Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site rti-sel.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!decvax!mcnc!rti-sel!wfi
From: wfi@rti-sel.UUCP (William Ingogly)
Newsgroups: net.sf-lovers
Subject: Re: Excerpts from Harper's article on Science Fiction
Message-ID: <434@rti-sel.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 1-Oct-85 09:39:21 EDT
Article-I.D.: rti-sel.434
Posted: Tue Oct  1 09:39:21 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 4-Oct-85 03:15:59 EDT
References: <1176@druri.UUCP>
Reply-To: wfi@rti-sel.UUCP (William Ingogly)
Organization: Research Triangle Institute, NC
Lines: 16

In article <1176@druri.UUCP> dht@druri.UUCP (Davis Tucker) writes:

>...[ED. NOTE: Acclaim
>is given to Wells, Stapleton, Cordwainer Smith, Bester, Dick, and especially
>Ballard.]

Thanks, Davis, for balancing the other poster's excerpts from this
critique of the genre. After posting my flame against Sante, I decided
it was only fair to go out and read the original article in its
entirety. Sante DOES acknowledge that certain books written by the
above authors are 'genuine literature' so he hardly dismisses the
genre completely. Although I still believe his knee-jerk reaction 
against science and technology is wrongheaded, I retract my comments 
about his limited knowledge of the SF field. Sante knows his stuff.

                          -- Cheers, Bill Ingogly


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com