by Gideon Marcus
Blackout
This morning, Janice noted sparks coming from the socket by her typewriter desk. With great swiftness, she unplugged the lamp and radio. There was a respite, but only briefly, and soon the wall was spurting flame again.
I heard her calm bellow, "Gideon, hit the circuit breaker. Now." You never saw someone descend a flight of stairs so fast (at least in control of their feet). She called an electrician – fortunately the phone company have a separate power supply – and we went out for breakfast until the fellow could arrive.
That afternoon, we got a stern lecture on overloading our poor house's circuits. We thanked and paid the fellow and were back to work by 1 pm.
Whereupon the entire neighborhood's power went out.
And that, dear readers, is why this article was typed by the light of the window rather than artificial incandescence!
Flicker, flicker
It was fitting that we should be failed by the men and women of our investor-owned, business-managed electric light and power company just as I turned to write about this month's Analog. It's not that the stories were horrible, but I've definitely seen better in these pages.
by John Schoenherr
Too Many Magicians (Part 1 of 4), by Randall Garrett
To date, the Lord d'Arcy stories, set in an alternate 1960s with Victorian technology but replete with magic, have all been novellas or shorter. This latest piece is the first full length novel.
A naval courier has been killed, perhaps while bearing crucial intelligence. The Anglo-French Empire's most renowned magical detective is contracted to get to the bottom of the case. Meanwhile, Sean O'Lochlainn, d'Arcy's sorcerer assistant, is thrown in the Tower after witnessing a second death at a wizards' conference; this locked-room murder has a similar murder weapon to the first.
And so, the setup for a magical who/howdunnit. As with the rest of the series, Garrett's tale compels (though none engage so thoroughly as the excellent first d'Arcy adventure.) If I have a complaint, it's that Garrett is starting to rely a bit too much on pastiche: d'Arcy gets more like Holmes with every installment. Indeed, his cousin, the Marquis, is Mycroft in all but name. I half-expect our hero will take up the violin and acquire a cocaine habit.
Four stars so far, but we'll see.
Spirits of '76, by Joe Poyer
by Leo Summers
A representative from the UN pays a visit to a lunar squatter, who has illegally laid claim to a piece of the Moon's surface and established a distillery. After a great many homebrewed drinks, the agent decides that free enterprise and private ownership are actually just fine.
I suspect maintaining an independent habitation on our airless neighbor will be a lot harder than this story would have us believe. Still, the libertarian spirit of the piece surely tickled Campbell's capitalist heart.
It'll go in one eye and out the other, but it's harmless, at least. Three stars?
One MOL Step Forward , by Lyle R. Hamilton
Hamilton opens up this non-fiction article with a promise to explain how the X-20 "Dynasoar" spaceplane was killed by paperwork. Instead, he offers up a meandering piece, told largely in contractor interviews and press releases, which culminates in a description of the Manned Orbiting Laboratory. This budget space station, serviced by an Air Force Gemini, is the current DoD space project of size.
I suppose there's useful information in the piece, but not much point. I've gotten much better insight from my subscription to Aviation Week and Space Technology.
Two stars.
Psychoceramic, by John W. Campbell, Jr.
The fearless editor follows Hamilton with a shorter piece on a ceramic that can apparently extract pure oxygen and produce power at the same time. Typical Campbellian kookery, or is he onto something? I guess only time will tell.
Two stars for the unnecessary smugness and having cried wolf too many times.
By the Book, by Frank Herbert
by Kelly Freas
An aged troubleshooter is summoned from retirement to fix a big beam. It's some kind of launching laser that propels seed packets (vegetable and human) toward colony worlds. Problem is, it keeps killing technicians trying to service it.
I had many problems with this story, the biggest of which was the devotion of so many words to setting up a technical problem whose resolution I had no interest in. A real snoozefest of gizmo-speak.
One star.
Technicality, by Norman Spinrad
The MPs have arrived, fearsome conquering aliens whose greatest strength is their ability to vanquish whole armies without firing a shot. But does their nonviolent rapaciousness hide an Achilles Heel?
While the gimmick falls a little flat, Spinrad tells this no-blood-or-guts tale with fine detail and not a little subtle satire.
Three stars.
Light of Other Days, by Bob Shaw
by Kelly Freas
A quarreling married couple touring the Scottish Highlands come across a purveyor of "slow glass." This remarkable substance passes light so slowly that, after ten years of absorption, will replay the scene that played across it for the next decade. Thus, a city dweller might install one of these wonder panes and enjoy ten years of a view of the rugged north of Scotland rather than local squalor.
The technical bits felt a little overdone, but Shaw tells the story with a light, domestic touch that reminds me of Cliff Simak.
Three stars, and eagerness to see him tackle a longer subject.
Something to Say, by John Berryman
by Leo Summers
Last up, the fellow who gave us the Walter Bupp psychic stories gives us, instead, one of his more nuts-and-bolts tales. The Earth Federation (apparently an evolution of the UN) has reason to believe that Soviet-aligned agents have infiltrated a primitive world to poison the natives against the West. Said planet has a breathable atmosphere some six times as dense as Earth's. This affords a far more airborne ecology, and even the indigenes have Bronze Age flying machines.
A troubleshooter is dispatched to thwart the Soviet plot, but is overpowered by a Communist. The two crash land and are taken prisoner. The Sovworld agent seems to have the leg up, as she is fluent in the indigenous tongue, but our plucky hero has an ace up his sleeve: an encylopedic knowledge of gliders.
There is a good story lurking in here, with a great setting and a decent setup. It is hampered by its truly insufferable and two-dimensional characters. As well, Berryman seems to have forgotten much that he's learned about pacing.
An uneven three stars.
After the lights go out…
2.7 stars is not a great score, though it's actually the median for this year's crop of Analogs. And also for the month. Coming in below it are IF (2.6), Galaxy (2.5), Worlds of Tomorrow (2.2), and Amazing (1.9). Note that three of those four are Fred Pohl's triplets.
Ahead of Analog are Fantasy and Science Fiction (3.1), New Worlds (3.2), and Impulse (3.4)
There was exactly one woman-penned new story this month, and four/five-star stories would have barely filled two slim magazines (and one of them is a reprint of Make Room, Make Room!).
Ah well. At least there's only one more month of summer, after which, ironically, things should get brighter!
Have you gotten your copy of Rosel George Brown's new hit novel, Sibyl Sue Blue? If not, get down to your local newsstand and pick it up!
The illustration for One MOL Step Forward looks like a wine bottle. An interesting coincidence…
"The Light of Other Days" will always be a 5-star story with me.
Very belatedly, I add that I agree wholeheartedly with Jim. One of the all time great SF stories.
Thought I would try this one this month with some interesting writers on board (and with If being so bad lately I don't have as much SF reading as usual):
The Lord d'Arcy stories are not my cup of tea really. Even at a longer length they do not appeal to me.
I wondered if Poyer was trying to respond to The Moon is a Harsh Mistress? Whether he is attempting to or not it doesn't really impress.
The Herbert was definitely subpar. He hasn't produced anything particularly interesting for a while.
The Spinrad didn't appeal to me much at all.
The Shaw was probably the best of the issue, not amazing but pleasant.
Finally, Berryman's piece had some good imagery and ideas but was certainly let down by execution.
So, overall, not particularly impressed.
I very much enjoyed the Lord d'Arcy. But the Marquis is by no means Mycroft. We have a man who almost never leaves his apartments, has an interest in breeding rare plants, and is assisted in his investigations by a man with perfect recall named Bontriomphe. Translate that into English. The Marquis is probably also something of a gourmet. I wonder if he has a wolf sable in his coat of arms. Also in this story is Lord Lyon Gandolphus Grey. Randy's having fun with this one.
Poyer's story was fairly pointless, but the sort of thing Campbell loves. Maybe he's mad that Heinlein sold his lunar revolution tale to Fred Pohl and got Joe Poyer to write this silly fluff.
As for Campbell's fact article, I'm sure he's overlooked something fairly obvious. Otherwise Westinghouse would have already filed patents, even if they haven't gone all in on research yet.
The Herbert was just bad. He may be the most uneven name author out there. Unfortunately, he's subpar most of the time and his highs aren't to everyone's taste.
The Spinrad was an enjoyable piece, but fairly forgettable. We've certainly seen better from him. On the other hand, it looks like he might be writing a little more frequently, which is a good thing. He's very promising.
I thought "Light of Other Days" was easily four stars, possibly five. Maybe it stood out for being a story about emotion and people rather than the technology. How often does that happen in Analog?
I'm in complete agreement about the Berryman. Uneven with some good bits. Imagine if a real editor had worked with him on this.
I wavered on the Shaw, almost giving it four stars, but though I appreciated the piece, it felt uneven.
But yes, definitely more F&SF or New Worlds than Analog.
Skipping the serial . . .
"Spirits of '76" was trivial . Sort of like the kindergarten version of "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress."
"By the Book" was dry engineering fiction; and since it's entirely imaginary engineering, what's the point?
I liked "Technicality" pretty well, mostly because of its sardonic attitude, more appropriate, perhaps, to the current conflict in Vietnam than to old-fashioned heroics.
I have to join with those who really like "Light of Other Days." I'd give it five stars, and it's a candidate for the Galactic Star, as far as I'm concerned.
I found "Something to Say" tedious. Way too much aerodynamics for me.
"“By the Book” was dry engineering fiction; and since it’s entirely imaginary engineering, what’s the point?"
Ah, you said it much better than I did. That is exactly me sentiment — a technical problem featuring tech that doesn't exist. Yawnsville.
There are folks who liked it, though. They rate it among his better stories (for what that's worth).
I have a question. How are we to take the star ratings? Do they reflect how a reader might rate them having read only stories published prior to 1966? Or can we assume that they reflect the reviewer's taste at time the review was written and read? One would hope that science fiction would evolve and mature over time, so that stories written in 1966 might appear to be rather quaint in, say, 2021. What is the baseline to evaluate these star ratings? Just curious.
I can only gauge things from my perspective in 1966! I don't have a crystal ball, you know…
(I will say that, having read SF that some of our readers have brought from the future, good writing is good writing regardless of the era.)
All I can say is that I give my star ratings based solely on how good I think a story is. Did I love it, and think it a classic? Five stars. Pretty darn good, if not a classic? Four stars. Worth reading, but not outstanding? Three stars. Not very good at all? Two stars. Truly bad? One star. I don't think I care when it was written. (I try to judge reprints, for example, in Fantastic only on their own merits, and not how they compare to works of their own time, or of today.)
For myself, I would say it is just my personal opinion, the only difference in time would be how often I have seen this kind of story. So if it has already become a cliche in 1966 I would be less generous than the first time I saw the concept in 1944.
In case you are interested, over 1965 and 1966 so far I would rate the pieces I have read as:
1 Stars- 14%
2 Stars – 29%
3 Stars – 30%
4 Stars – 24%
5 Stars – 4%
In general things tend towards the centre with fewer truly exceptional pieces than bad ones.
I think the Shaw story is a possible five-star also; certainly a four-star. But just for the record: "slow glass" (as a concept but not a name) was described thirty-plus years ago in "The Mirror That Remembered"
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1028357
I'm sure Bob Shaw invented it indepently, as the previous story is an obscure one. Nothing new under the sun.
Thanks for all the insights on how you rate these stories. One reason I asked is that I still have a list of the 100 SF books I read in 1966. I also have lists where I rated the books I read up to 1971. Now, having taken the milk-train time machine to 2021, I doubt that I could read and enjoy most of those books again. Time travel has changed my tastes. Perhaps it is different if you are reading those stories for the first time and/or in their temporal context. Or simply because you like those types of stories — though given the general ratings, panning for the gold in those publications seems to me to be a lot like work.
"Panning for the gold in those publications seems to me to be a lot like work."
Oh it is! But panning for gold anywhere is a lot of work. And my life would be considerably the poorer were it not for Zennna Henderson, Cordwainer Smith, etc. etc.
I find it interesting that so many folks liked the Shaw and felt I rated it too low. Reading the Analytical Laboratory in the November issue, it was universally deemed the least good story in the issue.
Which, I suppose, says something about Analog readers…