cjh (01/06/83)
In response to your message of Wed Jan 5 08:29:49 1983: On the contrary. Argument about something does not mean a closed mind (although some portions of this argument get close to it); having an open mind does not mean accepting everything uncritically. For instance: many of us are not interested in "...doorways into other dimensions of mind and spirit..." because the vast majority of people involved in these mishegeese have been shown to be either dupes or deliberate frauds. (I've derived occasional amusement from the fact that someone who was for some time the most wedged member of the Boston school committee bore the same name as (and could well have been related to) one of the most notorious fake mediums of the late 1800's.) I repeat my contention that absence of critical sense is one of the marks of the fringefan, and introduce the corollary (observable from the earliest days of anything recognizable as fandom) that argumentativeness is one of the common denominators of the [trufan] (I hate that term but it carries a useful sense). Until recently, reading SF at all was a marker of an oddity so great that it was either ground into conformity or (by reaction) shaped into extreme cantankerousness. You should read THE FUTURIANS (by Damon Knight); out of perhaps the most explosive group of fans ever came the first two intelligent critics of the field and a very large chunk of the creative talent of the 50's. As to the HARPER'S article, I'm not convinced that any other response is necessary. Does being open-minded require us to attempt to deal with those who have adapted a closed mind as a matter of principal (if not income; I noted on the arpa SFL that the author has been described as a professional troublemaker/@i(enfant terrible), and certainly HARPER'S is attempting to improve its once-debilitated financial state by moving toward the literary equivalent of yellow journalism). As for your equation of those who oppose the use of "sci-fi" with fascists, that is simply rude (and rudeness is often a resort of the close-minded). Certainly Lester del Rey (whom I recall as the first person to point out how often the term was used by people who knew nothing about the field and accepted its worst examples as representative) has been a reactionary codger at least as long as I have been alive; on the other hand, it was David Gerrold who pointed out the definitive use of the term (CBS executive to Gene Roddenberry: "We don't need another sci-fi show; we've already got LOST IN SPACE").