Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 16:16:53 -0500
From: Ted White <tedwhite at compusnet.com>
To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at keithlynch.net>
Subject: [WSFA] Re: Got Milk?
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at keithlynch.net>

"Strong, Lee" wrote:

>         Ted, Thank you for correcting my chronology.  O.K.  Shaver might
> have been influenced by speculation about atomic warfare etc. prior to the
> 1950s.  As for proving Shaver's influence on _The Time Machine (1960)_, I
> said this was merely speculation and therefore I don't feel a need for a
> detailed defense.  I can show, as a general proposition, that real people
> pick up and adopt ideas from people that they claim to hold in complete
> contempt so I can not rule out a POSSIBLE Shaverian influence on _The Time
> Machine (1960)_.  Since H.G. Wells wrote at least one atomic warfare story
> as well as the original novel about dehumanized humans living underground,
> one might speculate further that Wells influenced Shaver who influenced the
> script of _The Time Machine_.

This is what used to be called "playing tune detective."  Sam Moskowitz did it
all the time.  If author A used an idea in a story in the March, 1933 WONDER
STORIES and author B used a similar idea in the April, 1933 AMAZING, well, then,
clearly B was influenced by A.  (Moskowitz overlooked the fact that stories are
not always published in the order in which they are written, and that lead-time
meant that author B had not seen author A's story when he wrote his, etc.  To
say nothing of authors A and B socializing with editor C, who proposed the idea
to *both* of them....)

The idea of living in caves -- or of other races living in caves -- is Ancient
and probably embedded deeply in the human collective unconsciousness.  Think of
all the stories of worlds at Earth's center.  DOC SAVAGE ran a novel about
people who lived in an underground world reached via one (or both) of the poles,
back in the mid-'30s.   These are ideas which are Out There in a common pool
from which authors have drawn over many ages and generations.  Why assume that
these ideas originated with Shaver and that others who used them *had* to be
influenced by Shaver?   Common sense suggests otherwise.

>         You also wrote that you are incredulous that I would dignify the
> ravings of the lunatic in this fashion.  I take that as a complement to my
> good taste.  However, I don't have a Geiger counter that enables me to
> separate stupid stuff from smart stuff at a distance.  So, I read lots of
> stuff and analyze it according to my best understanding of how the universe
> works so that I can categorize the stuff accurately.  If you would like to
> discuss my arcane hobby further, fine, but it sounds like you are reading
> more into it than I do.  In the meantime, please recommend a good book or
> website that discusses the Shaver Mystery accurately and completely.  Thank
> you again.

When people split open rocks and display their new faces to you and ask if you
see the space-suit designs in them, how much of a "Geiger counter" do you
need?   How far does your credulity extend?

I've never encountered any books or websites that "discuss the Shaver Mystery
accurately and completely."   I *read* the original material, in AMAZING.  (And,
later, in Ray Palmer's OTHER WORLDS.)  I also read the 1948 article in LIFE
magazine on the subject, but I would not characterize it as accurate and
complete.

Shaverism was discussed thoroughly and at length in fandom in the '40s.
AMAZING narrowly avoided an organized boycott, and *was* boycotted by such
then-prominent fans as Forry Ackerman.   (That's why Rog Phillips' "The
Clubhouse" was initiated -- to win back the fans.)

--Ted White