TAFF 1996
Gary Farber
: And Martin Tudor
: Bernie
: bev...@cix.compulink.co.uk
: ** this fanzine/e-mail/chunk of protoplasm supports Tudor for TAFF **
: (Warning - this sig will be boringly in sight for months to come)
Will a Hanover be found to stand in opposition?
--
-- Gary Farber Brooklyn, New York City
gfa...@panix.com I is another, and I am that other. -- Rimbaud
Alun Harries
proves that although he might know a lot about Fan History, he knows rather
less about British History, when he says:
> Bernie Evans (bev...@cix.compulink.co.uk) wrote:
> : And Martin Tudor
>
> Will a Hanover be found to stand in opposition?
Um, Gary it was the Lancastrians v. the Yorkists (aka 'The War Of The Roses'),
in which Henry VII turned out to be the eventual winner. I have told Martin
of his Welsh ancestry.
You are thinking of 'Bonnie Prince Charlie' and 'The Forty Five'.
Only 300 odd years difference!
Richard III for TAFF.
Alun Harries | CHICKEN | ahar...@cix.compulink.co.uk
| BROTHERS | 10012...@compuserve.com
| ONLINE | al...@ceiliog.demon.co.uk
http://alife1.cs.man.ac.uk/welsh/people/web/ahar...@cix.compulink.co.uk.html
Gary Farber
: In article <465lt9$g...@panix2.panix.com> gfa...@panix.com "Gary Farber"
: less about British History, when he says:
: > Bernie Evans (bev...@cix.compulink.co.uk) wrote:
: > : And Martin Tudor
: >
: > Will a Hanover be found to stand in opposition?
: Um, Gary it was the Lancastrians v. the Yorkists (aka 'The War Of The Roses'),
: in which Henry VII turned out to be the eventual winner. I have told Martin
: of his Welsh ancestry.
You've never heard of uchronia and alternative history?
: You are thinking of 'Bonnie Prince Charlie' and 'The Forty Five'.
Sez you, Cymruian mind-reader!
: Only 300 odd years difference!
Small beans to a timebinding fan!
: Richard III for TAFF.
I don't have any of his zines. He does have a fan club, though. Does he
know Adrian Paul?
Besides, I am never in error on Usenet. I merely troll. :-)
It worked on _you_. ;-)
P Nielsen Hayden
>In article <465lt9$g...@panix2.panix.com> gfa...@panix.com "Gary Farber"
>proves that although he might know a lot about Fan History, he knows rather
>less about British History, when he says:
>> Bernie Evans (bev...@cix.compulink.co.uk) wrote:
>> : And Martin Tudor
>>
>> Will a Hanover be found to stand in opposition?
>Um, Gary it was the Lancastrians v. the Yorkists (aka 'The War Of The Roses'),
>in which Henry VII turned out to be the eventual winner. I have told Martin
>of his Welsh ancestry.
>You are thinking of 'Bonnie Prince Charlie' and 'The Forty Five'.
I certainly agree that Gary's remark was an error on the order of conflating
the Bay of Pigs with the Mexican-American War, but I don't see how he's
thinking of the '45. The Glorious R. of '88 would be more like it, yes?
-----
Patrick Nielsen Hayden : p...@tor.com : opinions mine
http://www.panix.com/~pnh : http://www.tor.com
David G. Bell
> Alun Harries <al...@ceiliog.demon.co.uk> writes:
>
> >In article <465lt9$g...@panix2.panix.com> gfa...@panix.com "Gary Farber"
> >proves that although he might know a lot about Fan History, he knows rather
> >less about British History, when he says:
>
> >> Bernie Evans (bev...@cix.compulink.co.uk) wrote:
> >> : And Martin Tudor
> >>
> >> Will a Hanover be found to stand in opposition?
>
> >Um, Gary it was the Lancastrians v. the Yorkists (aka 'The War Of The Roses'
> >in which Henry VII turned out to be the eventual winner. I have told Martin
> >of his Welsh ancestry.
>
> >You are thinking of 'Bonnie Prince Charlie' and 'The Forty Five'.
>
> I certainly agree that Gary's remark was an error on the order of conflating
> the Bay of Pigs with the Mexican-American War, but I don't see how he's
> thinking of the '45. The Glorious R. of '88 would be more like it, yes?
House of Hanover -- started with George I, well after 1688. Get
yourself a copy of one of the standard histories of England, I recommend
Sellar and Yeatman, in which you will find out all about 'The Young
Chandelier'. And about the Tudors...
"...and another, finding that his name was Clarence, had himself drowned
in a spot of Malmsey wine; while the last of all even attempted to give
his Kingdom to a horse. It was therefore decided, since the Stuarts
were not ready yet, to have some Welsh Kings called Tudors (on account
of their descent from Owen Glendower) who, it was hoped, would be more
memorable."
Martin who?
--
David G. Bell -- Farmer, SF Fan, Filker, Furry, and Punslinger..
Never criticise a farmer with your mouth full.
Steve Glover
Gary Farber <gfa...@panix.com> wrote:
>: ** this fanzine/e-mail/chunk of protoplasm supports Tudor for TAFF **
>Will a Hanover be found to stand in opposition?
Dunno about that, but there's a Martin Stewart...
Steve, who's going to have real problems deciding between Martin and
Paul/Maureen.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Soliciting for November issue of Etranger: topics include morality in
works of people called Smith or about people called Smith; net stuff of likely
interest to SF fans, art... Deadline 15-OCT-1995: kur...@tardis.ed.ac.uk
Maureen Speller Pa
> Steve, who's going to have real problems deciding between Martin and
> Paul/Maureen.
No you won't, Steve, as we aren't planning to stand for this TAFF race,
not with being the Evolution (Eastercon 1996) FGOHs. It would all be a
bit much in one year, don't you think?
Maureen Kincaid Speller
mks...@cix.compulink.co.uk
Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr
ro...@winternet.com (David E Romm) writes:
>In article <814212...@ceiliog.demon.co.uk>,
>ahar...@cix.compulink.co.uk wrote:
>
>> But seriously folks, what character would you nominate for TAFF?
>>
>> Personally, think I'd plump for Falstaff, Sir Toby Belch, or (as a double
>> act, tho' I don't necessarilly approve of dual candidacies) Dogberry and
>> Verges.
>
>Puck. Has the 'uk' part already in his name and everything.
I think Miranda from "The Tempest" would be a good candidate. She certainly
needs to get off that little island. On the other hand, her dad Prospero is
the one with the huge fanzine collection.
-- Alan
===============================================================================
Alan Winston --- WIN...@SSRL750.BITNET or WIN...@SLAC.STANFORD.EDU
Disclaimer: I speak only for myself, not SLAC or SSRL Phone: 415/926-3056
Physical mail to: SSRL -- SLAC BIN 69, PO BOX 4349, STANFORD, CA 94309-0210
===============================================================================
P Nielsen Hayden
>House of Hanover -- started with George I, well after 1688. Get
>yourself a copy of one of the standard histories of England, I recommend
>Sellar and Yeatman, in which you will find out all about 'The Young
>Chandelier'. And about the Tudors...
Yes yes yes, but wasn't the Elector of Hanover part of the whole deal worked
out by which William N. Mary came to the throne? Anyway, that's what was
thinking.
Seth Breidbart
Gary Farber <gfa...@panix.com> wrote:
>Is there something "a bit much" about being a FGOH and standing for TAFF
>in the same year, as a rule?
"A" FGOH? Of course not.
How would you feel about someone being the Worldcon FGOH (in a year
the Worldcon was in the US), and standing for TAFF that same year?
That might be a bit much.
> I'm not sure that I see a conflict here,
>even as a point of proper modesty.
How about a feeling that the egoboo of either lasts a while, so by
avoiding overlap the total egoboo lasts longer?
Seth
P Nielsen Hayden
>Though I perfectly well accept the Pa's declination of this honor (this
>year; Speller in 98! Speller for TAFF before the End is Nigh!), I do
>wonder what people think of the general principle she mentions.
>Is there something "a bit much" about being a FGOH and standing for TAFF
>in the same year, as a rule? I'm not sure that I see a conflict here,
>even as a point of proper modesty. (Which doubtless shows my declasse
>nature.)
Perhaps I misunderstand what Maureen means, but my immediate take is that
this is perfectly British and perfectly silly.
Then again, British humor is fundamentally based on taking chunks out of
anyone who appears to be doing too well -- getting too much praise,
succeeding too much at their aims, achieving too much happiness. Since this
humor can often be vicious to the point of being not very funny at all, it's
understandable for anyone to wish to avoid being its occasion.
I appreciate and enjoy many things about British culture, but the more I
notice this particular thing, the more pathetic it seems.
P Nielsen Hayden
>How would you feel about someone being the Worldcon FGOH (in a year
>the Worldcon was in the US), and standing for TAFF that same year?
>That might be a bit much.
That's actually a good point.
David G. Bell
ahar...@cix.compulink.co.uk "Alun Harries" writes:
> In article <468bcu$e...@oban.cc.ic.ac.uk> b...@ee.ic.ac.uk "MR K P SCHUPKE"
> writes:
>
> > Alun Harries <al...@ceiliog.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> > >Richard III for TAFF.
> >
> > I can imagine the trip report:
> >
> > "Now is the Worldcon of our discontent..."
> >
> > Bug
> > (Who may have gotten her Shakespeare confused ...
>
> Not this time.
>
> But seriously folks, what character would you nominate for TAFF?
>
> Personally, think I'd plump for Falstaff, Sir Toby Belch, or (as a double
> act, tho' I don't necessarilly approve of dual candidacies) Dogberry and
> Verges.
I have this image of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern slipping off to the
bar at a critical moment...
Enter TIMLET:
TIM: To SMOF or not to SMOF, that is the question....
Steve Brewster
: Jerry (whose e-mail handle has disappeared from my header) wrote:-
: <recursive atributions/comments snipped)
: > And there are more than a few very amusing Brits who haven't stood,
: > or who stood and didn't win: D. West, Nigel Richardson, Ian
: > Sorenson, Hazel Ashworth to mention a few.
: And Martin Tudor
Martin Tudor would certainly get my vote - but if he's not interested,
how about Tommy Ferguson? Fan historian, keeper of the Willis Collection,
drunk, troublemaker - a fine gift for our transatlantic colleagues.
(It would fit in nicely with James White's GoH status at LACon, too.)
'Taxman for TAFFman!'
'Ferguson - Fanzine Fandom's Favourite Fenian'
--
Steve.B...@Bristol.ac.uk http://zeus.bris.ac.uk/~masjb
Room 1.19a, School of Mathematics, University of Bristol, City and
County of Bristol, BS8 1TW, United Kingdom. Tel: 0117 928 7445
Gary Farber
: I have this image of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern slipping off to the
: bar at a critical moment...
: Enter TIMLET:
: TIM: To SMOF or not to SMOF, that is the question....
You're sure he wouldn't just enter, saying: "To SMOF!"?
--
-- Gary Farber Brooklyn,
gfa...@panix.com New York City
Alun Harries
db...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk "David G. Bell" writes:
> I have this image of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern slipping off to the
> bar at a critical moment...
Shirley!, everyone knows that Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are dead ....
Here at CB Towers we've asked Lady Macbeth, but she washed her hands of it.
Avedon Carol
PNH writes:
> Then again, British humor is fundamentally based on taking chunks
> out of
> anyone who appears to be doing too well -- getting too much praise,
> succeeding too much at their aims, achieving too much happiness.
> Since this
> humor can often be vicious to the point of being not very funny at
> all, it's
> understandable for anyone to wish to avoid being its occasion.
>
> I appreciate and enjoy many things about British culture, but the
> more I
> notice this particular thing, the more pathetic it seems.
Couldn't agree more. This particularly unsavoury aspect of the national
culture can be most clearly seen in our music papers which will hype an
obscure band as the best thing since multiple orgasms then, as soon as
they actually achieve any level of success, do their level best to tear
them down. There's a kind of small-minded envy at work here that I wish
would go away.
-Rob
Pam Wells
writes:
> Is there something "a bit much" about being a FGOH and standing for TAFF
> in the same year, as a rule? I'm not sure that I see a conflict here,
> even as a point of proper modesty. (Which doubtless shows my declasse
> nature.)
A good question. I was Eastercon FGoH in 1992, after having won TAFF in 1991.
I didn't turn down the FGoHship because I'd just won TAFF. But there's a
difference between accepting an offered honour, and setting yourself up to
enter a win/lose competition. It was just _wonderful_ to receive two high
honours like that within such a short space of time -- quite revitalised me,
fannishly speaking. But how can you top something like that?
--
Pam Wells Vacuou...@bitch.demon.co.uk
Pam Wells
writes:
> Then again, British humor is fundamentally based on taking chunks out of
> anyone who appears to be doing too well -- getting too much praise,
> succeeding too much at their aims, achieving too much happiness. Since this
> humor can often be vicious to the point of being not very funny at all, it's
> understandable for anyone to wish to avoid being its occasion.
>
> I appreciate and enjoy many things about British culture, but the more I
> notice this particular thing, the more pathetic it seems.
As Patrick says, this attitude is fundamental to British humour. It's one of
the things I love best about my home, and one reason why I could never live
in the States (though it's a wonderful place to visit). After a few weeks in
the Midwest, I'd probably have to kill someone. There's nothing so great
about incessant achievement and positive thinking, y'know....
--
Pam Wells 'Proud to be British -- proud to be pathetic!'
Ulrika
writes:
>I can imagine the trip report:
>
>"Now is the Worldcon of our discontent..."
"...made gafious bummer by the puns of dorks..."?
--Ulrika
Gary Farber
: As Patrick says, this attitude is fundamental to British humour. It's one of
: the things I love best about my home, and one reason why I could never live
: in the States (though it's a wonderful place to visit). After a few weeks in
: the Midwest, I'd probably have to kill someone. There's nothing so great
: about incessant achievement and positive thinking, y'know....
Try an arty neighborhood of NYC, or other city: Soho, TriBeCa, say. Or
just a back-biting small town. It may not be a national attitude, but you
can have chunks torn out of you if you wish, for reasons petty or large.
Of course, being cynical and arch isn't the same as resenting success,
either.
P. Morwood (& D. Duane)
>ROB HANSEN HERE:
>Couldn't agree more. This particularly unsavoury aspect of the national
>culture can be most clearly seen in our music papers which will hype an
>obscure band as the best thing since multiple orgasms then, as soon as
>they actually achieve any level of success, do their level best to tear
>them down. There's a kind of small-minded envy at work here that I wish
>would go away.
The Irish have it too. The name for it here is "begrudgery". D.
Diane Duane / The Owl Springs Partnership
County Wicklow, Ireland
Come see our homepages at http://www.ibmpcug.co.uk/~owls/
Now self-publishing the fantasy novel A WIND FROM THE SOUTH
JJSchalles
Pam Wells responds to Patrick Nielsen Hayden, who writes:
>> Then again, British humor is fundamentally based on taking chunks out
>>of anyone who appears to be doing too well -- getting too much praise,
>> succeeding too much at their aims, achieving too much happiness. Since
>>this humor can often be vicious to the point of being not very funny at
>> all, it's understandable for anyone to wish to avoid being its
occasion.
>>I appreciate and enjoy many things about British culture, but the more I
>> notice this particular thing, the more pathetic it seems.
>As Patrick says, this attitude is fundamental to British humour. It's one
>of the things I love best about my home, and one reason why I could never
>live in the States (though it's a wonderful place to visit). After a few
>weeks in the Midwest, I'd probably have to kill someone. There's nothing
>so great about incessant achievement and positive thinking, y'know....
And people wonder where America's tendancy toward violence comes
from . . . .
Geri
Dr Gafia
win...@SSRL01.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU ("Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg
Mgr") writes:
>I think Miranda from "The Tempest" would be a good candidate. She
>certainly needs to get off that little island. On the other hand,
>her dad Prospero is the one with the huge fanzine collection.
We could bring them both over and find out what they think about the
sf movie version of their story (FORBIDDEN PLANET) and all the changes
that were made in translating it to the silver screen. While I
generally dislike what the movies does to books, including
translations from the original German which they don't need, I must
say that FORBIDDEN PLANET had a fairly accurate bit of extrapolation
when it showed Prospero's fanzine collection as being totally archived
and already on line....
The problem with changing TAFF in this way, IMNSHO, is that once you
start it there's no telling where it will stop. And there is a
general question of fairness. If we allow Prospero and his daughter
to come here and voice their complaints against Hollywood, next thing
you know, that Greek fella, Ari Stefaneez, will want us to bring him
over so he can complain that Alfred Hitchcock didn't pay him a cent
for his play, "The Birds." It could get tacky.
--rich brown a.k.a. DrGafia
Avedon Carol
> Avedon for TAFF in '96. I'm for it. Hell, I'd even vote.
No way. Anyway, I've already been over, as some people might have
noticed.
Avedon
P Nielsen Hayden
to Dave Romm's offhand negative comments about what he perceives as British
fandom's sensibility. Buried in Andy Hooper's several paragraphs is this:
>I see this as just another effort to torpedo TAFF, characterizing British
>fans as unimpressed by and ungrateful for the wonders which the U.S. of A.
>has to offer (and we often go further, choosing to interpret this as
>willful hostility), and therefore unworthy of our attention or votes or
>voting fees.
I think this is a little over the top, no? Dave Romm and I have some pretty
fundamental disagreements, but I hardly think it's fair to characterize him
as someone engaged in an "effort to torpedo TAFF." It looks to me like Andy
is being a bit carried away with the majesty and power of his own
rhetoric...
Seth Breidbart
So? I still think it's a neat idea. (You could always use your
statement on the ballot to tell people not to vote for you.)
Seth
Gary Farber
: Grrrrr...had this big reply all fired up to Dave's posting, and then aol
: slipped of the rails and disconnected me from the newsgroup. Swine.
Yes. Have you not read of their evil? <grin>
: Oh well, I was saying that this statemant of Dave Romm's rather neatly sums
: up what I see as the biggest threat to Anglo-american fan relations today,
: to wit: We take one another too damn seriously.
Oh, well, if that's the biggest threat, I'd say we're pretty well off.
Heck, we make fun of each other all the time, across the Atlantic, as
well as on our respective islands. (A small number of us living on those
hellish islands separate from both the UK and the US: NYC.)
Your call to not exaggerate the differences is entirely valid. But the
situation looks little different to me on this score than it ever has.
Exploration and comparison of cultural differences is indeed one of the
joys of trans-Atlantic communication. It's one of the greatest pleasures
I take from rass-eff, and this will only increase as wiring continues.
: British fandom is seen as
: being so relentlessly downbeat and cynical, while in my experience, they
: are just as quick to respond to grim situations with humor, and rather
: sunny humor at that, as we are. American fans are supposedly so
: unshakeably cheerful and positive, while those of us over here know that
: we are as prone to gloom and black humor in the face of duress as anyone
: else in the world.
No shit. Some of us neededn't practice it; we've perfected it. Ah,
you're right -- it's all fucking doomed. <dour grimace>
: I see this as just another effort to torpedo TAFF, characterizing British
I'd say that's a tad strong.
<snip>
: And lest you decide that the death of TAFF would be nothing to worry about
: -- after all, any number of fans could start any number of funds at any
: time -- consider that such efforts could easily be a Trojan horse for the
: final marginalization and devaluation of fanzine fandom as we know it. It
: may seem like such a thing would hardly be worth anyone's time, but
: consider; certain elements within fandom clearly regard it as being a
: source of potentially limitless income, if only they could reorganize it
: on a commercial model.
At first I thought "it" was TAFF. Then I realized you meant "fandom as a
whole." I think that your outline sounds a bit paranoid if taken as
implying you seriously think there's someone out there plotting this.
(Though I can't swear there isn't, and there may be: even paranoids,
etc.)
Taken in bits and pieces, I agree with you. Fandom is being nibbled to
death, or at least considerable numbness that's more than worked its way
in from the edges of Our Body, by commericialism and the sheer ignorance
of so many who have become fans in the last decade, and even, in some
cases, two decades. This why Timebinders is discussing, and, at least as
individuals, proceeding with, what plans there are to make knowledge as
available as possible.
As well, people are discussing these issues here, as the net is one of
several excellent resources for broad-based dissemination of knowledge
and culture.
We've been discussing the a *lot*, though the last peak was back in
August. We ran down for a bit, but discussion can rise again through the
simple act of, zow, doing so.
: Fanzine fandom serves to offer witness to such
: plans, and to contrast them with the values and traditions which fandom
: has heretofore pursued.
Absolutely true, though I wouldn't limit it to just "fanzine fandom." The
creation of the Worldcon Fanhistory Exhibits, and efforts to preserve our
culture through cons, as well, is also crucial, particularly given that
that is the main exposure most new fans have to what is represented as our
culture. We cannot abandon these redoubts, or we shall be assuredly
over-run. Why is it I start using military metaphors around you, anyway?
<grin>
There are so many things we need to continue to work on: keeping material
in print, creating new Guidebooks to Fandom, continuing to have panels at
cons, utilizing drugs and hypnosis, seducing neos into trufandom with
sexual pleasure beyond their wildest dreams, sending out hit squads
against selected enemies, and all that other good stuff.
: Given only a few years to divorce contemporary
: fandom from its communal memory, it will be easy for certain
: entrepeneurial interests to convince fandom at large that the Worldcon was
: never a convivial place for friends from far and wide to meet and enjoy
: themselves, and has in fact always been designed to fleece as many Death
: T-shirt-wearing morons as can be crammed into a Zeppelin hangar over Labor
: Day Weekend.
We still have a blimp mooring mast station left in NYC, he offered
helpfully. Oh, sorry.
Yes, I have my worries as well, as most of us old farts do, but there are
also still plenty of us all left, and we're largely pretty noisy about
our opinions as to How Things Should Be, so we're not exactly lost yet.
It's still far easier for rip-off artists to do their own thing on the
side. I'm less concerned about Plotting Evildoers than I am the
diffusion to the point of loss of our culture around more than our
extremities through simple innocent ignorance. See alt.fandom.cons right
now for both sides.
: TAFF, with its ability to appear as an unwelcome revenent
: from the days before MAGIC: The Crack-Habit, is one of the things whioch
: will have to be changed before the new world of the mega-mall fandom can
: be brought to pass.
Gee, you missed John Bray's, head of the science program for the Scottish
convention, swell remark about (I paraphrase) how -"he didn't care about a
Fund for a bunch of people he'd never heard of." This in regard to all of
"fanzine fandom," not just TAFF contenders. I dropped an
off-the-top-of-my-head list on him, of people he's heard of from fanzine
fandom; I needn't recapitulate for you -- *you* know who, dear boy -- and
suggested he ask some members of his program such as Greg Benford what
they thought.
He never did respond.
I agree with the rest of what you said, you largely correct-thinking
person, you, though I think we have plenty of connections to the
continuity of fandom besides TAFF, much as TAFF is important to me: all us
fans who have been around, the entire old infrastructure of
Fandom-As-We-Know-It, the sheer big-wheel-keeps-on-turning,
Proud-Fans-keep-on-burning (well, something like that) inertia of it all
However, while you may be preaching to some fellow sect-members, there
are always those mythical creatures, lurkers, we like to think are
reading us. (Remember, Andy, it's lurkers all the way down.)
And I think it's too bad if Dave doesn't care about TAFF (though that's
*not* actually what he said -- he said he wanted to avoid politics, which
is another kettle of quibbles entirely).
I hope you note that I jumped ahead of practically every other post to
respond to yours, out of respect for you, and in hopes that some feedback
will encourage you to stick around -- that would be most interesting.
It's up to anyone who chooses to contribute to make what we will of this
newsgroup, and it's already been declared from various seats that it's
been "taken over by you fanzine fans," he paraphrased.
Join the triumphal conquerors.
Ask your friends in Las Vegas to show up. Then we'll *really* be
overwhelmed with faanishness. Bwahaha.
APHooper
mind is John Major.
Steve Brewster
: else in the world. British fans may be more prone to the use of invective
: or cynicism as a defense mechanism than we are, but a lot of that is down
: to the relatively gloomy and difficult conditions in which they live. And
: what would be the point of visiting another country if we were all exactly
: the same anyway?
Hmm - what particular gloomy and difficult conditions do you have in
mind?
Gary Farber
: This is one of the reasons I could never get into British fanzines, and
: most of the 'great Brit writers' seemed mainly to be Don Rickles with
: vocabulary.
I bop you with my lollipop. This is a remarkably dopey generalization,
Dave, no less than saying "all Mipple-Stipple zines are full of
happyfaces," or "all American fans wear 500 buttons and go to Star Trek
cons."
I sputter at the dumbness of dismissing the huge range this way.
Inarticulately. Do you find Rob to be Don Rickles? Do I have to go
through a list of 50 British fan-writers with the challenge?
How do you feel about equivalent generalizations of "American fans"?
: (And why TAFF tends to be ignorable; why would I want to send
: money to help someone come over here and go back and write insulting
: things about me when there's plenty of people willing to do that without
: my monetary contribution?)
I'm disappointed, Dave. I've never had anything but some of the greatest
pleasure I've taken in fandom from my involvements with TAFF. I've never
been insulted in an offensive way, and I've spent a fair amount of time
with some TAFF winners (though I missed Christina/Lillian, and Pam,
drat). Have you ever been insulted? Okay, you've avoided it: do you
*know* anyone who's been insulted?
: If I ever slipped over there and became part
: of that fandom, I'd either never publish a zine again, start firing back,
: or just ignore them all and stay on the net...
I know you were trying to be flip here, but I think this misfired.
APHooper
well, I was saying that this statemant of Dave Romm's rather neatly sums
up what I see as the biggest threat to Anglo-american fan relations today,
being so relentlessly downbeat and cynical, while in my experience, they
are just as quick to respond to grim situations with humor, and rather
sunny humor at that, as we are. American fans are supposedly so
unshakeably cheerful and positive, while those of us over here know that
we are as prone to gloom and black humor in the face of duress as anyone
or cynicism as a defense mechanism than we are, but a lot of that is down
to the relatively gloomy and difficult conditions in which they live. And
what would be the point of visiting another country if we were all exactly
the same anyway?
I see this as just another effort to torpedo TAFF, characterizing British
fans as unimpressed by and ungrateful for the wonders which the U.S. of A.
has to offer (and we often go further, choosing to interpret this as
willful hostility), and therefore unworthy of our attention or votes or
voting fees. I think there proportionally as many American fans writing
dour, dismissive material (perhaps not in fanzines published by Dave Romm)
as there are in the U.K., but this does nothing to reinforce prejudices
and stereotypes, and is therefore conveniently ignored. Check out any
issue of FOSFAX for an example of the sort of thing I mean -- we put our
uniquely American redneck spin on things, but at our worst we're just as
negative and divisive as D.West on his darkest day.
And lest you decide that the death of TAFF would be nothing to worry about
-- after all, any number of fans could start any number of funds at any
time -- consider that such efforts could easily be a Trojan horse for the
final marginalization and devaluation of fanzine fandom as we know it. It
may seem like such a thing would hardly be worth anyone's time, but
consider; certain elements within fandom clearly regard it as being a
source of potentially limitless income, if only they could reorganize it
on a commercial model. Fanzine fandom serves to offer witness to such
plans, and to contrast them with the values and traditions which fandom
has heretofore pursued. Given only a few years to divorce contemporary
fandom from its communal memory, it will be easy for certain
entrepeneurial interests to convince fandom at large that the Worldcon was
never a convivial place for friends from far and wide to meet and enjoy
themselves, and has in fact always been designed to fleece as many Death
T-shirt-wearing morons as can be crammed into a Zeppelin hangar over Labor
Day Weekend. TAFF, with its ability to appear as an unwelcome revenent
from the days before MAGIC: The Crack-Habit, is one of the things whioch
will have to be changed before the new world of the mega-mall fandom can
be brought to pass.
TAFF is a slender thread connecting us to time when fandom was a much more
essential part of the lives of fans than it is now. Once upon a time,
fandom was the sole source of approbation and self-esteem for many people
who received nothing but scorn and derision from the world at large.
Efforts to make the fund more accesible to that world just seem wrong to
me; others may feel differently, of course, but if nothing else, TAFF
seems to me to be an admirable exhibit in living history. A connection to
a time when fandom was, for many, the sole path to enjoying life, the
universe and everything. And when a trip across the Atlantic to see fans
in another country was as remarkable as a flight to Alpha Centauri.
Honestly, Dave, look into your heart; doesn't TAFF excite your sense of
wonder just a little?
Yrs in Roscoe, A.P. Hooper.
P Nielsen Hayden
>So far the pattern has been: You (or some other TAFF winner) makes a point
>about TAFF. I agree with you and toss out an idea. You flame me for
>agreeing with you, and say that my opinion doesn't count because I haven't
>been involved with TAFF.
If this is so, I apologize, Dave.
>In fact, I have supported fan funds since before you got into fandom.
>I've talked about it on Shockwave. But it's irresponsible comments such
>as yours here that make me want to avoid the politics of the subject like
>the plague, which includes voting or caring about the races.
"Irresponsible comments" like "I think it's over the top to assert that Dave
Romm is trying to torpedo TAFF"? You're right, that's a wild-eyed and crazy
statement. Er.
>You're
>becoming the Roland Castle of TAFF. Now, calm down. We're all on the
>same side, more or less.
If I actually wanted someone to "calm down", I wouldn't start by insulting
them. I'm sorry if you feel insulted or flamed by me.
David E Romm
> David E Romm (ro...@winternet.com) wrote:
> : This is one of the reasons I could never get into British fanzines, and
> : most of the 'great Brit writers' seemed mainly to be Don Rickles with
> : vocabulary.
>
> I bop you with my lollipop.
A hard to get cinnamon lollipop no less, one hopes.
> This is a remarkably dopey generalization,
> Dave, no less than saying "all Mipple-Stipple zines are full of
> happyfaces," or "all American fans wear 500 buttons and go to Star Trek
> cons."
I think you missed the quotes around 'great Brit writers'. That is, those
who fall into the discussion at hand. Here's an exchange from a related
thread:
---
In article <814472...@intersec.demon.co.uk>, fi...@intersec.demon.co.uk
wrote:
> In article <romm-23109...@ppp-66-103.dialup.winternet.com>
> ro...@winternet.com "David E Romm" writes:
>
> > Compared to the relentless attempts by many Britfen to outdo each other in
> > heaping insults on everyone they meet (an overstatement, but not by much),
> > 'Minnestota Nice' must look downright utopian.
>
> Nah, this insulting each other *is* our attempt at humour - you know
> when a Brit likes you - they start insulting you....on the other hand
> when they don't like you they start insulting you...hmmm - well it's
> obvious to *us* what the difference is! :)
---
Hope that clarifies the subjects under discussion. Do you disagree this
is a valid characterization of at least SOME Brit writers?
> I sputter at the dumbness of dismissing the huge range this way.
> Inarticulately. Do you find Rob to be Don Rickles? Do I have to go
> through a list of 50 British fan-writers with the challenge?
I certainly hope not, and I didn't mean to impune the reputation of the
many fine Brit fans/writers out there. But I didn't start this thread.
Go after Fiona or Patrick or whoever. I'm just weighing in. And I don't
find that level of insult 'humor' to be funny. Never have, since Don
Rickle's humor wore off for me when I was nine.
> How do you feel about equivalent generalizations of "American fans"?
Mildly amused. What are they?
> : (And why TAFF tends to be ignorable; why would I want to send
> : money to help someone come over here and go back and write insulting
> : things about me when there's plenty of people willing to do that without
> : my monetary contribution?)
>
> I'm disappointed, Dave. I've never had anything but some of the greatest
> pleasure I've taken in fandom from my involvements with TAFF. I've never
> been insulted in an offensive way, and I've spent a fair amount of time
> with some TAFF winners (though I missed Christina/Lillian, and Pam,
> drat). Have you ever been insulted? Okay, you've avoided it: do you
> *know* anyone who's been insulted?
Yes, okay, you got me on this one. It's a fair cop. I let my annoyance
with Patrick spill over into the rest of TAFFdom, and that was wrong. The
one example mentioned on this group of a TAFF candidate writing a
less-than-complimentary report was an American. (Tackett) The TAFF
reports I've read (hardly a comprehensive list) have been fine personal
travelogues. Sorry. Mea culpa. Now, where's that lollipop...
--
Shockwave radio: Science Fiction/Science Fact
http://www.winternet.com/~romm
"Men who never get carried away should be." -- Malcolm Forbes
John Dallman
> ... Oh well, I was saying that this statement of Dave Romm's
> to Anglo-american fan relations today, to wit: We take one
> I see this as just another effort to torpedo TAFF,
> characterising British fans as unimpressed by and
> ungrateful for the wonders which the U.S. of A.
> has to offer ...
Don't you think *you're* taking this a bit too seriously?
I though TAFF was about meeting fans, rather than seeing the USA/UK. Not
being impressed by *everything* in the USA doesn't mean that the trip
wouldn't be worthwhile.
A clarification about British fans, by the way. British English is a
language with two tones (like Chinese has four). One of the tones is
entirely devoted to sarcasm. Entire conversations (and fanzines) can be
done in the sarcastic tone, but this doesn't imply hostility, just an
awareness that irony is necessary for the maintenance of sanity. I'm
sorry if this doesn't always come across clearly...
John Dallman j...@cix.compulink.co.uk
Gary Farber
: I think you missed the quotes around 'great Brit writers'. That is, those
: who fall into the discussion at hand. Here's an exchange from a related
: thread:
<haircut>
: Hope that clarifies the subjects under discussion. Do you disagree this
: is a valid characterization of at least SOME Brit writers?
I think you're missing distinctions in the use of the word "insult,"
Dave; significant ones. I'm not a big fan of insult humor, myself, on the
whole, because it is so easily misunderstood, easy to do badly, easy to
get out of hand, and a little can go a long way. But it is one thing to
use a "Don Rickles style," in your term, and another to be wry, another to
be archly cynical, another to be affectionately deprecating with a friend,
another to be ironic, and so on. There are many choices available in what
you are loosely calling "insult humor," and I think this confuses the
issue. I don't disagree that "some" British fanwriters use various forms
of this type of humor any more than I neglect pointing out that so do many
Americans.
: > I sputter at the dumbness of dismissing the huge range this way.
: > Inarticulately. Do you find Rob to be Don Rickles? Do I have to go
: > through a list of 50 British fan-writers with the challenge?
: I certainly hope not, and I didn't mean to impune the reputation of the
: many fine Brit fans/writers out there. But I didn't start this thread.
: Go after Fiona or Patrick or whoever. I'm just weighing in.
I'm not criticizing British humor; I'm criticizing dismissing British
fans in a generalized way because of your perception. You're entitled to
your perception; I'm pointing out where I think it may not be justified.
: And I don't
: find that level of insult 'humor' to be funny. Never have, since Don
: Rickle's humor wore off for me when I was nine.
I don't care for him either; but I don't know any British (or American)
fanwriters who write like him.
: > How do you feel about equivalent generalizations of "American fans"?
: Mildly amused. What are they?
American fans all wear 100 buttons, are fat, and worship Star Trek. They
all filksing and read Piers Anthony. None of them drink, none of them
smoke, and they're all grinning idiots. They're all alike. They only
like bad fanzines if they know about fanzines at all. They all think
Lan's Lantern is the very best fanzine. They're all dull writers.
They're all sex-mad. They all demand ice in their drinks (well, gotta be
right on one of these :-)). They all know nothing about any country
besides the US. Need I go on?
: > : (And why TAFF tends to be ignorable; why would I want to send
: > : money to help someone come over here and go back and write insulting
: > : things about me when there's plenty of people willing to do that without
: > : my monetary contribution?)
: >
: > I'm disappointed, Dave. I've never had anything but some of the greatest
: > pleasure I've taken in fandom from my involvements with TAFF. I've never
: > been insulted in an offensive way, and I've spent a fair amount of time
: > with some TAFF winners (though I missed Christina/Lillian, and Pam,
: > drat). Have you ever been insulted? Okay, you've avoided it: do you
: > *know* anyone who's been insulted?
: Yes, okay, you got me on this one. It's a fair cop. I let my annoyance
: with Patrick spill over into the rest of TAFFdom, and that was wrong. The
: one example mentioned on this group of a TAFF candidate writing a
: less-than-complimentary report was an American. (Tackett) The TAFF
: reports I've read (hardly a comprehensive list) have been fine personal
: travelogues. Sorry. Mea culpa. Now, where's that lollipop...
Okay, then. Now that you've seen the light, you may lick your lollipop
wth the hard to find cinnimon flavor. :-)
David E Romm
wrote:
> Now, let us all take a deep breath -- no, Mr. Dave Romm, fine and
> fuzzy-thinking person that he is, is not personally attempting to
> "Torpedo" TAFF or anything like that -- he was only trying to dismiss it
> as irrelevant to his view of fandom.
Hmm... I think the fuzz is on the other foot here. I very much approve of
and encourage fans from one continent meeting each other. In general, I
refer to this as TAFF/DUFF, not wanting to limit this to just
cross-atlantic handshakes. (Historically, Mpls has stronger ties to
Australia than the UK. Heck, we have a DUFF winner from the Aussie side
living in Mpls now.)
I dislike the politics of 'races' and tend to frown upon fannish
activities that have 'winners'. That was part of the idea of the Fan
Guest of Honor Exchange, which never got off the ground, alas. Fan funds
each have their own personality, and that is both their charm and their
bane. I'm not sure I've ever actually voted for anyone in one of the
trans-ocean fan funds, but I have contributed, either in cash without
casting a vote or by contributing items to auction.
Maybe we should write a multi-continental play about this, eh Andy? "I
Was A Mail Britfan" or "The Adventures of Jophanne, Queen of the Apas" or
"I Was Walter's Double" or "The Woad Warrior"... I better stop...
--
"Remind me never to crash in the Andes with you."
"Oh sweetie. You know I'd eat you last."
-- The Nanny
David Levine
>And lest you decide that the death of TAFF would be nothing to worry about
>-- after all, any number of fans could start any number of funds at any
>time -- consider that such efforts could easily be a Trojan horse for the
>final marginalization and devaluation of fanzine fandom as we know it. It
>may seem like such a thing would hardly be worth anyone's time, but
>source of potentially limitless income, if only they could reorganize it
>on a commercial model. Fanzine fandom serves to offer witness to such
>plans, and to contrast them with the values and traditions which fandom
>has heretofore pursued.
Oh, fiddle-dee-dee. I think you are underestimating the timebinding
abilities of fannish non-fanzine fans and overestimating the influence
of fanzine fans on the rest of fandom. If the FIJASOI (Fandom Is Just
A Source Of Income) folks really wanted to Take Over Fandom, I don't
think the presence or absence of a few hundred twiltone-toting
historians would make a gnat's fart in a hurricane worth of
difference. In fact, if you look at the relative numbers of attendees
at fannish conventions vs. Creation cons and other for-profit media
events, you could make a good case that the FIJASOI crowd has *already*
taken over SF fandom, at least as "SF fandom" is defined by the outside
world. And fanzine fans have had no impact whatsoever on this
phenomenon.
Conversely, the thousands of actifans who put on and attend fannish
conventions are more than sufficient to keep the FIJASOI crowd from
taking over our most treasured conventions -- witness the triumph of
Baltimore over Atlanta in the last Worldcon race. And I would maintain
that fanzine fans had little or no impact on this phenomenon, either.
Many of the fine people who have been toting the fannish flag here and in
alt.fandom.cons are not fanzine fans, but they are *fannish*. And that's
what counts.
Nice to see you online, Andy. You write good, thought-provoking posts.
- David D. Levine, Intel Scalable Systems Division == dav...@ssd.intel.com
THIS is the race that will rule the Sevagram?
Avedon Carol
> a language with two tones (like Chinese has four). One of the tones
> is entirely devoted to sarcasm. Entire conversations (and fanzines)
> can be done in the sarcastic tone, but this doesn't imply
> hostility, just an awareness that irony is necessary for the
> maintenance of sanity. I'm sorry if this doesn't always come across
> clearly...
>
> John Dallman j...@cix.compulink.co.uk
Or that's what they claim. Then when you use that sarcasm on them, you
are a _mean_ person, by god.
The simple fact is that when you say nasty things about people, they just
might think you mean it. In any country.
Avedon Carol
> American fans all wear 100 buttons, are fat, and worship Star Trek.
> They all filksing and read Piers Anthony. None of them drink,
> none of them smoke, and they're all grinning idiots. They're all
> alike. They only like bad fanzines if they know about fanzines at
> all. They all think Lan's Lantern is the very best fanzine.
> They're all dull writers. They're all sex-mad. They all demand
> ice in their drinks (well, gotta be right on one of these :-)).
> They all know nothing about any country besides the US. Need I go
> on?
You forgot the part about how they don't get irony.
David E Romm
> If this is so, I apologize, Dave.
Okay, accepted.
Now, a different question: Does Europe count as part of 'Trans Atlantic'
for TAFF purposes (eg Croatia) or is this strickly UK?
--
Shockwave radio: Science Fiction/Science Fact
http://www.winternet.com/~romm
FAQ, Distribution Tapes, Top 11 Lists, scripts, sound files, more
Ulrika
Levine) writes:
<snip a bunch of fine and wise invective>
>Many of the fine people who have been toting the fannish flag here and
>in alt.fandom.cons are not fanzine fans, but they are *fannish*. And
>that's what counts.
Right. Spot on. What he said.
--Ulrika
David E Romm
> David E Romm (ro...@winternet.com) wrote:
>
> : I think you missed the quotes around 'great Brit writers'. That is, those
> : who fall into the discussion at hand. Here's an exchange from a related
> : thread:
> <haircut>
> : Hope that clarifies the subjects under discussion. Do you disagree this
> : is a valid characterization of at least SOME Brit writers?
>
> I think you're missing distinctions in the use of the word "insult,"
> Dave; significant ones. I'm not a big fan of insult humor, myself, on the
> whole, because it is so easily misunderstood, easy to do badly, easy to
> get out of hand, and a little can go a long way. But it is one thing to
> use a "Don Rickles style," in your term, and another to be wry, another to
> be archly cynical, another to be affectionately deprecating with a friend,
> another to be ironic, and so on. There are many choices available in what
> you are loosely calling "insult humor," and I think this confuses the
> issue. I don't disagree that "some" British fanwriters use various forms
> of this type of humor any more than I neglect pointing out that so do many
> Americans.
After mulling this over for a few days, it's time to clarify further, in a
bit of a mini-essay.
What you're talking about is 'signifying'. That is, insulting people to
strenthen bonds. As Frank Sinatra put it, "My friends can call me wop."
Signifying (playing the dozens, trash talk, celebrity roasts, et al) is
what Don Rickles does, the legal defense that got Two Live Crew off from
their pornography charges, and what, in my opinion, too many fans delight
in doing.
A dash of irony and a humourously phrased put down of fannish hubris is
one thing. Writing entire swaths of prose of excoriating contempt is
another.
I don't like it when Ted White does it; I don't like it when some Brit
fans do it. Sometimes it's relatively easy to tell when someone's
actually got a bone to pick or is simply kidding. Often it is not. As a
style, it sucks. There are few worse reputations, in my book, then to be
known as 'a put down artist'. If you get your kicks by making someone who
doesn't deserve it feel rotten, then you are a bad person and I don't want
to know you.
I (and others in this thread) see this far more in British fandom than
US. The candidates standing will indeed effect my feelings for TAFF.
(Though I don't know the current crop, and this whole sub-thread is not a
comment on any TAFF races so far.)
You may not agree, Gary, but I hope my position is clear. Make Love, Not
War. Or something like that.
diverse snips get us to:
> : > How do you feel about equivalent generalizations of "American fans"?
>
> : Mildly amused. What are they?
>
> American fans all wear 100 buttons, are fat, and worship Star Trek. They
> all filksing and read Piers Anthony. None of them drink, none of them
> smoke, and they're all grinning idiots. They're all alike. They only
> like bad fanzines if they know about fanzines at all. They all think
> Lan's Lantern is the very best fanzine. They're all dull writers.
> They're all sex-mad. They all demand ice in their drinks (well, gotta be
> right on one of these :-)). They all know nothing about any country
> besides the US. Need I go on?
The problem is, I don't see that as 'equivalent' to the points made
previously about Brit fans. I know some US fans who embody some of those
traights. Indeed, some of us are all alike... But those generalizations
are just generalizations. There _are_ Brit fans who fit into the sad
glove of put down artists. As Avedon says, I'm unlikely to support a fan
fund to get Pickerskill or D. West to America. I've never met the
gentlemen, and have tended to avoid their writing so this may be a bit
unfair. But I think not.
I don't particularly want to meet a bebuttoned, fat teatotalling Trekkie
who's most proud acheivement is getting his Xanth filksong published in
Lan's Lantern. Do you really want to meet someone who will use your
meeting as sneer fodder?
--
"The simple fact is that when you say nasty things about people, they just
might think you mean it. In any country." -- Avedon Carol (in this thread)
Chris Croughton
mins...@filklore.demon.co.uk "Chris Malme" writes:
>In article <814276...@keris.demon.co.uk>
> Chris Croughton <ch...@keris.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> I think it should at least be tried, just for fun. That _is_ what this
>> fandom thing's about, no?
>
>You seriously worry me sometimes....
That's OK, I worry myself sometimes as well...
***********************************************************************
* ch...@keris.demon.co.uk * *
* chr...@cix.compulink.co.uk * FIAWOL (Filking Is A Way Of Life) *
* 10001...@compuserve.com * *
***********************************************************************
John Dallman
> Now, a different question: Does Europe count as part of
> 'Trans Atlantic' for TAFF purposes (eg Croatia) or is
> this strickly UK?
It does. There have been non-UK TAFF and GUFF winners (Roelof the
unspellable and Eva Hauser, to the best of my memory).
John Dallman j...@cix.compulink.co.uk
John Dallman
> Or that's what they claim. Then when you use that sarcasm on
> them, you are a _mean_ person, by god.
Hey - I never said we were honest...
John Dallman j...@cix.compulink.co.uk
Gary Farber
: ro...@winternet.com (David E Romm) asked:
: > Now, a different question: Does Europe count as part of
: > 'Trans Atlantic' for TAFF purposes (eg Croatia) or is
: > this strickly UK?
: It does. There have been non-UK TAFF and GUFF winners (Roelof the
: unspellable and Eva Hauser, to the best of my memory).
I already pointed out that the answer is "yes," but neither Roelof
Goudrian nor Eva Hauser have been TAFF winners or candidates. GUFF, yes,
but that isn't what Dave asked, he nitpicked. :-)
P Nielsen Hayden
>I'm not a good TAFF candied date, really. I don't write fanzines, I
>argue with fannish demiGhods like Gary...
Yes, definitely arguing with Gary is an automatic disqualification for fan
fund candidacy; that's why every past TAFF and DUFF winner agrees with his
every word. Um, what planet did you say you were from, again?
-----
Patrick Nielsen Hayden : p...@tor.com : http://www.tor.com : opinions mine
Gary Farber
: Chris Croughton <ch...@keris.demon.co.uk> writes:
: >I'm not a good TAFF candied date, really. I don't write fanzines, I
: >argue with fannish demiGhods like Gary...
: Yes, definitely arguing with Gary is an automatic disqualification for fan
: fund candidacy; that's why every past TAFF and DUFF winner agrees with his
: every word. Um, what planet did you say you were from, again?
I see I'll have to have you, Avedon, Rob, Lucy, Jerry, and Langford
reprogramed again. This is getting tedious. Fortunately, the Tart model
is still functioning properly. How did Jack Speer's programming get into
Leah, though?
Pam Wells
> Pam Wells (Vacuou...@bitch.demon.co.uk) wrote:
> : As Patrick says, this attitude is fundamental to British humour. It's one of
> : the things I love best about my home, and one reason why I could never live
> : in the States (though it's a wonderful place to visit). After a few weeks in
> : the Midwest, I'd probably have to kill someone. There's nothing so great
> : about incessant achievement and positive thinking, y'know....
>
> Try an arty neighborhood of NYC, or other city: Soho, TriBeCa, say. Or
> just a back-biting small town. It may not be a national attitude, but you
> can have chunks torn out of you if you wish, for reasons petty or large.
>
> Of course, being cynical and arch isn't the same as resenting success,
> either.
Yes, _I_ know that....
--
Pam Wells Vacuou...@bitch.demon.co.uk
Gary Farber
: ave...@cix.compulink.co.uk ("Avedon Carol") wrote:
: >You forgot the part about how they don't get irony.
: Well, that one's true, actually.
: Oh, ok, I suppose it isn't true. But the fact remains that whenever I
: write anything on Usenet which relies for its effect on the audience
: realising that there is an intended irony, I get a little flurry of
: followups and emails from people who have clearly failed to realise
: this. And they are uniformly American. USian, specifically.
Oh, please, Alison. I can't speak to everything you've written on
Usenet, but I've seen everything you've written here, and the "little
flurries" you speak of came from people who were clueless, which is what
is significant, not that they are American.
There happen to *be* a lot of Americans on Usenet. I quite assure you
that I have people fail to get my irony all the time, and obviously this
clearly proves that I don't understand the form at all, and can't use
it, nor can any other American.
S'truth, most of the people I've seen not get irony have been American;
this must prove that you are correct that Americans utterly don't
understand the form. No other explanation is possible. All citizens of
the UK, of course, always appreciate all ironic statements.
What it leaves me wondering is how to explain the flurry of e-mail *I*
received this week explaining to me how unintentionally funny a remark of
mine was, if only I appreciated the irony.
They were all from citizens of the UK. I wonder what this means?
Excuse me, I have to go practice my slack-jawed drooling, and pratfalls,
now. "Have a nice day."
Perry Middlemiss
>In article <46b94f$g...@panix2.panix.com> p...@tor.com "P Nielsen Hayden"
>writes:
>
>> Then again, British humor is fundamentally based on taking chunks out of
>> anyone who appears to be doing too well -- getting too much praise,
>> succeeding too much at their aims, achieving too much happiness. Since this
>> humor can often be vicious to the point of being not very funny at all, it's
>> understandable for anyone to wish to avoid being its occasion.
>>
>> I appreciate and enjoy many things about British culture, but the more I
>> notice this particular thing, the more pathetic it seems.
>
>As Patrick says, this attitude is fundamental to British humour. It's one of
>the things I love best about my home, and one reason why I could never live
>in the States (though it's a wonderful place to visit). After a few weeks in
>the Midwest, I'd probably have to kill someone. There's nothing so great
>about incessant achievement and positive thinking, y'know....
>
>Pam Wells 'Proud to be British -- proud to be pathetic!'
Patrick, the attitude that you allude to, and which you ascribe to Britsh
humour, is known as the "tall poppy syndrome" down here. Basically, it
refers to the local penchant for tearing strips off people who "get too
big for their boots". This is usually restricted to sportsmen
(sportswomen generally don't get much of a mention in our papers),
financiers and politicians of all persuasions. But the difference here
is that Australians like to get stuck into people who put it about that
they are better than anyone else, who push to get their pictures in the
papers and magazines and on television on as many occasions as possible.
There are quite a number of prominent sportsmen, several financiers but
very few politicians who don't suffer from this treatment. In terms of
humour, tearing strips off people is like being thrashed with a warm
lettuce - you know it's happening but it doesn't have too much affect. I
like to refer to it as "gently mocking", a stance the British can
understand and relate to but which Americans tend to find personally
abusive.
All we need now is for Joseph Nicholas to join this discussion and tackle
the subject of irony and we'll all be at each others' throats. (Mild
joke that in case anyone missed it.)
Australia is continually referred to as being halfway between Britain and
the US. Maybe this means we like to "cut people down to size", but do it
with positive thinking and don't get so depressed about it all.
Perry Middlemiss
Jim Trash
> > maintenance of sanity. I'm sorry if this doesn't always come across
> > clearly...
> >
Yeah, what John sez
> Or that's what they claim. Then when you use that sarcasm on them, you
> are a _mean_ person, by god.
No, you're taking part in the game, joining in dialogue.
Dialogue is good, well, better than sending in the marines anyway.
>
> The simple fact is that when you say nasty things about people, they just
> might think you mean it. In any country.
>
They might and if so then surely they'll question you about it and
you can sort out your differences or agree to differ.
It looks as if you're dismissing irony and satire as totally invalid forms
of criticism.
I would suggest they're invaluable aids to ensure we don't start actually
believing Evangelist ministers (and giving them money) or electing
second rate actors as President or Senator.
I am convinced of the value of irony.
Here's a particularly good example of the form and, gosh, it's by
an American, Tom Lehrer and concerns a Senator from some years
back called George Murphy.
"Aw gee it's great, at last we got a Senator who can Rrrreally sing and dance
We can't expect America to win against its' foes with no one in the Senate
who can really tap his toes
The movies that you've seen on your television screen show his legislative
talents at a glance.
Should Americans pick crops, George sez no, cos no one but a Mexican
could stoop so low."
--
Jim Trash
Bridget Hardcastle
>fairly universal human practice of puncturing the pompous and mocking the
>powerful. I was talking about the peculiarly English -- and I mean English
>-- tendency to hate people just for being happy.
I'd disagree with you here. I don't know personally *anyone* who hates
people because they're happy. Sure, there are a few people who resent
the sucess of others, and fewer who take pleasure in building someone up
and knocking them down again. It seems the people who *do* do this work
for national newspapers though, which is why we get to see so much of it.
I don't know. Inflicting McDonalds on us wasn't enough, now you darned
Americans have sapped our brains and stopped us hating happy people! What
next?
Being apologetic for being successful is more common, you don't want to
let on in case you embarrass someone.
BridgetH
Alun Harries
engl...@frank.mtsu.edu "Lucy Huntzinger" writes:
> Steve Brewster (ma...@zeus.bris.ac.uk) wrote:
> : APHooper (apho...@aol.com) wrote:
> : : to the relatively gloomy and difficult conditions in which they live...
>
> : Hmm - what particular gloomy and difficult conditions do you have in mind?
>
> The Chicken Brothers?
Hey!, I met Glen, + wife Alex, with Nigel at Steve Higgins birthday party on
Saturday. These days we are happy happy people (well except for Nigel maybe).
Email to follow.
Peace, love, and understanding,
Alun Harries | CHICKEN | ahar...@cix.compulink.co.uk
| BROTHER | 10012...@compuserve.com
| + | al...@ceiliog.demon.co.uk
"The loneliest guy in the world" - Avedon Carol
http://alife1.cs.man.ac.uk/welsh/people/web/ahar...@cix.compulink.co.uk.html
Gary Farber
<Avedon said:>
: > The simple fact is that when you say nasty things about people, they just
: They might and if so then surely they'll question you about it and
: you can sort out your differences or agree to differ.
: It looks as if you're dismissing irony and satire as totally invalid forms
: of criticism.
No, I think Avedon is saying that she feels that she sometimes gets called
"mean" and "nasty" when she uses sarcasm and irony.
: I would suggest they're invaluable aids to ensure we don't start actually
: believing Evangelist ministers (and giving them money) or electing
: second rate actors as President or Senator.
It hasn't worked here, but then we're a notably inferior form of life,
and highly aware of it as well.
Alison Scott
>
>You forgot the part about how they don't get irony.
>
Well, that one's true, actually.
Oh, ok, I suppose it isn't true. But the fact remains that whenever I
write anything on Usenet which relies for its effect on the audience
realising that there is an intended irony, I get a little flurry of
followups and emails from people who have clearly failed to realise
this. And they are uniformly American. USian, specifically.
It's a little like when I first moved to Liverpool, which has a
particular brand of deadpan ironic spoken humour, and my staff used to
say outrageous things to me and then be forced to explain that it was
a *joke*. After about a year I'd pretty much got the hang of it; after
another year I moved to London and discovered that I was now using
this humour form myself and that people weren't understanding it.
--
Alison Scott ali...@fuggles.demon.co.uk
P Nielsen Hayden
>> The simple fact is that when you say nasty things about people, they just
>> might think you mean it. In any country.
and goes on to respond:
>It looks as if you're dismissing irony and satire as totally invalid forms
>of criticism.
>I would suggest they're invaluable aids to ensure we don't start actually
>believing Evangelist ministers (and giving them money) or electing
>second rate actors as President or Senator.
As if Avedon Carol needed to be instructed in the evils of Ronald Reagan, or
fundamentalism ... and as if the English have a lot to brag about in their
political leaders for the last decade or two.
This is the kind of half-baked, reflexive abusiveness that, I think,
typifies a lot of English people's attitude toward Americans.
Don't enjoy being generalized about? Pound sand.
Nigel E. Richardson
>Although my aim may not have been perfect, I wasn't trying to get at the
>fairly universal human practice of puncturing the pompous and mocking the
>powerful. I was talking about the peculiarly English -- and I mean English
>-- tendency to hate people just for being happy.
We also have a tendency to sneer at smarty-pants just for making
ludicrous generalisations....
If we do fail to get a warm glow in our collective English belly at
the happiness of others, it's usually because we suspect that they owe
their happiness to the exploitation and misery of others. Look at
Robert Maxwell - always smiling, always happy....
(and, of course, he was a foreigner... and we 'ate them too, don't
we?)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Happiness is a warm Chicken Brother...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------
http://metro.turnpike.net/N/ner/ It's slightly more fun than
something that is slightly less fun....
------------------------------------------------------------
Gary Farber
: We also have a tendency to sneer at smarty-pants just for making
: ludicrous generalisations....
That would be like "Americans don't understand irony"?
: If we do fail to get a warm glow in our collective English belly at
: the happiness of others, it's usually because we suspect that they owe
: their happiness to the exploitation and misery of others. Look at
: Robert Maxwell - always smiling, always happy....
Exactly. There certainly are Evil Exploiters, but surely many successful
people *aren't*? Patrick whipped Emma Thompson out of the paper: is she
successful because she exploited the misery of others? Or because she's
smart, funny, and talented?
Are the best regarded fans in Britain exploiters of misery? Or is that
the sort of attitude that prompted Charles Platt's attack on Willis back
in 66 or so?
Alison Scott
>
>Oh, please, Alison. I can't speak to everything you've written on
>Usenet, but I've seen everything you've written here, and the "little
>flurries" you speak of came from people who were clueless, which is what
>is significant, not that they are American.
Well, I *was* being begrudgering - I did start off by saying that I
knew it wasn't the case. And certainly I'd accept that the flurries
were from clueless Americans.
>There happen to *be* a lot of Americans on Usenet. I quite assure you
>that I have people fail to get my irony all the time, and obviously this
>clearly proves that I don't understand the form at all, and can't use
>it, nor can any other American.
Well, obviously you can understand the form. However, do you find that
people fail to understand your irony who aren't on Usenet? Or is this
mostly a function of Usenet and the way that everyone expects every
post to be an LCD?
> All citizens of
>the UK, of course, always appreciate all ironic statements.
Yup. It's hardwired.
--
Alison Scott ali...@fuggles.demon.co.uk
David G. Bell
ch.demon.co.uk> writes
>In article <46itro$2...@panix2.panix.com> gfa...@panix.com "Gary Farber"
>writes:
>
>> [...] seducing neos into trufandom with sexual pleasure beyond their
>> wildest dreams [...]
>
>UK translation: for 'sexual pleasure' please read 'beer'....
Cider
--
David G. Bell
Alison Scott
> Patrick whipped Emma Thompson out of the paper: is she
>successful because she exploited the misery of others? Or because she's
>smart, funny, and talented?
Neither.
She's successful because she's famous, and she's famous because she
married Kenneth Branagh. She is also reasonably smart, funny, and
talented. However, some of us remember her one woman TV series.
There. That is typical of the British tendency to mock those more
successful than themselves. Speaking of which, I got my package from
Roland Castle, airmail. I will probably be mocking forthwith in a
different newsgroup.
--
Alison Scott ali...@fuggles.demon.co.uk
Jim Trash
> be humorous with a proposal on how to change the US Congress to a system
> of casting rather than election.
Which reminds me that I received a delightful e-mail some time
back from a chap who had stood for his club president on the
spoof platform of free SF books for everyone.
He WON.
He only gave me the outline of the tale but hopefully he's watching
now and will step in with the details.
--
Jim Trash
Gary Farber
: > : > How do you feel about equivalent generalizations of "American fans"?
: >
: > : Mildly amused. What are they?
: >
: > American fans all wear 100 buttons, are fat, and worship Star Trek. They
: > all filksing and read Piers Anthony. None of them drink, none of them
: > smoke, and they're all grinning idiots. They're all alike. They only
: > like bad fanzines if they know about fanzines at all. They all think
: > Lan's Lantern is the very best fanzine. They're all dull writers.
: > They're all sex-mad. They all demand ice in their drinks (well, gotta be
: > right on one of these :-)). They all know nothing about any country
: > besides the US. Need I go on?
: The problem is, I don't see that as 'equivalent' to the points made
: previously about Brit fans. I know some US fans who embody some of those
: traights. Indeed, some of us are all alike... But those generalizations
: are just generalizations. There _are_ Brit fans who fit into the sad
: glove of put down artists. As Avedon says, I'm unlikely to support a fan
: fund to get Pickerskill or D. West to America. I've never met the
: gentlemen, and have tended to avoid their writing so this may be a bit
: unfair. But I think not.
I do. Not that you're not entitled to think as you like, but I think it
an unfair appraisal of either Pickersgill or West to reduce them to
nothing more than Mean Guys who do nothing but insult. Gregory is
certainly a loose cannon who fires broadshot, but he's also done
tremendous good for fandom, and there is far more to his writing than mere
put-down -- far more. West I've never met, and have a much more tentative
opinion of, but I'd still venture to say that there's far more to him than
"put-down artist."
This doesn't mean I'd nominate either as "most lovable."
: I don't particularly want to meet a bebuttoned, fat teatotalling Trekkie
: who's most proud acheivement is getting his Xanth filksong published in
: Lan's Lantern. Do you really want to meet someone who will use your
: meeting as sneer fodder?
That would depend on how much there was worth sneering at at my meeting,
how amusingly they did it, and whether they had anything further to
contribute.
Oh, by the way, since Gregory already won TAFF and had his trip in 1986,
he's unlikely to be running again. I had no trouble getting along with
him at the time.
Nigel E. Richardson
>Nigel E. Richardson (ni...@impolex.demon.co.uk) wrote:
>: We also have a tendency to sneer at smarty-pants just for making
>: ludicrous generalisations....
>That would be like "Americans don't understand irony"?
Indeed. Actually *no-one* understands irony, which is why God invented
italics, smilies, funny voices and those annoying hand gestures for
indicating quotation marks.
(No-one that is except fans, for course. They understand irony. Really
they do. Oh yes.)
>: If we do fail to get a warm glow in our collective English belly at
>: the happiness of others, it's usually because we suspect that they owe
>: their happiness to the exploitation and misery of others. Look at
>: Robert Maxwell - always smiling, always happy....
>Exactly. There certainly are Evil Exploiters, but surely many successful
>people *aren't*? Patrick whipped Emma Thompson out of the paper: is she
>successful because she exploited the misery of others? Or because she's
>smart, funny, and talented?
No, it's because she's Emma Bloody Thompson, the most irritating and
self-regarding twonk on the entire planet. No excuse is needed for
hating Emma Bloody Thompson. And I haven't seen any evidence of her
being smart, funny or talented. She had her own comedy series on TV a
few years back that was so unfunny that it has never been reshown.
Sometimes an Oxbridge degree, famous friends and parents in the media
aren't enough to win everyone's applause....
>Are the best regarded fans in Britain exploiters of misery? Or is that
>the sort of attitude that prompted Charles Platt's attack on Willis back
>in 66 or so?
Uh? You've sure spilt a potential bibful there, bucko.
Well, I wasn't around in fandom in '66, and life's too short for
fanhistory, so I don't really know. But since when has that stopped
anyone on rasf having their say?
From what I've read - I think it was something D. West wrote so it
must be true - Platt was mostly ticked off with Willis's lordly
manner, the way he seemed to regard himself as some saintly benefactor
bestowing crumbs of wit and wisdom to the servile but grateful common
herd of fandom. And from what little writing I've seen by Willis (such
as his column, "I remember Me" in MIMOSA), Platt (and subsequently
West) certainly had a point.
But hey, what do I know? (Now there's irony.)
Nigel
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Philip Larkin hadn't heard of the Chicken Brothers either....
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gary Farber
: > Oh, by the way, since Gregory already won TAFF and had his trip in 1986,
: > him at the time.
: What did his trip report say about you?
When he writes one, I'll let you know.
David E Romm
ali...@fuggles.demon.co.uk (Alison Scott) wrote:
So... a style that took you a year to get the hang of, after many
in-person explainations, you expect people on the multi-cultural Usenet to
understand immediately?
--
Shockwave radio: Science Fiction/Science Fact
http://www.winternet.com/~romm
"Abducted by aliens? What should we do?"
"Go find the cafeteria!" -- Animaniacs
David E Romm
> David E Romm (ro...@winternet.com) wrote:
> : As Avedon says, I'm unlikely to support a fan
> : fund to get Pickerskill or D. West to America. I've never met the
> : gentlemen, and have tended to avoid their writing so this may be a bit
> : unfair. But I think not.
>
> I do. Not that you're not entitled to think as you like, but I think it
> an unfair appraisal of either Pickersgill or West to reduce them to
> nothing more than Mean Guys who do nothing but insult. Gregory is
> certainly a loose cannon who fires broadshot, but he's also done
> tremendous good for fandom, and there is far more to his writing than mere
> put-down -- far more. West I've never met, and have a much more tentative
> opinion of, but I'd still venture to say that there's far more to him than
> "put-down artist."
Again, I've never met either of the gentlemen in question, and don't mean
to pick on them or reduce multi-talented individuals to a single
description. But their reputation precedes them.
> Oh, by the way, since Gregory already won TAFF and had his trip in 1986,
> he's unlikely to be running again. I had no trouble getting along with
> him at the time.
What did his trip report say about you?
--
Shockwave radio: Science Fiction/Science Fact
http://www.winternet.com/~romm
"You have to be fearless to marry your mother."
-- Bill Swill on Brisco County Jr.
David E Romm
("Avedon Carol") wrote:
> I'm saying that people should tread carefully and not be
> surprised when nasty comments made about them by people who ordinarily
> treat them with open contempt may be interpreted as exactly what they
> look like.
What you said.
--
Shockwave radio: Science Fiction/Science Fact
http://www.winternet.com/~romm
"When a man is wrapped up in himself he makes a pretty small package."
-- John Ruskin
Pam Wells
writes:
> [...] Fortunately, the Tart model is still functioning properly. [...]
Are you _sure_?
--
Pam Wells Vacuou...@bitch.demon.co.uk
Pam Wells
ahar...@cix.compulink.co.uk "Alun Harries" writes:
> In article <471c9e$m...@isdnlin.mtsu.edu>
> engl...@frank.mtsu.edu "Lucy Huntzinger" writes:
>
> > Steve Brewster (ma...@zeus.bris.ac.uk) wrote:
> > : APHooper (apho...@aol.com) wrote:
> > : : to the relatively gloomy and difficult conditions in which they live...
> >
> > : Hmm - what particular gloomy and difficult conditions do you have in mind?
> >
> > The Chicken Brothers?
>
> Hey!, I met Glen, + wife Alex, with Nigel at Steve Higgins birthday party on
> Saturday. These days we are happy happy people (well except for Nigel maybe).
>
> Email to follow.
>
> Peace, love, and understanding,
Bloody hell, chicken brothers reunited at last. Doom and gloom not on agenda.
Truly, I missed a historic event here....
--
Pam Wells Vacuou...@bitch.demon.co.uk
Pam Wells
[of my response to Dave Romm]
> She then goes on to say how she enjoys the style of the putdown
> on the receiving end, and sometimes practices it herself, but
> not with the intent of making anyone feel bad. Thus, she seems
> to have missed the whole point of Dave's conditional...
Yeah, sometimes I miss the point. So just call me vacuous, OK?
--
Pam Wells Vacuou...@bitch.demon.co.uk
Richard S Brandt
> ro...@winternet.com (David E Romm) asked:
> > Now, a different question: Does Europe count as part of
> > 'Trans Atlantic' for TAFF purposes (eg Croatia) or is
> > this strickly UK?
> It does. There have been non-UK TAFF and GUFF winners (Roelof the
> unspellable and Eva Hauser, to the best of my memory).
There have also been German winners, and Bruno Ogorelec campaigned
just in time to be the last TAFF candidate ever to run from
Jugoslavia.
--
"Torture! Torture! ... It pleases me!"
--Criswell, in Ed Wood's ORGY OF THE DEAD (1966)
David E Romm
Vacuou...@bitch.demon.co.uk wrote:
As long as I don't have to think of you as a bad person.
--
Shockwave radio: Science Fiction/Science Fact
http://www.winternet.com/~romm
"Pesky ninjas." -- Duckman
Lucy Sussex
well, this explains joseph nicholas plying us with assorted east
european/south american red wines and the arduous trudge down to
the robin hood & little john with eve and john harvey - BUT -
what fruits were they expecting from these convivial unions?
julian (duff losers' trip report due out rsn etc) warner
Ulrika
ali...@fuggles.demon.co.uk (Alison Scott) writes:
>There. That is typical of the British tendency to mock those more
>successful than themselves. Speaking of which, I got my package from
>Roland Castle, airmail. I will probably be mocking forthwith in a
>different newsgroup.
Oooh, oooh, ooh! Were there psheep? Were there psheep?
Give us the pstraight pscoop!
--Ulrika
Avedon Carol
> Is it more ironic to ellect Andrew Fowlds (Jet Morgan from Journey
> into Space) as MP or Glenda Jackson. And any country where the
> electorate are willing to vote in Giles Brandreth surely can't
> protest too much.
Someday someone is going to have to explain to me how Olga Maitland gets
elected.
And perhaps then I will learn to master "sarcasm", something obviously
unknown to me.
Avedon Carol
> Indeed. Actually *no-one* understands irony, which is why God
> invented italics, smilies, funny voices and those annoying hand
> gestures for indicating quotation marks.
>
> (No-one that is except fans, for course. They understand irony.
> Really they do. Oh yes.)
For some reason this puts me in mind of an item in the Guardian recently,
noting that a teacher was informing the class that you could not
construct a negative from two positives. And a voice from the back of
the classroom says:
"Yeah, right."
Avedon Carol
> As Avedon says, I'm unlikely to support a fan
> fund to get Pickerskill or D. West to America. I've never met
> the gentlemen, and have tended to avoid their writing so this may
> be a bit unfair. But I think not.
Um, I think I said a fund to get them on the internet, actually...
Gary Farber
: For some reason this puts me in mind of an item in the Guardian recently,
: noting that a teacher was informing the class that you could not
: construct a negative from two positives. And a voice from the back of
: the classroom says:
: "Yeah, right."
This is actually not an anonymous story; the credit for the line goes to a
particular logic professor, whose name I don't recall, but I've seen the
credit. I've even seen it repeatedly on one of the technical newsgroups
such as sci.logic, or sci.philosophy.technical, or one of them.
Chris Croughton
"P Nielsen Hayden" writes:
>Yes, definitely arguing with Gary is an automatic disqualification for fan
>fund candidacy; that's why every past TAFF and DUFF winner agrees with his
>every word.
Did they before their trips as well? Probably not - I understand that
Gary is young enough that some of the trips were before he was born.
Before I was born as well...
>Um, what planet did you say you were from, again?
You are not ready for that information!
***********************************************************************
* ch...@keris.demon.co.uk * *
* chr...@cix.compulink.co.uk * FIAWOL (Filking Is A Way Of Life) *
* 10001...@compuserve.com * *
***********************************************************************
Chris Croughton
Vacuou...@bitch.demon.co.uk "Pam Wells" writes:
>Oh, not if you made your position clear in your *100 word platform*, they
>wouldn't!
You mean I have to write 100 words? Can I do it by email?
>By the same token as people were saying to Avedon. Although I
>personally wouldn't want to run for something I had no intention of trying
>to win, I believe that it might be quite a good idea for _someone_ over here
>to think about this year. After all, TAFF would get more votes (and thus earn
>itself more money, and engender more interest) if there was more than one
>candidate running up against the perennial Hold Over Funds.
I don't believe this! Ulrika and Pam both urging me to run for TAFF (I
must be misunderstanding this - Ulrika has the excuse that she hasn't
met me, but Pam has and should know better).
Chris Croughton
"Gary Farber" writes:
>Sometimes, of course. This may have to do with my delivery, or the
>circumstances, or how bright they are, at least at that moment. It has
>nothing to do with their being American, as said beings come in most every
>shape and flavor, including ex-British. It is only from afar that
>220,000,000 people could be lumped into a generic homogenous mass. Up
>close, they may be seen in considerable variety.
Like trees. Big thick things with fluffy bits on the top. (That's
Americans, not trees - or do I mean that the other way round?)
>I'm not sure what an "LCD" is, but Usenet is not an irony-friendly place
>for many, to be sure. One reason for that, however, is the sheer number
>of people. If 10,000 read your post, and three don't get the irony and
>query you, you are in error in concluding, "ah, people don't get irony."
It's the lack of emoticons (or their Real Life (tm) alternatives, body
language and tone of voice). As Alison said about Liverpool, if one is
unfamiliar with the non-verbal cues then unintentional insults become
frequent. I've had Americans not realise that I was joking, and the
other way round, because our cultural backgrounds meant that we were
missing an important part of the communication.
This isn't an insurmountable problem with written communication. On
CompuServe we manage quite happily with a lot of irony and sarcasm, but
we have an advantage. We use emoticons. That's right, those little
ASCII things that look like smiling faces if you stand on your head, and
words or letters in angle brackets like <grin>. They take the place of
smiling and other non-verbal cues. On other parts of UseNet they are
common as well, it seems to be only here that (some) people disapprove
of their use ("Real writers don't use emoticons") and then complain
because they don't recognise irony...
>: > All citizens of
>: >the UK, of course, always appreciate all ironic statements.
>
>: Yup. It's hardwired.
I have to disagree with Alison there - Brits don't appreciate American
irony, because it's well-known that Americans can't take or tell a joke.
>I've long thought Denis Thatcher was a subtle comedian indeed; thank you
>for confirming this. This also explains that ironist, Joy Hibbert.
Who? (I don't read newspapers unless there's really nothing else to
read; cornflake packets or advertisements on the Tube...)
Gary Farber
: Passing on our memes is critical. What are the good ways to make sure
: this happens?
: Karen. [and then maybe we can examine Fortress Roscoe, 'cause I think
: that's an Interesting Symptom]
Some of it is the same stuff we've always done: publish fanzines, have
panels, program items, and exhibits at cons, publish special
publications, pass them along through our clubs, and orally at parties
and at cons. But that's clearly insufficient given the vast growth of
fandom in the last two decades, and no end in sight.
This is hugely important question to those of us to whom fandom, and our
vision of it, matters. Thank you for asking it, Karen. I hope we might
get some useful answers and ideas from talking about it.
I think it's obvious that the Internet can be of immense help, in many
ways, from Web pages, to discussions on Usenet to simply increasing
contact via e-mail (though that's the least of it). And Timebinders is
partially about discussing these issues and ideas.
(timebinde...@smith.chi.il.us to subscribe to the list.)
But there must be more. Perpetuating our ideas more creatively than the
same old same old is one way. Putting them into faan fiction, and plays
is one way. Then there are those fans who are simply giving birth to new
fans; an old-fashioned technique that sometimes works, if not quickly.
I have re-education camps, myself, with lots of drugs, and audio-visual
equipment. You've seen THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE?
P Nielsen Hayden
>Some of it is the same stuff we've always done: publish fanzines, have
>panels, program items, and exhibits at cons, publish special
>publications, pass them along through our clubs, and orally at parties
>and at cons. But that's clearly insufficient given the vast growth of
>fandom in the last two decades, and no end in sight.
>This is hugely important question to those of us to whom fandom, and our
>vision of it, matters. Thank you for asking it, Karen. I hope we might
>get some useful answers and ideas from talking about it.
I think fandom is basically just fine, and about the same size as it's ever
been -- a few hundred, maybe a couple of thousand people.
What's different is that, now, several tens of thousands of other people
also call themselves "fandom," and mean something else by it. Let 'em.
Most of them aren't interested in our kind of fandom, and won't be any
_more_ interested if we bust our butts explaining it to them. Any more than
randomly-selected mundanes would be interested.
I'm a bit more concerned that we aren't getting many young people; the
sixteen-year-old versions of ourselves are, by and large, doing other
things. Designing Web pages? Going to techno-raves? I dunno.
Still, is this really "hugely important"? Nothing lasts forever. We could
well be living through the last chapters of hard-core SF fandom as a social
phenomenon. Is this a terrible, or even an unexpected thing? I suggest
that it isn't. SF fandom has had a good run, historically, and it's been a
critical factor in seeding uncounted other subcultures with an ethic, and a
practical model, of self-empowering DIY. That ethic, that model, is now being
borne around the globe along the strands of the net. We've done our job.
-----
Patrick Nielsen Hayden : p...@tor.com : http://www.tor.com : opinions mine
Laurel Krahn
>I think fandom is basically just fine, and about the same size as it's ever
>been -- a few hundred, maybe a couple of thousand people.
>What's different is that, now, several tens of thousands of other people
>also call themselves "fandom," and mean something else by it. Let 'em.
Yup. Exactly. Something to keep and mind, because it's easy for
issues to confuse when one person says "fandom" and the other is
thinking of the larger beast.
>Most of them aren't interested in our kind of fandom, and won't be any
>_more_ interested if we bust our butts explaining it to them. Any more than
>randomly-selected mundanes would be interested.
It's still good to get the word out. No, not by shouting from the
rooftops, but making sure fannish resources are available so one can
find them. But again, I'm not disagreeing with Patrick-- just
pointing at this post and saying "what he said" a lot in order to
maintain context so I could get to this next point...
>I'm a bit more concerned that we aren't getting many young people; the
>sixteen-year-old versions of ourselves are, by and large, doing other
>things. Designing Web pages? Going to techno-raves? I dunno.
Not many young people, no. But more than most people think. I used
to feel rather alone in my age bracket in fandom (it didn't bother me,
I'm used to hanging out with folks older than me. My peers often bore
me).. There were many younger than me, often who were second
generation fans. And many older than me. Few around my age. But the
ones I've met have been pretty spiff people.
And of the many fen younger than me who seem uninterested in what we
call fandom, they may seem a part of the larger fandom or of other
groups. Going to raves, worshipping WIRED magazine, whathaveyou. But
many still have an interest in fandom. Or when the lure of raves et
al wears off, they'll still (mayhaps) have a keen interest in fandom.
Maybe renewed interest in what "we" call fandom. Maybe.
It's definitely different now, than what it was when others I know
found fandom. Heck, than when I found fandom (when I was 16 myself,
which isn't that long ago).
>Still, is this really "hugely important"? Nothing lasts forever. We could
>well be living through the last chapters of hard-core SF fandom as a social
>phenomenon. Is this a terrible, or even an unexpected thing? I suggest
>that it isn't. SF fandom has had a good run, historically, and it's been a
>critical factor in seeding uncounted other subcultures with an ethic, and a
>practical model, of self-empowering DIY. That ethic, that model, is now being
>borne around the globe along the strands of the net. We've done our job.
Yup. Well said.
I hope fandom lives on as we know it, though, too. It's a selfish
thing, 'cuz I want to go to ReinConation, continue reading zines and
this newsgroup and so forth. I've got so much catching up to do!
That's the complaint I hear the most from younger fen. So much has
gone before.... so many books, so many zines, so many cons, so many
people, so many stories... It's hard to catch up. I spose a slowdown
in the growth of fandom, or even the death of fandom, would give me
time to catchup. But I'd prefer it to keep living.
That said, Patrick's post is one of the most sensible I've seen on
this topic. It just prompted random thoughts on my part. :-)
Laurel (lak...@imho.net) Krahn, Webspinner
FGC: Fletcher, FAC: Matthew
Virtual Home: http://www.apocalypse.org/pub/u/lakrahn/
ATWT & GL fan since birth...
Gary Farber
: Like trees. Big thick things with fluffy bits on the top. (That's
: Americans, not trees - or do I mean that the other way round?)
Couldn't be Americans. We're the short, chubby, stubby little things with
hardly any roots; y'know, bushes.
: It's the lack of emoticons (or their Real Life (tm) alternatives, body
: language and tone of voice). As Alison said about Liverpool, if one is
: unfamiliar with the non-verbal cues then unintentional insults become
: frequent. I've had Americans not realise that I was joking, and the
: other way round, because our cultural backgrounds meant that we were
: missing an important part of the communication.
Yes, that must be it. Clearly that is the logical explanation. All
Americans, of course, understand each other and always get each other's
jokes, as we all have the same cultural background, as do all Brits and
other citizens of the UK.
: On other parts of UseNet they are
: common as well, it seems to be only here that (some) people disapprove
: of their use ("Real writers don't use emoticons") and then complain
: because they don't recognise irony...
Oh, yes, I see that all the time. ;-)
: I have to disagree with Alison there - Brits don't appreciate American
: irony, because it's well-known that Americans can't take or tell a joke.
Fer sure. <g>
: >I've long thought Denis Thatcher was a subtle comedian indeed; thank you
: >for confirming this. This also explains that ironist, Joy Hibbert.
: Who? (I don't read newspapers unless there's really nothing else to
: read; cornflake packets or advertisements on the Tube...)
Joy Hibbert is a famous British deep sea diver. Then she went into the
diplomatic service where she was an ambassador of good will. I'm
surprised you haven't heard of her, but if you don't read newspapers,
that might explain it.
Denis Thatcher is pretty obscure, though. No surprise you haven't heard
of that old music hall performer.
Ulrika
<ch...@keris.demon.co.uk> writes:
>I don't believe this! Ulrika and Pam both urging me to run for TAFF (I
>must be misunderstanding this - Ulrika has the excuse that she hasn't
>met me, but Pam has and should know better).
See. The perfect argument. You should run for TAFF so that
I can meet you so next time I'll know better. Ignorance must be
dispelled somehow, dammit.
Chris Croughton for TAFF. Who do I have to write to?
--Ulrika
Steve Brewster
race; almost-famous Bath-based fan MJ 'Simo' Simpson is standing
against Martin Tudor. More details when I get them.
--
Steve.B...@Bristol.ac.uk | Angst-ridden advice from the
http://zeus.bris.ac.uk/~masjb | City and County of Bristol.
Gary Farber
: Chris Croughton for TAFF. Who do I have to write to?
Ha! If you have to ask, we won't tell you. Thus our clique is
preserved. 8-P Neener-neener.
Alison Scott
>So... a style that took you a year to get the hang of, after many
>in-person explainations, you expect people on the multi-cultural Usenet to
>understand immediately?
It's actually primarily a spoken form, which I've largely dispensed
with these days. It's really, really tricky. I don't think I'd know
how to write in a Scouse style.
However, I will try to clarify. Most things that I say or write are,
if not deliberately humourous, at least somewhat sideways. It is
indeed harder to achieve the intended effect in writing. As I'm
moderately serious about my writing, and not just my writing on
Usenet, I tend not to use emoticons, particularly in longer pieces of
work.
I do however think that it's reasonable to expect readers to do a
little work when reading: just enough to take the piece as a whole,
and to consider it at least a little before responding.
And I do quite like teasing people, and Americans are certainly
insecure on the matter of British humour. For example, I'm pretty sure
that the majority of US fans don't realise that Joy Hibbert's famous
writings are intended to be gently humourous parodies of some of the
more depraved areas of the human psyche.
--
Alison Scott ali...@fuggles.demon.co.uk
Ulrika O'Brien
>Ulrika (ulr...@aol.com) wrote:
>: Chris Croughton for TAFF. Who do I have to write to?
>
>Ha! If you have to ask, we won't tell you. Thus our clique is
>preserved. 8-P Neener-neener.
Oh, no. The real problem is that the citations I'd need
to write a creditable letter recommending Chris have all
expired, and since I purge my files mercilessly, I don't
have them archived either. Don't taunt me too much or
I might be goaded to Make An Effort. rich brown's universe
is hanging in the balance, you understand...
--Ulrika
--
Polyamory: The act of doing unspeakable things to a parrot.
Ulrika O'Brien *** ulr...@aol.com
Pam Wells
ro...@winternet.com "David E Romm" writes:
> In article <815277...@bitch.demon.co.uk>,
> Vacuou...@bitch.demon.co.uk wrote:
> > Yeah, sometimes I miss the point. So just call me vacuous, OK?
>
> As long as I don't have to think of you as a bad person.
No, that one's optional!
--
Pam Wells Vacuou...@bitch.demon.co.uk
Pam Wells
ch...@keris.demon.co.uk "Chris Croughton" writes:
> I don't believe this! Ulrika and Pam both urging me to run for TAFF (I
> must be misunderstanding this - Ulrika has the excuse that she hasn't
> met me, but Pam has and should know better).
Ahem -- perhaps I should admit to some mischief-making here, Chris. Not
that I'd dissuade you from running for TAFF, but all I was trying to do in
this instance was to stir up a candidate from *somewhere* who would be
prepared to run against Martin Tudor, the usual suspects all having declined.
At Novacon this weekend Simo (Michael J Simpson) agreed to run, so from here
on in, additional candidates in the current race are purely optional.
The Tudor campaign has set off to a flying start, with a set of four badges
(buttons) designed by Dave Hicks for sale at 30p each or a pound for the set.
Further details on request, including overseas postage rates (e-mail me).
More badges from other artists will be forthcoming soon. I gather Simo's team
are likely to swing into action soon as well. Yay, a lively, friendly and fun
competition! Merchandising! Campaigning! People talking about TAFF again!
Fair takes me back, it does....
--
Pam Wells Vacuou...@bitch.demon.co.uk "Tudor for TAFF"
Pam Wells
[Gary Farber said:]
> >I've long thought Denis Thatcher was a subtle comedian indeed; thank you
> >for confirming this. This also explains that ironist, Joy Hibbert.
>
> Who? (I don't read newspapers unless there's really nothing else to
> read; cornflake packets or advertisements on the Tube...)
Ah, how soon they forget....
David G. Bell
> Denis Thatcher is pretty obscure, though. No surprise you haven't heard
> of that old music hall performer.
Some of us have -- didn't he do the routine about being drunk, and
trying to appear sober? I'm told a film of the act gets shown on German
TV, every year at Christmas.
Whoever said the Germans have no sense of humour.
--
David G. Bell -- Farmer, SF Fan, Filker, Furry, and Punslinger..
Never criticise a farmer with your mouth full.
Gary Farber
: I think fandom is basically just fine, and about the same size as it's ever
: been -- a few hundred, maybe a couple of thousand people.
: What's different is that, now, several tens of thousands of other people
: also call themselves "fandom," and mean something else by it. Let 'em.
: Most of them aren't interested in our kind of fandom, and won't be any
: _more_ interested if we bust our butts explaining it to them. Any more than
: randomly-selected mundanes would be interested.
I think this entirely misses the point of what I was talking about. Of
course there are all sorts of fandoms that are not ours, and that are, at
best, nearby to ours.
But *our* fandom always needs a bit of careful watering and attention. To
perpetuate it requires a bit more. That's why we bother doing reprints of
articles, publish Fanthologies, have Fan Rooms, invite new people to our
parties, and perhaps to a small degree, post on Usenet rather to to
private mailing lists.
We have a vision of *our* fandom, and only with a bit of conscious effort
is it perpetuated. Where would you and I be if Terry Carr hadn't
reprinted THE INCOMPLETE BURBEE, or Ted, rich and Arnie hadn't reprinted
THE ENCHANTED DUPLICATOR, and so on?
: Still, is this really "hugely important"? Nothing lasts forever. We could
: well be living through the last chapters of hard-core SF fandom as a social
: phenomenon. Is this a terrible, or even an unexpected thing? I suggest
: that it isn't. SF fandom has had a good run, historically, and it's been a
: critical factor in seeding uncounted other subcultures with an ethic, and a
: practical model, of self-empowering DIY. That ethic, that model, is now being
: borne around the globe along the strands of the net. We've done our job.
Oh, stef and nonsense. Maybe you're done, bub (though I don't believe
that -- rhetoric certainly is a wonderful thing, eh?), but many of us
aren't.
Fandom will always keep changing. You may recall a fanzine editorial I
wrote on the subject fifteen years ago that you did some helpful editing
upon (save for the handful of words that were yours, not mine <grin>). No
one is trying to freeze fandom. But we do try to push a bit of it towards
what makes us happy. Example: I've had a great time at CORFLU. If it
hadn't been started and perpetuated, current fandom would be less
interesting to me. Same if the other ensmalled cons hadn't been started:
REINCONATION, POTLATCH, SERCON, READERCON, etc. Same if new interesting
fanzines weren't being started. Same if electronic fandom weren't going
on.
No, I don't think fandom is Done.
I think it's worthwhile to encourage people to keep improving it, rather
than to say "we're done."
*I'm* not done with fandom, thankyewverymuch. I'm still chewing, and
when I'm done with that, I'll cook some more, with a slightly different
recipe to fit the new ingredients. It's not the only meal I want to eat,
but it's worth updating the recipe to have when one wishes some.
P Nielsen Hayden
I rarely quote such a long chunk of a previous post, but I'm doing so in
this case so I can ask Gary precisely what he thinks he's arguing with me
about. Where did I say anything about me being "done," and where did I
decry working to improve and maintain fandom? It seems to me I was
ruminating about other issues, and Gary has used a selective misprision of
what I posted as an opportunity to beat me around the head and shoulders
with a red herring. Or a rubber chicken. Either way, this attack of the
Serious-and-Constructives leaves me feeling just a touch like I've been
stuck in an elevator with the N3F Welcommittee.
Earth to Gary: we don't disagree. Sheesh.
Gary Farber
: this case so I can ask Gary precisely what he thinks he's arguing with me
: about. Where did I say anything about me being "done," and where did I
: decry working to improve and maintain fandom?
: pnh wrote:
: : Still, is this really "hugely important"? Nothing lasts forever. We
: : could well be living through the last chapters of hard-core SF fandom
: : as a social phenomenon. Is this a terrible, or even an unexpected
: : thing? I suggest that it isn't. SF fandom has had a good run,
: : historically, and it's been a critical factor in seeding uncounted
: : other subcultures with an ethic, and a practical model, of
: : self-empowering DIY. That ethic, that model, is now being borne
: : around the globe along the strands of the net. We've done our job.
That's where. That seemed darn clear to me. Not-important. "Nothing
lasts forever." ". . . last chapters. . . had a good run. . ." "We've
done our job."
^^^^
: Earth to Gary: we don't disagree. Sheesh.
Glad to know I misunderstood you. It's so easy to get confused when I
can't keep straight whether I'm your pawn or you're mine. It would be so
much tastier if we were each other's *prawns*, doncha think?
With chillis, of course. And Branston's.