Talk:Galaxy Science Fiction/Archive 1

Miscellaneous early comments
I seem to remember Galaxy magazine having some connection with "Worlds of If" at some point, like maybe they bought out the magazine and merged editorial content (maybe in the 1970s). Does anyone know for sure? I suppose I could do some research via Google and see if I can find anything. I loved Galazy back in the seventies, when I was a subscriber. I think somewhere I actually have a copy of a special edition from 1974. soulpatch

If, later called Worlds of If, was launched by James L. Quinn, apparently, in March 1952. I'm too lazy to do the research right now. :) Ejler Jakobsson and successor Jim Baen tried to reintroduce If with a new cover format in 1974, but the magazine failed and was incorporated into Galaxy, as I should have- (now have)- mentioned. I have 4 issues from that period. k4f 08:57 Dec 5, 2002 (UTC)

(Removing some questions by me and helpful comments byEloquence that don't bear directly on the topic.k4f 05:32 Dec 8, 2002 (UTC)

H. L. Gold vs Horace L. Gold: I think Gold is much more widely known as H.L. Gold, and that when a main entry is made it should be under that name. If I do it first I shall certainly try to establish "H.L. Gold" as the primary name. Right now if anyone searches for H.L. Gold they're going to have trouble finding anything. k4f 05:13 Dec 8, 2002 (UTC)

Trivia: a (presumed fictional) issue of Galaxy marked "September 1953, 38 cents" appears in the Star Trek: DS9 episode "Far Beyond the Stars." Worth mentioning? 168.9.120.8 16:27, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Puppet masters.png
Image:Puppet masters.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:05, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Edizione Mondiale
I took out the reference to Fascination, the name of the failed magazine that Edizione Mondiale published prior to Galaxy. I couldn't find any reference to it in Ashley or the Nicholls/Clute encyclopedia. If anyone has a reference to support the name of the magazine, it could be added back in, though I don't think it's a big deal if we don't have it. Mike Christie (talk) 01:40, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Here are the references to Fascination: http://208.100.59.10/wiki/index.php/Magazine:Galaxy_Science_Fiction

http://efanzines.com/EK/eI31/index.htm I thought this was pretty important as it explained exactly why Galaxy was started by a foreign publisher, something I had wondered about for years. Pepso2 (talk) 10:01, 19 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I've added the name back; I referenced the Ortiz book that efanzines.com quotes, since that's where the information comes from. It would be good to get a copy of that book to be able to quote a page number and eliminate the reference to the website.


 * I see there's also a reference to Fascination further down as a fumetti magazine -- I'm not sure we need this level of detail.


 * If I have time over the next couple of weeks I'd like to try to get this article up to FA level, so I hope to be working on it fairly regularly over that time. I'd be glad to collaborate with anyone else active on this page, but I'm also happy to have a go myself if nobody else has time to put in at the moment. Mike Christie (talk) 15:35, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Cover repro
Somewhere, maybe in the first issue?, Gold made a comment about how the cover of the first (?) issue was done with a radical new printing process. I've often wondered what this was. Pepso2 (talk) 23:26, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Space Opera meaning
I noticed the recent change with the edit summary to the effect that the meaning of "space opera" has changed over the last twenty years. Could the anon editor who made that comment clarify it? I'm not sure what the change is; to me, "space opera" still means what it did when it was coined: melodramatic adventure with flashy science-fictional trappings. Mike Christie (talk) 12:10, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
 * What Mike said. I agree. Pepso2 (talk) 12:55, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
 * (NB: Fyi, I've never participated in a talk page before, so my apologies in advance if my ignorance of protocol shows.) As the article itself quotes, the original "space opera" was a transliteration of a "horse opera" (western), and by extension any other pulp genre, into sf form by changing a few words. (As James Blish famously said, calling a rabbit a smeerp.)  That pejorative meaning has now largely been changed to favor the modern version of the galaxy-spanning super-science stories predating Galaxy by twenty years or more, as practiced by Iain Banks, Vernor Vinge, Alistair Reynolds, etc, in very thick books.  Here's an example of discussion in the field, turned up by googling "space opera change meaning": [] It's quite a turnaround from ridicule to acclaim (quite a few Hugos, Nebulas, Novas, etc), and that's because the meaning of the term itself has radically shifted.--75.92.162.183 (talk) 19:48, 5 July 2008 (UTC)


 * No apologies needed, and thanks for commenting. That's an interesting link you posted.  I hadn't been aware of the suggestion that the meaning had shifted, but I'm not sure from that particular discussion if there is general acceptance of the argument that it has.


 * I think it's clear that part of the argument works: it was definitely a pejorative term to start with, and it is not always pejorative now. The transition predates Star Wars, though; Aldiss's anthology, Space Opera, dates from 1974.  His selection (visible here) is not what everyone would choose, and some of the recent picks such as Sheckley's "Zirn Left Unguarded" are more parody than homage, but I think it's clear that there is also a shift to regarding stories that were originally called "space opera" with more respect, or at least with more affection.


 * But that's just my opinion. What counts here is what we can cite as a reliable source.  I think Cramer and Hartwell can be cited in the space opera article on the debate, but is there really enough consensus in the sf community to cite the debate parenthetically as if it were settled?  To do that I think we'd have to find at least a couple of modern references such as Nicholls which concurred with the view.  However, the most recent (1992) Nicholls explicitly connects the early pejorative terms with a rapid evolution into an affectionate nostalgia for romantic galactic adventure.  So I'd still be in favour of eliminating the reference as added.  What do you think, 75.92.162.183 and Pepso (and anyone else)?


 * (And by the way, 75.92.162.183, have you considered creating an account? It's quick to do and there are lots of benefits, and it'd be a pleasure to have another regular editor that evidently knows and cares about the history of sf.) Mike Christie (talk) 11:18, 6 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I found this in Mike Ashley's "The Time Machines" (2000), p. 231: "Space opera [...] was already the common denominator of sf, and in fact always remains so. It has never gone away, but in capable hands can develop into quality sf."  I think this is enough to say that there is not yet agreement on a significant shift in meaning for "space opera"; the discussion of that shift should be mostly in the space opera article.  Mike Christie (talk) 11:10, 7 July 2008 (UTC)


 * There's a real problem with these kind of terms on Wikipedia. Do "bitch" and "biotch" mean the same thing, or is there supposed to be a difference? I loaned someone Steven Levy's Hackers, but even tho he claimed to have read it, he went off on a 20-minute rant about all the negative aspects of computers. Somewhere I ran across a comment that the meaning of the word changed after Levy wrote the book, but in truth, both meanings of "hackers" still apply. Well, yes, words do evolve, but "good girl art" still means that the art is good, not necessarily the girl. So Wikipedia has it right on the "Good Girl Art" page, but wrong on the "Bad Girl Art" page -- unless one believes the people who think (as on discussion page) that the meaning of the word changed. The Internet is changing language. Millions of young people now believe that "alot" is a word. Pepso2 (talk) 17:51, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

online
I can't find any-thing here about Galaxy online, and yet I'm almost positive there was a site run by Gold's son as an extension/continuation of Galaxy. Kdammers (talk) 13:40, 18 November 2008 (UTC)


 * You're correct. It evolved into another site called SF Museum at http://galaxyezine.org/ ... However, many of the pages there are simply empty shells. Pepso2 (talk) 16:36, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Problems with new link/reference
I'm not convinced that we can use the new link that's been added by Pepso to this site. There are three problems. First, it includes copyrighted images, which we're not supposed to link to -- I don't recall where that's stated as policy but I can find it if necessary. Second, it doesn't actually express an opinion about the covers -- it just shows them. It's being used to support a couple of statements about the quality of the covers in the 1950s: that Sibley and Bonestell's early covers were effective, and that Emsh's humourous covers were notable. The latter should be easy to source elsewhere; I'll look for other opinions on the covers to see if I can source the first part. I'd be surprised if I can't find something about Bonestell, at least. Finally, the website doesn't seem to meet WP:RS; it's clearly self-published. I think it should be removed as a reference, and we should try to find other sources for the newly added statements. Mike Christie (talk) 12:29, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Edson McCann contest
I would like to be able to cite the issue in which the contest was announced that was ultimately won by "Edson McCann". Gladiator-at-Law was considered as a possible winner, so it was no doubt mid 1954 or earlier. I have scanned the issues but can't find it; if someone has a reference please post it here. Mike Christie (talk) 00:16, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Found it; it is March 1953. Ashley gives the issue date in Transformations, p. 119. Mike Christie (talk) 20:26, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

What is pulp prose?
Vyroglyph (talk) 21:28, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
 * It means prose of the type common in pulp magazines: action-oriented, often poorly written. I hope to rewrite the remainder of this article later this year and will clean that up as part of it. Mike Christie (talk) 23:32, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

To-do
-- Mike Christie (talk) 02:31, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Rewrite and expand lead Done.
 * Reorganize and compress material -- some repetition and some sequence issues. Done.
 * Clean up remainder of old material still not fully integrated, e.g. illustrator section Done.
 * Use Ortiz quotes from sandbox Done.
 * Can we keep the existing images? Check copyright on second one; what else could be used for first?  It's already in the collage.
 * Use scan of back cover of first issue to illustrate "You'll never see it ...." Done.
 * Review external links -- possibly link to E.J. Gold's site? Done.
 * Clean up references and check footnotes are all organized properly. Done.
 * MOS pass Done.
 * Need to mention Avenue Victor Hugo Done.
 * p. 28 of Hell's Cartographers has Silverberg's note on how Pohl agreed to buy whatever he wrote.
 * Expand coverage of inverted L shape; use Gold's editorial quoted in Rosheim. Done.
 * Source and expand Galaxy Novels and Magabooks. Done

Silverberg
Just a note for the future: I would like to use Silverberg's quote from Phases to support Tymm/Ashley's comment that Pohl came to a special arrangement with Silverberg in 1963. Note also that T/A say it was unique; but Ashley's (later) book Gateways relates a similar arrangement between Ted White and Gordon Eklund; that's probably worth mentioning in a note. Mike Christie (talk) 02:46, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Resolved; I found a quote in Hell's Cartographers that covers this. Mike Christie (talk) 16:09, 2 October 2010 (UTC)