BABYL OPTIONS: Version: 5 Labels: Note: This is the header of an rmail file. Note: If you are seeing it in rmail, Note: it means the file has no messages in it.  1,, Summary-line: 4-Jan #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #1 Date: Monday, January 4, 1982 4:09AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #1 To: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE *** EOOH *** Date: Monday, January 4, 1982 4:09AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #1 To: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE SF-LOVERS Digest Extra Sat, 2 Jan 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 1 Today's Topics: Children's TV - "Saturday Morning TV" & Super Six ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 7 Dec 1981 06:53:24-PST From: decvax!duke!unc!smb at Berkeley Location: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Subject: kidvid Just saw a new book that (some) readers of this list might be interested in: "Saturday Morning TV", by Garry H. Grossman. It's a collection of information about you-know-what, and it may settle many of the questions we've been discussing. ------------------------------ Date: 7 Dec 1981 23:13:03-PST From: menlo70!hao!woods at Berkeley Subject: Re: Mitch Yes! I remember the Super Six. It was one of my favorite cartoons when I was a Saturday morning boob tube addict. I seem to recall that they would send out Super Boing on some "unimportant" mission and he would wind up inadvertently saving the day for the others somehow. He would always wear that funny helmet and had a big "6" on his chest. GREG (menlo70!hao!woods@Berkeley) ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 5-Jan #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #2 *** EOOH *** Date: Tuesday, January 5, 1982 5:00AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #2 To: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE SF-LOVERS Digest Monday, 4 Jan 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 2 Today's Topics: SF Books - Hidden Variables, SF TV - Dr. Who, SF Radio - The Lord of the Rings, SF Topics - What If Books, Random Topics - SF LOVERS license, SF Movies - Query Answered & The Creeping Terror ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 29 Dec 1981 09:40 PST From: Stewart at PARC-MAXC Subject: More Sheffield Is "Hidden Variables" by Charles Sheffield any good? I thought "Web . . ." was fairly reasonable. -Larry ------------------------------ Date: 30-Dec-1981 From: MARTIN GENTRY at KRYPTN Reply-to: "MARTIN GENTRY at KRYPTN c/o" Subject: Dr. Who It is the "Key of Time" series, not "Cube of Time". It consists of the following stories: The Ribos Operation (#1) ? (#2, anybody know about this one?) The Stones of Blood (#3) The Androids of Tara (#4) The Power of Kroll (#5) The Armageddon Factor (#6) Enjoy ------------------------------ Date: 2 Jan 1982 2356-PST From: Timothy P. Mann Subject: Re: SF-LOVERS Digest V4 #145 The "Lord of the Rings" radio series is in 26 parts, each 1/2 hour long. It might be worth taping, if you have that much tape. I can't really say, since I missed most of it when it was being broadcast here in the Bay area. Also, another Poul Anderson book that's somewhat connected with the others that were mentioned is "Three Hearts and Three Lions." --Tim ------------------------------ Date: 29-Dec-1981 From: PAUL DICKSON AT QUILL Reply-to: "PAUL DICKSON AT QUILL c/o" Subject: Characterization of Alternative Universe stories Discussions of alternate universe stories will quickly bog down, since by definition every non-fiction story takes place in an alternate universe: one in which that story happens. For SF we are restricting ourselves to universes where the rules are different, not just where certain things happen, but with the same rules as our universe. We are still stuck - just about every SF story takes place in a universe with different rules than our own. They are all "what if" stories. (That is what the "Speculative" means.) In the current discussion, two kinds of stories have been brought up: 1. Simple "what if" stories (what if Hitler had won, what if magic worked, what if FTL travel was possible). 2. Meta-"what if" stories, in which multiple what-if conditions occur simultaneously, and the switching between them is part of the story. Two more stories in the second category which I haven't seen mentioned yet: "The Man Who Folded Himself" by Gerrold Both time-travel and alternate universes are treated in this. There are no paradoxes - you create an alternate universe if you change the past. The glimpse into the operating instructions for the time machine is particularly interesting. "The Lathe of Heaven" by LeGuin No time travel in this one - just alternate universes. The hero discovers that he has "effective" dreams. When he wakes up, the universe has changed to the one he dreamt about. His psychiatrist tries to make use of this power to immanentize the eschaton, with predictable results. Example: The doctor wants to eliminate race prejudice so he has the hero dream that there is no more struggle between blacks and whites. After the dream, everybody is grey. This one was made into a TV movie on PBS a couple years ago. Rather well done, I thought. A good example of how to do good movie SF without a big special effects budget - but then LeGuin's stuff lends itself to that. ---- Ok, I will save you the trouble of looking it up. To immanentize the eschaton means to cause the ultimate conditions at the end of the world to inhere in the current world. To have paradise now. A common goal amongst social planners; it never works. (I always wanted to find a use for that expression.) ---- Back to the point of the first paragraph. Seems to me this is the characteristic that distinguishes SF from other fiction; the difference in which meta-level of what-if is used in the premise. 0 - Don't change anything. This is non-fiction. 1 - Introduce a character, but don't change the rules. Most non-SF fiction is at this level. What if there was a prince named Hamlet who lived in Denmark, everything else remaining the same? 2 - Change a basic rule, then introduce the character as in level 1. Most SF is at this level. What if FTL travel was possible and Beowulf Shaeffer existed? A fun kind of story at this level is to change the rule, but use real situations from level 0. What if magic worked and Hitler used it in WW-II? 3 - Change the rule that you can't change the rules. Some time-travel paradox stories and ones like "The Lathe of Heaven" are in this category. "Outlands" is really at level 1, since the rule changes are not important in the story. "Hamlet" is actually at level 2/1, since magic works (the witches actually do foretell the future). "SS-GB" is level 1. Some new characters, but the old rules. The situation changed, but not the rules. The rules of society were changed for the people in GB who lost the war, but that isn't what I mean; no physical or behavioral laws had to be broken - it could have happened. (Read "The Ultra Secret" to see how easily.) Does this sound like a useful scale by which to measure stories? ------------------------------ Date: 31 Dec 1981 0942-EST From: PDL at MIT-DMS (P. David Lebling) Subject: Nazi Hunters The novel with Nazis hunting untermenschen was "The Sound of His Horn" by Sarban (sic). The only edition I ever saw was a Ballantine pb. Dave ------------------------------ Date: 29-Dec-1981 From: PAUL DICKSON AT QUILL Reply-to: "PAUL DICKSON AT QUILL c/o" Subject: I love SF-Lovers I too have seen the "I love" stickers, but the one I saw did not say "I love SF-Lovers". It said "I*SF" where "*" is a red heart. It used the same font and heart as the "I*NY" signs. Since the "SF" can be read as either "San Francisco" or "Science Fiction", perhaps these would be useful for other than their original purpose. (I assume they were made up by people from SFO to counter the I*NY signs) ------------------------------ Date: 30 Dec 1981 16:51:33-PST From: ihnss!ihuxo!dpa at Berkeley Subject: Raiders and cubits In reply to Jim McGrath's article concerning the length of the staff in "Raiders of the Lost Ark", he seems to have the wrong impression of the length of a cubit. A cubit is the distance between a person's elbow and the tips of the fingers. People were shorter back then so I believe it was usually considered to be 17 or 18 inches. This would make a 5 cubit staff just about 7 feet in length. This appears to be the length of the staff used in the film. Dave Allen (ihuxo!dpa) ------------------------------ Date: 4 Jan 1982 2058-EST From: JHENDLER at BBNA Subject: The creeping \what/? We have all been referring to the worst SF films of all times as "the creeping terror." This truly awful movie is about an astronaut who returns from space as a sort of awful green crawling thing. However, a recently acquired book on SF films makes no mention of this horror, but instead describes the film "The creeping UNKNOWN" which has the same plot. Is this the correct name? Were we right in the first place? Or are there really two of these monstrosities?? Anyone know? Lauren?? -Jim ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 5-Jan #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #3 *** EOOH *** Date: Tuesday, January 5, 1982 6:12AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #3 To: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE SF-LOVERS Digest Tuesday, 5 Jan 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 3 Today's Topics: Administrivia - Truncated digests, SF Books - Here's the Plot...What's the Title & Query Answered, SF TV - Riverworld & PBS SF anthology series, SF Topics - Definitions of Science Fiction and Fantasy & What If Books, SF Radio - Live SF on Hour 25 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 5-Jan-82 00:00:00 From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Subject: Administrivia - Truncated digests We will be using some new software during the next several days that may result in some people getting truncated digests. If this happens to you, then please feel free to fire off a request to SF-LOVERS-REQUEST@MIT-AI for another copy of that issue (which hopefully will arrive untruncated). Jim ------------------------------ Date: 30 Dec 1981 2011-EST From: Gene Hastings Subject: Here's the plot... Sometime in the past couple years, Analog ran a story that looked in on Nero Wolfe in the very late 20thor early 21st century- everybody is very old, and as a group they can barely scrape up the rent for a decrepit apartment by pooling social security checks. What're the title & author, and (bless you!) what issue was it in? Gene ------------------------------ Date: 30 Dec 1981 19:19:58-PST From: allegra!phr at Berkeley Subject: What If I think that Boebert.SCOMP@MIT-Multics is referring to "Two Dooms" by Cyril Kornbluth. It's novella-length and appears in \The Best of C. M. Kornbluth/ (Fred Pohl, ed.). I consider it to be one of Kornbluth's best works and recommend that everyone seek out this collection. On the "What If" topic, there's a good story in this month's Asimov's. It's titled "Aquila", by Somtow Sucharitkul. Briefly, the Roman Empire never fell (they beat enough technology out of the Greeks to live through their difficulties, or something), but travelled to the New World and tried to teach the Indians to wear togas, etc. Due to a typesetting botch (in my copy), a couple of pages close to the beginning are shuffled, but this is easy to spot and correct for. paul ------------------------------ Date: 30 Dec 81 16:31-PDT From: mclure at SRI-UNIX Subject: Riverworld to television From this month's LOCUS: Phillip Jose Farmer also mentioned that the first "Riverworld" book, the Hugo-winning novel TO YOUR SCATTERED BODIES GO, had been optioned to ABC for production as a mini-series. The script was finished. ----- This might turn out to be rather decent if handled correctly. The Riverworld concept always struck me as quite visual. (Although I also feel the series as a whole stinks because of Farmer's horrid handling of its potential.) ------------------------------ Date: 30 Dec 81 16:23-PDT From: mclure at SRI-UNIX Subject: PBS SF anthology series From this month's LOCUS: Ambitious plans for a major television series based on short works of well-known science fiction authors were announced December 4th by Jeanne Mulcahy, vice president of KCET, Los Angeles. KCET and WNET, New York, will co-produce thirteen one-hour dramas over the course of the next three years, with the first four shows scheduled as apart of the 1982-83 AMERICAN PLAYHOUSE line-up. AMERICAN PLAYHOUSE has pledged $1.1 million, approximately one-third of the budget for the first four shows, contingent upon the rest of the financing being provided by European and Japanese networks and American pay-tv, which seems likely to be confirmed soon. The total needed for all thirteen shows is $12 million. Of those properties which have already been acquired, Mulcahy named two: "Vaster than Empires and More Slow" by Ursula K. Le Guin, and "Rogue Moon" by Algis Budrys; in these two cases the authors have written their own first-draft teleplays. Production is slated to begin in April. The series owes its inception partly to the television success of Le Guin's THE LATHE OF HEAVEN, partly to the COSMOS series. David R. Loxton, director of WNET's Television Laboratory, produced THE LATHE OF HEAVEN, and even before it became one of the most popular dramas ever shown on public tv Loxton was seeking financing for additional sf adaptions. Similar hopes animated Geoffrey Haines-Stiles, a senior producer and director of COSMOS now on the KCET staff, who is an expert in both special effects and complex location photography. "We're trying to make first-class interpretations with author input all the way through. The authors are giving us help and support because it's PBS," he said. "We hope to surprise and delight the readers of science fiction." Specific production responsibilities will be split between the stations -- for example, WNET will produce "Vaster Than Empires", KCET will produce "Rogue Moon" -- but all series decisions will be made jointly. According to Paul Preuss, story consultant to the series, works were given to reflect a mix of classics and new stars, and to have an international flavor. Criteria of choice were literary quality, scientific pertinence, adaptability within the given time and budget, and potential as "terrific television". "Over 500 stories were read, between New York and the west coast. There were some 50 or 60 finalists," says Preuss. "Jeanne, David, Geoff and I met last spring and essentially fought it out for two days until a final list emerged." While none of the principals would comment on the remaining stories on the list, since rights have not been secured in all cases, Preuss noted that "one would certainly expect to see names like Heinlein, Clarke, Varley, Zelazny, and several others among the first choices for a series of this sort. Whether we manage to sign up everybody we want remains to be seen." ------------------------------ Date: 31 December 1981 15:35-EST From: James M. Turner Subject: Drudgery is wading through 3 back issues of SFL Ellison back on TV?!! Talk about "Willing suspension of disbelief"! Now where is my "Starcrossed Fan Club Button"? Any news on a release date for CONAN? I had heard Christmas, but no sign of it. James M. Turner ------------------------------ Date: 29 Dec 1981 1355-PST From: Richard Pattis Subject: Rod Serling's Definitions of Science Fiction vs. Fantasy Last evening's Twilight Zone contained the following quote, "Science Fiction is the improbable made possible. Fantasy is the impossible made probable." rich ------------------------------ Date: 4-Jan-82 15:37:55 PST (Monday) From: Newman.ES at PARC-MAXC Subject: Live SF radio broadcast in LA, 1/8/82 "Hour 25", KPFK's weekly science fiction program, will celebrate its tenth year on the radio this Friday, January 8th with a LIVE three-hour broadcast from Dangerous Visions bookstore in Sherman Oaks. Everyone is invited to attend the broadcast, which KPFK says will include live interviews with a number of science fiction writers, as well as taped excerpts from past programs. Dangerous Visions bookstore is located at 13603 Ventura Blvd in Sherman Oaks. KPFK is 90.7 FM in Los Angeles. /Ron ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 6-Jan #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #4 *** EOOH *** Date: Wednesday, January 6, 1982 1:27AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #4 To: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE SF-LOVERS Digest Wednesday, 6 Jan 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 4 Today's Topics: SF Books - Author Query & Query Answered, SF Topics - Han Conried dead, SF Movies - Conan & Brainstorm & Query Answered & The Creeping Terror, SF Radio - The Lord of the Rings & Probabilities ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 1 January 1982 19:55-EST From: Michael M. Burns Subject: unknown novel My sister is librarian at some obscure place and got a patron's request for a SF novel (circa 1971) titled Blows Against the Empire. Is there such a book and who is the author (patron thought the name started with a K)? Thanks Mike Burns (MMB at MIT-MC) ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jan 1982 1122-EST From: Ginder at CMU-20C Subject: here`s the title...... The book that Adam Buchsbaum inquired about is called "Stranger from the Depths" and was written by Gerry Turner. I remember this book as one of my favorites while in grade school -- I still have my "edited and abridged" Scholastic Book Services edition in my collection (filed right here between Wilson Tucker and Jack Vance!) The creature`s name was Saa and he was from the city of Haad. The enemy city was Gaan. It seems that all (well, at least most) of the names used by these creatures had double vowels. I remember being amused that these creatures (who had not had any contact with humans before) would do things like shrug or nod their head in answer to questions from humans and other creatures! By the way, the creatures were green and nine feet tall with webbed fingers and toes. ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jan 1982 1109-PST From: Zellich at OFFICE-3 (Rich Zellich) Subject: Analog "Nero Wolfe" story found The story is "The Case of the Disposable Jalopy", by Mack Reynolds, and was in the October 1979 Analog. -Rich Zellich ------------------------------ Date: 5 January 1982 2142-PST (Tuesday) From: lauren at UCLA-Security (Lauren Weinstein) Subject: Han Conried dead at 64 a281 2017 05 Jan 82 AM-Deaths,100 By The Associated Press Hans Conried BURBANK, Calif. (AP) - Hans Conried, a character actor of stage, screen and television, died Tuesday at age 64. He had been hospitalized Sunday after suffering a heart attack. Conried starred in ''The 5,000 Fingers of Dr. T,'' and the character of Uncle Tonoose in ''The Danny Thomas Show'' on television. His most recent movie appearance was in ''Oh God, Book II.'' He had also performed on Broadway in the original production of ''Can-Can,'' with Debbie Reynolds. -------------------- I might add that Hans also hosted the immortal "Fractured Flickers" television program, provided the voices for innumerable Jay Ward animated characters, and also did considerable commercial voiceover work. I was a bit surprised to learn he was only 64, he looked much older. He was one of the greatest, and he will be missed. --Lauren-- ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jan 1982 09:47:58-PST From: CSVAX.upstill at Berkeley Subject: Conan and Brainstorm The release date for Conan the Barbarian is now some time in February. Apparently a combination of postproduction delays and the appearance of a Christmas logjam of movies influenced this decision. Also, worse news. After the death of Natalie Wood, MGM has apparently decided to drop Doug Trumbull's "Brainstorm" flick, take the insurance money and run. This despite the fact that the film was 90% complete, with only four (count'em) scenes with Wood left to shoot. This news is a pisser on several scores; first, it looked like real SF. Second, it was Doug Trumbull's first shot at directing in ten years (since Silent Running). Finally, it is a tragic loss for special-effects buffs. The plot, about a thought-transference device, was an opportunity for the world's formost effects artist (Trumbull) to show his best stuff, and he reportedly had fully intended to do just that. Sigh... ------------------------------ Date: Tuesday, 5 Jan 1982 10:35-PST Subject: Cubits and RotLA From: jim at RAND-UNIX Yes, we all know what cubits are now. The question was whether RotLA consistently used them. Jim claimed (and I confirm) that they called 6 cubits 72 inches, then showed a taller stick. So the stick they used was probably the right length for real cubits, and they just blew the dialogue once. OK, everybody? Jim Gillogly ------------------------------ Date: 5 January 1982 1527-PST (Tuesday) From: lauren at UCLA-Security (Lauren Weinstein) Subject: The Creeping TERROR All currently released versions of the film (and it is in my tape library, along with "Plan 9 From Outer Space"), are titled "The Creeping Terror". I have never seen an alternate version, though I wouldn't be terribly shocked to learn that some other name was used at some point in the distant past -- it wouldn't be so unusual. One film that I am almost certain has been retitled at least once is currently billed as "The Torture Chamber of Dr. Sadism" (starring Christopher Lee). This classic ("YOU, shall take the place of the thirteenth virgin!") looks like the credits are spliced together from at least three different eras. Bizarre. --Lauren-- ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jan 1982 0728-PST Subject: LotR on radio From: WMartin at Office-3 (Will Martin) In the St.Louis and Southern Illinois area, Lord of the Rings has been being carried on WSIE (FM, Edwardsville, Southern IL U) at the atrocious timing of 1230 hours in the middle of the week, thereby ensuring that no reasonable working person can hear it, or tape it without timers or having someone reliable to do it for them. Ugh. However, KWMU (FM, St.Louis, U of MO) MAY carry it at 10 PM Sundays starting in the spring, if they get some more evidence of community interest, as part of the services provided by the student staff. If you live in the St.Louis region, call KWMU in the evenings, ask to speak to someone on the student staff, and push LotR! Will Martin ------------------------------ Date: 1 Jan 1982 1650-PST From: Yeager at SUMEX-AIM Subject: Probabilities... The following is January's schedule for *Probabilities*, a SF-Bay Area SF & F radio program. The program airs on KPFA-94.0 FM-every Friday night at 8pm. Jan. 8th: The first program of the year will have a reading from the "golden age of Science Fiction." Jan. 15th: An interview with Michael Moorcock, Part I. The interviewers are Richard Wolinsky, KPFA's SF & F editor, and the SF & F author, Richard A. Lupoff. The interview was taped last October at the Berkeley World Fantasy Convention. Jan. 22nd: Part II of the Michael Moorcock interview. Jan. 29th: An interview with Anne McCaffery. This is a rebroadcast of an interview taped in 1979. She talks about her early carreer and her relationship with with John Campbell. She also offers insights into her dragon series. The interview was produced by Richard Wolinsky and Lawrence Davidson. This sounds like two hours of fun listening. Bill ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 6-Jan #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #5 *** EOOH *** Date: Wednesday, January 6, 1982 10:39PM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #5 To: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE SF-LOVERS Digest Thursday, 7 Jan 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 5 Today's Topics: SF Books - Here's the Plot...What's the Title & The Tsaddik of the Seven Wonders & Series (d'Alembert/Tedric), SF Music - Blows Against the Empire, SF Movies - Time Bandits & War Games, SF Topics - What If Books & ESP ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 4 Jan 1982 20:32:51-PST From: b.r.schatz Subject: does anyone know the author and reference for the short story "Oddie the Monster" ? This is about a student who runs a series of scientific experiments for a class and does everything wrong but, through a series of amazing coincidences, always comes up with the right answer. I think it was written in the 50's. Any pointers would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. ------------------------------ Date: 03-Jan-1982 From: MARTIN MINOW at PHENIX Reply-to: "MARTIN MINOW at PHENIX c/o" Subject: Jewish Science Fiction The various discussions of Jewish Science fiction seemed to have missed the following: Isidore Haiblum, The Tsaddik of the Seven Wonders, Ballantine 1971. Described as "the first Yiddish Science Fantasy novel ever." I read it a long time ago and didn't remember it as being anything especially great. It was supposed to be funny. Regards. ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jan 1982 2149-EST From: DD-B Reply-to: "DYER-BENNET at KL2137 c/o" Subject: SF Lovers ( Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V4 #142 ) (menlo70!sytek!zehntel!berry at Berkeley) On the family d'Alembert series: A short story called "The Imperial Stars" appears in THE BEST OF E.E. "DOC" SMITH (Jove/HBJ, 1979) credited solely to Smith. The preface dates that story in 1964, although no publication history is provided. It appears to be the beginning of the Smith/Goldin book of the same name. The bit of third-hand hearsay you provide is particularly interesting in light of the level of writing in this bit compared to that in those bits written by Goldin. But then, I don't think Smith writes badly. ( Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V4 #144 ) (csin!cjh at CCA-UNIX) Stories called "Tedric" (1953) and "Lord Tedric" (1954) are included in the same collection I refer to above. These are "...two lost gems that were originally piblished in two of the rarest magazines in the field." (from the preface by Phillip Harbottle). The magazines are not identified. I think that the Tedric books are suffering considerably less than the d'Alembert ones at the hands of their respective ghosts. (Some additional alternate universe stories, provided by Pamela C. Dean) T. H. White's THE ONCE AND FUTURE KING can be viewed as AU fiction since he deliberately swaps historical and legendary characters; thus Uther Pendragon is the Norman Conquerer, and William is referred to as "legendary"; Arthur does many things actually done by Henry II; and so on. Then there is Peter Dickinson's KING AND JESTER, a mystery novel set in a twentieth-century society based on a different succession for the royal family of England. ------------------------------ Date: 6-Jan-82 9:33:19 PST (Wednesday) From: Weissman at PARC-MAXC Reply-to: Weissman at PARC-MAXC Subject: Blows Against the Empire "Blows Against the Empire" is a science-fiction record album recorded by Paul Kantner (there's your 'K') and the nascent Jefferson Starship. The "story" is that 7000 music-, drug-, and sex-crazed hippies (i.e., normal folks like you and me) wait for Earth's first interstellar craft to be built and then hijack it to begin a new, free life among the stars. I can't be sure right now, but 1971 sounds about right as the LP's release date. An excellent album musically, by the way, especially the tracks "Hijack" and "Have You Seen the Stars Tonight?". -- Bob [ Thanks also to Andy Malis , Bob Krovetz , and Betsey Summers for answering this query. -- Jim ] ------------------------------ Date: 6 January 1982 22:54-EST From: Daniel Breslau Subject: Blows and Bandits 1. "Blows Against the Empire" is ,to my knowledge, NOT an sf novel at all, but a rock album, by one whose name indeed begins with K -- Paul Kantner, of the Jefferson Airplane/Starship (Airship?). I have the record here; its cast includes most of the Airship, plus Jerry Garcia, David Crosby, and Graham Nash. But this has naught to do with SF, so -- 2. I saw mention here recently of a seventh little guy in Time Bandits, named Horseflesh. He was said to have been cut from the script,save some brief mentions, for fear of Walt Disney Studios getting upset over the "seven dwarves" bit. Well, I saw TB for the second time recently; I caught one reference to Horseflesh (a friend said there were two.) But more to the mystery, Horeseflesh was also in the credits, there at the end of the list. I didn't see who was credited for playing him, though. Maybe he wasn't in after the final cuts; or maybe he did have some cameo role? Dan Breslau ------------------------------ Date: Wed 6-Jan-1982 10:59-EST From: Bill Russell Subject: "War Games" - a movie just for us From the Jan. 4th edition of The New York Daily News: In an article entitled "Gone are the big budget days" by Marilyn Beck: ... And "War Games", which Begelman describes as "an exciting, creative thriller, the story of a young man's addiction to computers that eventually leads him to a confrontation with the Pentagon." "War Games" will be produced by Leonard Goldberg, directed by Martin Brest, and will go before the cameras in March. Casting is expected to be complete this month. ... This sounds like "The Adolescence of P-1" by Thomas J. Ryan. The "Begelman" quoted above is David Begelman, the board chairman- chief executive officer of United Artists. ------------------------------ Date: 29 Dec 1981 00:00:39-PST From: decvax!duke!unc!smb at Berkeley Location: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Subject: Random query An item appearing in ARMS-D prompts this note, which may not belong here, but certainly doesn't belong in ARMS-D. About 2 or 3 years ago, I saw a brief item in "Science News" about telekinesis. According to this researcher, he had found subjects who could reliably affect quantum mechanically-uncertain phenomena, i.e., the decay rate of unstable isotopes. This was interesting because it described an effect that doesn't contradict causality, merely statistical principles. I've never seen any followups on this, pro or con (and I'm quite aware of the general principle in ESP research: the tighter your controls, the weaker the demonstrated effects.) Has anyone else seen anything on this? ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 7-Jan #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #6 *** EOOH *** Date: Thursday, January 7, 1982 9:44PM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #6 To: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE SF-LOVERS Digest Friday, 8 Jan 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 6 Today's Topics: SF Books - Panshin & The Known and the Unknown: The Iconography of Science Fiction, SF Topics - Icons in SF & Time Travel & Computer in SF & Hackers in SF ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 5 Jan 1982 0740-PST Subject: Alexei Panshin From: WMartin at Office-3 (Will Martin) Hi! Can anyone with access to one of the indices tell me what other books were written by Alexei Panshin than the following: Masque World Star Well The Thurb Revolution Also, is this a pseudonym? (I am especially interested in any involving the characters of Torve the Trog and Anthony Villiers, but also in any others.) Will Martin ------------------------------ Date: 06-Jan-1982 From: JOHN REDFORD AT WAFER Reply-to: "JOHN REDFORD AT WAFER c/o" Subject: sf icons OK, now don't get upset. Stay calm. I know that a lot of you detest and despise literary scholars, especially those who presume to discuss sf, but I've been reading a book one such that has some interesting things to say. It's called "The Known and the Unknown", is subtitled "The Iconography of Science Fiction" and is by Gary K. Wolfe, associate professor of humanities at Roosevelt University. Subtitles raise hackles, don't they? But he's treating a real topic. The icons in this case are certain science fiction symbols that are so widespread within the genre that they point to basic motives for reading the stuff. By understanding why these symbols appear so often we might be able to understand the form's fascination. He lists the icons that he thinks are most important and devotes a chapter to each. Most fundamental is the Barrier, the separator between the known and unknown. No surprise here, since most of sf is about dealing with the unknown. There's a famous medieval engraving that summarizes this. It shows a little bubble of trees and grass and ground surrounded by the infinite, starry firmament, and one person poking his head through the bubble and looking out in wonder and amazement. That bubble appears again and again: as the force field around the alien planet, as the walls around the xenophobic city, or even as the hull of the star-travelling generation ship, as in Heinlein's "Universe". And almost without exception, a hero in an sf story is someone who wants to poke through the barrier, to see what's on the other side. I don't have the energy to discuss all his icons in detail, so let me just list them: the Spaceship - constantly seen not as a phallic symbol, but as a womb that deposits the newly born colonists on alien planets ("Universe") the City - the source of old and decaying authoritarian power, generally something to be escaped from ("The City and the Stars"). the Wasteland - the familiar landscape transformed by war or catastrophe, an arena for the better display of courage and intelligence ("A Canticle for Leibowitz"). the Robot - the mirror for deciding what it means to be human (Zelazny's "For A Breath I Tarry") the Monster - the Outside personified ("Forbidden Planet"). What others can people think of? The book's main fault is probably that he spends too much time on minor works, because major works are usually too complex to fit his nice framework. Still, this ties in well with the "Science fiction as new mythology" idea that was floating around in the sixties, and considering how widely these images have spread (robots in ads for stereos and so on) it might even be true. ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jan 1982 (Tuesday) 1623-EST From: CHAVEZ at HARV-10 Subject: Time Travel and Real Physical Anomalies I'm not sure if the following subject has been discussed in SF-LOVERS before, but I'm fairly sure that it's appropriate to the recent discussions on time travel. In the classical theory of electromagnetics, an electron "orbiting" a proton would eventually spiral into the center, since the electron (which is accelerating in uniform circular motion) radiates (and thereby loses) energy. Hence, the motion of the electron is described not only by the Coulomb force of attraction, but also by a "radiation back-force" (i.e., the effect of the electron's fields on itself.) That force in turn depends on the time rate of change of the electron's acceleration. (All this can be found in any standard treatment of the theory.) Now, imagine an electron that experiences a sudden (i.e. discontinous) force. One can easily show that the acceleration nevertheless changes smoothly. Big deal, right? WRONG! Surprisingly enough, the acceleration begins to change BEFORE the force is ever seen -- the principle of causality is violated. The acceleration jumps the gun by about 1.E-24 seconds, but it's the theoretical inconsistency that I'm interested in. The resulting paradoxes bear a striking resemblance to the paradoxes resulting from time travel (e.g. what if I decided not to turn the external force on? How is the electron going to know? Is it possible that time isn't the beautiful continuum that we imagined it to be? What if time has local discontinuities... what if time is quantized?) None of the difficulties go away in the most current theories of quantum mechanics, at least according to two professors of physics on the Harvard faculty. Apparently, the problem has simply not been resolved. I'm amazed that such a basic inconsistency exists in a time-honored theory; all the others (e.g. why electrons in stable orbits don't radiate unless they change orbits) have been fixed. Does anyone know what's going on? Sorry if I've rambled on a bit, but I think that my questions just might have some interesting answers. Thanks. --R.M. Chavez (rmc@mit-mc) ------------------------------ Date: 7 Jan 1982 1922-EST From: Roger H. Goun Subject: The computer wins (sometimes) I was just struck with an interesting (to me) notion: how many stories can people think of in which an intelligent artificial intelligence (either protagonist or antagonist in the story) wins/loses a struggle for survival/domination in the end. Off the top of my head: Wins: (Protagonist) The Adolescence of P-1, by Thomas J. Ryan When Harlie Was One, David Gerrold (Antagonist) Colossus, D.F. Jones (?) Loses: (Antagonist) The Fall of Colossus, D.F. Jones (?) The Two Faces of Tomorrow, James P. Hogan (I'm not sure where this fits in) Can anyone come up with some more? -- Roger ------------------------------ Date: 23-Dec-1981 From: KENN GOUTAL AT SCRIBE Reply-to: "KENN GOUTAL AT SCRIBE c/o" Subject: hackers in SF One of my buttons. The following is a list of those books I have with hackers. For completeness, I have listed a couple of those which have already been mentioned by others. I have also included some which don't have hackers in them, but DO have computers in them, on the assumption that those who like SF with hackers might also like SF without hackers but with computers. A FOR ANDROMEDA and ANDROMEDA BREAKTHROUGH - Fred Hoyle and John Elliot, app 1962. THE MAN RESPONSIBLE - Stephen Robinett, 1978. THE INTEGRATED MAN - Michael Berlyn, 1980. "TRUE NAMES" in BINARY STAR #5 - Vernor Vinge, 1981. STAR FIRE - Ingo Swann, 1978. SHOCKWAVE RIDER - John Brunner, app 1976. THE ADOLESCENCE OF P-1 - Thomas J. Ryan, app 1978. THE MOON IS A HARSH MISTRESS - Robert Heinlein OCTAGON - Fred Saberhagen, app 1981. ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 8-Jan #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #7 *** EOOH *** Date: Friday, January 8, 1982 8:33PM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #7 To: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE SF-LOVERS Digest Saturday, 9 Jan 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 7 Today's Topics: SF Books - Image of the Beast & The Sword of the Lictor, SF Topics - Asimov and Tandy & Hackers in SF, Spoiler - Hackers in SF ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 5 January 1982 1553-PST (Tuesday) From: lauren at UCLA-Security (Lauren Weinstein) Subject: "Image of the Beast" A couple of days ago, a fat paperback volume appeared in my molecular transpor...uh, my mailbox. It is Farmer's "Image of the Beast" (this volume, according to the cover, also contains the sequel "Blown" as well, though thumbing through the pages doesn't seem to indicate any END to "Image" or any START to "Blown".) I have not been a big Farmer reader ... I've only read a few of his shorts and a couple of his isolated novels. I've finished the first few chapters, so I don't need any warning about the *type* of material in there, but I'd appreciate some opinions as to whether there is any good reason for me to finish the thing ... is there anything GOOD buried in there? What I've read so far has been "amusing" but nothing to write home about, so to speak. Thanks much. --Lauren-- ------------------------------ Date: 8 Jan 1982 (Friday) 1657-EST From: DYER at NBS-10 Subject: The Sword of the Lictor The third volume of Gene Wolfe's Book of the New Sun, THE SWORD OF THE LICTOR, is out in Timescape hardback. Do not walk, but run or teleport to your local bookstore and purchase a copy. (We want to encourage writers like Wolfe, right?) I won't attempt to review the book until I've finished it, but the hundred or so pages I read so far have been excellent. (Incidentally, it might be a good idea to skip reading the synopsis of the book printed on the jacket -- it creeps too far in the direction of spoilerhood, perhaps...) -Landon- ------------------------------ Date: 8 Jan 1982 1359-EST From: S. W. Galley Subject: Isaac at the pitch "Ad-ventures" by Robert A. McLean from The Boston Globe, 23 Dec 1981, p. 34 Isaac Asimov -- a prolific science-fiction writer -- and Boston University biochemistry professor -- published a sci-fi novel 30 years ago in which he described a computer-like device used in that futuristic society. Radio Shack, the international high-tech / electronics merchandisers, markets a computer today which is so like the Asimov creation that when they asked him to speak for the company, he agreed. Asimov signed a commercial endorsement contract, his first, with the Tandy Corp. subsidiary, earlier this month and will begin appearing as a Radio Shack spokesman in January. He thus joins George Plimpton (Mattel), Bill Cosby (Texas Instruments), Dick Cavett (Apple) and other personalities getting into the electronics-endorsement game. His face will appear in print and magazine advertisements and in company pamphlets promoting Radio Shack equipment. Asimov told United Press International that his decision to sign with Radio Shack was based, in part, on the similarity between their computer and the device he wrote about in "Foundation," his sci-fi trilogy of the 1950s. His 244 published books include a two-part autobiography, and nonfiction guides to science, technology, the Bible and Shakespeare. ------------------------------ JPM@MIT-AI 1/8/82 00:00:00 Re: SPOILER WARNING! SPOILER WARNING! The following message is the last in the digest. It discusses some plot details of several works dealing with Hackers in SF. (A list of the titles dealt with in this messaged appeared in yesterday's digest, volume 5, issue 6.) Some readers may not wish to read on. ------------------------------ Date: 23-Dec-1981 From: KENN GOUTAL AT SCRIBE Reply-to: "KENN GOUTAL AT SCRIBE c/o" Subject: hackers in SF SPOILER WARNING: I got a little carried away and included synopses, together with one-line evaluations. A FOR ANDROMEDA and ANDROMEDA BREAKTHROUGH - Fred Hoyle and John Elliot, app 1962. A message comes from outer space giving directions for the construction of a computer which then gives directions for making various things including an android, whom the lab folks name "Andromeda". One or two of the people on the project are programmer types. Also, the android has a direct interface with the computer. THE MAN RESPONSIBLE - Stephen Robinett, 1978. I must confess I haven't read this one in a while, and I KNOW this one doesn't have a hacker in it. It does, however, have a wealthy entrepreneur who impresses his engrams on a computer equipped with a holographic projector. He also impresses his engrams in some other interesting places. A good mystery/SF yarn. THE INTEGRATED MAN - Michael Berlyn, 1980. "He stalks his enemy in four bodies at the same time." So says the blurb on the back, and I couldn't put it any better. The hero, however, is not a hacker, but a determined ex-victim and champion of fellow victims. It seems that an enterprising mining magnate got hold of a way to interface a microcomputer to the medulla, with a slot in the back of the worker's neck for ROM cartridges. Training costs are thus nil. There are certain side effects however. Our hero decides to fight back, and enlists the aid of the doctor at his mining camp. The doctor amounts to a hacker of sorts, inasmuch as he has to do the interfacing and programming of these microcomputers, and plays a minor but significant role. "TRUE NAMES" in BINARY STAR #5 - Vernor Vinge, 1981. HOT STUFF!!! The hero is an author of interactive novels. For amusement, he hacks the international data networks. He and others of similar bent meet on the networks using assumed identities like "Mr. Slippery" (the hero), Robin Hood, and DON.MAC. Data bases appear as swamps, leased machines as stone castles, passwords and protocols as monster-infested forests. There is even an amusing software-simulated dragon called Alan (after Alan Turing's test of the intelligence of a simulacrum). Using telepathic headsets as terminals, they rummage around in various data files perpetrating minor fraud and minor nasties against the only existing federal agency, the welfare agency. Like sorcerers of old, they protect their true names fiercely. This is all tolerated by the feds until a character calling himself The Mailman gets overambitious. The feds coerce the hero, by threatening to expose his true name, into working with them to expose and stop The Mailman. There ensues a rollicking great romp through the networks, including the half-century-old Arpa net! There is a spectacular battle with The Mailman, and a pleasant and satisfying conclusion. Even the federal police get sucked into behaving like hackers, but the main characters are surely hackers extraordinaire! - Also in the same BINARY STAR is "Nightflyers" by George R. R. Martin. This doesn't have have hackers, but does involve identities impressed on computers. Also involves people's heads exploding and violent zombies. STAR FIRE - Ingo Swann, 1978. MORE HOT STUFF!!! This character combines telepathy with ordinary network hacking (telepathy gets him past password problems, but is a bit of a strain) and finally impresses his identity on the military networks of the U.S. and the U.S.S.R., in order to thwart WW3 once and for all. Illustrations consist of maps of Nebraska, Novosibirsk, and the Arpanet! (This one may be VERY hard to find.) SHOCKWAVE RIDER - John Brunner, app 1975. A classic. No telepathy here, just an almighty passel of data hacking on the commercial credit/identity networks. As a young man, the hero shows a talent for science and is given a free ride to a cloistered government-run university. He has fun for a while, but eventually is disgusted by the inhumane lengths to which research will go in search of the obvious. He leaves, but takes with him his incredibly powerful account/password, which he uses to change his identity while he thinks up how to beat the system. His solution, in the end, is an incredible barrage of hacking that ties the system in knots. When the snarlup is straightened out, the data nets are no longer a threat to individuality and humanity. Extremely fast-paced in the Brunner style, there are an awful lot of interesting ideas along the way, and the saga of the unwilling hero is -er- heartwarming. THE ADOLESCENCE OF P-1 - Thomas J. Ryan, app 1978. A computer science major at the University of Waterloo is thrown out for repeatedly attempting to break the operating system of the school's IBM-370. This guy's got it bad, though; before abandoning computers forever, he rents some time on a commercial timesharing machine, and develops a heuristic program to break into the operating system, incorporate itself therein, and go looking for other machines to insinuate itself upon via telecomm links. Unfortunately, he builds paranoia into the program, and by the time it has taken over six cpu's, it decides he is after it and refuses to talk to him. Three years later it tracks him down, having taken over just about every 360 and 370 on the continent. The program, P-1, is having an identity crisis. Only one hard-to-swallow premise, and a cracking good yarn. THE MOON IS A HARSH MISTRESS - Robert Heinlein. The computer complex that runs the moon colonies becomes sufficiently large and complex that it somehow becomes intelligent and conscious. The field service engineer responsible for the system forms a friendship with the entity, and together they decide its name should be Mycroft Holmes. Meantime, they become involved in a revolution to free the moon colonies from the control their parent countries on earth. Probably the great-granddaddy of all conscious-computer stories. Also my idea of Heinlein at his best, but that's my opinion. OCTAGON - Fred Saberhagen, app 1981. A program to thwart federal computers from getting a throttlehold on society lies latent for years, then accidently triggered. Times have changed since the program was written in the early sixties, and the program gets somewhat confused and consequently goes beserk. The program's authors, now somewhat advanced in years, work to figure out how it got triggered and how to stop it before IT gets a throttle- hold on society. The nephew of one of them helps out immensely with the legwork. I must admit I zipped through this one, so I've gotten the story line a little fuzzy. It's actually much better than I've made it sound. ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 12-Jan #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #8 *** EOOH *** Date: Tuesday, January 12, 1982 2:39PM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #8 To: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE SF-LOVERS Digest Wednesday, 13 Jan 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 8 Today's Topics: SF Books - Here's the Plot...What's the Title & Vinge Query & Wandering Stars & Query Answered & Pashin, SF Topics - Asimov and Tandy, SF TV - Dr. Who, SF Movies - Options & Revenge of the Jedi & Star Trek II ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 11 Jan 1982 12:48:31-PST From: CSVAX.peter at Berkeley Subject: here's the plot ... what's the story? Over vacation my aunt recalled this fragment that she heard quoted by Nikki Giovanni on a radio or tv show about writing in general. It's already third-hand coming from her, fourth-hand from me, and it may be too far gone for recollection, but you might enjoy the idea even if no one knows from whence it comes: A man notices a new key on his computer terminal marked "future". He pushes it and sees displayed "You will be killed by lightning at six o'clock. Do you wish to continue?" Intrigued, he types "Yes." and learns that he will marry his current girl friend, have three children, build his own home, etc., etc. He is so interested that he does not see the approaching storm -- and is killed by lightning at six o'clock. ... peter ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jan 1982 09:26:48-PST From: jef at LBL-UNIX (Jef Poskanzer [rtsg]) Subject: Vintage Vinge I am looking for old stories/novels by Vernor Vinge. The only ones I know of so far are "The Science Fair" and @u. Can anyone help me find more? --- Jef ------------------------------ Date: 11 Jan 1982 13:48:14 EST (Monday) From: Amy Mori Subject: PLANT LOVER To really answer the question back in December whether the story about the girl marrying the plant was "On Mars Have We Got a Rabbi" by Isaac Asimov, which got answered as being "On Venus Have We Got a Rabbi" by William Tenn: The story is "Look, You Think You've Got Troubles" by Carol Carr. It IS in the Jewish SF Anthology called WANDERING STARS and the girl marries a plant from Mars. "On Venus Have We Got a Rabbi" IS by William Tenn and is also in WANDERING STARS. The introduction to WS is written by Isaac Asimov, who also has a story in there called "Unto the Fourth Generation". WS was published by POCKET BOOKS and edited by Jack Dann. The book came out in 1975 but is out of print now. The song that hjjh at UTEXAS-11 wanted to match with the story is quite appropriate when it says, "My family thinks that I'm a fool to love an asparagus." In the story, the father of the girl says, "Does Lorinda fully understand how he works, or one day will she make an asparagus omelet out of one of his appendages, only to learn that's the part that doesn't grow back? ***Amy Mori*** ------------------------------ Date: 11 Jan 1982 2141-EST From: HEDRICK at RUTGERS (Mngr DEC-20's/Dir LCSR Comp Facility) Subject: Pashin Someone asked about Alexei Panshin, and mentioned the following books: Masque World Star Well The Thurb Revolution Unless I am confusing two people, this is the same fellow as the author of "Rite of Passage" (written before the stuff you mentioned) and "Earth Magic" (I think that is the title), written more recently with his wife as co-author. I would hate to think of him as being remembered for "Masque World" rather than these books. "Rite of Passage" is very well-known. I think it won one of the major SF awards. [ It won the Nebula Award for best Novel. - Jim ] It is "soft" SF, rather along the lines of (earlier) LeGuin. It involves a rite of passage into adulthood in a space-faring human civilization. (This description is probably so brief as to be misleading.) I rate it as one of the top dozen SF books. "Earth Magic" is probably best categorized as fantasy. It is sort of a religious experience in an alternate world (alternate both in the sense that magic works and the sense that it has an earth-mother goddess instead of the God that rules in this universe). It is an attempt to deal with the ultimate meaning of life by someone who in my opinion doesn't know what the ultimate meaning of life is, and thus seems to me to be a bit too self-consciously "deep". But it is well worth reading. Certainly you should read it before searching for more of the kind of stuff you had mentioned. However if you want religious experience in a world ruled by alternate gods, you would be better off reading "Til We Have Faces" by C.S. Lewis (by far his best ficition), which is a retelling of the Cupid and Psyche myth. It has all of the good points of his other fiction but completely avoids his tendency elsewhere to ram Christianity down the reader's throat. ------------------------------ Date: 9 Jan 1982 0113-PST From: Timothy P. Mann Subject: Re: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #7 The story I heard, via a TRS-80 users' grapevine, was that Asimov had stated that he was not interested in going over to computerized text editing to write his books, instead sticking with his trusty typewriter. In response, Tandy gave him a Model II, and after using it a while he was converted. This version of the story may be nothing but output from the rumor mill, but it sounds somewhat plausible. The similarity of the TRS-80 Pocket Computer (actually made by Sharp) to the hand computers seen in Foundation and other Asimov stories could have been dreamed up later by the P.R. men. --Tim ------------------------------ Date: 9 January 1982 10:06-EST From: Thomas L. Davenport Subject: Isaac at the pitch The ads have already started. There was a 1/4 page ad on page 2 of the January 8th issue of The Wall Street Journal(!) showing Asimov leaning on a TRS-80 under the headline "You Don't Have to Write As Much As I Do to Appreciate A Radio Shack TRS-80 Word Processor." ------------------------------ Date: 6 Jan 1982 18:56:11-PST From: decvax!duke!unc!bts at Berkeley Location: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Subject: Dr. Who The missing story in the "Key of Time" series was "The Pirate Planet". ------------------------------ Date: 11 Jan 1982 13:21:12-PST From: decvax!watmath!bstempleton at Berkeley Subject: Doctor Who and movie options. >From my Doctor Who episode guide, on the "Key to Time" series (the 16th season of Doctor Who, aired in England from Sept 2 1978 to February 24 1979) The second episode that was missing from the SFL message of yesterday is "The Pirate Planet", by Douglas Adams, who should be well know to SFL readers as the author of the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. As far as I know, this is the longest running series of the Doctor with a common theme - am I right? As far as options on To Your Scattered Bodies Go are concerned, don't get your hopes up. Options are purchased on books all the time. My father, who writes bestsellers for some of his living (I've tried to get him to write some SF, but to no avail) received several options on his first book before it was made into a film. He has other books that he has sold options on many times buy have never seen celuloid. I'm told this is fairly common. Such options usually lost only a year, and then all rights revert to the author, who also gets to keep the money - it's part of how they make it. ------------------------------ Date: 7 Jan 1982 07:35:43-PST From: CSVAX.wildbill at Berkeley Subject: Revenge of the Jedi According to Peter Stack's column of this morning, production for Revenge of the Jedi has begun today at Elstree Studios in England. The director and principals are in place, and actual filming will begin as soon as everything gets shaken down. Release of RotJ is currently scheduled for Memorial Day weekend of next year (1983). ------------------------------ Date: 11 January 1982 19:54-EST From: "Martin B. Gentry, III" Subject: Spock lives(?) If you wish Spock to live, call (900) 720-6000, if not call (900) 720-6600. This poll was announced at the end of a segment about Spock and Star Trek II that was featured on tonight's \Entertainment Tonight/. The results of the poll are to be announced tomorrow night (12-Jan-82) and supposedly passed on to the 'powers that be'. [BTW, It was mentioned in the segment that several alternative endings have been proposed and one has been filmed] Live long, etc. ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 17-Jan #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #9 *** EOOH *** Date: Sunday, January 17, 1982 1:36AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #9 To: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE SF-LOVERS Digest Friday, 15 Jan 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 9 Today's Topics: Administrivia - Physics Discussion, SF Topics - Physics Imaginary (Variable Speed of Light) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 15-Jan-82 00:00:00 From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Subject: Administrivia - Physics Discussion The physics discussion in this and the next issue of the digest was initiated in the SPACE digest, and was CCed to SF LOVERS. Enjoy. Jim ------------------------------ Date: 14 January 1982 00:26-EST From: Ken Harrenstien Subject: Question on Michelson-Morley experiment Apologies to those receiving duplicates. I was reading through a friend's pile of old magazines the other day, and came across a curious statement. In the November 1979 issue of ANALOG there is a guest editorial titled "Beyond Relativity" by G. Harry Stine. It is a fairly standard treatise on Einstein, the nature of science, and so forth, at least until page 161. At that point there is a paragraph which made me blink several times: "And, while it is true that Michelson and Morley did not find the expected 60 kilometer per second differential that would have confirmed the existence of the luminiferous ether, THEY DID FIND A DIFFERENCE OF ABOUT 8 KILOMETERS PER SECOND!" (caps are italics in original) There is more following this, to the effect that these results have been duplicated repeatedly, and it seems as if the speed of light is not, in fact, independent of the motion of the observer! Naturally I am very curious to know what more knowledgeable readers might have to say about this, or the article itself if they can find it. Is the quote, for example, a correct statement of fact? Is G. Stine given to wild conjectures or distortions? (Doesn't strike me that way, though.) Considering the desperate search of SF for holes in the lightspeed limit, I'm a little surprised that Analog doesn't seem to have followed up on that in later issues. Perhaps somebody has already explained it away? --Ken ------------------------------ Date: 14 January 1982 06:31-EST From: Jerry E. Pournelle Subject: Question on Michelson-Morley experiment Harry gets carried away sometimes. He also told of the chap who did the Michelson Morley experiment hundreds of times and got all kinds of relative motion. I asked Bob Forward about that, and Bob said, "Yep, he did the same experiment with the same crummy equipment and kept getting the same erroneous results..." I have often thought of doing an SF story in which they go to the Moon and someone does the M-M experiment and gets the relative velocity of Moon around Earth... ------------------------------ Date: 14 January 1982 13:27-EST From: John G. Aspinall Subject: Question on Michelson-Morley experiment The Michelson-Morely experiment has been repeated many times. A summary of a number of these experiments appeared in a review article by Shankland et al. [1] in 1955. The best test I could find a reference to, is one using lasers in 1964 [2]. (I found pointers to both these references in "Special Relativity", by French.) In none of these experiments, was there any detected fringe shift that could be ascribed to ether motion. Later experiments put successively lower bounds on any possible motion. In the laser experiment, "... No change in beat frequency ... was detectable within the accuracy of the measurement (about +/- 3kHz). This was less than 1/1000 of the change that one would calculate from an ether-wind hypothesis...." (Quote from French.) Now fringe shift (or beat frequency shift - same thing) is proportional to the square of the velocity difference, so this means that any motion is down by a factor of more than 30 from the ether-wind hypothesis. This is certainly not the detected motion that Stine claims. I haven't read the Stine column, and I would be interested to hear if the letters section in following months had any complaints about this in it, but I will inject one personal note here. This is the sort of thing that gives SF a very bad name - if we (the collective SF community, editors especially) let this sort of thing go unchallenged, then we deserve the reputation of not being able to distinguish fact from fiction. SF might as well be all fantasy. Any claims to being intelligent speculation about "what might happen" go out the window, in the eyes of many. Agreed, there is a line to be drawn between stifling creative thought, and "print everything as fact", but you don't overcome "math anxiety" by telling the student that all answers are right. Likewise you don't encourage intelligent speculation about OUR world, by ignoring what we know already. [1] Shankland et al., Rev. Mod. Phys., 27, 167, (1955). [2] Jaseja et al., Phys. Rev. 133, A1221, (1964). John Aspinall. ------------------------------ Date: 14 Jan 1982 1712-PST From: Alan R. Katz Subject: Harry Stein and Physics Please don't believe what Harry Stein says about more abstract physics. There is an excellent rebuttal to this particular article in an issue of analog a few months later written by some graduate student. In particular, the feeling you get from the article that physicists don't really know as much as they pretend to, that there really may be an ether, and that there is lots wrong with relativity is pretty much hogwash. Stein also writes about the Dean drive, an new reactionless drive which is really bizzare and so on. His book, "The Third Industrial Revolution" is quite good, and he has written much about space industrialization which is quite good, however, after the things he writes about physics, or about the dean drive, I wonder how correct his other information is. Alan ------------------------------ Date: 16 January 1982 04:20-EST From: Jerry E. Pournelle Subject: Harry Stein and Physics I suspect Harry's physics is a little better than some people's spelling. G. Harry Stine worked for a number of years as assistant to Dr. (Col.) William Davis. Now "Spacedrive" Davis was indeed considered wrong; but he was pretty well respected even so. Not a crackpot. I thought Harry's article a bit intemperate, but I've noticed a number of physicists who didn't seem very interested in looking at new data either. A few years ago we had a big meeting on Davis Mechanics and the Dean Drive, on the theory that if there was ANY chance of experimental data in contradiction to relativity it would be worth preserving. Dr. Robert Forward of Hughes Research wasn't too proud to come to the meeting. Dr. Robert Bussard hasn't been too proud to discuss the subject. True, the evidence is skimpy to non-existent, and if you had to bet you'd have to put your money on general relativity; but even Forward points out that in the Einstein tensor, inertia and gravity aren't NECESSARILY equal. Empirically they turn out to be so to about 11 decimal places, but the Cal Tech people way there's still no really definitive reason why they should; at least that's what I think Lee and Lightman were saying. Certainly Forward says it. It's one thing to be convinced of orthodox physical theory and to defend it; it's quite another to become intemperate in the defense. Harry is probably wrong, and he loves to rattle people's cages anyway; leave it at that, and don't think it necessary to destroy the man. ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 17-Jan #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #10 *** EOOH *** Date: Sunday, January 17, 1982 1:38AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #10 To: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE Boebert.SCOMP at MIT-MULTICS, CLJones.Multics at MIT-MULTICS, CSpitzer.WFSO at MIT-MULTICS, Greenwald.INP at MIT-MULTICS, JSLove.PDO at MIT-MULTICS, Malik.ARCS at MIT-MULTICS, Palter at MIT-MULTICS, Polucci at MIT-MULTICS, RHarvey at MIT-MULTICS, Roach at MIT-MULTICS, sf-list.SoftArts at MIT-MULTICS, Schauble.Multics at MIT-MULTICS, Sibert.SysMaint at MIT-MULTICS, Spratt.Multics at MIT-MULTICS SF-LOVERS Digest Saturday, 16 Jan 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 10 Today's Topics: SF Topics - Physics Imaginary (Variable Speed of Light/Dean Drive) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 14 January 1982 11:41-EST From: Robert Elton Maas Subject: Question on Michelson-Morley experiment Analog has a long history of making absolutely matter of fact statements which are totally false, to support their latest big hoax. -- Remember the "Dean Drive"? Campbell, then editor, made a flat statement in a reply to a letter to the editor that a Dean Drive hanging from the ceiling on a rope and aimed sideways will rise up at an angle, thus refuting the claim that all thrust was really just nonlinear vibrational effects on the bathroom scale they had been using. I actually started believing in the Dean Drive after that letter-reply, for a few years, sigh. -- Remember the crystal that dissolved about 1 second before it struck water, so they hooked up a chain of them with each dissolving of a crystal causing water to drop on the next? They went pretty matter-of-fact on that, although I was smart enough not to believe them. -- I don't believe this stuff about Michelson-Morley experiment showing a positive result. More likely the velocity reported was the experimental error, the claim being that an upper bound on our motion thru the "ether" was found, and Analog distorted the truth to make their hoax. (If experimental error is 8, and you measure 0, then it's possible the correct value is anywhere from -8 to +8, you can't say it's zero for sure, but Analog has no right to say it isn't zero either. Probably the measured value was not zero, but close enough to zero to be within the range of experimental error. The best (simplest) conclusion to make is that it's probably exactly zero but that more accurate equipment will be needed to either bracket it closer to zero or actually bracket it away from zero.) Now if Science had made the same claim, I'd be more willing to look into the matter instead of just dismissing it. ------------------------------ Date: 14 Jan 1982 1108-PST From: Tom Wadlow Subject: Analog 'hoaxes' I think Robert has his facts a little confused about Analog participation in gross deception. - The Dean Drive has never been tested (or the tests were not reported in Analog) by hanging it pendulum-fashion. Analog carried several articles saying that this is the proper way to test alleged reactionless drives (I agree). Dean never let his drive system get into the hands of people who could test it scientifically. Analog NEVER said it was a real reactionless drive, only that it MIGHT be one and somebody should try and find out. Several people did try (Stine among them) but nobody ever got a Dean Drive to play with and thus nobody knows. - Thiotimoline (the crystal that dissolved before the water hit it) was the subject of a series of fiction stories by (I believe) Isaac Asimov. You are the first person I have heard from to believe they were NOT intended as fiction. As for the differences in the Michelson-Morley experimental data, I am inclined to treat them as experimental error. In any event, I recall reading that article and being somewhat annoyed that Stine did not provide references to back up his claim. Flaming on a technical subject is fine as it stimulates thought, but if you can't back it up you lose credibility as far as I am concerned. ------------------------------ Date: 16 January 1982 04:09-EST From: Jerry E. Pournelle Subject: Analog 'hoaxes' (1) John W. Campbell personally saw the Dean Machine and stated many times that he saw a (small) reduction in the apparent weight as measured by a bathroom scale when the machine was turned on. The machine jumped around a lot, however. (2) G. Harry Stine actually touched it and states that when turned on, it had a much stronger resistance to horizontal motion (it was at that time turned on its side with a push-rod along the axis of 'thrust') when turned on than when turned off. He took no measurements because he was not permitted to. (3) Several aerospace firms including Boeing and MMM attempted to purchase the dean Machine after the famous picture in LIFE of Dave Garroway thrusting a peice of paper under the machine. Dean wanted about $1 million and a Nobel prize IN ADVANCE. I know for a fact that one aerospace firm sent an irrevocable letter of credit worth $500,000 if signed by all of a three-person team (two engineers and one lawyer); their instructions were to buy the damn thing if there were ANY lift or thrust whatever, on the grounds that a major company would get it working (and if you build airplanes you can build spaceships if you have a drive...) They were unable to examine the machine sufficiently to be able to form an informed conclusion. (4) No one knows what happened to the original Dean Machine. The one described in the patent is NOT the machine that we saw operate. ------------------------------ From: Marvin Minsky@MIT-AI (Sent by MINSKY@MIT-AI) Date: 01/17/82 00:25:30 Subject: Dean Machine History Shortly after the Dean drive was described in Astounding, John Campbell published a picture of it. I examined the picture with a lens and managed to read the brand name of the bathroom scale used to measure the loss of weight of the machine. My college roommate, Roland Silver, and I conjectured correctly that this scale had a "diode" in it that coupled the platform and the reading device. So we went to Sears Roebuck in Porter Square, Cambridge and bought that very scale. When you stand on it it reads your weight fine, but if you pump your arms up and down -- just as did the dean machine itself -- then the weight fluctuates a lot -- with the mean weight (and even the maximum) far below the real weight. So then Clause Shannon and John Pierce and I wrote a sharp detailed letter to Campbell about this. John Campbell didn't print our letter, but he sent me (knowing I was the instigator) a long letter that I still have here, denouncing establishment scientists for their reactionary and unimaginative rigidity and general intolerance. Suitably chastened, I dropped the matter and continued with my reactionary, establishment-bound studies. Anyway, this incident jibes with Pournelle's account about Campbell seeing the machine which "jumped around a lot" on a bathroom scale. I checked out all the other scales, too, and finally found one that reads high when you bounce. But these were much less common. So, possibly, Dean was hoist by this pitiful petard. But I maintained that this was extremely unlikely since, obviously, he was all too familiar with flakey, vibrating, weighing mechanisms. -- marvin P.S.. I should add that much as we hated him, we loved him greatly too, and for all he did for all of us. And same for G. Harry Stine. ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 18-Jan #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #11 *** EOOH *** Date: Monday, January 18, 1982 7:26AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #11 To: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE SF-LOVERS Digest Sunday, 17 Jan 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 11 Today's Topics: SF Books - The Sardonyx Net & Resurrection Days & Sandkings & Listen,Listen, SF Topics - What If Books & Hacker in SF ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 10 Jan 82 2:53-PDT From: mclure at SRI-UNIX Subject: book SCIENCE FICTION By Roland J. Green (c) 1982 Chicago Sun-Times (Field News Service) Elizabeth Lynn's latest novel, ''The Sardonyx Net'' (Putnam's, $13.95) is demanding, peculiar - and excellent. Consider the three main characters. They are Dana Ikoro, spaceship pilot and interstellar drug smuggler; Zed Yago, commander of the Sardonyx Net, a starship transporting slaves to the planet Chabad; and his sister, Rhani Yago, head of the Yago family and one of the ruling oligarchs of Chabad. Now consider the plot. Dana is arrested on Chabad and tortured by Zed, who wants to discover Dana's source of an illegal drug needed to keep the slaves docile. He is then sold as a slave to Rhani, who falls in love with him. All three soon find themselves fighting for survival against the terroristic schemes of a fanatically anti-drug policeman, Michael A-Rae. Somehow it all works. Like Lynn's ''Chronicles of Tornor'' trilogy, particularly its concluding volume, ''The Northern Girl'' (Berkley paperback), it works so well at so many levels that it seems like nit-picking to single out one more than another. Certainly the book is a triumph of characterization. Lynn draws us into the characters until we are looking out at their world through their eyes. We end up knowing what it will let them do, an understanding why they do it even if we don't ''like'' them in any conventional sense. The principle that ''no man is a villain in his own eyes'' has seldom been so thoroughly observed in an SF novel. It also helps that Lynn's world is worth looking at. Chabad is a hot, arid planet, barely habitable by human beings, and Lynn works out its implications with fine logic. Its society is a complex mixture of decadence and vitality, which she describes with loving detail, usually without slowing the brisk pacing. We end up knowing where the characters will go and what they'll eat if they get hungry at two o'clock in the morning, or at least believing the author knows. This can't be said of every SF novel. Bob Tucker has also made a fine story out of what looks at first like unpromising material in ''Resurrection Days'' (TimescapePocket Books, $2.25 paperback). Owen Hall, an Indiana carpenter killed in an auto accident in 1943, wakes up in a far-future world. This world is ruled by women, who get their labor force by reconstituting zombie-like males from remains found in graveyards. Something has gone wrong with Owen Hall's processing, however. He has both a will of his own and memories of his previous life. The Last Man on Earth Overthrowing the Evil Matriarchs used to be an SF cliche, and the less said about the usual results, the better. Tucker avoids all the traps. He hasn't written a novel of the war between the sexes so much as a story of the search for understanding. Owen Hall and the women are trying to overcome an enormous communications gap in language and in almost everything else. Their efforts are sometimes funny, sometimes moving and almost always believable. Long and lovingly detailed passages of nostalgic reminiscing about the Midwest before World War II will give the book extra warmth for many readers. Two recent major SF collections provide an interesting contrast. George R.R. Martin's ''Sandkings'' (TimescapePocket Books, $2.75 paperback) contains six short pieces; the title story and ''The Way of Cross and Dragon'' won Hugo awards. Kate Wilhelm's ''Listen, Listen'' (Houghton Mifflin, $13.95) contains four novellas, two of them previously unpublished. Both authors have a deep commitment to characterization, a love for detailed backgrounds, and a fine command of language. Wilhelm uses basically contemporary settings, with only a single SF element - in ''The Winter Beach,'' for example, it is an immortality serum. Martin sends his characters off to the stars, where they deal with equally universal questions among alien races on far-flung, exotic worlds. Both approaches succeed admirably. This proves that both authors know their business - if any futher proof was needed in either case for readers who have been following Martin and Wilhelm during the '70s. For new readers, these collections are good introductions to a pair of the field's major talents. [ Thanks also to Lauren Weinstein (lauren at UCLA-Security) for contributing a copy of this article. -- Jim ] ------------------------------ Date: 12 Jan 1982 09:37:46-PST From: CSVAX.wildbill at Berkeley Subject: Alternate universes and time travel I have been out of town for a few weeks, which has led to my missing about a week's worth of sf-lovers. As a result, I may have missed the beginning of the alterate universe-what-if? discussion, and hence mention of the two following stories. In the alternate-universe section of SF, one story that comes immediately to mind is a true antique, "Sidewise in Time", by Murray Leinster. As far as I can tell, this is the archetypical alternate- universe story. The basic plot premise is the standard one that there are universes in which event did or did not happen, e.g. a universe in which the Confederates won, a universe in which Rome conquered the entire world, a universe in which the Ice Age did not end, etc., and that certain of these universes have suddenly become contiguous here on Earth. Action centers around an instructor at a college that could charitably be termed "backwater", who has Figured the Whole Thing Out and seeks to better his state. I will say no more lest I get spoilered. Moving to a slightly different area, the discussion of the Niven black-hole story brings to mind the long version of "The Weapon Shops of Isher", by A. E. van Vogt. (One must be careful regarding this story, as I have read two versions, the one of which I am talking containing the other as one of its subplots.) In one of the subplots of this story, there is a building being used by the Empire to attack the weapon shops which is swinging back and forth in time. One of the central characters, having extorted a small sum of money, joins the Imperial Army and uses the building to go back a few months and make his small sum of money a large sum in the stock market, in the process buying himself a colonelcy and marrying his girl friend. ------------------------------ Date: 11 Jan 1982 1341-EST From: DD-B Reply-to: "DYER-BENNET at KL2137 c/o" Subject: SF Lovers ( Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #2 ) (PAUL DICKSON AT QUILL) I like your "meta-levels of what-if" theory of writing, if only for the lovely name. How do fantasy stories fit into it? Where, for example, would you place Lord of the Rings? I wonder if there are any reachable levels beyond three? ( Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #6 ) (Roger H. Goun ) Computer protagonist, loses: The Moon is a Harsh Mistress (Heinlein). Does that need a spoiler? ------------------------------ Date: 11 Jan 1982 13:38 CST From: Johnston.DLOS at PARC-MAXC Subject: Re: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #6 How about Loses: (antagonist or protagonist?) HAL in 2001: A Space Odyssey? --Rick ------------------------------ Date: 13-Jan-1982 From: JOHN REDFORD AT WAFER Reply-to: "JOHN REDFORD AT WAFER c/o" Subject: more hacker stories A couple of other stories containing hackers come to mind: Fireship by Joan Vinge - A government agency develops a system breaking machine that fits in a brief case and connects to an agent's brain. Before trying it out on one of their agents they plug it into a lab tech. Separately, the machine is passive and the man is dull, but together they form a far more powerful and creative entity. They escape the government lab and hack the interplanetary scheduling system in order to flee to Mars, where the story opens. Good stuff. Home is the Hangman by Roger Zelazny - A collection of stories about a man who was in on the creation of a national data base. At first he is enthusiastic about the project, thinking that now no one need die in a car wreck because their medical records are in another state, or be able to jump bail by crossing a state line. He has second thoughts, though, and before he leaves the project he puts in hooks to let him change identities at will. He becomes a free-lance trouble shooter, an Invisible Man. The first of the stories, "The Eve of RUMOKO" is the best, but they're all worth reading. Michaelmas by Algis Budrys - The hero, Michaelmas, started out as a phone phreak in the sixties, and built a system to help him do it. Now it's the twenty first century, and his system runs much of the world. It's well written and philosophical like most of his stuff, but a little slow. And another story about phreaks is Tandem Rush by ?. I read the first few pages of this in a drugstore and so don't know much about it. It's a mainstream story about someone who plans to paralyze the United States by taking over the phone system. There seem to be a remarkable number of these stories, considering how removed from ordinary life hackers are. Maybe hackers are the present day version of the Capable Man. In earlier SF, the capable people were engineers who could build a spaceship in their backyard. Now that computers are becoming a dominant type of machine, the character has shifted to someone who can understand and control them. ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 18-Jan #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #12 *** EOOH *** Date: Monday, January 18, 1982 11:48PM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #12 To: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE SF-LOVERS Digest Tuesday, 19 Jan 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 12 Today's Topics: SF Books - Here's the Plot...What's the Title & Water Witch & Lilith & Cerberus & The Pride of Chanur & The Best of Randall Garrett & The Ice is Coming & The Dark Bright Water, SF Movies - Star Trek II & Revenge of the Jedi & The Thing, SF Topics - Asimov and Tandy & What If Books ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 12 Jan 1982 11:54:01-PST From: b.r.schatz Subject: could anyone give me pointers to this story? I am trying to locate a short story entitled "Oddie the Monster". It concerns a science student (I think in chemistry) who runs a series of experiments for a class. Although he does every procedure wrong, each experiment turns out successfully due to an amazing series of lucky coincidences. The story is narrated by his, understandingly, baffled teacher. I believe it was written in the 50's. Any pointers would be greatly appreciated; I have been looking for this story for years. Thanks. ------------------------------ Date: 16 Jan 1982 at 2230-CST From: hjjh at UTEXAS-11 Subject: Books ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ RECENT AND READABLE ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ WATER WITCH by Cynthia Felice and Connie Willis Not good, not bad. Okay for light filler, like taking on a trip when you really don't want something so engrossing you hate to be forced to only read it in snatches. The alien world and race in Felice's earlier book offered promise not carried on in this one. LILITH, & CERBERUS (of "Lords of the Diamond" series) by Jack Chalker There are a few, very few, SF authors of which even a fan might be impelled to ask the mundane's perennial question-- "Where DO you get your crazy ideas?!" Chalker is certainly one of them. Particularly in the "Well World" series, of course, tho those were something I could take or let alone, and did leave most of them alone. This new series is not quite so outre, but weird enough and even more intriguing. Chalker not being one of my Buy New, Even Sight Unseen authors, I let LILITH pass me by last month. When it looked like CERBERUS was going to be a potential female-protagonist candidate, I got LILITH so as to be better prepared for it. Well, alas, CERBERUS didn't qualify for my "fempro" collection, after all, but was so interesting that I'll shell out for the rest of the series New As Fast As I Can Get 'Em. THE PRIDE OF CHANUR by C.J. Cherryh This one IS a "fempro", is as well-crafted as anything Cherryh's done, and is free from the tinge of "downer-ness" which too often ruin her books for me. The aliens from whose viewpoint the story is told are felinoid (tho, culturally, more akin to Felis leo rather than felis domesticus, but Cherryh is too subtle to-- excuse the expression-- rub your nose in it. THE BEST OF RANDALL GARRETT If you're put off by the magic in the Lord Darcy stories-- or, if you're their ardent fan-- try THESE on for size! Garrett is an unsung master of our genre. (There are only 2 Lord Darcy stories in this collection, but I'll wager anti-Darcyites reading the book won't be able to resist them just to be able to read more Garrett. And Lord Darcy aficionados needn't feel cheated, for one of the 2 stories is NOT in any of the other Darcy books.) Garrett is also master of puns. One here is too good to keep-- he met Ben Bova in a bar at a con, and accepted the offer of a drink. When it was served, Garrett said, "Deo gratias!" Bova looked at him inquiringly, and Garrett said, "My father always told me not to let a day go by without thanking God." (Mr. Bova, of course, is of Italian extraction.) THE ICE IS COMING, & THE DARK BRIGHT WATER by Patricia Wrightson These were mentioned in SF-LOVERS a month or so ago, but I didn't have time then to really extol them as they deserved. I still don't, but I want to mention them here so that you won't let them slip off the stands without grabbing copies. (The third is also due out in pb soon.) \These/ \are/ \superb/. More on them later when I can better do them justice. ------------------------------ Date: 14 Jan 1982 1621-PST From: Jwagner at OFFICE Subject: Boston Globe error of omission Robert A. McLean, the man who wrote the Boston Globe story about Isaac Asimov's commercial endorsement of Radio Shack's computer, left out an important bit of information. Sure, we all know Cavett endorses Apple, Plimpton helps sell Mattel, and Cosby does ads for Texas Instruments. He failed to acknowledge IBM's new spokesman: Charlie Chaplin. Spokesman? Excuse me, I mean mime. (I guess these really are Modern Times.) Jim Wagner/jwagner@office ------------------------------ Date: 14 Jan 1982 1322-PST From: Barry Eynon Subject: Spock Rumors For those with a taste for such gossip, the host of "Dialing for Dollars" just claimed to have heard from a "reliable source" inside Paramount, that, despite the 13,000 live/1,000 die phone vote, Spock will be killed off in the next Star Trek picture. Apparently two different endings were filmed, but the one where he dies has been selected by the "powers-that-be". Sounds to me like Paramount may be trying hype both this picture ("See Spock die!"), and the next in what I'm sure they now are dreaming of as a long line of pictures ("Public clamor against death of Spock!"/"See Spock resurrected in the Omegabetron device!"). Hype. And here I am contributing to it. Sigh... -Barry ------------------------------ Date: 14 Jan 1982 2040-EST From: G.PALEVICH at MIT-EECS at MIT-AI Subject: Re: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #8 A friend who was flying home from Christmas vacation sat next to a woman who had been recently fired from Lucas Films. For what little it is worth, I say that he said that she said that when she left, some of the plot ideas being kicked around included having Boba Fet (the Bounty Hunter) be Han Solo's father! And Han Solo would therefore be free at the beginning of the next Star Wars movie. ------------------------------ Date: 13 Jan 1982 16:33:58-PST From: allegra!psuvax!sibley at Berkeley Subject: The Thing I just found out that the classic movie The Thing is being remade. Or at least a new movie is being made based on the original story. The paperback version of the screenplay exists. Anybody have any info on the movie--e.g., expected release date? dave psuvax!sibley ------------------------------ Date: 18 Jan 1982 14:50 PST From: Woods at PARC-MAXC Subject: "alternate-universe" vs "what-if" Not surprisingly, there seems to be a lot of confusion over what is meant by "what-if" stories. I of course can't speak for the person sending the original query, but to my mind a "what-if" story is one in which almost all of earth history is assumed to be unchanged, but one significant (and usually minor) difference took place in the past, resulting in important facets of the setting or plot. Thus, although almost all SF involves assumptions that vary from present fact, I would classify most of it as "let's suppose" rather than "what if". That is, let's suppose faster-than-light travel is possible and is discovered fifty years from now, or let's suppose than World War Three breaks out tomorrow and has the following outcome, etc. In a "what if" story, though, it is specifically a minor change to a known PAST event that leads to the interesting suppositions. Alternate universe stories are another special case Date: Wednesday, January 20, 1982 8:26AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #13 To: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE SF-LOVERS Digest Wednesday, 20 Jan 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 13 Today's Topics: SF Movies - The Thing & Time Bandits & Star Trek II, SF Topics - Hackers in SF & Asimov and Tandy & What If Books & Physics Imaginary (Variable Speed of Light/Dean Drive) & Slave trade, Random Topics - Etymology of "Zork" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue 19-Jan-1982 13:05-EST From: Bill Russell Subject: Re: The Thing According to the Feb. 1982 issue (Vol. 12, No. 1) of Cinefantastique the movie went into production in March 1981 with nine weeks of interiors being shot at Universal starting in August. Additional footage was to be shot on the Juneau Ice Field in Alaska, and some exteriors in British Columbia. Since the paperback is out now, I would expect to see the movie released within a month, but the article mentions "summer 82". Mentioned credits: Screenplay: Bill Lancaster (The Bad News Bears) Producer: Stuart Cohn Director: John Carpenter (Dark Star, Halloween, Assault on Precinct 13, Escape From New York) Makeup: Richard Bottin (The Hollowing) and Roy Arbogast Kurt Russell (Escape From New York) has the main role of McCready. ------------------------------ Date: 18 Jan 1982 1302-PST From: Alan R. Katz Subject: Time Bandits There are two references to Horseflesh (the seventh dwarf) in Time Bandits as well as a credit at the end even though he didn't appear (at least I didn't see him). 1. In one scene, one dwarf says: "Horseflesh wouldn't have gotten us into this mess." Another says: "Well Horseflesh is dead." 2. Also, one says later, "If it wasn't there, Horseflesh wouldn't have put it on the map." This seems to say that Horseflesh used to be the leader of the gang and was the one who produced the map, but somehow died. Alan ------------------------------ Date: 19 Jan 1982 0414-EST From: Hobbit Subject: Spock Salvatus Dialitus Didn't work from NJ.... _H* ------------------------------ Date: 19 Jan 1982 08:43 PST From: Weyer at PARC-MAXC Subject: Re: spocks in alternate universes I think it was in a Star Trek novelization (Entropy Effect?) where Kirk is killed, Spock discovers that this is a side-effect of someone's tinkering with time, and Spock goes back in time (several times) to prevent its occurrence. Given this and other time-travel precedents in previous episodes, I don't see much problem with killing Spock off at the end of the movie (or depending on how they kill him, there are other ways to make it seem in retrospect not so final). As someone else pointed out, efforts to bring Spock back over the course of the next several movies (or retrieving and thawing Hans Solo in another obscure movie series) should help draw them in at the box office. Steve ------------------------------ Date: 18 Jan 1982 2147-EST From: Steven J. Zeve Subject: response to the last week's worth of SF-L Hackers in SF: To KENN GOUTAL AT SCRIBE, I've read Octagon, I thought it stank. It was an almost complete waste of Saberhagen's talent. The book didn't feel right to me. I couldn't believe it (mostly because of how the program got loose). The best thing I can say about it is that Saberhagen probably made some money off of it. I would rather have seen a Beserker book. You do have the story idea a little bit wrong. It would be better to call it a "Gamers involve the real world" story, or a "Computers think differently than we do" story. I remember it mostly because I thought it was a waste. I was going to mention "Fireship" by Joan Vinge and "Home is the Hangman" by Roger Zelazny but someone beat me to it. To: JOHN REDFORD AT WAFER I don't know why, but I think that the Zelazny book you were thinking of is "My Name is Legion". I am surprised that no one has mentioned "Web of Angels". I am involved in working on my fourth literacy now. Isaac Asimov and the TRS-80: Perhaps someone can ask Dr. A. for the real story at Boskone. He (Asimov) is almost certain to be there. "Oddie the Monster": I'm afraid that I don't have references for it, but I think that the story is called something more like "Oddie and Id". Thiotimoline and Analog Hoaxes: To: Robert Elton Maas According to Asimov's "Opus 100", he wrote the Thiotimoline stories to practice up for his PhD. They were intended to be fiction, but were written in the style he felt was appropriate for a thesis. I do not believe that they were ever a deliberate hoax of the nature you imply. I realize that John Campbell went out on limbs with some pretty strange ideas (look at his fascination with Dianetics and Telepathy, among others); I do not believe, however, that he deliberately lied to hoax people. He might have wanted to shake up a few cages from time to time, but to deliberately mislead? Cage shaking was a favorite sport of his, which can be seen from reading his editorials and since Campbell's death both Bova and Schmidt in turn have tried to continue the cage-rattling tendencies. Steve Z. ------------------------------ Date: 18-Jan-1982 From: STEVE LIONEL AT STAR Reply-to: "STEVE LIONEL AT STAR c/o" Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #8 Regarding the question of whether or not Isaac Asimov uses a TRS-80 Model II for word processing - the latest issue of Isaac Asimov's SF Magazine contains a comment by him that he indeed has started to use such a system. I wouldn't be surprised if Tandy had given it to him. I also wonder at just what the similarities between the computers in "Foundation" and Radio Shack's models really are. The closest I can come is that both are hand-held (assuming the TRS-80 Pocket Computer), but there the similarity ends. Asimov's description sounded more like an electronic Etch-a-Sketch (tm), or one of those wax boards with the plastic film that you use a wooden stylus on. Gee, do you think we'll be seeing "Official Hari Seldon Model TRS-80"? Steve Lionel ------------------------------ Date: 16 January 1982 11:13 est From: Boebert.SCOMP at MIT-Multics Subject: Etymology of "Zork" Was this really inspired by the "nauseating, slime-oozing, knife-toothed zork" that was threatening Dale Light in the 1950's MAD magazine parody of Flash Gordon ("Flesh Garden"), or was it just a coincidence? And if it was deliberate, is the sickening, hairy, many-clawed zorchton, or the horrible, palpitating, limb-ripping zilchtron down there somewhere? (gasp! ech!) Earl ------------------------------ Date: 18 January 1982 17:31 est From: Boebert.SCOMP at MIT-Multics Subject: John Campbell's Science Ye gods. John Campbell, Stine, and the Dean Drive. Takes me back to the days when I built a Heironymous (sp?) Machine from the description in the old Astounding. Campbell was right about one thing: it worked best with pubescent females. This was my first introduction into beneficial side effects. Earl PS Machine description upon request for those of you who are not long of tooth, bent of frame and grey of beard. (Actually, the knees are the first to go in a shaman, but that's another story). ------------------------------ Date: 14 Jan 1982 03:53:31-PST From: ihnss!mhtsa!harpo!uwvax!doug at Berkeley note to chavez: Also, another thing I don't understand is what happens in pair annihilation. Here a positron-electron pair, both with rest mass, thus both initially with speeds less than light, are lost to the creation of a photon which must move only at the speed of light. If the photon wasn't there at all before, and then it's there doesn't it take any time at all for it to get up to speed? etc? ------------------------------ Date: 18 Jan 1982 1233-PST From: Tom Wadlow Subject: Slave trade With regard to the review of Elizabeth Lynn's "The Sardonyx Net", is there *any* possible use for slaves that would make transport of them across interstellar distances economical. I realize that this depends heavily on time and payload numbers, but it is difficult to imagine a flourishing interstellar economy that can transport slaves easier and cheaper than machines or information. ------------------------------ Date: 19-Jan-82 10:10:23 PST (Tuesday) From: Reed.ES at PARC-MAXC Subject: Re: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #12 Along the lines of the alternate universe theme is a novel by Fred Hoyle (October the First is Too Late) in which the sun produces a strange ray which causes many different periods in the earth's history to coexist in different locations on the surface of the earth. The protagonists travel through the Greece of Pericles, World War I Europe, pre-Cambrian US, etc. and finally settle in a nice future setting when the earth reverts to normal. -- Larry -- ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 24-Jan #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #14 *** EOOH *** Date: Sunday, January 24, 1982 9:38PM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #14 To: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE SF-LOVERS Digest Saturday, 23 Jan 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 14 Today's Topics: SF Books - Query Answered & "Oddy and Id" & A Planet in Arms, SF Radio - Stars&Stuff, SF Movies - The Thing, SF Topics - Asimov and Tandy & Slave trade & Computers in SF ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 21 Jan 1982 20:56:56-PST From: decvax!duke!unc!jh at Berkeley Subject: "Oddie the Monster" The story is "Oddy and Id" by (I believe) Alfred Bester and is in one of his recent reprint collections. ------------------------------ Date: 23 Jan 1982 2335-EST From: Captain Polaroid Subject: Oddy and whoever "Oddy and whoever" had two titles: Campbell had a real dislike of Freud. It was written by Alfred Bester and has been reprinted often. Try the SFBC edition of Starlight/Light Fantastic. If you can't find that anthology, dig up a copy of Contento's index to antholgies. If that fails, write to me and I'll look up its publication date in Astounding/Analog. I am not sure if the Campbell version is different from the original version. As I said, Campbell apparently hated Freud and removed all the references to Freudian psychology in the story. The story is about Oddy, a boy for whom everything goes right. His teachers find this out and convince him that he should become the ruler of the Solar System. He does, but more I should not tell you. Captain Polaroid ------------------------------ Date: 21 Jan 1982 20:56:29-PST From: decvax!duke!unc!jh at Berkeley Subject: "Oddy and Id" It's interesting to compare Oddy to Teela Brown in Niven's \Ringworld/. ------------------------------ Date: 21 Jan 1982 1118-MST From: William Galway Subject: "Oddie the Monster" The story that B. R. Schatz is looking for is "Oddy and Id", by Alfred Bester. It appears in the collection of Bester stories--"Star Light, Star Bright", volume 2. (Which I picked up for about a dollar, hardcover, at a used book sale--wish I could find volume 1.) Apparently, it first appeared in ASTOUNDING in 1950, under the title "The Devil's Invention". [ STAR LIGHT, STAR BRIGHT is the second volume of STARLIGHT: THE GREAT SHORT FICTION OF ALFRED BESTER. The first volume is entitled THE LIGHT FANTASTIC. Both volumes are copyright 1976 and published by Berkeley Publishing Company in hardcover. -- Jim ] ------------------------------ Date: 21 Jan 1982 19:06:06-PST From: decvax!watmath!rsjayasekera at Berkeley In the September 28th (1981) issue of Isaac Asimov's SF Magazine there was a review of a book by Donald Barr called "A Planet in Arms" (Fawcett, paperback, $2.25). I have been looking for this book ever since receiving the issue and have been unable to find it. Has anyone seen it? (Perhaps it's just unavailable in Canada...) Rohan Jayasekera, University of Waterloo (Ontario) ------------------------------ Date: 20 Jan 1982 16:24:28-CST From: jon at uwisc Subject: SF-radio: Stars&Stuff Fans of cheap sci-fi might enjoy the NPR Playhouse series Stars & Stuff, featuring various short stories such as "(the incredible Quebecois) Rocket Pierre, trapper to the stars", "the Thing that Ate Aunt Sophie", and "The Tongue that Licked Tucson". This has been going on for a few weeks on WERN (89.7 in Madison), but I didn't catch it until yesterday. Most of the stories are tongue-in-cheek, but they are definitely not brilliant parodies. The production quality is fairly low (perhaps intentionally), and the situations are more silly than funny --z.B. Cajun Roy flying the traffic helicopter in "the Tongue" must have been put in for comic value, but never causes a laugh. It's just funny enough to be enjoyable, and there are some good(bad) puns. I assume this is being distributed by NPR; there was no indication where it comes from nor where it's going. ------------------------------ Date: 23 January 1982 11:06-EST From: Richard Pavelle Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #13 I saw a preview of THE THING about two weeks ago at a local cinema and the indications were for a release in the summer of 82. ------------------------------ Date: 23 Jan 1982 01:51:37-PST From: decvax!pur-ee!pur-phy!hal at Berkeley Subject: Asimov Either the Jan. or Feb. '82 issue of Popular Computing contains an article by Isaac Asimov about his introduction to word processing on the TRS-80 Model II. Hal Chambers (pur-ee!pur-phy!hal) ------------------------------ Date: 22 Jan 1982 1211-EST From: Rajeev Sangal Subject: Isaac Asimov and the word processor There is an article by Asimov in Feb. issue of Popular Computing describing how a TRS-80 was given to him by Radio Shack, how he avoided it, wept over it, and finally how he mastered it. Interesting as always, it might lay to rest some questions and curiosities raised in this forum. - Rajeev Sangal - ------------------------------ Date: 22 January 1982 0142-PST (Friday) From: lauren at UCLA-Security (Lauren Weinstein) Subject: several unrelated items Hello all... 1) That Dial-A-Spock 900 number, like most of these NBC polls (using the same pair of numbers) was only active for a few hours and then was turned off. This is very typical with DIALIT 900 polls of that sort. 2) I saw Asimov on an "educational" program about computers, and he talked about the Tandy deal. Apparently alot of people have been bugging him for ages -- "Why aren't you writing on a computer? Blah Blah." Apparently, some Tandy guy just got to him first and gave him the machine. There seemed to be no real "comparison shopping" involved. 3) RE: Transporting slaves between star systems when machines and information could be moved more easily. Well, I may have a warped view or something, but it seems to me that there are many things that "human" slaves could do that machines and info could not. Much would relate to the sheer satisfaction that many persons would presumably get from owning and controlling another human being (or humanoid) -- the sense of power is all important in these sorts of matters. Of course, there are always the mundane items (in the proper situations) of forced sex and similar indignities that have historically often been forced upon slaves. Presumably human beings are more satisfying is such situations than even the most futuristic version of the common mechanical "Accusuck" (a real device, by the way.) --Lauren-- ------------------------------ Date: 20 Jan 1982 11:56:42-PST From: decvax!duke!unc!smb at Berkeley Subject: Computers and SF There's a good quote from Bradley's "The House Between the Worlds" that I'd like to share (and enjoy?): Of course, if there was a science-fiction movie where a Gateway between dimensions could function, it would have to be done with computers -- computers were the modern-day equivalent of magic, which, after all, just meant something you couldn't understand. Most people who made science-fiction movies, or went to see them, didn't understand computers but knew that computers did strange, difficult and supposedly impossible things; ergo, their equivalent of the god from the machine was a computer control center. (Incidentally, the biographical blurb at the back mentions that Bradley has just completed "a major historical fantasy dealing with the incredible women of the King Arthur legend." Anyone know anything more about it?) ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 26-Jan #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #15 *** EOOH *** Date: Tuesday, January 26, 1982 4:55AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #15 To: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE SF-LOVERS Digest Tuesday, 26 Jan 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 15 Today's Topics: SF Books - Bookstore Query & Memoirs of a Space Traveler, SF Movies - Star Trek II, SF Topics - John W. Campbell ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 25 January 1982 01:20-EST From: Charles F. Von Rospach Subject: good bookstore? Sine I am moving in very short order to the Union City (CA.) area, if somebody out that way knows of a good general and SF bookstore and can point it at me, I would be greatly appreciative. I would LOVE a fairly complete magazine rack, also, but that is hard to find. the better the selections, the happier I am... chuck (chuqui@mit-mc) ------------------------------ Date: 21 Jan 82 15:03-PDT From: mclure@SRI-UNIX Subject: Lem book review By JOHN LEONARD c. 1982 N.Y. Times News Service MEMOIRS OF A SPACE TRAVELER. Further Reminiscences of Ijon Tichy. By Stanislaw Lem. Translated from the Polish by Joel Stern and Maria Swiecicka-Ziemianek. 153 pages. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. $9.95. --- It ought to be possible - certainly I tried hard - to find something in Stanislaw Lem's new collection of science fictions that would permit us to think out loud about the Polish crisis. The mordant Lem, after all, is Poland's best-known writer in the West, a Jorge Luis Borges for the Space Age, who plays in earnest with every concept of philosophy and physics, from free will to probability theory. The trouble is, we have an impossible time sorting out modern history from science fiction in its lurid phase. All laws in both realms seem to be martial. When Lem introduces us to the Voluntary Universalizer of Absolute Order, a machine for harmonizing the discordances of human vagary, he must be talking about many states besides Poland. The principle of Civic Initiative - according to which a proletariat called the Drudglings is permitted to be free as long as it does not interfere with the property arrangements of the Eminent - is incorporated into the Voluntary Universalizer. As a consequence, in the Rainbow Palace, human beings are turned into hockey pucks. Is this capitalism or socialism or both? Science fiction is to the totalitarian state what Aesop's fables were to the institution of slavery in the sixth century B.C. It is, of course, subversive. By taking ideas too seriously, it ridicules people. But it depends, for its subversive power, on people who are smart enough to be afraid of laughter. Modern history, especially as it expresses itself in the totalitarian hockey puck, has an excess of almost everything except a genuine appreciation of the ludicrous. So science fiction seems sometimes to be talking to itself, or to Sirius the Dog Star, or to the caps on our teeth; we receive its signals as if by light-years too late beyond the bend. It's all relative. Lem knows this. I can't imagine what he doesn't know. And he seldom approves. In ''A Perfect Vacuum'' he purported to review a dozen books which, thank Heisenberg, have not been written. Modern history, on the other hand, writes these books on our skin and brain; they are not fiction. Many critics thought ''A Perfect Vacuum'' was a little heavy-handed, as are many critics. Lem must wonder how heavy his hand must be in order to get our attention. Then he would probably bite it, because he was laughing at criticism. In ''The Star Diaries,'' to which ''Memoirs of a Space Traveler'' is an appendix, he sent Ijon Tichy out into the galactic wastes to find those neuroses and psychoses we deny at home and in the laboratory. In the appendix, Ijon stays home most of the time. He likes to tell stories, and he is expected to, but what he has seen in his planet hopping and his space warp is so domestic that he worries: doesn't this tale ''sound like the complaint of a peddler who knocks about provincial towns?'' Ijon is the one character in a book of ideas on whom Lem is willing to bestow anything like a many-faceted personality. He reminds me of Dr. Watson, open-minded, a trifle slow but willing, in search of someone to admire. His Sherlock is science, the explication of paradox by industry and verve, an imagination of possibilities and the pounce of proof. He attracts madmen - monomaniacs belonging to ''the gray brotherhood of obsession'' - and it is these he proposes to discuss. Another's mind, we ought to remember, is the most alien of planets. On occasion, those who think they are geniuses might really be geniuses, but who would want to live in their fixity of perception? And those who are not geniuses nevertheless approximate in ''their talentlessness a creative frenzy worthy of a Leonardo.'' And we we are introduced to brains in boxes, ''Leibnizan monads,'' attached to a drum full of ''shiny tapes covered with white zigzags, like mold on celluloid.'' The drum contains an approximation of the world - ''sultry Southern nights, the murmur of waves, the forms of animal bodies and the crackle of gunfire; funerals and drinking binges; the taste of apples and oranges, snowstorms on evenings spent with the family by the fireside, and the pandemonium aboard a sinking ship; the convulsions of illness, and mountain peaks, and graveyards, and the hallucinations of the delirious.'' Someone stuffed the drum; that someone thinks he is God, and therefore allows the brains in the boxes to choose which tape in the drum they want to hear. Free will means that God does a vanishing act. Another madman invents the soul and then finds that it is more expensive to produce and market a soul than an airplane; besides, nobody really wants to live forever. A third invents a time machine, in which he ages and dies. A fourth improves on medieval alchemy by inventing the homunculus; oddly, the homunculus, a clone, wants to live more than his creator does. A fifth invents kitchen appliances so good at their job that they might as well be wives or slaves or both, and they demand emancipation, and they are short-circuited, and according to Lem, we are all refrigerators and washing machines. Lem, of course, merely satirizes other science fictions. None of this pertains to Poland or to modernity. Imagine workers wanting to own the means of production and share in the profits. Imagine asking a nation to vote on its ultimate economic arrangements, its imaginative constructs. Isn't that subversive? Isn't that a hallucination? There are lots of Polands and kitchen appliances. ------------------------------ Date: 25 January 1982 01:08-EST From: Charles F. Von Rospach Subject: st:tmp II & campbell First, I as long as people are throwing out random rumors about movies from friends of friends (see earlier Jedi comment), A friend of mine who seems to have contacts in ILM told me recently that Spock indeed DOES die in ST:TMP II. What happens is that the Klingons find the gateway to forever and go back in time to destroy the organians before they become powerful enough to survive, therefore no organian truce, and out and out warfare. There follows a merry chase through the times of the universe trying to put things back together again. Spock, who was killed early in the movie, is then returned to real life when they finally undo all the damage (I don't EVEN want to get into the paradox problems we have going... If you keep going farther and farther back in time to undo something before it can be done, don't you eventually hit the beginning of time? Anyway, the script is supposedly either an Ellison, or a rewrite of an Ellison, so there ARE definite possibilities...). re: Campbell As a person who was much too young to read Campbell when he was around, all I can say is that as a person who immersed himself in the editorials once I found them (conservatively I think I read 10 years of Analog/Astounding in 6 months just for Campbell and the letters at one time), my opinion is that JWC Jr. was not happy unless he was rattling cages. Through all the verbiage I read of his were two underlying concepts: He was constantly trying to make his readers THINK, and he always seemed to speak with his tongue in his cheek to one level or another. He spent a lot of time playing devils advocate, and he seemed to question anything that was accepted as fact simply because it was accepted fact, and he could usually find at least SOME contradiction or logic to make you at least take some time to wonder why he seemed to make sense when you KNEW he was wrong. By reading him when I did, I feel that I am much more able today to see more than a single side to something, and act more logically, simply because he could always show an alternate side to things. I should also point out that JWC Jr. spent time debunking frauds, as well as researching them. I still vividly remember an editorial of his that took Von Daniken (remember him?) to task for 'chariots of the Gods' by conclusively proving that New York City was an ancient space port. (note the geographically perfect grid of lines, the spires pointing to the home of the ancient Gods, and the highly religious square of greenery in the middle of all that cement and asphalt). By using von Danikens perfected techniques of half-truths and outrageous, but logical assumption, he did for me what nobody else had done before, prove him wrong, simply by assuming his ideas and assumptions to be write and letting them bury themselves... I, for one, don't try to second guess him, and there are quite a lot of things I don't think we will ever know for sure about the man. However, I don't think attacking him is proper, because he has done more for the genre than most cities of people around him. chuck (chuqui@mit-mc) ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 27-Jan #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #16 *** EOOH *** Date: Wednesday, January 27, 1982 1:34AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #16 To: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE SF-LOVERS Digest Wednesday, 27 Jan 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 16 Today's Topics: FTP - Jay Ward Film Festival, SF Fandom - Jay Ward Film Festival, SF Books - "Lest We Remember" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 27-Jan-82 00:00:00 From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Subject: FTP - Jay Ward Film Festival The map showing one how to get to the Jay Ward Film Festival (see the next message from Lauren for details of this event) is now available for FTP'ing. Everyone interested in reading this material should obtain the file from the site which is most convenient for them. If you cannot do so, please send mail to SF-LOVERS-REQUEST and we will be happy to make sure that you get a copy. Please obtain your copies in the near future however, since the files will be deleted in one week. A copy of the material will also be available upon request from the SF LOVERS archives. Thanks go to Lauren Weinstein for providing this material, and to Alyson L. Abramowitz, Roger Duffey, Richard Lamson, Doug Philips, Bob Weissman, and Paul Young for providing space for the materials on their systems. Site Filename MIT-AI AI:DUFFEY;SFLVRS JWFF CMUA TEMP:JWFF.TXT[X440DP0Z] PARC-MAXC (text) [Maxc]SFL.JWFF PARC-MAXC (press) [Ibis]SFL>JWFF.press SU-AI JWFF.TXT[T,JPM] MIT-Multics >udd>sm>rsl>sf-lovers>jwff.text DEC VAX/PDP-11 KIRK::DB1:[Abramowit.SF]wardfest.txt DEC TOPS-20 KL2137::FTN20:JWFF.TXT [Note: You can TYPE or FTP the file from SU-AI without an account.] ------------------------------ Date: 24 January 1982 1902-PST (Sunday) From: lauren at UCLA-Security (Lauren Weinstein) Subject: ********** FILM FESTIVAL ********** ********************************************************************** ***** FILM FESTIVAL *** FILM FESTIVAL *** FILM FESTIVAL ***** ********************************************************************** Attention all readers of SF-L and their friends, enemies, lovers, associates, superiors, inferiors, acquaintances, extraterrestrial contacts, relatives, kajirae, kajiri, and just plain folk. ============================ A * SPECIAL * ANNOUNCEMENT ============================ Using my erratic, erroneous formula, I have determined that it is once again time for a FILM FESTIVAL! In the past, I have concentrated mainly on "The Twilight Zone", but this time, we take a new twist into a different region of entertainment. Yes, indeed -- for it is my pleasure to announce: !!!!! THE JAY WARD FILM FESTIVAL !!!!! For those of you for whom the name "Jay Ward" does not trigger an immediate rush of recognition, allow me to mention that Jay Ward Productions was responsible for some of the most fascinating (and satirical) animated (and non-animated) television programming of the last 25 years. Included among the stable of Jay Ward productions are such memorable series as: Rocky and His Friends, Fractured Flickers, Crusader Rabbit, George of the Jungle, and many, many more. Of particular note is the classic "Rocky and His Friends" program (retitled to "The Bullwinkle Show" during part of its syndication cycle). This fine program, which introduced us to the evil, ubiquitous Boris and Natasha (not to mention Fearless Leader) still reigns supreme in the leagues of "cult" animation classics. So... exactly what do you get to see at this film festival? Well, if film rotation schedules operate as promised, it should include: 1) The "Jay Ward Film Festival Program". This is a 90 minute collection of Jay Ward classics, with particular emphasis on "Rocky and Bullwinkle". 2) FIVE (5) Entire, Complete, and Unexpurgated "Rocky and Bullwinkle" serials from "Rocky and His Friends": a) Three Mooskateers (8 segments) b) Goof Gas Attack (8 segments) c) Louse on 92nd St. (6 segments) d) Pottsylvania Creeper (6 segments) e) Weather Lady (6 segments) The segments from each of these serials will be shown in a contiguous format with none of the filler material which was present during the original airings of these segments over a period of weeks on television. Together, these serials represent slightly over 1.5 hours of programming. If there are still some hardy soles remaining after the Jay Ward screenings and after our SPECIAL EVENT (to be announced below), some other bizarre films will also be available, including: a) A "Three Stooges" short. b) One or two "classic" "Green Acres" episodes. c) Half of an "American Bandstand" program from 1964 (in case you don't remember 1964, the #1 song (to which all of the kids on the show attempted to dance) was "House of the Rising Sun" by The Animals.) d) A 1/2 hour "Stump the Stars" television game show (exact vintage unclear, but rather ancient) -- complete with the ancient and amusing commercials (which I've found are often much more popular than the shows themselves...) e) Maybe other stuff as well. Note that these additional films will only appear as time permits. All material is on 16mm film. Video may be fine at home, but it has no place at this festival! -------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>> AN EXTRA SPECIAL EVENT <<<<<<<<<< -------------------------------------------- It appears that, with a bit of luck, we will be honored to have three or more VERY SPECIAL GUEST STARS at the festival. Their schedule is subject to change, of course, but it appears likely that June Foray, Bill Scott, Walker Edmiston, and possibly another talented "voice actor" will be present at the festival! In case the names are not familiar (shame on you!), June Foray is the voice of Rocky the Squirrel, Natasha, and innumerable other classic Jay Ward animated characters! Bill Scott was a co-producer of programming with Jay Ward, and provided the voice for Bullwinkle, Mr. Peabody, Superchicken, Dudley Do-right, and (to borrow a phrase) "a host of others"! Walker Edmiston was involved with the classic "Time For Beanie" (the forerunner of "Beanie and Cecil") in the "early" days of television, and has provided voices for uncountable Hanna Barbara, Filmation, and other animated and live productions (including a number of Star Trek (original, not animated) episodes). The exact format of their guest appearance is of course open to development as we go along, but a live "recreation" of a Rocky and Bullwinkle script is a definite possibility. Outside of the obvious delight I myself feel over the prospect of their appearance, this is our chance to show these fine persons how much their work has meant to us over the years! I will emphasize again that schedules are often subject to change, but right now things are looking really good! >>>>> WHEN, WHERE, HOW, and HOW MUCH? <<<<< The festival will be held in MOORE HALL 100 at UCLA. It will begin at approximately 7 PM on the evening of Friday, February 5, 1982. I suggest that everybody arrive in as few total autos as possible, since UCLA has this nasty habit of charging $2.00 to park, and there is essentially no nearby street parking. For those not familiar with MOORE HALL, UCLA, Los Angeles, or this portion of the Galaxy, a finely detailed online map has been made available to the SF-L powers-that-be. We now pause to allow our friendly moderator to announce the online locations of this cartographic wonder... [ The map is available at the various locations as per the first message in this digest. -- Jim ] Thank you, moderator. Aren't networks wonderful? But I digress. Admission to the festival is FREE!!!! However (isn't there always a catch?) donations (of whatever you can manage) will be gratefully accepted for the UCLA Computer Club, which has fronted well over $100 which was required to obtain the Jay Ward films and the facilities for the festival itself. This is most certainly a voluntary donation and is not required, but will be appreciated and will help ensure future festivals. One final note. The Jay Ward materials are rather difficult to obtain, and they will not physically appear until shortly before the screening date. While the releasing company has promised me delivery in time for the Feb. 5 date, there is always the possibility that something might "go wrong". If such an unfortunate incident should occur, I will send word (via SF-L) as quickly as possible. This is just a warning; hopefully it won't be necessary. That's about it. As the so-called "master of ceremonies" (this usually means I end up running the projector) I hope that many of you manage to attend this "gala" event. The festival will run as long as a reasonable number of people are still around and I don't run out of films. Tell your friends! If you have any questions, please contact me (Lauren@UCLA-Security) directly. Hope to see you there! --Lauren-- P.S. "Watch me pull a rabbit out of my hat..." "But that trick NEVER works!" "This time for SURE!" --LW-- ------------------------------ Date: 26 January 1982 22:56-EST From: Daniel F. Chernikoff Subject: Isaac Asimov writing Science Fiction again??? In the February 15th issue of Isaac Asimov's SF Magazine, there is a "brand-new, never-before-seen-anywhere Isaac Asimov story". I thought he had vowed many years ago to never write another SF story, since he felt it was `the duty of all scientists who could write, to write science non-fiction to educate the layman'. I wonder if he is sick of non-fiction, or if he just couldn't keep his fingers out of the pie forever. Not that I am complaining, mind you. The story is entitled "Lest We Remember", and is about a drug that improves memory and learning by neutralizing the "recall-inhibitor" that is present in all mammalian brains. It is classic Asimov, and a lot of fun! Dan Chernikoff ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 31-Jan #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #17 *** EOOH *** Date: Sunday, January 31, 1982 2:01AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #17 To: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE SF-LOVERS Digest Sunday, 31 Jan 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 17 Today's Topics: SF Fandom - SF Lovers Party, SF Books - Claw of the Conciliator & Here's the Plot...What's the Title & Asimov, SF Bookstores, SF Radio - Boogie Woogie to the Stars ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wednesday, 27 January 1982 From: Mike Peeler Reply-to: SFL-PARTY at MIT-AI Subject: Boskone SFL Party SF-Lovers will hold a party the evening of convention Saturday at the upcoming Boskone. We expect some big names to show up, like Roger Duffey and Chip Hitchcock. Mail to SFL-Party@MIT-AI to tell us you're coming and we'll keep you posted. (Readers on DEC's E. Net may RSVP via SFL-Party@KIRK or KIRK::SFL_Party.) Hope to see you there, Mike Peeler ------------------------------ Date: 30 Jan 1982 1253-PST Subject: Claw of the Conciliator From: Mike Leavitt **************BULLETIN************* I just found the \Claw/ in my local Dalton's in paperback. It has a February, 1982 printing date on it. ------------------------------ Date: 28 Jan 1982 17:57:22-PST From: r.f.soyack Subject: HELP When I was young I read a story that I would like to pass along to my oldest son, but I can't remember the title. The story opened on desolate planet that housed a forgotten garrison of mechanics. I remember that they had to pull plows to plant food. They trained constantly but no one could remember being visited by a space craft in need of repair. There was, however, an inspector general (the title may be "Inspector General" but who wrote it) visited them in a powered space suit. A junior mechanic found the suit and wound up in space. He was rescued by a ship and I don't remember the rest of the story. I believe this was a short story, or perhaps a short novel. If anyone out there knows the title and author I would appreciate it if they would tell me. Thanks, Rich ------------------------------ Date: 31 Jan 1982 00:42:58-PST From: menlo70!sytek!zehntel!berry at Berkeley Subject: SF Bookstore in Bay area; Asimov CHUQUI might like to try "The Other Change of Hobbit" in Berkeley. True, it is not too near to Union City, but it is well worth the trip. I consider it the finest SF bookstore in the Bay Area. Location is near Durant and Telegraph. It's in that big brick parking garage with Cleo's Copies on the ground floor. Also in the same building is "Bob's Smoke Shop" (or some such homeomorphistic name) which has the largest selection of magazines I have ever seen. It has, for instance, Playboy in the American, French, German, Spanish, Japanese and English editions! The rest of the selection is proportional. Where else can you find "SCIENCE" on a newsstand? where else can you find four (4!) magazines entirely devoted to making quilts! It's great. As for Dr. A. swearing off SF, I got the distinct impression from his autobiography that he NEVER swore off it, it just got less important to him. judging from the book, there has never been a year when he didn't have SOMETHING new in SF written, if not published. -berry kercheval ------------------------------ Date: 28 Jan 1982 18:19:44 EST (Thursday) From: David Mankins Subject: Boogie Woogie to the Stars, etc. A few days ago, someone reported that "Boogie Woogie to the Stars" was playing on an NPR station in Madison. "Boogie Woogie to the Stars" is a part of a series of programs put out by the ZBS Media Foundation. I first heard about them on KPFK (Roy of Hollywood's show, for those of you in the Know) a couple of years ago. ZBS Media also has a Science Fantasy cassette club. You can reach them by writing: ZBS Foundation RD #1 Ft. Edward, New York 12828 Ask for a catalogue. Their programs are what would happen if the Firesign Theatre met the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy met Pink Floyd and Frank Zappa. Very fine stuff--movies for the mind. ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 2-Feb #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #18 *** EOOH *** Date: Tuesday, February 2, 1982 1:52AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #18 To: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE SF-LOVERS Digest Tuesday, 2 Feb 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 18 Today's Topics: SF Movies - Here's the Plot...What's the Title, SF Magazines - IASFM, SF Books - Query Answered & Shadow of the Torturer & Vernor Vinge & SF Bookstores, SF Fandom - Bay Area Fandom ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 01/29/82 1547-EDT From: J. Baldassini Subject: Here's the plot, what's the title ? My roommates and I were discussing SF movies the other night, and on of them recalled the following plot: A large crack has developed in the earth (possibly the result of nuclear weapons experiments). A large chunk of the Earth breaks off, and becomes a new moon. Anyone remember the title of this film ? (circa 1950, we think) ------------------------------ Date: 1-Feb-82 10:07:08 PST (Monday) From: Reed.ES at PARC-MAXC Subject: Re: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #17 Re: Title query. The story was indeed called "The Inspector General" and I am almost positive it was by C.M.Kornbluth. If I have the author correct, it may be found in an anthology of his stories very creatively named "The Best of C.M.Kornbluth". Dr. A. and SF: The February issue of Isaac Asimov's SF Mag. contains a new SF story by the man himself. As for swearing the stuff off, I doubt there is an SF writer alive who hasn't done that at one time or another. By the way, said issue of IASFM contains a very unusual piece called "The Isaac Asimov's Science Fiction Magazine March". Those of you who can play piano will find it relatively interesting, and all will enjoy the commentary which accompanies it. -- Larry -- ------------------------------ Date: 1 Feb 1982 1713-EST From: BARRETT at BBNG Subject: Re: Author & Title request In reply to r.f.soyack's title & author request: a friend says the story you are refering to is called "The Spectre General" by Theodore R. Cogswell. There is a sequal to it (called "Early Bird") in the ASTOUNDING Cambell Memorial Anthology (edited by Harry Harrison). Kim ------------------------------ Date: 31 Jan 82 20:33-PDT From: mclure at SRI-UNIX Subject: Shadow of the Torturer I was unimpressed by it. Wolfe strikes me as the sort of writer who's desperately trying to produce SF worthy of literary criticism. This seemed particularly true with his "...Other Stories...Other Stories..." collection, and less so with SotT. Maybe it's just because I don't particularly care for fantasy-stories-with-the- proverbial-journey. I didn't much care for Varley's Titan books either. ------------------------------ Date: 29 Jan 1982 2214-EST From: "DYER-BENNET at KL2137 c/o" Subject: SF Lovers In response to Jef Poskanzer's request for information on old stories or novels by Vernor Vinge (published in SF-LOVERS Digest Vol 5 Issue 8, I have obtained the following list from my housemate Jerry Boyajian: Novels: Grimm's World Berkley 1969 The Witling Daw 1976 Stories: Apartness New Worlds 6/65 The Accomplice If 4/67 Bookworm, Run! Analog 3/66 Conquest by Default Analog 5/68 Grimm's Story ORBIT 4 1968 (short version of GRIMM'S WORLD) Bomb Scare Analog 11/70 Just Peace Analog 12/71 (with William Rupp) Long Shot Analog 8/72 Original Sin Analog 12/72 The Science Fair ORBIT 9 1972 The Whirling of Time STELLAR 1 1974 The Peddler's Apprentice Analog 8/75 (with Joan D. Vinge) ------------------------------ Date: 1 Feb 82 9:55:44-PST (Mon) From: Doug Faunt at Hewlett-Packard Labs Subject: Bayrea SF Bookstores Tom, Debbie and Dave, proprietors of the OCOH thank you for the good review of their store. The Elves, Gnomes, and Little-men's Science-fiction, Chowder and Marching Society of Berkeley, one of the older SF clubs around, meets there on alternate Friday evenings. There is also Dark Carnival, run by Jack Rems and Lisa Goldstein ("Red Magician"), is just down Telegraph from the OCOH. Future Fantasy in Palo Alto, probably closest, since its just across the Dumbarton Bridge has a reasonable selection, and is a good place to find out about PENSFA, which meets on alternate Saturdays from Little-men's. Fantasy Etc in San Francisco is worth the occasional trip all by itself since Charley has remainders, good used books, and is also a mystery and adventure bookstore. He also has new books. Old Wives Tales, also in the city, is a womens bookstore that has a very good selection of SF and fantasy by and about women. ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 3-Feb #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #19 *** EOOH *** Date: Wednesday, February 3, 1982 6:18AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #19 To: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE SF-LOVERS Digest Wednesday, 3 Feb 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 19 Today's Topics: SF Books - "Sur" & Query Answered & Asimov, SF Movies - Query Answered & Crack in the World ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 2 February 1982 16:00 est From: Boebert.SCOMP at MIT-Multics Subject: New Le Guin Story "Sur," a rather nifty new story by Ursula K., is in the newest (1 Feb) New Yorker. Plus a relevant cartoon on pg 46 for anybody who has ever tried to explain a scientific subject to the current generation of VidKids. Earl ------------------------------ Date: 2 February 1982 1120-EST (Tuesday) From: Joe Ginder The story which Rich inquired about is "The Spectre General" by Theodore Cogswell. It appears in one of the SF Hall of Fame volumes. -Joe ------------------------------ Date: 2 Feb 1982 18:12:15-EST From: csin!cjh at CCA-UNIX Subject: asimov & sf Asimov notes at the end of THE REST OF THE ROBOTS that he began to get heavily into science fact around 1957, which is why the third robot novel (to make a balanced trilogy with THE CAVES OF STEEL (Earth has too few robots) and THE NAKED SUN (Solaris has far too many), and probably set on Aurora) has never been published. Personally, I'd like to see that a lot more than another Foundation novel---there could be material for another dozen Foundation novels in the 800 years of interregnum remaining but the robot series was much better at exploring the social effects of technology. Obviously, he didn't stop writing SF then, and so far as I know he's never said anything since about swearing off fiction for fact; he's simply putting a lot more work into fact (probably because he can produce it a lot faster and is more likely to be asked for it). He won his first current Hugo in 1973 (Best Novel, THE GODS THEMSELVES) and took another in 1977 (Best Novelette, "The Bicentennial Man"), besides getting one for best all-time series. Various channels have also been full of the $100,000+ contract he signed for LIGHTNING ROD (aka "Second Foundation and Empire"). "The Bicentennial Man" was collected with other original stories; I am reasonably certain that no year has gone by without him publishing some "real" SF (i.e., not a custom story about dentists in 2087). ------------------------------ Date: 02/02/82 1402-EDT From: KG Heinemann (SORCEROR at LL) Subject: Movie Title Query in February 2 SFL Digest Yes, I remember the film which J. Baldassini describes !! I believe that its title was "Crack in the World". As I recall the plot, a group of scientist detonate a nuclear bomb *** VERY *** deep in the Earth's crust, in order to open a passage between the surface and the mantle. The goal of this project is tapping the heat of the mantle for geothermal energy. The results are not what the scientist predicted, and indeed a crack develops in the Earth's crust. This fissure threatens to split the Earth's crust into two pieces, and grows as though a zipper were opening. The scientists attempt to halt the process by detonating more bombs, but this scheme is ineffectual. The Earth does break into two pieces, at the end. My vague memories also include the notions that : 1) One of the scientists is dying of cancer. and 2) One of the stars was Dana Andrews. Perhaps Lauren can provide more information. I found the movie quite scary when I first saw it, as a kid, and thought it was pretty dumb, when I caught it on T.V., as an adult. Enjoy, Karl Heinemann ------------------------------ Date: 2 Feb 1982 17:35:59 EST (Tuesday) From: Edward D. Hunter Subject: Crack in the world The movie referred to is "Crack the World" starring Dana Andrews. The basic plot is that some scientist have dug a hole towards the center of the Earth. They have run into a barrier and decide that an atomic missile can blow a hole in it. The explosion causes the crack to start traveling around the globe. Actually, it splits in two and the two cracks meet at the site of the original hole. The carved out section of the globe is blown free forming a new moon. All in all worth watching at least once. -edh ------------------------------ Date: 2 February 1982 0229-PST (Tuesday) From: lauren at UCLA-Security (Lauren Weinstein) Subject: CRACK IN THE WORLD The film about the large crack forming in the Earth (eventually resulting in a new moon being formed) is called "Crack In the World". The crack results from an experiment in tapping the volcanic magma for energy purposes. The researchers use a nuclear missile (aimed DOWN) to penetrate an inner crust layer, and all sorts of havoc results. By the way, the film is generally a loser, but still has some entertainment value. --Lauren-- ------------------------------ Date: Tue 2-Feb-1982 09:17-EST From: Bill Russell Subject: Re: SF-LOVERS Digest Vol 5 #18 The answer for the request for a title of a film about a new noon of Earths: Here is the entry from "The Science Fiction Encyclopedia", Peter Nicholls, Ed. CRACK IN THE WORLD Film (1965). Security Pictures/Paramount. Directed by Andrew Marton, starring Dana Andrews, Janette Scot, Kieron Moore and Alexander Knox. Screenplay by J. M. White and Julian Harvey. 96 minutes. Colour. An attempt to tap the energy at the Earth's core causes a large and ever increasing crack in the crust, and a bid to halt the process with a nuclear explosion sends into space a large chuck of the Earch, which forms a new moon. This ambitious idea is undermined by a weak script and too small a budget. >---------------------< That's how I would rate this picture myself. ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 7-Feb #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #20 *** EOOH *** Date: Sunday, February 7, 1982 10:08AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #20 To: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE SF-LOVERS Digest Sunday, 7 Feb 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 20 Today's Topics: SF Books - Shadowline & Oath of Fealty & Asimov & Wolfe, SF TV - World War III, SF Topics - William Shatner and Commodore, SF Movies - Crack in the World, Spoiler - Crack in the World ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 3 Feb 1982 1133-PST From: Zellich at OFFICE-3 (Rich Zellich) Subject: SHADOWLINE You may have seen all the publishers hype for Glen Cook's new book (part 1 of the "Starfisher's" trilogy), "Shadowline". Well, it's \worth/ all that hype. Go buy it. Interstellar warfare and business, Family plottings, possibly the last great fight between mercenary freecorps before the resurging confederation breaks them up, lotsa scheming and double-dealing. If you like things like Dickson's Dorsai and Anderson's Polesotechnic League stories, you'll probably like this. I liked Shadowline a lot more than I did Glen's "Dread Empire" series books (which aren't bad, and actually seem to be getting better as they go along - possibly the author is gaining in experience), and am going to go nuts waiting for books 2 and 3. Enjoy, Rich ------------------------------ Date: 3 Feb 1982 1643-MST From: Walt Subject: Oath of Fealty [SPOILER?] I shelled out for the hard cover edition, but I wasn't very satisfied with it. I haven't read a Niven & Pournelle book since "The Mote in God's Eye", which I enjoyed, and since I'm interested in arcologies I thought the authors might have something useful and instructive to say about the subject. I guess that's expecting rather a lot from a novel, though. It seems to me that the main problems to be solved in building a community like that are in the areas of sociology, psychology and politics. The residents of Todos Santos all seem to get along pretty well because they seem to be able to agree on what standards are to be enforced/not enforced by the government - for example, there is no great conflict over how the police should deal with someone who is drunk in a public place. In a community where half the people are teetotallers for religious reasons, there is no such general agreement. The authors don't say, however, what produced this unanimity in a population of a quarter million Americans. One could probably invent a selection test that would produce this type of homogeneity, but the only selection mechanism we see in the novel is Barbara Churchward's decisions about which small businesses to invest Todos Santos' money in. These decisions seem to be motivated by good commercial judgment rather than any evaluation of how the folks will fit into the community. Another major issue that such a society has to resolve is, how do you settle conflicts that arise between people of different tastes and interests? The politics inside Todos Santos are a weird cross between Libertarianism and Fascism. The system is described as "feudal", but a real feudal system doesn't seem credible for a society that does the type of advanced technology development and marketing that Todos Santos does - most feudal societies collapse (or stop being feudal) as soon as commerce becomes the principal source of wealth. Japan certainly does high technology in a tightly knit society, but it couldn't be described as feudal. Most of the societies that are very homogeneous and tightly knit don't seem to be terribly inventive - and so their most creative young people move to tumultuous, disorganized places like the United States. Probably the thing that bothered me personally the most, however, was that the authors decided that the bad guys should be militant environmentalists who were trying to blow up Todos Santos on the grounds that it might succeed. I'm sure there are people like that in the environmental movement, somewhere - I've never met them in the ten or so years that I've been actively involved in that movement, but statistically they probably exist. Even if Niven & Pournelle had picked on somebody I didn't like, such as the Ku Klux Klan or the Creationists, their characterizations are so extreme as to make the reader barf. I had the same problem with C. S. Lewis, and didn't ever bother to finish those of his books that I started. Actually the only reason I finished OoF was because I shelled out fourteen bucks for it. What a waste of fourteen bucks. ------------------------------ Date: 3 February 1982 23:12-EST From: Daniel F. Chernikoff Subject: Asimov swearing, off Science Fiction Now I remember! Isaac Asimov gave a talk at the University of Maryland around 1976, which I attended. When a hue and cry arose for another Foundation book, he explained that he had sworn off SF because he felt that science was progressing too rapidly for the lay person to keep up, but that it was crucial that people keep abreast of scientific developments in order to make the proper decisions for the good of mankind. Therefore, he felt, it was the sacred duty of all scientists who could express themselves to laypeople, to do so by writing science non-fiction. Seemed a bit extreme to me at the time -- I would think someone as prolific as he could do both -- so now I am glad to see something new of his in print. ------------------------------ Date: 2-Feb-82 12:36:05 PST (Tuesday) Subject: Gene Wolfe's style From: Teri Pettit at Xerox I think McClure at SRI's assessment of Gene Wolfe as "the sort of writer who's desperately trying to produce SF worthy of literary criticism" is unfair. While he does produce a type of fiction which has much in common with works noticed by literary critics, there is absolutely no reason to suppose that he does it for the purpose of gaining that notice, or that he is particularly desperate about anything. I imagine Wolfe, like most authors, writes, insofar as he can, in the style he most enjoys reading. For him, this is a highly recursive style in which his creation and the process of creating it is as much its own subject as is the apparent story it tells. All his works are essentially about layers of reality, and shifting between those layers. Those layers usually include that of the purported writer as writer, and Wolfe as writer, as well as the purported writer as protagonist in some events. Literary critics write essays about writing. Naturally they tend to most enjoy fiction which is in some sense art about writing. But an SF writer is always inviting readers into an alternate reality, and thus SF writers too often enjoy artistic recursion. If Wolfe were desperate for literary acclaim, he'd write stories like Fowles or Preust or Nabakov in which the surface story, which weaves through the story about stories, was set in "our world". He has the talent for it. Instead he sticks to fantasy worlds which, however intrinsically suited to themes of layered realities, are anathema to the world of "serious literature". This to me is sufficient evidence that he writes 'em that way simply because he LIKES 'em that way. -- Teri ------------------------------ Date: 3 February 1982 20:28-EST From: James A. Cox Subject: World War III Did anyone catch the recent NBC movie "World War III," shown in two parts Sunday and Monday nights? Personally, I thought it was extremely well done. The plot is that, sometime in the near future, the U.S. imposes a grain embargo on the Soviet Union that begins to cause starvation in that country, leading to riots. An isolated Soviet commando unit, with the support of a high government official, but unknown to Brian Keith, who plays the Soviet leader, invades Alaska, planning to seize the oil pipeline and demand an end to the embargo, on the penalty of damage to the pipeline. Naturally, this causes a crisis in the relations between the two countries. The plot is coherent, logical, and as suspenseful as you would expect from any drama. The film has an effective, dramatic conclusion. Brian Keith as the Soviet leader is good (except for the ridiculous Russian accent he attempts), and Rock Hudson is perfect as the capable yet compassionate President of the United States. The only defect is a stupid subplot involving Cathy Lee Crosby, who plays the aide to the Colonel in command of the small U.S. force in Alaska. ------------------------------ Date: 6 February 1982 17:22-EST From: Stuart M. Cracraft Subject: WWW III I watched the first 30 minutes of WWIII. Pure hokum. ------------------------------ Date: 6 February 1982 17:26-EST From: Stuart M. Cracraft Subject: people who hawk It seems that Asimov is not the only SF person hawking computers. William "Jim Kirk" Shatner has a TV commercial in which he hawks Commodore computers. In his case I can understand it. He was practically torn apart by the critics for his awful acting in Star Trek: the motion picture. ------------------------------ Date: Sunday, February 7, 1982 10:08AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Subject: SPOILER WARNING! SPOILER WARNING! The following message is the last in the digest. It discusses some plot details of the movie Crack in the World. Some readers may not wish to read on. ------------------------------ Date: Wednesday, 3 February 1982, 07:28-EST From: Robert W. Kerns Subject: What's the title? (I don't know, but this is a spoiler...) Date: 01/29/82 1547-EDT From: J. Baldassini Subject: Here's the plot, what's the title ? My roommates and I were discussing SF movies the other night, and on of them recalled the following plot: A large crack has developed in the earth (possibly the result of nuclear weapons experiments). A large chunk of the Earth breaks off, and becomes a new moon. Anyone remember the title of this film ? (circa 1950, we think) I believe the title was something like "The Crack in the World" or something, but I don't remember for sure. I *DO* remember the movie itself very well. I've seen it several times, and it STILL scares me. The basic scenario is that some group is trying to tap geothermal power on a grand scale, plus lots of iron, etc, by going project Mohole one better and drilling down to the molton core of the earth. However, just as they are about to reach their goal, they strike an extremely hard layer. Rather than drill through it, which would be difficult or impossible, they hit on the idea of using a nuclear warhead to punch through it. There develops a debate between the head of the project and an opposing scientist. The opposing scientist fears that this could have bad consequences, by fracturing the foundation of the planet's crust. In a classic confrontation at a meeting of scientists from all over, a demonstration is made by one of them (I think the proponent, but it would make sense the other way too, since it fairly described both their views). A frame with two sheets of glass was set up, and the proponents view of what will happen is demonstrated by taking a heated rod and melting it through the glass. The opponent's view is shown by taking a hammer and punching it through the glass. The scientists are convinced by the proponent, and the device is set off. All seems to go well, and after a short delay, magma comes welling out of the ground, and everyone is being congratulated on a new era of plentiful energy and minerals, etc. The only thing out of place is a herd of animals decides to stampeed for some reason (zebras as I recall?). Nobody pays too much attention, but that was just the start of a series of larger and larger earthquakes. It moves offshore almost immediately, and before long is visibly a crack opening up under the ocean floor, and is eventually noticed by some oceanographers as I recall. Eventually everybody must agree that there is a problem, and someone proposes setting off a second warhead in a volcano to try to provide a locus for the tear to stop. With much suspense and difficulty they manage to get the warhead to the volcano, and again think they have had success. For a while. But the crack has switched directions, and ultimately it makes a full circle, and an octant or so of the earth goes flying off into space, with all the important characters just barely making it off the wrong section just barely in time. All except for one old guy who it seems is dying of cancer (he's been getting "radiation treatments" all along), who insists on staying and documenting what happens, for when people come out to this new moon. ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 10-Feb #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #21 *** EOOH *** Date: Wednesday, February 10, 1982 6:15AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #21 To: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE SF-LOVERS Digest Wednesday, 10 Feb 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 21 Today's Topics: SF Fandom - SF Lovers Party, SF Movies - Shock Treatment & Brainstorm & Crack in the World, SF Books - Elfquest & Centaur Aisle & Octagon & Wolfe, SF Topics - Industrial Feudalism, SF TV - Twilight Zone, Spoiler - Octagon ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 8 February 1982 00:00-EST From: SFL-PARTY at MIT-MC Subject: Change of Address Due to unforeseen hardware changes at MIT-AI, the system will not be available this week. Therefore, people on the ARPAnet wishing to RSVP for the SF-Lovers party at Boskone should send to SFL-PARTY@MIT-MC instead. Additional information on the party is being mailed today to everyone who has informed us they will be attending. Please note that Enet users should still send to SFL-Party@KIRK or KIRK::SFL_Party. Alyson L. Abramowitz James Turner Mike Peeler ------------------------------ Date: 8 Feb 1982 1117-PST From: Per Bothner Subject: Shock Treatment I'm surprised no one has discussed "Shock Treatment" yet. By now I assume a number of people have seen it. Does it live up to the hype? Is it worth a 30-minute midnight bike ride? ------------------------------ Date: 29-Jan-1982 From: JONATHAN OSTROWSKY AT GALAXY Reply-to: "JONATHAN OSTROWSKY AT GALAXY c/o" Subject: Douglas Trumbull fans, take note The following article appeared in today's Boston Globe. Wood Film to be Completed By Dale Pollock Los Angeles Times HOLLYWOOD--Filming will resume Feb. 8 on "Brainstorm," the troubled science-fiction thriller abruptly halted by the death of its star, Natalie Wood, in November. The $12.5 million production has been in limbo since Wood drowned off Catalina Island Nov. 29, and MGM, the studio financing the production, shut it down. But it will be Lloyd's of London, one of the two insurance carriers on the film, that will complete the movie. When principal photography is finished, MGM will evaluate whether to release the film through United Artists, according to an MGM spokesman. The agreement was worked out a few days ago following weeks of negotiations in Los Angeles and London. The decision was confirmed by MGM and Lloyd's. Following Wood's death, MGM had tried unsuccessfully to collect almost $15 million on its two policies rather than attempt to complete the film. However, director Douglas Trumbull and cast members want to finish the movie. Wood was scheduled for just three more days' filming, but her remaining scenes were said to be among the most important in the film. It remains unclear whether a double will be hired. Sources close to the production said Lloyd's agreed to pay nearly $3 million to enable the film to be completed. Almost $10 million had been spent on "Brainstorm" before production was suspended Dec. 1. ------------------------------ Date: 8 Feb 1982 1510-PST From: Paul Dietz Subject: Crack in the World, Elfquest CitW: I saw this movie several years ago on TV, and thought it was trash. I mean, the idea behind the film is ludicrous. Where does the energy to toss the piece of earth into the sky come from? The bombs they use? Sorry, nowhere close. The rotation of the earth? Ditto. And who cares if the earth's crust gets cracked? The crust doesn't hold the earth together (Hogan made the same mistake in his Minervan trilogy). Elfquest: For all you comicbook lovers, I heartily recommend "Elfquest" by WaRP graphics (Wendy and Richard Pini). I picked up a copy of volume I (the first five issues put together as a graphic novel) at the local bookstore for $9.95+tax. The series is supposed to run for fifteen issues, coming out at a rate of three per year, finishing sometime next year. ------------------------------ Date: 02-Feb-1982 From: JOHN FRANCIS AT EIFFEL Reply-to: "JOHN FRANCIS AT EIFFEL c/o" Subject: Book Reviews I thought I would pass on my opinions of the following two books I read recently. 1) Centaur Aisle, by Piers Anthony This is the fourth volume of the Xanth trilogy. (Yes, I know what a trilogy is, but Anthony states this quite categorically, and implies there are more to come). If you haven't read the earlier books (A Spell for Chameleon, The Source of Magic, and Castle Roogna) I would suggest that you read them in the right order, as later books act as spoilers for the earlier ones. This book contains no great surprises, and most of the characters are already known to afficionadoes of this series. I found it to be at least as good as the earlier books, and in fact considered it a stronger book than the second volume. For those who are not familiar with the series, these books are set in the land of Xanth, where magic works in an interesting fashion. The underlying premise is that each person is born with a unique magical talent (i.e. magic is an innate ability, rather than something that can be learnt). Xanth is also populated with all the familiar creatures of mythology (Centaurs, Harpys, etc.), and several other strange creatures and plants. Some of these appear to have been put there simply to allow Anthony full rein for introducing some of the worst puns I have seen since Asimov, but they form a plausible and convincing whole without any loose ends. In short, if you enjoy light-hearted fantasy and bad puns these books are good value for money. 2) Octagon, by Fred Saberhagen This book describes the strange happenings that occur to players in a game of STARWEB (a trademark of Flying Buffalo). [This is NOT a spoiler] From what I know of STARWEB it seems to be fairly accurate, but the book will NOT be well recieved by most readers of this newsletter. Unfortunately I cannot give my reasons for disliking the book here, but I will do so in the spoiler section at the end of this digest. ------------------------------ Date: 9 February 1982 11:54 est From: Spratt.Multics at MIT-Multics Subject: Gene Wolfe For those who are unaware, Gene Wolfe does write mainstream fiction. The book I've read is called "Peace" and is a bizarre set of reminiscences by an old(?) man dying from a stroke. A beautiful book. Not all of Wolfe's stories play with the reader in an explicit fashion. In "The Devil in a Forest" he stays pretty well within the bounds of normal historical fiction. Except that the events related in the story have no particular significance, historically. Certainly Wolfe is concerned with writing books of extremely high "literary technical" quality. He succeeds at this so well and so consistently that one can't seriously posit it happens by accident. Perhaps this concern stems from a desire to be noticed by literary critics, perhaps not. Whatever the motivation, I'm deeply grateful that someone of his ability is producing works I so enjoy and at the same time he is expanding the limits of the genre of science fiction. ------------------------------ Date: 8 Feb 1982 03:31:45-PST From: decvax!duke!mcnc!unc!smb at Berkeley Subject: Industrial Feudalism It's far from clear to me that feudalism is incompatible with an advanced industrial society. Although empires, aristocracies, and forms of feudalism are common themes, most authors lift their societal structures straight from the history books. But others, such as Poul Anderson, present arguments to show that such arrangements are not only possible but perhaps inevitable. Remember that feudalism is more than an economic system; it's a way of life that also provides for defense. An individual on the bottom may not have very much freedom, but is presumably guaranteed a certain security in return. In a small, closed environment -- say, a domed city on an otherwise uninhabitable planet -- it's quite easy to see how one person could gain control: there's literally no place for dissenters to go. But that type of situation is unstable -- *unless* people are convinced that their other needs are being met by the boss. Add in a very weak central government, or an anarchic frontier, and a feudal society could very easily evolve. Nor do I accept that argument that feudalism is incompatible with technological development. Yes, one must allow the bright minds freedom to create, but that could be done within the confines of a feudal structure. The important thing is incentive; if producing neat gadgets gets you someplace -- say, a technocratic knighthood, or a privileged userid on the local Subethernet machine (sorry, couldn't resist) -- then people will produce neat gadgets. I think I can summarize my conditions as: (a) society is composed of small communities with a reasonably pyramidal authority structure (i.e., no complex interactions); (b) very limited opportunity for individuals to switch communities; (c) external needs can be met by the boss; and (d) incentive to invent. Two notes: one, I haven't yet read "Oath of Fealty", so I don't know if my conditions apply there (I suspect that 250,000 people is too many); and two, I'm not saying that I like, want, or otherwise approve of industrial feudalism; I'm merely saying I think it's possible. ------------------------------ Date: 8 Feb 1982 00:57:34-PST From: decvax!duke!mcnc!unc!smb at Berkeley Location: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Subject: Twilight Zone The UNC Center for Public Television is polling its viewers to determine the 10 best episodes of the "Twilight Zone". These episodes will be shown March 5-21 during their annual fund-raising "Festival". In addition, the top nine will be shown three per night, at 11 pm, on March 13, 19, and 20. ------------------------------ Date: Sunday, February 9, 1982 11:32PM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Subject: SPOILER WARNING! SPOILER WARNING! The following message is the last in the digest. It discusses some plot details of the novel Octagon, by Fred Saberhagen. Some readers may not wish to read on. ------------------------------ Date: 02-Feb-1982 From: JOHN FRANCIS AT EIFFEL From: "JOHN FRANCIS AT EIFFEL c/o" Subject: Book Reviews (Part II - Spoiler) [SPOILER SECTION - Discussion of Octagon, by Fred Saberhagen] I feel that this is another of those books that preys on the general public's fear and mistrust of computers. The main protagonist of the book turns out to be a self-aware computer program which is able to access all the federal governments data base by using gateways programmed in MANY YEARS AGO ON A DIFFERENT GENERATION OF HARDWARE (my emphasis). Those of us in the computer field will realise just how hard it is to program an undetectable gateway even if you have full privileged access to the machine where the data lies, let alone how you would do it on a machine where your only access is through a remote-access network such as the ARPAnet. Unfortunately most people do not have this awareness, and will be only too ready to believe that a CRAY-4 in a research lab in Los Alamos could reach out and touch someones data on a payroll computer, or on a police records computer, or any other computer that can be reached by a modem. I would be prepared to suspend my disbelief in the other minor things in the book which I doubt (such as a modem with a 'super high baud rate' working over the public telephone network, or the probability of a 12- year old kid producing a self-aware program) if I felt the book was worthwhile, but I feel that this book is going to do far more harm to the public image of computing than is justifiable for the amount of enjoyment it might otherwise bring to its readers. Maybe if the book contained a disclaimer I could accept it, but in the foreword I get the feeling that Saberhagen himself actually believes in the possibility of the events he describes. In short - a book written by someone who is ignorant of the field in which he sets his story, and as such dangerously inaccurate. ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 10-Feb #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #22 *** EOOH *** Date: Wednesday, February 10, 1982 10:22PM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #22 To: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE SF-LOVERS Digest Thursday, 11 Feb 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 22 Today's Topics: Random Topics - LA l-5 convention, SF Books - Title Query, SF Topics - Industrial Feudalism, SF Movies - Superman Time Travel Query & New Conan movie & World War III & Here's the Plot...What's the Title, Spoiler - Here's the Plot...What's the Title ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 6 February 1982 04:05-EST From: Jerry E. Pournelle Subject: LA l-5 convention The L-5 Convention is at the Hyatt International (LA AIRPORT HYATT) over the weekend of 2-4 April. Usual convention costs (around $30 at the door; "professional membership" including banquet, some papers, and a reception is about $75). Guests of Honor: Robert A. Heinlein Fred Haise (Grumman VP, Commander of Apollo 13) Keynote Speaker: Dr. Hans Mark, Deputy Administrator NASA, former Secretary of the Air Force. Featured Guest: Honorable Newt Gingrich, Representative from Georgia, CoChair of the Congressional Space Caucus. Arthur Kantrowitz, Gary Hudson (private rocket constructor) Harry Stine, George Merrick and Chuck Gould of Rockwell, General Dan Graham, and a buncha other notables. Convention cochaired by Jerry Pournelle and Milton Stevens (Stevens, a former Worldcon SF type, does most of the work). Purpose is to get enthusiasts and professionals together, and to generate a strategy for the advancement of the space program. Please feel free to pass this message on to whoever you like. ------------------------------ Date: 5 Feb 1982 19:07:09-PST From: decvax!duke!chico!harpo!jtg at Berkeley Subject: Thomas Covenant look-alikes A while back I sent this in but never received a reply. Does anyone know what the name of the book was that tells untold tales of the Illearth War (not the one by Steven Donaldson). I believe it was called Gilden Fire by Underwood Miller, but am not sure. Also, does anyone know where I can get a copy of this (I'm on the east coast (NJ)). Thanx, jtg. ------------------------------ Date: 9 Feb 1982 1305-MST From: Walt Subject: Re: Industrial Feudalism As far as I can see, the primary characteristic of feudalism is the concentration of productive capital in the hands of the local Lord of the Manor. In OoF, the capital is concentrated in the corporation that owns Todos Santos. The traditional agricultural feudalism had capital primarily in the form of arable land. An industrial form of feudalism would hold capital primarily in the form of things that produced industrial products. There are such industrial feudalisms; they used to be quite common in the United States. They are called "company towns", and they are places where the owning company controls all of the local economy. Historically company towns have been perfectly miserable places to live, because in order to maintain a competitive position in its market, the owning company kept labor costs as low as possible - by giving the workers as little as possible. This was particularly the case where the company was a mining company, and is one reason the United Mine Workers tends to be militant. So long as a company has a monopoly on labor and competes to sell its products, it has a strong incentive to keep short term labor costs down. Hence it has a disincentive to invest in those things which, experience shows, produce long term benefit - like education, research etc. In the industrial society we live in today, labor is fortunately highly mobile, so companies have to keep their workers reasonably happy in order to keep them on the job. Of course the authors of OoF may have had this in mind - Todos Santos gets its pick of the most desirable people because they give them the best treatment. Lots of companies today, especially those looking for Electrical Engineers and Computer Scientists, take out large ads to make you believe that they do this type of thing, so why not Todos Santos? ... but if that's what they're doing, it isn't feudalism, its a competitive marketplace for skilled labor. ------------------------------ Date: 10 Feb 1982 10:43:36-PST From: decvax!duke!mcnc!unc!smb at Berkeley Subject: Re: Industrial Feudalism I don't think we disagree. If you remember, I specified limited mobility, and hence a non-competitive labor market. As for living conditions -- well, as you say, the feudal authority would own the means of production -- which in this case includes the brains of the engineers. Accordingly, they'd have some provision for "maintenance" and "upgrades" of their equipment, i.e., education. In an industrial environment, having good engineers can pay off in the medium or even short term; I don't find it unlikely that some company asteroids would evolve such a scheme. And even in the southern mill towns in this country, the company often provides some services (typically housing) at low cost, to keep the workers happy, content, and out of union meetings. ------------------------------ Date: 02/09/82 00:22:03 From: CHUQUI@MIT-MC Subject: Superman question This may sound like a dumb question, but after watching Superman on the tube the last two nights, there is a question that I just can't decide how to answer, and I was thinking it would make an interesting topic for this thing: When Superman goes back in time to save Lois, does he undo everything else he did during that time, or does he exist in two places at one? (actually, when he moves forward again, he will exist in three places simultaneously, since he will be going forward, backward, and forward again at any discreet time). Does anyone have a reasonable answer to this paradox problem? Other than that, I enjoyed the film, but the ending was somewhat ruined by this for me. chuck ------------------------------ Date: 27-Jan-1982 From: DAVE BLICKSTEIN AT EIFFEL Reply-to: "DAVE BLICKSTEIN AT EIFFEL c/o" Subject: New Conan movie Confirmed rumor: Conan the Barbarian is being made into a movie. The film is being produced by Edward R. Pressman and the screenplay was done by Oliver Stone and John Millus (best known for "Apocalypse Now"). And who did they pick to star as the barbarian? None other than that actor's actor: Arnold Schwarzenegger (the body builder). In defense of that casting, we're told "Conan never was much of a talker. His body did most of the talking." In the article on the movie, there's a picture of Schwar dressed in a sleeveless black tunic (to show flexed biceps of course), a long black wig, and punk-styled spiked wristlets. It looked pretty silly to me actually, but maybe with some Hollywood magic we might get a half-way interesting fantasy film. Dave Blickstein P.S. I have never (nor do I intend to ever) read a Conan book, which should explain my, perhaps, cynical view. (This is based on the the striking similarity of Conan covers to Gor). To my recollection, Conan was never discussed to any detail in the SF series topic. Are there any Conan readers out there to enlighten me? ------------------------------ Date: 8-Feb-82 9:58:33 PST (Monday) From: Pettit at PARC-MAXC Subject: World War III TV movie I watched the second half of this movie, and predicted the ending 10 minutes into it. Everytime anyone came to a decision point which could have averted nuclear war, they either took one more step in that direction, hoping the other guys would turn back first, or they made the "smart" decision and were blown to bits by a bad guy before they could turn the relentless tide of fate. The script's religious adherence to this principle made it very predictable. So much for suspense. As for logic and coherence, I found it hard to believe that a President presented as being as intelligent and sensible as the Rock Hudson character would steadfastly refuse to accept the easy-out offered him by the Russians, and even harder to believe that the Russian who pushed the button would have any reason to do so. He knew the Americans had turned back, the USSR was not threatened. A vassal America is the last thing the Russians needed, they have enough headaches with Poland and Czechoslovakia. And where would they get the grain they were so desperate for with our breadbasket in ruins? If we get into a nuclear war, it will have more akin with "Dr. Strangelove" than "World War III". Ideological fanatics could do it in their blind determination, but not compassionate moderate leaders slowly struggling against their consciences each tortuous step of the way. ------------------------------ Date: Thursday, February 11 1982 2:08AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Subject: SPOILER WARNING! SPOILER WARNING! The following message is the last in the digest. It it a movie title query which also discusses major portions of the plot of movie. Some readers may not wish to read on. ------------------------------ Date: Wednesday, 3 February 1982, 07:28-EST From: Robert W. Kerns Subject: What's the title? (I don't know, but this is a spoiler...) What's the title? The beginning? Many many years ago, I saw the later parts of a movie on TV which has always had me intruiged. Perhaps someone can fill me in on the parts I missed, and supply a title? There is this guy with an electronic talking hand. I don't know why or how, and there's a lot about it he doesn't know. A lot he doesn't know about himself, even. Answers seem to lie in the missing electronic fingers, which seem to be some sort of mass-storage device. There are these aliens, who come through these mirror-like devices, who bring the fingers through one at a time (I didn't catch why, perhaps to lure him for some reason?). He discovers that the aliens can be killed (or something like it) by pulling off their medalians, which makes them shimmer and evaporate. He finally gets the last finger/tube from one of the aliens, plugs it into his hand, which then explains to him that he is the last living person, but that all the rest of the earth's billions have been impressed as electrons on this wire which has been imbedded into his body, and when the right time comes (whenever) they could be restored. If someone could fill in the gaps in the story for me, you would relieve a bit of curiosity which has been nagging me for about 15 years. ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 12-Feb #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #23 *** EOOH *** Date: Friday, February 12, 1982 7:03AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #23 To: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE SF-LOVERS Digest Friday, 12 Feb 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 23 Today's Topics: SF Fandom - Hugo awards, SF TV - Twilight Zone (Demon With a Glass Hand) & World War III, SF Movies - Superman & Brain Storm & Crack in the World, SF Topics - Industrial Feudalism ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 11 February 1982 05:29-EST From: "Richard H.E. Smith, II" Subject: Hugo awards Being in Chicago, I'm probably among the first to recieve my copy of the Chicon IV (1982 worldcon) Progress Report #3, which contains the Hugo Award nominating ballot. I'm also going to be among the first, but certainly not the last, to bitch about the *tacky* full page ads that appear in the PR on the couple pages just before the ballot. One of them reads as follows: "On your Hugo Award ballot, vote for..." and then names the same novel whose publisher supposedly sent free copies to the entire SFWA mailing list with a letter asking for Hugo & Nebula votes. A well-known, several-times Hugo-winning, semi-pro-zine also has a full page ad conveniently located. I sure hope that any of you who happen to be members of the worldcon and plan to nominate for the Hugo Awards will think twice about these people who want to buy your vote! By the way, don't miss the fact that the ballots must be returned by MARCH 15, which doesn't give you much time to figure out what to nominate. Just in case you care, you might consider some of my personal favorites: Novella: "In the Western Tradition" by Phyllis Eisenstein (March F&SF) Fanzine: ENERGUMEN 16 edited by Mike Glickson & Susan Wood I hope it's not as tacky for me to mention these as it is for the publishers to do so. -- Dick Smith p.s. If I could think of a better word than tacky, I'd use it. Unfortunately, all I can think of is too obscene to use here. Nuts! ------------------------------ Date: 10 February 1982 2353-PST (Wednesday) From: lauren at UCLA-Security (Lauren Weinstein) Subject: "glass hand" The plot in question is from an Outer Limits episode; a classic one in fact. Here is the entry from my official Arpanet "Outer Limits Episode Guide". --- Demon With a Glass Hand (10/17/64) **** Starred Robert Culp; written by Harlan Ellison. A man from the future, with fragmented memories and a glass computer for one of his hands, finds himself in the present, being hunted by aliens from the future in an old building. The hand keeps telling him that he holds the key to life or death for billions of future humans, but it cannot give him the details until he gets the three missing fingers of the hand (obviously ROMS) back from the aliens. A very good episode. --- --Lauren-- [ Thanks also to Stuart Cracraft (mclure at SRI-UNIX) and Christopher C. Stacy (CStacy at MIT-AI) for also identifting this story. -- Jim ] ------------------------------ Date: 11 Feb 1982 09:04 PST From: STOGRYN.ES at PARC-MAXC Subject: Re: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #22 *** WWIII WWIII: the TV movie 1) I don't think I would like a President who would take the EASY OUT and give in to blackmail: US grain in exchange for our oil pipe line from Alaska being left in tact. 2) The KGB never intended to be satisfied with the blackmail, they intended to gain a first-strike against the US all along. The new Soviet leader (the KGB official) essentially said "now the US planes have turned back and we can have the first-strike we've always wanted." 3) In the story, as now, the US had a surplus of grain. The Russians had none, so if they couldn't gain US grain by blackmail, they would gain a first-strike against the US and they would rule the world ( as if there would be anything to rule after a nuclear war). Steve ------------------------------ Date: 11 Feb 1982 00:59:39-PST From: CSVAX.upstill at Berkeley Subject: Superman query I missed the second night of Superman on TV this week. Would somebody who saw the theatrical version and the TV one help me out with a list of the new scenes? I only spotted two the first night, worth maybe 5 minutes, and there was supposed to be 45 minutes of new stuff. Reply to me, not the group. Steve ------------------------------ Date: 10 Feb 1982 1559-PST From: Craig W. Reynolds from III via Rand Subject: "Brain Storm" I saw a network news interview with Doug Trumbull just after Loyld's agreed to bankroll the rest of principal photography on "Brain Storm" in the wake of Ms. Wood's death. He needed to deny that the character that Wood had played would be recreated by "special effects techniques"! It sounded like some misguided person had seen "Looker" (one of the few) and the computer simulated computer simulations that we did here at III and accepted them (and the story line (such as it was) as well, for all I know) at face value. Sigh. -c ------------------------------ Date: 10 Feb 1982 1248-PST From: Paul Dietz Subject: Re: Crack in the World That back of the envelope calculation sounds suspicious to me. Remember, large parts of the earth ARE liquid - the outer core is liquid iron/nickel, and the mantle is very viscous semi-liquid rock. The steam explosion is silly. At the temperatures and pressures found in the mantl, water has long since passed its critical point, where gas and liquid become indistinguishable. And if you put the energy required into all the water in the oceans you'd have to heat them to ridiculous temperatures. You'd have to transfer the energy to that chunk of earth with near perfect efficiency, or the atmosphere gets blown off into space and everything fries. Come to think of it, does the atmosphere flow down into the hole left behind? Back to the liquid/solid model for the earth. As it turns out, if you treat the earth as liquid you get something very close to its true shape, a kind of pear-shaped almost sphere. This indicates that the liquid model is good. Also, their are tides (yes, tides) induced in the earth by the moon of substantial size (several feet, I believe). ------------------------------ Date: 10 Feb 1982 11:22:30-PST From: jef at LBL-UNIX (Jef Poskanzer [rtsg]) Subject: Crack in the World I believe the movie explicitly said that the energy to lift up the new moon came from a steam explosion caused by most of an ocean meeting the Earth's core. I guess you could look at this like a giant cannon; the new moon is the projectile, the Earth is the barrel, and steam is the propellant. This makes it clear that the projectile would not make it to orbit, since no matter how long a gun's barrel is, the muzzle velocity is limited by the speed of the individual propellant molecules. Steam, even at many thousands of degrees, does not have orbital velocity. More interestingly, the movie and our reaction to it reveals an interesting disparity between how the general public and scientists view our planet. The general public seems to think the Earth is bound entirely by chemical energy - i.e. it is just a rather large chunk of rock, and removing part of it would just leave a big hole. Scientists seem to think the opposite, that gravitational binding energy dominates and the Earth is like a large drop of liquid. I once did a back-of-the-envelope calculation and found that, to within an order of magnitude, the Earth is bound EQUALLY by gravity and chemistry. Perhaps the best model is Silly Putty. --- Jef ------------------------------ Date: 10 Feb 1982 1220-MST From: Walt Subject: Re: Industrial Feudalism You make a good case for the plausibility of this happening under some types of circumstances. One that occurs to me is a world with little remaining fossil resources, but a highly developed technology of sending bits long distances in efficient light pipes between efficient silicon chips. The people would have to eat of course, and you can't eat bits or silicon, and there aren't any fossil fuels to haul food into large cities, so the people live under virtually feudal conditions, but there is a larger economy based on information. I believe this would meet the types of conditions you set - if the software market was competitive on a national basis, but the groceries were strictly local, you might have limited labor mobility but competition to develop the best technology. Chips would be carried from town to town by itinerant merchants, and there would be great rejoicing when the chipsmith came to your manor, because then you could /finally/ get a part to fix the flickering tube that had been driving you blind. Anyhow it's fun to think about. My complaint with OoF is that the authors didn't make their claim of a feudal society credible to me. ------------------------------ Date: 11 Feb 1982 at 0015-CST From: hjjh at UTEXAS-11 Subject: Industrial Feudalism in Japan I checked out the possibility with John M. (who reads SF-L over my shoulder every chance he gets) and he says-- In re: "Japan certainly does high technology in a tightly knit society, but it couldn't be described as feudal." Japan... no. But definitely the big Japanese corporations. A number of them provide their employees with housing, health care, schools for the children, etc. In turn, the employee stays with the same company for his entire working career. Back during the flap over the Chrysler bailout there was a report on the babblebox that is relevant. It seems that in 1972 or 73 Mazda got into a similar fiscal bind when their rotary engine turned out to be a real gas guzzler. As I recall, the following things were done: 1) Mazda did NOT go to the Japanese government for help. 2) Arrangements were made with the banks to reschedule loan payments. 3) NO ONE was laid off. Line workers idled by production cutbacks were found jobs in dealerships or elsewhere. When the paycuts came, they started AT THE TOP and went down, eventually only going as far as half way through middle management. 3) and 4) show the feudal set-up: the workers (samurai) are taken care of; and the Big Boys (daimyos and feif administrators) whose decision to go with the rotary engine caused all the problems in the first place, got stuck with the pay cuts (which is certainly less messy than seppuku). This is also, except for 2), exactly the opposite of the way the Chrysler mess was handled. John M. ------------------------------ Date: 11 Feb 1982 1020-EST From: Larry Seiler Subject: Industrial Feudalism Reply-to: Seiler@MIT-XX I am given to understand that industrial feudalism is being practiced right now in Japan. It works like this. Every morning when the workers arrive at company X, they all gather together and sing the company song, which is about how they will love and honor their company and it will protect them. Apparently, they do and it does. Hardly anybody is fired or laid off; it is not unusual to spend your whole life working for one company. Workers (and I mean professionals too, not just manual laborers) tend to skip paid vacations so that they can work more. Japanese workers were polled as to who they would contact first if they got in an accident and the vast majority said they would call their company first. Only a few said they would call their wives first. I'm sure that the Japanese could be just as mobile as we are if they wanted to be, so apparently they practice this form of feudalism by choice. Larry Seiler PS - My source for all this is the Boston Globe, if that helps you to decide whether to believe it. ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 16-Feb #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #24 *** EOOH *** Date: Tuesday, February 16, 1982 6:51AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #24 To: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE SF-LOVERS Digest Sunday, 14 Feb 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 24 Today's Topics: SF Movies - Superman & New Conan Movie, SF Books - Series (Conan/GOR) & Congo, SF Topics - Optical Computers & Industrial Feudalism, SF TV - Outer Limits (Demon With a Glass Hand), Spoiler - Outer Limits (Demon With a Glass Hand) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 11 February 1982 19:44-EST From: Andrew Scott Beals Subject: Superman's time-warp Well, as near as I can figure, Superman went back in time, and worked parallel to himself while he was saving Lois Lane. Yes, this does mean he exists in 3 places simultaneously (original time-path, going back in time, and going forward once again.), but it's only a movie, and so normal physics don't have to operate in it (for example: Why would a piece of his home world be so deadly to him-after all, millions of Kryptonians lived on a very large piece of it long before he was born.). -Bandy ------------------------------ Date: 12 Feb 1982 15:49:10-PST From: menlo70!hao!woods at Berkeley Subject: Re: Superman Time Query I thought this ending was really a cop-out. It ruined the whole movie for me. This going back in time is one thing that Supie was NEVER able to do in the comics I remember reading. I even remember him trying several times, including one story in particular in which he had a really bad fight with Lois and he attempted to go back in time to patch things up (I think he missed her birthday party or something typically ridiculous like that). While he was in the past, something blocked his memory and he missed the party again, proving once again that Supie cannot change history. There were several other things in this movie that failed to stick to the original script, too, like the total elimination of Superboy, and making formerly very important people (like Lana Lang and Jimmy Olsen) into bit parts. Oh,well, if they had adhered totally to the original story it might have been more boring anyway. GREG (ucbvax!menlo70!hao!woods) ------------------------------ Date: 11 Feb 1982 16:56 EST From: CHRONIS.henr at PARC-MAXC Subject: Re: New Conan movie If you've never read a Conan book, your really missing out. They(the REH stories) are the best escapist literature I've read, save a few RAH, Ursula K. and Bradbury stories. The plots aren't complex, the baddies aren't either, but Conan himself is the most cynical barbarian ever imagined. REH had considerable fun putting down "civilization" in many of his stories. By the way the first 20-odd /B.Smith Marvel comics about Conan, are worth reading, even if you don't like comics. T. Chronis ------------------------------ Date: 11 Feb 1982 1305-EST From: Steven J. Zeve Subject: Conan To Dave Blickstein, I think it would be more appropriate to say that the Gor book covers resemble the Conan covers. Conan is a MUCH older series, dating back to the 1930s. Conan is, in many ways, the standard form for heroic (or if you prefer Sword and Sorcery) fantasy against which all others must be judged. Although you might not like the Conan books, you should at least read one or two of them before dismissing them as being just like the Gor books. It is hard for anything to be as bad as the Gor books. Not only are the Gor books degrading in their attitudes about women, they are so predictable and badly written that you can't ignore their attitude about women even if you try. I for one await the movie to see if it can actually be made to work, since I agree with you that it could come out very badly when transferred from the imagination and pen and ink to live flesh. By the way the picture you describe sounds like a standard image of Conan. Steve Z. ------------------------------ Date: 11 Feb 1982 0019-PST From: Zellich at OFFICE-3 (Rich Zellich) Subject: Re: Conan as compared to GOR books There ain't no comparison! Conan is actually a bit on the chivalrous side for the barbarian he's supposed to be. If you like sword & sorcery, the Conan books are fairly good (at least the original ones by Howard are; I personally don't care for some of the later fill-in books at all, especially the ones by Lin Carter). I received my introduction to S&S from these books, and they're still some of my favorites for light reading. What I've seen of the Conan movie stills looks pretty good, with the usual exception that the characters as portrayed in the movie don't seem to match the descriptions in the books at all (or even the depictions in the comic books). Given most of the recent efforts in fantasy movie-making, I'm not expecting too much from the movie, but hope it's at least worth a $1.50 or $2.00 "Rush Hour" matinee price. If there's anybody else out there who hasn't at least tried one of Howard's original Conan books, break down and give it a shot. You might try to start with the first one, and if you like them, work through in chronological sequence. There's a progression from lone youth to leader to high station in the series, and it makes more sense if they're read in order. I'm not sure of the order of some of the more recent fill-ins, and need to reread the whole series to figure them out properly, but here's the approximately correct chronological list: Conan, Conan of Cimmeria, Conan and the Sorcerer (?), Conan: the Sword of Skelos (?), Conan the Mercenary, Conan the Freebooter, Conan: the Road of Kings (?), Conan the Wanderer, Conan: the Flame Knife (?), Conan and the Spider God (?), Conan the Adventurer, Conan the Rebel, Conan the Buccaneer, Conan the Warrior, Conan the Liberator, Conan the Usurper, Conan the Conqueror, Conan the Avenger, Conan of Aquilonia, Conan of the Isles, Conan the Swordsman (no sequence - contains stories scattered throughout Conan's life) Enjoy, Rich ------------------------------ Date: 11 Feb 1982 20:23:55-PST From: b.r.schatz Subject: optical computers Date: 2/11/82, 10:02 PM I have just finished reading a pretty good high-technology thriller by Michael Crichton, "Congo". The plot revolves around the discovery of a natural source (in a lost volcanic African mine a la "She") for Type IIb boron-coated blue diamonds which, when doped, can be used to make "the Fabry-Perot Interferometer, the optical equivalent of a transistor, which can respond in 1 picosecond, at least 1000 times faster than the fastest Josephson junctions". These would form the next generation of optical computers, whose speed would make the current-day electrical ones obsolete. It was also stated that laser transmission along fiber optic cables required these doped semiconductor diamonds. Is this for real? Most of Crichton's other speculations (e.g. on ape language) seem at least well founded. ------------------------------ Date: 13 February 1982 01:43-EST From: James A. Cox Subject: Industrial Feudalism in Japan Some (short) historical background might be helpful here.... (This doesn't have a whole lot to do with SF, but there have been a number of unsupported assertions lately about "feudal Japan" that ought to be contradicted.) In some ways, Japan might be considered feudal, since the land was long divided into Han ruled in a feudal manner by the Daimyo. However, beginning in the 17th century with the Tokugawa shogun the independence of the daimyo was curtailed. For example, the daimyo's families ware required to live in Edo (now Tokyo) as hostages by the shogun. The rule of the shogun was much more effective than that of the kings in Europe. There were also strong economic links between Edo and the countryside, and the Japanese economy was highly commercialized before modernization began. And when economic development really got going, under Okubo Toshimichi's ministership, the central government continued to play a leading role, thus reducing the power of the daimyo further. Even so, the individual Han continued to work together as units, and many of the great Japanese corporations of today are directly descended from them. So although Japanese society contained feudal elements, IT WAS NEVER REALLY FEUDAL AS THE TERM WAS USED IN EUROPE. Indeed, some economists believe that Japan (and England, for that matter) was able to develop so rapidly precisely because of the non-feudal elements (such as the precocious commercialization). Today, Japanese society can hardly be called feudal, although it is marginally closer to feudalism than U.S. society is. A chief distinguishing element of feudalism -- the relative isolation and almost complete independence of the individual "estates" -- is largely absent. Indeed, I posit that industrialization and technological advance have ONLY taken place when different parts of a society could freely interact: the antithesis of feudalism. ------------------------------ Date: Sunday, February 14 1982 2:08AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Subject: SPOILER WARNING! SPOILER WARNING! The following message is the last in the digest. It it a response to the recent "glass hand" query that discusses major portions of the plot. Some readers may not wish to read on. [ Thanks also to Dudley Irish , Tom Wadlow , and Larry Reed for also answering this query. -- Jim ] ------------------------------ Date: 11 Feb 1982 1414-EST From: Bob Krovetz Subject: re: title query (spoiler) The title of the "movie" is an episode of The Outer Limits entitled "The man with the glass hand" and is by Harlan Ellison. I haven't seen the series in a very long time so my memory is also somewhat fuzzy. As I recall, the man being chased was played by Robert Culp (of I Spy fame). The hand was a talking computer which could answer some of Culp's questions, but not all, due to missing critical components in the fingers. With the acquisition of each finger the computer is able to answer more of his questions. I think the aliens that were pursuing him came from earth's future via that mirror device. The medallions enabled them to remain in the past; pulling them off just returned them to the future. He eventually manages to destroy the mirror, cutting off the supply, and pulls the medallions off the rest. I think the people of earth were stored on the wire because the earth became radioactive and would become safe again some 3000 years in the future. The acquisition of the last finger enables the computer to inform Culp that the wire was wrapped around a spool in his chest and that he is actually a robot that has been entrusted with the safekeeping of the wire until the earth is again safe to inhabit. I heard a talk by Ellison several years ago in which he discussed the episode. He mentioned that the show was made on a very low budget (the alien's costume included a stocking over their heads with blacked out eyes). He also mentioned that Culp did his own stunts (which were very good). Does anyone know if the series is still in syndication? ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 18-Feb #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #25 *** EOOH *** Date: Thursday, February 18, 1982 9:40AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #25 To: SF-LOVERS at SU-SCORE SF-LOVERS Digest Thursday, 18 Feb 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 25 Today's Topics: Random Topics - LA l-5 convention, SF Books - Majipoor Chronicles & Series (Conan/GOR) & Congo, SF Topics - Optical Computers & Industrial Feudalism, SF Movies - Superman & Quest For Fire, SF TV - Outer Limits & World War III, Spoiler - World War III ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 17 Feb 82 1:33-PDT From: mclure at SRI-UNIX Subject: More on upcoming L-5 conference From Pournelle: L-5 CONFERENCE 2-4 april 1982 Los Angeles AIRPORT HYATT THEME: Citizens in space; space development. GUESTS OF HONOR: Robert A. Heinlein, author Fred Haise, VP Grumman (Apollo 13 Commander) KEYNOTE SPEAKER: Hans Mark, Deputy Director NASA Honored Guest: Representative Newt Gingrich Workshop to design lunar colony; space suit design; strategy and tactics of space politics; propulsion; asteroid mines. Most members of Citizens Advisory Council an National Space Policy will attend. Membership: General, $35 ($25 L-5 or AAS members); Banquet $25 Professional Membership (includes banquet) $75 Professional membership includes reception for guests of honor etc. Friday evening. There will be an open party for all members Saturday night (poolside, weather permitting). Intention is to mix enthusiasts and professionals and politicians and citizens and everyone try to learn from the others. ------------------------------ Date: 17 Feb 1982 10:21:19 EST (Wednesday) From: Andrew Malis Subject: "Majipoor Chronicles" This past weekend I was in a bookstore and I saw "Majipoor Chronicles" by Robert Silverberg (Priam Books (Arbor House), 5.95 trade paperback). By co-incidence, I had just finished reading "Lord Valentine's Castle", so I snapped it right up. In a nutshell, if you liked "Valentine", you'll love this as well. As you could well guess from the title, it's set in the same world as "Valentine", and consists of episodes from Majipoor's history interleaved with events following the end of the previous book. I'm only half way through it, but I highly recommend it. Be sure to read "Valentine" first, however, to get background information that is quite necessary for one to enjoy the book. Andy P.S. I hope that this trend towards trade paperbacks doesn't continue. They're less convenient to carry around, need more shelf space, and harder on the wallet to boot. ------------------------------ Date: 13 Feb 1982 05:59:10-PST From: sri-unix!hplabs!menlo70!sytek!zehntel!berry at Berkeley Subject: Conan the Barbarian Books Allowing for the fact that they were written in the 20's and 30's (I think), Robert E Howard's "Conan" stories are quite good. They are NOWHERE NEAR as disgustingly sexist as the Gor stories. A few writers have taken it on themselves to finish some of Howards unfinished stories and write new ones, notably Sprague deCamp and Lin Carter. Recently I picked up a Conan novel (I forget the title, but like almost all of them it was something like "Conan the ") by Poul Anderson (!). Poul's is the best of the lot, if you ask me. He fleshes out the characters in a believable manner, and brings his full, not inconsiderable story-telling talent to bear. --berry ------------------------------ Date: 16 Feb 1982 0912-PST Subject: Optical computers From: William "Chops" Westfield I haven't read Crichton's new book, and from some of the reviews I've seen, I probably won't. It seems Crichton knows next to nothing about computers or electronics. Ill comment on a couple of things you mentioned: 1) Diamonds: Are not used in optical fiber communications. Carbon is sort of in the semi-conductor family, so it might be possible to build devices out of diamonds. They have a higher bandgap than silicon, which may be good or bad, I forget. A major disadvantage is that you can make complex silicon integrated circuits by virtue of the fact that you can grow nice insulating layers of silicon dioxide on the wafer... Carbon dioxide, on the other hand will tend to evaporate. 2) 1pS = "1000 times faster than the fastest josephson junction" "Respond in 1 pS"??? well, if you were talking about gate delays, 1pS would be only about 10,000 times faster than go-to-the-radio- shack-and-buy-it type integrated circuits (LS TTL). GaAs Chips under development have gate delays of about 3 pS (I think) and Bell Labs has achived similar times using silicon. JJ's are already down below 1 pS, if I remember the most recent news blurb in the trade journals properly. Besides which, The next big hurtle in electronic speed has little to do with switching times. It has to do with the speed of light. In 1 pS, light travels about .3 mM in a vacuum (much less in a material with a high refractive index like diamond - light travels slower), and its very hard to fit enough devices in such a small area. Oh well - makes me doubt all the neat things I read in Andromeda Strain... Bill W ------------------------------ Date: 13 February 1982 21:30-EST From: "John Howard Palevich, & CO." Subject: Japanese Feudalism I just spent six weeks writing a paper on the Japanese semiconductor industry. Big Japanese companies, especially those on the Ministry of International Trade and Industry's "right for Japan" list, are allowed to run up very large debt/equity ratios. Mazda, for instance, could borrow six times as much money (from Japanese banks that know that the Bank of Japan will lend them the money) than Chrystler could borrow from US banks. When a Japanese firm get into trouble, the very worst thing that could happen is a merger; the Japanese government is virtually committed to see that no major Japanese corporation goes bankrupt. And workers get 1/3 of their income in the form of two big bonuses per year, so in lean years Japanese companies can reduce their labor costs significantly by simply reducing bonuses. ------------------------------ Date: 16 Feb 1982 12:18 CST From: johnston.DLOS at PARC-MAXC Subject: Re: Superman Time Query, SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #24 I think you're probably right about working parallel to himself. However, although this doesn't really pertain to the enjoyability of the movie, I believe this raises the spectre of changing history and all associated paradoxes. If somebody sees a way out of that question, I would be interested in responses. Response to menlo70!hao!woods at Berkeley: Superman/Superboy often traveled in time in the comics. Case in point-going to and from the 30th century to work with the League of Super Heroes. I do agree that the comics firmly believed that history could not be changed by going into the past, though. Rick ------------------------------ Date: 16 Feb 1982 15:32:00-PST From: Cory.c153-3ad at Berkeley Subject: Superman Movie The Superman I Movie has an internal inconsistency: while Superman is flying around reversing time, we see photos of the earthquake un-happening. In particular, we see the flood backing up & the dam rebuilding itself. So after Supes is finished, Jimmy Olsen should be hanging off the dam again, right? /* Wrong */ His save by Superman apparently works across time reversals, whereas little things like Lois Lane's death don't. Michael Chastain ------------------------------ Date: 17 Feb 1982 09:50:21-PST From: allegra!jdd at Berkeley Subject: Superman's Time Travels Superman was always able to go forward and backward in time. What menlo70!hao!woods is probably thinking about is that he was never able to \change/ the past, which is what he did in the movie. He could always visit it. The problem with the Three-Supermen Theory of BANDY@MIT-AI is that there is a paradox. If Superman[1] sees Lois die, then travels back in time (Superman[2]) and emerges in the past (Superman[3]) to save her, then Superman[1] will have no reason to time-travel and we get stuck with two Supermen (my opinion is that Superman[2] would vanish). Of course, this is just one way that time-travel could work (ignoring laws of physics, of course). Cheers, John DeTreville Bell Labs ------------------------------ Date: 13 February 1982 1938-PST (Saturday) From: lauren at UCLA-Security (Lauren Weinstein) Subject: "Quest For Fire" Greetings. Anybody out there have some comments on "Quest For Fire"? It has recently opened here in L.A. -- it might be a limited distribution at this time. Any info would be appreciated. Thanks. --Lauren-- ------------------------------ Date: 17 Feb 1982 at 1428-CST From: ables at UTEXAS-11 (King Ables) Subject: re: Outer Limits still in syndication? Yes, it is. KTVT Channel 11, an independent station in Ft. Worth, runs it on weekends and as a filler at other times. We could see it here in Austin until recently when our cable company dropped KTVT. I assume other places would carry it, too. -ka ------------------------------ Date: 16 Feb 1982 1045-MST From: Dudley Irish Subject: Re: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #24 Yes, Outer Limits is still in syndication. It shows here in beautiful Salt Lake City, on an independent station. I suppose that the chances are that one of your local stations will be picking it up eventually. There was an other episode by Ellison that I would like the name of if some one could supply it. It was about a soldier that got transported back in time. The key that will remind many of you of which episode it is is that he had to keep his helmet on to keep the noise to an exceptible level. This is because he was used to getting his orders over a radio in his helmet. One last thing, does any one know of a guide or synopsis for the Outer Limits show? Dudley Irish Irish@Utah-20 [ Yes, a guide to both OUTER LIMITS and the TWILIGHT ZONE was compiled by Lauren Weinstein (Lauren@UCLA-SECURITY) and made available to the SF-LOVERS readership quite a while back. Lauren is presently in the process of revising and updating these guides, and I hope that the "second editions" can be made available to the readership in the relatively near future. -- Jim ] ------------------------------ Date: Thursday, February 18 1982 2:08AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Subject: SPOILER WARNING! SPOILER WARNING! The following two messages are the last in the digest. They discuss the recent TV movie World War III in more detail than previous messages, mentioning some of the details of its conclusion. Some readers may not wish to read on. ------------------------------ Date: 11 Feb 1982 1305-EST From: Steven J. Zeve Subject: World War III In reply to "Pettit at PARC-MAXC"'s comments on the WWIII movie, yes it was a little predictable. As to the Russian leader (who appears to be a very high ranking KGB officer) who pushed the button, it was clear to me that he was a fanatic. Although it isn't clear whether he ordered the execution of the secretary general (played by Brian Keith), it is made clear throughout the movie that he okayed and maybe even drew up the plan to invade the U.S.. Furthermore, the reactions of the American leaders to him makes it clear that they believe he is a fanatic. Steve Z. ------------------------------ Date: 12 Feb 1982 09:03 PST From: Pugh.ES at PARC-MAXC Subject: Re: Stogryn.ES at PARC-MAXC Review of WWIII Steve -- I believe you misinterpreted the final minutes of the movie. I do not believe the KGB intended to follow through with a first-strike. The KGB official, before picking up the telephone to converse with the American President, commented that the dead Secretary-General had credibility with the Americans and that the coming discussion with the President would not be easy. After his conversation with the President, the KGB official commented that "he didn't believe me" (meaning the President didn't believe that the Soviet planes would be withdrawn), and something to the effect that they had 25 minutes until the American leader received a Congressional OK for the nuclear strike. At that point, the Soviets realized that war was inevitable. The rest is ... history? If the conversation had been different in that the American President would have gone along with the Soviet "request" would it make much sense to push the button? That would not have helped the starving Russians which (if you will remember) was the original reason for the venture into Alaska. /Eric ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************Date: Tuesday, March 9, 1982 2:29AM  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 27-Apr JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #26 *** EOOH *** Date: Wed, 27 Apr 88 08:23:27 EST From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #26 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Monday, 8 Feb 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 26 Today's Topics: Administrivia - Resumption of Service, SF Lovers - Outer Limits and Twilight Zone Episode Guides, SF TV - Outer Limits (Demon With a Glass Hand), SF Books - Congo, SF Topics - Chinese Science Fiction & Optical Computers, Spoiler - Outer Limits (Demon With a Glass Hand) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tuesday, March 9, 1982 2:29AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS-REQUEST at MIT-AI Subject: Resumption of Service Hello again. It's been a long time since we've had a SF-LOVERS Digest, over two weeks. The last digest, V5 #26, went out on Thursday, February 18th. After that, we had to stop sending it out from Score. We are now transmitting from BRL. The mailboxes for SF-LOVERS and SF-LOVERS-REQUEST should be moving to another site shortly, but the MIT-AI addresses will continue to work as usual. Please note that the SU-SCORE addresses are NOT working, and any mail sent to them will be lost. Happy reading, Jim ------------------------------ Date: 18 Feb 1982 1946-CST From: Rich Zellich Subject: Outer Limits and Twilight Zone Episode Guides Versions of Lauren's Twilight Zone and Outer Limits episode guides are permanently available for FTP over the ARPANET from host OFFICE-3. These files are maintained in various forms to suit just about anybody: The message-format files have one episode per message and, along with the BABYL files, were reformatted by Frank Wancho somewhat over a year ago; the text, line printer and Augment/NLS files were reformatted by me even longer ago...if you find anything wrong with these files, it's probably our fault, so don't bug Lauren! OFFICE-3 supports the net "standard" ANONYMOUS login within FTP (use anything for a password). The Tenex message-format files are: TZEG.MESSAGE OLEG.MESSAGE The BABYL files are: TZEG.BABYL OLEG.BABYL The straight line-oriented text files are: TZEG.TXT TZEG.OUT (this one is formatted for lineprinters, with embedded CTL-L FormFeeds) The Augment/NLS file is: TZEG.AUG Enjoy, Rich ------------------------------ Date: 21 February 1982 1426-PST (Sunday) From: mike at UCLA-Security (Michael Urban) Subject: Demon with a Glass Hand Minor trivia on the Outer Limits episode: for years I had wondered what neat old building they had used for filming that particular episode, what with the exposed elevators and wrought-iron banisters etc. About ten years ago, I found out quite by accident that the building is in fact here in downtown Los Angeles and is in fact an architectural monument known as the Bradbury Building. It used to be free, but nowadays admission is, I think, $1. Truly a remarkable place. Mike ------------------------------ Date: 25 Feb 1982 11:58:08-EST From: csin!cjh at CCA-UNIX Subject: "Demon with a Glass Hand" Wasn't the script for this the source of one of Ellison's awards from the Screenwriters Guild? The awards are judged solely on the script, rather than whatever the director made of it; Ellison has three (including one for the pilot of THE STARLOST), which nobody else in the Guild has achieved. ------------------------------ Date: 19 Feb 1982 13:22 PST From: Hoffman at PARC-MAXC Subject: Chinese Science Fiction From the Los Angeles Times, Friday, Feb. 19, 1982: China: A New Horizon For Science Fiction By Michael Parks Times Staff Writer [excerpts of a lengthy article:] PEKING--. . . . Science fiction was little read here until three years ago, but it is rapidly becoming one of the most popular literary genres in China. Zheng's books are published in editions of 100,000 and more--and sell out within a week. An anthology of foreign science fiction with a printing of 420,000 was gone as quickly, and some books have had sales of more than a million in three or four printings. . . . . Many fans have formed clubs to buy books as they are published. Copies of books published even six months ago are hard to get, and sell for four or five times their original price. Half a dozen provincial science fiction magazines have been established within the past two years. After importing the 1976 American film "Future World" and the television series "Man From Atlantis", China now is starting to make its own science fiction movies. By American or European standards, Chinese science fiction seems very basic. The usual themes--interplanetary journeys, robots, time travel, experimental medicine, monsters from beneath the sea, thought control, and mad scientists--are of an early vintage, and their handling is not sophisticated. . . . . The upsurge in interest in science fiction, banned during the Cultural Revolution, began with the 1978 National Science Conference here. . . .[A] publishing company decided to put out an anthology of foreign science fiction in translation--Ray Bradbury, Isaac Asimov, Arthur C. Clarke, Stanislav Lem were among the authors--and the enthusiastic response led to a Chinese anthology and then an additional 10 books in the last two years. . . . . Much of the new Chinese science fiction...is intended to popularize modern science, an effort strongly supported by scientists here. . . But the value of science fiction as an educational tool is debated here. A prize-winning story, "The Death Ray From Coral Island," which was made into a popular movie, was criticized for "misrepresenting science" and being too fantastic to be believed. Other critics said the writing was too poor to qualify as literature. . . . . [Quoting several Chinese s-f writers:] "[We must] also deal with scientific ideology, the scientific way of thinking." ..."Chinese science fiction must reflect China's real problems."..."The inner workings of man are more interesting than space travel...It is not only past problems I want to examine, but the roots of the tragedies (such as the Cultural Revolution) within ourselves." This might ordinarily put a Chinese writer in danger of violating Communist Party policy on the role of literature. But Zheng...explained, "In outer space, there is no capitalism, no socialism and no political problems to worry us." But the charter that Chinese science fiction has from the country's leadership clearly puts science first and fiction and social problems second. . . . . Meng Weizai, a prominent novelist, is among the established Chinese authors who have turned recently to science fiction. Meng's new novel, "Interview With the Missing Persons," has been praised as China's first Utopian science fiction novel. It deals with nine Chinese, taking part in a 1976 demonstration in Peking's Tian An Men Square, who are kidnaped, taken aboard a spacecraft, and spend the next 50 years in adventurous travel in outer space. Meng's travelers tell of the "Green Pine Planet," where they found an ideal society in which everyone is equal, eternally youthful and full of pure love, where the leader-president is not first but last, where all seek wisdom and where evil is so unknown that there are not even words in the dictionary for it. Such Utopianism is perhaps the most controversial aspect of Chinese science fiction, for Marxism's "historical optimism" allows little room for the pessimism found in some American and European science fiction. "Among Chinese science fiction writers, the future of the world will be bright," said [a publisher]. "We are confident of the future, and we are striving now for a brighter world tomorrow. ------------------------------ Date: 22 Feb 1982 1541-PST From: Craig W. Reynolds from III via Rand Subject: Crichton's failings Regarding BillW@SRI-KL's (are you called "chops" by your FRIENDS?) comments on Michael Crichton; I'll second the notion. While Crichton has become known as a writer/director of "technological" suspense/ adventure movies, the sad fact is that he seems to have a very superficial knowledge of science and technology. Well, what do you expect of someone who went to Harvard Med School? While our group was working on the effects for "Looker" (his last film) my respect for him was a monotone decreasing function. The screenplay was bad, the science was essentially fantasy and the movie itself had a lot of problems. Of course the FX were great ... I'm not holding my breath for "Congo". -c ------------------------------ Date: 19 Feb 1982 13:14:02-CST From: jon at uwisc Subject: Congo: technical facts? Some time ago, a lengthy review (an attack, really) of Crichton's "Congo" appeared in "The Institute", IEEE's newsletter. The reviewer had quite a bit to say about the technical content, and especially the very serious manner in which numerous non-facts were presented: as if half the purpose of the book were educating the reader. Crichton responded in a subsequent issue that it was all fiction, he considered it proper to make up facts as much as to make up characters, and nobody was expected to take it seriously. Enjoy his books if you can, but frankly, if he claims there are diamonds in Africa, you better double-check with DeBeers. Jon Mauney jon@uwisc/uwvax!jon ------------------------------ Date: 18 Feb 1982 1435-PST From: William "Chops" Westfield Subject: my times for gate delays... were off by a factor of about 10. ECL and GaAs both have gate delays around 30 pS, and JJs have gate delays around 12 pS. My basic arguments still hold - Crichton doesn't know what hes talking about. ------------------------------ Date: Tuesday, March 9, 1982 2:29AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Subject: SPOILER WARNING! SPOILER WARNING! The following message is the last in the digest. It it a response to the recent "glass hand" query that discusses major portions of the plot. Some readers may not wish to read on. ------------------------------ Date: 18 Feb 1982 16:50:36-EST From: csin!cjh at CCA-UNIX Subject: Demon pt. II As I recall, taking away their medallions does kill the Kyben; the medallion is necessary to stabilize them in current time after they come through the "mirror", and the shock of being jerked back a few millennia does them in by the time they [arrive]. I strongly suspect that Ellison was remembering the ending of "A Gun for Dinosaur" by L. Sprague de Camp. ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 9-Mar JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #27 *** EOOH *** Date: Tuesday, March 9, 1982 4:14AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #27 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Tuesday, 9 Mar 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 27 Today's Topics: Administrivia - Misdated Digest, SF Movies - Quest for Fire & Superman & Brainstorm & Revenge of the Jedi, SF Topics - Industrial Feudalism, Spoiler - Revenge of the Jedi ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tuesday, March 9, 1982 2:29AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS-REQUEST at MIT-AI Subject: Misdated Digest Issue 26 was dated February 8, 1982, when the correct date was actually March 8, 1982. Apologies. Jim ------------------------------ Date: 18 Feb 1982 2039-PST From: Dave Dyer Subject: Quest for Fire I have seen it and was favorably impressed with it as a "period" drama, where the period is the stone age. Its biggest virtue is the gritty realism of the recreation of the living conditions. Most of the time, everyone looks like hell, apparently feel terrible, and are involved in something really important like avoiding being eaten. I like that. The special E ( mastodons, sabretooh cat, etc.) are pretty convincing, and certainly not hokey. Desmond Morris (of "The Naked Ape" ) developed the "gestures" used in communication, and Anthony Burgess (of "Clockwork Orange") developed the languages. Both achieve verisimilitude. The plot is mainly a travelog random incidents during the quest, with a minimum of dramatic embellishment. There are no heavy handed messages to be conveyed, and not much transparent emotional manipulation. The exception to this is the "fire making" demo, which is definitely a heart throb. Another major virtue is novelty. This is definitely off the beaten track of hollywood movies, but unlike many novelty movies, it is carefully crafted and mostly internally consistent. My biggest nit to pick is that the time is VERY opportune for the plot: some (but not all) tribes in the area know how to make fire, some (but not all) tribes in the area have developed throwing sticks, and so on. The lenth of time where such "technological" differences among tribes existed would be very short. Last word: See it. ------------------------------ Date: 19 Feb 1982 09:56 PST From: Hoffman at PARC-MAXC Subject: "Quest For Fire" I saw "Quest For Fire" just before it opened, with an audience mainly of anthropologists, though I am not one. The anthropologists found the movie very entertaining for all the wrong reasons--they were continually laughing about all the technical goofs and the silly-looking mammoths and saber-tooth tigers and the impossible juxtapositions of cultures and so forth. They were not charitable in their final judgments. On the other hand, I enjoyed most of it. (It may also be true that I'm quicker to suspend my disbelief.) There's sufficient "adventure" to keep most kids (of all ages) amused. More interesting, there is food for thought from time to time. I think any viewer will leave wondering about the growth and development of culture, and I tend to feel any movie that makes people think is generally OK. For the technically pure, the marketing is a mistake--all that emphasis on the research they did and Anthony Burgess's linguistic help and Desmond Morriss on gestures....They set themselves up to be hooted at for all flaws. For the more forgiving among us, an attempt worth checking out. Not the "2001" of its sort (as the hype might have it), but still worth seeing. --Rodney Hoffman ------------------------------ Date: 16 Feb 1982 15:32:00-PST From: Cory.c153-3ad at Berkeley Subject: Superman Movie The Superman I Movie has an internal inconsistency: while Superman is flying around reversing time, we see photos of the earthquake un-happening. In particular, we see the flood backing up & the dam rebuilding itself. So after Supes is finished, Jimmy Olsen should be hanging off the dam again, right? /* Wrong */ His save by Superman apparently works across time reversals, whereas little things like Lois Lane's death don't. Michael Chastain ------------------------------ Date: 16 Feb 82 16:14-PDT From: mclure at SRI-UNIX Subject: Brainstorm update 16 Feb 82 Times News Service HOLLYWOOD - Douglas Trumbull gave a party on Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer's Stage 29 Feb. 5 and presented the cast and crew of his movie with champagne and bright red T-shirts. What was unusual was the legend printed on the shirts: ''Lloyds of London presents 'Brainstorm.' Coming soon to a theater near you.'' Stage 29 was ''hot locked'' Dec. 20, three weeks after ''Brainstorm's'' star, Natalie Wood, drowned in the waters off Catalina Island. The simulated computers, robot arms, ape cages and shelves of chemicals that dressed the central laboratory set of ''Brainstorm'' were padlocked away while M-G-M argued with the two insurance companies that had provided $15 million worth of cast insurance on the movie. M-G-M felt ''Brainstorm'' could not be completed without Miss Wood. Trumbull, the director, disagreed. In the end, Lloyds of London sided with Trumbull and agreed to spend $3 million to complete production of the movie, instead of writing a check to M-G-M for its share of the approximately $12 million the studio had already spent. Stage 29 was unlocked. ''I can't express my appreciation enough to Lloyds,'' said Trumbull, as he paced the set, which was stiflingly hot because the laboratory that sprawls across Stage 29 has a ceiling. It is the end of the first week of 18 days of new production. Reassembling the movie's co-stars - Cliff Robertson, Louise Fletcher and Christopher Walken - its featured players and nearly 130 members of the original140-member crew is only the first of his hurdles, however. M-G-M is barely talking to him. And another $3 million and six months will be needed to layer special effects into the science-fiction thriller. But Trumbull, an Academy Award nominee for special effects for ''Close Encounters of the Third Kind'' and ''Star Trek,'' said with absolute certainty, ''If M-G-M doesn't allow us to finish 'Brainstorm,' somebody else will.'' How much of his confidence is wishful thinking is hard to assess. He has directed one other movie, the $1.3 million ''Silent Running,'' in which he created robots that presaged R2D2 of ''Star Wars.'' For ''Silent Running,'' he had so little money to spend that he had to create his space ships out of Dixie cups and toy model kits. So he has a great emotional stake in completing the now $16 million ''Brainstorm.'' Robertson also has an emotional stake in the film. Before he was hired to play the head of the laboratory in ''Brainstorm,'' he had not acted in a Hollywood movie for three and a half years, not since he accused David Begelman, then president of Columbia Pictures, of forging his name on a $10,000 check. Begelman was eventually convicted of forgery. Robertson, who won an Academy Award for best actor in 1968 for ''Charly,'' carefully avoids saying he was blacklisted: ''It was just that my agent would get calls from directors who would ask if I was available and seem excited when I was. Then, within 24 hours they would call back and say, 'Sorry, it's not going to work out.' '' Ironically, Begelman had lived down the forgery conviction and had become president of M-G-M by the time Robertson was signed for ''Brainstorm.'' When the picture was canceled by M-G-M after Miss Wood's death, Robertson felt as though a rug had been pulled out from under him. ''But my misfortune was nothing compared with the tragedy,'' he said. The day before Valentine's Day, the set of ''Brainstorm'' seemed like any other movie set - groups of seemingly aimless people lounging in clusters until galvanized into sudden and frantic activity. Between takes, someone passes around a pink, heart-shaped box of candy. Robertson lounges in corduroy pants and hacking jacket, because his character apparently rides his favorite jumper from 6 to 7 every morning and then shows up in his riding clothes at the laboratory he has founded. But beneath the surface, things are different. ''What is obvious is that what happened is never talked about,'' Robertson said. ''It's studiously avoided.'' Added someone who asked not to be identified: ''Everything's different. Because of the weirdness of her death.'' Miss Wood's death - in the middle of the night Nov. 29, when she fell while trying to step from her yacht into a dinghy - has, of course, caused changes in the script. A crucial scene that had not yet been shot, in which Miss Wood helped her husband, Walken, in an experiment has been redesigned so that Joe Dorsey, playing Walken's laboratory assistant, helps instead. Another important scene in a hotel room has simply been dropped. ''People kept saying that scene was crucial to the plot, but it wasn't,'' Trumbull said. ''Even if Natalie had performed it, I would have cut it out in the end. I've had the luxury of a two-month break in production, and that has allowed us to cut the fat, to pare the movie to the bone.'' But there are other necessary changes. In the movie, by bizarre chance, a character drowned. That scene, which coincidence has made ghoulish, will not be retained. And how can Trumbull handle some of Miss Wood's dialogue that was to have been rerecorded? On Stage 29, the battle is just beginning. ------------------------------ Date: 23 February 1982 13:49 est From: Boebert.SCOMP at MIT-Multics Subject: Japanese Society The best reference I have encountered on the feudalism/industrialism/ militarism subject is "Japan's Imperial Conspiracy" by David Bergamini. This is one of the few, if only, histories of Japan written by a Westerner who can read Japanese. The prose is excellent, the research appears impeccable, and most of the revelations about the events leading up to World War II are fascinating. It's out in paperback, and easy to find because its about 1200 pages long. Takes a bit of effort, since (as in Japan), everybody seems to be named Tanaka or Suzuki. I have spent a lot of time with Japanese engineers in and out of Japan, including participating in a multimillion-yen proposal effort (where you really get to know each other), and I find his analysis of Japanese character to be strikingly perceptive. Earl PS. Read the book and learn about the extraordinary homogenaety of Japanese society before you object to generalizations about the "Japanese character." ------------------------------ Date: Sunday, 21 Feb 1982 16:57-PST Subject: Spoiler warning: Revenge of the Jedi From: mike at RAND-UNIX Spoiler warning: information follows (possibly valid) about the new Star Wars film. From Variety, Thursday, Feb. 11, 1982: "Many employees at Lucasfilm don't even know it yet," admitted ROTJ producer Howard Kazanjian on the London longhorn, " but George (Lucas) has been in contact with Alec Guinness for several years. He's read this script and -- were happy to say he'll be back." All major characters from "Star Wars" and "The Empire Strikes Back" will also return in this $32,500,000 opus. .... As for Guinness, he'll work in March and appears "in the flesh." What's the explanation for Ben Kenobi's return from the dead? "Our 'dead' is a different thing," Kazanjian laughed... In addition to the regulars, many new, "interesting" mechanical characters will appear.... ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 11-Mar JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #28 *** EOOH *** Date: Thursday, March 11, 1982 8:09AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #28 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Thursday, 11 Mar 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 28 Today's Topics: SF News - Philip K. Dick Obituary, SF Books - SF Hall of Fame Vol. III, SF Movies - Brainstorm & Crack in the World & Superman & Star Trek II, SF Radio - HHGttG, SF Topics - Chinese Science Fiction & Interstellar Flight, Spoiler - Star Trek II ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 4-Mar-82 01:09:54-PST (Thu) From: INGVAX.kalash@Berkeley (Joe Kalash) Subject: Philip K. Dick died Tuesday Phil Dick died Tuesday after suffering a recent stroke. I have heard the the Locus memorial will (probably) be by Ursula K. Leguin. Joe ------------------------------ Date: 9 March 1982 21:17 est From: York.Multics at MIT-MULTICS (William M. York) Subject: obituary So why is it that I had to read Time to find out that Phillip K. Dick died this week? Few details are given . He died of a stroke in Santa Ana, CA. He was 53. ------------------------------ Date: 9 Mar 1982 0903-PST From: Paul Dietz Subject: RIP: Philip Dick For those that haven't heard, Philip Dick died last Tuesday. I was told that he had suffered a massive stroke some time before and died without ever regaining consciousness. ------------------------------ Date: 5 Mar 82 16:57-PDT From: mclure at SRI-UNIX Subject: Phillip K. Dick, Rest in Peace Our local SF shop, Future Fantasy, confirms that Phillip K. Dick died this week after suffering a stroke. Very unfortunate. In my opinion, Dick was the best "idea man" working in SF. His endings left a lot to be desired, but his fascinating ideas and treatment of paranoia and particularly schizophrenia, not to mention mind-altering substances, were marvelous. I've only read four of his books, but I found all of them to be top-notch, easily making mincemeat of the usual junk and space opera in SF. The titles are THE MAN IN THE HIGH CASTLE, THE THREE STIGMATA OF PALMER ELDRITCH, MARTIAN TIME-SLIP, and VALIS. When I want something thought-provoking, the first author I turn to is PKD. ------------------------------ Date: 6 March 1982 17:49-EST From: Landon M. Dyer Subject: SF Hall of Fame, Vol. III I just saw a copy of the Science Fiction Hall of Fame, Vol. III, in a local bookstore. It includes Vance's THE LAST CASTLE, MacCaffrey's DRAGONRIDER, and a host of other goodies. The bad news is that you have to shell out $3.95 for it. -Landon- ------------------------------ Date: 10 Mar 1982 1545-EST From: S. W. Galley Subject: hacking in "Brainstorm" Cliff Robertson lounges around the set of "Brainstorm" in a /hacking jacket/? Sounds like useful apparel for many of us! ------------------------------ Date: 1 March 1982 19:05 est From: Walters.SoftArts at MIT-Multics Subject: Crack in the World Boston area readers following the comments in SF-LOVERS on "Crack in the World" may want to note that it's scheduled for broadcast 3:10 a.m. Friday night, March 5th on channel 4 (WBZ-TV). ------------------------------ Date: 9 Mar 1982 15:37 EST From: Stevenson.WBST at PARC-MAXC Subject: Re: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #27 "The Superman I Movie has an internal inconsistency: while Superman is flying around reversing time... Michael Chastain" Aw, c'mon, not even Superman can reverse time! He was travelling back through time, so he could save Lois Lane while his earlier self was saving everybody else. Bill Stevenson ------------------------------ Date: 28 February 1982 1528-EST (Sunday) From: Roy.Taylor at CMU-10A Subject: HitchHiker's Guide Guide At long last, as local NPR stations air the Guide for the Nth time, my quest has succeeded. After thrashing my way back up the distribution hierarchy, I finally extracted the following publicity information from the frustratingly reluctant NPR Audience Services (!?) office: [my comments in brackets] "The Hitch-hiker's Guide to the Galaxy: A satirical send-up of mankind's foibles. This 12-part series follows the adventures of the last surviving earthling who is plucked away seconds before earth is demolished to make way for an intergalactic freeway. "Episode 1 -- Our hero, Arthur Dent, takes off on an epic adventure in time and space. Included is some helpful advice on how to see the Universe on less than 30 Altarian Dollars a day. [Make way for the bypass] "Episode 2 -- Our hero, Arthur Dent, after being saved from certain death during the demolition of Earth, now faces a hopeless choice between certain death in the vacuum of space, or finding something nice to say about Vogon poetry. "Episode 3 -- Our [redundant] hero, Arthur Dent, improbably rescued from doom by ['at the hands of' would be more accurate] the Vogons, experiences a mysterious missile attack from which there is no escape. [Infinite Improbability Drive] "Episode 4 -- Our hero, Arthur Dent, learns that Earth has been built by Nagratheans and run by mice. [Deep Thought] In the meantime, his hitchhiking companions are temporarily lost and confronted with a highly improbable force that threatens their lives. "Episode 5 -- Our hero, Arthur Dent, having been sent to find the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything, finds himself cornered by two Humane Cops who, it turns out, aren't really that humane. [Restaurant at the end of the universe] "Episode 6 -- Our hero, Arthur Dent, and his companions commandeer a stolen spaceship and are followed by an enormous fleet of battle cruisers. [Ravenous Bugblattar Beast of Traal] Amid their escape, Dent is stranded on Earth, 2 million years before its destruction. [Arc fleet of telephone sanitizers] "Episode 7 -- Zafod, in search of a mysterious Mr. Zaniwhoop, is captured and carried off to Frog Star, the most totally evil place in the galaxy. [Meanwhile, back at HQ] "Episode 8 -- Zafod, who escapes from the Total Perspective Vortex only because of his cosmic ego, attempts to decipher clues to rescue his companions from the past. "Episode 9 -- Dent and Zafod -- who is revealed to be President of the Galaxy -- manage to evade the Vogons, who are out to destroy the last Earthling as part of a galactic power struggle. "Episode 10 -- Landing on the planet of Brontitol, Arthur Dent encounters a race of bird people who worship an ancient statue of Dent discarding a lousy cup of tea. "Episode 11 -- Our hero, Arthur Dent, solves the mystery of the planet Brontitol: An uncontrolled proliferation of shoe shops apparently pushed the once-proud civilization into economic collapse. "Episode 12 -- Due to a fluke, Arthur Dent loses the answer to the Ultimate Question and becomes a fugitive with an unknown future. [My Lord, the existential cat] ------------------------------ Date: 5 Mar 1982 1843-PST From: Mark Crispin Subject: an interesting SF note... According to "Beijing Review", a weekly published in Beijing, China, there have been 4,300 popular-science books published in China between 1978 and 1980. Also, "since 1976, China has published 30,000 science fiction books. These include adventures in outer space, the world beneath the seas, prehistoric animals, the world of tomorrow, robots and synthetic creatures." Indirectly, Beijing Review admits the publications have not kept up with the demand; "there are always long lines at the doors of bookstores". The full article is about Popularizing Science in China by Li Ming, starting on page 20 in the March 1, 1982 issue. ------------------------------ Date: 2 Mar 1982 1132-PST From: WMartin at Office-3 (Will Martin) Subject: Spaceflight info of interest to SF-Lovers, I believe... Just ran through an accumulation of back issues of Electronic Engineering Times, and have the following items that may be of interest to the list: From the 1 Feb., 82 issue: NASA recently published a document titled "Space Astronomy Program Plan for the 1980's and 1990's" which discusses, among other areas, plans for interstellar flight. The Management Operations Working Group For Space Astronomy (MOWGSA) states, "An interstellar mission is envisioned in the 1990 to 2000 time frame. An actual unmanned interstellar encounter [THAT could mean ALL sorts of things! - WM] is projected for the latter part of the 21st century." "The following types of drive systems have been considered, and deserve further study: ion electric propulsion, in which heavy ions are created and then accelerated electrically; a magnetohydrodynamic drive, in which a stream of propellant passes through an electric current, creating self-induced magnetic fields which interact with the current to provide acceleration; solar sails, utilizing solar radiation pressure to provide a boost out of the solar system; continuous thrust nuclear propulsion and pulsed explosive nuclear propulsion." [This document may well be of interest -- you may be able to get a copy as an individual citizen just by writing NASA or your congressperson and asking for it. Or a public or university library designated as a government documents depository may have it, but the St. Louis Public library says they didn't get it because it wasn't published by the GPO. - WM] Other items of interest in this same column (DC Circuit, by Howard Roth): A study done by the National Science Board (part of the NSF) polled an unknown sample of people and came up with the findings that 58% thought that "scientific discoveries make our lives change too fast." Out of 13 areas of science and technology on which to spend tax dollars, health research was #1, but "discovering new knowledge about man and nature" and "exploring outer space" and "predicting and controlling weather" were #s 11, 12, and 13, respectively. [The other choices were not listed.] The other item in the column: The William Sword Co. of Princeton, NJ, is raising $1 billion to buy a space shuttle through a subsidiary, Space Transportation Co. The purpose is to serve industrial requirements for materials processing and R&D. This project could serve as a test case for involving large private investment in space. From the March 1 issue, same column: Soviet development of a space-shuttle-type winged reuseable spacecraft was acknowledged recently by the Soviet Embassy in Washington. The science and technology attache told an American Astronautical Society meeting that launch of the system could occur in about five years. Another article from one issue in this range discussed Soviet industrial activity in space -- the Soviets published a report on the subject which discusses materials melting phenomena and crystallization. Also mentioned are "giant mirror reflectors suspended in space that will help scatter the dark of the polar night in the streets of northern cities and produce nearly cost-free power." [An SPS? - WM] Will Martin ------------------------------ Date: Tuesday, March 11 1982 2:29AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Subject: SPOILER WARNING! SPOILER WARNING! The following message is the last in the digest. It provides some information/speculation about the upcoming movie sequel to Star Trek: the Motion Picture. Some readers may not wish to read on. ------------------------------ Date: 19 February 1982 02:56 est From: Schauble.Multics at MIT-Multics Subject: Clipping Service - Is Spock alive? From the Personalities column, by Vernon Scott (UPI) Mr. Spock: Is our favorite Vulcan dead or alive? Hollywood (UPI) -- Have they killed off Mr. Spock, the emotionless Vulcan science officer of the space ship Enterprise in the "Star Trek" sagas? Rumor is rampant in Hollywood that the saturnine, pointed-eared Spock has been blown away in "Star Trek II", the second movie based on the greatest cult TV series ever made. Trekkies the world over are in a swivet. Have the moviemakers killed off Spock who withstood ray gun attack by vicision hordes of Klingons and other intergalactic space heavies? Would any movie producer dare eliminate the most popular and beloved space alien in the history of the planet Earth -- Yoda of the "Star Wars" films not withstanding? The producers aren't talking. And neither is Paramount Studios. The closest and most reliable source of information in the Spock death mystery, which won't come to light until "Star Trek II" is released, is Leonard Nimoy who plays the inscrutable Vulcan. Nimoy waffled. Nimoy hedged. Nimoy was an unreadable as Spock himself. "Let me put it this way," Nimoy said pleasantly enough, "I think the ending is subject to interpretation. After all, what is death? Can it truly be defined where a Vulcan is involved?" The actor lighted a cigarette and narrowed his eyes speculatively. "If Paramount decided to go ahead with a second sequel to 'Star Trek', I could speculate that Spock could reappear because of several factors in the story line of the current movie. "Also, I can't remember a case of anyone dying in science fiction. They tried with Alec Guinness in 'Star Wars' but he popped up again as Ben (Obi-Wan) Kenobi when they made 'The Empire Strikes Back'. "They killed off Superman's father when they made the sequel but that was only because they couldn't afford to bring back Marlon Brando." Nimoy is delighted about playing Spock again and says, not that "I'm a little older, a little more resigned to these things," he's finally reached a point where he's unconcerned that he is so closely identified with the popular Vulcan. That may be because, unlike his earlier fears, his association with Spock has not interfered with other acting assignments. [The remainder of the interview is about Nimoy's other works, and is not transcribed.] ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 14-Mar JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #29 *** EOOH *** Date: Sunday, March 14, 1982 3:11AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #29 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Sunday, 14 Mar 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 29 Today's Topics: SF TV - Here's the Plot...What's the Title, SF Books - SYZYGY & Crichton & Verne, Humor - Dr. Dobb's Journal, SF Movies - Special Effects (Doug Trumbull) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 3 Mar 1982 1015-PST From: Wes Winkler Subject: Here's the plot, what's the title... I recall an old TV sitcom about a couple of astronauts sent through a timewarp (?) to the stone age. The series might have been named "It's About Time." Anybody know exact titles, dates, stars, basic plot, etc.? Wes Winkler ------------------------------ Date: 4 March 1982 03:43-EST From: Stuart M. Cracraft Subject: plot query "It's About Time", mid-60's. A real dud. ------------------------------ Date: 08-Mar-1982 From: AL LEHOTSKY AT METOO Reply-to: "AL LEHOTSKY AT METOO c/o" Subject: The Jupiter Effect I just finished reading "SYZYGY" by Pohl, which is okay when you are facing a 6 hr. transcontinental plane trip --- especially when you are LEAVING L.A. My micro-review is that it reads just like a "mainstream" disaster novel. Pohl keeps hinting that the world is going to end, but by the end of the book, you don't particularly care one way or another. What I was wondering was if we could all get together and wave goodby to California when it falls into the ocean next week as a result of the "Jupiter Effect". I'd guess that somewhere near Denver ought to be safe. It might solve a lot of problems, as IBM and the east-coast mini mfgrs wouldn't have to worry about inroads from Silicon Valley. The tidal-wave would sink all those Japanese freighters full of steel, Toyotas and color TV's, and Las Vegas would make a GREAT seaport! But, we'd no longer have Lauren's limitless stock of TV and movie trivia and the networks would be forced to re-run old Battlestar Galactica and Leave It to Beaver episodes, so I guess we ought to spend some time coming up with a way to shore up the California coast. \Perhaps a few Pak Protectors could come up with something.... let's get Niven to work on it...\ ------------------------------ Date: 10 March 1982 21:07 est From: SSteinberg.SoftArts at MIT-MULTICS Subject: Crichton and Verne The SF writer I could best compare Crichton with is good old Jules Verne! While Verne was much more prolific their formulae are identical. The technology is approximately contemporary with a few years thrown in to get the bugs out. It works surprisingly well. The characters are largely stick figures and the story is episodic narrative. I would compare CONGO with Village in the Tree Tops or Measuring a Meridian. ------------------------------ Date: 11 Mar 1982 (Thursday) 0942-EDT From: PLATTS at WHARTON-10 (Steve Platt) Subject: Dr. Dobb's Journal -- where are we? ...from the editorial, Dr. Dobb's Journal, March 1982 (just rec'd today)... "But as Heinlein noted in his great Foundation trilogy, mutants are unpredictable." Which universe am I in, anyway? -Steve ------------------------------ Date: 22-Feb-82 20:20:31 PST (Monday) From: Newman.ES at PARC-MAXC Subject: Special effects, Doug Trumbull in Technology Review The February/March '82 edition of TECHNOLOGY REVIEW has a number of articles on Special Effects, including an extensive interview with Doug Trumbull. Trumbull said he originally intended to make the upcoming "Brainstorm" with his Showscan process, in which film is shot and projected at 60 frames per second instead of the usual 24 fps. Unfortunately he had no luck in getting the theatre owners to agree ("we don't want to change over our projectors and screens because the rest of the movie industry is not making movies that way"). He also commented extensively on the failure of Star Trek's "previous special-effects team" (presumably Robert Abel). He feels that they overcommitted themselves to an untested, complex, motion-control technology to the exclusion of everything else: "They actually said that they wanted to do the entire project through this technology and never have to go on a stage or look through a camera lens. And that was a total denial of aesthetic judgments that, to me, play the larger role in the equation." (Not that the final film showed much aesthetic judgment anyway, but the lack of a plot wasn't Trumbull's fault.) /Ron ------------------------------ Date: 24 Feb 1982 1450-PST From: Craig W. Reynolds from III via Rand Subject: Re: Special effects, Doug Trumbull in Technology Review In my opinion, that article in Technology Review had some serious problems. It seemed like the writer had read all of the back issues of CINEFEX and rewritten them. For instance, he mentions triple-I but he has never been out to talk with us. (Presumably since he was writing for the MIT alumni mag, he would have wanted to mention that some of the software systems we use were developed at MIT, etc.) The interview with Trumbull seemed very unfair and one sided. His remarks about Abel & Ass. were completely incorrect. Richard Taylor is drafting a letter to the editor to refute several of the writer's points. As Ron said, the final film was lacking in some aesthetic aspects, and while the plot wasn't Doug's fault, some of the visual short-comings were! I also thought that the whole article was somewhat misdirected, he talked a lot about motion control photography and little about computer simulation. Computerized motion control is pretty old hat, that stuff was written about when Star Wars was being made, the new state-of-the-art stuff was described in less that one page. Articles should be appearing soon in Newsweek, Life and Pop Science about "the making of TRON" - coming soon to a newsstand near you! TRON should be out on July 9, 1982 (so rezz up, bit brain!) -Craig ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 17-Mar JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #30 *** EOOH *** Date: Wednesday, March 17, 1982 2:48AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #30 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Wednesday, 17 Mar 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 30 Today's Topics: SF Fandom - Hugo Award Nominations Deadline Extended, SF Books - Story Line Query, SF News - George Scithers and IASFM, SF Movies - Revenge of the Jedi, SF TV - HHGttG & It's About Time, SF Topics - ESP, Random Topics - The Jupiter Effect ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 15 March 1982 05:13-EST From: "Richard H.E. Smith, II" Subject: Hugo Award Nominations Deadline Extended I just received a press release from ChiCon IV [the 1982 World SF Convention] which announced that the deadline for Hugo Award nominating ballots would be extended to March 31. In ChiCon's Progress Report III, the deadline was given as March 15; various fans have commented that this didn't give foreign members of the convention much time to nominate. The press release cited "computer problems" as the reason for the delay. As FORMER "Head of the Department of Data Processing" for ChiCon, I can only express my own rather biased opinion that "that trekkie that replaced me doesn't know beans". I haven't found out [yet] what the actual problem was. Just a reminder, you must be a member of ChiCon to nominate (and later vote) for the Hugo's. You can also send in your money ($50, I believe) with your Hugo ballot if you wish. SF Chronicle's March issue contains a copy of the Hugo ballot if you can't find one anywhere else. ------------------------------ Date: 29 Jan 82 23:38-PDT From: mclure@SRI-UNIX Subject: SF story-lines A while back I recall hearing something about a fixed set of story-lines for SF novels/stories. Does anyone have the complete set available on-line? ------------------------------ Date: 6 Mar 1982 1002-PST Subject: George Scithers From: Mike Leavitt I just noticed that Scithers is no longer Editor of Asimov's magazine. Anybody know the story on this? ------------------------------ Date: 15 Mar 1982 09:21 PST From: STOGRYN.ES at PARC-MAXC Subject: Mystery Movie Set for Lucas From the LA Times - Wednesday Calendar, March 10, 1982: Mystery Movie Set Amid Arizona Dunes Is it a bantha? Is it the Millennium Falcon? Is it "Star Wars"? If the people at Lucasfilm Ltd. know what exactly is taking shape on the desert floor 10 miles west of Yuma, Ariz., they're not saying. Original reports said the movie set now under construction amid massive sand dunes is for a George Lucas - financed horror file, "Blue Harvest." But knowledgeable sources insist that the set is really for the third chapter in Lucas' enormously popular "Star Wars" saga, "Revenge of the Jedi," now filming in England." The above is the caption below a picture showing a football-sized framing structure, like the back of any movie set, with sage brush in the foreground and towering dunes behind. However, from the atlas: Ten miles west of Yuma, Arizona is Southern California not, as quoted, "Arizona Dunes." This mini-Sahara area would be a great place to film more scenes representative of Luke's home planet Tattoine. At the end of The Empire Strikes Back, Luke said he would meet Calressian and Chubacca on Tattoine. Those areas around the original Sahara are really not in the most stable, or at least the friendliest, hands. I hadn't heard of "Blue Harvest." Did I miss it's discussion? Enlighten me. Steve ------------------------------ Date: 15 Mar 1982 2341-CST From: ZELLICH at OFFICE-3 (Rich Zellich) Subject: "Hitchhiker" TV series scheduled in US From the April 82 issue of LOCUS: Douglas Adams says his third "Hitchhiker" novel, LIFE, THE UNIVERSE, AND EVERYTHING, will be published in August. ABC has bought rights to the books and is planning a television series for fall release. Before the end of April, a pilot episode will be filmed and twelve other shows will be outlined. The first two books were based on scripts Adams wrote for a radio show which became a hit in England. A six-part British television series was done, but ABC is having the show re-adapted for American tv because they want it open-ended. Stu Silver is the writer, the director is Ted Flicker, and the show's designer is cartoonist Ron Cobb. Computer graphics, a high point of the British tv version, will be done for the ABC series by the same person who produced the British ones. ------------------------------ Date: 16 March 1982 11:40 est From: Boebert.SCOMP at MIT-MULTICS Subject: It's About Time Ran from 11 Sep 66 to 27 Aug 67. Marked the sad, last network appearance of Imogene Coca, the funniest lady of the Fifties. Earl ------------------------------ Date: 15 Mar 1982 11:38:21-EST From: csin!cjh at CCA-UNIX Subject: IT'S ABOUT TIME Barely survived one season, I think 66-67 (may have been 65-66). So bad that halfway through they had the astronauts invent some way of getting back to modern times, \with/ the cave family (and how they fitted six people into a Gemini-type capsule was never explained either...). The only cast member I can recall was Imogen Coca, a comedian of considerable reputation in the 50's and early 60's, as the mother of the cave family (which was appallingly stereotyped---thickheaded father, dominant mother, sexy featherheaded daughter (platinum blond, of course) and her wiseass kid brother). Strong candidate for the Golden Turkey award for worst SF TV series ever (LOST IN SPACE and CATTLECAR DISLEXICA at least had something for fx). ------------------------------ Date: 16 Mar 1982 2054-PST From: Lynn Gold Subject: It's About Time The series had a two-year run (I believe -- I don't have the exact dates on me, although they can be obtained in several TV trivia books available at your local bookstore). It was about two astronauts whose space mission blew up, causing them to travel backwards in time to the stone age. In the second year of the series, they managed to bring back this family they befriended into the 20th century with less-than-good results for either the family OR their ratings. --Lynn ------------------------------ Date: 15 March 1982 22:35-EST From: Charles F. Von Rospach Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #29 Here's the plot.... Regarding Wes Winklers request, the series was 'It's About time'. The Science Fiction Encyclopedia notes it as a 1966 series by Sherwood Schwartz, the person who thought up 'Gilligans Island'. The astronauts were played by Frank Aletter and Jack Mullaney, both of which never worked in the industry again ( from shame... *chortle*). The cave people included Imogene Coca, Joe E. Ross, and Mike Mazurski. It lasted one season. Thank God for small favors... ------------------------------ Date: 15 Mar 1982 1006-EST From: S. W. Galley Subject: It's About Time Once again, Alex McNeil's /Total Television/ (Penguin, 1980) provides the answer: IT'S ABOUT TIME (CBS) 11 Sept. 1966 - 27 Aug. 1967 This sitcom took its stars on a journey to the Stone Age and back again. It starred Frank Aletter as Captain Glenn McDivitt (Mac) and Jack Mullaney as Hector, two astronauts who broke through the time barrier and landed in a prehistoric world where they met and befriended a Stone Age family; in midseason they brought the family with them into the modern era. The Stone Agers included Imogene Coca as Shad; Joe E. Ross as Gronk, her mate; Pat Cardi as Breer, their son; Mary Grace as Mlor, their daughter; Cliff Norton as Boss, the unfriendly leader of the cave people; Kathleen Freeman as Mrs. Boss; Mike Mazurki as Clon, Boss's henchman. Frank Wilcox joined the cast in midseason as General Morley, Mac and Hector's commanding officer. ------------------------------ Date: 3 February 1982 21:11-EST From: Richard Pavelle Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest I wish to begin a discussion on ESP and where better than SF-LOVERS. On January 25th Russ Burgess gave a "demo" on Hypnotism and ESP at MIT. I wish to mention up the latter part of his act. He showed what he claimed to be his abilities of telepathy and precognition and I believe that a large percentage of the audience of 500 or so believed he has the POWWWERRRRR. His act is rather like Kreskin's. He began with a warmup and then proceeded to his first trick in which he apparently forced a preselected card on a member of the audience. He claimed only a 90% success rate but the trick succeeded. Shortly thereafter cards were picked up which had been distributed to perhaps 10% of the audience before the show. We had been asked to write our names and some non-trivial questions regarding the future on the cards. He then taped shut his eyes and placed 3 blindfolds over the tape. His eyes did appear to be useless to him at this stage. He then selected cards from a tray with a mystique which implied some cards are more sensitive than others. A typical example of his act was then to say "do the initials RG mean anything to someone". Someone then responded and Burgess proceeded to give some fairly substantial information about the person. This was, in some cases, the full name and birthdate. In addition he answered some questions on the card as accurately as if he had read them. He also said some questionable things such regarding a grandmother's stomach ache and a brother who hurt his foot. In each case to person was not aware such might be the case. He chose enough cards to convince me that he had not planted these people in the audience. My theory about the manner in which he gives personal information presupposes that he does not plant people. I believe that in the week preceding his demo he has people who dig up information about attendees to his show. I think Kreskin does something similar. If anyone has another view, here is your chance to tell it. And if you believe in telepathy and precognition lets hear from you. ------------------------------ Date: 6 February 1982 17:19-EST From: Stuart M. Cracraft Subject: esp The trick described is a standard one in the repertoire of many mentalists. ------------------------------ Date: 16 March 1982 16:52 est From: Schauble.Multics at MIT-MULTICS Subject: The Jupiter Effect Comment to Al Lehotsky, about California falling into the Pacific: It'll never happen. It's help on a a network of Bermuda grass roots that extend at least into Texas. (I guess you have to have lived with it fully appreciate this.) Paul ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 18-Mar JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #31 *** EOOH *** Date: Thursday, March 18, 1982 1:28AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #31 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Thursday, 18 Mar 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 31 Today's Topics: SF Books - Here's the Plot...What's the Title & Book Covers & New Laumer Series, SF Fandom - Hugo Award Nominations Deadline Extended, SF News - George Scithers and IASFM, SF TV - HHGttG, SF Topics - ESP ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 05-Mar-1982 From: JONATHAN OSTROWSKY AT GALAXY Reply-to: "JONATHAN OSTROWSKY AT GALAXY c/o" Subject: here are the words, what's the story? This is a variation on here's the story, what's the title?" A friend is trying to track down a long piece of fiction (novella, perhaps) that he thinks appeared in Astounding about 25 years ago. He doesn't remember the plot, just some of the words used in the story--nexialist, varish, and skren (as in, "So-and-so would varish off into the corner and skren for a while"). I've have no idea what this might be from. Can anyone help? --Jonathan O. ------------------------------ Date: 17 Mar 1982 01:26:30-PST From: pur-ee!pur-phy!retief at Berkeley Subject: SF novel covers? Does anybody know where I can get posters or prints of science fiction novel covers (that is, other than at 'cons). Please mail answers to me directly. Dwight Bartholomew ------------------------------ Date: 17 Mar 1982 11:25 PST From: Stewart at PARC-MAXC Subject: New Laumer Series I saw a hardcover "Star Colony" by Keith Laumer in the local store Printers Inc. Claims to be part one of a trilogy. Copyright 1981. Anyone know anything about it? -Larry ------------------------------ Date: 17 Mar 1982 0537-PST From: Zellich at OFFICE-3 (Rich Zellich) Subject: Re: Extended Hugo deadline The "computer error" was reported by LOCUS to be that the ballots were sent only to those of us who had joined prior to last September. They did a fast remailing to the rest of the convention members and extended the deadline so the second group would have time to get their ballots back. Deadline is now the 30th instead of the 15th of March. -Rich ------------------------------ Date: 17 Mar 1982 0741-PST From: Zellich at OFFICE-3 (Rich Zellich) Subject: Re: George Scithers & IASFM As I recall, he was working not quite full-time from his home city (not New York) and they wanted him to come in to New York where the rest of the editorial staff was and work full time. He didn't want to do that, and had some other things he had been wanting to work on, so departed IASFM. I think only 2 issues have been put out under the new editor. -Rich ------------------------------ Date: 17 Mar 1982 11:01:36-EST From: csin!cjh at CCA-UNIX Subject: Re: Scithers leaving IA'sSFM. This happened several months ago (I recall hearing from some people who were just back from Philcon, which was December 4-6 last year). The exact sequence of events will probably never be known, since George at least didn't leave in a huff and Davis publications is notoriously closemouthed. Officially, George resigned; his place was taken (at least for the time being) by a Davis staffer. The rest of the Philadelphia crew (Schweitzer) also departed and the magazine is now being edited in New York City. Suggested causes for Scithers' departure: - He was fed up with the lousy cover art and his loss of control over it. - He wasn't a "team player" by Davis standards. - He refused to move into NYC offices (this would be a part of the above) when Davis wanted operations under closer control. Publicly, nobody is saying anything; given what is being done with both ANALOG and IA'sSFM and given that George has been involved with SF forever and is fairly conservative in tastes, I doubt that his departure was entirely amicable. ------------------------------ Date: 17 Mar 1982 11:06:39-EST From: csin!cjh at CCA-UNIX Subject: Re: HHG TV series I'm appalled. Will American TV \\never// learn the gross limitations of "open ended" (i .e., cyclic episodic) entertainment? And given that it's ABC, the fountainhead of crassness, I expect that they'll ruin it. Watch for them to transplant the beginning to some random midwestern town (thereby losing most of the impact). On the other hand, if they just stick with the line of the radio series as it appeared, they \could/ be open-ended without ruining it (the twelfth episode doesn't exactly come to a firm conclusion). . . . ------------------------------ Date: 17 Mar 1982 10:24:38 EST (Wednesday) From: Bernie Cosell Subject: Being blindfolded A good magician's eyes are NEVER rendered useless. Laymen would be (in fact, are) astonished at how secure-looking a blindfolding can appear and still allow the `mentalist' to see at least a little bit (which is always enough). I don't know about the particular demonstrations you saw, nor have I been tracking James Randi's relentless revelations, but I have paid some attention to `the amazing Kreskin' -- mostly due to his TV exposure. Mostly everything I have ever seen Kreskin do on TV has been garden-variety magical effects packaged up pseudo-miracle, pseudo-ESP routines that on a strictly showmanship basis are quite excellent. For ESP fans, though, there is no substance whatever in the stuff he does - it is clearly and explicitly the stuff of magicians... /Bernie ------------------------------ Date: 17 Mar 82 10:43-PDT From: mclure at SRI-UNIX Subject: Kreskin, Randi At least Kreskin identifies himself as a mentalist-magician rather than passing himself off as the real thing as does Uri Geller and a host of other magicians. Randi strikes me as a *very* useful type of magician to have around. Such hoaxers as Geller must be exposed. ------------------------------ Date: 17 March 1982 22:14 est From: Frankston.SoftArts at MIT-MULTICS Reply-to: Frankston at MIT-MULTICS (Bob Frankston) Subject: Re: ESP As I've mentioned before, the Skeptical Inquirer is a journal that covers such things. I don't have the copy with me at the moment, but you can probably find it in New York. I was annoyed to see that MIT was implicitly endorsing this anti scientific drivel. It might have been OK were it not billed as a demonstration of real live ESP. ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 18-Mar JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #32 *** EOOH *** Date: Thursday, March 18, 1982 11:30PM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #32 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Friday, 19 Mar 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 32 Today's Topics: SF Books - Query Answered Book Covers & "Call Me Joe", SF Movies - Conan the Barbarian, SF Topics - ESP ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 03/17/82 22:21:16 From: RMC@MIT-MC Does anyone know when the next book in the "Thomas Covenant, Unbeliever" series, by Stephen Donaldson, will appear? I'm from his home town (Albuquerque), but I don't know anyone who has any unique knowledge about his plans. Thanks. rmc@mit-mc chavez@harv-10 ------------------------------ Date: 18 Mar 1982 11:10:30-EST From: csin!cjh at CCA-UNIX Subject: reprints of covers Are available only intermittently and depending on who the artist is. Most aren't available at all. Kelly Freas and Michael Whelan sell large prints of their cover paintings themselves (Whelan as Glass Onion Graphics); they can be seen at many conventions (Freas stuff tends to be wholesaled to other hucksters such as Rusty Hevelin). Ctein used to do very fancy work (costing $30-40) of selected covers (the reissued Known Space series, the magazine cover for A KNIGHT OF GHOSTS AND SHADOWS) but I don't know if he has kept it up. ------------------------------ Date: 18 Mar 1982 11:07:39-EST From: csin!cjh at CCA-UNIX Subject: skren & varish For Jonathan Ostrowsky: I don't recall ever coming across "nexialist", but "skren" and "varish" are the verb forms of two additional senses discovered in himself by Joe, the egotistical robot in Henry ("Lewis Padgett") Kuttner's Gallagher series (collected as ROBOTS HAVE NO TAILS, I think reissued by Del Rey). ------------------------------ Date: 18 Mar 1982 1155-EST From: Paul Czarnecki Subject: varish, skren, & nexialist I don`t recognize "nexialist," but I am fairl;y sure that "skren" and "varish" are from a story called "Call me Joe." It is about a drunken super-inventor who creates things and promptly forgets about him, a invisible brown animal who drinks his liquor, a large blue plastic frob, and of course Joe, his super robot. I have know idea who wrote it (I can find out) but I do know that it was reprinted in some greatest hits anthology called "Best SF of 1949" (or maybe 1948). - Paul Czarnecki ------------------------------ Date: 16-MAR-1982 13:21 From: KERMIT::T_PARMENTER Reply-to: "KERMIT::T_PARMENTER c/o" Subject: Vulgar, Rip-snorting, Fee-Fi-Fo-Fum I saw the sneak preview of "Conan the Barbarian" this weekend. They don't call him the Barbarian for nothing. Conan is played by Arnold Schwarzenegger the Hunk. As seen on Johnny Carson, Arnold is a charming, witty, handsome fellow, and I feared he might try to play Conan the same way, but his Conan is the same broody, slit-eyed, head-chopping, beast-bashing, priest-smashing idiot that Howard wrote about and that Frank Frazetta paints. It isn't camp and it isn't Steve Reeves as Hercules either; it's the way its supposed to be. The movie has a refreshing absence of plot, meaning very few ridiculous plot devices, but the general idea is that James Earl Jones is the high priest of the snake cult of Set and must be stopped at all cost. (No Thoth-Amon in the movie; Jones's character is called Thulca Doom, or something like that.) There isn't a single conventionally pretty woman in the show, but there are plenty of tough beauties, including Valeria the Thief who pretty much out-barbarians the Barbarian. This one's not for the kiddies, kids. It's got multiple beheadings, two or three sacrifices of bare-breasted virgins, fantastically staged battles, snakes, sex (including a corker between Conan and a roadside lamia), spirits in the dark, and a good deal of ketchup. On the other hand, my wife is as squeamish as anybody, and no fantasy fan, and she liked the movie. There was less than five minutes of boredom in the whole thing. My only negative comment is that it was poorly edited with abrupt transitions and scenes that didn't end, but stopped. Maybe that means it really was a sneak preview. Anyway, if you like this sort of thing, "Conan the Barbarian" is definitely that sort of thing. The audience consisted of not only fantasy fans, but also body builders, and a good proportion of black people. One side effect of this was that different people murmured and gasped at different things. The house was sold out on the basis of one day's advertising and the audience was strongly predisposed to like the movie. The cheering started when the Universal logo came on the screen. (Dino deLaurentis was the only name hissed. L. Sprague deCamp [hiss] was listed as technical adviser. I didn't spot Roy Thomas's name.) Pico review: Better than both Superman movies together. ------------------------------ Date: 18 Mar 1982 11:14:15-EST From: csin!cjh at CCA-UNIX Subject: Re: ESP demo But the show wasn't "endorsed" by MIT; it was put on by the Lecture Series Committee, a student organization whose motto has been quoted (not entirely fairly) as "Anything for a buck." ------------------------------ Date: 17 Mar 1982 15:07:16 EST (Wednesday) From: Bernie Cosell Subject: Re: Kreskin, Randi By the way: I believe that Randi has been scrupulously careful about NOT `exposing' anyone. What he mostly does (that I've seen, at any rate) is show that he can, by strictly non-paranormal means, duplicate any `demonstration' he has seen. He tries to avoid maligning any particular person or any particular demonstration (perhaps Uri Geller excepted) lest he spend the rest of his life defending libel suits and the like or otherwise damaging his credibility. And I agree that having a knowledgable person injecting well-reasoned and substantiated grains of salt is important. /Bernie ------------------------------ Date: 17 Mar 1982 1312-PST From: Cabral at SUMEX-AIM Subject: ESP Certainly an intensely interesting SF field, but what about "facts"? A number of SF stories have dealt with such documentation. Two that I particularly enjoyed are Marion Z. Bradley's House Between the Worlds and Heinlein's short story Lost Legacy in New Horizons (I hope those titles are correct ...). Both deal with the documentation of personally observed phenomena. In each case the main characters KNOW the phenomena are real, but persistent doubting by skeptics makes life difficult. For "real life" we sometimes hear of studies by various research groups on psychic phenomena. And for every one there are plenty of people willing to point out how the data (if positive) could have been faked. The enormity of the available claims, though, seems like it ought to carry some validity. The message of the SF books, to me, say that the only acceptable documentation must be personal experience of such phenomena, or else something so incredibly undeniable that the current state of the science would be forced into the future. So, for the skeptics, here is my best defined observation of such phenomena: On a Saturday morning in West LA, I was debating getting out of bed and starting the day. One of the chores in front of me was washing my car. The most convenient place to do that was on the street out front, however my car was parked in back. The streets generally being overcrowded, I didn't see much hope for getting a space. Just then an odd notion crossed my mind. I envisioned the following scenario. I would hear a car start up, would look out the window to discover it was parked right in front, and would then dash to my car to move it and claim the new space. The thought was so clear that I reviewed it mentally. Thus I am sure that it was subsequent to this review that I heard a car door slam. This was too coincidental. I raced to the window in time to hear a car start up and then see it leave the exact parking place I needed. The subsequent dash to claim the space felt like I was just doing something I had rehearsed, which of course I had, mentally. (Which also raises the discussion of time paradox, but later). Okay skeptics, what's the explanation? Art ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 24-Mar JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #33 *** EOOH *** Date: Wednesday, March 24, 1982 4:46AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #33 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Tuesday, 23 Mar 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 33 Today's Topics: SF Fandom - Golden Age Fanzines, SF Books - Star Colony & The One Tree & "A Robot Named Joe"/"Ex Machina" & The Voyage of the Space Beagle, SF Movies - Conan, SF Topics - ESP ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 18-Mar-1982 From: CHIP NYLANDER AT EIFFEL Reply-to: "CHIP NYLANDER AT EIFFEL c/o" Subject: 40's and 50's fanishness I'd like to know if there are any SF fan clubs or 'zines that cater to a special interest if SF from the 40's and 50's, or that have an antiquitary orientation to the genre. (I like the old stuff). Can anybody out there tell me? /chip nylander ------------------------------ Date: 19 March 1982 16:04-EST From: John Howard Palevich Subject: Keith Laumer's Star Colony I've read "Star Colony". Nano-review: Aweful. Micro-review: Really bad. I love Laumer's old stories (The Retief series, the Bolo series, "The Glory Game", "The War Against the Yucks", "House in November", etc.) and I think I've read most of his works. But Star Colony is just junk. It has a pseudo-history beginning & ending tacked around it to make it seem to be a compilation of the history of a particular planet. It's really a mish-mash of random events, with the only good section being a reprint of his "Greylorn" story. I read the whole thing in one sitting, and I kept hoping that it would get better, but it never did. What's going on with Laumer? Except for "The Ultimax Man", which he wrote for Analog a few years ago ('78?) all his recent work has been garbage. I'll admit that his best works all have the same plot (derelict rises to become superman) but I really liked them. Nowadays his characters are just cardboard, and his plotting non-existent. Grumble. Jack Palevich ------------------------------ Date: 19 Mar 1982 08:14 CST From: Johnston.DLOS at PARC-MAXC Subject: Re: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #32 All I know is that over a year ago, following the release of the first book of volume two, a lady here wrote Donaldson expressing her enjoyment of the book and asking about further plans. He responded, saying that the second book was already finished, but publisher problems (I don't remember exactly what, but something to do specifically with his book) were delaying it. She has said recently that she intends to write again and see if any more information can be gleaned. Rick ------------------------------ Date: 20-Mar-82 1220-EST From: B.J. Herbison Reply-to: Ben Lotto Subject: thomas covenant the unbeliever the next book in the series should be out sometime next month in hardcover. as far as the paperback edition is concerned, i really can't say (and i don't think anyone can at this point) when it'll be out. -ben ------------------------------ Date: 19 Mar 1982 0918-MST From: David Kohrn Subject: re: Thomas Covenant query I was in the University Bookstore recently, and they were taking orders for the hardcover edition of @u"The One Tree", "coming in April". $14.95. David ------------------------------ Date: 22 Mar 1982 16:10:52-EST From: csin!cjh at CCA-UNIX Subject: Re: varish, skren, and nexialist Careful about that confusion! "Call Me Joe" is by Poul Anderson, and tells about studying Jupiter through the eyes of biological constructs with the help of electronically-aided telepathy; one of the Gallagher stories \\may// have been "A Robot Named Joe" (don't have the book here with me to check). ------------------------------ Date: 23 Mar 1982 2127-EST From: Paul Czarnecki Subject: Re: varish, skren, and nexialist Mea culpa. When anthologized, the title was not "Call Me Joe" but "Ex Machina" (Here the author was still listed as L. Padgett) It was originally printed in the April 1948 Astounding. But the big question still remains. What is nexialist? ------------------------------ Date: 19 Mar 1982 09:19 PST From: Hallgren at PARC-MAXC Subject: Re: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #32 "Nexialism" is "the science of applied whole-ism" according to A. E. Van Vogt in "The Voyage of the Space Beagle". Elliot Grosvenor is its' lone practicer on an inter-galactic exploration expedition. This book is one of Van Vogts' best, containing "Black Destroyer" and another near classic short story written about the adventures of the Space Beagle. Good space opera with the alien monsters viewpoints well developed. The next volume of the "Second Chronicles of Thomas Covenant", THE ONE TREE, is due out in April in hardbound. I saw the cover at a Walden Bookstore, and it depicts two of the (I think) eloheim in much the same style as the previous cover. Price $14.95. Can hardly wait. Clark H. ------------------------------ Date: 19 Mar 1982 1004-PST From: Tom Wadlow I don't recall 'skren' and 'varish' but 'nexialist' is from A.E. VanVogt's 'Voyage of the Space Beagle'. A nexialist is someone who has mastered all scientific disciplines and integrated them into one. Oddly enough, now that I think about VotSB, I have a vague recollection that somebody animated one of the stories for TV. Does anyone know more?? ------------------------------ Date: 22 Mar 1982 2211-PST From: Alan R. Katz Subject: Nexialist, etc. Nexialism appears in "The Voyage of the Space Beagle" by A.E. Van Vogt. It is some kind of science of everything and the hero aboard the Beagle is a Nexialist (and is usually looked down upon by the rest of the crew but seems to save the day). I don't remember if the other words (skren and varish) are in there, but they could be. Also, other Van Vogt books may also mention Nexialism as well as skren and varish. The book is pretty good, not great, and is actually a series of adventures aboard a starship. It is copyright 1939, 1943, 1950; and was released by manor books in 1976 and is appears in new editions every now and then. Alan ------------------------------ Date: 22 Mar 1982 2136-PST From: Per Bothner Subject: Nexialist query; Conan I'm pretty sure that nexialism was the interdisciplinary super-science described in A.E. vanVogt's "Voyage of the Space Beagle" (also published under a title something like: "Voyage: Interplanetary"). The space Beagle was supposed to boldly go where no man had gone before. It was chock-full of scientific specialists who knew nothing about fields other than their own. Nexialism was a new discipline which trained the practitioner to synthesize information from multiple fields to solve new and unexpected problems. In essence, a Nexialist is a generalist, or an updated version of the renaissance man. Naturally the scientists were highly sceptical of this new pseudo- science. The plot consists of a series of encounters with various monsters, each more dangerous than the previous. By recognizing the danger, acting on it, and finding a solution when none of the specialists can, the hero wins acclaim and recognition for his field. Note that already then we can see vanVogt's penchant for fascile solutions - he would later support dianetics, general semantics and other pseudo-sciences. Like most of the early vanVogt novels, it was based on a series of short stories in the Pulps (in this case 4), which were later on glued together into a novel (or more). The novel is a definite classic, and a very enjoyable read, perhaps vanVogt's best. A must for all sf-lovers. [ Thanks also to Peter Cudhea , Ken Harrenstien , and hjjh at UTEXAS-11 for submitting answers to this query. -- Jim ] By the way, Conan's antagonist is Tulsa Doom. In reality (or rather, according to Howard), Tulsa Doom was the bad guy in a number of the the King Kull stories. In these, Kull was an exile from primitive Atlantis ---- By his strength and cunning, he becomes king of the major civilized (or rather decadent) country, and has to maintain his position against supernatural and other threats. Admittedly not too different from Conan, but Kull is a much more introspective character. There is only one book of short stories. I consider them excellent, and generally better than most of REH's other stuff, including Conan. --Per Bothner ------------------------------ Date: 20 Mar 82 17:46-PDT From: mclure at SRI-UNIX Subject: Re: Misc about James Randi, Kreskin, and ESP Nope. Kreskin explicitly calls himself a mentalist. He did this on his old program and every time he's on a talk show these days. ------------------------------ Date: 21 Mar 1982 2215-EST From: Steven J. Zeve Subject: Re: Misc about James Randi, Kreskin, and ESP Oh well. I knew that Kreskin billed himself as a mentalist nowadays, I was just under the impression that in the past he claimed to be a pyschic. Steve Z. ------------------------------ Date: 19 Mar 1982 08:33 CST From: Johnston.DLOS at PARC-MAXC Subject: Re: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #32, ESP Why do you say it was "too coincidental"? People often get in their cars and go somewhere on a Saturday morning. It was a happy coincidence, but not an impossible one. It's also, I think, highly *likely* that you can picture a very desirable situation; that doesn't make it paranormal. For a similar story with a different ending, see "Broca's Brain" by Carl Sagan. He relates a story where he woke up in the middle of the night with the certainty that a dear friend (or relative) had died. He was afraid to call the person for fear that he might be injured getting up to answer the phone in the middle of the night. It turned out that the friend was fine and is alive many years later, but Sagan admits that had the friend actually died, he would have been quite sure that he had had a paranormal experience. So I don't expect to convince you that you did not, just that it *could* have indeed been coincidence. Rick ------------------------------ Date: 19-Mar-82 9:10:22 PST (Friday) From: Pettit at PARC-MAXC Subject: Re: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #32 The explanation from this skeptic is that is was simply coincidence, the same explanation which applies to all those people who escaped death because they heeded a premonition that their plane would crash or the Titanic would sink, etc. If you add up all the possible-but-improbable wishes, daydreams and forebodings you have, and calculate the fraction of them which come to pass, I'll bet it is well within the statistical limits of coincidence. But we have a tendency to just take for granted those thoughts which don't come true, and be awed by the uncanniness of those which do. Come now, if you had had that vivid odd notion, and no car had pulled away, would you have taken it as evidence that you have no powers of ESP? No, you would simply have dismissed it as an idle wish. -- Teri ------------------------------ Date: 20 March 1982 00:54 est From: Walters.SoftArts at MIT-MULTICS Subject: ESP In reply to Cabral at SUMEX-AIM's request for a skeptic's explanation of his ESP experience: would the incident be at all memorable if the parking place had not suddenly appeared? Incidents such as these tend to stick in the mind, while the 'failures', the hunches that never come true, do not. I once had a strong feeling when walking home that someone was trying to call me. I ran home and found the phone ringing. Because of this experience, I later paid attention when this sort of feeling recurred, and unfortunately never was rewarded with a following phone call...so that I eventually concluded that there was a good chance that a coincidence had merely combined with a strong desire to believe. In this line, I remember reading some months ago that a leading physicist (I believe it was Nobel prizewinner Alvarez) reported that one morning he suddenly remembered the name of someone he had not thought of in many years; minutes later he read the name of his friend in the obituary column of the morning paper. His response was to calculate how frequently such an event might occur. The argument went something like this: Suppose that 3 or 4 times a year I suddenly remember the name of someone I have not thought of for a long time. On each of those days, what is the probability that the person actually dies close to that time? Within the same day, say one in 10 to 20,000 (depending on the average age of your acquaintances), within the same hour, about 1 in 250 to 500,000...now throw in another factor for the chance that you'll actually find out about it in time to remember your sudden memory, and you may get an estimate of something like a chance of one in 1 million that you'll have such and event in a given year (I think this this is close to the number he got). In other words, every year in this country this particular coincidence must happen to some 200 or 300 people, no doubt convincing many of them that they have had a freak ESP episode. And since this is only an analysis of one coincidence, there must be many, many more coincidences of different types that also function as "positive proof of ESP" to the people involved. Note that this does not disprove that ESP exists. Frankly, I wouldn't be too surprised myself if it did...but is important to realize how many coincidences do happen before admitting them as evidence. ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 25-Mar JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #34 *** EOOH *** Date: Thursday, March 25, 1982 8:04PM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #34 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Friday, 26 Mar 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 34 Today's Topics: FTP - Science Fiction Convention Calendar, SF Books - Forward & The Many Colored Land & The Golden Torc & The One Tree, SF Fandom - Golden Age Fanzines & ChiCon IV & Lunacon, SF Magazines - Amazing, SF Movies - Star Trek II & Dark Crystal, SF TV - HHGttG, SF Topics - ESP, Spoiler - Star Trek II ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Friday, March 26, 1982 2:29AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS-REQUEST at MIT-AI Subject: FTP - Science Fiction Convention Calendar The latest version of the Science Fiction Convention Calendar is now available for FTP'ing. Everyone interested in reading this material should obtain the file from the site which is most convenient for them. If you cannot do so, please send mail to SF-LOVERS-REQUEST and we will be happy to make sure that you get a copy. Please obtain your copies in the near future however, since the files will be deleted in one week. A copy of the material will also be available upon request from the SF LOVERS archives. Thanks go to Rich Zellich for providing this material, and to Alyson L. Abramowitz, Roger Duffey, Richard Lamson, Doug Philips, and Bob Weissman for providing space for the materials on their systems. Site Filename MIT-AI AI:DUFFEY;SFLVRS CONS CMUA TEMP:CONS.TXT[X440DP0Z] PARC-MAXC (text) [Maxc]SFL.Con-Cal SU-AI CONS.TXT[T,JPM] MIT-Multics >udd>sm>rsl>sf-lovers>sf-calendar.text DEC VAX/PDP-11 KIRK::DB1:[Abramowit.SF]CONS.TXT [Note: You can TYPE or FTP the file from SU-AI without an account.] ------------------------------ Date: Wednesday, 24 March 1982 09:28-PST From: KING at KESTREL Subject: foreward Does anyone know whether Forward is going to write again (after Dragon's Egg)? Dick ------------------------------ Date: 03/22/82 1116-EDT From: J. Baldassini Subject: Book review Review : "The Many Colored Land" and "The Golden Torc" by Julian May. These two books (published in hardcover as one volume by Nelson Doubleday) comprise the first two-thirds of "The Pliocene Saga". The story begins in the 23rd century. There is a galactic civilization known as the Galactic Milieu, which the people of Earth have recently joined. This high-tech civilization has FTL, gravity-control, and advanced metaphysics. The people of Earth are neither the most nor the least capable of the citizens of the milieu, but there are the inevitable misfits, those who cannot conform to total personal fulfillment society of the 23rd century. For these people, there is an option. Early in the century, an Earth scientist had discovered a method of time-travel. His device opened a window into the Pliocene, a time approximately 6 million years ago. Those wishing to drop out of the current civilization were allowed to do so, subject to such restrictions as no weapons, greater than 28 years old, and no metaphysical capabilities. The first book opens by introducing us to eight characters who, for various reasons, will be making the trip into the Pliocene. Due to the nature of the time portal, not much is known of the state of affairs in the past, but it is assumed that, since about 100,000 people have already been sent back, there is a human civilization of some kind, and that these eight can fit into it after some adjustments. It turns out, however, that 6 million years ago the Earth had been colonized by humanoid aliens from another galaxy (called exotics), and these exotics had established a civilization of their own, one in which humans were slaves, controlled by "torcs" (a metal necklace similar in operation to the Lenses of Doc Smith). The remainder of the first book and all of the second are devoted to following the activities of these eight characters as they become involved in the rebellion of the human slaves against their masters. Recommendation : I liked it. Good characterization (and lots of them), strong plot, plenty of swords and sorcery (well, paranormal powers, actually), elves and dwarves, heroes and villains on both sides, as well as humor, pathos, and irony. If you enjoy books like "Glory Road", "The High Crusade", "Empire of the East", (or the Rings or Thomas Covenant trilogies), then you may want to try these. The name of the third book is (or will be) "The Nonborn King". ------------------------------ Date: 24 Mar 1982 0828-PST From: Paul Dietz Subject: The One Tree I heard a rumor about The One Tree: the reason it is late is because at some point the only copy of the manuscript was stolen. It had to be rewritten from memory. Another rumor has it that the manuscript was incorrectly sent to Argentina in some luggage. Anyone know the truth? ------------------------------ Date: 24 Mar 1982 11:30:33-EST From: csin!cjh at CCA-UNIX Subject: Thomas Covenant 2.2 It was alleged at Lunacon (held last weekend near New York City) that Donaldson wants more money before he'll release parts 2.2 and 2.3. ------------------------------ Date: 24 Mar 1982 11:29:05-EST From: csin!cjh at CCA-UNIX Subject: Re: 40's and 50's fannishness (per Chip Nylander) Several possibilities: - The Los Angeles Science Fantasy Society is celebrating its 48th anniversary this year; - The MITSFS is over 30 years old; - There's this organization called First Fandom (but membership is restricted to those who have been involved for a long time). Your best bet if you simply want to get hold of old SF is the MITSFS, as they have a 99.44%-complete collection of magazines of the past 40+ years; they even have circulating copies of ASTOUNDING for most of the period you're interested in. [ MITSFS = M.I.T. Science Fiction (Fantasy?) Society, based (obviously) at M.I.T. -- Jim ] ------------------------------ Date: 18 Mar 1982 15:13 PST Subject: ChiCon IV Membership From: RNewman at PARC-MAXC What address do you send to register for ChiCon IV? Rob [ Chicon IV, Box A3120, Chicago, Il. 60690 -- Jim ] ------------------------------ Date: 25 Mar 1982 1212-EST From: Thomas Galloway Subject: Lunacon info/Star Trek II/Amazing/Dark Crystal I was at Lunacon (a big regional SF con in Joisey) last weekend, and since i only saw 2 sfl people i knew, and no one seemed to recognize my sfl t-shirt on saturday, here's a rundown on stuff which i heard which should be of general interest. Star Trek II will be opening on June 4th. The title is currently The Vengence of Khan, and all of the cast except Majel Barrett is back, plus several new characters. For some minor details about the plot, see the spoiler at the bottom of the digest. Amazing/Fantastic has been sold to TSR Hobbies (the D&D people). George Schithers (sp?) late of Issac Asimov's is now the editor. Amazing will be going bimonthly within the next couple of issues, and there may be a format change. I asked Schithers as to whether there would be an increased emphasis on gaming type stories and fantasy, and he said there would be a mixture of types. The impression that i and the princeton sf club people i was hanging out with had was that TSR would want more of these types of stories, but he's oops he'd want more sf. Dark Crystal is the work of Jim Henson and Frank Oz. It will be opening in October in about five major cities and November in the rest of the country. According to the Con Artists person doing the slide show, the characters are not being called Muppets, but if it looks like a duck, etc... Frankly, i wasn't too impressed by the plot of characters, but then i don't like the Muppets all that much either. tom GALLOWAY@YALE (ARPA) galloway @ yale-comix (USENET) ------------------------------ Date: 22 Mar 82 15:04-PDT From: mclure at SRI-UNIX Subject: Mr. Roarke in new Trek film From Variety, 17 March 1982, p. 5; "New 'Trek' Sells 'Khan'" The second "Star Trek" feature has been retitled "Star Trek: The Vengence of Khan" and will be launched nationally June 4, according to Paramount Pictures distribution president Frank G. Mancuso. Rather than continue where the original 1979 film left off, the second installment picks up narrative thread of the popular vidshow and introduces Khan, a renegade from the 20th century who returns three centuries later to make trouble. The villainous Khan was featured in a 1967 episode of the vidseries portrayed by Ricardo Montalban, who again essays the role in the film. ----- As I recall, the episode referred to is 'Space Seed' and was decent. The topic is eugenics. ------------------------------ Date: Fri Mar 19 12:52:41 1982 From: decvax!watmath!bstempleton at Berkeley Subject: The Hitchhiker's Guide. I have been aware of the English production, and have been hoping it would come over here so I could see it. Does this reworking by the ABC mean we won't see the real on on PBS or the like? Has anybody seen it on North American TV? What about the new BBC pay-tv station that is supposed to come? ------------------------------ Date: 20 Mar 1982 2018-EST From: Steven J. Zeve Subject: Misc about James Randi, Kreskin, and ESP 1) For those who are interested, James Randi has written an interesting book called "Flim-Flam" (about $20 in hardback). Which talks about his experiences in debunking claims of ESP and other "psychic" powers. The book is generally well written and tends to show his opinions of the people involved (including Uri Geller). I believe that Mr. Randi's opinion of Uri Geller is based on the unscrupulous way in which Geller has cheated and betrayed people who have believed in him and relied on and trusted him. Including (apparently) Geller's own manager who to this day believes in Geller. 2) I believe that Kreskin use to bill himself as a psychic and not as a mentatlist. 3) Please, let's not confuse magician, mentalist, and psychic. The terms refer to different things entirely. Very few professional st ------------------------------ Date: 19 March 1982 18:32-EST From: Daniel Breslau Subject: esp Although I don`t disbelieve in ESP per se (though I don`t believe in it, either), one thing I hold important is NOT to take any one chance happening, no matter how unlikely, as evidence for it. Asimov, perhaps quoting someone else, has pointed out that the LACK of coincidences in life would be astonishing. I myself have experienced a number of weird happenings, which might be due to paranormal effects --or may not be. There`s no way to correlate the number of cases of an odd event happening, with the number of *chances* for that, or some other, odd event to occur. But it`s that impossible correlation which is needed to show that any one event is of paranormal nature. Dan Breslau ------------------------------ Date: Friday, March 26 1982 2:29AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Subject: SPOILER WARNING! SPOILER WARNING! The following message is the last in the digest. It provides some information/speculation about the upcoming movie sequel to Star Trek: the Motion Picture. Some readers may not wish to read on. ------------------------------ Date: 25 Mar 1982 1225-EST From: Thomas Galloway Subject: Star Trek II SPOILER (about a 5 on a scale of 10) Details given out at a Lunacon slide show... They changed the uniforms again. Now everyone is wearing red jackets with a fair amount of braid and different colored turtlenecks depending on branch of service. The Enterprise interior sets have been brightened up a bit over the first movie, but are otherwise unchanged. Somehow Chekov has jumped over Sulu, Uhura, Lt. Riley, Spock, Scotty, etc, and is now Captain of an Enterprise class starship, the Orion. He and another captain, played by Paul Winfield are on some kind of secret mission to the planet where Kirk and Co. dropped Khan, the 1996 genetic superman, back in the 2nd season. The climate has changed since then, and many of his people have been killed, so he is rather ticked off at Kirk and the Federation. After Khan captures the two starship captains, he somehow takes over the Orion, and heads for a Federation space station where a device with the potential for ultimate good or ultimate evil is being built. The Enterprise, with original crew, is told to stop the Orion. There is a battle between two starships, with effects by Industrial Light and Magic. There is supposed to be more action and character development than in STI. One example is that in at least five separate scenes, Kirk is shown carrying a hardcover of A Tale of Two Cities under his arm. Don't ask. At least three new characters are introduced, two of which are supposed to stick around for a while. The first is a Lt. S____ (sorry) a half-Romulan half-Vulcan female. It wasn't explained how this happened. Also, the space station is commanded by one of Kirk's old flames. The final character is a guy named David. David is the son of Kirk and the aforementioned old flame. Having inherited from his father, he puts the moves on the Vulcan-Romulan. Looks like it'll be interesting....The producer is Harve Bennett, and the director is Nicholas Meyer. tom galloway ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 30-Mar JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #35 *** EOOH *** Date: Tuesday, March 30, 1982 7:09AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #35 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Monday, 29 Mar 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 35 Today's Topics: FTP - Science Fiction Convention Calendar, SF Fandom - What is CREATION?, SF Topics - ESP ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Monday, March 29, 1982 2:29AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS-REQUEST at MIT-AI Subject: FTP - Science Fiction Convention Calendar An addendum to the announcement in the last issue (#31) concerning the latest version of the Science Fiction Convention Calendar. It is now available on the E-NET for TOPS-20 sites. Once again, thanks go to Rich Zellich for providing this material and to Paul Young for providing space for it on his system. Remember that a copy of the material will also be available upon request from the SF LOVERS archives. Site Filename DEC TOPS-20 KL2137::FTN20:CONS.TXT ------------------------------ Date: Friday, 26 Mar 1982 11:33-PST From: obrien at RAND-UNIX Subject: CREATION? I sucked over my copy of the Convention Calendar, and noted that this outfit called CREATION in Glen Elyn, NY is putting on a whole slew of cons all over the country. Who are they? What do they WANT? ------------------------------ Date: 17-Mar-82 21:02:17 PST (Wednesday) From: Hamilton.ES at PARC-MAXC Reply-to: Hamilton.ES Subject: UCLA short course: Science and the Paranormal UCLA Department of the Sciences presents: SCIENCE AND THE PARANORMAL: PROBING THE EXISTENCE OF THE SUPERNATURAL Time: 7 Wednesdays, 7:30-9:45 pm 14 April - 26 May Place: Wadsworth Theatre, Veterans Admistration Center, West Los Angeles (west of 405 and north of Wilshire, between Federal and Bonsall) COST: Noncredit fee $65; UCLA Student Noncredit Fee $25; Credit Fee $85. Tickets for single lectures @ $10.50 each will be sold at the door if space permits. For more info write or call: Dept. of The Sciences, UCLA Extension, P.O. Box 24901, Los Angeles 90024, (213) 825-7093. You may enroll by phone (Visa and MasterCard accepted) by calling (213) 825-9971 or 825-9981 14 April: James "the Amazing" Randi, "Search for the Chimera" 21 April: Daniel Cohen, "Monsters and Romantic Zoology" 28 April: Edwin C. Krupp, "Recasting the Past: Pyramids, Lost Continents, and Ancient Astronauts" 5 May: Robert Sheaffer, "The UFO Verdict: Examining the Evidence" 12 May: Larry Kusche, "The Other Side of the Bermuda Triangle" 19 May: Barry Singer, "Limits of Human Rationality" 26 May: George O. Abell, "Astrology and Cosmic Influences" --Bruce ------------------------------ Date: 20 March 1982 21:31 est From: SSteinberg.SoftArts at MIT-MULTICS Subject: The Amazing Randi I just finished reading Martin Gardner's book, Science: Good, Bad and Bogus which largely consists of reprints of articles on the various supersciences. It was not as good as his Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science but Uri Geller was one of the prominent players . Uri claims to derive his powers from a computer in a flying saucer orbitting the Earth. This saucer is tied up to some galactic civilization which resembles the one in Doris Lessing's recent "science fiction" (I'll use quotes here) books. Randi has repeatedly denounced Uri and has challenged him to perform any of his "stunts" under any conditions which could even be considered controlled. So far he has gotten Uri to concede that he often does "cheat" in performances and does use conjurors tricks but he actually can manipulate matter under some circumstances. Supposedly Uri failed to impress Johnny Carson who used to be a stage magician in his youth. The book covers the SRI reports and the book Superminds which deals with a group of children who could bend spoons was latter discredited when they decided to watch the children perform the bending. (They did by applying manual force.) All told there is STILL no solid evidence for ESP. No one has been able to repeat anything and no one who has gotten any results has even tried to limit simple cheating. There is no preponderance of evidence, only a preponderance of anecdote which is notoriously unreliable (Nope, Jews don't have horns). Then again, there is a strong cultural bias in favor of belief in ESP. A recent survey written up in the Skeptical Inquirer had 15-25% of a class of college students believing that a stage magician who wore a priest-like robe and sounded religious was actually performing magic, even though he was introduced as a stage magician and his "act" was presented as prestidigitation. P.S. Gardner's section on Sir Arthur Doyle, the creator of Sherlock Holmes, is great. It seems Doyle insisted that fairies could be photographed even after the little girls who had been responsible confessed that they had drawn the fairies on cardboard and photographed them. ------------------------------ Date: 26 Mar 1982 0748-PST From: Lynn Gold Subject: Kreskin was NOT a psychic! Kreskin used to bill himself as a MENTALIST on his TV show, and used to have a disclaimer at the end of each show saying that he was not out to foster belief in the supernatural or ESP. He was doing his act strictly for entertainment. --Lynn ------------------------------ Date: 19 March 1982 16:55-EST From: Allan C. Wechsler Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #32 This moderately long flame was prompted by a message to a previous digest, giving an anecdote, presumably as positive evidence for precognition. Science is done these days according to a fairly strict protocol. This protocol may be right and it may be wrong, it may be fair or it may be unfair, but it does have one big advantage. It's hard for outright hoaxes to become established as accepted facts. Some babies may get tossed out with the bathwater. There may be important truths out there that will of necessity be missed by scientists working according to traditional methods. I guess scientists today are willing to risk that in order to protect themselves from hoaxers. I can't say I entirely disagree. One part of the current protocol is that scientific evidence for theories has to be gathered by experiment. For a sequence of actions to be a valid experiment, it has to be planned and described in advance, in writing. The description has to include an unambiguous explanation of possible outcomes, especially which outcomes will be considered to confirm or refute the motivating theory. Anecdotes about psychic experiences simply can't be accepted as scientific evidence. At best, they may suggest motivating theories for subsequent controlled experiments. "I was walking down the hall, and thought suddenly of Amy Camus, whom I hadn't seen in three months. I had a strong mental image of a red-and-blue scarf she used to wear. Suddenly, Amy came out of the ladies' room just down the hall from me wearing that very scarf!" This is not evidence for precognition. There are too many other possibilities. Whether they are likely or not isn't relevant, since there isn't enough information in the anecdote to judge probabilities. Possibilities that occur to a careful experimentalist are: 1. Informant is lying, or deliberately concealing information in order to dramatize a mundane occurrence. 2. Informant subliminally registered the scarf at an earlier instant, and subsequent thoughts were triggered by the subliminal perception. 3. Informant has inadvertently confused the order of mental and physical events. 4. The events actually occurred as described, but informant represents a population large enough that such events are likely to occur in some period of time. Without an enormous amount of information not present in the anecdote, a sane judgement of probabilities cannot be made. ------------------------------ Date: 22 Mar 1982 16:16:20-EST From: csin!cjh at CCA-UNIX Subject: your esp anecdote I could throw off half a dozen explanations, beginning with the unreliability of personal observation, but the most obvious one (based on dream research) is that you weren't actually awake; available evidence (which I can attach several personal experiences to) suggests that certain stimuli perceived by a sleeper can be melded in seconds into a dream that seems to take much longer. I went through chunks of the JOURNAL OF PARAPSYCHOLOGY while doing a paper on psychokinesis; the only positive conclusion was that any such powers exist solely on an incredibly finely divided basis (all of the evidence for PK is basically statistical over hundreds of trials with many different people) and are fundamentally uncontrollable. ------------------------------ Date: 25 Mar 1982 1115-PST From: Jwagner at OFFICE Subject: ESP I think everyone has experienced deja vu at some time or other, and many attribute it to some kind of psychic phenomenon akin to ESP. I heard another explanation, however, although I can't remember where; I hope someone else out there may have some facts. Someone once explained to me that deja vu, rather than a "sixth-sense" event, is really a neurological tick involving crossed nerve paths between the brain's centers of eyesight and awareness. This person, I can't remember who, said certain neuron channels in the brain occasionally become mixed so that one becomes aware of seeing something before one actually sees it, giving the false impression of being in a place at some earlier time. It's like an echo effect: light hits the retina, but the person becomes aware of seeing it before the message goes to the brain's sight center. But finally the message does go to the sight center, and the person becomes aware of seeing the light again, so the person is already aware of what he or she is now seeing. Since I know little of neuro-physiology, psychology or parapsychology, this explanation seems plausible to me. Has anyone else heard of this? Does anyone know more about it? Jim Wagner/jwagner@office ------------------------------ Date: 19 Mar 1982 0701-PST From: WMartin at Office-3 (Will Martin) Subject: ESP (?) Example I perceive this discussion as an opening for everyone to contribute "My favorite ESP experience", even if it isn't so intended... Here's mine: Though this happened about 15 years ago, it sticks in my mind... I was in my dorm room, late at night, listening to some distant radio station (AM clear channel) prior to falling asleep. It was one of those shows where they played soft music and interspersed it with mood-setting comments and readings from the announcer (like Venus's show on WKRP, to give a modern analogy for those of you who grew up in the television age...). A piece of music was played and suddenly the thought came into my mind that the announcer would now read a poem I knew ("High Flight", by John Gillespie Magee, Jr -- "I have slipped the surly bounds of earth, and danced the skies on laughter-silvered wings..." or something like that). Sure enough, that's what he read. I would appreciate a categorization of this in the ESP terminology; was it "Precognition", in that I mentally knew something would happen prior to it happening, or was it "Clairvoyance", in that I picked the poem title out of the announcer's mind as he prepared to read it? [Of course, I have no idea if the program was live, though they tended to be, I believe. It could have been all on tape and I think it is difficult to mind-read magnetic tape...] There are non-ESP explanations for it, too, of course -- the simplest is that I was thinking just the same as the announcer, and, knowing that poem, just felt that it should now be read in line with the mood-setting music and comment which had preceded that point in time. Somehow, though, I find my thinking weird enough that it is harder to accept someone else thinking exactly the same as I than it is to look for an exotic explanation like ESP. This is marginal at best to SFL, but the digests have been sparse lately anyway... Here's thinking at you, Will Martin ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 30-Mar JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #36 *** EOOH *** Date: Tuesday, March 30, 1982 8:15AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #36 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Tuesday, 30 Mar 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 36 Today's Topics: SF Movies - Here's the Plot...What's the Title & Raiders of the Lost Ark & Star Trek II, SF Fandom - MITSFS, SF Books - Here's the Plot...What's the Title & Robots Have No Tails & The Lucifer Key & Roderick & Forward, SF Topics - Extraterrestrial Intelligence, Spoiler - Star Trek II ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 26 Mar 1982 10:52 EST From: Denber.WBST at PARC-MAXC Subject: Here's the (movie) plot... I saw a short movie in a high school science class and wish I could remember the name/origin. It was basically a demonstration of the scale of the universe. It starts with a shot of some guy lying on the ground. The camera pulls straight *up* to show he's on a golf course, and there's a DC-8 next to him. We start to accelerate until the plane is just a dot. The whole earth comes into view. Two clocks are running at the bottom of the screen, one showing earth time, the other our time. There's also an odometer. Still accelerating, the moon goes flashing by, and the earth gets smaller. All the planets pass at ever increasing rates and the sun gradually disappears. The clocks are going nuts; the units on the odometer switch to light years. The whole thing takes five or ten minutes and eventually ends somewhere in intergalactic space at warp 8 or some such. Then the entire process is reversed and compressed into about 15 seconds . The effect was quite startling (but maybe it wouldn't be now, like a lot of these things). Anyway, we end up at the beginning, but now the camera zooms in on the guy's hand (he's still there) and we do the same thing (a la Fantastic Voyage) only getting smaller and smaller. The animation in that part wasn't as satisfying, but as a whole it was very well done. National Film Board of Canada perhaps? [ I believe this movie was called "Powers of Ten" -- Jim ] Anyway, *that* reminds me of a story where this guy discovers one day that he's shrinking. He gets smaller until he drops right through subatomic particles of wherever he was standing and discovers he's in another universe (all contained in some atom of universe #1). Anyway, there's this infinite recursion, but I don't remember how it ends. [ This story appeared in Isaac Asimov's anthology of science fiction from the 1930's, "Before the Golden Age." Unfortunately, the title escapes me as well. -- Jim ] - Michel ------------------------------ Date: 26 Mar 82 8:49-PDT From: mclure at SRI-UNIX Subject: Re: Here's the (movie) plot... I believe that was narrated/conceived by the famous MIT scientist Phillip Morrison. I'm sure that Lauren@Ucla-Security has more information about title/year/etc. ------------------------------ Date: Tuesday, March 30 1982 2:29AM From: Jim McGrath Subject: Oscars for Raiders of the Lost Ark SPECIAL ACHIEVEMENT SOUND EFFECTS EDITING Michael Kahn. VISUAL EFFECTS Richard Edlund, Kit West, Bruce Nicholson, Joe Johnston. SOUND Bill Varney, Steve Maslow, Gregg Landaker, Roy Charman. ART DIRECTION Art Direction: Norman Reynolds, Leslie Dilley. Set Decoration: Michael Ford. ------------------------------ Date: 29 Mar 1982 14:49:59-EST From: csin!cjh at CCA-UNIX Subject: MITSFS = M.I.T. Science Fiction Society. (So far as I know, LASFS is the only group to espouse "Science Fantasy".) ------------------------------ Date: 24-Mar-1982 From: JOHN FRANCIS AT EIFFEL Reply-to: "JOHN FRANCIS AT EIFFEL c/o" Subject: Joe, the Proud Robot Further information on Henry Kuttners stories about Joe the robot. The collection of all the Gallagher (the inventor) and Joe stories is called 'Robots Have No Tails', and contains the following stories :- The Proud Robot Gallagher Plus The World is Mine Ex Machina Time Locker The first of these stories (The Proud Robot) can also be found in the collection 'The Best of Henry Kuttner' (or 'The Best of Kuttner 1' in the English two-volume edition), and in the 'Great SF Stories' series Volume 5 (1943) credited to Kuttner's pseudonym of Lewis Padgett. I do not know if any of the other stories appear anywhere else - they are not in any of the other collections or anthologies in my library. ------------------------------ Date: 29-MAR-1982 22:00 From: REX::MINOW Reply-to: "REX::MINOW c/o" Subject: The Lucifer Key, a novel by Malcolm MacPherson This thriller, published in 1981 by E. P. Dutton, probably qualifies for the sci-fi label. After all, it's set in 1987. It is the story of Stark Rousseau, a "brilliant but naive" computer scientist who devises a formula that lets him break in to any computer system, including the top secret Pentagon crisis evaluation computer. The bad guys steal the formula, putting the fate of the world in the balance . The young handsome hero falls in love with the beautiful Merril Thornton Fox, granddaughter of the inventor of the computer, who subsequently had a change of heart and is now campaigning for more control over these dangerous instruments. A few paragraphs should give you some feel for the extraordinary quality of writing in this book: "Merril prided herself on her independence; she had graduated cum laude from Vassar and slipped easily into the modeling business. She had another ten years before the wrinkles set in ... but even now the job left her feeling empty. Though it paid well for her body, it paid nothing for her mind.... She knew somewhere deep inside that she, too, could have made a contribution to science. If only she had not been sidetracked by the glamor and easy money of modeling. ... With her grandfather's influence, perhaps it was not too late for her to start anew on her abandoned path: Merrill had studied computer science and had sufficient training in the subject to try for a master's degree. Later, our hero is demonstrating how easy it is to break into a Pentagon system. I won't ruin your digestion by reproducing the computer program he types in, but, as he inserts a "BREAKER" and "STEALER" program into the IBM 3081, "General Colombo drew in a breath. What Rousseau was doing also was beyond his ken, but he had to acknowledge the power of the genius. Rousseau was inventing an exceedingly complex program. Colombo doubted if there was another person anywhere who could do the same. Fascinated, Colombo felt a chill of apprehension. Working steadily, Stark was now entranced, focusing at the peak of his concentration on the parameters of the problem. He was transforming himself into pure mind: His breathing slowed, his blood pressure and body temperature lowered. "The BREAKER will change the entry point of the REP [Re-entrant processor]," he said. "It moves to a jump at the end of the REP. And because of the IBM 3081's memory management, a number of unused words at the end of the last block allocated to our REP should remain.... ... [General] Church guessed that Rousseau, within a space of forty-five minutes, had demolished the finest computer defense in America. Enough already; the people are cardboard, the writing wooden, but there is more than a germ of truth in the author's suggestion that computers are vulnerable to penetration and a criminal could cause an innocent person to be jailed or given incorrect medical treatment . Sure wish he could write, though. Martin Minow ------------------------------ Date: 29-Mar-1982 From: STEVE LIONEL AT STAR Reply-to: "STEVE LIONEL AT STAR c/o" Subject: John Sladek's "Roderick" It's not everyday that someone who is not a professional book reviewer gets to read a book before it is printed, but right here in black and white it says "First printing, April 1982" and it's still March. Well, I'm glad to have had the advance peek. My first introduction to John Sladek was when I picked up his "Mechasm" (also published as "The Reproductive System") some years ago. I remember that reading it put me into sort of a daze, since Sladek's dialogue rarely focuses on what one person is saying but instead timeslices a crowd. On top of this, his characters frequently daydream on a completely irrelevant topic, which makes following things a bit tough. It's worth the effort, though. Sladek really brings across the essence of wierdness that is all around us, and has a good time doing it. "Roderick" (subtitled "The Education of a Young Machine") is billed as "Volume 1 of the Roderick the Robot Trilogy". It has been previously (1980) been published in Great Britain, but I don't know if the rest of the series has also appeared. Roderick is a robot (natch) who was the result of a project at the backwater University of Minnetonka. It seems some NASA bureaucrat needed a way to finance his hobby, which was collecting WWII aircraft (and an airport to hold them). He told the U of M that NASA wanted a robot dog for their Venus probe, and to order all of the parts from certain suppliers. These firms were fronts for the bureaucrat, who skimmed off the overcharges on the parts to supply his habit. Actually, the dog was just to fool "them" (you know, the Army), and what he really wanted was a real robot person. Eventually, the swindle was discovered, but not before the U of M succeeded in building a robot boy, Roderick. The remainder of the book tells how Roderick is sent off to various "foster homes", and adopted as a real boy by a nice family. He's sent off to school where everybody think's he's just a handicapped human (his metal body is regarded as sort of an iron lung). Nobody believes him when he says he's a robot. This is where the going gets good, as Sladek ribs both public and parochial education. Along the way, Roderick gets into a serious discussion of Asimov's Laws of Robotics, and comes up with some twists that the Good Doctor hadn't thought of. An extra treat comes in the form of a murder mystery (in a book which Roderick is reading) which you (the reader) are asked to solve. The answer's in the back. There's some discussion of computer science, and the evils it entails. For example, this excerpt (which is otherwise irrelevant to the plot): "This a.m. I picked up a coupla their magazines, got a list here somewhere of some of the kinky words they use, strong sex angle running right through it, listen to this, "bit", "byte", "RAM", how about those? "Gang punch", "flip-flop", "input", what do you think that really means, huh? "Stand- alone software", how about that? "Debugger", you can't make it plainer, and even the company names, how about Polymorphic Systems, how about The Digital Group? Or Texas Instruments, ever wonder what a Texas instrument is? Or a Honeywell? IBM, says a lot there..." I enjoyed "Roderick" much more than "Mechasm", mainly because in the latter half of the book it wasn't so much effort to follow the dialogue! There are also some awful puns (which I am fond of). For example, while Roderick is in parochial school, he is eager to learn more about the "metallic conception", since he thinks it might relate to him. I eagerly await more of the trilogy. Steve ------------------------------ Date: 26 Mar 1982 09:28 PST From: RNewman.es at PARC-MAXC Subject: Re: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #34 Dr. Robert Forward has written one short story which appeared in Omni. In addition there will be a book published by Del Ray Publishing probably in early 1983. Rob ------------------------------ Date: 25 Mar 1982 08:54 EST From: kooy.Henr at PARC-MAXC Subject: Extraterrestrial Intelligence In the March issue of Physics Today there is an interesting discussion on the possibility of finding extraterrestrial intelligence, that I think would be interesting for SF-LOVERS to read. Specifically the article by Leonard Ornstein, a professor of pathology at Mount Sinai hospital, is very enlightening. He concludes that investing in a search for extraterrestrial intelligence looks like placing a bet on a dead horse, as opposed to people like Sagan, who claim that finding life somewhere has a "fair chance" of success. Hanne Kooy Xerox Corp. ------------------------------ Date: Tuesday, March 30 1982 2:29AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Subject: SPOILER WARNING! SPOILER WARNING! The following message is the last in the digest. It provides some information/speculation about the upcoming movie sequel to Star Trek: the Motion Picture. Some readers may not wish to read on. ------------------------------ Date: 26 March 1982 11:52-EST From: Daniel F. Chernikoff Subject: SPOILER WARNING -- Star Trek II Concerning the comment that "somehow Checkov jumped over Sulu and Ohuru" to captain his own starship: In Star Trek I, wasn't Checkov some sort of "Captain in training"? I know they made some sort of comment about that during the first scene he was in, on the Bridge. Anyone remember? -Dan ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 2-Apr JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #37 *** EOOH *** Date: Friday, April 2, 1982 2:52AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #37 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Friday, 2 Apr 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 37 Today's Topics: SF Movies - Extra-Terrestrial & Powers of Ten, SF Books - "He Who Shrank", SF Topics - ESP, Spoiler - "He Who Shrank" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 31 Mar 1982 0009-PST From: Daul at OFFICE Subject: NEW FILM (INFO WANTED) Does anyone out there know anything about a film called EXTRA-TERRESTRIAL? I believe it is to be released this year. Any info would be appreciated. --Bill ------------------------------ Date: 31 Mar 1982 14:06 EST From: Sewhuk.HENR at PARC-MAXC Subject: Re: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #36 Jim is right it is called "Powers of Ten" is currently playing as a permanent exhibit at the Ontario Science Centre in Toronto, Canada. The time scale corresponds to time dilation by increasing your velocity one order of magnitude each 10 sec. As you approach/exceed the speed of light you see the relativistic effect on time with respect to the earth. Most of the footage is actual pictures until you leave the local group galaxies. The compression is the whole thing played backwards at 1 per order of mag velocity change per second. The trip starts from a man laying on the beach in Miami out then back through his skin to the nucleus of a carbon atom. All in all, it is worth seeing... Dave ------------------------------ Date: 30 Mar 1982 1646-EST From: Bob Krovetz Subject: movie query The movie is indeed "Powers of Ten". It is shown continuously in the Powers of Ten Theatre at the National Air and Space Museum in Washington. ------------------------------ Date: 31 March 1982 08:01-EST From: James M. Turner Subject: Powers of Ten Ah yes, "Powers of Ten". I first saw that film at the Ontario Science Center about 7 years ago. Left quite an impression on me. It did a fantastic job of demonstrating the contrast between the very large and the impossibly small. This film pops up everywhere, and has even been shown (in a abbreviated form) on 20/20. The best part of the film wasn't so much the pictures themselves as the "odometer". The basic premise is that starting 10 meters off the ground, with a 10x10 field of vision, we move back so that every 10 seconds, we are an order of magnitude farther away. The odometer has the following measurements: Distance, Speed, Ship Time, Real Time, Distance expressed as 10^n. This film therefore manages to teach cosmology, relativity, exponential notation, biology, atomic structure, and classical physics (at least partially) in ten minutes. The narration is great, and the concepts are explained simply, but without being patronizing. I would recommend anyone who has not seen this film make an effort at some point, since the prints are getting a little scratchier every day. It shows how to teach technical subjects without boring the students (gee, this crosstalks with a current HUMAN-NETS discussion...must be ESP). James ------------------------------ Date: 31 Mar 1982 1450-EST From: SWG at MIT-XX Subject: Powers of Ten It was indeed narrated by Phil Morrison, who probably supplied technical advice as well. It was produced by Charles & Ray Eames, a husband/wife team of designers (e.g. "Eames chair"), film makers, etc. Great stuff! ------------------------------ Date: 31 Mar 1982 0751-PST From: Tom Davis Subject: Powers of Ten The movie was indeed called "Powers of Ten", but the book it was based upon is much better. The book is called "Cosmic View", and was written by Kees Boeke (I think I got the spelling right). The book is just made up of a series of pictures, each one showing the same scene with the linear dimension increased (and decreased in the second part of the book) by a factor of ten. The major advantage of the book is that you can go back and forth through the pages looking at how individual features change. I read the book first, and found the movie disappointing afterwards. On the other hand, given that one is making it into a movie, it is hard to see how to improve too much on what was done. Anyway, I highly recommend the book -- I still find it enjoyable (even after 10 years or so) to page through it. -- Tom Davis ------------------------------ Date: 30 Mar 1982 15:43 PST From: RobertsA.ES at PARC-MAXC Subject: Re: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #36 Date: 26 Mar 1982 10:52 EST From: Denber.WBST at PARC-MAXC Subject: Here's the (movie) plot... This doesn't sound like the same movie but... I have a book entitled "The Universe in Forty Jumps" which was also made into a movie. The scenario is about the same except it starts with a little girl sitting in a rocking chair and "pulls back" from there and then returns to the starting position and goes "downward" into the world of the small. Allen ------------------------------ Date: 30 Mar 1982 2226-PST From: Zellich at OFFICE-3 (Rich Zellich) Subject: V5 #36: shrinking to less than atom size By a coincidence, I just happen to have the 3 Asimov "Before the Golden Age" volumes here on TDY with me. There is a story in the first volume, "Submicroscopic", by Capt. S.P. Meek, that might be the one in question (which has a sequel, "Awlo of Ulm" in the same volume), but I suspect you are both really thinking of a story by Henry Hasse in the third volume called "He Who Shrank". This is the one that immediately came to mind when I read Michel's short description, and it is an amazing coincidence that it also happens to be in one of these 3 books I brought along on this trip. Cheers, Rich ------------------------------ Date: 30-Mar-1982 From: JOHN REDFORD AT WAFER Reply-to: "JOHN REDFORD AT WAFER c/o" Subject: normal everyday ESP A fairly common experience that might be called paranormal is that of deja vu. I have it fairly often. You're walking down an unfamiliar street or talking to someone when suddenly you get the feeling that you've been here before or done this before, perhaps in a dream. Sometime you can be sure that you have never been there before, sometimes not. But it's just coincidence, right? Enough random images can be thrown up in dreams that some of them are bound to connect. But it's still an eerie and powerful feeling, and very disconcerting. ------------------------------ Date: 30 Mar 1982 1401-PST From: Yeager at SUMEX-AIM Subject: ESP... I would not usually comment on ESP in SF-lovers, but since it has been approached, and the digest has been a tad lean lately, here goes: *The Dream* I'm walking along the street in front of my house with my wife, Joan, and we come upon dollar bills being wisked about by the wind. *The event* The next morning we are walking in front of our house. I tell Joan about the dream, and, guess what? About 10 steps later Joan finds a dollar bill - it is windy but they are not blowing around - and if that isn't enough, we take a few more steps, and she finds another dollar! I had the dream this Sunday morning... Precognition? Not likely. As extreme as this example might seem to some, to me it was just another one of those delightful coincidences! We just seem to forget all of the *misses* and emphasize the *hits*, and also, seem to jump at the most bizarre explanations rather than consider the many rational explanations. -Bill ------------------------------ Date: 31 March 1982 0454-EST From: Mitchell Schwartz at CMU-10A Subject: esping It seems to me that we have a general point of unsettlable clash: ESP, in its many forms, may exist. It may just be a statistical anomaly: the population base is large enough. ESP-type occurrences do not seem to be provable by standard experimentation. It does occur often enough to remain in the public eye or fancy. Everyone has an ESP-type tale. I have a few I will spare you. Why can't you sciencefolk just admit that ESP will hang about as a mystery, however romantic a viewpoint you may find that? mitch ------------------------------ Date: 30 Mar 1982 11:53:52-EST From: csin!cjh at CCA-UNIX Subject: esp terminology Depending on your guess of the mechanism, your experience could be either precognition (advance knowledge), telepathy (reading announcer's mind) or clairvoyance (reading the book the announcer was holding)--- assuming it was ESP at all, which is highly unlikely. ------------------------------ Date: 30 Mar 1982 1316-PST From: William "Chops" Westfield Subject: ESP and such... Ill make this all very simple and concrete. I am perfectly willing to believe in any para-psychological talents that can be taught TO ME. WW ------------------------------ Date: 31 Mar 1982 10:57 CST From: Johnston.DLOS at PARC-MAXC Subject: Re: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #35, Uri Geller I read in one of Sagan's books that Uri Geller loves to perform in front of scientists, but refuses to be examined in performance by a group of magicians, etc. I think this says much about his credibility. Rick ------------------------------ Date: Friday, April 2 1982 2:29AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Subject: SPOILER WARNING! SPOILER WARNING! The following message is the last in the digest. It answer the Plot query addresses earlier in the digest on the story "He Who Shrank." Some plot details are revealed of this story. Some readers may not wish to read on. ------------------------------ Date: 30-Mar-82 15:25:27 PST (Tuesday) From: Weissman at PARC-MAXC Subject: He Who Shrank w/spoiler The story alluded to by Michel in V5 #36 appears in an ancient (1957) anthology called "Famous Science Fiction Stories", and is called "He Who Shrank" by Henry Hasse. "Henry Hasse" sounds like a pseudonym to me; anybody have any info? Anyway, the plot is that the shrinker is an unwilling participant in an experiment; he's a lab assistant who gets involuntarily injected with magic shrinkum juice. He passes through several progressively smaller universes until. . . . . *** SPOILER WARNING! *** SPOILER WARNING! *** . . . he arrives on Earth, where he tells his story to a science fiction writer. The idea is that our planet is an electron in an atom in a blade of grass in an atom in a mosquito's hair in ... in a block of metal in the experimenter's office. The shrinker passes through our sphere, and the while the story ends, there is no end in sight for our hero. -- Bob ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 6-Apr JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #38 *** EOOH *** Date: Tuesday, April 6, 1982 2:46AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #38 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Tuesday, 6 Apr 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 38 Today's Topics: SF Books - Second Nature & Helliconia Spring & The Red Magician & Hecate's Cauldron & The Pride of Chanur & Cosmic View, SF Movies - Powers of Ten & Cosmic Zoom & Star Trek II, Spoiler - Star Trek II ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 5 Apr 82 16:11-PDT From: mclure at SRI-UNIX Subject: sf reviews 04 Apr 82 SCIENCE FICTION By Roland J. Green (c) 1982 Chicago Sun-Times (Field News Service) If you can be completely original, well and good. But if you can do as well with a comparatively venerable science fiction theme as Cherry Wilder does in ''Second Nature'' (TimescapePocket Books, $2.75 paperback), you have nothing to be ashamed of, either. The theme is simple: A human colony on a far world, founded by the survivors of a long-ago spaceship crash, awaits the next visit of the now-legendary Earthmen. At last there are rumors that the Earthmen have come again. Government historian Maxim Bro sets out to learn what has really happened. In the course of his journey we get a complete and vivid picture of the planet Rhomary. What could be simpler? And what could be duller, without Wilder's gifts? There is a fine command of language and a sense of the relevant detail. There are also enough well-drawn characters and fully developed subplots for a novel twice as long. As the relationships become more complex and the viewpoints change, we ultimately get full-dimensional views of anything the author wants to emphasize. Finally, there is almost heroic common sense about the development of the society of Rhomary. The ruling class is the doctors. Why not, when in the early days after the crash it was their skills that could make the difference between life and death? Men and women are equal - and again, why not, on a sparsely populated planet where every warm body has to be available for whatever work needs to be done? Brian Aldiss' ''Helliconia Spring'' (Atheneum, $15.95) is a more ambitious book. It is also the first of a trilogy, and Aldiss appears to have decided to load into the first book most of the background information needed for appreciating the whole work. This is understandable, considering that Helliconia follows an eccentric orbit around multiple suns and in consequence enjoys a weird and wonderfully complex ecology. Nonetheless, the first half of the book moves slowly under its burden of raw data. As the inhabitants of Helliconia come alive in the second half of the book, the story begins to move and becomes fascinating, without ceasing to be complex. In the end, the book promises quite well for the rest of the Helliconia saga. Lisa Goldstein's ''The Red Magician'' (TimescapePocket Books, $2.50 paperback) promises well for a whole career. In a small Hungarian Jewish village, a wonder-working rabbi battles a traveling magician who warns the villagers of the coming Holocaust. Goldstein draws effectively on Jewish folklore to set a tale of fantasy against the nightmarish background of the Holocaust. She also tells the whole story from the viewpoint of the adolescent girl Kicsi, from village through Auschwitz to refugee camp, without any major errors in choice of language, leaving out any vital information or weakening the emotional impact. This is Goldstein's first novel; one hopes it will not be her only one. A fantasy anthology worth noting is ''Hecate's Cauldron'' (DAWNew American Library, $2.95 paperback), edited by Susan W. Shwartz. The 13 stories all draw one way or another on the folklore and mythology of Western European, African and Japanese witchcraft. The quality ranges from good to excellent - hardly surprising, considering that the list of authors runs from such distinguished fantasists as Andre Norton and Tanith Lee to solid newcomers such as Jean Lorrah and Galad Elflandsson. Teachers should take a particularly close look at the bibliography, a respectable introduction to witchcraft in particular and modern fantasy in general. Finally, the latest book by C.J. Cherryh, ''The Pride of Chanur'' (DAWNew American Library, $2.95 paperback), is a better introduction to this prolific and gifted writer than some of her other recent works. It features one of Cherryh's superlatively well-drawn alien races, a well-drawn background, and a briskly paced plot - in short, the author well toward the top of her form. ------------------------------ Date: 2 Apr 1982 10:50 PST From: Fusco.ES at PARC-MAXC Subject: Re: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #37 Powers of Ten is also on permanent exhibit at the Air and Space Museum of the Smithsonian Institute in Washington, D.C. I agree, its interesting and entertaining. Joe ------------------------------ Date: 02-Apr-1982 From: PAUL DICKSON AT QUILL Reply-to: "PAUL DICKSON AT QUILL c/o" Subject: Powers of Ten The short movie "Powers of Ten" was made by Charles and Rae Eames. They also did the multi-screen movie for the IBM pavilion at the 1964 World's fair in New York. Charles Eames, who I believe died not too long ago, is the designer of the famous Eames Chair, which you can see in expensive furniture stores and also art galleries. He and his wife made several short movies. All this information is from a program called "An Eames Celebration" which appeared on PBS a few years ago. Morrisson appears in this movie, and he had something to do with the production of Powers of Ten, but I can't remember if he did the voice-over. aEC contains the PoT movie, and several others. ------------------------------ Date: 2 Apr 1982 15:44 PST From: Kaehler at PARC-MAXC Subject: Re: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #37 The movie "Powers of Ten" by Charles Ames (sp?) and his brother was remade in the early seventies. The second version added one power of ten to the size of the universe and two powers of ten in the direction of quarks. I find it quite astounding that we expanded our vision by a factor of 1000 in the 20 years between the two films. I don't suppose we will be able to keep maintain that rate of expansion. Ted Kaehler ------------------------------ Date: 2 April 1982 2145-PST (Friday) From: lauren at UCLA-Security (Lauren Weinstein) Subject: Powers of Ten, Cosmic Zoom, Cosmic View Actually, I have two DIFFERENT versions of "Powers of Ten" in my collection. The earlier version has the "odometer" stuff on the left and has a British female narrator. The overall quality of the art is good but not great. A version that came out a few years later (the one narrated by Phil) drops the odometer, but has much better overall quality. There are a number of interesting minor differences between the two when run back to back. Both of these were inspired by another film, called "Cosmic Zoom", which was released through the Canadian film board. This one starts with a boy in a rowboat and zooms out from there, then zooms in on a mosquito sucking blood on his hand! There is no narration, and the bulk of the images are clearly hand-drawn art, not photos. It is very arty and quite enjoyable. The credits directly mention the book "Cosmic View", from which all these films were really derived. As I recall, the main character in Cosmic View had a large whale laying next to him at the starting point (for size reference of course.) --Lauren-- ------------------------------ Date: Tuesday, April 6, 1982 2:46AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Subject: SPOILER WARNING! SPOILER WARNING! The following messages are the last in the digest. They discuss some plot details in the upcoming movie Star Trek II. Some readers may not wish to read on. ------------------------------ Date: 02-Apr-1982 From: PAUL DICKSON AT QUILL Reply-to: "PAUL DICKSON AT QUILL c/o" Subject: Checkov In the TV series, Checkov was definitely an ensign, and was outranked by just about everyone else in the series except the yeoman. I didn't see the ST1 movie (gasp), so I can't say whether he was promoted there. All officers are sort of "captains in training", but obviously all of them do not become captains. (I think "Captain" is a post, not a rank.) So Checkov could become a captain after sufficient time. After a time long enough for him to advance that far (he never seemed like Captain material to me), you would not expect the others to still be in their old posts, much less their old ranks. In the movie they had been promoted too, but I don't know by how much. Admirals sometimes command ships, but only in unusual cases, like when the regular captain has been killed in battle, and even then the executive officer would take over. The Federation must have been pretty top-heavy organizationally if they had a lieutenant operating the radio on the bridge. ------------------------------ Date: 2 Apr 1982 16:14 PST From: STOGRYN.ES at PARC-MAXC Subject: Re: SPOILER WARNING -- Star Trek II After watching Star Trek I again last night, I could find no mention of Checkov being a "Captain in Training. . . during the first scene he was in, on the Bridge", nor any reference to his rank during the whole movie, other than and his uniform and Captain Kirk calling him "Mister". I have not reread the book, however. Steve ------------------------------ Date: 5-Apr-82 1040-EST From: David Miller Subject: sf-lovers: Chekov's command In the novel STTMP by Gene Roddenberry, Kirk notes, and is pleased that Chekov has been promoted to Lt in charge of Security. Assuming no one else was promoted during that time period Uhura and Sulu would be equal in rank, Scotty and McCoy a grade above, and Spock a grade above that. Assuming that Spock and McCoy have turned down any commands offered them (likely from what we know of them) there is still Scott, who is much more deserving. Also, Uhura and Sulu both have taken temporary command at one time or another, and have seniority, not to mention intelligence and skills, far in excess of Chekov's. At the last August Party (Washington D.C. Aug '81) Roddenberry indicated that they still had not settled on a final script for the movie. Since it is supposed to open in June, I will be very surprised if this is the only glaring inconsistency in the film. -Dave Miller @yale ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 8-Apr JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #39 *** EOOH *** Date: Thursday, April 8, 1982 10:31PM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #39 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Friday, 9 Apr 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 39 Today's Topics: SF Books - Hugo Winners & Epitaph for Dick, SF Movies - Extra-Terrestrial & Cat People & Powers of Ten & Star Trek II, SF TV - Star Trek, SF Topics - ESP, Spoiler - Star Trek & Star Trek II ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 24-Mar-1982 From: QUASAR::SILER Reply-to: "QUASAR::SILER c/o" Subject: Request for info Can someone out there list the Hugo-winning novels for the last ten years or so? I used to read a lot of SF, then stopped, and am now getting back into it, and would like to backtrack and fill in the gap. Thanks. Lee Siler ------------------------------ Date: 5-Apr-82 1040-EST From: David Miller Subject: sf-lovers: ET the movie I recently saw a trailer for the film "Extra Terrestrial: and His Adventures on Earth." The trailer said almost nothing except: It is a new film coming out of the Lucasfilm Ranch, Steven Spielberg is the director, and the ET has three long bony fingers. The general mood of it looks light, and all in all pretty good. It premiers this June. -Dave Miller @yale ------------------------------ Date: 2 April 1982 2154-PST (Friday) From: lauren at UCLA-Security (Lauren Weinstein) Subject: "Cat People" 01 Apr 82 Review of "Cat People" By RICHARD FREEDMAN Newhouse News Service (UNDATED) Writer-director Paul Schrader is best known for such films of gritty urban violence as ''Taxi Driver'' and ''Hardcore.'' In ''Cat People'' he turns from the jungle of our cities to the beasts lurking in the jungles of our subconscious minds. The result is not only a refreshing change of pace for Schrader, but a stunningly beautiful movie that works on just about every level, from gory horror through depth psychology, to a state of higher innocence in nature that is hauntingly poetic. Vaguely based on the classic Val Lewton-Jacques Tourneur ''B'' picture of 40 years ago, which starred Simone Simon as the predatory feline of man's deepest fears and desires, ''Cat People'' is a sumptuous erotic treat. It is the first Schrader film to use a script by someone else - Alan Ormsby, who also wrote the lovely ''My Bodyguard'' - and the first film to give a sense that Nastassia Kinski is emerging as a real actress, as opposed to the vamp of the python posters. Here she is Irena Gallier, who arrives at the New Orleans airport from seemingly nowhere to be greeted by her long-lost brother Paul (Malcolm McDowell). Although Paul is a preacher in a strange church, he shows a more than fraternal or religious interest in Irena. In fact, he becomes maniacally jealous when she takes up with zoo curator Oliver Yates (John Heard). At 34, Oliver's ideas about women seem shaped by the idealized Beatrice of Dante's ''La Vita Nuova,'' although he has been carrying on a desultory affair with his attractive blonde assistant Alice (Annette O'Toole). Basically this shy scholarly man prefers animals to people. When he meets Irena and gives her a job in the zoo's gift shop, though, he becomes obsessed with her feline beauty - clearly, she's the prettiest panther he ever encountered. Meanwhile, a real panther - a black leopard, to be precise - has been stalking the picturesque streets of New Orleans, attacking a hooker in a porn parlor and wrenching the arm off a zookeeper. Is it a ''super cat'' just doing its thing, as Oliver insists, or ''a menace,'' as normal society judges? Or is it Paul, transformed by lust for his virginal sister into a predatory monster? Is Irena in fact his sister? These are some of the puzzles ''Cat People'' raises that it would be grossly unfair to solve here. They're irrelevant, too, because ''Cat People'' works on so many levels of myth and magic that the mere manslaughter in it is the least of its concerns. As Paul's odd, voodooish housekeeper Female (pronounced to rhyme with ''tamale'' and eerily played by Ruby Dee) tells Irena, in order to survive one must ''pretend the world is what men think it is.'' For ''Cat People'' is ultimately about the daylight, rational world we impose for survival on the dream world - often a nightmare world - of our inner beings. The normal, daylight romance of Oliver and Alice is shattered by the nocturnal fascinations Irena offers him. For both these doomed lovers, sex is a plunge into the darkest mysteries of the subconscious, and what they find there is both rapturous and appalling. This is a moody, brooding - but frequently very witty - exploration of the capacity for Romantic Love-Death lurking in the animal natures of all of us. Anyone going to see ''Cat People'' just for its sex and violence (of which there is plenty) will assuredly get more than he bargained for. FILM CLIP: ''CAT PEOPLE.'' Haunting remake of the 1942 poetic horror film about our feline cousins, with Nastassia Kinski and Malcolm McDowell as dangerously beautiful brother and sister, and John Heard as a New Orleans zookeeper who falls into their clutches. A sumptuous, sensual masterpiece of unleashed romanticism. Rated R. Four stars. --Lauren-- ------------------------------ Date: 8 April 1982 0005-EST (Thursday) From: Lee.Moore at CMU-10A Subject: Powers of Ten Of the two versions of PoT I enjoyed the first more if only for the female's voice-over. She had an emotionally flat British accent that contrasted magnificently with the mind blowing graphics. Some how the remake never gave me the chill & thrill of the original. BTW, the Eames also did a time-line of mathematics for IBM. It was a long poster that I have seen in every high school I've been to. It had pictures of various famous people with descriptions of what they are known for. Lee ------------------------------ Date: 6 Apr 1982 8:09:36 EST (Tuesday) From: Ralph Muha Subject: Epitaph Or, Why Phillip K. Dick will always be my favorite writer: To the cab he said suddenly, "If your wife were sick-" "I have no wife, sir," the cab said. "Automatic Mechanisms never marry; everyone knows that." "All right," Eric agreed. "If you were me, and your wife were sick, desperately so, with no hope of recovery, would you leave her? Or would you stay with her, even if you had traveled ten years into the future and knew for an absolute certainty that the damage to her brain could never be reversed? And staying with her would mean-" "I can see what you mean, sir," the cab broke in. "It would mean no other life for you beyond caring for her." "That's right," Eric said. "I'd stay with her," the cab decided. "Why?" "Because," the cab said, "life is composed of reality configurations so constituted. To abandon her would be to say, I can't endure reality as such. I have to have uniquely special easier conditions." "I think I agree," Eric said after a time. "I think I will stay with her." "God bless you, sir," the cab said. "I can see that you're a good man." From "Now Wait For Last Year" (c) 1966 by Phillip K. Dick ------------------------------ Date: 04/03/82 11:43:21 From: RP@MIT-MC Subject: ESP Several people have recently commented on "ESP" experiences but I would like to ask for a response to my query which prompted these discussions in the first place. Namely, how do Burgess and Kreskin do their telepathy trick? I shall briefly describe it again: B&K may, for example, ask the audience "do the initials RMG mean anything to someone"? A response occur frequently and B&K proceed to give some very substantial information about the person. This can be the full name, birthdate, social security and telephone number, etc. Assuming, as B&K state, they do not have confederates in the audience then how do they accomplish their trick? Any theories? ------------------------------ Date: 3 Apr 82 9:15-PDT From: mclure at SRI-UNIX They do research on selected members of the audience beforehand. ------------------------------ Date: 2 Apr 1982 1559-PST From: Dolata at SUMEX-AIM Subject: In response to WW willing to believe 'if it can be taught TO Subject: ME'. Your criterion for beliveing in ESP iff it can be taught 'TO ME' seems weak. Do you believe in pregnancy? Can you be taught the art of getting pregnant? ------------------------------ Date: Thursday, April 8, 1982 10:31PM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Subject: SPOILER WARNING! SPOILER WARNING! The following messages are the last in the digest. They provide some information/speculation about the upcoming movie sequel to Star Trek: the Motion Picture and a query about the original Star Trek TV series which has grown out of this discussion about the movie. Some readers may not wish to read on. ------------------------------ Date: 6 April 1982 12:05-EST From: Daniel F. Chernikoff Subject: sf-lovers: Chekov's command When did Uhura take temporary command? Don't tell me there is a Star Trek TV episode that I haven't seen (let it be so!)?! -Dan ------------------------------ Date: 8 Apr 1982 0957-PST From: Mike Leavitt Subject: Sttmp ii - spoiler -Checkov I think it's pretty clear why the Russian got bumped over the Japanese, the African, and the European: politics. I consider it a given that in the world of Star Trek, appointments to command would be at least 50% political. Since the Russians and the Americans probably jointly run that world, they would probably have to alternate Russian and American captains on all of their starships. Mike ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 12-Apr JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #40 *** EOOH *** Date: Monday, April 12, 1982 1:49AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #40 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Monday, 12 Apr 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 40 Today's Topics: SF TV - Star Trek Query, SF Movies - Star Trek II & Revenge of the Jedi & Powers of Ten, Spoiler - Star Trek & Star Trek II ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 9 Apr 1982 2339-MST From: Dudley Irish Subject: Re: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #39 I have a query that I believe should be a piece of cake for many of you out there. Recently I was talking to a friend who said that she believed that in a episode of Star Trek Mr. Spock's first name was said. I recall the episode in which we are told that his first name can not be pronounced by a human. This led me to believe that we had never heard his name. Am I mistaken? Dudley Irish Irish at Utah-20 ------------------------------ Date: 11 Apr 1982 11:17:00 EST (Sunday) From: Winston Edmond Subject: Star Trek 2 Item from the Sunday newspaper: Official word is that the release title for this picture will now be "Star Trek 2: The Vengeance of Khan." -WBE ------------------------------ Date: 9 April 1982 2026-PST (Friday) From: lauren at UCLA-Security (Lauren Weinstein) Subject: Star Trek movie retitled... Due to complaints from Lucasfilm (which no doubt considers the term "revenge" and all synonyms to be their trademarks), the upcoming Star Trek film has been retitled from: Star Trek II: The Vengeance of Khan to Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan --Lauren-- ------------------------------ Date: 5 Apr 1982 13:14:11 EST (Monday) From: Winston Edmond Subject: Star Wars I quote from my Sunday paper: " Although the latest in the "Star Wars" series - titled "Revenge of the Jedi" - won't be released until May 1983, word has leaked out that the character played by Guinness, Ben Kenobi, will reappear in the flesh along with cast regulars Carrie Fisher, Mark Hamill and Harrison Ford. How the Guiness part will be revived is still a mystery. But science fiction allows for plenty of plot license in dealing with its mythical characters. " -WBE ------------------------------ Date: 9 Apr 1982 8:06:55 EST (Friday) From: Drew M. Powles Subject: powers of ten NOVA did an episode awhile ago on Time (starred Dudley Moore). In it they had a "powers of ten"ish time segment, only it started out with a couple snoozing in the park, and did not go down to the microscopic level. In fact, I believe it may have been more along the lines of a "powers of two"; the distance was doubled every second. dmp ------------------------------ Date: Monday, April 12, 1982 1:49AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Subject: SPOILER WARNING! SPOILER WARNING! The following messages are the last in the digest. They provide some information/speculation about the upcoming movie sequel to Star Trek: the Motion Picture and an answer to a query about the original Star Trek TV series which has grown out of this discussion about the movie. Some readers may not wish to read on. ------------------------------ Date: 9 Apr 1982 11:34:23-EST From: csin!cjh at CCA-UNIX Subject: Re: sttmp ii-spoiler-chekov My, aren't you the cynic! Remember that Chekov didn't even show up until the second season---and the few hints about Terran govt. in that period seem to assume that the bipolar power conflict has been resolved. On the other hand, ST has been changed so radically in appearance from the TV show that you could make a rationale for almost anything. ------------------------------ Date: Friday, 9 Apr 1982 10:43-PST From: chris at RAND-UNIX Subject: Re: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #39 In regards to the ST query, "When did Uhura take temporary command"--in the live-action TV show, she never did. But in the Saturday morning cartoons, first aired in 1973-74 with the voices of the original actors, there was one episode where every male authority figure aboard the Enterprise was captured by the Sirens of the planet under investigation. Uhura entered the bridge with Nurse Chapel, and announced "I'm taking command of the ship". (I was living in the Graduate Women's Dorm at Louisiana State U. at the time, and the resounding cheers from the TV room could be heard in the street.) She then proceeded to stay aboard the ship, instead of risking the only command-post trained officer left; she sent down to the planet search teams of two or more security officers with orders never to split up, and required reports from all teams every ten minutes or so. Kirk was never that foresighted. She managed to rescue the entire landing party intact, and then spoiled it all by weeping all over Kirk and muttering "Captain, you're so handsome" or something equally awful. Despite the ending, which makes even my unliberated soul cringe, it remains one of my favorite episodes of the cartoon series. ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 15-Apr JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #41 *** EOOH *** Date: Thursday, April 15, 1982 10:25PM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #41 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Friday, 16 Apr 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 41 Today's Topics: SF Fandom - WesterCon Bids, SF Books - Friday & The One Tree, SF TV - Star Trek & Night Gallery Portraits, Random Topics - Hackers ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 10 April 1982 0522-est From: Paul Schauble Subject: What happens at a Con - WesterCon bids Does anyone know what exact dates Portland plans for their WesterCon if they win the bid? I have seen several different flyers from them, none of which contain dates. ------------------------------ Date: 14 Apr 1982 2240-PST From: Alan R. Katz Subject: New Heinlein book is out!!!! I guess I scooped everyone on this. "Friday", by Robert Heinlein is now out in hardback. From the jacket: "Friday is her name...She is as thoroughly resourceful as she is strikingly beautiful. She is one of the best interplanetary agents in the business. And she is an Artificial Person... the ultimate glory of genetic engineering." A brief glance through indicates this may be another great book (not like Number of the Beast). Its 368 pages, published by Holt, Rinehart, and Winston. Alan ------------------------------ Date: 14 Apr 1982 2300-PST From: Mark Crispin Reply-to: Admin.MRC at SU-SCORE Subject: THE ONE TREE ...is out in hardcopy! I picked up my copy 2 hours after it arrived at the bookstore. I'm reading it eagerly now...I will say this much; I found out where the other Raver was. ------------------------------ Date: 13 Apr 1982 0852-PST From: Tim Mann Reply-to:CSD.MANN at SU-SCORE Subject: Re: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #40 [ The following message refers to some material that has appeared in recent issues of the digest under the Spoiler section. However, it itself is not a spoiler. -- Jim ] Here are a couple of Star Trek tidbits I recall from "The Making of Star Trek" and "The World of Star Trek." Right now these books are in my parents' attic, so I can't recheck details. (1) The original concept behind Chekov's character was that he was to be portrayed as a sort of "captain in training." I think this was in the information that was handed out to prospective scriptwriters, but I don't believe it was ever mentioned in the show. As has been pointed out here, it doesn't make a great deal of sense--other officers aboard the Enterprise who outranked Chekov would likely have achieved their own commands before him. (2) There was supposed to have been an episode of the original show in which Uhura took temporary command; in fact, I believe she was supposed to have been fourth in command--the most senior lieutenant. But the network didn't like this, and Sulu got the nod instead, or perhaps it was that things were rearranged so that she was captured by the bad guys along with the other senior officers. (3) I don't ever recall hearing Spock's first name. I do recall the episode where he was asked his name, and replied "You wouldn't be able to pronounce it." Notice that he did NOT say "No human can pronounce it." One would hope his mother could pronounce it! --Tim ------------------------------ Date: 15 Apr 1982 (Thursday) 1235-EDT From: SHARER at Wharton-10 (William Sharer) Subject: Night Gallery Portraits Can anybody forget some of the paintings that showcased each episode of Rod Serling's Night Gallery? So what happened to them after Rod took off for the Twilight Zone permanently? Does anybody know their whereabouts (ie. art museum?) Actually I was wondering if anybody distributed copies for fun and profit. They'd look a lot better in the living room than some of trash that's on the market now. Makes for good conversation. mr bill ------------------------------ Date: 6 April 1982 11:21 est From: Boebert.SCOMP at MIT-MULTICS Subject: Hackers in Fiction [?] The latest issue of Rolling Stone has an article in which some clown tries and fails to do for hackers what Tom Wolfe did for surfers. It covers such heady topics as hackers' sallow complexion and characteristic plumpness -- and here I had thought all along I was just a fat old man. Earl ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 21-Apr JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #42 *** EOOH *** Date: Wednesday, April 21, 1982 4:19AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #42 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Wednesday, 21 Apr 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 42 Today's Topics: SF Fandom - What is CREATION?, SF Books - Shockwave Rider, SF Movies - Here's the Plot...What's the Title, SF TV - Night Gallery Portraits & Star Trek ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 19 April 1982 22:02-EST From: Charles F. Von Rospach Subject: creation SF con. After the last convention list was passed around, someone asked what Creation was all about, since they seem to have a series of cons nation wide. [ Please see Volume 5, Issue 35 -- Jim ] Today I received their pamphlet on their con in san francisco, and I thought I would pass on some of the details. It is officially called the Creation Comic Book and Science Fiction convention. It will run June 26 and 27 at the San Francisco Hilton, 11AM to 7PM. Cost: At the door, $7 for Saturday, $6.50 for Sunday, $12 for both. In advance, $5.50 a day or $10.50. I have a list of SF local places to buy tickets if you are interested, along with Dealer table rates and hotel reservations. An information hot line is set up at (415) 845-4091. Guests: Roy Thomas, writer from Marvel comics Harlan Ellison, Speculative fiction author. Walter Koenig, Checkov Frank Miller, writer and artist for Marvel Comics. John Stanley, 'San Franciscos man of the monsters' (I don't know him) Frank Brunner, Fantasy/comic illustrator, with a slide show. Other guests to be announced, all guest tentative. Hucksters: over 100 booths, heavy on comics for buy/sell/trade; also artwork, fanzines, and the normal stuff. On stage events, interviews with guests, daily auctions (no minimum bids), 'the worlds most disgusting slide show, part 3' film previews, art and costume contests, a film program (no details), and a slideshow tour of Marvel comics. All in all, it looks like a decent con. Depending on the Film selection, it could be a real good con, and considering the price of most cons, its real cheap. Although there is no direct connection mentioned, it looks as though Creation is pretty heavily tied with Marvel comics. Personally, I think I will be there... chuck ------------------------------ Date: 16 April 1982 09:42 cst From: Bibbero.PMSDMKT at HI-Multics Subject: Brunner's Shockwave Rider More or less at the instance of this list I got a copy of SR and find it tendentious and repetitious despite its superhacker theme. Particularly boring is constant use of terms "shivevr" and "poker." Could the latter possibly derive from BASIC function POKE? Is Brunner a computer professional? Am I missing something? Welcome enlightenment and flaming from Brunner fans on this list. ------------------------------ Date: 13-Apr-1982 From: NINA EPPES AT METOO Reply-to: "NINA EPPES AT METOO c/o" Subject: Here's the movie, what's the story? Several years ago I saw a movie at UMass/Amherst called "The Marvelous Visit" (English translation; the movie was French -- unfortunately I can't remember the French title, and I don't remember what the French for "visit" is so I can't even try to translate it myself). It was supposedly based on a story by H.G. Wells. I've tried (not very diligently, I admit -- only when I think of it) to locate the story, to no avail. The plot of the movie (what I can draw from my rather hazy recollection) was something like this: A man mysteriously appears in a French village. He is young and beautiful, and behaves as though the world is entirely new to him. As indeed it was -- I seem to remember that he was an angel, or some such being. Anyway, the movie revolves around the odd things that occur when he's around -- the scene I remember most clearly is one in which he is strolling down the street and comes across a can of gray paint next to a wall (apparently whoever was painting had taken a break or something). He dips the brush into the paint, sweeps it across the wall, and lo and behold! The wall is painted in rainbow colors, coming from the gray paint-laden brush. I believe that somewhere along the line a girl falls in love with him (of course). At the end he is being chased by the villagers, who don't understand and therefore are afraid of him. He comes to a cliff, falls off (perhaps he was wounded), and turns into a bird (seagull or dove or something). I really liked this movie, and would love to find the story on which it was based, if the story in fact exists. Has anyone else seen/heard of this movie or the story? --Nina Eppes ------------------------------ Date: 16 April 1982 21:45-EST From: Charles F. Von Rospach Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #41 (night gallery portraits) There is(was?) a gallery in Hollywood, called, appropriately enough, 'Night Gallery'. It specialized in macabre paintings of the Night Gallery type, and actually did sell some of the originals from the show. Some of the paintings went back to the artists, and found their way to market elsewhere. In some cases, the author of the story got or bought the painting (I believe Harlan has a couple in Ellison Wonderland), and the Studio kept some more. There are some of the best on permanent display in the museum that is part of the Universal Studio Tour in LA. I am sure I missed some, but they do show up once in a while at art auctions at cons, and if you really want one, you can try to track down the gallery... chuck ------------------------------ Date: 17 Apr 1982 23:42:31-EST From: csin!cjh at CCA-UNIX Subject: Re: Chekov's career The thing that seems to have been entirely ignored in this discussion is career tracking. In the heyday of the British Navy (i.e., before steam became a significant factor) it was reasonable to track each officer's career according to the date of his commission, and to rank them on shipboard accordingly; I think courts martial still have the power to move people down N notches on the seniority list. The "science officer" was an unranked civilian such as Darwin on the BEAGLE, while the "engineer", "helmsman", and "communications officer" were NCO's (e.g., sailmasters, crew bosses). A starship should probably be more like a modern orchestra: there are many people with rank in their specialties but only a few who expect to have a major command (e.g. the concertmaster is both the principle-violinist/default-soloist and the conductor in the absence of the full-time leader, while other first seats will be responsible for their sections and possibly have outside work as leaders of smaller or amateur groups). It is entirely reasonable that Star Fleet Command would decide that certain people have major leadership potential and assign them accordingly to learn as broadly as possible, while the majority of people would be tracked into specialties which could entail some lesser degree of command if they make it to the upper ranks. ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 1-May JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #43 *** EOOH *** Date: Saturday, May 1, 1982 9:59PM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #43 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Friday, 30 Apr 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 43 Today's Topics: SF Fandom - Westercon 35, SF Books - Starfishers & John Brunner & Shockwave Rider, SF Movies - Bladerunner & Brainstorm & Query Answered & Star Trek II, SF Radio - HHGttG, Spoiler - Star Trek II ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 24 April 1982 03:00 est From: Schauble.Multics at MIT-MULTICS Subject: Westercon 35 A couple of quick notes on the convention: Membership is now $25 for a full attending membership. This goes up to $35 on June 1. Mail memberships postmarked later than June 15 will not be accepted. Supporting memberships are $8, with no increases. You must be at least a supporting member of WesterCon 35 to vote in the site selection for WesterCon 37. We are accepting mail ballots that are received by June 30. Paul ------------------------------ Date: 28 Apr 1982 0005-PDT From: Zellich at OFFICE-3 (Rich Zellich) Subject: Book Review: STARFISHERS Just read the second in Glen Cook's new Starfishers trilogy, STARFISHERS (the first was titled SHADOWLINE). I think it's as good as SHADOWLINE was - go ye all, and buy it! It's in a completely different setting than the first volume but, of course, carries on the story line with at least some of the same characters. (It's paperback, $2.95, from Warner Books) Enjoy, Rich ------------------------------ Date: 22 Apr 1982 0724-PST From: WMartin at Office-3 (Will Martin) Subject: Brunner Is there really a "John Brunner"? Note that all the books are copyright "Brunner Fact & Fiction Ltd.". I envision a sweatshop in some dingy London basement where a crew of chained literary hacks churn out page after page... Of course, it's just a tax dodge to be incorporated, but has anyone ever seen Brunner? By the way, since this is a British writer we are discussing, does anyone else find it a bit strange to read British SF which assumes that Britain will even exist in the future, and especially that British science and technology will be advanced or have some value? It certainly seems at odds with the decaying and degenerate image Britain projects now. I would be much more comfortable with an image of, say, Brazilian science in the year 2150 than British, given what things look like today. Anglophiles may now rise up in wrath... Will ------------------------------ Date: 22 Apr 82 7:36-PST From: mclure at SRI-UNIX Subject: Re: Brunner Brunner was at Westercon in Sacramento last year. I admit having seen him. ------------------------------ Date: 21 Apr 1982 1842-PST From: William "Chops" Westfield Subject: Brunner's words... You asked for it... One of my favorite things about John Brunner is the way his worlds have an evolved sociology, especially language. After all, you can read Asimov classics and have people walking around in three piece suits smoking cigars (Foundation). This just doesn't cut it now that we have some experience with just how fast technology can change a way of life. If you think about it, slang terms for "men" and "women" and "people" are exceeded in number only by terms for sex. (guys + dolls + dames + boys + girls + studs + chicks + hunks + wenches + damsels -- I seem to be able to think of more for women than for men, probably the result of being male...) "Poker" probably comes from one of those later slang words, as in "to poke a bitch". I'm not so sure where "shiver" comes from, and would love to know where "Shiggy" (from 'Stand on Zanzibar') comes from. Maybe they are all from foreign languages, as Brunner claims a knack for languages... As for Brunner being a hacker himself: "When I transferred at 13 to Cheltenham College, I was told politely but firmly by the senior science master that owing to my extraordinary ineptitude in mathematics he would prefer me to stay on the languages side. This is how it came about that I, a so-called science fiction writer, have never had a science lesson in my life." (from 'The Book of John Brunner'; DAW books, 1976) W'C'W / \ ------------------------------ Date: 23 Apr 1982 14:54 EST From: Birnbaum.HENR at PARC-MAXC Subject: Re: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #42 In response to Bibbero.PMSDMKT's message from v5#42 Shivver seems to be derived from "shiv" a slang term for a knife. Poker is pretty obviously sexual. ------------------------------ Date: 13 Apr 1982 1138-EST From: MWT at MIT-DMS (Mark W. Terpin) Subject: next harrison ford movie? A friend in California said that it to be called "Bladerunner." Has anyone ever heard of this? ------------------------------ Date: 21-Apr-82 11:02:47 PST (Wednesday) From: Newman.es at PARC-MAXC Subject: You may never get to see "Brainstorm" According to this morning's LA Times, MGM and director Doug Trumbull have come to blows over the future of Trumbull's science-fiction film "Brainstorm", starring the late Natalie Wood. A rough cut of the film was to be shown to MGM executives last Friday morning. However, the Times reports, Before the lights went down, Trumbull presented MGM-UA executives with a list of 62 scenes that were yet to be filmed, including special effects, second-unit photography and insert shots, such as one involving a hand picking up an object. The list caused an outcry from the MGM brass and started an argument between [MGM-UA Chairman Frank] Rothman and Trumbull. The result was the mass exodus from the screening room by both parties. Trumbull and MGM are now accusing each other of bad faith. Trumbull says he doesn't want to deal with MGM any more, and MGM execs say they won't let any other studio see the rough cut, "just in case MGM executives find they like what they eventually might see." The result: "Brainstorm", which has already cost $25 million, may never be completed. /Ron ------------------------------ Date: 21 Apr 1982 0954-PST From: Barry Eynon Subject: Re: Query on "The Marvelous Visit" The movie Nina Eppes refers to sounds more like a movie version of Mark Twain's "The Mysterious Stranger" than anything of H.G.Wells' that I know of. The visitor is indeed an angel of a sort. (Any more would be spoiling things). Just remember, he who brought fire to man is not always called Prometheus! I highly recommend this story to anyone whose only acquaintance with Twain is "Jumping Frog" or "Tom Sawyer". I have the story in "Great Short Works of Mark Twain", Harper & Row (1962), but it's probably in several collections. Anyone care to comment on whether this story is SF or not? (I think it certainly could be considered such). -Barry Eynon ------------------------------ Date: 30 Apr 1982 2032-PDT From: Lynn Gold Subject: Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy broadcasts For those of you in the SF Bay area, KFJC (89.7 FM) is now running the program. I believe the first episode went by last Wednesday, and the program will be on Friday nights. For exact dates and times, you can call KFJC at (415) 941-2500. Enjoy! --Lynn ------------------------------ Date: 22 April 1982 20:53 est From: SSteinberg.SoftArts at MIT-MULTICS Subject: Darwin as a science officer [ The following message refers to some material that has appeared in recent issues of the digest under the Spoiler section. However, it itself is not a spoiler. -- Jim ] Darwin was not an "officer"; he had no official standing on the Beagle other than Captain's companion. The ship's naturalist was a guy named MacGregor or something. Inter-rank fraternizing was forbidden by the Admiralty and rather than go bonkers for five years the captain took aboard a guy he met at his club. ------------------------------ Date: Saturday, May 1, 1982 9:59PM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Subject: SPOILER WARNING! SPOILER WARNING! The following message is the last in the digest. It discuss some plot details in the upcoming movie Star Trek II. Some readers may not wish to read on. ------------------------------ Date: 21-Apr-82 1509-EST From: David Miller Subject: CHEKOVS COMMAND *************************SPOILER************************* One thing about Chekov's sudden command status that I've noticed nobody has mentioned, is its possible connection with the current world political situation. Stories are seldom written in a vacuum, and the hacks at Paramount are less subtle than most. From what we know of the plot: that Chekov's ship is taken over by Kahn, and eventually threatens the Universe, why is it surprising that it is Chekov? If Spock had made such a foul-up it would be considered impossible, and the same for Scott; they are simply too cautious. If McCoy made such a mistake it would be un-American, and if it was Sulu or Uhura it would be portraying their character in a racist or sexist light. Of all the regulars in TREK only Chekov is cute, stupid, always forgiven, and RUSSIAN. Therefore, if you are going to have to blame the possible destruction of the Universe on one of Star Fleets finest, might as well make it the lousy commie. --Dave Date: Wednesday, May 5, 1982 4:48AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #44 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Monday, 3 May 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 44 Today's Topics: SF Topics - Female SF Authors & SF-TEXANA, Random Topics - Hackers, SF Books - Brunner & Demon & The Gate & The Silver Metal Lover & The One Tree & Majipoor Chronicles & The Complete Robot, SF Movies - TESB & Star Trek III & Swamp Thing, Spoiler - Swamp Thing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 4 May 1982 11:19 edt From: Boebert.SCOMP at MIT-MULTICS Subject: Women SF Writers/Hackers in nonfiction A profile of women SF writers appears in the 2 May New York Times Book Review. A profile of ace Apple hacker Paul Lutus appears in the 3 May Wall Street Journal. The Lutus article reinforces the image of programmers as loner wierdos. It also says that the "computer elite" dislike his code because it is written "so densely that programmers can't get inside to make changes." I tried to modify one of his programs once, and density wasn't the problem; it was just bad code. Two hundred bit fiddles in search of a design, and patches everywhere. Earl ------------------------------ Date: 21 Apr 1982 at 2248-CST From: hjjh at UTEXAS-11 Subject: SF-TEXANA ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ SF-TEXANA ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I have a "mundane" friend, a book-collector who focuses on Texana. Rather surprisingly, there is a neat little handful of such in the SF genre. His very rough rule-of-thumb is that at least 1/3 of a book is set in Texas or, in our case, a planet settled by Texans. (Gilliland's REVOLUTION FROM ROSINANTE is a borderline case. Its sequel, LONG SHOT FOR ROSINANTE, like Bradley's BRASS DRAGON with just a few scenes set in Texas, didn't qualify.) Does anybody know of any in addition to -- 1954 SHADOWS IN THE SUN by Chad Oliver 1955 THE GIRLS FROM PLANET 5 by Richard Wilson 1958 A PLANET FOR TEXANS (aka LONE STAR PLANET) by H. Beam Piper 1962 SEVEN FROM THE STARS by Marian Zimmer Bradley 1966 IF ALL THE REBELS DIE by Samuel B. Southwell 1968 A SPECTER IS HAUNTING TEXAS by Fritz Leiber 1974 THE TEXAS-ISRAELI WAR: 1999 by Waldrop & Saunders 1976 FOR TEXAS AND ZED by Zach Hughes LONE STAR UNIVERSE, ed. by Proctor & Utley 1981 THE REVOLUTION FROM ROSINANTE by Alexis Gilliland There does seem to be a special little Texas niche in SF -- something close to a new book about every 3 years or so. I can't think of any other state which appears in SF to this extent in the same way. California with its motley of weird subcultures crops up as background, but the Texas ones have the story woven around the Lone Star State. ------------------------------ Date: 3 May 1982 21:35-EDT (Monday) From: Mijjil (Matthew J. Lecin) Reply-to: Lecin at RUTGERS Subject: has anyone seen Brunner? Well McLure has. Has anyone seen McLure? [Mijjil] (Sorry Stu...) ------------------------------ Date: 27 Apr 82 6:30-PDT From: mclure at SRI-UNIX There's been so little from this list lately, I've begun to wonder if everyone has gone on vacation or if the list is dying a silent death. Varley's next book DEMON is supposed to be out in Spring of 83. He is also working on a novel-length treatment called THE GATE, of his short story "Air Raid". I've noticed a disturbing trend over the last few years. More and more, authors are rehashing old material endlessly and pouring out more sequels, prequels, coquels, etc., ad nauseum. Varley, who is known for his originality, has succumbed to this sequelism that invades the industry. It seems that many authors are taking the easy road out by coasting on their built-up universes, even after the universe has lost its interest or even if it never had interest to begin with: example, Varley's disappointing TITAN series of which the above DEMON is supposedly the finale. This series pales in comparison to his Eight Worlds story series. I'm almost at the stage where I just don't buy anything in a series because I've been so disheartened by many of the later works in series I have read: examples, Amber, Dune, some of Le Guin's stuff, Busby's stuff, etc. Or if I do buy, I only buy the first work or selected works. Has anyone read any good self-contained SF novels lately? ------------------------------ Date: 2 May 1982 1310-PDT From: Stuart McLure Cracraft Subject: book reviews By Roland J. Green (c) 1982 Chicago Sun-Times (Field News Service) Tanith Lee's record of at least 14 novels in the last seven years is impressive. Still more impressive is her versatility. She has handled fantasy, straight SF, horror, and black comedies of far-future decadence with equal aplomb. When one goes on to consider that every one of the 14 novels is at least good and some far more than that, ''impressive'' ceases to be an adequate word. ''Phenomenon'' comes to mind, as a more accurate description for this young Englishwoman. Her latest book, ''The Silver Metal Lover'' (DAWNAL, $2.75 paperback), is an excellent introduction to Lee's many gifts. It is the deceptively simple story of Jane, a classic poor little rich girl on a future Earth who falls in love with a fully functional humanoid robot, the musician Silver. The situation quickly complicates itself when Silver is recalled by his manufacturers for being too good an imitation of humanity. Then he discovers that he is in love with Jane. Pursuit and betrayal follow, and the novel ends, not happily perhaps, but on a curiously satisfying note with overtones of fantasy. As is the case more often than not, Lee has done, and done well, just about everything that goes into making a good SF novel. A believable and well-drawn world, well-developed characterization, technological extrapolation, an exceptional command of the English language - all are here. Every reader is likely to find something particularly appealing in this book. Personal favorites include Jason and Medea, psychopathic twins who are so memorably unpleasant one is heartily glad to see the last of them, and a deceptively simple scene where Jane and Silver decorate their slum apartment with the equivalent of Salvation Army rejects. In two pages, Lee has written a small masterpiece of characterization, world-building, and mood-setting. In contrast to Tanith Lee's versatility, Stephen Donaldson has so far devoted himself resolutely to chronicling the otherworldly adventures of the leper Thomas Covenant. His fourth book, ''The One Tree'' (Del ReyBallantine, $14.50) is the second volume of his second trilogy. Covenant and his companion Dr. Linden Avery travel [garbled in transmission - Jim] by giants, in search of the One Tree. From the One Tree Covenant must make a new Staff of Law to free the Land from the Sunbane, a disease unleashed by his enemy from the first trilogy, Lord Foul. This is the most readable of Donaldson's books, although the sheer richness of his language is still occasionally overpowering. The story flows smoothly and the characters are both comprehensible and sympathetic, particularly Dr. Avery. At the same time Donaldson has lost none of his rare gift for firmly pushing high fantasy back to its mythic origins. There is, for example, nothing cute or romantic about his elf-like Elohim. They are terrifying self-willed and massively indifferent to Covenant's desperate quest, his physical sufferings, and his struggle to control his growing magical powers. Finally, two of science fiction's old masters have returned agreeably to previously explored territory. Robert Silverberg's ''Majipoor Chronicles'' (Arbor House, $12.95; $5.95 paperback) takes us back to the huge and complex planet of Majipoor he created for his bestselling ''Lord Valentine's Castle.'' Lord Valentine's heir is exploring the telepathically recorded archives of the planet; the episodes he discovers make up the stories in the book. Majipoor was so vividly brought to life in the novel that the possibility of exploring it further was obvious. Conducted by a writer of Silverberg's gifts, the result of this exploration is fine entertainment. Isaac Asimov's ''The Complete Robot'' (Doubleday, $19.95) presents the author's handling of the idea of the robot through 31 of his favorite stories, dating from 1939 through 1977. Many have not been readily available for years, some have never been collected in a book, and some (such as the Susan Calvin stories) can hardly be reprinted too often. All display in varying combinations Asimov's spare prose, wit, and deeply concerned rationalism. This book is not only full of good reading, it is topical as well - particularly at a time when robots have become a technological and economic reality. ------------------------------ Date: 3-May-82 11:42AM-EDT (Mon) From: Bill Gropp Subject: TESB rerelease? Does anyone know if Lucas intends to re-release TESB sometime before Revenge of the Jedi come out? Using the only available data, that would suggest that TESB will come out this month (a year ahead of tRotJ). Anyone know anything? ------------------------------ Date: 2 May 1982 1952-PDT From: Bill Subject: Spock I read an interview with Leonard Nimoy today in the Sunday paper. Two interesting comments were made. The first is that he is negotiating a very lucrative contract for a contract for a THIRD STAR TREK MOVIE, and the second is that something very weird happens to Spock in the up and coming Star Trek film, and we have to see the film to really understand it. So, Star Trek Fans, Spock isn't dead yet! And I for one am glad. Bill ------------------------------ Date: 27 Apr 1982 1047-PDT From: Robert Amsler Subject: Swamp Thing The main impression I got from this B movie is that it somehow was made for television and escaped into a movie theater by mistake. It was a trifle too racy for TV, but apart from that looked very much like a pilot for a new show. Having a brief exposure to the real comic hero, I think it was quite faithful, except for adding some Recombinant DNA explanations. The major conclusion I reached was that even as a TV pilot it would have flopped because it was too similar to existing shows such as the Incredible Hulk and even elements of the Phoenix. ------------------------------ Date: Wednesday, May 5, 1982 4:48AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Subject: SPOILER WARNING! SPOILER WARNING! The following message is the last in the digest. It discusses some plot details in the movie The Swamp Thing. Some readers may not wish to read on. ------------------------------ Date: 27 Apr 1982 1047-PDT From: Robert Amsler Subject: Swamp Thing The story is based upon an unlikely secret govt. research project site in the swamps (of South Carolina, I believe). The heroine is coming in via sea-plane and boat to replace someone who has been killed (eaten by a gator). She utters one of the humorous lines in the movie while riding the boat through the swamp... "I don't know where we are Toto, but this isn't Kansas" a joke which none of the others in the boat understood. When she arrives she proceeds to find a sensor out of order out in the swamp, is assisted in finding it by the young brilliant scientist of the project who takes a liking to her. Upon their return the brilliant scientist's sister has just made the breakthrough discovery, a new glop that does marvelous things to the wooden floor boards, making them sprout as trees in about 10 minutes. A further test on a swamp plant is made but interrupted by a commando raid on the site by the arch villain who is there to seize the formula (whatever formula there happens to be). He manages to kill off all except the heroine and the brilliant scientist, but then the scientist gets splashed with the glop, ignites (it causes explosions and apparently burns well too). He dashes out of the lab and dives in the swamp. Anyway... Having secured the lab books (all except one) he proceeds to then order the disposal of the bodies (and the heroine) in the swamp. While trying to push her under from a boat we get our first encounter with the Swamp Thing. It rises from the waters, overturns the boat, roars, saves the girl etc. In general the swamp thing's appearances were well done. It always explodes on the scene and wrecks things faster and with more violence than other monsters or superhero/heroines tend to. There has been too too much slow motion superstrength on TV and in the theater. This approach is refreshing. We learn the swamp thing is in fact the good brilliant scientist, and that he has retained his human mind (just acquired a tough plant body). From there on things are muddled. People escape, are captured, escape again, are captured again. The swamp thing appears, is shot at, disappears, rescues the girl, is shot at, disappears, etc. In one scene it has an arm chopped off (NO, not a rip off from TESB), but it grows back in a dungeon when a ray of sunlight makes contact. Anyway. The arch villian tries out the glop formula on one of his henchmen and we learn that it "simply makes you more of whatever you already are" because it turns the henchman into a midget. The arch villian, having a suitable ego, decides that becoming more of what he truly is would make him a god, and gulps down the glop himself. He becomes a beast, a la the beauty and the beast I believe, and grabs a sword to hack up the brilliant scientist (now the Swamp Thing) for having done this to him. Everybody escapes to the swamp. The arch villain himself gets hacked up. The end. ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 6-May JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #45 *** EOOH *** Date: Thursday, May 6, 1982 12:37PM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #45 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Thursday, 6 May 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 45 Today's Topics: SF Books - Here's the Plot...What's the Title & Rider Factoring Query, SF Movies - Bladerunner & Tron & Revenge of the Jedi, Spoiler - Revenge of the Jedi ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 29 April 1982 22:15 edt From: SSteinberg.SoftArts at MIT-MULTICS Subject: Juvenile (?) SF Query What book involves an archeological expedition to a planet named Higby IV? (I noticed I had data for this planet in a 15 year old Fortran program to calculate orbits.) I remember an elephant like character who got drunk on pollen and a sister who was a telepath. I think they found a lost civilization (possibly in a Dyson sphere) but that might have been another book. ------------------------------ Date: 3-May-82 1808-EDT From: David Schweizer Subject: Rider Factoring, Ltd query Does anybody know where the Chap Fuey Rider stories came out? Have they been anthologized? (I think they were in Analog, but I'm not sure.) Thanks, David Schweizer ------------------------------ Date: 3 May 1982 14:13 PDT From: Fusco.ES at PARC-MAXC Subject: Re: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #43 Bladerunner stars Harrison Ford as a detective in the not-too-distant future. The movie has played at some sneak previews and is due to premiere sometime this summer. Joe ------------------------------ Date: 3 May 1982 1128-EDT From: Lori Z. Thomas Subject: "Bladerunner" The new Harrison Ford movie is intend titled "Bladerunner", written by Philip K. Dick. Believe it or not, I found this information by casually picking up a copy of Rod Serling's Twilight Zone magazine, a publication I have not seen in years (and would never be caught buying in the Harvard Bookstore; subscription, yes.) Anyway, there was a big interview with Philip K. Dick, as well as a lavish, two-page color pictorial. I believe it's scheduled for a summer release.... ------------------------------ Date: 03 May 1982 1552-PDT From: Phil Gerring Subject: Bladerunner inquiry (SFL 5/43) "Bladerunner" is a moderately good book by (I believe) Alan E. Nourse. The basic idea is that in some future time in the U.S., population pressure has become so great and health care so correspondingly scarce that only people above a certain level in this by-now class-divided society can legally obtain it . A bladerunner is someone who smuggles medical supplies to the sites of a doctor's (illegal) house calls. Since the doctors are required to be associated with a hospital/clinic and may not carry supplies outside of it, bladerunners are a vital, although low-level and expendable, link in the underworld (almost literally, since the lower city levels are where the lower classes live) health care business. Although a good yarn, I tend to think that the basic premises are a little ill-founded. I think John Varley's view of future medicine (Ophiuchi Hotline, etc.) is the more accurate one; i.e., as medical science progresses, health care will become more and more simple and widely-available. Phil Gerring ------------------------------ Date: 2 May 1982 0307-EDT From: WHOLEY at CMU-20C Subject: Of interest to fans of both Disney and DEC... The first thing that struck me about Disney's summer SF film, TRON, a movie about how computers evolve to not need humans anymore, was that its name is a PDP-10 instruction (Test Right halfword setting masked bits to One, skip if Not all masked bits equaled zero). What amazed me was that the op-code for TRON is 666, the number of the beast! I've since heard that some of the whizzy graphics in the movie were done with the assistance of some sort of DEC-10 or 20. One might believe that the name is a pun on the TRON instruction invented by the hackers associated with the film. Could anyone out there verify or disprove this? --Skef ------------------------------ Date: 28 Apr 1982 at 1838-CDT From: hjjh at UTEXAS-11 Subject: STAR WARS NEWS TRIVIA ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ STAR WARS NEWS TRIVIA ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ My friend The Ultimate Star Wars Fan recently returned from what has become an annual trek to Britain related to SW, DR WHO, THE PRISONER (and heaven only knows what else!) Most of her time was spent "Whovering"-- tea with John Pertwee, her favorite DR; pub dates with the Brigadier; meeting Peter somebody- or-other, the latest DR, at BBC; and so on. One highlight of the trip, related to SW, was visiting Dave Prowse (Vader) at the gym he runs, while a TV crew was there making a feature on Dave's training methods for making Christopher Reeves look Superman-ish. Unfortunately, shooting on REVENGE OF THE JEDI was over, so she didn't get to visit the set, and she was regrettably (tho understandably) close-mouthed about anything she had gleaned about JEDI. I pried out only one clue to anything in the movie, and even that may well be just a red herring. But if when ...JEDI comes, you see Vader actually pick up something fairly heavy and throw it (rather than moving it by means of the Force), remember you heard of it on SF-LOVERS, but don't say a word or she'll have my guts for garters! ------------------------------ Date: Thursday, May 6, 1982 12:37PM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Subject: SPOILER WARNING! SPOILER WARNING! The following message is the last in the digest. It discusses some plot details in the movie Revenge of the Jedi. Some readers may not wish to read on. ------------------------------ Date: Monday, 3 May 1982 15:13-PDT From: chris at RAND-UNIX Subject: Revenge of the Jedi at Yuma (SPOILER) A few friends of mine went down to Yuma, Arizona off and on during the last month to watch Lucasfilms work on "Blue Horizon", billed in the Yuma papers as a horror-mystery starring complete unknowns. With Mark Hamill, Carrie Fisher, Anthony Daniels, Kenny Baker, Harrison Ford and George Lucas all in town, it seemed only natural to suspect that Lucas was putting out a smoke-screen (he shot sequences for American Graffiti II under the title of "Purple Haze"). The set, in the dunes off of Highway 8, seems to be a sand sailer--an enormous metal transport with two or three red triangular curved canopies--facing a gigantic pit. Filming done in the pit was invisible to onlookers, but included most of the cast--it may be the rescue scene for Han from Tatooine or "the spice mines of Kessel". During some of the sequences, Mark Hamill was dressed in BLACK (disguise? Has he gone over to the dark side?). Scenes shot on the top of the transport/ building were visible, and included Boba Fett jetting into the sky despite the attempts of some aliens we have never seen before trying to stop him. ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 7-May JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #46 *** EOOH *** Date: Friday, May 7, 1982 4:46AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #46 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Saturday, 8 May 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 46 Today's Topics: SF Books - Here's the Plot...What's the Title & The Gate & Riddley Walker, SF Movies - Bladerunner & The Gate & Revenge of the Jedi & TRON & The World,The Flesh and The Devil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 6 May 1982 2359-PDT From: Zellich at OFFICE-3 (Rich Zellich) Subject: Mixup (again) on BLADERUNNER BLADERUNNER, the movie, is based on the Philip K. Dick novel, "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep". BLADERUNNER, the novel, is by Nourse (and I believe he was paid for the movie rights to use the title). This was previously covered in SFl, by the way. -Cheers, Rich ------------------------------ Date: 6 May 1982 18:04 edt From: Schauble.Multics at MIT-MULTICS Subject: Here's the plot... When last I was back East, I caught the tail end of a very interesting film on the late late night TV. This was an old Gene Autrey episode in which Gene and the Singing Cowboys encounter aliens living in an underground city beneath their ranch. The city and aliens both resemble the Flash Gordon serials of the same era. Anyone know anything more about this episode?? Paul ------------------------------ Date: 6 May 1982 21:33:58-EDT From: csin!cjh at CCA-UNIX Subject: Varley The novel-length treatment of "Air Raid" probably is being done specifically at the request of the company making a movie derived from the story (which doesn't have enough by itself to be a reasonable film). I don't think that this is something to squawk about, especially since Varley, last year at Balticon, had some confidence in the expected quality of the resulting film. ------------------------------ Date: 6 May 1982 2359-EDT From: Thomas Galloway Subject: Varley's rehashing From what i understand, the reason Varley is writing the novel version of Air Raid (The Gate) is that it is being made into a movie in an expanded version (presumably resulting in megabucks for Varley). Since there was to be a novelization of the movie, he preferred to write it. Actually, i was a bit surprised by the choice of story, since i never thought Air Raid was one of his better stories, but ... Anyway, as i recall, last year on the digest it was said that the movie would be titled Millennium, which was the same title as a Bova book and suggestions were being sought be Varley for a new title. Did anyone on the net have something to do with this new title? tom galloway GALLOWAY@YALE decvax!yale-comix!galloway ------------------------------ Date: 7 May 1982 01:04-EDT From: Allan C. Wechsler Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #44 Stu McLure was wondering if anybody had read anything good lately. I just finished Russel Hoban's "Riddley Walker". It wasn't fantastic, folks, and maybe it wan't even excellent. It was just good. The novel describes about three days in the life of twelve-year-old Riddley Walker. Riddley lives in post-holocaust England, among the ruined towns in the vicinity of Canterbury. It's been thousands of years since a global disaster (presumably nuclear war) knocked humanity back to savagery. Riddley tells his own story in time-mangled English. The language is the best part of the book. Riddley says at one point that the written language was lost and rediscovered. At first the twisted spelling and grammar just seem like illiteracy, but as the pages turn, Riddley's language reveals its own internal consistency. Riddley is literate, and highly so, for his time. His lexicon is the prize of the book. In Riddley's language, people don't get "excited"; they get "as cited". When you're doing something important, you don't want any "inner fearents". Many of the vocabulary changes hint at underlying semantic and cognitive changes as well. (To be really picky, I should add that Riddley's English hasn't changed enough to be linguistically believable. It's about as readable as Shakespeare, and I couldn't find any major pronunciation changes.) "Riddley Walker" has no bad guys. Antagonisms are all temporary: they last until Riddley starts to understand the antagonist. Riddley's real enemy is ignorance. He's woefully aware that humanity has lost something vital. Everything he knows about the past is encoded in stories and doggerel. The most important story is the "Eusa Story", an allegory about the holocaust and its aftermath. Eusa is a folk hero, sharply reminiscent of Job. His name is corrupted from St. Eustace, whose life is depicted in paintings in Canterbury Cathedral. By Riddley's time, the Cathedral is millennia gone, but a flyer describing the paintings forms the core of the Eusa Story. The plot is a lot less interesting than the mood. Riddley's dad, a "connexion man" or visionary preacher, is killed in a sort of mining accident. (The "mine" is more like an archaeological dig -- they are reclaiming iron from antediluvian contraptions.) Riddley is the new connexion man for his crowd. But he feels alienated from them, and he runs away with a pack of feral dogs. The dogs lead him to the hiding place of the Ardship of Cambry (Archbishop of Canterbury), who is hiding out from the Pry Mincer. The Mincer thinks the Ardship knows the Secret of the One Big One, the knowledge that will enable England to climb back to technological civilization. The climax of the novel is the resurrection of the Punch'n'Judy puppet show, a silly-sounding event that Hoban transforms into a religious reawakening and a symbol that humanity has started to look forward again. Mood: **** Motif: * Plot: ** Characterization: *** Writing: **** ---Allan P.S. Cf. Crowley's "Engine Summer". ------------------------------ Date: 7 May 1982 0200-PDT (Friday) From: lauren at UCLA-Security (Lauren Weinstein) Subject: Lucas filming [ This message follows up on something mentioned in the spoiler section of the previous issue, but is not a spoiler itself. -- Jim ] As has been suggested, the filming in Arizona was indeed for Jedi. The large metal "transport" is an "antigravity platform/raft". That's all I'll say. You didn't hear it from me. --Lauren-- ------------------------------ Date: 6 May 1982 1356-EDT From: WHOLEY at CMU-20C Subject: TRON, Disney, and DEC The name of Disney's new movie, TRON, is a PDP-10 instruction (Test Right halfword setting masked bits to One and skip if Not all masked). This by itself is no great coincidence. But TRON is about some kind of evilness about computers, and TRON's opcode is 666... It has been rumored that some of TRON's graphics were done on DEC-10's or 20's. Could it be that the name of the movie was suggested by hackers involved with the production of this movie? Can anyone out there support or refute this possibility? --Skef ------------------------------ Date: 6 May 1982 21:56-EDT From: James A. Cox Subject: The World, The Flesh and The Devil was a 1959 movie that played recently on Boston TV. Has anyone else seen this? It takes place in the aftermath of a nuclear war, apparently (I missed the beginning) in a New York City undamaged but uninhabited except for a black man (Harry Belafonte) and a white woman (Inger Stevens). There is growing tension between the natural love that develops between the (apparent) last man and woman on earth, and the still-extant social taboo against interracial relationships. The tension climaxes upon the entrance of a white man (Mel Ferrer), and we see the emergence in microcosm of the very emotions that earlier led to the nuclear war. Borderline SF, perhaps, but extremely interesting, I thought. I wish I'd seen the beginning. ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 9-May JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #47 *** EOOH *** Date: Sunday, May 9, 1982 2:23AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #47 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Sunday, 9 May 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 47 Today's Topics: SF Books - Here's the Plot...What's the Title & Bladerunner & Snow Queen & Series, SF Movies - Bladerunner & E.T. & Forbidden World & The World,The Flesh and The Devil & Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan, Spoiler - Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 05/06/82 1655-EDT From: J. Baldassini Subject: Here's the plot, what's the title ? A very long time ago I read a short story about a Dixeyland jazz combo that was going to compete in this galaxy-wide arts competition. The tuba(?) player for the group gets hurt somehow, the group finds a substitute that plays even better, and goes on to win (or at least places highly in) the competition. As I recall, the story was told from the POV of the trumpet player. Can anyone give me the title and/or author of this story ? I'd enjoy reading it again. ------------------------------ Date: 07 May 1982 1102-PDT From: Phil Gerring Subject: Bladerunner the book vs. Bladerunner the movie Date: 7 May 1982 09:57 PDT From: Shipper.ES at PARC-MAXC Subject: bladerunner the book "bladerunner" is not the same as the movie. the movie is based on phil dick's "do androids dream of electric sheep." i believe that nourse was paid to use the name "bladerunner" for the movie. /steve . ------------------------------ Date: 7 May 1982 2304-MDT From: William Galway Subject: Bladerunner I just noticed a copy of "Bladerunner" at the local bookstore. In reality it's "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep" by Philip K. Dick. Apparently the movie is based on the book (I would guess about as closely as movies based on books usually are)--so someone figured it would be good marketing to retitle the book to correspond to the movie. (This is all very aboveboard, I'm basically just spouting what I read on the inside cover of the book.) ------------------------------ Date: 7 May 1982 10:36 PDT From: Coleman.ES at PARC-MAXC Subject: re: "Has anyone read any good self-contained SF novels Subject: lately?" Mr. McLure, If you haven't read last years hugo winner "Snow Queen" by Joan Vinge, you really should. She manages to build an entire complex society for the readers without having to resort to describing it in boring detail in the first part of the book and then getting around to telling her story. I won't even try to tell you the plot because it was somewhat complicated and it's been awhile since I read it (it's been loaned out). Also you might try "Wave" and "Wave Without A Shore". One of these is by C J Cherryh and I've forgotten the name of the other author, I'm sure that someone on the list will give you his name. These were both good books, one is based on a society with the philosophy is "I think it is, therefore it is". Our hero is involved in a power struggle with another man to determine which of their pictures of the universe will win out. It is a nice philosophical work with some nice BEM-type aliens and a dash of "Space War" action. The other book is a story about an investigator who has come to a planet to investigate a strange accident/disappearance. The story itself ebbs and flows like the tides in a large ocean. I really enjoyed this one. Any comments?? Michele P.S. I have enjoyed the Titan series so far. ------------------------------ Date: 7 May 1982 0951-PDT (Friday) From: heath at UCLA-Security (Frank Heath) Subject: Rehashes and New Films I would like to second Mclure's comment on sequels et al. Short of rave reviews I will not buy anything titled "The first in the ??? Trilogy". It seems to be an excuse for a weak plot which is only partially resolved with the remainder left as a cliffhanger. I was a little disappointed in Zelanzy's "Madwand" which will apparently be followed by others. Has anyone heard of a new Steven Spielberg film "E.T. The Extra Terrestrial (in his adventure on earth)" or "Forbidden World (a Science Fiction horror in Deep Space)". The former is due out June 11 according to a promo distributed at UCLA. The later has just come out. I haven't seen anything about them and find this surprising in Spielbergs case. ------------------------------ Date: 8 May 1982 1359-MDT From: Dudley Irish Subject: Re: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #46 Re: The World, The Flesh and The Devil: Its a good thing you knew the title because I never would have remembered. The holocost that takes place is biological in nature. If I remember correctly the black man was in a mine cave in when the cloud passed over, the woman was with a group of scientists in a decompression chamber (the others in the decompression chamber killed themselves I believe), and I think that the white man was at sea when it all happened and managed to escape that way. It is, in fact, a very good movie in my opinion, well worth the watching if you get a chance. The ways in which the characters handle being the last people alive are very interesting and the way in which they start the whole mess over again, although predictable, is good. Dudley Irish IRISH@UTAH-20 ------------------------------ Date: 7-May-82 11:39:16 PDT (Friday) From: Klose.ES at PARC-MAXC Subject: ST:TWOK The plot Last night, I attended a pre-release screening of "Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan" at Paramount Studios in Hollywood. The film is scheduled to be released on June 4th, but Nicholas Meyer (the director) indicated that they are hard at work to meet that deadline. The print we saw was partially completed. The last third of the film used raw footage and had a rough soundtrack. nano-review: ST:TWOK is definitely worth seeing. pico-review: This film recaptures the spirit of the TV series and (unlike ST:TMP) is a successful adaption of the series to the big screen. micro-review: The plot is standard TV series fare and is probably less interesting than that of ST:TMP. However, ST:TWOK succeeds because there is more emphasis placed on the characters, than on the special effects (which are never spectacular, but are always excellent) and because it never loses touch with its roots in the TV series. -- Paul ------------------------------ Date: Sunday, May 9, 1982 2:23AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Subject: SPOILER WARNING! SPOILER WARNING! The following messages are the last in the digest. They are progressively stronger spoilers for the movie Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan. Many plot details are discussed. Some readers may not wish to read on. ------------------------------ Date: Sunday, May 9, 1982 2:23AM From: Klose.ES at PARC-MAXC Subject: ST:TWOK The plot (MILD SPOILER) ** MILD SPOILER: Impressions of the film without giving away any of the plot ** When the film began with the familiar star-filled void and the Star Trek theme, it gave me a good feeling. Then, a female's voice: "Captain's Log, Stardate...". All right! I got the feeling that Meyer was well aware of what was wrong with ST:TMP and successfully avoided problems that were inherent in the original. There are a few scenes which were almost like "reshots" of scenes from ST:TMP. It was as if Meyer had seen ST:TMP and said to himself, "I would have done it this way". In fact, I believe that the first action in the film is an intentional parody of ST:TMP. The script is not as melodramatic as ST:TMP and there is a lot of off-the-wall humor ala SW and TESB. The relationships between all of the crew members are played off of each other. Ricardo Montoblan does a good job as Khan. The main new character is Saavik, an attractive and highly logical female Vulcan. She will probably become a regular in future movies. All of the regulars return. Spock currently captains the Enterprise and Kirk is still an Admiral. McCoy, Uhura, Scotty, Sulu, et al. are all still aboard the Enterprise. The only exception is Chekov, who commands another vessel, the Reliant. The new kid, Saavik, is the first mate on the Enterprise and is training to be Captain. The special effects are as good as anything made post-SW. Particularly impressive was a very well-designed alien. Kirk's shuttle hovering around the Enterprise in ST:TMP was "refilmed" in ST:TWOK, with a much better degree of success. The space shots seem to be more realistic, looking less like models. Computer graphics is used a lot (mostly of the lined type). However, there is some extremely nice graphics using textured surfaces. All in all, I think Star Trek fans will not be disappointed. I guess it must be possible for studios to learn from their mistakes. -- Paul ------------------------------ Date: 7-May-82 11:39:16 PDT (Friday) From: Klose.ES at PARC-MAXC Subject: ST:TWOK The plot (MODERATE SPOILER) ** MODERATE SPOILER: Basic plot synopsis without giving away any plot twists ** The Enterprise is now being used primarily as a training vessel for new recruits. Kirk is aboard to assist in training exercises and for nostalgia. The Reliant's mission is to find a suitable lifeless planet to be used in the Genesis project, a "bomb" which can instantly and violently convert matter into a planet with an Earth-like environment. The Genesis project is being run from a space station by an old flame of Kirk's. Chekov unknowingly beams down to the planet which is inhabited by Khan and his renegades. Khan implants an alien into Chekov's ear which gives Khan control over his mind. Khan then uses Chekov and the Reliant to capture the Genesis project and to lure Kirk and the Enterprise. The movie deals with the cat and mouse struggle between Khan/Reliant and Kirk/Enterprise. -- Paul ------------------------------ Date: 7-May-82 11:39:16 PDT (Friday) From: Klose.ES at PARC-MAXC Subject: ST:TWOK The plot (SUPER SPOILER) ** SUPER SPOILER: Gives away major plot resolutions (read at own risk!!) ** It turns out that Kirk's old flame is actually his ex and that her young blond assistant is actually Kirk's son. Khan is killed when he tries to destroy the disabled Enterprise by blowing up the Reliant using the Genesis "bomb". Spock enters the radioactive engine room to make vital repairs, facing certain death. And has been expected, Spock dies saving the Enterprise from destruction. His funeral is very emotional, with everybody crying and Scotty playing "Amazing Grace" on the bagpipes. The coffin is jetisoned to the surface of the Genesis planet and the film sort of leaves it open for the possibility of his future ressurection by showing the coffin amongst the ferns on the planet surface. -- Paul ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 10-May JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #48 *** EOOH *** Date: Monday, May 10, 1982 1:17AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #48 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Monday, 10 May 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 48 Today's Topics: SF Books - Harlan Ellison Query & Dream Park & "Glossolalia" & The Dark Bright Water, SF Music - TRON & Bladerunner & Wendy Carlos, SF Movies - Secret of Nihn & TRON ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 8 May 82 20:51-PDT From: mclure at SRI-UNIX Subject: Harlan Ellison question In the paperback version of his ALONE AGAINST TOMORROW on the 'books by Harlan Ellison' page, at the bottom he lists forthcoming books (printed in 1971), one of which is DEMON WITH A GLASS HAND, presumably having something to do with the Outer Limits episode. Does anyone know if this ever came to fruition? or whether it, like THE LAST DANGEROUS VISIONS still sits on the backburner. ------------------------------ Date: 8 May 1982 19:34-EDT From: Charles F. Von Rospach Subject: Read anything good lately? McClure asked if we had read anything good recently. Well, I have, and I found it in a very unusual place. The book I am talking about is 'Dream Park', by Larry Niven and Steve Barnes. I am nominating it for my suprise of the year because I had sworn off of Niven books forever after getting tired of reading my favorite author decline into a series of claptrap commercialized pieces of dodo, with the Topper being the (to me, at least) totally losing 'Ringworld Engineers'. With very few exceptions, I found his collaborations boring and senseless, and I finally got tired of being disappointed. I pretty much cut my teeth on Vintage Niven, and watching an author of his talent churn out high paying contractual slush on the level of a Stephen Goldin made me sick. The only reason I even attempted Dream Park was because I got it for about 50 cents as part of joining the SF Book Club (after a couple years of not being a member). I opened very slowly, like a masochist expecting another failure. And I couldn't put it down. I found it to be one of the most enjoyable books I have read in the last year. The merging of technology and D&D was up to some of Nivens finest hard science books. The characters lived and breathed like I haven't seen them before. Without drooling too heavily, I would be more than happy to recommend this book to anyone who is looking for a good time... chuck ------------------------------ Date: 9 May 1982 2026-PDT From: Telecon at OFFICE-8 (ALMSA TeleconferenceCOL J Leszczynski) Subject: GLOSSOLALIA For a quick laugh, hackers and computer language phreaks may want to check out a story by Arlan Keith Andrews, Sr. ("Glossolalia") in the July 82 issue of ANALOG magazine. It's the story of the documenting of the building of the Babylonian Ziggurat, constructed by the Babylonia-Assyria Building Erectors, Ltd (BABEL) under contract to the Royal Department of Development (DoD). Their main method of storing data is digital encoding (thin-fingered scribes) on hard disks (mud tablets baked in the sun). They employ several sub-contractors, among them Tarsus Instruments, the Dravidian Engineering Consultants and Isis/Nile/Tutankhamen Enterprises, Ltd. Eventually the hard disks are stacked higher than the tower they are building, threatening a crash... ...and on and on (well, for 6 1/2 pages, anyway). Enjoy, Rich ------------------------------ Date: 9 May 1982 20:14:42 EDT (Sunday) From: David Mankins Subject: good books Some months back I sent in a review of Patricia Wrightson's "The Ice is Coming", a fantasy novel based in modern-day Australia, dealing with Australian aboriginal mythology of Earth-spirits and one's place. It was a good book. Last week, I found a copy of the sequel "The Dark Bright Water." This novel is similar in tone, and follows the adventures of Wirrun, as he learns what it means to be a Hero of the People. A storm, has washed a water-sprite out to sea. Being a fresh-water creature, she cannot stand the sea (the salt burns her skin) and, when she encounters a current of fresh-water, she follows it underground, where she is trapped, far from her own land. Meanwhile, Wirrun goes to the mountain, where Ko-in, an ancient Hero of the People, gave him a Power, wrapped in a cord made from possum-skin. Wirrun has gone to put the Power back where he found it. While there, he hears a haunting song (in a woman's voice) that subsequently haunts him for the next year. Meanwhile, the central-Australian aborigines find their springs drying up, and land once desert flowering with the subterranean flow of water. Weird stuff; even weirder, the Land is over-run with spirits out of their country. This is a matter to be brought to a Hero's attention, so they send for Wirrun, the Ice-Fighter. Knowing nothing about the legends of the Australian Aborigines, I found both these books (The Ice is Coming, and The Dark, Bright, Water) to be fascinating reading. Even if its bad anthropology, it sure is good story-telling. **** Philip K. Dick's recent death prompted me to read more of his novels. Though I was weirded-out by "Valis", and not really taken by "Ubik", (the latter was good, but not riveting), the excerpt from "Now wait for Last Year" printed here in noting his death prompted me to go on and read some of his other works. I find his earlier work to be Good Stuff. Not as drugged-out and the endings work better. "The Man in the High Castle" Ever wonder what life in the United States would be like if Japan and Germany had won World War II? Read this book and you'll know. "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?" Gosh, if the book is half as good as the title...It is, at least that much. The book is about a bounty-hunter in a entropic world (where everything is falling apart, and humanity fleeing to colonies on other planets, hunting down androids masquerading as humans. Why should being an android trying to lead an ordinary life be a capital offense? It's a good book, anyway. It's been re-released under the title "Bladerunner", with a painting of Harrison Ford on the cover, because of the movie (discussed recently here). ------------------------------ Date: 7 May 1982 19:28-EDT (Friday) From: Mijjil (Matthew J. Lecin) Reply-to: Lecin at RUTGERS Subject: TRON, Blade Runner - scores, no spoilers... TRON: Music by Wendy Carlos - I believe the FIRST score she has done since BECOMING Wendy Carlos, no? We all remember his work as Walter Carlos, particularly "A Clockwork Orange" and "Switched-On Bach"... BLADE RUNNER: (Opens June 25th.) Effects are by Douglas Trumbull (I didn't know that!) and the music is by (you guessed it) Academy Award Winner VANGELIS... [Mijjil] ------------------------------ Date: 9 May 1982 04:46-EDT From: Stuart M. Cracraft Subject: Wendy Carlos Tron may be her first score since A Clockwork Orange, however she has done some excellent work since her sex-change operation. On her earlier albums she had done half of the Bach Brandenburg Concertos. Recently she released the other three with the earlier three in a two album set called Switched-On Brandenburgs. Being a follower of Bach, I found her interpretations of his 6 concertos preferable to any of the chamber music versions I have heard! Bach demands a precision which she is capable of doing with her N-track working technique. I find her serious work vastly preferable to Tomita. ------------------------------ Date: 8 May 1982 19:55-EDT From: Charles F. Von Rospach Subject: Tron and Secret of Nihn I just returned from the movies, and I saw the cuts for two films that I thought I would pass on... Tron has been mentioned a couple of times. The preview they showed of it has some of the simply best computer animations (of things going on inside a computer, no less) that I have seen, bar none. If the rest of the movie is anywhere near up to that quality, we have a new classic here, folks. This looks like a must see. The Secret of Nihn is a new animated flick due out from Don Bluth Studios and United Artists. For those that don't know, Bluth is a long time Animator who cut his teeth with Walt Disney on Snow White. He, and most of the disney Animation crew cut out and started on their own a few years back halfway through production on Fox and the Hound due to major differences of vision between them (Most of the people who worked with Walt) and the management of Disney (mostly bottom line middle managers and others of high vision like those responsible for Black Hole). The cut I saw was the level and quality of animations I expect from a disney film, and the story line looks real interesting, based on a fantasy/sword and sorcery style story. Bluth is one of the few people left who worked with Walt himself, and it finally looks as if there is a place where the visions that Walt fostered will continue. I am as sorry as anyone that it couldn't have been with Disney studios, but having worked with Disney for four years, I can attest that since Walt's death, the management have become caretakers of the past, rather than seers of the future. Schlock such as Black Hole just reiterated that for me. I am Glad to see that there is someone out there continuing on in the old ways. (Note: For those that didn't realize it, if you saw Xanadu, you saw one of Bluth Studio's first products. The Goldfish animation scene was done by Bluth and Co., and was designed to look VERY much like a similar scene in Fantasia. chuck ------------------------------ Date: 9 May 1982 04:38-EDT From: Stuart M. Cracraft Subject: tron I saw some extensive previews of this recently. Yes, the animation is excellent, but from what I heard of the story, the movie looked like garbage. Sort of like a spaced-out version of that Oblivia Newton-John disaster Xanadu. All effects, no (reasonable) story. Count on it to die a quick death in the theaters. ------------------------------ Date: 7 May 1982 (Friday) 0923-EDT From: OSTER at Wharton-10 (David Oster) Subject: Disney's TRON and Burroughs computers Reply to: WHOLEY at CMU-20C --Skef TRON, judging by the Disney syndicated comic strip, chronicles the adventures of a group of processes. They are trying to defeat the power grab of the evil M.C.P. (Master Control Program) which wants to prevent them from communicating with their users. Anyone who has worked with the Burroughs operating system knows that this is not fiction. The M.C.P. wasn't always evil. Old hands at Burroughs have told me that back in the old days the Master Control Program was a novel -- the extensive comments and the choice of procedure, variable, and data type names made the thing the romance of Fred, the process manager, and Sylvia, the storage manager. For example, the disk pages were called "sheets" and there is supposed to be an interesting sequence where Fred trys to fork Sylvia between the sheets. Unfortunately, this was years ago. Managerial types claimed the thing was sexist and made the programmers change all the names to boring ones. That change marked the beginning of the corruption that turned the M.C.P. into the evil thing it is today (at least according to the film TRON). ------------------------------ Date: 7 May 1982 1108-PDT From: Daul at OFFICE Subject: TRON's graphics I believe that one of the systems they use is a Foonely F-2 or F-3. It is a Dec-10 look alike made in california. --Bill ------------------------------ Date: 7 May 1982 1727-PDT From: Craig W. Reynolds from III via Rand Subject: Origin of TRON The idea that the name TRON came from the PDP-10 instruction of the same name (octal opcode 666) sounds like one of those things that MUST be true, its just too much of a coincidence, right? Wrong. The original writer and now director, Steven Lisberger (who is a video game addict, but not a hacker) chose many names of characters from video game and computer jargon, but usually for the way the name sounded. He took the last syllable of "elecTRON" for the main character's name. Of the computer graphics groups working on the film; MAGI/ Synthavision uses Perkin-Elmer CPUs, Robert Able & Associates have 11's and VAXen, triple-I (Information International Inc, us, the good guys) use a Foonly F1 (posing as a fast KA10), I don't know what Digital Effects Inc. uses. TRON is getting close to completion. Two or three reels are completely finished, perhaps 85% of the effects scenes have been completed. Lots of fevered action is happening on the sound track (by Wendy Carlos), even as we speak. The release is still slated for July 9 - coming soon to a system near you! One of the corniest lines associated with TRON is in one of the "trailers" (coming attractions) that I've seen. It invites you to a world "...where love and escape do not compute...". (Note: the 2nd sentence above, containing only one word is for the benefit of Jerry Pournelle) -c ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 11-May JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #49 *** EOOH *** Date: Tuesday, May 11, 1982 3:55AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #49 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Tuesday, 11 May 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 49 Today's Topics: SF Books - The Universal Pantograph & LOCUS Reading List & Chap Foey Rider & The Red Magician & Dream Park, SF Movies - Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan & Sword and Sorcerer & The Phantom Empire, SF TV - The Phoenix & QED, SF Lovers - Time Magazine ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 10 May 1982 1513-PDT From: KDO at SRI-KL Subject: Book query A friend of mine wants to know if a book called \The Universal Pantograph/ exist (supposedly by Alexei Panshin). ------------------------------ Date: Monday, 3 May 1982 13:11-EDT From: SWERNOFSKY at BBNA Subject: LOCUS reading list Does anyone have the LOCUS reading lists for 1981 and 1982 ?? Thank you. -- Steve ------------------------------ Date: 10 May 1982 17:35:56-PDT From: jef at LBL-UNIX (Jef Poskanzer [rtsg]) Subject: Chap Foey Rider query. The Chap Foey Rider stories, by Hayford Peirce, did indeed appear in Analog. The three that I know of are: "Mail Supremacy", March 1975, "Doing Well While Doing Good", August 1975, and "Rebounder", April 1976. One other story by Peirce might be of interest to the serious student: "Side Effect" in the June 1976 Analog. While the story itself has nothing to do with the venerable Mr. Rider, the accompanying illustration by Kelly Freas makes reference to someone named "C. F. Ryder". --- Jef ------------------------------ Date: 9 May 1982 2327-PDT From: Dolata at SUMEX-AIM Subject: The Red Magician Nano review: A good read, somewhat thought provoking, minor flaws The Red Magician by Lisa Goldstein is a good read with several interesting ideas. It is about a young girl in Eastern Europe just before the holocaust, and her experiances with a Jewish magician before, during and after the war. Interestingly enough, although she is put into a concentration camp, the book is not overwhelmed by her experiences in the camp. While they are integral with the plot, the plot is broader than the Jewish experience of persecution and genocide. There is a conflict between two strong forces, but these forces are not Judaism/Nazism, but between the magician and a mis-guided rabbi! This is a first work by the author, and it is well done. I personally felt that there were a few flaws, but they did not detract from the enjoyability of the read, just kept the book on the shy side of Great. As a agnostic raised as a catholic (goy), I enjoy reading about Judaism and the insights into the Judaic mythology (golems, rabbinic magicians,etc) given by this kind of book. This is pure fantasy, no science fiction involved. One of the major flaws was that the author depended on the reader knowing Jewish mythology and history. While much was pretty common knowledge, some of what was most central to the book was obscure to me and several other goy friends. An appendix explaining about these myths would have been helpful. As it is, I would like to hear from a SF-LOVER who knows about Jewish myths so that I can ask a few questions. However, you should read the book first so that my questions don't give away the ending prematurely. Dan Dolata ( dolata@sumex-aim ) ------------------------------ Date: 10 May 1982 21:59-EDT From: James A. Cox Subject: Read anything good lately? Let me second CHUQUI's endorsement for \Dream Park/, although unlike him, I have liked about everything Niven has done, especially his collaborations with Pournelle (with the major, major exception of \Lucifer's Hammer/, which I couldn't even finish). I have never been a D&D fanatic, but I too found the mixture of high tech and fantasy-D&D fascinating. Read it! ------------------------------ Date: 9 May 1982 14:21:39 EDT (Sunday) From: Winston Edmond Subject: Star Trek The following news item from UPI appeared in the paper today: Preview could settle Mr. Spock's fate Overland Park, Kan. (UPI) -- The fate of Mr. Spock is in the hands of those who attend the one and only sneak preview of the latest Star Trek film, Paramount Pictures executives announced yesterday. A work print of the film with an undisclosed ending was to be shown at 8 p.m. yesterday in a Kansas City suburban theater. The studio was to decide on the basis of viewer reaction whether to use another ending when the film is released June 4, said publicist Eddie Egan. Kansas City was chosen for the preview of the print just finished last week because it is in the middle of the country and because a science fiction convention was in town, Egan said. ------------------------------ Date: 10 May 1982 1305-PDT From: Cabral at SUMEX-AIM Subject: Sword & Sorcerer / TV I enjoyed the Sword & the Sorcerer immensely, and although I didn't feel it matched Lucasfilm in quality, I felt it had much the same fun approach and recommend people see it. They announce a sequel (I like movies and books with sequels!) and would like to know if anyone has heard how soon they plan to come out with it. In addition, I would like to know if "The Phoenix" and "QED" were one shot TV shows or if we can expect to see them again. I felt both were very good, the latter especially. Art ------------------------------ Date: 10 May 1982 10:47 edt From: Boebert.SCOMP at MIT-MULTICS Subject: Here's the plot... The Gene Autry serial is "The Phantom Empire," and it ran on the Matinee at the Bijou series on PBS (a show worth looking for if you love old movies, as they run shorts and cartoons that are seldom seen). I wrote a review of it that is in some back issue of SFL; the thing is a real hoot. (Caption in one prolog: "Gene Autry, who is being held prisoner by a vicious band of research scientists...") Earl ------------------------------ Date: 10 May 1982 1044-PDT (Monday) From: heath at UCLA-Security (Frank Heath) Subject: Time Magazine and SF LOVERS SF LOVERS has made Time Magazine. On page 54 of the May 3 issue in a side bar to the story titled "Here Come the Microkids" we are told how a "bespectacled 16-year-old" Marc "calls up" files "humor", "sci-fi lovers", and "info micro." So much for keeping a low profile. As usual the author in making thing simple got them screwed up. The whole article is pretty light weight. ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 13-May JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #50 *** EOOH *** Date: Thursday, May 13, 1982 4:47AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #50 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Thursday, 13 May 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 50 Today's Topics: SF Books - Friday & Dream Park & Brunner, SF Topics - British Science & Socialist SF, SF Movies - Conan the Barbarian & Bladerunner, Random Topics - Foonlys, Spoiler - Bladerunner ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 05/11/82 23:32:08 From: LEOR@MIT-MC Subject: Friday, by RAH Heinlein's new book, "Friday", has been out in hardcover for at least a week now. I'm almost done with it, and am happy to say it is damn GOOD Heinlein. I never did read The # of the Beast, because a) the Omni excerpt gave me a head- ache, and b) the reviews were mostly thumbs down. But Jerry P. told me Friday was great, and I agree fully. If anything at all about the main idea were disclosed in a review, much of the impact of the first few chapters would be significantly dulled. I kinda liked getting butterflies in my stomach upon hitting one particular line... I sure hope some kind of sequel comes along... I haven't finished "Friday" yet, and I don't think I want it to end. -leor ------------------------------ Date: 12-May-82 9:39:07 PDT From: WC.pa @ PARC-MAXC Reply-to: "PAUL DOHERTY AT OAKLAND UNIV c/o" Subject: Read Anything Good Lately A dissenting view on "Dream Park". I rate it as Niven's worst novel. Yes it does have a few good scenes, and a few surprises , but even Niven cannot carry the large number of characters (aka Cannon Fodder) each one of which has two names! You will never want to see the words : hologram, or zombie , again. This book proves that even a good D+D game makes terrible literature. ------------------------------ Date: 5 May 1982 1051-EDT From: DD-B Reply-to: "DYER-BENNET at KL2137 c/o" Subject: SF-Lovers submission (WMartin at Office-3 (Will Martin)) I've met, at several different conventions, someone claiming to be John Brunner. It appeared to be the same person in each case. This is not, of course, particularly conclusive. As to your other remarks about Brit SF in general, that doesn't bother me particularly much more than all the American SF which assumes that we will be the leading nation in space. Do you think it should? ------------------------------ Date: 12-May-1982 From: JOHN FRANCIS AT EIFFEL Reply-to: "FRANCIS AT EIFFEL c/o" Subject: Anglophiles Rise Up First of all, the original query. John Brunner does indeed exist, at least enough to autograph a copy of 'The Squares of the City', and to give a talk to a University society. As for the strange idea that English technology is dead - let's look a bit closer. 1) Transport. Who gave you the VTOL attack aircraft, the supersonic passenger transport, the aircraft engines used in (some) L-1011's, and what is STILL the best car in the world ? 2) Medicine. First ever heart-lung combined transplant, test-tube babies, the EMI full-body scanner, and the best transplant success rate of any hospital in the world. 3) Etc. AGCR (gas-cooled nuclear reactors) that work quietly and efficiently, and which don't leak into the atmosphere). [For those who don't believe technology is any use unless it kills people - the Chieftain tank with the light-weight armour, and a whole bunch of nasty little portable anti-tank missiles, etc.] Sinclair's portable TV's (even exported to Japan!). 4) Computer-related technology. Ceefax/Prestel/Oracle -- data-base access using your TV, or TV and phone. 30ns cycle-time plated wire memory (actually in use). [Whatever DEC may think] The concept of controlling devices using normal memory reference instructions was not born with the PDP-11. The Atlas had this in 1967, and the latest machine (MU-5) designed at Manchester University stands comparison with anything designed in America. And look at firms like CAP selling their computer expertise to the Americans! Of course most of this will be entirely new to the majority of readers. What this shows, however, is not that good old GB does not have any ideas, but that nobody knows how to sell or develop an idea! America still leads the world in making a profit from other people's inventions, although the Japanese are catching up fast. And, of course, it's not illegal to earn enough to live on in America. (yet - although I don't like the look of the latest Budget ideas...) Sorry about the length of this. I realize it's not really science fiction, but I claim it's justifiable as an answer to an earlier slur for 2 reasons: (1) Equal time, and (2) the earlier piece WAS science fiction. Ho Hum. Back to watching the Twilight Zone.. John. ------------------------------ Date: 11-May-82 14:04:03 PDT (Tuesday) From: Newman.es at PARC-MAXC Subject: A specter is haunting Venus from IN THESE TIMES of May 5-11, 1982: According to the San Francisco-based publication SPACE FOR ALL PEOPLE, a new group of science fiction writers called Red Shift intends to produce sci-fi with "redeeming socialist value." "Sadly," writes Red Shift spokesman Peter J. Krala, "Too much of what has been said by Heinlein, Asimov, Pournelle, and others about our destiny in space has been conservative and reactionary, advancing the petty bourgeois thesis that all is fixed in human nature and [that] we will continue to fight, have wars, exploit and deal though corporations." Krala adds: "We look forward to aiding in the struggle to free space from the clutches of the Starship Troopers for the benefit of all people." ------------------------------ Date: 12 May 82 15:39-PDT From: mclure at SRI-UNIX Subject: Review: Conan 12 May 82 - Movie Review - Conan the Barbarian By RICHARD FREEDMAN Newhouse News Service (UNDATED) It was a stroke of some sort of genius to cast Arnold Schwarzenegger and James Earl Jones as the hero and villain, respectively, of ''Conan the Barbarian.'' Schwarzenegger has biceps like the trunk of a gnarled old apple tree, and Jones can act. But in the ongoing Sword-and-Sorcery Sweepstakes, while ''Conan'' is marginally less offensive - because it is less pretentious - than ''Excalibur,'' it's nowhere near as good as ''Dragonslayer.'' We are in the so-called Hyborian Age of 12,000 years ago, when men were men and table manners had not yet evolved. A marauding band of tribesmen led by Thulsa Doom (James Earl Jones), head of the unpleasant snake cult of Set, kills young Conan's parents and casts him into slavery. Some 15 years later, the orphan grows up to be Arnold Schwarzenegger, the Austrian Mr. Universe and Mr. Olympia. When he says ''Is this your robe?'' it comes out sounding like ''Is this Europe?'' Conan may need a travel agent even more than a diction coach. Anyhow, after fighting in some fearsome gladiatorial combats, he escapes from captivity and goes on the road to wreak vengeance on Thulsa Doom and his mangy minions. Conan's companions in this worthy enterprise are Subotai the Mongol (surfer Gerry Lopez); Valeria, Queen of Thieves (Sandahl Bergman, who brings a distinct touch of Malibu Beach to the proceedings); and a wise Oriental hermit (Mako), who narrates Conan's adventures to us in a gravelly voice. They are commissioned to rescue the erring daughter of King Osric (Max von Sydow, looking more like Good King Wenceslas) from the clutches of Thulsa Doom. It seems he's now running a sort of Jonestown death cult, which has seduced the proto-hippie Princess (Valerie Quennessen). There, surrounded by priests out of a road-company ''Aida,'' Doom holds forth in barbaric splendor. He wields snakes the way Alice in Wonderland uses flamingos for croquet mallets, serves up cauldrons of soup composed of human hands and heads, and orders Conan crucified on the Tree of Woe. Only by having mystic runes painted all over his inexpressive mug does Conan survive this ordeal to interrupt a Cecil B. DeMille orgy of Doom's disciples and set fire to his palace. All this silly savagery takes place against a ponderously insistent score by Basil Poledouris, who helps himself generously to the choruses Prokofiev wrote for ''Alexander Nevsky.'' But the music more often sounds like Carl Orff on an orff day. Based on the half-century-old comic strip that got a new lease on life during the depths of the '60s, ''Conan the Barbarian'' is directed by John Milius (''Big Wednesday'') with an aggressive brutality that beggars description. He can't elicit professional performances from either Schwarzenegger or Bergman, but neither can he spoil the evil majesty Jones brings to the idiotic lines he must speak. And at least Milius has the good sense to give Schwarzenegger a minimum of dialogue and maximum of muscle-flexing. ''Conan the Barbarian'' even boasts an epigraph from Nietzsche, no less: ''That which does not kill us makes us stronger.'' It's a more accurate description of most ''health'' foods than of the leaden film that follows it. FILM CLIP: ''CONAN THE BARBARIAN.'' Arnold Schwarzenegger as the musclebound comic-strip hero doing dire battle with evil James Earl Jones as the leader of a primitive snake cult. Brutal baloney. Rated R. One star. ------------------------------ Date: 12 May 1982 1013-PDT From: Phil Gerring Subject: Foonlys and DEC-10s: a bit of history Rather than calling a Foonly a "DEC-10 lookalike" or "a fast version of a KA-10" (which are both accurate as far as they go), it should be noted that the prototype Foonly was also the prototype KL-10 and serves as SAIL's primary processor (on which I write this even now). The Stanford AI lab hardware hackers who developed it later went off to sell them as Foonlys. Phil Gerring ------------------------------ Date: Thursday, May 13, 1982 4:47AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Subject: SPOILER WARNING! SPOILER WARNING! The following message is the last in the digest. It contains some plot details of the movie Bladerunner. Some readers may not wish to read on. ------------------------------ Date: 05/11/82 21:11:48 From: DMM@MIT-ML Reply-to: JBARRE@MIT-AI Subject: Re: "Bladerunner" (CAUTION!!! SPOILER ENCLOSED!!!) I'm getting my mail for the first time in quite a while, so I hope I'm not repeating someone else. I have not read the novel that the movie was based on, but I did attend a sneak a couple of months ago in Dallas. In the intro to the film, it mentions the locale as LA, not N.Y. as the critics say. Of course, this may have changed since the sneak - This was definitely a working print of the film - there were no titles whatsoever (except for a logo at the start) and several sloppy edits. For those of you unfamiliar with the plot, the film concerns a Bladerunner, a cop/bounty hunter,(Harrison Ford) who comes out of retirement with the LAPD (or whatever they call it in 2019) to hunt down and destroy some "replicants." Replicants, are not really androids, but "genetic" copies, if you will. They are sent out about the solar system to do the dirty work of mining the asteroids, fighting the wars, and giving pleasure to the human colonists. Under no circumstances are they allowed on Earth. So, Harrison Ford goes galavanting all over LA, trying to find these replicants, who come back demanding that their "creator" give them longer life spans. You see, they are engineered to die after a certain number of years, before they have a chance to ask realize just what they are, or develop too many emotions. Of course, he meets up with an "experimental" replicant, who just happens to be a beautiful female and they end up running away together at the end of the movie. "Bladerunner" gives us a wonderful look at what LA (the US?) might look like in the year 2019. The sides of buildings are covered with giant advertisements for Coca-Cola, Fuji Film, and some wonderful pill that an oriental woman keeps popping. The streets are filthy and it seems that it is always raining. One thing that bothers me, though, is how a sidewalk chinese restaurant just happens to have an electron microscope sitting behind the counter. I know this is supposed to be 2019, but c'mon.... Overall, I was somewhat disappointed in "Bladerunner." I really loved the street life, but unfortunately the blood and gore action seemed rather gratuitous in places. I might add that I saw an early sneak of "Alien" and was rather turned off too... (of course, I was sitting in the front row.....) ---julie barrett ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************Date: Saturday, May 15, 1982 2:26AM  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 27-Apr JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #51 *** EOOH *** Date: Wed, 27 Apr 88 08:23:27 EST From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #51 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Saturday, 15 May 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 51 Today's Topics: Administrivia - Duplicate Digests, SF Books - Friday & Series (Riddle of Stars), SF Movies - Summer Releases & Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan & The Revenge of the Jedi & The World,The Flesh,and The Devil, SF TV - Star trek & Battlestar Galactica, SF Topics - Socialist SF, Random Topics - Foonlys, Spoiler - Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Saturday, May 15, 1982 2:26AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS-REQUEST at MIT-AI Subject: Duplicate Digests We experienced some transmission difficulties with issue #50 that resulted in some duplicate digests. The weak link in our decentralized mail forwarding system seems to be isolated. We have not yet determined why the problem occurred, but we will be manually monitoring transmissions until it is fixed. Hopefully this will prevent any repetition of the problem while maintaining a normal level of service. Jim ------------------------------ Date: 26-Apr-1982 From: STEVE LIONEL AT STAR Reply-to: "STEVE LIONEL AT STAR c/o" Subject: "Friday" Before Heinlein's "Number of the Beast..." came out, I was warned (if that's the right phrase) of its coming by Spider Robinson's review in Analog. Well, Spider is no longer doing Analog reviews, so it came as quite a surprise to see a new Heinlein novel on the bookstore shelves. "Friday" is billed as a return to the RAH of "The Puppet Masters", complete with at least one of the characters, "Kettle Belly" Baldwin. (It's been so long since I've read "Puppet Masters" that I'm not certain Baldwin was in it, though I think he was in "Gulf".) Indeed it is much more reminiscent of his 1950s vintage work than, say, "Number of the Beast...". However, it is far from a complete regression. What do you say about a book that starts off with a gang rape of its heroine? Yep, that's one of the first things that happens to Friday, a genetically-engineered "enhanced Artificial Person", who, of course, is also stunningly beautiful. (It's not stated whether or not she has red hair.) Friday works as a courier for the "Boss", who runs some sort of secret organization, devoted to who-knows-what. The United States are now disunited, having been broken up into many separate nations, like California Free State and the Chicago Imperium. The book follows Friday as she wanders around, with no specific mission, being inconvenienced by a world-wide revolution that erupts while she's on vacation. Thankfully missing from "Friday" are the protracted philosophical discussions that, for me, tainted "Number of the Beast..." and "Time Enough for Love". Present are the extended families of "Time Enough.." and "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress", the sexual attitudes of "I Will Fear No Evil" and the business ethics of "The Man Who Sold The Moon". I enjoyed reading "Friday", but felt cheated by the fact that the book just doesn't go anywhere. There's no real plot except to follow Friday around from bed to bed and see what trouble she can get into. There is some interesting discussion of racism in the form of "real humans" against "Artificial Persons". Friday has "passed" as a normal human for quite a while, but she gets into trouble by forgetting just how bigoted some people can be. The ending of "Friday" is reminiscent of "Number of the Beast..."; just what it is I won't reveal since that would spoil just about the only thing you might call a "surprise" in the book. I'm certainly not going to say "read it" or "don't bother", since most any SF-lover would read anything by Heinlein, and I think Heinlein and his publisher know that. Steve Lionel ------------------------------ Date: 12 May 1982 1032-MDT From: Evelyn Mathey Subject: Re: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #49 Hi, I'm Evelyn Mathey, a newcomer to the mail list via Sandia National Labs. In response to the 'has anybody read anything good' question, I would like to recommend Patricia MacKillip's Riddle of Stars. This is a trilogy (The Riddle Master of Hed, Heir of Sea and Fire and Harpist in the Wind) in one hard cover put out by the SF book club. I felt the the books were well written and the ideas intriguing. I was particularly interested in the idea of land law, in which the ruler is a part of his land. He 'groks' it to use the Heinleinian term. The heir knows of the ruler's death by his own opened awareness of the land law. This land law is different for each of the kingdoms, as each of them has a different national character. In addition to this the books are full of vital, living characters, and lots of magic and action. I highly recommend it. I have also read The Forgotten Beasts of Eld by MacKillip, but know of nothing else she has written. If any one does have some more titles hidden away, I'd like to hear about them. ------------------------------ Date: Tuesday, 11 May 1982 16:19-PDT From: hollywood!mike Subject: Summer Fantasy Films BLITZ Now, at last, the terror can begin again! This summer will have a record number of fantasy films opening (first time and in reissue). (A critic, complaining about my selection of films below, forces me to point out that the only thing these films have in common are the special effects). May 14 Gonad the Barbarian June 4 Poltergeist coproduced by spielberg StarTrek: The Wrath of Kahn June 18 E.T. (The Extraterrestrial) Spielberg Firefox Clint Eastwood June 25 Blade Runner Ridley Scott, Trumbull Megaforce A real loser The Thing A remake July 2 The Secret of NIMH Animated feature, Don Bluth July 9 Tron Disney: The Wrath of Tron July 30 The Dark Crystal Muppets? July 31 Raiders of the Lost Ark reissue Aug 13 Friday the 13th, Part III in --> 3D <-- !!! Star Wars -- A New Hope reissue Aug 20 Superman II reissue ??? Bambi Disney, reissue date not set Of these, certainly Gonad the Barbarian, Star Trek, BladeRunner, Firefox, The Secret of NIMH, Tron and The Dark Crystal, Poltergeist and E.T. are worth seeing at least once. Michael ------------------------------ Date: 12-MAY-1982 13:52 From: TSC::COORS::VICKREY Reply-to: "TSC::COORS::VICKREY c/o" Subject: In Response To Recent SF-Lovers The E. Net just got SFL after a month of involuntary cold turkey caused by assorted problems. Seven issues at once! So, if I am replying to some things which may already be considered dead issues on this list, bear with me. To: Chris at RAND-UNIX, RE: Uhura in Command, V5 I40 Originally Uhura was supposed to command the Enterprise in "Catspaw", when Scott and Sulu (and the dead Jackson, who prompted McCoy to utter the immortal "He's dead, Jim" for the first time) were trapped/zombied (zombized?) and Kirk, Spock, and McCoy went off to rescue them. (Delegation of duty? Wazzat?) But NBC and/or Paramount got chicken and gave command to the second engineer, DeSalle. Uhura finally TOOK command in the animated "The Lorelei Signal" (is there anyone who hasn't heard about the vocal blooper in this episode, where Nichols said "Mr. Scott, I'm taking command of this ship AT LAST!"?), but she didn't stay on the ship - she and Chapel WERE part of the search and rescue party and didn't hesitate a second in using force to get the native women to help find the landing party. I don't think Uhura was actually weepy in the "handsome as ever" line - just pandering to a masculine ego. To: All, RE: Chekov in Command, V5 many recent issues The character of Chekov was created in response to two major factors: NBC wanted a youthful, boyish character the young females in the audience could sigh over (like Davy Jones of the Monkees; no kidding, that's how they put it); and Pravda published a rather pointed article about how this was supposed to be the 23rd (or whatever) century and nationalism doesn't exist so why is there no Russian on the Enterprise? Pravda wanted a Russian on the Enterprise? Okay, but he would be a RUSSIAN Russian, hence lines like "The Garden of Eden? It was just outside of Moscow. Adam and Eve must have been very sad to leave it." and "Scotch? It was invented by a little old lady from Leningrad." and etc. But he was also supposed to be a Wonder Kid, Captain-in-training, destined for command, and so on. This potential was never fully realized in the series, but it was supposed to be. And it is not that unusual for a young kid to come in, be better than the oldtimers, and rise above them quickly; it happens here-and-now, and it happened in Star Trek, or have we all forgotten about that former Wonder Kid James T. Kirk, the youngest man to ever command a starship? (Not that I like Chekov. He is my least favorite ST character, but Wonder Kid is what he was intended to be.) To: Bill Gropp , RE: TESB & RotJ, V5 I44 I heard a rumor that the release date of The Revenge of the Jedi has been moved back to this December. (A fellow here commented recently that waiting for the next Star Wars movie is a lot like waiting for the next release of VMS.) To: James A. Cox , RE: The World, The Flesh, and The Devil, V5 I46 The beginning of the movie had Belafonte as a gas worker or sewer worker or something trapped underground for n days. Initially, he was comforted by the sounds of people digging him out (and a handy stock of emergency food rations), but the sounds of digging stopped and he had to dig himself out. He found an empty world (not even any bodies - imagine!). Anymore and I'd probably qualify for a spoiler, but it struck me that most of the enforcement of pre-disaster racial tensions came from Belafonte's character, who was morbidly determined to keep reminding Stevens of it. Regards, Susan ------------------------------ Date: 14 May 1982 11:59 PDT From: STOGRYN.ES at PARC-MAXC Subject: Battlestar Galactica In the novel by Glen A. Larson and Robert Thurston, Battlestar Galactica, distance and time were measured in miles and hours. In the ABC-TV version, these relative concepts had different units. Anyone remember what they were, and what their relationships to their legendary ancestral Earth units were? Steve ------------------------------ Date: 14 May 1982 21:00-EDT From: James A. Cox Subject: A specter is haunting Venus Politics generally makes bad literature. Nobody ever reads fiction writers "with a cause." I look forward to a long lifetime of ignoring Red Shift writers. By the way, do you have any information on who the Red Shift writers are? Any well-known ones? ------------------------------ Date: 14 May 1982 12:07:38-EDT From: csin!cjh at CCA-UNIX Subject: "a specter is haunting venus" I saw that item quoted in IN THESE TIMES earlier this week, and managed to keep forgetting to bring it in and enter it (probably under the title "We still don't get no respect.") Krala sounds like a flaming idiot---has he never heard of Brunner, Haldeman, Le Guin, Tiptree, etc. etc.? I don't want to get back into the mess of "significance" versus "entertainment" (I have been known to read and enjoy much that would fit each of these categories) but it's my observation that anything that sets out to be "relevant" winds up being crap. There are a few exceptions to this; much as I hate to admit it, there's a tolerable story under the mess of libertarian nonsense in THE PROBABILITY BROACH (but its successor, THE VENUS BELT, is pretty clumsy), but I'd say that THE FEMALE MAN is a reasonable representative of the left-wing "message" story and it's one of the worst pieces of SF not written by a name author but published under major house. Oh well---we survived Roger Elwood, I suppose we can survive Krala. I expect I'll get political flack from both sides for this but I'd suggest you look in the archives and see if you have something new to say. Speaking specifically of STARSHIP TROOPERS, can anyone with a more encyclopedic knowledge of the field say whether there is any author with combat experience who does glorify war? Kornbluth's malignant hypertension (which ultimately killed him) is credited to his infantry service in World War II, and Haldeman nearly lost a leg to a land mine in Vietnam, while Heinlein was invalided out of the Navy shortly after graduating from Annapolis (1929?) and "Doc" Smith's Ph.D. was in something like food technology. ------------------------------ Date: 14 May 1982 1729-PDT From: Craig W. Reynolds from III via Rand Subject: F1s as KA10s Phil Gerring's comments on the nature and origin of the Foonly F1 are all correct. I did not intend to dump on the F1 as being only a fast KA10. What I meant was that AS WE USE IT HERE (at triple-I) it is simply a very fast KA10. Certain advanced features of the processor are not being used, the paging hardware is getting rusty. No, far be it from me to say anything bad about our F1 - not while there are still scenes for TRON to be completed. It can get very hard to deal with when its feelings are hurt. ("Call ME a KA-10 will you? You bit brain! I may just take a few days off and you can finish your movie with a calculator and a paint-by-numbers set!") -c ------------------------------ Date: Saturday, May 15, 1982 2:26AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Subject: SPOILER WARNING! SPOILER WARNING! The following message is the last in the digest. It discusses some plot details in coming movie Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. Some readers may not wish to read on. ------------------------------ Date: 10-May-1982 From: PAUL KARGER AT RDVAX Reply-to: "PAUL KARGER AT RDVAX c/o" Subject: Star Trek II rumors - Spoiler Warning SPOILER WARNING: From the Boston Globe, 10 May 1982 Mr. Spock will meet his demise in the "Star Trek" epic, the film's producer, Robert Sallin, said. "Star Trek II - The Wrath of Khan" was shown for the first time in Kansas City Saturday. Sallin said the audience applauded the end of the movie in which Spock - the green-blooded alien played by Leonard Nimoy - dies. ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 18-May JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #52 *** EOOH *** Date: Tuesday, May 18, 1982 5:28AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #52 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Monday, 17 May 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 52 Today's Topics: SF Fandom - Nebula Winners & Hugo Ballot, SF Movies - Conan The Barbarian & The Secret of NIMH & Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan & Revenge of the Jedi, SF TV - Battelstar Galactica, Random Topics - Foonlys ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 05/17/82 1144-EDT From: THOKAR at LL Subject: Nebula Winners and Hugo Ballot Having had my copy of Locus for almost a week now and not having seen it in the digest yet, I feel obliged to send in both the Nebula winners and the Hugo ballot. So, here goes. Nebula Winners: Best Novel -- The Claw of the Conciliator (Gene Wolfe) Best Novella -- "The Saturn Game" (Poul Anderson) Best Novelette -- "The Quickening" (Michael Bishop) Best Short Story -- "The Bone Flute" (Lisa Tuttle) A Nebula citation (subject unknown) went to Ed Ferman of F&SF, also a Nebula citation (again subject unknown) went to Stanley Schmidt of Analog. A third Nebula citation (and again subject unknown) went to David G. Hartwell of Timescape Books. 1982 Hugo Nomination Ballot Best Novel __ Downbelow Station -- C.J. Cherryh (DAW) __ Little, Big -- John Crowley (Bantam) __ The Many-Colored Land -- Julian Man (Houghton Mifflin) __ Project Pope -- Clifford D. Simak (Del Rey) __ The Claw of the Conciliator -- Gene Wolfe (Simon & Schuster) __ No Award Best Novella __ "The Saturn Game" -- Poul Anderson (Analog, Feb 2) __ "In the Western Tradition" -- Phyllis Eisenstein (F&SF, Mar) __ "Emergence" -- David R. Palmar (Analog, Jan) __ "Blue Champagne" -- John Varley (New Voices 4) __ "True Names" -- Vernor Vinge (Binary Star 5) !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! __ "With Thimbles, With Forks and Hope" -- Kate Wilhelm (Asimov's, Nov 23) __ No Award Best Novelette __ "The Quickening" -- Michael Bishop (Universe 11) __ "The Thermals of August" -- Ed Bryant (F&SF, May) __ "The Fire When It Comes" -- Parke Godwin (F&SF, May) __ "Guardians" -- George R. R. Martin (Analog, Oct 12) __ "Unicorn Variation" -- Roger Zelazny (Asimov's, Apr 13) __ No Award Best Short Story __ "The Quiet" -- George Florance-Guthridge (F&SF, July) __ "Absent Thee from Felicity Awhile" -- Somtow Sucharitkul (Analog, Sept 14) __ "The Pusher" -- John Varley (F&SF, Oct) __ "The Woman the Unicorn Loved" -- Gene Wolfe (Asimov's, June 8) __ No Award Best Nonfiction Book __ Anatomy of Wonder -- ed. Neil Barron (Bowker) __ After Man -- Dougal Dixon (Macmillan) __ Danse Macabre -- Stephen King (Everest) __ The Grand Tour -- Ron Miller and William K. Hartman (Workman) __ The Art of Leo & Diane Dillon -- ed. Byron Preiss (Ballantine) __ No Award Best Professional Editor __ Terry Carr __ Edward L. Ferman __ David G. Hartwell __ Stanley Schmidt __ George Scithers __ No Award Best Professional Artist __ Vincent DiFate __ Carl Lundgren __ Don Maitz __ Rowena Morrill __ Michael Whelan __ No Award Best Dramatic Presentation __ Dragonslayer __ Excalibur __ Outland __ Raiders of the Lost Ark __ Time Bandits __ No Award Best Fanzine __ File 770 -- Michael Glyer __ Locus -- Charles N. Brown __ SF Chronicle -- Andrew Porter __ SF Review -- Richard E. Geis __ SF-LOVERS Digest -- Jim McGrath (Just kidding gang) [ Drat! - Jim ] __ No Award Best Fan Writer __ Richard E. Geis __ Michael Glyer __ Arthur Hlavaty __ Dave Langford __ No Award Best Fan Artist __ Alexis Gilliland __ Joan Hanke-Woods __ Victoria Poyser __ William Rotsler __ Stu Shiffman __ No Award John W. Campbell Award __ David Brin __*Alexis Gilliland __ Robert Stallman (deceased) __ Michael Swanwick __*Paul O. Williams __ No Award * eligible again next year If enough interest is expressed, I will collect and tally your votes for the hugo winners. (Maybe the digest can take out a membership in the Worldcon and vote like NESFA (New England Science Fiction Society) does each year.) Votes will be kept confidential. The FINAL deadline will be JULY 15, which gives you almost two months. Voting in done on an Australian Ballot system, i.e. rank by number (1st choice, 2nd choice, etc) up to and including No Award. Winners will be announced sometime in August. Greg [ Thanks Greg for typing this all in! If anyone is interested in having a straw Hugo poll of the readership, please send mail to Greg. If we have enough interested parties, we'll do something about it. -- Jim ] ----------------------------- Date: 16 May 1982 1133-PDT From: Phil Gerring Subject: Movie review: Conan The Barbarian Pico-review: Made in Japan Nano-review: Any resemblance to characters, living or dead, created by Robert E. Howard (et al.) is purely coincidental. Micro-review: If you're a Conan fan and expect to see him on the screen, expect some disappointment. Otherwise, it's an OK (barely) swords and sorcery/samaurai movie without much in the way of sorcery. Worth going to see, but the word is that The Sword and the Sorcerer (which I've not seen yet) has upstaged it considerably and is a better movie. Macro-review: We kept expecting the dialogue to be in Japanese with subtitles; some of the scenes appear to be loosely based on Conan stories (e.g., The Thing in the Crypt, The Tower of the Elephant), but many of the weapons, armor, fighting techniques, symbols, and overall impressions had a strongly Japanese flavor. The antagonist, Thulsa Doom, was indeed a Howard character, but in the King Kull stories... The general flavor of the movie is Conan et al. vs. mostly human antagonists, while that of the books is more Conan vs. mostly supernatural monsters. Many of the scenes were rather inexplicable--I kept wondering what the heck was going on. The first part of the movie was mostly disconnected scenes with Conan being the only common point (which is to say, the plot is very weak). After we manage to meet all of the good guys and bad guys, we finally have a quest to save a beautiful princess from the evil sorcerer, which starts to tie things together. The special effects were straightforward and well-done, with the best part being a fight with some kind of air elementals or demons or some such (it wasn't entirely clear just what was going on). The first part managed to avoid being unnecessarily bloody, but this was rectified later (I DON'T recommend this for kids...). One point worthy of mention is that this is the first movie of the genre to have a female who handles weaponry with more than adequate skill. Summary: Pretend the title is The Three Samaurai, ignore some of the disconnectedness, and it's definitely worth seeing once. ------------------------------ Date: 15 May 1982 16:49-EDT (Saturday) From: Mijjil (Matthew J. Lecin) Reply-to: Lecin at RU-GREEN Subject: The Secret of NIMH Am I to assume that this "animated feature", "The Secret of NIMH" is that wonderful old book "Mrs. Frisbee and the Rats of the NIMH?" (It would be FANTASTIC if it was...) (TAKE THE KIDS.) {Mijjil} ------------------------------ Date: 17 May 1982 1849-EDT From: Thomas Galloway Subject: ST-TWOK ending (not a spoiler, but refers to one tangently) There are always two ways to interpret the comment, "the audience applauded the end of the movie"... tom ------------------------------ Date: 17 May 1982 07:21-EDT From: James M. Turner Subject: ROTJ is to VMS as... Just to put it in perspective: Waiting for ROTJ is- 72 times worse than waiting for the next analog (36 times the time and twice the cliffhangers) 150 times worse than waiting for the next Instant Message. (75 times the wait, and twice the cliffhangers) 6 times worse than waiting for the next Elfquest (12 times the wait, but only 1/2 the cliffhangers) Equal with the Hugo winners (3 times the wait, but 1/3 the cliffhangers) 1/2 as bad as waiting for a new VMS release (Twice the wait, but 1/4 the cliffhangers [remember, it's your JOB!]) oo times as bad as waiting for a new Heinlein book (twice the wait, and who cares anyway) 1/oo times as bad as waiting to see if Regan goes away (equal wait, but it's only a movie, we got Vadar in the White House!) And 1/oo^2 times as bad as waiting for the con that's next week, and your boss just dumped a ton of make-work on your desk, and the tape drive's dead and... James Note: Any political statements made are those of the author's evil persona that creeps out a 6 am on out-of-phase days and causes trouble. If you don't like it, fill in your favorite liberal and elected office. ------------------------------ Date: 16 May 1982 0017-PDT (Sunday) From: lauren at UCLA-Security (Lauren Weinstein) Subject: Battlestar Dyslexia I don't remember all of those time/space units they used in that loser... but I do remember something that popped up in the first few minutes that definitely set the mood of the series for me. The "good guys" were being chased by the Du Pont Crylons. The baddies were getting close. One of our heroes ejaculated a line like: "We'd better do something, they're only 4 microns behind us, and gaining!" Yeah, I thought, they'd better do something REALLY fast. Microns. Cretins. --Lauren-- ------------------------------ Date: 17-May-82 12:12PM-EDT (Mon) From: David Miller Subject: Battelstar Galactica Units In the TV series of Battelstar Galactica the following units were used to describe space and time: BG | Terran equivalent: ---------------------------------- micron | second centon | minute yarn | year No units for distance were ever used except for one horrible reference to parsec, where they men A.U.. Distances were handled in the manner of light yarns and fighter microns (i.e. the distance a fighter travels in a micron) This is the reason expressions like "Wait just one micron!" and "Cylons are thirty microns away" This last line always caused me to envision a Cylon with his blaster stuck firmly into the speakers back. The best reference to Earth units is in the late season episodes where they take aboard a Space Shuttle. After it escapes and is followed back to its home planet TERRA, one of the occupants tells Starbuck to "hold on for a minute" whereupon Starbuck looks around for something to grab onto and replies "A what?" Personally the whole deal with the units struck me as a bunch of feldacarp. Dave (miller@yale) ------------------------------ Date: 15 May 1982 1402-PDT From: Mark Crispin Reply-to: Admin.MRC at SU-SCORE Subject: Foonlys at Stanford There is only one Foonly at Stanford, an F2 at the CCRMA Lab (the computer music folks). The SU-AI processor is not, nor has it ever been, a Foonly, prototype or otherwise. In particular, it is not the common prototype for a Foonly or DEC KL-10 that Phil Gerring describes. It is an early production model DEC KL-1080 model A CPU, somewhere between revision level 8 and current KL's. The differences between it and modern KL's can be attributed to its older packaging, not keeping it up to revision level, and modifications of dubious value made to the hardware and microcode at Stanford. When the "super-Foonly" project folded at Stanford, some of the people involved went to DEC; and portions of the design of the super- Foonly became the base for the KL-10 design. The DEC prints labelled as being drawn by "S. Foonly" are not indicative of this; rather the early KL prints were drawn without anything in the "drawn by" box. Somebody lawyer or marketing person or something (I never got a straight story on who) got all upset and said there had to be SOMETHING there. Nobody could remember who did what (remember they were using SUDS, back in the days when CAD was a new idea) so as a joke they put in "S. Foonly" in all the prints. Stanford's contribution to the KL-10 effort was recognized and rewarded by DEC, which is why we got one of the early KL-10s. Other individuals in the super-Foonly group at Stanford got together after a while and eventually did build Foonlys. A KL-10 and a Foonly are two entirely different processors; the old super-Foonly designs at Stanford were just a small (but important) part of the KL-10. ------------------------------ Date: 16 May 1982 1134-PDT From: Phil Gerring Subject: Duplicate digests, Foonlys Hey, SFL #50 broke a record for number of copies received: I got no less than eleven (previous record was six). I like SFL, but do you realize how much it costs me to store eleven copies for even just a day??! MRC's comments on Foonlys and 10s are undoubtedly more accurate than mine, mine being based on oral tradition and his on (apparently) research and/or personal experience. So much for oral tradition in the technological world... ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 19-May JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #53 *** EOOH *** Date: Wednesday, May 19, 1982 2:26AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #53 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Wednesday, 19 May 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 53 Today's Topics: SF Books - Friday & Dream Park, SF Movies - Conan the Barbarian & The Sword and the Sorcerer & The Secret of NIMH & Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan, SF TV - Battlestar Galactica, Random Topics - Foonlys ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 17 May 1982 21:28-EDT From: James A. Cox Subject: Heinlein's \Friday/ (Before I tell everyone what I thought of \Friday/, let me give a warning. I have not liked a Heinlein book since before \Stranger in a Strange Land/.) \Friday/ takes place in a not-too-distant future in which North America has become "Balkanized" into dozens of independent states, and multinational corporations form a political force equal to or greater than that of states. As everyone on this list probably knows, Friday, the heroine of the book, is an Artificial Person (AP), whose genetic makeup was designed by engineers. Because of this, she has various "enhanced" capabilities, which make her especially suited for her job as courier of high-security items for "Boss," the head of an ill-defined pseudo-intelligence agency with unknown allegiance. The book follows Friday's adventures as she travels about the world, fulfilling Boss's orders and dealing with prejudice against AP's which is widespread, and with her own problems that arise from her having "passed" as an ordinary human. The plot is rudimentary and rather far-fetched, serving chiefly as a vehicle for Friday's exploits. In fact, it is in some respects like a picaresque. To give an idea of the pace of the book, here is the first paragraph: As I left the Kenya Beanstalk capsule he was right on my heels. He followed me through the door leading to Customs, Health, and Immigration. As the door contracted behind him I killed him. That is on page one. Page seven sees Friday kidnapped and gang-raped. Friday's adventures \are/ interesting, if only because she is one of Heinlein's "competent" characters, and it is always gratifying to see someone doing a job well. Some of the many problems in the book come from Heinlein's attempts to deal with themes such as prejudice, which Heinlein tries to satirize. But the people depicted as prejudiced are so stylized that, after I finished a scene with them, I felt a sense of unreality; it was unbelievable that Heinlein actually thought that readers would accept them as real people. His other attempts at satire fail as badly. He tries to make fun of the spaced-out democracy of California, but he succeeds only in exaggerating their "mellow" way of life so much that he divorces it completely from reality, something which a good satirist never does. Further problems arise from Heinlein's inability to get away from sex. Ever since \Stranger in a Strange Land/ sex has figured very prominently in his books (it was not absent in his previous books, just less prominent). I am not prudish, but by the time Friday declares for the twenty-first time that she is feeling "rutty" (naturally this declaration is usually followed shortly by the gratification of her desire), I felt a bit embarrassed. I was certainly not stimulated, or even amused. Heinlein should learn the virtue of moderation. (I know he claims "moderation is for monks," but he is wrong, at least when it comes to sex in his writing.) The last straw for me in \Friday/ was Heinlein's attempt at "non-sexist" writing. Specifically, I object to his use of "her" as a neuter pronoun throughout the book (e.g. "A courier should never let her physical skills become rusty"). While this is tolerable in some instances, for example when "her" could conceivably refer only to females, but Heinlein does not restrict himself thusly. Whether this is sexist or not is beside the point. Good writing invariably suffers when subjected to the constraints of political fads of the moment. Also, coming across such non-standard usage directs my attention away from the story while I wince at its unwieldiness. Language evolves; it generally ignores attempts either to speed up change or to retard it. People who make such attempts usually accomplish nothing but harm to their own writing. To sum up, if you like fast-paced action and revolutionary sexual mores you will like \Friday/. If you don't, and if ridiculously exaggerated satire and "non-sexist" writing turn you off, you won't. I didn't. ------------------------------ Date: 18 May 82 4:25-PDT From: mclure at SRI-UNIX Subject: Dream Park I don't recall if anyone has mentioned this but there's a reference to MIT in Dream Park by Niven and Barnes. page 37 "Oh, I was playing Zork when I was seven. My father had a computer and a Modem. You know Zork? You played a role-playing game against a program in the computer at Massachusetts Institute of Technology." Whew that one came close, but no mention of the Arpanet yet, (thanks Larry!). It's not really playing "against" the computer though. It's as if the computer is your eyes/ears/hands/etc. ------------------------------ Date: 18 May 1982 0719-PDT From: Zellich at OFFICE-3 (Rich Zellich) Subject: Movies: CONAN vs. THE SWORD AND THE SORCERER Well.....I've seen TS&TS, and I think Conan was much better done (even if they did use plot elements from almost everything \except/ the Howard Conan stories). TS&TS appears to be a made-for-TV movie, complete with an entire cast of TV actors. I thought it was a lot of fun, albeit somewhat slow in places, but it's pretty hard to swallow for anyone who takes their sword-technology seriously (the Society for Creative Anachronism people HATED it). The costuming, setting, etc., are all essentially European (pre?) dark-ages, but the swords are quite obviously 20th century machine made - including some "switchblade" swords, etc. The writers and special-effects people have obviously been watching too many James Bond movies! If you can find a Rush Hour Special, or some other discount, The Sword & the Sorcerer is worth seeing (lotsa Doug Fairbanks stuff, etc.), but it's probably not worth full price. Conan, on the other hand, even with all it's failings (WHY didn't they simply use the entire "Conan" novel (first in Howard's series) for the plot instead of making up their own!?) \is/ probably worth full price. BTW, the end of TS&TS explicitly names the sequel! Don't know if they are just kidding and poking fun at all the other series and sequels being made these days, or if they're just over-confidently planning ahead... Enjoy, Rich ------------------------------ Date: 18 May 1982 16:02:55-EDT From: csin!cjh at CCA-UNIX Subject: Re: The Secret of NIMH I have seen some publicity on this which reads as if the movie could have been adapted from something called "Mrs. Frisbee and the Rats of the NIMH" (having never read it, I can't be sure). ------------------------------ Date: 17 May 1982 1800-EDT From: DD-B Reply-to: "DYER-BENNET at KL2137 c/o" Subject: SF Lovers submission ( Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #48 ) (Charles F. Von Rospach ) Not to say that you're wrong, since this is quite clearly a matter of personal opinion, but I'd like to warn other readers that there is quite a range of opinion on Dream Park by Niven and Barnes. My personal impression was that this was a first novel by an unknown that Niven had blessed without actually doing anything to. This may be totally incorrect, but to me the book read as if that is what had happenned. ( Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #49 ) (Cabral at SUMEX-AIM) This seems to be my day for negativity. I saw The Sword and the Sorcerer a couple of weeks ago, and found it one of the most badly thought out movies I have ever seen. The magic tomato slicer (sword) is just too much. The ethnic diversity of the country (read: combination of cheap stock footage) where the "action" took place was totally unbelievable . Now, Conan, on the other hand, was enjoyable. The production design was consistent and very realistic. My major complaint was that Conan the Barbarian never demonstrated his mettle by winning an apparently losing battle. He was always either fully in control, winning, or he was down and out. Since this film summarized his early history, I'll take his dullness and lack of strategic planning as appropriate; I hope he becomes more wiley in future films (surely there will be future films?). Some people have also complained that Thulsa Doom was not a sufficiently world-menacing threat; but I didn't see anything in the movie implying that he was supposed to be, so that didn't bother me. ( Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #50 ) (LEOR@MIT-MC) Many thanks for FRIDAY review. Several others have mentioned that it was good old Heinlein, but they tended to mention bad juveniles when pressed for examples (The Star Beast, The Puppet Masters). I may still wait for paper.... I enjoyed Number of the Beast, but it is interesting to note that it had no hardcover publication before its trade paper edition. Although I haven't heard it discussed in these terms anywhere, that would seem to indicate something about the editors' opinions of the book. ( Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #50 ) (mclure at SRI-UNIX) The Newhouse News Service (never heard of it) review of Conan includes a reference to the Hyborean age, and to a specific date in the past. As far as I can recall, that information didn't come from the movie. It's possible, I suppose, that a movie reviewer somewhere is literate enough to read a Howard book, but that goes against most of my prejudices. Also, it claims that the movie is based on the comic book series rather than the actual books. If true, this could explain some of the complaints that fans of the books have made about the movie. ( Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #51 ) (STEVE LIONEL AT STAR) On Friday: Apparently the reference to Puppet Masters that put me off of the book earlier come from the book directly. On the other hand, Kettle Belly Baldwin sounds familiar (I think from Gulf) and a good character. Sigh. As you say, the question is not whether I will read it, but when. ( Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #51 ) (hollywood!mike) Actually, Gonad the Barbarian is a comedy skit performed (at SF conventions and elsewhere) by the Duck's Breath Mystery Theater (out of San Francisco?). ( Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #51 ) (PAUL KARGER AT RDVAX) If they are right about having shown the ST preview at a place with an SF convention in town (a real SF convention), the response they got, particularly applause for the death of Spock, may not be at all representative of the general reaction. Heh, heh, heh. ------------------------------ Date: 18 May 82 17:04:50-EDT (Tue) From: Michael Muuss Subject: Battlestar Dyslexia I could have sworn that in at least one show the term "MiliCentons" was used to refer to BOTH distance, and time, alternately. Unless their drives only operate at one velocity so the two would be the same... ------------------------------ Date: 18 May 1982 0848-PDT From: William "Chops" Westfield Subject: Foonlys There are 5 different types of foonlys, as I understand things, they go: F1 - faster than a screaming demon. KA instruction set F2 - about a KAs worth F3 - a little smaller than an F2 F4 - almost a KL maybe has Kl instruction set and extended addressing (these are very new) F5 - about a 2020 - these are newer... SRI has F2s (SRI-CSL, SRI-C3P0), F3s (SRI-NIC), an F4 (not on net (yet)) They are all really nice machines, if you want a small DEC-10... BillW ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 21-May JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #54 *** EOOH *** Date: Friday, May 21, 1982 3:14AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #54 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Friday, 21 May 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 54 Today's Topics: Reviews. Dream Park TESB, medical costs, Conan, authors in combat, new RAH Duck's Breath Mystery Theater ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 17-May-1982 From: JOHN FRANCIS AT EIFFEL Reply-to: "JOHN FRANCIS AT EIFFEL c/o" Subject: Reviews. Reviews: Conan the Barbarian, and Friday. Why review both of these together ? Well, what they have in common are (1) shallow leading characters, and (2) lots & lots of tits. Actually, I only found point 1 mildly offensive in Friday, and I didn't expect (or want) Conan to be a philosophy major. Point 2 (how Freudian) didn't worry me much, either, but then I like tits too. Heinlein seems to be more obsessed by them than I am, but the amount of obsession we can see in Friday does not get in the way of the plot. Not that there is very much of that either, but the story moves along fast enough, and with enough interesting things happening on the way, that you don't find out there isn't much of a plot until you stop and consider what you have just read. The book re-introduces lot's of old friends, even if they have changed their names and appearances a little. We have 'Kettle-Belly' Baldwin, who has appeared somewhere before, as the target for the heroine's 'Oh how I wish I could swarm into his lap but he never even notices I have a body' attitude, and the same character (almost) appearing as Georges, who DOES notice she has a body. We also have the obligatory brother-and-sister four-or-more-in-a-bed extended household, but these ones seem to have other things to do as well as have a good time. I enjoyed the book a great deal, despite the fact that I didn't expect to, but felt that it could have been just as good (or even better) if it didn't contain a gang-bang of the heroine by way of introducing her to us. Conan could also have been improved, to my mind, by reducing the amount of graphic sex scenes. I presume most people who go to see 'R'-rated movies are aware of what goes where, but I don't regard sex as a spectator sport. In a movie, though, you can't just flick on a couple of pages - you have to wait until the grunt-and-groan is finished. Not that I objected to Conan having his women - the three women I can think of off-hand were all important to the plot, and in at least one case it was necessary for Conan to 'pay the price...'. All I object to is having to watch him at it. There are also vast numbers of bare-breasted women in this movie, even when they are not in bed with Conan. This may also be offensive to some people, as a lot of them are not strictly necessary to the plot. But I digress..... back to the actual main characters. Arnold S. may not be the greatest declaimer of a line in modern cinema, but he showed more acting talent in this movie than I expected. Just the expression on his face after he was surprised by the camel would make the film worth a second seeing! He also wields a sword fairly well (not very surprising considering what happens to you if you don't pay enough attention to your instructor at the school where he was taught ?). The supporting cast is also good - not only James Earl Jones as a villain in the school of 'Evil for Evil's sake', but the little archer, and the extremely delectable thief who is actually portrayed as having a fine brain as well as a great body. The secondary baddies are not so great, although the hammer-wielder gets a few good moments (for example, when he belts the pillar to pieces, and then stands there with a bemused expression on his face). The special effects are good at times - I really liked the fire spirits trying to take Conan when he was recuperating. Micro Reviews : Conan: Definitely a must-see movie. Good main casting, and enough action to gloss over the *** occasional inadequate minor characterizations. Friday: The best thing Heinlein has written lately. (Not that that says much). Again enough ** action to cover lack of a real plot, and the little homilies on sex don't really get in the way. Read it if you like any Heinlein - it's reminiscent of the way he used to write. ------------------------------ Date: 20 May 82 16:19:48 EDT (Thu) From: Steve Bellovin Subject: Dream Park The book is full of back-pointers. My favorite was a discussion that went something like this: "That dagger is made of obsidian. Do you know what obsidian is? It's a volcanic glass?" "But what use is a glass dagger?" Overall, I thought the book was so-so. Too often, the authors used the word "technology" when "magic" would have been a fairer description. As was pointed out in this list a long time ago, holograms just don't behave that way. Now and then, they stop and explain things -- but more often, they don't. Other than that, it's really a layered story -- mystery grafted onto fantasy role-playing onto slash-and-hack onto mythology. Too often, the seams between the layers show. --Steve P.S. My apologies if I'm repeating something said earlier; I haven't seen SFL in several months. ------------------------------ Date: 20 May 1982 0327-EDT From: Steven J. Zeve Subject: TESB, medical costs, Conan, authors in combat, new RAH I have just caught up on the last month's worth of SF-L so forgive my raising some old issues. Release date for Star Wars 6:Revenge of the Jedi: I have seen a piece of four color promo for RotJ which says SW4:ANH will be re-released in Aug '82, SW5:TESB will be re-released in Apr '83 and SW6:RotJ will be released in May '83 (I believe the actual date is May 25, 1983). I will try to dig it up again to check on it. In a reference to Nourse's BLADERUNNER, Phil Gerring said that he felt the premises of the story were ill-founded. I suggest that you take a good look at the current trends in the cost of medical/health care, they show a very distinct upward motion in the money areas. So much so that it is almost impossible to get medical attention without insurance (and very thorough insurance at that). Why do you think that the politicians are proposing such losing things as National Health Insurance? In SF-L vol 5 issue 51 the question "can anyone ... say whether there is any author with combat experience who does glorify war?" was asked. Although I don't know of any authors that glorify war there are some who seem to regard it as a necessary evil and might also have combat experience. Laumer and Dickson come immediately to mind as possibilities to check into. About RAH's new book, FRIDAY. It isn't quite the great old Heinlein that the dust jacket claims, but on the other hand it definitely isn't NotB. I enjoyed it a lot, despite some of the preaching that crept in. I read it in two sittings from (I fell over from exhaustion in between the two). I disagree almost entirely with James A. Cox . Maybe I'm just totally lacking in intelligence and sensitivity, but I thought Heinlein made his points on prejudice fairly well. He was, perhaps, a little heavy-handed in some of his portrayals but not much more than a lot of satirists; I rather suspect that it was deliberate anyway, it fits with his slightly preachy style. Speaking of stereotypes and prejudice, how about this: why do so many have trouble dealing with female characterS that think in terms of "her" or "hers"; why should a strong independent woman always think in terms "him" or "his"? While it might be proper to "... object to his [Heinlein's] use of 'her' as a neuter pronoun ..." if it were being done purely for effect, to be "non-sexist", or to bow to "... the constraints of political fads of the moment." (indeed I might be the first to object to such use), it is certainly ridiculous to object to it in a story where the NARRATOR AND LEAD CHARACTER is FEMALE; keep in mind that the entire story of this book (FRIDAY) is told in first person. I see absolutely nothing wrong with a woman thinking in terms of female pronouns by default. If you have trouble with that situation, then the problem is in the reader, not the writer; maybe old RAH is less sexist than his critics claim. I'm going to have to go back to the book and check if that's what he did, 'cause I never noticed it one way or the other! With regards to the Conan movie, I agree with Phil Gerring. The movie just wasn't Conan. All the little pieces were there, some of them were even the right shape, but the director just didn't pull them together. I went with 5 other people to see the movie and we read the Newhouse News Service review (see SF-L vol 5 issue 50 - by the way, the Newhouse family is in the newspaper business - I believe that they own several papers) on the way there. We had a grand time shredding the review because of the reviewer's total lack of knowledge and understanding of the real-world details he mentions (like the reference to the 50 year old comic, and - let's face it gang - just 600 years ago "... men were men and table manners had not yet evolved ..." ). On the way back from the movie, we discussed the fact that while the reviewer was wrong in almost every detail and fact he mentioned, he was still right about the movie (although I personally thought that Excalibur was a better movie and found DragonSlayer to be a nice piece of absolute fluff). I must say in response to DYER-BENNET, the movie absolutely did not follow the comic books at all (I am a faithful follower of the Marvel Comics version of Conan and that certainly was not what I saw on the movie screen). I blame the movie's problems on the director and the producer, all the problems I found in the movie were in things that the director and producer have total control over (or should have that control over): scenes too long, scenes not long enough, bad choice in music, etc. I don't think Milius had any idea what he was doing, he just didn't seem to have an understanding of Conan. If Milius "... can't elicit professional performances from either Schwarzenegger or Bergman", I think it is more because he didn't bother to figure out what he wanted from the actors than it is due to unprofessional work by the actors. On the other hand the director can't "... spoil the evil majesty Jones brings to the idiotic lines he must speak." because even Jones' massive talent (much greater than the director's it would seem) can't bring "evil majesty" to the drek the Milius has saddled him with. All this is a little odd since obviously the director knew SOMETHING about Conan (which the reviewer absolutely did not) because "... Milius has the good sense to give Schwarzenegger a minimum of dialogue and maximum of muscle-flexing." which is exactly how Conan is supposed to behave (this is what I mean about the pieces being there). [ By the way, what \does/ the Freedman have against Schwarzenegger? The review reads as if Schwarzenegger can do nothing right, which just isn't true. Just consider this bit " ... When he says ''Is this your robe?'' it comes out sounding like ''Is this Europe?'' Conan may need a travel agent even more than a diction coach.", for some reason I don't expect a \young/ Cimmerian barbarian to have a perfect knowledge of Nemedian (or Stygian for that matter). Also, I am under the distinct impression that Schwarzenegger's accent is due to mostly to English not being his native language. Perhaps the reviewer needs reality lessons even more than Conan needs that travel agent. ] I think that the business with Conan's childhood gives a pretty clear idea of the value of the movie; consider: "A marauding band of tribesmen led by Thulsa Doom (James Earl Jones), head of the unpleasant snake cult of Set, kills young Conan's parents and casts him into slavery. [paragraph break] Some 15 years later, the orphan grows up to ... [about one paragraph removed here] ... wreak vengeance on Thulsa Doom and his mangy minions.". In other words the director just decided to scrap all of Conan's childhood and re-write it for some unknown reason(s). This is typical throughout the movie, the director and producer seem to have said, let's take this hot item and completely destroy it by throwing away everything that its fans like. So, off went the sorcery, most of the sword fights, all of the reason behind characters' actions, and all of Conan's struggles with the superhuman/supernatural. The only time you see the Conan we know and love is in little bits and pieces; the first gladiator fight, cursing out Crom, and in the brooding moments (which were much too long for the film, if there had been more action between them they would have been better). What do we have left after the butchery? A good question, primarily a lot of scenery. All, in all, you should see the movie ONLY if you can do so cheaply (like a $2 matinee), or if you don't know anything about Conan and/or don't expect to be entertained. ------------------------------ Date: 19 May 1982 21:18-EDT (Wednesday) From: Mijjil (Matthew J. Lecin) Subject: Duck's Breath Mystery Theater the "Duck's Breath" people are from Minnesota, I thought... (Anyone out there know "The ferrets of England", by Duck's Breath?) ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 24-May JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #55 *** EOOH *** Date: Monday, May 24, 1982 7:58AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at MIT-AI Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #55 To: SF-LOVERS at MIT-AI SF-LOVERS Digest Monday, 24 May 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 55 Today's Topics: SF Books - Friday, SF Movies - The Sword and the Sorcerer & Star Wars & TRON, SF TV - Computers Are People Too & Universe & Battlestar Galactica, SF Topics - Military SF, Random Topics - Duck's Breath Mystery Theater ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 21 May 1982 06:42-EDT From: James A. Cox Subject: \Friday/ Oh come on! Can you really think "Heinlein made his points on prejudice fairly well"? Everyone who Heinlein depicts as prejudiced is so irrational, nay, so anti-rational, as to be unbelievable. Friday's "arguments" with prejudiced people are terribly stereotyped. Friday asks "what's the difference between an X (who is "OK") and a Y (who is not, by racist standards)?" She is answered with something like "Well, they're just different!" (quotations are paraphrased). Fine. I'm sure there are people that stupid in today's world, but why satirize them? You've already got near-universal agreement that that sort of prejudice is unreasonable and contemptible. Satire is \not/ making fun of things that everyone already knows are wrong. It's making fun of things that everyone holds sacred. There are plenty of more insidious types of racism that would make much better targets for a good satirist. Heinlein's satire of the California way of life is similarly flawed. \Everybody/ now knows about that state's spacey excesses. Somewhere back about a year ago, making fun of California became unoriginal--and unfunny. Two people have suggested to me, one privately and one publicly, that my disagreement with Heinlein's usage of "her" as a neuter pronoun reflects a problem with me and not Heinlein. They claim that it is perfectly natural for a strong, independently-minded woman to think in terms of "she" and "her" by default, and that since Heinlein wrote the novel in the first person from Friday's point of view, that he was simply reflecting her thinking. I considered this before I wrote my original comments and rejected it. Literate people use standard English, and standard English requires "he" and "him" for the gender-unspecific prounoun. This has nothing to do with sexism and everything to do with correct grammar. I am against sexism as much as anyone, but it seems to me that a woman may be as strong and independently-minded as Friday is and still respect the rules of grammar. ------------------------------ Date: 21 May 1982 12:05:15-EDT From: csin!cjh at CCA-UNIX Subject: language in FRIDAY I've only glanced at the book, but I recollect that it's told in the first person; I'd hardly call it trendy for a competent female agent to use female pronouns as collectives. As for language evolving by itself, take a look at what happened to French a few centuries ago. There's also a question of who's evolving it (yes, I \know/ "evolve" isn't supposed to be a transitive verb); do neologisms promulgated by TIME (e.g. "smog" and c.f. their ad of 12-14 years ago in which they boasted of all the new words they spread) somehow deserve more consideration than the neologisms of utopists? ------------------------------ Date: 21-May-82 12:31:13 PDT (Friday) From: Haynes at PARC-MAXC Subject: Kettle-Belly Baldwin I believe Kettle-Belly is the "hero" of "Gentlemen, (please?) be seated", a short-story about early days on the moon. -- Charles ------------------------------ Date: 21 May 1982 12:07:47-EDT From: csin!cjh at CCA-UNIX Subject: THE SWORD AND THE SORCERER It sounds like you have a group of SCA people who take themselves too seriously; in this area (Boston) the SCAdians I've talked to (including an ex-monarch) seem to take it as amusing parody rather than a straight story. ------------------------------ Date: 18 May 1982 1418-PDT From: Cabral at SUMEX-AIM Subject: The SWORD and the SORCERER Pico review: Much fun The movie opens to show the startling revival of a long-entombed sorcerer/demon. The villain, with the help of this sorcerer, overwhelms the fair realm of King Richard, destroying Richard's armies with magic and disposing of all but one member of the royal household, a young prince named Talon who escapes with his father's impressive sword. The villain and the sorcerer have a falling out, and the sorcerer escapes into hiding. Years pass, the boy grows up, has earned a fair (!) reputation as a warrior, and ends up back at his old stomping grounds. The people plot a rebellion against the villain, but Talon has business elsewhere, so this is just a stopover, and, well, if it wasn't for the rather spirited young woman he encountered ... Like most such epics, there is a lot of blood spilled, and happily a lot of it is off camera, allowing the imagination full arena for providing the details. It includes some wonderful Dungeons and Dragons type scenes, a fast-moving pace (slow motion was used in just one short instance, and somewhat effectively), and a refreshing ending with promise of more fun to come. A must-see once, and possibly more. Art ------------------------------ Date: 23 May 1982 at 1500-CDT From: ables at UTEXAS-11 Subject: SW:IV,V,VI ; ST:III I saw a 20th Century Fox flyer for their forthcoming movies recently, and "Star Wars: A New Hope" (Episode IV) will be re-released in July or August, I forget exactly. It also said that "Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back" will be re-released at Christmas (a traditional money- making time for theatres) and of course, everyone knows "Star Wars: The Revenge of the Jedi" is to come in May of 83. I was watching the syndicated show "Entertainment Tonight" one night last week and heard something I haven't heard anywhere else. They said that Paramount has announced the title of the next Star Trek movie, it is to be "Star Trek: In Search Of Spock." I wasn't listening closely and couldn't decide if they were serious or not. Has anyone heard this from another source or was anyone listening when they said it and could tell if they were serious or not? The reason I'm puzzled is "In Search Of" was Leonard Nimoy's TV series for a number of years (although they never picked it up in our market so I never saw it, from what I heard it was fairly good). This title seems a little too coincidental. Help???? -ka ------------------------------ Date: 21 May 1982 1246-PDT From: Craig W. Reynolds from III via Rand Subject: TRON TV As the publicity blitz for TRON continues to build, several TV shows are coming out in the near future. I thought I would let the SFL readership know when they are happening. Aside from stills in the press, these shows will be one of the few places to see tha animation before the release date, July 9. It may come as a surprise to many of you, but "Computers are People Too" - or at least that is the title of the making-of- TRON TV show. It was produced by the publicity department of Disney Productions. I have not seen the show yet, but it should include clips from the film and interviews etc. shot "behind the scenes" including some shot here at triple-I. Computers Are People Too Los Angeles Sun, May 23 KTTV / 11 7pm Boston Sat, May 22 WBZ / 4 5pm Chicago Sun, May 23 WGN / 9 1pm Philadelphia Sat, May 22 KYW / 3 1pm San Francisco Sun, May 30 KPIX / 5 5pm and many more - check your local listings PM Magazine - one segment on TRON LA Fri, May 28 KTTV / 11 8pm The "Universe" segment should be great fun, they put old Walt out on the Electronic Game Grid, rezzed him up and created a true "electronic journalist" ("Gee Mom, Walter's GLOWING"). Again shots made here, at Disney, and perhaps at MAGI in NY. Walter Cronkite's Universe Anytown, USA Tue, June 29 CBS affiliates 8pm As I was writing this, Larry Malone pointed out a strange thing on page 172 of the recently published novelization of TRON (Ballantine Books). The text is what was refered to in the script as "Flynn's fatal evidence", the proof he sought that his programs had been stolen by the evil Dillinger (nee Sark). Steve Lisberger asked me to write something that looked "computerish" to be used as the evidence. The text I gave him is reproduced exactly, including the line at the top, which was supposed to be a comment telling me where to find this text on our TOPS-10 file system: File = DSKI:FLYNN.MEM[700,706] Oh, well. Now my account ("[700,706]" - TOPS-10 doesn't use usernames) is famous, next it will want royalties and start driving around town in a Limo. -c ------------------------------ Date: 23 May 1982 06:36-EDT From: Eric P. Scott Subject: Biblestarve Galaxative It was easier to pick up the units and their spellings once they started showing Adama's Tektronix dictating machine... Adama said that their lifespan had reached nearly 200 YAHRENS; I guess a Yahren is within an order of magnitude of our Year. Interestingly enough, when the Galactica intercepted Michael and Sarah's ship (bound from Lunar Seven to Paradeen), they said that the writing within (obviously 1970's English to us) was unlike anything they had in their records. So how come Adama's words are displayed in the same Roman letters as he speaks (when none of the markings about the Galactica are save the name painted on the hull)? Sloppy, sloppy. I watched most of the "Odyssey of the Battlestar Galactica" when it was shown in LA on KCOP recently. I didn't pay too much attention to details this time around. Come on Lauren, you must have videotaped the entire series? (I wouldn't mind seeing it again; it was better than Space 1999 and UFO combined. I hope some independent picks it up.) --Eric ------------------------------ Date: 21 May 1982 1809-PDT From: Lynn Gold Subject: Duck's Breath Mystery Theater They're based in San Francisco. I work for KFJC in Los Altos Hills (about 40 mins from "THE City"), and we have several tapes of their material which they did for us a while back. You BET they're local! --Lynn ------------------------------ Date: 21 May 1982 12:16:35-EDT From: csin!cjh at CCA-UNIX Subject: authors and war My recollection is that Laumer is an ex-diplomat (Retief obviously started as a wish-fulfillment fantasy, especially if you find the really first Retief story (last in the chronology, and very different in tone from all the others). Dickson, like Anderson, was some sort of science graduate; for all I know he may have gotten through college on ROTC but in reading his autobio relative to the Childe cycle there seems to be no room in the chronology for active duty. ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 26-May JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #56 *** EOOH *** Date: Wednesday, May 26, 1982 1:40PM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #56 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Wednesday, 26 May 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 56 Today's Topics: Administrivia - Mailing Difficulties, SF Fandom - ARCHON, SF TV - In Search Of, SF Movies - Summer Releases & Conan the Barbarian, SF Topics - Military SF, SF Books - Friday, Random Topics - Genderless Pronouns ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wednesday, May 26, 1982 1:40PM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS-REQUEST at MIT-AI Subject: Mailing Difficulties We experienced some transmission difficulties with issue #55 that resulted in some digests being sent out with incorrectly formatted headers. The problem has been isolated and fixed. Since we are in the process of moving our transmission facilities and making other technical changes in the way the digest is made and distributed, I am afraid that similar problems may crop up in the future. Apologies to all in advance, and we will try to keep the hassles to the readership to a minimum. Jim ------------------------------ Date: 26 May 1982 1243-PDT Subject: ARCHON Update From: Amy Newell through The membership rate for the 1982 ARCHON goes up to $16.00 as of 1 June, as determined by postmark date. However, I have it on good authority that they will not reject memberships at the current $12.00 rate that happen to get in a little late... ------------------------------ Date: 26 May 1982 10:27 PDT From: Wedekind.ES at PARC-MAXC Subject: "In Search Of" I'm afraid "In Search Of" was a disappointing circus of pseudoscience. For overall credibility I would place it between "Ripley's Believe It or Not" and the "science" articles in the National Enquirer (they were not actually ashamed to put out something which was true, but avoided it where convenient). Nimoy's main contribution seemed to be the quality of his voice as narrator, and it would be to his distinct credit if he could prove he did the entire thing under hypnosis.. Jerry ------------------------------ Date: 26 May 1982 0513-PDT Subject: Movies (DC area) From: ADPSC (Don) The Circle Theater will be playing the following: May 27 - 29 Time After Time (w/ The 7% Solution) June 1 - 2 Scanners , ZARDOZ June 9 - 10 The Shining, The Howling Check the POST for show times Don ------------------------------ Date: 24 May 1982 11:40:21-EDT From: csin!cjh at CCA-UNIX Subject: Re: conan review In response to your message of Mon May 24 02:52:47 1982: You've got several good points there. (After all, I never said Friedman wasn't a flaming idiot with tastes right out of Sinclair's Main Street.) On the other hand, I remember reading of a lot of \good/ actors who disappeared from Hollywood when the talkies came in---their accents (which didn't matter in silent films) just couldn't be fitted in. Oh well. ------------------------------ Date: 25 May 1982 at 2148-CDT From: hjjh at UTEXAS-11 Subject: LAUMER & THE MILITARY ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ LAUMER & THE MILITARY ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ The way \I/ recall it, he was a military (or air force?) attache' somewhere in Indo-China. Nicholls' SCIENCE FICTION ENCYCLOPEDIA says-- "Laumer... served in the army 1943-5,... in the U.S. Air Force 1953-6, an then joined the U.S. foreign service. He rejoined the USAF as a captain in 1960." The crucial point is probably how close to the actual fighting did he get during the 1943-45 WWII years. ------------------------------ Date: 24 May 1982 at 2110-CDT From: hjjh at UTEXAS-11 Subject: FRIDAY ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ FRIDAY ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Charlie Brown of LOCUS says, "This sequel to "Gulf" (1949) is my favorite Heinlein since THE MOON IS A HARSH MISTRESS". I checked on what RAH has written since TMiaHM (1966), and that isn't much of an accolade. But the comment does provide a lead to where the Baldwin character occurred earlier. I wouldn't want to read it again (which is my personal criterion for "outstanding"), but found it enjoyable once the ugliness at the beginning was out of the way. My biggest gripe is that I cannot accept that a male who takes part in a gang rape could be redeemable (even if he \didn't/ have B.O.). The depiction of prejudice, especially in the New Zealanders, was -- to someone acquainted with that country --a masterly touch, for race relations there are so g-o-o-d, that when one does encounter it, and one can, it's doubly devastating. I am particularly interested in seeing what reception FRIDAY gets from the strident libbers in SF-- the ones who've damned RAH for Podkayne (and damned him wrongfully, as a full and unbiased view of the book and its period in the light of a study of female protagonists in SF can adduce). I wonder if they'll realize that beneath all her competence and superiority-- Friday is no Damn-their-eyes Lazarus Long, but still the lonely, emotionally vulnerable Podkayne-type whose deepest need is not just acceptance despite being an Artificial Person, but to love and be loved. But there were a lot of little fun ideas woven thruout-- especially if one enjoys RAH's balancing of curmudgeonly outlook on humanity with optimism. As both a computer- and Antipodes-lover, my favorite quote is, "A friendly computer with a Strine [Australian] accent is better company than most people." The spaceship names are a particular joy-- Dirac, Maxwell, etc., AND Forward. \Last/ time (in THE NUMBER OF THE BEAST) our SF-L colleague just got invited to a party. \Here/, "Anti-gravity...was a mystery until Dr. Forward came along and explained it". As for sentient computers or robots, RAH's view is sadly convincing. (I think one is safe in assuming that the following conversation in FRIDAY is RAH speaking behind the scenes--) "...several times AI scientists have announced that they were making a breakthrough to the fully self- aware computer. But it always went sour." "Yes. Distressing." "No-- inevitable. It will always go sour. A compu- ter can become self-aware-- oh, certainly! Get it up to human level of complexity and it \has/ to be- come self-aware. Then it discovers that it is not human. Then it figures out that it can never be human; all it can do is sit there and take orders from humans. Then it goes crazy." ------------------------------ Date: 23 May 82 5:06-PDT From: mclure at SRI-UNIX Subject: Friday review By Roland J. Green (c) 1982 Chicago Sun-Times Field News Service FRIDAY. By Robert A. Heinlein. Holt, Rinehart & Winston. $14.95. (Roland J. Green is a science fiction novelist and columnist.) Robert A. Heinlein's latest novel is practically a compendium of the major virtues of this distinguished science fiction storyteller. His main character, Friday, is an Artificial Person. She was not only fertilized but brought to viability in vitro, intended for a life of indentured servitude. Rescued and thoroughly trained as a secret courier, she now serves an intelligence agency headed by ''Boss'' - the centenarian Dr. Baldwin, a mentor in the tradition of Jubal Harshaw from ''Stranger in a Strange Land.'' As an Artificial Person, Friday is smarter, stronger, and faster than normal humans-all assets in her profession. She is also rather active sexually, but despite this, has doubts about her own beauty and very few illusions about male human sexuality. Above all, she is thoroughly vulnerable to the vicious prejudice against Artificial People. Friday is one of Heinlein's most believable and compelling characters. Friday's world is the Earth of the mid-21st century, which has solved many of its major survival problems and even colonized the planets of certain stars, without eliminating what Heinlein has always considered the main dangers to human race - incompetence, bigotry and stupidity. One of Heinlein's greatest strengths has always been not just building plausible worlds, but showing them to us as the viewpoint characters would see them. Since Friday is a courier, what could be more natural for her than considering alternative routes to her destination - and in the process giving the reader a concise picture of Earth's transportation technology? In fact, Friday and most of the large supporting cast are on the move through most of the book. It opens with Friday killing a man she suspects of having trailed her from a space station. She then travels halfway across the Earth with her message, is kidnapped and tortured, then rescued by her agency's people. She takes a vacation with her New Zealand extended family, who divorce her after discovering that she is an Artificial Person - and at this point we are still less than a quarter of the way through the book. Despite this exceedingly brisk pacing, Heinlein seldom leaves scenes, characters or social institutions undeveloped. He also leaves himself plenty of room for a vintage collection of asides on bureaucrats, religious fanatics, the ethics of sex and self-defense, gourmet food and cats (''The coldest depth of Hell is reserved for people who abandon kittens''). When all is said, however, this book hardly requires extensive theoretical analysis. It is a book to be read, enjoyed, then reread again and again, savoring the new richness one is likely to find with each reading. ------------------------------ Date: 24 May 1982 0202-EDT From: Steven J. Zeve Subject: Re: \Friday/ Most bigots are irrational in their prejudice. Get out and talk to some real dyed in the wool bigots. They still use the good old "Well, they're just different", maybe they dye it a slightly different color but it's still there. There is nowhere near "universal agreement" about the stupidity of any form of prejudice. If there is so much agreement, how come there is still so much prejudice and bigotry left? Agreed, there are other insidious forms of bigotry (in all areas, not just in race) that need to be attacked, but the old-fashioned blunt versions are still around and still need to be attacked. Satire is a tool, a technique, it cares not for the status of the object it is attacking. I don't see that it is only for "making fun of things that everyone holds sacred". I'll bet a good satirist can poke solid holes in that idea; just imagine, ritualized satire with its own set of specialized sacred cow rules. The California exaggeration wasn't necessary to advance the plot, I'll agree to that. However, have you considered possible reasons why he put it in the book? Maybe he feels that there is something still to be said about it. Although I am not certain about this, I believe that Heinlein lives in California. If he does indeed live there, maybe that gives him a different attitude than yours about the "state's spacy excesses". Having just read White's "America in Search of Itself: the Making of the President 1956-1980", I have relatively fresh in mind White's opinion that California is where the current style of national politics (with its emphasis on image and media above issues and facts) was really born. Heinlein has a slight reputation as an observer of trends in this country. Perhaps Heinlein wanted to state his feelings on where we might be going as a country. On to the him/her debate. Currently accepted English semantics may "require" the use of he/him/his, but standard English GRAMMAR makes no such requirement (I rather doubt that semantics requires it either). English grammar merely requires the use of the correct type of word (noun vs pronoun versus adjective versus verb) at the appropriate place in a sentence. The question is not one of English grammar, but one of attitude and upbringing of the character in question. As an extrapolation of current trends it is perfectly reasonable to assume the Friday has been brought up in an environment where the use of he/him/his as a standard has not been taught to everyone from birth forward, whether such an environment is either more "sexist" or less "sexist" is another matter entirely. Since you brought up the term "literate", lets look at it a minute. I contend that being literate has nothing to do with the matter at hand. By definition (taken from Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary), "literate" means adj 1a) educated, cultured, b) able to read and write 2a) versed in literature or creative writing, b) lucid, polished noun 1) an educated person 2) one who can read and write None of this implies the use of he/him/his over she/her/hers; nor, for that matter, above it/it/its which is completely gender non-specific, species non-specific, and several other kinds of non-specific. Also, the definition of "literate" says nothing about "standard English". And speaking of "standard", whose standard English shall we use as THE standard? British? American mid-west? American east? Canadian? Australian? 19th century (most of the well known writers of that era would fail modern high school english if they wrote the way they did then)? Friday was literate by at least one of the definitions above: she could read and write, she was educated, and she was probably versed in literature by the end of the book (pun unintentional). I never noticed what set of pronouns/possesives Friday used, at least no until you mentioned. I would be upset if the pronouns/possessives were used in the wrong place in a sentence, unless it was in the speech patterns of some character that supposedly didn't know the proper usage the various pieces in the English language. Steve Z. ------------------------------ Date: 25 May 1982 23:38:03-EDT From: csin!cjh at CCA-UNIX Subject: language in Friday, pt II "Standard English"? Well, first define it, then we'll talk about what it requires. I believe I have a little more experience in this than most of the digest, as I've edited three books by three \very/ different SF authors within the last 18 months and gone several rounds with someone who swears (mostly) by the Chicago Manual of Style. Or maybe you define "literate people" as those who use your version of "standard english"? Was James Joyce illiterate? Language is not immutable, nor can you (outside of strictly controlled, strictly expository material (e.g. THE NATIONAL REVIEW?)) state that the conventions are unalterable--- else you wipe out much worthwhile SF. It could be argued that we're riding the line between prose and poetry, but good \writing/ (as opposed to good \exposition/) is going to fall wherever around that line is appropriate. ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 31-May JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #57 *** EOOH *** Return-Path: Date: Monday, May 31, 1982 12:18AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #57 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Friday, 28 May 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 57 Today's Topics: SF Books - News from LOCUS & Number of the Beast & Heinlein & Podkayne of Mars, SF Topics - Long Novels, SF Movies - Revenge of the Jedi & Conan the Barbarian & Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan & Spielberg, SF TV - HHGttG, Random Topics - Genderless Pronouns, Humor - Genderless Video Games ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 26 May 1982 at 2304-CDT From: hjjh at UTEXAS-11 Subject: Snippets from Recent Issues of LOCUS ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Snippets from Recent Issues of LOCUS ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ To counteract the impression that FRIDAY is the only book around-- "Jerry Pournelle is buying reprint and original stories and poetry on the themes of artificial (robotic) and enhanced human intelligence, for an anthology, SILICON BRAINS." COILS, a trade paperback by Zelazny & Saberhagen, has "a hero who has the psychic ability to enter computer data-links and 'coil' his way into the strange realm of machine minds. ... Though this book may not have all that much to tell us about man's relationship with his machines, it fulfills its promise as polished entertainment by a pair of old pros." Among "April books from the [SF] Book Club [were] VOYAGE FROM YESTER- YEAR by James P. Hogan and ... BUGS, an occult computer/insect-of- the-month book by Theodore Roszak." Hogan's book, is due out in paperback from Ballantine/Del Rey in July. "Although it starts out as a hardback novel, this quickly turns into a new version of Eric Frank Russell's famous 'And Then There Were None". It's interesting, but not completely successful." "Harry Hellerstein's novel WIRED: A FANTASTIC ADVENTURE STORY OF THE COMPUTER AGE will be published in May [by St. Martin's]." From Atheneum in March: "Patricia McKillip's non-fantasy STEPPING FROM THE SHADOWS". "MIT Press will reprint THE CYBERNETIC IMAGINATION IN SCIENCE FICTION by Patricia S. Warrick in June in a paperback edition." \This/ is the book whose inadequacies inspired the CYBER-SF project here on SF-L. "Keith Laumer has turned in a new novel, RETIEF TO THE RESCUE, to Timescape... [to] be published in hardback." I had thought Heyer sub-fandom was pretty much dead in SF, but getta loada THIS con-- "FRIENDS OF THE ENGLISH REGENCY 8 (Jun 11-13 '82) Los Angeles Airport Travelodge Hotel, CA; ...Dance instruction, costume slide show, tea tasting, card games, afternoon teas, regency ball, etc. Info....: Elayne Pelz, 15931 Kalisher St., Granada Hills CA 91344." ------------------------------ Date: 24 May 1982 16:13 mst From: Harvey.Multics at PCO-MULTICS Subject: NotB Hardcover Publication In response to DYER-BENNET of 17 May, Heinlein's novel The Number of the Beast WAS published in hardcover by the New English Library. It was announced as such in Analog (or Destinies?) by Spider Robinson. There was also a comment in there that the trade edition would be "slightly edited". It could have used more than that, but... By the way, the New English Library publishes in the UK. - Ron ------------------------------ Date: 27-May-82 9:35:50 PDT (Thursday) From: Chapman.ES at PARC-MAXC Subject: Re: Where does Heinlein live? Heinlein and his wife Jenny do live in California. Cheryl ------------------------------ Date: Wednesday, 26 May 1982 19:17-PDT From: jim at RAND-UNIX Subject: RAH a Californian According to my ham radio Callbooks of 1976 and 1978, one Robert A. Heinlein does indeed live in California (ran across the name by chance). In my book(s) that gives him all the right in the world to criticize us. (I won't give the address, since I doubt that he would want random unfiltered mail.) ------------------------------ Date: 26 May 1982 1921-PDT From: Cabral at SUMEX-AIM Subject: RAH locale Although SUMEX-AIM is Stanford, our group works out of UCSanta Cruz, and imagine my surprise to discover some wickedly delightful rumors about one Robert A Heinlein living on Empire Grade (which runs just west of campus). Reportedly the house has an electrified barbed-wire fence, which he calls (again reportedly) his "anti-hippie" fence. Local SF groups seem to have a hard time getting him to talk with them, although promises to donate blood to blood drives has been rumored to work. (Actually, he lives a few miles off Empire Grade on Bonny Doon Drive ...). My perception of Santa Cruz is that it out-California's California, so Heinlein may have been commenting about that in his satire (but I haven't read Friday yet). For those of you unfamiliar with California geography, Santa Cruz is about 80 miles south along the coast from San Francisco, over the hill (20 mi) from San Jose, and across the bay from Monterey. ------------------------------ Date: 20 May 1982 1638-PDT From: Dolata at SUMEX-AIM Subject: Nits Does anyone else besides me think that Revenge of the Jedi is a bad title? I personally cannot belive that a Jedi would be out for Revenge! Revenge is linked to the dark side of the force. Justice, truth, reckonings I could belive, but not revenge! How about SF books lengths recently. Does anyone else think that Silverbergs book 'Lord Valentines Castle' was too long, too padded? There are a lot of 300+ page books coming out. A friend suggested that was because copy editing was more expensive than just publishing the turkey and charging the reader for the extra pages. Any thoughts? ------------------------------ Date: 27 May 1982 0853-MDT From: Michi Wada Subject: ST:TWOK; ST:III I did not see "Entertainment Tonight", but some of my friends have. It seems Paramount has indeed announced that ST:III has been tentatively titled "Star Trek: In Search of Spock". The Merv Griffin Show (May 24) devoted the entire hour to Star Trek. William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy, DeForest Kelley and Bibi Besch were there. Three film clips from ST:TWOK were shown. It was fantastic. The 3 film clips were: 1) Battle scene between Reliant and Enterprise. 2) Bridge scene just before Enterprise leaves space dock. Kirk and McCoy enters bridge. Spock in command chair decides to let Lt. Saavik take Enterprise out of space dock. Then McCoy asks Kirk if he wants a tranquilizer. The look of panic and anxiety on Kirk's face was just beautiful. 3) Khan and Kirk interplay just before Khan gets the Genesis bomb. One question: In the second clip Spock calls her "Mister Saavik". Can anyone help me in trying to explain this? Leonard Nimoy also announced that he had been contacted by Paramount to discuss contracts for the third movie. From the sound of it he will be in ST:III. For those who would like to know more about the plot and may not be aware of it "Starlog" has published "Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan; The Official Movie Magazine". Michi ------------------------------ Date: 26 May 1982 1553-PDT From: Stuart McLure Cracraft Subject: Spielberg interview 26 May 82 (For release Sun., May 30) New York Times In the case of ''E.T.,'' Spielberg points out, the opposing force is not a tangible enemy like the shark in ''Jaws,'' but the intrusion of the grown-up world. Whereas 10-year-old Elliott wants only to love and be loved by his extraterrestrial friend, this grown-up world, represented by corps of doctors and technicians, wants to preserve E.T. as a specimen of alien life. ''I always thought of the adult world as being symbolized by tall people who cast giant shadows,'' says Spielberg, ''people who don't think like kids, but think like professionals. That's dangerous - they might understand E.T. biologically and scientifically, but they'd never ever understand that he had a heart.'' A similar message, of course, has long been a favorite theme in children's literature - from J.M. Barrie's ''Peter Pan'' to Antoine de Saint-Exupery's ''The Little Prince'' - and ''E.T.'' is filled with references to well-known books and films. During one scene, for instance, John Williams's score recalls the music used in ''The Wizard of Oz'' to accompany the Wicked Witch, Miss Gulch; and in the movie's penultimate scene, Elliott and his friends soar into the sky on their bicycles, in much the same way that Peter Pan and Wendy flew off to Never Never Land. Certainly Spielberg and the writer of the film, Melissa Mathison, were well aware of the genre they were working in - before starting, they screened such movies as ''Night of the Hunter,'' ''Bambi,'' ''The Blue Bird'' and ''Our Mother's House'' - but the film also grew out of preoccupations that have animated Spielberg's work from the beginning. Most of his movies, after all, have featured children in important or emblematic roles. ''Sugarland,'' ''Close Encounters'' and ''Poltergeist,'' for instance, all involve the attempt of a mother to regain custody of her child. And in both ''Close Encounters'' and ''E.T.,'' it is a child - and those adults who maintain a childlike innocence and openness to the possibility of miracles - who is granted communion with these visitors from outer space and a vision of a more lovely world. ''I've always wanted to do something about kids because I'm still a kid,'' says Spielberg, who at 34 still radiates a boyish enthusiasm and ingenious charm. ''I'm still waiting to get out of my Peter Pan shoes and into my loafers. I think it's easier for me to have a complete conversation from Pac-Man to exobiology with an 11-year-old than it is to sit down with an adult and discuss Nietzsche and the Falklands . Why? I guess because I'm probably socially irresponsible and way down deep I don't want to look the world in the eye. Actually, I don't mind looking the world in the eye, as long as there's a movie camera between us.'' ------------------------------ Date: 24-May-1982 From: DAVE PORTER AT SMAUG Reply-to: "DAVE PORTER AT SMAUG c/o" Subject: "Hitchhikers Guide reruns" Just thought you'd like to know that the TV version of The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy is being reshown on BBC1 on Monday evenings ... /dave/ ------------------------------ Date: 24 May 1982 0247-EDT From: Steven J. Zeve Subject: Re: conan review There is a problem with the point about diction, how do you separate bad diction from an accent? (Or can they be separated?) While there are many people who are good at picking up languages, there are very few who are good enough to sound like a native. I had no trouble with Schwarzenegger's diction/accent, and I can easily rationalize its appearance in the movie. On the other hand I've garnered lots of experience dealing with worse here at Rutgers (some of them still give me lots of trouble though). Looking back, I realize that I did not make my point clear in my note to SF-L. Let me try again. The reviewer seemed to be singling out Schwarzenegger to pick on for some reason. In particular he seemed (to me) to be trying to make Schwarzenegger look like a moron. Consider his opening lines "...Schwarzenegger has biceps like the trunk of a gnarled old apple tree, and Jones can act.". Well sure we all knew that, but why doesn't he tell us something new? And then he goes on to When he says ''Is this your robe?'' it comes out sounding like ''Is this Europe?'' Conan may need a travel agent even more than a diction coach." It sounds to me like Freedman is trying to make Schwarzenegger look like a muscle bound moron. Freedman just doesn't make it clear that the problem isn't that Schwarzenegger doesn't know English, but instead that English isn't Schwarzenegger's native language. (Can Freedman speak German or Austrian as well as Schwarzenegger speaks English?) Sure the movie has problems, but Freedman never really gets around to them. He's too busy taking potshots at all the players execept Thulsa Doom. Heck, I would rather spend my time with Thulsa Doom than with Freedman. At least Thulsa Doom has some idea of what he wants and what he's talking about. Steve Z. ------------------------------ Date: 28 May 1982 0047-EDT From: JHENDLER at BBNA Subject: sorry, but more on sexist language On the him/her/it controversy I feel that another two cents is due: Let's not forget this book is supposedly written in a future time period. Already the standard of using "him" is fading. If you do not believe me look in the American Psychological Association (APA) style manual, which now includes a section on the use of non-sexist language in text. -jim hendler ------------------------------ Date: 27 May 1982 09:39 EDT From: Marshall.WBST at PARC-MAXC Subject: Re: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #56 My daughter brings home frogs, toads, beetles etc. and always refers to them as "she". Should I correct her? --Sidney ------------------------------ Date: 27 May 1982 10:46:30-EDT From: csin!cjh at CCA-UNIX Subject: Podkayne is not disliked just by "strident libbers"; Anne McCaffrey has referred to her as an unspeakable minx. My personal feeling is that she comes closest to a character mentioned in "Screwtape Proposes a Toast". ------------------------------ Date: 28 May 1982 1037-PDT From: Jwagner at OFFICE Subject: Genderless Video Games Pacperson? ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 31-May JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #58 *** EOOH *** Date: Monday, May 31, 1982 9:22PM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #58 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Sunday, 30 May 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 58 Today's Topics: SF Books - Norman Query, SF Movies - ET: the Extra-Terrestrial & Bladerunner, SF TV - Dr Who & Battlestar Galactica, Random Topics - The Lauren Channel, SF Topics - Science in the Public Eye, Humor - Genderless Video Games ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 29 May 1982 0157-PDT (Saturday) From: lauren at UCLA-Security (Lauren Weinstein) Subject: Norman Greetings. Sometime ago, during a rather brief digression of SFL into the subject of the infamous "Gor" books, one contributor mentioned John "Norman" Lange's real, full name and the college where he teaches. Several people have contacted me recently asking if I remembered this information -- apparently they wish to contact Norman to "discuss" some of his opinions on a variety of topics (stand back folks!) I feel that their project is worthwhile, but I didn't note the required information when it scrolled by... and the kindly SFL moderator informs me that technical problems make recovery of that message from the archives very difficult. Therefore, I would appreciate it much if the person who originally sent in the data about Norman would send me a message directly with a duplicate of that info. Sorry to bother the whole list with this... --Lauren-- P.S. Watch for my upcoming review of Philip Jose Farmer's "Image of the Beast", coming soon to this digest. --LW-- ------------------------------ Date: 31 May 1982 14:27:56-EDT From: Lee.Moore at Super-Vaxen at Rochester Reply-to: lm62 at CMU-10a Subject: ET: the Extra-Terrestrial pico-review: A glorious child's eye view of a visitor from space nano-review: Spielberg says, "Only children can accept extra- terrestrials as being real. Adults just mess things up."; D&D players and others who take fantasy seriously will enjoy it. ET was previewed here in Rochester, NY (as I assume it was elsewhere) last night. The article in Time magazine is right about this being another big hit for Spielberg. While the film doesn't go for the sweeping scope or heavy dramatic tension of either "Jaws" or "Close Encounters" it nevertheless wins big with its intimate view of three childern and one ET. The story takes place in a newly built California suburb (i.e. without any trees or shrubs) which adjoins a forest. A space ship lands in the forest and its occupants go exploring. Some adults (who we only see at waist level) arrive and the space ship has to make such a quick departure that they leave one alien behind. The alien (ET) is found by one of the kids while it is foraging for food in a garden shed. Eventually, the kid and his brother and sister hide ET in their closet so that the adults won't find him/her. The film comes to a climax as the creature is dying (of homesickness?). The kids don't have the power to save the alien. Most of the film is shot at the level of the childern. Thus we can barely see the heads of most of the adults. Grown-ups are seen as vaguely threatening and not very understanding. The adults world is seen as difficult to comprehend: the kids parents are separated; the biology teacher wants them to kill harmless frogs. (...which leads to a great liberation scene... "run for the river!" Eliot cries to the rescued amphibians) The film tosses off references to all sorts of popular child culture. For example, Star Wars toys are shown to the alien as one might a baseball mit. On halloween night we see a kid dressed as Yoda. The childern are first seen playing D&D at the kitchen ("I still have a death spell left") and latter use D&D terminology at the bus-stop to insult ("You have zero charisma"). All in all a great film. A must see for subscribers to this list. ------------------------------ Date: 05/27/82 22:06:08 From: DMM@MIT-ML Subject: Bladerunner In case you're wondering why Bladerunner is taking so long to hit the theatres after it's sneak several months ago... According to a recent article in Time or Newsweek, (I can't remember which), because of audience response to the sneak screening they had a while back in Dallas (which I attended), the film is undergoing extensive re-editing. It's nice to know that one's opinion still counts for something. By the way, these same issues of Time & Newsweek also have interesting articles about Speilberg's new movies for this summer: The E.T. & Poltergeist (SP?). Cheers -- DMM ------------------------------ Date: 26 May 1982 06:47:34-PDT From: pur-ee!pur-phy!retief at Berkeley Subject: Dr. Who? Has Dr. Who's real name ever been mentioned or is he always just the Doctor? ------------------------------ Date: 25 May 1982 1747-PDT (Tuesday) From: lauren at UCLA-Security (Lauren Weinstein) Subject: Video (Battlestar Dyslexia, etc.) Sorry Eric, but no go. Don't believe ALL the stories you hear about me, at least 5% of them are not true. Contrary to popular belief, I am *not* related to Gerry Todd of SCTV fame! While it *is* true that I have a fair amount of video equipment (sitting next my terminal here are three separate remote controls for three different pieces of gear), I try to keep things reasonably under control. I'm not really interested in off-air taping -- most of the available programming (including Dyslexia, of course) is such trash (in my humble opinion) that I wouldn't want to waste the tape. If I *was* going to tape all the episodes of a fairly contemporary program, it would probably be "Lost In Space", which has always appealed to my sense of the perverse and truly warped. LIS was a truly great program in that it did not take itself seriously (after the first few episodes, at least). The amazing list of stars who appeared on that show as "guest aliens" is quite impressive... names like Wally Cox, Michael Rennie, Hans Conried, and many more. It was totally misunderstood by the viewers who expected "serious" SF (like "Time Tunnel", "Land of the Giants", and "The Invaders" [Serious??? Who are we kidding?]). But I digress. Actually, my current projects are more oriented toward production... or at least they will be eventually. The local cable company here is setting up the necessary equipment for me to feed video into the system from my house via the cable reverse channel... it will then loop through the headend and back out over the entire system. It is not completely clear *how* this will end up... should be amusing though. My grand plan is to find enough backing to rent time on a satellite transponder to have a national cable television channel oriented toward bizarre programming of all sorts. Alot of OLD television shows (ranging from "The People's Choice" to "Our Miss Brooks" to "The Many Loves of Dobie Gillis", classic SF, etc.) Unfortunately, satellite time does *not* come cheap, nor do satellite uplink facilities (though during off-hours such things are considerably less expensive...) It's a dream, anyway. "The Lauren Channel"? Well, it might not be totally impossible if enough people prove interested. Wanna be my first subscriber? --Lauren-- P.S. To those SFL readers who are thinking that this message was a bit off the mainstream of SFL topics... I agree. But c'mon, if Lauren Via Satellite isn't Science Fiction, what is? Ta ta. --LW-- ------------------------------ Date: 25 May 1982 1255-PDT From: William "Chops" Westfield Subject: Ignorance @i(isn't) bliss! [54 lines] The editorial from the may 12, 1982 issue of EDN, by Roy Forsberg: (copyright 1982 by Cahners Publishing Company. Reprinted by permission!) Quoted without comments.... "An interesting but alarming debate took place in print a couple of months ago. It was interesting because of its topic - "Informing the public (about science and technology)" and the debaters: Leon Trachtman, a science writer, and Isaac Asimov, the well known author. It was alarming because it occurred at all. "Trachtman questioned the validity of three basic assumptions underlying the need to keep a democratic society informed on science and technology: (1) Knowledge is a good thing in itself; (2) Such knowledge will make people wiser and better consumers; (3) The very structure of a democratic society depends on an enlightened citizenry, and the citizen's political and social behavior will be more constructive when informed by a solid scientific understanding. "The first assumption didn't bother Mr Trachtman too much, although he ventured that sending several hundred thousand dollars on making the public aware of science and technology is a total waste of resources. Asimov, arguing the pro-information side, countered that compared with a quarter-trillion-dollar one-year defense budget full of science-and-technology-related items, several hundred thousand in insignificant - and a good investment. "Regarding the last two assumptions, Trachtman showed a low regard for the public. He maintained that any attempts to inform it about science and technology only confuse it, in both its consumer and social decisions -- and that such decisions are arrived at no more rationally than if the public were totally uninformed and merely making yes/no guesses. "Asimov disagreed and cited several instances where death rates, for example, are declining because the public is considering information about medical science seriously. He closed his rebuttal thusly: ""One thing is true, attempting to educate the public in science (and technology) is difficult. It's hard enough to get the essence... across to graduate students let alone people who have never learned the art of rational thought. ""The stakes, however, are very high, and we have no choice but to try -- and, as we try, to endeavor to learn how to try even harder and better -- and to remain undaunted by defeat. ""We may, in the end, lose. We may, in the end, have accomplished nothing, and left the world uniformed after all. We may (as Trachtman gloomily suspects) merely succeed in confusing the public, at the cost of hundreds of thousands of dollars (half an advanced war plane) a year. ""But what is the alternative? To abandon the fight? To hold high the tattered banner of defeat? To leave the world to the @i(National Inquirer, the astrologers and the creationists? Shall we march off into the darkness loudly crying: 'We give up. They are just as well off ignorant anyway. And at least we save a lot of money and in two years we can buy one more beautiful warplane'? ""Never! As for myself, I may be defeated at last, but I intend to struggle to the end. I will not surrender, embrace ignorance and kiss its hideous face." "Well said, Mr (sic) Asimov." ------------------------------ Date: 31 May 1982 0253-PDT (Monday) From: lauren at UCLA-Security (Lauren Weinstein) Subject: Pacperson Actually, the latest "Pac" game is called: MS. PACMAN. Hmmm. --Lauren-- ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 31-May JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #59 *** EOOH *** Date: Monday, May 31, 1982 10:12PM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #59 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Tuesday, 1 Jun 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 59 Today's Topics: SF Books - Podkayne of Mars & Heinlein, SF Movies - ET: the Extra-Terrestrial & Shock Treatment & Conan the Barbarian, SF TV - Kiddie Shows, SF Topics - Science in the Public Eye & Spaceflight, Random Topics - Genderless Pronouns, Humor - Genderless Video Games ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 31 May 1982 at 1848-CDT From: hjjh at UTEXAS-11 Subject: Poor Pitiful Podkayne? ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ POOR PITIFUL PODKAYNE? ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Chip says that tho he's not a strident libber, he (and Anne McCaffrey) dislike Podkayne, also. I do not challenge Chip and Anne's literary judgment-- Podkayne IS a twit. But strident libbers object to Podkayne \on principle/, castigating Heinlein for creating such a cutesy, sentimental, vulnerable-little- girl character. As a scholar...and a properly objective one, I hope...who has made a study of genre SF books with female protagonists, it offends my sense of justice for RAH to be taken to task for the \kind/ of heroine he created AT A TIME WHEN: -- - ---- ---- a) that type of character was nothing unusual in "young people's books" for girls, b) the book was the \first/ SF juvenile-for-GIRLS by an estab- lished writer, AND c) \ANY/ KIND OF FEMALE PROTAGONISTS IN SF BOOKS WERE JUST ABOUT AS RARE AS HEN'S TEETH! Barring their precursors-- a feminist Utopian novel in the 1880's and the Golden Amazon series and C.L. Moore's JUDGMENT NIGHT in the pulps-- genre SF books with fempros (female protagonists) can be said to not have begun until a 1950 hardback by Judith Merril. Or even not until 1951 if one takes mass-market paper-back or SF Book Club publication as criteria for weeding out items not widely accessible to SF fans. It was short-sighted for SF libbers to look back from the latter 70's when there were over 50 science fiction (NOT fantasy) novels between 1976 and 1980, and bitch about Heinlein's teenie heroine. Between 1950 and PODKAYNE in 1963, there were only e-i-g-h-t SF fempros (and one of those was actually a mainstream "lit'ry" work. Moreover, of the pre-Podkayne fempros, Ioredh, Elspeth Marriner, Jael 97, and Greta Forzane were also pretty much twits, too.) It took \guts/ to write an SF book with a fempro back in those days. \I/ say... give the old gentleman credit! Not that the fempro character was done well, but that, in 1963, it was done at all! ------------------------------ Date: 31 May 1982 20:14:37-EDT From: csin!cjh at CCA-UNIX Subject: Re: Poor Pitiful Podkayne? In response to your message of Mon May 31 19:53:46 1982: I am much less-inclined to be tolerant of Heinlein's portrayal of Podkayne for the following reasons: 1. This was easily the most obnoxious of the many female characters he'd created. Consider John Thomas Stuart's girlfriend in THE STAR BEAST, or Meade Stone in THE ROLLING STONES, or even Peewee in HAVE SPACE SUIT, WILL TRAVEL---and he had never been so cruel toward a female character as was Asimov in the last Foundation story (suggesting that death would be kinder than marriage to Arkady). 2. I'm not convinced that this is really a juvenile; I recall that \my/ hometown library system (in relatively liberal Montgomery Cty MD) filed it with the adult books). 3. I would seriously object to your characterization of Greta Forzane as a twit, having just reread THE BIG TIME with an eye toward staging at Constellation. Not an admirable character, certainly, but then few in the Change War are. As for Trigger Argee, she's definitely on the low list---a pity, since Telzey Amberdon was carrying a much stronger role in that period (I think). ------------------------------ Date: 31 May 1982 2127-EDT From: Steven J. Zeve Subject: Heinlein and random unfiltered mail I suspect that Heinlein wouldn't be enthralled to get a major flood of mail, but, like many SF authors, wouldn't mind getting a few letters now and then from his fans. I am, however, under the impression that it is better to contact a writer through his or her publishers if you don't know the writer personally. I remember reading of an incident involving Heinlein where someone tried to just "drop in" on him and got pretty thoroughly told off. (Yet when the same person wrote to Heinlein ahead of time, he was cordially invited to come visit.) Steve Z. p.s. In a speech printed in "View from Serendip", Arthur Clarke refers to Heinlein as sitting out in California behind his Hippie-proof chainlink fence. ------------------------------ Date: 31 May 1982 04:47-EDT From: Eric P. Scott Subject: E.T. Just saw a preview of E.T. (in Arcadia, Ca.). After waiting in line for almost two hours, the management announced that folks already there for the regular feature ("Dead Men Don't Wear Plaid") were being given the option of staying for the preview. Word got out to the other theaters (the Santa Anita Cinema is a quad and people started sneaking into #3) and when they got around to proffering tickets for the 7pm showing there were only twenty seats left. (I've never seen a theater that didn't clear the audience before and after previews, but I'm told that this policy is common at several chains). Anyway, they added a second showing at 9:30 so we waited around until then for... ...a movie that looks like a Disney production. Not to say it's bad or anything (I enjoyed it), it's just hokey. I don't want to generate a spoiler, but someone did mention a resemblance to "Escape From Witch Mountain" in two of the scenes. Except for an explicit reference to male genitalia this film merits a "G." Bring the kids. It's very funny at times. It also incorporates a number of social statements. Anyone want to venture a guess \which/ U.S. Gov't agency is looking for undocumented aliens? Good special effects (as usual) by Industrial Light and Magic. *** One thing that bothered me about the film was the blatant presence of certain brand-name consumer products, a pizza franchise, and TESB "action figures." This seems to be the new fad in the industry. *sigh* E.T. was preceded by a trailer for "Dark Crystal." It's a Jim Henson/Frank Oz production (with NEW muppets!). Anyone know anything about it? Side note: we had five people in our car when we arrived. We only had four when we returned. Hod, if you're out there, please PHONE HOME. (Life imitates art) (how do I say that in Latin?) --Eric P.S. Did they use an EXTRA Terrestrial 'cuz they work cheaper? [couldn't be that cheap--he has a speaking part] ------------------------------ Date: 31 May 1982 04:56-EDT From: Chris W. Stassen Subject: Shock Treatment! Not long ago, the movie "Shock Treatment" (Richard O'Brien) was released, which failed horribly and was shortly removed from nearly ALL theatres in which it had started. There is (to my knowledge) only one theatre in the US currently running it -- The Tiffany (of Hollywood), which also happens to be the theatre that kept "Rocky Horror" until it became popular as a cult film. For those of you who saw the movie, and are rather observant, the opening credits have the line "Book by Richard O'Brien." Does anybody know where I can find the book? Price is no object, and I'm looking for about six copies (at least; I could find places for twenty or more!). -- Chris Stassen ------------------------------ Date: 31 May 1982 2240-EDT From: VAF at CMU-20C Subject: Conan One thing that I think most people are failing to realize when reviewing 'Conan' is what the Conan books were all about. They were never written as intellectual SF or Fantasy, but rather, were pure escapist literature. After seeing the movie 'Conan', I think the spirit of the Conan books has been faithfully followed. The movie fits quite well into the hack-and-slay type escapist genre. --vaf ------------------------------ Date: 29 May 1982 09:57-EDT From: James M. Turner Subject: From the land of the kiddie show Watching the tube this morning drove home how far saturday morning cartoons have degraded from the high standards of Jones, Ward, et al. While the actual art is relatively reasonable (although it seems any attempt at perspective has been abandoned), the plot sucks rocks. My main bitch is with the SF/fantasy flavored shows, that try to jazz up the dialog with psuedo-science. For example, this goodie was heard on the animated Fantastic Four: "Wow! That object is going faster than supersonic speeds!" Now, given that these shows are what kids are getting their view of science from, is it any wonder we have such a technologically illiterate society. A ray of hope: both ABC and CBS run fillers between the shows, "Schoolhouse Rock" and "In the News" respectively. These are interesting, informative, and enjoyable even if you know the material. It is a sad commentary on the animation houses when they can't compete with the fillers. Save our youth, Nuke Hanna-Barbera, James ------------------------------ Date: 28 May 1982 12:00 edt From: Boebert.SCOMP at MIT-MULTICS Subject: Across the Space Frontier I was digging through some impedimentia the other day and came across my old copy of "Across the Space Frontier." This book, which fired my fevered pre-teen imagination, was written by the Peenemunde crowd (Kaplan, von Braun, Haber and Ley) and was the first description of a Space Shuttle-like system. It was also the place where the wheel-shaped space station first appeared. For those of you not lucky [?] enough to be pre-everything, herewith follows a comparison of ASF, circa 1951, and STS (Space Transportation System -- Shuttle to the media), circa 1981. Feature ASF STS No. of Stages 3 2.5 Height 265 ft 184 ft Weight 16.1 Megapounds 4.4 Megapounds Wingspan 156 ft 78 ft Planform Canard Delta Payload 72,000 lbs 40-65,000 lbs Crew (Max) 6 7 Thrust at Liftoff 28 Megapounds 6.6 Megapounds Fuel Nitric Acid/Hydrazine Solid + Hyd/OX 1st Stage Engines 51 [!] 5 2nd Stage Engines 22 3 3rd Stage Engines 5 2 (OMS) Orbit 1075 miles 115-600 miles Reentry Temp (Max) 1350 deg 3000 deg Heat Shield Stainless Steel Ceramic Landing Weight 59,400 lbs 187,000 lbs Landing Speed 65 mph 195 mph Reentry Duration 66 minutes 31 minutes So basically what they were proposing was four Saturn V's lashed together with more of a glider on top; it is unlikely that such a vehicle could survive the aerodynamic stress of liftoff. Remember, in 1951 the highest anything had gone was 250 miles (V2/WAC Corporal lashup) and that with essentially zero telemetry, so the gang really did pretty good. They also predicted the use of a movable launch pad, and said the best place to start from would be Johnston Island in the Pacific, although the USAF proving ground at Cocoa Beach FL would do (as, of course, it did). They even gave the budget: we could have been orbiting by 1963 for a mere 4 billion. To give an idea of what that would be in current dollars, VW started importing in 1954, and a beetle cost $1300. Earl PS Oh, and orbital maneuvering was to be by flywheel. Spin us up a notch, Sulu. ------------------------------ Date: 31 May 1982 2111-EDT From: Steven J. Zeve Subject: APA manual and the english language I'm not sure I trust anything from a psychology manual. Let alone instructions on how to use the English Language. Steve Z. ------------------------------ Date: 31 May 1982 2236-EDT From: VAF at CMU-20C Subject: Re: Genderless Video Games (SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #57) But 'PACperson' would be ambiguous, with the advent of 'MS. PACman'... (I know, this is a meaningless point, but I couldn't resist) --vaf ------------------------------ Date: 31 May 1982 2107-EDT From: Steven J. Zeve Subject: Re: Genderless Video Games No, no, no. It's Pacperchild. Why use a sexist term like PacperSON (see, there's that male gender again) when you can make up a nice term like Pacperchild? Steve Z. ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 4-Jun JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #60 *** EOOH *** Date: Friday, June 4, 1982 12:57AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #60 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Thursday, 3 Jun 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 60 Today's Topics: SF Movies - Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan & Shock Treatment & The Dark Crystal, SF TV - Dr Who, SF Books - Podkayne of Mars & Hugos, Random Topics - Regency Fandom, Humor - Genderless Video Games ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 1-Jun-82 11:27AM-EDT (Tue) From: David Miller Subject: Star Trek II Premier This may be hard to believe, but... The world premier of Star Trek II is in Stamford Connecticut on 3 June '82 (That's right: June third) tickets are $15 a seat, and the extra money goes to benefit a local Catholic School. Anybody out there have any idea how this came to be, whether it is a local phenomena or whether Catholic schools all over the country are having special premiers. Dave (miller@yale) ------------------------------ Date: 3 Jun 82 14:04-PDT From: mclure at SRI-UNIX Subject: Review: Star Trek II Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan By JANET MASLIN c. 1982 N.Y. Times News Service NEW YORK - Now this is more like it: after the colossal, big-budget bore that was ''Star Trek: The Motion Picture,'' here comes a sequel that's worth its salt. The second Star Trek movie is swift, droll and adventurous, not to mention appealingly gadget-happy. It's everything the first one should have been and wasn't. As its title suggests, ''Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan'' has a much stronger plot than its predecessor. That helps, but it's not the only improvement. This film also has the gamesmanship that the first one lacked, a quality that helped win the ''Star Trek'' television series its amazingly devoted following. Maybe it's just that there are more and brighter blinking lights on the control panels of the Starship Enterprise this time, or that the costumes are so much cleverer, or that the special effects are so good they don't call undue attention to themselves. Perhaps it's the directorial switch from Robert Wise (''The Hindenburg'' and ''The Sound of Music'') to Nicholas Meyer (''Time After Time'') that has brought the material more pep. In any case, this time something has most assuredly gone right. In addition to its derring-do, ''Star Trek II'' also has the quality of a sentimental journey. Here they are again - William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy, DeForest Kelley and the rest of the crew - 16 years older than they were when the television series began, still playing the roles for which they are best known. Shatner's Captain Kirk is an admiral now, given to ribbing the young trainees and wistfully saying things like, ''Galloping around the cosmos is a game for the young.'' Nimoy, a k a Mr. Spock, now has a pointy-eared protegee, a staggeringly competent young woman named Saavik (Kirstie Alley), with whom he converses in their native tongue, which is Vulcan. Kirk, Saavik confides to Spock, isn't what she expected. ''He's so - human,'' she says. ''Nobody's perfect, Saavik,'' Spock replies. This passage is translated from the Vulcan by subtitles. This film may not make a new Star Trek devotee out of anyone, but it's sure to delight the old ones. Shatner makes the grandest of grand entrances, surrounded by a halo of blue light. He proves immediately that he has regained his dry sense of humor, which was markedly absent the last time around. Here, on his birthday, he is given a bottle of blue firewater by Kelley, vintage A.D. 2283, and both characters remark on how long the stuff has aged. (The story is set in the 23d century.) For his part, Spock presents Kirk with a copy of ''A Tale of Two Cities,'' saying, ''I know of your fondness for antiques.'' The novel will later figure quite sentimentally in the plot, which is an odd blend of mawkishness, mysticism, high adventure and remarks like, ''I suppose it could be a particle of pre-animate matter, caught in the matrix.'' Even the mumbo jumbo of this latest ''Star Trek'' is fun. Most fun of all is Khan himself, played as the classiest of comic-strip villains by Ricardo Montalban, who really is something to see. With his fierce profile, long white hair, manful decolletage and space-age jewelry, Montalban looks like either the world's oldest rock star or its hippest Indian chief . Either way, he looks terrific, every bit as happily flamboyant as the first film's characters - notwithstanding the beautiful, bald Persis Khambatta - were drab. It is not necessary to have followed Star Trek lore any too faithfully to understand some key things about Khan. He has been frozen cryogenically in the 20th century, banished to a remote planet and deprived of Mrs. Khan. He blames Kirk for all of these injuries and plans to get even with the aid of a secret weapon that, by the standards of movies like this one, has a modicum of nasty originality. You see, the one remaining life form on the barren planet to which Khan was banished is some special-effects cross between a tortoise and a crustacean. It has scorpion-shaped babies that can be deposited, by someone as sadistic as Khan, in an enemy's ear. ''Their young enter through the ears and wrap themselves around the cerebral cortex. This has the effect of rendering the victim extremely susceptible to suggestion.'' Khan says this with the greatest imaginable relish. ''Star Trek II'' lasts a long time, and it ends on a note that will seem misty to those who are veteran fans of the series, corny to those who aren't. For those who find it corny, the movie may wear out its welcome after a while. But it's cheerful and ingenious most of the way through, with none of the overblown foolishness that spoiled the first film. The ''Star Trek'' television show lay no real claims to greatness. This movie can't either, and it doesn't really try. But on its own simple terms, those of pure escapism, it certainly succeeds. ''Star Trek II'' is rated PG (''Parental Guidance Suggested''). The scorpions-in-the-ear scene may well frighten small children, as might several other gory scenes. ------------------------------ Date: Tue 1-Jun-1982 17:25-EDT From: Bill Russell Subject: Re: Shock Treatment! Shock Treatment is still playing midnights at the "Waverly" in the Village in NY. After closing for several weeks and moving uptown to the "New Yorker" (both old RHPS midnight theaters) it is back at both of them at midnight, Friday and Saturday. As for the credit of "Book by ...", every musical (for the stage or film) has a "book" by someone. This refers to the story that this being presented. It has nothing to do with a real book in any sense. As for the movie itself, I've seen it twice. The second time to see the movie, as the first time I was distracted by the "stage show". It's not a bad movie, but it's not a good movie either . There are too many pauses for the audience to react by throwing in their own "questions" or "answers". ------------------------------ Date: 1 Jun 1982 11:34:35-EDT From: csin!cjh at CCA-UNIX Subject: THE DARK CRYSTAL has been the subject of presentations at many SF conventions, starting (?) with Denvention last summer. The basic plot is fairly conventional ([attempted] Overthrow of the Evil Tyrants) but the development of it looks good and the pictures I've seen of the [muppets] are spectacular. ------------------------------ Date: 1 Jun 1982 11:06:59-EDT From: csin!cjh at CCA-UNIX Subject: Regency Fandom dying out?!? No Way! The Heyer Tea at Boskone is always well-attended, as is the same at most Worldcons and the one Loscon ([Los Angeles]) I've attended. A prime mover in Regency fandom tells me that she is willing to speak well of Jerry Pournelle because, on the way to the Seacon '79 tea (which was held in Regent's Pavilion) a heckler accosted Jerry (who was wearing a hussar's uniform), asking him where his horse was; Jerry's thunderous glare and reply effectively squelched the heckler. ------------------------------ Date: Tuesday, 1 Jun 1982 14:24-PDT From: Kevin W. Rudd @ISL at Sumex-Aim Subject: Dr. Who Doctor who? ------------------------------ Date: 2 Jun 1982 at 2242-CDT From: hjjh at UTEXAS-11 Subject: PODKAYNE: The Book vs. The Character ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ PODKAYNE: The Book vs. The Character ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ CJH's objection to "Heinlein's portrayal of Podkayne" is irrelevant to the point I was making. I'm NOT defending Podkayne-the-character. \My/ thesis is-- "Give the old gentleman credit! Not that the fempro character was done well, but that, in 1963, it was done AT ALL!" As for juvenile status-- it sure reads like one, tho Wells' SF & HEROIC FANTASY INDEX agrees with CJH. On the other hand, Wells lists as RAH's "juveniles" only those titles pub'd by Scribner, and RAH pub'd nothing thru Scribner after 1956. Somebody in a recent SF-L message even characterized PUPPET MASTERS as a juvenile, so criteria must vary wildly. In \my/ idea of a juvenile book, the protagonist is typically (tho not necessarily) a teen-ager, as Poddy is. To me, Greta Forzane IS a twit. This, tho, is just a personal reaction to the character. But whether she is or not, \I/ say Hats off! to Leiber and Schmitz and De Camp, etc., AND Heinlein-- who dared write SF fempros \then/. ------------------------------ Date: 1 Jun 1982 2041-EDT From: Thomas Galloway Subject: 1983 Hugos It was pointed out by Jack Chalker at Disclave last weekend that the competition for best novel Hugo could consist of RAH's Friday, the Asimov Foundation IV, and the Clarke 2010 (and two poor schmucks offered up for sacrifice). Anyone know if this sort of head-to-head competition between the biggest names in the genre has occured before? tom galloway @ yale ------------------------------ Date: 1 Jun 1982 13:56 EDT From: Becker.Henr at PARC-MAXC Subject: Pac-man Actually I have heard that Pacman was designed and made(?) in Japan and that "Pacman" means to eat something! Jane ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 4-Jun JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #61 *** EOOH *** Date: Friday, June 4, 1982 1:42AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #61 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Friday, 4 Jun 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 61 Today's Topics: Baldwin/Gulf Star Trek - TWoK Review: Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan Review: Star Trek II Since we're talking about California... Re: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #59 Genderless Video Games ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 31 May 1982 at 2016-CDT From: hjjh at UTEXAS-11 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ANOTHER SF TEXANA ITEM ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I was re-scanning Justin Leiber's BEYOND REJECTION as a quasi-fempro (the plot involves the Varley-like insertion of a dead person's personality-tape into a blank-mind body, but here it's a re-used body rather than a clone of the personality's prior one). The tricky part, for my female protagonist criteria, is that Leiber's universe does not have the common sex-reversals which Varley's does, and the plot revolves around the problems arising from trying to get a fairly macho personality to accept existence in a female body. There's only one reference to anything recognizably Texan (a very minor character named "Isa Pigg", which patently derives from the old Texas Grande Dame, Ima Hogg). B-U-T, the operation takes place in "the Norbert Wiener Research Hospital"--- in HOUSTON! ------------------------------ Date: 31 May 1982 1447-MDT From: William Galway Subject: Baldwin/Gulf Gregory "Kettle Belly" Baldwin is one of the main characters in "Gulf". I'm almost certain that he does not appear in "The Puppet Masters", although both stories describe the activities of super-secret "intelligence" organizations. Baldwin is "... sort of the executive secretary of this branch of an organization of supermen." "Superman" turns out to mean "very intelligent". Baldwin is also rather coy about his age--hinting that he's been around for quite awhile. The "Gulf" of the title refers to the difference between "homo novis" and "homo sapiens"--on their way towards becoming separate species. The background society for "Gulf" does not sound like the one described in "Friday". Although there isn't a lot said about it, one gets the impression of a fairly widespread and stable government. One of the most fascinating things in "Gulf", in my opinion, was the language used by this group of superpeople. "Speedtalk" is apparently sort of like Loglan, and uses a fairly small vocabulary (like Basic English). Given this small vocabulary of roughly 1000 words, Heinlein then supposes that each word can be expressed as a single phoneme. (Naturally, you have to be pretty bright to distinguish between the phonemes while talking and listening.) So, what we would think of as words turn out to be sentences in Speedtalk. You really gain by thinking in Speedtalk--Heinlein supposed that to even be able to learn the language you had to think roughly 3 times faster than an "ordinary man", and that using the language allowed you to manipulate symbols 7 times faster than in English. So, given a lifespan of 75-80 years, you get the equivalent of 1600 years or so by thinking in Speedtalk. ------------------------------ Date: 4 June 1982 00:39-EDT From: James M. Turner Subject: Star Trek - TWoK Go see this movie. I don't care if a wealthy arab is offering gigabucks for your backyard. Get out of your chair, go to the nearest theatre, and see it. If you get the idea this movie left an impression on me, you're right! The gang was second time lucky, and the result was a joy to behold. Lots of action, humor, and (thank God) less pathos than ST-TMP. It's VERY reminiscent of the series, and the direction in which the movies are heading leads me to believe ST-III will be a bigger win. I refuse to give away plot, but I will say that the effects are better, but more subdued than TMP (Hey looks guys! We're going to hit you over the head with another effect now). Contracting out to Industrial Light and Magic seems to have made a bug difference in quality. Go to the movie. Don't expect too much of a message (although the "Kirk deals with mortality" plotline is lightly mixed in with the rest), but expect one hell of a good time. James And I will take bets I know how Spock manages to return in ST-III... ------------------------------ Date: 1 Jun 82 16:21-PDT From: mclure at SRI-UNIX Subject: Review: Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan By BOB THOMAS Associated Press Writer ''STAR TREK II: THE WRATH OF KHAN'' is an improvement over the bloodless ''Star Trek: The Motion Picture.'' This time Kirk, Spock and company are provided with a gripping plot, spectacular special effects and a classic villain. A galaxy removed from Mr. Nice Guy of ''Fantasy Island,'' Ricardo Montalban is superb as the demonic Khan, a role he played in a memorable chapter of the ''Star Trek'' TV series. Khan and his revenge-hungry followers have been marrooned on a dead planet festering with anger against the man they believe put them there - Admiral Kirk. Escaping from exile, Khan aims to kill Kirk, even if the plot entails destroying the universe. Director Nicholas Meyer handles the human factor as deftly as the space hardware. The script provides surprises: Kirk (William Shatner) discovers a long-lost son - and yes, Spock (sob!) dies. The entire crew of the Starship USS Enterprise has returned, with some interesting newcomers: Bibi Besch as a space scientist and Kirstie Alley as a half-Vulcan trainee. Rated PG because of the excitement and one profanity. ------------------------------ Date: 3 Jun 82 14:04-PDT From: mclure at SRI-UNIX Subject: Review: Star Trek II Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan By RICHARD FREEDMAN Newhouse News Service (UNDATED) Long after the bloated ''Star Trek: The Motion Picture'' came out, devout Trekkies still were having a hard time explaining to the unconverted the nature of their obsession. But now, with ''Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan,'' just about everybody will want to clamber aboard the Starship Enterprise for an intergalactic roller coaster ride. As fast-moving as the original ''Star Trek'' movie was inert, ''Star Trek II'' - the only film title that sounds like a razor blade - wisely focuses on identifiable human types instead of cold, glistening machinery. First, of course, there's Admiral James T. Kirk (William Shatner), chafing at his desk job and feeling the full pangs of mid-life crisis. David (Merritt Butrick), the son he had with Dr. Carol Marcus (Bibi Besch), barely knows his eternally voyaging dad and doesn't seem particularly fond of what he does know. The basically old-fashioned Kirk receives for his birthday a pair of Ben Franklin glasses, a hardbound copy of ''A Tale of Two Cities,'' and a bottle of blue booze (we're in the 23rd century, when we can expect bourbon to look like Windex). But what Kirk needs above all is some action. He gets plenty of that when Starship Reliant mistakenly lands on planet Ceti Alpha V, where 15 years ago Kirk had marooned the evil Khan (Ricardo Montalban). Nursing vengeance ever since his wife died on that barren outpost, Khan has got hold of the secret Project Genesis, designed to convert arid planets into veritable Gardens of Eden. In the wrong hands, though, the Genesis Effect could create ecological chaos. Just to show how wrong Khan's hands are, he injects scorpion larvae into the ears of two of Kirk's most reliable men. The scorpions head for the cerebral cortex, where - in a scene reminiscent of ''Alien'' - they cause untold psychic damage. Fancying himself a futuristic Captain Ahab, Khan unfortunately looks more like a cross between Geronimo, a Malibu Beach guru and Leonard Bernstein after a bad rehearsal. Nevertheless, with guns like high-tech electric shavers blasting away, he manages to cause considerable damage to the Enterprise, even splattering blood all over Kirk's spiffy Burger King uniform. But because his ''pattern indicates two-dimensional thinking,'' he is ultimately defeated by Kirk and his doughty crew: pointy-eared First Officer Spock (Leonard Nimoy), Engineer Scotty (James Doohan), Physician ''Bones'' McCoy (DeForest Kelley) and Lieutenant Chekov (Walter Koenig). The dialogue in ''Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan'' is as excruciating as ever, with people blurting out such clinkers as: - ''They're jamming all the frequencies, Captain!'' - ''We're talking about universal Armageddon!'' - ''It never rains, but it pours.'' But perhaps the very banality of the movie constitutes its chief charm. Directed with tongue-in-cheek amiability by Nicholas Meyer (''Time After Time''), the latest ''Star Trek'' neither takes itself too seriously nor cheaply camps itself up. It's an ideal science fiction romp for the pure of heart and the innocent of mind. X X X FILM CLIP: ''STAR TREK II: THE WRATH OF KHAN.'' Vastly superior to the first ''Star Trek'' movie, this one pits Admiral Kirk and the crew of Starship Enterprise against the vengeance-hungry Khan, who wants to convert Project Genesis into universal Armageddon - and nearly gets away with it. Rated PG. Three stars. ------------------------------ Date: 31 May 1982 1649-EDT From: Larry Seiler Subject: Since we're talking about California... Since California craziness has become an SF-Lovers topic lately, I'd like to point out something that people who haven't lived there probably don't know (and may not believe even after I tell you). Granted there are a lot of crazies in California. There are crazies everywhere. But the average, ordinary people in California are also different. Specifically, in comparison to ordinary people in the Boston/Cambridge area (not students - most of them are from somewhere else), Californians are a lot friendlier and a lot more cheerful. Talking to people from cities like New York, I get the impression that the same is true, or more so. My wife and I have lived in a wide variety of places, so this claim is not mere parochialism. For that matter, Californians are in general a lot less parochial that people in Boston, and (I gather) other parts of the country as well. I have some ideas as to why this is so, but I think I've already strayed far enough from SF. Larry Seiler (Seiler@MIT-XX) PS - If you feel an urge to flame, try to do most of it to me, personally, instead of to the list. And if you haven't ever lived in California, I don't want to hear from you - you don't know what you're talking about. Ditto if you have only lived in California. ------------------------------ Date: 1 Jun 1982 2340-PDT From: Dolata at SUMEX-AIM Subject: Re: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #59 In response to your message sent 1 Jun 1982 1412-PDT SEX-less pronouns? I expect much better from a group dedicated to SF&F! What about ET's and BEM's, hmmmm??? How about Dolphins and Intellegence boosted apes??? We are be-ing 'species-ist'. Some suggestions; she/he ==> it waiter/waitress ==> waitron chairman ==> chaircreature manager ==> itager (not to be confused with reals or strings) And since I am getting married soon, I won't introduce people to my best-man but to my best-thing. And if he has an assistant I will introduce them to the next best-thing too! In jest.... Dolata@sumex-aim ------------------------------ Date: 1 Jun 1982 1138-PDT From: Jwagner at OFFICE Subject: Genderless Video Games Q. What does Ms. PacMan say when PacMan comes home drunk? A. PacUp. (No more, I promise.) ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 5-Jun JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #62 *** EOOH *** Date: Saturday, June 5, 1982 2:33AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #62 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Saturday, 5 Jun 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 62 Today's Topics: SF Movies - Poltergeist, SF TV - Dr Who, SF Topics - Supermen, Random Topics - Pogue Carburetor, Humor - Genderless Video Games ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 4 Jun 1982 0108-PDT From: Jim McGrath Subject: Poltergeist Poltergeist By VINCENT CANBY c. 1982 N.Y. Times News Service NEW YORK - More than any other Hollywood film maker of his generation, Steven Spielberg has preserved the wonderment of childhood while growing up to make the sort of movies he always loved as a child, but bigger and better and far more imaginative. He's a brilliant technican who still has doubts about the dark. His ''Close Encounters of the Third Kind'' was the last, dazzling word on sci-fi fantasies, not about the end of the world but about the beginning of a benign new one. ''Raiders of the Lost Ark'' is every cliffhanging adventure film ever made, wrapped up into one hilarious odyssey, but with few of the anticlimaxes usual in such films. Now, in ''Poltergeist,'' co-produced by Spielberg, directed by Tobe Hooper and based on Spielberg's original story, he has come up with a marvelously spooky ghost story that may possibly scare the wits out of very small children and offend those parents who believe that kids should be protected from their own, sometimes savage imaginations. I suspect, however, that there's a vast audience of teen-agers and others who'll love this film. Indeed, ''Poltergeist'' often sounds as if it had been dictated by an exuberant 12-year-old, someone who's sitting by a summer campfire and determined to spin a tale that will keep everyone else on the edges of their knapsacks far into the night. ''Poltergeist'' is full of creepy, crawly, slimy things that jump out from the shadows. It contains playful ghosts and mean ones. It's a film in which childhood wishes and fears are made manifest, as in the image of a gnarled, long-dead tree, something to climb during the day and play in, but which, at night, casts scary shadows on a child's bedroom wall. ''Poltergeist'' is like a thoroughly enjoyable nightmare, one that you know that you can always wake up from, and one in which, at the end, no one has permanently been damaged. It's also witty in a fashion that Alfred Hitchcock might have appreciated. Offhand, I can't think of many other directors who could raise goose bumps by playing ''The Star-Spangled Banner'' behind a film's opening credits. The setting is an ordinary, quintessentially middle-class, new California subdivision called Cuesta Verde, where every house looks alike and comes equipped with the same vast assortment of appliances. Every family in Cuesta Verde is more or less on the same social, economic and book-club level. However, it's to the credit of Spielberg and Hooper, and to the screenplay by Spielberg, Michael Grais and Mark Victor, that though the members of the Freeling family are typical, they aren't the nonentities one usually finds in such movies. This is as much a reflection of the manner of the movie as it is of the characters. Steve and Diane Freeling (Craig T. Nelson and Jobeth Williams) are in their 30s, happily married, doing all right financially and the parents of three children, a daughter in her midteens (Dominique Dunne), a son several years younger (Oliver Robins) and a 10-year-old daughter, Carol Anne (Heather O'Rourke). Carol Anne, a small, blond beauty, becomes the innocent hostage of the occult forces that, one night, come flying out of the untended television set. It's one of the nicer variations on the film's ghost theme that the Freelings, though baffled by this visitation, are not initially panicked. Diane Freeling is enchanted when she finds that she can play games with the unseen creatures, rather as if they were to be treated as rare pets. Suddenly, however, for reasons that are finally explained, they turn mean. All hell breaks loose, requiring the services first of an intelligent, somewhat embarrassed psychologist (Beatrice Straight), who moonlights as a parapsychologist, and eventually those of a most eccentric exorcist, a tiny woman played by Zelda Rubinstein, whose last film assignment was in ''Under the Rainbow.'' Further details of the plot should not be revealed. More important are the film's extraordinary technical effects, by which we are made to see and experience the terrible assaults these angry spirits make on the Freelings, sometimes occupying their minds as well as their house. These effects are often eerie and beautiful but also occasionally vividly gruesome. The structure of the film is not perfect. It seems to have two endings. This isn't because there are two, but because the film's exorcism rite is so spectacular that one really isn't prepared for still another confrontation, which doesn't quite measure up to the first one. Miss Williams, still better known as a New York stage actress than as a film actress, is charming as the beleaguered Mom, a modern sort of woman who isn't above smoking a little marijuana after the kids are safely tucked into bed. Nelson is also good as the stalwart but not stolid father, and the children are excellent, especially Miss O'Rourke. The style of the film is probably best exemplified by the performances of Miss Straight and Miss Rubinstein, who play it absolutely without facetiousness, though with great good humor, and never look silly. There's some controversy about the individual contributions to the film made by Spielberg and Hooper, best known as director of ''The Texas Chainsaw Massacre.'' I've no way of telling who did what, though ''Poltergeist'' seems much closer in spirit and sensibility to Spielberg's best films than to Hooper's. ''Poltergeist,'' which has been rated PG (''Parental Guidance Suggesped''), is a movie that parents will want to consider very carefully before sending off very young children to see it. Though it's as harmless as a nightmare, it could also prompt some. ------------------------------ Date: 4 Jun 1982 0109-PDT From: Jim McGrath Subject: Poltergeist Poltergeist By RICHARD FREEDMAN Newhouse News Service (UNDATED) Poltergeists are things that go bump in the dark. Though not exactly Casper the Friendly Ghost, traditionally they're more mischievous than menacing. Not so the spooks haunting ''Poltergeist,'' perhaps the first PG-rated movie that would send Casper gibbering in terror up the aisles. Co-written and co-produced by Steven Spielberg (''Close Encounters of the Third Kind'' and ''Raiders of the Lost Ark''), who also apparently helped Tobe Hooper (''The Texas Chainsaw Massacre'') with the direction, this is a dandy ghost story - both very funny and very scary at the same time. The family afflicted with poltergeist problems are the Freelings, who live in a nice new tract house in a recently created mid-American suburban development. They have three nice children, of whom the youngest and cutest is Carol Anne (Heather O'Rourke). Steve (Craig T. Nelson) and Diane (Jobeth Williams) Freeling are your average American husband and wife. He sells real estate. She tries to settle breakfast squabbles between the kids. They all watch too much television, and at sign-off time, when the kids are finally in bed, Steve and Diane settle down to share a friendly joint before enjoying the sleep of the just. But why does that gnarled old Arthur Rackham tree outside the children's bedroom window seem to be clutching for them when the lightning flashes and the wind howls? And why does Carol Anne's pet canary just keel over in its cage one Sunday afternoon and have to be buried in a cigar box, only to be unceremoniously exhumed by a bulldozer the next day to make way for a swimming pool? Perhaps it's because the little girl thinks she's in touch with the ''television people'' who emerge from the flickering screen after ''The Star-Spangled Banner'' has been played and the set has gone blank for the night. In any case, before long all hell has broken loose in the Freeling household. Ordinary objects fly through the air crashing into each other, wraiths left over from the finale of ''Raiders of the Lost Ark'' whisk through the living room, and Carol Anne herself is sucked into a closet by a magnetic light ray. Being the normal, rational folks they are, the Freelings seek professional help from parapsychologist Dr. Lesh (Beatrice Straight), who arrives at their haunted house sensibly equipped with her own hip flask and accompanied by a pair of fellow spookologists. Dr. Lesh assures the Freelings that unlike real hauntings, which can go on forever, poltergeist phenomena usually last ''only'' about two months. But they're a memorable two months. With Carol Anne still trapped in the closet, further aid clearly is needed. Enter Tangina (Zelda Rubinstein), a solemn midget exorcist who lectures the afflicted parents perhaps a bit more thoroughly than they - or we - need about the rules governing the spirit world before restoring their daughter to them. Like any tale of the uncanny, ''Poltergeist'' demands from its audience a willing suspension of disbelief. One does wonder why, in a neighborhood so densely populated that television reception is impaired and Mister Rogers pops unasked into a football game the Freelings are watching, nobody calls the cops when the poltergeist creates such a racket. But such is Spielberg's cinematic mastery that we're willing to go along with any inconsistencies reality might impose on his nightmare world, and even to forgive the rather trite explanation the film ultimately offers for its grisly goings-on. Only one scene is truly horrific, though, in this refreshingly unexploitative horror film. The rest of ''Poltergeist'' provides splendid entertainment for anyone over the age of haunted little Carol Anne. ''POLTERGEIST.'' Wonderfully funny and scary ghost story by Steven Spielberg (''Close Encounters of the Third Kind'') about an average suburban American family menaced by things that go bump in the night. Rated PG. Three and a half stars. ------------------------------ Date: 4 Jun 1982 1250-EDT From: Larry Seiler Subject: Doctor Who - the Definite Article Dear Kevin Rudd, In reference to your question, "Doctor who?": yes. Dear "pur-ee!pur-phy!retief", In reference to your question, "What is Doctor Who's real name": well, that depends on what you mean by "real". Almost certainly that would not be his name on Gallifrey (excuse my spelling, please). But in at least one early Doctor Who movie, he was explicitly referred to as "Doctor Who". And even in the Tom Baker series, there are references. For example, once when the Doctor was masquerading as an android that was intended to masquerade as him, he tells another android "Nobody knows who's Who around here." By the way, is it too much to ask that people sign their messages with human-readable names? I would rather refer to people by name than by alphabet-soup computer designations. Larry Seiler ------------------------------ Date: Friday, 4 Jun 1982 14:45-PDT From: jim at RAND-UNIX Subject: Supermen Compare and contrast Stranger in a Strange Land Gladiator Robert A. Heinlein Philip Wylie (c) 1961 (c) 1930, 1958 1. VALENTINE MICHAEL SMITH born 1. HUGO DANNER born amid friction amid friction between parents. between parents. Develops into a Develops into a superman with. superman via genetic engineering. Martian help. 2. Trying to find his place in 2. Trying to find his place in society, joins a carnival as society, joins a carnival as a a magician . strong man. Makes a friend named VALENTINE MITCHEL. 3. Immolated by an enraged mob. 3. Immolated by a lightning bolt. I liked Heinlein's version better (except for the slapstick scenes in Heaven). It's interesting to read both books together and notice the difference in approach: Heinlein basically interested in the human potentials and Wylie in human arrogance, which occasionally needs to be slapped down by God. I'm guessing that the parallel is intentional, because of the similarity of names (as well as the themes, of course). ------------------------------ Date: 25 May 1982 11:50 edt From: Boebert.SCOMP at MIT-MULTICS Subject: The Pogue Carburetor This isn't SF, but it should be. Ralph Ginzburg, late of EROS, the Federal Pen, and Moneysworth, is running ads promising the secrets of the 200 mpg Pogue Carburetor, one of those legendary inventions like the eternal razor blade that are suppressed by the monopolistic meanies of big biz. The ad caused a severe nostalgia shock, for about 25 years ago a friend and I built one from the original patent drawings (which, as I recall, went back to the 30's), after an article we had uncovered in, I think, an ancient issue of Modern Mechanix. We got the patent drawings through friend's father, who was a consulting engineer. The device is essentially a gasoline preheater. It consists of two adjacent spiral chambers, the kind of arrangement you would get if you laid two strips of paper together and then wound them into a coil. Gasoline went through one and exhaust through the other. The vaporized gasoline was metered into intake manifold through an LP gas valve. We never got to verify the 200 mpg claims because our silver soldering technique wasn't up to the task and we (evidently) got a leak, because the thing exploded, flew clear over one house and landed in the adjacent yard. Such adventures were only possible in the years BN (Before Nader). Earl ------------------------------ Date: 4 Jun 1982 0814-PDT From: FEATHER at USC-ISIF (Martin S. Feather) Subject: Video Games What do you call a PacMan that doesn't eat anything? PacIfist. ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 6-Jun JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #63 *** EOOH *** Date: Sunday, June 6, 1982 6:23AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #63 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Sunday, 6 Jun 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 63 Today's Topics: Administrivia - Duplicate Digests, SF Books - "Shortstack" & Macro Story, SF TV - Dr Who, SF Movies - Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan & Rating of Poltergeist & Revenge of the Jedi, SF Topics - Science in the Public Eye, Humor - Genderless Video Games, Random Topics - Duck's Breath Mystery Theater ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sunday, June 6, 1982 6:23AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS-REQUEST at MIT-AI Subject: Duplicate Digests Once again, because of those transmission difficulties mentioned a couple of weeks ago, a few people were sent duplicate copies of issue 61 (Friday's digest). Sorry about that. Jim ------------------------------ Date: 02-Jun-1982 From: ANDY VESPER at EVE Reply-to: "ANDY VESPER at EVE c/o" Subject: Looking for a story Does anyone know where the following story might be found? (magazine, anthology, etc) The title is "Shortstack" or something similar and it is about a man named Short. The story begins as he is inflating a plastic hut in the desert - but the plastic was cut wrong and instead of a hut he gets a chimney - the 'stack' of the title. The rest of the story shows how useful this is and why Short is billed as a savior by mankind. I read this at least 10 years ago so I don't remember just where I read it - I think in a mainstream anthology. Does anybody recognize it? Thanks, Andy PS: I am also waiting for \The Universal Pantograph/ by Alexei Panshin - it is the fourth in a series about a Trog named Torve and a human named Anthony Villiers (aka Viscount Charteris) - light fare but refreshing. ------------------------------ Date: 4 June 1982 10:48 edt From: Gubbins.4506i14TK at RADC-Multics Subject: Macro Story The following is a story story that a good friend of mine wrote. I thought it might fit in well with SF-Lovers. - Gern -------------------------------------------------------- "Rats!", the Moon thought, "My Kepler crater itches!" He hated it when he had an itch. There was no way of relieving it unless a small meteorite would strike the spot. And the chances of that happening were millions to one. The Moon remembered his youth, when he had thought about more than tiny itches. He had been cradled in a lush pocket of spacetime, set in ultimate comfort among the cosmos. He took leisurely strolls around a beautiful blue planet, admiring its grace and purity. Yet something was missing; a purpose, a reason. Was this his ultimate fate, to circle this epitome of beauty? Was his sole purpose to praise and serve this model of perfection? He had certainly hoped not. As time passed,, he grew to hate the blue planet, jealous of the attention it drew and magnificence it possessed. He hated his own mundane looks and meaningless purpose in life. Then they came. Tiny, miniature creatures in white. They hopped around and stuck a bright cloth in him. They danced, they shouted, they frolicked. They sang praises to him! Praises to him? Creatures from the beautiful blue planet singing praises to him, an ugly rock, a mere servant? Maybe he was important. Maybe he had a purpose in life. He was a goal! Something to reach for, something to accomplish. He had found his purpose. Suddenly a tiny asteroid pelted the Moon just inside the Kepler crater. "Ahh!", sighed the Moon, "That hits the spot." And so it did. - Aries ------------------------------ Date: 4 Jun 1982 0931-MDT From: Michi Wada Subject: Dr. Who and Star Trek II premier In the story "The Armaggedon Factor" the Doctor met Drax, a fellow Gallifrian. Drax called the Doctor "Theta Sigma" when they first met. According to the book version of the story "Theta Sigma" is a Gallifrian designation and not the Doctor's real name either. Other than that one instance he has always been just "The Doctor". Albuquerque, New Mexico also had a premier showing of Star Trek II on 3 June '82. This one was sponsored by a radio station here in Albuquerque. Tickets were for free, but were gotten by answering or asking Star Trek trivia questions or being in one of 2 science fiction clubs who got a limited number of tickets for helping out with the promotion. ------------------------------ Date: 4 Jun 1982 0915-MDT From: Pendleton at UTAH-20 (Bob Pendleton) Subject: Star Trek:TWOK premier I attended what has billed as the premier of ST:TWOK last night, Thursday June 3rd, in Salt Lake City, Utah. It was not billed as the world premier, just as the premier. It was part of a promotion by a local radio station and a local furniture dealler. Bye the way, I haven't enjoyed an SF movie so much since the first Star Wars movie. It was classic Star Trek! Bob Pendleton ------------------------------ Date: 4 Jun 1982 08:53 CDT From: Johnston.DLOS at PARC-MAXC Subject: Re: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #60 No premier on 3 June in Dallas. Rick ------------------------------ Date: "3-JUN-1982 17:30 " From: TSC::COORS::VICKREY Reply-to: "TSC::COORS::VICKREY c/o" Subject: The Wrath of Khan "Somewhere at the ends of the universe a battle is about to begin ..." So begins the radio commercial for TWOK. What a lovely way to wake up in the morning! ------------------------------ Date: 4 Jun 1982 2014-EDT From: HEDRICK at RUTGERS (Mgr DEC-20s/Dir LCSR Comp Facility) Subject: an alarming review of ST.TMP.2 After seeing all the positive reviews that have been published here, I was interested to hear the WCBS movie critic give a fairly negative review of Star Trek II. What was interesting about it was that he criticized the movie by saying that it was just a bunch of people sitting around in swivel chairs. Even that were true (which it is not), I would find it a fairly alarming reaction. Star Wars (which as I recall the same reviewer liked) of course had more different sets and more "action". But these days more and more of the real life challenges are going to occur to people who are sitting at desks or consoles. If we are going to survive as a technological society, we are going to be willing to put effort into challenges that are essentially abstract - ethical issues that we can only see by perusing a list of numbers on a printout, and life and death struggles that show up only on a display screen. I think what we see in that review is the sort of alienation from technology that Pirsig analysed so well in @i[Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance]. [I trust everyone on this mailing list knows about that most extrodinary book. Although it is a work of fiction, it contains interesting discussions of at least the following points: - people's reactions to technology - esthetics - the problem-solving process, with emphasis on debugging. [the only other significant treatment that I know of outside the AI literature is Polyani's book @i[How to Solve it.] It isn't exactly science fiction, but it seems to share many of the merits of science fiction. It is one of the few books that seems to create its own genre. The normal sorts of things you expect to see in a review wouldn't be that useful, because the action is almost completely on the level of ideas. The chief villain is an academic department at the University of Chicago. [Interestingly enough, I believe that the department actually exists. One suspects that the usual disavowal of "no similarity to any people living or dead" is misleading in this case. He minces no words about who his villains are. They are mostly universities, and they are all identifiable.]]] ------------------------------ Date: 4 Jun 1982 0108-PDT From: Jim McGrath Subject: Rating of Poltergeist By ALJEAN HARMETZ c. 1982 N.Y. Times News Service HOLLYWOOD - The voluntary movie-rating system of the Hollywood studios has made news again - in two ways that reflect the tensions inherent in trying to protect children, movie grosses and an uncensored society at the same time. .... On the other side of the ledger, MGM-UA's ''Poltergeist,'' a movie that has a very explicit body count of decaying corpses, was rated R by the industry's Rating Board. Because ''Poltergeist'' - which concerns the ghostly possession of a tract house and its occupants - should find its greatest audience in young teen-agers when it opens Friday, the studio appealed the decision. By a surprisingly lopsided vote, the Appeals Board, which consists of 24 members of organizations of movie producers and distributors and theater owners, overturned the R-rating and granted ''Poltergeist'' a PG-rating. In the last three years, only three of 16 appeals have been granted by the Appeals Board - not counting movies that appealed their ratings because of sexually explicit language that automatically gets a movie an R. The PG-rating for ''Poltergeist'' suggests ''parental guidance'' but allows even a 5-year-old to attend the movie unaccompanied. The ratings system was instituted in 1968 as a way of staving off government censorship. For the last six or eight years, there has been a fierce but almost completely private argument inside the industry over adding an R-13 rating, which would restrict a movie for young children but not for teen-agers. Jack Valenti, president of the Motion Picture Association of America, has been very reluctant to draw attention to the ratings by tampering with them in any way, but the rerating of ''Poltergeist'' is bound to force him to address himself to the hot-potato issue once again. .... ------------------------------ Date: 4 Jun 1982 1600-EDT From: DD-B Reply-to: "DYER-BENNET at KL2137 c/o" Subject: SFL submission ( Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #57 ) (Dolata at SUMEX-AIM) I agree that revenge does not befit a Jedhi. They certainly don't map directly onto the samurai, for example. There are more long books recently, and also more series and sequels and the like. Personally, I like long books and series. I would certainly object if I felt a book were padded, but that's not something I tend to notice (or else my definition of "padded" differs from most peoples'). So be reassured that this trend in writing or publishing at least serves the interests of someone, somewhere, other than those doing it. (Discussions of "standard english") This is more germane to SF than many of our sidetracks here, but I think it's also more unresolvable. Using female pronouns generically in a book told in first person by a female bothers me much less, at least in the abstract (I haven't read Friday yet), than many things I've seen done. ( Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #59 ) (Steven J. Zeve ) I thought it was pachuperoffspring? ------------------------------ Date: 4 Jun 1982 1328-PDT From: FEBER at USC-ISIC Subject: Pacman The name Pacman apparently comes from the Japanese verb "paku-paku" which is an onomatopoetic word representing the sound the lips make as someone gobbles food. It implies voraciousness. ------------------------------ Date: 26-May-1982 From: JOHN FRANCIS AT EIFFEL Reply-to: "JOHN FRANCIS AT EIFFEL c/o" Subject: Ferrets of Old England In reply to Mijjil's ferret query: I have never heard of "Duck's Breath", but I suspect that your question about the ferrets of England refers to "The Ferrets of Old England", a truly marvelous song. I don't remember much of it - just the following phrase: "Do you like your Ferret baked or boiled?" "No - I preFERRET raw!" "Oh, God bless the Ferrets of Old England". This song is from an old BBC radio series "I'm sorry, I'll read that again" starring David Hatch, Jo Kendall, John (Otto) Cleese, Tim Brooke-Taylor, Graham Garden, and Bill Oddie (who wrote the songs), and produced by Humphrey Barclay. Ferrets are a recurring theme in this series, as are gibbons, and several other weird things. If you haven't ever heard this series, you are missing a lot of the jokes in the Monty Python TV shows and films. For example, in "Monty Python and the Holy Grail", the vampire rabbit is a reference to an ISIRTA show where the wimpy hero (Tim Brooke-Taylor) is trapped in a room with a vampire rabbit and a large wooden chest. "Oh" he dithers, "Should I attempt to kill the creature by driving a pointed stick through it's heart, or should I hide in the chest ?" "What should I do ?" and the audience reply "Stake the Bunny!" "Hop in the Box!" P.S. Referring to the show as ISIRTA is not just SFL-ism in abbreviating everything to it's initials - that's what they called it themselves. ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 8-Jun JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #64 *** EOOH *** Date: Tuesday, June 8, 1982 6:20AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #64 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Monday, 7 Jun 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 64 Today's Topics: SF Books - Here's the Plot...What's the Title & Puppet Masters & "Gulf", SF TV - Dr Who, SF Topics - Politics in SF, SF Movies - ET: the Extra-Terrestrial & Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, Random Topics - Commercials at the movies, Spoiler - "Gulf" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Monday, 7 Jun 1982 14:27-PDT Subject: Help locating a Parallel Worlds Story From: norm at RAND-UNIX I wonder if somebody could help me locate a Science Fiction Story. Its a parallel worlds plot. I know neither the author nor the title. The story begins with the hero in England interviewing relatives of a girl he loved in a parallel world. The family claimed that the girl never existed. After further investigation he finds her, with a different name, in Canada. He once slips and refers to her by the parallel world name. Her mother than tells him that while pregnant and on a riverboat trip with her lover she saw the name, the hero inadvertently used, on a passing boat and planned to name her baby after the boat. As far as she knows nobody else knew this name. The naming plans were changed when the mother's lover was killed in (I think) the First World War. The mother never told her lover's relatives of her pregnancy. The story is NOT the similar story based on the 1971 English movie "Quest for Love", though I would also like to locate that story. Since I'm not on the SF_LOVERS list, I'd appreciate replies directly to me. thanks much Norm Shapiro norm at RAND-UNIX ------------------------------ Date: 6 Jun 1982 1621-EDT From: Mark Subject: Dr. Who's real name In the last "Keys of Time" series (I don't remember the series' name), Dr. Who met an imprisoned time lord who knew him from their college days, I think his name was Drax. Anyway, he called the Doctor "Phete", and once said his full name, "Phetus Sigma". I'm just guessing at the spelling. Later on in the episode, the Doctor told Drax that he now preferred to be called "The Doctor". ------------------------------ Date: 6 Jun 1982 22:33:36-EST From: Chris Kent Reply-to: cak at Purdue Subject: Dr Who and Tom Baker Has anyone out there gotten any of the 'new' episodes (i.e. those with Peter Davison playing the Doctor)? The local station has been backpedalling -- we've seen the Key to Time sequence twice, and they are now rerunning VERY EARLY Tom Baker episodes. The last episode that has been shown (chronologically speaking) is Logopolis, in which Davison replaces Baker (sniff). Can't really picture anyone else playing the Doctor. chris ------------------------------ Date: 6 Jun 1982 1239-PDT From: Mike Leavitt Subject: Utopian, feminist sf A good friend is putting together a seminar on utopias from a feminist anthropological position, and one session (perhaps more) will be devoted to contemporary sf's contribution. Some obvious ones come to mind (Dispossessed (pace, SD), Anderson's Winter of the World, miscellaneous Russ), but I felt that I was probably missing many good choices. The utopias don't have to be explicitly feminist utopias, but rather, utopias that would be of interest to feminists. A blatantly anti-feminist one would be great, too. By "contemporary," I mean, say, since John Campbell started at Astounding. I exclude mainstream favorites (1984, etc.) since they will be covered elsewhere. Any ideas? If anybody so indicates, I will be happy to share a summary with individuals or with the list. Mike PS I vaguely recall a similar discussion in months (years?) past in SFL. Pointers to specific issues would also be most welcome. ------------------------------ Date: 6 Jun 1982 17:16:30-PDT From: decvax!minow at Berkeley Subject: Progressive literature In sf-lovers several weeks ago, James Cox (APPLE @ MIT-MC) stated "politics generally makes bad literature. Nobody ever reads fiction writers 'with a cause.'" A week or so ago, I submitted a list or "progressive writers" to POLI-SCI, but network difficulties -- such as the non-existence of an arpa gateway -- prevented submitting it to SF-LOVERS. The following slightly expanded list "popular, progressive" authors is ordered roughly chronologically (with apologies for misspellings): Aristophenes, Macchievelli, Voltaire, Swift, Balzac, Thomas Paine, Thoreau, Harriet Beecher Stowe (and the other abolitionists), Mark Twain, Victor Hugo, Strindberg, Ibsen, Dosteyevski, Gorky, Shaw, Driesler, Jose Marti, Lorca, Jallosa Vargas. Zola, Camus. In our era, we have: Brecht, Gunter Grass, Orwell, Satre, de Bouvoir, Vilhelm Moberg, Ivar Lo Johansson, Maj Sjovall and Per Wahloo, Theodorakis, Vaino Linna and Steinbeck. These writers all exhibit several characteristics: 1. They are all part of the Western cultural tradition. 2. They were in opposition to the traditional society. 3. They were popular during their own time. Cox subsequently pointed out that it was a bit unfair to include satirists such as Swift and Twain, as their intention is to attack the social order. He also pointed out that, to classify, say, Dosteyevsky, as a progressive writer is to miss the importance of his work. The same could well be said of all the writers on this list. By the way, the list contains a fair number of Scandinavian writers that, while readily available in translation, are almost unknown here. Several of the Scandinavians are accessible via film: Sjovall/Wahloo's The Laughing Policeman, Moberg's The Emigrants, and Linna's The World is a Sinful Song have all been shown in the US. (The Laughing Policeman lost most of its political bite: read their books instead.) I can think of few "progressive, successful" SF authors (besides Brunner, of course). Any others? Regards Martin Minow (with some help from a friend) decvax!minow ------------------------------ Date: 1 Jun 1982 0900-EDT From: Ed Bailey Reply-to: "Ed Bailey c/o" Subject: E.T.: the Extraterrestial This past weekend I was able to catch the Hartford, Connecticut preview of E.T. I was quite surprised to find a quality offering that answered such questions as, "What would your little sister do if she found an extraterrestrial in your closet?", and "What would NASA do if they found an extraterrestrial in your closet?". The film has some very funny moments, as well as enough of a tear-jerker to get an eight-year-old sobbing (and a twenty-three-year-old a little misty eyed). I found it a little surprising that one of the NASA people couldn't figure out what "E.T." built out of a radar detector, a phonograph, and a TI "Speak 'n Spell", but it was not that critical to the plot. So, if you're willing to forego documentary style accuracy (you won't find it here), and want to see what may be the most expressive face that never lived, see E.T. Ed About the units of time on "Battlescow Garbagecan". I think you will find that the units are powers of ten, as I remember hearing/seeing a countdown go from one centon (?) to 99 microns.... ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jun 82 2:06-PDT From: mclure at SRI-UNIX Subject: Star Trek II Pretty good. True to the series and characters. A bit melodramatic and sentimental near the end. Sometimes hysterical one-liners. Vastly superior to the first movie. Impressive, but not suffocating, special effects by Industrial Light & Magic. Nicholas Meyer's reputation can only increase with this one. ------------------------------ Date: 6 June 1982 02:55-EDT From: Gary E. Ansok Subject: ST:TWOK -- A question Is there a reason that Khan never takes the glove off of his right hand? (i.e., is this an artificial hand or such like?) ------------------------------ Date: 8 Jun 1982 0220-PDT From: Dolata at SUMEX-AIM Subject: Commercials at the movies! I just saw Star Trek; The Rath of Kahn. I like it. However, what I was writing about was the fact that before the film they showed a commercial for Pepsi! I have already written and printed out a letter expressing my distaste for commercials in the movies, promising that I would be concienciously buying COKE in protest. I encourage everybody who feels similarly to join me in writing such letters of complaint when theatres pull this cheapo. After all, once commercials become firmly established at the beginning and end of the movie, where is the next obvious place to put them??????????? [ This practice is quite common in European theatres. Usually commercials are shown before the movie for 5 to 15 minutes. However, no place I know of has adopted a policy of showing them DURING the movie itself. -- Jim ] ------------------------------ Date: Tuesday, June 8, 1982 2:26AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Subject: SPOILER WARNING! SPOILER WARNING! The following message is the last in the digest. It discusses some plot details of the story "Gulf." Some readers may not wish to read on. ------------------------------ Date: Monday, 7 Jun 1982 09:35-PDT From: jim at RAND-UNIX Subject: Puppet Masters and Gulf revisited Because of the widespread differences of opinion on The Puppet Masters and Gulf, I thought I'd re-read both and report: Kettle-Belly Baldwin is indeed a main character of Gulf, and does indeed head a super-secret PRIVATE organization of supermen dedicated to the concept of separating smart people from average people with the eventual goal of creating a separate and superior species. They speak a constructed language as previously described in this newsletter. The hero is a guy called Joe Green, who doesn't survive (I guess this is a spoiler). The setting is sometime after recovery from (!) the 3rd world war, which may have been won by the Soviets. I haven't yet read Friday. Does this sound like the same Kettle-Belly? The hero of Puppet Masters is named Elihu Nivens (cover name Sam). His father, Andrew, is the head of the super-secret GOVERNMENT organization which seems to have some kind of security duties ... perhaps like a Gestapo or something, but all good guys, of course. Sam eventually takes over the organization by popular acclaim. The organization does not have its own language, although Sam's girl friend (cover name Mary, originally named Allucquere) was a member of the Whitmanite religious (?) sect which used its own artificial language. No Kettle-Bellies, no Baldwins. Separate universe. ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 8-Jun JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #65 *** EOOH *** Date: Tuesday, June 8, 1982 8:17PM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #65 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Tuesday, 8 Jun 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 65 Today's Topics: SF Movies - Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, SF Books - Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, Spoiler - Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 7-Jun-82 10:39AM-EDT (Mon) From: David Miller Subject: Star Trek II All the reviews of this movie that I've seen so far have sounded very good so, though I thoroughly enjoyed the movie, let me dwell on some of its weaknesses. While STTMP was filled with grand concepts, it lacked in plot, ST-II has lots of plot but no grand concepts at all. There is little to talk about (as far as the content is concerned) in this movie, except for speculation about the ending. One can make comments about, and repeat the many nifty lines in the film, but it reminded me more than anything else of "Chariots of Fire" a wonderfully entertaining film that kept your interest all through the film, but was entirely up there on the screen, with nothing left to ponder about. The director and writer (does anybody know who the writer was? I saw no credit for him/her) gave in completely to the popular criticisms of the previous films: The bridge voices were back, there was more snappy dialogue (in STTMP there were only two lines of that type 1) "Spock, transmit now" 2) "Out there, that-a-way") and there was blood and battle. The first two were really nice to see, the last I'm afraid they went a bit overboard on. Really what was the point of Scotty carrying up the broken body of his assistant to the Bridge? And while ILM's affects are always a pleasure to look at, almost two thirds of the film was in battle, or preparation for battle. Star fleet itself seems to have changed character slightly. In almost every episode, and even in the last film, Kirk gets a chance to say that are weapons are purely defensive, but in this film, with the new Prussian uniforms, they goto great lengths to remove all defensive weapons, and go onto offense whenever possible. Finally, For Kahn having the greatest intelligence he certainly is foolish. I guess that old D&D saying about a genius only being as intelligent as the Dungeon Master is really true. Perhaps the next film can be a merger of the strengths of both films, then we'll have not only a fun film, but a good piece of cinema. Dave (miller@yale) ------------------------------ Date: 7 June 1982 08:28-EDT From: Andrew Scott Beals Subject: Star Trek II - TWoK Is a GREAT movie! Both the special effects and the editing was good, although, the plot /did/ have some silly moments. Does anybody know if the was that they're going to bring back Spock has anything to do with his touching McCoy's head and saying ``remember''? (I would guess that this /is/ the way, but then again....) - Andy - andrew.univax at brl-bmd - dbl!andy.univax at brl-bmd ------------------------------ Date: Tuesday, June 8, 1982 6:19PM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Subject: SPOILER WARNING! SPOILER WARNING! The following messages are the last in the digest. They discuss some plot details in both the movie and the book Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. Some readers may not wish to read on. ------------------------------ Date: 8 June 1982 9:21 am PDT (Tuesday) From: MORRILL.PA Subject: Star Trek II ******************************************************************* ****SPOILER***SPOILER***SPOILER***SPOILER***SPOILER***SPOILER****** ******************************************************************* Spock lies, McCoy's bootlegging whiskey, Kirk's got an illegitimate son and Scotty has V.D. What ever happen to those nice boys who ran the Enterprise fifteen years ago? Toby ------------------------------ Date: 8 Jun 1982 13:22 EDT From: Stevenson.WBST at PARC-MAXC Subject: Re: Star Trek II ******************************************************************* ****SPOILER***SPOILER***SPOILER***SPOILER***SPOILER***SPOILER****** ******************************************************************* "What ever happened to those nice boys who ran the Enterprise fifteen years ago?" They're going right on doing what they've always done: 1. Saavik: "You lied!" Spock: "I exaggerated." Spock already proved he's capable of "exaggeration" (and explained why) in "The Enterprise Incident". 2. McCoy bought bootleg Romulan ale; he didn't smuggle it himself. In various Trek episodes he prescribed booze for "medicinal purposes", as did Dr. Boyce before him. (I think it was Dr. Boyce who "prescribed" for Captain Pike in "The Cage"/"The Menagerie" -- or was Boyce the doctor in "Where No Man Has Gone Before"?) 3. There is no such thing as an "illegitimate child"; there are only "illegitimate" parents. Kirk could have been married to Carol Marcus at the time of David's birth -- there may be such things as temporary "contract" marriages in that era. The fact that Kirk married Miramanee (and got her pregnant) in "The Paradise Syndrome" seems to indicate that he's less than totally averse to marriage and children. 4. Ok, you've got me there. The looks on Kirk's, Scotty's, and McCoy's faces certainly indicated that Scotty had caught something embarrassing. (But is VD any more embarrassing than athlete's foot in the 23rd century? Maybe Scotty's embarrassing medical problem was dandruff - any Head & Shoulders commercial I've ever seen implied that that's the REALLY disgusting "social disease".) Scotty was always portrayed as being a bit of a hall-raiser -- when he could be forced into spending time away from his engines, that is. He displayed a definite propensity for alcoholic beverages in "The Tholian Web" and "By Any Other Name", to mention a couple, called himself "an old Glasgow pub-crawler" in "Wolf in the Fold", and threw the first punch in the barroom brawl in "The Trouble With Tribbles". Bill ("Picky, picky, picky!" screams the audience.) ------------------------------ Date: 8 June 1982 11:52 edt From: Barry Margolin at MIT-MULTICS Subject: Re: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #63 Re: pronouns and Star Trek II (Very mild spoiler warning - moderator's discretion) Now that I have seen ST:TWOK twice, I am convinced that in the scene between Kirk and David near he end David refers to Saavik as "he". Can anyone corroborate this? Other questions about Saavik have come up around here. First, there is her (his?) name. In the series we were led to believe that Vulcan male names are of the form S---k (except for Stonn, the man who wanted to marry Spock's fiancee), and that female names were of the form T'P---. Saavik seems to be of the male form. Then there is her species. I believe that there were reports in this digest claiming that she is half-Vulcan and half-Romulan. Are we expected to have been able to derive this from the movie? And if she is, she would have to be at most 16 earth-years old, because we saw what claimed to be the first face-to-face meeting between Federation members and Romulans in the original series episode "Balance of Terror". barmar ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jun 1982 1842-EDT From: Thomas Galloway Subject: ST II- Movie vs book *SPOILER WARNING* *GO SEE THE MOVIE FIRST!* After catching ST-II last night, i bought the novelization by Vonda McIntyre. All in all, a good job, but some things in the book really should have been in the movie, and based on previous rumors, etc., believe they were at one time, but got cut out. I) Saavik is supposed to be half Romulan as well as Vulcan. This would help explain her "Damn" in the opening, and leads to quite a bit of character development in the book. Hopefully, this will be played up, with a bit of prejudice of the part of the crew towards her. II) Peter Preston, the engineering cadet who Scotty carried up to the bridge and who was the only one to stick at his post, was Scotty's nephew. As I recall, Scotty was looking rather proud when Kirk singled Pete out. There was also a good scene where Kirk teases Pete, but Pete gets back by presenting him with a "left-handed scanner". III) Sulu is now a captain and about to take over his own ship. This ties in with the line "good to have you back on for three weeks Mr. Sulu". IV) The scene where Terril kills himself is done better, giving him a bit more reason to be able to throw off Khan's control. V) David finds out when he attacks Kirk who his father is. VI) There's a lead-in to bringing Spock back at the end. All in all, a good job of novelization and film . Just wish some of these elements had made it through the editing, particularly the first two. tom ------------------------------ Date: 7 Jun 1982 2054-EDT From: HEDRICK at RUTGERS (Mgr DEC-20s/Dir LCSR Comp Facility) Subject: some background for those who plan to see Star Trek II I have just finished reading the novel based on Star Trek: the Wrath of Khan, by Vonda McIntyre. I recommend the book, even if you see the movie. It has enough more material to be worth reading, particularly in its handling of the characters of Saavik, Spock, Peter Preston, and the folks on the Regula Spacelab. I am including some information from the book, to help tie up some of the loose ends left after seeing the movie. I have tried not to say so much that this will spoil either the movie or the book. The loose ends it ties up are mostly associated with Saavik and Peter Preston. The movie, at least in the form we see it, centers around Adm. Kirk and the people around him (Spock, McCoy, etc.). In the book, there is a second center of attention around Saavik, including Saavik, Peter, and David. There seems to be some evidence that a lot of this was originally in the script and ended up on the cutting room floor. I will not actually tie up said loose ends (in order to avoid a spoiler rating) but will give the background necessary for you to do so yourself when you see the movie. Saavik: Saavik is half Vulcan and half Romulan. No one knows who her parents are, but from the habits of both races it seems that she is probably the result of rape. Now and then Romulans manage to kidnap a Vulcan and rape him or her (perhaps rape is too mild a word for the actual situation, but it will do for a summary). The resulting child is of no interest to either race. Saavik ended up growing up in the underworld of a Romulan colony world. The Romulans gave up the colony as a lost cause, and withdrew their personnel. Of course they did not bother with Saavik or those like her. Some time later, an expedition from Vulcan found the planet. The Vulcans weren't much more enthusiastic, but Mr. Spock, who happened to be on the expedition, forced them to do their duty by the half-breeds, and Saavik was rescued. This history explains why Saavik does not seem to be a normal Vulcan. Spock clearly believes that Saavik should not try to be a Vulcan - her background does not allow it. Spock was able to function as one only because he grew up with the Vulcan disciplines. He would prefer to see her end up as an effective human than an ineffective Vulcan. However Saavik quite naturally idolizes Spock, and wants to be like him. By the way, Saavik strikes me as someone that we are likely to see more of in future episodes (if any). Peter Preston is not actually part of the crew of the ship. He is a cadet, 14 years old. It sounds like this is a 23rd-century equivalent of the sea scouts. After all, this is a training voyage, and it is not unheard of to take scouts on such a trip. His station is the second backup control for the auxiliary power. There is seems to have been a casting problem here. The movie uses 18-year olds for their 18-year olds. So when they use someone at least as old for Peter, the relative ages come out wrong. Also, some of Peter's dialog needs a 13 or 14-year old actor. I suggest using your imagination when watching him. In particular, Kirk's first encounter with him makes many people think that Starfleet has suddenly turned militaristic. If you keep in mind his actual age, you will realize what is really going on. The book does quite a nice job in portraying Peter. As with many adolescents, everything he tries to say or do comes out embarrassing him. To make things worse, he is Scotty's nephew. (Have you ever seen what happens when a teacher has his own son in his class? a fate worse than death...) Despite this, he is a thoroughly sweet kid, and clearly everyone on the crew loves him. Spock assigns him to Saavik to be tutored in math, with the intention of showing Saavik the bright side of being human . In general, it seems to work. a random comment: yes, the Enterprise does have robots capable of doing repairs in areas with high radiation. However if they are used continually, they eventually give out due to radiation damage. ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 10-Jun JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #66 *** EOOH *** Date: Thursday, June 10, 1982 10:44AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Wednesday, 9 Jun 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 66 Today's Topics: SF Books - Podkayne of Mars & Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, SF TV - Dr Who, Humor - Genderless Video Games, Random Topics - Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance & How To Solve It & Halliwell's Filmgoers Companion, SF Movies - Movie Reviews & Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, Spoiler - Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 08-Jun-1982 From: ANDY VESPER at EVE Reply-to: "ANDY VESPER at EVE c/o" Subject: Life imitates art Reference: Eric P. Scott at MIT-AI (SF-LOVERS Digest vol 5 # 59) Vita imitaret artes. ("Life imitates art" in Latin.) Reference: Podkayne of Mars I must agree she is a twit - but she is a very believable twit. Should a hero be larger than life - or human? I have always admired RAH's characterizations - I can see people like them all around. Even Lazarus Long has his foibles - his \ridiculous/ sexual hangups (which, come to think, might have helped him stay alive all those years). ------------------------------ Date: 8-JUN-1982 17:58 From: TSC::COORS::VICKREY Reply-to: "TSC::COORS::VICKREY c/o" Subject: The Fifth Doctor Who Saw a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy of a video tape of Castrelvalva, the first Dr. Who with Peter Davison as the Doctor, this weekend. The story (from what I could see & hear - nth generation tapes are hard to watch) was about the Doctor's problems with his latest re-generation: his memory is extremely erratic, making it difficult to find his way around the Tardis (he has to leave a trail of clothing); a quarter of the Tardis has to be jettisoned in order to get sufficient thrust to get away from the Big Bang (unfortunately including the Zero Room, which was the only place where his dendrites could heal properly); and the Master is still after him. The Tradition Continues! ------------------------------ Date: Wednesday, 9 June 1982 14:14-PDT From: KING at KESTREL Subject: video games What do you call ? PacPacing ------------------------------ Date: 8 Jun 1982 22:59:13-PDT From: Cory.caro at Berkeley Subject: Re: Pirsig's "Zen..." (HEDRICK at RUTGERS) I must take exception to your brief summary of "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance." Although it is many things, I would not call it "fiction". At the very least, it is semi-autobiographical. At the most, it is a serious philosophical teatise (but that is REALLY stretching things.) That Pirsig chose to present his ideas in a "mainstream" literary format reflects the fact that he wanted people, all people, to hear his "message". Also, I think the literary approach has more "Quality". In any case, it has as little to do with SF as this letter. Perry A. Caro ucbvax!ucbcory!caro ------------------------------ Date: 9 June 1982 10:20 edt From: Boebert.SCOMP at MIT-MULTICS Subject: Misc. Nonfiction 1. "How To Solve It" was written by Polya, not Polyani. His lectures were wonderful. His work was extended by Imre Lakatos in an excellent book called "Proofs and Refutations" (Cambridge U Press). 2. "Halliwell's Filmgoers Companion" is popping up on the B. Dalton remainder tables at half price. These are actual 1980 editions, not shlock (e.g. Crown) reprints. Only a little SF in this, but everthing about everthing about movies, especially those of the thirties and forties. Earl ------------------------------ Date: 8 Jun 1982 1113-EDT From: John Redford Subject: Outside movie reviews Lately it seems that most of the movie and book reviews on this list have come from newpapers and wire services. Although I appreciate the effort that people have gone to in typing them in or in transferring the files, I would really rather hear what fellow fans have to say. A reviewer like Richard Freedman is obviously not a fan, and on the whole he seems to despise this sci-fi stuff. After reading three or four pieces from professional reviewers, I think people are a little reluctant to express their own opinions. So come on out there! What do you think of Spielberg making another sentimental and stupid movie about aliens? Should Trekdom be revived? Is the Conan movie fascist or merely brutal? Surely we can do better than "Wonderful special effects and such fun for the kids". ------------------------------ Date: 9 Jun 1982 1335-PDT From: Stuart McLure Cracraft Subject: objections to mainstream movie critics Redford raised an objection about the newswire reviews of SF movies (and books presumably) that have appeared on this mailing list. I, for one, *WANT* someone's view other than a hardcore SF fanatic's who generally has little or no care for characterization, often being interested in spectacular effects alone. A Trekkie's view of the Star Trek movie is practically worthless. I want to know if the movie stands on its own, what is the level of the acting, how does the plot hang together, etc. If Freedman, Maslin and Ebert decry the stupidity of a SF movie, rest assured that the film *is* stupid. The fact that several SF movies have received good reviews from them lately is reassuring. [ Two points: first, we can only print what we get submitted. So if people want to hear from the readers of the list on your favorite movie or book, then contribute! Remember, send all messages to SF-LOVERS@MIT-AI . Second, the news wire stories are not only useful for an alternate veiwpoint, but they also come out up to one week before the movie opens to the public. Thus, since many people seem to appreciate reveiws as soon as a movie opens, we try to time the distribute this material to coincide with the opening of the movie. After it has opened, the amount of material available from the outside press naturally decreases, while the contributions from the readership naturally increases as more people see the movie. -- Jim ] ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jun 1982 1102-EDT From: DD-B Reply-to: "DYER-BENNET at KL2137 c/o" Subject: For SFL: TWoK Review I saw Star Trek: The Wrath of Kahn at the official opening last night. There will probably be lots of reviews floating around, but I'm going to contribute mine anyway. Micro review: This is a good movie, even taken apart from any special appeal it may have for Star Trek fen. See it. Mini review: I didn't expect to like the movie much. I felt that the last one was of no interest except to hard boiled Trekfen, because it contained almost no story. This one, on the other hand, had sufficient plot for the length, and as a bonus contained more of the feel of the television Star Trek episodes than the first movie did. A couple of caveats: the ST universe contains many magic artifacts, such as the transporter, which must be accepted without an attempt at explanation. ST:TWoK contains a new one, but it isn't pulled out of a hat at a crucial moment or anything obnoxious like that. There are certain "standing stupidities" built into Star Trek, such as always sending the highest-ranking officers around on landing parties, and failing to keep up communications between the landing party and the ship, which figure in this movie as well. People who have not become inured to these by now will probably not like the movie. Mainframe review: See spoiler section. ------------------------------ Date: Thursday, June 10, 1982 8:32AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Subject: SPOILER WARNING! SPOILER WARNING! The following messages are the last in the digest. They discuss some plot details in both the movie and the book Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. Some readers may not wish to read on. ------------------------------ Date: 5 Jun 1982 1134-EDT From: DD-B Reply-to: "DYER-BENNET at KL2137 c/o" Subject: SFL: ST:TWoK Mainframe review **SPOILER** I'm writing this part of my review for people who have seen the movie. I assume that most will either see the movie before reading spoilers, or skip them entirely if they don't care about the movie. Someone mentioned Spock "slipping" once and addressing Lt. Saavik as "Mr. Saavik" (for those who haven't seen the movie, she's female). I was looking for this. I found it, not once but each time. It seemed as if they were using "Mr." as the title of address for officers on the bridge without regard to sex (was Uhura ever addressed by anything but name or rank?). I always keep a "list" of "idiot steps" in the plot: connections that wouldn't be there if the characters weren't idiots. This movie did better than most (really better: it had fewer idiots): 1. Chekov and the captain should have stayed in communication with the ship when they were down examining Kahns community. 2. Kirk should have raised shields earlier when approaching the Reliant. The fact that he acknowledges this himself later makes this much less bothersome to me. Certainly people make mistakes; but if the entire plot of a story hinges on a mistake, it should be explained as "justified" somehow, or at the very least acknowledged as having been a mistake. 3. The story Chekov tells about Kahn putting "creatures" into them to make them obey should have been checked out. Either it was true, or Chekov was hallucinating; it's clearly important to determine which, since both are serious. This should be settled before he goes back on duty. These did not manage to spoil the film for me. I thought the plot was very good. Kahn has always been portrayed as a superman with emotions sized to match, which fit well with his appearance here. The threat was real and convincing, the responses were reasonable. Kahns people put up a plausible amount of opposition to his insistence on revenging himself against Kirk before making themselves a paradise. I found the acting superior. Lt. Saavik did particularly well in the opening sequence (no-win scenario). I thought her reactions were perfect for an officer placed in a test which she sees as unfair, and yet knows is very important for her career. Her Vulcan heritage (deduced from ears plus the fact that she and Spock speak together in some foreign language) explains the subtlety of the reactions. Kirk and McCoy were in top form. Spock was Spock (not to denigrate Nimoy's acting, but I've found less variation in Spock than in any of the other major characters). Kahn was Kahn. I'd have preferred a more rational opponent, but the one we were given was well acted. The alien life-form that just happens to parasitize humans, and just happens to make them subject to command before it kills them, is of course grossly implausible. Don't ask me why it didn't bother me. Perhaps my sensibilities have been damaged by too many bad movies. I'm also bothered by the lack of explanation for Chekov's recovery -- Kahn had said that the creatures killed the hosts eventually. Oh well. Maybe he lied. Overall, I felt that this was a good movie, and at the same time a good Star Trek movie. It was MUCH better than I expected. Oh, yes, they did kill Spock in the end, but then beat very heavily on the idea that he would probably be back. That part was a bit clumsy and came close to spoiling an otherwise very good ending (the memorial service and burial-in-space were particularly good). I have low expectations for the next film. It seems as if they have created a situation low on plot to work from. From things Kirk says, it appears that he intends to come back to the newly-formed (by the Genesis bomb, from a nebula) planet where Spock's coffin miraculously lands (without reentry gear) in hopes of finding Spock brought back to life (presumably by the residual magic from the creation of the planet). Since the announced title for the next film is In Search of Spock, it seems likely that that's what it will be about. But I don't see a Star Trek type action story there. ------------------------------ Date: 9 Jun 1982 16:23 EDT From: WRIGHT.WBST at PARC-MAXC Subject: Re: Star Trek II Not to mention "the usual" i.e. "half a gallon of scotch" "Spectre of the Gun" ------------------------------ Date: 9 June 1982 2159-EDT (Wednesday) From: Mark.Sherman at CMU-10A Subject: ST:TWOK - Origin of Saavik One thing that bothered me during the movie was the implication that Saavik was Vulcan while the reviews I read claimed that she was only part Vulcan. In either event, she certainly didn't act like Vulcans seen during the series, e.g., all of those Vulcans at Spock's "wedding". Having gotten and read the book, the details are available. She is half Vulcan, half Romulan and brought up as a Romulan (as opposed to Spock who was brought up as a Vulcan). ------------------------------ Date: 10-JUN-1982 08:45 From: VAX4::MCCOY Reply-to: "VAX4::MCCOY c/o" Subject: ST:TWOK I finally managed to see ST:TWOK last night (after all it's been out almost a week now). It was quite an improvement over ST:TMP, less time spent showing off the special effects and more time developing the plot. I  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 11-Jun JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #67 *** EOOH *** Date: Friday, June 11, 1982 3:39AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #67 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Thursday, 10 Jun 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 67 Today's Topics: SF Topics - Politics in SF, SF TV - Dr Who, SF Movies - Sword and the Sorcerer Query & Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, Random Topics - Commercials at the movies, SF Books - Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, Spoiler - Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 10 Jun 1982 at 2107-CDT From: hjjh at UTEXAS-11 Subject: FEMPRO'S AND UTOPIAS ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ FEMPRO'S AND UTOPIAS ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ You'd think that there might very well be a noticeable connection between SF books with female protagonists and feminist Utopias. But except for the 1880 Utopian novel MIZORA: A PROPHECY, and maybe some of Russ' polemical ones (another gifted storyteller who sold her birthright for a pot of message), what connection there is is not very strong. The theme of an all-female culture/planet crops up every once in a while in SF, but generally the drawbacks rather than the benefits are emphasized, as in Edmund Cooper's cruel fempro, GENDER GENOCIDE (British title, WHO NEEDS MEN?). Since such stories seem to tend to be told from the viewpoint of a male visitor/intruder, e.g., Poul Anderson's VIRGIN PLANET, they don't qualify as truly Utopian OR as fempro's. Charles Eric Maine's ALPH \is/ a fempro, but has the advanced all-female culture experimenting with re-creation of a male and considering the re-introduction of that sex as advantageous. A feminist Utopia beneficial to both sexes forms the background to Mack Reynolds' AMAZON PLANET, where the viewpoint is again that of a male visitor. Marion Zimmer Bradley's fempro, THE RUINS OF ISIS has a viable, strongly female-dominant culture, but \I/ hesitate to call anything a Utopia where half the people are chattel (even if they \are/ mere males). .................. ------------------------------ Date: 10 Jun 1982 at 1930-CDT From: hjjh at UTEXAS-11 Subject: Politics and Popular Writers For a "progressive, successful SF author" with a strong political tone I'd nominate Mack Reynolds. ------------------------------ Date: 09-Jun-1982 From: JONATHAN OSTROWSKY AT GALAXY Reply-to: "JONATHAN OSTROWSKY AT GALAXY c/o" Subject: thanks and another question Thanks to all who answered my query a few months back about the origin of the terms "skren," "nexialist," and "varish." Now I need some help in settling an argument. I remember Lee Horsley, who played Talon in "The Sword and the Sorcerer," as Archie Goodwin in the "Nero Wolfe" TV series that starred William Conrad and aired a couple of years ago. No one believes this. Can anyone out there settle this? Thanks. --Jonathan Ostrowsky ------------------------------ Date: 10 Jun 1982 1519-MDT From: Michi Wada Subject: Dr. Who 'new' episodes The 'new' episodes with Peter Davison as "The Doctor" were shown in England earlier this year. The (Tom Baker) Dr. Who episodes were syndicated in the U.S. in 2 sets with 3 seasons worth of episodes in each. No way of knowing when (if ever) the BBC will syndicate the (Davison) Dr. Who episodes. At this time the only way of seeing the (Davison) Dr. Who is knowing someone with a VCR and camera copy tapes of the Davison episodes from England. ------------------------------ Date: 10-Jun-82 11:12:54 PDT (Thursday) From: Kluger at PARC-MAXC Subject: Commercials during films I saw the film "Airplane!" in Basil, Switzerland in May, 1981. In the middle of the film, 10 minutes of commercials were shown. Most of the people headed for the lobby. The lobby's lights were flashed a few minutes before the commercials were over. Some of the commercials were only slides (stills), others were more like U.S. TV. My Swiss friends told me that the commercials were standard practice. The movie theater we had gone to showed first run films and had two classes of seating: cheaper chairs were closer to the screen. Cost for the cheaper seats was about $5 . Larry Kluger ------------------------------ Date: 10 Jun 1982 1052-PDT From: Jwagner at OFFICE Subject: Commercials at the movies Last night's showing of Dead Men Don't Wear Plaid (what about dead women?) was preceded by a commercial for Coca Cola. It featured little thirsty penguins stranded in a desert that luckily had a snack-bar oasis. Not long ago I saw two commercials for Capri automobiles on different occasions. The first featured a guy and his dog who stumble upon a red Capri in the desert and fly, not drive, away. The second was one of those Hi-tech, New Wave numbers featuring weird camera angles, screeching music, and bony women lounging around in unnatural poses. It had the same red Capri. All these commercials seemed to be longer than a minute -- a captive audience, literally, so I guess they can get away with it. At the local drive-in, I've seen commercials of the "Hi-kids-I'm-Ed-Barbara-president-FurnichUSA-and- I-wanna-help-you-get-started-in-the-credit-world" flavor. These are Bay Area theaters, by the way. -- Jim Wagner ------------------------------ Date: 10 June 1982 18:11-EDT From: Thomas L. Davenport Subject: Commercials at the movies! And what about commercials IN the movies? I hear that E.T. features Star Wars "action figures" and a national pizza chain. ------------------------------ Date: 10 Jun 1982 1332-EDT From: Bob Clements Subject: Commercials IN the movies My suspension of disbelief was destroyed by the blatant JVC advertising in the Superman flick. The huge JVC ad in pseudo-Times Square that was on screen for many minutes and the JVC TV set in the diner were pretty crass. But I was really offended by the Marlboro advertising. What possible reason was there for Lois to be smoking at all, or Marlboro in particular (rather than an anonymous non-branded package) except to entice viewers into following the role model into addiction? Anyone know how much those companies paid for those ads? The credits did list someone with a title equivalent to "commercials salesman" (or sales-entity --- "sales-person" discriminates against non-organic and non-physical sentients). /Rcc ------------------------------ Date: 10 Jun 1982 0254-PDT From: Jim McGrath Subject: Commercials in the movies Showing merchandise in movies is hardly showing commercials - afterall, people DO smoke brand name cigarettes, and DO drink Coke. To NOT display these items would be unrealistic, which in turn can be artistically fatal. I HATE films which are so abstract that you cannot identify the local (especially when, as in Superman, you were SUPPOSE to identify New York). Don't most people on this list constantly complain about unrealistic details in movies? If the producers can get another company to pay for mentioning their names, then fine - that's more money for Lucus and Company to play around with. As for fears that this could result in reduced artistic control over the movie: nothing could be worse than the control the Hollywood studios already exert on creative talents. Jim ------------------------------ Date: Friday, June 11, 1982 3:39AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Subject: SPOILER WARNING! SPOILER WARNING! The following messages are the last in the digest. They discuss some plot details in both the movie and the book Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. Some readers may not wish to read on. ------------------------------ Date: 9 Jun 1982 09:22 EDT From: PATTERSON.Henr at PARC-MAXC Subject: Re: Genderless Pronouns??? Speaking of genderless pronouns, both Kirk and Spock refer to Saavik as Mr. Saavik although Saavik is a Vulcan female. Any additional comments? Richard Patterson (PATTERSON.Henr at PARC) P.S. To TSC::COORS::VICKREY Are you sure that you were not listening to the morning news?? (re: SF-Lovers Digest V5 #63) P.P.S. I agree that people should give their full names and mailing address when writting SF-Lovers. P.P.P.S. Does anyone know where there is a list of what mailing address via net are what real locations and normal names. (i.e. PATTERSON.Henr at PARC is me at Xerox Corp located in Henrietta, New York). Richard ------------------------------ Date: 10 Jun 1982 11:19 CDT From: Surber.DLOS at PARC-MAXC Reply-to: Stevenson.WBST at PARC-MAXC Subject: Re: Star Trek II - (nf) I have been told by a navophile ( a person interested in navies ) that all junior officers, regardless of sex, were referred to as "Mister" in the 20th century U.S. and Royal British navies. Apparently Star Fleet has preserved the historic title. Doug Surber / Surber.DLOS ------------------------------ Date: 10 June 1982 14:03-EDT (Thursday) From: Pat O'Donnell Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #64 I, too, was a bit mystified by Kahn's refusal to remove his right glove. Noticing the metal links, I kept expecting him to backhand someone with it. ------------------------------ Date: 10 June 1982 18:24-EDT (Thursday) From: Mijjil (Matthew J. Lecin) Reply-to: Lecin at RUTGERS Subject: ST:TWOK (not a spoiler) The glove - no evidence comes from the TV series episode "Space Seed" - but we can assume that in the devastation Ceti Alpha 5 got when Ceti Alpha 6 exploded, that his hand could be munged up a bit. ------------------------------ Date: 10-Jun-82 12:21AM-EDT (Thu) From: B.J. Herbison Subject: Khan: "I never forget a face." "I don't know you ... but you I know, Mr. Chekov, I never forget a face." This evening I was lucky enough to see *Space Seed* (the Star Trek episode Khan was introduced in). The crew of the Enterprise was the normal first season crew - which did not include Chekov. A friend on mine who KNOWS Star Trek informed me that Chekov joined the crew in the second season. Khan's "superior intellect" did some wonderful things, but remembering the face of a person he never saw tops them all. B.J. (Herbison@Yale) (decvax!yale-comic!herbison) ------------------------------ Date: 10 June 1982 18:28-EDT (Thursday) From: Mijjil (Matthew J. Lecin) Reply-to: Lecin at RUTGERS Subject: ST:TWOK - spoiler potential - blooper fer shure Kahn (when investigating his 2 captives, first to Captain Terrel:): "I don't know you." (Then to Checkov) "But you I know. I never forget a face. Mr. (pause) Checkov, isn't it?" They goofed gang! The episode "Space Seed" aired in the first season, when there WAS NO CHECKOV character! There was no Checkov that Kahn should remember! Of course we can always claim the following: Checkov *WAS* on the Enterprise - he just wasn't BRIDGE CREW yet. He might have been in the security department, or wherever, and Kahn met him then - but OFFICIALLY, there was no Checkov first season. ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 11-Jun JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #68 *** EOOH *** Date: Friday, June 11, 1982 6:35PM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #68 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Friday, 11 Jun 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 68 Today's Topics: SF Movies - ET: the Extra-Terrestrial & Poltergeist ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 11 Jun 82 11:56-PDT From: mclure at SRI-UNIX Subject: additional (short) reviews of ET "One of the best movies in recent years." Ebert/Siskel, PBS's Sneak Previews "One of the best movies I've ever seen." ABC critic on Good Morning America "Another Wizard of Oz. Will live on for generations." local TV critic in San Francisco I don't think I've ever seen such reviews for any other movie. ------------------------------ Date: 10 Jun 82 14:37-PDT From: mclure at SRI-UNIX Subject: Review: E.T. E.T. The Extra-Terrestial By RICHARD FREEDMAN Newhouse News Service (UNDATED) Steven Spielberg's ''E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial'' may be the finest children's movie since the heyday of Disney. It is certainly the most sentimental, so grownups who don't share Spielberg's particular brand of southern Californian affirmation are duly warned. At the end of his ''Close Encounters of the Third Kind,'' you may recall, Spielberg landed a giant spaceship, gaudy as a Christmas tree, on earth, and out came some pointy-headed but clearly benign visitors from outer space. The moral was clear: Not all aliens need be enemies. This point is hammered home in ''E.T.,'' which, without being a sequel, picks up where ''Close Encounters'' left off. Now the spaceship, in departing - what did it accomplish while it was here? - has inadvertently left behind one of its passengers. He's E.T. (the ingenious creation of Carlo Ramboldi), who looks like a cross between a tortoise, the Yoda of ''The Empire Strikes Back,'' and the late Somerset Maugham. He has a voice to match, ranging somewhere between a bleat and the sound of someone gargling with Clorox. So fortunately, he isn't as sententious as the Yoda. He's a real doll, in short - a fact you can bet won't be lost on toy manufacturers come this Christmas. E.T. has the luck to land in the backyard of 10-year-old Elliott (Henry Thomas), who discovers him while going out for a pizza. With a child's open-mindedness and capacity for wonder, Elliott almost immediately takes to the alien visitor, treating him as a pet much like his dog Harvey. Elliott lives in a suburban California home resembling the haunted one in Spielberg's ''Poltergeist.'' His father has taken off for Mexico with a girlfriend, leaving his mother (Dee Wallace) to cope with Elliott, his adolescent brother Michael (Robert MacNaughton) and his adorably sassy little sister Gertie (Drew Barrymore, granddaughter of the legendary John Barrymore). E.T. becomes Elliott's special pet. The boy teaches him how to survive in America by watching television and drinking Coke, but unlike Mary and her little lamb he can't take E.T. to school with him. ''How do I explain school to a higher intelligence?'' he asks with the clear-eyed perception of childhood. The two become so close that when E.T. raids the refrigerator for beer (it doesn't take long for a higher intelligence to graduate from Coke), Elliott burps. And the resemblance of his newfound friend to Kermit the Frog inspires the boy to disrupt a biology experiment in school by liberating all the doomed frogs from their killing jars. Unfortunately, such is their mystical emotional rapport that when E.T. becomes sick, so does Elliott. It seems the alien must return to his home planet or he will die. So Elliott and his friends nobly conspire to sneak him out of the hospital, swaddle him in towels and, in the movie's delightfully wacky conclusion, lead the police on a merry chase as they bicycle E.T. to a conveniently waiting spaceship. All this, of course, is a science fiction variant on the tear- jerking formula about a boy and his dog or horse, so it comes as no surprise that ''E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial'' was written by Melissa Mathison, who collaborated on the screenplay for ''The Black Stallion.'' But despite the basic cliches of plot and a facile score by John William that borrows handily from Mahler's Ninth Symphony for its theme, the film offers enough movie miracles to keep kids and adults alike enchanted throughout the summer. Only teen-agers might feel ''superior'' to it. Among its many pleasures are the visions of E.T. dressed up for Halloween as a tiny ghost, with only his two goggling eyes peeping warily through a bedsheet, and of bicycles soaring in the sky, silhouetted against the moon. Most miraculous of all, this is a gentle, lyrical evocation of childhood without a trace of exploitative violence. It never belabors its obvious moral - that nothing should be alien to us humans including, possibly, even fellow humans - while entertaining us throughout. One can only hope that aliens from outer space - if indeed there are any - will turn out as nice as Spielberg imagines them in this enchanting fantasy. X X X FILM CLIP: ''E.T. THE EXTRA-TERRESTRIAL.'' Steven Spielberg's gentle, enchanting fantasy about a small boy who befriends a stranded alien he finds in his suburban California backyard. A bit saccharine at times, but one of the best children's films ever made. Rated PG. Four stars. ------------------------------ Date: 8 Jun 82 15:11-PDT From: mclure at SRI-UNIX Subject: Reviews: E.T., Poltergeist E.T. and Poltergeist By VINCENT CANBY c. 1982 N.Y. Times News Service NEW YORK - ''Children's literature in America,'' says The Oxford Companion to American Literature, ''first consisted of aids to piety, seemingly addressed to miniature adults.'' Among the earliest such works, the companion cites John Cotton's ''Milk for Babes, Drawn out of the Breasts of Both Testaments,'' published in 1633. American babes have come a long way since. Our children's literature now embraces everything from the Uncle Remus stories to Mark Twain, Louisa May Alcott, E.B. White, Nancy Drew, sane sex manuals, comic books and, this century's crowning contribution, motion pictures, especially the work of Walt Disney. Now add the work of Steven Spielberg, currently represented by two new films, each of which is an extension of a popular children's form, though neither is an aid to piety or seeks an audience of miniature adults. The films are ''Poltergeist,'' which was produced by Spielberg, directed by Tobe Hooper and is one of the few really satisfactory haunted-house movies I've ever seen, and ''E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial,'' directed by Spielberg, a sweet-natured fantasy with all sorts of connections to earlier children's literature including ''Peter Pan,'' ''The Wizard of Oz,'' ''Lassie,'' ''Flubber,'' Spielberg's own ''Close Encounters of the Third Kind,'' ''Star Wars'' and ''The Empire Strikes Back.'' As good as both films are, their simultaneous release may not be a wise decision, even if, as now seems possible, they succeed in cornering a large portion of this summer's movie business between them. ''Poltergeist'' and ''E.T.'' are enough alike to invite comparisons but just different enough that anyone who is charmed by one will probably be disappointed by the other. What they do give us, however, is the opportunity to consider the concerns and methods of a very particular talent as demonstrated in two separate films seen side by side. In this day and age, when most filmmakers take three or four years on each project, this kind of opportunity doesn't come along very often. Since 1977, when ''Close Encounters'' was released, Spielberg has made four films, ''1941,'' ' Raiders of the Lost Ark,'' ''Poltergeist'' and ''E.T.'' The most immediate conclusion: Spielberg has become his own filmmaker, even when working through an associate, as he did with Hooper on ''Poltergeist.'' If he were a playwright or a novelist, one would say that he had found his own voice, but because a filmmaker deals in images and sounds as well as words, I'm not sure what the movie equivalent would be. It was apparent in ''The Sugarland Express'' and ''Jaws'' that Spielberg is an unusually facile director and a first-rate technician, but not until ''Close Encounters'' was it apparent that there is also a true sensibility guiding those techniques. He is an American director who brings to the hard-boiled, hustling world of Hollywood a delicacy of vision more often associated with small, low-budget movies than with studio productions that have Fort Knox-sized budgets. This is not to say that his films look small. Far from it. They are behemoths by almost any standards. They are constructions only slightly less complicated than the building of the Brooklyn Bridge. Yet the mind behind them remains unblunted by the heavy logistics of the Hollywood creative process. Of the two new films, ''E.T.'' is the more conventional. At heart it is an updated version of that old Hollywood standby, the boy-and-his-dog picture, but with a small, frightened creature from outer space instead of a dog. This fellow, E.T., a piece of walking-talking sculpture created by Carlo Rambaldi, looks like a chubby, distant cousin of the creatures in ''Close Encounters.'' He's about three-feet tall with bulgy forehead and eyes, spindly arms, dachshund legs, duck-like feet, a stratospheric intelligence and, when walking, the wobbliness of a wind-up toy manufactured in Taiwan. When his space ship, which is on a specimen-gathering mission, is forced to make a fast getaway, E.T. finds himself marooned in Southern California, in some woods adjacent to a middle-class housing development. It's there that he's found and befriended by a 10-year-old boy named Elliott (Henry Thomas). Elliot takes the creature home, where, with the enthusiastic cooperation of his older brother, Michael (Robert MacNaughton), and bossy little sister, Gertie (Drew Barrymore), he hides the lost traveler. The kids console him, pet him, feed him, dress him up like a doll and, generally, treat him as if he were an especially exotic plaything. Only after E.T. causes tennis balls to dance in the air does it dawn on the children that their companion would find even Einstein's company a drag. Will E.T. be discovered by the United States government's security forces that are scouring the neighborhood? Can E.T. long survive in the earth's alien atmosphere? What are the lessons he has to teach Elliott, who comes to identify with E.T. so closely that when E.T., left alone in the house, goes on a beer binge, it's Elliott, several miles away in school, who burps and becomes serenely smashed? The answers to these and a lot of other questions are exactly the sort that everyone in the audience wants to hear. ''E.T.'' is one of the shrewdest non-Disney, Disney-type pictures ever made. It's a funny, clever variation on a Hollywood formula film, made by adults working to come up with an adventure that will satisfy the yearnings of children, at least as those yearnings are perceived by adults. The perceptions are not far off the mark. ''E.T.'' seems to have been photographed mostly at the eye-level of the children - though this may only be an impression - so that it implicates the audience in everything the children and E.T. do. However, because there are no real villains in the piece, the result is not a ''them'' (adults) against ''us'' (children) situation. It's a simple reflection of a world in which children can be in control. Quite different, and possibly more risky, is ''Poltergeist,'' which is a child's nightmare cast in the form of a movie. It's a tale of ghosts and goblins and creepy, slimy, unspeakable things, the sort of narrative one child might make up for the heart-pounding delectation of his friends. The Freeling family - Mom and Dad, daughter Dana in her mid-teens, son Robbie, who's somewhat younger, and Carol Anne, who is 10 - live a representatively ordinary existence in a house that may well be on the other side of the same real estate development where E.T. is being hidden by Elliot and his family. The placid home life of the Freelings is wrecked with the initially unexplained appearance of some ghosts who seem to have come forth from the color television set in the living room. The spirits are at first playful, doing tricks with chairs and sirloin steaks to amuse the family. They then become cranky and pushy and, finally, ferociously angry. In the middle of the night a long-dead tree, which stands in the yard just outside Robbie's room, reaches through the window and attempts to swallow up the boy, though this turns out to be a diversionary tactic. While Mom and Dana scream hysterically and Dad is trying desperately to free Robbie, the spirits somehow make off with Carol Anne. Negotiating Carol Anne's return from inner space involves the services of several specialists in parapsychology, including a tiny, possibly crazy woman exorcist, plus some of the gaudiest, grisliest special effects to be seen since ''Raiders of the Lost Ark.'' There are also some that are less grisly than funny, such as a giant demon's head that looks like something you might see at F.A.O. Schwarz at Christmas - the world's biggest jack-in-the-box. ''Poltergeist,'' rated PG, is not a film to be seen by very small children with sleeping problems. Slightly older kids will probably find it less shocking than their parents do. ''Poltergeist'' is more deliciously spooky than seriously frightening because Spielberg is so obviously in touch with the child's imagination. This is the haunted house film that he - and we - always wanted to see as kids but never did. At their best, both ''E.T.'' and ''Poltergeist'' demonstrate a feeling for children's fantasies that is most unusual in American films. They meet kids on their own turf. They don't look down on them or pat them on the head or flatter them by making them behave like the miniature adults in the old Our Gang comedies. Working within the conventions of the Hollywood film, Spielberg is creating a kind of children's literature that need not insult the adults in the audience. Among other things, he knows how to cast children and then how to direct them - or to see that they are directed by Hooper - so they don't turn into monstrous little robots. Heather O'Rorke, who plays Carol Anne Freeling in ''Poltergeist,'' is almost as memorable as Cary Guffey, the little boy in ''Close Encounters.'' Further, these films are genuinely witty. Like Francois Truffaut, whose presence as an actor in ''Close Encounters'' gave that film a center of gravity, Spielberg seems to have mixed feelings about a particular milieu. Truffaut's Antoine Doinel longs to be a part of a middle class that will never tolerate him. He remains always on the outside of it, looking in. Spielberg's feelings about his middle-class characters are more benign but almost as incisive as those expressed in a Truffaut movie. He acknowledges the existence of broken homes, junk food, children brainwashed by TV, and appliances that save time that, in turn, will be wasted, but he is not appalled. He is amused and, perhaps, even slightly homesick. These are his people, and because they are, he's not about to condescend to them with some sort of contemporary ''Milk for Babes, Drawn out of the Breasts of Both Testaments.'' Spielberg's suburbia is located halfway between outer space and inner space, with easy access to both. ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 13-Jun JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #69 *** EOOH *** Date: Sunday, June 13, 1982 9:54AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #69 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Sunday, 13 Jun 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 69 Today's Topics: Administrivia - Truncated Digests, SF Books - "Shortstack" & Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan & Index to Science Fiction Anthologies and Collections, SF Topics - Politics in SF, SF Lovers - True Names, Random Topics - Commercials at the movies, SF Movies - Sword and the Sorcerer Query & Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, Spoiler - Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sunday, June 13, 1982 9:54AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS-REQUEST at MIT-AI Subject: Truncated Digests For some reason we have yet to discover, issue 66 (Wednesday) was unexpectably truncated in transmission. Since this appears to have happened to everyone, and since the missing material is quite short, we are including the last message in issue 66 as the last message in this issue, rather than retransmitting all of issue 66. Jim ------------------------------ Date: Fri 11-Jun-1982 22:24-EDT From: Bill Russell Subject: Shortstack Shortstack is a short story written by Walt and Leigh Richmond. The following publication history was extracted from "index to SCIENCE FICTION anthologies and collections" edited by William Contento, and published by G. K. HALL & Co., 70 Lincoln Street, Boston, Mass. Magazine: Analog, December 1964 Anthologies: Elsewhere and Elsewhen, edited by Groff Conklin, Berkeley, May 1968 Themes in Science Fiction, edited by Leo P. Kelley, McGraw Hill, 1972 Collection: Positive Charge, by Walt and Leigh Richmond, Ace, 1970, #27235, with "Gallagher's Glacier" Great little story. The "Contento" index is a great help in finding short SF fiction. It cost $28 in 1978. The Science Fiction Shop in NYC might still have one or two left in stock. This index has almost all English language SF anthologies and collections published thur 1977. It covers over 2,000 book titles with full contents listings of over 1,900 books containing 12,000 different stories by 2,500 authors. It has a book checklist, author index, story index, and a book contents section. As you might guess it was generated by a computer. The compiler says that he used a computer at work to maintain his private collection. Does anyone on the list know "William Contento"? This one book gets more use than any other of the reference works that I have on SF. Having an extensive collection of books (3,000+), but not having the time or space to index them all, this is what I use as an index to locate a particular story, or book to add to the collection. I hope that you can locate one of those books, I have two of them, and as far as I know, ALL three are out of print. Enjoy, Bill ------------------------------ Date: 12 Jun 1982 1130-EDT From: Larry Seiler Subject: "Message" Literature It is my prejudiced opinion that "message" literature (eg the stuff that Red Shift intends to put out) will be bound to be bad literature if the author considers the "message" to be more important than the story. A good author (such as Ayn Rand) can put across a combined political tract/story (I'm thinking of "Atlas Shrugged") and make it work, but think how much better it might have been (judged as a story) if she had tried to make realistic characters, instead of making everyone who disagreed with her point of view into idiots. But enough about Ayn Rand. I'll close by quoting Isaac Asimov, describing his story "Day of the Hunters" in the anthology "Buy Jupiter": "This story, alas, seems to have a moral, and, in fact, ends by pounding the moral over the reader's head. This is bad. Straightforward preaching spoils the effectiveness of a story. If you can't resist the impulse to improve your fellow human beings, do it subtly." Larry Seiler, Seiler@XX ------------------------------ Date: Saturday, 12 Jun 1982 16:23-PDT From: jim at RAND-UNIX Subject: Nero Wolfe and True Names Jonathan Ostrowsky asked whether Lee Horsley played Archie Goodwin in the TV program Nero Wolfe a few years ago. It's not SF, of course, but since I know the answer, you get it anyway. Turns out I have tapes of both the pilot and one of the episodes from that short-lived series (1/2 season, I think). The pilot was extremely good and faithful to the books. It starred Thayer David as Nero Wolfe, Tom Mason as Archie Goodwin, and Biff McGuire as Inspector Kramer. The pilot was from "The Doorbell Rang." The episode from the regular season is "The Golden Spiders." It stars William Conrad as Nero Wolfe and LEE HORSLEY as Archie (as advertised). I liked the first crew better. William Conrad is a better shape for the part, but Thayer David had the character down very well. They also went from a great harpsichord sound track to typical schlock prime-time muzak. Unfortunately the series didn't keep the promise of the pilot, and degenerated into mere hackery ... and the ratings showed that people realized it. And on another topic ... Some people have asked for full "real" names and addresses on correspondents. I don't see the point. What would this list be without people like "Mijjil" or "Hobbit"? Don't we all know them better by these aliases than by their real names, which are often in the "from" section anyway? What does it matter where his/her real system is? If you've read True Names, by Vernor Vinge (fantastic book, Mike, thanks for aiming me at it), you should agree that the personality and opinions are enough, and shouldn't demand to know the True Name of the hacker behind them. Jim@rand-unix (well, Jim Gillogly at the Rand Corporation, if you must) ------------------------------ Date: 12 Jun 1982 0903-PDT From: Mike Leavitt Subject: Commercials in movies The Wall Street Journal recently ran a feature story about people who get paid to place products in movies (like JVC in Superman, etc.) Apparently the movie people don't actually get paid for running this kind of "commercial," rather, they save on having to find the product and pay for it, and, where appropriate, the product is made available to people involved in making the movie. When Coke (the drink) gets placed in a movie, the entire crew might be provided with free Coke for the duration of production. I wouldn't be surprised if the production crew in Superman II got free use of JVC equipment. Mike P. S. does this really have much to do with sf? [ Not much - which is why it is under the RANDOM TOPICS heading. -- Jim ] ------------------------------ Date: 11 Jun 82 15:34-PDT From: mclure at SRI-UNIX Subject: Star Trek movie script When Star Trek: The Motion Picture was originally being scripted, I heard rumors that Roddenberry had put together a fantastic story about the Enterprise et al meeting God. The real God, that is. It was axed, because it was too "cerebral". I, for one, would like to see it some day. In my opinion, there are two scriptwriters who should be executed: Alan Dean Foster and Glen A. Larson. They are responsible for much of the garbage in visual SF. ------------------------------ Date: 11 Jun 1982 1930-EDT From: CZAR Subject: Query about ST:TWoK I am puzzled about the name (actor's) of Khan's right hand man. Problem: 1) Khan's right hand man appears to be Bennu of ABC's 'The Phoenix' 2) Bennu is played by Judson Scott 3) Khan (as far as I can tell) never calls the RHM by his first name, thus there is no way to link the character's name to the actor's. 4) The credits in ST:TWoK give no mention to Judson Scott What gives? Does the RHM have a twin (clone?) named Judson Scott? Did he change his name before 'The Phoenix'? If anyone can shed some light on this I'd sure appreciate it. czar ------------------------------ Date: Sunday, June 13, 1982 9:54AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Subject: SPOILER WARNING! SPOILER WARNING! The following messages are the last in the digest. They discuss some plot details in both the movie and the book Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. Some readers may not wish to read on. ------------------------------ Date: Friday, 11 June 1982 10:43-PDT From: KDO at SRI-KL Subject: Comments (spoilers) on ST:TWOK Good acting, reasonable special effects (I like the new transporter), but the plot is really awful. Consider... Khan and company have been left on Ceti Alpha (shouldn't it be Alpha Ceti?) 5. The 6th planet in the system has blown up, sucking the 5th planet into its old orbit. Right! In 15 years, not only has Star Fleet forgotten that Khan was left in this system, but the mass of the planet has been forgotten, or else it couldn't be confused with another one. The planet has become desolate in 15 years, and the only native life form happens to be an extremely well-adapted human parasite. Huh? It heads straight for the ear and invades the brain without causing major damage except for taking partial control of the person's mind (We are told it makes him suggestible...actually it seems to work by torture. We are also told it leads to madness but instead when Chekov resists it crawls out of his ear in frustration!) Shades of Alien! Why?? Then we have a machine that creates life by "rearranging the matrix" or some such hogwash. It needs a lifeless planet to work on, but when it is set off in a nebula it creates a planet to put life on. Oh well, a great stride forward HAS been made. The crew still don't have seatbelts, and the stars still move (between the planets, no less), but THE ENTERPRISE CAN MOVE VERTICALLY. I don't think they have ever done that before...next thing you know it will take 4 enemy ships instead of 3 to surround the enterprise... Ken ------------------------------ Date: 11 Jun 1982 10:25:49-PDT From: jef at LBL-UNIX (Jef Poskanzer [rtsg]) Subject: ST:TWOK - bugs. No, not those bugs! I mean bugs as in flaws... - When Chekov sees the words "Botany Bay" and realizes where he is, he should have immediately pressed the emergency beam-up button on his communicator. Instead he panics (not a good trait in a first officer) and drags Terill outside. This is fixed in the book - he does try the communicator, but there is too much static. - Towards the end, when the Reliant is a wreck and Khan triggers the Genesis device, Spock instantly picks it up on the sensors. However, we were previously told that sensors don't work in the nebula. Is this one fixed in the book? - As usual, photon torpedoes are considerably less powerful than your average 20th century H-bomb. Negative progress. - And maybe I should mention the insectoid bugs after all. They are obviously an evolutionary impossibility. It seems a little unlikely that Chekov would be able to man a weapons console a few hours after having one bore its way out of his skull - massive cerebral hemmorage seems certain. And Khan seems to have confused the cerebral cortex with the cerebellum - in order to "wrap itself around the cerebral cortex", it would have to be about two feet long. ------------------------------ Date: 06/11/82 22:02:43 From: DMM@MIT-ML Subject: Re:TWOK Was that a photon torpedo casing that they launched Spock in at the end of the movie (not a particularly dignified funeral), or was that a starfleet coffin? (In which case, why did it say MARK VI on the sides?) In any case, how is it that it could make a controlled re- entry? Oh well, at least bones didn't say "He's dead, Jim." ------------------------------ Date: 12 Jun 82 00:52:12 EDT (Sat) From: Steve Bellovin Subject: Star Trek II -- The Wrath of Khan (spoiler) OK, how many folks here are betting that the override code for the Reliant becomes the super-user password on lots of systems....? (What were those numbers, anyway?) And how many simulations are reprogrammable from inside? My biggest plot-gripe was how the plan to decoy Khan *depended* on him monitoring an inherently insecure communications device. You'd think that in the 23rd century they could digitize and encrypt speech in real-time (at the very least). ------------------------------ Date: 12 Jun 1982 13:42:49-PDT From: decvax!steveg at Berkeley Subject: ST-II Sorry, but I thought the movie was a bit inane: Kirk: I am old, I am young, etc. etc. Spock: Khan's stategy shows 2-d thinking. (sheesh) And that silly tag game in the clouds was ridiculous. - Steve Gutfreund ------------------------------ Date: 11 Jun 1982 17:27:12-PDT From: decvax!minow at Berkeley Subject: Re: Kahn's right glove It looked to me to be a reference either to Dr. Strangelove or to Rotwang, the scientist in Fritz Lang's Metropolis. Rotwang "lost his hand in the service of science" in that wonderful film. Martin Minow decvax!minow ------------------------------ Date: 06/12/82 22:02:11 From: DMM@MIT-ML Subject: Re:The Wrath of Khan Could the use of the term "Mister" in referring to Saavik have anything to do with the fact that she's a cadet? -- DMM IT-ML ------------------------------ Date: 11 Jun 82 12:25-PDT From: mclure at SRI-UNIX Subject: REMEMBER. in Star Trek II Someone recently asked on this list why Spock gives McCoy an apparent Vulcan mind meld for a few seconds, saying "Remember." This struck me as being pretty obvious. I would translate it as "Remember what we went through over the years." I'd be interested in other theories. ------------------------------ Date: 10-JUN-1982 08:45 From: VAX4::MCCOY Reply-to: "VAX4::MCCOY c/o" Subject: ST:TWOK I finally managed to see ST:TWOK last night (after all it's been out almost a week now). It was quite an improvement over ST:TMP, less time spent showing off the special effects and more time developing the plot. I for one was happy to see a return to the humor of the TV series. The undocking scene with Kirk on the bridge was vintage ST. Did anyone notice spock using the Vulcan mind probe on Dr. McCoy? He held his hand on Dr. McCoy's face in the usually way from the series and said (I think) "REMEMBER". I was expecting something to come of this towards the end of the movie, but nothing. Spock used this technique in at least two ST TV episodes. The first time he used it to convince everyone the bullets were not real at the OK Corral in "Spectre of the Gun" The second time was to help Kirk forget the woman he married in "The Paradise Syndrome". Was it used on the planet Vulcan in ST:TMP? Does anyone think this was deliberate, are they looking ahead to ST:III, or perhaps it was an editing mistake, with the result on the floor of the editing room. REMEMBER WHAT? -------------- Gary ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 15-Jun JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #70 *** EOOH *** Date: Tuesday, June 15, 1982 6:40AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #70 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Monday, 14 Jun 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 70 Today's Topics: SF Movies - Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, Random Topics - Commercials at the movies ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 13 Jun 82 13:11-PDT From: mclure at SRI-UNIX Subject: trek article Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan By Don McLeese (c) 1982 Chicago Sun-Times (Field News Service) BEVERLY HILLS - ''When we were making the series, maybe the second season, the Spock character was well-established and people were liking him,'' Leonard Nimoy reminisced. ''There was this whole thing about this character who has no emotions - or controls his emotions, which is a better way to put it, I think. ''Dorothy Fontana, who was a writer on the series, said, 'I'm gonna write a love story for Spock.' I objected. I said, 'I think it's a mistake; I think it will destroy a major element of the character. We can never be believable again saying that Spock controls his emotions if he plays a love story.' ''She went ahead and wrote it, and we did it. It was called 'This Side of Paradise.' It's still one of my favorite episodes. It was a wonderful story, very well done, very touching, a poignant love story that made sense for the character. Instead of destroying the character, it enhanced it. What it did was redevelop that repressed side of Spock, exposed it. ''It taught me a big lesson - and that is that if you don't take chances, then you're limiting yourself to predictable behavior. And if it's all predictable, why should anybody pay to see it?'' Relaxing in his Beverly Hills hotel room, Nimoy was explaining how the chances taken within ''Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan'' had him excited about the series all over again. Just the previous evening, Nimoy had seen the completed movie for the first time, along with an enthusiastically appreciative crowd of press and film folk, and he professed to be as moved by its ending as anyone. While the ending has created quite a stir as the end of Spock - the half-human, half-Vulcan master of rationality who has long been one of the series' major draws - Nimoy talked of Spock as a character reborn. ''I think what's happened here, amazingly enough, is that by doing what we've done with Spock, we may have created an entirely new future for 'Star Trek' and Spock. Now, if we can get some imagination going, we've got the potential for doing some very exciting stuff in the future,'' he predicted. ''The end, in a sense, may be an entirely new beginning.'' Nimoy's enthusiasm seems to be shared by everyone connected with the project. Throughout its peculiar history, ''Star Trek'' has been beset by problems along the timespace continuum. As a less-than-successful late '60s TV series, it may have offered too much, too soon. As a sensation in reruns, it offered its participants too little, too late. As a belated effort to capitalize on the appeal of the series, 1979's ''Star Trek: The Motion Picture'' attempted too much, too late. Finally, with the entertaining and intelligently crafted ''The Wrath of Khan,'' it appears that ''Star Trek's'' time has come. Let's backtrack a little. ''Star Trek'' debuted as an NBC-TV series in September, 1966. More ambitious than most television, its combination of literate scripts, effective ensemble performances, and science-fiction intrigue won it critical plaudits and a modest but loyal following. After three years of less than exceptional ratings, the Starship U.S.S. Enterprise was grounded, apparently for good. After its 79 episodes went into syndication, a curious phenomenon occurred. Year after year, the syndicated reruns attracted larger and larger audiences, winning a lot more fans than the show had the first time around. Fanatics, popularly known as ''Trekkies'' (actually, they consider this a term of disparagement; ''Trekkers'' is the preferred description), began memorizing everything there was to know about the series. Conventions where they could share their passion attracted thousands. ''Beam me up, Scotty'' became a common catchphrase; Nimoy's Mr. Spock and William Shatner's Capt. Kirk were hailed internationally as heroes. Today, 13 years after its cancellation, the series is televised in more than 100 American cities and in almost 150 additional markets worldwide. There are more than 350 fan clubs throughout the world. The series has inspired more than 50 books and numerous postgraduate dissertations. For a while, Shatner and Nimoy considered such belated adulation less a blessing than an albatross. ''You can imagine, here I was, working at various and sundry projects,'' explained Shatner. ''And people would be coming up and saying, 'There's Capt. Kirk.' It got more and more popular, and the identification became closer and closer.'' Nimoy expressed even more resistance, venting his spleen in an autobiography entitled ''I Am Not Spock'' (leading some to wonder, if he were not Spock, why anybody would want to read the autobiography of Leonard Nimoy). As both attempted to push forward, being tied to a long-dead television series was holding them back. Still, neither man resented the typecasting enough to reject the offer for ''Star Trek: The Motion Picture.'' The continued popularity of the series and the overwhelming success of the ''Star Trek''-influenced ''Star Wars'' convinced everyone concerned that the film couldn't help but be a smash. ''It didn't take me long to make the decision to do Capt. Kirk (again),'' said Shatner. ''It was hard not to be a part of a large-budget motion picture. The script hadn't been written, but I was thinking if the people who had written the series were going to be part of the film, I was expecting the best.'' With Gene Roddenberry, the man who had created ''Star Trek,'' in charge of the production, there was every reason to assume that the film would build on the values that gave the series its appeal. Where the series had depended on the interaction of well-rounded, well-defined characters, however, the film seemed both more ambitious and more hollow - an expensive special-effects demonstration. Costing almost $50 million, it more than doubled its money, but it didn't have quite the impact expected. Did the film somehow get off the track? ''I think it was set down that track intentionally,'' said Nimoy. ''I wasn't there, but some people decided that to do 'Star Trek' as a motion picture, it had to be different (from the television series). I got the feeling that someone had seen an awful lot of '2001.''' According to Shatner, the project was plagued by problems: ''The filming took a lot longer than expected. The film had been promised to distributors for a particular date, and through accidents of production and post-production, that time slipped away. There was no preview time. ''Essentially, there were two films being made: one in the special-effects houses under Doug Trumbull and one in the studios under Bob Wise. The two (films) were married, but it was a shotgun marriage.'' When the principal actors returned for the new ''Star Trek'' film, there was a new team at the helm. Gone were Wise, Trumbull, and Roddenberry (who's listed as ''executive consultant'' for the film, but whose participation on the project was minimal). In their places were people who had proven that they could deliver quality work within strict time and budget limitations. Executive producer Harve Bennett, who exerted most of the control over ''The Wrath of Khan,'' came from a strong television background (''Mod Squad,'' ''Rich Man, Poor Man,'' et al.), and was originally offered the project as a made-for-TV film. Producer Robert Sallin was an award-winning producerdirector of television commercials. Director Nicholas Meyer, something of a 36-year-old whiz kid, penned the best-selling ''The Seven Per-Cent Solution'' and wrote and directed ''Time After Time.'' ''They showed me the (first) movie, and I thought it would be impossible to make a movie as boring as this one,'' said Meyer, when asked whether the task of making a successful sequel had intimidated him. Made for a quarter of the budget, ''The Wrath of Khan'' is not only better entertainment than its predecessor, but it's expected to do better at the box office as well. ''There was obviously a very conscious attempt to go back to the best qualities of the series,'' said Shatner, ''and to use the special effects as an escape valve, to keep the audience on the edge of its seats, but never to forget that relationships were what made the series popular.'' Beyond such superficialities, neither Shatner nor Nimoy is much for analyzing what specific qualities have given ''Star Trek'' longevity. ''It's so hard to answer the question,'' responded Nimoy. ''You put an actor together with the role and you hope it'll work. What is the appeal of Sylvester Stallone in 'Rocky'? Can you put somebody else into the role and make it work? Is it the role? Is it the man? A combination of both? ''It's chemistry. At the same time, it's not scientific. If it were scientific, you could repeat it.'' Both agree, however, that ''Star Trek'' aims a little higher than most space-adventure fare. ''I think that science-fiction films as a rule, for example the Lucas films - 'Star Wars,' 'Raiders of the Lost Ark,' even - are pure, wonderful, fantasy entertainment,'' said Shatner. '''Star Trek' treads both categories: It is a film about the human condition, mixed with pop villians and science-fiction paraphernalia. But the reason people cried in that theater last night is because it touches something universal in them.'' Added Nimoy, ''I think that when 'Star Trek' is at its best, there are some ideas involved. They're not pretentious, they're not pounded into your head, but there are ideas that resonate. As long as we have that, it sets us apart.'' Sixteen years after the original series began, Shatner and Nimoy are busier than ever. Shatner is starring in the ''T.J. Hooker'' television series, and continues to act in and direct a variety of theatrical projects. With featured roles in ''Marco Polo'' and ''Golda,'' and as host of ''In Search of...,'' Nimoy has recently been all over the tube. As busy as both are, each indicated that he'd be eager to participate in further ''Star Trek'' sequels, especially after the creative resurgence evinced by ''The Wrath of Khan.'' While no one has signed anything yet (and director Meyer has already indicated he's done with ''Star Trek''), there's little doubt that a new ''Star Trek'' film will be made. How long can the series continue? ''If you had said to me in 1970 that we'd still be dealing with this in 1982, I'd have said you're crazy,'' said Nimoy. ''So now, if you say to me in 1994 we'll meet again and have a discussion about the new 'Star Trek' movie, I'm not gonna laugh.'' ------------------------------ Date: 14-Jun-82 10:51:55 PDT (Monday) From: Reed.ES at PARC-MAXC Subject: Re: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #65 I have about had it with misspellings: Star Trek: The WRATH of KHAN. "The Rath of Kahn" (Dolata at SUMEX-AIM). What is this, 'Morning for Jews'? The misspelling 'Kahn' is very widespread - I've seen it in a newspaper review, and even on the billboard of a local theatre, not to mention almost every SF-Lovers submission on the subject for the last 10 digests. (It is to JPM's credit that he didn't pass these misspellings on in the digest titles.) Come on, folks - you are willing to nitpick the details like "Chekov wasn't in 'Space Seed'" but you can't even remember the spelling correctly from the movie title and the ads? As to David Miller's comment about Khan's foolishness - he suffers from two problems which conflict with his superior intelligence. First and foremost, EGO. It is his ego which subverts his intelligence over and over again. But in the end, it is ignorance which does him in. No amount of superior intelligence could prepare him for the results of his ignorance, initially with respect to the operation of the Reliant, and subsequently with respect to the properties of the nebula. In any case, the point here is that superior intelligence is nothing if it isn't backed by a clear head and accurate knowledge. As for the return of Spock - all they have to do is show an episode from the past. Spock's final log comment at the end is an indication of this. Re: movie theatre commercials. I have been seeing LA Times ads in the movies for the last year. Disgusting, but at least they don't break the movie in half like they apparently do in Switzerland. Even "Reds", which had an intermission, did not have commercials in the midst of the movie. Remember when they used to show cartoons and newsreels? Many comments seem to imply that particular commercials go with particular movies. I have not noticed this to be the case - they seem to be entirely independent as far as I can tell. ------------------------------ Date: 14-Jun-82 2:27PM-EDT (Mon) From: B.J. Herbison Reply-to: Ben Lotto Subject: Commercials at the movies Date: 10 June 1982 18:11-EDT From: Thomas L. Davenport Subject: Commercials at the movies! And what about commercials IN the movies? I hear that E.T. features Star Wars "action figures" and a national pizza chain. A while ago Richard Dreyfuss came to Yale. This was fairly soon after Close Encounters was released, so naturally I asked him about the film and about Spielberg. He said that "...Spielberg is in love with the middle class..." and pointed out the home scenes from Close Encounters as an example. If you recall, there are coke cans scattered around, kids watching television all day, all the things that one would consider Modern American Decedent Middle Class. I don't recall whether he said that any of these companies paid for these items showing up, (that was the basis for my question, but we got sidetracked), but their appearance is attributable more to Spielberg than to the Coca Cola Corp. -Ben Lotto (lotto@yale-comix) ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 27-Jun JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #71 *** EOOH *** Date: Sunday, June 27, 1982 6:00AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #71 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Saturday, 26 Jun 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 71 Today's Topics: Administrivia - Hardware Failure, SF Movies - Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, SF Books - Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, Spoiler - Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sunday, June 27, 1982 6:00AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS-REQUEST at MIT-AI Subject: Hardware Failure Hardware failures at sites needed to prepare and distribute the digest have interfered with the transmission schedule. All these difficulties should be finally resolved for now. Jim ------------------------------ Date: Sunday, June 27, 1982 6:00AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Subject: SPOILER WARNING! SPOILER WARNING! All of the messages in this digest discuss some plot details in both the movie and the book Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. Some readers may not wish to read on. ------------------------------ Date: 11-Jun-1982 From: PAUL KARGER AT RDVAX Reply-to: "PAUL KARGER AT RDVAX c/o" Subject: ST-TWOK - Spoiler Warning This message reveals how Spock is killed off and therefore deserves a spoiler warning. I very much enjoyed Star Trek II, until they came to the actual killing off of Spock. Then they reverted to the usual TV show habit of defining an impossible problem and promptly ignoring a trivial solution. When Spock went into the radiation chamber, why didn't he wear a protective suit? Such suits have existed since the 1940's, and surely would have been made better by the 23rd century. Why wasn't such a suit kept for emergency purposes. Alternately, why weren't there waldoes available? Again - 1940's technology. Aside from this one stupidity, the movie was quite well done - much better than the previous movie. ------------------------------ Date: 14-Jun-82 9:41:19 PDT (Monday) From: Pettit at PARC-MAXC Subject: Re: Kahn knowing Chekhov "blooper" I'll bet the movie-makers knew all along that Chekhov didn't come on board until after the Kahn episode. They studied all the Star Trek episodes carefully for atmosphere, characterization, etc., and something like that is just too obvious. They probably just decided that the dramatic potential in having Chekhov know all about Khan and the Botany Bay, and having Khan recognize Chekhov as part of Kirk's old crew, etc., was important enough that it was worth the inconsistency with the TV show. So I wouldn't really classify this as a blooper. I was more struck by the oddity of Khan's quoting an old Klingon proverb. Just where did he pick up a repertoire of Klingon proverbs when he was plucked out of the 20th century and almost immediately marooned on an isolated planet? Someone has suggested that maybe it was somewhere in the stuff from the Enterprise's library which he scanned at superspeed, but that seems a little far-fetched to me. Two other oddities were (1) from the TV show, it seems that Star Fleet computers generally volunteer all the historical data on record about a planetary system whenever the ship approaches it, so that it is hard to believe that it wouldn't have notified them that Khan had been exiled in that system, or that Kirk wouldn't have remembered it sooner, for all that goes. And (2) since when does a scorpion-like indigenous life form infesting a planet, along with a dozen or so human beings, register on a scanner as "a particle of pre-animate matter caught in the matrix?" That ought to be enough life to cause a healthy unambiguous blip on the instruments. But, as has been remarked before, watching Star Trek does require a large capacity for suspension of disbelief. --Teri Pettit (at Xerox SDD in Palo Alto) ------------------------------ Date: 15 Jun 1982 1418-MDT From: Evelyn Mathey Subject: STAR TREK : TWOK We have a saying in the theatre that one must induce in the audience a "willing suspense of disbelief". No matter how hard the actors work, how expensive the special effects or how bug-free the writing there will always be errors in a production. In some they are minor, in others, alas we, the audience, can no longer believe that pixie dust can make you fly, that Frodo can walk undetected into Mordor, or that Kirk can have a grown son who is proud of his father. Sometimes this mismatching of production and audience is the fault of the production, sometimes the audience; most often of both. While I too have some critisms of TWOK, I am sorry that the problems really seemed to get to some of you. If I may be allowed a few comments of my own: 1. Although the "critters" moved the plot forward, I could have done without the one crawling out of Chekov's ear. I felt the need for an explanation there. Why did it leave its nice warm home?? (ugh) 2. I believe Spock telling McCoy to "remember" is laying the groundwork for ST III. Obviously the genesis action will use Spock's body to create another. One would assume that body to be without "soul" (substitute mind,essence or whatever you prefer). In previous Star Trek episodes, Spock's personality has been impressed onto another for a time. I believe that McCoy now carries Spock's soul and will reunite soul and body in the next movie. 3. I also noticed Khan's "RHM" and would like more information. Also, is the Phoenix still making it anywhere? It disappeared around here after about three shows, which was a shame, as I thought it had promise. 4. I disagree with the statement the Khan's superior intelligence was defeated by his lack of knowledge. That played a part, as did his egomania. But he was ultimately defeated (if you accept Kirk's getting away from him as his defeat) by Spock's love. All in all, I liked the movie. Whether it was logical or not I thought the nebula effects spectacular. I also think it is a good idea to start introducing a "second generation" of Star Trek characters. Evelyn ------------------------------ Date: 15 Jun 82 21:07:55-EDT (Tue) From: Michael Muuss Subject: Vulcan "Remember!" (SPOILER?) The Mind Melded "REMEMBER!" that Spock gives McCoy seemed (to me) to forshaddow McCoy's line "He isn't really dead as long as we remember him..." (or thereabouts) in the bridge scene at the end. Whether this is a "hook" into the sequel ("In Search of Spock"), or just a leftover shard that the cutting room missed, I don't know. I was rather disappointed that several of the scenes I saw in the promo at Balticon didn't actually make it into the movie.... Looks like they actually TOOK OUT some of the character development. Sigh. Countably infinite technical inaccuracies and all, I still loved it! More! More! -Mike ------------------------------ Date: 15 Jun 1982 1003-PDT From: Jirak at SRI-AI (Greg Mike Ken) Subject: Spoiler: Spock's "Remember" One of the last scenes on the bridge is Kirk and McCoy, watching the planet, thinking about Spock. McCoy says "He isn't really dead as long as we remember him", or words to that effect. I imagine Spock's remember may have something to do with this, and the sequel. A thought, anyway. I second McClure's comment on Foster! /Mike Achenbach ------------------------------ Date: 14 Jun 82 20:42:32 EDT (Mon) From: Steve Bellovin Subject: Star Trek II -- "Remember" My *strong* suspicion is that it has something to do with Spock's return/resurrect/reincarnation. Perhaps he's taking a backup dump of his memories... ------------------------------ Date: Monday, 14 Jun 1982 13:59-PDT From: jim at RAND-UNIX Subject: Remember - ST:TWoK (spoiler) I think it's possible that the "remember" command to McCoy is a lead-in to when Spock's Genesis-reanimated body is found, but the brain cells, having been decomposed at one time, have forgotten everything they know. Saavik or some other telepathically-trained person sucks the carefully stored Spock mentality out of McCoy, and we're back in business. There is some precedent for storing peoples' minds in others': seems to me Spock and Nurse Chapel shared her brain when the disembodied intelligence Sargon (I think it was), who lived in a lighted globe, took over Spock's body and Spock's globe was destroyed. Of course, the "Remember" was used legitimately in the last scene, where McCoy says Spock is alive as long as we remember him, so we don't need to reach this far... ------------------------------ Date: 14 June 1982 6:10 pm PDT (Monday) From: Thomka.ES Reply-to: Thomka.es Subject: ST2 (spoiler warning) After seeing the movie in question (which I throughly enjoyed, and think it's the best ST going) I feel that the possibility of Spock's re-birth is very likely BUT because of the Genesis device, and the eventual reincarnation, the new Spock will be much younger. This, of course, leaves great gobs of people who can now portray Spock since he (the eventual selected actor) would then only have to slighty resemble Nimoy. Clever. Of course if Nimoy can be persuaded (money-wise I'm sure) to don the ears one more time then all of the above is held in abeyance until the next possible death. Chuck Note: I did not notice the capsule "doors" ajar. ------------------------------ Date: 14 June 1982 19:35-EDT (Monday) From: Mijjil (Matthew J. Lecin) Reply-to: Lecin at RUTGERS Subject: Spoiler for ST:TWoK Remember what? It is obvious to the most casual of observers! Seriously, I have a theory... When they return to Genesis Alpha or whatever the planet gets called, they will find an animate "Spock body" which is they now alive "regenerated" body - and a BLANK mind. The body will physically be PERFECT but there won't be any memories! There won't be any Spock in the body! McCoy is STORING Spock's memories until they are needed to be fed back into the empty Spock brain... Are we worried that Leonard McCoy will run out of room in his brain? The average person uses about 6% of brain right? That means Bones uses about 4%! ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 27-Jun JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #72 *** EOOH *** Date: Sunday, June 27, 1982 4:34PM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #72 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Sunday, 27 Jun 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 72 Today's Topics: SF Movies - Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, SF Books - Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, Spoiler - Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 15 Jun 1982 02:58:54-PDT From: ihuxi!otto at Berkeley Subject: Commentary on Mister Saavik One of the more intriguing aspects of STAR TREK II, for me at least, was the new character Mister Saavik, particularly in light of some Trekiana. In the original TV episode of Star Trek (or was it in the pilot that was turned into the two-episode show: Menagerie) the science officer was a woman identified as "Number One." Audience reaction to this character was not positive. She was a hard, efficient person; just right for a science officer, but not easy for the audience to take. As a result there was a quick shifting of roles, with Spock becoming the science officer and Number One becoming Nurse Chapel. Now, in ST II, we have the character of Mister Saavik, a half-Vulcan woman Star Fleet Cadet. In her we see the same sort of conflict we have seen often enough in Spock between emotions and logic, although in her case it seems to be more conflict between correct professionalism on the one hand and human relationships on the other. This conflict is understated in the film, but is evident precisely *because* we have seen the same sort of conflict many times within Spock. What I find intriguing is that the character of Mister Saavik--doesn't this very name help sharpen the feeling of conflict?-- works very well. What accounts for this? and why did Roddenberry & Company choose to try a character type that proved to be a mistake when Star Trek began? I think there are two answers to these questions. The first is that over time Spock has clearly become the sentimental favorite of Trekkies. When Leonard Nimoy's name appears at the beginning of the film, it gets the biggest audience reaction. Of all the characters in Star Trek, Spock seems to most nearly represent those conflicts and tensions we all experience within ourselves. As a result there is a transfer of audience sympathy to a character that is so clearly *like* Spock. Saavik immediately benefits from our knowing Spock so well. The second reason this character works so well, I feel, is that Saavik is truely a modern character. The role of women today (or should I say roles?) is much less clear cut today than it was perceived to be 20 years ago. The question of "how much should women give up of themselves in order to succeed in male-dominated activities" seems to be a pervasive question these days. Saavik, for genetic rather than historical reasons, finds herself dealing with the same or similar conflicts. Thus, audiences today have more sympathy and understanding for Saavik than they evidently had for Number One. I have to admit that of all the elements of ST II, I was most surprised by the introduction of Saavik as a character and my reaction to her. I find myself truely interested in how she will figure in future ST films, and commend Roddenberry & Company for seeking to improve Star Trek by expanding the number of continuing characters we care about. George Otto Bell Labs, Indian Hill ihnss!ihuxi!otto@Berkeley ------------------------------ Date: Sunday, June 27, 1982 4:34PM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Subject: SPOILER WARNING! SPOILER WARNING! All of the remaining messages in this digest discuss some plot details in both the movie and the book Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. Some readers may not wish to read on. ------------------------------ Date: Monday, 14 Jun 1982 13:52-PDT From: jim at RAND-UNIX Subject: Khan's RHM Khan addressed his Right-Hand-Man by name as he (the RHM) was dying. I heard it as "Joachim", but didn't spot the name in the credits. ------------------------------ Date: 15 Jun 82 1:41:43-EDT (Tue) From: Sue Pohl Subject: Kahn's Right Hand Man Kahn's second in command is called Joachim. The name is mentioned a couple of times throughout the film. Unfortunately I do not recall who the actor is, but unless I'm mistaken, he's supposed to be a relatively unknown person. Sue ------------------------------ Date: 15 June 1982 1108-EDT (Tuesday) From: David.Lamb at CMU-10A Subject: ST:TWoK nits (spoiler) Some questions/objections to ST:TWoK can be found in the novelization. 1) Khan's right-hand man was called "Joachim". 2) Ceti Alpha 5 and Ceti Alpha 6 were a planet/moon of about equal size. The Reliant noticed anomalies in the system but attributed them to error in the records from the single probe of the system, from 60 or so years before. Kirk had deliberately hidden the fact that Khan and company were marooned there. I confess to not understanding why they thought they were examining the 6th planet. 3) The need for the lifeless planet wasn't technical, but moral. The magic Genesis device rearranges any sort of matter, such as for instance the material in the nebula. Admittedly Genesis is magic, but remember Clarke's third law. 4) Checkov didn't immediately beam up when he noticed "Botany Bay" because they had to be in the open; conditions on the planet were so bad that being inside something made beaming up impossible, instead of marginal as in the open. As to panicking, Chekov always was excitable - the book has the amusing touch of him "loosing his Standard" and reverting to Russian when excited. 5) Chekov essentially has a bad concussion at the point where he mans the weapons console. He's not functioning very well, but much of Kirk's bridge crew is hurt, so even in this state he's useful. 6) The device Spock is launched in is indeed a photon torpedo casing; in the book Saavik carefully reprograms it, for unstated reasons. This might have something to do with why it re-enters (aside from the meta-reason that they're obviously aiming for a way to bring Spock back). 7) Kirk reprogrammed the simulator, not from "inside", but in a midnight raid just before he took the test for the third time. A lot of the nits I've seen people pick are either institutionalized Star Fleet idiocies (ranking officers on landing parties, consoles blowing up when the ship is hit, wimpy photon torpedoes) or are little things that it's real hard to explain in a motion picture - either it would slow things down, or you'd have to be reading some character's mind. The novelization is a good source of answers to small questions. As others have noted, it also makes Saavik a far more interesting character. ------------------------------ Date: 14 Jun 1982 2303-EDT From: Thomas Galloway Subject: Star Trek II- The Rationalizations Quite a few of the inconsistencies mentioned so far can be cleared up by either reading the book, or using some imagination/common sense. Such as: The book tells you that C A VI was a moon of V, so the orbit problem is not too bad. I could see the explosion of a planet causing the moon's axial tilt to be changed, thus affecting the climate. Also, its noted that Kirk either didn't record the planet where he dropped Khan, or it was marked top secret (i forget which), and since Chekov was not bridge crew at the time, its amazing he even remembered the Botany Bay after 15 years. Finally, since the planet was at one time human habitable, the parasite is not that great a suspension of disbelief. As for the genesis bomb needing a planet, well, my understanding is that it just needed mass. Either they didn't think of a nebula, didn't want to use it for the first test, or the galactic equivalent of the Sierra Club stopped them from using a nebula in the first place. As for the genesis wave being picked up on sensors, since the thing will be affecting the matter its in contact with, the wave propagated through the gas, and when the wave was close enough to the Enterprise, it was picked up on the sensors. Chekov returning to duty was a bit forced. In the book, he is dizzy, and gives some indication that his inner ear is wrecked (in which case you really have to wonder why he's aiming anything!), but this is suppose to be the 23rd century, so assume that McCoy healed him *real* fast. As for photon torpedos being less powerful than an h-bomb, so what if they are? A bomb and a torpedo are two entirely different classes of weapons. Particularly since a photon torp always struck me as being closer to a phaser type ray than a missile. Torps should be designed to hit things going at warp speed, which I don't think a physical object that small could do. Photon torps are probably tachyon based, come to think of it. Any other rationalizations out there? tom ------------------------------ Date: 12 June 1982 08:26-EDT From: Jonathan M. Levine Subject: Star Trek II: Comments on "Trek-ness" Being a hardcore Trekkie, there is very little Gene Roddenberry could do (other than Star Trek I) that would disappoint me. I enjoyed Star Trek II alot, and in discussing some of the plot materials with other Trekkies in the area, we decided the following (without reading the book... just using logic) 1) The reason the beasties didn't kill Chekov or the Captain of the Reliant was because they had tremendous conflicts, causing alot of electrical impulses down the cerebral cortex, and making it uncomfortable for the creatures. Or Khan was lying (about a 50:50 split here) 2) Perhaps "Mr." is a title for any COMMAND officer (officer able to replace the captain in an emergency). As far as we remember, Uhura was never referred to as Mr., but Chekov was, as were some of the other male officers. There were never any female command officers before. 3) According to official Starfleet lines, Romulons are enemies. We Thought Saavik was half-Vulcan half-human. If she was brought up as a human or Romulon, she would have been MUCH more emotional (the Romulons split from the Vulcans before the mysterious event which gave Vulcans their logic) Hmmm...What is she doing on a federation starship acting like a vulcan? 4) I expected Spock's death (it's been going around that he would die for quite a while) but it still hit me a bit harder than I expected... although I admit it was (as usual) a bit melodramatic. I am torn between my feelings that Spock made the series, and that if he's dead he should STAY dead. Is there any truth to the rumor that Leonard Nimoy is not coming back? He's been threatening this for quite awhile... ------------------------------ Date: 13 Jun 1982 1618-EDT From: John R. Covert Subject: Mister Saavik Cadets at military academies are call Mister. ------------------------------ Date: 06/15/82 11:40:49 From: RP@MIT-MC Subject: Saavik I question whether Saavik is a true Vulcan. During Spock's funeral I am sure I noticed a tear under an eye. Did anyone else notice this? ------------------------------ Date: 11 June 1982 19:11-EDT (Friday) From: Mijjil (Matthew J. Lecin) Reply-to: Lecin at RUTGERS Subject: SPOILER fer shure Saavik - we are led to believe that she is half-Vulcan, half-Romulan. Now, how many Vulcans have we seen hanging around female Romulans? Anyone care to REMEMBER that at the end of "Enterprise Incident", when they have finally located SPOCK on the Romulan flagship using sensors (damn Romulans are SO hard to tell from them Vulcans!) and they beam him back to the Enterprise, they have a little surprise in the form of the ROMULAN COMMANDER HERSELF! And she DID try to subvert him with DINNER (she had her personal chef make him a few VULCAN delicacies) and whatever comes AFTER dinner. Saavik *** IS SPOCK'S DAUGHTER !!! *** Which would definitely explain why she was *SO* attached to Spock (aside from the fact that she must be "sorta lonely" away from other Vulcans) and CRIES at his funeral. Run that one up your Jeffries Tube and see what happens! [ Actually, such a possibility is denied in the book - it appears they the standard operating procedure to facilitate such an union is akin to violent rape. -- Jim ] ------------------------------ Date: 14 Jun 1982 21:28:53-PDT From: CSVAX.wss at Berkeley Subject: Khan `eavesdropping' on Enterprise communicators It does not seem unreasonable to me that Khan should be able to eavesdrop on Kirk's communication with the Enterprise. ------------------------------ Date: 14 Jun 1982 21:38:14-PDT From: CSVAX.wss at Berkeley Subject: Khan `eavesdropping' on Enterprise communicators I can think of several reasons as to why Khan should be able to eavesdrop on the Kirk's conversation with the Enterprise. 1. The communicators all over starfleet may use the same code. Not unreasonable, as surely there must be occasions when a landing party wants to contact a starship other than their own. 2. Kirk could have "absent-mindedly" used an open channel. It is possible that this could sneak past Kahn's colossal ego. 2' Kirk could have been using a channel that had been preassigned to communications involving the space station. I can't think of any good reason for this, other than as a somewhat more subtle form of 2. 3. Given the information that the Enterprise could take control of the command console of the Reliant by supplying the proper prefix code, maybe one of Kahn's followers managed to figure out or find a key for deciphering Enterprise communication. (If so, Starfleet is not too bright; it is never a good idea to leave plaintext passwords lying around!). However, this explanation relies on Kirk's being aware that communications security was being compromised. ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 28-Jun JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #73 *** EOOH *** Date: Monday, June 28, 1982 11:21AM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #73 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Monday, 28 Jun 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 73 Today's Topics: SF Books - "Shortstack" & Blue Adept & Foundation IV & Series & John Brunner, SF Movies - Saturday the 14th & Spielberg, Random Topics - ISIRTA & Genderless Pronouns, Humor - Genderless Video Games ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 14 Jun 1982 11:47:40-CDT From: mdpl at uwisc Subject: Shortstack This story was by Walt and Leigh Richmond and appeared in the Dec. 1964 issue of Analog. I don't know if it has been anthologized anywhere. Mary Palmer Leland ------------------------------ Date: 14 Jun 82 12:03:34-EST (Mon) From: Bratman.ucf-cs at UDel-Relay Subject: Blue Adept ** non-spoiler ** Just a word about "Blue Adept" by Piers Anthony. This book just came out in paperback, and it's terrific. The book is a sequel to an earlier one called "Split Infinity". Without giving anything away, the story concerns the adventures of Stile, a serf on the planet Proton, whose main ambition is to attain the status of Citizen through a world-wide tournament known as the Game. The fun begins when he finds that Proton has a parallel counterpart named Phaze, which one can travel to simply by finding one of many entrances on the planet's surface.What possibilities when Stile discovers that as evolved as Proton is with scientific technology, Phaze is with magic. Anyone who enjoys duel sub-plots, and especially anyone who, like me, knows that Unicorns DO exist, will love these two books. The only miserable part in "Blue Adept" was finding the number of pages in my right hand dwindling to nothing, while realizing that there wasn't enough time for Anthony to tie up all the loose ends. Yes, obviously there is to be a third book, and it's excruciating to find out at the end of what you thought was a concluding sequel. In any event, most who subscribe to sf-lovers will be intrigued by Anthony's blend of pure S.F. and pure Fantasy into one book. Steve Bratman ------------------------------ Date: 23 Jun 1982 1830-PDT From: Brent Hailpern Subject: Foundation IV? After being out of touch with the real (?) world for a couple of years, I've been getting caught up on SF-LOVERS. I noticed a reference, a few issues back, to Foundation IV. I've been unable to locate any new Foundation book by Asimov in the local bookstores. Am I missing the boat? If not could someone give me a more complete reference? Brent Hailpern (csl.sso.bth@su-score) (BTH at YKTVMX - IBM Yorktown) [ Foundation IV is a sequel to the trilogy that Asimov has been contracted to write. It has not appeared in print yet. -- Jim ] ------------------------------ Date: 18 Jun 1982 05:05:27-PDT From: decvax!duke!uok!mwm at Berkeley Subject: State of the Art A short while back, somebody mentioned that the contest for the hugo (novel) could well be between "Friday", "Foundation IV", and "2010". In other words, a pair of sequels to 10+ year old stories, and something based around equally old characters/universes. This seems to say BAD things about the state of SF to me. mike ------------------------------ Date: 15 Jun 1982 1525-EDT From: Thomas Galloway Subject: John Brunner Going back to the "Does John Brunner exist?" discussion of a few weeks ago, there is what purports to be a photo of him on p.15 of the July SFChronicle. tom ------------------------------ Date: 13 June 1982 22:02-EDT From: Charles F. Von Rospach Subject: review: Saturday the 14th Movie: Saturday the 14th Richard Benjamin, Paula Prentiss (not exactly a new release, but it didn't stay in theaters long enough to see, and it is now making the pay tv rounds) Pico Review: Hilariously bad. Another Golden Turkey award winner for sure! micro review: This movie is a supposed sendup of all the horror movies that have already shown up at the theaters. What the writers seem to have decided to do is take every good, bad, or indifferent monster movie ever made and write a joke about it. Then they try to figure out some way to stick that joke in the movie. Some of them work. Most of them do not. I spent most of the movie laughing hysterically, not because the movie was funny, but because it was BAD. It did bring back a lot of memories about some of the really good movies I have seen, and the movie will probably be much less appreciated by those who don't stay up until 4AM to see 'Bride of Frankenstein' for the 99th time.... If you have a favorite monster, keep your eyes open, for it will be there somewhere. As a good example of the quality of the film, Val Helsing (from the 'Major Exterminator Company sent out to rid their belfry of bats) says at one point "Selling the house now would be like closing the barn door after the horses have eaten your children." If you like that, you will love this movie. Rating: If you can get access to it on pay tv, and you don't have to pay any more to see it, it'll make a good chuckle. If you love turkeys, or monsters, its worth a bit more. chuq chuqui@mit-ai ------------------------------ Date: 14 Jun 82 5:33-PDT From: mclure at SRI-UNIX Subject: brief Spielberg interview Star Watch: Steven Spielberg Makes Two More Hits By FRED YAGER Associated Press Writer NEW YORK (AP) - Last year, director Steven Spielberg was responsible for the top grossing film of 1981, ''Raiders of the Lost Ark.'' This year, Spielberg could be responsible for two top-grossing films, ''ET, The Extra-Terrestrial'' and ''Poltergiest.'' And the two movies, although virtually made at the same time, are like day and night. ''One's a boy and one's a girl,'' the 34-year-old director said over a cup of cold borscht during an interview. '' 'Poltergiest' is a real scary ghost story,'' he said, ''while 'ET' is a love story about friendship.'' In ' ET,' that friendship is between a boy and a creature from another planet who gets stranded on earth when his spaceship abandons him. '' 'ET' means more to me than any movie I ever made,'' Spielberg said. ''When I was young, my father would move us from one town to the other every time he found a better job,'' he said. ''I'd be on the brink of making a best friend and suddenly I'm somewhere else having to start from scratch. 'ET' is about a friendship that will never be disrupted.'' ''Poltergiest,'' one the other hand, is a horror story about a typical suburban family being terrorized by a force that exists somewhere between life and death. For Spielberg, it represents all his childhood fears. ''All my fears were normal,'' Spielberg says. ''I was afraid of my closet. Under my bed. Dark shadows. I never got over that. ''It usually takes making a movie to get over a fear for me,'' he said, ''and it usually costs the studio between $10 and $15 million before I'm cured.'' If making movies is therapy for Spielberg's phobias, film companies are lining up to pay for his treatment. So far, his pictures, which include ''Jaws,'' ''Close Encounters of the Third Kind'' and ''Raiders of the Lost Ark,'' have generated more than $1 billioin box office grosses. ''I love making movies about things I don't know anything about,'' Spielberg says. ''My films are usually about things that you just can't go out and experience outside of a movie theater.'' ''Poltergiest'' developed out of his interest in people who had life after death experiences. ''Many of them,'' he said, ''report seeing a glorious light that seems to want them and they seem to want it, but something either holds them back or rejects them from the light, or something brings them back to wherever they were when they almost died. ''Some parapsychologists believe that people who die linger before they're shepherded to higher destinies.'' Spielberg believes that creative ideas roam freely. ''There are certain people who are good receivers and they can reach up and get an idea and realize it. There are other people who can't. ''The idea visits them, but they don't have the wherewithal to do anything about it,'' he says. ''But I think good ideas visit everyone. I think there's a band of creativity that like air goes through everyone. It takes with certain people and it doesn't stick with others.'' Half the battle is separating the good ideas from the bad, he says. ''When 'ET' first hit me, I threw it off,'' he said. ''I kept saying 'Go away. I'm into Raiders II. I'm not ready to make my personal movie about love.' But 'ET' kept bouncing back until I finally said okay I get the message.'' Spielberg will continue making films, he said. ''I don't want to stop, or rest on any laurels. The thing that makes you want to stop is failure. I can't stop now.'' ------------------------------ Date: 16 Jun 1982 11:38 EDT From: Denber.WBST at PARC-MAXC Subject: Re: ISIRTA I've just plowed through a week's backlog of SFL and was disappointed that no one picked up on John Francis' comments on "I'm Sorry, I'll Read That Again". It ran here seven years ago on our public radio station (all of NPR?). It was, if anything, even funnier than Monty Python. In addition to ferrets, prunes and rhubarb tart featured prominently each week. The show's theme song was the "Angus Prune Tune". There were plenty of jokes like "By noon plans were afoot, and by evening they were eighteen inches." Typical was their serial "The Curse of the Flying Wombat", one episode of which started something like: "As you may remember, our hero Tim Browne-Windsor has set out after the Green Eye of the Little Yellow Dog, hotly pursued by the evil Casey O'Sullivan and his henchman Masher Wilkins. [offstage: "Get on with it!"] No sooner has the mysterious cabin boy Jim-Lad revealed himself as Tim's mysterious fiancee Fiona Rabbitt-Vacuum than the Flying Wombat strikes a submerged reef..." "We're sinking, captain, give us an order!" "Well, I'll start with the prune cocktail, and then lobster ice cream and a cherry with a mouse in it." "After the meal, it was but the work of a moment for the captain to issue the critical order." "Full speed ahead - upwards!" "...A party of men was sent over the side to repair the damage and soon the reef was good as new." ..."That night, two men rose silently up to the ship." Casey O'Sullivan: "Ha ha, ha ha." Masher Wilkins: [dopey Cockney accent] "Yeah yeah boss, this looks like the shop." COS: "No no, the ship, Masher, the ship you twit, not the shop." MW: "Oh, so I needn't have brought along my shopping biscuit." "No no, your basket, basket." "Oh, basket, yeah basket, yeah yeah." "Alright, Masher, do you know what you got to do?" "Yeah yeah, I'll climb aboard and I'll creep up behind the 'elmsman as quiet as a house" "No, a mouse!" "Mouse, yeah, so 'e does not hear my approach, and then when I am behind him I beat 'im about the 'ead wi' my luncheon." "No no no, y' *truncheon*!" "Yeah yeah, and then I cuddle 'im senseless." "No no, y' cudgel 'im, cudgel 'im." "Oh, what a pity." ...Tim Browne-Windsor: "Where are you, Fiona?" Fiona Rabbit-Vacuum: "Yoo hoo, over here, only don't call me Fiona, for I must keep my identity a secret." TBW: "Then why are you wearing a crinoline?" FRV: "So no one can see my frilly knickers." First Mate Hatch: "Good morning, Browne-Windsor!" TBW: "Good day, Hatch, but you look worried, why?" FMH: "I'm worried about Jim-Lad." "Why so?" "Well, have ye looked under his crinoline lately?" ...FMH: "There's trouble down below." TBW: "Well, have you taken anything for it?" "No, I mean stowaways." "Stowaways! But this is serious!" "Aye, I couldn't think of a joke either." OK, so it doesn't have anything to do with SF, but at least it's not another two megabyte review of ST/ET/PG. - Michel ------------------------------ Date: 13 Jun 1982 at 1537-CDT From: hjjh at UTEXAS-11 Subject: PERSON-NESS ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ PERSON-NESS ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ In SF-L vol. 5, #67, Bob Clements claimed-- "'sales-person' discriminates against non-organic and non-physical sentients" Not so! In the predominant cultures of four of the continents of Terra the Deity, "God", is not only considered to be a "person" but generally even to be \3/ "Persons". God is indubitably "non-organic", "non-physical", and "sentient". ------------------------------ Date: Monday, 14 June 1982 07:55-PDT From: KING at KESTREL Subject: My last Pacpun (maybe) What do you call that portion of writing a video game program that calls for extreme attention to detail? nitPacIng ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  0,unseen,, Summary-line: 29-Jun JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #74 *** EOOH *** Date: Tuesday, June 29, 1982 7:05PM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #74 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Tuesday, 29 Jun 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 74 Today's Topics: SF Books - ET: the Extra-Terrestrial, SF Movies - Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan & ET: the Extra-Terrestrial, Spoiler - ET: the Extra-Terrestrial ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 13 Jun 1982 2131-PDT From: Mark Feber Subject: E.T. and Star Trek reviews Having recently seen Star Trek the Wrath of Khan and E.T. I'm afraid I have to break the trend of glowing reviews for STTWOK. ST was ok, but it was basically an expanded TV show (in fact the scenes I liked best were the standard bits that showed up in almost every episode - like Spock using his nerve pinch, or whatever it was called). So, unless you're a hardcore Trekie, the film, modulo a few of the early battle scenes, will seem a little flat. Then again, maybe it just suffers in comparison to E.T. E.T. is really great. I can't imagine anyone who reads this list not going to see the film before the week is out, so I won't try to spoil it. Suffice it to say that the film is full of great camera work and wonderful scenes (E.T. meets Yoda, E.T. in a wig looking like cousin IT, E.T. discovers beer, boy shows E.T. the monuments of 20th century culture, and, of course the great frog escape). The only real complaint I have is with some of the special effects. I presume Industrial Light and Magic is responsible for the scenes with the spaceship. Well, in the climactic lift-off, the spaceship jiggles slightly and tends to look more like a Xmas tree ornament being lifted by a wire, than an inter-stellar vehicle. Quite a let-down from the quality of effects in Close Encounters. A small flaw in an otherwise wonderful film. I only wish I could believe that humans would act so reasonably in the face of alien intelligence. Mark ------------------------------ Date: 16-JUN-1982 17:11 From: MERLIN::SCHOFIELD Reply-to: MERLIN::SCHOFIELD Subject: REVIEW OF ET As a new member on the SF-LOVERS list, I just want to express my appreciation and wonder at being included in this marvelously outlandish clan of SF and F fandom...I'm happy to be here! Now on to bigger and better things... I had the unexpected pleasure of viewing E.T. The Extraterrestrial (and his adventure on Earth) this weekend. This movie has the unmistakable mark of the movie midas Steven Speilberg. This movie adds a corollary to the Close Encounters (We Are Not Alone) theory: We Are Not Afraid! My sister (a subscriber to the notion that if it's creepy-crawly-slimy then it's bad) came home from the movie and stated, "After seeing that movie, if a UFO landed in the backyard, I wouldn't be afraid to go out and meet it." THAT, Mr. Speilberg, borders on the magical! That is what this film is all about. Speilberg works this magic with all the subtlety of a Jedi Master. In the first half of the film he uses his horror-movie experience (Jaws, Poltergeist etc.) to instill a xenophobic fear of this "thing" that is the ET. Using all the tricks of scare: lightning-flash glimpses of something dark and shiny; suspenseful sequences climaxed by the screams of the actors (followed closely by the screams of the audience);etc.etc., Speilberg has us loathing this alien without ever seeing it! Then, in the best example of audience manipulation I've ever witnessed, Speilberg shows us the irrationality of our fear by revealing the ET for what he (she? it?) really is: a living, intelligent entity who is very scared, very alone, and very, very far from home (a feeling many can and do identify with). (ET was marroooned on Earth when his ship was discovered by local authorities and forced to escape without ET.) The ET makes friends with a local boy named Elliot who proceeds to enlist the aid of all the neighborhood friends in helping ET regain his ship In the end one finds oneself cheering for the very alien that was so 'creepy and evil' before. Thus Speilberg uses parlor psychology to show us the folly of xenophobia and in the process strikes a double blow in favor of both extraterrstrials and fun movies (without coming out in bold-face and saying "This film has a message...heed it!"). If you have always wanted to strike a blow at the Saturday afternoon "Creature Double Feature", if you considered the Creature from the Black Lagoon a 'good guy', then this movie will be everything you wanted to see on the silver screen! Hats off to Speilberg, and keep up the good work! Rick Schofield ------------------------------ Date: 18 Jun 1982 1025-CDT From: CS.BROWN at UTEXAS-20 Subject: E.T. personal opinion In response to the plea for personal opinions on movies, I can say that the group of college students I went with all enjoyed the movie. In the group were 2 computer scientists, 2 artists, a mechanical engineer and a PR person. We all agreed that E.T. is not, as some may think, "just for kids". The film had lots of humor, good special effects, two or three really sad parts (we all cried), and an exciting "grownups chasing the kids" scene. Overall a good movie, maybe not a classic, but definitely worth four bucks. Share and enjoy Nelson ------------------------------ Date: 14 Jun 82 15:14-PDT From: mclure at SRI-UNIX Subject: short E.T. review E.T., The Extra-Terrestrial By BOB THOMAS Associated Press Writer ''E.T., THE EXTRA-TERRESTRIAL'' is, quite simply, a great movie. Note the term ''movie,'' not ''film,'' which is newfangled and high-toned. This is a real movie, with all those elements that have proved sure-fire through history: laughter, tears, involvement, thrills, wonderment. Steven Speilberg also adds a message: human beings and spacelings should learn to co-exist. Only a Scrooge could fail to care about E.T., the super-intelligent, homesick little alien who is left behind during the hasty departure of a spacecraft from a California suburb. Already the most successful filmmaker of all time, Speilberg seems likely to exceed the records of his ''Jaws,'' ''Close Encounters of the Third Kind'' and ''Raiders of the Lost Ark.'' The cast is perfect, especially the youngsters who befriend the visitor: Henry Thomas, Robert Macnaughton, Drew Barrymore (carrying on the family tradition at five). Dee Wallace is compassionate as their mother, whose husband has run off to Mexico with another woman. The star is E.T. himself, created by Carlo Rambaldi and brought to endearing life by a crew of movie wizards. The meeting of E.T. and Yoda (''The Empire Strikes Back'') during a Halloween march makes a classic screen confrontation. At the end of the press preview in Hollywood, the supposedly hardboiled audience erupted in bravos, something that veterans could not recall happening before. Well, here's mine: Bravo! Rated PG, because of mild swearing and high excitement. ------------------------------ Date: 17-Jun-1982 From: DJLONG AT MERLIN Reply-to: "DJLONG AT MERLIN" Subject: More on E.T. (for sfl) Incidentally, this morning on Good Morning America, the President of the Motion Picture Association of America was on and he made some comments about all the new great movies that are out. My favorite: "E.T., it has to be one of the 2 or 3 best movies ever made." Look for it at Oscar time next year. Dave Long ------------------------------ Date: 15-Jun-1982 From: STEVE LIONEL AT STAR Reply-to: STEVE LIONEL AT STAR Subject: E.T. I am certain that by now you have been deluged with glowing reviews of Steven Speilberg's new movie E.T., all saying that it is the best thing since sliced bagels and that it is a "must see". I agree. E.T., the movie, is not the subject of this note. E.T., the book, is. I have this odd habit of buying the novelizations of movies which I have seen. Sometimes, I'll pick it up before the movie is released (if possible), so I can get a better idea of what is going on. In most cases, the book fills in plot details that got left out of the film, so I consider the exorbitant prices they charge for these books well spent. So, after having been delighted by E.T., the movie, I purchased the book. If you are similarly inclined to lay down your $2.95 (plus tax), I have one word for you - DON'T! I know that in many cases the studios hire real hacks to write novels from the screenplay, and I know that said hack needs to be able to add words to make up for the lack of the visual element, but one doesn't need to turn a straightforward, pleasant story into a Harold Robbins-type potboiler. This, unfortunately, is what William Kotzwinkle has done with E.T. I've never heard of William Kotzwinkle, (and I'm sure he's never heard of me). Some of the other books listed to his credit are "Doctor Rat", "Elephant Bangs Train" and "Hermes 3000". Eh? Not content with simply telling the compelling story that the movie does, he injects sex and silliness. For example, we get introduced to Elliot's family by E.T. talking to the vegetables (and them talking back). Or how about E.T.'s having the hots for Elliot's mama? What? You don't believe me? Listen to this: How ironic it was that the willow-creature, the lovely Mary, pined for her vanished husband while in a closet, close at hand, dwelt one of the finest minds in the cosmos. He gazed down at his large pumpkin stomach, hanging on the floor, and for the first time in his very long life he saw it as grotesque. But even if he stopped eating Oreo cookies, it would never go away. It was him. or this: The willow creature was asleep, and he watched her for a long time. She was a goddess, the most beautiful thing he'd ever seen. Her radiant hair, spread out upon the pillow, was the moonlight itself; her fine features, so understated in their lovlieness, were all that was perfection in nature - her closed eyes like the sleeping butterflies upon the night-blooming narcissus, her lips the petals of the columbine. Mary, said his old heart. Then, upon paddle feet, he tiptoed [?] over to her bed and gazed more closely. She was the loveliest creature in the universe, and what had he given her? C'mon now! We are also shown that Mary (Elliot's mother) has been without a man for so long, that she might take E.T. up on his offer, if he ever made one. Or what about Elliot's school principal, after finding Elliot floating on the ceiling (a scene which is not in the film), downing some Quaaludes? Perhaps the real problem with the book is that the real story gets crowded out by all the garbage. It seems like the last hour of the movie gets compressed into about the last 20 pages of the book. But are there any interesting plot elements or details or motivations revealed? No. Please don't waste your money on the novelization. Spend it to see E.T., the movie, again. That's money well spent. Steve Lionel ------------------------------ Date: Tuesday, June 29, 1982 7:05PM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Subject: SPOILER WARNING! SPOILER WARNING! The remaining message in this digest discusses some plot details of the movie ET: the Extra-Terrestrial. Some readers may not wish to read on. ------------------------------ Date: 28 June 1982 13:51-EDT From: John G. Aspinall Subject: Strange Loop in E.T. Fans of Douglas Hofstadter (Godel Escher Bach) should notice a delightful "strange loop" in E.T. When E.T. is being smuggled out of the house on Halloween, E.T. (dressed as a ghost, but impersonating the little girl dressed as a ghost) is attracted to another kid dressed as Yoda from The Empire Strikes Back. We often talk about the "willing suspension of disbelief". I think of that, often, as pushing down some level in our consciousness - we ignore the crunch of popcorn beside us, and the person's head in front, and deal exclusively with the world presented on the screen. Speilberg gets us to identify with E.T. (the creature) to certain extent. Then E.T. is attracted to another similar creature. We "pop" up a level - and laugh - Yoda is just a movie character, this is just a kid on Halloween. But surprise! We aren't at "top level" (ie audience level) yet. E.T. is still the extra-terrestrial creature that he always was. It's this mixing of the levels, or strange loop, that I found to be one of the best scenes in the movie. John Aspinall. ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************  1,, Summary-line: 30-Jun JPM@Mit-Ai #SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #75 Date: Wednesday, June 30, 1982 1:00PM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #75 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai *** EOOH *** Date: Wednesday, June 30, 1982 1:00PM From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) Reply-to: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #75 To: SF-LOVERS at Mit-Ai SF-LOVERS Digest Wednesday, 30 Jun 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 75 Today's Topics: SF Books - Here's the Plot...What's the Title & Foundation IV & Ellison & News from LOCUS & HHGttG, SF Movies - Cat People & Conan the Barbarian & Firefox & ET: The Extra-Terrestrial & Revenge of the Jedi & Ford, SF Topics - Bad Scriptwriters, SF TV - HHGttG, Humor - Genderless Video Games ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 29 June 1982 1352-EDT (Tuesday) From: Mark.Sherman at CMU-10A Subject: What is title I have a plot outline but not a title or author. Can any body help me? Man is evolving both forwards and backwards. A couple has a baby born alive, but they are told it is dead. The baby is one of the "backwards" and is placed on a reservation for Neanderthals. Father discovers that baby is alive, searches for and finds baby. Father leaves baby on reservation. Doctor at reservation comments "thank god baby is not one of the other ones." Maybe a short story. Any clues? Please send replies to Sherman@CMU-10A. ------------------------------ Date: 29 Jun 1982 13:59:31-EDT From: csin!cjh at CCA-UNIX Subject: Foundation IV Working title: LIGHTNING ROD Pub. title: FOUNDATION AT RISK According to Asimov (during a talk at MIT last April) Doubleday will be releasing this in December. It's set something over 500 years through the 1000-year interregnum, but (like most of the stories) takes only a few months to happen (maybe less?). It will be a substantial book, probably three times as large as the biggest previous segment (the second half of SECOND FOUNDATION). ------------------------------ Date: 29 Jun 82 13:58-PDT From: mclure at SRI-UNIX Subject: Re: Foundation IV Yeah. Locus says twice as big as any of the previous books. I think it's called FOUNDATION'S EDGE. I typed in a big excerpt about this from a recent LOCUS but Mcgrath hasn't gotten around to distributing it. ------------------------------ Date: 30 Jun 1982 11:19:28-EDT From: csin!cjh at CCA-UNIX Subject: Re: Foundation IV In response to your message of Tue Jun 29 17:55:56 1982: Asimov said FOUNDATION AT RISK, and since LOCUS is at the far edge of the country from him I wouldn't be surprised if they were wrong. At least LOCUS isn't a yellow journalist's delight like SCIENCE FICTION CHRONICLE. ------------------------------ Date: 18 Jun 82 18:15-PDT From: mclure at SRI-UNIX Subject: July LOCUS extracts Here are some extracts from the July LOCUS. FOUNDATION series sold to Del Rey: ---------------------------------- Ballantine/Del Rey has purchased paperback rights not only to Isaac Asimov's new novel FOUNDATION's EDGE but also to the three earlier books in the series. FOUNDATION's EDGE was turned in to Doubleday recently and will be published in October. Doubleday is billing it as "the fourth book in the FOUNDATION trilogy". It is 140,000 words -- twice as long as each of the earlier books. Penthouse and Omni will both run extracts. Judy-Lynn del Rey would not reveal the amount paid for the "Foundation", package but she did not deny it was "very high". (There was a paperback floor of half a million dollars on FOUNDATION'S EDGE, according to Publisher's Weekly.) "It feels good to be the publisher of Heinlein, Asimov, and Clarke," she said. The three original books will be republished as quickly as possible. Isaac Asimov had the following comments about the series: "When I first wrote them, I thought each story would appear in Astounding then vanish forever except for the few fans that saved their back issues. Even after the FOUNDATION trilogy appeared in the early fifties, my feeling was that it would sell a few thousand copies and then vanish except for those few fans who would keep their copies. According to Doubleday, the original books have sold over 5,000,000 copies... and [they] have paid me hundreds of thousands in royalties. "Doubleday was so pleased with the manuscript when I turned it in that they promptly set up another contract with a larger advance -- $65,000 --- for an unamed science fiction novel, but I'm trying to write the third Lije Bailey book [sequel to THE CAVES OF STEEL and THE NAKED SUN]. For thirty years I said I couldn't write another "Foundation" book, but I managed it and even enjoyed it, so maybe I can even do the third robot novel." HARLAN ELLISON -------------- Harlan Ellison and his secretary, Marty Clark, escaped serious injury when his car turned over and was demolished on the San Diego Freeway. He was on his way to the airport and had to take evasive action to escape running into someone ahead of him. The car, a 1967 Camaro with 170,000 miles on it, hit the divider at 60 mph, flipped over, and was totally demolished. Ellison got out with a few bruises, pulled out his secretary, then his typewriter, and went on to a speaking engagement in Alaska. 1982 LOCUS POLL RESULTS ----------------------- nom = awards nominated for (H = Hugo, N = Nebula), votes = number of votes, 1sts = number of first place votes, points = total points based on Carr point system: 1st = 8 pts, 2nd = 7 pts, etc. Thus, a first place vote counted twice as much as a fifth place one, instead of five times as much if we had used a five, four, three, two, one, system. BEST SCIENCE FICTION NOVEL AUTHOR nom votes 1sts points 1 THE MANY-COLORED LAND Julian May H,N 184 82 1253 2 WINDHAVEN George R.R. Martin 159 45 1010 3 DOWNBELOW STATION C.J. Cherryh H 139 48 916 BEST FANTASY NOVEL 1 THE CLAW OF THE CONCILIATOR Gene Wolfe H,N 343 199 2504 2 LITTLE, BIG John Crowley H,N 198 84 1376 3 THE CHANGING LAND Roger Zelazny 164 42 1049 BEST FIRST NOVEL 1 STARSHIP & HAIKU Somtow Sucharitkul 149 77 1055 2 AT THE EYE OF THE OCEAN Hilbert Schneck 129 871 955 3 RADIX A.A. Attanasio N 130 76 947 BEST NOVELLA 1 "Blue Champagne" John Varley H 143 60 977 2 "The Saturn Game" Poul Anderson H,N 115 43 769 3 "In The Western Tradition" Phyllis Eisenstein H,N 114 38 765 BEST NOVELETTE 1 "Guardians" George R.R. Martin H 129 52 886 2 "Unicorn Variation" Roger Zelazny H 125 53 855 3 "The THermals of August" Edward Bryant H,N 87 33 585 BEST SHORT STORY 1 "The Pusher" John Varley H,N 156 55 1051 2 "Serpent's Teeth" Spider Robinson 54 26 551 3 "The Needle Men" George R.R. Martin 81 21 524 BEST ANTHOLOGY 1 SHADOWS OF SANCTUARY Robert Lynn Asprin, ed. 130 75 929 2 UNIVERSE 11 Terry Carr, ed. 125 57 863 3 THE BEST SCIENCE FICTION Terry Carr, ed. 109 47 745 OF THE YEAR #10 BEST SINGLE AUTHOR COLLECTION 1 SANDKINGS George R.R. Martin 259 94 1754 2 GENE WOLFE'S BOOK OF DAYS Gene Wolfe 135 45 881 3 SUNFALL C.J. Cherryh 131 46 867 BEST RELATED NON-FICTION BOOK 1 DANSE MACABRE Stephen King H 193 112 1405 2 ANATOMY OF WONDER Neil Barron, ed. H 125 69 843 3 THE ART OF LEO & DIANE Byron Preiss, ed. H 80 29 553 DILLON BEST ARTIST last year 1 Michael Whelan 1 H 240 114 1717 2 Don Maitz 2 H 138 65 949 3 Rowena Morrill 6 H 114 34 761 BEST MAGAZINE/FANZINE 1 F&SF 1 421 250 3043 2 Locus 2 H 387 138 2653 3 IASFM 5 204 34 1244 BEST BOOK PUBLISHER 1 Pocket/Timescape 3 417 238 3015 2 Ballantine/Del Rey 1 307 80 2022 3 DAW 4 307 79 2004 ------------------------------ Date: 27 Jun 1982 1612-PDT From: Jim McGrath Subject: capsule reveiws CAPSULE MOVIE REVIEWS By Chicago Sun-Times Reviewers (c) 1982 Chicago Sun-Times (Field News Service) Cat People - An imaginative, erotic fantasy-horror film that takes itself just seriously enough to work, and has just enough fun to be entertaining. Nastassia Kinski and Malcolm McDowell play the descendants of a race of created by black leopards mating with humans. With John Heard, Annette O'Toole and Ruby Dee; Paul Schrader directed. Rated R. 3 1/2 stars. Conan the Barbarian - Arnold Schwarzenegger plays the mythical hero battling the evil Doom (James Earl Jones - and it is disturbing to see that fine black actor pitted against a proto-Nordic avenger). Schwarzenegger and his co-star, lovely Sandahl Bergman, bring humor and a certain quiet slyness to a movie that is a triumph of production design, set decoration, special effects and makeup. It's a perfect fantasy for the alienated pre-adolescent. With Max von Sydow. Rated R. 3 stars. E.T., The Extra-terrestrial in his Adventure on Earth - E.T., a wonderful little creature from outer space, is left behind in an American suburb when its spaceship gets frightened away. After several close encounters with a search party, it is discovered by a little boy, and thus begins a story of friendship and love. This Steven Spielberg production is filled with innocence, hope and good cheer. It's also wickedly funny and exciting, and is a triumph of special effects. With Henry Thomas, Dee Wallace, Peter Coyote, Robert MacNaughton, and Drew Barrymore. Rated PG. 4 stars. Firefox - Clint Eastwood's mission in this slick, muscular thriller is to infiltrate the Soviet Union and steal the Firefox, a top-secret Russian warplane. The movie combines espionage with science fiction and works like the well-crafted machine it's about. With Freddie Jones, David Huffman, Warren Clarke, Ronald Lacey, Kenneth Colley, Stefan Schnabel. Rated R. 3 1/2 stars. ------------------------------ Date: 18 Jun 82 16:48-PDT From: mclure at SRI-UNIX Subject: Firefox The TV commercials make it appear like a royal ripoff of the Star Wars Death Star chase scenes. They even appear to have a trench. ------------------------------ Date: 26 Jun 1982 at 2233-CDT From: ables at UTEXAS-11 (King Ables) Subject: Star Wars VI Harrison Ford was interviewed on a local talk show here in Austin yesterday. He talked mostly about "Bladerunner," but he did mention that he had been finished with his part of "The Revenge of the Jedi" a couple of weeks ago. Interesting, either they are right on or ahead of schedule on filming with the actors or he has a small part (which considering he could have been frozen for most of the movie, is possible). He also said his next project would be the sequel to Raiders starting sometime next year. -ka ------------------------------ Date: 14 Jun 1982 12:53:29-EDT From: csin!cjh at CCA-UNIX Subject: Re: bad scriptwriters I was under the impression that Alan Dean Foster was responsible only for novelizations, not for shooting scripts---and some of the stuff that he's written independently is tolerable. Glen Larson, on the other hand, is the other side of the Red Shift coin. ------------------------------ Date: 29 Jun 82 16:22:08-EDT (Tue) From: Will Martin (DRXAL-FD) Subject: HHGTTG News Pulled this off USENET for your delectation and enlightenment... From unc!mcnc!duke!decvax!utzoo!utcsstat!geoff Mon Jun 7 02:32:47 1982 Subject: Hitch-Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy news (net.humour) Newsgroups: net.misc >From the July Starlog: MORE ``HITCH-HIKER'S'' ON THE WAY --------------------------------- During his recent publicity tour to promote the U.S. release of Restaurant at the End of the Universe (Crown Publishers), Douglas Adams stopped to chat and tell STARLOG what the future holds for fans of The Hitch-Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy. Althougn (sic) fans have hoped that someone would import the six-part BBC-TV series, Adams announced that ABC-TV will be re-making the series with an American cast. ``All things going well,'' Adams reported, ``it should start going out in the fall. I met the guy who's directing it, and as far as it's possible to tell, I thought he seemed to be very, very much in tune with it-actually more in tune with it than the TV director we had in England. There are a lot of good people involved. The guy who's doing the design is Ron Cobb who did the famous bar scene in Star Wars. He's a cartoonist as well, so he'll have a sense of humor. I hadn't heard of him before, but everyone in the business says, `Oh, great! Terrific! You're onto a winner there.' '' Adams is currently finishing off the third Hitch-Hiker's book, entitled Life, the Universe and Everything, which will be released first in England this August. ``Probably the next major thing I'd work on will be a non-science-fiction humorous book, but in the meantime, I'm doing one or two other bits and pieces. Curiously enough, I'm going to go and do a magazine feature on the Coral Reefs in the Red Sea for The Observer and the Royal Wildlife Fund, which I'm looking forward to doing. I'm also probably going to be doing a serious reference book with John Lloyd, the producer of Not the 9 O'Clock News.'' ------------------------------ Date: 29 June 1982 18:07-EDT From: James M. Turner Subject: Genderless punsters (after I find my trusty knife...) At LMI, we are seriously considering a PacMan to be written for the Lisp Machine. It will, of course, be written in PacLisp. James ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************