by Gideon Marcus
Sock it to me
In the middle of this month's issue of F&SF is this ad:
In short, 68 members of the science fiction community (most of them authors, but some I only know of from fandom) have paid lucre to support staying the course in Vietnam. Some of the names on the list surprised me: Biggle, Buck, De Vet, Galouye… I should have thought they'd be less belligerent. And, of course, Bradley's name just makes me sick.
But, as David pointed out, the language is "weasel-worded. It's perfectly possible to be opposed to the war, but feel that the US has an obligation to South Vietnam."
I'll also note that, for this ad to have come out in this issue, it must have been prepped last year. This is before the recent offensive, when it could be said with a straight face (albeit with decreasing credibility) that we were slowly but surely "winning" in Vietnam.
I was rather surprised to find this ad in F&SF, to be sure. It's the most liberal of the SF mags–this felt like it would be more at home in Analog. But then, flipping to the back of the issue, I found this:
That's right–half again as many authors and fans are against staying in Vietnam (they use the older spelling, "Viet Nam"). One wonders which ad came first, and did the two campaigns know about each other?
Does this kind of political posturing belong in our science fiction magazines? I was already seeing buzz about this in the fanzines even before the ad was printed (I somehow ended up out of the loop, but San Diego is a bit of a fandom backwater). One fan opined that fans had no business politicizing our sacred pages.
I just think it's a mark of how polarizing and important this debate is that it now has spilled over into our sanctum sanctorum, the monthly escapist literature. I can only imagine the war of ads will become more bitter now that the actual fight has escalated.
Doo-whackadoo
by Gahan Wilson
Aside from the shots traded in the dueling ads, the rest of the issue is actually surprisingly pleasant, if not entirely placid. A number of these stories could have been played for horror, but instead, deliberately eschew it. Intentional? Or just a happy coincidence? (I prefer my stories with happy endings.)
The Egg of the Glak, by Harvey Jacobs
Harold North is an unprepossessing campus cop, whose life is irrevocably changed when he meets and befriends the eccentric Professor Hickhoff. In addition to being obssessed with the monopthongization of the English language (as well as with Harold North), the rotund professor also has a secret of the zoological kind. Upon his untimely passing, his dying request is that North procure the egg of the last Glak, a Labradorian avian, from a local pet store owner. After hatching it, North must release it in its home wilds.
Thus ensues a lusty, mildly hazardous, and rather droll journey in which North procures the egg and keeps it from the clutches of Nagle, an anthropologist who would make his reputation on the discovery. Along the way, North finds romance, of a sort, but mostly haplesses his way through the endeavor.
What makes this tale is the telling. It threads the line between light and serious, literary and earthy, bawdy and chaste. It's something Goulart or Lafferty might have come up with on one of their better days.
Interestingly, Harvey Jacobs has only appeared on Galactic Journey twice before, and both were unfavorable outings. This one, on the other hand, I thoroughly enjoyed.
Five stars.
by Gahan Wilson
The Ajeri Diary, by Miriam Allen deFord
DeFord, on the other hand, is a name that needs no introduction; she's as grizzled (in her ladylike fashion) as they come. This tale is of an anthropologist who visites the rigidly segregated planet of Ajeri. divided along sexual lines into "eskons" and "orgs", the researcher gradually learns that those terms do not precisely align with male and female.
Knowing deFord's penchant for horrific stings in the tail, I was on tenter hooks for much of the piece, especially when the anthropologists finds himself having more and more in common with the neuter "eskons". But in the end, what we really have is a thoroughly logical state of societal affairs–indeed, something of an utopia…
For some values of utopia, in any event!
Four stars, and the Anti-Queen Bee Award for the month.
Whose Short Happy Life?, by Sterling Lanier
Two hundred years after the Atomic Apocalypse, a hunting party invades the Reserve in search of the most deadly game–the preserved tribes of The Enemy. About halfway through, you'll figure out that something is amiss, but it's worth the ride to the end to figure out what it is.
Four stars.
Dinosaurs in Today's World, by L. Sprague de Camp
Unusually, we have two science fact articles this issue. This is the weaker of the two, a piece on whether dinosaurs could yet live somewhere on the globe. It's sort of a poor man's version of a Ley piece I'm sure I read several years ago.
Three stars.
Budget Planet, by Robert Sheckley
Here is an excerpt from an upcoming book, Dimension of Miracles, that (sort of) stands on its own. It's the account of a planet builder who cuts corners every chance he gets, and his personal reminiscence of his contract with a certain Jehovah.
It's a lot of fluff, but kind of fun. Three stars.
The Shapes, by J. H. Rosny aîné
This piece is a contender for the "oldest reprint" award. A Damon Knight translation from the French (he's quite good at those), it is the story of an extraterrestrial invasion in a pre-Sumerian (but more advanced) Mesopotamia.
Not bad, though the "scientific account" portion in the middle both drags and feels strongly out of flavor with the beginning and end.
Three stars.
The Seventh Planet, by Isaac Asimov
This is a good, but somehow hollow account of the discovery and nature of the planet Mercury, one of the harder planets to observe as it never is very far from the Sun (I had little difficulty finding it when I lived in the desert — the horizons are very low there).
Four stars, I suppose.
That High-Up Blue Day That Saw the Black Sky-Train Come Spinning, by David R. Bunch
Finally, the most forgettable story is this piece of frivolity about two drunks who concoct an alien menace as a prank–but was one of them actually serious?
Two stars.
Who cares? I don't give damn!
However one may feel about the expanding war in Southeast Asia, I think we must remain united on this one matter: the March 1968 issue of F&SF is pretty darned good. And if we be not united, well, I'd like to hear where you agree or disagree.
You won't even have to pay me to take out an ad…
Yes, the campaigns knew about each other. Wilhelm was convinced that there were FAR more anti-War supporters than pro-War supports in the Sf community. And Poul Anderson collected signatures and mobilized the other side to prove her wrong. And Wilhelm was apparently shocked at the amount right wingers…
There is a lot of scholarship that covers the background to the list and what it means. For example, Rjurik Davidson's article "Imagining New Worlds: Sci-Fi and the Vietnam War" (which I think is a deeply flawed and predictable look at SF published about the War).
The scholarship I should have mentioned — as they are superior to Davidson's — are H. Bruce Franklin, Vietnam and Other American Fantasies and David M. Higgins' chapter "New Wave Science Fiction and the Vietnam War." Both discuss the list.
I've always wondered what the list would look like if you polled them a year or so later… as anti-War sentiment grew in the US.
I was a bit surprised to find the ads. While I don't think science fiction is in any way apolitical, I also don't see what these provide. Also, I recognize the vagaries of magazine layout, but it might have been better to have the ads a lot closer together, if not on opposite pages. The large separation looks more like subtle editorializing.
"Egg of the Glak" is, if you'll excuse the phrase, an odd bird. I like it a lot, though I didn't think all that much of the story. As you say, it's the telling that makes the tale, and more to the point it's the way of the telling. Something about the narrative voice just pulled me in and wouldn't let me go. Not sure I'd go all the way to 5 stars (the plot needs more meat for that), but it's a very high 4. And speaking of printing things closer together, the Wilson cartoon really should have come immediately after.
"Ajeri" was certainly interesting, and like you, I was waiting for the classic deFord sting. I found the ending a bit weak, almost as if the author couldn't quite go through with all that she had suggested up to that point. Probably 3 stars for me.
I figured out the Lanier almost as soon as I realized all was not as it appeared to be. It was enjoyable enough, but once again, I'm a star behind you.
After that, we're in general agreement. Sprague is a much better science writer than this article. It really did feel like a Willy Ley article, and not one of his better ones.
I think the Sheckley may be related to "Street of Dreams" in last month's Galaxy. At least, I think the protagonist in that and the guy who's trying to get to Earth in this have the same name. This was fine, better than a lot of what we've seen from Sheckley of late, but I miss the old Bob Sheckley and wish he'd find his groove again.
"The Shapes" was an interesting history lesson, the history of science fiction that is. For a story written 80 years ago, it felt like one of the more literary pulp stories. It does suffer a little from wordiness, but still interesting.
Dr. A's article had some interesting astronomical bits in it, but you're right. It did feel a bit hollow. You can't blame him for overestimating the difficulty of seeing Mercury. This is a man who gets twitchy for the big city when he's in the suburbs.
And I don't know what to make of the Bunch story, but then I never do.
I think these ads (really paid statements rather than ads) also appeared in Galaxy. As Joachim points out, they were discussed in H. Bruce Franklin's books War Stars: The Superweapon in the American Imagination (1988) and Vietnam & Other American Fantasies (2001). When I first read about these statements some years ago, my main reaction was lack of surprise at many of the names–Robert Heinlein, John W. Campbell, Poul Anderson, L. Sprague de Camp in the pro-war statement; Judith Merril, Harlan Ellison, Ray Bradbury, Ursula K. Le Guin, Harry Harrison, Philip K. Dick, etc, , in the anti-war statement.
There was a similar controversy in the early years of the Reagan Administration over the Strategic Defense Initiative ("Star Wars"), with (I think) Poul Anderson and Robert Heinlein in favour, and Isaac Asimov and Arthur C. Clarke opposed.
The pro-war side is a bit disconcerting, but also bizarre in how many of these authors are from two literary generations ago. When was the last time Raymond Z. Gallun put out a major piece? But also some folks I very much respect: Heinlein, Poul Anderson, Hal Clement, a few others. I suspect, however, that they were struggling to find pro-war folks to sign because there are some names here that I swear have never been published professionally.
Anyway the anti-war side is longer, and a lot of those names have been active since circa 1950. I have no doubt this is indicative of the left-liberal magazines (namely Galaxy and F&SF) that sprouted round that time.
"I suspect, however, that they were struggling to find pro-war folks to sign because there are some names here that I swear have never been published professionally." I think Franklin said in one of his books that the pro-war side was padded with the names of fans. In any case, I would expect (alas) to see many names from Campbell's "Golden Age" in the pro-war statement. I like a lot of the writing from this period, but it's nevertheless suffused with unquestioned ideas of the U.S. as a defender of freedom.
Humor is more subjective than any other form of fiction, I suppose.
Which is a way of introducing the fact that I liked "The Egg of the Glak" less than you did, and I liked "Budget Planet" more than you did.
As far as the pro and anti war ads lists go, I'll just say that it seems odd that a quirky (if not quite New Wave) writer like Lafferty is on the pro side, just judging by his fiction. I understand that, in real life, he's a very traditional/conservative Catholic.
The "dove" list was beginning to be assembled first, and the "hawk" list in response to the effort. The petition ads appeared in the GALAXY group (including IF and INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE-FICTION) as well as F&SF…and there were fans and not (at least) widely-published writers mixed into both lists, including one George Scithers signing the hawk petiton as "Karl Wulf"…which I see is missing from the version you have here, but can be seen here:
https://socialistjazz.blogspot.com/2012/02/1968-judith-merril-and-kate-wilhelm-put.html
Make that Wurf.
Is this the same George Scithers who later edited the "Asimov" SF magazine? I admire that publication, so I'm sorry to learn he signed the pro-war statement.
Yes, the same. At this point, perhaps still in the military, and definitely publishing AMRA, the S&S fanzine that became semi-pro.
Many thanks for this history, Todd! (I didn't know about AMRA.)
I remember when those ads came out. I was still in high school, and that's when I began to move away from Heinlein as a fan. I still loved his work, but he was on the far side of the generation divide, with my father. Also, Heinlein's treatment of Alexei Panshin bothered me too.
The names in those ads seem to reflect the sides of the Old Wave and New Wave, and I decided then I was for the New Wave writers.
I went to high school in the late seventies and early eighties, so this was somewhat before my time. I agree 100% with the anti-war statement, but I like the work of signatories of both statements . My preferences (at least, of the writers on each side whose work I've read) are about 50-50.
Delighted to find J. Hunter Holly's (Joan Hunter Holly / Joan Carol Holly) name on the second list, and also interesting that she was close friends with Lloyd Biggie, who is on the other list. I'm working on a projected dedicated to Joan's life/works for 2024, and will be sure to include this. Thanks!
Oh that's wonderful! Do let us chat about her some time.
Thanks – what's the best way to get in touch with you in the future? Through 'Contact the Traveler'?
Yep! And I dropped you a line, as well. If I've got your address right.