From LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Fri Sep 10 19:37:09 1999 Date: Fri, 10 Sep 1999 20:48:21 -0500 From: "L-Soft list server at University of Illinois at Chicago (1.8c)" To: Laura Quilter Subject: File: "FEMINISTSF LOG9907C" ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 06:17:13 +0000 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: April Goodwin Smith Subject: Re: OT: Amazon MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hi, (newbie breaking cover) The one I read was _Amazon: A Novel_ by Barbara G. Walker, and I would be delighted to see it discussed, but Amazon books says it's out of print. Is it possible to disuss it under such circumstances? And if it is, then would it also be possible to discuss Emma Bull's _Bone Dance_? (Grovel, beg, plead.) Thanks, April. --- Vivian Lee wrote: > Anyone ever read Barbara O. Walker's _Amazon_ ? I > liked reading it and if no > one else has recommended it for future list > discussion, I'd like to. > > > V. Lee > === "Things that try to look like things often do look more like things than things. Well-known fact." Esmerelda Weatherwax. (Pratchett, 1988) _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 10:00:48 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Todd Mason Subject: Re: OT: Amazon/BONE DANCE: Smith MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" April--if you like, start the discussion! Unless you want to introduce in on FeministSF-Lit, which is slightly more process-oriented (you have a window for nominations, the noms are voted on, and all that). The only problem you might face is that no one else who posts may have read it, but perhaps we will be inspired by your first posting. -----Original Message----- From: April Goodwin Smith [mailto:aprilgoodwinsmith@YAHOO.COM] ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 08:48:15 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Candioglos, Sandy" Subject: Re: OT: Amazon/BONE DANCE: Smith MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Not true. The Fsffu-lit list is NOT exclusively for the BDG (nominated and voted for) books, it's open to any discussion of or about feminism in SF/F/U, you'll just get reminded if you stray too far off topic, unlike on this list. The BDG is hosted on fsffu-lit, but that's not its sole purpose. -Sandy > -----Original Message----- > From: Todd Mason [mailto:Todd.Mason@TVGUIDE.COM] > Sent: Thursday, July 15, 1999 8:01 AM > To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU > Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] OT: Amazon/BONE DANCE: Smith > > > April--if you like, start the discussion! Unless you want to > introduce in on > FeministSF-Lit, which is slightly more process-oriented (you > have a window > for nominations, the noms are voted on, and all that). The > only problem you > might face is that no one else who posts may have read it, > but perhaps we > will be inspired by your first posting. > > -----Original Message----- > From: April Goodwin Smith [mailto:aprilgoodwinsmith@YAHOO.COM] > ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 10:56:33 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Todd Mason Subject: Re: OT: Amazon/BONE DANCE: Smith MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" True enough. My remarks are more true of the Book Discussion Group. -Lit was founded to serve those who wanted the discussion to stay on-topic...though at the time that topic seemed to be, for most of the folks, the BDG itself...and avoid the sometimes heated discussion of side issues. I am corrected. -----Original Message----- From: Candioglos, Sandy [mailto:sandy.candioglos@INTEL.COM] Sent: Thursday, July 15, 1999 11:48 AM To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] OT: Amazon/BONE DANCE: Smith Not true. The Fsffu-lit list is NOT exclusively for the BDG (nominated and voted for) books, it's open to any discussion of or about feminism in SF/F/U, you'll just get reminded if you stray too far off topic, unlike on this list. The BDG is hosted on fsffu-lit, but that's not its sole purpose. -Sandy > -----Original Message----- > From: Todd Mason [mailto:Todd.Mason@TVGUIDE.COM] > Sent: Thursday, July 15, 1999 8:01 AM > To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU > Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] OT: Amazon/BONE DANCE: Smith > > > April--if you like, start the discussion! Unless you want to > introduce in on > FeministSF-Lit, which is slightly more process-oriented (you > have a window > for nominations, the noms are voted on, and all that). The > only problem you > might face is that no one else who posts may have read it, > but perhaps we > will be inspired by your first posting. > > -----Original Message----- > From: April Goodwin Smith [mailto:aprilgoodwinsmith@YAHOO.COM] > ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 16:40:50 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Todd Mason Subject: Grand-niece of Periodical Thoughts MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Kate Wilhelm has the lead novelette in the new ELLERY QUEENS, a Charlie and Constance story (earlier entries, including some borderline horrors, were recently collected in A FLUSH OF SHADOWS), "An Imperfect Gift." Only one offhand reference could be called fantastic in this good psychological suspense story, but with some of the characters fleeing the Nazis back in the thick of WW2, and attempting now to reclaim lost treasure (even if the lost lives can't be), reading the story last night dovetailed with some of the television I watched just after...episodes of LAW AND ORDER (involving young neoNazis and their guru), OZ (with its Aryan Brotherhood prisoners and guards and general brutality), and INTERNATIONAL DISPATCH (the UK documentary series [known as DESPATCH at home?] imported here by some public stations, this episode about Evita and Juan Peron, and, in part, about their sheltering of Nazi refugees in Peronist Argentina). Some horror needs no fantastication. Tanith Lee has a good feminist/humanist fable in "Scarlet and Gold" in the Summer issue of WEIRD TALES. Occasionally the arch narrator's asides fall with a thud (the sly joke or two she allows her characters to share with us work better), but this baroque pretense is only slightly offputting, and more than made up for. Catherine Mintz's vignette also will repay those who seek out this issue; only Keith Taylor's lead story struck me as less than good, and that had virtues. I was reading a long essay on the newly-issued Hemingway novel, as re-pieced-together by his son, in the June or July HARPER'S, and a passage describing Hemingway struck me as just as applicable to Heinlein. I'll try to dig it up and lay it out for you tomorrow, but it has always struck me that just as Hemingway ushered in a terseness and a concern for very precise word choice (perhaps even going Twain one better in this), aside from embarrassing machismo (apparently eminently on display in this book, pieces of which apparently appeared in SPORTS ILLUSTRATED ca. 1970...some seven years or so after Theodore Sturgeon had a minor sf story in that magazine). Dashiell Hammett had essentially the same role in crime fiction, and Robert Heinlein introduced the lean and contemporarily glib idiom more adeptly and influentially than even Sturgeon or Leiber (who were writing at least as much fantasy as sf in the early John Campbell years), and, as I said, began to parallel "Papa" Ernest in self-parody toward the end. Hammett fell silent, contenting himself with occasionally slugging Lillian Hellman. In horror, Robert Bloch was probably the most comparable figure, introducing a decidedly modern idiom into WEIRD TALES and its competitors when it seemed most of their contributors and readers were content with Victorian and Edwardian fustian. Unlike the others, Bloch never gave himself entirely over to self-indulgence; the worst example I can think of was his mediocre third "PSYCHO" novel, PSYCHO HOUSE, which may or may not have been a buck hustle. Perhaps Sturgeon deserves some attention in this context for his UNKNOWN fantasies, which more than anyone else's aside from L. Sprague de Camp's helped perpetuate the Thorne Smith tradition in the magazine. So perhaps it's Smith, influential on Bloch (an occasional UNKNOWN contributor) and his colleagues, who deserves the Hemingway nod in fantasy... ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 15:53:23 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Cera Kruger Subject: Re: Clarion In-Reply-To: <802567A9.006916A1.00@nun.postmaster.co.uk> from Mike Stanton at "Jul 9, 1999 7:46:48 pm" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mike Stanton writes: > On 8 Jul 99, at 14:31, Daniel Krashin wrote: > > > There are several Clarion diaries on the web that > > will give you an idea of the ecstasy and madness > > that is Clarion, if anyone is interested let me know > > and I'll dig them up. > > I'd be grateful if you would. I find the whole topic fascinating. CJ Silverio has a great one. It starts with: http://www.blackbook.org/June97/970621.html -- Cera -- Cera Kruger -++- diony@idiom.com -+- http://www.requiem.com -++- SFLAaE/BS "And it's alright if you hate that way / hate me cause I'm different / hate me cause I'm gay / Truth of the matter come around one day / so it's alright." -- Emily Saliers (Indigo Girls' _Shaming of the Sun_) ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 18:19:24 -0600 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Valerie Eakes-Kann Subject: Re: Clarion MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I found another one... http://www.sff.net/people/chiara/JournalClarionMainPage.htm Cera Kruger wrote: > > Mike Stanton writes: > > On 8 Jul 99, at 14:31, Daniel Krashin wrote: > > > > > There are several Clarion diaries on the web that > > > will give you an idea of the ecstasy and madness > > > that is Clarion, if anyone is interested let me know > > > and I'll dig them up. > > > > I'd be grateful if you would. I find the whole topic fascinating. > > CJ Silverio has a great one. It starts with: > > http://www.blackbook.org/June97/970621.html > > -- Cera ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 09:17:07 EDT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Phoebe Wray Subject: OT - Bulwer Lytton winners MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Just for a chuckle on a Saturday... winners of the annual Bulwer-Lytton contest, which includes both SF and F categories... http://www.bulwer-lytton.com/99win.htm Enjoy. best phoebe Phoebe Wray zozie@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 18:35:47 +0100 Reply-To: edward.james@newscientist.net Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Edward James Subject: Re: The Article Is Wearing a Bib MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Keith wrote: > On Tue, 13 Jul 1999, Rose Secrest wrote: > > > Sarah Lefanu, In the Chinks of the World Machine > > > > The woman responsible for that excellent, excellent study "Feminsism and > Science Fiction" has written so Tiptree-titled a story? This is indeed > welcome news! Thank *you*, Rose Secrest. > > Kathleen No one seems to have cleared this one up ovver the last few days (while I have been at the Leeds International Medieval Congress!), so do let me... Sarah lefanu's bpook on feminist sf was called _In the Chinks of the World Machine: Feminism and Science Fiction_ when it was first published over here in the UK, by Women's Press. When it was eventually published in the USA by an academic press, they dropped the wonderful title, and ran it on the subtitle. So Kathleen and Rose are talknig about the same book. (I remember Marleen Barr making a similar mistake in concversation with me, complaining bitterly that "Feminism and Science Fiction" was printed by an academic press, and it did not follow academic standard of footnoting etc. But, as I pointed out, it was not _written_ for an academic press, and Sarah Lefanu (a writer and journalist) was not even _pretending_ to be a journalist!) Edward James ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 18:42:51 +0100 Reply-To: edward.james@newscientist.net Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Edward James Subject: Re: feminist litcrit MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Nicola Griffith wrote: > Sheryl writes: > > I didn't much enjoy Barr's _Lost in Space_ either, to tell you the truth. > One text I did thoroughly enjoy was Robin Roberts' _A New Species: Gender and > Science in Science Fiction_ (University of Illinois Press, 1993). As a > bonus, it has some reproductions of wonderful pulp illustrations, all of > giant women, or giant female aliens, menacing teeny tiny men. Good stuff. > > Nicola > > Nicola Griffith > http://www.sff.net/people/Nicola My problem with Roberts's book came on page 41. I quote "The covers and stories represented in books like James Gunn's _Alternate worlds_ typically display the cliched image of an enormous bizarre-looking and malignant alien carrying away a curvaceous woman." Well, I didn't believe that, and I checked in James Gunn's book. I haven't got the statistics in front of me. But there are about 600 pictures in Gunn's book, nearly two hundred of which (I think) represent book and magazine covers, and there were TWO pictures of aliens carrying away women. I lost faith in Roberts after that. Why didn't she do her own research? Count the covers of _Planet Stories_ or something? Or even count the pictures in James Gunn... Edward James ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 09:30:18 THT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Anne-Marie Langford Subject: CJ CHerryh discussion Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit When I first came on the list there was an interesting discussion of CJ Cherryh's book Pride of Chanur going on. I just finished the book only to find that the discussion has gone. Has everybody lost interest or could I start again? I thought the historical discussion was getting pretty good, neither too academic or simplistic. Anne-Marie ____________________________________________________________________ Get free e-mail and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1 ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 18 Jul 1999 01:08:48 CDT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Barbara Benesch-Granberg Subject: Re: Bone Dance Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Oooh ooh. Someone mentioned Bone Dance. Can we discuss it? Huh huh, can we please?? grin. For those interested, Bone Dance is by Emma Bull, and takes place in a post-apocalyptic future. The book's central character is Sparrow, who surpasses appearances (that much I can say without giving away any spoilers). We follow Sparrow's exploits and the shattering of many a preconception. There's a bad guy who admittedly feels a little obligatory, but mostly it's about Sparrow's journey. Learning about one's strengths, and the development of self-esteem in someone who never had it before. I really enjoyed it, and would be really interested to see what other people think of it as well. Pweeeeease talk about it with me!! :) Barbara Benesch-Granberg _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 18 Jul 1999 16:38:23 CEST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Claudia Lyndhurst Subject: Re: CJ CHerryh discussion Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Anne-Marie Langford wrote: >When I first came on the list there was an interesting discussion of CJ >Cherryh's book Pride of Chanur going on. I just finished the book only to >find that the discussion has gone. Has everybody lost interest or could I >start again? I thought the historical discussion was getting pretty good, >neither too academic or simplistic. Anne-Marie The discussion's moved to a list specifically for adventure/space opera sf/f. There's no reason why it shouldn't continue as well on this list so I suggest you just start again. Claudia ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 18 Jul 1999 06:47:33 THT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Anne-Marie Langford Subject: Re: CJ CHerryh discussion Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Claudia Lyndhurst:- > The (Cherryh) discussion's moved to a list specifically for > adventure/space opera sf/f. There's no reason why it shouldn't > continue as well on this list so I suggest you just start again. It seems to me that changing the discussion to another list was the wrong thing to do. I know the discussions lately have been dry and academic and so I'm sure that there are plenty of other people like myself on the list who were and would be interested in a discussion of CJ Cherryh or others like Robin Hobb or Lois McMaster Bujold who write adventure/space opera sf/f. On most lists there are usually only a few people who like writing in but there are usually many who enjoy reading what they have to say. For the ones who like writing to just move off to another list is very unfair to those who remain. Anne-Marie Langford ____________________________________________________________________ Get free e-mail and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1 ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 18 Jul 1999 17:53:45 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: April Goodwin Smith Subject: Re: Bone Dance MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Yes, please, indeed, with bells on, and other eager manifestations of anticipation to boot. But how do we discuss it while, (a) enticing other people to read it, yet (b) also not spoiling it for them, as well as (c) satisfying our desire to chew it over and savour every juicy morsel? I feel strongly about not spoiling the book for other people because I enjoyed unravelling the central secret, and I believe that lack of knowledge of the secret makes a discernable difference to the new reader's first perception of the novel. On the other hand, the four people I have forced it upon have not had the same reaction to it that I did, despite my reticence. Of course, me bouncing up and down saying, "G'wan, read it, have you finished yet? C'mon, hurry, hurry," so that I can talk to them about it has probably not helped. (Or done much for my pose of reticence, I suppose.) On the third hand (think rummy), since the publisher has foolishly allowed this classic to go out of print, even if we whet other people's appetites, how will they sate that desire? There is an excellent resource for searching for out-of-print books on the web: http://www.abebooks.com/ but the prices range from acceptable to "ouchie" to "I would never have opened my copy if I'd known how much a pristine copy would eventually fetch". On the final hand, I truly believe that Bull achieved the stature of LeGuin and Russ with _Bone Dance_, and I would like to talk about her work, but especially about _Bone Dance_, with a group of people who are interested in this type of work (especially since I did a paper for a 4th year theory course, and am bursting with ideas - okay, so my ability to conceal my intentions is nil and dropping). So, as a newbie, I'd be interested to hear the best way to approach this idea on this list. I know that the lit list has chosen its schedule of books until about Jan 2000. Is it possible to engage both lists (under different time frames), or are most people members of both lists? April. with thanks for the encouragement to: --- Barbara Benesch-Granberg --- Todd Mason --- Candioglos, Sandy --- Vivian Lee === "Things that try to look like things often do look more like things than things. Well-known fact." Esmerelda Weatherwax. (Pratchett, 1988) _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 18 Jul 1999 21:18:51 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Jocelyn & Sheryl Denton-LeSage Subject: Re: Bone Dance MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I loved Bone Dance, but couldn't get into any of her other books. Has anyone else had this problem with her, or is it just me? Sheryl -----Original Message----- From: Barbara Benesch-Granberg To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Date: Sunday, July 18, 1999 1:10 AM Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] Bone Dance >Oooh ooh. Someone mentioned Bone Dance. Can we discuss it? Huh huh, can we >please?? grin. > >For those interested, Bone Dance is by Emma Bull, and takes place in a >post-apocalyptic future. The book's central character is Sparrow, who >surpasses appearances (that much I can say without giving away any >spoilers). We follow Sparrow's exploits and the shattering of many a >preconception. > >There's a bad guy who admittedly feels a little obligatory, but mostly it's >about Sparrow's journey. Learning about one's strengths, and the development >of self-esteem in someone who never had it before. > >I really enjoyed it, and would be really interested to see what other people >think of it as well. > >Pweeeeease talk about it with me!! :) > >Barbara Benesch-Granberg > > >_______________________________________________________________ >Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 18 Jul 1999 21:38:59 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Jocelyn & Sheryl Denton-LeSage Subject: Re: OT - Bulwer Lytton winners MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit OK, the one about the plumber and the one about the dragon were the best. -----Original Message----- From: Phoebe Wray To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Date: Saturday, July 17, 1999 8:18 AM Subject: [*FSFFU*] OT - Bulwer Lytton winners >Just for a chuckle on a Saturday... winners of the annual Bulwer-Lytton >contest, which includes both SF and F categories... > >http://www.bulwer-lytton.com/99win.htm > >Enjoy. > >best >phoebe > >Phoebe Wray >zozie@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 18 Jul 1999 22:56:45 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: April Goodwin Smith Subject: Re: Bone Dance MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii No, sadly. I *like* her other books, but Bone Dance is by far and away her best. April. --- Jocelyn & Sheryl Denton-LeSage wrote: > I loved Bone Dance, but couldn't get into any of her > other books. Has > anyone else had this problem with her, or is it just > me? > Sheryl > === "Things that try to look like things often do look more like things than things. Well-known fact." Esmerelda Weatherwax. (Pratchett, 1988) _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 19 Jul 1999 15:12:13 CEST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Claudia Lyndhurst Subject: Re: CJ CHerryh discussion Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Anne-Marie Langford wrote: >For the ones who like writing to just move off to >another list is very unfair to those who remain. I think you're being unfair here yourself. The type of discussion you refer to as "dry and academic" is what *most* people wish. I myself - along with others on the list - have no interest in "lit crit" or other academic discussions and still less in what you yourself refer to as "simplistic". So we attempted to discuss books and topics more interesting to us. As in so many cases where the tastes of a minority diverge too far from the group, tensions began to arise and we felt it best to move. Rather than criticise, I urge you to try it too. Discussions are, I must confess, rather "robust" but if you're amenable to "give and take", I'm sure you'll find it enjoyable. The _The Pride of Chanur_ discussion "expires" on 22 July, but you've still got time for a few solid punches. I should point out however that, although all the books discussed to date have been feminist sf/f and almost all the people are women, discussions in future will cover all "space opera / adventure". Though the way Mike Stanton has been whimpering about J V Jones and Robin Hobb, I expect femsf to last a bit longer . Talking about the devil, has anyone heard from Mike over the last few days? Claudia ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 19 Jul 1999 15:46:55 0100 Reply-To: mayerhofer@usf.uni-kassel.de Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Petra Mayerhofer Subject: Book discussions and BDG In-Reply-To: <19990718215345.6789.rocketmail@web601.yahoomail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT On 18 Jul 99, April Goodwin Smith wrote: > So, as a newbie, I'd be interested to hear the best > way to approach this idea on this list. I know that > the lit list has chosen its schedule of books until > about Jan 2000. Is it possible to engage both lists > (under different time frames), or are most people > members of both lists? And another poster said she'd like to discuss _Amazon_. The subject line of her post was 'OT: Amazon'. >From that I concluded that for some newcomers to (both) lists the role of the BDG is not quite clear. Furthermore in the last weeks many things were said about the BDG which bothered me (to say the least). So, I'd like to clarify some things concerning a 'monopoly' of BDG on book discussion and (my favourite) what's off- topic. The FeministSF email distribution list was created in early 1996. At the end of 1997 i.e. after the list had existed for 1 1/2 years somebody suggested to create a scheduled book discussion. The reason for this were the difficulties _to come together_ somehow in a discussion. Very often people suggested to discuss a book, some said yes, let's do it, and ... then nothing came of it. Or people posted their opinions on books and nobody or hardly anybody reacted because others had either not read the book or a long time ago or ... So, there were a lot of false starts. Of course, sometimes there was a discussion but in many cases that was due because something was said about a book that was the complete opposite of what other list members thought about the book, the author, feminism or life in general. That means 'opinionated' discussions (with a tendency to become hostile or even flame wars) were IMHO more successful (in terms of 'list space') than calmer, more harmonic ones. As that statement can be misunderstood I'd like to clarify that I do not think that calmer discussions are in itself better than more opinionated ones, simply that IMO it is unfortunate that calmer, harmonic discussions have less chance to come into existence. All in all in-depth discussions of books were rather rare on the list (and outside of the BDG still are). So, the set-up of a scheduled book discussion was discussed and the Book Discussion Group (BDG) established in early 1998. Thereby, it was always stressed that the BDG is ONLY HOSTED by the list and should not influence the nature of the list i.e. the BDG has no monopoly on book discussions on the list. IMO the BDG was very successful in generating fruitful and more in-depth discussion. However, although it was not the intention at least in terms of percentage of postings the BDG has taken over the list. Thus, newcomers could get the impression that the BDG is the list and everything else is Off-topic. But Off-topic are only messages that do not concern feminist speculative fiction books (or speculative fiction books in general from a feminist perspective). There are certainly degrees of Off-topicness but I think under any definition a discussion of _Amazon_ would be clear On-topic. The BDG rules did not change when the group moved to the newly created feministsf-lit list. Again, the BDG is only hosted by that list. The same issues April raised in her email (availability, spoiler protocol, scheduling and participation) were discussed before the BDG was established (and sometimes following a selection process). The result is a rather formal process with nominations and voting and a long-term schedule to accommodate non-US residents like myself. IMO the process is very democratic and if list members are unhappy about the selected books one can at least say that the majority of those who voted preferred the selected ones. As in any democratic process there is (1) the question how to take the interests of minorities into account and (2) the question why people do not vote. So far, there have been each time about 30- 50 votes in the various selection periods. As there are about 250 list members that is not a high percentage and the reasons why people do not vote are certainly of interest. However, I don't think that it is possible to create a single discussion group/process that is satisfactory for all, it is probably better to establish several features to accommodate the interest of many. Last thing I wanted to discuss is the reproach that the BDG discussions are too academic. I am rather puzzled by that as from my perspective for example the Cherryh discussion was much more academic than any BDG discussion ever was. I suppose it's a question of what people understand under academic. So, to clarify my view of that term: I don't think the BDG discussions are academic because IMO an academic discussion would involve (1) a comparison with literary concepts of whatever provenance (note I am an engineer and have hardly any idea of literary criticism) and (2) an analysis close to the text. At least the latter was the case to a certain degree in the Cherryh discussion and never happened in the BDG discussion. And no, I don't think a close text analysis is a bad thing although had I read the Cherryh books I probably could have learnt more from the discussion. I assume that the other posters define 'academic' in a different way and their reproach concerns other points. BDG guidelines and schedule can be looked up at the BDG website http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Comet/1304/ More specifically the archives of the former discussions from _Ammonite_ to _Slow River_ (compiled by the industrious Janice Dawley) can be read up at http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Comet/1304/bdg_archives.html Petra *** Petra Mayerhofer **** mayerhofer@usf.uni-kassel.de *** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 19 Jul 1999 13:49:55 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Todd Mason Subject: FW: PHILADELPHIA FANTASTIC--KATE ELLIOTT Comments: cc: SCIENCEFICTION-L@LISTSERV.INDIANA.EDU MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" For those in the tristate area and not unwilling to step into a megaglump: -----Original Message----- From: Camille Bacon-Smith [mailto:camille@voicenet.com] Sent: Saturday, July 17, 1999 11:42 AM To: Multiple recipients of list SF-LIT Subject: PHILADELPHIA FANTASTIC--KATE ELLIOTT Philadelphia Fantastic has moved! Join us at our new venue and permanent home, BORDERS BOOKS, 1727 Walnut Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, to hear speculative fiction writer Kate Elliot. Elliott will read from her recent work on July 23rd @ 7:30 in the evening . Kate Elliott is the writer of the best selling CROWN OF STARS heroic fantasy series including the books KING'S DRAGON. PRINCE OF DOGS, and THE BURNING STONE. With Melanie Rawn and Jennifer Roberson, she has also co-written the huge best seller THE GOLDEN KEY. Her science fiction includes the popular JARAN alien world series. Philadelphia Fantastic presents a series of readings and informal discussions by and with local writers of speculative fiction--science fiction, fantasy, horror--on the fourth Friday of the month. Our location is BORDERS BOOKS, 1727 Walnut Street, and the time is 7:30 pm. So grab a latte and join Kate Elliott at Borders for some great speculative fiction. The readings are free: post-reading snack-hunt is pay as you go. Camille Bacon-Smith for Philadelphia Fantastic PS Check out our website at http://www.voicenet.com/~camille/phillysf.html for news of upcoming events. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 19 Jul 1999 09:13:12 THT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Anne-Marie Langford Subject: Re: Book discussions and BDG Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Petra Mayerhofer:- > Last thing I wanted to discuss is the reproach that the BDG > discussions are too academic. I've only just seen some of the earlier discussions of the BDG books on the feminist-lit list (thank you Claudia) so I wasn't referring to that. Most discussion - "I liked xxxx because the hero didn't shave her armpits", "I liked that too because it made me feel good about myself", "Even my cat liked it and she's very particular" and so on - seems to be about as far from academic as I can imagine. I'm not being catty because all discussion lists are like that ... 80% one or two liners about trivialities. > I am rather puzzled by that as from > my perspective for example the Cherryh discussion was much > more academic than any BDG discussion ever was. I suppose it's > a question of what people understand under academic. The Cherryh discussion at least showed that the participants mostly thought a little before posting but I don't think it was academic, not if the historical discussions I've read (history was one of my majors) are good examples. The participants, I think, had read generally on the subject but none of them were experts on the periods they discussed. In fact I doubt if any of them were experts on history generally either even to the extent of doing more than 1 or 2 semesters of history. If we think that's "academic" then academia has really hit the skids. > So, to clarify my view of that term: I don't think the BDG > discussions are academic because IMO an academic discussion would > involve (1) a comparison with literary concepts of whatever > provenance (note I am an engineer and have hardly any idea of > literary criticism) and (2) an analysis close to the text. "Lit crit" made some of my college days miserable and I envy your lack of contact with the subject. I don't think the Cherryh discussion was a "close reading" unless I've forgotten more than I realize in the 15 years since I did "lit crit". What I did like about it, as I said, is that the participants thought more or less carefully and carefully tried to explain what they meant and why they thought as they did. I also thought they showed a good spirit of debate because there were obviously strong differences of opinion but nobody started wailing about being flamed even when one of them flatly said all the others were "obviously" wrong. That's rare on mailing lists where the first response to any disagreement is usually to start crying. Anne-Marie ____________________________________________________________________ Get free e-mail and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 19 Jul 1999 18:15:47 EDT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Tanya Bouwman Subject: Re: CJ CHerryh discussion MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 7/18/99 12:47:37 PM Eastern Daylight Time, a-msl@USA.NET writes: > > The (Cherryh) discussion's moved to a list specifically for > > adventure/space opera sf/f. There's no reason why it shouldn't > > continue as well on this list so I suggest you just start again. > > It seems to me that changing the discussion to another list was the wrong > thing to do. I know the discussions lately have been dry and academic and so > I'm sure that there are plenty of other people like myself on the list who > were and would be interested in a discussion of CJ Cherryh or others like > Robin Hobb or Lois McMaster Bujold who write adventure/space opera sf/f. On > most lists there are usually only a few people who like writing in but there > are usually many who enjoy reading what they have to say. For the ones who > like writing to just move off to another list is very unfair to those who > remain. As one of those who more often reads than posts, I have to agree with this. Also, I never saw any notice to those of us "readers" that the Cherryh discussion was moving to another list, which is also unfair to the rest of this list. If you felt the discussion no longer belonged on this list, why didn't someone let the rest of the list know that the discussion was moving--you'd have probably gotten a lot of "please don't!!!!" responses. Tanya ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 19 Jul 1999 21:31:43 -0800 Reply-To: shander@cdsnet.net Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Sharon Anderson Subject: List Cloning MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit <> Uh....first we got a list just for books, since a few people on THIS list can't seem to stay on the topic of feminist sf.......which is, after all, the name of this list. OK. So we got a new list to discuss what -- ostensibly -- this list is about. The "on topic" list. I can live with that. Now you are telling me that there is a THIRD list, this one just for adventure/space opera. WHEN DID THIS HAPPEN? When did Dr. Frankenstein get loose in the feminist sf cloning lab? And where will it end? Is there another list I don't know about for lesbian separatist SF? How about feminist sf written by men, such as Delaney? Do those of us who like fantasy have to form a separate list just for fantasy? I recall sometime ago that there was a lengthy discussion on "hard" science. Did that result in a hard sf list, which I don't know about? I do admit I like e-mail. I like being on several different lists. It's just that the several different lists I currently belong to reflect my several different interests: vegetarianism; women's politics; disability; gardening; mystery books; lesbians-only. I never thought...I never dreamed that I'd have to join eight separate lists just to deal with feminist sf. I think I'm rapidly losing interest here. ----sharon ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 11:52:19 +0300 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: U Sanna Koulu Subject: Re: List Cloning In-Reply-To: <379409BF.B1A77794@cdsnet.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sharon Anderson wrote: > OK. So we got a new list to discuss what -- ostensibly -- this list is > about. The "on topic" list. I can live with that. Now you are telling me > that there is a THIRD list, this one just for adventure/space opera. Agh. Would someone help me out and tell me what other lists there are, and how one joins them? Is there a help page somewhere? Grateful for any help, - Sanna Koulu -Sanna Koulu -------------------------------------------------------- - ------------Naisen saa parahultaisen pehmeäksi------ -050-5849 617 ---------------kun sen laittaa ammeeseen kylpygeelin--- -Seanna @ irc --------------kanssa. Sitten sen voi kääriä huopaan--- -Viljo Sohkasen k. 3 E 38 ---ja syöttää sille suklaata.-------------- -01370 VANTAA ------------------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 11:09:08 0100 Reply-To: mayerhofer@usf.uni-kassel.de Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Comments: Sender has elected to use 8-bit data in this message. If problems arise, refer to postmaster at sender's site. From: Petra Mayerhofer Subject: Re: List Cloning In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT There are multitudes of email lists out there. Formerly the Science Fiction Resource Guide gave an overview of these but that website vanished. More specifically there are 2 email lists on feminist sf organized by Laura Quilter, this one here and the feministsf-lit. The only distinction is that on the feministsf-lit Off-topic postings are not tolerated, on-topic being discussions closely related to feminist sf or feminist perspectives of sf in general. The feministsf-lit list was created in February (?) this year after more and more people became annoyed about the high load of Off-topic postings on this list. Some people are subscribed to both lists and some are only on one. Both lists are described at Laura's Feminist Science Fiction, Fantasy & Utopia website (highly recommended): http://www.wenet.net/~lquilter/femsf/listserv/index.html The Space Opera list Claudia refered to is not related to the feministsf lists and I don't think there is any intention of further clones. Petra On 20 Jul 99, U Sanna Koulu wrote: > Sharon Anderson wrote: > > > OK. So we got a new list to discuss what -- ostensibly -- this > > list is > > about. The "on topic" list. I can live with that. Now you are > > telling me that there is a THIRD list, this one just for adventure/space > > opera. > > Agh. Would someone help me out and tell me what other lists there are, and > how one joins them? Is there a help page somewhere? > > > Grateful for any help, > > - Sanna Koulu > > -Sanna Koulu -------------------------------------------------------- > - ------------Naisen saa parahultaisen pehmeäksi------ > -050-5849 617 ---------------kun sen laittaa ammeeseen kylpygeelin--- > -Seanna @ irc --------------kanssa. Sitten sen voi kääriä huopaan--- > -Viljo Sohkasen k. 3 E 38 ---ja syöttää sille suklaata.-------------- > -01370 VANTAA ------------------------------------------------------- *** Petra Mayerhofer **** mayerhofer@usf.uni-kassel.de *** ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 07:19:08 -0300 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Patricia Monk Subject: Re: List Cloning Comments: To: Sharon Anderson In-Reply-To: <379409BF.B1A77794@cdsnet.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII I agree with you, Sharon, wholeheartedly. It is hard enough to keep track without having things pulled out from under you without notice. I didn't know the Cherryh discussion was moving, and I wish it hadn't. How do I catch up with it, I wonder. ************************************************************** Dr Patricia Monk patmonk@is.dal.ca Department of English Dalhousie University HALIFAX Nova Scotia B3H 2S3 ignorance is curable * stupidity is forever ************************************************************** On Mon, 19 Jul 1999, Sharon Anderson wrote: > < sf/f. There's no reason why it shouldn't continue as well on this list so I > suggest you just start again.>> > > Uh....first we got a list just for books, since a few people on THIS list > can't seem to stay on the topic of feminist sf.......which is, after all, the > name of this list. > OK. So we got a new list to discuss what -- ostensibly -- this list is > about. The "on topic" list. I can live with that. Now you are telling me > that there is a THIRD list, this one just for adventure/space opera. WHEN DID > THIS HAPPEN? When did Dr. Frankenstein get loose in the feminist sf cloning > lab? And where will it end? Is there another list I don't know about for > lesbian separatist SF? How about feminist sf written by men, such as Delaney? > Do those of us who like fantasy have to form a separate list just for > fantasy? I recall sometime ago that there was a lengthy discussion on "hard" > science. Did that result in a hard sf list, which I don't know about? > I do admit I like e-mail. I like being on several different lists. It's > just that the several different lists I currently belong to reflect my several > different interests: vegetarianism; women's politics; disability; gardening; > mystery books; lesbians-only. I never thought...I never dreamed that I'd have > to join eight separate lists just to deal with feminist sf. > I think I'm rapidly losing interest here. > > > ----sharon > ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 09:17:02 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Laura Quilter Subject: Re: List Cloning In-Reply-To: <199907200909.LAA10075@cserv.usf.uni-kassel.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit out of curiosity, is this space opera list related to feminism in any way? laura q list-mistress On Tue, 20 Jul 1999, Petra Mayerhofer wrote: > Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 11:09:08 0100 > From: Petra Mayerhofer > To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU > Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] List Cloning > > There are multitudes of email lists out there. Formerly the Science > Fiction Resource Guide gave an overview of these but that website > vanished. > > More specifically there are 2 email lists on feminist sf organized by > Laura Quilter, this one here and the feministsf-lit. The only > distinction is that on the feministsf-lit Off-topic postings are not > tolerated, on-topic being discussions closely related to feminist sf > or feminist perspectives of sf in general. The feministsf-lit list was > created in February (?) this year after more and more people > became annoyed about the high load of Off-topic postings on this > list. Some people are subscribed to both lists and some are only > on one. > > Both lists are described at Laura's Feminist Science Fiction, > Fantasy & Utopia website (highly recommended): > http://www.wenet.net/~lquilter/femsf/listserv/index.html > > The Space Opera list Claudia refered to is not related to the > feministsf lists and I don't think there is any intention of further > clones. > > Petra > > On 20 Jul 99, U Sanna Koulu wrote: > > > Sharon Anderson wrote: > > > > > OK. So we got a new list to discuss what -- ostensibly -- this > > > list is > > > about. The "on topic" list. I can live with that. Now you are > > > telling me that there is a THIRD list, this one just for adventure/space > > > opera. > > > > Agh. Would someone help me out and tell me what other lists there are, and > > how one joins them? Is there a help page somewhere? > > > > > > Grateful for any help, > > > > - Sanna Koulu > > > > -Sanna Koulu -------------------------------------------------------- > > - ------------Naisen saa parahultaisen pehmeäksi------ > > -050-5849 617 ---------------kun sen laittaa ammeeseen kylpygeelin--- > > -Seanna @ irc --------------kanssa. Sitten sen voi kääriä huopaan--- > > -Viljo Sohkasen k. 3 E 38 ---ja syöttää sille suklaata.-------------- > > -01370 VANTAA ------------------------------------------------------- > > > *** Petra Mayerhofer **** mayerhofer@usf.uni-kassel.de *** > Laura Quilter / lquilter@igc.apc.org "If I can't dance, I don't want to be in your revolution." -- Emma Goldman *** NEW TRIAL FOR MUMIA ABU-JAMAL *** ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 11:43:32 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Todd Mason Subject: Re: List Cloning: Monk et alles MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" I suspect that the space opera list doesn't exist, or else we would've been given some contact information, just as I suspect that several names who contribute to this list from free mail services are actually one person having a bit of fun... -----Original Message----- From: Patricia Monk [mailto:patmonk@IS.DAL.CA] I agree with you, Sharon, wholeheartedly. It is hard enough to keep track without having things pulled out from under you without notice. I didn't know the Cherryh discussion was moving, and I wish it hadn't. How do I catch up with it, I wonder. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 19:35:48 CEST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Claudia Lyndhurst Subject: Re: List Cloning: Monk et alles Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Todd Mason wrote: >I suspect that the space opera list doesn't exist, or >else we would've been given some contact information, just as I suspect >that several names who contribute to this list from free mail services are >actually one >person having a bit of fun... Todd Perhaps you should re-read your letter again. It would tell you why the discussion was moved and why no contact information was given. Setting up a list on one of the several services is five minutes work and costs nothing but unfortunately doesn't give the founders any say about who can join. The problem, therefore, is to simultaneously attract people with the right interests and keeping undesirables out. Claudia ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 12:44:36 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Todd Mason Subject: Re: List Cloning: "Lyndhurst" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" This does nothing to lessen my suspicion. -----Original Message----- From: Claudia Lyndhurst [mailto:clyndhurst@HOTMAIL.COM] Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 1999 3:36 PM To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] List Cloning: Monk et alles Todd Mason wrote: >I suspect that the space opera list doesn't exist, or >else we would've been given some contact information, just as I suspect >that several names who contribute to this list from free mail services are >actually one >person having a bit of fun... Todd Perhaps you should re-read your letter again. It would tell you why the discussion was moved and why no contact information was given. Setting up a list on one of the several services is five minutes work and costs nothing but unfortunately doesn't give the founders any say about who can join. The problem, therefore, is to simultaneously attract people with the right interests and keeping undesirables out. Claudia ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 10:45:30 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Candioglos, Sandy" Subject: Re: List Cloning: Monk et alles MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" So the rest of us that might have been interested in the Cherryh discussion are just SOL because you won't tell us where it moved? Cool, thanks. -Sandy > -----Original Message----- > From: Claudia Lyndhurst [mailto:clyndhurst@HOTMAIL.COM] > Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 1999 12:36 PM > To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU > Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] List Cloning: Monk et alles > > > Todd Mason wrote: > > >I suspect that the space opera list doesn't exist, or > >else we would've been given some contact information, just > as I suspect > >that several names who contribute to this list from free > mail services are > >actually one > >person having a bit of fun... > > Todd > > Perhaps you should re-read your letter again. It would tell > you why the > discussion was moved and why no contact information was > given. Setting up a > list on one of the several services is five minutes work and > costs nothing > but unfortunately doesn't give the founders any say about who > can join. The > problem, therefore, is to simultaneously attract people with the right > interests and keeping undesirables out. > > > > > Claudia > > > ______________________________________________________ > Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com > ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 18:46:22 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Lesley Hall Subject: Re: List Cloning: "Lyndhurst" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >discussion was moved and why no contact information was given. Setting up a >list on one of the several services is five minutes work and costs nothing >but unfortunately doesn't give the founders any say about who can join. I don't know which service you're using but this is certainly possible with listbot: which also enables pro-active list moderation - i.e. moderator can read and select messages before sending to the entire list. Lesley Hall lesleyah@primex.co.uk ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 13:43:17 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Todd Mason Subject: Re: List Cloning: Monk et alles MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" This assumes there is a new (and quite discreet) list some-hidden-where--which, btw, one Can keep "undesirable" people from joining, presumably: are these easy-to-establish lists necessarily moderatorless? Indeed, thanks. The joke is quite good. -----Original Message----- From: Candioglos, Sandy [mailto:sandy.candioglos@INTEL.COM] Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 1999 1:46 PM To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] List Cloning: Monk et alles So the rest of us that might have been interested in the Cherryh discussion are just SOL because you won't tell us where it moved? Cool, thanks. -Sandy ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 13:17:02 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Candioglos, Sandy" Subject: Re: List Cloning: Monk et alles MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" I thought the whole point is that they CAN'T keep people from joining it, once they know where it is, and that's why they're not telling the rest of us "undesirables" where it is. -Sandy > -----Original Message----- > From: Todd Mason [mailto:Todd.Mason@TVGUIDE.COM] > Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 1999 11:43 AM > To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU > Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] List Cloning: Monk et alles > > > This assumes there is a new (and quite discreet) list > some-hidden-where--which, btw, one Can keep "undesirable" people from > joining, presumably: are these easy-to-establish lists necessarily > moderatorless? > Indeed, thanks. The joke is quite good. > -----Original Message----- > From: Candioglos, Sandy [mailto:sandy.candioglos@INTEL.COM] > Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 1999 1:46 PM > To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU > Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] List Cloning: Monk et alles > > > So the rest of us that might have been interested in the > Cherryh discussion > are just SOL because you won't tell us where it moved? Cool, thanks. > > -Sandy > ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 15:40:32 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Todd Mason Subject: Re: You Can Keep "Undesirables" Out...:Candiologos MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Yes, that was the supposed point...it just doesn't ring true. -----Original Message----- From: Candioglos, Sandy [mailto:sandy.candioglos@INTEL.COM] Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 1999 4:17 PM To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] List Cloning: Monk et alles I thought the whole point is that they CAN'T keep people from joining it, once they know where it is, and that's why they're not telling the rest of us "undesirables" where it is. -Sandy > -----Original Message----- > From: Todd Mason [mailto:Todd.Mason@TVGUIDE.COM] > Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 1999 11:43 AM > To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU > Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] List Cloning: Monk et alles > > > This assumes there is a new (and quite discreet) list > some-hidden-where--which, btw, one Can keep "undesirable" people from > joining, presumably: are these easy-to-establish lists necessarily > moderatorless? > Indeed, thanks. The joke is quite good. > -----Original Message----- > From: Candioglos, Sandy [mailto:sandy.candioglos@INTEL.COM] > Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 1999 1:46 PM > To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU > Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] List Cloning: Monk et alles > > > So the rest of us that might have been interested in the > Cherryh discussion > are just SOL because you won't tell us where it moved? Cool, thanks. > > -Sandy > ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 23:54:38 CEST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Claudia Lyndhurst Subject: Re: List Cloning: "Lyndhurst" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Lesley Hall wrote: >I don't know which service you're using but this is certainly possible >with listbot: which also enables pro-active list moderation - i.e. >moderator can read and select messages before sending to the entire list. Doesn't help, Lesley, because none of us can be bothered with moderating or list administration. Even if we had a proper server, even then it wouldn't be worth the effort. The object of starting a list was to move away from hassles not create new ones. As I've said before several times, I'm just not that interested in discussing sf/f. Even now, I don't have time or inclination to read a 1/4 of the stuff I get from lists. Sometimes (like last week) I collect a few days or a weeks worth of messages and just delete them because I don't have time to read them. I think a lot of people are the same. Claudia ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 22:52:53 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Richard Holmes Subject: Re: Bone Dance I loved Bone Dance both times I read it. After a break of 2-3 years I still found plenty of surprises, though they were familiar ones... I enjoyed Finder as well; War for the Oaks was ok as well but much more fantasy (though I do like fantasy). I would look forward to discussions on Bone Dance. -Richard. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 21 Jul 1999 08:21:59 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Pat Subject: Re: Bone Dance In-Reply-To: <199907210552.WAA14462@ccrma-gate.stanford.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Tue, 20 Jul 1999, Richard Holmes wrote: > I loved Bone Dance both times I read it. After a break of 2-3 years I > still found plenty of surprises, though they were familiar ones... > > I enjoyed Finder as well; War for the Oaks was ok as well but much more > fantasy (though I do like fantasy). I would look forward to discussions > on Bone Dance. > > BONE DANCE is one of my all-time favorites. I have kept it to read and re-read. FINDER is another. Those are the only 2 Emma Bull novels I've kept. I LOVE Sparrow.> Patricia (Pat) Mathews mathews@unm.edu ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 21 Jul 1999 11:14:26 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Laura Quilter Subject: Angela Carter bulletin board (fwd) Comments: To: feministsf@uic.edu, -Fem-SF list , feministsf-lit@uic.edu Comments: cc: "From: kfox" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: MULTIPART/ALTERNATIVE; BOUNDARY="----=_NextPart_000_0004_01BED363.659A8100" This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. Send mail to mime@docserver.cac.washington.edu for more info. ------=_NextPart_000_0004_01BED363.659A8100 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=iso-8859-1 Content-ID: fyi y'all ... Laura Quilter / lquilter@igc.apc.org "If I can't dance, I don't want to be in your revolution." -- Emma Goldman *** NEW TRIAL FOR MUMIA ABU-JAMAL *** ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 21 Jul 1999 10:25:47 +0100 From: kfox To: lquilter@igc.apc.org Subject: Angela Carter I think I have already been in touch with you, but I'm looking to promote an Angela Carter message board, and I needed some advise. I fyou could help in any way I would be grateful, as I don't even have a web site yet. The board can be reached on http://www.insidetheweb.com/mbs.cgi/mb659155 Thank You, K.Fox ------=_NextPart_000_0004_01BED363.659A8100-- ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 21 Jul 1999 13:02:37 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Joyce Jones Subject: Re: List Cloning: Monk et alles Todd Mason wrote: "I suspect that the space opera list doesn't exist, or else we would've been given some contact information, just as I suspect that several names who contribute to this list from free mail services are actually one person having a bit of fun..." I've long suspected that Mike and AJ are the same person. It seems the whole jetting around the world, don't forget to call the pope for dinner and pick up a quart of diamonds on your way home from work is a pathetic ruse. Now you add the possibility that his receptive audience is another guise to turn feminssf into the all-Mike-all-the-time listserv. The Connie Willis To Say Nothing of the Dog award for investigative internetting goes to Todd. Thanks. I've enjoyed the possibility. Joyce ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 21 Jul 1999 15:29:12 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Todd Mason Subject: Re: List Cloning: Monk et alles MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" You're quite welcome, and thank you. The constant references to their? wealth and, as you note, mobility, might well be some kind of sad fantasy rather than the rude self-aggrandizement it has seemed. The boy may just be wrong, as Mike Judge might intone, rather than a prankster. Oh, well. -----Original Message----- From: Joyce Jones [mailto:hoop5@EMAIL.MSN.COM] Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 1999 4:03 PM To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] List Cloning: Monk et alles Todd Mason wrote: "I suspect that the space opera list doesn't exist, or else we would've been given some contact information, just as I suspect that several names who contribute to this list from free mail services are actually one person having a bit of fun..." I've long suspected that Mike and AJ are the same person. It seems the whole jetting around the world, don't forget to call the pope for dinner and pick up a quart of diamonds on your way home from work is a pathetic ruse. Now you add the possibility that his receptive audience is another guise to turn feminssf into the all-Mike-all-the-time listserv. The Connie Willis To Say Nothing of the Dog award for investigative internetting goes to Todd. Thanks. I've enjoyed the possibility. Joyce ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 21 Jul 1999 17:10:06 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Todd Mason Subject: Re: List Cloning: Monk et alles--nuance MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" I would've probably put this a bit more diplomatically, but would've said essentially the same thing, had I realized I was replying through the list. Busy day. Sorry, Mike and/or Anthea, but the money-jingling has been kind of much. -----Original Message----- From: Todd Mason Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 1999 4:29 PM To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] List Cloning: Monk et alles You're quite welcome, and thank you. The constant references to their? wealth and, as you note, mobility, might well be some kind of sad fantasy rather than the rude self-aggrandizement it has seemed. The boy may just be wrong, as Mike Judge might intone, rather than a prankster. Oh, well. -----Original Message----- From: Joyce Jones [mailto:hoop5@EMAIL.MSN.COM] Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 1999 4:03 PM To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] List Cloning: Monk et alles Todd Mason wrote: "I suspect that the space opera list doesn't exist, or else we would've been given some contact information, just as I suspect that several names who contribute to this list from free mail services are actually one person having a bit of fun..." I've long suspected that Mike and AJ are the same person. It seems the whole jetting around the world, don't forget to call the pope for dinner and pick up a quart of diamonds on your way home from work is a pathetic ruse. Now you add the possibility that his receptive audience is another guise to turn feminssf into the all-Mike-all-the-time listserv. The Connie Willis To Say Nothing of the Dog award for investigative internetting goes to Todd. Thanks. I've enjoyed the possibility. Joyce ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 21 Jul 1999 23:54:02 EDT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Tanya Bouwman Subject: Re: List Cloning: Monk et alles MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 7/20/99 1:37:50 PM Eastern Daylight Time, clyndhurst@HOTMAIL.COM writes: > Perhaps you should re-read your letter again. It would tell you why the > discussion was moved and why no contact information was given. Setting up a > list on one of the several services is five minutes work and costs nothing > but unfortunately doesn't give the founders any say about who can join. The > problem, therefore, is to simultaneously attract people with the right > interests and keeping undesirables out. > Sorry, but aren't you the one who has complained about not being able to say what you want to on this list because "it's not allowed". And, also, aren't you the one who has lamented the lack of "spirited" discussions on this list? Soooo, exactly who are these "undesirables" that you and your fellow discussionists wish to keep out? The ones who disagree with your ideas? Or, the ones who would insist on civility during the discussion? Just curious. Also-- >As I've said before several times, I'm just not that interested in discussing sf/f.< 1. Then why are you on a list that discusses sf/f? and, 2. Why are you discussing Cherryh's works, which are very obviously sf/f? Tanya