An Open Letter to Fans of Beauty and the Beast Regarding the Tunnel Con III Video

Open Letter
Title:	An Open Letter to Fans of Beauty and the Beast Regarding the Tunnel Con III Video
From:	Lynette Combs
Addressed To:	Beauty and the Beast (TV) fans
Date(s):	December 1994
Medium:	printed
Fandom:	Beauty and the Beast (TV)
Topic:
External Links:
Click here for related articles on Fanlore.

An Open Letter to Fans of Beauty and the Beast Regarding the Tunnel Con III Video is a 1994 open letter by Lynette Combs, of C.A.B.B..

It was printed in Soulmates - Neverending Dream #4 in December 1994 where it was prefaced by "Dear Teri. I realize that SND has no desire to become a letterzine, but I am sending this in the hope that you will print at least excerpts of it. -- Lynette"

Another variation of this letter, a longer one, was printed in Vincent's World #10 in February 1995. There, the letter has a date of November 1994.

For some context on this topic, see Beauty and the Beast: The Classic vs. Season 3 Fandom Split.

Some Topics Discussed

• Tunnel Con
• ship wars
• Beauty and the Beast (TV)
• "fan-bashing" which is defined in this essay as behavior that is perceived to be insulting or abusive to specific factions of a fandom, or specific fans
• "intolerant" and "untunnelish" as interchangeable
• Classic fans (SND vs fans who support the third season and the character Diana Bennett
• "I don't know why it should be so hard to understand that for many of us, that particular story line will never be acceptable. Never. Ever. For us it was too deliberately destructive, too painful and too contemptuous of the show's audience."
• the rumor of boycotting the L.A. Con
• the right of consumers to state what they want
• Ron Koslow: fan appreciation of, but also betrayal of trust and ability
• "I am disturbed that their first glimpse of this fandom might be through the kind of inflammatory, pointless name-calling I saw on this convention video tape."
• Beauty and the Beast's "dream" and its far-reaching influences

Excerpts from the Letter as Printed in "Vincent's World"

The DreamSeekers have received the Tunnel Con III video, and I just finished watching the cut from the "What Do Know About Diana" panel. I feel the entire fandom was very badly represented on this tape.

I was most appalled to see this panel deteriorate into common fan-bashing. What exactly, I wonder, did that have to do with the stated "Diana" topic? -- Nothing, that's what. Episodes like this should never appear on a convention video.

This is why many Classic fans (like me) have avoided attending such panels for more than three years now. Most of us would do anything to avoid being exposed to such unpleasantness. It was very disheartening to find that kind of fan-bashing still going on; and it creates a very negative impression for newcomers.

Where are the majority of the Classic fans when this is happening? They're out in the dealer's and media rooms, buying and selling and having a good time.

I'd like to address some of the points brought up after the original direction of the panel was lost. (I guess I'm writing to SND, because of a lack of a fair print-forum to air such views.)}

The point was made that Classic fans "won't even discuss" third season: "They might even find it interesting!"... It seems to have escaped the speaker's notice that we've all been "discussing" this issue for four years now. Enough, already. There is nothing we find less interesting, particularly since it always seems to deteriorate into the sort of fan-bashing exemplified by the "Diana" panel.

It was also mentioned that we should get rid of terms like "classic," & etc. Why? I'm proud to be known as a Classic fan; and while I do disagree with name-calling as such, I don't think that applies to names we call ourselves. I don't believe we are ever going to get rid of those names that most accurately (and inoffensively) describe our preferences.

Once again I heard that we are "intolerant" and "untunnelish" in our refusal to accept third season. Nonsense. We're only rejecting the idea, not the people who embrace it. I don't know any "classic" fans who are "intolerant" of anything except third season itself. The fact that time has passed, and we're no longer visibly upset about it, changes nothing. I don't know why it should be so hard to understand that for many of us, that particular story line will never be acceptable. Never. Ever. For us it was too deliberately destructive, too painful and too contemptuous of the show's audience. We do not censure those who choose to enjoy it; we believe this fandom is big enough for all of us.

Now, as for the dearly-held and fiercely-spread rumor that Classic fans are threatening to boycott the L.A. Con "if they invite third season guests" — I wish you'd quash this whenever you hear it. It's been understood from the beginning that the L.A. committee intended to invite those stars. Our only concern has been that their appearances are handled sensitively. I don't mind telling you that I would object to Stephen McHattie's Q&A being sandwiched between Roy's and Armin's, and why should that be hard to understand?

The "Vincent's World" Version Contains the Text Below

Meanwhile. we're devoting an awful lot of energy to attacks and defenses, snipers and sieges. A Klingon once said, wisely , "Only fools fight in a burning house. ") -- And all for a "war" that we, the fandom, cannot possibly resolve on our own, Any decisive storyline resolution will have to come from higher up, whether it be a full-length feature, a TV-movie, or whatever.

If we'd stop fighting amongst ourselves and devote all these energies, instead, to furthering the show, its ideals and the Dream (in whatever incarnation we prefer it), this would be a happier and more productive fandom. And we'd stand a better chance of getting what we want, too.

And I still believe that if we're not giving each other the feeling the show used to give us, then we ' re going about this al l wrong.

Well, that's really all I have to say . . . I'm also enclosing a copy of a letter I wrote recently to "OUT-IN." I don't know if Jeannie will print it; it hardly falls in with her "party line" of late, and after all I am not a subscriber; so she'd be justified, of course, in not running it.' (Teri Peppe wrote a longer and much more lucid letter, and I do hope Jeannie prints that. ) Please feel free to show copies of either letter to anyone you think might be interested. I'm tired of the misunderstandings and lack of communication, so I guess you could say this is me "coming out of the closet." But I was shocked by the behavior of that panel.

I know that certain of the attendees meant to show the so-called "classic fans" in a bad light. Instead, they put all of us there.

You were right. We are all just speaking from our

hearts, and would like to be respected for that alone, if for nothing else. I didn't see that exemplified by the public fan-bashing indulged in by the panel and its attendees on the con tape. I could not have been comfortable in that acrimonious atmosphere, and I would have left once it began. (And yet even that retreat, I suspect, would have been misinterpreted.)

The "Soulmates - Neverending Dream" Version Contains the Text Below

As for the word "boycott" -- that 's a silly and inaccurate term for people refusing to buy into what they don't want. If I don't like the look of a new movie release. I don't pay to go and see it, The products and services ' of "B&B" fandom , whether provided by amateurs or professionals, are a business. Certainly, they are considered so by Republic Pictures. Spelling, Blockbuster and other corporations now involved. Those of us who provide a product that the majority of the market likes and enjoys. will profit and succeed. Those who don't, can't. That's the basic law of consumerism. It wasn't invented by Classic "B&B" fans.

As for the remark that we shouldn't be allowed to behave that way, or that we should be stopped. My goodness, what an absolutely pointless argument.

Finally, in response to comments I have heard made by some fans: There is nothing wrong with telling the Powers That Be (including movie makers and con organizers) what we want. Corporations like Spelling and Republic spend millions every year trying to find out exactly that. As consumers, it is absolutely our right; and writing (in a positive way) also lets them know we're still out here. What reasoning would lead anyone to disagree? If someone said you didn't need to vote in an election because "everyone" had your best interests at heart, wouldn't you have better sense?

As for the idea that Ron Koslow "would never let us down," as I have heard argued—Oh, please. I think that's confusing the "magic with the magician" (those of you who still believe in magic, that is.) I think the old saying goes, "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me," remember?

I have a great deal of respect for Mr. Koslow, who after all, gave us Vincent, Catherine, and the original Dream; but in bowing to network pressure to "re-tool" (and for purely financial reasons) he proved himself just as susceptible to corporate pressure as anyone else. He's human, and fallible.

What began as his dream, we have made our own. In a way, that's a tribute to him; it's part of what, as a writer, he meant to do.

BEAUTY AND THE BEAST is a fantasy. With enough faith and determination we can have what we want. And I for one, refuse to let anyone dictate my dreams.

I hope this letter makes sense. I go to conventions (and stay in this fandom) to have a good time. BEAUTY AND THE BEAST has been a positive force and a catalyst for change in my life, and I would like to help carry it along in that direction for newcomers to the show as well. I am disturbed that their first glimpse of this fandom might be through the kind of inflammatory, pointless name-calling I saw on this convention video tape.

This isn't about us. It's never been about just us. It's about Keeping the Dream Alive.

Fan Comments

[comments from one of the two editors of the zine the letter was printed in]:

I agree completely with everything Lynette has said in her letter. I sincerely feel that most of us "classics" did give third season at least a try. I know of several friends who did. That"", did not like the new "format" or didn't like the fact that they brutally ended a "Once Upon A Time" fairy tale romance should be our right. Just as anyone who found something to like about third season has a right to their feelings. I cannot understand why everyone has to agree about what we wanted cut of the series. Over the course of the past few years, Teri and I have become very close friends, and we don't, and never have, totally agreed on certain aspects of all three seasons, fan stories, etc. I've decided very early on in our relationship to agree to disagree about these things and get on with our newly-found friendship and the fun and satisfaction BEAUTY AND THE BEAST provided us with.

I am hoping to attend the L.A. Convention, (with no babies and/or weddings on the horizon, I'm certainly going to give it a try) and if I do I will be very selective about what, if any panel. I will attend. And while I certainly would have no interest in seeing third season guests, I have no intention of boycotting the con, and I promise to be polite and civil no matter who I run into. That said, I hope that the powers-that-be behind the convention will take heed of Lynette's letter, and take into consideration everyone's feelings when it comes to con scheduling.

[from a comment at The Helpers' Network Gazette]:

Last and probably least, a small tempest over certain footage in the TunnelCon III video. In a recent published letter, a concerned fan objected to this footage that involved Nan and a few other all-season fans discussing the state of tolerance in this fandom. The letter-writer didn't like such a discussion being made in so public a forum as a convention video (she took it to be part of the panel session concerning Diana). What the letter-writer didn't and couldn't know, with only the tape itself to go by, is that this was a private conversation among a few friends after both the panel and the following meeting of the Jo Anderson fan club were OVER. No audience was present. The room was empty except for 4 or 5 friends who rarely get a chance to talk face to face...and a videographer way off at the other end of the room, whom Nan, at least, had completely forgotten about by that time.

Although Nan is unapologetic about what was said and feels it's absurd to call the conversation "fan bashing" (as the letterwriter did) since no fan whatsoever was even so much as criticized (really, in all honesty, it's pretty dull, bland stuff with nil shock value), it's nevertheless unfortunate that the resulting footage was included on the tape since it's so easily misinterpreted, out of context. Phil Smith, like the letter-writer, assumed it was part of the session, found it interesting, and put it in; and, although surprised, Nan at first saw nothing wrong with it, not realizing it could be (and had been) interpreted as part of something public rather than one of the video's many miscellaneous "candid" sequences of fans "fanning," as it were. Nan has no criticism for Phil or his crew: they were doing what they were supposed to do, taping whatever was going on. It was only Nan's inexperience in such matters that's the culprit here, if culprit there be. She's not used to checking on whether or not she's being taped. Hereafter, at a convention, she'll try to do her own "fanning" more discreetly and more wisely.