I don't need to be lectured on my responsibilities toward Blake's Seven fans.
| Open Letter | |
|---|---|
| Title: | I don't need to be lectured on my responsibilities toward Blake's Seven fans. |
| From: | Terry Nation |
| Addressed To: | Linda Terrell |
| Date(s): | December 22, 1988 |
| Medium: | |
| Fandom: | Blake's 7 |
| Topic: | fan run conventions |
| External Links: | |
| Click here for related articles on Fanlore. | |
I don't need to be lectured on my responsibilities toward Blake's Seven fans. is a a line in a 1988 letter by Terry Nation sent to Linda Terrell.
It had a part in the Blake's 7 Wars.
The information in Nation's letter was expanded upon in the January 2, 1989 letter, Press Release to Fan Clubs, Fanzine Publishers, Fan Artists, and Fans.
In 1990, the article Dalek Man, London. Having scrambled British SF TV expectations, Terry Nation considers reshaping fan conventions was printed in Starlog.
The Letter
The last paragraph of your letter says "If I've over-reacted here, so be it." Then so be it, because you have. You have made a series of assumptions based on what was clearly very inaccurate information. Linda, I don't need to be lectured on my responsibilities toward Blake's Seven fans. I view them all as friends and I am eternally grateful for their dedication to the show. I would resist each and every attempt by anybody to use and exploit them.
I was not present to hear what Paul said (and nor were you) but I suggest that whatever he said, if indeed he said anything, has been astonishingly and perhaps maliciously misinterpreted.
Because of your evident passion on the subject I will take the time to explain the genesis of the idea that gave rise to our hopes and plans for later next year. When Paul was a guest at my home we talked about our mutual unhappiness in that our cast members were often unable to accept many of the invitations to attend conventions here in the United States. Rightly, Paul pointed out that actors (and writers) have to earn a living wherever they can in the highly insecure climate of their profession. It was then that we had what I believe is a brilliant idea. How would it be we reasoned, if we could offer some of the actors what would virtually be a job? Six weeks in a touring show for which they would be paid and have the security of knowing they would have a definite "run".
This then was the concept. Our enthusiasm grew as we discussed the elements we could include in the "con". Apart from the usual panels we would have especially written sketches and scenes in which the fans could play roles along with the actors. We would offer informal writing and acting workshops. We would search for new ways in which the fans could be involved with the guests to a greater degree than normal. It went without saying that we would be available to the fans for most of the time. There would be no skulking off to ones room between panels. Indeed, all the hopes and plans for later next year. When Paul was a guest ideas we discussed were generated by the question "how can we make certain the fans totally enjoy themselves?'
It was only later that we addressed the more sobering question. How could all this be achieved? It was clear that our scheme would require enormous organization and pre-planning, not to mention considerable capital investment. We instantly rejected enlisting the help of professional presenters (e.g. Adam Malin, Ren Kate etc) knowing their philosophy is light years away from ours. It was then we thought we might be able to enlist the help of fans in various cities. There would probably need to be in a central group who would co-ordinate the project and oversee the thousand and one details. We are as yet uncertain that any of these ambitions can be achieved. I understand the reluctance of anybody facing the gigantic logistics of such an enterprise. The advance funding is a major hurdle. However this is the route that we are now investigating.
That then is the tentative plan. Hardly the very "Federation" like "control" to which you refer. Now, to your specific questions:
1. Yes, I, Paul and other B7 cast members want to appear at a series of cons but certainly not 'pro' cons if I understand your definition correctly.
2. We have no ambitions to monopolise B7 fandom or control fan cons. I have no idea how that could be done anyway. Naturally we would ask guests to be exclusive to the six week tour but beyond that they are free, as always, to accept or reject any invitations they may receive*. We are not managers! The idea we want to "control" (you seem almost paranoid about that word) fan fiction, art or 'zines is simply ridiculous.
3. Paul and I will have some say in the matter of choosing the guests on our six week tour. Beyond that we have no influence what-so-ever on who the fans select to invite to their cons. 4. Yes we do hope to receive financial recompense for our appearances,during our six weeks. Beyond this, any artist asking for an appearance fee is totally at liberty to negotiate for him or herself. I repeat, we are not agents or managers. (For the record I am appearing at six cons next year and from only one will I receive a modest fee).
Finally your point about dealers. Licencees and copyright holders have the right to police and protect their interests. We make no rule about dealers. The law is perfectly clear about infringements of rights.
Let me end by saying that it was our intention to present a series of six very happy conventions that could be totally enjoyed by the fans. The task will not be made easier by irresponsible conjectures based on half heard or misinterpreted conversations. Now, knowing the truth, I hope you will support us with the same zeal that you brought to your attack.
