not some gawdawful adaptation of the too-trite script with I, ROBOT slapped on the front of it. With any luck, a chunk of new generation readers can be lured into the Asimov fold (and SF in general) and educated about Hollywood folly in one shot. I know, this pre-supposes they won't cast the book aside when the robots never run amuck, but you rolls the bones and you builds the coffin.

An Edge In His Voice
Howdy--I'm a recent lurker to these places, but a longtime HE fan/reader. My first encounter with the Ellison was reading those Marvel comics based on his synopsis back in the early 70s--good, but they still lacked that Ellison VOICE (since it was scripted by Roy Thomas). The first time I heard the VOICE was the story "The Man Who Was Heavily Into Revenge". The outrage, the lessons in ethics and morality, the sense of JUSTICE, the conflicts of the human condition--THRILLED me. And I became a lifelong reader. Fortunately my personal encounters over the years with the Gentleman Rogue were not disappointing in the least--he walks through his life with the same grace and intelligence that he pours into his stories.

I followed his column in the "LA Weekly" and later enjoyed his year-long run on the "Mike Hodel's Hour 25" program--I still have some recordings from those days (I may have missed it--I presume Harlan still owns the rights to those shows/interviews--Will they be released on tape/CD anytime soon??).

I missed Harlan's voice when he left the show, and am so thrilled to hear him here, hale 'n' hearty, outliving his torturers, still creating mischief like the Harlequin and having a grand old time.

Pardon my puffery--something I had to get out of my system!

Mucho blessings to Harlan and his support group here!

Greetings, Ziggy! Welcome to this iniquitous den of rakehells, hoydens and ne'er-do-wells. We're not a bad bunch, here....

...As long as you keep your back to the wall.

And, watch out for Cindy. She pinches.

Chuck

Will Smith does SO much shit!

I was curious about this "I, Robot" and the sources they used for the story, and I appreciate the info just provided on it. It doesn't take well-honed instincts to deduce from the previews that this is one CHEESY flick. I didn't know about HARDWIRED.

* A quick note about my last post: I wants ya to be knowin’ the lame gay jokes were used to make a point not to amuse.

I always go in with a game plan. At LEAST 10% of the time.

**The Stand-off in Russia Between Corruption and the Dauntless Journalists

Russia: " a place where the absolute WORST of the internet pirates resides"

Shit, that’s just the tip of yer proverbial iceberg; in fact, the nearest thing to a virtue Russia has now. It shouldn’t be any surprise a mutation like "Norma" would come crawling out of the landfill. For those of you here who haven’t kept up with Russia’s state of affairs, that country has become a MASSIVE web of corruption. The Russian Mafia - probably the world’s most ruthless in organized crime - has its tendrils everywhere in business and government. The U.S. is partly responsible for this shit in that it naively dismantled the old structures in Russia, shoving a free market system down its throat over night. It was too FAST. Services that kept people afloat there disappeared. The turbulent forces of democracy and market capitalism have shaken the economic and social stability that characterized life under communist rule and have brought neither prosperity nor political freedom. Now most of the civilians remain in poverty while a precious few covet wealth, power, and politics. Small businesses are coerced into paying mobsters a "fee" for certain "protections" (I got that straight from a lady now living in the U.S. who HAD a store there), officials are paid off to keep silent or participate in framings that would protect mobsters, and what’s left of the free press journalists - who I consider heroes in the real sense - are being murdered when they get too close to the source in an investigation. Those journalists are unbelievable: they are putting their lives on the line to print the truth and fight for a free media; an uphill battle, possibly a hopless one. Putin, a puppet for corruption, has taken control of the media and the press, shutting down tv stations and suppressing papers. It is not far from being like the old regime; in some ways it’s far worse simply because it can only GET worse, as long as the masses remain I poverty. Internet piracy is NOTHING compared to the other shit going on there. That the country has "pirated and pilfered and stolen more written material than almost any other" could only be expected.

Recently I saw a report about the city of Togliatti, whose main automobile factory is run by corrupt oligarchs and where killings attributed to organized crime occur nearly every week! Russia's few remaining independent journalists risk their lives to expose organized crime and government corruption.

Recent constitutional amendments, as the "Law on the Struggle with Terrorism" have served the ends of corruption as well. There is a ban on the media to prevent disseminating information that "hinders the execution of" or "justifies resistance to" a counter-terrorist operation, specifically in regard to Chechnya. But it is stated in the broadest terms so that ANYTHING could be suppressed. Putin has waged this campaign of state ownership more through unilateral covert action than the normal legislative process. Consequently, censorship of any outright condemnation of his regime is strengthening.

To exacerbate the situation a majority of the Russian population thus far APPROVES of Putin’s censorship efforts, proving the failure of the democratic experiment we shoved down their throats so quickly. Americans - ever naïve about other nations - would have a hard time grasping this; but in the context of Russian history it’s understandable. The Russian people suffered through a prolonged period of economic stagnation throughout the 1990s, an experience that led to widespread disillusionment with the democratic experiment.

On the other hand, I recently read that the Russian people’s willingness to tolerate censorship may prove short-lived, as Putin's attempts to bring a political solution to the war in Chechnya - the basis upon which he makes his argument for censorship - may undermine his own efforts to establish control over the Russian media. If Putin succeeds in his attempts to resolve the conflict in Chechnya - which I doubt will happen - it will be more difficult for him to justify censorship on the basis of national security. Additionally, Putin’s failure to reverse Russia’s economic downturn could undermine his personal popularity, leaving him more vulnerable to critics of his anti-democratic control over the media.

Unfortunately, for the near future, Russia's media stands little chance of maintaining what's left of its autonomy. Yet, these incredible journalists fight and persevere to report everything - even if it means their lives. I feel so much for them and the Russian citizens caught in this trap. It’s fucking sad, it really is.

Since its criminal organizations are working outside the country as well, certainly in the U.S., Russia’s situation may one day turn into a serious international issue.

***Other frontiers:

"Yer a low-down Yankee liar"

Any fans of the movie SHANE here?

We rented it this weekend, and I found its themes and metaphors about survival and resolve, and the symbolic surrogate Alan Ladd represented, really compelling. But an interesting if not unsettling element in the movie caught my attention. It implied Confederate sympathies. The dark, gunslinging villain embodied by Jack Palance was a hated northern "yankee", a "low-down liar" who recited his slurs of the good Robert E. Lee to the dropping jaws of our good valley folk. Even though this was not a pronounced element, I began to feel if a black man came through the territory or the Indians from whom our heroes took that territory walked in, the heroic figures of the movie would turn into a mindless lynch mob. This is not my imagination, because at one point that famous Southern 'Dixie' tune is played sentimentally on the soundtrack as well. Hate to put such a damper on a classic, but given the Hollywood history of Uncle Tom stereotypes and pro-Confederate mythmaking that’s exactly what the snatches of dialogue evoked.

Mind you, I wasn’t "disturbed" by it so much as fascinated. I guess the reason I was so surprised is that, at times, I forget how late this kind of sympathy stretched in Hollywood movies. I had this notion it faded by the late 40’s. But it was 1953 now and here you could still spot it. Shane SUBTLY harkened back, for those of us who were film students, to the silents as early as 1912, in which we meet our "faithful" slave who sacrifices himself for his white master. Uncle Tom's Cabin itself appeared during these years in three film versions, which eliminated Harriet Beecher Stowe's central indictment of slavery. This set the tone for Condederate sympathy in Hollywood movies, which would stretch for generations from Birth of a Nation through Gone With the Wind, and, finally, as mere implication, into the subtext of Shane.

Despite all that, I still like SHANE. I instantly empathized with the lead character, Joe, who bullheadedly stood against the odds. I dug the narrative symbolism. I was intrigued by Alan Ladd’s character, not so much a character as the symbol of an ideal; an almost spiritual figure whose presence would influence the dice roll, and create an odd subliminal triangle with Joe and his wife (noting he filled voids that were there as, for example, a surrogate dad for Joey, even though the kid’s dad was present all the time, and voids that MIGHT be, depending on the possible outcomes, as Joe being killed. Fascinating when you think about it). I was just taken off guard by an element I recognized and always take exception to, even though I know I have to accept movies, and DO, for better or for worse, in the context of when they were made.

(A REALLY laughable one was SANTA FE TRAIL from the early 40's, with Ronald Reagan as the fine General Custer helping Errol Flynn go after the evil abolitionist John Brown in the name of Southern pride and defeat the Yankee conspiracy. They set up Olivia de Havilland to look right pretty on the spot Brown is hanged. I don't think 'His Truth Goes Marching On' meant much back then)

Hello, Ziggy, and welcome to the environ.

The I, ROBOT opening next Friday is the awful retrofitting of an old screenplay called HARDWIRED that had been lying around for years, until it was picked up by Proyas. At that point, lawyers (or someone) who were slightly less illiterate than the usual movie gang, pointed out that the script used as its core the 3 Laws of Robotics that were clearly the creative property of the estate of the late Isaac Asimov. And so, properly fearing a lawsuit, they scampered fast as their asses-needing-covering would permit, and they bought the rights to the title of Isaac's classic collection of robot stories from an equally ignorant rights&permissions functionary at Doubleday. They changed the names of a few characters, they stuck in as little of the Asimov material as they could, and they used the idiotic robot-amuck CGI-festooned HARDWIRED, now retitled I, ROBOT.

You can either take my word that it's a dog, and save your good money, and rent it for a buck when it hits the shops, or ignore the gardyloo and spend your hard-earned cash on yet another coarse and mindless summer disaster. In my opinion, it is just another brainless, loud, sadly-badly-made WILD WILD WEST with Will Smith doing his no longer fresh prince shtick.

Again, Ziggy, we pinch your claw in welcome.

Yr. pal, Harlan

This is sounding like one of my favorite scenes in Airplane, in which the passengers are all waiting in line to smack the dog out of the hysterical woman.

Teak,
You hurt Harlan's feelings! I'm certain you didn't intend for your defense of buttfucking to translate into an accusation against him. If you read his work or listen to him speak at all you must know he would be the LAST person interested in what adults do consensually with other adults.

Say something kind and contrite, please, so we can put this behind us ( no pun, I swear).

Cindy



Ziggy!!
Welcome and welcome!! Come'ere. I'll scoot over and you can sit right here by me.
Don't worry, I won't crowd ya.
What's your 'druther? Sweet tea or straight tea?
:)
Cindy


Hiya Neal.
:)
Cindy

I Robot...
Hello from the gulf coast of Texas, this is my first post so please bear with me.This is in regards to the movie I ROBOT that is soon to assault us.I was at your book signing in Houston years ago(future visions) for the screen play for the'TRUE' movie .Damn you did a wonderful job,when you talked about watching the movie with Isaac it got to me.Any comments about this movie, ie ..who wrote this screen play, etc.
Ziggy

Is it only coincidence that the anonymous poster is called Norma, and the persistent stalker Harlan addressed earlier is Norman?

For the Weed of Crime . . .

HARLAN: Wow! It seems, after all these years, you have actually become The Shadow. For example, you strike fear into the hearts of giant corporations, and you put criminals on notice around the globe. Your many agents are everywhere, ready to aid you in your war on crime. For years, I thought your the Shadow's true identity was adventurer/aviator Kent Allard or perhaps, rich socialite, Lamont Cranston, but no! The Shadow is in reality a *ahem* mild mannered author from California.

Whoi woulda thunk it.

Steve Dooner

Mea Culpa, but you're still a jackass
Ok, so you're in Moscow after all. I was wrong about that point, and as promised I will freely admit that I was wrong. But even if I was also wrong about everything else in my analysis -- in short, if you're a high-ranking and highly promiscuous female member of the russian noveau riche who ALSO happens to be a short-runner for next year's Nobel Prize for Economics -- the overall thrust of my comments still stand.

You fill a much-needed void.

A-TC

How charming. An arrogant and self-righteous snipe from an alleged denizen of the country that has pirated and pilfered and stolen more written material than almost any other, even Taiwan and Hong Kong and China. One of the few countries that never signed onto the Universal Copyright Protection Treaty so it could steal with impunity. The country that, when it published an unauthorized edition of my stories, and I quickly countered the illegal edition with a legitimate and commensurated edition, drew down on the legal publisher the wrath of just such maggots as our "Norma."

You have no coin here, criminal. You live in a place where the absolute WORST of the internet pirates resides. Go join "Moskva"
and his storage of illegal files of everyone from Asimov to Heinlein to King to Rowling to Tolkien to Zelazny. Tell us how brave and foursquare for "freedom" you are, and while you're at it, why not tell it to Zelazny's widow, from whose mouth you're stealing the bread.

Eat vomit, you wretched thief. As my people say of you and your kulaks, may you grow in the earth like a beet, head down!

It took four years, pus-bucket, but I beat you and your kind!

Dos vedanya. Harlan

I hate to say it, Harlan,
but it actually came from fookin Moscow. Go figure.

Sincerely,
your little web gnome

On the other hand, howzabout some of you out there (hey, Charlie Petit!) who are skilled at tracking anonymous pinheads on the net finding out who/where "Norma, Moscow Russia" is, so we can have a little fun with him/her.

Now THAT'S what the internet was created to do!

Harlan

REPLY TO TEAK

The image of the naive or the ignorant artist being willingly buttfucked by big business interests (or, to further enhance your completely subjective interpretation), commonly refered to as "The Man," is a metaphor. It is, in fact, a unisex metaphor. However, it is a reality more loathesome for women than for men.
That you manage to break the spine of logic in twisting the remark to be an insult to gay men, takes my breath away. It also hurts my feelings.

Everyone else's posts are relevant; and the least sensible among them contains more sanity in its wonkiest sentence than in the totality of your insulting leap-of-disrespect.

Random accusations such as yours -- out of the blue and sans rational connection beyond paralogia -- deserve no denials from me, nor do they deserve much attention ... except from your therapist.

The problem is yours, Teak. Not mine. Believe me: the spatial relationships you favor in aid of social congress is a topic of less than no interest to me. As others have said here: I truly couldn't care less.

Sheeet, kiddo, I don't even think fag jokes are funny; which is why I've given up on "Will & Grace."

But if you've got a good kike or nigger or gypsy or mick or bitch or beaner or wop or towel-head gag, send it along; and I'll put it with all the other dumb blonde, lazy porch-monkey, cheap jew, drunken irishman, terrorist camel-jockey, penny-pinching scot, ignorant spic, stupid canuck, arrogant frog jokes.

In short, Teak, nobody'll blacklist you (sorry for that less-than-p.c. term), but I know somebody who'll say you're fulla shit, and that you have insulted me without cause. But no one will tell you to go away, though one of us MIGHT reply: piss off, douche bag.

Respectfully,

Maligned J. Ellison

Actually, I thought the amusing part of Norma's post was the typo "...I will be less interesting in his books..."

I suspect what her psyche was desperately trying to say was "...I will be less interesting _than_ his books..."

Norma, Norma, Norma, if that is your real name. Please allow me to be the first to ask you to go back to the cowardly anonymity of your precious Usenet from whence you came. Your arrogant post had very little to say. You attack a writer you obviously know little about, and then say that if a particular story sounds good, you will try to find it on the Internet for free? C'mon Norma, get with the program. Just because fan fiction is free, doesn't mean that Harlan, or any other writer, has to offer their hard work to the unwashed masses sans renumeration, even if it is in a new, i.e, electronic, form. I bought an X-Men comic when I was ten; does that mean that I should get a free ticket to X-Men 2? I don't think so, and neither should you. Between discount bookstores and websites like Amazon, Ebay and used bookstores, there should be no reason why you should be so cheap. And once you've bought his words, you can read it a hundred times if you'd like. Hell, rip out the pages and wipe your bum with them if you please, but only after giving the author is just and due compensation. Now that I've said my piece, I'll go back to ignoring you, which is really what your post deserved in the first place: our silence.

Ah, Norma
Norma, I don't for one tenth of a second believe that your name is Norma or that you're posting from Moscow, Russia; in fact, I believe you're a male, probably somewhere between 15 and 30, that you watch science fiction on movies and on television to the point of obsessiveness but do very little non-media reading; and finally, that if you are an adult, in chronological years if not in temperment, you have some higher education, but you're still working at a low-pay, low-prestige job. I will further opine that you haven't had a sexual relationship in at least two years.

I have a fair degree of confidence in these predictions. They may be off in a minor detail or two, but they're accurate in general sense. (Identify yourself, with proof that I'm substantially off, and I will publicly acknowledge the egg on my face. Go ahead. I don't expect to.)

You see, "Norma," the general tragedy of people like you is that you're easy to see even at those times when you want to be invisible; and, conversely, that you're invisible when you're standing in clear sight.

A-TC

Political Correctness Stalks Us Yet Again

Teaky...

NO ONE gets banned 'round here - certainly not for P.C. kneejerk reactions like the one you just flushed down Harlan's throat, however removed his comment was from your abstractions. I'm in a "position" to know it.

Stop inferring generalities from the use of a word or phrase.

Let me demonstrate a point with something more palpable:

"How do you fit 4 gays in a crowded bar?"
Turn the stool upside down

"Did you hear about the Polish lesbian?"
She likes men

"What do you call a Jewish homosexual?"
He-blew

"What do you call an IRISH homosexual?"
Gay-lick

There you GO. NOW you really have something to go after. "Straight". Direct. As clear as a lubricant.

And, I'm sure, now, a contingent here will assume that reflects my true notions about gays, and run about in a frenzy.

That is called living in a vacuum of shallow ideas. Do yourself a favor and grow up.

AOL suit
I think that Harlan is an asshole for his AOL suit. I think that he deserves no money from me or anyone else who cares about freedom. I don't think he has anything important to write about, so I will be less interesting in his books, but if I will read a favourable review or get a recommendation, I will most definitely use a Usenet group (from a provider who does not censor them) or download it off the P2P network.

Bradbury 9/11


Neglected to mention that earlier this week Pubisher's Weekly Online reported a surge in sales of Bradbury's famous tome in conjunction with the release of the Moore film.


'nuf said,

good weekend everyone!!

Kneel

Harlan, thanks for the word. Now, I'm hoping that the recent wave of DVD box sets, including commentaries and documentaries with writers of Webderland's acquaintance, gave those shows' creators something of remuneration. I'm not just thinking of the Trek and Twilight Zone sets: there's Babylon 5, Invader Zim, and just recently, the Kroffts' _Land of the Lost_, which David Gerrold and Dorothy Fontana made into a really good kid's show back when I was old enough to enjoy it fully.

(Actually, you may have given us a heads-up on a collector's item. Get the Trek box set now, before they take that particular documentary off on subsequent pressings...)

And I've got an Observation of Interest to all. I remember a story of Harlan's, with a title like "Enter the Fanatic, Stage Left." It was one of his more mainstream stories, where a mysterious artist turns up in a small town and presents paintings of the town's most sordid secrets. I just Tivo'd TCM's broadcast of Clouzot's _Le Corbeau_, where libelous letters circulate through a small town, wreaking havoc. The film was remade with Charles Boyer as _The Letter_, and Gabriel Garcia Marquez's _In Evil Hour_ used a similar plot. So, Harlan: when you wrote that story, were you doing a riff on the Clouzot film?

(I remember you saying that you drove a dynamite truck in your youth. Wonder what you made of Clouzot's_The Wages of Fear_.)

And there I thought Teak was being ironic and funny....

Belated apology
Hey, Harlan. I attended your Halloween '98 weekend in Boston (there was a speaking appearance in a downtown church and a writing workshop the next day--I was at both). Because I was totally depressed and completely unaware of it, and because I was, at the time, severely emotionally underdeveloped, I got drunk on the free wine at the reception after the lecture and got all loud and made an ass of myself. What I thought of as cutely combative was no doubt simply annoying (combine that attitude with a Bad Religion t-shirt... it had a cross in a red circle with a line through it... you said you liked it... remember me?).

Anyway, I'm sorry. That was dumb. I would have come to apologize in person at your last Boston appearance (at MIT), but I was in Connecticut and far too broke.

That said, I am grateful for this opportunity to unburden myself. Thanks for being alive in the world. Your words have helped this maladjusted boy get by more than once.

-Gabriel

Whoops. That should be "offense." Sorry.

And Barney: It's "Roma," not "Gypsies." Don't be insensitive.

Teak,

There is huge difference between anal sex/anal rape (which is not confined to homosexuals) and homosexuality, and there is also a huge difference between homosexuality and homosexual love. You've got a lot of ideas confused in your remarks and the sin you've committed is being humorless.

Everytime I hear folks say "We got fucked!" OR "We got royally, majorly fucked!" are they slandering heterosexual sex? The answer is obviously, no. But it might be more salient to ask whether a humorous description of receiving anal sex is inherently demeaning to gay or straight people who engage in such acts. Seriously, how could it be? All sex is funny. Shakespeare called it "the beast with two backs," Montaigne and Rabelais laughed at it, Erasmus used sex as proof that we are all clowns because we have all had such a silly inception.

Gore Vidal uses humorous and non-humorous metaphors about anal-sex and anal-rape all through his books, so he would be similarly insensitive by your estimation.

Hetero football teams and hetero frat boys have done this as a form of hazing and humiliation, not as an expression of consensual love but as an expression of physical dominance. Sex acts can be used to humiliate one of the partners involved. Therein lies the answer to the question you have posed. Having read Harlan's fiction and non-fiction writings about his Hollywood experiences, I have come to believe that working in Hollywood is a steady and degenerative process of hazing and, if you will, rape.

Anytime you use sex to annihilate the existence of the other and use it entirely in a selfish manner, you are "fucking" the other. This, as Martin Buber would say, substitutes an "I-it" relationship for an "I-thou" relationship and fully dehumanizes the other. Read the end of Vidal's "City and the Pillar." Read Vidal's "Duluth," Read Jean Genet. Read de Sade.

Lastly, as much as you might think previous generations were insensitive and sexist, I have to let you in on a little secret. You are actually part of one of the most insensitive generations in world history.

No offence,

Steve Dooner

Writing is a perfectly valid lifestyle choice!

I think getting fucked up the ass repeatedly without anybody asking your permission would be a big step up in terms of personal self-esteem for some writers I've met.

The actual reason Harlan denigrates them because he suspects they're descended from Gypsies.

[sub-header / Tis an ill wind that blows somebody somewhere]

While my outlook is less than hopefull and my capacity to care about the state of the language is somewhat diminished I did want to plug another book for those who go boldly into these sorts of discussions...

SPEAKER'S MEANING by Owen Barfield is out in a small TPB from Wesleyan University Press. It's a collection of his lecture series at Brandeis University. Anybody who has an opinion about the english usage thread could do worse or better or par 7 by picking this up.

- Barney

Muddlefuddle, PA.

Errata and loose ends, especially Teak's

Teak,

Harlan said “bend over and grab their knees”, not ankles.

Why assume anyone engaging in anal sex will be male? Perhaps you should turn your watchful eye to the mirror? It may be you who have ingrained and stereotypical attitudes. Additionally, don’t you think it sexist on your part to imply that all professionals interviewed for the Twilight Zone DVD were male? Harlan did not imply that. It may be the case, but he did not say one way or the other. It is, as you say accurately, 2004, and you might want to examine some of your own assumptions.

Jeremy Hurtz: Don’t know if you’re still lurking here or not, but I got a reply from David Dodd, the proprietor of Richard Powers' official website, regarding the alleged copyright infringement you reported of The Gold Bug Variations on a college website. Here’s what he said:

“Hi Keith,
Here's my reply from Powers:
------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi David,
Thanks for the note. This is something that I've known about for a while, but I really don't want to make a fuss about it. In fact, it's kind of a nice resource, and I can't imagine that it's hurting book sales at all!
------------------------------------------------------------------
So I guess in this instance there is no cause for alarm. I'm sure that it's not a great practice, generally, though. People should always obtain permission--Jeremy was kind to point it out.

Best,
--David”

ALL: On the OTHER forum, under the General topic, Debbie has created a topic thread called DragonCon. If anyone is going to DragonCon to see the wonderful and splendiferous show that IS Harlan Ellison, that’s where we’re meeting to figure out what’s up and discuss possibly getting together one night to meet each other. If you’re interested, and are going to DragonCon, please meet us over there and drop your name in the bucket. There isn’t much activity as of yet, but DragonCon is still 2 months away, and the chatter will probably pick up exponentially as we approach Labor Day.

That wraps up this post. Everyone have a marvelous weekend!

-Keither

Teak,

It takes a helluva lot more than that to get banned. Just scroll back through some of the posts and see.

On the other hand, I don't think there was anything the least bit mean in what Harlan said. He wasn't saying anything against homosexuality and merely meant that, by submitting to do these interviews for free, these writers were allowing a company to rape them, like what sometimes happens in prison. Either you fight or submit. Harlan fought, the others submitted. For chrissakes, anyone who's read Harlan's work knows he's not into putting people down because of their race, sexual orientation, or any of the other things politicians and evangelists get away with on a daily basis. He has publicly--and loudly--denounced such morons as Jerry Falwell and others in the Religious Right for their homophobic views.

So, while I understand how offense can be taken, I'd say that this is something not worth bringing up.

But, I know I'm not Harlan and he'll be able to take care of himself, but I haven't posted in a while and, well...I think getting upset over this is pretty considering how much or the Real Thing there is out there to take on and put-to-task.

Later,
Bill

bending forward and grabbing their ankles
I realize this'll probably get me banned and that I'm not being properly sensitive to your generation, Harlan, what with its artificially narrowed conception of manhood. So be it:

Do you really have to denigrate homosexuals in the course of criticizing your colleagues? It is 2004, you know.

As I recall, the Sci-Fi Channel treatment of CITY AT THE EDGE OF FOREVER had the usual guest segments. The episodes were aired in 90 minute slots so that the complete episodes could be shown, and cast and crew members could have their say. CITY was different. Shatner did the opening and closing segments and all the guest segments were devoted to Harlan. It was interesting, since he apparently could say pretty much what he wanted about the episode. He talked about the heartbreak and heartburn over the rewrites and the connection of the story to the story of Aimee Semple McPherson .

I would bet the DVD does recycle the Sci-Fi segments, and I'll bet Harlan is probably due some stipend.

Is that largely correct, Harlan? Would they owe you something for the footage they already shot?

By the way, did you all know Anthony Quinn was once one of Aimee Semple McPherson's disciples? I got the impression he still thought highly of her decades later.

Chuck

Yes.
It's come to this. Heh heh.

http://www.cafeshops.com/bluepotato

Also: http://caramelpoet.deviantart.com

BRIAN:

I think you meant to type: George Clayton JOHNSON, not THOMAS.

As for the rest of your question, I'll be damned if I remember doing an interview for Paramount. I DID do a session for either TNT or the Sci-Fi Channel, a few years ago; and this may be a re-use of that session (in which case Paramount had better pony up some payment or they'll have as much luck of my appearing on their product as did the cheap fucks who're releasing the 1985 TWILIGHT ZONE shows, on which everyone but Ellison decided to bend over and grab their knees, for a little ego-inflating "face-time" on the boxed set.) I asked for a modest honorarium, with a favored nations clause so each of the other guys would get a taste, too...but they all caved and did it for nothing. So to "punish" me -- and ostensibly to get me to fall in line with the other trekkers of the Bataan Death march, to get me to do a session for nothing -- yeah sure that'll happen -- I was no further solicited, and thus I will not be on that release.

Millions are made off these sets, and the jerks who goofily rush to fling themselves in front of the cameras for nothing (some of whom are my friends)only reinvest the attitude that writers are chattel. What a cultural cringe and feelings of unworthiness must claw at their souls. Had the hucksters even offered fifty or a hundred bucks, I'd've been glad to do it; hell, I was a substantial part of that story-unit, and bloody proud of the work we did. Best year in tv I ever had. But the production company was too goddam cheap even to offer a stipend. CBS will get its taste. DeGuerre's production company will get its taste. The video/CD packager will get their taste. But my determinedly small-time buddies who worked on the show will get bupkess. Shit, they'll be lucky if someone bothers to remember to send them a copy of the set, months after it's hit the stores.

So the answer to your question is: when you find out, let me know. Recycle is the duplicitous game these corps play. They all get THEIR paychecks, but they feel affronted when you suggest, "Hey, I'm a professional, too; and I get paid for expending hours of my life to make you a bigger buck, SO PAY ME TOO, MUTHUHFUGGUH!

Rancorously, yr. pal, Harlan

A Star Trek question worth asking Harlan, for a change
This fall, Paramount's releasing the original _Trek_ series in a series of three DVD box sets, one for each season. This time, they're loading it up with lots of the sort of extras we lust after, like documentaries and interviews and stuff.

But here's what's of interest here at the Webderland. The first season's set is supposed to include a documentary/profile/something about the show's _writers_. One description reads: " Sci-Fi Visionaries: A look at Star Trek's famous writers, featuring interviews with Gene Coon, Harlan Ellison, George Clayton Thomas, Richard Matheson, D.C. Fontana, Gene Roddenberry, Bob Justman and John D.F. Black."

So the obvious question is: Hey, Harlan, is this going to include you in some way? Did they interview you for this? Or is this entirely new news for you, and I've inadvertently given you some a nice helping of _tsuris_ which ain't good for your insides?

Wow!

I got my copy of "god's 15 minutes" today! It's simply beyoootiful! And very much worth the wait.

Walshy: I'll bring my copy to the cafe today, so you can drool over it.

Steve Dooner

Keith to Ray Carlson:
"If you don’t want to post out here in front of Frank and Rob and everyone, feel free to e-mail me."

RAY! Don’ t be shy! With OUR low standards NOTHIN’ offends us! Bare it ALL! Go ahead n’ flash it! Show us yer goods! Shake your booty! Be MERCILESS! Hell - drink some fire n’ break some wind! DUMP yer load, man! We’ll take ANYTHING ya got!

…did Washu just call me a freak?

Hugh B. Cave

For those interested there is a nice long obit in today's NY Times.

Hugh Cave was a genre workhorse for 75 years.

His "The Mountains of Madness" was published two months ago.

He was 93.

Dig it,

Neal

Lengthy End Credits
If you think end credits are too long, you may be watching only major big budget movies with lotsa lotsa special effects; granted, a few of those are actually good, but you will find shorter closing credits in smaller, and often better, films.

lurking
John,

Cleverest thing I've heard all day. Funny too.

Have a good break, Washu. And remember, don't lurk back in anger.

Cheers, Jon

I've made the decision to take a sabbatical from the Webderland for the next two weeks, maybe more.

I've taken a long look over my posts (both here and on the bulletin board), and I've noticed an unpleasant bile beginning to ooze into their general tone. They're becoming shrill, brittle, mean-spirited. Indistinguishable from the rest of the hateful, faceless crud you see within every other public forum.

I don't know where it's coming from, to be honest. Could be one of a dozen things, from an unstable relationship with a new girlfriend to interfamily conflicts...a whole lot of vague, indefinable crap.

So, I'm going to chill for a while (difficult to do during a Bermudian summer). There's absolutely no finality connected to any of this - I'll be back soon enough. Just to let you freaks 'n' geeks know.

Sayonara for now,
Benjamin A.A. Winfield

P.S. HARLAN -

A warm and sincere thanks for the Hebrew DV in advance. See you later, alligator.

Could never get annoyed at you, Harlan. Been through too much fighting the good fights.

I'm not sure if anyone has mentioned yet, but the first DC COMICS PRESENTS comic book was released this week in tribute to Julius Schwartz. This is the Batman-watching-his-own-teevee-show cover from the Silver Age.

This is NOT the Harlan Ellison story issue; the two tales are by Geoff Johns with Carmine Infantino art and Len Wein with Andy Kuhn art, but Harlan's obituary is on the back page and cover (I'll be damned if this obituary hasn't appeared in 1001 publications.....it's obvious that our host wanted to get the word out on his friend as widely as possible).

I did not read Harlan's script for his DC PRESENTS tale in The Comic Buyers Guide because I wanted to see it first with full-blown art and color and lettering and page turning purity....I felt that reading the script was the same as reading the Spider-Man 2 script prior to seeing the movie and trying to imagine how it would look. But for those of you interested, pick up that publication for your Ellison collection.

-TODD

I can remember one time smacking a vehicle was good for my health. I just stepped off the curb, when a huge van lurched forward. If I hadn't hit the front of the vehicle with my fist, I wouldn't be writing this right now. Goofus couldn't be bothered to look directly ahead before hitting the accelerator.

Otherwise, I'd also say hitting someone's car could get a violent response, maybe even a fatal one. Watch it.

Chuck

Replies
Rob: :)

David Loftus and Duane: I used to be a very aggressive driver. One of the jerks who “enforced” the law with my 3500lb pseudo-sportscar, by blocking assholes from cutting into the line of cars, by passing slow drivers in the left lane on THEIR left (running serious risks for myself and them by barreling down the shoulder, throwing up glass, stones and detritus in my wake), and by speeding like I was racing in the Indy 5-Oh-Oh. Some crazy guy even pulled a knife on me once, but that was after I deliberately cut him off because he failed to stop at a blinking red light. Now that I live closer to work, and don’t stress about the drive, I’m mellow about it. But I know what you mean. I’ve pulled some true accidental bone-head moves in my car (more than I’d like to admit), and have been flipped off and threatened more than once as a result, by pedestrians, cyclists, and other motor vehicle drivers.

If someone ever slapped my car, I would probably get out, check for damage, and, assuming no damage, go about my way. It would be very upsetting, but what else could I do? As far as David doing this...I agree with several others: I wouldn’t put it past some freak to react in an aggressive non-verbal way. Please be careful.

Elijah Newton: Thanks for noting my deliberate use of the word “jump.” Also, my mistakenly IDing you as a college puke comes from your post on April 7th, when you were talking about a Harlan lecture at MIT, and I was lazy in my reading apparently and assumed this was recent, even though you do mention in the post that it was 2 years previous. ATD. Attention To Detail. Must hammer that home. Maybe I’ll get together with Rob and we can both go to class.

Ray Carlson: A: My opinion really can be changed with a good argument. I’ve got convictions, but I’m young and I keep an open mind. Most recently I have changed my mind about gun control and gun ownership. I used to believe that all guns should be banned. Now, I do not. I think all handguns should be banned, and I think there needs to be a national registry of gun owners, and what they own, etc. etc. Ironically enough, Michael Moore’s BOWLING FOR COLUMBINE helped to change my mind about it. B: Your attempt at levity was not lame. It would have been funny, had it not been an antagonistic one-liner which was clearly tossed in for negative reaction. If you had gone to the trouble to list some of the problems you had with the film (for [one] example, Moore’s insinuation that NONE of the escaping Saudi’s or bin Laden’s were interviewed by the FBI, which was false), it might have worked. Don’t assume everyone here is anti-Bush or pro-Moore. I care as much about your opinion as I do everyone else’s. I would LOVE to know what you thought about the movie, and what you thought was made up, etc., and be able to evaluate your arguments and evidence. I’m glad you’re here. If you don’t want to post out here in front of Frank and Rob and everyone, feel free to e-mail me.

-Keith

GUY:

The long and the short of it is this: If such a request were the ONLY time-and-work intrusive fannish request a writer received, I'd say no harm/no foul...go for it.

But if other writers are assailed even half as much as I am in any given short span of time -- nine of one sort or another just this week already, and it's not even Friday -- then these endless demands become a massed pain in the ass. And if one throws up one's hands and says, "Enough already!" one is certain to reap only bad cess for not complying. Not even if one accomodates the first ten thousand gimme-gimmes (most of which are never rewarded with a thankyou, and an equal number of times don't even draw the courtesy of a copy of the publication for one's files), if you say NO to #10,001 the supplicant will tell everyone you're a selfish fuck.

It is, however, your choice; to do it or not. And it is the choice of those you'd ask, if they want to accomodate. But since most of them are, at core, businesswise, just jumped-up amateurs, you'll no doubt guilt a few into responding just to get their low-level "face time." And others will ignore the plea. And others will do it because they don't want to offend their alleged audience.

As these requests go, this is a piddling one; and if the plea was accompanied by a SASE to return it, as well as a cardstock note on which to write the autograph clearly, well, it probably won't send anyone over the brink.

Just think how much time it took me to answer your question. And I get a hundred of suchlike queries every fortnight. But how annoyed at "that prick Ellison" you'd've been if I'd shined it on.

Harlan

A question of autographs
Harlan -- This is a direct question to you on a matter of fannish etiquette.

I'm editing the Noreascon 4 program book. Part of these souvenir tomes is the listing of Hugo winners. Fascinating to awards freaks like me, who can name the Oscar winners in the major categories for every year since the Awards were created, but deadly dull to LOOK AT on the page.

The first time I edited one of these books, in 1988, I illustrated the page with photographs from the various ceremonies. There was a great shorrt of Asimov grimacing as he handed you your first Hugo, for instance. This time, I was thinking of jazzing up the pages with facsimiles of winners' autographs.

How do you think the professional community would react to this? Would they regard it as intrusive and rude? Let me know, please, here or by e-mail. Thanks -- and sorry to add to your busy-ness.

Movie credits
On the other hand, credits have expanded past the point of ridiculousness. Especially with the use of special effects and CGI in pretty much every movie. Used to be the credits listed the actors and the significant behind the scenes folks. Now it's that, plus the secretaries, the catering firms, every programmer who touched the graphics code, the lawyers, the accountants, etc. If it takes five minutes just to run the credits at a reasonably readable speed, I can't really blame people for bailing on them.

I was riding my road bike down Santa Monica Blvd. when I nearly got clipped by a large Cadillac. I caught up with the car and threw my fist into the driver's side window. I glanced back and caught a glimpse of the driver: a small, perhaps 16 year old boy learning how to drive with his dad. I felt really bad about that, and I wanted to turn back and apologize but traffic was just too heavy.

I still feel bad about that incident. It's like people lose all identity when they get behind the wheel. The driver is no longer a person with his or her own thoughts, feelings and motivations. Instead, I transform him into a mindless, thoughtless, erratic moron in control of a 3000 pound vehicle that can emerge from out of nowhere and kill me. And in 99.99% of cases, that simply isn't true. I learned a great deal that day.

"I mean slapping their car window, side panel, or something, nice and loud, though harmlessly, to get their attention and express my displeasure with their driving behavior around pedestrians like me."

David L., don't do that. You're not Ratso Rizzo and it's probably not cabs you're slapping. It's never harmless.

Harlan - I'm out the door to take my mom for physical therapy. The only numbers I have are from the website;

Phone: 678-567-9777 24 Hr.
Fax: 770-222-6192

Hoping that helps - gotta run. - Barney

college going Kid?
Who, me? Not to toot my own k'zoo but I graduated some years back, if not long enough ago so as to be unduly flattered by my apparent youth.

Sophmoronically yrs,
the Ypsi Kid

(ps: Rob - I enjoyed reading your comments, but uhh... of course it's "leap." I suspect that's why Keith wrote "jump.")

David L:

I understand your concerns, and I sincerely hope that in slapping cars you do not one day find yourself looking down the barrel of a loaded weapon. Please be careful.


Dorman:

That was a very Harlanesque admonition.

My very hasty internet search and subsequent post on Goya contained mere speculation; I was simply woolgathering, saying the first thing that surfaced, essentially screwing around, winging it. That's why I put the PERHAPS in there. I am well aware that I had about as much chance of finding the truth via a quick net search as a certain rotund, bespeckled, ball cap-wearing, multi-millionaire "common man" has of winning this years Most Honest Filmmaker award.

In my copy of The New Encyclopaedia Britannica Macropaedia Volume 8 p. 260, 1984 edition (ain't ya proud of me?) it says that in the Los Caprichos etchings--of which the sleep of reason piece is part--that Goya used "veiled language in designs and captions," and themes from "the extravagances and follies common to all society."

If I lifted that veil, would I find Rea's son?

Who wrote the book you mention? I am having trouble finding it.

Scuttling back to my corner, I remain, with Rea's son or reason,

yr. (usually) obt. servt,

DC

DOUG & BARNEY:

I'll tell you all about "The Battle of Lake Erie" later today.

Barn: do you have current Hinchberger phone numbers? Tim is absent, and all the numbers I've been using--home, office, cell-phone--don't dance. I need to get with him. Can you help? Give me a call if you can.

Harlan

Keith,

"I changed one word on purpose."

Nuh-uh. I did.

I know you are but what am I?

Takes one ta know one.

...yeah. I think that should cover my ass.

responses

Keith:

Agree with you on the swift and tiny credit rolls on TV, squeezed to the right by ads for upcoming shows. Many's the time I've recognized a face in the supporting cast and wanted to get the actor's name, only to be stymied by this near-universal practice.

Thurman's okay. In fact, she's pretty good in the "Kill Bill" movies, for what they are. She seems to be Tarantino's Great Blonde Goddess, the way Matt Damon is Van Sant's; they'll put them in film after film just to be able to look at them over and over, order them around, and show them off to the world in all their beauty (to the adoring director). Sometimes she's terrific, sometimes she's awful (cf, "The Avengers" remake).

By the way, something I HAVE been doing to protest the ugliness and inconsiderateness of other people is hitting their cars. I don't mean ramming them with mine, because I don't drive; I mean slapping their car window, side panel, or something, nice and loud, though harmlessly, to get their attention and express my displeasure with their driving behavior around pedestrians like me. They're breaking the law, but it's a law that's basically unenforceable. At least I can startle them.

(P.S. The proper phrase is "Hear! Hear!")

Keith Cramer:

Hey, thanks for clarifying for me. No quotes when punning. Got it! I'll have you know, I agonized for hours over whether or not quotation marks were appropriate. But now I know and you can betcha I'll never forget. Again, thanks to you Mr. Cramer, I'll never suffer another grammatical embarrassment.

As for Moore's latest flickÉ I was just trying to add a note of levity (lame as it was) to the proceedings. C'mon Keith, I'm not going to waste valuable time and bandwidth arguing the movies merits or lack there of. I'm not going to change your mind and you're not going to change mine. So, why bother? There is, however, something really important we do agree on, Sean Young. Did you see her in the movie "No Way Out"? (Gee, I sure hope I used those quotation marks correctly.) Wow! I was hooked after seeing her in that one.

Viruses?
In the last few days, I've received emails apparently from folks on this list -- I believe the addresses are spoofed; the emails have attachments. The one I just received consists of the message "What means this?" and a button that will apparently run a program known to carry the NetSky virus.

Don't know if somebody's just shotgunning this stuff out and using faked addresses from this board, or if my machine's sending stuff out and people are replying. It may be tomorrow or Saturday before I can get to a full scan on my machine. So in the meantime...

If you're getting email from me, don't open it because I didn't send it. My conversations with folks on the board are practically always conducted here on the board, not through private email.

Bests to all,

--tr

Illium typos and verbal gaffes
Paul Foth: The typos are irritating to me as well. I was going to keep a list and email them to Tor, so they could get them corrected before the paperback edition comes out, but I'm already about halfway through the book without writing any of them down, and they are numerous. I hope they do a better job with the sequel. Though they are so bad that it makes me wonder if a copy editor had read it at all. And why did Simmons make so many of these mistakes?

The "I couldn't care less" poster reminded me of another one of Unca Harlan's favorite irritating verbal faux pauxs: you can't have your cake and eat it too. Of course you can. You can have it, and then you can eat it. What one is supposed to say, according to our patron author, is you can't eat your cake and have it too. I had an argument with my wife some years ago over the proper ordering of that phrase, and she had a salient point about use of the former, but it escapes me at the moment.

Going back to count the typos in Illium,

I remain,

James

ILIUM
James Palmer: ILIUM was my third Simmons book, and I loved it. It got my Hugo vote for best novel. The one thing about it that grated, however, was the high number of typographical errors. There were also two continuity errors involving numbers that leaped right off the pages at me. Because of these things, I found it difficult to sink into the story. I'd be cruising along, letting this world of Mars and Ilium and far-future-Earth enfold me; then I'd hit one of these gaffes and it felt like a speed bump on an interstate, throwing me right out of the flow. I'm certainly looking forward to OLYMPOS, but I'm just as certainly hoping for a better job of copy editing.

Barney - Of course I care. The sad truth, however, is that if Harlan answers your inquiry, and I read it here, I'm going to have to displace some other bit of my 'so-fine-it-could-sift-through-silk' minutiae in order to keep his response in my collection.

Am I prepared to lose a random title off of Charles Beaumont's bibliography? The name of the Cleveland pitchers who combined to stop DiMaggio's hitting streak at 56? What my great great grandfather did for a living? What Miles Davis' final live performance was?

For some of what Harlan could share from the two-fisted tales of his life and times? Hell yes, in a heartbeat. Great great grandpa has been dust for a century - who cares what he moulded?

But for the answer to whether an article in Battle Cry in April, 1957 grew out of an OSU paper?

Barney, Barney, Barney - you have to aim higher than THAT...

Something that I'm quite sure only I care about.
*** Harlan *** It's a slow day here at Casa Dannelke and I just received in the mail a copy of the April 1957 issue of Battle Cry magazine. Apparently it was "lost in the mail" for just over 47 years but no matter, I have it now. As you may recall, it has an odd little 4 page piece of non-fiction by you called THE BATTLE OF LAKE ERIE.

The short form is me just raising one eyebrow and staring at you. But my Dick Tracy watch is in the shop and I could never raise just one eyebrow, so... ????

It just seems like sort of a zebra. Even for you and even in that particularly prolific year.

[How prolific kids? I've got a notebook that puts it at around 185 sales AND that's working from the old bibliography, not Tim's new one. THINK about that in an era before printers or e-mail. That's insane.]

Was this a satellite magazine from some magazine group you were already doing detective or skiffy work for? Was this assigned? Did you re-write an OSU paper with a new smack talk opening? I know it's sort of your childhood neck of the woods the same way that Wisconsinites are familiar with Paul Bunyan stories but what gives? It's never been re-printed but I'm sure hundreds of people would love to know the mysty origins of this piece of maritime journalism.

OK, Doug and Tim and I would. What's that guys? You don't give a shit? I'm out here in the wind alone? Bastards.

- Barney

Threesheets, PA.

Illium
Hate to jump up and down on the dead horse that is our Simmons discussion, but I recently aquired his latest, Illium, and I am absolutely DIGGING it. Anyone else reading/read it? What are your thoughts? I can't wait until Olympos comes out.

Back to the mines,

James

hmmm
"'I could care less' MEANS YOU COULD CARE MORE"

Not necessarily. Because if you cared as much as you could, you could care less--but you couldn't care more.

Various
Edward King:

Welcome aboard. You have been mildly castigated by the skipper; it is to be expected on this ship. We all castigate one another pretty regularly, especially Rob, but since Harlan gets the bulk of the questions, he does the bulk of the castigating.

We started the Moore conversation some weeks ago: my post on the topic was on Tuesday, June 22 2004 13:26:41, and that was after it had been raging for about a week. Harlan said back then as an answer to a question by Bob Ingersoll that he would not comment on this topic. Subsequently, he’s said the same thing, but also that he did, indeed, have an opinion on it. He’s now said that about 4 times, and each time he gets a bit redder in the face. It’s as if we’re not listening or something….

You should go back to that week and read the Fahrenheit posts, because I’ll wager a lot was said by the regulars that you might have missed, and they’re not going to waste their “one post per day” to re-hash what they already said; it’s good stuff.

Mike Thomas: Welcome, as well.

Jon Stover: A very proud and compassionate thing you said…not callous. I think everyone will see that. It is especially significant when you consider that Mr. Bradbury lost his wife last year, and at any age that is a special pain not easily surmounted or assimilated.

Rob: I meant to say “jump.” I know my famous moon-quotes, baby. I changed one word on purpose.

ALL: Mr. James Doohan has been diagnosed with early Alzheimer’s. Just saw it on the news. He is 84, and I enjoyed every minute of time he played Scotty on the Star Trek tv show, and in the movies. Sadly, I am not familiar with any of his other acting endeavors. I hope the illness does not advance quickly.

David Loftus:

Here-here! I may not stay for every credit roll in the theater, but I stay for a lot of them. One of my current pet-peeves is the way movie credits are treated on broadcast and cable channels…they’re so busy self-promoting that they squish the credits into 1/4th the screen and advertise Celebrity Poker Showdown or Charmed or such like. It makes me want to boycott the channel in disgust, but they ALL do it. I have not yet seen any of the Kill Bill movies, though I’m very impressed with Uma Thurman’s physical attributes, and will someday see it. It took me a long time to get over “Even Cowgirl’s Get The Blues,” notwithstanding the sensuous lesbian played by Sean Young, whom I would gladly give my superior vena cava, my left ventricle, my right testicle, and the partridge in my pear tree out back.

Ray Carlson: Please, sir. Please. If you insist on punning around, don’t use quotes. And, I should add, if that’s all you come up with, why bother us with it? At least refute ONE THING in the movie. I’m sure you can do it. The conservative press is not light on attack dogs right now, and you can certainly crib from one of them for your answers if you can’t think of any of your own. Hurry up, now. I’ll be back tomorrow to check your work.

-Keith

Shedding Light on Goya's famous quote
DAVE C & SIANO: Obvoiusly, you two need to do a bit more research (off line). Looking through my copious volumes of nonfiction, skimming over to the tome entitled _Gods, Goddesses and Their Offspring_, I find a reference to Rea, goddess of culpability, and her son, shea, god of shame, first mentioned in the book of carnal knowledge and backgammon, circa 34 BC ( a rare volume was rescued from the Library of Alexandria, and reprinted down throught the centuries -- at one time, it outsold the Hebrew version of what is now the King James bible).
Since Rhea=guilt, and shea=shame, what Goya actually wrote (and what has been misinterpreted all of these years) is that "The sleep of Rea's son brings forth monsters." Therefore, what Goya was saying is that without shame we would all be a bunch of naked, unsightly beasts, running around with special sauce dripping from our chins onto our not-so sevlte bodies (let's face it -- we Amurrrricuns are tres chubby). Thank god (or Wal mart) for body gloves and foot covers.
Yours in shared information,
DTS

Brian:

A quick Google search on Goya's "sleep of reason" produced a picture of a man with head down on desk, apparently asleep, and surrounded by some odd looking creatures. Perhaps Goya was merely observing that sleep is the time in which reason is supressed; a time when the dreaming brain makes fantastic associations and images.

"Because You Don't Listen!"

In the Cohen brothers' movie, Barton Fink, John Goodman tells the title character why he has been damned and caught in a Hollywood-style Hell. He tells Fink this reason: "Because You Don't Listen!" Imagine if people prattled on insensitively, concerned only about their own self-righteous opinions and without the ability to listen. Could it happen here? In The Pavilion? I shudder to think it.

"Sit down and look at the names of all the people who gave you this wonderful film!"

Well, some of us try to hold in our piss during the movie, and I'D be a teensy bit annoyed if somebody tried to give me a guilt trip while making a break for the restroom. I'm sorry, but that's how I'd react in that kind of predicament.

Okay, okay, I am _not_ throwing this out to pick an argument with Harlan. But I would like to defend the use of the phrase "I could care less" to mean that one cares very little.

The phrase _can_ be used this way, but it works best in _conversation_, when inflection can convey a sarcastic intent. With the right stresses, and languid delivery, the phrase "I could care less" can convey a different meaning-- that the person _could_ care less, perhaps, if the effort was worth it. (The fact that this effort _isn't_ worth it emphasizes how little the speaker cares.)

It's a bit like saying "I could be happy with that." The meaning is that one is _not_ happy with that, but an effort or adjustment is required to _become_ happy with that. In this case, saying "I could care less" means that one cares very little, so little that effort is required to care less. And since the effort isn't worth expending, the phrase emphasizes that the speaker has no worthwhile interest in the subject.

As I said, this works when vocal inflection can be used, or described, to emphasize the sarcasm; it's not easy to do this in print.

And as I also said, I'm not offering this to pick a fight. I'm fascinated by phrases that work both ways. One of my favorites is Goya's phrase "The sleep of Reason brings forth monsters." That isolated sentence can be read in two contradictory ways. Does it mean that, when Reason sleeps, monsters come forth? Or that Reason itself _is_ a sleep, that creates noightmarish monsters? (I ought to read up on Goya to see what he meant.)

Prokosch
Unca Harlan,

I spotted Prokosch's memoir in a bookstore yesterday. It was quite reasonably priced. They had one other title there, it was not "The Seven Who Fled".

Is your library lacking any FP titles?



Humbly,

Neal

smacking the barbarians

Somewhere -- I'm pretty sure it's in _Harlan Ellison's Watching_ -- Harlan describes the time he harangued all the people who were walking out of the theater during the movie credits: "Sit down and look at the names of all the people who gave you this wonderful film!" he yelled, or something like that. It stunned and stopped them . . . for a moment.

I often think of that passage, not because I wish I had the courage to do such a thing myself (I don't), but because I revel in the goodies that filmmakers have been giving those of us who do bother to stay through the credits -- increasingly, these days, it seems.

It could be as small and subtle as the shooting star that crosses the dark sky above the credits of Steve Martin's "Roxanne" or as lengthy and obvious as the out-takes of Peter Sellers cracking up repeatedly during a crucial scene of "Being There" (which, I've argued, was a violation of the creepy integrity of the movie, BECAUSE it was such a refreshing relief to see).

I can't remember EVER walking out of a movie during the credits. It used to be that there was something interesting I was looking to know there -- the name of a particular tune or performer on the soundtrack, or the particular overseas or domestic location where a scene was shot -- and occasionally there would be a discreet joke tucked in among all the small print. But, as I say, filmmakers have increasingly put visual zingers in, since, oh, about the mid 1980s.

This comes to mind because I caught a cheap, second-run showing of "Kill Bill, Vol. 2" night before last, and Tarantino did not disappoint in this respect. Most of the audience got up and left in a rush as soon as the credits started to roll, but a couple next to me stayed through the first tier of credits, which roll over b&w footage of Uma Thurman, in close-up, as she drives to freedom and her new life. At the conclusion of that several minutes, she winks, pointedly, at the camera, which is sweet.

Then a second tier of credits rolls over a blank background . . . but at the very end of that, there's a delightful out-take. Show of hands, everybody: who stayed long enough to see that? Hint: The final words of the movie are "Oh, come on, guys, let's do it again!"

Michael Moore?

One of Hollywood's greatest "make-up" artists?

Dammit. Say what you mean, mean what you say. I must've been asleep when Harlan mentioned the "could care less" phrase as being wrong. (Though, I do remember the "off of" and went back and got rid of the offending word in some of my short stories thinking that was what was keeping them from being sold. Uh, it turns out that's not the case.)

I will now go to the chalkboard and write "I couldn't care less about Rob posting in the Pavilion" five hundred times.

Chagrined and humbled (not for too long, though),
rich

You know, I disagree with what Mr. Bradbury said about Bush in 2000 and I disagree with what he said about Moore now.

But I'm much, much happier to see Mr. Bradbury talking about the situation, giving interviews, and yelling about perceived injustice given his age and what he's gone through in the last year than I am peeved because I don't agree with what he's yelling about. Much, much happier; much, much less peeved.

That doesn't mean I want to see him angry or subjected to stupid questions. But I am glad to see that he's still ready, willing and able to yell. I hope he'll be yelling about Michael Moore's 2024 documentary about the space program _The Martian Debacles_, too.

You know, no matter how much I revise the above, it still seems callous. Well, it isn't, but I guess you'll get what I'm saying or not.

Cheers, Jon

Well...I've Been Pushed Into It

Keith:

It’s "LEAP", fer chrissake. "LEAP!"

On Bradbury’s LEAP to Rationalilty:

The issue with Moore, in itself, is not important.

Obviously, Bradbury’s objection to Moore’s title is in itself trifling; yet, given its degree - marked by outbursts like, "he’s a TERRIBLE human being" and "the ONLY reason Europe likes Moore’s film is because they hate us" - there is a certain circularity in his argument that can raise one’s brow in the undercurrents. This is a man who commited himself to the ideal of learning and free thought, determined to present metaphorically the dire alternatives in FARENHEIT 451 (ironically).

Originally, I wasn’t planning to contribute further to the Bradbury/Moore thread, feeling it was already becoming taxed and redundant. But it was tough, see? TOUGH for me to read that quote in Brian's post revealing Bradbury's perception of Bush: "He's wonderful. We needed him. Clinton is a shithead and we're glad to be rid of him...I think we have a chance to do something about education, very important... and then the whole structure of our education will change because people will know how to read and write." That's too much.

Here, it doesn't seem to occur to Ray that Bush was merely strategizing. That Bush is attached to a conservative agenda whose commitment to censorship - Ray's greatest, most passionate "No-No" - propels itself even as we speak.

Ray: "whether it's Republican or Democrat" DOES matter. It matters a LOT.

I’ve always known Bradbury to see the world with a child-like optimism. Ideally, every region of our planet should be like Disneyland, an immaculate world irradiated by the human spirit. To Bradbury, a WONDERFUL future awaits us all in a benevolent cosmic plan, REGARDLESS of how things seem. That may be a very unfair diminishing of his philosophy; I’m so not sure that it is, having read and heard him over the last ten years. Like Candide, he seems determined to believe we live in the best of all possible worlds.

His message about human potential can touch people - and HAS - all OVER the world; the man even breached the Iron Curtain in the days of the Soviet Cold War, inspiring readers from the Baltics to the Black Sea.

But when does he do a disservice to his own message? What happens when one makes an argument, then fails to see the bigger picture? Is it possible Bradbury could unwittingly contribute to the very forces he’s loathed all his life?

I heard him interviewed on NPR last week. He only briefly touched on Michael Moore and repeated his sentiments to a caller what we’ve repeated here ad nauseum. He said Moore finally DID call him; he said Moore gave him his abject apologies for not getting back to him when he said he would. Bradbury dissed him, telling him "Well, it’s too late", and went on repeating to the listening audience that Moore is simply an awful human being. (I HAVE to tell you he really did sound slow. I’m totally convinced his medical problems are giving him difficulty. He even replied to one question with a non sequitor. Whatever the Bradbury of 10 or 15 years ago would have to say about Moore or Bush or the issues, his mind today is NOT too clear. I want to be fair to him about this. News is slow to reach him now; he didn’t even know about the Cassini-Huygens yet - news that had been tough to even avoid over the last day)

What I found interesting was his comments about the upcoming elections (now finally getting to my point):

"We are going to have a NEW president and everything is going to be wonderful; or we’ll have the same president and everything will still work out. We’re going to have a wonderful future." This, in my mind, is Bradbury’s overriding world view. He embraces hope and shuns pessimism. Regrettably, I think he does this while neglecting to pull up the rock to see what’s really beneath it in order to formulate sound judgements; in other words, he doesn’t always think the problem all the way through. Unlike his exposition in Fahrenheit 451, he doesn't study the ramifications. To me, an argument is not a true argument unless it's thought all the way through.

A persuasive passage from one of Bradbury's essays:

"Some five years back, the editors of yet another anthology for school readers put together a volume with some 400 (count 'em) short stories in it. How do you cram 400 short stories by Twain, Irving, Poe, Maupassant and Bierce into one book?
Simplicity itself. Skin, debone, demarrow, scarify, melt, render down and destroy. Every adjective that counted, every verb that moved, every metaphor that weighed more than a mosquito - out! Every simile that would have made a sub-moron's mouth twitch - gone! Any aside that explained the two-bit philosophy of a first-rate writer - lost!"

The leitmotif of Fahrenheit 451.

Ray…given this exposition how could you possibly regard Bush in any pertinent light? Bush has been the embodiment of anti-intellectualism. The nearest thing he ever got to literature is a BBQ sauce label. The closest thing to culture he ever got was NASCAR. He has an Attorney General detemined to censor what he sees fit if it can be done; but most importantly, Bush’s biggest constituent is the right wing religious organizations - a force constantly trying to spearhead censorship efforts of books and school texts more than anyone else in the country. If they could, they would suppress anything that would undermine or threaten their beliefs and values - values that are not necessarily shared by the majority. These censorship efforts are now primarily directed at school boards, where these groups are often successful in getting books removed from the shelves of libraries and from teacher's reading lists.

Ray! The groups who strive so hard to check the flow of free thought are Bush’s biggest constituents. THESE are the people he represents. Is this your model "education president"?

In Ray’s words, "There is more than one way to burn a book.
And the world is full of people running about with lit matches."

No one ever said it better.

Some quick examples of the agenda: The most popular of children's books of this decade, the Harry Potter books, were censored, condemned for promoting witchcraft. I believe I read that Christian Parenting Today branded the books "pure evil." Even so, the series is credited in getting more young people interested in reading than any books in recent history. And reaching back decades, Tarzan and Little Red Riding Hood were censored (respectively, for a "suggestive" relationship out of wedlock and wine being offered granny as a gift).

Texas has been especially active in this regard. Conservative groups that have taken over many textbook selection committees often object to passages in texts. In 2002, one textbook was rejected because it revealed that during the time Texas was being settled, the state had 50,000 prostitutes! (I got that information from a course at Cal State University!) As with the Cassini, Ray seemed to miss this fact when he decided Bush and his cronies were the guys with the answers.

And how many religious groups tried to pound Sagan into the ground for, among other things, his Cosmos series being presented in the schools?

Those are just examples off the top of my head. This, along with his corporate brethren, is the entity George Bush espouses. It is an inbreeding that can only be at our expense. They are very much the thought police so reviled in Fahrenheit 451. As such, it can only be my conclusion that Ray formulates his principles without examining the complexity of the socio-political machinery.

I once heard Ray go on about how beautiful Hollywood used to be; but now, in his words, you have to go through there and see "all the ugly people". Well...yes, they ARE ugly. Many are really fucked up. But does he ask himself how marginalized their lives are? They consist of runaways, addicts, prostitutes, the mentally ill, the homeless, and so on. None of that came up. There was no compassion on the issue; just annoyance that it wasn't as pretty as before. I mention this because it implies a vacuum. I often hear this kind of verbiage from people living in their own worlds (not that I don't live in MINE; but at least I'm informed on the issue enough to want to know more and feel disturbed by it). Can you fully argue the thesis of Fahrenheit 451 if you live in such a vacuum? I suppose it's possible to offer a kernel of truth to readers and still be unable to fully live up to it yourself. Yet, if you're THAT entombed in your own world, in the end you'll wind up serving the advantages of those you indict. Nothing could make people like Bush, Ashcroft, and right-wing religious groups happier.

The issue with Moore doesn't matter. It's the bigger picture which Ray - a man whose imagery and ideas are so famous - is missing terribly, it seems to me.

Writing theory memoirs
I've wondered for some time now what a book by Harlan, something like "On Writing: A Memoir on the Craft" By Stephen King, would be like.

I suspect HE has quite a bit on his plate, likely too much to consider this notion. I'd bet it would be damned impressive teaching if he did.

I'd like to see Harlan publilshing essays on a regular basis like he did for the Freep back in the 70s & 80s. The subject matter is inconsequential - movie reviews, comic books, life on the road, cool toys, rememberance of things past - whatever.

That's me. Of course, HE will have another opinion altogether.

Trying to bust up the Moore/Bradbury ice floe before this happy harbor freezes over en todo.

Mark

Hey folks,
great to see a board like this, i consider Mr. Ellison to be one of the great contemporary writers and a major influence on my life for quite a few years.

I noticed a gentleman posted about Charles Beaumont and I wanted to mention a film made in the early 90's based upon a script he had written in the 60's. It's called "Brain Dead," produced by Roger Corman, starring Bill Pullman, Bud Cort and Bill Paxton.

Yes its very low budget, but the spirit of Beaumont rings true.
I thought the acting and dialog was superb and I highly recommend this little gem to anyone looking for a decent video rental...if you can find it.

As for Beaumont books I only have one collection of shorts called "The Hunger and other stories." Excellent of course. Tragic loss of such a great writer so early in life.

REPLY TO EDWARD KING

Sir:

I have read your most recent post. I am mildly, barely mildly, but not terribly, sorry that your expectations have been so tragically dashed. But, in truth, good sir, your expectations are not my problem. People in Hell, I'm told, want ice water. I can do nothing for them and, likewise, I cannot quench your desires and/or expectations for the cooling quaff of my take on this endless Moore/Bradbury fandango. I will NOT be drawn into it, for good and sufficient reasons, which (like your vaunted expectations) are mine own.

I wish all you beanbags would break a tilt to my thrice-stated position which will not--not even to get Rich to stop saying "I could care less" when he means "I couldn't care less" because (as I've harangued you before, folks) "I could care less" MEANS YOU COULD CARE MORE--I repeat for those who came in late, my position will NOT alter.

So expect, expectate, expectorate, or kaopectate, Mr. King, but I am on the sidelines on this one.

Huffily,

Harlan

Edward,
Actually, Steve Dooner and Cindy rode in the Welcome Wagon together and gave you the fly-swatter, the coupons for the crappy local diner (not the Pavilion, the other one), and the basket of flowers. You'll find this lot cranky, kind, aggravating, supportive, and downright funky at times so bear with us. One post a day keeps the conversations here somewhat stilted, but there is another area linked above where you'll find us drunks discussing Matters of Import and solving all the World's Problems each and every day.

Stick around if you'd like, but try not to take our brusqueness too personal.

As far as Moore/Bradbury, I think it's not much about much. It's between Bradbury and Moore as far as I'm concerned so, frankly, I could care less about this thing. It's a title and, as such, doesn't fall under the legal protections as the content.

HOWEVER, I must agree with John K. that common courtesy alone would've prompted me (if I was Moore and gained 100lbs and appeared slovenly dressed) to have a conversation with Bradbury about the title. Even if Bradbury said no, I would've thanked him for his time and opinion and then promptly named the movie whatever I wanted. But, at least I would've had the conversation and everything would be in the open. I think that's only fair. And I think that, more than anything else, is what pisses Bradbury off.

Ray Bradbury

I have nothing but respect for Ray Bradbury. The man means too much to me to quibble over this wiggling fish.

He took me to Mars once, we spent the entire summer running. How can I repay such a thing?

respectfully,

a lower-case neal

On second thought...
Ya know, being knew to the whole web posting deal (this is my third post, ever, to any website) I wanted to be at my most polite and reserved, but spending the last few days packing for the big move has left me feeling ornery. First , what I had hoped for from these postings is an intelligent, well-reasoned debate about, well, anything (this would be akin to the "science" in the dictionary definition of political science.) After all, this is the HE website- which is to say, I expect more of those postings (pro & con) then, say, those posting on a pro-wrasslin' site. In my first post I made mention that I feel that Ray Bradbury is wrong to be angry with Michael Moore about Moore's alluding to Fahrenheit 451. I think my posting was concise and to the point. I did not say that Mr. Bradbury was evil and hateful or that his books should be banned; only that over the past twenty-five years (I'm 33) RB has been one of a handful of writers that have yet to disappoint. True, in this case it's nothing that RB has written, but what he said. And what he said seems to be a 180 degrees to almost anything he has written. In making my post I was looking for a response from not ony HE, but anyone else who wanted to weigh in with their logical, well-reasoned reponse. What I did receive was a couple of snide personal remarks (save Mr. Evil--Thanks!!) I was not seeking validation from HE. I have respect for the man's work and for the process of how he arrives at his p.o.v.; I'm not looking for a new buddy. When did not pointing a failing by a supposed friend become a requiste to true friendship? --I'd tell such-and-such that he shouldn't mainline heroin into his eyeball, but why upset our friendship!!??--By the by, Did Walt Whitman ever go on record on how he felt when Ray Bradbury cribbed one of Whitman's lines for his short story collection??? Oh, well... Anyone looking to buy/sell/trade books please contact me at my e-mail address. I'm interested in Shirley Jackson, Fredric Brown, Robert Bloch, Richard Matheson, Road Dahl, Charles Beaumont and related-maybe even some Ellison ;).

Pretty darn entertaining on the Michael Moore website. Lotsa neat new articles there.

Big Time magazine story on our Mikey the Red. (I keed)

The right wing guns coming out in force. That fucking liar Isokoff of Newspeak magazine giving false impressions. Mike fighting back very well. Get em pudgy.

The one problem I had with Fahrenheit 911 was the guff about the Unocal pipeline. Yea, there is collusion, but the reasons behind the war are more complex then just oil money. Empire is the dog that shat the 24 carat gold question mark on this one.

But, I am still shocked that a leftie film can be this big.

Too bad Moore's latest flag waving piece in the La Times is a bit much in the sucking up to patriotism stuff. Bein a muckraker is patiotic Mikey. Don't worry, they like you already. Put the fucking flag and bugle down!

Harlan,
Regarding Trey's comment about the Neil Gaiman collaboration, I also ordered it and never received it. I recall that when I ordered it at the con, the person taking the order told me I would receive copy #2 (and he had me sign a list "reserving" that copy). Approximately a year after ordering it, I received a postcard from the publisher apologizing for the delay and stating that it would be published soon. The postcard also stated I could receive a refund if I wished to cancel the order. Obviously, I had no desire to do so. I certainly don't care about the minor cost. I only mention these facts in case something beyond your knowledge occurred.
Dan

co-authored story w/ Neil Gaiman - finished?
Years ago (maybe 96?)at Madcon in Madison Wisconsin you and Neil were writing a story during the convention, did you ever finish it? I ordered it but never received it. I would look forward to reading it.

Trey.

"REPENT! Harlequin-novel writer!" Said the Cramer-man
Harlan,

Seriously, I love seeing you branch out and try new things. Corner of mouth: (don't-quit-your-day-job-in-magical-realism).

Elijah,

I think you have said a good deal that is wise, for a College-going kid. Keep up the good work.

Steve Jarrett and Brain Siano,

Thank you both for finding/listing the Bradbury quote regarding Bush. I have seen other primary sources indicating Bradbury's politics and support of President Bush, but I could not locate them. And, I was one of the ones who, a few weeks ago, said as much in my post about this slight controversy...so I'm glad a primary source has been found and referenced.

I submit, however, that Bradbury's politics are irrelevant to the propriety of Moore using someone's hard-thought title, legal or not. Moore should have asked and gotten it cleared. I liked the movie, and, like Elijah, noted the parallelism of themes in the movie and the similarly-named book. But it would have been nice for Moore to get permission. Bradbury is a living legend, and as such deserves this type of consideration, especially since the book is what helped make him a living legend… It’s a bit kind of like a future astronaut stepping out onto the Mars surface and saying “One small step for man, one giant…jump for mankind.”

-Keith

DIANE DUANE baby chickie sweethaht darlin':

The missuz says we're o and kay for the nonce.

But thanks, anyhow smooch kissy kissy smekkkkkkk!

Staidly, Yr. pal, Harlan

Moore/Bradbury from a novice Webderlandian bushwhacker
apologies, Harlan, if I'm mistaking sarcasm for sincerity...

I can't bring any legalese to bear on this debate, but I find the controversy decidedly odd. The title is a clear derivative of Bradbury's, but I don't see Moore trying to supplant or subvert the original. My initial reaction was that the title had been chosen to evoke cultural memes pertaining to censorship and government control. I thought it was ever so slightly clever, but hardly worthy of this sort of brouhaha.

Does Bradbury dislike that he has a work which has so pervaded our culture that it's universally understood? Is this not the goal of most writers when they publish their works, or is there some sort of (*ahem*) catch-22 of which I'm not aware?

I understand that his politics differ from those expressed by the documentary. That's... too bad, I guess. I mean, McDonalds would rather Mirriam -Webster didn't include 'mcjob' as a word in the eleventh edition of their dictionary because it's got connotations with which they'd rather not be associated. I don't have much sympathy for McDonalds, and I say that proudly. Mr. Bradbury's an outstanding writer and probably quite the nice fellow to boot, but when it comes to complaining about this... it seems pretty much the same thing to me.

I'm entirely open to the possibility that I'm missing a myriad of subtle, nuanced points here. Edify me.

HARLAN,

Just for the record - I'm not a yenta. I'm a Washu, which is... well, I'll let this (abridged) passage from THE MANY FACES OF WASHU website do the explaining:

"...a cute, quirky and enigmatic scientist of genius-level intellect. She is easily recognized by her distinctive mane of red hair which appears to be styled after a mix of crab and hedgehog.

Washu appears as a seemingly minor character in the 'Tenchi Muyo! Ryo-Ohki' OVA anime series (WEBDERLAND NOTE: That's "Japanese Cartoon" for the uninitiated). She has also appeared in different forms in spin-off Tenchi TV series, movies, games and novels."

But that's not all! A Washu is also...

"...a diminutive self-assured red-haired ex-god ex-academic, mother of two. She appears to be 12 years old. Occasionally she reveals herself to be a rather well-proportioned adult. She is in fact somewhere past the 20,000 year mark chronologically. Before this, she was an immortal Goddess.

Washu has mastered all forms of science, having built an extensive collection of ultra-tech machinery with which she conducts her research.

Washu is mischievous. She loves to tease, and uses her various forms to their full advantage. She delights in keeping people off-guard with her erratic behaviour, while concealing her true feelings behind a wry smile or a concentrated look. Her playful nature is often used to mask bitter experiences from her past.

Washu is a woman of many mysteries. She reveals very little of her inner character, and is content to remain in the background. However, her true importance becomes increasingly apparent upon further study - leading to many questions of her origin and motives."

I hope I've provided sufficient evidence on how much I'm NOT a yenta.

Looking forward to the DV. Thank you, Harlan - and thank you, Susan.

CINDY: Thanks for your good wishes. I'm feeling much better now, but summer colds are awful.

EDWARD KING: Hello. Glad to have you here with us in the pavilion. You'll have a great time.

FOR EVERYONE: Howard Zinn, James Earl Jones, Danny Glover, Alfre Woodard, Marissa Tomei and several others read out portions of Zinn's book, 'A People's History of The United States,' over the weekend. You can hear one hour of the performance over at www.democracynow.org. I really recommend this.

Hey Harlan!
How's the coffee situation? Need a top-up?

To Steve Jarrett, who reported on a Bradbury interview showing that Bradbury was a Bush supporter:

I think some further quotation was needed, Steve. Here's the full exchange, dated less than two weeks before 9-11:

"Q: What do you think of President Bush?

Bradbury: He's wonderful. We needed him. Clinton is a shithead and we're glad to be rid of him. And I'm not talking about his sexual exploits. I think we have a chance to do something about education, very important. We should have done it years ago. It doesn't matter who does it -- Democrats or Republicans -- but it's long overdue. Our education system is a monstrosity. We need to go back and rebuild kindergarten and first grade and teach reading and writing to everybody, all colors, and then the whole structure of our education will change because people will know how to read and write."

Okay, end of quote. Needless to say, it doesn't make Ray Bradbury look very good. It's obvious by now that the "no child left behind" initiative was bullshit, and that if Bush does anything with the school system, it'll be to keep cutting funds until it turns out nothing but Bush supporters.

Now, maybe Ray was snookered by the fact that Bush was the candidate who kept talking about education, while Gore yabbered on about technological infrastructures. It's possible; it was an irony I noted at the time, that the Democrat sounded like a Republican business-blowjobber while the Republican sounded off on what had once been traditional Democratic themes.

So that said, I'd be interested in knowing what Bradbury thinks _today_, and whether that informs his animus against Moore.

boy, I dunno...
*** Harlan *** Thanks for "punctillious". That was nice. Hope you found the envelope with the "game" Doug forwarded me.

As for the Moore/Bradbury debacle. I honestly feel it was homage in the best kind of way. I suppose if Mr. Bradbury is a republican of any flavor it's going to be hard for him to see it as such but that's how it looked over here.

In terms of legal precedants, there was that Kubrick "2001: A Space Odyssey / Space: 1999" lawsuit, which I believe was thrown out as essentially groundless. I think we're treading the same path here but I am no lawyer.

If we're to look at the consequences of Moore's title - well, I don't think it could possibly hurt the sales of the Bradbury book FAHRENHEIT 451, but we have to weigh that against how many moronic Michael Moore questions Ray is going to have to endure in his remaining twilight years.

Having hung about Harlan for twenty some years, the phrase "if I had a nickel for every stupid goddamned question..." has taken on a VERY real meaning. The bump in sales may very well NOT be worth the trouble.

Finally, there is literary appropriation to think about. Sure, Moore has appropriated. Granted. Pace. BUT, if we took away every Poe and Melville (and a few others, you fill 'em in) reference from the body of Mr. Bradbury's work - we would have a decidedly smaller body of work.

In my view this would be a tragedy of the first order. I've written at some length here about just how much I love Ray's stuff. PILLAR OF FIRE was the very first science fiction/horror/dark fantasy story I ever read. The last few pages feature a laundry list of literary references that, if internalized, will set the unsuspecting young reader on a lifelong path never to be recovered from. Add to this Harlan's use of Melville's "catalog" technique and you're well and truly bibliophillicly buggered. Literary references and appropriation are almost inescapable in the arts. They are pointers and signposts.

I love Ray Bradbury and his legacy. But in regards to "references", this influence will inevitably run forward as well as backwards.

- Barney Dannelke

Booksinmywalls, PA.

BRIAN SIANO,

It's true: Bradbury is in fact a Bush supporter, and has been since before FAHRENHEIT 9/11 was ever conceived; since before September 11, 2001, in fact. Look at this Salon.com interview from August of 2001: http://archive.salon.com/people/feature/2001/08/29/bradbury/print.html

Scroll down the page a bit, and you'll find this exchange:

"What do you think of President Bush?

He's wonderful. We needed him. Clinton is a shithead and we're glad to be rid of him."

Steve J.

Well, shit. As long as Harlan's inviting...

From my admittedly poor grasp of the law, Bradbury's on shaky ground, legally. You can't copyright titles, right?

Morally, I'm not sure. FAHRENHEIT 451 has become part of the culture. Doing a riff on the title seems fair in that sense. It's unlikely that anyone would confuse Bradbury's landmark of a book with Michael Moore's film. Then again, there are some dumb motherfuckers walking around out there.

It seems to me that this would be less of an issue were Bradbury dead, or had the film's reception not been so divisive.

I think it's clear that Moore used the title because he thought it was good, not to disenfranchise Bradbury or cash in on the success of the book.

Then again, then again...maybe Moore should have gotten Bradbury's permission, just as an act of courtesy and deference. I'd never open up an optical place with the name DANGEROUS VISION, but if I did, I'd approach Ellison first. Or at least invest in high-tech security. You never know what that guy's gonna pull.

To Steve Evil and Everyone Else:

MY (in caps, for emphasis)option to remain silent on the Michael Moore/Ray Bradbury matter should in no way be taken as any kinda indication by implication or inference that discussion here should be curtailed. On the contrary: I think this is a VERY important moment in both political and literary events, and should be vetted exhaustively by anyone cutting trail here.

Just remember: the map is not the territory.

Keep on keepin'-on, muchachos and muchachas.

Yr. pal, The Curse of Capistrano

Not sinister, Evil. . .
Mr. Dooner:

I am aware of Mr. Ellison's neutrality on the issue, and have never asked his opinion on it. On the other hand, to my knowledge, niether he nor the moderator has forbidden further discussion of the subject. If asked directly, I will discontinue, but in the meantime my post was a response to Mr. King, whom I agreed with, and not a question for Harlan (may I call you Harlan?).

Mr. Siano:

You may well be right. I hope so. I may have been unfair, and I do hope so. All the same I find it strange that Bradbury would be offended rather than honoured by the reference, thus adding fuel to the conservative anti-Moore fires. Why would he make the effort to bring bad publicity to a Bush oponent at this critical juncture? If he's anti-Bush, why not speak out against White House policy rather than an anti-Bush filmaker, when he most needs support, over something so seemingly insignificant as a title? It does appear that he has chosen sides, or at least made his priorities known.

I did read something on this Pavilon about Bradbury supporting Bush for his Mars program. But I should know better than to use that as a source. I eagerly await Bradbury's anti-Bush statement.




(Even if it never comes, "The Halloween Tree" will always be my favorate.)

Filling up the World with "What I Didn't Know"
All,

So I never knew there was a sucha thing as "the Group" until I chanced upon an anthology this weekend entitled, "California Sorcery" edited by William F. "the Windmill" Nolan and William Schafer. Ya'll should check this one out. Thanks to this book, I learned a little bit more about some of my favorite writers; namely Charles Beaumont and Richard Matheson. This is a small treasure.

Not to diminish any of the other members of this group, but Beaumont must have been an absolute gas to hang out with, Unca Harlan.

And in case ya'll didn't notice, Unca Harlan penned a nice preface to Jack Dann and Janeen Webb's fantabulous anthology of Australian scifi writers, "Dreaming Down-Under". It's not new (TOR 1998), but it's new to me.

Plus, I chanced upon a near-mint DELL edition of "The Seven Who Fled", and now I don't know what to do with myself. I wonder how many of ya'll Webderlanders have read this book? (I have not, and I feel bad about it.) If so, didya dig it as much as Ellison?

Hi Cindy.

Respectfully,

Neal

CURTAIN CALL

I want to thank the Ellison Playhouse for what has to be one of the most bizarre, puzzling, surreal dramas I’ve ever sat in on. Our performers - ERIC, CINDY, and HARLAN - utterly outdid themselves.

Opening with a deceptively predictable first act, the drama led to starkly mystifying twists and turns of malice and mutual suspicion. I don’t know WHAT the fuck you guys were talking about and I have NO idea how things ended in the mollifying warmth of a sunrise as they did. It was like Ibsen on crystal meth. Yet, it is this narrative labyrinth that kept the play from descending into standard melodrama; its very POWER lay in the ambiguity. Making clever use of a shadowy, mysterious asshole from New York as a hook, the drama sustained a tension all the way to its extraordinary resolution. Filled with red herrings, broken hearts, treachery, brooding, conciliation, philosophical themes, taut dialogue, and broad technique, this was one of the best Twilight Zones I’ve ever seen. It's Stoppard and Shakespeare rolled in one.

I applaud our outstanding cast. All three of you must take a bow. THIS...was a work of genius!

REPLY TO LI'L BENJY WASHU

Geezus, what an unconscionable yenta nag you've become, BennyBoy!

Barney was as good as his word. Even punctilious. The book got here last Friday, was sturdily repackaged by Susan, and was mailed to you at the address you provided...same day. Friday.

This is Monday.

We had something called the Fourth of July over the weekend, and no mail was moving, being as the US Postal Service, a Federal adjunct, had a day off in respect.

I know it's difficult for someone with (as we say in Yiddish) schpillkehz or (as we say in Sicilian) agita to hold one's water for the protracted period of less than a week, but I urge you to take a placebo of some kind, place a cool compress on your furrowed brow, and lie down till the ill humours and vapours pass. It did wonders for Mussolini, howzabout you?

With a manly hug and a kiss,

Yr. pals, Harlan & Susan

Re Bradbury and Michael Moore. I just want to make a small, corrective comment, and I hope I'm correct here. I saw a comment where Bradbury was said to have "thrown in his lot" with Bush, and several people have posted about the apparent incongruity of Bradbury's stance against censorship and this alleged support of Bush.

People, please. You're speculating way beyond the data-- and you are probably maligning Bradbury in a very small-minded and sinister way.

Please, gang, do NOT fall into the sullen, defensive belief that criticism of Moore equals support of Bush. This is the beginning of a totalitarian mindset, where a difference of opinion is recast as an act of bad faith, or malignity. It is not very different from saying that a vote for Kerry is vote for terrorism, or that doubt about capitalism makes one a Stalinist.

Bradbury is angry at Moore over the title of his movie. As far as I know, that's his complaint. But as far as I know, Bradbury could be every bit as critical of Bush as Moore is. I could be wrong here, but I have not seen any indication that Bradbury supports Bush, or that his complaints about Moore are based on a defense of Bush.



I saw the new Spider-Man movie, and loved it. I think it's mainly because Dr. Octopus was my favorite Spider-Man villain, and because they gave the role to Alfred Molina, and because they gave him a good script and a vivid, human character to work with. (J. Jonah Jameson's my other favorite character, and the scene where his assistant's suggesting names for the new super-villain gave me the biggest laugh of the movie. No, it wasn't "Science Squid.") Spidey gets to save Aunt May, who in turn gets to deliver a wonderful speech about what superheroes mean to the rest of us mortals. (I get the feeling that, in a sequel, she's going to tell Peter "Of _course_ I knew you were Spider-man. Did you really think I didn't know you that well?")

HARLAN,

If you don't mind me asking - what is the current status of the Hebrew DV? Is it on the way to Bermuda, or are you still awaiting its arrival from Barney? Are you waiting for me to send the $100.00 to you now, or (as you stated earlier) do I wait until I've actually seen the book with my own eyes? (Not that I believe it's all that neccessary. From my past experiences with items sent directly from HERC, quality is practically always gauranteed.)

Eric,
I am so happy you're you! Delighted!!

No more talk of leaving, then. Hurry home with your bad self when you've finished with your travels. I will look forward to your return and new tales of where you've been and what you've seen.

Truly delighted, I am
Cindy


Harlan,
It's really entirely Norman Epstien's fault. In your case that's ONE, count it, ONE miss in the almost quarter century I've known you ( not such a bad record). I'm just so pleased that it wasn't Eric. Your message was balm.

You are, as always, such a peach.
:)
Cindy



Hello Chuck,
I hope you have a safe and lovely holiday.
Your friend,
Cindy


Mr.King,
Welcome, sir. May I take your hat? A small suggestion, if I may... if you sit next to our host it would be wise to choose his right side.

;)

He's left handed.
Cindy


Steve Dooner,
Drink fluids, LOTS of fluids.
I hope you're well soon.
:)
Cindy

Dear Eric
I wanted you to know how much I sympathize with your horror at being accused of being a psychotic stalker. Mr. Ellison's rant came immediately after my first post (a silly homage to grilled cheese). My immediate reaction was "Is he talking to me? Perhaps "grilled cheese" is the secret code phrase that the frothing fanatic used to identify himself. Perhaps Mr. Ellison received anonymous postcards from exotic locales with nothing more than an ominous warning scrawled in black marker--GRILLED CHEESE!"

Fortunately, I quickly realized that it was simply my timing. I was involved only as a bystander in a drive-by imbroglio.

It's your fifteen seconds, Eric. Someday you'll laugh about it.
You are Harlan Ellison's personal pseudo-cyberstalker. And I've heard that rubber chicken, if properly roasted and seasoned with rosemary, tastes just like crow.

On the off chance that Steve or Mark are recipients of the Mega Millions ticket that was sold in MA while purchasing the daily ripple, I would like to say that you guys are the best. Really. And that I am willing to be your next best friend and can relocate if necessary.

If you did not win, then forget it.

(I'm still busy going through the Lowell, MA phone book so I can touch base with everyone. Surprisingly, I'm getting a lot of hangups. I don't know why.)

Still searching for the real Zombie Gandhi...

rich

Farenheit 9/11 part two
Steve,
I hope I haven't offended either you or Harlan with my previous post. In my defense, my previous post was my first post (I guess I should gone further back through the previous posts) as well having spent the last three weeks getting married, buying a house (which is about seven hundred miles away from where I currently live) and dealing with dragging a house full of stuff across four states.
In no way was I trying to be cute, rude or disrespectful to either Ray Bradbury or Harlan; I know they have put up more than enough of that without yet another turd-thrower coming their way. So keep up the good fight!!!!

"Yet Once More O Ye Laurels, Yet Once More Ye Myrtles Brown"

Mr. Lycidas, Mr. Evil:

Harlan's already made it clear that he will not enter the Moore/Bradbury fray. Read back a few days and you will see that he has said that it is legal to parody or make homage to another work's title. That is about as far as he will go.

Why would you expect him to enter into a conversation that could potentialy hurt his dear friend? I mean, seriously, we are just little electronic strangers afterall.

I'm sorry to be a budinsky, here. No wish to intrude. Harlan fights his own battles beautifully (it is truly awesome to behold), but why goad the man? It's already been dealt with days ago.

And if you are sincere, then realize that you have had the power all along to make your own judgement about the improper conduct of Mr. Moore or Mr. Bradbury. You have the silver slippers already; you do not need the validation of a famous wizard who happens to reside behind the curtains here.

Sorry to sound petulant. I have been up all night with a cold.

Steve Dooner

Indeed
I must agree with Mr. King here, who put things far more politely than I ever could. "451" was about a repressive state which kept people dosile with frivolous distractions. I can't think of a more appropriate reference for Moore to use. Bradbury's main concern seemed to be that people were forgetting literature, but surely that wasn't the sole horror of that society? Surely protecting our right to read (and thus THINK) is just as important (more usefull?) than memorizing the text? Is holding the powers that Be up to scrutiny not the first step in safeguarding such things?

And has a great man of letters truly thrown in his lot with a President who's barely literate? It saddens me to no end.

-Steve

Happy 4th, everyone! May you end the holiday without a hangover and with all your fingers.

Harlan,

Even Sherlock Holmes blew it once. It was The Adventure of the Yellow Face. At the end of the story he covered his ass.

Chuck

Fahrenheit 9/11
Mr. Ellison,
First, let me say that I have nothing but respect (with a little bit of envy thrown in) for Ray Bradbury. The man has more than earned his place in the canon of world literature and is the standard-bearer for anyone who has the slightest inkling (pun intended) they have something worthwhile to contribute to the collective bookshelf. However, I am at a loss for words about recent reports that Mr. Bradbury is upset that Micheal Moore alludes to Fahrenheit 451 in the title to his new movie.
W., or, more truthfully, the people that have their hands up the dummy's ass, are poised to turn the fiction of Bradbury, Philip K. Dick, George Orwell, et al into reality. I understand that a writer's words are their's and their's alone, but when they are used not only to affect change in the spirit of the writer's work, but serve as an acknowledgement of the work as well... Well, where is Mr. Bradbury's anger justified? And yes, Harlan, as an avid reader of anything worth the effort (especially in time when to worry about anything other than what decent Americans should be going into hock for is to invite contempt,) this bothers me more than it should.

Edward King

HE in Wired
There's a brief interview with Harlan in the current(July)issue of WIRED concerning his AOL lawsuit. Also, a feature on Isaac Asimov and his robot stories.
Joey

NOW AVAILABLE: A New Petition For Commemorative F&SF Stamps
Hello Weberlanders All,

Happy 4th of July...I am rather pleased to announce that There is a brand new petition for a series of commemorative stamps for science fiction and fantasy authors, editors and artists.

Last weekend at Midwestcon 55, a test version of the petition was distributed and was promptly vetted by a gang of smofs (never mind who THEY are), sipping martinis late in the evening around the consuite. Their criticsm, in turn, prompted a number of changes in the petition, all for the better.

The petition consists of two opening pages of your choice; the first features photographs of John W. Campbell, Jr, Isaac Asimov, Robert A. Heinlein and Chesley Bonestell. The second version has photos of Catherine L. Moore and Henry Kuttner, Alice Sheldon (a.k.a. James Tiptree, Jr.) and Philip K. Dick. All three are Word documents; the first page contains jpeg pictures, the second version has gif photos. A third page has a section for write-in candidates (in case I missed anyone significant), a web address for information on the selection process and the address to the Citizen's Stamp Advisory Committee.

What it does not contain is a master plan for who will be honored; the final selections will ultimately made by the USPS and the Committee. What we are attempting to do here is catching their attention, in a BIG way.

The petition will available to you Weberlanders FIRST via email today through 6 July; just contact me at the address above. The petition and a press release will go out to related media outlets and other sf/fantasy websites on 7 July, by no small coincidence, Robert Anson Heinlein's birthday.

Another point; this petition effort is not in any way in competition with F&SF editor Gordon Van Gelder's effort to honor Isaac Asimov with a stamp, rather, it is complementary to it. He and I exchanged emails on the subject several months ago and he stated that it was his view that the groundswell support for an Asimov stamp will overwhelmingly convince the US Postal Service and the Committee that other stamps would be warranted.

I begged to differ with him; it takes three years to mount a campaign to authorize a stamp...why wait another three years to mount another drive when there are so many who deserve to be honored now. I do believe that the Good Doctor would have like to have been honored with his friends and collegues rather than by himself.

Please feel free to share the petition with your friends, neighbors and fellow readers. This little project has been a labor of love and an absolute pleasure to do. Thank you for your time and attention.

Faithfully Yours,
Chris M. Barkley


Now Reading (Non-Fiction): Rex Stout by John McAleer, Ghosts of Tsavo by Philip Caputo.

Recently Purchased: A Tale of Two Cities by Charles Dickens (afterword by George Orwell), Preston Sturges by Preston Sturges,
The 20th Centry's Greatest Hits by Paul Williams and The Ethical Slut by Dossie Easton and Catherine A. Liszt.

Thsnks, Harlan.

APOLOGIA IN EXCELSIS TO ERIC MARTIN

My most abject and most sincere apologies. More than several unique and otherwise disconnected elements came together, melded with one final act of brash meanness, to produce my conclusion,

which

is

totally

and

completely

and

embarrassingly

WRONG.

For the record, and particularly for Cindy who was dragged into this sideways, ERIC MARTIN is NOT NOT NOT NOT the stalker to whom I referred in earlier posts, the last two-three days. (Kindly conjure the mental image of Ellison striking himself repeatedly in the noggin with a rubber chicken.)

Mr. Martin, one more thing, apart from my discomfort at using all the right data to evoke a completely incorrect conclusion (gawd, i hate it when i do that):

Your leavetaking should not, in any way, be based on the false assumption that your "voice troubles me." On the pleasant contrary, sir: I like a little tabasco in my scrambled metaphors.
It is true you nip or gum at my heels from time to time, but I take utterly NO OFFENSE at that. I need it, from time to time; I admire it, most of the time; and at no time does it make me wish you were gone. I blow no smoke, sir. I tell you true.

Please stay or go as you desire; but if you go, do not for a nanosecond lead yourself astray with the belief that it's because of me or my "discomfort," onaccounta nonesuch exists.

Again, I feel the Idiot Detective for even having suggested Eric Martin was a nom-de-net for Norman Epstein. I was wrong, and I once again apologize to Mr. Martin (and to Cindy) for my failure to apply ratiocination and implication correctly.

Truly red-faced, I remain,

Certifiable,

Harlan Ellison

Threading back through the posts, I see HE recently had some "settlement" with some jerk in New York about never bothering him again. My same-time departure from Webderland is a coincidence. It pains me greatly that Harlan would think I was some kind of stalker or psycho---all the more reason I SHOULD leave the board, since obviously my voice is troublesome enough to Harlan for him to think I'm this loser.

I asked Rick to confirm to Harlan, if it's not a pain, that I am of whom I speak, based on private e-mails to him and IP addresses.

That said, and having posted TWICE, I do now cease posting for good, although I'm truly sorry to have to go on such a strange note.

Eric Martin

(Ed. Note: removed first post which contained some personal info at Eric's request. Confirming it's doubtful he is the same person as the other gentleman being discussed.)

Rick,

I don't think you normally sound like Ellison.

AJB,

As I said, my words weren't directed at anyone in particular, except maybe my younger self.

It wasn't the concept of being a luddite I found telling, it was the word itself. Atavistic, archaic, anachronistic--these and many others could do the job, right? But Ellison readers are more likely than the average guy to have luddite at their disposal. Other tell-tale words: lagniappe and paralogia. I used the former once in a paper, and for my troubles the paper was returned, the word crossed out in red ink with the admonishment, "Don't use colloquialisms!"

Mr. Ellison,

I appreciate your correction. As to your actual barb, I'll take your word for it; even were I inclined to research your Sci-Fi Buzz commentaries, my research time is spent trying to find a mainstream dictionary that defines "causist".

Seriously, tho, that sounds like an amazing library. I go back and forth over whether I should hold onto the books I read. There is always a chance I'll want to reread certain passages or entire books in subsequent years. But when I lived in Baltimore, I saw maybe the coolest idea ever for read books: The Book Thing (http://www.bookthing.org). It's a tiny, dangerously cramped warehouse, open Saturdays and Sundays, where you can go and take as many books as you want, for free. Over the two times I went there, I maanged to snag Wife to Mr. Milton, The General in His Labyrinth,The Official Preppie's Handbook, Paul Fussell's BAD and tons of other great stuff. Granted, I suspected a lot of the wheelbarrow-pushers of being illiterate Ebay vultures, but who knows what evils lurk? All the books you leave with are stamped with the request that you not resell them. And me and the people I'd go with aren't the reselling type anyway.

Rick Wyatt: why would you think that 'you sound like Harlan Ellison' is an insult? It certainly wasn't intended that way.

I've read through the "rants" link you posted and I can see that there have been incidents in which people have gone after you personally. This isn't one of them.

Happy Frank Capra, Sgt. York, Irving Berlin, Woody Guthrie, Captain America, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Jack Kirby, Martin Luther King, Will Eisner, Jim Thorpe, Superman, Scott Joplin, Louis Armstrong, Ring Lardner Jr., Jimmy Cagney, Jesse Owens, Orson Welles, Isaac Asimov, Arthur Miller, Ray Bradbury, Joe Dimaggio, Hank Aaron, Willie Mayes, Ted Williams, Duke Ellington, John Ford, Paul Robeson and Norman Rockwell Day!

Steve "A Yankee Doodle Dandy" Dooner

Damn near six years too late...
...to make the "let's call Rick an Ellison imitator" window guys, but thanks for the feedback:
http://harlanellison.com/rants/rt980709.htm

Much has changed since then - I'm much more calm and reserved for the most part, and the site DOES have an extensive bibliography now - but many of the sentiments remain the same.

Have a good fourth today and day off tomorrow. Celebrate your country by going and seeing "Fahrenheit 9/11."

Washu,

"We have no distinctive personas of our own in cyberspace, and whenever we try to have one, we end up sounding like goofballs."

My ass is covered on this one because I sound as much a goofball in the 3D world as I do in cyberspace. I have the same distinctive irritating personality in both realms. Only the other day a friend likened me to a gastric stitch.

...and speaking of irritating, a quick general word about movie critics:

From this day forward I eschew movie critics. They get me too vexed by their blatant oversights, blundering blatherings, and hackneyed lines. Recently Roger Ebert - whose essays I generally enjoy, even when I disagree - panned a film of solid redeeming value, a film extremely important to me (and in my own collection). It had to be the lamest nonsense he'd ever written on a film, EXPLODING with oversight. When I read it I snarled like Karloff's Frankenstein monster. It reminded me of a sentiment once expressed by Harlan himself, when his friend Ebert failed to grasp the obvious about RETURN TO OZ (1985). And the review that bugged ME was on par with Leonard Maltin's 1 1/2 star rating for BLADERUNNER. It was THAT absurd.

Add to this the shallow comments of NPR critics I hear typically and I have to say I'd like to take a shovel to 'em as Cleavon Little did to Slim Pickins in BLAZING SADDLES.

Yeah, I'm adhering to a new rule. When I want to read a review I'll read my own. From here on in the universe begins with my opinion and ENDS with my opinion (hell, I got extraordinary praise from a professor for a 10-page thing I did on SALT OF THE EARTH at Cal State University). Self-deification has its merits after all.

...And I AM honoring BRANDO over the next few days by running all his artistic triumphs on my vcr (and dvd) as well as his hammier roles in which he mumbles incomprehensibly like he was BORN with cotton swabs in his mouth. (I actually purchased ONE-EYED JACKS about 5 years ago. A used video, but in great condition, I had the store run it for me to check its quality. Well, turned out that wasn't the greatest idea: they picked up from a scene late in the movie in which Brando - as Rio - is in jail telling Louisa how much he loves her. In unison, the entire store - staff and customers alike - exploded in laughter listening to Brando go, "Mmm-mhhh-mmm-mmm-mmm-hhh-hm-mm-m-hmm-hm-hmm-mm"...a bit he does pretty much throughout the whole movie; and when you DO understand him he gives us lines like, "You gob o'spit!" or "git up yuooooo bag o'guts" or "don't be doin' 'er like that". Nevertheless, it's a FUN film and Maldin is brilliant and it's a great friend-turned-foe epic. So, even though I had to hide my face till I was out of the store, I dun gone ahead n' bought the tape)

(Incidentally, if anyone tried to argue that Brando was dryly and intentionally sending up Western dialogue here I WOULD buy into that. The actor was extremely meticulous and exact in his designs)

Feeling like an idiot-- AGAIN.

Sigh.

Thank you. It occurs to me that you have never steered me wrong. Not ever.

Now my curious is up.

Blue and dying from lack of details, I am

your friend,
Cindy Holmes

Blah
Well, Spider-man 2 was pretty happy-making, at least for me and the person I saw it with. Still processing the Eric Martin thing, of which no more here.

But Spider-man was swell. Too much speechifying and one other thing I'll mention below. But otherwise, swell. Jim dandy. Crammed with homages and recastings of great Spider-man moments on covers and within issues, gifted with Tobey Macguire and a great cast. Well, it was swell.

Leaving aside wonky science and the sentient tentacles, I thought it was curious that a superhero film had to up the ante by putting a loved one in danger for the climax along with everyone else in New York. But then, Superman, Superman 2, Spider-man, Batman, Batman Returns...so it's a complaint that could be addressed at a number of super-hero movies, and not just this one.

What I then realized was interesting was that the only good super-hero film that didn't add in this extra layer of 'Oh, and your [insert endangered loved one here]' to the climax was Unbreakable, wherein both the 'action' climax and the twist ending keep the hero fully in the realm of helping others or being horrified by their deaths, without adding in a family member in peril bit.

But, all in all, a happy-making movie, and Spider-man has enough selfless moments that I'm willing to live with MJ in peril again. I just wish Spidey didn't have to.

Cheers, Jon

The problem with on-line posting is that, no matter how hard you try, it is impossible to fully convey your personality. This is why my earliest posts are so schizophrenic - I was trying desperately to articulate my own voice within the written word, and I constantly met with complete and utter failure. Nowadays, I just try to take it easy. This is Harlan's one advantage in here. We ALL know what he sounds like. We can connect the words to the voice - one reason perhaps why we sometimes subconsciously (or not-so-subconsciously) attempt to imitate him. We have no distinctive personas of our own in cyberspace, and whenever we try to have one, we end up sounding like goofballs.

You're welcome, Alex.

Ellisonian influences and others
Teak, those are some interesting thoughts, but I can't agree with your unstated premise. I doubt there's anyone here who is so dominated by Harlan's influence as to wipe out the vestiges of any other reading. I was influenced by Harlan--no doubt about it. I think my opinions and approach to argument were heavily weighted with his imprint, as I met him when I was a sappy 15-year-old (I'm now 52; this was not recent).

But my writing style is probably more influenced by Stanley Elkin and Mark Twain than by Harlan's. Pynchon and Dickens and Moorcock all left their marks on me. It's not Harlan's voice I sought to emulate. It was his thinking processes, the woof and warp of his analytical skills. And I must have succeeded. When my wife finally met Harlan, just 15 years ago, she said, "He sounds like you." No, I corrected her; I sound like him.

Do we often speak of luddites? Well, sure we do, sure we do. But is that because of Harlan, oft accused (unfairly, I think) of being a luddite himself? Isn't it more likely it's because so many of us came from a youth spent poring through science-fiction magazines? What Harlan's influence did for me, through "Dangerous Visions" and like work, was to break me free of the fannish mentality that "fans are slans" and that science-fiction was necessarily forward-looking literature. For all of the genre's merits, in the mid-sixties the SF field was all too often reactionary, not progressive.

I've picked up on some writers due to Harlan's direct suggestions (and some jazz artists, too). But most of the reading I've done in the intervening decades, from Gaddis to Coover to Asturias, was not because Harlan suggested them, but because his take-no-prisoners assault on style demonstrated that there were voices out there, if only I'd seek them out myself. They've all influenced me. Harlan's influence was the wedge that got me to find them on my own.

Hey, Harlan--thanks.

GETTING IT RIGHT

CINDY: Do not lament Eric Martin's departure. What I had gradually begun to suspect for some while has now been cast as fact. The person you've been addressing as "Eric Martin" is not, in fact, Eric Martin. It is a nom-de-net for someone who has spent more than twenty-five years annoying me, duplicitously and obsessively posting here and by other means a tsunami of bad spirited and purposely hurtful blatherings. Eric is
gone; "Eric" is gone; and the E who is "Eric" is gone.

Do not lament the departure.

TEAK: Whatever your observations and ruminations about me may be, I must perforce advise you that your memory does not serve you well. I have ALWAYS responded to the query, "Have you read all these books?" with exactly the same words, whether in situ, in my 250,000-book library here at the house, or out of the mouth of Danny Kaye as Potiphar in the Twilight Zone adaptation of my story, "Paladin of the Lost Hour." I have NEVER responded "Of course I do" (and I think you meant to write "Of course I HAVE"). NEVER.

What I HAVE SAID, every time, as I said on-camera in that "Buzz" commentary, was as follows:

IDIOT TO ELLISON: (with stunned awe and disbelief) Have you read all these books...?

ELLISON: (with innocence) Hell, no. I haven't read ANY of them. Who wants a library fulla books you've already read?

You could look it up, Teak.

Harlan

Free Comic Book Day
In case any of you haven't heard, today is Free Comic Book Day. Go to http://www.freecomicbookday.com to find a comic store near you that is participating in this great chance to get free schwag. Tell your friends, tell your loved ones.

This has been a public service announcement.

James

People writing like Ellison
Note: The following thoughts aren't addressed to anyone in particular, except maybe a younger me. I address Mr. Ellisonas "Ellison" because Harlan is too familiar, HE looks too much like someone giving him holy capitalization and typing Mr. Ellison over and over again seems overly deferential, and that's exactly the tone I want to avoid. In any case, no disrespect is intended.
____________________________
I don't think it's just Rick; to me, a lot of the posts I read here sound like people who've been reading a lot of Ellison. I always wonder if he notices it--how aware can someone be of their own style? But when you start seeing the word "Luddite" used in regularity, you know you're around Ellisonistas. I mean, shit, my undergrad studies revolved around industrial and labor history and we never used the word as often as Ellison fans. Referencing Kitty Genovese too much is a good sign, since every war in the intervening years provides a better example of apathy towards others' suffering.

The way Ellison writes, it's like a guy who's a total culture junkie and is able to regurgitate it back at will. That's why even his earliest stuff feels Pomo to me. It's an approach that would gain many followers in the subsequent decades, although few could do it as effortlessly as he can. I always feel like here's a guy with knowledge amazing in its breadth and all you'll ever see is a thin slice.

He's a charismatic guy. I think he wrote once he slept with like 500 (!) women in his time. Granted, if anyone tried that now they'd quickly catch something fatal, but even in pre-AIDS time the average jerk doesn't sleep with 500 people. (Except maybe for Sam Delany, who I'm almost sure has Ellison beat on this front. See The Motion of Light on Water) He's an aggressive, take-no-shit, old-school macho kind of guy, which is especially unusual given the culture of pussiness and fear that prevails in sci-fi/fantasy settings. He's exerted a lot of influence over me, though I hasten to deny it. I read Borges when I was 15 because of him. I read Bester because of him. I checked out Why I Hate Saturn because of him (even though I didn't much care for it). When I was doing improv debate in high school I ripped off some Sci-Fi Buzz thing he did about Genovese. (Almost 10 years ago, so I think I'm covered by the Statute of Limitations). He's a great, powerful writer.

But no one got good reading just one writer. To the extent your effort actually makes a difference in how well you write (as opposed to sheer, congenital talent), reading is 80-90% of the battle. And that means reading lots of different shit. Do you think Ellison would only ever read 1 writer? Hells no. He'd be reading Flaubert and Marquez and Flannery O'Connor and god knows what else.

As I said, Ellison has exerted a lot of influence in my life, starting from when I finished the Essential Ellison at 14. But the really life-altering moment was during one of those Sci-Fi channel clips. Ellison's down in this giant library, talking about how people always ask him if he's read all these books. And with typical bellicosity, Ellison says he always replies "Of course I do!" And I remember thinking, I want to be able to have some giant library of books I've read some day. To this day, when I meet someone who stocks their shelves their books they haven't and won't read, I feel slightly irritated.

_________________________
It was a long time ago and I'm sure no one cares but I just noticed someone said I was trying to accuse someone else of hypocrisy. Total bullshit. If I want to call someone a hypocrite, that's the word I'll use.

Cindy, Webderland means never having to say you're sorry.

But seriously, I'm on hiatus for some months...it will be good for the soul. I'm just cleaning up the leftovers now, which includes responding to your very gracious post. Stay gold, sweetheart.

--Eric

Go easy on that waterbed, Rob. I haven't even kissed you yet!


XXXXXXXXX
there, now I have :)

Brando
My mother had a crush on Marlon Brando. He broke my heart with a shrug as Terry Molloy in ON THE WATERFRONT. That's one of the four or five best male screen characters ever. He had another: Don Corleone. He stole A DRY WHITE SEASON with a single word, "lozenges." The few seconds I've seen of THE FUGITIVE KIND were stunning. He could also be a ham for all seasons. I think he was terrible in JULIUS CAESAR, acted off the screen by James Mason, and THE WILD ONE seems like silly exploitation nowadays. His commercial movies could be embarrassing -- but I got a real hoot our of his funky oilman Caesar in THE FORMULA and I dug on that much-reviled thriller, NIGHT OF THE FOLLOWING DAY. But sometimes he went beyond mere quality, into something celestial. His natter about prom night in LAST TANGO IN PARIS made me forget about Maria Schneider's T&A and the pretentious French dialog -- I was HIM for the moment, suffering in a human way. That was acting for the gods.

I'm sorry, Eric.

I don't want you to go. I've been in hot oil all week over some things that are happening in my community with some outrageously crooked cops. Things are pretty intense and I over reacted to your statement. I should have just let you express your opinion. The things you and Harlan said were correct. I had no right to admonish you over your statement. I was way out of line and I am sorry.

I guess I have a thing for Ray Bradbury, I took it personally.

Please don't go away. I meant what I said you ARE charming, witty and clever and can put a skirt blowing english on your words when you feel like it.

I behaved like a fishwife and I beg your indulgence.

With genuine contrition, I remain
Cindy

Frankie Angel,
You are right as well.

Cindy

Marlon Brando

My feelings about Brando are and were all over the place. Even when he broke the goofy meter in ISLAND OF DR. MOREAU, he seemed to be striving for...SOMETHING. What it was, I'm not sure, although I think he would have been happier if he'd done more films like ONE-EYED JACKS, where he was the auteur. I guess he felt Hollywood to be painfully constricting.

Maybe that's why he took such a lackadaisical approach so so many of his later projects. There were exceptions, though, like THE FRESHMAN. I think he turned in an interesting and layered performance in DON JUAN DEMARCO. Maybe films like that just tickled his fancy, let him do things that most of the films he did just didn't allow.

Brando never bored me, that's for sure. His talent was as impressive as it was all to often squandered.

A bit like Orson Welles, another great talent who ended up as the butt of so many fat jokes.

Chuck

June issue of Harper's -- on the way
HARLAN: It's on the way, buddy. No sweat. Meant to give you a ring this week but things got busier than I expected (a couple of article deadlines, two interviews and the usual reviews -- finishing the last of them now). I'll call you next week and let you know how things turned out regarding that discussion we had a few weeks back. In the meantime, you and Susan should catch the new Spidey flick -- this is the first time in a long time that I've caught a movie twice in a row the same week -- it held up real well. Lotta fun.
--Dorman

Cookie (and for that matter, Charlie):

I’m like the feckless juvenile delinquent in the tradition of Brando, Lee Marvin, and Steve McQueen. But I sure as hell didn’t "push the envelope" in my last post, having simply pointed out, as you yourself did, that others had been breaching the double post rule as well and having simply offered a suggestion the board could take or leave.

To footnote Frank's post, Rick, like many of us, myself included, goes flagrantly over-the-top sometimes. Recall, for example, his almost pathological outburst directed at PAB on the day he shut down the old site. NONE of that shit he gave her was necessary. She was numbed by it for a while but she stuck around. In my opinion, Rick is not ALWAYS particularly mindful about humiliating a person when he sees fit and his inferences can be as looney as anyone’s. While you and I DO have to behave like civil guests - and, indeed, we are all going to do so - I don't think ANYONE here is above reproach.

Beyond that I don’t care what ANYONE has to say after CYNICAL GIRL's earlier post - that reassuring, loving, supple embrace. Her reception made me feel REAL good. I’m already pulling out the water bed. Man, I haven’t used THIS thing in a LONG time.

DORMAN: Yes, please. And thank you.

RICK & RICH: It's spelled Gandhi, not Ghandi.

You're banished for six years, Wyatt. Twelve, for Rich.

heh heh heh harlan

Aw, c'mon. You didn't laugh at Zombie Ghandi?? Fantastic.

Of course it was nice to see Rob staying true to form.

And GODDAMMIT!!! Fucking bases loaded and Manny just struck out looking. GODDAMMIT!!

Oh, well. I just saw the CATWOMAN trailer and I'm really underwhelmed. However, I cannot wait for the porno version.

One spells it M-I-C-H-A-E-L.

Or wasn't that what you meant?

Frank, that was the first thing I thought also: Rick Wyatt's remarks definitely had an Ellisonian flavor to them. Brought to mind Stephen King's bit about milk in the refigerator taking on he flavor of the things nearest to it. Though I never noticed Stephen King sounding a bit like Harlan Ellison, or vice-versa.

June issue of Harper's --
HARLAN: If you still need a copy, I've got mine. I can get into the mail on Saturday or first thing next week, depending on when you respond on this board (I'll check back later this evening -- now that I have another break from writing, I've gotta take my daughter to see "Spiderman 2" -- again! -- she's web happy).
--Dorman

Steve: Jor-El seems to be current canon and is the spelling on the movie box I've got, though I've also seen it as Jor-el, Jor El and (for the Golden Age Superman) Jor-L. Regardless, 'El' is the family name and 'Jor' is the given name. Hence Superman's Kryptonian name of 'Kal-El.'

Cheers, Jon

Marlon Brando was one of the few actors who would bring me into the theater no matter what the fuck film he was appearing in. That's what Marlon Brando was to me.

Only few living actors can do that for me today; Jack Nicholson, Kevin Spacey, Tom Hanks (though the Hanks response, I believe, is more his careful choice in projects rather than my affinity for his acting).

-TODD

REPLY TO NORMAN EPSTEIN

Rick forwarded your reply. Fine.

If the silence-between-us you promise in your communique is maintained ABSOLUTELY, you need not worry about any further action on my part. I have already spoken to my NYC attorney, Pat Lyons, and he will be calling both the Postal Inspectors and the Manhattan DA's office, to lay quietus on this affair.

Leave me alone, for GOOD this time, and FOREVER; and we need have no further contact.

Harlan Ellison

HELP HELP HELP REQUESTED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

DOES ANYBODY OUT THERE HAVE A COPY OF LAST MONTH'S ISSUE (JUNE 2004) OF HARPER'S MAGAZINE

??????????

!!!!!!!!!!

I NEED ONE, I WANT ONE, I HUUUUUUUUNGER FOR ONE!

WILL PAY, WILL RECOMPENSE, WILL TRADE. I DO WINDOWS & FLOORS.

Hysterically, yr. pal, Harlan

I just read Carrere's book on PKD and liked it quite a bit. He certainly approached the material in a strange way. Comepelling, I thought.

Harlan Mentioned in Harper's
Unca Harlan,

I was looking through back issues of Harper's Magazine in the River Falls (WI)library yesterday when I ran across your name in a review of Emmanuel Carrere's new book on Philip K. Dick.

You appear but briefly in the book review by John Leonard;
in the last partial paragraph on page 85, and ending on page 86, of the June 2004 issue.

In the event that you do not subscribe and you need a copy for your files, someone else here will probably be able to help you more speedily than I would.

Of all the people I miss most, Ted Sturgeon and PKD top the list.

Respectfully,
Neal

A long, slow moment of silence for Brando. We all know his great work, but I also loved his performance in "The Score" and his fantastic self-parody in "The Freshmen."

Mark Walsh

To echo Cookie, just b/c someone is good, doesn't mean they're exempt from the rules of this Board or the laws of society.

Harlan,

The two Shadow VHS tapes were mailed to the HERC today via media mail. Rather slow, but they'll still get there faster than a wealthy Roman in a horse-drawn chariot could, fleeing Vesuvius.

Rick and Rob
This is probably stupid to jump in for, but what the hey. I'm feeling reckless:

Frank: You said, "Wyatt, just remember, we are good people. I'm sure even Rob has a soft part somewhere in that blackened husk.

That was a good Harlan imitation you did there. You are learning, grasshopper."

Do you think Rick *doesn't* remember we are "good people"? Who are you to suggest otherwise? Rick maintains this site out of the goodness of his own heart. It isn't a commercial site (I see no pop-ups or banners or other crap). We are guests here. I guess I read your comment as bordering on the disrespectful---even if you said it with a smile on your face.

Rob reminds me of my 12 and 10 year olds. Always pushing the envelope. Always claiming to have not understood the limits. Always seeking a loophole. Always having some (in their minds) legitimate reason for going against the rules. It's childish at best. Grow up and act responsibly on the board. Scores of us do it all the time so why should it be so hard for this individual???

Taking cover for 24 hours....

Micheal Moore is God
What was Brando to all of you here in the Pavilion?

Jourrel, father of Superman. How does one spell that name anyway?

What was Brando to all of you here in the Pavilion?

Was he the legendary Broadway star of "Streetcar"? Or the surrogate for Kazan in "On the Waterfront"? Was he the stereotyped caricature of "Teahouse of the August Moon" or an actor of psychological depth in "Last Tango in Paris"? Was he the inventive actor who created Don Corleone out of his own eratic genius or the bad actor who "phoned it in" in movies like "The Formula" and "Candy." Was he a crank who self-destructed or an artist that could not endure in commercial film.

Was he the quintessential rebel?

I ask all the wild ones here to respond.

Wyatt, just remember, we are good people. I'm sure even Rob has a soft part somewhere in that blackened husk.

That was a good Harlan imitation you did there. You are learning, grasshopper.

---------------

Cindy, for once Eric is right; now let's all get along. The square dance punch bowl needs some vodka. Kiss.

--------------

The great Marlon Brando is dead, but I feel cold. He wasn't exactly the happiest camper in Hollyweird. Hell, Hollywood made him into quite a goof. But, It does pain me to know that there will be no more movies with that cranky curmudgeon.


Rest in peace, Marlon--if you can.

As an adjunct, please bear in mind that I didn't see anything against the board rules with either Eric's comments about Bradbury or Cindy's umbrage. Please bear in mind that the rules only prohibit cut-and-pasting, anonymous abuse, and threatening behavior. Outside of that, unless Harlan or I declare the direction a conversation is going to be uncool there are no sacred cows. While you should of course be considerate of your fellow posters, someone's tenure here or their perceived closeness to me or Harlan does not mean you should give their opinion of what you should or should not say any greater weight.

For example, while I am a huge fan of his work, I personally don't know too much about Bradbury the man. Thus, I can't make informed comment on his character. I *was* deeply disappointed by some of his statements on Politically Incorrect a while back - but it is difficult to tell from an isolated incident if actions are demonstrative of a man's fabric of being or just a method employed to generate shock or attention. And while Harlan understandably refrains from comment, he has not said such comment is off-limits nor has he told me it makes him uncomfortable or otherwise is the sort of thing he would not allow to be discussed at his dinner table.

I also don't want to be perceived as putting the kibosh on any discussion of the rules here or how they should be enforced. I also want to be clear that the "one strike and you're out" policy in my last post was directed solely at Rob. In general, I tolerate well-meant misconduct here, responding with the occaisional post or e-mail when the violation is inexcusable or gratuitous or otherwise catches my notice. The exception is when someone abuses this tolerance to the point I feel I'm being disrespected and taken advantage of. I probably do not have to note that I do not respond well to this.

I know many chafe at the restriction here, and share the sentiment that the threaded nature of the other forums does not provide the casual conversational tone that many (myself included) prefer. Also, those who have been her a long while probably notice a repeating pattern in which the board starts off safe, calm, and very boring, spends a good deal of time in a state of (usually enjoyable) controlled chaos, and then begins to spiral out of control. Sometime around that point I, in the words of the inimitable Yngwie Malmsteen, "release the fucking fury," and things return to the initial rest state.

I am not altogether happy with this cycle. However, I do not know a better way to both keep this board readable for Harlan and allow visibility for infrequent or new posters - at least not one that does not involve taking up more of my free time than I already lose to this endeavor or requiring a similar investment in writing monitoring or enforcement programs. Believe me, I would rather be able to just shoot the shit with you folks instead of being the guy who bursts into the bedroom every so often like an angry stepdad. But, as I said, que sera sera.

various and sundry, as usual

That's great news about "On the Road, volume 2"! As some of you may recall, I lobbied for this in my review of volume 1 on Mike Zuzel's Islets of Langerhans website. I can hardly wait.

Cindy, I am sorry. Nobody loves Bradbury's writings more than me -- I daresay I am the one person on the planet who has read _Something Wicked This Way Comes_, four times, cover to cover, out loud -- so it grieves me to see the great man work himself into a snit about this, for no good reason. I am convinced that Moore used the reference to _Fahrenheit 451_ as an homage to Bradbury and the lasting influence of the book, as well as to communicate something of his feelings about where this country has been dragged the past 4 years, and he was probably genuinely shocked that Bradbury got upset. That he hasn't called Bradbury at this point, when it's too late to make any sort of meaningful amends on the order of what Bradbury says he wants, is probably on the advice of lawyers, sad to say.

Oh, and my first thought when the 11 o'clock news came on with photos from the Saturn mission last night was: Where's the braiding that Ellison talked about in his 1981 essay?

I missed you, Rob. Welcome back. But for the love of all that's Good and Holy, be careful from now on.

Wow, all of a sudden it's so SERIOUS in here...I think we all need a little dementia today...

http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/Fuji/5942/issue001.html

(P.S.: My previous post might have been a bit confusing - sorry 'bout that. I was referring to the very FIRST cartoon on the page as you scroll down...the one with the husband and wife standing outside the theatre. Nevertheless, the ones that follow are also quite clever in and of themselves.)

Sorry to see Eric go. I still hadn't gotten around to responding to his (and Cindy's) comments on the "Are We Afraid to Disagree with Harlan" thread. If you're still peeking in, time to time, Eric --

And just because Ray Bradbury and I are friends, Cindy, does not mean that either of us is blind to the other's flaws. I haven't gotten into this Moore/Bradbury embroglio purposely. But I would prefer not being used as a rationale for one's not speaking his or her mind. I'm publicly SILENT on this one, but not without OPINION.

Yr pal, Harlan

Dear Ed and Darryl: Than you for your help wth the eyboard problem. Gong to ht the thng some more. Seems you do need all of the letters n the alphabet. Surprse.

Susan

Coda to Cindy

Cindy, before the door slams into my self-righteous ass on the way out, I realize I missed the Bradbury discussion, being in Italy for two weeks. So I see how my comments may have seemed a little past the selling point, although I didn't think much of your "he's Harlan's friend, therefore off-limits" argument. It struck me as a bid for censorship founded on sentiment, surely the most insidious defense.

That said, I'll still depart, since the new format of the Pavilion, fiercely enforced, is finally too constricting for a jabberjaw such as myself, and I'm out of sound bites. The alternative forum is just too compartmentalized for comfort.

It was a SLICE, people. Ouch, that door is a smacker...

Keith - *laugh* Thanks for the kind ephithet, part of me would love to put that on my resume. I'm going to have to decline your invitation to continue the discussion on the other forum, though. One posting a day doesn't interfer with my ability to get work done and, lacking willpower, I sort of need that limitation. And, honestly, while I'm intrigued by the idea of a debate, I didn't post with the intent of changing your mind (or anyone else's). I was just tired of seeing a well-intended idea killed for crimes of articulation rather than its inherent flaws.

Aherm. Anyway...

Anyone getting the same chills of excitement as I am from the wondrous saga of Cassini as it dives in and out of Saturn's rings? I re-read Ellison's "Saturn, November 18th" (please 'scuse if I got the date in the title wrong) to compare Cassini's data to Voyager's, and there ain't no comparison. It's absolutely spine-tingling to see the breakthrough images and findings being transmitted by that nifty little spacecraft.

A wonderful species, indeed.

Umm...
Would anyone care for a grilled cheese sandwich?

It's a message board
Just repeat to yourself - it's a message board.

There's a big, beautiful world outside where the events we discuss actually take place, and you can talk all you want to new and exciting people, drink exotic coffee and admire works of art and nature.

It's just a message board. It's just a message board.
(a GOOD message board, to be sure...but...)

Rob Sez:
"I agree, you could argue that in the past I had continued my transgressions after being warned several times and I therefore warrant no further consideration on the matter."

Absolutely correct.

"Then, again, the general issue about double posting had been stated many times, in effect, warning EVERYONE, yet several people had proceeded with it regardless, presuming self-penalty made it acceptable. I never saw a provision saying they could do that. No one said a THING when they did it.

I feel, then, it would be fair to officially modify the rule, SLIGHTLY, and hold me to an agreement that would eventually entitle me to the rights shared by the board"

I hope everyone has enjoyed seeing what I have to deal with. I have been absolutely, unequivocally, crystal clear with Rob about his status and about what will happen to him if he breaks the rules again and in return I get this doublespeak.

Allow me to be CRYSTAL clear, Waterford clear, one more time.

I don't give a flying rat fuck what anyone else says or does, Rob. You, and everyone else here, exist at my behest and on my sufferance. You have no rights. I am not running this as a public service and I am not enjoined to act in a manner you find just or consistent.

The amount of my time you have wasted by your inability to either follow the rules or suck it up when you're called on it is staggering. Unconsciencable. Beyond the pale. Furthermore, it's clear to me from your past actions that you have a loose enough handle on what is fair to have no business holding forth on the same with regards to me. Point of fact, I find you to be a bullshit artist and a sophist of the highest order when it comes to your own peccadilios. My patience with such is at its limit.

So - if you fuck up again, or if you push me on this with crap like this ONE MORE TIME, you're gone. I don't care who comes to your defense this time. I don't give a shit if Ghandi himself comes back from the grave and lays his skinny, homespun-clad body at my feet on your behalf. I will stomp on that bald-ass undead fucker with jackboots if that's what it takes to get to you. Because I have HAD IT.

I hope for your sake, and the sake of Zombie Ghandi, you decide to hop to. Otherwise, que sera sera.

Susan, I received the Ray Bradbury tape. Thanks to you and Harlan.

David

You're way off base, Cindy. Way, way off. My comments on Bradbury and the failure, in my opinion, of his people are accurate enough, and hardly inappropriate or out of left field, given that the link to Ray's very public interview was two posts previous.

However, if you indeed feel that it should all be milk and cookies here, and that those few of us who bring the whiskey should stay outside, then by all means, I'll go. Frankly, I'm tired of having to argue off the constant accusations of farting in church, which is essentially what your gripe is. Obviously you didn't read my post carefully enough, which lionized Bradbury as much as was possible, given his recent step into silliness.

Enjoy your Oreos. I'm solid gone.

And Happy Canada Day right back atcha.

Space celebrating Canada Day with a Trek: TNG marathon is a bit odd (frankly, I'd go with a series filmed in Canada) but besides that, take off, eh.

Also, Bonhomme, des french fries, screech, Stomping Tom and George Vancouver to all of you.

A demain, Jon

Happy Canada Day to all you Canadians out there!

I just read an interview with Robert Silverberg about his 50-year-long career and how his writing has changed and evolved as he has personally. I got the impression from what he said that he feels a little freer to push the limits of his abilities as a writer, to try ways to tell stories he felt unable to pursue when writing for the Big Houses like Bantam.

That left me a little curious, since Harlan is also a writer who seeks to expand his boundaries, to push the envelope, as it were.

So, Harlan, do you feel more free now that you are published by smaller houses than you did when you were published by the big boys, or is this something that simply coincided with the shift away from the large publishers?

Or am I blowing bubbles in the bathtub?

Chuck

Well God damn, Eric.

I don't know what devil climbs behind your wheel from time to time but he's not your friend. We've whipped this dead horse to the bones and you want to start whacking again. Your comments about Mr. Bradbury piss me off. Mr. Bradbury is so beautiful and so sincere-- that this matter has caused him a moment's pain fills me with disdain for Moore. How tough would it be to pick up the phone? OH but that would require a modicum of class.

Sigh.

But alas, I have already sung this chorus until I'm blue and the rest of the room is draped snoring over the furniture so I'll hush up ( yeah y'all can thank me later).

Just let me say this... I do not wish to insult you, but I cannot understand how you could feel comfortable denigrating the old and dear friend of the very one in whose name we congregate here. It isn't good form and you cannot say you don't know "no" better. Give it up old chum. Bring back the Ghost-- he was so CHARMING, so bright, so witty and polished. BRING BACK THE GHOST because I'm tired to dying of that cudgel your devil packs. I'm fixin' to take it away from him and do one of those vietnamese restuarant monkey brain tricks on him... just let me cut the hole in this here table...


Cindy


Keith Cramer,
SHOOT ME-- I couldn't seem to contain it that time. The S0andy was cropping out in me in that last paragraph up yonder.

Cindy


Welcome back, Rob.

Barney,
I LOVE the toast-- LOVE it.

;)
yer pal,
Cindy

Dorie,
I wanted to extend my gratittude for the high fiver on the Christmas tree remark. I didn't know if that was going to translate at ALL.

Thank you SO much,
:)
Cindy

Jon Stover, Scotty and Melissa,

Happy Canada day to you all.

:)
South of there,
Cindy

Happy Canada Day!!
Dr. Who rules. Dare say my favorate is whichever one I'm watching at the time. Unless it's Paul McGhan whom I did not like too much. More for the lousy Fox hackjob than his performance, which actually wasn't bad. . .

Regarding Norm:

Hmm. Amazing the lengths people will go to annoy other people.

A fine little commentary on our arrogant, dumbass times:

http://cagle.slate.msn.com/news/MichaelMoore/main.asp?GT1=4244

Rob is back with a Proctoscope!

Rob,

Welcome!

I wish you would use other words than “While no counterarguments would change my view on it” in your defense of stricter rules for double-posters. I would say that zero tolerance rules, of which I want no part, are well intentioned but ill-conceived.

I have been frequenting the board for over a year, and posting for just under that, and I have only one time double-posted, and that was after I had requested help from the Pavilion denizens in locating a way to contact the publisher of a book I’d ordered, and someone immediately e-mailed me the info I had requested, and I posted QUICKLY that someone had helped, and to disregard the prior post. In a world of zero tolerance, I would have been banned for a while. Not logical. Had I not double-posted, multiple people (perhaps I flatter myself) may have been looking for ways in which to help me, and whatnot.

Exceptions are necessary. I will confess that most diners here who double post are not doing so for reasons I would consider viable, but I don’t run the board. However, there’s nothing to indicate that Rick isn’t hunting down the offenders and sending them warnings via e-mail, either. He may be aware of more than you think.

Also, I’m fairly sure (though not positive), that Rick has a day job, and managing the board to that degree of exactitude would take all his time, of which we all have precious little. I’ve e-mailed him before and he sometimes does not reply. Again, it’s a time factor. In my post responding to Teak last week, I misattributed the manufacturer of Photoshop and I did not double-post to correct it…I sent Rick an e-mail and asked him to correct it, if he could, the next time he went in and performed maintenance on the board. Does it matter? Only to my ego, in that I made a stupid mistake. Did it require a double-post? No. Will Rick see to it that my misattribution is corrected so that the geeky readers of the archives (of which I am one) don’t see my mistake? Maybe…who knows?

And I don’t think you were neutered. It was more of a smack down, really.

I’m happy you’re back.

-Keith

A big hug, a pint of absolution, and a welcome to Rob. Glad you're back.

OUT OF REHAB

Last week I got neutered. You may witness some gradual personality changes here. Hopefully NOT.

I DO have a few comments about last week for the simple purpose of submitting a suggestion to the board management.

Highlighting relevant feedback from Chuck and Rich, respectively:

"Rick, I'd say you warned the hell out of him."

and

"And I'm sure when Rob comes back he'll spout a few chastened words about his exile"

Both comments are totally indisputable. I plead no "doe-eyed" innocence; I claim no martyrdom. I’m as guilty as the feller who lets one fly in a jam-packed elevator on a hot summer afternoon. I am NOT a better man for it, to Rich's relief; but Jeff may be pleased to know I visited the doctor a few days ago. In fact, I saw a whole company of doctors. BUT…yes, m’am, you got the inevitable "but":

First, a word about my posting history. When the new site was set up, as we all know, limp in my self-discipline, I had this "inclination" to continue double posting in a conveniently sophistic interpretation of the rules. Trauma model baggage from my childhood. It took our webmaster some work but I finally - FINALLY - ceased. I stopped cold. I wouldn’t even CONSIDER double posting again. I watched the time cycle carefully. Understand? I DID stop double-posting.

Then, in time, I saw this odd pattern emerge, wherein people were double posting, declaring, "I will take a few days off the board to make it up". Their justifications for it were generally quite weak; if the comment had some importance to them (whether it was a "link of interest" or a political observation) that seemed to be enough. I thought they were going to get shit for it. Particularly since it went on for some time and it was usually the same people. They weren't doing it often, but they WERE doing it. Yet, no warning from the management popped up. Regardless, at first I wouldn't even consider doing it again under any circumstances. I stayed away from it, watching for some response on the matter. It never came. We'd never seen THIS privilege on the board before.

So, I wondered if the "self-penalty" had become a compromise, an unspoken provision in the rules. I waited to see what would happen as this behavior went on. Finally, I decided to try and follow the example. I did just as the others were doing and I e-mailed Rick about it. Admittedly, I contacted him AFTER the fact. I stayed OFF the board for a few days as I said I would. I never heard from Rick. I went on to do this sporadically a few more times. But I never got a response. No, "you are on probation and you are therefore not entitled to the same leniency as the others. Don’t do it again." With that brief counseling I would have ceased in my tracks, regardless of what others were doing. But I received no feedback at all.

Thus, along with the few people who'd been doing it, I occasionally double posted and stayed off the board for a while anytime I did so. This went on for a long time. When Rick finally posted his warning last week I was almost plagued with the question, "why NOW?" Even leniency - which I DO think is something to appreciate - has to follow some consistency with the rules.

What is my aim here?

A simple suggestion. If the purpose for the one-post-a-day rule is "to give the less frequent posters and new people room to be heard", why not INCORPORATE the provision, "if you double-post you must hold all posting for 1 week (no more, no less); if you post again within that time you will be band promptly from the Pavillion"? I feel, since people have been double-posting no matter what, that this minimizes the headaches, the "confusion", and the technical breaches. The management, at first, might want to give people a "freebie", as news about law changes take a while to reach EVERYONE in the community.

As for MY situation: At least once in the past the word "probation" was used to describe my status. If my memory serves me, in law probation means a method of dealing with offenders that allows them to go at large under supervision for a period designated by the court, after which time that offender has a chance to redeem himself. I would like to suggest, if you’re going to grant others the leniency to double-post at at ALL, in which case they would gradually EXCEED my own record for the transgression, that you impose a LIMITED penalty time on ME. Say, maybe 4 months or 6 months. If I should double post with even just ONE word within that time I would be automatically banned. But if I HOLD to my agreement...I eventually get the same leniency others here receive.

I agree, you could argue that in the past I had continued my transgressions after being warned several times and I therefore warrant no further consideration on the matter. Then, again, the general issue about double posting had been stated many times, in effect, warning EVERYONE, yet several people had proceeded with it regardless, presuming self-penalty made it acceptable. I never saw a provision saying they could do that. No one said a THING when they did it.

I feel, then, it would be fair to officially modify the rule, SLIGHTLY, and hold me to an agreement that would eventually entitle me to the rights shared by the board.

I wish I were playing to the gallery, but whether you agree or disagree, that’s all I have to say on the matter. While no counterarguments would change my view on it, it is ultimately up to the community and the 'court' to weigh in and I’ll have to abide by the decision.

(In closing, I want to genuinely thank those like Steve and Washu and others for having the perspicacity to come to my support. I'm rather bias myself)

TO EVERYONE ELSE:

Preceding post intended for one lurker only. No need for your comments. Stay out of this. No exceptions.

I can carry my own water.

Harlan

A WARNING TO NORMAN EPSTEIN

Yes, Norman, I'd rather see a brainless Harry Potter movie than think. Apart from it being a tautology, it is an observation on your part that proves how well you understand me. Thinking has always been my short suit.

But I do think this, and you might pay heed:

Do you really conceive of me as being so dense that after more than twenty-four years of your obsessive stalking and harassment,
I don't know precisely who is writing those despicable postcards?
I have other samples of your handwriting in the Norman Epstein files; not signing the postcards would only fool Scooby-Doo.

Files? Oh, yeah, fer shur, Norman: files.

And the file on you is extensive, Norman. It goes all the way back to 1980. You know I am familiar with your address in New York, and your former employer, Bernstein, has given me more than enough data to pursue legal action against you.

Not to mention that among the endless vomitations I've amassed in the Norman Epstein files since you first surfaced decades ago, and after I tracked you down, is your letter swearing you would stop annoying me, and would never write to me again. The fact that more than a hundred letters and cards followed that sworn pledge, thus indicating that you are daft, and obsessed, and unable to control yourself like an old fart pissing down his own leg, is more than enough material for my NYC attorney to file against you.

Whether I win or lose such an action is a matter of no concern to me. Reciprocating a hefty measure of the miserable pain your ugly remarks about Asimov, Farmer, Sturgeon, and other of my friends has caused me, will more than suffice. Since you are now retired, age 65, merely filing and pursuing such a case ought to cause you enough concentrated grief to balance the long-
unequally-tipped scales.

On the other hand, Norman, I do indeed know where you live.

You can reply in your usual sophomoric manner.

If I don't get a reply from you, by whatever means, by this weekend, be assured that I can and will happily plow this field
on my own.

Harlan Ellison

(Oh, and by the way, Epstein, my zip code is not now, nor has it EVER been 91014, which you continue to put on the unsigned cards, as you did on your signed letters years ago.)

How Harlan Ellison Changed My Life
Years ago, so many that I don't remember the source, Mr. Ellison changed my life. I'm fairly sure that it was a short story, but I couldn't for the life of me tell you which one.

In it, he described how to make a grilled cheese sandwich. The clincher is that you take the sandwich, sizzling and golden-brown from the pan, and you wrap it in a napkin. Two, if necessary. Now, you don't have a grilled cheese sandwich--you have the world's best grilled cheese sandwich.

I have won hearts with these sandwiches. I have soothed fractured egos with these sandwiches. If I could get all the world leaders together at a summit and serve these sandwiches for lunch, we would have no more war. Another, Mr. Arafat? Certainly.

Thank you, Mr. Ellison

DAVE CLARKE:

Love to have 'em. Send via the HERC address. Thanks a grumpkin.

(At today's rate-of-exchange, one grumpkin is worth 20 piasters, or 6 darics, or 2 zuzim.)

Harlan

This was one of the headlines in the "Top of the Times" email I get from the LA Times:

"Ellison Gives His Reasons for Wanting PeopleSoft"

At first glance, all I could think was "why would he want soft people? Are they easier to squish?"

Sorry about the double post, but I want need to correct something. "The Invisible Avenger" was the 1958 unsold TV pilot, and "The Shadow Strikes" was supposed to be the first of series of feature films, also(I think)originally broadcast in the late 1950s.

Harlan,

I have two copies of THE SHADOW series on VHS: The Shadow Strikes and International Crime. Both star silent screen actor Rod LaRocque as The Shadow, circa 1937.

I picked these up at a local thrift for a mere pittance, and I'm hereby offering them to you if you need them for your collection. No charge.

Let me know one way or the other.

If you don't want them, maybe I could give them away here in the DP--pick a number between...?

Susan's laptop seems to be acting erraticoid again. Sorry about the double-post.

Harlan

ON THE ROAD WTH ELLISON, Volume 2

What Michael Reed of Deep Shag neglected to mention, that might be of some small interest to Webderlanders, is that I have already written and remitted to him the short liner note essay he requested for this new collection of my lecture ramblings. It runs almost exactly 800 words, and it is entitled PERILS OF THE ROAD. Contains anecdotal material you may find amusing and slightly scarifying.

Yr. pal, Harlan

ON THE ROAD WTH ELLISON, Volume 2

What Michael Reed of Deep Shag neglected to mention, that might be of some small interest to Webderlanders, is that I have already written and remitted to him the short liner note essay he requested for this new collection of my lecture ramblings. It runs almost exactly 800 words, and it is entitled PERILS OF THE ROAD. Contains anecdotal material you may find amusing and slightly scarifying.

Yr. pal, Harlan

BARNEY,

"The cake was white-on-white with chocolate and lemon layers."

Ooooh, you lucky sonovabitch. My sweet tooth is starting to ache...

quick notes and wedding post of sorts;
*** Harlan *** True to my word the Hebraic DV was posted this afternoon via priority USPS with insurance. Probably Friday, certainly Saturday. Also I made $5.00 postal profit off Amazon by sending an early Dean R. Koontz to a kid in Australia via the nifty small Global Priority envelope so it's all a wash and I'm good.

I received your message on my cell phone while taking my mom to the podiatrist. Before Harlan cracks wise about my mother again - something I still have not quite recovered from - the only trists she is having are podiatrists - OK?

Tim's wedding went off without a hitch. Harlan hoped that I didn't do any untoward damage to the groom the night before. We all hope for things. Actually it was fairly mild. They pretty much roll up the sidewalks in that neck of the woods around 1AM, so after some errands, for the sake of being able to say we at least TRIED to misbehave, we ended up at the Cathay Pearl. This is the weirdest place I've been to in a while. Half Chinese restaurant - half cowboy/biker/kareoke bar - it is the only Chinese restaurant that has bouncers AND armed rent-a-cops after 10PM. When we got there at 1AM there were local cops on the scene and an ambulance pulling away. The first table we chose was a mistake due to the blood and broken glass. It may set the tone to realize that nobody seemed in a hurry to clean that up. Tim had a double shot of Tequilla and I had a domestic beer and a shot of Jack since the first 2 whiskeys I named weren't even on the menu. We toasted, made fun of the band and the dancers and left. Pretty tame. I've certainly done worse to friends but I was not the best man - LONG private story - and couldn't easily set things up from 4 states away.

The wedding was short and sweet in a small liberal minded New England chapel. The reception was held at the Taylor Mansion in Newport [think Wayne Manor with 3 story slate roofs] which was some sort of classical knockoff done in the 1920's with cattle and telegraph monies. This is all just up the road from where they have the Newport Jazz festival. We had the run of the 1st floor acreage plus the back yard terraced lawn for photos. I suspect they used this as a set for the garden party in Dorothy Parker and the Viscious Circle. You could walk down to the water but then you'd have to walk back up again. I did fine but others struggled under their own self-imposed open bar quotas. More fun stuff to watch for moi. The band was PUMPKIN HEAD TED and they played lots of Grateful Dead, Tom Waits and Jethro Tull. Old fogey music for the 40-somethings. I loved it. The cake was white-on-white with chocolate and Lemon layers. The bride was lovely. The bridesmaids were cute. No fights. Everybody kept there pants on. Kind of lame for a bunch of Irish Yankee Swamp Rats but that's what we've come to I suppose.

My toast was;

If you're going to cheat - cheat death,
If you're going to steal - steal one anothers hearts,
If you're going to fight - fight for one another,
And if you're going to drink - drink with me!

And then it was off to the races Monday hitting three banks, a drugstore, a department store, a restaurant and the tux rental place before driving them up to Logan for their Air France flight that whisked them off to Dublin and a long and complicated honeymoon. I did get to see large chunks of the Big Dig and was suitably impressed with the progress since I last saw Harlan in Boston. I'm sure it was more fun for me because I don't drive it every day. THEN it was a 335 mile drive home alone. The last 85 miles done in a pissing down rain with scattered flying monkees beating on the sun roof. Bollocks, I wouldn't want to do that again for awhile.

*************************************************************

The other stuff;

I recommend the July 2004 issue of WIRED. Do not boycott this just because of the I, Robot movie cover. There is a swell article on the history of Robots and a nice little piece about Isaac Asimov with a FANTASTIC photo of Isaac as an adult at Ellis Island. Also a kewl 4 pager on Lance Armstrong's new fab bike gear AND on page 96 there is a half page mini-interview with Harlan about the AOL/Time Warner lawsuit. It's not really "Harlan friendly" but at least it didn't make me grind any more enamal off my teeth.

And if you have ANY money left pick up the August 2004 issue of Chile Pepper Magazine where Lenora Dannelke proves for the 24th month in a row that YOU CAN make a living as a freelance writer - IF you have 3 feature articles in one issue - which she does;

Chorizo: Links from the past to the present. Page 40.
Chocolate Inferno: the sweet union of chiles and chocolate. P54.
Tacos Magnifico. Page 96.

Harlan I'm sending you a comp on this - you're going to love the Chocolate Inferno article. Now if they'd just bring back the pulps she to could be another Paul W. Fairman...

and I'm spent.

- Barney

Happytobehome, PA.

I read and listened to the Bradbury interview, and came away feeling disappointed that so prestigious a writer and cultural force is being allowed by those close to him to go on the air without any obvious legal briefing, to embarass himself.

Ray kept going on about "my title," how it was stolen from him, and how he wanted Moore to give it back. But Moore never took Bradbury's title: he riffed off of it, something anyone can do with any popular title or phrase, without any permission from the author of the original.

This apparently has escaped Bradbury, which is easily forgivable (the temperments of great artists must be given a certain amount of slack) but it should not have escaped those who are no doubt paid hefty fees to represent him. It was incumbent on these people to work with their client and preserve his reputation, and not allow him to make a fool of himself.

They have not done this, and so now we have one of our finest writers, in what might be his last big moment in the public eye, going off like some schoolboy whose ice cream was pinched on the playground. What consolation we have is that the public has a short memory, and Ray's complaints will be forgotten when Moore's movie is just another rental.

The Candy Conservationists; various corrections and an apology

Yea, though I skip down the candy aisle at the grocery store, I will feel no guilt. There's a semi-sweet secret organization in Kalamazoo, MI, stockpiling historical candies. It's called The Candy Conservatory, and it's run by Graham Valdemar, an eccentric Southerner whose racist nature is evident to all who meet him. One of his good qualities is that he's got a sweet tooth, and it's led him on a serious life-quest to accumulate every type of candy that has ever been. He even claims to have a batch of honey candy found in the tomb of King Tut. Each year the members of this semi-sweet secret society meet to sample the stock and replenish it with new candy, and I understand that Hydrox, Necco wafers, and Wax Lips are favorites, as well as Charleston Chews (Graham's favorite).

To join, all you need to do is send him a $1000.00 check and a 23'x17' truck of your favorite candy.

PIRACY:

I posted a response to Teak's post a few days ago, and I went overboard. Teak, I apologize for that. I had no right calling you names and disparaging your point of view. I should have made my argument without rancor.

ELIJAH NEWTON, LEET SPEAKER EXTRAORDINAIRRE: Points taken; no ruffled feathers. I love a good debate, but I don't debate here, because it gets tedious, and the one-post-per-day rule is great for what this area is useful for, but a debate requires some quick give and take, corrections, etc. If you'd like, we can talk about it on the "other" board. Let me know. Teak, that goes for you, too.

ROB: Please come back soon. I miss your voice.

-Keith

Steve Evil, yes, I'm a Dr. Who fan. Favourite Doctor - Jon Pertwee. It will interesting to compare the new Doctor, Christopher Eccleston with the previous 8 (9 if one includes Peter Cushing). Also, Hydrox cookies are way better than Oreo's.

David

Chocolate covered Daleks. . .
David Ray

Anyone with the word "TARDIS" in their e-mail address must be a Doctor Who fan! Is this the case?

Anyone with a package of chocolate necco waffers that Mr. Ellison no longer wants is more than welcome to send them to me:

3449 Regal ROad, L7N 1M1

Am also anxious to try Hydrox.

_Steve

Brad, I thought I read that NECCO had moved candy production out of Cambridge, and the old factory was now being renovated to serve as offices and/or perhaps condos?

Looking forward to getting back to Boston for Worldcon for some Tosci's ice cream and swans et al down at Mary Chung's myself.

On The Road With Ellison
Greetings from Atlanta. I thought I'd update everybody on the progress being made towards Volume Two. After going through a great number of recordings, the stack has been whittled down to a few tapes of classic Ellison. I am currently in the process of selecting the best bits for Harlan to approve.

The goal is to have the CD ready by September 3 in time for Harlan's appearance at DragonCon in Atlanta. When I have a firm release date, it will posted here. Thanks for your patience.

Best Wishes,

Michael Reed
Deep Shag Records

NEAL: Your memory serves you properly. I do admire and enjoy Sologub. My favorites are SMOKE AND ASHES, BAD DREAMS, DROPS OF BLOOD, QUEEN ORTRUDA and a lovely cyrillic/english volume from Zapizdat Publications (Palo Alto, 1994) titled SELECTED STORIES, brilliantly edited by the uncommonly talented poet and editor Vassar Smith. But my all-time favorite of the works of Fyodor Sologub is the Random House 1962 edition of THE PETTY DEMON, as translated by Andrew Field. Just a w o n d e r f u l and deeply engrossing phantasmagoric novel. It has been more than forty years since I first read it in that Random hardcover; and every five years or so, I go back and re-delight myself.

I doubt your five bucks was wasted.

Yr. pal, Harlan

DAVID LOFTUS: Could you get me a good print of that AVH "On the Slab" photo? I'd like to have one for the scrapbook. Happy to reimburse you for any expense in pulling a nice, clear print.

BRAD: You come a tot late to the chocolate Necco Wafer thing. Yes, I love(d) them with sufficiency even to the writing of a short-short story purposely mispronouncing their name -- "Necro Waiters" -- but I beg you......do NOT send me any Necco Wafers. I've received BOXES of them over the years, and even have a large supply currently. The nice thing about getting candies you remember from your youth, candies no longer readily available (though Neccos certainly are easy to come by), is that you can have one every once in a while to keep the nostalgia fresh. But if EVERYBODY inundates you with your fancy, you overload on them and find you don't want to taste them ever again. The thrill goes stale. You know what I mean, so pleasepleaseplease...no more Necco.

Yr. pal, Harlan

BRAD: Sorry, but no. Not at present.

Harlan

hew [sic] and cry

I placed a rather hastily-written review of "Fahrenheit 9/11" on DocumentaryFilms.net yesterday. Will probably polish it a bit in the days to come:

http://www.documentaryfilms.net/Reviews/Fahrenheit911/index.htm

Re Necco wafers. There's a new book which, I think, has a chapter on their manufacture: Candyfreak: A Journey Through the Chocolate Underbelly of America, by Steve Almond. I've only read the chapter on Goldenberg's Peanut Chews, my own favorite.

_Fahrenheit 451_ is back on the bestseller's list. Hmm...

Bradbury Talking
For the 99 (?) of us who missed out on the Ray Bradbury VHS tape up for grabs, the DVD of THE BEAST FROM 20,000 FATHOMS (Warner Bros) has a short extra entitled 'Harryhausen and Bradbury: An Unfathomable Relationship', in which Mr Bradbury and Mr Harryhausen reminisce about their friendship to a studio audience, circa 2003. Good stuff.

Harlan, thank you very much for the Ray Bradbury Celebration tape. My daughter Shanee was born on the 22nd.

David

Brad, I recall Harlan's love of NECCO wafers; but if I recall properly, the love is for CHOCOLATE NECCO wafers.

For some reason, NECCO sells either their mix wafers or chocolate only wafers (myself, I would love to have a roll of licorice-only NECCOs, but that's why I've been called strange).

I once witnessed Harlan burst through a roll of chocolate NECCOs during one of his convention appearances; granted, he did share it with a friend's child who ambled into his performance zone.

-TODD

Sologub


Unca Harlan rsvp,

Please tell me was it the Russian FYODOR SOLOGUB you mentioned as one of your personal faves? or did i throw away a fiver on a dud?

tell me i got it right, unless i got it otherwise.
-------------------------------------------------

I just reread the intro to APPROACHING OBLIVION again this past weekend. Affecting stuff, of which I never grow bored. Of all the Ellison I dig the most, the essays slay me deadest.

respectfully,

neal

Keyboard
Failing a PS/2 slot, that laptop should definitely have a USB port. And there are plenty of USB keyboards available. If not, you can unscrew the puppy and plop in a replacement keyboard for about $15. (Just be sure to find a reputable parts vendor. There are some shady folks operating out there.) I know that there was a particular Inspiron model which had lousy springs for the keyboard and requires constant replacement. All one of those notorious cost-cutting measures. Sounds like this might be the model.

Indeed
I thought as much. It's much the same way in the music industry. One was curious.

The Liberal Party won the election last night,and the COnservatives were soundly defeated. I can rest easy for four more years.

not much
Hello,

Does anyone recall HE's love of Necco Wafers, they are made in Cambridge, MA. I visit a small chinese restaurant next door from time to time, depending on the day you can smell Tootsie Rolls, Thin Mints, and the aforementioned Necco Wafers in the neighborhood. Hopefully this would be enticement enough for HE to pay a visit to our area again. If not there is some of the best ice cream in the world down the block (Toscanini's).

Keyboard
Hi Susan:

Sure, it will work. Actually, the keyboard is a Dell, but any keyboard with a PS/2 connector will work.

I'll take your question as a request, and shoot this thing down to you tomorrow. Please let me know when you get it.

Darryl

Avenue Victor Hugo

Helluva shame about the Avenue Victor Hugo. But they've been ailing for quite a long time. It was an old-fashioned bookstore of the best kind, with tall, narrow alleys of (seemingly) dust bookshelves in a warren of rows and floors.

I was in Boston when Harlan did his thing there in the late 1970s/early 1980s, but missed his store appearances. (Still have a clipping from the Boston Phoenix ABOUT that event, though.) A couple years later he did a benefit reading for AVH at the Sheraton Commander in Cambridge; the story was "On the Slab," he finished writing it (about six concluding pages of a roughly 18-page ms.) on site before reading it, and I took my best photo of him there, seated at his Olympia with a pipe in his mouth.

I ended up putting together much of my initial Ellison collection with the help of Avenue Victor Hugo, including several Alternate World LPs. The store had a specific shelf labeled Ellison . . . .

Here's a link to the transcript and video of the Bradbury appearance.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5324876/

Ray Bradbury was on Hardball last night and told Andrea Mitchell that Michael Moore 'stole' the title from him. I love Ray, but cannot 'steal' a title, just a story, or plot idea. Ray should know this. I respect him greatly, but dang.

He also said that he didn't think his book was political. Hell, it talks about censorship; as political of a topic as there is. Of course, the book is political.

---------------

The Supreme Court did a good thing, by saying that the internet porn law was illegal. The right wing just can't get their agenda through any more. Another win for free speech.

Susan,
Not meaning to speak for Darryl, but you could use the keyboard he has by plugging it into the back of the notebook. It wouldn't be quite as portable then, but it would be a bigger keyboard and you wouldn't have to worry about missing keys.

On the other hand, doesn't that thing have a warranty? Keyboard problem should be covered.

And, in a blatant attempt of sucking up, I also work for a fairly large computer company so let me know if you need to upgrade. I'll be able to use my discount + you'd get any technical support you'd need (the team lead for technical support for the notebooks of the company I work for was with me at I-Con last year---we were at the same table as Barney and Bern and Doug, etc during the awards banquet, or whatever it was called.)

Victor Hugo
Hello Harlan,

Wasn't sure if you heard the news, last month the Victor Hugo Bookshop in Boston closed. For those who don't know (and those who do) the Victor Hugo Bookshop was were HE wrote the short story "Broken Glass" while sitting at a desk stationed in the front window of the store.

Harlan, are there any speaking engagements in the Boston area in the near future ?

Best Regards,
Brad

>If you have a choice, become a plumber instead.<

Um, I've seen plumbing offered up so many times on this board as an alternative pursuit to writing, by merits of its compensation, its contributions to society, or the bizarre vibe of coolness it seems to have earned on this board, that I think I'll chime in with a note of objection.

Plumbing sucks. It's a filthy, back-cracking job. Plumbing is sticking your hands down clogged toilets, rebuilding ruined septic tanks, or spending hours sweating pipe with your arms over your head. I'm sure it pays more than sending short stories to Granta, but there are many other ways to earn a living in this life, as an alternative to writing, besides plumbing. Or brick-laying, or ditch-digging, or any other working-class hero occupation that seems to pop up whenever we decide to congratulate ourselves that we are not published writers.

Sell used-cars instead. Hose down rhinos at the local zoo. Drive a taxi cab. At least in these and so many other vocations, your butt-crack won't be showing every time you crawl under that sink.

WE HAVE A WINNER!!!!!!

The number I was thinking was:

22

The winner of the Ray Bradbury Celebration tape is:

DAVID RAY of Bellevue, Washington.

Susan says she has your address, David, so the package is on its way2ray2day.

Thanks to all of you who played so valiantly, and don't forget--

You are ALL winners!

(Put down that cudgel, Utley.)

Yr. pal, Pat Sajak

Dear Darryl:

Many, manny kinnd thanks for your offer but...the computer is a Dell Inspiron 3800 notebook? Does this make a difference?

With all best wishes--Susan

Such swill you muhfuggaz talk. Writing has brought me mad cash, crazy bitches and an Umbrian manse, and it can do the same for you. Such a Bling Bling lifestyle can be YOURS, if you act fast. Pick up the phone NOW and reserve your seat at my next seminar: "Think Laterally, Suckheads."

And my guess is 12.

Apropos of Harlan's reply to Steve Evil's question, I tender this job description by Robert Benchley: A freelance writer gets paid per word or per line or perhaps.

I tell anybody who makes noises about Wanting To Be A Writer: Don't count on it for ANYthing. Fame? Winning the Hugo is (in the words of another writer pal of mine) about comparable to winning the Junior Jaycee of the Year Award in a town the size of Columbus, Georgia. Fortune? See Benchley, above, or Ellison, below. Inner satisfaction? What you get down on paper will almost never be what you meant to put down, and sometimes it is disastrously off the mark. If you have a choice, become a plumber instead.

99

33.

Harlan & Susan - The book arrived today, unmangled, crisp, and beautiful (no small feat with the USPS in Northern VA, who I suspect employ out of work Samsonite gorillas to fit parcels onto the truck...), and moved with much haste to the cool, dry place where the treasures are kept.

Many, many thanks.

As for a number - why not? It'll warm me up for picking the Big Game numbers tomorrow (will I drop a buck against astronomical odds of winning $222 million? Yup. I also buy bridges in New York and land in Florida.

I'll take lucky 79.

Okay, I'll try again:

32

12

STEVE EVIL:

The answer is: Doesn't matter whether you buy an Ellison book from a retail shop, online, in a library clearance sale, a second-hand shop, from a pal moving outta the area, from a guy selling bootlegged or pilfered copies from a cart on the corner, a book club, a mail order catalogue, a text-to-print dot.com, or find it in a remainder bin at the supermarket. The answer is: unles the author is Stephen King, Dan Brown, Danielle Steele, Tom Clancy, Nora Roberts or someone with a foolproof diet by which you eat only your fingernails and lose eight lbs. a day, not even a Philip Roth, a William Styron, a Kit Reed or a Pablo Neruda is going to make much more than pennies per copy. Bestselling authors (until they tank two or three times in a row) can command breathtaking advances and royalties; everyone else--and I do mean EVERYONE ELSE--works, for the most part, for wages no self-respecting plumber or electrician would more than hock-a-loogie at.

Ending with a preposition, I remain,

Still makin' a living,

Yr. pal, Harlan

7.

My guess is 15.

17.

Number of the Beast
666! Wait, that's three digits. 66 if it's not taken.

Canadian election this evening. Prey for us.

QUESTION ABOUT INDUSTRY:

If a new book by Harlan Ellison finds it's way into the dreadful Chapters bookstore in Burlington Ontario, and Steve Evil forks over $32 Canadian for it, how much of that makes its way into Mr. Ellison's pocket?

Always been curious.

Where do second hand shops fit in?

-Steve

P.S. Every book I own by Mr. Ellison has been bought and paid for from a reputable book vendor.

my dream of Harlan
Well i just woke up from a nap and i have HE in my head so i thought i would share my dream of HE.I was at the school in which i work,an elementary school, i was cleaning the main office entrance area,dusting,wiping down windows ect..
I looked over at the women sitting in one of the chairs near the principals office and i thought she looked familiar so i casually dusted my way nearer to her so i could get a better look. I noticed she was holding several drawing's,they were in pencil and were about11 x 14 in size,then i got a really good look at her and as i realized who she was i leaned over and whispered, are you Meredith Baxter Birney? She looked up at me and did not speak she just nodded her head and put her finger to her lips as if to say (yes but don't tell).
So ,i'm kind of excited about this and i'm wondering what she's doing in our little town , and i start to think about where she lives which in my dream i,m figuring California ,because in my dream i,m thinking, they all come from California when suddenly i got really excited and i leaned over and asked,DO YOU KNOW HARLEN ELLISON????Well she just smiled at me again and began shuffling thru her drawings until she pulled out 3, they were drawings of harlan, the first one was of him sleeping on a couch
but his mouth was sort of grinning,he looked like he was trying to hold back from busting out laughing so i didn't think he was really asleep,the next picture was of HE sitting on the end of a dock with a fishing pole stuck in the water looking very happy,feet in the water smiling in the direction of whoever drew the picture.Then my damn phone rang and i never got to see the last picture.So that was my dream of HE,just out of curiosity does HE know MERIDITH BAXTER BIRNEY? It's really not so bad having Harlan in your head.
,

Keith, your tally is a little off...at least for me...my number was 24.

Thanks,
Bill

48


debbie

Oh, I'll pick the unremarkable number 59.

Thanks for the chance.

D.

76!

Sorry, Charlie.

I'll take #13.

Damn you Martin, you stole my pi! No punch for you!

OK, I'll take phi (1.61803...)

Cheers, Jon

Seven.

My guess:

"Don Quixote", by Miguel De Cervantes

Scott

My Guess
is 80

Here is a tally so far (duplicates omitted, earliest post gets the number!:

Robert Chatham - 38.
Frank Church - 51
Brian Siano - 67.
Peg - 49
David Loftus - 62.
Rick K. - 15
Elijah Newton - 69
Jeff Lampert - 6
Cindy - 99
Steven Utley - 56
Scott Clark - 34
Darryl - 37
Adam-Troy Castro - 41.
rich - 10
Joseph Paul Haines - 82.
Jeff R. -55
Steve Dooner -58
David Ray -22
Juan Sanmiguel - 14
Alan Coil - 27
Julian Rodriguez - 8
jack skillingstead - 75
Floyd E. Shock - 66
Michael - 17
Alex Jay Berman - 1
Alejandro Riera - 40
Rod Williams - 35.
Rosy (Lillian?)'s guess is 25
John Thompson Jr. - 72
Steve Jarrett - 47
Dan Thorne - 88
Cookie - 23
John Kissane - 53.
Phil Merkel - 5
Lil' Washu -92.
Alex Krislov - 39
CJ Hurtt - 42
Andrew Rogers - 26
Michael Zuzel - 2 (two).
Dorie Jennings-18
Steven Gomzi - 100
Jay Smith - 70
Charlie - St. Pete, FL - 44
Jake Patrick - 3
Mark Walsh - 84
Bill Gauthier - 2

I had dibs on 3, Lillian. Sorry, pal.

Pi.

HE never said it was a WHOLE number...

Yo, Dave Clarke, I already picked 44...try again...(-:

My guess: 38.

is this legal? *laugh*
http://getafreelancer.com/projects/2196.html

Oh, if it's an AP story, don't steal it; but if its NOT...go ahead? Rewrite it?

Man, you people out there. Anything for a fuck, er buck.

H, so proud to be a part of this...industry. Heh.

My number is 44.

TV shows:

The Sopranos is superb, and one of the few shows I've seen where I'm disappointed when the hour is up. I'm even more disappointed to see that there will be only one more season.

The actors on that show (especially Mr. Gandolfini) constantly surprise me with their unbelievable skill.

Six Feet Under is also very good, being only one notch below The Sopranos IMHO.

Jesus told me 51 Amen.

My number is 67.

Why? Because I recall a study that showed that, when people are asked to pick a "random number," there is clustering. When told to pick a number between 1 and 4, people usually pick 3. Between 1 and 10, the cluster's at 7. And between 1 and 100, the cluster's at 67, with secondary clusters nearby or in the 30's.

(Kreskin used to take advantage of this. He'd say he was sending a number out to the audience by telepathy. He'd say it was between 1 and 40, both digits odd numbers, and the digits weren't doubled a la 33 or 11. That doesn't leave many numbers to select... and most people would select 35 or 37.)

But I don't need the tapes. Harlan, if I win, give the tapes to a Berman, either Alex or P.A.

my guess is...
49

short clips

Noting down the numbers that have been taken, I see certain patterns. I choose 62.

The Moore movie is very good. I notice that film critics tend to praise it and political commentator-types tend to hate it. I suspect that means the latter are taking it too seriously.

I'm rereading Gaiman's "Sandman" series right now.

Pick a number
15.

2

number and filesharing
"69, duude!"
(oh, c'mon - at least one other person hadda be thinking it)

Harlan, you have my every sympathy for the malfunctioning keyboard, but I can't help but chuckle a little as I get a really odd mental image thanks to a toxic level of exposure to pop culture. A frustrated writer a la Stephen King's 'Misery' forced to write not trashy bodice rippers but 'l337 speak,' which is somehow so much worse then enduring a homocidal nurse.
(for those who don't know why I just wrote one-thousand three-hundred thirty-seven, the bbc drily explains it for you: http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A787917)

Brian Siano: thanks for the thoughts on the Hugo. I don't have anything to add, just wanted to say it was neat to read.

Re: Teak's question. It wasn't dumb but god, man, I wish you hadn't tied it in to the 'Goonies.' That was almost enough to make me bite my tongue and keep quiet. But I can't have people thinking you're alone (on this message board) in this: Forgive me faddah for I have sinned - I have downloaded .mp3 files and have used copied war3z.

I consider my choice in these matters to be an act of civil disobedience. As I write in the hallowed presences of those who were my age during 60s, let me quickly point out that despite my word choice, I claim neither the moral rectitude nor the courage implicit to those acts of Civil Disobedience performed in support of Civil Rights. Indeed, it's an unfortunate limitation of our language that there is not a lesser phrase which still adequately encompasses my motivation. I must insist that the tacit assumptions of greed that accompany the word 'stealing' are incomplete and worth refuting.

My stance is not perfect. I have great compassion for the author, the musician, and the programmer who do deserve to be compensated for their work. I would never directly do harm to these people. But I do take issue with the means by which works are distributed, and I do not feel it is right to stop thinking and acting against these mechanisms. I accept that we live in a captialistic society - but I refuse to accept that ours is where evolution ends.

Keith, your response clarified some of my thoughts for me. Music is a luxury, but it shouldn't be. Let's not get mired in the squalor of pop-music, it's crap for small minds. But should those small minds wish to expand themselves by seeking out classical works or music from around the world that may not readily be at hand, shouldn't every obstacle to that end be removed?

That libraries now contain media other than books is a point well-taken, but what is it about those spaces that sanctifies the free exchange of information? (feel free to interpret that as an inquiry as to what guarantees exist to ensure that a just enforcement of copyrights will not shut down or cripple libraries) And look - I know I'm setting up some bad arguments here, but the only point I'm trying to make is that this is not a black and white issue. It could be, but I can't quite make it work.

Take copying something. Flat-out wrong, in the sense of taking one of Harlan's fine stories over to a Kinko's and running off a couple hundred copies and selling them. Still very not-right if you're giving them away for free. But where's the line? What if you're sitting in a library and copying that work by hand, to get a more intimate sense of how he writes, of rhythm and word choice? Even if you burn what you copy before anyone else can read it, the whole point of the exercise has been to become a better writer in the hopes of being published... and you have still taken something without paying for it. What about art students who go to museums to copy paintings? Programmers who share code?

There are more practical reasons for why knowledge should not be a luxury, too. Photoshop's a fair example - the running price for a copy is $649. That's a lot of dough, bub. But if you can get it, learn it, and list it on your resume, that and a bit of creative talent will get you jobs. Not quite 90K a year jobs, but something solid that you can build on. Can you steal yourself a future? Should you tell someone else they can't? Which attitude encourages lazy good for nothing slobs who do not see the value in hard work? (yah Keith, that comment stung)

I know Harlan is four-square against piracy, he has every right to be and penny-ante peccadillos don't make it hypocrisy. I really don't want my hero and yours to hate me; I firmly believe that this is simply the consumer side waging the same Artist's fight to control distribution. While the current system can still be rationalized, there is something seriously out of whack.

...sorry for the length, and any ruffled feathers.

I am not a number! I am a free VHS tape!
You (picked) Number 6.

the number...
1

99

Ooh! ooh! I wanna play!
Fifty-six (56).

HARLAN & BARNEY,

Here's (hopefully) the bulk of the information you need to have:

Benjamin Winfield
Seagull Cottage
3 Magnolia Court
Sandys MA 05
Bermuda
441 234 4321 (home)
441 292 4148 (work)
colonel_clive@hotmail.com

Thank you both.

The number is...
34

Number
37

By the by, if you take a keyboard, hold it vertically (so that the space key is horizontal along the desk) and bang it pretty hard (so that all the stuff that falls between the keys goes below the space key) it often fixes stuck/missing keys.

Having said that, I work with computers and have about 500 still-in-box keyboards, one of which I'd be happy to send to the HERC address, gratis. Mr. Ellison, you've done me a couple of favors through the years (you don't remember them, or me, but I have an elephantine memory) so no recompense is asked or required. Lemme know.

Darryl

Naked Greed
41.

NOT the wedding post
*** Harlan/ 'Li'l Washu aka Ben***

Okay, it's the morning after the wedding and I have not had coffee yet and the font on this alien screen is the size of the 2 volume O.E.D. but here we go.

SINCE the autograph is the wrinkle and since I already have Harlan's address MY plan is I'm shipping it back to Harlan for him to personalize. And while Harlan fairly points out that I can take my sweet time getting things off my plate, since this involves a third party and money I really can behave responsibly.

When Harlan gets the check or money order he can ship it out. I would REALLY PREFER he not comp me the postage. The contents of the Tim/Barney spillover box really makes that completely unnecassary.

I plan on posting it back to Harlan on Wednesday and he should have it by Saturday. It is indeed a gorgeous book. MUCH prettier than I would have expected - BUT, I have 7 or 8 other gorgeous books in languages I can read so Tim and I will simply form a 2 man tontine for the other copy. ;-)

Ben - This requires you simply including your return address with your check to Harlan. Simple and anonymous.

But as far as anonymity goes I would say relax - watch this;
Barney Dannelke
319 North 8th Street
Allentown, PA. 18102
610 437 2094 [home]
610 657 5886 [cell]
[plus my e-mail up on top which I almost always give in each post]

This is at least the third time I've done that here on Webderland and perhaps the dozenth time overall on the web and usenet. In 9 years I have received no dead gophers, no abusive phone calls and only 2 abusive e-mails. I suppose your mileage could vary but since I haven't exactly been Casper Milquetoast I don't see why it would be any worse.

- Barney

Goingoutforcoffee, MA.

Wedding post on Wednesday if Connecticut traffic allows.

10 (ten)

Number
82.

55. (Why? Beats me!)

58

22

David

14

27

8

The Number
75

66

Uh... 17?

MOVIES: I intend, since I'll be computerless for a couple weeks starting Tuesday (laptop in for repairs), to take the time next weekend to spend it patriotically, going to see FAHRENHEIT 9/11 and SPIDER-MAN 2.
What? He's red, white, and blue, isn't he?

(and yes, ya wisenheimers--I intend to pay for both features, thank you ...)

HARLAN: I will guess Number 1. But I haven't a VCR, and besides, you've already sent me more than enough cool stuff, so if I have, as the man said, chosen wisely, then pack it off to the estimable Mr. Siano.

40

1-to-100 Guess
Number 35.

Think of a Number....


92

Guess number
My guess is 3
Rosy's guess is 25

72

My guess
47

88

23

53.

Pick a Number
Five
5

92.

39

Wot the hell.

... so lazy, I missed Jay's posting! Argghh! No posting tomorrow...

(Btw, Harlan: I'm glad you stole Susan a new laptop.)

70 (because I'm lazy).

42

CJ

26

The number

... is 2 (two).

-- Zuz

18

" 100 "

70

Susan, Happy belated birthday! Glad ring was found. Knowing your penchant for tennis, what did you think about the gaff during the Venus match! Seems the commentators made a bit much about the one point off-score. Anyway, Venus was outplayed.

I'll pick #44, Hank Aaron's old number.

3

84

24

Bill

GUESS THE NUMBER --- WIN THE PRIZE

THIS IS WHAT I HAD TO OFFER:

Free of charge, no strings attached. I'm thinking of a number between 1 and 100; closest guess to it, wins ...

About two months' ago, there was a large and lavish dinner and ceremony honoring Ray Bradbury out here in LA. Many celebrities and much hoopla. Extremely chi-chi, and expensive per seat donations (for the Library). I was a member of the Committee, though at the last minute neither Susan nor I could attend. Theatre West taped it: RAY BRADBURY: A Writer / OUT OF THIS WORLD.

They sent me two. VHS tapes. I need only one. Guess the number I'm thinking of, 1-to-100, and closest guess will get this artifact as a kindly service of the Harlan Ellison Largesse and Criminous Activity Echelon.

This romp is open till 12:00 MIDNIGHT TOMORROW NIGHT, PACIFIC DAYLIGHT SAVING TIME. Monday midnight, Los Angeles time.

Just post a number and your name. Ask no questions, do not doublethink or comment, just pick a fuckin' number if you want this VHS record of Ray's celebratory evening. Name and number.

As Einstein suggested: "Things should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler."

Yr. pal, Jean Valjean, the Count of Monty Wooley

Look out, Harlan. Jack Valenti will probably send Ben Affleck over to your house to collect the price of two tickets.

Cheers, Jon

The weekend in Mobile
The weekend in Mobile with fred & Mary Ann van Hartesveldt was strong on seafood -- Mobile is a fair substitute for New Orleans if you can't be here to order your fried shrimp -- and touristing, with the beauty of Bellingrath and and the innate cool-os-ity of the battleship ALABAMA to distract us from the heat death of the universe.

Bellingrath really was a stunning experience. Every turn of the head or shift of the eye in Bellingrath brought a new vista of floral gorgeousness to our view; the estate is simply the best-designed and most beautiful private home and grounds I've ever seen. As for the battleship, I personally preferred touring the WW2 submarine DRUM, also on display, being a more stimulating imaginative exercise (try to imagine this clean, green fighting machine packed with greasee, stinking with diesel smoke and writihing with 80 sweating gobs, while Japanese destroyers popped presents onto your heads from above) but the whole experience awoke the 12-year-old boy innate in my masculine nature and gave said boy a substantial thrill.

Point of this post, though, is to lift all but the slightest impediment to praise for FARENHEIT 9/11 -- we saw it Friday night, and even allowing that it was made by & for people of our political persuasion,I found it infinitely sharper than Moore's previous work, in fact, devastatingly effective. The 2000 election was this country's dreariest and bleakest moment since the Dred Scott decision, and we will be feeling its effects for as long. I hope a multi-millionaire sends free DVDs of this movie to every American of voting age.

Since I've already seen FARENHEIR 9/11, and will be voting for Mr. Kerry anyway, I would ask that this philanthropist send ME the disc for NEW YORK NIGHTS, or at least Corinne Alphen's dance in the last segment, repeated forty or fifty times over.

Some Hugo Chat. Yesterday the Philly SF society had our screening of the Hugo dramatic presentation nominees. (They're watching more stuff today, but I've seen those,so I'm home.) Here's a quick Report on Brian's Opinions.

The Dramatic Presentation (Short Form) nominees included two episodes of _Firefly_, the finale of _Buffy_, an ep of _Smallville_, and Gollum's acceptance speech at the MTV Awards. Right off the bat, I can eliminate _three_ of these from any serious consideration.

The Gollum speech is a nice joke, but nothing more. But _Firefly_ got _two_ nominations, which is pretty disappointing in general. The show is, explicitly, not science fiction. It's a Western in SF garb. It is literally a Bat Durston story, and as such, should _never_ have been nominated.

So what's a Bat Durston story? Back in the 1950s, _Galaxy_ ran an ad which compared two story paragraphs. One began with "Hooves drumming, Bat Durston rode into the canyon..." The other began with "Jets blasting, Bat Durston rode into the asteroid belt..." They were the same paragraph, one with Western set design, the other with SF trappings. The ad went on to say that if this was your idea of SF, fine, but _Galaxy_ would try to be something more. In other words, changing the sets and props does not make a Western into science fiction.

_Firefly_ was _precisely_ that: a Western, with some mild set and prop design changes. And the two shows which were nominated for Hugos were worse. One involved an old Army buddy turning up, engaging in smuggling, and putting everyone in danger. The other involved a whorehouse where one of the whores was pregnant with the son of the wealthy rancher, and the whores needed champions to come and defend them. It wasn't just as Westen with lasers: it was a ripoff of _The Seven Samurai_ and _Unforgiven_ as well.

And _nothing_ in either of these episodes required SF or fantasy. Yes, they were well-made, the scripts were entertaining, the women were uniformly hot-looking, and Adam Baldwin made a fine mercenary (tho to me he'll always be Animal Mother). But _Firefly_ should _never_ have even been considered for a Hugo, simply because it isn't science fiction. It's not even very good fantasy.

That leave the _Buffy_ finale and the _Smallville_ episode as possible winners of the award. And they do qualify, mainly because the conflicts and problems of the characters do derive from the SF and fantasy elements. Buffy and friends have to fight the Hellmouth to the end. And Clark Kent is realizing that the symbols in the cave spell out what could be his destiny. Both were well made, with decent scripts.

And they're tough to evaluate because much of their dramatic impact rests upon events in other episodes. This has become more the rule than the exception with fantasy television, and perhaps the Hugo people ought to change the categories to include series television. And I was told that the works should be evaluated "on their own," which I could do because I never watch those shows. All of these were new to me.

So which did I favor? Well, the _Buffy_ finale had a nice plot bit where the witch character shares Buffy's powers with girls around the world. But this episode was mainly a Final Battle, with the final blow coming from the sacrifice of a character. I'd guess that the ending was satisfying to Buffy fans. But there didn't seem to be very much suspense in the show, and no real ethical or moral problems. So, as a standalone work, the show wasn't great.

_Smallville_ was certainly better. The main conflicts here were between a surprisingly likeable Lex Luthor, a somewhat scuzzy anthropologist, and Clark Kent-- who was a pretty self-absorbed and fairly wretched person next to the affable Lex. The main plotpoint here was Clark's being contacted by a reclusize, brilliant billionaire who realizes that Clark was the child sent from the former planeyt Krypton. The billionaire was played by Chris Reeve, and his scenes with Clark were scored with excerpts from John Williams' famous _Superman_ score.

But the real neat part was the twist to the Superman legend-- revealed in the translation of a message Jor-El left to his son in the spaceship. Now this, I thought, was interesting as hell. Does this make a great SF dramatic presentation? Maybe not. It did match the minimum requirements of SF and fantasy. And, as with _Buffy_, it depends on people knowing a lot of backstory. But unlike the Buffy episode, it did involve some challenging moral questions, so I'd give it the edge.

Okay, the long-form dramatics. Nominees were _Finding Nemo_, _28 Days Later_, _Return of the King_, _X-Men 2_, and _Pirates of the Caribbean_. Closest to actual science fiction were X-men and _28 Days Later_.

_28 days ater_ was disappointing. I'd expected a terrifying little movie. But after a terrific opening and first half-hour that George Romero'd envy, the zombie menace almost evaporated once the characters left London. The ending among the military guys was straight out of Romero's _Day_ zombie movie. Good performances, good characters, Danny Boyle has a great visual sense, but I was pretty disappointed.

_Pirates_ was a dandy fantasy, and _Finding Nemo_ was a terrific kid's movie. But _X-Men_ was closer to science fiction, so I'd look closer at it for a Hugo. It was well-made, with a good, complex plot. But there didn't seem to be much in the way of dramatic conflict or any real depth. Sure, there's Wolverine's search for his origins (no real progress there), and Magneto's shifting allegiances. In the first movie, I cared about Wolverine, Rogue, and even the magisterial Magneto.

But in this movie, the only character who really grabbed my sympathies and held them was Alan Cummings' Nightcrawler. During most of the movie, I kept wishing we'd had more of him. Otherwise, the characters were vivid and intelligently written, at least. There were other good scenes (for example, when the ice-making kid came out to his parents as a mutant, and Pryo's choice to join Magneto), and some terrific action sequences. But the movie's villain, Striker, wasn't much more than a James Bond character. Still, it was a strong entry, and might be a shoo-in for the Hugo if not for _Return of the King_.

And it's no contest. _Return_ is just such a superior achievement in so many ways that it's an obvious win. If it hadn't been made, _X-Men_'d get the prize.

COULD BE WORSE
If you were convict KB7608163, you'd be Dr. Richard Kimble and Lt. Gerard would be after you. (God, I love that show!)

HYPOCRSY

shoot!!! the "eye" -- and eye presume the "cay" as well -- not to ment on the comma -- done gone out aga n on susan's pc. but eye reluctantly tough out the badness to reply to those of you upset at my thr ll ng "saunter on the lawless s de of the street."

harlan confesses wrongdo ng. harlan am not perfect. harlan would NEVER go theater-to-theater on any day or performance n whch ch the theater was busy. done the deed on a thursday when theater nearly empty & at the 1st screen ng. as a larque. went bacque to youth just for fun. not excuses and not condones--done a m sdemeanor--but was be ng a scamp and meant no harm and stole noth ng from ANYONE because they would run the show w th or w thout us there...an almost totally empty theater. seven or ten people total. not val dat on and not v nd cat on and not even excuse. done the deed and prepared to accept your proper condemnat on for my flawed nature.

but they D1D ST1FF US A GREEDY $11.00 TO GET THE CAR OUT OF THE GARAGE -- NOT TO MENSHUN A SMAL FORTUNE FOR M1LQUE DUDS AND SOME POPCORN. not tryng to exculpate...just say1ng 1 d1dn't steal nutt1n' from nobody.

had someth1ng else to offer here...but 1'll go away t1ll the heat d1es down and the cops've moved on.

damn pc! respectfully--

Conv1ct 332376550

Rich, your wish is my command. Check out the other board.

Others: I believe Harlan had more of a part to play in the 80's Twilight Zone revival. I think that he was creative consultant, or something like that, in addition to having some of his work adapted to the screen (and he also adapted one of Stephen King's stories to the screen). He quit over the Nackles controversy; damn that negro-hatin' Harlan and his horrible Christmas story.

-TODD

>But what Teak and Eric are really asking is, is it hypocritical?<

I asked no such thing. I merely gave an answer to Teak's question. Kindly pay attention to writings you comment on.

"Hypocrisy" is a heavy word, and I would not use it in this instance. Yes, HE "stole" from the creators of Harry Potter by sneaking into that movie. Just like I'm sure many of you loyal contributors to KICK have copied movies or music without paying for them in your time.

However, KICK was a lawsuit targeted at AOL for providing a venue for copyright theft to occur. I did not agree with the reasoning behind this lawsuit (and I still don't), but the acts AOL was being sued for are not the same as an individual bootlegging a short story off the Internet (or sneaking into a movie.)

That said, I think HE would have been better off NOT mentioning his private pecadillo, given that he has very publically placed himself on the rostrum of creator's rights, and spared little vitriol at those who think they are entitled to works of art for free. So while I would not use the word "hypocrisy" in this matter, I might use the word "foolish." But then who among us is no less a fool?

I'd like to address the pseudo-elephant in the Pavilion...

Harlan Ellison just spent a few years and much of his time and money on a lawsuit against various individuals and corporations regarding the use of copyrighted material in venues not approved by the creator. Basically, theft of copyrighted material (the user didn't pay for the work). Recounting what he and his wife did on celebrating her birthday he made mention that they sneaked into another movie after seeing one they paid for. Basically, theft of copyrighted material (the users didn't pay for the work).

So maybe Teak DID NOT ask a dumb question (as Eric also mentioned). It would be entirely reasonable for some to ask Harlan Ellison, who has gone on at length regarding copyrights and fair use and numerous pleas for creators to be justly paid for their work, why he thinks sneaking into a movie without paying is right. Whether he responds is up to him, but my thoughts are thus:

Harlan Ellison never mentioned that what he did was right. As a matter of fact, he recounted the experience as if he just grabbed the Mona Lisa right out from under the security guards snooty noses. A self-described "Old Fart" snuck into the movies, probably something he hasn't done in awhile. He's got his girl with him and 70 becomes 18 (I was gonna say 6, but shit, he's got his girl with him) and he's sneaking into the movies just like the old days.

Is it wrong? Sure.

But what Teak and Eric are really asking is, is it hypocritical? I mean, we've run the gamut of analogies on this board and others, and we've pared it down to stealing is stealing, right? So what's the difference? As Robert Morales said, there is no difference other than the venial sin and the mortal sin---say, if Harlan stole a loaf of bread as opposed to the old lady's pension check. I'm pretty sure that if one of those crackerjack ticket-tearers nabbed Harlan and Susan, HE would've 'fessed up and vacated, or paid, without much of a hassle. As Robert implied, Harlan, along with most reasonable adults, knows the consequences of his actions and is willing to abide by them.

Make up your own mind about Harlan Ellison sneaking into a movie and whether you think it's "right" or "wrong", but personally it doesn't shatter my world or my image of Harlan Ellison. To be quite blunt about it, we've all sneaked into a movie theater (so to speak) at one time or another and we've all rationalized why we did it. We're all hypocrites. I don't think it invalidates his KICK campaign and I certainly don't think it invalidates his integrity.

Maybe the above is all rationalization and you're still saying, stealing is stealing. Fine by me. But, the white guy with the long hair said something about stones and being the first one to throw 'em. So I'm not gonna argue a whole lot about sneaking into a movie 'cause I got my own sins to take care of before I start fucking around with someone else's. (And I know Jesus was white and had long hair 'cause I saw the pictures when I went to Sunday school in Alabama. Maybe in your neck of the woods he was different, but that Sunday school teacher said that motherfucker was white----and she said it just like that, too.)

HARLAN,

I'll probably choose the first scenario you offered, i.e. I give my address to Barney, and he mails the Hebrew DANGEROUS VISIONS to me. Only one other niggling detail I need to know for certain - would both scenarios allow you the chance to sign the book?

BARNEY,

Which would be easier for you - post my address here in the Pavilion, and let Rick delete it later, or get it to you by e-mail? (If you do happen to change your mind about the arrangement at the last second, that's fine...just let me know).

Six Feet Under
Strong disagreement on SIX FEET UNDER; I think it's a fine multilayered comedy-drama.

Saw FAHRENHEIT 9/11 yesterday. Yow.

Yeah! What Keith said...
The only things I can add to Keith's well-made points are to turn it around.

Let's say: You've written a book, a song, or a piece of software.

The people who are paying YOU for that product are paying you based on units sold.

People decide that, instead of buying it - registering the sales at the point of sale - they duplicate it on their own for free.

YOU ONLY get paid for the 250,000 units that were sold instead of the 750,000 units that are actually circulating. Sucks for you since the publisher only has to honor the contract for what's in writing.

If someone wonders why people like Harlan get so upset about piracy, think about it in terms of potential revenue. In this relatively new age of digital file sharing, its guys like him that are reinforcing the right of the artist to be paid for their work. If he is silent and lets one user slide, the next one can legally defend himself by saying "well, he didn't have a problem with OTHERS taking his work...why is he singling ME out?"

For over 5 years I've had angry people threaten my job because I wouldn't violate copyright. I wouldn't let people do what libraries and schools do every day - reproduce material freely without regard for copyright. People bring in studio portraits to be copied because they don't want to pay high cost of having the photographer to reproduce them or they don't want to pay $50 for a textbook when they only need one or two chapters. When you explain that the law is there to protect the owner of the property, most people think THEY are the owners. "I bought those pictures. They're mine!" "It's MY book. I can do whatever I want with it." and my favorite. "I download this stuff online all the time and the cops never came to take me away."

I still have questions about where that line is drawn between the public's right to Art and the Artist's right to control its distribution for the purpose of maximizing profit (versus, say control of HOW the material is used) but that's not for this forum. Last time I asked a question like that, it look months for the burns to heal.

TV shows and DVDs
ALL: Now that Joss Whedon's shows are no longer on the air, the revitalized "The Practice" (with a terrific, form-fitting part for James Spader) has made its last run and the marvelous "Wonderfalls" was wrong-headedly canceled, the only thing I make an effort to catch is "Dead Like Me." After accidentally catching it on "Showtime earlier this year, I was hooked. Great acting, great writing -- only one or two shows fell to the level of good -- and lots o' dark humor. (I know some reviewers have said it was a "ripoff" of HBOs "Six Feet Under," but it isn't. I caught the first two seasons of that show; the actors are excellent, but I didn't think the writing and plotlines don't held up that well).
Speaking of TV -- shows old and new -- I read last week that Image Entertainment will be rereleasing the original "Twilight Zone" TV show in boxed sets (every episode, not just selected ones) on DVD between Dec 2004 and 2005 (the cost, unfortunately, will be about $120) per box; they'll also be releasing the 1985 version of "the Twilight Zone," ($70) for each boxed set) starting with season one in December of this year (season two and three will be out in Mar 2005). And the third incarnation will be out just before those two (in Sept). Anyone looking for a Harlan connection should already know that he wrote a couple of epipsodes for the 1980s revival, had several of his stories adapted by other writers, and even served as creative consultant for a while.
--DTS

ARE YOU ON CRACK, OR MARIJUANA?

Teak,

Stop smoking that stuff; it's bad for you in so many ways.

"Appropriating" software and music you do not buy is stealing.

If you take a friend’s Photoshop disk, and make a copy for yourself, or if your friend gives you a copy, it is stealing. You and your friend are thieves, just as if you took the contents of the cash drawer at a 7-11. Adobe, maker of Photoshop, employs thousands of people, many of them software engineers. They have to be paid. If they aren’t paid, they won’t work to make new copies of that software. Also, they cannot afford to support a technical support arm, which is there when people need help. Adobe will go out of business. Then your only hope will be freeware graphic applications which aren’t as good. If they were just as good, you’d never have stolen Photoshop in the first place.

You are equating theft with a physical loss, and because an actual item is not physically removed from a location, but merely copied, you argue that theft did not occur. That does not jibe. Can’t you think of anything you could steal that isn’t physical? Would it be okay for me to crack into your bank account or credit card account and take as much money as I can, because it’s not physically represented? How about your social-security number? I’ll take Teak’s identity: it’s not physical. It’s not like I’m taking Teak’s car or Teak’s clothes; if I take Teak’s SSN, Teak still has it.

What if you had a really great idea; the next light-bulb? You tell your best friend, and before you can do anything about it, your best friend patents the invention and makes a billion dollars. Did your friend (well, not a friend anymore!) steal something from you?

But in a lame way, you address this. Let me quote: “I suppose one could say you're denying them the money you would've spent on the work. But I doubt that holds up in many cases, since only a small fraction of DLers would've actually purchased whatever they've just obtained for free. I believe the number of people who substitute DLing for buying are outweighed by the number who find something they didn't know about and want to upgrade the experience with packaging, better sound, etc.” You also say: “Money is a great restraint on access to media and that's unfortunate for democracies, because the latter thrives when all segments of society have acceess to a broad range of ideas.”

WRONG AND WRONG. If you’ve been to a library in the past 20 years, you would know that you can get more than books there, bub. I think there might be some ideas in there, too. You don’t need to steal songs from Kazaa or LAMEwire to see if you’d like them; you can go to the library, or run into any of the kajillion Wal-Mart stores, media stores of other stripes, etc., and “try-out” as many CDs as you want. And most software companies have trial versions you can download legally from their sites, or order on CD. ALL of Microsoft’s products have trial versions; and most other companies do as well.

I’m not now defending the prices for CDs, which I think are gross. But for good or ill, those are the prices. People with more money can buy more stuff. If you choose to work hard and make more money, you can buy more stuff. Granted, some of your contemporaries have parents who give them more money, and some of them have better jobs, but music and software and CDs are not bread and butter, and YOU’RE NOT ENTITLED TO THEM. Just like you’re not entitled to a PORCHE, or a FERRARI, or any old gosh-darned luxury thing you want, but can’t pay for. Yes, Teak, MUSIC IS LUXURY!!!! Even 90% of the food we eat is LUXURY.

I am salaried, but I work an average of 60 hours a week and I make 90K a year, and my yearly expenses for DVDs, books, and CDs (and other media) is somewhere around $3000, and I have a shitty TV. It’s only 27”, it’s 5 years old, and I want another one. But I have to work for it. My next TV is going to be a 50” or greater LCD HDTV, and I’m saving for it now…I’m working for it now. I also have a mediocre stereo system, and my DVD player is NOT progressive scan (it was a gift). But I know how much money I need to get them, and I know how to make money.

Make your choices, but if you choose to steal, you are a thief. Don’t fool yourself into thinking you are any better than the guy who grabs the loot from the cash-drawer of a 7-11 when the clerk is in the back room. You are not a democratic freedom fighter; you are a lazy good for nothing slob who does not see the value in hard work.

And I have never snuck into a movie.

The only thing I have ever stolen in my life: I was 7 years old; it was a 7-11; and I paid for 1 hot tooth-pick, and I took two! TWO!!!! I returned the following day, having been ridden down by guilt all night until I could not bear it any longer. I TOOK IT BACK!!!! I understand, on a deep emotional level, "The Telltale Heart."

The nice clerk looked at my tear-streaked face and said, “Keep it, kid.” I must admit, though, that it was very thrilling when I took it, initially.

-Keith

PS – Saw Fahrenheit 9/11 yesterday. Great movie. Go see it immediately. AND PAY FOR IT.

I don't think people who use Kazaa steal. It's misleading to call that stealing, as if stealing should be measured by the winner's gain and not the loser's loss.

A few years ago giant software companies ran ads where they said getting a free copy of Word or whatever was equivalent to shoplifting it from a store. No it's not. When you take something from a store, theres an actual loss--whatever they've spent on shipping, packaging, materials are all lost. There's no such loss when a guy puts Photoshop on a disc for a friend.

I suppose one could say you're denying them the money you would've spent on the work. But I doubt that holds up in many cases, since only a small fraction of DLers would've actually purchased whatever they've just obtained for free. I believe the number of people who substitute DLing for buying are outweighed by the number who find something they didn't know about and want to upgrade the experience with packaging, better sound, etc.

"The free exchange of information" argument is a serious one that shouldn't be dimissed without considering it. Money is a great restraint on access to media and that's unfortunate for democracies, because the latter thrives when all segments of society have acceess to a broad range of ideas. Media conglomerations mean only the rich and the persistent downloader can have such a broad range of choices. When clear channel plays the same 5 damn bands over and over again, the guy with enough money to buy one CD a month must choose between them, as he cannot afford to take a risk on an unknown group. The active collusion of record companies to artificially raise CD prices only worsens the situation, meaning a consumer must limit his purchases proportionally.

There're also personal gains from downloading stuff you can't afford to buy. Life is rich when it is filled with an expansive range of ideas, musical styles, authors, etc. And the intellectual richness of one's life shouldn't, to the extent possible, be a product of one's financial resources.

Stealing at the movies & stealing from Kazaa
There's no difference - except I presume Harlan doesn't delude himself that he's NOT stealing, like most people who download from Kazaa do. There are venial sins and mortal sins, and sneaking into a movie or snatching a grape at the grocer's are arguably venial. (Childnapping at the movies, however, is definitely mortal.) Self-righteous downloading under the pretense that one is exercising the "free" (and there's never any irony in this here usage) exchange of ideas - well, that's stealing compounded by hubris.

Not that I'm AGAINST sin, mind you...

Michael Moore's film left me grief stricken and without words, and the truth is, I kept crying for several minutes even after the film was over. It is not an easy movie to see, and I would not recommend it to very sensitive individuals. The movie will break your heart, and older folks who have lived through the sixties may be left in despair because this is a severest case of the "Hereweareagain gaities" that I can remember.

A day later, I am still disturbed, sick, angry and very, very sad. All of you who can stand it should see this film.

Steve Dooner

LI'L WASHU:

Barney is in Rehoboth; Tim is marrying Andrea tomorrow. We sent the copies of the Hebrew DV to Tim (just in time for him to enter it in FINGERPRINTS ON THE SKY before he sent it off to the publisher), both unsigned. Eliminating the possibility that when Barney sees his copy he doesn't fall so in love with it that he changes his mind and decides to keep it, what I suggest as the procedure for this 3-way liaison is as follows:

1. You get your address to Barney.
2. Barney mails you the book.
3. I reimburse Barney for the postage.
4. You receive the book and are satisfied with it.
5. You mail a check for $100 made out to The Kilimanjaro Corporation (initial caps, spell out "corporation" completely), c/o The Harlan Ellison Recording Collection (HERC) at the address below.

Or:

1. Barney (not being the world's fleetest transshipper) leaves the book with Tim (who is going to be gone for a month on his honeymoon), and when Tim and Andrea get back, exhausted and incapable of cleaning up the mail and chores that have mounted since they went away, Tim eventually gets around to sending it to you, or to me.
2. Either way, we (or Tim) have to get your address.
3. He (or I) send you the book.
4. I reimburse Tim for postage.
5. You get the book and are happy with it.
6. You send a check for $100 made out to TKC, to the HERC address, which is PO BOX 55548; Sherman Oaks, CA 91413-0548.

Pick yer poison. Ball's in your, and Barney's, court.

Yr. pal, with grats to both of you, Harlan

THE HEBREW EDITION OF "DANGEROUS VISIONS"

All right. I want to be ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY CRYSTAL CLEAR ON THIS, just so I know where the situation currently stands:

FinderDoug snapped up the (initial) last offer for the Hebrew DANGEROUS VISIONS. I bitched briefly about the cruelty of the universe and how God hates me, and then shrugged my shoulders and got on with my life. Subsequently, Barney offered his own copy for me to own. Harlan seems O.K. with this. Heck, I’M O.K. with this. The whole arrangement is simply wonderful. Thank you, Barney.

Now, all I need to know is what to do now. Should I give my phone number to Harlan in my next post, or wait until after Tim’s wedding has properly unfolded?

P.S. HARLAN -

In case this works out according to plan – yes, I would very much like my copy to be signed, AND personalized. I’m not interested in it as a collectible. I would like it as a gift from a friend.

>dumb question
Why is it permissible to sneak into a movie but not download that same movie from Kazaa? Aren't you essentially "stealing" from the creator either time? <

It's not a dumb question. My answer would be that yes, you are stealing from the creator either time.

I'm doing a rather dumb thing: I am smoking again. I know, you didn't know I didn't smoke or cared, but yes I did smoke at one time, and now I am smoking once again. Sure, smoking is insane, sure it kills the tender lungs and soils the climes of suburbia, but I am smoking. It calms me. What else can I say. I hope to quit again soon.

My Grandfather lived to 86, smoking FIVE packs of unfiltered Camels a day. When he died, my born again Christian Aunt and Uncle tried scrubbing the yellow off his apartment walls. It would not budge. That yellow lives in the soul of that apartment.

I do wonder if there are nicotine jags on the other side?

------------

Michael Moore is da mannnnnnnnnn.

Movie of the year. Oscar number two in the tumbler.

Conservatives, eat meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.

I respectfully interrupt the good news of birthdays and rings found (I lost my patience last week, but after retracing my steps I found I lost it between the Sears automotive department and the snooty bookstore employee; of course I'm constantly losing my patience so my wife suggested I keep it on a dummy-cord attached to the growth under my armpit) to say that I saw FAHRENHEIT 9/11 yesterday and liked it.

I humbly ask that those with varying views on this film bring it over to the other board and not sully the Pavilion with the mud slinging (or huzzahs) that will surely accompany any discussion of this film. I'm even more interested in what the conservatives of the board have to say about the film (especially you, Todd; I know you want to see it). So, to paraphrase the Lizard King and George W. Bush, bring it on to the other side.

Just thought I'd let you all know, "Fingerprints on the Sky," (The HE bibilography) is complete and now rests in the hands of Dave Hinchberger at Overlook Connection Press. I haven't a clue as to how long it will take to go to press, but at least after nine years I've it go. Now it's up to Dave. So glad you found the ring Susan! Thanks for the well wishes guys. Talk to you later. Tim

dumb question
Why is it permissible to sneak into a movie but not download that same movie from Kazaa? Aren't you essentially "stealing" from the creator either time? Maybe it's just a generation gap, the same divide that keeps Mr. Ellison from seeing the same genius in Goonies people my age did and still do. Just typing these words replays the swashbuckling score in my mind and I relive Sloth lifting the boulder with his back, Chunk's chubby digits pushed down into the blades of a blender, and the minature Statue of David's inverted penis.

BTW, that M. Moore movie is amazing. His last one struck me as manipulative and unfocused but this new one is incredibly powerful. I don't think many people made it through without crying at least once. I don't think I've ever seen a documentary that approached it in terms of urgency, innovation, investigative journalism (thin blue line maybe?) and poignancy. Fence-sitters interviewed on the news said it'd swung them, so who knows what effect it could have in a tight presidential race?

Er, Happy Friday, Susan!

D.

Many happy returns. . .
Indeed, most happy birthay. . .how was the second movie? I have not seen either of the Harry Potter sequals. . .

The only movie I ever snuck into was "Highlander tv crossover thing" and found it not worth the effort.

Happy Birthday Susan!

So glad you found your ring--what a relief! Now you can focus on more pressing matters...like how many carats you want for the next one...

Happy belated birthday, Susan.

Cindy: Man, Guiness under the blazing sun of Texas. You should try to visit Ireland sometime -- the Guiness really is better there, though the brewery tour runs something like 17 euros now.

Cheers, Jon

HAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAA

Cindy....the Christmas tree...yer killin' me!!

hahahaheeheeheeehhhaahahahhahaaa


next Guinness is on me.

Happy Birthday Susan!

Many, many more for you and your husband who clearly and rightly adores you.

I'm delighted y'all found the ring. That Dorman is a treasure.

:)
From Texas,
Cindy




Frank,
He wouldn't give a feck, he cusses too. Of course he normally limits his to high school football games and private orations about the woman who sits on the front pew every week and reads while he speaks from the pulpit. She does it to irritate and insult and it gets under his vestment from time to time. He's only human and claims no more. A reformed alcoholic and regular AA attendee the man is a bright spot in a land of dust clery. He is the real deal. He speaks of inclusion and not exclusion and of the folly of judging others for any reason. There are about 17 members of the congregation who don't want to hear that overeating is just as sinful as participation in same sex intercourse. In my pastor's opinion a homosexual pastor should be no less acceptible than a fat one. He said there is no pasaage in the Bible that directs the minister of a church to be a "better" person than the other members of the congregation. He said that was something devised by people.

Oh and he knows I cuss when something strikes me as outrageously wrong. He's heard me.

;)
Cindy

Conan
Dear Mr. Ellison,

I've been picking up the Chronicles of Conan as Dark Horse releases them, and for a kick I got out the original issues and compared them (mainly for changes in color). I noticed that you had a letter to the editor printed in Conan the Barbarian #2 (vol.1, no.2, Dec 1970) praising the Roy Thomas & Barry Smith team. So, I really wasn't surprised to see you mentioned in the new Kurt Busiek/Cary Nord Conan series (#4, May 2004) in relation to the hot debate concering the typewriter font for narration. What do you think of this new incarnation compared with previous visions (I personally like John Buscema's work and would have liked to have met him).

Sincerely,
SH

Susan: Oh, frabshious day! (sp?) Nice to know the little ringy-thingee showed up. I also wanted to express my appreceation for the Rabit Hole #35. It was nice to get something besides the usual bills in the mail this week. I especially enjoyed the photo of three grown men, Harlan, Joe Haldeman and Mr. Van Gelder, acting like high schoolers. No guy, including me, will ever turn down a chance to regress from time to time.

I saw Joe Haldeman read from a manuscript and play a few songs on his guitar at Denvention Two some twenty years ago. Talented fellow.

Chuck

I was about to suggest that Harlan and Susan check with their Pilates instructor before tearing up all the plumbing in California, but I suppose great minds think alike.

I suppose your birthday is finally complete: Happy Birthday Susan.

-TODD

Susan's good fortune
HARLAN & SUSAN: So glad to read that your story ended happily. Susan, you're a terrific woman, and your face is much more beautiful when smiling -- so it's doubly pleasing to hear of your good fortune. (And remember: next time I'm in LA, feel free to take me along to your Pilates class -- I'm an amateur Pilatist, so I can help the women in your class contort -- would this keyboard lie to you?)
Finally...as much as I'd like to take credit for lending the correct advice, I believe it was one of the other angels here on Cloud Nine that helped you out (the one with a name that sounds like a sneeze -- Washu). You two kids have a good weekend. I'll talk to you both via the modern magic of Herr's Edison and Bell. Now I'm off to catch Michael Moore's latest.

--Clarence (aka, DTS, aka Dorman, aka...) (Don't forget to ring a bell or two on your way out of doors tonight -- I could use a pair of wings).

The Return of the Ring
Harlan, I can't believe you passed up the chance to use that as you header.

Robin went through something similar. About five years ago, she came home crying because the stone had vanished from her ring. I wasn't too happy about it myself. It was a big ol' rock, or at least as big as I could afford when we got engaged in 1984. But Robin can't find a man in day-glo plaid suit at a formal dinner, so I had to do the searching. After I went through the schoolroom where she taught, half the rooms in our house, and the JCC where she exercised, I found the little bastard glinting gently in the detritus that had accumulated on the floor of her car. By then, we had to cancel the insurance claim that was half processed.

I'm glad to hear Susan got hers back. Happy belated birthday, Susan!

And Michael, maazel on the wedding.

Re: Moore's film and Bradbury's ire, has anyone here ever heard the recordings of a ska band by the name Farenheit 451? I can't help wondering if Bradbury is aware of them. Here's a link: http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=it&u=http://stage.vitaminic.it/main/fahrenheit_451&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dfahrenheit%2B451%2Bcd%2Balternative%2Bmusic%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8

THE RING HAS BEEN FOUND.

Susan slipped it off her finger four days ago, at her Pilates class, because a certain exercise is painful to perform while wearing the ring. The Pilates instructor had found it; but didn't know to whom it belonged. She was keeping it, and Susan would never have thought she was "without something that is so much a part of me" (sure it is!) (then how come you didn't know it was missing for THREE FUCKING DAYS, WOMAN???????) had our Guardian Angel, senor Shindler, not suggested she relive the times when she had removed it in the past. Bingo! Had it not been, yet again, for DTS's good offices, we'd still be in the swall.

You may now resume your regular lives. Wheeeeew.

Harlan

Harlan, is it possible the ring got washed down the sink, either yours or the theater's? Just a thought. -- duane

Belated birthday greetings to Susan, truly the better half. Gotta keep the leash on the little boys; you know how they love to run amuck.

Michael: Congrats on your daughter's nuptuals, now the little one becomes another man's problem.

We gals do curse the male gender, don't we?

Yes, and I love it.

Love to all, Melissa

Happy Birthday
Happy Birthday Susan!!

Hell, I sneak into movies all the time. They have these kiddie ushers who basically clean up the dirty theatre then scoot. Because of the huge size of the venue there is no way in hell that anyone could guess who snuck into what. Sneaking is a great way to preview a film you have doubts about. It has saved me loads of pocket lint.

--------------

Happy B day, fare Susie Q. Hope you find that ring. Harlan may have eaten it. lol.

---------------

Cindy, I'm tellin your pastor about all that cussin. Your busted juicy bunz.

Happy birthday and a day, Susan!

Bill

Happy (belated) Birthday, Susan!

I hope your ring turns up - via theater lost and found (for if it were to turn up, it probably wouldn't necessarily be found until the good cleaning at the end of the evening), improbable good samaritan, FOUND poster on a phone pole, something. Sadly, it might not hurt to eyeball Ebay listings for wedding rings for a few days, just in case someone of less than stellar character found it and tries to turn it for a quick buck or two.

But you never know. I have a crucifix given to me by a priest when I was in the 9th grade - he was later killed in a highway accident in South America - that has gone missing three times from around my neck while in public, and all three times - however improbably - it has found its way back to me. Good luck!

REPLIES

BRIAN SIANO: Damned if I know. I'd have to see the Lampoon letter before I could say. Either choice is possible.

BARNEY: First, we'll deal with the Li'l Washu sitchyashun after Tim's wedding. I don't object to getting a free hundred bucks, but you'd better take a look at that Hebrew edition first. You might have second thoughts.

Second, cover Tim and Andrea and Alexa with Susan's and my deepest affection and happiest good wishes. May they be as joyful in their union as you know who and you know who.

Yr. pal, Harlan

Happy Belated Birthday, Susan!! Sorry about the ring...

I spent your birthday giving my daughter away in marriage... and organizing guests, sewing emergency buttons, posing for pictures, shelling out crazy money, and killing half a bottle of Jameson's.

Today my head hurts... but my baby is happily married. And I don't have to see ANY of those people for at least a few days. Life ain't so bad.

best to all,
Michael and hangover

YIKES!!
it's H-A-R-L-A-N sorry so so sorry


regretfully,


neal

Susan's Ring
Hrlan,

I suppose it has already occurred to you to pay a plumber to check the traps on all the sinks in the bathroom in question...

Respectfully,

Neal

SUSAN,

Happy Birthday, and good luck on locating the ring. I'm not sure if it's any help, but whenever I lose something important, my Mom would tell me to retrace every action just before and just after losing the object. That's probably not much good to you, since you know you had it in your possession up to the restroom in the theatre, but still...I had to offer SOMEthing.

Pity about CHRONICLES OF RIDDICK. I hope Vin Diesel was a hoot, at least. I've heard Thandie Newton is on par with Freddie Prinze, Jr. as an "actor" who can actually absorb the creative energies of everyone around her by the sheer vacuity of her physical presence.

road trip hustle
*** Susan ***

Oh man, I'm sorry about the ring. I lost my fathers Navy ring while fishing 30 years ago and it still makes my heart ache to think about it. Especially since I know approximately where it is - 4 states away and a hundred feet down.

On the other hand, I once found a diamond ear stud under a baseboard that I had given up on 6 years earlier. Of course I don't wear things in my ear anymore as I have decided that pirate and/or gay wasn't really a look for me.

So Happy Birthday Susan. I'll be 29 if you will. I say declare it the official Sadie Hawkins Birthday Year and spank Harlan - for the Michael Jackson riff IF NOTHING ELSE.

And speaking of things found near the seat of our pants, you folks must have butts of molybdenum. Two movies is my limit. I had to stop sneaking in to those double features. EVERY time I did this the movie would be so bad as to beggar description. Instant Karma jumping up and snapping at my eyeballs. Last time I snuck into SPHERE. That cured me for good.

And now I'm off to Manhattan and the Museum of Comic Art Show [Mocca] and then dinner at Andino's in Providence. Then I will do my best to dissuade Tim from drinking too much Tequilla and Sunday you can all join me in singing Get Me To the Church On Time while crossing our fingers and waiting for the Excedrin and Advil to kick in.

If nothing comes of my Hebrew DV offer I'll bring it to Atlanta and we'll put it to good use there somehow. Are there Jews in Atlanta? Are there any Jewish to Baptist converts? What the hell would that schtick be like?

HAPPY BIRTHDAY SUSAN!!!!!!!!!

[!!!!!!!]

- Barney

Makeawish, PA.

Happy Birthday, Susan.

Yesterday, I ran into an acquaintance whose birthday it was. I asked him if he'd done anything about it, i.e., gone fishin', saw a movie, bought a bar of Swiss chocolate, got high and watched _Koyannisquatsi_, whatever. Thereupon he alluded to very bad, traumatic associations between his right-wing parents, the college he attended, choices not made in his life, worries baout his sterngth of character, all of which he associated with His Birthday. When I offered some suggestions to brighten himself up, he got very defensive and walked away.

I tell you this because, if you grew weary of hearing Harlan wail "Susan, It's your Birthday" all day yesterday, consider that you got off _lucky_. You may be married to a lovesick lunatic, currently ringless, but at least you're not a whiny, self-obsessed, self-defeating West Philadelphia slacker.

And it makes me feel nice that you guys spent the Lady's B-day the same way I spent the Fabulous Dusti's birthday-- seeing the Harry Potter movie with her. We liked it, too.

Re Letters to Comics. I have a REALLY obscure question for Harlan on this point. Back in the early 1970s, the _National Lampoon_ used to run a recurring feature called "Son'O'God Comics," depicting Jesus as a Captain Marvel-like agent of Protestantism. It was written by Tony Hendra and Sean Kelly (astounding, given Hendra's latest book _Father Joe_), and illustrated by Neil Adams.

Now, here's my question, In one of these "issues," there was a bogus letter column, asking about plot points in a previous "issue." And one of those letters was signed by one Harlan Ellison, of Los Angeles. So, Harlan, jog yer memory: was this a real bit of text you tossed to the _Lampoon_, or was this just a gag tossed in by one of the contributors?

Hm..funny how you find things.

Take a look: http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0974246905/ref=sib_dp_pt/103-4854846-0455838#reader-page

which is odd, as I wasn't _looking_ for this, but it coincides rawther nicely with some personal explorations. (Derek Taylor/Ronald Coleman, anyone? Heh.)

Gee, Harl, do you have this book yet in your librerry?

Happy birthday, Susan. Hope you had a nice day.

H

Belated Birthday Wishes
SUSAN: Belated Happy Birthday wishes. Glad to hear you had a nice time with Harlan; sorry to learn of the unfortunate incident. In order to cheer you up, here are...
TWO TALES OF SOMEONE ELSE'S (lack of) WIT & WOE, DESIGNED TO MAKE YOU FEEL BETTER ABOUT YOUR SITUATION: First, regarding belated birthday wishes, I should tell you that once --early in our marriage -- I set up a romantic birthday dinnner for my wife on October 10th. Which would've delighted her no end, if it weren't the wrong date. The woman I had been married to _before_ her had a birthday on Oct. 10th; my wife's birthday is on Oct. 6th. (Bet Harlan's never done that).
Second, only five years after arriving in Kansas City, I managed to get permantly laid off from my communications job with Yellow Freight (I was on a blacklist kept by my boss -- not because I didn't work hard, but because I wasn't good at "towing the company line" and not pointing out when something was stupid or wrong. Anyway, the friday I got laid off, from my job (while Marcia was out of town, taking a much-needed weekend off with a girlfriend in Washington), I learned that the company that had financed a remortgage of our home (so we could get lower interest payments), went belly-up, taking our $800.00 down payment with them. Then, after getting my daughter to take a nap (she was four years old at the time), I went out to mow the lawn and work some of my stress off. By four o'clock that day, I found that I had lost my wedding ring, which I taken off to keep from soiling it. A really great looking ring -- a plain gold band inlaid with a three rectangle shaped rubies and two reeeeally small diamonds --that Marcia had found in New England, along with hers (which comes in two parts, and looks sort of like a flower). Not only did they match, we got the two rings for a song from a small store in Massachusetts. (No amount of searching, for years afterward, turned the damned thing up -- even when I used a metal dector in the yard -- I think this asshole nextdoor to us found and kept it, but that's another story). When Marcia called to let me know she was having a nice, relaxing time with her buddy in Washinton, and when she asked me how things were going, I, of course, said, "Fine. Everything is just fine." So if you think back on yesterday -- or if you have another bad day -- just remember the anecdote above and thing of that dumb schmuck in Misssouri: one job, $800, and a wedding ring -- all lost in less than 24 hours.

Your friend,
Dorman

Various Fulminations
1) Of course, happy birthday to Susan, and commiserations on the ring. We know the pain. The diamond from Judi's engagement ring fell out, a long time ago, and has yet to be replaced. I won't ask that most unhelpful and aggravating of questions, "Where did you see it last?", which always makes me want to slap somebody. Good luck finding same.

2) Ah, the days of letterhacking. Once upon a time I used to send the comics dozens. Though no more than one-third of my letters were negative, I had this reputation as a guy who couldn't be pleased...

3) Herb Gardner's A THOUSAND CLOWNS, which I've seen many times, but not for at least fifteen years, still stands up today, thanks to the wondrous dialogue and the brilliant performances by Jason Robards and Barry Gordon, among others -- but, y'know, the times have changed, and some of its elements seem odd. For instance, the child welfare workers go after this guy with a clearly well-adjusted kid, on the grounds that he has been happily unemployed for all of five months. Five months. These days that's not even all that unusual -- five months of unemployment, from a guy who had a lucrative tv writing job beforehand. (It resonated uncomfortably with my own position, as a guy who recently departed a 17-year hellhole and is trying to write full time. Am I "uncomfortably close to being a bum?", or is the movie too rooted in the saturated employment 1960s?) Secondly, the certainty of the child welfare workers that this guy is providing an unhealthy home seems just as strange in these days where single-parent families, and odder permutations, are downright common. Judi, encountering the film for the first time, kept saying, Huh? Why?

Regarding the character's reluctance to rejoin the workforce: it also seems a little odd that he refuses the very first job offered him, host of a tv panel show (!), with total freedom to rant. I understand him not wanting to go back to his old employer, who is obnoxious in the extreme. Granted that he doesn't want to work AT ALL, it seems a lot like what he does all day anyway.

Other elements strange to the modern eye: the character likes to go off to the docks to join the crowds hurling confetti and streamers at the cruise ships sailing off to Europe. I remember seeing those crowds as a child, when my parents took the family on cruises: I remember hurling confetti when my Grandfather sailed off to Europe. This would be circa 1965, the era of A THOUSAND CLOWNS. You know what? I don't think people do this anymore, either. They just get on the ship and go.

It's still a fine film, with fine performances, but time has changed the context...