Not to repeat yesterday's thread, but--I think I was wrong about something. The editorial comment about the Hollow Tree's diverse readerships--"Hindus, a Kongo African, etc" which I said yesterday was about Americans...I'm thinking the readers must have been international. 1/
Western Story Magazine didn't have international distribution per se, but it did have Australian, British, and UK editions, and those editions would have been distributed to the British colonies like any other British magazine was pre-WW2.
2/
And of course Hawai'i, mentioned in the Hollow Tree editorial as one of the nationalities represented, wasn't a state in the early/mid-1920s, it was a Territory, and Hawai'ians weren't considered "Americans."
3/
Which makes what the Hollow Tree editor, Louise Rice, tried to do all the more impressive. She (and the Hollow Tree Gang letter writers) wasn't trying to do away with social/racial/gender/etc barriers in the USA; she was trying to do it *globally*. 4/
If I were a young person in need of a PhD topic, I'd do my best to track down Louise Rice's descendants (if there are any) and quiz them on her. Was she an activist in personal life as well? Did she work in isolation, or was she a part of a group?
5/
This seems to me to be very low-hanging fruit for a PhD candidate: 1920s international civil rights activism in a Western pulp, spearheaded (?) by its letters page's editor and realized by the women readers of that pulp.
6/
One can only imagine what the British colonizers in India, during the turbulent 1920s, thought of a white woman (Louise Rice), and an American to boot, not just treating Indian readers without the racist oppression which was the colonizers' norm, but "levelling" them.
7/
I know how closely the British censors in India inspected and censored Indian-made popular culture; I don't know if they applied that same level of scrutiny to British popular culture. I doubt the censors examined the British version of Western Story Magazine at all closely.
8/
I'm tending to think that WSM may have been subversive literature that totally escaped the notice of the British. Which is kinda neat, I think.
Anyhow, tl/dr: I was wrong. The Hollow Tree was a global enterprise, not a USian one.
9/
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Anyone interested in a thread about where modern fandom came from, and who created it?
[only 18 tweets long this time! I may be learning brevity.
The accepted wisdom is that Hugo Gernsback invented sf fandom in the Science Fiction League & in the pages of AMAZING STORIES, and that (per Wikipedia) “a wide variety of Western modern organized fannish subcultures originated with science fiction fandom.” LIES! ALL LIES! 1/
The reality is that sf fandom was one point in a continuum, not the starting place. Modern fandom got its start in the late 19th century dime novels, but what we think of as fandom now, in the 21st century, is really the product of a few Western pulps and their women readers. 2/
So who wants to hear about the first queer woman sheriff of the pulps?
(Or has everyone bugged out of Twitter to start the gorging process?)
Thread Ho!
After 1924 the western pulps fractured & became gendered--western pulps for male readers, western pulps for female readers. There was significant overlap in readership between the two, of course, but the publishers thought that gendered pulps were the way to go. 1/
Eventually, in 1935, the trend toward western pulps for female readers produced ROMANCE (later ROMANTIC) RANGE. Laugh at it if you like, but RR was in the top 3 of the best-selling pulps, and had heavyweights writing for it and a devoted readership of men *and* women. 2/
in my nightmares I've written something like Ready Player Two.
RPT is...it's like a transcript of my worst self holding forth. It's Kurtz's vision of the horror, the horror. It's cosmic horror. It's Krapp's last tape, if Krapp were written (ironically, of course) by Evan Dorkin as a less aware member of the Eltingville Club. It's leprosy.
I charge Ernest Cline with sedition against the Muses.
Who wants to hear about some obscure Japanese horror movies from 1898-1949?
Trust me, you won’t be getting what you expect.
(Warning for those who don’t like long threads: this is a big one. Mute me for a little while if you don’t want me in your TL too much. Thanks!)
1/
Japanese moviemaking got its start when a Japanese businessman worked with Louis Lumière to import movie cameras into Japan in 1897. Moviemaking had only been a commercially viable prospect for two years, but the businessman knew what available movie cameras would mean. 2/
The first horror film was Georges Méliès’ LE MANOIR DU DIABLE (House of the Devil, 1897). The first Japanese horror filmmakers didn’t really have any models to go on—they were breaking new ground, which was one reason why Japanese horror films showed little US/Euro influence. 3/
Of course (rolls up sleeves, takes off watch and earrings) what makes the Old Guard hate the New Guard isn't just loyalty to Asimov, Clarke, etc.
I see some of the Old Guard's online conversations, you know. Names you'd recognize.
It's not loyalty that motivates them.
They read the New Guard in bad faith. Their interpretations are deliberately hostile. They let their resentment at fading away and their growing irrelevance become the lens through which they read the New Guard. Reading as an act of grievance.
Most of all, it's wounded amour propre at women and BIPOCs taking their place. They are incredibly offended if you point this out, but when they think no one is watching the masks slip.
Sexism and racism and white privilege. That's ultimately what motivates them.