@@@@@ @   @ @@@@@    @     @ @@@@@@@   @       @  @@@@@ @@@@@ @@@
         @   @   @ @        @ @ @ @    @       @     @   @   @   @   @  @
         @   @@@@@ @@@@     @  @  @    @        @   @    @   @   @   @   @
         @   @   @ @        @     @    @         @ @     @   @   @   @  @
         @   @   @ @@@@@    @     @    @          @      @@@@@ @@@@@ @@@

                        Mt. Holz Science Fiction Society
                    Club Notice - 10/17/97 -- Vol. 16, No. 16

       MT Chair/Librarian:
                     Mark Leeper   MT 3E-433  732-957-5619 mleeper@lucent.com
       HO Chair:     John Jetzt    MT 2E-530  732-957-5087 jetzt@lucent.com
       HO Librarian: Nick Sauer    HO 4F-427  732-949-7076 njs@lucent.com
       Distinguished Heinlein Apologist:
                     Rob Mitchell  MT 2D-536  732-957-6330 rlmitchell1@lucent.com
       Factotum:     Evelyn Leeper MT 3E-433  732-957-2070 eleeper@lucent.com
       Back issues at http://www.geocities.com/Athens/4824
       All material copyright by author unless otherwise noted.

       The Science Fiction Association of Bergen County meets on the
       second Saturday of every month in Upper Saddle River; call
       201-933-2724 for details.  The New Jersey Science Fiction Society
       meets on the third Saturday of every month in Belleville; call
       201-432-5965 for details.  The Denver Area Science Fiction
       Association meets 7:30 PM on the third Saturday of every month at
       Southwest State Bank, 1380 S. Federal Blvd.

       1. URL of the week:  http://www.sff.net/people/Jim.Morrow/.   James
       Morrow home page.  [-ecl]

       ===================================================================

       2. Before I take a point of view, particularly  if  it  is  one  of
       these  things  that  just  about  everybody  knows and agrees on, I
       occasionally like to play this little game with  myself.   I  am  a
       lawyer and I am arguing for the opposite point of view.  I am being
       the Devil's Advocate.  Now I grew up in the nuclear era.  Everybody
       lived  under  the  Sword  of  Damocles  of nuclear weapons.  I went
       through the old "duck and cover" exercises in grade  school.   Like
       everybody  else  I  hated  nuclear weapons.  But I play the Devil's
       Advocate role with nuclear weapons and I am not sure they have been
       the  curse  that  we  all  think of them as being.  In fact my best
       arguments have been in favor of  nuclear  weapons.   So  I  am  not
       telling  the  reader what to believe, but I would like to list some
       of the arguments in favor.

       The first shock argument is that using nuclear weapons against  the
       Japanese  was  like  a  slap in the face to someone hysterical.  It
       shook them out of a mindset that was hurting them.  These days  you
       hear arguments all sorts of ways but I think the best arguments say
       that the Japanese would have kept fighting until a  lot  more  were
       dead than were killed by the bombings.  The bombings were a slap in
       the face to say you will not win  and  you  will  destroy  yourself
       playing  out  the  game.  In a way the bombings may have even given
       the Japanese an honorable way out of the war, but  I  am  convinced
       that  more  Japanese survived the war because of the bombing and it
       left more latitude for friendship between the two  countries  since
       there were not hundreds of thousands killed on both sides.  So this
       adds up to saying the admittedly weird statement if  taken  out  of
       context that Japan ended better off because of the bombings.

       Then nuclear weapons remained around convincing us that if we fight
       too  much  with the communists we could be in for some real trouble
       in the form of nuclear retaliation.  There probably would have been
       another  world war over something like the Soviets grabbing Hungary
       or us doing something that angered them.  There was not because  it
       was  all  played  out  with  nuclear  weapons that never were used.
       Again nuclear weapons probably saved lives, this  time  perhaps  in
       the millions.

       And certainly our standard of living is  better  because  countries
       have not had to field huge armies.  Nuclear weapons have meant that
       people have not had to disrupt their lives for national defense.

       Nuclear weapons have slowed our movement to biological and chemical
       weapons.   We  have  not  needed  them  because we have had nuclear
       weapons.  And frankly they are a lot  scarier.   One  of  the  nice
       things about a nuclear bomb is that it is not subtle.  You see that
       mushroom cloud and you have a really good idea that somebody had it
       in  for  you.  Now look at biological warfare.  If you and most the
       people you know come down with a cold  that  just  gets  worse  and
       worse, and soon your whole country is debilitated, at what point do
       you decide you have been attacked?  But of course  if  you  develop
       such  a germ, there is always the danger that the news will get out
       and you will be threatened with nuclear weapons.

       Finally there is this nice  discovery  that  if  you  actually  use
       nukes, it will trigger nuclear winter.  It is a weapon you dare not
       use because it is as destructive to the person wielding it as it is
       to the person attacked.

       I am not telling anyone that they should love nuclear  weapons.   I
       am not even saying that I have decided that they were a good thing,
       though admittedly I am starting to lean that way.  But I  do  think
       it  is worth looking at the possibility that they have gotten a bad
       rap.  I think there are good arguments that the world is better off
       for  their  presence.   The causes of World War I to me have always
       looked like a sort of immaturity on the part of  nations.   It  was
       nations  acting  a  lot like children.  Nuclear weapons have taught
       the lesson that major powers cannot behave like children.   And  we
       all may be better off for the lesson.  [-mrl]
       ===================================================================

       3. The following is a comment by member Jeanette Walker:

       Mark,

       I was reading your entry in MT Void on the discounts  at  Barnes  &
       Noble.  This  is  a  program  which  resulted  from  a revamping of
       Lucent's purchasing policies, which was negotiated with the help of
       the  Global  Library  Network.  It  is  a  program  which should be
       available to any Lucent employee  anywhere.  It  should  appear  in
       B&N's  computers,  so  any employee encountering any problem should
       ask B&N to check their records.

       This program offers a 20% discount off of list price. This is about
       10%  more  than  is  usually  discounted. But if you see a B&N sign
       offering more than 20% off, it is probably  better  to  leave  your
       badge in your pocket and get the better deal.

       To the best of my knowledge, AT&T has  made  no  such  arrangements
       with any book vendor.  [-jfw]

       ===================================================================

       4. SEVEN YEARS IN TIBET (a film review by Mark R. Leeper):

                 Capsule: Only in the casting does  SEVEN  YEARS
                 IN  TIBET  reveal  itself  as  a  very  Western
                 production.   While  the  basic  plot  is  very
                 reminiscent  of  SHOGUN--each  story is about a
                 European who finds himself  in  an  exotic  and
                 incomprehensible    Asian    land,   eventually
                 becoming the confidante of the ruler and a pawn
                 in politics of momentous events--the setting is
                 endlessly fascinating and director Jean-Jacques
                 Annaud  creates  an  entire  world  of the past
                 caught in the wheels of changing time.  Rating:
                 +2 (-4 to +4), 7 (0 to 10)

       For millennia Tibet  has  been  protected  from  intrusion  by  the
       tallest guards in the world, the Himalayan Mountains.  There in the
       7th Century A.D. a culture all but unremembered  first  mixed  with
       Chinese  culture.  Until relatively recent history it was a culture
       that was so isolated that it could go its own way and not  be  very
       much  influenced by any other culture in the world.  SEVEN YEARS IN
       TIBET tells the true story of two Austrian climbers who happened to
       be  in  Tibet during its years of fastest change, probably the only
       Europeans in the country at the time.

       In Austria of 1939 lives Heinrich Harrer (played by Brad  Pitt),  a
       world-renowned  Olympic  athlete,  a  member of the Nazi Party as a
       matter of style, and a totally selfish boy-man.   He  abandons  his
       pregnant  wife--who is nearly due to give birth--over her objection
       and he goes on a four-month climbing expedition in  the  Himalayas.
       His  first  shock is to discover that the expedition will be led by
       an awkward-looking climber, Peter Aufschnaiter (David Thewlis).

       Harrer determines to undermine the ungainly man's authority and  to
       make  himself the star of the expedition for the press.  His little
       battle only gets him into  trouble,  first  of  the  sides  of  the
       mountain  to  be  climbed,  then  when war breaks out in Europe the
       troop of  climbers  are  captured  by  the  British  in  India  and
       imprisoned  in  a  POW camp.  Harrer fights a two-front war against
       the British imprisoning him and against  Aufschnaiter's  authority.
       Eventually  Harrer  and Aufschnaiter escape from the camp, lead the
       British a chase through India, and  flee  across  the  border  into
       Tibet,  a  country  officially  closed  to foreigners.  The two lie
       their way into the capital city of Lhasa, a beautiful  mountainside
       city  forbidden to any non-Tibetans.  After some time there dealing
       with the bureaucracy of monks, Harrer is  given  counsel  with  the
       Dalai  Lama.  The great lama, still a young boy, finds he likes the
       brash German.  Harrer becomes a friend, confidant, and  teacher  to
       the  boy.   The warm relationship between the two forms the core of
       the film.  But their relationship is cut off when  the  country  is
       virtually stolen by invading Chinese Communist troops.

       There has been discussion on whether this was a good role for  Brad
       Pitt  or  not.  As the supercilious Heinrich who finds his humanity
       by loving Tibet, Pitt was fairly believable.   I  had  the  feeling
       that  if I had never seen him before I would not have thought twice
       about whether this part was right for him.   In  fact  associations
       with  previous  films were about the only thing that got in the way
       of the credibility of the story.  We have people like  Victor  Wong
       of THE JOY LUCK CLUB and BIG TROUBLE IN LITTLE CHINA; Mako of CONAN
       THE BARBARIAN; and B. D. Wong, whom we saw around the incubator  in
       JURASSIC  PARK  and  flitting  around  in  FATHER OF THE BRIDE.  It
       almost makes the film seem less Asian to see these actors  present.
       David Thewlis has turned in one good performance after another over
       the last four years since he stood out in Mike Leigh's NAKED.   The
       Dalai  Lama, played by three boys of varying age, seems not so much
       a font of wisdom as an unending source  of  simple  straightforward
       curiosity,  mostly  about  Western culture.  Jetsun Pema, who plays
       the Dalai Lama's mother is in reality the Dalai Lama's sister.  The
       film  is  directed by Jean-Jacques Annaud, who directed THE NAME OF
       THE ROSE and THE BEAR.  As with the former,  the  setting  is  main
       attraction of the film.

       One disappoint of the film is that the actual time covered in Tibet
       is  shortened  by  a  long introductory section.  The screenplay by
       Becky Johnston spends nearly half of the film just  getting  Harrer
       and Aufschnaiter to Lhasa so that the story from that point forward
       seems rushed.  Most of the adventure,  however,  is  in  the  first
       hour, with some harrowing scenes of mountain climbing.  The stories
       of escapes, bound by the truth, seem almost cliched.  John Williams
       spices the score with eerie Tibetan music.  I rate the film a +2 on
       the -4 to +4 scale.  [-mrl]

       ===================================================================

       5. LOOKING FOR THE MAHDI by N. Lee Wood (Ace,  ISBN  0-441-00450-4,
       1997 (1996c), 337pp, US$5.99) (aA book review by Evelyn C. Leeper):

       This book is not without flaws, but it did keep me up until 3 AM to
       finish it, so I guess that serves as a recommendation.

       Kahlili bint Munadi  Sulaiman  is  a  television  journalist.   She
       covered  a war in Khuruchabja (not unlike the war in Iraq, from the
       description), and now finds  herself  involved  in  escorting  John
       Halton  to Khuruchabja.  But neither are what they appear: Sulaiman
       is also K. B. Sulaiman, male journalist (because frankly, there was
       no  way  a  woman  could  cover  a  war  in a Muslim fundamentalist
       country), and Halton is a fabricant.   And  besides  the  issue  of
       gender,  there  is  also  the  layer  of  deception and concealment
       inherent in the television journalism business: the newscasters are
       just  "bubble-heads" repeating the words fed to them and nothing is
       what it seems.  Given that the whole Middle East situation in  real
       life and in the book seems tied up with identity in strange ways, I
       am sure that this emphasis on multiple and hidden identities is not
       accidental.   (I  might  quibble  that  "Khuruchabja"  sounds  more
       Central Asian than Middle  Eastern,  but  let  it  pass.)   If  you
       question  whether  Sulaiman  could carry off her disguise, consider
       Linda Hunt in the film THE YEAR OF LIVING DANGEROUSLY.

       Halton is also trying to conceal his identity.  Fabricants are  not
       entirely  popular,  even  with  heavy  government regulation.  This
       regulation, by the way, is one of my two major complaints.  LOOKING
       FOR  THE  MAHDI  was  obviously  written  before the recent cloning
       announcements, but even then reproductive technology had  gone  far
       enough  that  the  sorts  of definitions of "human" used here would
       never have been accepted.

       Wood thinks through this whole issue of concealment more than most.
       Her  characters need to acquire more than just the clothing and the
       hair cuts, they need to think and react the way  their  false  egos
       would.   They  do not always succeed.  One of the things that makes
       the story ring true is that they are not perfect at it.  They  make
       mistakes.   Things  happen  beyond their control.  And they have to
       deal with it.

       Wood focuses primarily on intra-Muslim strife,  and  maybe  because
       both  (all?)  sides  are Muslim, she seems to avoid the stereotypes
       and extremes that so many writers fall  into  when  they  have  the
       Muslims  all  on  one  side  as inhuman monsters bent on destroying
       Western civilization.  My only other  complaint  is  the  ending--I
       find  Wood's  "solution"  to the Middle East situation unlikely, to
       say the least.

       I haven't read Wood's first novel (FARADAY'S  ORPHANS),  but  after
       reading  LOOKING  FOR  THE MAHDI, I will be looking for that one as
       well.  Wood is an author to watch and LOOKING FOR THE  MAHDI  is  a
       book to read.  [-ecl]

       ===================================================================

       6. FOREVER PEACE by Joe Haldeman (Ace,  ISBN  0-441-00406-7,  1997,
       326pp, US$21.95) (a book review by Evelyn C. Leeper):

       One, this is not a sequel to THE FOREVER WAR.  Two,  the  title  of
       this is FOREVER PEACE, not THE FOREVER PEACE.

       Haldeman has claimed that FOREVER PEACE is part of  a  triptych  of
       thematically  connected novels containing THE FOREVER WAR and 1968.
       This is true, but only to the extent that they are  all  about  war
       and what makes us fight and kill each other.  And while the idea of
       FOREVER PEACE is that there may be a way to end the  killing,  most
       of  it  is  devoted  to  descriptions  of  battles  and attacks and
       killing.

       One problem is that the pacing is off.  We  spend  half  the  novel
       following Julian Class, the operator of a "soldierboy"--basically a
       remote-controlled robot soldier.  Then suddenly within a few pages,
       we  find out that there is something happening that can destroy the
       universe, and that there is a way to convert  humanity  to  a  non-
       aggressive  state.   Another  problem  is that while the first plot
       twist is moderately  believable,  the  second  I  found  completely
       unconvincing.  All the problems that are introduced are solved with
       a wave of the hand.  It's as if we have a solution to world  hunger
       that  involves  getting to Proxima Centauri in an hour, and then on
       the next page someone says, "Oh, by the way, we just discovered how
       to  travel  faster  than  light."  (And while we're at it, Haldeman
       also postulates the miracle of nanotechnology,  which  can  provide
       for all material needs.)  Another problem (at least for me) was the
       foreshadowing, where you would  read  some  first-person  narrative
       from  Julian,  and then a third-person omniscient would break in to
       say, "But Julian had no way of knowing how wrong he was, " or  some
       such.

       But FOREVER PEACE is still worth reading.  Haldeman is at his  best
       when  he is describing everyday life in the "permanent war footing"
       of the future, with all its restrictions and "acceptable"  dangers.
       If  THE  FOREVER  WAR was the Vietnam War transposed to the future,
       then FOREVER PEACE is Nicaragua, Kuwait, and Oklahoma City.  It's a
       world  full  of security precautions that don't work, but which are
       followed because they  make  people  feel  better.   (Exactly  what
       purpose  does  showing  a  picture  ID serve when you fly somewhere
       now?)  It's a world of elaborate rules of friendship based  on  who
       gets  paid  what,  and  when,  and  how.  (And haven't you heard of
       someone picking up a dinner check by explaining that they can claim
       it as a business expense?)  One of the aspects of science fiction I
       like is the way it looks at the near-future and consequences of our
       current  politico-economic  situation.   Had  Haldeman just written
       about nanotechnology and the war between the haves  and  the  have-
       nots, it would have been far more satisfying.  As it was, there was
       too much going on here for any one thread to  be  given  sufficient
       space.

       As I said, I think FOREVER PEACE is worth reading, though  not  for
       the  plot  so much as for the setting.  The obvious comparison will
       be to THE FOREVER WAR, and it doesn't stand up to  that--but  then,
       that is very high standard.  [-ecl]

       ===================================================================

       7. STARLIGHT 1 edited by Patrick Nielsen Hayden (Tor,  ISBN  0-312-
       86215-6,  1996,  316pp,  US$13.95)  (a  book  review  by  Evelyn C.
       Leeper):

       Two Hugo nominees out of twelve stories--not a bad  percentage  for
       an  original anthology. (And this anthology undoubtedly contributed
       to Nielsen  Hayden's  own  Hugo  nomination  as  Best  Professional
       Editor.)  And  it's  not  a  theme anthology.  This is not "Science
       Fiction Stories Set in the Interior of Stars" or  "Fantasy  Stories
       About   Light."   It's  just  good  science  fiction  and  fantasy.
       Everyone seems to be comparing this to such series as Terry  Carr's
       "Universe"  or  Damon  Knight's "Orbit," but in my opinion it's too
       soon to tell.  I will say that this is a very auspicious start.

       The first story in STARLIGHT 1 is "The Dead" by  Michael  Swanwick;
       the  last  is "The Cost to Be Wise" by Maureen McHugh.  Traditional
       anthology wisdom is to start with your  strongest  story,  and  end
       with  your  second  strongest.   Nielsen  Hayden  is  certainly  in
       agreement  with  the  readers  here--these  were  the  two  stories
       nominated  for the Hugo Award.  But don't ignore the stories in the
       middle, or you'll miss some excellent works.

       For  example,  "Mengele's  Jew"  by  Carter  Scholz  is  a   unique
       combination  of quantum mechanics and the Holocaust.  "The Weighing
       of Ayre" by Gregory Feeley  is  a  science  fiction  story  of  the
       seventeenth  century.   Jane  Yolen has "Sister Emily's Lightship,"
       the second "Emily-Dickinson-and-the-space-aliens" story of the year
       (and  in  my  opinion,  the  better  of  the  two).  John M. Ford's
       "Erase/Record/Play" is written in the  rather  unusual  form  of  a
       playscript,  and  reminds  me  in  some ways of the plays of Vaclav
       Havel.  It is subtitled "A Drama for  Print,"  though  it  wouldn't
       surprise  me  to  see  this  performed  at  some point.  In fact, I
       wouldn't  object  if  the  folks  at  Boskone  who  do   theatrical
       performances  each  year  decided to do this one.  (Consider that a
       hint.)

       I won't list every story, but I will recommend that you go out  and
       get  this book and discover them for yourself.  I'm looking forward
       to the second volume.  [-ecl]

                                          Mark Leeper
                                          MT 3E-433 732-957-5619
                                          mleeper@lucent.com

            All politics are based on the indifference
            of the majority.
                                          -- James Reston