Conversation

Replying to
Think of pulp vs slick/glossy kinda like Wordpress blogs vs mainstream media websites built on bespoke web publishing stacks. Heinlein in 1950 trying to break out of astounding and into glossies is like blogger trying to get a New Yorker byline today.
1
9
So where are we now, circa 1950? Campbell is parlaying nuke-age attention on SF into mainstream influence Heinlein is using YA fiction to slingshot into mainstream, and trying to get foot into space program Hubbard has found cultish feet Asimov starting to flex Reading on...
1
4
On a darker note, all 4 have woman trouble. Campbell’s wife Dona has left him, Heinlein’s wife Leslyn is out as an alcoholic, Hubbard has hooked up with clingy 18 year old he now wants to dump, Asimov is a mildly frustrated newlywed turning into a low-intensity harasser.
1
4
Still wrapping my head around the fact that letters to magazines = blog comments. Magazines printed addresses of letter writers so sliding into dms = writing to other fans. Early fan conferences *were* the basic Facebook groups and slacks. Not escalations from something else.
3
20
Magazines also ran reader polls like we do Twitter polls. The community dynamics, rivalries among different kinds of fan clubs etc all sound very, very familiar. We just do it all online now. It truly is astounding (heh!) all this rhymes with blogosphere of last decade.
1
9
To us all this sounds very heavyweight. But back then this *was* the lightest-weight, cheapest way to get anything done. Fans coordinated regional meetups and stuff through *postcards* not even phone! Stamp = 3c, postcard = SMS, letter = email Local phone call = 5c
1
7
Imagine how you’d form a group then 1. Postcards to letter writers you “follow” 2. Exchange of letters 3. Bunch of postcards to invite people to regional meetup 4. Asimov might show up 5. Escalate to phone for locals you meet more often on short notice/impromptu
1
7
Phone was also limited because a) landlines b) answering machines weren’t yet big (first commercial failure = 1949, first successful ones ~1960) Local postcards would have been easier, and as quick if high chance phone wouldn’t be answered it you had to leave a message anyway
1
4
This all feels alien to me though I did grow up in landline/postcard/letter era. We did pen-pal crap in the 80s (my sister had one, I never bothered). Long-distance was letter-writing. “Trunk” calls were too expensive except for emergencies. Local phone was also sparingly used.
1
3
In general I did very little non-locally except join a kids club sponsored by our regional newspaper which sent me a dumbass badge, membership card, and some stickers. I had one letter published in a comic book I subscribed to (more stickers as reward). Circa 1982-86 I think.
1
3
Okay now we’re at dawn of Scientology, 1950 or so. Hubbard has convinced Campbell his stuff is real. They’re experimenting with hypnosis, regression to past lives, scopolamine, barbiturates. Terminology like engrams, clear, preclear, auditing is coming together. Dianetics time!
Replying to
Hubbard picked up his shtick via disciple of Alesteir Crowley, english occultist. This is outside scope of the book, but clearly occult and SoCal new age religion scene was the other parent of Scientology if sci-fi was the first parent.
2
8
Heh, early Scientology is reminding me of current blogosphere interest in trauma. Question is who’s the Hubbard of this crowd? A charismatic older blogger with vaguely occult leanings and a line in technobabble-infused talk therapy and a self-improvement/perfection protocol? 🤔
5
14
The book’s understanding of Wiener and cybernetics is weak. Planting a Gell-Mann amnesia flag for this bit. Like most outsiders he credits Wiener with way too much. He was at best a sort of P. T. Barnum of control theory with a few contributions.
1
11