Open Letter by "Name Withheld By Request"

Open Letter
Title:	Open Letter by "Name Withheld By Request"
From:	later identified as Ann Wortham
Addressed To:	Blake's 7 fandom
Date(s):	1988
Medium:	print
Fandom:	Blake's 7
Topic:	fan run conventions
External Links:
Click here for related articles on Fanlore.

In late 1988, an open letter began circulating in Blake’s 7 fandom .

The letter was passed around at fannish events, slipped in zines being sold and included as a flyer in Blake’s 7 fanzines that were being sold at conventions and by mail. It was also printed in Avon Newsletter #35.

This letter was part of The Blake's 7 Wars.

The letter discussed a series of professionally run, “for profit” conventions in the US that would be organized by volunteer fans under the direction of some of the actors and writers of the Blake’s 7 TV show. These conventions, the letter argued, would compete with fan-run events and would place further restrictions on fannish activities, including on what type of artwork and fan fiction could be sold.

In early 1989, the letter was published in the US in Avon Club Newsletter #35 (February 1989), and in the letterzine The Federation Archives. Both of these publications included a supporting editorial and a call for additional letters of comment.

Anonymous vs Name Withheld By Request

The letter was signed "Name Withheld By Request", and was often referred to as "anonymous" -- these are actually two different things.

The reason Wortham had her name withheld at first was because she was on the concom of the then-upcoming Gambit convention and she feared that if her authorship were known at that time, reprisals might be taken against the convention itself because of her association with it. I believe her fears were well grounded, because once Gambit was over, she went public about her authorship of the letter in the next issue of the FA, and the next big B7 con that she was associated with. Freedom City, did suffer a backlash of refund requests even though the chairman kicked Wortham off the committee. However, the "Name Withheld by Request" became an issue in itself because it was turned from "Name Withheld" to "Anonymous" in most of Darrow's statements on the matter and in his supporters' statements. Again and again, they made a point of how cowardly it was to write an "anonymous" letter and how irresponsible it was to publish an "anonymous" letter, and this went on even after Wortham went public about her authorship.

Immediate Aftermath

Fandom's response to the letter was vigorous. Many of the letters of comment were printed in a wide variety of US and UK letterzines such as The Federation Archives, Pressure Point and Horizon Letterzine. You can read these responses on their respective pages.

More significantly, the “Name Withheld” letter spurred numerous additional open letters: two from the Blake’s 7 actors (Paul Darrow) and his wife, Janet Lees Price (the Darrows’ Letters). A press release was also issued by Paul Darrow and Terry Nation about their planned pro convention tour, along with a letter from their fan coordinator, Laurie C. (the Paul Darrow/Terry Nation Press Release Packet). All three people took issue with the contents of the Name Withheld letter.

From here the debate spiraled out and grew until it became what many fans now call The Blake's 7 Wars.

Background

The earliest media conventions were Star Trek conventions organized by fans in the 1970s. These events were non-profit, volunteer run with the actors and TV show writers and directors often in attendance. As time went by, more and more professionally run conventions took over such as CreationCon. These events lacked many of the social amenities that fan run events had – if there was a dealer’s room, only licensed merchandise could be sold, not fanzines. There was no con suite, no fanzine library and no fan run panels. Additional charges applied to almost every event driving the costs up. Many fans felt as if their hobby was being taken over by people who were only out to make a buck. The Star Trek convention experiences of the 1970s had been replicated across US Doctor Who fandom in the 1980s. (cite??) It is against this backdrop that both the “Name Withheld” letter and the two Darrows’ letters were written.

Three Pages

As printed in Avon Newsletter #5:

• 

  page 1

• 

  page 2

• 

  page 3

Letter

”Have you ever attended a "fan" convention? Have you ever attended a "pro" (e.g. CREATIONS) convention? Do you know the difference? Because there are a world of differences.

Fan conventions, by their very nature, are run solely for the benefit of the fans and usually donate any profits made to charities (and, in the case of B7, the chosen charity is often a local PBS station which shows B7). The committee and staff of these conventions donate their time, their skills, their hard work, and quite often their money to support the endeavor. The only compensation they receive is the pleasure of attending the convention (where they work some more ... and often even have to pay for their membership!). Virtually none of the committee’s or worker's expenses are paid by the convention but come rather out of their own pockets.

At fan conventions, there is usually a video room where various fannish videos, TV series, and movies are shown for the enjoyment of all; a dealers' room where professional dealers and fan dealers alike sell merchandise such as zines, buttons, posters, pictures, etc.; a convention suite where fans can gather to talk, socialize, often share refreshments, etc.; caption contests; costume contests; fan cabarets or shows where skits, parodies, etc. are performed; fan panels where fans get together and discuss certain aspects of their favorite fandom, etc; banquet get-together where fans can again socialize; sometimes even group outings to see the premiere of movie or something similar; blood drives; and all manner of other activities. The key thing to pay attention to here is that everything centers around and is done for the benefit of the fans.

In recent years, fan cons have sprung up which focus on the actors of B7 rather than on purely fannish activities. Because of the high cost of bringing the actors over from England (and it's only going up and up with the declining dollar), membership fees, correspondingly had to go up. But, the actors were so charming and so willing to mingle with the fans (in other words, so lacking an American "star" attitude) that everyone was willing to pay more to see them. The actors took note of this. Fannish activities at cons dropped off as the committees were forced to spend more and more time and money on keeping the guests satisfied, it became a CATCH-22: the fans wanted to see the guests so the guests had to be kept happy; but in order to keep the guests happy, the fans' needs began to be ignored.

Then the "Pro" cons stepped in. These cons are run for no other reason than profit. There are few fannish activities at them. There is usually a video room; a dealers' room (where you are expected to spend yet more money -you will see few fannish dealers here as the tables cost in the hundreds of the dollars); and you get to see an actor talk for one hour on stage. Afterwards, you can stand in line for an autograph. That's it. If you want more, you can come back the next day, pay to get in again, and see the actor for another hour.

But it's great for the guests: they hardly have to work at all and they get paid a fee.

So the fan cons had to start paying many actors a fee (there are a few of them who haven't lost their idealism in this area yet) PLUS expenses or the actors wouldn't come. Why should they? They could go to a pro con, do very little work, and make money. They also began to demand business-class or first-class airfare (a difference of about $2,000.00 in price from coach from England). And never mind that every extra penny spent on their demands is a penny taken away from dying children or other worthwhile charities. Never mind that the fans are willing to scrape up the money somehow by contributing to guest funds -that's still not enough. Which tells you about how much respect these actors actually have for the fans. Many of these actors who used to pontificate about how they considered the fans their "friends” are now copping a “star" attitude. How dare we not bankrupt ourselves to obtain their sterling presence? After all, they're worth it and screw the charity (and the fans who worked for a year to put on the con, for tatter). Ever wonder why certain actors never appear at SCORPIO anymore, even though the SCORPIO people were mostly responsible for promoting B7 in the USA? There's your real answer. SCORPIO doesn't pay the actors a fee, you see. And the worst part of it is all that many of the committees of these fan conventions are being blamed for "keeping the guests away from the fans." I have served on the committee for two major B7 cons last year; I am on the committee for three in the upcoming year. I am acquainted with lots of the organizers of the other major cons across the country -and I’m very sorry to have to tell you that the committees in question rarely try to keep a guest "away from the fans". They are rarely able to control the guests at all. The truth is, the actors no longer want to mingle with the fans. They just want to take a buck.

At a recent CREATION CON, a well-known B7 actor, used to be known as a “friend” to fans, was heard to say he was doing as little as "necessary" at the Con. As he entered a brunch, he said, 'I've only got to spend 75 seconds with each fan. I worked it out. That's all I’m getting paid for.'

This same actor has been telling people that he intends to start up a series of "pro” cons in direct competition with CREATIONS. There are other people involved in this venture, most notably a financial backer who once ran a “fan" con of her own. Their aim is to (and here I quote) "put the fans cons out of business" and 'control fannish literature.' (!) The cities they are considering for these cons are: Ft. Lauderdale (where OMNICON, a fan con, is held); Chicago (where SCORPIO, the major fan run British media con is held); Houston (where REBELLION -and previously DESTINY -is held); San Francisco (where ORAC is held); Newark, NJ (where GAMBIT - and previously DSV -is held); and I believe St. Louis (where TARDISC0N was held). Dallas (where STAR ONE was held last year) and ORLANDO were also mentioned as 'possible' sites (the people it ORLANDO put on OASIS is the spring and they are working toward getting World Con in 1992). Many people of my acquaintance who are involved in running the fan cons in these cities have already been approached about helping to run the "new" Cons. In other words, these new organizers want the fans to help (free of charge, of course) put themselves out of business!! To their credit, most of the people approached that I am aware of have said either "No" or that they'd only work for a fee (after all, it's a profit-making venture, not a charitable one, so why should they donate their time, money and expenses to line the actors' pockets?)

Now, to the latter of "control". The organizers of these cons are going to supposedly assemble their "own stable" of approved artists. Only these artists will be allowed to exhibit at the cons. And the artists will be charged a 50% commission for this privilege. They want to put together their "own stable" of fan writers and only these writers' work will be allowed to be sold (I’m assuming in the zines). The Cons will feature different "events" at each venue, too, so that if you want to see everything, you will have to attend all of them across the country. One of the actors involved was so kind as to point out that he is well aware that there are fans who "follow him around". This same actor also intends to refuse to attend any other cons so if you want to see him, you will have to come to his con and allow yourself to be controlled and ripped off. He also claims (I have no idea if this part is true) that he can guarantee two other actors for his cons because they are friends of his and they will "do what he tells them". Well, it looks like the day of the guest-oriented conventions is coming to an ignoble end, my friends, because I don’t know about you, but I’m not going to sit still for this. I won’t be controlled; I won’t be taken advantage of; I won’t allow the fans to be ripped off; I won't work for free for a non-charitable con; I won’t line a greedy actor's pockets, no matter how charming he is; I won't travel cross-country just to see an actor for a few minutes on a stage when I can see him for free on my VCR (this actor who thinks people follow him around obviously never considered the fact that a lot of us attend cons to get together with our friends in other parts of the country); in short, I will fight this attempt at a hostile "Federation" takeover. It's free country and anybody who wants to can contribute to my zines, whether they're part of an "approved" stable or not!

I think it's time to get back to the affordable, fan-oriented, fan conventions. We can have conventions without a single "guest" in attendance. MediaWest and others do it every year. The committee and the fan attendees are the only indispensable components here. I am adopting a new motto: He's expendable; he's stupid; and he's not going.

You think about it.

My sources of information for all of the above were: the actor involved; some of the people involved in backing the proposed conventions; some of the people who have been approached to run the conventions.

Later Comments by the Author

First, I wrote one and only one public letter regarding the Fan vs Pro Convention situation. This letter was printed in its entirety and in the only form ever written or authorized by me in THE FEDERATION ARCHIVES. I asked no other club or newsletter to print it. I have since heard it said I wrote numerous other letters which 'named names.' This is untrue. Prior to the publication of any public letter, I wrote one personal letter to a West Coast fan. Within six days of writing that one personal letter, I was receiving 'anonymous' hate mail accusing me of conducting a hate campaign against Paul Darrow and Michael Keating (?!). All of a sudden the Darrows had copies of my public letter... before it ever saw print. I may be incredibly naive and slow, but even I could figure out what happened. I obviously trusted the wrong person with sensitive information. I have more recently learned that private letters I wrote to Terry Nation, Paul Darrow and Laurie Cohen regarding the whole situation have been circulated indiscriminately by the principles involved. I find this lack of discretion disgusting but given recent developments, hardly surprising.... Paul Darrow's pseudo-legalistic letters which attempt to deny me the right to use his 'likeness' in any way, aside from being legally unenforceable, do not seem to take into account the fact that [L R], [L V] and I paid him $2,000.00 in February, 1988, for total rights to certain photographs. If Mr. Darrow would like to return our $2,000.00 we will cheerfully stop selling the photos. Until then, the United States legal system will, I believe, take a dim view of him selling the rights to something and then attempting to withdraw same without enumeration. As to my fanzines, Paul Darrow and Michael Keating hold absolutely no rights to trademarks or copyrights associated with B7. As to artists using their likenesses, the United States courts have continually upheld the rights of artists to use the likenesses of public personalities in work which is artistic as opposed to commercial. And, yes, they have a right to sell said work without paying anybody a royalty.