Subject: File: "FEMINISTSF LOG0208D" ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 18:03:50 -0700 Reply-To: listmistress@feministsf.org Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: listmistress@FEMINISTSF.ORG Subject: listmistress on spam Comments: To: feministsf@uic.edu, feministsf-lit@uic.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII hi list members (esp. list posters!), i've received an influx of spam lately as has everybody, i'm sure. amongst that spam i've received some particularly horrible spam advertising material that advertises children. i'm trying to track down how, exactly, i got added to those lists, and i'm also spam-proofing the website. so i'd like 2 things from y'all. one, if anybody else has recently received spam advertising material involving children, i would appreciate hearing from you -- if other people on the list are getting it then it might indicate that the list archives are the harvesting source. two, what do people think about password protecting the list archives? would it be a pain in the ass? do you think that it's worth it? do you think you get a lot of spam because you post to these lists, and the archives are on the web? do you have any other ideas about how to spam-proof the list archives? three (i guess it's not just two after all), just fyi, i am going thru the website, the listserve files, etc., and changing all my contact information to listmistress@feministsf.org -- a generic address which will hopefully help my personal email addresses from being polluted. [although it may be too late!] so, if you do have problems with the list, that's the new address to contact me at -- listmistress@feministsf.org . thanks, your frustrated list-mistress laura -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 07:27:47 -0700 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Monica Bielke Subject: Re: Jaran Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed It's nice to hear I'm not the only one who feels that way about imaginary world fantasy. I tend to look for mostly women authors because of it. I really like CJ Cherryh's "Foreigner" series, and Mary Gentle's "Golden Witchbreed" and "Ancient Light". To me they both capture what it must be like to live on a different planet, and their alien cultures really feel....well, alien! :-) Just my personal opinion. Monica Maire wrote: >Thanks for this question, and answer.. I have the Jaran book and I have been >wondering teh same thing. Actually, I would like any recomendations on good >imaginary world fantasy, that is not sexist... the adolescent male attitude >towards women is epidemic in epic fantasy. >Maire > > > -----Original Message----- >Christine asked: > > > I was wondering, does anyone recommand Kate Elliot's Jaran > series? I have > > > read her other series and was wondering if the Jaran is good or > simply the > > > same thing in another setting. Catherine Asaro > > I enjoyed her Jaran series a great deal. I really liked the > characterizations, > > the world-building, the complexity of the plot,and also the cultural > > development of the people. I would give it a high recommendation. -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2002 13:22:43 +0200 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Petra Mayerhofer Organization: http://freemail.web.de/ Subject: BDG Schedule Reminder Comments: To: FEMINISTSF-LIT@UIC.EDU, FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The upcoming discussions within the BDG on the feministsf-lit list are September 2 -- The Annunciate, by Severna Park October 7 -- The Books of Great Alta, by Jane Yolen _The Books of Great Alta_ consists of _Sister Light, Sister Dark_ (originally published in 1988) and the sequel _White Jenna_ (1989). The current BDG discussion is on _The Fifth Sacred Thing_ by Starhawk. The next selection round for the BDG will be probably in September. Info for the newcomers: The BDG is one (and only one) feature of the feministsf-lit. It's purpose is to focus discussion on a particular book at a particular time. Every four months four books are selected to be discussed within the next BDG round. Other books can be discussed in parallel to the BDG, of course, and past and future BDG books can be discussed at any time on the list. The difference to a 'normal' list discussion is that in BDG messages spoilers (for the BDG book under discussion) have not to be pointed out (the 'BDG' in the subject line is the actual spoiler warning). Further info on the BDG can be found at the BDG website http://www.geocities.com/bdg_volunteers/ Petra -- Petra Mayerhofer p.mayerhofer@web.de ______________________________________________________________________________ WEB.DE MyPage - Ohne Computerkenntnisse in nur 5 Minuten online! Alles inklusive! Kinderleicht! http://www.das.ist.aber.ne.lustige.sache.ms/ -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2002 14:04:05 -0400 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Dave Belden Subject: The Fifth Sacred Thing Comments: To: FEMINISTSF-LIT , FEMINISTSF MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Note: this is a spoiler. Save this for reading later if you haven^Òt finished the novel. It is also enormously long. I just had a lot to say. I have to say that this is one of the most ambitious and successful novels I know of. Most sf writers would be happy to have believable characters and future society, and a great plot with strong narrative drive. In addition, feminist and other sf authors with a social agenda need at least to present strong female or minority characters; while utopians want to come up with an inspiring future society. Starhawk does all this successfully, in my opinion, before even getting to the most ambitious task she sets herself: to show that non-violence can work against a government and army that equals the worst humanity has produced. She reiterates the litany of Nazism, the slave trade, genocides. These are what her utopian society needs to be able to confront, and change, if it is to survive. And not just these, but plague and disease. Her people^Òs spirituality and politics needs to be big enough to encompass, to know of, the worst evils of which nature and human nature are capable, and to survive. Crucially, instead of objectifying these horrible cruel acts of humans and nature as ^Ñevil,^Ò incomprehensible or devilish, and putting them ^Ñover there^Ò, while we people, the good ones, are ^Ñover here^Ò, she has her people struggle in themselves with these cruel forces. Madrone takes the disease into herself, to learn about it and overcome it. This becomes a metaphor for how the whole community takes the army into itself, and for how Bird becomes part of the army, in order to know it, and grapple with it at a deeper level than violence. There is no doubt in my mind that this is an inspiring and true attempt to grasp at what we humans need. I find this novel extraordinarily inspiring. But I did not expect to, second time around. I found Piercy^Òs Woman on the Edge of Time (WOTEOT), a novel which greatly inspired me back when it was written, to have lost much of its magic for me on rereading for this listserve. But the Fifth Sacred Thing still casts its spell on me, if anything more than it did first time around. This time around, WOTEOT seemed too ungrounded: getting rid of birthing seemed ungrounded, a head trip; the armed struggle seemed unrealistic; the economy seemed unrealistic (with its quotas, reminiscent of soviet five year planning ^Ö typical of the left even in the 70s); both the collapse of the current world economy and the creation of the new one seemed too fast; and the whole creation of such a fully rounded, consensus-driven, feminist society seemed too fast. What grounds the novel is Connie and her experiences and attitudes; but though she is in sharp focus, the future(s) she encounters seem less realistic and more out of focus to me now than they did then. The Fifth Sacred Thing (TFST) has some of the same problems: the too rapid collapse of our current society and at the end, the too rapid disappearance of the military. After the climactic scene where Bird is made to confront Maya in public, Starhawk sends the military packing in less than a page. This is odd, considering how she has avoided easy answers up to then. But I was actually willing to suspend my disbelief on that issue, because I bought into so much else. In TFST there are aspects of the society that do not seem realistic to me: especially the extremes of healing, the bees, and programming crystals or unlocking electronic devices by pure mental energy. And one has to take for granted that the Stewards originally abandoned San Francisco for reasons of their own, rather than because lots of alternative folks dug up the tarmac. But the development of the new society from that point was well told. This utopia is believable. It is full of differences (Cress and his faction, even the differences among the healers over traditional vs. energy-based medicine), and hard choices (e.g. the expulsion of the wild boar people). The people seem totally real: as real as Shevek in the Dispossessed, or Connie in WOTEOT: for my money, more real than Luciente. The economy seems possible, a regulated market economy (this shift to markets happened on the left between the 70s and the 90s). The locale is totally real, especially for anyone who has lived in San Francisco (for 12 years I lived in walking distance of the spiral hill in the lake where the nine crones guard the city). The spiritual basis of the new society has much to do with why I find it more plausible and attractive. It is an eclectic spirituality, broad enough to include the Christian Sisters next door, the Jewish tradition etc., and more focused on ecology and recalling the ancestors than on supernatural beings. It goes forward through myth, story, symbolism, music, ritual, healing, energy work: the richness of traditional religions and then some, without their dogmas. As an agnostic, even I can buy into it. The left as a whole spent most of the 20th century lacking any deep and universally available spirituality, (and lacking even the desire for it), and in my experience, it was feminists who started bringing it in, in the 1980s. I believe there are reasons why religions survive, beyond their misappropriation as rationalizations for powerful elites. The secular left cut off much of its own spiritual nourishment by rejecting religion as the opiate of the masses. That^Òs one reason why Starhawk^Òs vision feels to me like a more mature or holistic feminism than the 70s variety that lies behind WOTEOT. The social egalitarianism in WOTEOT and TFST both come from the socialist/anarchist left, the gender politics from feminism; the polyamory in both novels is pure 70s alternative culture; but the healing and spirituality, like the ecological consciousness and understanding of market economics, is more a development of the 80s. It^Òs a step forward, a larger embrace of the world. As a man, of course, I also like that Starhawk^Òs is not a feminism that writes off men. She is perfectly clear about the evil of male violence. But a crucial moment in the book is when the military is trying to break down Bird in jail one little step at a time, and they think getting him to rape Rosa is the next small step; whereas for him it is the ultimate impossibility. The implication is that it would be for most men raised like him. Did people find this plausible? More or less plausible than the bees? I don^Òt know, but I thank her for it: we men desperately need to be believed in. This too made it seem like a more mature feminism, or perhaps I should say a more universal or human approach. (This is not by contrast to Piercy, who shares this breadth, but still I found it more developed in this novel). The focus on disease also made it more universal. Disease is not a gender issue, at base. How it is treated, its sociology etc. of course is gendered. But the most feminist, egalitarian society will still have disease. This novel was written in the Western city perhaps hardest hit by plague in the lifetime of Starhawk^Òs (and my) generation. Personal knowledge of San Francisco in the time of AIDS before the current life-prolonging drugs suffuses this novel. It brings a sense that our struggle is not just against oppression, but for life and health itself. But the best thing for me is Starhawk^Òs attempt to tackle non-violence head on. This is why she has to make the Stewards so terrible ^Ö caricatures of both right wing Christians and corporations, and way beyond what they could become in one generation, in my opinion. That debate aside, she clearly needed a Nazi-level regime to go up against. As I wrote at the start, she constantly reiterates the horrors of the past: the Holocaust, the slave trade, the genocide of Native Americans. This is extraordinarily ambitious. She wants to heal the whole of history. She wants to say: non-violence doesn ^Òt just work against relatively democratic people who want to preserve their moral self image like the British in India, or white Americans in Selma, it will work anywhere. Or at least, it must be tried even if it fails, because violence never works. I looked for and failed to find the place where she actually says that violence never works. It^Òs there somewhere. That is a huge debate in itself ^Ö I think it is much less clear than she argues. One of the great surprises of history, to me, is that the European powers which caused more carnage than any others in history, have been at peace with each other for almost 60 years, and are unlikely to go to war with each other again. I am overwhelmingly grateful to all those who fought the Nazis to make it so. No doubt training the entire population of late 1930s Europe in non-violent resistance, of the sort portrayed in this novel, would have secured a better result. But that was not remotely feasible, and agreeing that mass non-violence would have been better doesn^Òt mean that fighting Hitler was wrong or that it didn^Òt change anything. Fighting Hitler changed a great deal, saved modern European democracy, gave growing space for countless lives and for vital ideas, such as modern feminism. Some mid-19th century Christian revivalists, notably Charles Finney, the most successful of them, argued that Christians should not get involved in political campaigns against slavery, since revivals would change enough slave owners to end it voluntarily. Thank God (?) many Christians disagreed and led the political fight for abolition. At times Starhawk^Òs purism seems as out of touch as Finney^Òs. Both are right, in one sense: changing hearts is better than coercion. But can it work on a big scale, to change history? The challenge Starhawk undertakes is to make a plausible scenario in which 1) a whole population can be trained to forego violence and coercion and undertake a kind of deep public theater in order to try and change the oppressors^Ò hearts, and 2) they do this against the worst history has to offer. And in spite of the speed of the army^Òs collapse at the end, I think she makes her case incredibly well. Am I being naïve? I actually think she makes it work. (Will I still in a month, when the novel^Òs glamour has faded?). In TFST you can see how hard it is to get consensus even in a totally prepared populace like this one, how it could be done, how they could train (as Starhawk has trained many groups herself), what the cost would be in applying it, how it could affect the enemy. It reads true, and possible, in such a context, to me. That doesn^Òt mean I think the Jews could have avoided the Holocaust by such actions ^Ö the context was too different. Likewise, the Palestinians^Ò history has probably prepared them less well to follow a Palestinian Gandhi, should such have appeared, than the Indians^Ò history prepared them for Gandhi himself: though, really, the appearance of a Gandhi or an MLK or Mandela is utterly astonishing anywhere. The question for us is, are we more ready than previous populations to try such a strategy, if put to the test ourselves ^Ö e.g. by a fascist-type takeover in the USA? I think that modern peace, plenty, education, and health have made us more able to learn of such things, to read novels like this, to imagine such outcomes, than our grandparents^Ò generation in Europe. Are we too lulled by advertising and TV to get off our butts and try it? I don^Òt know, but I don^Òt think so. Today, a lot more people would at least have a go than tried to in 1939. This brings me to my main problem with the novel. Using the terms of the novel itself, you can think of any situation, especially a crisis, as the Good Reality (el Mondo Bueno) or the Bad Reality. In such terms, there is little doubt that Starhawk sees our present society as the Bad Reality. I know she had to portray it as such, for the novel. I wonder what she really thinks? I fear she is so far into her alternative culture, that she demonizes the mainstream. And the danger of this, as she explains in other contexts in her novel, is that defining something as the Bad Reality helps to make it so. I think that democracy and freedom and the rule of law run deep in this culture. Creating even this much democracy has been a long tough road. I have lived in countries without (e.g. Eritrea under Haile Selassie). For people in dictatorships, the imperfect US democracy looks unattainably wonderful. I don^Òt think it would be given up as easily as it is in this novel. I think that Starhawk has bought into a general gloom and doom on the left that takes every sign of social sickness and extrapolates it to its most horrific possible conclusion. From this viewpoint, when ecological degradation was ^Ñdiscovered^Ò in a big way in the 70s and 80s, the only plausible outcome is a Central Valley as desert, oceans too toxic to swim in, the whales gone, as in TFST: when in fact the discovery of degradation started the ball rolling the other way. Several whale species are already abundant again. So also, when the resurgence of the Christian right was ^Ñdiscovered^Ò in the 1970s and 80s, left imaginations went wild with scenarios like The Handmaid^Ò s Tale and the TFST Stewards / Millennialists. But that^Òs demonizing. (I know lots of SF has fun doing this, and mostly I don^Òt object, but I am taking this novel more seriously, as seriously as it asks to be taken, and I think such demonizing has consequences). The whales are recovering, and there is evidence the fundamentalists are also. A recent New York Times article pointed out that when security situations have got impossible in some African countries lately, and most Western medical teams left, the only ones who stayed were the fundamentalist Christians. They have recently got energized about combating AIDS in Africa. If Bono had not believed Jesse Helms could change his decades-long opposition towards aid to the poorest, he would not have talked religion to him. Bono took the el Mondo Bueno view, and Helms changed his outlook, and so billions of unexpected dollars are going to Africa (at least in theory ^Ö now looks like there are hold-ups). There are good sociological reasons why fundamentalists become more vested in this-worldly solutions as their clientele becomes better off. Defeat in the Civil War, and being left behind economically by the North, generated Bible Belt fundamentalism: the magical solution of the Second Coming. The current economic rise of the South will eventually turn the fundamentalists back into folks who believe in progress, the social gospel, and being stewards (in the best sense) of the environment. I am told there are already fundamentalist environmental groups. I am a stuck record on this topic, on this listserve, so I will leave it. But my point is simply that the left^Òs penchant for thinking the worst helps galvanize public opinion to change things at some times, but in the long run leads many idealists, especially young idealists, to give up on Western civilization and democracy altogether. This is frightening. It is giving up on so much accomplishment by brave women and men who fought for and won incremental gains. Demonizing the opposition doesn^Òt help them change at all ^Ö as demonstrated rather beautifully by the non-violent tactics in TFST. I objected to this demonizing tendency in the Handmaid^Òs Tale, WOTEOT and He, She and It, and I object to it in TFST. At the same time, I see that for Starhawk^Òs broader purpose, it is necessary to construct a terrible, cruel, fundamentalist enemy to go up against. I expected to dislike TFST, second time around, because of this demonizing. Instead I was completely won over by the humanity of the novel. This is what I want for the future: an egalitarian spiritually alive garden city, with people trained in non-violent conflict. It^Òs just that I believe we can get there slowly by evolution, not by demonizing anyone or expecting the worst. The latter may actually help create or allow to happen the very evils we fear. I prefer to believe Starhawk needed a fascist America for her novel, but in fact is working to avoid that outcome and does not believe it need happen. I want to believe that she sees the worst of the Bad World, but chooses to live in el Mundo Bueno. That is the biggest challenge, bar none, that religion, literature, academia and humans in general can aspire to. This novel, despite and because of its contradictions, is a great teaching tool and inspiration in that task. Dave Dave Belden web page: www.davidbelden.com -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2002 17:00:37 -0700 Reply-To: publicity@mystgalaxy.com Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Maryelizabeth Hart Organization: Mysterious Galaxy Subject: Bummed to be missing WorldCon Comments: To: IsaacL MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit given some of the programming ... from a local author / musician's sked... > > Subject: Worldcon: Concert and Panels > > > > Geeky music for geeky people. > > Voice, guitar, and multiple sarcasm. > > References to comic books, physics, > > role-playing games, math, ancient gods, > > supernatural horror, and other cool stuff. > > It's an Allison Lonsdale concert. > > > > at > > > > ConJose, the San Jose Worldcon > > August 29-September 2, 2002 > > http://www.conjose.org > > > > The Fairmont Hotel > > (Room to be announced in the con program book, > presumably) > > Saturday 7:30 PM > > Yes, this means the end of my show will > overlap the beginning of the > > Masquerade. But the beginning is all the > children's costumes, so if you > > can live without seeing those, you should be > able to catch my show and > > then the rest of the Masquerade. > > > > Here are the panels I'll be on: > > > > Thursday 1:00pm > > Nightingale to Lark: Tips to Transition from > Night > > Folk to Morning People (1.5 hrs) > > Kent Brewster > > Evelyn C. Leeper (M) > > Allison Lonsdale > > Deirdre Saoirse Moen > > > > Most fans left to their own devices aren't > morning people. Most fans > > function best at night. We will try to give > you some helpful tips to aid > > our fannish night folk in transitioning to a 9 > to 5 lifestyle successfully. > > > > Thursday 10:00pm > > Dark Bedtime Stories (1.5 hrs) > > Keith Hartman (M) > > Allison Lonsdale > > Mary Anne Mohanraj > > Lucy Sussex > > Cecilia Tan > > > > What's better than a scary story right before > bedtime? A sexy scary > > story right before bedtime! Put on your > pajamas and your fuzzy werewolf > > slippers and join us for a few readings... > > > > Friday 11:30am > > Gazeboboy Saves the Day and Other Gaming > Anecdotes (1.5 hrs) > > Adina Adler > > Bill Fawcett > > Julie Haehn > > Allison Lonsdale (M) > > > > Kind of a roundtable of amusing happenings in > roleplaying, roleplaying's > > urban legends and famous chestnuts. > > > > Friday 10:00pm > > Why Does All SF Erotica Tend Toward the Dark > Side? (1.5 hrs) > > Allison Lonsdale > > Lee Martindale > > Mary Anne Mohanraj > > Lucy Sussex (M) > > Mark W. Tiedemann > > > > No text was given for this; I imagine it's > self-explanatory. > > > > Saturday 5:30pm > > I'm Not Here with My Boyfriend (1.5 hrs) > > Adina Adler > > Lori Ann Cole > > Rachel E. Holmen > > Allison Lonsdale (M) > > > > Some areas of fandom are, well, less co-ed > than others. GamerGrrls and > > GeekGrrls discuss making their way through > male-dominated branches of > > fandom, and tell you the top ten ways to never > get a date with them. > > > > Sunday 11:30am > > Gender Identity and the Malleable Body: > Transsexuality in SF Literature > > (1.5 hrs) > > Keith Hartman > > Allison Lonsdale > > Debbie Notkin (M) > > Cecilia Tan > > Katie Waitman > > > > The transgressive potential of science > fiction's representation of gender. > > > > Sunday 1:00pm > > Improv Story Telling (1.5 hrs) > > Phil Foglio > > Allison Lonsdale > > Terry Pratchett > > Tad Williams (M) > > > > Want to both torture writers *and* see how the > sausage of storytelling > > is made? Our intrepid panel will make up and > tell stories on the > > spot,based on setting, style, and character > suggestions from the audience. > > > > -- > > Allison Lonsdale > > poichon@earthlink.net > > Original songs and weird fiction about sex, > science and God. > > For concert and publications announcements, > email > > Lonsdale-subscribe@yahoogroups.com > -- ******************************************************************* Mysterious Galaxy Books Local Phone: 858.268.4747 7051 Clairemont Mesa Blvd, Suite 302 Fax: 858.268.4775 San Diego, CA 92111 Long Distance/Orders: 1.800.811.4747 http://www.mystgalaxy.com General Email: mgbooks@mystgalaxy.com ******************************************************************* -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 16:13:15 -0500 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Todd Mason Subject: www.whyy.org tomorrow: TWILIGHT ZONE folk Comments: To: "horror@listserv.indiana.edu" Comments: cc: "fictionmags@yahoogroups.com" , "pulpmags@yahoogroups.com" , "sciencefiction-l@indiana.edu" , SF-LIT@sun8.loc.gov MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" 11am-Noon EDT: > Hour Two Twilight Zone revisited. Next month UPN Network will premiere > the latest incarnation of the series. We'll talk with Marc Scott Zicree, > author of "The Twilight Zone Companion," David Bianculli, TV Critic for > the "New York Daily News," and from George Clayton Johnson, one of the > original writers from the series. > > The Radio Times toll free call-in > number is 1-888-477-WHYY (1-888-477-9499). Visit the Radio Times web site > at http://www.whyy.org/91FM/RadioTimes.html > > -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems.