Rábanos Radiactivos number 8
Written & published by Fred Patten on the LASFS Rex Rotary, December 9, 1964. Intended for Apa L, Eighth Distribution, LASFS meeting #1426, December 10, 1964. Address: 1825 Greenfield Avenue, Los Angeles, California, 90025. Phone: GR 3-6321.
LONCON II in 1965! Jock Root for TAFF! Salamander Press #62


You folks are looking at the new Official Collator of Apa L. I more or less inherited the post after Dian threw up her hands in disgust last week. Why she did this is why I am requesting 35 copies of your Apa L zines for future Distributions.

The original purpose to Apa L was to produce special fanzines that would be distributed freely at LASFS Meetings every week to anyone that wanted them. Theoretically, everybody that showed up at a Meeting was entitled to that week's Apa L zines, by the mere fact that he was there. The person needn't even be a LASFS member -- one of the things the free zines were to do was to attract the casual guest into coming back again. Another thing the zines were to do was help end the apa-fan and non-apa-fan cliques, as some of the members termed them, so that the club members not in national active fandom wouldn't have to sit in a corner while the rest of us discussed our ingroup apa politics and things. Instead of this, Apa L has been turning more and more into another ingroup fannish apa, and this original purpose has almost become lost. Last week's Distribution proved a perfect example. If you checked through the zines, you'll have noted that we had 25 contributors. This left only five copies of the Distribution for the rest of the Meeting's attendees; and one of them went into the LASFS Library/Archives, as usual. The other four were quickly grabbed by the non-contributing actifans (such as Ted Johnstone). This meant that such members as Betty Knight, who can't publish for a variety of reasons but are still interested in getting the Distributions, had to be turned down flat. It meant that the old-time member who might become active again under the influence of the weekly Distribution -- Elmer Perdue, this time, who was heard asking "What do you have to do to get in this, Meyer?" -- only could get the leavings from those contributors who happened to send more than 30 copies. There are no longer copies of the Distribution to hand out to guests, whether they be visiting BNFs or interested non-fans, who might become good fans with any interest. There are no longer copies to give to the non-publishing club members to induce them to try putting something out, as we used to encourage Earl Thompson, Lyn Stier, and the CalTech CATS. It means that Apa L is losing its distinction as an apa by and for LASFS members, and is becoming just another apa which just happens to have its 30-man "membership" filled with LASFSians. And Apa L is still growing. And the first time we get 31 contributors, with only 30 copies of the Distribution...

Therefore, I am decreeing some new rules. Firstly, no more out-of-town fans joining the LASFS to take part in the Distributions. (As to existing out-of-town members such as Katz, Scithers, or Tackett become active -- well, we'll consider that when it happens.) secondly, I am requesting 35 copies for future Distributions. Note that word "requesting" -- I am not demanding 35 copies (as yet) for two reasons: A. I want to give everybody a chance to discuss this and complain if they want before I arbitrarily impose this new rule; and B. I am frankly curious to see which of us will willingly produce 35 or more copies since they know they are needed, and which of us will refuse to produce any more than 30 copies until they are forced to do so. I know that there are members who feel it would be better to get the extra copies for LASFS distribution by keeping the number at 30 and expelling all our out-of-town members (Bailes, Kussko, Lupoff, Van Arnam, Mann -- some of our most active contributors). Still another point is how I am to enforce this. By the rules, anyone who shows up at a LASFS Meeting and requests a copy of the Distribution is entitled to one. If an attending member persists in producing only 30 copies, is he still not more entitled to a copy of the Distribution than a member who produces nothing at all? It would seem so. However, what happens if we get 31 contributors while our recalcitrant member is still only turning out 30 copies? Someone is going to have to go short; is he, as an attending contributor, more entitled to a complete Distribution than an out-of-town contributor who sends 35 copies? I rule No! The out-of-town contributor will take priority. The stubborn member who persists in producing only 30 copies does so at his own risk.

If anyone wants to contribute as many as 40 copies, I'm sure they'll all be used, because we're constantly running short, and I doubt that even 35 copies will be enough to make sure everybody gets a complete Distribution. But I won't request more than 35 copies at this time; that should be enough to hold us for awhile. If things do get to the point where we need more than 35 copies, there may have to be some drastic revisions made; past that point Apa L stops being light-hearted fun to many, and starts become work. We may have to drop all our out-of-town members after all; though I certainly hope not. All this should be considered material for discussion in the next few Distributions. In the first place, how do you feel about the request for 35 copies instead of 30; and will I have to make this request a demand?


Jay Freeman -- If Prof. Thorpe comes up with a system to beat the dealer at brag, I'll sit up and take notice. Otherwise, I'm not overly interested in studying his system, not being an inveterate gambler. The only time I was in Las Vegas, I spent the time wandering around the city seeing what it looked like, rather than gambling. Of course, if I ever go back a second time, I'll probably take up gambling because there's nothing else to do there after you've seen the city once. But I have no intentions right now of ever going back. Ron Ellik has a good system for losing; you might get that and try to reverse it.

Dave Hulan -- After a couple of weeks of Al's cooking, I seem to be holding up rather well. Of course, I like my food well-done anyway, so I don't mind when it's burnt a little. We just got a new stove this weekend -- one that produces variations of heat other than 575o -- so maybe his cooking will become even better. Al says he'd prefer to do the cooking as a matter of survival. Actually, I don't see what everybody's got against my cooking, anyway. As I asked Al, "How do we know your cooking is better than my cooking? Neither of us have ever given my cooking a fair try yet." ## Simulacron-3 indeed went beyond the standard world-in-miniature plot, being of the subvariety of the micro-world controlled by the macro-world, which hasn't been used too often. But I still didn't like the handling of the story because I found it too simple for me -- I was about one step ahead of the author and three steps ahead of the protagonist all the way. Well-handled, perhaps, but too overly familiar for any suspense. If Galouye had made it a what-will-happen-next novel, it might've been a lot better, but it was strictly a what-is-going-on?, and that was too obvious.

Richard Mann -- What did I do with what LASFS ad? If you mean the one on the back of RR#6, it was originally published to publicize the club at the 1962 WesterCon here in LA. ## Confusing stories about telepathy are many; a lot of Philip Dick's arc are in that class. Peter Philip's "Dreams are Sacred" is a good one; I'd recommend it if you haven't read it yet.

Previous Index Next