"I've been watching the controversy in 'The Boiling Point.' It seems to me that young Forrest J. Ackerman is by far the most sensible of the lot. Instead of intelligently answering his arguments, Messrs. Smith, Lovecraft, Barlow, etc., have made fools of themselves descending to personalities. Ackerman is a most interesting type of 'crank.' (Everyone who writes in to a magazine is a 'crank.' So'm I). At least, F. J. A. shows signs of a rudimentary intelligence, which most cranks don't. I agree with him. 'The Light from Beyond' and several other Smith yarns, had no place in Wonder Stories. WS calls itself a science fiction magazine. Smith's story under discussion isn't science fiction, so, it had no place in such a magazine. F. J. A. is right there. I see no reason why Lovecraft should condemn Ackerman for not liking Smith. After all, we each have our own tastes. Smith, in my own opinion, is a poor writer. His stories are all like the ravings of some fearfully diseased mind. Lovecraft, on the other hand, is a fairly good writer. But I'm wasting good typewriter ink; your readers haven't enough intelligence to grasp such a common sense argument as the one presented by Ackerman, so they call him a nitwit, while he actually has more sense than the lot of them thrown together. If there were a hundred-million Forrest J. Ackermans in the world, it'd be a better place to live in, at least we'd have a little common sense used occasionally."
Now, while we are very glad to find defenses on the Ackerman side, we must disagree with Mr. Alexander when he calls our readers too ignorant to grasp an argument put forth by Mr. Ackerman. Their eager disapproval with logical objections contradicts this theory. And then again, the mere fact that they are science fiction and weird fans puts them above the average, for such readers must be broadminded and open minded, and not the "What's-good-enough-for-father-is-good-enough-for-me" or "There-ain't-no-such-animal" types. We believe that this letter leaves cause for rebuttal on the part of Messrs. Smith and Lovecraft.
Forrest J. Ackerman, of course, does not like the way he has been treated, and has this to say about it:
"Pardon me, do; but why did you run 'The Boiling Point' in a foreign language? What a vocalberry on those Weird Men Smith and Lovecraft! And I think I'll have to change my tag from 'Forrest J. Ackerman, Scientifictionist' to 'Forrest J. Ackerman, Ebullitionist'. The two got the word in within the first line of comments. Now Mr. Smith will be calling Mr. Lovecraft 'Plagiarist', and then maybe Mr. Smith (the 'Skylark') will burst in and say that HE owns the original. Let's have a contest… Just thought of it—the original Paul illustration that I treasure would be from Smith's story, 'The City of the Singing Flame.' I don't get the connection: the Lovecraft says in print 'a very childish attack', and in his personal reply to me 'your bright and candid letter.'!?"
It can be seen by the above letter that Ackerman really holds no hard feeling toward the Weird Men; just a bit of mockery and rare Ackerman wit.
Just to show that we are always open to both sides, following are a couple of fans who still choose to 'lay it on thick.'
"Personally, I thought that 'The Light From Beyond' was very good, and I certainly could see nothing weird about it. It was fantasy, yes, and not stf, but some of the greatest classics of so-called science fiction have been almost pure fantasy. Witness: 'The Snake Mother,' 'The Moon Pool,' 'The Time Stream' (Ackerman's objection to this was particularly obnoxious to me, as I thought it was one of the best stories ever written. Certainly it offered the most food for thought), 'The Skylark of Space' (partly fantasy), 'The Princess of Mars,' and other greats. Certainly, there should be something more to science fiction than rays, machines, villains, heroines, (composed of lipstick and legs, as Mr. Barlow rather bitterly expresses it) as has been stressed so greatly of late. There should be an element of fantasy, strong character, and a well-developed plot in addition. The lack of those is why so many weird story lovers (like Mr. Barlow) can find so much fault with stf. I do not blame him. I, myself, as a reader, will stop reading stf when the fantasy element is dropped completely." William Crawford (Editor of Unusual Stories).
"What does this Ackerman guy know about weird and fantastic fiction? From the way he writes, he must be an unimaginative person unable to stretch his mind away from space-ships and foreign star-clusters. I get that he is an egotistical radical and one who doesn't like something that is not even intended for him. So far, in telling about his collection, he has described a sort of madhouse. However, I certainly would like to see this madhouse, as I can appreciate a thing or two that is connected with stf. At heart, I am truly a weird and fantastic fiction fan."—F. Lee Baldwin
There seems to be enough controversy in this month's discussion to bring in enough letters to fill next month's. Write in and give us your opinions on the subject. Are Smith's tales fit for Wonder Stories? Does Ackerman know what he's talking about, and are the Weird Men justified in their criticisms of him? Here's hoping to hear from you.
