Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site edison.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!mcnc!ncsu!uvacs!edison!dca
From: dca@edison.UUCP (David C. Albrecht)
Newsgroups: net.sf-lovers
Subject: Re: Re: THE PROBLEMS OF SCIENCE FICTION TODAY, PART II
Message-ID: <500@edison.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 29-May-85 11:17:04 EDT
Article-I.D.: edison.500
Posted: Wed May 29 11:17:04 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 1-Jun-85 23:23:54 EDT
References: <1091@druri.UUCP> <edison.496> <285@unc.UUCP>
Organization: General Electric Company, Charlottesville, VA
Lines: 39

> So, Dave, you're the canonical SF fan? There's plenty of 'lite'
> reading out there for people who are looking for something to shade
> their noses while they get a suntan; why should you resent those of us
> who are looking for something more? I could care less what you think
> of 'art for the sophisticate;' there are those of us who get the
> greatest enjoyment out of listening to classic jazz, looking at modern
> art, and reading well-written SF (oh, and by the way, the term 'sci fi' 
> is an abomination).
> 
> This interchange is addressing SF on one level; you obviously read it
> on another. If you don't like what we're saying, use your 'n' key.
> 
>                           -- Hugs & kisses, Bill Ingogly

Me thinks you miss the point.  I am not OFFENDED by classic jazz, modern
art, "well written" SF (since you find sci fi such a cultural abomination
I will use your abreviation) etc.  Variety is the spice of life and enriches
all of us, I have probably read and enjoyed some works that even the author
of the original posting would consider acceptable.  What I disagreed with
was the haughty tone of the posting that was criticizing all of us who
like to read the perhaps less sophisticated SF (I DO like Zimmer-Bradley
and McCaffery and no doubt alot of others the author would detest) because
it is limiting their evolution or recognition of authors of which the
author approves.  The relation I was making here was that modern art fans
often sneer at Classic art, classic jazz people disdain fusion.  Personally,
I don't sneer or disdain modern art, classic jazz, the "well written" SF I
just don't generally like them.  Obscure authors are frequently that way
because their material is simply not written such that it is accessable
to most people.  Criticizing the people because they don't like the
work instead of recognizing that the author's style has limited his
market is just plain ridiculous.  If you want recognition write what the
critics like, if you want sales write what the masses like, anything else
will address some sub-spectra of the populace.  Just because the masses
don't side with your sub-spectra doesn't make them wrong or you right,
we are talking reality here, grow up.


David Albrecht
General Electric