INTERACTION

From page 38 of editor Stephen Jones’ introduction to The Mammoth Book Of Best New Horror #20 (Robinson, p/b, 15 Oct)…



Oh dear! I’m going to be unbearably smug this afternoon…

_________________
Pigasus Press | VideoVista | The ZONE

I do find a lot of what he says ridiculous and insulting, and I'm not just talking about Black Static. But re Black Static, I don't think there has ever been any doubt about the "identity" of the magazine. There was before -- that was the problem we fixed! The content is exactly the same as it was in TTA: same columnists (with one addition) and same type of fiction just minus the very occasional soft sf story, which obviously now could appear in Interzone. In short, there isn't anything in Black Static that wouldn't have been in TTA.

Jones on Weird Tales:

"Weird Tales should have been re-tittled 'New Weird' Tales as Ann VanderMeer took the magazine in a new editorial direction... more likely to showcase whimsical fantasy than the weird or unusual... ill-judged attempts to apparently make the magazine more 'accessible' to modern readers..."

These ill-judged attempts recently won the magazine a Hugo.

I do admire the advert which runs on the World Horror Con website for Black Static (and elsewhere) ...

_________________
www.andrew-hook.com

I do find a lot of what he says ridiculous and insulting, [/quote]

Way to burst Tony's bubble!

_________________
www.rosswarren.co.uk

Hi Ross,
I find that remark a bit fatuous. I’ve known Andy C for over a decade and he certainly isn't the kind of guy who engages in recreational bubble bursting – he’s always been pleased when contributors to TTA and Interzone (the two magazines with which I’ve been involved to varying degrees) have received the occasional critical bouquet – whatever the particular critics overall response to the issue in question.
It’s clearly Andy’s intention to challenge what he sees as flimsy or groundless assertions on the part of Stephen Jones, and certainly not to take regular contributors down a peg or two. It’s tricky not to come over as self-righteous when making this kind of point, but I have to take the risk: contributors to the forum need to be a bit more mindful of other people’s genuine intentions as well as their sensibilities. I’m sure your intention was to make a throwaway quip but I think it actually detracts from Andy’s argument and casts doubt on his generosity of spirit. Good magazine editors, like their contributors take pride in their work. Hey, they even have feelings.
Hope that doesn’t come across as too peevish (I’m crap at confrontation) but I feel I have to respond. I should add that I’m responding on my own behalf (as a reader of BS) and not on behalf of the IZ editorial group.
Best ... Andy H

Oh, I laughed at Ross' remark, because it was the first thought that went through my head when I read Andy's response, though if I'd bothered to post it I would have added an emoticon at the end, just in case there was anyone who could possibly think it was seriously intended.



Exactly.

_________________
http://trumpetville.wordpress.com
http://ttapress.com/blackstatic/casenotesblog/

Woops, it was intended as a joke! Emoticons it is in future then

_________________
www.rosswarren.co.uk

I can do irony Pete: I didn't for a moment assume it was seriously intended.
It may, of course, be a sense of humour malfunction on my part, but I didn't laugh when I first read it and I'm still not laughing.


Andy H.

I have the same problem with "Only Fools and Horses"

_________________
http://trumpetville.wordpress.com
http://ttapress.com/blackstatic/casenotesblog/

The TV listings would certainly be improved by emoticons. I might upset the kids less with my inappropriate laughter and curmudgeonly silences. Are you sugesting 'Fools and Horses' is intended to something other than a life negating documentary?

Pete: I've amended my error in relation to your name in the message above. Whoops.

Erm...

_________________
http://trumpetville.wordpress.com
http://ttapress.com/blackstatic/casenotesblog/