Mantichore No. 1

MANTICHORE 1, No 1 (Dec 2005) A Contribution by Leigh Blackmore for SSFWT

Leigh Blackmore, 78 Rowland Ave, Wollongong, NSW 2500. Australia. Email: [email protected]

THE FABULOUS BAKER BOYS: THE HORROR NOVELS OF 'PETER SAXON' & 'ERROL LECALE' By Leigh Blackmore © 1991 Peter Saxon is a name that most horror readers will have seen at one time or another. It is one of those names which do not conjure up great enthusiasm for the literary quality of the author's output, but his novels, most of which appeared in the late 1960's, are all entertaining excursions into various types of encounter with the supernatural. I remember THE TORTURER was one of the first horror novels I ever read, at about the age of 14 - it was perfectly suited to my age at the time, for the writing is pitched only a step above hackwork.

Due to my joining this organisation rather hastily, and due to having various commitments that seem overwhelming at present, this first issue of Mantichore is being put together from a grab-bag of older material which has not seen print elsewhere. I hope other members will forgive me for this, and await more promising issues in 2006.

Probably Peter Saxon's greatest claim to fame is that the novel THE DISORIENTATED MAN was adapted for the movies as SCREAM AND SCREAM AGAIN - a film notable for its co-billing of three major horror stars - Christopher Lee, Peter Cushing and Vincent Price (and incidentally, the delectable Yutte Stensgaard, the busty lovely who fuelled many a teenage horror fan's wetdream in the early seventies with her performance in Hammer's LUST FOR A VAMPIRE) but otherwise fairly undistinguished. Saxon's series featuring those battlers of occult evil, The Guardians, also deserves some praise. However, I am not going to discuss the novels' contents at length here; rather, I want to explore the identity of this admittedly second-rung horror novelist. The name Peter Saxon does not appear at all in the PENGUIN ENCYCLOPEDIA OF HORROR AND THE SUPERNATURAL; however, the following reference works do give some information, and they are my principle sources for this brief article:

The following article was written about fifteen years ago! At the time, many of the ‘Peter Saxon’ novels were still around, but now this seems like ancient history. However, I present the piece for what it’s worth; there are still unanswered questions about the authorship of some of these books.

Adrian, Jack. "W. Howard Baker". MILLION magazine (May-June 1991), p. 11. Ashley, Mike - WHO'S WHO IN HORROR AND FANTASY FICTION Reginald, R. - SCIENCE FICTION AND FANTASY LITERATURE (2 vols) Rock, James - WHO GOES THERE?: A BIBLIOGRAPHIC DICTIONARY OF PSEUDONYMOUS LITERATURE etc..

Tuck, Donald H. - THE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF SCIENCE FICTION AND FANTASY (3 vols) Probably no one will be surprised to know that 'Peter Saxon' is a pseudonym. However, there seems to be some haziness about how many writers used this pseudonym, and exactly which novels are attributable to those writers known to have used it. The writer chiefly responsible for 'Peter Saxon' seems to be one Wilfred Glassford McNeilly (1921), a friend of author and publisher W (illiam) Howard Baker, though he used other pseudonyms. As by Baker, McNeilly published a novel called THE GUARDIANS in 1967 (Mayflower pbk), which seems to have spawned The Guardians series. There were three earlier 'Peter Saxon' novels, however. The exact order of their publication is unclear. The titles, and the editions I have traced, are as follows: THE DISORIENTATED MAN. Mayflower pbk Sept 1966; reprinted in hardcover library edition (not listed in Reginald, Tuck or Rock) by Howard Baker [Publishers] 1967; reprinted as SCREAM AND SCREAM AGAIN, Paperback Library, Dec 1967. (The title change seems to have been instigated by the publishers rather than the filmmakers. The movie did not appear until 1969 - or 1970 in some sources - Presumably SCREAM AND SCREAM AGAIN was a more saleable title than the science-fictionish THE DISORIENTATED MAN, though the original title more clearly represents the novel's sf content). Ashley and Rock attribute the novel to McNeilly; Reginald and Tuck do not (i.e. they consider the attribution is unclear). THE DARKEST NIGHT. Mayflower hardcover 1966; pbk 1967; reprinted by Paperback Library, Sept 1967 (not listed in Reginald, Tuck or Rock). Five Star pbk (UK, early 1970's?). All sources attribute the novel to McNeilly. THE TORTURER. Mayflower hardcover 1966; pbk 1967; reprinted by paperback Library, April 1967 (not in Reginald, Tuck or Rock). All sources attribute the novel to McNeilly.

Before going any further, let's look at how the various sources view the Peter Saxon material overall. Ashley seems to view McNeilly as solely responsible for all the Saxon novels; he does not mention the use of the name as a 'house pseudonym'. While Tuck's main entry says 'apparently a house pseudonym'; he cross-references to one Thomas Hector Martin but not to McNeilly (see Vol 2, p. 379). However, in Vol 3 of Tuck's work his Pseudonym Index gives the identity of Peter Saxon as 'Thomas Hector Martin; Wilfred McNeilly; others'. Rock attributes all the novels to McNeilly except THE CURSE OF RATHLAW, which he attributes to Thomas Hector Martin. Reginald, who gives the most detailed information, attributes four novels to McNeilly, THE CURSE OF RATHLAW to Martin, and does not attribute the others specifically - the implication is that 'Peter Saxon' masks the identity of one or more authors still to be identified. If 'Peter Saxon' is a 'house pseudonym', it is a curious one. Usually a house pseudonym is given to a group of writers by one publishing house (whether it be a book or magazine publishing house). The various writers use a 'house style' to produce a series ('James Workman' for the Sydney publisher Horwitz is a case in point). Yet in the case of Peter Saxon, the novels appeared under a number of different imprints in the UK and the US. It's likely that the house pseudonym originated at Howard Baker Publishers; then the reprints merely followed suit by using the Peter Saxon pseudonym. The other Peter Saxon horror novels are as follows: SATAN'S CHILD. Mayflower pbk 1967; reprinted by Lancer Books, 1968, pbk; reprinted by Lodestone Books, 1968, pbk; reprinted by PBS/Five Star, 1973, pbk. From the Five Star reprint, of which I have a copy, I have deduced the existence of various other Peter Saxon novels in Five Star editions. All sources attribute the novel to McNeilly. THE CURSE OF RATHLAW. Lancer Books, 1968, pbk. Reprinted by Magnum/Prestige Books, 1968, pbk. All sources (save Ashley, who neglects to mention it at all) agree that this novel is attributable to Thomas Hector

Martin, and that it is Martin's sole contribution to the Saxon novels. This novel is part of the Guardians series, but it is not numbered. (Later Guardians novels are numbered #1-#4, but if THE GUARDIANS by Baker, and THE CURSE OF RATHLAW and THROUGH THE DARK CURTAIN are included, the series consists of 7 novels). BLACK HONEY. Mayflower pbk, 1968. Reprinted by Five Star (UK, early 70's?). Authorship unattributed by Reginald. CORRUPTION. Sphere pbk, 1968 (Tuck gives 1967). Authorship unattributed by Reginald. DARK WAYS TO DEATH. Howard Baker [Publishers] hardcover, 1968; reprinted by Berkley Medallion pbks 1969 as GUARDIANS #2: DARK WAYS TO DEATH; reprinted under the original title by Mayflower, 1970, pbk; reprinted by Sphere, 1975 as Dennis Wheatley Library of the Occult #32, with an introduction by Wheatley, giving Wheatley's usual reactionary views on the occult. Note that Ashley comments that Wheatley inspired McNeilly in the first place! Authorship unattributed by Reginald.

novels not attributed to either author by Reginald are in fact by one or the other; or whether there are other authors involved. As both McNeilly and Martin are still alive, it may prove possible to resolve this more accurately. I should also mention a series of three novels under the pseudonym Peter Saxon, which are outside the horror field. These are THE ENEMY SKY (1969? - see Rock), THE UNFEELING SKY (1968) and THE WARRING SKY (1970). These were all published by Corgi books and are set in the First World War, the action revolving around members of the Royal Flying Corps. Rock attributes THE ENEMY SKY to McNeilly, so it's a fair assumption that he authored the whole trilogy. (Adrian says, however, that Baker wrote them). McNeilly and Martin both wrote other novels, horror and otherwise, under various pseudonyms - for instance, McNeilly's series about The Specialist under the pseudonym 'Errol Lecale’ (Ashley is in error when he gives the pseudonym as Error (!) Lecale). I hope to explore the works of these writers further....

THE KILLING BONE (Guardians #1). Berkley Medallion pbk, June 1969. Authorship unattributed by Reginald. THE HAUNTING OF ALAN MAIS. (Guardians #3). Berkley Medallion pbk, Aug 1969. Authorship unattributed by Reginald. THROUGH THE DARK CURTAIN. Howard Baker hardcover 1968 (listed in Rock but not Reginald); Lancer pbk 1968. Part of the Guardians series but not numbered. THE VAMPIRES OF FINISTERE. (Guardians #4). Berkley Medallion pbk, 1970. Authorship unattributed by Reginald. VAMPIRE'S MOON. Belmont pbk, Mar 1970; reprinted by Five Star (UK, early 1970's?). Authorship unattributed by Reginald. On the balance of the evidence, McNeilly seems to be responsible for the greater number of Peter Saxon titles, with T.H. Martin as author of THE CURSE OF RATHLAW only. It is a matter of speculation whether the

Biblical references to HORROR. These were found with the use of my handy Biblical concordance. "And when the sun was going down, a deep sleep fell upon Abram; and, lo, an horror of great darkness fell upon him" (Gen 15:12) "Fearfulness and trembling are come upon me, and horror hath overwhelmed me". (Psalm 55:5). "Horror hath taken hold upon me because of the wicked that forsake thy law" (Psalm 119:53) "They shall also gird themselves with sackcloth, and horror shall cover them; and

shame shall be upon all faces and baldness upon all their heads" (Ezek 7: 18) "Be astonished, O ye heavens, at this, and be horribly afraid, be ye very desolate, saith the Lord" (Jer 2:12) "He brought me up also out of an horrible pit, out of the miry clay, and set my feet upon a rock, and established my goings" (Psalm 40: 2)

COLUMN FOR CULT FICTION © JAN 1997 Cult Fiction was a magazine planned by my colleague Chris Sequeira, comics writer and former co-editor with me of Terror Australis magazine. It was to have a mix of graphic (comic) stories, fiction, and non-fiction that would appeal to a hip inner city audience. Chris asked me for a punchy column for the first issue, which I delivered in a short space of time as follows; however plans for the magazine were shelved and my column remained unpublished. ___________________________________ Thank God for endorphins! I've been generating a lot of 'em lately, and my current reading has a lot to do with it. Why? I'll tell you in a moment. Endorphins, as many of you may know, are naturally occurring biological opiates in the body. They can make us feel good, providing a 'natural high'. For that reason, exercises like aerobics are popular because these feel-good chemicals are generated by any exercise similar to a strenuous aerobic workout. But endorphins actually work primarily by blocking or dulling

pain" Reading some recent horror fiction by Australian authors has led me to reflect on the nature of pain in more ways than one. Pain is something that we all experience at times, and experience as individuals in different ways. Not only that, but our culture expects us to behave in certain ways in response to pain. Ironically, as journalist Diane Ackerman points out in her wonderful book A NATURAL HISTORYOF THE SENSES, what we define as pain differs according to circumstance. For instance, the torture we (especially women in twentieth century Western society) inflict on our bodies is the name of beauty is not considered to be torture, because of its ultimate end, which is considered desirable. Even more ironically, the torture that Australian publishers are currently inflicting on devotees of the horror genre is considered by them to be 'jumpstarting' the genre in Australia. Strange and wonderful it is, the way they can view positively a process which, as a longtime reader and reviewer of horror, even as one who is inured to ghastliness in my reading matter, is causing me intense pain. And jumpstarting my endorphin production into the bargain. For the year of 1996, the second year of the Aurealis Awards, which are awarded by AUREALIS magazine for excellence in science fiction, fantasy and horror, the judges have been unable to locate a single horror novel published in Australia that might qualify for the category of Best Novel in this genre, and have consented to a 'No .I\ward' vote. Can't say as I blame' em, folks. The rules of the awards sensibly allow for such an eventuality, and while it may be a little weird to actually have an award and not be able to present it, there is at least (and plaudits to the judges for this) some realistic recognition of the sparsity of quality horror fiction in this year's 'no award' vote.

This year's judges of the horror category no doubt faced similar problems I did when I voted on the 1995 awards. They had to consider whether any of the handful of novels published in this country in the last 12 months that were 'packaged' as horror truly deserved to be called the "Best" horror novel. (An aside: 'packaged' is the usual marketing term that refers to how a book has been presented -what genre slot it is seen to fit into, what cover design has accordingly been given it, what typography has been used to enhance that impression). There were two or three such novels this year packaged as genre offerings, which evidently the judges felt unable to distinguish by nominating them for the award. The judges also had to take into account what was happening in 'mainstream' novel publishing. Were there any novels by established writers that were not 'packaged' as horror that nevertheless were deserving of being awarded the Best Horror Novel? Last year, I was able to suggest several. This year's judges were evidently unable to do likewise. This situation highlights the problems that the horror genre faces in Australia. Firstly, there are too few novels -this year, in point of fact, none -that are packaged as horror that are worth the paper they're written on. So what would have been the contenders? EVIL SEED OF THE FATHER by James Tatham was one of the most hotly touted horror novels of the year (by its publisher, Random House). According to its publicity release it was 'a bloody combination of WAKE IN FRIGHT, RAZORBACK and THE EXORCIST' with 'all the markings of classic outback Australian horror' .It was perceived as' splatter horror with more blood and guts, than another horror novel from the same

house, MY BEAUTIFUL FRIEND by Venero Armanno. (The latter, while wrong-headedly promoted as genre horror, was at least competently written with good local colour and holds its own as a thriller with Anne Rice-ish overtones). Tatham, known for his 'autobiographical novel KISS TOMORROW GOODBYE, which draws on his dark crimeconnected past, failed dismally to dent the horror market with EVIL SEED. The book got my endorphins a-juicin’ right away in response to the pain I felt on reading the first few chapters. By book’s end, I was mighty high – not from the clean adrenalin rush one gets from a really good page-turner, but from the chemical reaction of my body spitting out opiates to combat the mental anguish that engulfed me as EVIL SEED’ s plot grew, by swift yet clunky turns, more outré and yet more unbelievable. I could have more concisely (if more unkindly) reviewed this novel with one word: WOOF. In my blunt judgement, the book was a complete dog, as one publisher's rep of my acquaintance says of books that 'bark all the way out from the warehouse and bark all the way back' (when unsold copies are they are returned by the bookseller). Lest it be thought I am unduly negative, perhaps even biased, in this view, I may mention that another who read the book, and to whom I have spoken of these profound matters, told me that they thought EVIL SEED's plot ''as full of holes as a Swiss cheese". (Another aside: Let no-one think, due to my vitriol, that I am accusing the book's publishers of having been venal or greedy enough for fast bucks to shove this novel out into what they perceived to be as a lowbrow market that would lap up whatever slop was put in front of it. But let no-one think either that we readers of the horror genre do not have

standards and taste merely because our literary poison of choice is the conte cruel, the supernatural or the grisly and gruesome. And in this column I have been given carte blanche to tell it like I see it. Unless those of us who value the horror genre speak up against these Emperors with No Clothes in the guise of 'classic Australian horror', we shall have more of these inept concoctions foisted upon us, and a market which could expand and grow if nurtured with quality writers and writing will be strangled at birth

GM Hagues' latest, THE DEVIL 'S NUMBERS, continues the push to make him the number one bestseller in the genre in Australia, but the problem it seems to me is that the genre is horribly misunderstood by the publishers, hence the current offerings are largely horrible misconceived. Here is a novel that has (yes) supernatural occurrences and has (yes) hints of ghostly transcendence and (yes) some shocks; but is structurally more of a historical spy thriller, not an exceptionally well-written one at that.

But let us proceed what was wrong with this particular book? Well, not only didn't it sell, it didn't deserve to sell. It was shoddily written; not merely dull and silly, but consummately and howl-evokingly dumb. That the Australian reading public conspicuously failed to take notice of it was probably the kindest fate that the author could have hoped for. More disturbing to me by far than the book itself, is the fact that Tatham (living in Bondi) is said to be writing a sequel to EVIL SEED wherein its beasts (there are these beasts you see...but frankly, I can't be bothered to explicate) propagate and take over the outback. Will this mooted sequel enhance or even marginally contribute to the state of the art in Australian horror fiction? The headspin I feel when I contemplate this sequel and the endorphin rush I get in consequence tells me in no uncertain terms -NO.

Granted, it's not strictly necessary for a good writer to be familiar with terms like 'negative dialectics' or 'postmodernity' or 'transavantgardism' or the 'paradigm of referentiality' to write a literate novel in the '90's; but in these times of stylistic change and innovation in the mi an stream field, it is disheartening to read local fiction that has all the eclat of the lower spectrum of American horror novels of twenty years ago.

The situation not be so bad if at least one decent horror novel had crept through during this year. Perhaps the problem of definition is part of the difficulty. Victor Keller's STORYMAN was a rivet tingly dark tale, quite conceivably categorisable as horror, but packaged as a crime novel and therefore possible discounted from consideration by the Aurealis judges.

Let's diverge from these weighty considerations for a few heartbeats... The nineteenth-century poet Baudelaire took an attitude to himself (and by extension the nature of man) that underlies much of modern horror As paraphrased by the critic Georges Pulet in his book EXPLODING POETRY, it was this: "I am a man, that is to say, a fallen being, ashamed of existing, doing evil, trampling in mud that is no different from me. Moreover, in my misery as in my baseness I discover that I am a poet...eminently representative of human vileness. My situation is unexceptional, but the consciousness I have of it is in itself exceptional. Not for an instant do I forget the fact that my nature, like that of the entire human species, is one of degradation, and that the mud in which I trample fills a place essentially low and dark -a place into which the whole of creation, by reason of a Fall that occurred at its origin and irrevocably altered its essence, has forever slipped".

Baudelaire of course, greatly admired Poe, the father of the modern horror story, and might be considered a distant great-uncle of horror. Certainly his poems collected as "The Flowers of Evil" provide a unique insight into that degraded state of man's nature that Baudelaire delineated so well. But Baudelaire only saw one side of the coin. The horror novel, in my view, ought to provide a sense of transcendence of this side of man's nature. The richest, most readable novels of the genre are those that portray not just evil or debasement, but its potential opposites. I can (and will) say a lot more along those lines about horror. But for Australian horror fiction to work, it has to begin to grapple with that one side of the coin and do it well, before it can even dream in its wildest most phantasmagoric dreams of depicting both sides. Maybe in the next twelve months we will see a novel published that attempts to do so and I would be the first to applaud it (along with the Aurealis judges I'm sure). Meanwhile, I reiterate my thankfulness for those internal drugs, the blessed endorphins that drop the lily of ease and Lethe on the brow of the sufferer who delves into the current crop of local horror .

NOTES FOR PANEL AT ‘MAGIC CASEMENTS FESTIVAL’ 13 Sept 2003

Due to the exigencies of being on a panel – other panelists, time pressures, etc, I didn’t get to deliver thee notes as prepared below at the event for which they were written up. Perhaps the thoughts expressed are still worth passing on? I will let other members be the judges.

‘WHAT’S HOT & WHAT’S NOT” Some thoughts by Leigh Blackmore Written 11-09-03 Firstly, Terry Dowling has often made the point that there is no genre, there is only good or bad story. This is, I think, true on an exalted plane, BUT in fact for better or for worse the publishing industry clearly delineates areas of genre and subgenre in sf and fantasy, and separates these from ‘mainstream’ fic. For the most part, publishers categorise the fantasy they publish as epic fantasy in the mould of Eddings/Feist etc, or as urban fantasy in the mold of Charles de Lint, or as ‘romantic’ high fantasy like the novels of Cecilia DartThornton, or as historical fantasy like Sara Douglass. Most other authors are packaged to appear between the poles set by the big sellers. SF authors are slightly less strictured perhaps, but there are still numerous perceived subgenres such as cyberpunk, military, space opera and so on. I don’t believe it’s necessarily a bad thing to genrify, but as readers we need to be discerning enough to know what’s really HOT and what is merely warmed-over pap. Genre distinctions generally work well, due to the reader’s predominant tendency to come to the bookshop seeking something similar to what they have read before. If some of a thing is good, more of the same must be better, right? The whole publishing of sf and fantasy is predicated around this concept and without undue cynicism about the willingness (or otherwise) to take risks of the audience, this is reader-driven – because most readers do not demand difference, they demand quantity. Publishers cater to the demands perceived – it seems almost accidental sometimes that real quality will arise within the formulaic notions of what constitutes good and entertaining fantasy. Readers by and large are reluctant to venture out of their comfort zones, to try new writers and new themes. I would say this is more typical of the fantasy reader than the sf reader. Because sf is often forward-looking and idea-driven, readers seem more willing

to embrace a book by a writer they know which is very different from the one before it – or to try a new writer – they are looking for ideas at the edge of the envelope. Unfortunately heroic fantasy writing, it seems to me, is often saddled with a conservative political outlook and is much slower to embrace tropes which vary from the norm. This isn’t to say there can’t be fine writing in fantasy – Llyn Flewelling is a good example of a writer who pays close attention to style as well as plotting. I speak as a bookseller; what’s HOT of course includes the new Robert Jordan or the new Tad Williams or the new up and comer such as Greg Keyes or [author of Fifth Sorceress]. What’s NOT of course includes the decaying Star Trek franchise. What’s hot is Tolkien because of the movies. What’s not is Red Dwarf and Magic the Gathering – popular series that have passed their peak of popularity. But I’d prefer to dwell on what’s HOT than not. Naturally there are trends, peaks and troughs in the popularity of given subgenres. It’s quite possibly good that the likes of EE Doc Smith are no longer HOT, although see his influence (and that of the pulps in general) on the New Space Opera. As a bookseller one is continually wanting to steer readers towards the new and different, of which there is an abundance. So what’s hot in the bookseller’s mind (REDSHIFT anthology, Ted Chiang in SF, Jeff Vandermeer and the whole ‘new weird’ style of fantasy vanguarded by China Mieville and others) are merely what the readers perceive as hot. Fortunately there are quirky books like the Jasper Fforde which do become a cult success and tend to blur the boundaries of what constitutes fantasy – which in my opinion can only be a good thing. Of course Terry Pratchett is a great example of a writer who sells by the bucketload and doesn’t feel the need to write doorstoppers, which is always cause for hope.

Also, in a broad sense, novels are hot and short stories are not. This is a pity, because most of the exciting work in the field is being done in the short story. But as far as sales go, anthologies are not hot. It’s all you can do to sell a Year’s Best anthology of sf or fantasy, which should be being snapped up by readers keen to sample the wide variety the field has to offer. The reluctance of readers to sample short fiction (which after all is a much quicker way of checking out what’s around than trying to read 800-page blockbuster novels) naturally leads publishers to resist short story collections and it becomes a vicious cycle. In my opinion, if you want to know what’s REALLY hot, it’s the collections from small presses that represent the leading edge of the field – the most current ideas, the best writing, and the trendsetting that will dictate the direction of the field in the decade ahead. So to see what’s HOT you should be reading the magazines – AUREALIS, ASIM etc locally, and whatever you can get from overseas (Interzone and the like), and the anthologies. US and UK small presses both have incredibly exciting work coming out, in sf and fantasy and also in horror. Again, in a broad sense, in the marketing sense fantasy is HOT and sf and horror are not. Fantasy is hot in the sales sense in that it’s possible to move a vast quantity of trilogies and multi-part series, and there’s nothing wrong with this. These works are the Victorian triple-deckers of our time. Popularity based on quantity of units sold is not necessarily a measure of poor quality, either. There are genuinely intelligent and innovative writers working the fantasy field, as well as hacks rehashing the well-trodden plot coupons of a thousand doorstop novels that came before.

Horror seemed virtually moribund in the nineties, with the sales boom of the King, Koontz, Barker and Rice days of the eighties dying well down; but exciting writers are revivifying its mouldy corpse – eg Tim Lebbon, Tom Piccirilli, Jeffrey Thomas and others (also the very popular Lauren K Hamilton). So horror is becoming a little HOTTER than it has been for some time. Sf sells comparatively poorly, although there is enough momentum there to keep it going. Sf occupies a kind of middle ground, ,a kind of well-heated but rarely sizzling position. There are peaks of HOTNESS as for instance when a new Peter F Hamilton or other popular space opera writer brings out a new book, or when (commendably) readers pick up on the great writing of a Kim Stanley Robinson (Hugo winner for YEARS OF RICE AND SALT). Those that follow sf also recognise the HOTNESS factor of the writers actually forging new frontiers, like the whole British space opera school (Alistair Reynolds, Ken McLeod etc) with their focus on fabulous old-fashioned adventure along with cutting edge science based in everything from AI to quantum physics. I think what I’m saying is that what’s HOT and NOT depends very largely on where you stand. If you’re a fourteen year old schoolboy it’s probably true to say that what SEEMS hot is the latest Raymond Feist Krondor novel in which he further sharecrops the roleplaying game he wrote in college. And yes, there’s a place for Dragonlance novels and MechWarrior novels – let us not decry their presence, although we may hope that their readers move on to more substantial fare later. If you’re an experienced fantasy reader you may see what’s HOT as China Mieville or the increasing tend to romance/fantasy crossovers – e.g. 2001 Nebula winner

Catherine Aasaro and the latest Harlequin line in the US. As a sf reader you may see what’s hot as William Gibson continuing to write excellent cool books like PATTERN RECOGNITION, or Neal Stephenson opening up the idea of what sf is (as he has done since CRYPTONOMICON to reexamine historical developments and so on (QUICKSILVER et al). If you are a devotee of Dr Who you will of course perceive the ABC’s action in repeating the series on TV as HOT at the moment. If you’re really sizzling you will know that’s what’s HOT is often in what has been variously referred to as INTERSTITIAL fiction, SLIPSTREAM fiction etc. I’m talking about writers like Jeff Noon, Carol Emshwiller, etc whose work is not easily slotted into the typical fantasy pigeonholes but who clearly are advancing the genre from within and expanding its scope simultaneously. This is a technique and a school revolving around what Gary Wolfe terms (and I love this) – the ‘interpenetration of discursive modes’. You can have a HOT time simply tracking down and reading all those writers who are chucking those discursive modes in the pot and mixing them around – consider their books the sharp sauce at the dish of more formulaic fantasy. There is plenty that is HOT in all the genres of fantasy. What’s currently NOT is as much to do with fad and fashion as anything. There is nothing to say that we won’t see LOST RACE novels become HOT again, or a resurgence in the sales of writers like Verne, Wells, MP Shiel and all the great old masters of imagination who started it in the first place. Modern readers with short attention spans often don’t delve back into these writers, but I never give up hope – and it is fantastic to see series like the SF Masterworks and Fantasy Masterworks

keeping these classics before readers who have not encountered them. Another thing that’s HOT is the trend to Books on Demand. Cite Wildside Press, Cosmos and Prime Books,etc, who give us the work of lesser-known but excellent contemporary writers, and can also reprint the old classics at will. This contributes to a richness and variety in the field that only be welcomed. I agree that really there is no genre. Of course all writers are paid liars, and all fiction is fantasy – made up stuff. But in the ‘real’ world of writing, publishing and bookselling, I’m quite happy to see sections of bookstores where the fantasy and sf books congregate. Genre does not have to imply ghettoisation, pace Margaret Atwood (ORYX and CRAKE). I would love to see a fantasy or sf novel winning the Booker prize – no reason why a good one shouldn’t, except the oftimes prejudicial attitude of the literary establishment. But I am happy to say what’s HOT in sf and fantasy is generally HOTTER than most of what’s happening in the mainstream. It’s an exciting time, with no end in sight, and for fantasy and sf (as in Broderick’s THE SPIKE), the end is out of sight, yet about to happen. Rich, varied, incredibly adept at looking at all the issues which confront the human race, and also terrific at offering simple escapism and entertainment, the speculative fiction happening now is as HOT as you could wish for – you just need to take a few risks, know where to look and not be content to sample only the tried and true fare that’s out there.