Page:Amazing Stories Volume 15 Number 10.djvu/107

Rh

OUR editor has a letter from Lynn Bridges, who was quoted in our column last issue in his capacity as columnist for the fan magazine, Eclipse, and who was the object of some disagreement by two readers in Discussions. So, to give him his chance to present the other side of the question, we'll quote from his letter.

First, he calls our remarks about Eclipse an "attack." Regarding the "news" reported by his magazine, he points out it was an excerpt from another magazine, and therefore, if it was untrue, it wasn't his fault. We agree, and we want to humbly and hopefully point out that we did exactly the same thing, our news item being an excerpt also. And if the excerpt was an attack, we plead not guilty of the same attack.

OW, about Phil Stong's anthology. We quote Mr. Bridges: "Your boast about three of 's stories being used in Phil Stong's anthology would be a bit stronger if more people agreed with your opinion of the book's quality. But they don't, and in a recent contemporary, another editor gave Stong's book a quite thorough roasting."

Have you read the reviews on this book, as they have appeared in the nation's daily newspapers? It is on these reviews, and on the selling power to the general public that a book's popularity is based. We simply ask you to read those reviews.

We have received, among 's fan mail contributions, numerous letters, without exception saying each and every story in the book stinks, and is not a true representative of science fiction or fantasy. All of these writers are members of a group called "New Fandom." Yet, in our files, we have letters nominating Stanley G. Weinbaum's story "The Adaptive Ultimate" as one of the ten top stories of the decade. These by the same fans. Why the reversal?

EXT point: The recent science fiction convention in Denver (July 4), held as one of its main points that if anything was to be done about improving science fiction, it was up to the fans to work toward that end by constructive criticism, by aiding in the popularization of science fiction and the gaining of new readers, and in concerted effort along a definite line rather than a pulling in all directions at once, simply for personal and selfish reasons. We are quoting Mr. Evans of your group, who called on us several days after the convention.

E need only mention one more pertinent fact: Some months ago, the fans moved that the "professional" magazines had no place in their organization, and that therefore, they were disassociating themselves, and becoming an organization that was by, for, and of the fans.

ECENTLY, as a matter of curiosity, we dug out all the fan letters of the past six months, (which means several thousand letters) and made a list of the authors' names. Behind each name we marked a check to indicate the fact that a reader had listed him in a personal list of the five or ten or twenty best authors writing for today. Perhaps you'll be interested to discover which authors we discovered to be the first ten in popularity.

(1), Don Wilcox; (2) William P. McGivern; (4) John York Cabot; (4) Nelson S. Bond; (5) David Wright O'Brien; (6) James Norman; (7) Edgar Rice Burroughs; (8) Robert Moore Williams; (9) David V. Reed; (10) Eando Binder.

Which is something we can't argue about—it's what you say, dear reader, and it's a poll that's gospel to us. We don't think we wasted one whole afternoon finding out about that list!

N response to popular demand, we are increasing the number of cartoons in each issue. We will present five or six in each issue from now on. And we invite you all to submit "gags" or cartoon ideas to this editor. We'll buy good ones, and turn them over to cartoonists for finishing. Here's your chance to make a little easy money. And a chance to help make a popular feature of your book even better than before.

With which we'll cast down our pen (and sword) for this issue. Address all bombs to Hitler! Rap.