A Little Lesson in Tuckerology
| Meta | |
|---|---|
| Title: | A Little Lesson in Tuckerology |
| Creator: | Bob Tucker |
| Date(s): | Oct. 1939 |
| Medium: | |
| Fandom: | Science Fiction |
| Topic: | Fandom, interpersonal feuds |
| External Links: | Hosted online by fanac.org. Spaceways #7 pp. 9-10. Aug. 1939. |
| Click here for related articles on Fanlore. | |
A Little Lesson in Tuckerology was an 1939 essay published by Bob Tucker. It followed as the fourth in a series: Sam Moskowitz' The World Changes; Tucker's parody The Moon Changes, Too; and Moskowitz' response Hey! Stop! Please!
In A Little Lesson in Tuckerology, Tucker explained that all of his work was intended as gentle good humor, meant to spread a few laughs through fandom. Contrary to what Sam Moskowitz seemed to think, Tucker wasn't picking on him intentionally out of any personal grudge, but simply because it was easy to do so. He finished by reminding readers that, just as Moskowitz had said in Hey! Stop! Please!, he wasn't actually upset about anything.
Text
The gentleman who once said: "o, but to see ourselves as others see us!" obviously wasn't a science fiction fan. If he had of been, he would have put it this way: "O, but that others could see us as we see ourselves!"; or perhaps this way: "O, but that others coudl see us as we wish them to see us."For ever and anon we --us fans -- being consistantly taken in the wrong light from which we intended to be taken....for one reason or another. One reason is that some fans have not the all-embracing intelligence necessary to grasp the unwritten lines between each printed line of the authors. These unwritten lines are the thoughts of the authors as he wrote the piece in question. Another reason is that the reader may be so dimwitted as to utterly fail to grasp the meaning of anything, and twists the written lines to conform to his own understanding of things. (Much as when Campbell describes horror---he actually doesn't describe it, he merely erects it and each individual reader does the real describing as far as his (the reader's) intelligence and scope permits. A third reason, and a minor one, thanks to something or other, is that a reader may distort lines for his own personal satisfaction, greed, envy, maliciousness, or what have you.
MOSKOWITZ is a fitting subject to begin on: I do not know how SaM wishes the fan to look upon him because no one can get into Sam's mind and read his thoughts. But it is easy to see how he is taken. There are some who are his enemies and pass no opportunity to discredit his written and spoken word at every opportunity. There are others who merely read his articles and take what is very easily apparent on the surface: that Sam has a very bloated ego. Others, his closest friends, who are in contact with him daily, and almost know his personality, can probably read the true meaning from his words. But this group is small. Too small to counteract that large group that does not know him and pick up the surface impressions. Ask anyone living west of the Hudson what they think of Sam. The answer is: a big headed little punk trying to act as if he knows what it is all about."
Now in all probability, this is not Moskoiwtz as he sees himself at all. It is merely the impression he gives off in his writings, his actions, and his doings; by those can't won't, or are unable to see himself as he desires those to see him, or as he sees himself.
WOLLHEIM is another grade A subject. You have heard more cussing and discussing of Wollheim than any other fan. For almost the same general reasons as surround Moskoiwtz and all the others named herein. It is just that the reader of his written word, the reader who reads of his doings in other publications (twisted and otherwise) simply cannot get a straight picture of him, most of all, cannot get a picture of him as he thinks himself to look, or as he wishes to look.
ACKERMAN is another. In FJA's ten or fifteen years of fan activity, he has probably been accused of every fan crime under the sun. (By the newcomers, please note, who were in diapers when FJA first started reading AMAZING.) It is very very doubtful if Ackerman is, if he even pictures himself as others see him.
TUCKER is the next and last subject. And now we are getting to the point of this matter. I know only too well that hardly anyone else sees me as I wish to be seen, or even as I see myself!
It is astonishing how very few people realize that I am trying to be funny. Yes, that's it. I know that I am not a Joe Miller, or any other famous wit, but I am trying to be. Articles and stories by me, appearing under the name of Pong far outnumber any non-humorous or 'straight' articles and stories I have written. Simply because I recognize the scope of my writing ability. I do not need to be told there are literally dozens of fans who write better non-humorous stuff than I do. I try to write very little of it.
Instead I concentrate on humor (or what I am pleased to term humor) because and again it has been brought home to me that my humorous material is quite passable, that fans like it (the majority, that is) and that therefore, that is the field to stay in! I decided upon that some time ago.
Now, this particular brand of humor of mine is injected into almost everything. D'JOURNAL naturally, drips with it. I put it into LE ZOMBIE, with the usual mistakes on the parts of some fans that I was indulging in personalities, tossing barbs, etc. under the guise of 'humor'. Such is not the case. Moskowitz and his NEW FANDOM has been ribbed ever and anon in LE ZOMBIE and dozens of other articles. Moskowitz should please understand that this is ribbing only. It never was, never will be anything else. If it hurts, or causes bad feeling, I will be only too glad to stop it, for it is the farthest from my wishes to stir up any more bad feelings in fandom. I do rib Moskowitz, NEW FANDOM, Wollheim, and everything else that is in the fan eye, however, for the laughter it will afford those who read it. I mean ill of no one or no institution I speak of.
Moskowitz is extremely easy to rib because of the existing picture of him in fandom. He is giving away gratis, reprints of some of his old hecktographed works. Therefore, what is simpler than to have him the Captain of the first space ship, carrying along a bound volume of his works to give to the natives of the first planet he lands on? You will admit it makes for keen fun, whatever your views on Moskowitz the fan. That Moskowitz would actually do such a thing in real life is absurd, and no one knows it better than I.
He is also easy to rib because of his numerous articles on "old-timing" (yes, that horrible subject is up again!) Nothing will provoke more smiles from readers than to hook the name Moskowitz up with the term "old-timer". As he practically states himself, all his knowledge of old times comes from fan magazines of those periods and the letter columns of professional magazines. Yet, because he writes of old time as if he was part of them, he is accused of adopting "artificial age". And because I rib him of this aura of "age," I am accused of being peeved, and what-have-you.
So here is the picture of myself as I see myself, and I wish to hell you fellows would look at me that same way and stop of this short-sightedness of my ways and doings: I am trying to develop into another Shaw, I am trying to out-Miller Miller, I am doing my darndest to provide fandom with a big bucket full of that humor it so sorely needs, and above all, I am not trying to bait, tease, ridicule or besmirch anybody! It just so happens that some few cannot understand the humor that I am trying to put across, cannot read my thoughts between each line of printed type, cannot see the lighter point I am aiming at, and take me all wrong.
Believe it or not I laughed all hollow over the Loki article in NEW FANDOM that Moskowitz mentions....simply because I thought it uproariously funny. I believe that Loki is a better humorist than I, when he is trying to be serious. I never bothered to answer that poke at me because I don't expect Moskowitz to get mad and answer all the pokes I have taken at his expense in my stories. I understand a few friends of mine, who did not see the Loki article in the same light I did, have done all the answering necessary. Well and good.
There will even be some few who will distort this article in the manners mentioned in paragraph two.
Reactions
Next I like "A Lesson in Tuckerology," agree with Tucker in the idea that he has missed the point, but will take matters up with him personally where a more complete and satisfactory conclusion may be obtained.Sam Moskowitz: Letter printed in Spaceways #8, pg. 21. Oct. 1939.
Who's been picking on poor Tucker this time? No doubt the monstrous Moskowitz snapped a hunk out of the seat of his pants. Seeing he couldn't lick his wounds, as he probably couldn't reach them, the next best thing was to write an article about it. I know he's trying to be funny, and some of his efforts succeed, so I wish he'd continue, instead of writing stuff like A LESSON IN TUCKEROLOGY.Art Widner: Letter printed in Spaceways #8, pg. 21. Oct. 1939.