that "who is a Pan" is a favorite topic of mine and that I discuss it voluminously
(actually that conversation was started by you and I wanted to postpone it until we
got the chance to discuss the future of TAFF in tranquillity), the statement that
there are few I consider fans and that I refuse to recognize American fandom as it
is, that Richard Eney is my 'idol' and your pointed avoidance of any reference to my
attempts to offer friendliness and hospitality.
I should like to point out that to the best of my remembrance, my only comments
on the last US TAFF election consisted of two sentences in FAPA railing comments on
Gemzine, which were directed against Stu Hoffman, whom I knew Mrs. Carr had been
supporting, and part of a tape to Don Ford which I did not originate and in which I
tried to be placatory. I have long ago had an apology Prom Don Ford for the allegation
that I spread rumors about your election and I thought this canard was killed. As for
the previous controversy about TAF'F voters' qualifications, my arguments (apart Prom a
brief outline of both points of view in a history of TAFF for YANDRO) have been con-
fined to personal correspondence with Don Ford and a few others concerned with the
Pounding and administration of TAFF. (Although one of them, my letter of resignation,
was subsequently reprinted by McCain in his FAPAzine.) I am not responsible for the
opinions of Chuck Harris, with whom I often disagree, nor for those of other fans,
even when they defend what they think to be my point of view, Perhaps it would help
if I set down as briefly and as clearly as I can what my point of view is and is not:
1. My remarks about you and the other 'ghost fans' in TRE HARP STATESIDE
were literally true as far as I was concerned and I see no reason for anybody
to take exception to them. To me and to any other fan not in the local Pan
clubs concerned - that is, in each case the majority of fandom - these worthy
people were only three-day-a-year fans. I am not denying they were active in
their individual local groups; all I say is that as far as fandom as a whole was
concerned, they were not heard of between conventions. Isn't that so?
2. I have never said that a person who does not read fanzines is not a fan,
nor that a person should have published a fanzine to be allowed to vote in or
stand for TAF'F. My argument (and it is one that so far as I know has not been
answered yet) has always been simply that a person who ignores fanzines is not
in a position to discriminate between the merits of opposing candidates, some of
whom are fanzine fans. I admit that, like you, I have my own opinions as to
what is the most worthy form of fanactivity, in terms of permanent achievement,
use to fandom and sf as a whole, and pleasure given to others, but I do not deny
that even a person whose sole contact with other fans is boozing in a bar on
Labour Day is entitled to call himself a fan, If you're interested,. my
definition of a fan is a person interested enough in sf to wish to communicate
with others of a like mind.
3. I have never said that you were an unsuitable candidate for TAFF, or a
fake or fringe fan, and still less that you were ineligible to be nominated. I
admit my personal preference for Eney and Raeburn on the grounds that they seemed
to me to have done more for fandom in the years immediately prior to the election
(i.e., fandom as I, and, I think, British fandom, sees it) but I did not campaign
for them or against you before or after the election, I also admit I was sorry
to see the election won by canvassing, but I recognize that you felt this was
forced on you, and I believe it was the inevitable result of the TAFF rules
which I fought unsuccessfully to correct, and therefore more my fault than yours,
I hope you'l1 feel that you should ask Lynn to publish this letter in fairness to
someone who has been abused for almost a year without replying.
Sincerely,
Walt Willis
|
