SFX has a dig. Again...
Christian Smith
are having a dig at JMS. Again.....
At the bottom of a Crusade video review it reads "One of Crusade
creators JMS' favourite magazines, it seems, was our late and lemented
sister mag, Cult TV. One of his least favourite magazines is Cult TV's
still thriving sister mag, SFX."
They can't let it go can they?
Remind me why that mag is going down hill faster than a gerbil on
roller skates!
--
"Every new beginning is some other beginnings end..."
ICQ 45494039
(E_Mail: Remove "NOSPAM" from e-mail address when replying)
Alison Hopkins
Gerard J Keating wrote in message <8j82tg$rqs$1...@ID-11244.news.cis.dfn.de>...
>
>> They can't let it go can they?
>> Remind me why that mag is going down hill faster than a gerbil on
>> roller skates!
>
>
He was probably reading it off the rack in Smith's. :)
Ali
Gerard J Keating
> They can't let it go can they?
> Remind me why that mag is going down hill faster than a gerbil on
> roller skates!
sp why do you bother to read it, if you dislike the magazine sooo much.
gerard
Richard Tibbetts
>Just noticed on a VERY short flick through <spit> SFX <spit>
[..]
Fooled by the head obscuring the title on the cover, eh Christian?
The middle letter's an F not an E ;-)
--
Richard Tibbetts
http://www.primepeace.ltd.uk/
Christian Smith
wrote
>
>Gerard J Keating wrote in message <8j82tg$rqs$1...@ID-11244.news.cis.dfn.de>...
>>
>He was probably reading it off the rack in Smith's. :)
>
Acshully, my brother got me a Subscription for it last X-mas thinking
he was being nice. He's since seen the error of his ways <g>
Christian
Tom Holt
The message <8j85n3$73k$2...@lure.pipex.net>
from "Alison Hopkins" <fn...@dial.pipex.com> contains these words:
> Gerard J Keating wrote in message <8j82tg$rqs$1...@ID-11244.news.cis.dfn.de>...
> >
> >> They can't let it go can they?
> >> Remind me why that mag is going down hill faster than a gerbil on
> >> roller skates!
> >
> >sp why do you bother to read it, if you dislike the magazine sooo much.
> >
> He was probably reading it off the rack in Smith's. :)
My local Smiths doesn't carry it any more. Wonder why.
I can only assume it's something to do with the recent dramatic
decline in the quality of the Star Trek novel reviews.
Andrew Swallow
<gerard...@my-deja.com> writes:
>
>sp why do you bother to read it, if you dislike the magazine sooo much.
>
They are one of the few places that review the Crusade videos.
Andrew Swallow
Jms at B5
>creators JMS' favourite magazines, it seems, was our late and lemented
>sister mag, Cult TV. One of his least favourite magazines is Cult TV's
>still thriving sister mag, SFX."
>
Just proves that the good die young while banality thrives.
jms
(jms...@aol.com)
B5 Official Fan Club at:
http://www.thestation.com
(all message content (c) 2000 by
synthetic worlds, ltd., permission
to reprint specifically denied to
SFX Magazine)
Paul Harper
>Just proves that the good die young while banality thrives.
How old are you Joe? (Joking, just joking. Put that axe down. Come on
now, no need to get <thud>...<drip>...)
Paul.
--
A .sig is all well and good, but it's no substitute for a personality
" . . . SFX is a fairly useless publication on just
about every imaginable front. Never have so many jumped-up fanboys done so
little, with so much, for so long." JMS.
The Nuclear Marine
> > They can't let it go can they?
> > Remind me why that mag is going down hill faster than a gerbil on
> > roller skates!
>
> sp why do you bother to read it, if you dislike the magazine sooo much.
>
> gerard
I thought it was SEX magazine before I caught my mistake. Who knew jms
was to blame for the anthrax problem and the short lived light-bulb.
=========================================
no sig can improve on the humor of the current post.
Gharlane of Eddore
On 26 Jun 2000 21:18:28 -0600, jms...@aol.com (Jms at B5) wrote:
>
> Just proves that the good die young while banality thrives.
>
In <4mfhlscb66n4a51vk...@4ax.com> pa...@harper.net writes:
>
> How old are you Joe? (Joking, just joking. Put that axe down.
> Come on now, no need to get <thud>...<drip>...)
>
He's 45. Just a punk kid, at this point.
Of course, after mid-July, he'll be 46, and Old.
So if he's still alive in a month, he'll be subject to a certain
degree of accusation, particularly if observed "thriving."
Paul Harper
of Eddore) wrote:
>He's 45.
But he look so much o....
Well I guess producing B5 kinda took it's toll, huh? <g>
Jms at B5
>
>But he look so much o....
>
>Well I guess producing B5 kinda took it's toll, huh? <g>
>
I've always looked a lot older than I am. I look like a guy in his late 40s or
early 50s even though I'm just 45. Harlan definitely attributes this to the
difficulty of making B5, but it's always kind of been that way. When I was
doing Murder She Wrote, one of the other producers there, Bob Swanson, asked
how old I was (then 39) and he about fell over when I told him.
"Either you're a hell of a lot older than 39, or you've come by a hard road,"
he said.
I came by a hard road.
Pelzo63
>How old are you Joe?
and you were about to marry the man without knowing his age? <g, d, rlh>
> (Joking, just joking. Put that axe down. Come on
>now, no need to get <thud>...<drip>...)
whew, i guess i no longer have to run.
--Chris
who reads this NG way too much, and remembers way way too much.
JBONETATI
he said.
I came by a hard road.
jms>>
So when do we get to read your autobiography, Joe? Inquiring minds want to
know, you know <g>...
Jan
Rob Hayward
<pa...@harper.net> writes
>On 26 Jun 2000 21:18:28 -0600, jms...@aol.com (Jms at B5) wrote:
>
>>Just proves that the good die young while banality thrives.
>
It's not the axe but the pen you need to worry about. Especially if you
saw G'Kar/Londo act out the spurious b story he once wrote. Evil....
--
Rob
We eat for the one, we drink for the one.
,
,
,
We get fat for the one
Jms at B5
>know, you know <g>...
I cannot even conceive of anything that would be more tedious, boring and dull.
Paul Harper
>and you were about to marry the man without knowing his age? <g, d, rlh>
Age? We hadn't even got as far as exchanging star signs and favourite
chiropractors! Ah well. One of life's missed golden moments I
suppose.
>--Chris
>who reads this NG way too much, and remembers way way too much.
Not kidding!! <g>
Paul Harper
wrote:
>It's not the axe but the pen you need to worry about. Especially if you
>saw G'Kar/Londo act out the spurious b story he once wrote. Evil....
Had the pleasure of seeing that acted out by Andreas, Peter and Rick
at a Starfury convention in London earlier this year.
Excellent, and I know *exactly* what you mean!
Pelzo63
>I cannot even conceive of anything that would be >more tedious, boring and
>dull.
surely you're forgettin SFX? <g>
seriously though, i'm not a biography(auto or not) fan, but i'm sure MANY here
would be deeply enthralled in such a book, and i would possibly give it a
chance.
--chris
Paul Harper
>seriously though, i'm not a biography(auto or not) fan, but i'm sure MANY here
>would be deeply enthralled in such a book, and i would possibly give it a
>chance.
Yeah Joe, dish the dirt! :-)
Christian Smith
>On 28 Jun 2000 01:49:35 -0600, pel...@aol.com (Pelzo63) wrote:
>
>>seriously though, i'm not a biography(auto or not) fan, but i'm sure MANY here
>>would be deeply enthralled in such a book, and i would possibly give it a
>>chance.
>
>Yeah Joe, dish the dirt! :-)
Never was the intention for *this* to start when I made the first
post. Honest, Joe!
Though now it's been mentioned, my nosiness (cos lets be honest,
that's what it is!) has been piqued!
Besides I want to read the chapters about how you coped with Yours and
Paul's break up <g>
Cos he didn't cope well! I know!
:-))
Pelzo63
>Age? We hadn't even got as far as exchanging star signs and favourite
>chiropractors! Ah well. One of life's missed golden moments I
>suppose.
Kids these days. rushing headlong into important life decisions without even a
hint of thinking about the consequences. did you even find out if he's a
babylon 5 fan? <shakes head>
--chris
who's only 21, so i AM "the kids these days". <g>
Iain Rae
>
> >So when do we get to read your autobiography, Joe? Inquiring minds want to
> >know, you know <g>...
>
>
>
> (jms...@aol.com)
> B5 Official Fan Club at:
> http://www.thestation.com
> (all message content (c) 2000 by
> synthetic worlds, ltd., permission
> to reprint specifically denied to
> SFX Magazine)
Quick, someone send him a years subscription to SFX.
--
Iain Rae
Computing Officer
Dept. Civil & Offshore Engineering
Heriot-Watt University
10 of 10321
Jms at B5 <jms...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000628010028...@ng-fp1.aol.com...
> >So when do we get to read your autobiography, Joe? Inquiring minds want
to
> >know, you know <g>...
>
> I cannot even conceive of anything that would be more tedious, boring and
dull.
>
> jms
>
Ooohhh! I can............
The return of the Zarg!
(Why do I hear the sound of boots?)
Christian Smith
>
>> >So when do we get to read your autobiography, Joe? Inquiring minds want to
>> >know, you know <g>...
>>
>> I cannot even conceive of anything that would be more tedious, boring and dull.
>>
>> jms
>>
>
>
>
>Quick, someone send him a years subscription to SFX.
He can have what's left of Mine. My poor brother is gonna regret that
present this year. perhaps a years subscription to "Womens Weekly" or
"Just Seventeen"? Revenge enough?
carl Dershem
> I've always looked a lot older than I am. I look like a guy in his late 40s or
> early 50s even though I'm just 45. Harlan definitely attributes this to the
> difficulty of making B5, but it's always kind of been that way. When I was
> doing Murder She Wrote, one of the other producers there, Bob Swanson, asked
> how old I was (then 39) and he about fell over when I told him.
>
> "Either you're a hell of a lot older than 39, or you've come by a hard road,"
> he said.
>
> I came by a hard road.
I dunno - I've seen you off an on for ... lotsa years (since the writer's strike),
and B5 definitely accelerated the process.
Dan Dassow
jms...@aol.com (Jms at B5) wrote:
> >So when do we get to read your autobiography, Joe? Inquiring minds want to
> >know, you know <g>...
>
> I cannot even conceive of anything that would be more tedious, boring and dull.
>
> jms
Joe, methinks you protest too much. By no means is your life
any more tedious or boring or dull than that of Isaac Asimov.
If you have not already done so, read Isaac Asimov's two
volume biography, "In Memory Still Green" and "In Joy Still
Felt". As a story teller, you know perfectly well that no
life that has been lived with purpose is boring. A great
story teller like yourself would be able to write a very
interesting biography of your life. You are simply too modest
to admit it and too close to your life to have the perspective
needed to write your biography. Surely, the day will come when
you are ready to write your biography and I like many others
will buy it and read it.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Flameholder
to
> know, you know <g>...
>
>
>
Probably the same time Harlan's comes out.
Start holding your breath . . . now!
Joshua
Tammy Smith
Everything I've read about you doesn't seem boring in the least.
Tammy
Tom Holt
The message <395A05D6...@civ.hw.ac.uk>
from Iain Rae <ia...@civ.hw.ac.uk> contains these words:
> Jms at B5 wrote:
> >
> > >So when do we get to read your autobiography, Joe? Inquiring minds want to
> > >know, you know <g>...
> >
> > I cannot even conceive of anything that would be more tedious, boring and dull.
> >
> Quick, someone send him a years subscription to SFX.
The words 'cruel & unusual' spring to mind in this context.
Christian Smith
Actually the words "sadistic" and "bastard" came to mine <g>
Iain Rae
>
> On 28 Jun 2000 12:38:57 -0600,Tom Holt <lemmi...@zetnet.co.uk> wrote
>
> >
> >The message <395A05D6...@civ.hw.ac.uk>
> > from Iain Rae <ia...@civ.hw.ac.uk> contains these words:
> >
> >
> >> Jms at B5 wrote:
> >> >
> >> > >So when do we get to read your autobiography, Joe? Inquiring minds want to
> >> > >know, you know <g>...
> >> >
> >> > I cannot even conceive of anything that would be more tedious, boring and dull.
> >> >
> >
> >
> >
> >> Quick, someone send him a years subscription to SFX.
> >
> >
> >The words 'cruel & unusual' spring to mind in this context.
>
> Actually the words "sadistic" and "bastard" came to mine <g>
>
No, you see we then point out that it'll be a recurring subscription
UNLESS he produces an autobiography ;)
LK
>On 28 Jun 2000 01:49:35 -0600, pel...@aol.com (Pelzo63) wrote:
>
>>seriously though, i'm not a biography(auto or not) fan, but i'm sure MANY here
>>would be deeply enthralled in such a book, and i would possibly give it a
>>chance.
>
>Yeah Joe, dish the dirt! :-)
>
>Paul.
There's no need, for JMS "sneaks" or unintentionally slips himself
(drilling through his ear and getting to like it) into his characters
and stories.
>From his recurring themes we know what is important to him: service to
something greater whether it be a worthwhile cause or the needs of the
story.
>From his character portayals we know he admires strong women.
He likes whap-upside-the-head humor.
>From Max Elierson's ex, Cynthia, we know JMS used to be a smear on the
sidewalk mouthing off to bullies.
>From Zack's pursuit of Lyta, JMS exhibits understanding of wanting yet
totally missing the mark, accepting that fate and moving on without
anger, which applies to more than romantic situations.
And that some situations deserve to have anger retained and
remembered as a warning and strength.
>From refusing tenchobabble, he knows solutions are rarely pulled from
a magic hat.
>From non-committee dramatic scripts we know he knows too many
strokes, dull the pokes, and encourages denyablity.
>From spiritual portayals, we know he has basic respect for ideas and
people even when they disagree with each other.
>From Shadow-Vorlon conflict, Earth-Minbari conflict, Clarke vs
resistance he knows no individual or group is totally wrong/evil or
totally right/pure.
>From Gideon, we know he knows being a hardass is a useful tool to
accompish certain tasks.
>From his treatment of Bester we know, he knows decent treatment of a
villian is more intreiguing (and baffling to the villian) than simple
bad guy bashing.
>From the basic questions of who, what, service, why, trust we know he
knows questioning never ends.
>From "This ends now" lines, we know he knows questions are not enough.
>From his Babylon 5 universe portrayal he probably knows each of our
own lives are occassionally a Rorschach test.
I'd say it is more useful to know the basic character of someone than
their life story and that actions speak longer than dates on a
timeline.
And if anyone doubts the list above, spend some time, acutally days,
in the archives accessable from the Lurker's Guide to Babylon 5
wherein JMS admits to most the of the above. And don't forget the
"JMS speaks" for each epsiode. (I didn't start reading the records
until a couple months ago, but I suspected a good portion of it. And
I'm sure the man is no saint, either, but who would want to be?)
LK
LK
>Christian Smith wrote:
>>
>> On 28 Jun 2000 12:38:57 -0600,Tom Holt <lemmi...@zetnet.co.uk> wrote
>>
>> >
>> >The message <395A05D6...@civ.hw.ac.uk>
>> > from Iain Rae <ia...@civ.hw.ac.uk> contains these words:
>> >
>> >
>> >> Jms at B5 wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > >So when do we get to read your autobiography, Joe? Inquiring minds want to
>> >> > >know, you know <g>...
>> >> >
>> >> > I cannot even conceive of anything that would be more tedious, boring and dull.
>> >> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >> Quick, someone send him a years subscription to SFX.
>> >
>> >
>> >The words 'cruel & unusual' spring to mind in this context.
>>
>> Actually the words "sadistic" and "bastard" came to mine <g>
>>
>
>
>No, you see we then point out that it'll be a recurring subscription
>UNLESS he produces an autobiography ;)
Sorry. We must abide by the rules of safe, sane, and consensual.
Anyone who writes is a masochist and turns the pain of compostion into
the pleasure of writing for self and the reader.
You just have to trust his judgement on his limits.
LK <doing too much research for her own work in progress>
LK
Don't ask how the formatting got screwed up, I don't know. <grr>
I wasn't quoting anyone once I started.
LK
Paul Harper
>There's no need, for JMS "sneaks" or unintentionally slips himself
>(drilling through his ear and getting to like it) into his characters
>and stories.
Whilst I agree that there is bound to be some "colouring" of the
fictional characters by a lifetimes experiences, I think Joe is a good
enough writer to be able to portray genuine fictional characters
independent of that.
Hell, (to use a favourite phrase of the man!) he probably dislikes
some of his own characters!!
To...@fred.net
:>So when do we get to read your autobiography, Joe? Inquiring minds want to
:>know, you know <g>...
: I cannot even conceive of anything that would be more tedious, boring and dull.
Neither would I. Still, I do need a good combination doorstop and leg
leveler for the workmen's bench.... <g>
--
To...@Fred.Net http://www.fred.net/tomr
* Faith Manages...... But Willow is in Tech Support
* "Hello, girls.... I'm the Easter Bunny!" - Janet Reno, "South Park"
"I'm not wealthy enough to be innocent." - Marc Bowden
Mary Kay Bergman 1961-1999 - http://www.wackyvoices.com
JBONETATI
know, you know <g>...
I cannot even conceive of anything that would be more tedious, boring and dull.
jms>>
Okay, now we know two things JMS doesn't want to write-poetry and his
autobiography.
One reason I asked, though, Joe, is because of your voice(?) speech
patterns(?), something like that. Since the first time I heard you on TV and
even moreso at a convention, you sound like *home* to me. I'm originally from
Chicago and so it interested me when it came up in chat the other day that
you'd spent time in Kankakee (where the train pulls out of). Previously all I'd
heard of was the NJ street kid.
May I ask how long you spent in Illinois and the midwest and from what ages?
Thanks,
Jan
BRETNTRACI
>dull.
<sigh>
fine.
ok.
play modest.
How about a biography on the conception, selling, and production of B5. That
could *not* possibly be dull.
Tammy Smith
That's what I've been waiting for.
Tammy
Rob Perkins
to
> >know, you know <g>...
>
dull.
Newt Gingrich's autobiography.
Bob Dole's autobiography.
Bill Gates' autobiography.
The Fourth Book of Moses, also known as Numbers.
_Moonwalking_
You, at least, could write it. Not that I would buy it, it might still be
tedious, boring, and dull enough not to read... ;-)
Rob
Andrew Swallow
>
>>So when do we get to read your autobiography, Joe? Inquiring minds want to
>>know, you know <g>...
>
>I cannot even conceive of anything that would be more tedious, boring and
>dull.
>
> jms
>
Strange, I found the Introduction to 'Babylon 5 The Coming of Shadows'
Script Book you wrote in 1997 very, very enjoyable.
Andrew Swallow
Paul Harper
>The words 'cruel & unusual' spring to mind in this context.
We could always force Joe to do the book reviews in SFX. <evil g>
(cue)
Christian Smith
>On 28 Jun 2000 12:38:57 -0600, Tom Holt <lemmi...@zetnet.co.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>The words 'cruel & unusual' spring to mind in this context.
>
>We could always force Joe to do the book reviews in SFX. <evil g>
>
>(cue)
Yeah cos intelligent and informed views by someone who can actually
write (and read) are always and have always been SFX's forte!
Tom Holt
The message <ue5mls0o49jrgtb1j...@4ax.com>
from chri...@jasdigital.com (Christian Smith) contains these words:
> On 29 Jun 2000 01:32:24 -0600,Paul Harper <pa...@harper.net> wrote
> >On 28 Jun 2000 12:38:57 -0600, Tom Holt <lemmi...@zetnet.co.uk>
> >wrote:
> >
> >>The words 'cruel & unusual' spring to mind in this context.
> >
> >We could always force Joe to do the book reviews in SFX. <evil g>
> >
> >(cue)
> Yeah cos intelligent and informed views by someone who can actually
> write (and read) are always and have always been SFX's forte!
J. Potts
>
>I wasn't quoting anyone once I started.
It's an automatic function of the newsreader so that the software can
distinquish between text and header info. You'll notice it only happens
when the word "From" starts in the first position in the line.
--
JRP
"How many slime-trailing, sleepless, slimy, slobbering things do you know
that will *run and hide* from your Eveready?"
--Maureen Birnbaum, Barbarian Swordsperson
Paul Harper
wrote:
>Ah. That explains why I haven't heard from them for a while.
Someone else was using the crayon?
(probably the editorial staff of "cre@te" by the look of the first
issue :-( )
Pat Kight
>
> >So when do we get to read your autobiography, Joe? Inquiring minds want to
> >know, you know <g>...
>
> I cannot even conceive of anything that would be more tedious, boring and dull.
Besides, as a mere pup of 45, you haven't lived long enough to have an
autobiography.
(-;
--Pat Kight
bemused at having reached an age where my favorite writers (not to
mention my doctor and my lawyer) are all younger than I.
kig...@peak.org
Felicia Harmon
SFX and JMS (maybe it's a three-initials-instead-of-a-name thing). Could someone fill
me in?
Christian Smith
>On 29 Jun 2000 06:46:15 -0600, Tom Holt <lemmi...@zetnet.co.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>Ah. That explains why I haven't heard from them for a while.
>
>Someone else was using the crayon?
>
>(probably the editorial staff of "cre@te" by the look of the first
>issue :-( )
Glad it wasn't just me that was disappointed by this. After the
Excellent Computer Arts, I had high hopes for this, but it's basically
SFX for the Web isn't it (even down to the "Ask the general public
inane questions" bit...)
:-((
Paul Harper
<felici...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>I'm afraid I'm not familiar with the source of the apparently ongoing feud between
>SFX and JMS (maybe it's a three-initials-instead-of-a-name thing). Could someone fill
>me in?
I posted a "potted history" of some of the problems re. SFX onto .mod
at the back end of last year.
<quote>
"Mark Alexander Bertenshaw" <Mark.Be...@virgin.net> said to JMS :
>Personally, I have always wondered about the change of heart that SFX took.
>It seems to me that it must have occurred in the Wolf 359 convention in
>Blackpool. If you remember, the coverage of that event was highly promoted
>and reported in the magazine, and if I'm not mistaken, you were given two
>awards by SFX at the con. Then a couple of months later, I heard about your
>criticisms of the organiser. And with Ms. Christian's departure from the
>series, this is where relations seemed to break down.
>
>Does this seem a fair summary?
The awards were given by the *readers* of SFX. Not the magazine
itself.
As for the rest, as usual, it's a lot more complicated than that. My
understanding of it is this (if anyone knows differently, or knows
more, please feel free to correct any misunderstanding on my part) :
The "problem" actually stems from a certain con organiser - part (and
only *part*) of the Wolf organisation. Way back when B5 was young,
said organiser started importing US taped copies of B5 episodes and
started showing them at public meetings. This is illegal here in the
UK for both copyright and certification reasons, and quiet words were
had between the B5 production office and this individual, who
basically said he's stop the practice.
He didn't. He carried on, just tried to be more sneaky about it. Since
he's not the sharpest pencil in the drawer, he failed miserably in his
attempts at subterfuge, and was taken to task once again, and issued
assurances that it wouldn't happen again. This is the reason Warner's
despatches F.A.C.T. people to conventions in the UK to make sure no
Warner's stuff is shown. Say thanks to this guy anyone who's ever been
disapointed that there's no B5 or Crusade shown at B5 cons over here.
Then came the first of the Blackpool cons, and questions arose
concerning the ultimate destination of money donated for charity.
Assurances were given that all was above board, and there were no
issues. Stars were photographed handing over cheques to Great Ormond
Street children's hospital etc. and all seemed well.
Another Blackpool con was set up, and the organisers promised that the
accounts would be made available at the end of the con to JMS and
other guests. Once again, questions arose over the charity auction
funds. JMS and others asked to see the promised accounts, which were
not (and never have been) forthcoming. This was the con where the
Claudia Christian bombshell hit, and JMS' notes for a lot of season 5
were destroyed by the hotel he was staying at, so he understandably
wasn't in the best of moods for dealing with corruption issues.
Then came the Warner Bros. debacle over the public showing of "In The
Beginning" at the Warner's West End cinema. Warner's in their infinite
wisdom decided to use the Wolf organisation to contact fans who might
want to attend this event, which was a promotion for the forthcoming
UK video release of the TV movie. Unfortunately, it was decided to
charge for the tickets, which is against all sorts of US Actors Guild
rules ("cinematic presentation" or somesuch). So once again, Wolf is
in the middle of a controversy concerning cash and its ultimate
destination. JMS stepped in, and as a direct result of his
intervention, fans were given refunds and the event became what it was
always supposed to be - a free one as a "thank you" to the UK fans for
their long-time support of the show.
Then comes the VOR con in the States, run by the same organiser, but
totally independent of Wolf. The budgeted 5,000 attendees turned out
to be around 1,500 for a wide variety of reasons - location and cost
being the main two. Given that the majority of the B5 cast were
attending, the end result was that some 90% of the speakers ended up
either not getting paid in full, or not getting paid at all. Nothing.
Zip. In short, because of the ineptitude of the organisers of VOR,
most of the B5 cast were not paid what they'd been promised. Quite why
this failure was *their* fault, I have never understood. As is his
wont, JMS spoke up for the short-changed actors, and was vociferous in
his demands that they be paid what they'd been promised.
Now in the middle of all of this, sits SFX magazine. Run by people who
are also not the sharpest pencils in the drawer, and who get taken in
hook line and sinker by the organiser's line that he's being
victimised by these nasty people (JMS in particular, but also the UK
B5 group) and how unfair it all is. They start to use this organiser
and his lackeys as their main story feed for B5 and JMS items. As a
consequence, accuracy falls straight through the floor, as does SFX's
small remaining credibility with B5 fans.
SFX despatches an "independent journalist" to uncover the fuss over
the In The Beginning showing, and produces an article that manages to
slate JMS and the UK group without actually having dug *too* hard into
the underlying bad feeling. That a rabid defence of the organiser was
posted to the UK newsgroup a few months afterwards from the same PC
used by the journalist rather laid low any claim to impartiality from
that quarter. She has denied posting the message, but the computer's
IP address is fixed, so it must have been someone else using her PC
then.
Around this point in time, the B5 production office decide they've had
enough of the stuff put out by SFX, and cut them off from any and all
communication. No press releases, promotional material, set visits,
photos, nothing. SFX comes to rely more and more on their "unofficial"
sources of information with an additional drop in quality.
SFX have never got over the fact that it seems to have been easy for
the B5 production office to "cut them off", and this has coloured
their reporting ever since - despite the fact that they now seem to
have severed their own relationship with the con organiser. I don't
know why they've done this. I am curious, however!
I *think* this covers most of the events, in roughly the right order.
I have deliberately missed a few items out that are not directly
relevant to the JMS / SFX debate, but this is the broad overview from
my perspective.
As I said at the top - feel free to correct any mistakes or omissions
I've made here.
Cheers,
Paul.
<unquote>
Hope this helps!
LK
>On 28 Jun 2000 14:15:09 -0600, LK <founta...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>There's no need, for JMS "sneaks" or unintentionally slips himself
>>(drilling through his ear and getting to like it) into his characters
>>and stories.
>
>Whilst I agree that there is bound to be some "colouring" of the
>fictional characters by a lifetimes experiences, I think Joe is a good
>enough writer to be able to portray genuine fictional characters
>independent of that.
>
>Hell, (to use a favourite phrase of the man!) he probably dislikes
>some of his own characters!!
>
>Paul.
Definately.
I never would have said he draws bits of himself here and there for
some of the characters if he hadn't admitted it himself. JMS is
hardly a professional confesser. I don't make the mistake of thinking
every character is a rehash of an author. That's rather insulting.
Besides most characters are more interesting than their creators if
for no other reason than we're given more of a character's "character"
in a story than an author gives of their own Self in a story. Few
writers of fiction are Hemmingways in that respect. (So what is more
important to the writer: their lifestyle worth writing about or their
wirting?)
LK leaving before this becomes too philosophical and thinking probing
into any writer's personal character is quite likely a MYOB. Writer
does not equal public figure and even then.... See what I mean?
Tammy Smith
local bookstore, but I never have). Guess I haven't missed anything!
Tammy
Paul Harper
>Thanks for the history, Paul. I've never read SFX (I can buy it at my
>local bookstore, but I never have). Guess I haven't missed anything!
You're welcome. As for missing anything, you'd be far more up to date
on scurrilous and unfounded rumours by taking them directly from the
sources (usenet) than getting them second-hand through SFX :-)
Alison Hopkins
Paul Harper wrote in message <3k2vlsoca4a1ps6sg...@4ax.com>...
>On 2 Jul 2000 09:07:19 -0600, gka...@webtv.net (Tammy Smith) wrote:
>
>>Thanks for the history, Paul. I've never read SFX (I can buy it at my
>>local bookstore, but I never have). Guess I haven't missed anything!
>
>You're welcome. As for missing anything, you'd be far more up to date
>on scurrilous and unfounded rumours by taking them directly from the
>sources (usenet) than getting them second-hand through SFX :-)
I'd recommend Ford Thaxton and Theron Fuller. <g>
Ali
Tammy Smith
Tammy
Paul Harper
>leaving before this becomes too philosophical and thinking probing
>into any writer's personal character is quite likely a MYOB. Writer
>does not equal public figure and even then.... See what I mean?
That's fair enough.
I will admit to a (morbid?) interest in what drives a writer to write
though. Joe has said several times that he loves to tell a story.
Given that the result was B5 among other stuff, this is great. I *am*
curious as to *why* writers are driven to tell a story though, since I
am fairly convinced that whatever that drive is, I ain't got it!
Tom Holt
The message <pri0msotv33hc7t0o...@4ax.com>
from Paul Harper <pa...@harper.net> contains these words:
> On 1 Jul 2000 15:14:31 -0600, LK <founta...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >leaving before this becomes too philosophical and thinking probing
> >into any writer's personal character is quite likely a MYOB. Writer
> >does not equal public figure and even then.... See what I mean?
> That's fair enough.
> I will admit to a (morbid?) interest in what drives a writer to write
> though. Joe has said several times that he loves to tell a story.
> Given that the result was B5 among other stuff, this is great. I *am*
> curious as to *why* writers are driven to tell a story though, since I
> am fairly convinced that whatever that drive is, I ain't got it!
save for money") and Noel Coward ("your motivation is your pay-check
on Friday; now get on with it!"); qualified by Terry Pratchett, as
amended ("[being a writer] isn't something you do, it's something you
are") and Chesterton ("a bad poet is still a poet, just as a bad man
is still a man.")
Put another way; when you write your first novel/screenplay/epic
poem/whatever, there's a vast reservoir of observations, feelings and
things you've simply got to say, pressing against your nerve-endings
like an abcess. So you write the sucker; and by some miracle it's
accepted and gets sent out into the world, and enough people like it
that it's worth somebody's while to pay you to do another one.
At this point, you realise that (a) being a writer is really good fun
(b) you contrived to shoehorn at leasy 90% of all those observations,
feelings and things you've simply got to say into the first novel or
screenplay, and what's left in the tank is an eggcupful of
inspiration and a lot of flakes of rusty paint. At this point, you
look at the signed contract and the delivery date and the advance
check, and begin to wonder what you've gotten yourself into.
If you can get past this point, IMHO, it's because (a) you have the
writer's perspective; you go through life like a foreign
correspondent who's in a strange land for the sole purpose of
covering the story (b) you realise that the things you simply had to
say back-along were simplistic, incomplete, vague or just plain wrong
(c) you were foolish enough to chuck in the day-job and you need the money.
Once you've been a full-time writer for five years or so, you simply
aren't fit for anything else. You couldn't hold down a job in a
hamburger restaurant. In fact, the only other career options open to
you are executive-producing or politics, and most of us would rather starve.
Writing is a craft, like blacksmithing or carpentry. You do it
because you can, because it's more fun than work, and to pay the
rent. When you need material you go out and get it, just as the smith
and the chippy go out and get steel and timber. Quite often, when you
can't find the right grade of bar-stock or you haven't got the energy
to work a round section down into a flat, you take somebody else's
artefact and reshape it (as, for example, JMS took sections of
Tolkien, inter alia multa; or Shakespeare took huge chunks of
Holinshed's Chronicles) This is an essential part of the craft, and
perfectly legitimate, as Kipling knew ("'After me cometh a
builder/Tell him, I too have known.'"), and Tom Lehrer ("... But be
careful always to call it - research...")
Put another way, writing is one per cent innate ability, ninety-nine
per cent stubbornness, determination, skill, theft and low cunning.
If you doubt this, look into a writer's eyes as you ask him, "where
do you get your ideas from?" If he doesn't reply, "Mail order" or
punch you in the mouth, you'll probably see a distant reflection of
your own question.
Paul Harper
wrote:
>Put another way; when you write your first novel/screenplay/epic
>poem/whatever, there's a vast reservoir of observations, feelings and
>things you've simply got to say, pressing against your nerve-endings
>like an abcess.
Thanks Tom.
Is there any "sadness" (probably a bad word, but can't think of a
better one at the mo. - "regret" maybe?) about subsequent efforts not
being as meaningful as the first, or does it really get reduced to
just jobbing work?
Gharlane of Eddore
On 3 Jul 2000 03:44:17 -0600, Tom Holt
<lemmi...@zetnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Put another way; when you write your first novel/screenplay/epic
> poem/whatever, there's a vast reservoir of observations, feelings and
> things you've simply got to say, pressing against your nerve-endings
> like an abcess.
>
In <fkn1msc86s7bc6ipb...@4ax.com> pa...@harper.net writes:
>
> Thanks Tom.
>
> Is there any "sadness" (probably a bad word, but can't think of a
> better one at the mo. - "regret" maybe?) about subsequent efforts not
> being as meaningful as the first, or does it really get reduced to
> just jobbing work?
>
This is both an undiplomatic and an unthinking way to phrase it...
REAL writers simply can't help themselves; while there's a feeling
of Using Up All The Good Stuff in the first one or two, this passes
quickly, since anything and everything you encounter contributes More
Stuff to use in subsequent work. While *SOME* people have only had
one or two good books in them, and stopped writing due to lack of
anything to write about ( only one thing to say, and once it's
said, no impetus to go on? ) *REAL* writers never run dry; they
just get better as time goes on, albeit with occasional dry spells;
but dry spells ( "blocking" ) are *not* due to lack of drive, fizz,
ideas, stories that need to be told.... they're caused by other
problems. Ideas are cheap, ideas are easy; it's the WORK you do
with them that makes them worthwhile.
Think of Poul Anderson doing the hoary old "lost space ship" story,
and doing it so well that he won a Hugo for it, and it's been in
print ever since. ( And P. Schuyler Miller, reviewing it in
"ANALOG," commented that "... now everyone else who's been trying
to do this sort of thing can just crawl quietly away and die."
( paraphrased; been years since I read it. ))
Think of Roger Zelazny doing two fundamentally magnificent stories
set on Mars and Venus, at a time when we already knew that Mars
and Venus didn't *have* environments like that... but he wanted
to do two classic SkiFfy yarns set in milieux that everyone else
had milked dry and discarded. So we got "A ROSE FOR ECCLESIASTES,"
and "THE DOORS OF HIS FACE, THE LAMPS OF HIS MOUTH," and Zelazny
got umptyzillion awards and reprints. ( And deserved them! )
Think of Joe Straczynski doing Dodge City with several variant
tribes of Injun, a few Italians, and some archetypical plot
elements that Joseph Campbell would have applauded.. *NOTHING*
new... but an inspired assemblage, that even while creaking
under exhaustion and stress and network botch-management *still*
contrived to be one of the best things we've had on TV.
If you care to compare Tom's early books to his more recent efforts,
you'll see that not only does he keep on improving in style and
technique, he explores more styles and techniques, and steadily
goes higher, takes more risks, and pulls off more challenging work.
The kid who wrote the additional "Lucia" books could *NOT* have
written "ALEXANDER AT WORLD'S END;" he didn't have the chops,
and hadn't begun to refine his tools and drives. But both
are worth time, money, and attention.... they just come from
different eras of a still-developing career.
Since he's a gentleman, and was making jokes about Using Up All
The Good Stuff on the first one, he won't take umbrage; but be
chary of taking this attitude with writers worthy of the name,
since some aren't amused by it.
Think of Arthur C. Clarke's tight-lipped essays on his feelings
about the well-meaning fans who walk up to him and inform him
that "RESCUE PARTY" is their favorite of all his work, and
the best he ever did.... he's invariably *polite* to them,
because he *likes* fans, but it does not make him happy.
And should you ever feel the need to make analogous comments
to Tom Holt in person, try to bear in mind that as a Retired
Lawyer, he has *no* milk of human kindness in his veins; and
that as a master forger and bladesmith, and long time hoplophile
with strong leanings toward the ethic and style of the followers
of the bushi-do.... he could snap at any second and start
screaming invocations to Kali while approaching you behind
a blur of singing razor-sharp steel.
When you say something as unthinking as:
>
> Is there any "sadness" (probably a bad word, but can't think of a
> better one at the mo. - "regret" maybe?) about subsequent efforts
> not being as meaningful as the first, or does it really get
> reduced to just jobbing work?
>
to a working writer --- more importantly, to a working writer who
obviously gives a hoot and busts his tail trying to do his best work,
and make each one better than the last, and who *refuses* to take the
easy way.... implying that he's a piecwork hack just typing them
out... you're displaying one of the facets of behavior that
exemplifies all that is most odious about SF fandom.
If you want to address comments of that nature to semiprofessional
kludge typists like Jean Cavelos, feel free; but try to be a bit more
courteous to the folks who produce respectable work.
So do yourself and him a favor, and approach him only with several
copies of his most recent work in hand, asking for autographs, and
tell him how much more you enjoy each new work. In this way, you
will be telling the truth AND developing social habits that will,
when exercised in the presence of real writers, increase your odds
of surviving until retirement age .....
I'm reminded of Mickey Spillane, when some old bat charged up to him
and informed him that she didn't like his Newbry Prize-nominated
children's book as much as his old private-eye stuff.
"That's okay, lady, it's not like I wrote it for you."
Jms at B5
>though. Joe has said several times that he loves to tell a story.
>Given that the result was B5 among other stuff, this is great. I *am*
>curious as to *why* writers are driven to tell a story though, since I
>am fairly convinced that whatever that drive is, I ain't got it!
A true writer -- as opposed to someone who's only in it for the bucks, or who
just want the Pointy Hat that says "I sold something" -- can't NOT write.
Stories are always unfolding behind your eyes, and the only way to get rid of
them is to write them up and send them away.
Case in point...during our first trip to England about 12 years ago, my wife
told me, very specifically, "We're not going overseas so you can write. This
is a vacation. No writing."
I said sure, no problem...and by the third day there I'd bought a small pen and
a pocket-sized spiral notebook in a pharmacists, and was secretly making notes
on my next novel (which became OtherSyde) in the bathroom at night.
Just can't *not* do it.
jms
(jms...@aol.com)
B5 Official Fan Club at:
http://www.thestation.com
(all message content (c) 2000 by
synthetic worlds, ltd., permission
to reprint specifically denied to
SFX Magazine)
Jms at B5
>better one at the mo. - "regret" maybe?) about subsequent efforts not
>being as meaningful as the first, or does it really get reduced to
>just jobbing work?
>
Don't take one person's impressions -- especially one speaking as a non-writer
-- as necessarily accurate. If every new thing I wrote wasn't as meaningful to
me as the last thing, or the first thing that I wrote, I'd get out of the
business.
Because at that point you've got no business being IN the business.
Shaz
> >Is there any "sadness" (probably a bad word, but can't think of a
> >better one at the mo. - "regret" maybe?) about subsequent efforts not
> >being as meaningful as the first, or does it really get reduced to
> >just jobbing work?
> >
>
> Don't take one person's impressions -- especially one speaking as a
non-writer
> -- as necessarily accurate. If every new thing I wrote wasn't as
meaningful to
> me as the last thing, or the first thing that I wrote, I'd get out of the
> business.
>
> Because at that point you've got no business being IN the business.
>
> jms
I assume you're talking about Gharlane there, not Tom who's a very
successful writer (been reading some of his stuff myself lately. Hilarious!)
Shaz
Jms at B5
>successful writer (been reading some of his stuff myself lately. Hilarious!)
Then I must apologize; I was referring to Tom's message, and didn't know he was
a working writer. His work, I confess, is unfamiliar to me. Nonetheless, the
error there was mine.
Tom Holt
The message <20000703195857...@ng-fg1.aol.com>
from jms...@aol.com (Jms at B5) contains these words:
> A true writer -- as opposed to someone who's only in it for the bucks, or who
> just want the Pointy Hat that says "I sold something"
> -- can't NOT write.
I'm not citing my own experience here, because I probably don't meet
Mr Straczynski's exalted criteria, even though I never got my Pointy
Hat; I'm citing the couple of dozen *real* writers I've had the
privilege of discussing the craft with over the years (1); all of
whom have, at one time or another, found that they can not-write with
depressing ease and fluency, often for years at a time. As a great
admirer of Mr Straczynski's work, I'm delighted to hear that he
hasn't reached that point *yet*, and I sincerely hope that when it
does, he'll find a way round it and come out in one piece. But,
unless he's very lucky, to this favour he will come.
I'm intrigued by this pointy-hat thing, though. Is it black and
conical with a brim, like a witch's hat, or conical without a brim
but with pom-poms, like a clown's hat, or conical without brim or
pom-poms but with a veil attached to the apex, like a medieval
noblewoman's hat, or does it have a big D stencilled on it, and you
have to go and stand in the corner of the room and have all the other
kids laughing at you? Or is it pointy without being conical at all,
like a WW1 picklehauber? Do you have to save box-tops, or do they
just ladle them out at some award ceremony, like Hugos?
(1) Admittedly, many of these conversations have been over breakfast
at SF conventions, with both of us hung over and dead miserable. That
said, anybody capable of being bright and cheery over Sunday
breakfast at any SF con worth the name is clearly a mutant and should
be put to death without hesitation or mercy.
Tom Holt
The message <20000703203324...@ng-fg1.aol.com>
from jms...@aol.com (Jms at B5) contains these words:
> His work, I confess, is unfamiliar to me.
Understandable, since it crashed & burned in the US market; though
I'd have thought you might at least have seen the review column I
used to write for SFX...
(Ducks, removes Pointy Hat, and runs like hell)
Shaz
> >I assume you're talking about Gharlane there, not Tom who's a very
> >successful writer (been reading some of his stuff myself lately.
Hilarious!)
>
> Then I must apologize; I was referring to Tom's message, and didn't know
he was
> a working writer. His work, I confess, is unfamiliar to me. Nonetheless,
the
> error there was mine.
>
> jms
>
If you're interested, if you type in Tom's name in Amazon.com at the moment
three titles come up:
Snow White and the Seven Samurai
Wish You Were Here
Only Human
It makes sense that people who like his work are often Terry Pratchett fans
as well. They're both equally crazy with a wonderful way with words <doffs
non-pointy hat in Tom's direction>.
Shaz
Dwight Williams
>
> (1) Admittedly, many of these conversations have been over breakfast
> at SF conventions, with both of us hung over and dead miserable. That
> said, anybody capable of being bright and cheery over Sunday
> breakfast at any SF con worth the name is clearly a mutant and should
> be put to death without hesitation or mercy.
Errrr....(looks around *very* nervously at the lynch mob prepping
itself)
--
Dwight Williams(ad...@freenet.carleton.ca) -- Orleans, Ontario, Canada
Maintainer/Founder - DEOList for _Chase_ Fandom
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jms at B5
>I'd have thought you might at least have seen the review column I
>used to write for SFX...
Takes a lot for a man to come out and admit he wrote pornography....
Christopher Pound
>If you're interested, if you type in Tom's name in Amazon.com at the moment
>three titles come up:
Amazon.co.uk is the right place to look; they have about 20 titles
and deliver to the US. :)
Having greatly enjoyed _The Walled Orchard_, I'm looking forward
to _Alexander at the World's End_.
--
Christopher Pound (po...@rice.edu)
Dept. of Anthropology, Rice University
The Reverend Jacob Corbin
>
> I'm intrigued by this pointy-hat thing, though.
That's the *idea*; the hat is invisible to those who have not spoken the sacred
words (in the original tongue of Mu, of course), suffered the ritual death of Hiram
Abiff, and pledged undying allegiance to Jah-Bul-On, the Three-Headed God of the
Atlanteans.
People with X-ray goggles ordered from old comic books can see them as well. (If
you're curious, they look like Madonna's old ice-cream-cone bustiers.)
>
> (1) Admittedly, many of these conversations have been over breakfast
> at SF conventions, with both of us hung over and dead miserable. That
> said, anybody capable of being bright and cheery over Sunday
> breakfast at any SF con worth the name is clearly a mutant and should
> be put to death without hesitation or mercy.
How charitable of you. Why restrict this rule only to SF conventioneers?
--
Reverend Jacob
http://www.fortunecity.com/tattooine/shirley/272/
"People that are really weird can get into sensitive positions and have a
tremendous impact on history." -- J. Danforth Quayle
Gharlane of Eddore
In <20000703195857...@ng-fg1.aol.com>
jms...@aol.com (Jms at B5) stumbled out these words:
>
> A true writer -- as opposed to someone who's only in it for the
> bucks, or who just want the Pointy Hat that says "I sold something"
> -- can't NOT write.
>
In <200007040...@zetnet.co.uk>
Tom Holt <lemmi...@zetnet.co.uk> writes:
>
> They give out Pointy Hats? Hey, why didn't I get one?
>
After that unauthorized biography of Maggie Thatcher, the Brit
Customs People were specfically ordered to burn all incoming
awards, medals, encomiums, fan letters, and trophy gewgaws
shipped to you.
Your Pointy Hat, the Class A Summa Cum Laude model, composed
of cultured mink trimmed with ermine, lined with the softest
Pawnee-tanned deerhide, with a small blinking green light on
top, was intercepted by Brit Customs, cast in a block of
methyl-methacrylate, cast in concrete, sintered into a
larger block of silica, and sunk in the Mindanao Trench,
right next to your Nobel Prize For Literature, which was
also not mentioned by the British Press after the "D Notices"
were sent out.
I thought you know. Sorry to be the bearer of such ill tidings.
JMS: " -- can't NOT write. "
>
> Sadly, not true
>
> I'm not citing my own experience here, because I probably don't meet
> Mr Straczynski's exalted criteria, even though I never got my Pointy
> Hat; I'm citing the couple of dozen *real* writers I've had the
>
Don't sweat over it; you got your hat, even if it never made it to
your hands. JMS' hat is still on hold pending a Board Review of his
dialog concerning isotopic dating and pollen analysis in a "CRUSADE"
movie. As a senior Board member, I can, without betraying any
confidences, report that his Pointy Hat *will* almost surely be
granted, most likely retroactive to "THE REAL GHOSTBUSTERS;" but
that the Magical Runes inscribed on it will mostly likely read
" I DESPERATELY NEED A TECHNICAL ADVISOR, AND I NEVER READ TOLKIEN! "
--- in Angerthas Elvish.
>
> privilege of discussing the craft with over the years (1); all of
> whom have, at one time or another, found that they can not-write
> with depressing ease and fluency, often for years at a time. As a
> great admirer of Mr Straczynski's work, I'm delighted to hear that
> he hasn't reached that point *yet*, and I sincerely hope that when
> it does, he'll find a way round it and come out in one piece. But,
> unless he's very lucky, to this favour he will come.
>
Remember Robert Silverberg griping about having been blocked for
almost four-and-a-half hours one afternoon... in the hearing of
certain other writers who nearly lynched him on the spot. Some
people don't run down. Others, like Ted Sturgeon, take ten-year
vacations, or like Ellison, stay blocked on some things for decades,
and do *other* projects in the meantime.
>
> I'm intrigued by this pointy-hat thing, though. Is it black and
> conical with a brim, like a witch's hat, or conical without a brim
> but with pom-poms, like a clown's hat, or conical without brim or
> pom-poms but with a veil attached to the apex, like a medieval
> noblewoman's hat, or does it have a big D stencilled on it, and you
> have to go and stand in the corner of the room and have all the other
> kids laughing at you? Or is it pointy without being conical at all,
> like a WW1 picklehauber? Do you have to save box-tops, or do they
> just ladle them out at some award ceremony, like Hugos?
>
Conical. All conical. It's a rule. No veils allowed for
male-type writers. ( Pointy Hats granted to "that peculiar
anomaly, the lady novelist" are wimple-oid in form, but the
Pointy Hats given to *real* Lady Writers aren't much different
than the other Real Writers', although some of the color choices
are a bit much. )
Each Pointy Hat is unique. Mike Jittlov's is fluorescent green,
covered with golden astronomical symbols.... my own is RealTree(tm)
camoflage pattern, trimmed in "Hunter's Green." ( and has little
green L.E.D.'s on it. ) Ellison's was a snappy Italian ivory
thing with an elegant snake-skin hatband... but he gets so cerebrally
overheated that over the years it's melted and reshaped itself into
a floppy round pattern, and now looks precisely like what Smurfs wear.
Hunter S. Thompson has the one that Margaret wore in "THE WIZARD OF OZ."
( She presented it when he was visiting the set of "BREWSTER McCLOUD,"
in one of the most emotional formal ceremonies the Pointy Hat Brigade
has ever sponsored. Dr. Thompson demonstrated his awe and reverence
by remaining upright and coherent throughout the ceremony, and
not firing on anyone. )
>
> (1) Admittedly, many of these conversations have been over breakfast
> at SF conventions, with both of us hung over and dead miserable. That
> said, anybody capable of being bright and cheery over Sunday
> breakfast at any SF con worth the name is clearly a mutant and should
> be put to death without hesitation or mercy.
>
Ah. THERE lies your problem. Nothing depresses the functioning of
the central nervous system like alcohol, and you've been hanging around
with people who are Bad Influences.
I'll bet that if you stopped drinking, stopped smoking, made it a point
to run at least 8-10 miles per week, and switched over to a vegetarian
diet, you'd be writing a dozen books a year rather than a mere half-
dozen. Of course, they'd probably be a tad acerbic and touchy, and
you'd have to learn to avoid sending in your final submission copy bound
in the skin of your more capricious editors, but there you are.
( Not to mention that you'd probably die a whole lot sooner, and we'd
miss your work... )
In the meantime, I wouldn't worry about it; think of high-volume writers
like Lionel Fanthorpe, "Piers Anthony," and John Creasey, and be content.
H. Rider Haggard's fame is predicated on only a dozen or two books;
Daniel Keys Moran's on half that.... Stanley G. Weinbaum was only
selling for a year and a half before the cancer ate him, and our
field would be much less without his contribution, even though it
was only a few books. ( Heck, they've made several movie and TV
adaptions of just *one* of his stories, "THE ADAPTIVE ULTIMATE." )
It's not *quantity.* That attitude is borne of the episode-a-week
Hollyweird mentality, or the book-every-two-weeks pulphackers.
( Seen a lot of reprints of John Creasey's books? *snicker* )
I'll shut up now, but you get the idea; don't compare yourself to
Straczynski; he's *SICK*. Just so we have that clear.
Paul Harper
>>Is there any "sadness" (probably a bad word, but can't think of a
>>better one at the mo. - "regret" maybe?) about subsequent efforts not
>>being as meaningful as the first, or does it really get reduced to
>>just jobbing work?
>>
>
>Don't take one person's impressions -- especially one speaking as a non-writer
>-- as necessarily accurate. If every new thing I wrote wasn't as meaningful to
>me as the last thing, or the first thing that I wrote, I'd get out of the
>business.
>
>Because at that point you've got no business being IN the business.
Oops. I think I might have been a little untactful here - apologies to
anyone I've upset.
The analogy I can make with my own profession (IT) is that around
90-95% of it is dead boring. It gets that way after 23 years in the
business.
But it's the 5-10% of the business that's new and exciting that makes
the rest worth while.
All I meant to ask was "is this the same for writers?"
Paul Harper
wrote:
>I'm intrigued by this pointy-hat thing, though.
Do I detect the emergence of a plot device for your next book?
Hope so!
<g>
Paul Harper
of Eddore) wrote:
>So do yourself and him a favor, and approach him only with several
>copies of his most recent work in hand, asking for autographs, and
>tell him how much more you enjoy each new work.
Whilst I thank you for your long and occasionally interesting post, I
will also thank you not to make assumptions on my part as to how I
should "behave" towards other people.
Tom is very well aware of what I think of his books (his later ones at
any rate - I haven't read any earlier ones) because I have told him
so.
If Tom is upset by anything I say (and I don't think he will be,
because I believe he will understand where the question's coming
from), I am absolutely sure he will tell me, and will put me straight.
It is up to Tom to do this, and the assumption on your part is very
arrogant.
Tom Holt
The message <20000703222522...@ng-fa1.aol.com>
> >I'd have thought you might at least have seen the review column I
> >used to write for SFX...
> Takes a lot for a man to come out and admit he wrote pornography....
(*Now* can I have my Hat? Pretty please?)
Paul Harper
wrote:
>
Did you actually get paid for it? I ask not because I don't think it
worthy of payment, but because SFX has a *terrible* name for not
paying it's bills. I had first-hand comments from a regular
contributor to SFX [not your good self] that "it'd be nice if they
paid their invoices once in a while".
Paul.
p.s. have a hat...
^
/ \
/ \
/ TOM \
---------
Tom Holt
The message <10a3msgc21gpog6hb...@4ax.com>
from Paul Harper <pa...@harper.net> contains these words:
> >Worse. I reviewed Star Trek novels. Lower than which...
> >
> Did you actually get paid for it? I ask not because I don't think it
> worthy of payment, but because SFX has a *terrible* name for not
> paying it's bills. I had first-hand comments from a regular
> contributor to SFX [not your good self] that "it'd be nice if they
> paid their invoices once in a while".
Well... Several of my contributions haven't been paid for; but SFX
(quite reasonably) requires an invoice before they cough up, and for
some reason I'm rather vague about sending them; so the fault could
well be on my side, rather than theirs.
> p.s. have a hat...
> ^
> / \
> / \
> / TOM \
> ---------
Thank you. I shall wear it with pride; because -
"He wanted to say : It's the Archchancellor's hat, don't
you understand? Its worn by the head of all wizards, well, on the head of
the head of all wizards, no, metaphorically it's worn by all wizards,
potentially anyway, and it's what every wizard aspires to, it's the symbol
of organized magic, it's the pointy tip of the profession"
- Terry Pratchett, 'Sourcery'
Benjamin Schultz KE3OM
= (1) Admittedly, many of these conversations have been over breakfast
= at SF conventions, with both of us hung over and dead miserable. That
= said, anybody capable of being bright and cheery over Sunday
= breakfast at any SF con worth the name is clearly a mutant and should
= be put to death without hesitation or mercy.
I've found that having several cups of coffee helps make me (relatively)
coherent on Sunday morning. But bright and cheery? That just ain't
possible.
That said... next con I'm going to, I'll try a morning bagel run on Sunday.
--
<*> Benjamin Schultz, KE3OM <*>
------------------------------------------------------------
If the ancient Greeks had known about coffee, they wouldn't have
had their pantheon drinking nectar!
Tom Holt
The message <8jt7vl$8vk$1...@dailyplanet.wam.umd.edu>
from Benjamin Schultz KE3OM <benj...@w3eax.umd.edu> contains these words:
> On 3 Jul 2000 19:14:09 -0600, Tom Holt <lemmi...@zetnet.co.uk> proclaimed:
> = (1) Admittedly, many of these conversations have been over breakfast
> = at SF conventions, with both of us hung over and dead miserable. That
> = said, anybody capable of being bright and cheery over Sunday
> = breakfast at any SF con worth the name is clearly a mutant and should
> = be put to death without hesitation or mercy.
> I've found that having several cups of coffee helps make me (relatively)
> coherent on Sunday morning. But bright and cheery? That just ain't
> possible.
of Saturday night, ie not going to bed.
It ain't the booze gives you the hangover, it's the sleep...
Shaz
"Tom Holt" <lemmi...@zetnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:200007041...@zetnet.co.uk...
Been there, done that, got the t-shirt (it's a bit crumpled, but I've got
it).
> It ain't the booze gives you the hangover, it's the sleep...
Or rather lack of same! I remember after the Big one in Blackpool my friend
insisted that on the Tuesday we go on the Pleasure Beach. Now keep in mind,
I'd gone full out at that con (it being my first pure B5 one, and I'd had a
blast!) and had about 3 hours sleep, if that, each night (seems pretty
standard for me at cons. Same thing happened at the Wrap party). We went on
that Roller Coaster they boast about. As I said to my friend afterwards, had
I actually been fully aware of what was going on, I could assure her I WOULD
have had heart failure. As it was, I was too knackered to die. When you're
too exhausted even to get scared any more, you're in trouble.
Shaz (still remembering that 100 foot upside down drop... albeit somewhat
hazily)
Iain Rae
>
> On 3 Jul 2000 19:14:09 -0600, Tom Holt <lemmi...@zetnet.co.uk> proclaimed:
>
> = (1) Admittedly, many of these conversations have been over breakfast
> = at SF conventions, with both of us hung over and dead miserable. That
> = said, anybody capable of being bright and cheery over Sunday
> = breakfast at any SF con worth the name is clearly a mutant and should
> = be put to death without hesitation or mercy.
>
> I've found that having several cups of coffee helps make me (relatively)
> coherent on Sunday morning. But bright and cheery? That just ain't
> possible.
>
> --
> <*> Benjamin Schultz, KE3OM <*>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> If the ancient Greeks had known about coffee, they wouldn't have
> had their pantheon drinking nectar!
Drink lots (at least a pint) of water before going to bed the night
before, has worked for me so far. Equally I've found that by and large
mixing your drinks doesn't seem to make that much of a difference except
that I won't mix more than a glass of red wine with anything and I
follow my grandfathers advice of switching to shorts (spirits) whenever
you feel bloated. Hair of the dog will delay the onset but only delay,
not stop.
--
Iain Rae
Computing Officer
Dept. Civil & Offshore Engineering
Heriot-Watt University
Gharlane of Eddore
On 3 Jul 2000 19:14:09 -0600, Tom Holt
<lemmi...@zetnet.co.uk> proclaimed:
>
> (1) Admittedly, many of these conversations have been over breakfast
> at SF conventions, with both of us hung over and dead miserable. That
> said, anybody capable of being bright and cheery over Sunday
> breakfast at any SF con worth the name is clearly a mutant and should
> be put to death without hesitation or mercy.
>
Is *this* why they shoot at me, at SF conventions, when I tap-dance
on my way to Steve's 0600 T'ai-Chi lessons? I never knew; I thought
it was something I'd *said*.
In <8jt7vl$8vk$1...@dailyplanet.wam.umd.edu>
Benjamin Schultz KE3OM <benj...@w3eax.umd.edu> used his digital
sideswiper to transmit, at 30WPM with a good "fist:"
>
> I've found that having several cups of coffee helps make me (relatively)
> coherent on Sunday morning. But bright and cheery? That just ain't
> possible.
>
Adding one drug to the toxic products left by incomplete metabolization
of other drugs is not a hugely bright thing to do; pouring black coffee
down a drunk just gets you a wide-awake drunk, and pouring black coffee
down a hung-over short-of-sleep guy just gets you a guy who's so wired
that he doesn't realize how baaaaad he feels. Or smells.
The *trick* is to make *sure* you take at least 500 mgs of aspirin
( and tossing in a nice batch of generic B-vitamins won't hurt )
before you go to sleep, and add in a bit of melatonin and chromium
picolinate if it's available; and sleep in a reclining chair, to
insure minimum load on your rib cage for better blood oxygenation
( primary cause of central nervous system cellular damage as a result
of alcohol abuse is POOR BLOOD OXYGENATION due to impaired breathing
and blood circulation; if you can stay awake til you sober up, so
you keep breathing fully, that's an even better approach. ) --
and then, *immediately* upon rising, ingest at least ten ounces of a
good grade of CHOCOLATE, with maybe a couple more aspirin.
Avoid the Demon Caffeine unless absolutely necessary to walk.
The World Health Organization rates Caffeine as *the* most-abused
addictive drug, on a per-capita tonnage basis, world-wide.
Social acceptability does not validate the use of a debilitating
drug; just look what all that tea did to the former British Empire.
In <200007041...@zetnet.co.uk> Tom Holt
<lemmi...@zetnet.co.uk> writes:
>
> It can be done; but only by converting Sunday morning into an annexe
> of Saturday night, ie not going to bed.
>
> It ain't the booze gives you the hangover, it's the sleep...
>
And the Filk. The Surgeon General has found that habitual engagement
in all-night Filking can result in cumulative brain damage, resulting
in a state of mind indistinguishable from Gilbert & Sullivan.
Tom Holt
The message <8jt99a$pgb$1...@lure.pipex.net>
from "Shaz" <hyp...@Dial.pipex.com> contains these words:
.
> > It ain't the booze gives you the hangover, it's the sleep...
> Or rather lack of same!
Mileage varies. Sleep is bad for you. Thousands of people die in it every day.
I'm lucky; trained myself over the years to be comfortable on four
hours a night, functional on three; can go without for 72 hours quite
happily so long as I don't try and drive a car or do anything else
potentially hazardous to others. Figured out that by the time I'm 60,
I'll have had 10 years more useable lifespan than most everybody my age.
Added benefit (of incalculable value) is being awake in the middle of
the night, when everyone else is asleep and therefore not capable of
telephoning...
Gharlane of Eddore
In an attempt to describe social behavior toward working writers
that approximates some modicum of courtesy,
On 3 Jul 2000 15:51:08 -0600, ghar...@ccshp1.ccs.csus.edu
(Gharlane of Eddore) lectured:
>
> So do yourself and him a favor, and approach him only with several
> copies of his most recent work in hand, asking for autographs, and
> tell him how much more you enjoy each new work.
>
In <8e13mss7cvd10kb7j...@4ax.com> pa...@harper.net peeves:
>
> Whilst I thank you for your long and occasionally interesting post, I
> will also thank you not to make assumptions on my part as to how I
> should "behave" towards other people.
>
Intriguing. When I explicate, inform, and comment on your antisocial
and unthinkingly fanboyish smarm, I get this sort of response from
you; but when Joe or someone else mentions it, *THEY* get stuff like:
>
> From: Paul Harper <pa...@harper.net>
> Date: 4 Jul 2000 00:27:07 -0600
> Message-ID: <rl03msk7ng7n8bdjt...@4ax.com>
>
> On 3 Jul 2000 18:02:13 -0600, jms...@aol.com (Jms at B5) wrote:
> >
> > Don't take one person's impressions -- especially one speaking as a
> > non-writer -- as necessarily accurate. If every new thing I wrote
> > wasn't as meaningful to me as the last thing, or the first thing
> > that I wrote, I'd get out of the business.
> >
> >Because at that point you've got no business being IN the business.
>
> Oops. I think I might have been a little untactful here - apologies to
> anyone I've upset.
>
> The analogy I can make with my own profession (IT) is that around
> 90-95% of it is dead boring. It gets that way after 23 years in the
> business.
>
> But it's the 5-10% of the business that's new and exciting that makes
> the rest worth while.
>
> All I meant to ask was "is this the same for writers?"
>
So you're willing to apologize for behavior that a total of THREE
different people have called you on, in three different styles of
comment; but tell me to go roll my hoop because I, unlike the other
folks involved, have no business "telling you how to behave?"
Hey, guy, *someone* has to, since your parents didn't do the job.
>
> Tom is very well aware of what I think of his books (his later
> ones at any rate - I haven't read any earlier ones) because I
> have told him so.
>
Hit the second-hand bookstores and find "EXPECTING SOMEONE TALLER,"
"FLYING DUTCH," and "WHO'S AFRAID OF BEOWULF." He's gotten
much better since then, but when you start out *good*, your books
are worthwhile no matter what part of your career they come from.
You should also take a look at "MY HERO," which is positively
made for a light-comedy dramatic-adaption romp the next time
the BBC is feeling too stodgy.
>
> If Tom is upset by anything I say (and I don't think he will
> be, because I believe he will understand where the question's
> coming from), I am absolutely sure he will tell me, and will
> put me straight.
>
Tom was raised as a gentleman, and doesn't berate his audience,
no matter how ham-handedly unthinkingly discourteous their
comments may be; because he's quite aware of your interest,
no matter what you actually said. Of more import is the fact
that he doesn't kill anything unless his wife is willing to
cook it, and has consequently learned a degree of toleration
not seen since Gautama Buddha welcomed the Narn to Shangri-La.
>
> It is up to Tom to do this, and the assumption on your part
> is very arrogant.
>
As opposed to your own constantly-demonstrated on-line arrogance?
At least *I* am cute, and an amusing writer whose knowledge of the
field and the work makes my postings worthwhile; what have you
brought to these on-line colloquia aside from an overcompensated
inferiority complex and an inability to acknowledge your own
errors and mis-statements?
I'm sure you're a warm, wonderful, very special person, but at
some point it would be really keen of you to learn some manners,
and stop acting like an adolescent with a massive case of
testosterone poisoning. You're old enough to know better.
Note that I wouldn't have bothered to comment at all if you'd not
already made "rec.arts.sf.tv" even more of a mudpatch than usual.
Glad to have you around, since you have good taste in TV shows
and literature, and can actually write in the English language;
but don't expect special treatment when you blortch in public.
And a cheery wave from the Colonies on Independence Day.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
| __ __ |
| We are dreamers, shapers, singers and makers. / | / \ |
| We study the mysteries of laser and circuit, -|---+----+- |
| Crystal and scanner, holographic demons, | | | |
| And invocations of equations. |_/ \__/ |
| |
| These are the tools we employ. And we know... many things. |
| |
| .....including how to spell "gray." +\../- |
| |
| "Ars sine scientia nihil est." --- Martinus Paduei |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
carl Dershem
> >I will admit to a (morbid?) interest in what drives a writer to write
> >though. Joe has said several times that he loves to tell a story.
> >Given that the result was B5 among other stuff, this is great. I *am*
> >curious as to *why* writers are driven to tell a story though, since I
> >am fairly convinced that whatever that drive is, I ain't got it!
>
> A true writer -- as opposed to someone who's only in it for the bucks, or who
> just want the Pointy Hat that says "I sold something" -- can't NOT write.
> Stories are always unfolding behind your eyes, and the only way to get rid of
> them is to write them up and send them away.
>
> Case in point...during our first trip to England about 12 years ago, my wife
> told me, very specifically, "We're not going overseas so you can write. This
> is a vacation. No writing."
>
> I said sure, no problem...and by the third day there I'd bought a small pen and
> a pocket-sized spiral notebook in a pharmacists, and was secretly making notes
> on my next novel (which became OtherSyde) in the bathroom at night.
>
> Just can't *not* do it.
I always liked the way ... I think it was Diana Paxson said it: "You know you're a
writer when you slam your hand in the car door, and write out the scene that had
you rushing in the first place before you think about going to the doctor."
Paul Harper
of Eddore) wrote:
>I, unlike the other
>folks involved, have no business "telling you how to behave?"
It's down to respect Gharlane. Pure and simple.
The others have earned it from me. You, unfortunately, have a long way
to go. I doubt that this matters one jot to you, and there's no
particular reason why it should.
And they didn't "tell me how to behave". You mistakenly presumed.
Now since the issue in question has long since been sorted out by
private email between Tom and myself (feel free to check with him if
you like), I intend to drop the subject and suggest good manners on
your part would dictate you doing the same, especially since it was
none of your business in the first place.
Have a good holiday.
Paul.
Alison Hopkins
Iain Rae wrote in message <39622B21...@civ.hw.ac.uk>...
>Drink lots (at least a pint) of water before going to bed the night
>before, has worked for me so far. Equally I've found that by and large
>mixing your drinks doesn't seem to make that much of a difference except
>that I won't mix more than a glass of red wine with anything and I
>follow my grandfathers advice of switching to shorts (spirits) whenever
>you feel bloated. Hair of the dog will delay the onset but only delay,
>not stop.
Personally, I always find that sticking to champagne always avoids the
hangover. Of course, this *may* go someway towards explaining why Kim and I
are known as Eddie and Patsy. <g>
Ali
Iain Rae
You can do the same with whisky (or whiskey) but you have to stick to
good stuff (doesn't have to be single malts but they're usually safer)
it has to be fresh or well kept, yes it sounds silly but drambie in
particular goes off if left, I have a friend that won't put the cork
back on the bottle. finally it should be drank neat or with a little
water at room temperature. Now comes the bit the purists down't like,
room temperature in scotland is (checks the thermometer) definately
below 20C, on the cold winters nights when whisky was meant to be
drank(1) that's about 4 or 5 C so if you're sitting in the tropics put
the stuff in the fridge.
NB as someone on umtsb5 recently found out the cask strength varieties
can produce dramatic mood changes ;)
(1)Like sitting in the pub trying to defrost after standing for 21/2
hours on a freezing march night watching Scotland gubbing france 2-0.
wonder if I'll ever see that again?
Gharlane of Eddore
Griping about the Apprentice Harper of Perniciousness,
On 4 Jul 2000 13:09:33 -0600, ghar...@ccshp1.ccs.csus.edu
(Gharlane of Eddore) wrote:
>
> I, unlike the other folks involved, have no business "telling you
> how to behave?"
>
In <coj4ms0hsjfkjoodp...@4ax.com> pa...@harper.net writes:
>
> It's down to respect Gharlane. Pure and simple.
>
Yes, it certainly *is* "down" to respect me.
( Unless I'm mis-reading that, and it's parsing wrong because you have
as much difficulty with commas as with apostrophes.. but I digress. )
>
> The others have earned it from me. You, unfortunately, have a
> long way to go. I doubt that this matters one jot to you, and
> there's no particular reason why it should.
>
Good call.
But when you cut up in public, *ANYONE* nearby is entitled to point
a finger and call shame, shame, fie on you. Especially when it's
done with a degree of wit and humor beyond your reach.
The elitism that moves you to find correction from major public
figures acceptable, and grounds for griping when coming from someone
you've arbitrarily chosen to regard as your social inferior, is a
rather stinging indictment of your attitudes and personality, and
somewhat amusing. The fact that you go ballistic over anything
that you perceive as an indictment of your execrable party manners,
or of the cavalier mismanagment of the island where you choose to
live, is a further indicator that you're not entirely happy, and
results in huge enjoyment on the part of those among us who delight
in tweaking you; you're an easy troll.
>
> And they didn't "tell me how to behave". You mistakenly presumed.
>
They corrected your misbehavior in considerably more diplomatic and
less amusing ways than I bothered to employ; your apology indicated
that you now have some understanding of your discourtesy to working
writers, although I suspect you still lack any intimation of the
magnitude of your malefaction.
>
> Now since the issue in question has long since been sorted out by
> private email between Tom and myself (feel free to check with him if
> you like),
>
Actually, that's an "Expert System," a LISP program that one of the
Turing Test hackers at U.C. Berkeley put together for him to handle
his fan mail, and thus leave him more time for writing. But the
Rules System that governs its behavior is largely an accurate
representation of his attitudes, save for its fondness for teddy
bears. ( The lady who wrote the program loves teddy bears. )
>
> I intend to drop the subject and suggest good manners on
> your part would dictate you doing the same, especially since it was
> none of your business in the first place.
>
Ah, a Strategic Advance To The Rear. Excellent tactics on your part;
to respond in kind, and free up the topic bandwidth for things more
relevant to Generalized B5-ish-ness, I hereby reciprocate, *PLONK*ing
you here, as I already have on "rec.arts.sf.tv" and allied topics.
>
> Have a good holiday.
>
Absolutely; the Acolytes have been sneaking extra Wild Turkey 151 and
Diet Dr. Pepper into the nutrient feeds since local dawn, and I'm
linked into optical obs systems in three major cities and a couple
of satellites to see the fireworks tonight. Pity that only about
thirty percent of the Bill of Rights is still undamaged, so that we
don't have all that much left to celebrate, but any excuse to shoot
off munitions, right? ( You lot should try it; only my suggestion
would be, come Guy Fawkes Day, blow up Parliament and Windsor Castle,
rather than your own neighborhoods. )
==================================================================
|| ||
|| " To be governed is to be at every operation, at every ||
|| transaction, noted, registered, counted, taxed, stamped, ||
|| measured, numbered, assessed, licensed, authorized, ||
|| admonished, prevented, forbidden, reformed, corrected, ||
|| punished." ||
|| --Pierre Proudhon, 1809-1865 ||
|| ||
==================================================================
Andrew Swallow
of Eddore) writes:
>
>The World Health Organization rates Caffeine as *the* most-abused
>addictive drug, on a per-capita tonnage basis, world-wide.
>Social acceptability does not validate the use of a debilitating
>drug; just look what all that tea did to the former British Empire.
>
You mean captured it? It is when we copied the yanks and
drank coffee that the empire went away.
Andrew Swallow
p.s. Tea is a drug, it helps kill water borne diseases.
(Source Channel 4 tv program 'The Day the World Took Off')
Tom Holt
The message <20000704210507...@nso-fy.news.cs.com>
from andrewm...@cs.com (Andrew Swallow) contains these words:
> In article <8jtal1$f...@news.csus.edu>, ghar...@ccshp1.ccs.csus.edu (Gharlane
> of Eddore) writes:
> >
> >The World Health Organization rates Caffeine as *the* most-abused
> >addictive drug, on a per-capita tonnage basis, world-wide.
> >Social acceptability does not validate the use of a debilitating
> >drug; just look what all that tea did to the former British Empire.
> >
> You mean captured it? It is when we copied the yanks and
> drank coffee that the empire went away.
Persuasive reasoning; swigging tea inspired the British to occupy and
mercilessly exploit large parts of Asia and Africa; later,
presumably, they ingested American concepts of freedom and human
dignity along with all that Yankee coffee, and went home again.
(I'm afraid I find it hard to be nostalgic about the golden age of
British imperialism; it's a bit like boasting that you're directly
descended from slave-traders)
I prefer the hypothesis put forward by the singer/songwriter Leslie
Fish, who notes that the British (who have the worst weather and food
in the world) generally tended to conquer warm, sunny places where
you could get a decent curry.
Pål Are Nordal
>
> It's down to respect Gharlane. Pure and simple.
>
> to go. I doubt that this matters one jot to you, and there's no
> particular reason why it should.
While I have only "experienced" Gharlane for a short time, I have come
to the conclusion that on matters of opinion, there is only three
conditions that could make him yield:
(a) You being of the opposite sex, with green eyes and red hair.
(b) You having more firepower than him.
(b1) You being Harlan Ellison.
As I do not believe you fulfil any of these, I suggest you back down and
save the energy for something useful.
--
Donate free food with a simple click: http://www.thehungersite.com/
Pål Are Nordal
a_b...@bigfoot.com
Paul Harper
of Eddore) wrote:
>I hereby reciprocate, *PLONK*ing
>you here, as I already have on "rec.arts.sf.tv" and allied topics.
Ah. "declaring victory and running away" is an accurate quote I think?
Anyay, it's good to see you following my suggestion of several days
ago. This should certainly stop your annoying habit of butting in to
topics in which I'm involved with your usual racist, anglophobic
drivel which is totally irrelevant to the topic being discussed, and
designed to do nothing but irritate and annoy.
"Trolling" in other words.
Bye.
Paul Harper
>You can do the same with whisky (or whiskey) but you have to stick to
>good stuff
Which is one of the excellent reasons to hang out with Iain at
conventions. He tends to have a very good supply of *very* good malts.
I consider it to be part of my education, and therefore totally
guilt-free. <g>
Paul Harper
wrote:
>While I have only "experienced" Gharlane for a short time, I have come
>to the conclusion that on matters of opinion, there is only three
>conditions that could make him yield:
You're absolutely right. Certainly him being wrong has never stopped
him.
>As I do not believe you fulfil any of these, I suggest you back down and
>save the energy for something useful.
Hopefully, it's all done and dusted now that he's killfiled me. I can
get back to getting ready for the next big face-to-face next month in
London. Should be a blast!
Paul Harper
of Eddore) wrote:
>They corrected your misbehavior in considerably more diplomatic and
>less amusing ways than I bothered to employ
<sigh>
Go back. And this time, actually *read* what was written, and take
special, careful note of to whom it was written.
*You* are the only person who presumed to tell me anything. JMS
responded referring to Tom, not knowing he was an author, and has
since set the record sraight.
*You* are the only one so anally-fixated on me that you don't even
properly read the posts you refer to.
Instead of Viagra, might I suggest Vallium?
Paul Harper
wrote:
>Personally, I always find that sticking to champagne always avoids the
>hangover. Of course, this *may* go someway towards explaining why Kim and I
>are known as Eddie and Patsy. <g>
I always thought it was "Torville and Dean" after the way you skate
around the floor after the second or third bottle! :-)
J. Potts
Gharlane of Eddore <ghar...@ccshp1.ccs.csus.edu> wrote:
>The *trick* is to make *sure* you take at least 500 mgs of aspirin
>( and tossing in a nice batch of generic B-vitamins won't hurt )
>before you go to sleep, and add in a bit of melatonin and chromium
>picolinate if it's available; and sleep in a reclining chair, to
>insure minimum load on your rib cage for better blood oxygenation
>( primary cause of central nervous system cellular damage as a result
> of alcohol abuse is POOR BLOOD OXYGENATION due to impaired breathing
> and blood circulation; if you can stay awake til you sober up, so
> you keep breathing fully, that's an even better approach. ) --
Or, you can do what my dad use to do in the Navy. If he'd had a wee bit
too much to drink and had flight duty the next day, he'd take a few whiffs
off the O2 and it would clear his head *right* up (or so he said). Mind
you, dad wasn't *flying* the plane, he was just there to take pictures.
--
JRP
"How many slime-trailing, sleepless, slimy, slobbering things do you know
that will *run and hide* from your Eveready?"
--Maureen Birnbaum, Barbarian Swordsperson