Shootout

From Fanlore
Jump to: navigation, search
Zine
Title: Shootout
Publisher: in the UK
Editor(s): Cathy Buckett (main), June Bushnell (art editor)
Type: letterzine
Date(s): October 1983- April 1986?
Frequency:
Medium: print
Fandom: Starsky & Hutch
Language: English
External Links:
Click here for related articles on Fanlore.

Shootout is a Starsky & Hutch letterzine published in England.

There were fourteen issues.

According to a 1984 ad in Between Friends #4, "Shootout" was "a bi-monthly A5 zine for short stories, artwork, letters and poetry plus news items and reviews. No S/H." An ad in APB #3 (January 1985) also specified "No S/H"

In 1985, the editor stated that it had between 45-50 subscribers, and "I believe that has stayed pretty much the same since it was started." [1]

This letterzine was a contemporary to The Who Do We Trust Times and APB, and was preceded by Handcuffs, a letterzine that several fans referred to as "late lamented" and hoped "Shootout" didn't end up like "poor "Handcuffs."

For similar zines, see List of Letterzines.

Content

The letterzine had letters of comment, fanart, fiction, poetry, fiction reviews, zine reviews, fan bios, photos of posed Starsky and Hutch dolls, and clippings.

Slash Vs Gen

"Shootout'" first editorial stated it the content should be family-friendly:
As Editors, we also feel that we must appreciate that some of our readers have children, and knowing how much our two heroes love children, we would be truly ashamed on their behalf if our zine could not be enjoyed by young and old alike. We want this zine to be something that you, as its authors, can be proud of, rather than something that can only be read after the kids have gone to bed, or quick]y hidden behind the sofa cushions when dear old Auntie unexpectedly comes to tea. Indeed, our aim is to try and keep the contents of this zine 'middle-of-the-road', showing neither prejudice nor favour to any particular belief, whilst at the same time allowing everyone to express their own opinions, and hope fully, maintaining a happy balance between all our readers.

In 1984, an ad stated "no S/H.

The first issue, however, had some very intense gen content, as well as a cartoon by one of the editors of Starsky and Hutch in bed together. A fan in that first issue wrote that she was happy that: "I can discuss S&H or S/H till the cows come home and am interested in everyone's point of view."

The S/H (never called slash but instead "/" or the premise) vs S&H topic NEVER COOLED, however, and went on to be probably the biggest topic of much heated conversation.

Other Topics

The other main topics of discussion (besides S/H vs S&H) were:

  • the appropriateness of fans comments on the private life of David Soul
  • whether comments about David Soul belonged in a Starsky & Hutch letterzine
  • censorship
  • what constitutes being a "good fan" and a "bad fan"
  • being "in love" with celebrities was immature and stupid vs not idolizing celebrities in every way was "disloyal"
  • boycotting Dobeycon and other fan gatherings based on ones' alliance with S/H or S&H
  • three zine reviews
  • art, photos, poetry, photos of posed Starsky and Hutch dolls, caption contests
  • the long-running series of fan bios called Personalities
  • con reports for various fan gatherings
  • the issues contain a long-running round robin story called "Consequences" that morphed into a crossover with The Professionals
  • the issues contain a a long-running story by Chris Power and Terri Beckett called "A Fair Exchange"
  • the topic of violence on television, and were the critics too harsh about Starsky & Hutch, which was a show about love and friendship
  • some discussion about the show itself (though this could be sparse, which some fans were not happy about)

A Peek at Putting This Letterzine Together

From issue #8:
I would like to explain briefly, how S.O is produced, for all send your material and subs, to Cathy, she forwards the items of S.O. to me, I sort them out and send the typing on to Joan, who returns them to me when finished. I then paste up the copy/photos/drawings etc. and send camera-ready artwork to Cathy, who takes it to the printer, then sends them out. The last items arrive a few days after the final closing date, so Joan probably gets the final typing, to do a week after which is usually the bulk of it, and it's about 2 weeks after the closing date that I can start putting it all together. As all three of us are in full-time employment, we can only work on S.O. in the evenings and whatever time we can spare at the weekend (not much in my case), so that is why it takes nearly a month to produce, 10-12 days of that at least it spends in the post as, for reasons best known to the P.O., it takes 3-4 days for 1st class mail to go the 20 miles across London between Cathy and myself, it moves faster on the 140 miles between Joan and I, so S.O. is never late,it just arrives in its own good time!

This Fandom's Letterzines

  • S and H (June/July 1979-Jan. 1983) (gen, non-explicit slash)
  • Wanna Share?? (German language) (Sept. 1995-April 1998) (gen, non-explicit slash)
  • Me 'n Thee Times (Feb/March 1999-2000) (gen and non-explicit slash)

Issue 1

Shootout 1 was published in October 1983 (deadline was September) and contains 34 pages.

front cover of issue #1, Ruth Kurz
back cover of issue #1, June Bushnell

It contains material from twenty-one people.

From the editorial:

Hi, everybody. Welcome to the first edition of SHOOTOUT and what we hope will be a long and successful run.

Firstly, we want to thank you all for your wonderful support and good wishes. It's great to see how many fans out there have responded to our call for back-up.

It's also heartwarming to see just how many people there are who still love those two delightful guys who entered our homes and hearts each week, bringing a new meaning of friendship and understanding to folk of all ages. Our hone is that we, too, will be able to entertain the same all-round family audience, for it was this that helped to make the show so popular in the first place. As Editors, we also feel that we must appreciate that some of our readers have children, and knowing how much our two heroes love children, we would be truly ashamed on their behalf if our zine could not be enjoyed by young and old alike. We want this zine to be something that you, as its authors, can be proud of, rather than something that can only be read after the kids have gone to bed, or quick]y hidden behind the sofa cushions when dear old Auntie unexpectedly comes to tea. Indeed, our aim is to try and keep the contents of this zine 'middle-of-the-road', showing neither prejudice nor favour to any particular belief, whilst at the same time allowing everyone to express their own opinions, and hope fully, maintaining a happy balance between all our readers.

At the same time, we do understand that some fans prefer the more mature type of reading material, and we will be only too pleased to advertise the availability of this material, so that those who want to, can CHOOSE to obtain it for their own personal entertainment.

Please do not be afraid to write us and share with us your thoughts and feelings. Your letters and articles are not here to be judged, nor should any of you feel that you have to 'compare' your work with anyone else's. We're just hoping that you'll help us fill the pages of SHOOTOUT with Fun, Facts, Fantasies - but most of all Friendship.
  • Thank-You, Guys, poem by Glynis Jones
  • David Soul -- My Everything, poem by Hazel Houldey
  • Incident Report, fiction by Cathy Buckett
  • Reflections, fiction based on "Targets Without a Badge," uncredited -- noted in the second issue that is was written by Joan Hollingworth
  • Night Games, poem by Sue-Anne Hartwick
  • City Boy, poem by Joan Hollingsworth
  • That Striped Tomato, article about the cars, author not credited
  • clippings, some about David Soul and his personal troubles
  • two small illos portraying Hutch, by Glynis Jones
  • small illo portraying Starsky, by Ruth Kurz
  • illo of Starsky and Hutch by Pamela Grove
  • two fanworks with posed Starsky and Hutch dolls
  • illo of the Torino by June Bushnell
  • cartoon by Cathy Buckett
  • review of the story "Hutch's Puppy," see Code 7 #2

Sample Fan Comments: Issue 1

[Debra W]: When I heard that there was to be a new S&H letterzine, I was really pleased; and I think we must all have felt the same. Cath and June are taking on a lot of work, but I hope they both enjoy it, and that we all do too! My thanks to Cath and June for starting up this letterzine -- now it's up to all of us to keep it going and make it the best it can be.
[Glynis J]: Hi there, everyone, first off thanks to June and Cath for a new zine. I hope very much it turns out to be as popular and successful as APB, and doesn't end up like poor Handcuffs. So may I wish you both all the very best. Second, thanks to everyone who's written and also to all of you who've wished me all the best in my new house. I'll try to get round to answering you all soon, but I do have sixteen letters not answered right now and it happens to be tennis this week.
[Judy S]: Hi, everyone, let's hope SHOOTOUT can be as successful as APB. It's up to us S&H fans to stick together.
[Jacky B]:

Even though S&H has been off the air for over 3 years, it's nice to know fandom is still strong and working. In the many years that I've been involved in S&H fandom, I've come to realise how important the sharing and swapping of opinions and views is, it can be of value to us all and I hope SHOOTOUT will play a useful part in that.

All the best and let's hope SHOOTOUT is the success it deserves.

[Lynn C]:

Hi, everyone! This is great, isn't it? A brand new letterzine! I do hope it's going to have a long and prosperous life. We can all have a whole lot of fun and enjoyment from this, so let's try and make it the biggest and best ever.

To those of you who have not contributed to this type of thing before, how about having a try with SHOOTOUT? We'd love to hear from you. I can discuss S&H or S/H till the cows come home and am interested in everyone's point of view.

I don't know if Carla will be reading this, but I hope she doesn't mind me using a suggestion of hers. Do any of you remember her saying in the late, lamented Handcuffs that it might be a good idea if we had a sort of continuing story that we could all take it in turns to add to? All the names could be put into a hat, or something, and one drawn out and printed in each issue so that the person whose turn it was next would have plenty of time to get the piece ready. The story would be about S&H of course, but needn't be a serious one, we could just have fun with it. I think it could turn out to be a good idea, but of course that's only my opinion. It would be nice to hear if anyone else was interested.

Well, I hope SHOOTOUT No.l is going to be a bumper issue and that there are many more to come.

[Sandi C]:

Hi! I've never been very good at first letters to new letterzines, so I'll make the excuse that at present I'm up to my ears in Dobeycon Five (honest, I am) and various other pursuits, and just wish all those responsible for SHOOTOUT the very best of luck. May all your subscribers be participants. I'd send you some poetry, if I could write the stuff... and I'm already over-committed fiction-wise. Maybe next time, okay?

[...]

I won't bore you all to tears about Dobeycon, except to say that there are still a couple of places left if anyone wants them. Invoices and Prog. Reports go out at the end of August - so get your money ready...

[one of the editors]: In recent years there appears to be an increasing amount of adverse criticism and comment about the series, as these newspaper cuttings of the last 9 months show. Maybe this has influenced the BBC in their decision not to show any more repeats "in the foreseeable future." Sadly, it shows that much of the public missed the message that ran

throughout the series, of trust, love and the trials of two humanitarian cops, trying to do their job well in an increasingly violent world.

Issue 2

Shootout 2 was published in November 1983 and contains 34 pages.

front cover of issue #2
back cover of issue #2, Sanje
  • letters of comment
  • Halloween, poem by Sue-Ann3 Hartwick
  • small illo by June Bushnell
  • small illo by Sue-Anne Hartwick
  • clippings and photos
  • cartoon by Jacky Birch
  • photo of Starsky & Hutch dolls climbing an apple tree
  • large illo by Ruth Kurz of David Soul and his small son, reprinted in Love Book (1983)
  • Sweet Sorrow, fiction by Linda Merryweather (told from the point of view of a nurse that takes care of Starsky and Hutch as old men until Hutch's death as he lies in Starsky's arms in bed, Starsky tells his nurse: "'Hutch and me are lovers!'")
  • Friend, poem by Lanny Adams
  • Personalities: Spotlight on Sandi Chapman
  • Those Foxy Ladies, long essay about female characters in Starsky & Hutch, by Joan Hollingworth
  • untitled fiction by Rusty
  • illo of half-naked Starsky by June Bushnell
  • zine ads
  • quiz by Cathy Buckett

Sample Fan Comments: Issue 2

[Linda M]: Suggestion: As S/H isn't entirely a 'no-no' in "Shootout," how would it be if you put these pieces at the back of the zine, on different coloured detachable pages, that way, readers could view these at their leisure and leave the black and white pages for all age groups to see?
[Linda M]: What someone said about the Beeb and their reasons for not showing S&H, I would like to believe they have valid reasons, but I don't, they're just 'snippy' if that's the word, they just do what suits them at the time. They're always harping on about their 'standards'...
[Sandra J. F]:

I agree about wanting the zine to suit all age groups, rather than to whisk the zine away from children's eyes, and parents. There are far too many publications into the other premise and I hope "Shootout" doesn't fall into that too much.

[Judy S]: Glynis and Hazel: You write such beautiful poems, how well you put the feelings we all have about S&H into words, and Hazel, I'm as mad about David as you.
[Sandi C]:

As one who can't afford to buy many zines now, I was grateful for the fiction. That's the first non-S/H I've read since 10:13/ii came out. REFLECTIONS was S&H to perfection. Starsky's clipped, matter-of-fact way of speaking, with that streak of idealism that refuses to be put down. Hutch, more paced, more visual. Lines like 'Watching the daily slaughter of the innocents' - wish I'd said that! - really sum up Hutch's disillusionment with what they are doing.

[Glynis J]: Hi there, friends, well what can I say, this zine is Brill, no this zine is Great, Soul-per, Terrific, Half-Tidy, Fab, no way that's just not good enough, in fact I can only think of three words to describe this zine that are good enough and that's David and Paul. Thanks a lot Cath, June and Joan, good luck and keep up the good work, and of course ray thanks to Deb for typing this out for me, goes without saying I guess, but thanks anyhow, Deb.
[Glynis J]: So that was Carla's idea in Handcuffs about all of us doing an S&H story together? Well, whoever's idea, it's a good one, can't say I'm all that good at writing stories but I've plenty of ideas for them and sounds like it could be fun.
[Jacky B]: With regard to David and Patti, I'd just like to say to anybody reading this - for God's sake don't take the word of newspapers as gospel. We've heard their version of how David beat his wife, fair enough, but we've not heard the other side of the story - David's (or Patti's). So please, if there are people out there who feel sickened at these stories, think hard, papers do blatantly lie and exaggerate - Patti was apparently David's second wife so stated one newspaper, and who do we believe, David or the paper?!
[Debra W]:

My own reaction to that article about David (in "Woman's Own") was, at first, 'Oh no, not another one!' It came at a time when all we seemed to be seeing about David and his marriage were bad things. I was sick and tired of reading what a rotten person he was supposed to be. I would agree with you that there may be some truth in the various pieces that appeared about him at that time, but I do think a lot of what was written was done in a sensationalised, exaggerated way, and I think that it's given people who aren't fans of David a really bad impression of him, but it's not all bad. During the time that these articles were being printed, almost everyone that I heard from said the same thing; that they still considered themselves to be David's fans, that they hadn't changed in the way they felt about him, and that they still continued to support him, I think the true fans have stayed true to David - those who weren't so serious about him are the ones who've changed their minds.

[Debra W]:

I was interested to see the newspaper clippings in issue one, relating to incidents that the press had likened to S&H. What annoys me about these stories is that they (the incidents, that is) are usually totally out of character for S&H - for instance, have you ever seen S&H involved in 'making early morning raids with sledgehammers and guns on totally innocent people'? I know i haven't! I can think of loads of other shows that would be more appropriate to compare the shooting, assaults etc.etc. with, but not S&H. The press miss the all-important point that S&H is a show about love, friendship, caring and concern for other people, not about violence for the sake of entertainment. Maybe one day they will wake up and see the mistake they've been making - I hope.

[Lynn C]: I did read the article on David in that issue of the woman's magazine, and at first it upset me very much. Then I got to thinking about it, and realised that not only was it by then 'old news', but most likely very far from the truth and very sensationalized. I also like to remember that David is a human being and therefore, like all of us, is not infallible. I also believe that while S&H, being fictional characters, are fair game for our opinions, David and Paul's private lives are really their own affair.
[Linda M]: Re the article [in the last issue] concerning David and his marriage problems, speaking personally, I would never believe that the gentle David I've always loved, would ever be so cruel as this article suggests, and I think it's time to sort out the wheat from the chaff and let David's REAL friends stand up and be counted, for to me, those who would say "I don't like him any more" never really loved him in the first place. Now is the time he needs our love and support.

Issue 3

Shootout 3 was published in December 1983 and contains 36 pages.

front cover of issue #3, June Bushnell: "Happy Christmas Partner"
back cover of issue #3, Ruth Kurz
From the editorial:
We are trying to keep SHOOTOUT a well-balanced mixture of Starsky and Hutch (Paul and David, too, of course) as well as printing all your letters, stories, poems, pics and news items. [snipped] We can't expect you all to contribute all the time. Although, come to think of it, we do seem to be hearing from the same people all the time (knock, knock). So, come on, some of you other guys out there -- how d'you know you've got it if you don't ever give it away? For those of you who'd like to see a bigger zine -- great! -- a beautiful idea. But if you want SHOOTOUT to stick at the price it is now, and many of you do, I guess we'd better keep to 36 pages.
  • Anyone for Prune Juice?, poem by Tabby Davis (reprinted from Tagging Along)
  • Personalities: Spotlight on Terri Beckett & Chris Power
  • That's Another Fine Mess (or, How to Get Rid of Unwanted Present...), fiction by Sandi Chapman
  • Christmas Song, poem by Sue-Anne Hartwick
  • Prayer of Thanks, poem by Debra Warner
  • Christmas Story, fiction based on the episode "Little Girl Lost," by Joan Hollingworth
  • Consequences..., part one by Telany ("This story is a starting-point for the continuous "round-robin" type of story in which a number of you have expressed interest. However, we'd like to suggest the story be continued on a voluntary basis, rather than making it obligatory for all to participate, since not everyone has the time, inclination or even ability to write fiction. For the next installment, we'd like to hear as soon as possibLe from those who want to participate. If you don't want your name to appear, pen-names are perfectly acceptable, so don't be shy. If you've got ideas and want to try your hand at writing, now's your chance!")
  • The Letters of Soul, poem where each line begins with the letters "DAVID RICHARD SOLBERG", by Hazel Houldey
  • small illo of Hutch by Ruth Kurz
  • untitled poem with the first line "I am your friend for life," by Lisa K
  • illo of Starsky and Hutch laying in the grass, by June Bushnell
  • In the Land Of, poem in calligraphy by Sandra J. Ferriday
  • portrait of Hutch by Sandi Chapman
  • cartoon by Jacky Birch
  • Fatal Charm, A Missing Scene, long fiction by Lynn Chessum
  • a short con report for Dobeycon #5
  • quiz on the inside back cover, by Cathy Buckett

Sample Fan Comments: Issue 3

[Debra W]:

I know that the letters aren't really the most important part of Shootout, so I'll try and keep this short but interesting.

Agree with you (and Lynn and the others who've mentioned it) that the idea of us all writing a story together is a good one. I think in Handcuffs, Lyndy and Steph (or was it Carla?) suggested putting everyone's name into a hat or similar, and the person who was picked out had their name printed in each issue, giving them time between issues to write their part of the story. Maybe our Editors will try this?

I think your idea of having the S/H in "Shootout" separate from the 'general' stuff is a good one, and would work. Again, it's up to our Editors whether or not they do this, but I think it would work and would give those who enjoy S/H the chance to read and contribute it without any arguments or embarrassment to anyone.

I enjoyed your story "Sweet Sorrow", although it was sad - the title really sums it all up! Also, I agree with what you said to Pat re. David and the reporting of his marital problems in newspapers and magazines.
[Hazel H]:

Well, I must say how much I enjoyed issue No.2 of Shootout, it's getting better and better, I thought No.l was good, keep up the good work girls, it's fantastic. Well, I must say thank you so much to everyone who said they liked my poem in No.l, it's so kind of you all to say what you did, also I must say the drawings and stories are all brilliant, really half-tidy.

Well, I see you put in the photo of Glynis and I as S&H, in case you didn't notice I'm Hutch, Glynis is Starsky, and the poor unfortunate I have got hold off against the wall is my brother, Michael, who is also a great S&H fan. Thank you, Mike. We were in St. Fagan's Castle, we didn't half have some funny looks I can tell you.
[Glynis J]: That centrefold of David and Jahn - well what can I say, except Ruth, any chance of you doing me a copy of that for my wall? It's really ace. [...] Well, I've been asked nicely not to write so much, so I'll end by wishing you all a "Happy Hutchmas" and a "Soul-filled New Year". Take care and much love and joy to you all.
[Judy S]:

As you say about the comments made of David and his marriage, those of us who know David and won't hear his name blackened, are surely his true fans, as we know how kind, honest, fair, just and good he can be, and would be worth trying, possibly, to show those who don't know, just what a nice person he is. [...] The centre picture of David and Jahn sums up precisely what David is like.

[Lynn C]:

Let's hear from more Starsky fans, please. I don't have a favourite, I just love them both and especially when they are together. I'd also like to see more discussion of S&H instead of quite so much on David and Paul.

[Lynn C]:

I must admit that I was horrified when I first saw Hutch with his mustache, I positively loathed the wretched thing! Then last year when I saw David with the trimmed version I still detested it! Strangely though, my hatred of the caterpillar has moderated slightly, I now find I can just about tolerate (only just though!) the trimmed version, but much prefer David and Hutch with a naked upper lip.

[Nicky K]:

I really could not agree more, S&H are fair game for us, but David and Paul are not. I read a lot last time about the press and David's marital traumas and I know how concerned all David fans are (including myself) about his happiness. But I honestly feel this sort of thing should be discussed privately (if at all), and not in an open forum. After all, even if you're writing in his defence, it's still keeping the incident alive and adding fuel to the fire — surely it's best forgotten by us - and David.

[Nicky K]: Please don't do that to us! I can't stand reading stories where one or both of them dies! It depresses me, it upsets me (and I use best part of a box of tissues!). Still - I always was a sucker for a good weepie!! "Sweet Sorrow" was unique! Thanks.
[Sandra J. F]: A good well-written story there "SWEET SORROW", but as you already know, I'm not into that kind of premise, nevertheless, that's beside the point.
Sandra J. F]: Recently viewed video of THE FIX, and I can't honestly say why it should have been banned by the BBC, especially since there are worse things shown on tv these days, and besides, even if the theme is on heroin, so what? Personally, I think it'd be a good idea to show kids this kind of story before 9.00 pm as a warning against taking drugs. It was very well acted by David. I mean it can't be very easy playing the part of a drug addict when he hasn't even been one himself.
[Josie S]

"Sweet Sorrow" was a great story from Linda Merryweather. I did enjoy that one. I like Dave, very handsome with his hair going grey. I can see him almost, but why, Linda, did poor Hutch have to die? I like happy endings. Still it was very good indeed.

And to Sandi Chapman, yea, my favourite is Paul. I love him very much, always have. I love David as well, but not the same.

To Hazel, I love your poetry, I did enjoy David Soul, My Everything. I wish I could write like that.

[Wendy P]:

My favourite subject: BLOOPERS!

"Watch this scene!" I'd cry to anyone I could hold captive in front of my VCR. "Watch the towel on Starsky's shoulder when he's fixing breakfast for Sharman in RUNNING. See how it appears and disappears." They'd watch', dutifully, and then try and tune out as I tried to expound on all the various bloopers to be found in the series. "But I thought you LIKED this show," they'd say in amazement. "How come you keep pulling it apart?" I'd just shrug, for they were right in both instances. I did and DO like (for like read adore, exalt, salivate over...) S&H, both the characters and the show itself, and finding faults doesn't detract from it in any way — at least not for me — if anything, it serves to endear it to me even more. It proves in a way that I watch it TOTALLY. Total concentration — hearing every word, observing every frame of film, every move, every nuance, every glance, every gesture, and naturally — every blooper.
[Wendy P]: Better split now and give somebody else a go. Apologies for the length of the letter, and also for the fact that I failed to write a letter for the last issue. It looks as if SHOOTOUT may just be a success. The production is very nice, with lots of nice information which I haven't been able to get anywhere else, and I'm sure others feel the same way. The pictures etc., are an added bonus, and I like the idea of a combination of letters and stories, poems, illos, etc. Keep up the good work, It's appreciated by all of us.
[Ruth K]:

I think SHOOTOUT is starting out very well for a brand new letter and literature zine. I believe in giving new editors a chance, and you two have done a good job, I am delighted to see the acceptance of S/H which has been given a light touch in these first two issues. Everyone agrees to the strong love between S&H. There is a great deal of intimacy between them even in a completely straight "universe". That love is v/hat most of us find so compelling and refreshing in this all too uncaring world. On the other hand, I get just as much enjoyment out of a light-hearted bit like Rusty's blue-sheeted phone conversation, so delightfully illoed by June.

Hello, Sandi, I enjoyed seeing your picture and reading about you. It's almost like meeting you in person. I don't mind that you're a PMG person — just leaves more of pretty David for me not to have to fight over!

[Lyndy H]:

I must admit I find the re-hash of Soul's marital problems a little disturbing. It's certainly not the topic like to see discussed in an S&H L/Z. However, I'll jump on the bandwagon and throw in my 10 cents' worth.

I'm sick to the back teeth of hearing cries of how beautiful David is, or what a wonderful person he is and how desperately some of you love him. Oh, I understand how you feel, believe me. I had similar feelings about John Lennon — I was twelve at the time!! Now my 'love', physical and emotional is directed towards the 'someone' who's here for me. Oh, I fantasise, ladies — some of us do, but I prefer the real thing.

Admittedly, I find Soul attractive, even if age has been a little unkind to him. The man still has an incredible sensuality - it drips from him. I've found great pleasure in Soul's craft — when he's given his performance his best shot, but I've also cringed with embarrassment at some of his endeavours!

I'm one of those individuals who cannot rave over many of Soul's or Glaser's solo performances. Only together are they at their best. Anyone who met and talked to Soul in the late seventies and again more recently, will have found the change in his character a little worrying. He's obviously gone through 'not-too-pleasant' changes. It's obvious the man's had problems and possibly still does, nevertheless, I personally think he was a louse to use his wife as a punch-bag. Don't misunderstand me. I'm not siding with Patti either —— no doubt there was some provocation and I certainly find the woman's motives a little suspicious.

However, none of us know the truth behind the Souls' marital problems, so none of us can offer more than our personal assumptions. Whichever way you look at it, Soul is no more than a human being. He's not a plaster saint. He cusses, drinks, smokes, blows his cool, puts it around a little and performs all the necessary little functions like the rest of us.

Now I've spent time writing about Soul, when I'd far prefer to write about Hutch. For heaven's sake, let's get back to discussing the characters that mean so much to us ~ some of us! They're far more interesting.

Issue 4

Shootout 4 was published in February 1984 and contains 36 pages.

front cover of issue #4
back cover of issue #4, Tabby Davis
From the editors:

We have reluctantly had to prune some of the letters in this issue, partly through lack of space (Shootout is not just a letterzine) but also because a lot is being writ hen that is not relevant to the subject of this zine, Starsky & Hutch although we do include items about Paul and David and their careers when space allows.

Another reason is that we have been made very aware that one letter in S.O.3 upset many of you. All have been allowed to have their say in full in this issue but the topic is now closed.

We would like to state here that the views expressed in this zine are those of the contributors not the editors. To end on a happier note, half of our subscribers are also contributors and we Trish to thank them all for their support, we only wish S.O. could be larger but the cost would be very much higher and it makes a loss now. (Hobbies always do!).

[...]

We regret that owing to smaller numbers subscribing to the zine, which means that print costs are higher per copy.
  • Personalities: Spotlight on Sandra J. Ferriday
  • Consequences, part two of the round robin, by Sue-Anne Hartwick
  • synopsis by Telany of the round robin story, "Consequences," Debra Warner is going write the third installment
  • Lifelines, poem by Lyndy Harding
  • Visions of Juna, fiction by Sandy Barrett (Starsky and Hutch run out of gas, Starsky is ill with a fever, they find a unicorn)

Sample Fan Comments: Issue 4

[Terri B]:

Yes, I know I haven’t written a letter before, but I’m pleading pressure of work, and I haven't been totally uninvolved -- so what excuse do the rest of you have? Seriously, editors — this is something all zine-producers come across. There are people who become involved, and write, and contribute in one way or another — and there are those who don’t, just pay their money and devour what comes their way, without so much as an LoC. This is their privilege -- there’s no law demanding participation -- but speaking as a writer and zine producer, I feel that a little reciprocation would be nice. How do we know we’ve done good unless someone tells us? It doesn’t have to be a long and detailed missive — hell, an acknowledgement of receipt would be better than nothing — and it doesn’t have to be unalloyed praise either. I don’t think there are many writers in this or any other fandom who think they cannot benefit from a little constructive criticism. So -- tell us what you like and what you don’t. We’re not mind- readers, and we’re not gonna know unless you tell us!

Having said all that -- thanks to those who did LOC on OMR, and for the letters of congratulation on the Huggy Awards.
[Alexandra and Natascha M]:

Hello, everybody, thanks ever so much for creating the lovely SHOOTOUT mag. We lack the words to tell you just how cheerful it is to read it.

Well, we've been thinking. We must thank you and we want to write you so much in return for your wonderful artwork, poetry, pictures, stories and letters but space is short. Special thanks to Sandi Chapman for her lovely story 'That's Another Fine Mess', and thanks to Lynn Chessum for the beautiful little story finishing FATAL CHARM. We love to read so much and we could have read on for hours.

Thanks very much indeed for talking about your opinions and ideas and for being so open to the readers, it is great and it can only make us feel closer to you. You must feel lucky being able to write letters, stories and poems concerning David, and Paul, plus Starsky and Hutch, how much we wish being able to do the same, but have you any idea how hard it is to write in what is for us a foreign language? It's quite awful sitting here and not being able to write something very special to put into the magazine. Pity, we are not even good at painting. One of Alexandra's latest attempts to do a drawing of Paul turned out to be quite horrible. Oh yes, with some imagination you would certainly have recognised it as a human being, but nothing else.

All we want to say is, we are glad, so happy, thrilled and delighted to have found some people sharing our love for the two men. David and Paul really created so many friendships, and for us it seems we all belong to one family and it makes us proud being a small part of it.

Sue-Anne - Thanks very much indeed for the lovely Christmas story and much thanks to Debra for "Prayer of Thanks". Se love it. Tabby — thanks a lot for "Anyone for Prune Juice", it's very funny and we enjoyed reading it so much.

[Judy S]:

I never saw S&H as particularly violent either. Especially in the earlier episodes, there were plenty of action-racked chase scenes etc. but I never saw much violence. Okay, so they kicked quite a few doors down and the poor Torino got a bit of a tough deal a lot of the time, but the love and understanding far outweighed any violence. When the almost non-existing 'violence' was toned down in later episodes i feel the programme lost just a little something. I also feel that round about the same time, the loving relationship of S&H was also toned down and many episodes suffered as a result. The main aspect that drew me to the series in the first place (as well as the relationship between S&H) was that they weren't the usual run o' mill super heroes, but they were two warm and very human people.

[Sandra J. F]:

I did enjoy "Anyone for Prune Juice", "That's Another Fine Mess',' and Debra, your "Prayer of Thanks". The missing scene from "Fatal Charm" I found slightly leaning over to the S/H premise, therefore not a story I particularly enjoyed, however, I couldn't have written a missing scene like Lynn's anyway,

[Jean D]: As I understand it (Eds. correct me if I am wrong), in Shootout #1 the Editorial Policy stated that S.O. is a genzine, i.e. S&H, not S/H. Now some folk are suggesting that there should be a S/H content, surely there are already more "/" zines than genzines, so why try to change Ed. Pol.? I am not against the "/" premise, far from it. I tend to believe in it and enjoy a good relationship story. I do think there is a need in fandom for a good genzine such as S.O, one that can be left around and shared without fear of offending anyone. We do not all live in totally liberated households. This fandom is a Celebration of Friendship, these pages are open for us to discuss Starsky and Hutch between friends. Tolerance is the key word, tolerance of the other person's point of view. If you have to cross swords with someone please do it in private, do not let these pages become a battleground.
[Lyndy H]:

I don't think segregating S/H and S&H letters etc. is a good idea at all. If this was allowed to happen we'd be rebuilding that 'fence' again. The S/H premise I has been discussed more than any other subject in fandom and I think we're all agreed that it's a necessary and valid part of the relationship. I find it hard to believe there's anyone in fandom now who still refuses to accept, at least the possibility, that the physical consummation of the relationship has or will take place.

[Glynis J]:

Re S/H: I know most people see S/H after Sweet Revenge which means is it or is it not there? All depends on what you want to believe doesn't it, people in most cases see S&H as being David and Paul they are not though. David and Paul are of course S&H they only acted them right? So it's to be judged by the series to what one sees as being right, if you don't have the piece of the puzzle in the right order you don't get the right picture do you? However, whatever the love, maybe it is definitely there,I'm sure every one agrees on that, as you said.

[Terri B]:

Lyndy — Yes, dear. Now calm down. Hope you're feeling better.

[Jean D]:

I am a David Soul Fan, it was DS singer that made me watch DS actor and so become a S&H fan.

I do agree with some of your comments, Lyndy. I think with DS and PMG their private lives should be just that, Private, certainly not for public discussion on these or any other pages. If we their fans cannot refrain from discussing what should be private, how can we complain about the press intruding. I think you were a trifle hard with some of your remarks, whatever happened to tolerance? Not everyone is as fortunate as you are to have (I quote) "someone here for me". Let them be starry-eyed, it says something that nothing changes the love and warmth felt by such loyal fans. Please everyone, if this discussion has to go on let it be in private correspondence.

[Judy S]:

I agree, [the actors' personal lives is] not the topic I like to see discussed in the S&H L/Z either, that's why I don't discuss it. Like yourself I am an S&H fan as opposed to a Paul and David fan and I must say I get a little disappointed when, to some people all S&H means is David and Paul. I feel a little sad that they seem to be missing out on so much by only being interested in the actors instead of the series and its characters. However, that's the way the cookie crumbles and I don't believe we should condemn or criticise people's beliefs, or personal feelings, in such a way as to cause them unnecessary hurt or upset. So please let's get back to S&H? Like you say, it's far more interesting and i always enjoy hearing what you have to say about them.

Hazel H]:

Now, to Lyndy - referring to what you said about David, and you prefer the real thing. Well, why do you think I love David, he's the real thing, he's not made of plastic you know. Also, you said age hasn't been kind to him, I don't think he looks 40, although he's had a lot of worry, and any way we all have to get old, although David is young yet.

I don't agree with your letter from start to finish. You also said some of David's performances have made you cringe with embarrassment, why? And I'd love to know in what, he's a great actor, and deserves a hell of a lot more than he gets, he works so hard. And another thing, you said you're sick to the back teeth of hearing cries of how wonderful David is, and how much we love him. Well, I think he's wonderful, fantastic, gorgeous, brilliant, I love him, he's generous, lovely, kind, caring, the list could go on and on, but I'd better stop there. And no, nobody knows all the problems between Patti and David, with their marriage etc., and I hope everything is O.K. between them.

Well, I've got that lot off my chest, and I hope you read this, Lyndy. If you say you felt this way about John Lennon, then you should know how I feel about David, so kindly leave him alone.

[Tracey H]:

I agree about David and those who won't have his name blackened are his true fans and know what he is really like....

Lyndy, I don't agree with hardly anything you said I'm sorry to say for a start I hope I look as young as David when I am his age, I find great pleasure in both their solo performances and David being the perfectionist he is always give his performance his best shot. Those of us who really care about S&H care about David and Paul more since they were responsible for bringing those fantastic characters to our screens. If you think David has changed then you don't know how kind he is to people and how he still lights up their lives his personal problems are his own but his real fans would never put him down and as some people said in previous issues a lot of the story was sensationalised as in the past.
[Debra W]:

Lyndy - I had to give a lot of thought to this reply to you - I don't suppose I'm the only one that applies to. Firstly - I was under the impression that "Shootout" is a forum for discussing David and Paul as well as S&H;- therefore people are quite free to discuss either of them. Secondly - good grief, isn't there enough snipping, criticising and misunderstanding of us outside fandom without those of us in it picking at each other too? There are people in fandom who do genuinely love David and Paul; it is not the teenage crush kind of love we all go through - if it was, why are we still involved,after all this time? What has kept that love alive if it's only in people's imaginations? As for fantasising and the "real thing" - I'm sure we would all like to have the "real thing" in our own lives, but not all of us are lucky enough to actually know what that's like. Those of us who are don't have the right to lambast those who don't, nor to deny them the feelings they have for David and Paul, which bring a lot of pleasure. If people can't express that love and those feelings freely in a zine like this, then where on earth can they express them? I disagree that only when they are together are David and Paul at their best» I like a lot of the things they've done since the show and I defy anyone to sit through "Rage" without being moved by it. That's my point of view.

As for the "plaster saint" business - we all know that David is a human being. Which means he has feelings. As do the rest of us. Try giving those feelings a little consideration before you sink to the level! of the press - they've said enough about David's problems for all of us. And please, don't assume that it is only people who prefer discussing S&H to Paul and David to whom the show means anything. We wouldn't be reading and writing to Shootout if that were true.

[Glynis J]:

Lyndy - I've been told not to start a row in "Shootout" but I feel I can't let you get away with that, since I love David and do think he's all the good things you say he's not. Call yourself a David Soul fan, who are you kidding? I'm sorry T find that the joke of the century so will you just drop it please? We do love David and since you do not, I think you're very brave to try to make out that you do after saying all that. S&H fan, well, maybe but they are not David and Paul as I've said before, everyone to their own, but if you don't have anything good to say why bother to say anything? Trying to get a job as a tv critic are you?

[Tracey H]:

"Sweet Sorrow" is a good story, but I don't like that kind of thing.

[Debra W]:

Censorship is a very tricky area to get into - though I think that When it comes to tv, parents should take more responsibility for what their children see. No child has to watch the more 'adult' shows (neither do adults who don't like that kind of thing) and I think it's wrong that people who do_ want to see things like the banned episode of S&H, namely us fans, should have to suffer because the tv companies take it upon themselves to decide what we should and shouldn't be allowed to see. The banned episodes are an often-discussed subject and I could personally talk about there till the cows come home! I think though that there will always be disagreement about them.

[Hazel H]: I caught my Dad reading SHOOTOUT when he thought I didn't know.

Issue 5

Shootout 5 was published in April 1984 and contains 36 pages.

front cover of issue #5, June Bushnell
back cover of issue #5, Ruth Kurz
The editorial:

A word of thanks for the support we have received for our 'non-aggression' policy. We are encouraged by your response. We prefer to call ourselves editors, rather than censors. Censorship as such, is not, and never has been, intended, it is not our wish to suppress any genuinely-held opinions. If I have learned one thing from typing your letters to S.O., it is that S&H fandom is composed of people who hold strong and highly-individual views. This is a forum for those views, all we are asking is that in expressing them, tolerance of other viewpoints is kept in mind. The zine would, I'm sure, be less interesting if we all agreed about everything relating to S&H. We need the stimulus of discussion, even of disagreement, to keep fandom alive. I would like to endorse what [Jean D] says in this issue, on the subject of our policy. S.O. was envisaged as a "genzine", with the emphasis on S&H rather than S/H and we believe this was clearly stated and accepted by subscribers. However, there was no "ban" on S/H, we have printed some S/H items, although people who believe in the premise have respected our wish to keep it to a minimum.

Many people see S/H as an important and necessary part of the relationship. Many others (myself included) see it as neither important or necessary. In that respect there is a distinct division in S&H fandom. But we can, and must, co-exist. I have read, and will continue to read S/H material, for the simple reason that I am interested in anything and everything to do with S&H, and want to keep up with all strands of opinion.

Agreeing or disagreeing with something seems largely irrelevant when one is concerned with exploring all aspects of the show and its characters. S.O. is geared to a general readership, with non-explicit S/H making the occasional appearance. The main theme of S.O., we hope, is friendship, based on our mutual admiration of the show and the actors who created it.
  • Death Angel, poem by Sue-Anne Hartwick
  • Move Over, John Wayne, fiction based on the episode "Murder on Stage 17", by Jean Hollingworth
  • Personalities: Spotlight on Tabby Davis
  • Consequences, part 3 of the round robin, by Debra Warner (part four was to be written by Leah Townsend)
  • Captain Dobey and His Band, long poem by by Sara Slinn
  • review of "Jealousy," a clipping from "The Hollywood Reporter" (January 23, 1984)
  • A Fair Exchange, part one, fiction by Terri Beckett and Chris Power

Sample Fan Comments: Issue 5

[Judy S]: You're a pal about the supposed violence, and [the show] did lose some "charm" but David and Paul both tried to make up for this loss by bringing out the best of their faithfulness to each other and loyalty to the parts they portrayed.
[Wendy P]: As for VISIONS OF JUNA, Sandy, I know you wrote that one just for me — well, for me and Dee Brendel and all those others who adore and believe in unicorns.
[Hazel H]:

I loved "Visions of Juna" what a lovely story, it really was great, it's such a shame those beautiful unicorns don't really exist, or do they!!

[Jean D]:

"Visions of Juna" is a very nice fantasy, but if you believe what they say about unicorns I don't think either of Our Heroes qualified for being helped by one. But I like it and the illo, June.
[Sandra J. F]:

For me, the best thing in this issue is the story "Visions of Juna" - I really enjoyed that, of course I am slightly biased liking unicorns anyway, but I like the way it was put into a Starsky and Hutch story too.

[Josie S]: What great news that Paul and David are going to do a S&H movie I look forward to it. Do others think that the repeats in the USA helped to get S&H on TV again? Let's hope the BBC do the same.
[Judy S]:

As you said David certainly doesn't look 40, I know I'm a few years younger than David and only hope I can look as young as he does in 5 years time it would be so "oooh" it makes my spine tingle to think of him, and yes, David does work hard for what he wants and it shows what a great person he is, as he works so hard at things just to please the people who appreciate him and his good, great performances.

[Sandra J. F]:

Like last time I don't have a great deal to say and being diplomatic over a certain letter in S.O. 5 I'm going to keep my opinions to myself, but I must say that I can't really see what all the fuss is about, we are all entitled to our own opinions, and that just happened to be one of them. Enough said.

[Lyndy H]:

Firstly I would like to commend the eds' decision to erase any irrelevant text from letters to this forum. I presume they will be equally resolute when selecting poetry, fiction and trivia.

Naturally, the snippets of information concerning Soul's and Glaser's careers are interesting and I'm certain we all enjoy them - but there is such a thing as overkill.

Having played an extremely active part in fandom and contributing extensively towards its continuation, I can certainly understand why those who know me find it rather ludicrous some of you are under the impression I actually dislike David and Paul. I fail to understand how the unadulterated truth can be so blindly misinterpreted. However, I have adhered to the eds' wishes and replied to some of your letters in the last issue of "S" privately.
[Lyndy H]:

When I stated I would 'prefer the real thing in my life', I meant, simply I would prefer a tangible partner. The world of S&H and S/H fandom is delightful escapism, a fantasy universe which can be whatever one desires, with a little imagination the possibilities are endless. Unfortunately, I do have personal and rather tying commitments in my life, therefore have to put my priorities into perspective. There are times when reality must take effect. Hence the need for someone palpable, someone I can turn to when I need help. What good is a screen idol to me at any such time?

I think you'll find I'm right when I say Soul has aged. One only has to re-view 1st/2nd season S&H then later or recent television appearances. It stands to reason. He couldn't remain the blond and beautiful all-American-boy forever - but that does not mean he is no longer sensuous!

Yes - I repeat some of Soul's performances have made me cringe. I could name several of the 6.55 Specials as prime examples, also the man is hardly articulate during live interviews. Though I would like to add here he an adorable klutz! In contrast, I've also found great pleasure and gratification in Soul's craft. I was fortunate enough to view "Rage" in Los Angeles when it was originally aired in 1980. I was numbed by the actor's portrayal of Cal Morrisey - stunning - disturbing - brilliant! Need I say more?

Finally, Hazel, may I respectfully suggest that such an ardent DS fan as yourself could find great satisfaction in directing your energy and enthusiasm towards the introduction/producing of a British DS L/Z.

[...]

Of course Soul and Glaser have performed well in separate projects, but only when they are together does that 'special magic' become apparent.

I must stress, Tracey, I am not denying anyone the right to personal feelings. I am fully aware there are those who really do believe they love David and/or Paul - hence my suggestion to [Hazel H]. it may help to provide a much-needed outlet.

[Lyndy H]:

Tolerance works both ways! I was under the impression this was an open-forum in which we are permitted to discuss various aspects relating to the S&H series. Whilst agreeing not everyone would be content to find "Shootout" full of S/H related topics, I feel the premise cannot be totally dismissed. The majority of S&H fandom today either subscribes to the premise itself or at least accepts the possibility! It would be extremely difficult for some of us to discuss various episodes if we were forced to limit our theories in order to avoid the "/" relationship. It is that relationship that forms the basis of our universe/s. I certainly hope the eds. understand this and won't deny us the freedom of open discussion.

[Jean D]:

Some folk see S/H during the series, some, me included, after SR, some do not see it at all. You takes your choice, it is up to you what you believe.

[...]

[But] we are not all agreed on the S/H premise, far from it, I cannot imagine what gave you the idea that we are. There are many fans here and in the US (going by the old LZ) who are very much against the idea. However hard it may be for you to believe, I know it is so. I have friends who abhor the whole idea of a physical relationship between S&H. We respect each other's views, and it is not difficult to discuss S&H without any reference to the "/". Such a thoughtless statement could have caused upsets in many homes, suppose the parent of a young fan read your letter, or any not so tolerant member of a family, it gives a false picture of fandom. You have the right to your opinion, but do not try to impose it on the rest of us. I repeat, I am not against S/H, but I do object to such an unjustified statement being made on behalf of Fandom.

It seems to me a shame that so much emphasis is placed on S/H, I know of fans who dropped out of fandom because they felt S/H was taking over. I have said it before and I hope I do not need to keep repeating it: "Shootout" is a genzine. A genzine is a zine intended for family reading, i.e. to be read by anyone of any age group without fear of embarrassment. I do seem to keep getting on my soapbox, but this is something I do feel very strongly about.

[Debra W]:

I enjoyed your letter and couldn't agree more with you on what you said about tolerance and friendship in fandom. I've made some of my best friends through fandom - I'd hate to lose any of them. I do think we could have at least mentions of S/H in SO - if the eds. are dead against it, I will go along with their wishes, but I hope we don't get to the situation where people are afraid to mention it. I have the same problem as you with the more explicit zines, as you know; I live with ray parents and younger sister and don't think I should expect them to accept S/H Just because I do. I don't want to read any zines in private, but sometimes it's the only way! Agree with you that our eds. deserve to be mentioned in the 'personalities' spot - how about it ladies?

[...]

Re. the 'segregating' of S/H and S&H in SO: no, I don't want to see letters on S/H segregated either. Let me clear up my comments to Linda, I think they were a bit misleading - what I would like to see is occasional S/H fiction or poetry, separate from the letters, perhaps at the back of the 1-zine rather than slap in the middle" of general letters. I don't want to go into my opinions and thoughts on S/H because I've done it often enough before, but I have to say, sad though it is, that I think there are still some who won't accept S/H in any context. (Let me just make it clear that I'm not of those people, okay!!)

[Terri B]:

On the whole, let me say, I am against censorship. But since SHOOTOUT is not just a letterzine, and certainly not a place for snit-fights, I think the editorial policy as stated is a Good Thing. After all, there is ample space for that in our private correspondence.

While I would agree that full-fledged discussions on S/H are not,the thing for SHOOTOUT, I don't think we can ignore the subject completely. There are indeed plenty of S/H zines and l/zs now freely available - no longer is it a deep-dark secret, and no longer must one sign in blood to be part of the Cabal. This kind of freedom is great, and I want to keep it that way, not re-erecting that 'wall of silence' that took so long to break down.

[...] Having just finished the mammoth task of typing nearly, 200 pages of 3-ll you can appreciate that I am not wholly enamored of either the typewriter or S&H right now. S.O.P. It's like post-natal depression. And a swift dose of S&H on TV, Friday evenings, will work a miracle cure.

[Debra W]:

I'd like to say that I support and agree with our editors in their decision to keep SO as friendly as possible - I think this is really what we all want, so let's try and keep that in mind when we write in.

[Tracey H]:

Our feelings for David and Paul are not the teenage crush feelings - you said a lot of what I felt.

[Dee B]:

LIFELINES is so terribly sad. It's impossible for me to see either partner going on alone. It would be a lonely, painful existence as your poem pointed out. Tugged at my poor ole heart strings. All those nice photos to go with your poem...Nice!

[Lynn C]:

Thank you to all those who showed interest in the Fatal Charm missing scene. Yes, it was S/H by the way...I haven't seen Fatal Charm in a long time and was working from memory and an audio tape.

[Jean D]: Terri - You made me feel very guilty, I rarely LOC a zine. Mainly because I do not feel qualified to criticise other people's writing. I cannot write so hesitate to criticise those who do. When 3-11 sees the light of day I will LOC, that's a promise.

Issue 6

Shootout 6 was published in June 1984 and contains 36 pages.

front cover of issue #6, Pamela Grove, a scene from the episode "Texas Longhorn"
back cover of issue #6, June Bushnell: David Soul and his wife Patti
  • The Yellow Rose art by Ruth Kurz
  • a photo submitted by Hazel H of her father reading this letterzine; this fan comments that this will be surprise to him
  • portrait of Starsky by Regenia Marracino
  • Almost, poem by Sue-Anne Hartwick, illo by June Bushnell
  • Consequences, part four of the round robin, by Leah Townsend
  • Personalities: Spotlight on Glynis Jones
  • Snarl-Up on Lincoln, filk by Tabby Davis, to the tune of "Hiawatha" (post-script to the episode "Partners") (This was originally a poem in Tagging Along called "Snarl-Up on Wilshire")
  • two screenshots from episodes
  • That's What I Like, poem by Alexandra and Natascha Meng
  • Rosie, fiction by Joan Hollingworth (based on the episode "I Love You, Rosey Malone")
  • A Fair Exchange, part two, fiction by Terri Beckett and Chris Power

Sample Fan Comments: Issue 6

[Terri B]:

After mature consideration, I have to agree with Jean D, Neither of the lads qualifies for a ride on a unicorn. In fact, as I remember, you had to be virginal to even see one — or is that to get one to lie in your lap? The symbolism of unicorns is rather interesting, too, especially in relation to S&H. 'My strength is as the strength of ten/because my heart is pure.' You may also like to note that according to St. Hildegard of Bingen, only the pelt and liver of the unicorn are of use medicinally. But the horn, as we all know, is sure proof against any poison. First catch your unicorn....

[Judy S]:

I agree we should all keep friendly without getting upset, uptight and offended at what other people write; anyone who is so offended can write personally to the people or persons involved surely, without having it printed.

[Jean D]:

The policy on S/H in S.O has been stated several times, and surely we can all go along with it? The non S/H readers have a right to a gen zine just as much as we have to the "/" zines. Other fandoms keep "straight" and "/" material completely separate, why should it be so difficult for us to do?

[Terri B]: I agree that one can discuss S&H without any mention of the "/" premise and I don't consider that a restriction. But I do resent any implication that S/H doesn't have a valid place in fandom, and I tend to kick if told that I must not mention it. 'Must not' being the operative words. Rather than impose censorship, I'm sure the editors would rather we practised a little self-restraint. As for fans who dropped out of fandom when they felt that S/H was taking over — that's their privilege. I think they were wrong, though. If fandom had been 'taken over', SHOOTOUT wouldn't exist, would it?
[LynnC]: I really have to agree with what you said concerning S/H in "Shootout". I respect the views of those who do not like, or cannot accept S/H, and do not expect to see it in an explicit form within these pages. However, to some of us S/H is a very important part of the relationship, so how can we just ignore or dismiss it when discussing S&H?
[Lyndy H]:

Perhaps I should rephrase that. The majority of active S&H fandom agree in the S/H premise or are at least open-minded about it. I am, of course talking about the present time not a few years back when the heavy '/' discussions began in the US L/Z.

Terri said it adequately. The S/H premise is no longer a closely guarded secret nor is it an exclusive club! Admittedly there were elements in fandom who really did abhor the idea, but a great many of those people have (a) left S&H fandom altogether; (b) become more tolerant and open-minded towards the premise; (c) accepted the idea totally.

Agreed - there are still some people who are definitely against the premise but they are definitely in the minority now. I don't wish to sound blase, but it's a case of — 'if you can't stand the heat stay out of the kitchen' - and come on, let's face it this forum is far from hot!

Strangely enough I also avoid leaving "Shootout" lying around. My family would think I'd entered my second childhood if they read some of its contents.

Hey - you are the lady who had an 'in-depth' discussion on the S/H premise with me at a certain DobeyCon? I'm beginning to wonder now!

[...]

For heaven's sake - let's drop the irrelevant trivialities and get a good heavy discussion started. You may dislike my candor, ladies, but this is your 1/z also - and you're it's lifeline. Stop feeding it and it'll die!

[Regenia M]: Oh, boy. Lynn, you do love to be on the receiving end of flak, don't you? What am I up in the air about? Just one little (actually two, but I will ignore the first) sentence. Girl, 'this here is one gal' who does not, has never, and will not ever believe in the '/' concept for S&H. I do not believe in the possibility of it either. I have already been through 'the great debate' with those who do believe. I did not change their minds; they did not change mine. Being an American, my motto is 'while I may not agree with you, I'll defend your right to say it'...but that doesn't mean I have to like it! One has to simply shrug shoulders and find a different topic to discuss or walk away. I guess what I wanted to say is that there are a few of us diehards who do refuse to accept '/'.(And I have read some of it. In fact, the first '/' I ever read was STROKES. Needless to say, I almost went into a state of shock because I had no idea I was reading '/'. Yeah, I was a little dense, but being new to any kind of fandom I didn't know what same-sex meant! And no, I did not finish even the first story. I have since read some 'softer' '/', and while the story-plots are great, I still don't believe.)
[Tracey H]:

I'm sorry but one of the things I enjoy about SHOOTOUT as well as discussing Starsky & Hutch is the information about Paul and David's careers, I would never find the snippets excessive. In "Between Friends" from the U.S., the people who contribute (not all, but quite a few) talk about the Yellow Rose and David, and Paul's recent films.

I wish you would phrase yourself more carefully. If some of the things you stated in previous issues were misread, then if you had said what you supposedly meant in the first place^ a lot of the anger stirred by your comments would not have occurred. We don't believe we love David and/or Paul, we know it. If I had the chance to meet either of them once, it wouldn't take me many meetings and time to entertain the idea as you say!

[Regarding your suggestion we start a David Soul letterzine]: I am sure Naomi Marrow gives us a good enough news letter and David isn't in England enough to start a British letterzine. 'Soul Mates' covers other British aspects and gives plenty of information. In my opinion S/H should not be discussed in S.O. as the editors decided it should be a genzine. I personally find the subject embarrassing and I am sure as Jean said the concept could be taken very badly in some homes, but it is up to the eds. Enough said on the subject.
[Hazel H]: I'll say yet again, most of as DO love David. You say you don't love him, it's more lust, but some people do have genuine love for him and you can't doubt it. I'll also say again, I have the greatest respect for David, and all the good things he does, as I do for Howard Jones and Nik Kershaw (yes, it's true, I love them too!). So I think we should let this subject ride as it seems to be dominating the pages lately. Wouldn't it be good if we could send in letters without arguing with each other about our feelings for David and Paul? I wonder what will come up in the next issue of Shootout (you never can tell!)
[Terri B]:

The centrefold was excellent. One of the best portraits of Dobey I have seen. Not that S&H weren't well-drawn too — it's just that so few artists try to draw anyone else!

[...]

For full appreciation, CAPTAIN DOBEY AND HIS BAND should be read aloud, preferably to an audience. If anyone can get through it without cracking up, I'll be very surprised.

[Terri B]:

Well, [the episode "Starsky vs Hutch"] also happens to be one of my favourites, though I know there are many of you who won't agree, and some who prefer to pretend the episode didn't happen. For me, it poses many questions, and stimulates a lot of thoughts about the relationship at the time. Just what was Hutch trying to prove by staking a claim on Kira? That he could take a girl away from his partner? There didn't seem to be any love between the two, merely a sexual attraction. Understandable, but hardly fair on Starsk, who plainly did feel more for her than just an itch in the gonads. Kira's explanation was one in the eye for the chauvinist Hutch, but it was still a lousy thing to do to Starsky. (There's no doubt whose side I'm on, is there? But it's the tag that wins the prize for blatant shamelessness. Is there anyone who doesn't know what they were proposing? (Is there anyone besides Kira who'd have turned them down, I ask myself! I'd play sandwich with them anytime!). Or, for that matter, what their exit had to say about their relationship. Think about it. It's also one of the episodes that shows that there can be serious misunderstandings between even the closest friends, that the friendship isn't invulnerable. And most clearly, that it is possible to cut the umbilical cord between them. They are not Siamese twins, they are not joined at the hip. There's a missing scene here for anyone who likes filling in the gaps.

[Lyndy H]:

Isn't it fun watching 'first season' again. Hats off to the ladies who fought so hard to get the series re-run. God - the guys were so young back then. Even Huggy had a youthful gleam. I like first season. It was all so fresh - even if some of the episodes were poorly acted. There didn't appear to be any of the tension which was so apparent in later seasons and the rapport between the two protagonists was fast and amusing. Yes - I love the days when Starsky wore his thrift shop cast-offs with an air of arrogance and Hutch's voice had 'no balls'(quote from Mr. Soul himself). It's relaxing to sit back and just enjoy the guys before the relationship became more apparent and complex and meaningful glances, intentional touching and profound statements started us thinking far more deeply about everything.

[Regenia M]: Speaking of DS's looks — and I am not wanting Hazel H. to come down on my head, please! — but I have always thought the poor man looked like he never got enough sleep and his hair needed washing. I think he looks better now in "The Yellow Rose" -- than he has in years! Those dark circles under his eyes were so distressing to see. Now, he looks healthy and robust.

Issue 7

Shootout 7 was published in September 1984 and contains 36 pages.

front cover of issue #7, by Alberto Listiero (sent in by Mariangela Cerrino)
back cover of issue #7, Reggie (Regenia Marracino), also used as an illo in Long Road Home
From the editor:
"/" vs. "&" and D.S. arguments. A lot has been said on these two topics, and it is obvious that an agreement will never be reached. The views in this issue are unedited but so as not to bore our readers we feel it's time to close these particular subjects.
  • Starsky and Hutch dolls posed with a Hersey's chocolate bar
  • a few screen shots from the show
  • an illo by Ruth Kurz
  • Succubus, poem by Sue-Anne Hartwick (about Vanessa Hutchinson)
  • photo of Paul Michael Glaser in a lounge chair
  • Personalities: Spotlight on Ruth Kurz
  • Blue Ridge Melodies, fiction by Sandy Barrett
  • small illo of The Torino by June Bushnell
  • review of the zine 3-11, see that page
  • review of the zine Intermission #1, see that page
  • Consequences, part five of the round robin, by Terri Beckett, includes an illo by June Bushnell
  • progress report for Dobeycon #6, comments by Lynne Dolan, Chris Ripley, and Jill Ripley
  • some clippings
  • A Fair Exchange, part three, fiction by Terri Beckett and Chris Power

Sample Fan Comments: Issue 7

[Judy S]:

Your feelings about love for David are genuine, there are those of us who do love David as a person, who believes in what he's doing and tries to make things so much better to please the people who will watch his films etc., and gets the pleasure himself of doing so. Surely those fans of PMG feel the same way, and it certainly isn't fantasy.

[Sandra J. F]:

I know of several girls in S&H fandom who refuse to buy or read zines with "/" contents. The same applies to letterzines which contain S/H. As regards l/z's how ever, they could, like me ignore the fact, although I do actually read l/z's from cover to cover. I for one do not believe in "/" premise. I know there are still some of us around, thankfully! Besides not believing in the male/male, I disbelieve in male/female too. In the past I have accepted the softer "/" in my zines, trying to cater for most tastes, however, I now find myself going away from that and sticking to my guns so to speak. Trying the actual stories for me is a very embarrassing task. I don't think a zine need contain S/H in which to sell it.

As for other members of my family reading SO (or APB, since it also contains the occasional wording of male anatomy and S/H contents), I would feel embarrassed if either of my parents started to read those particular parts. My dad wouldn't even know what S/H was anyway. If people insist on wanting to read "/" then I suggest a l/z be brought out specifically for this premise only, then those who do not want S/H in a gen-zine need not worry.

I personally do abhor the "/" idea, but certainly haven't dropped out of S/H fandom. Being part of a minority doesn't matter to me. Who cares who's minority and who's majority, it's what the individual really feels. There are people who aren't so open-minded, unlike yourself for example, therefore the idea of S/H is of no embarrassment. The other element, like myself, find words like 'sex' and 'sexual' embarrassing, therefore it is no fun reading sexual, suggestive stories which we find in our fave fandom of S&H. Why spoil a good thing?

The worst S/H I ever read were two stories in PUSHIN' THE ODDS fanzine, called..."Fall With Lucifer" and "Fountain of Sorrow." Fortunately, they were on red paper and almost unreadable!! [3] Both were utterly disgusting and anyone liking those kind of stories must have a warped mind. Don't get me wrong, I'm not stopping anyone from reading what they want to read or fantasise with. We, as the non-S/H-ers, are supposed to respect others, so let's have a bit more understanding in our direction for a change!

Since the repeat series of 1st season S&H, I have not read any "/" into their partnership. Yes, I am watching the same shows as the majority... sure they touch, etc., but why does that need to be interpreted into something else? Beats me!

[Terri B]: Other fandoms may keep 'straight' and '/' fiction completely separate. I wouldn't know. I don't think it's difficult to do that — I just query the need to be objectionable about the premise. No, maybe that's a tad strongly-worded. I query the necessity, among open-minded people (as most fans thankfully are) of treating a loving and beautiful relationship as if it were something to be ashamed of.
[Terri B]: There, are a number of people I respect, too, for their talent, their enterprise, their good nature. Bu-t love and respect aren't the same thing, and I find it hard to 'love' someone I've never met, never formed a relationship with, and have only seen acting a part. The feeling I have for both DS and PMG would have to be classified as 'admiration' - tinged with a healthy dose of 'what if... Read C.S.Lewis' 'The Four Loves' for an example of the different faces of the emotion. English language only has one word for something for which the Greeks had at least four...
[Lyndy H]:

OK - yes, yes, [Hazel]! I believe you love David Soul and Nick Kershaw and Howard Jones, but don't worry - I promise you'll grow out of it. Seriously! Let's call a truce, eh? I know we all have a right to our opinions, but sometimes the age and cultural gap is too wide to cross. From where I stand it's often hard to be tolerant, but I digress. Let the matter rest.

[Lyndy H]:

There is something I'm not at all sure about. It concerns the young ladies who claim undying love for David and/for Paul. I find it hard to understand how they can claim to love so freely without even knowing either man and in the same breath decry S/H as embarrassing and tasteless. This may be out of line but I have to say it. How can you 'love' unquestionably a man who beats a woman consistently, yet totally disregard a man who 'loves' his friend. There seems a great contradiction there. Please don't misinterpret what I'm trying to say here. I'm not criticising Soul for his behaviour, I have no right to do so. What I am saying is, if you're tolerant of the first situation, you surely have to be tolerant of the latter.

I never stated that everyone believed in the S/H premise. I agree there are those who don't as you said yourself there are a few diehards left in fandom, though I would say 'few' is the operative word here.

[Debra W]:

Please, don't ignore or dismiss S/H when writing about/discussing S&H. I wouldn't want anyone to. You know how I feel about S/H and I think I've made my feelings clear enough to most other people through either private letters or the l-zines, but while we are happy to discuss it, all I'm saying is - let's remember there are some who don't.

[Sandy B]:

How long are these S&H vs. S/H squabbles going to continue? I am anti-S/H, always was and always will be and I'll argue against it till that proverbial cold day in hell. What's the point? Does it do anyone any good?

Does it win friends and influence people? No! All it does is cause more bickering, more bad feelings, more turn-offs and alienates more friends. I lost two good friends because of it and I don't have enough good friends that I can risk losing any more. I write to a few S/H people and consider some of them closer friends than some S&H people I know. It's that way because we agree to disagree and let it go at that. I've changed my attitude in the 2 1/2 years I've been in fandom. At one time I would have argued with the best of them. If I can turn the other cheek, I know the rest of you can.

If we all ignore Lyndy's harsh comments she wouldn't have anyone to argue with and would soon cease trying. She wants to be the center of attention and that's where you've put her. Lyndy - I have nothing against you personally, but you're hurting some people who've done you no harm. Can't you keep your hurtful comments to yourself?

[Regenia M]:

I don't mean to imply that / has no valid place in fandom, I state it emphatically. In my opinion, it does not. Now, the next person may state emphatically that & has no place in it. The whole point is, there will always be those of us who do not see it and never will see it; there will always be those who do. IDIC. (Get a little Trek in here, girls. Infinite diversity in infinite combinations.) As much as it sticks in my craw that anybody would ever think of those two handsome gentlemen as gay, there is such a thing as freedom of thought (even if speech and press are going out the window!) But as Jean D said, if / fans can have their own zines, why can't we & fans have one, too? If you don't believe in the straight concept, do as Lyndy suggested — Get out of the kitchen. Say, Lyndy, you could take your own advice there. I aim to stay out of the / kitchen. And I don't like reading / when I think I'm supposed to be reading &. If I want to read /, I'll buy a / zine. Rather like TV. If I don't like what's on, I change the channel or turn the blasted thing off. But I don't have a right to tell the station to take the show off the air! I have one big question to ask. Has anyone asked PMG and/or DS what they think about being thought of as gay (their characters, that is)? I have heard that DS blew his stack when he heard about it. Hmm?

[Lynn C]:

I often wonder if P. & D. were trying subtly to tell us something in episodes like D.I.A.D.P. too. The tag scene of S.'REV. was another example of this I thought. Why else climb into a single bed with your partner when you've spent a whole 4 seasons avoiding sharing a double bed with him?! I often feel that had they been able to have complete say in the scripts and how they played them, we'd have seen an even better series than we already did.

[Anne H]:

I am really enjoying [the round robin story] "Consequences". Please, please, please don't let either of them get too badly hurt, I couldn't bear it!!

Issue 8

Shootout 8 was published in November 1984 and contains 36 pages.

front cover of issue #8, Ruth Kurz
back cover of issue #8, Reggie (Regenia Marracino)
From the editors:

There's a welcome and refreshing: breath of sanity in our letters section this time. Thank you all for responding to our request to cool the arguments and get on with the discussions. It wss a real pleasure to type the letters, which hasn't always been the case recently. It's so much more enjoyable to read your comments and observations on h&H than personally directed remarks which are, frankly, of no great interest, except possibly to those they're aimed at.

[snipped]

Hope for the future of fandom - we echo the sentiments expressed by [Jean D] and trust that we can still find purpose and harmony in staying together, despite occasional differences of opinion. S&H was - and is - what brought us all together in the first place, the show still has that special kind of magic for us. Its theme was friendship and we can at least try to reflect that in our fandom activities. We at S.O. are encouraged by your appreciation of our efforts, and your kind comments on the work of our talented contributors. Thank you for your continued interest and support - and please keep those letters, poems, stories, artwork, coming - we need them!
  • letters from fans
  • The Creed, poem by Sue-Anne Hartwick
  • From Starsky to Hutch, poem by Hazel Houldey
  • small illos by June Bushnell
  • some clippings, including one from The New York Times that is a good review of "Bleeding Hearts' by Teri White
  • filk to "The Yellow Rose of Texas", by Sandra J. Ferriday
  • caption contest results (subject was Starsky and Hutch dolls)
  • Starsky portrait by Pamela Grove
  • Hutch portrait by June Bushnell (reprinted from Sandra J. Ferriday's poetry zine: Partners in Verse)
  • A Fair Exchange, last installment of this fic, by Terri Beckett and Chris Power (six pages, has an illo of Hutch in underwear and an automatic rifle)
  • Personalities: Spotlight on Tracey Hodgson
  • Love Song, poem by Debra Warner (author notes that it is S&H)
  • con report for Soul Mates Weekend
  • illo of Starsky, possibly by Alberto Listiero
  • Consequences, part six of the round robin, this segment by Cathy Buckett

Sample Fan Comments: Issue 8

[Josie S]: I loved Blue Ridge Melodies, love the way Starsky starts off grumbling about hills and trees, then as the story goes on, Starsky gets to enjoy the place. It was so good I almost wished I was there myself. Also enjoyed Consequences, Terri. I hope Starsky comes out of this okay. Why is it always Starsky? Sorry, Hutch fans.
[Lynn C]: To all those whose comments in S.O.7 annoyed me — growl, hiss, spit, snap, snarl, grrrrr!!
[Lyndy H]:

Sandra, I have never denied you or anyone in fandom the right to hold an opinion. I have merely requested the same courtesy be shown to me. I find it extremely difficult to believe, no - perhaps understand - that, in this day and age, the words 'sex' or 'sexual' should offend or embarrass you.

With regard to your statement that you disagree with male/female relationships - well, for once words fail me! My dear girl - how do you think you got here!? Whatever - as I've already stated - you have a right to hold opinions. Still - there is one thing that puzzles me. If you find it so distasteful, why do you continue to edit/publish S/H material. It can't possibly be because it's commercially viable - can it?
[Lyndy H]: Yes - a survey of 'fors' and 'againsts' would be interesting (just for fun, of course). However it would be virtually impossible to contact every S&H fan. Many don't even subscribe to l/zs here or in the USA. Also, unfortunately, some fans won't come 'out of the closet'. They agree totally with the S/H premise but refuse to state so publicly. However, that's their prerogative.
[Lyndy H]: Sandy, I'm pleased you manage to retain a good relationship with friends who subscribe to the S/H premise. That's exactly the point, isn't it? Agreeing to disagree! If everyone adopted that attitude in the pages of S.O. I'm certain we would witness the end of present animosity. I have absolutely no objection if anyone wishes to discuss characters/episodes/plots etc. without reference to S/H and I think you'll find I've never criticised anyone for doing so. However, by the same token, allow me and others who subscribe to the S/H premise to discuss characters/episodes/plots etc. in our manner. As I've said before, tolerance works both ways.
[Lyndy H]: Regenia - Of course you can have a totally '&' zine. I'm sure no-one would object if you started one - and with reference to 'Soul blowing his stack' when he was supposedly asked about his screen relationship with his partner, all I can say is - WATCH THE BLOOPER REELS!!
[Debra W]: has anyone asked PMG and DS how they feel about their characters being thought of as "gay"? Well, don't know if you have heard of or seen the BBC's 1978 documentary on DS, but something along the lines of that question was asked during the interviews that appear as part of it, and DS's answer was (to the best of my recollection), "If you want to think that, that's up to you." Of course, we can interpret quotes they've made on the subject in any way we choose, and we'll never really know how they feel - at least, I doubt it. Interesting question, though.
[Debra W]: I'm getting a bit tired of all the arguments over S/H and S&H and I would personally like to see the last of them; I think we all know where we stand in our views on the subjects, and endlessly repeating ourselves is just a waste of time - and is getting a little boring, too!
[Terri B]: A hiatus in the S&H repeats, but we have YELLOW ROSE and PRINCESS DAISY to make up for it, yes? Well, frankly, no, as neither fill the gap for me. YELLOW ROSE is the better of the two, as DS is actually acting and not being Hutch in a cowboy hat. And I think the show has potential — enough, at least, to keep me watching, which not much does these days. And he is looking very very watchable. The same can be said for PMG in PRINCESS DAISY, though alas there was less of the acting on show here — I could have sworn it was just Mr. Renaldi behind that camera. The walk, the talking, even the clothes — strongly influenced by DMS. Not to mention the ubiquitous sniff. Granted, one couldn't do much with that script, but I expected better from the man. I am allowed to be critical, yes? If I didn't care so much, I wouldn't be. Besides, this is a free country, and so I can kvetch all I like. I do not have to rave about everything those two choose to appear in, just because they are in it. This is understood, no feelings hurt? Right.
[Terri B]: I've read worse S/H than that. See my letter in APB for my view on S&H*S/H — frankly I'm tired of the snit-fights. I know how I feel, and I'm willing to let other people have their opinions without brow beating them or calling names or even insinuating they have warped minds. And I'll keep my thoughts on 'believing' in m/m and f/m relationships to myself in this 1/z respecting the editors' wishes. Anyone who wants to carry the discussion further, please write to me direct.
[Terri B]: You know, there doesn't have to be a differentiation between S&H and S/H - one doesn't exclude the other. I write both — but they don't live in different compartments in my brain. I don't tune S&H out to write S/H, or vice versa. If I didn't believe in the straight concept, I'd be ignoring the very core of S&H — and I think most S/H supporters would agree on that point, given the chance. Thanks to all who voted for 3-11 in the Huggy Awards —our contributors did very well, and I'm delighted!
[Jean D]: I thought the fiction in SO 7 the best to date because I really like all of it. Usually there is some I like,some I don-t, but everything was really good. And the art work,too, June, I love your illo to the delightful story from Sandy. I could almost hear the strains of "In the Blue Ridge Mountains" drifting from the Torino. That would make a lovely watercolour if you ever have the time. Pleased to see Consequences back on the right track, Hutch meets Bodie and The Cow should be something. Fair Exchange is riveting, i wasn't sure whether to smile or chew my fingers, so I did both.
[Jean D]: There has been a depression deepening in S&H Fandom over the last few months. This depression has given me hope and made me feel that there is a future for our fandom. The fact that so many people do feel so unhappy and sad means that they care and will not just sit back and let something so good just fade away or be hidden in a' closet. May I commend to all of us a quote from Turlough (Doctor Who) that we should "Disagree agreeably". If we all stick to this then there is a future for our fandom, letterzines and conventions.
[Regenia M]: It is not easy to embarrass me about matters sexual, but I do know the feeling you get. Got it from reading an extremely explicit sexual story about Spock! Knocked me for a loop. NOT because it was sexual mind you, but because of WHOM it was about! Spock! Of all people. I was embarrassed for him! Then I went back and read it again and laughed myself silly!
[Sue-Anne H]:

I hate to be the bringer of gloom, but I feel I must reply to a statement made by [Sandy B] last issue. This was regarding the "premise" behind my poems that have appeared in SHOOTOUT, and her implications were incorrect. Onward...

Sandy, I resent it when someone deliberately misinterprets something I've written. For your information, the only S/H poem I've EVER written for SHOOTOUT was one entitled "NIGHT GAMES" and that was way back in issue 1 before I knew what the editors' policy on S/H was. All the poems I've written for SHOOTOUT since issue I have been,and will continue to be, totally "straight". The editors understand that, and so do most of the other readers. I'm afraid your homophobia is running rampant again, my dear. It's making you see "/" where none ex ists. In other words, it's making you paranoid. Oh, if you want to read some REAL S/H poetry, so you can differentiate between "/" and STRAIGHT, in the future, I'll be very happy to provide you with samples.
[Hazel H]: I do disagree with what you said about David's hair, I've always thought it looked clean and shiny myself.
[Hazel H]:

Yes, I do know the difference between love and respect, and I realise they are not the same thing, that's why I wrote love and respect. I was stating I love David, as do many others as a friend,of course you can love your friends as well, and that's what David etc. is to me, a dear friend. David has said himself, he loves his fans, and regards them as his friends.

[...]

You can love friends of course, you don't seem to be able to see that, as you keep saying I'll grow out of it! You don't grow out of loving your friends and as I said before, David I do regard as a dear friend. Of course I admit as a teenager I had dreams of marrying David etc., but don't we all. But no, I haven't and never will grow out of loving him. And why do you keep on about David wife-beating? It seems to me as if you can't get through a letter without getting your sarcastic 2p worth in.
[Judy S]: I don't wish to enter into any arguments about David's life, friends etc., but there are some of us who appreciate David's work, and like him as a person and really enjoy his acting, and it's understandable he can get depressed if things go wrong, anyone can, and when depression sets in anything can happen.

Issue 9

Shootout 9 was published in January 1985 and contains 36 pages.

front cover of issue #9, Mariangela Cerrino
back cover of issue #9, June Bushnell
The editorial:

Due to ever-increasing demands on our spare 'time, we have decided that henceforth SHOOTOUT will he issued quarterly. We feel this will give us the extra leeway needed to maintain standards, and trust we will continue to have your support in the of letters, stories, poems, artwork.

S.O. can only he as good as its contributors, we know the talent is there and we'd like mare of you to participate — doesn't take too much time and effort to write a letter, and you've all got something to say on the subject of S&H haven't you?
  • illo of Starsky and Hutch holding their action figure dolls, artist is P.B.?
  • Guilt-Trip, fiction by Joan Hollingworth (based on the episode "Blindfold")
  • Eclipse, poem by Sue-Anne Hartwick
  • a clipping from "The Hollywood Reporter"
  • Thank You, Friend, a follow up poem by Hazel Houldey to "From Starsk to Hutch" in the previous issue
  • Personalities: Spotlight on Alexandra and Natascha Meng
  • Personalities: Spotlight on Lyndy Harding and Tiger Jones
  • Luck, poem by Alexandra and Natascha Meng
  • caption contest
  • photo of Starsky and Hutch dolls in deep snow
  • Holding On, fiction by Joan Hollingworth (based on the episode "Black and Blue")
  • photo by Cathy Buckett of posed Starsky and Hutch dolls
  • illo of Starsky and Hutch by Pat Bushnell
  • illo of Hutch ("Against the Wind") by Pamela Grove
  • Consequences, part 7 of the round robin by June Bushnell, includes an illo of Hutch overlooking the River Thames

Sample Fan Comments: Issue 9

[Carol J]: Dobeycon 6 - was very upset that it had to be cancelled, as I had been really looking forward to meeting everybody. I always thought (correct me if I am wrong) that S&H, P&D and everything to do with S&H meant a lot to you all, but I seem to have been mistaken. That's all I am going to say on that subject.
[Carol J]: I really enjoyed "Fair Exchange" right up to the very end - where Hutch smeared Starsky. Great, fantastic, brill, more, please, more.
[Tracey H]:

Agreed with your comments about David. We got to see "Wait Till, Your Mother Gets Home" last week. Boy - he looked good - loved the scene in his dressing gown. It was an hilarious movie, I cracked up when he put all the washing in together. He really can act.

[Tracey H]:

Well done, Hazel, you said what needed to be said.

[Lynn C]:

I think it's all a matter of how we interpret things. David may have said they weren't a couple of "prime-time homos". This doesn't rule out my feelings about their relationship however - I feel that David was merely confirming my beliefs. I don't see S&H as gay either, but I do see them as lovers. To me there is a difference, but as I said it's all a matter of personal choice. I guess we should agree to differ?

[Lyndy H]:

Of course Soul and Glaser have been asked consistently about their screen relationship in both British and American interviews. I'm familiar with the show you're referring to, Regenia, and you failed to mention Soul and Glaser were giggling like machine-guns when asked that particular question - or should I say, when the particular subject was raised. Neither man has ever appeared offended by any such question - unless of course the question was asked by a 'numbskull' interviewer. On the contrary, they've either appeared amused or ambiguous in their replies. Having watched almost an hour of 'blooper' reels I definitely feel Soul and Glaser have a 'tongue-in-cheek' attitude over the whole premise.

[Lynn C]:

I feel I owe you an apology, Sue-Anne. I love your poems and have to admit I always read them as S/H too. mind you I do this with a lot of things that are meant to be straight I guess.

[Lyndy H]:

I fail to understand how depression can give you hope but I would agree with you that 'people' care. 'People' care when prejudice mars something as valuable to S&H fandom as D/Con. 'People' care when unpleasant, untrue rumours are circulated. 'People' care when a certain element seem hell-bent on destroying a unique fandom some of us have strived hard and long to maintain. Hopefully there Is a future for fandom, L/zs, and cons....

As I've continuously repeated, I admire and respect Soul and Glaser’s talents but I think now, in the interest of S&H fandom, it would be best for all concerned if the "Soular Energy" people started their own L/z in which they could discuss David and his career to their heart's content. I'm honestly under the impression that these 'people' would be far happier if such a forum was introduced by/for them. They've already demonstrated that they'd much rather spend their time and energy at a David Soul 'get-together' than attend a Dobeycon Convention and support S&H fandom. This is, of course, their prerogative, but it does tend to prove where these 'people's' loyalties lie. All the American and British L/zs were introduced solely for the purpose of discussing the S&H phenomena with the occasional reference to the actors themselves in the form of news articles etc.

I, personally, don't want or need to discuss Soul and/or Glaser, as much as I admire both men. Admittedly, I have been guilty of doing so, in the past, but I just seemed to get caught up in the whole damned thing.

I know there are lots of people out there who feel the same as I over this issue. If they wish to support me they'd be welcome. If not, perhaps they'd allow me to speak on their behalf. Whatever - it comes down to this - there are _so many aspects of the relationship between the two protagonists and the people whose lives they touched, still waiting to be discussed. So why waste time chewing over things that don't really matter? I just cannot understand why certain people find gratification in continually discussing the actors when the characters are the whole basis of our fandom.

Please understand here that I am merely trying to put over a point in defence of S&H fandom - something I care deeply about. So no retaliating letters next month please. Just think about what I've written, it makes sense, or should, if you’re a true &SH fan.

It saddened me, yet again, to read out of thirteen letters in last month's issue there was such little mention of S&H. What's the matter with everyone? Have we forgotten already? Whatever - before I close, I'd like to pose a few questions in the hope we can get a healthy discussion together in next month's issue... [four suggested TOTM regarding plotting, characterization, and the show].

[Judy S]:

After reading the editorial, Joan certainly has a point about sanity returning to Shootout, and not before time, it is certainly time to leave the "nit-picking" and bickering out of our published letters, and just stick to S&H fandom, we've been having a lot of their good films since the series finished. "Rage" was certainly well worth watching, and seeing the emotional trauma that David portrayed, which brought utter relief at the end of the film, it was a film which showed the rage, emotion and guilt v/hich must surely be felt by these sort of people, when this sort of thing happens.

[Hazel H]:

The Soul Mates weekend was a great success, it all went very well, and it was lovely meeting old and new friends.

[Sandra J. F]:

There's a lot who totally disagree with S/H and won't come out of their closets, too.... I have never stated you aren’t allowed your opinion - of course you are, everyone is. We'll have to agree to disagree as you suggested in APB. How I got here, is irrelevant to how I feel about male/female relationships now. I don't continue to edit that material either, as some months ago I put a stop to it; [my zines] you see advertised now are reprints, both of which contain S/H fiction. Embarrassing, I would say, rather than offending. I know of another person who still feels this way about certain sexual words too. Is it becoming contagious, or what? There’s an awful lot of 'my dear girl’ going around lately. It's unnecessary and needn’t be used. It implies that the owner of said words is like a school marm looking down their noses at us mere school kids. A haughty way. Enough said.

[Terri B]:

Knocking other people's emotions? I re-read my letter - I don't think I knocked anything. Merely stated a case. There are also quite a few words to describe love in the English language — check your thesaurus. We don't need to be Greek. However, I will admit that I can be fond of peopled haven't met — I haven't met quite a few of my correspondents, but I'm very fond of all of them. However, I wouldn't entertain a romantic relationship with anyone at a distance. A fault in me, maybe. I cannot agree, however, that the depression in S&H fandom is a good thing. I'm afraid it could prove all too fatal. S&H fandom is essentially a form of escapism. The intrusion of personality conflicts, rumour-mongering, behaviour of this kind is not a sign of caring. If I was a new fan, I think I'd be very much put off by this kind of thing, and I might well decide to take my interests elsewhere, or stay in that closet where no one could hurt me. I'm not a new fan however, and although I'm personally very saddened as well as annoyed by the present situation, I do not intend to let myself be intimidated, muzzled, or driven out into the outer darkness where there is weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth.

[Terri B]:

A FAIR EXCHANGE was a very early eff ort by the way, and inspired by a photo of PMG clad in pristine virginal white.

[Terry B]:

The future of fandom. The question remains - what do YOU want out of fandon, people? Do you want a yearly SdH Con like DOBEXCOK? This year, it seems there weren't enough people who did.

[Terri B]:

Do you want zines? INTERMISSION 2, I'm told, may be the last in a very promising series, because contributions are so thin on the ground. The letterzines seem to exhibit the same names every time. Our own 3-11, (and winner of four Huggy Awards, I'm pleased to say) though selling well in U. S., has not enjoyed the same popularity here at home — and I'd like to make a point here re xeroxing of zines. It is a common practice, I know, and if you have the author/editors permission to xerox, then that's fine. BUT -- when you consider the time, hard work, and expense that goes into producing a zine, it is not fair on the producers to xerox zines that are still generally available. Out-of-print — yes, sure, it may be the only way to read some of the best fanfic. But first, it is courteous to ask permission. I've never refused it myself, and I've only ever been turned down once when I asked, and that was because a reprint was planned. Zines don't grow on trees. They cost a lot in blood, sweat, and tears to produce. I'm sure the editors will back me up on that. So if in doubt — ask.

Issue 10

Shootout 10 was published in April 1985 and contains 36 pages.

front cover of issue #10, Ruth Kurz
back cover of issue #10, a mainstream t-shirt design
The editorial:

The subject of S&H fan fiction, and why we are not getting more of it, interests me very much. Our own round-robin story CONSEQUENCES appears to have run out of steam and on a wider front there is an alarming lack of new full-length zine projects, both here and in the U.S.A. This may be partly due to ever-increasing difficulties of cost and the time required to edit and produce a quality zine. But I would like to know whether S&H stories are still being written, as distinct from published.

In the heady days when S&H was an ongoing series, many superb zines and stories were available (a number of them quickly became classics). Since the series ended the flow has dwindled to a trickle, and even that now shows signs of drying up. LONG ROAD HOME was an oasis in the desert, and every bit as welcome. "What has happened to SCALES OF JUSTICE? Any news of that, Terri? But that, at least is a projected zine and I'm not criticising delays which I know are often unavoidable.

Rather, I'm pondering the reason for the shortage of new writers. To me, one of the most likely explanations is still intimidation - simply because of the excellence of what has gone before. I am not involved in any other fandoms., and am therefore not familiar with the writing standards that apply elsewhere. However, I believe that S&H fanfic has always contained much-better-than- average writing, even in its earliest days. Later it reached near-professional level (indeed one or two S&H writers went on to attain the exalted 'pro' status). You don't just have to take my word for this. It's an opinion held in other media fandoms, by people with wide experience of fanfic.

A media fanzine review recently came to my attention. It contained an excellent, well-reasoned review of an S&H zine, which the reviewer recommended with certain reservations. She concluded with the statement that the zine stood about midpoint on the ladder of excellence in S&H fandom, which made it better than most zines published in other fandoms. It's a great pity if any potential new writers are put off because they feel they may not measure up, though I have no idea what can be done about it. If any of them are listening, it would be interesting to know if new S&H stories - or poems - or writings of any kind - do exist, even if the writers are not willing for them to be published. I take account of the fact that with less - or no - new zines in the pipeline, writers may be justified in asking where they are to submit their work, but the smaller 1-zines could provide a useful stepping-off point with the added advantage of a somewhat less critical audience.


  • Thunder Man, fiction by Sandy Barrett
  • illo by June Bushnell of Hutch as a White Knight
  • Life With a Friend, poem by Alexandra and Natascha Meng
  • caption contest: Starsky and Hutch dolls posing with a miniature Torino
  • review of the zine Long Road Home, see that page
  • An Open Letter to Shootout and All Its Readers, by Jackie Allison (about Soul Mates and some fan gatherings)
  • First Time, poem by Sue-Anne Hartwick
  • illo by June Bushnell (reprinted from an unknown issue of APB)
  • Personalities: Spotlight on Judy Smith
  • Personalities: Spotlight on Linda Walter
  • some clippings
  • letters from fans

Sample Fan Comments: Issue 10

Natascha and Alexandra M]: Lyndy, dear, who gives you the right to judge who's S&H fan and who not? Have you ever had in mind that there are people like we both, who are true S&H fans as well as true Glaser & Soul fans. We don't think your idea is good. Hell, what would S&H be without Glaser & Soul? THEY made your heroes live. The sooner it goes through your head the better. Anyway, we don't want to dispute with you, as we respect your point of view as well as others.
[Jean D]:

It took me a long time to be brave enough to write to a SI newsletter way back when, let alone a LZ. This leads me on to zines. From what 1 hear some new writers are not submitting work for fear of unkind/harsh criticism. Zines are important to me and S&Fi zines are few and far between, and for the most part they do tend to be quite pricey. Intermission was a rare exception and very good it is too. Don't misunderstand me, Terri, I know a quality zine costs a lot to produce but S&H zines do have a limited market therefore a small run, so maybe a little less quality in production would bring prices down. I have been involved with the production of a K/S zine so I do know all that goes into a high quality zine. The story content is the most important thing, surely; maybe editors should concentrate on the contents and a little less on the quality of paper etc. 1 imagine this is the only way to bring prices to a more sellable level.

[Debra W]:

I personally would hate to be without [cons]; that goes for letterzines, too. I do feel that there must be people involved with fandom in other ways who could contribute something - I don't know what's holding them back, but I feel it's a great shame that they don't contribute, we all have something to give, something to say, so why keep it to ourselves? Sharing should be a natural part of fandom for all of us. The editors of the l-zines and other zines can only print what is sent to them, after all - if we don't con tribute, we may well end up with nothing, and that to me would be a very sad situation when there is so much talent that could be put to good use.

[Sara S]:

If [David Soul fans] wish to start their own letterzine, I'm sure they will do so without any prompting from anyone else. However, the implication which I read into Lyndy's letter was that they should withdraw from letterzines such as 'Shootout'. If this is indeed what Lyndy intended to suggest then I must strongly disagree. I would have thought that the last thing fandom needed was to fragment itself into sections, each section covering just one small aspect of the aeries we all enjoy so much.

If the 'Soular Energy' people were asked to withdraw by a majority of 'Shootout' subscribers - and I see no chance of this, thank goodness - it does not take much of a stretch of the imagination to envisage people interested solely in fandom asking those who wished to discuss S/H to go away and start their own zine. And where would it go from there? ... Surely we need the support of everyone, regardless of how great or small their interest is in the series. Presumably people who buy 'Shootout' or any other letterzine are, by paying their subscription and/or writing letters, involved in fandom because they wish to be. I would not dream of questioning that. As far as I'm concerned, the more the merrier.

[Lynn C]:

The artwork last issue was superb. Lovely photos too, especially the back cover, which of course is one of my favourites. Looking at such a photo, I just cannot believe that Paul and David would be very upset at the thought of S/H.

[Lynn C]:

How I agree, let's please get back to discussing S&H and the series. I've nothing against the actors, far from it in fact. I have the greatest admiration for them and avidly follow their careers as well as taking an interest in every thing concerned with them, but all this is only because of S&H. The series and the characters are what comes first with me every time and what I'd like to see discussed here.

[Lynn C]:

The reason I wasn't going to the last Con and haven't ever been to one is mainly because I just plain can't afford to, but I don't want to bore everyone by keep repeating this and I would guess many others feel the same way. It's the same with zines. I love 'em and want 'em, but they're so expensive and people seem to want the earth for second-hand ones, too, though I can't say I really blame them.

[Sara S]:

Instead of a weekend con in 1985, would it not be possible to hold one-day meetings for fans so that we could at least get together to talk? Since it would be impracticable to expect people from up north to cane to, say, London just for a day, would it be a good idea for one-day meetings to be held in several large towns throughout Britain; cities such as London, Manchester, Cardiff, and maybe somewhere in Scotland? At least this would give fans the chance to talk to other people even if the numbers at each meeting were much smaller than at a weekend con.

Having a one-day event, say on a Saturday, could hold some advantages over a weekend con. It would be; (a) less expensive for all fans since no hotel bills would be involved; (b) less to do for the person who organised it since no videos, panels or competitions would be needed; (c) less travelling for most people; (d) less time away from home for people with commitments which make a weekend difficult. If anyone is interested in organising a meeting in London, I'd be happy to do the paperwork involved - sending details to interested fans, collecting a small charge from each for the hire of the room etc - if someone else could actually find a roan for us to use. I don't know London well enough to do that. Similarly, anyone interested in arranging a meeting in the north of England or Scotland or Wales could do so without too much trouble once the room had been found. And, of course, anyone interested in going to more than one meeting could do 30 by making their own arrangements for travelling and staying overnight somewhere. Does anyone else think this is feasible?

[Debra W]:

I want to mention something that has been bothering me recently. 1 hope you'll bear with me... I've been wondering why it is that some people seem to think that those who attended the Soul Mates Weekend did so at the expense of DCon 6? The SM Weekend was held during the last weekend in September, so other than monetary problems, there was really no reason why anyone who attended couldn't also have gone on to attend the SM convention. The vast majority of people who are involved with SM aren't actively involved with the DCon side of fandom anyway - they may have known about DCon, but it's hard\dly fair to lay any blame at their door for what happened simply because they chose not to attend. Having been involved with SM since it started, and also having been involved with Soular Energy, I feel that some people have the wrong impression about what members are really like, and how they feel.

[Debra W]:

I really do hope that we will have DCons, or at least some kind of regular get-together, in the future. Would it be possible for us all to think about some kind of get-together for this year? it is after all, the 10th 'anniversary year of S&H - at least, the ten year anniversary of the show going on the air in the USA - and it seems a shame to let this year go by without doing something. Maybe we could discuss this? It would be interesting to see how you feel about it.

[Jean D]:

Lyndy: I do agree with quite a lot of your remarks but.... You know that I went to Soul Mates for a day so I assume I am one of "these people" you refer to. I should like to point out that going to one convention does not exclude anyone from going to any other con they may wish to attend. I went to five cons last year. I was at a Star Trek con in August with Chris and Jill and we had talks about S&H and Dcon and they are aware of my reason for reluctantly deciding not to attend Dcon. I have to admit that the cancellation of Dcon did not in itself affect me, hut it was a great shame and I felt very sorry for Lynne, Chris and Jill. I was never connected with Soular Energy but I believe it was disbanded by David last year.

[Jean D]:

What do I want out of fandom? I think the most important thing anyone can get out of fandom is friendship with other fans, but we also have top put some of it back and one way to do this is to be friendly and hospitable to new and isolated fans. This is the reason I have a Local Group meet at my home, we started as a Trek group but we welcome anyone with an interest in media fandom. From time to time I have a day, or weekend devoted to one particular programme or person. I've recently had a S&H weekend; there were ten of us, should have been fifteen but five had to drop out due to weather and work. We had a good time, spent mostly talking with plenty of laughter and good cheer.

The first Dobeycon was held in Janet Hunt's front room. There is no reason togethers, mini cons, whatever title pleases you, should not be held in front rooms, back rooms, any room where fans care to congregate be it for a couple of hours or a couple of days. Make the most of what time and space there is; being together to enjoy is a most important part of fandom.

I am fortunate in that I usually go to several cons a year: one big Trek con and several smaller Trek, S&H or Multi Media cons for maybe just one day. There are so many conventions held during a year it is impossible to get to all that one would like to since most of us have limitations of finance and free time. To not attend one implies no "disloyalty' or lack of caring for another.

[Lyndy H]:

What does one want from fandom?

Firstly, an annual convention, fully supported by S&H fans from all over the country.

Secondly, a regular production of quality zines (bring back Beckett & Power). This, of course, could only be achieved through ’supportive' fans putting pen to paper and ’creating'. 'Closet-writers' - pay attention. Your work is also required. If anyone can't/won't write, or try their hand at art-work, support your zine eds. by purchasing the productions when they’re available for distribution.

Thirdly, I’d like to regain that 'one-big-happy-family' feeling we had a few years back, when we cared, shared, and dared - and had a lotta fun on the way.

That’s what I want from my fandom, though I fear we may have already destroyed 'the Legend'. I hope a lot of you will prove me wrong.

Can't we bury-the-hatchet, forget past grievances and strive hard to re-eatablish an interest in fandom. The S&H phenomena means to me, as I’m sure it does to some of you, one helluva lot! I couldn’t begin to explain how my involvement in fandom has changed the direction of my life. I believe those who know me well will understand that statement, but even those who don’t know me at all can surely empathise with me where S&H fandom is concerned. If you do, you’ll know what I’ve been saying makes sense. I don’t think I can say any more on the subject. If it hasn’t 'hit hone' by now, it never will. So there it is - it’s up to you/us!

[Ruth K]:

I like all the artwork, the cover, centerfold etc. I'm especially impressed with "Against the Wind" by Pamela — both a favorite pose and a favorite idea, whether Hutch, or David, or Johnny.... And hooray for the back cover.' The essence of Paul and David is their sense of humor, as if they're telling us "Don't take things too. seriously, — we don't.'" That photo appeared on nationwide TV" on the Dinah Shore Show with David laughing gleefully about it,

[Terri B]:

Not the best of issues, I'm afraid. Is this the reason for [the publication of this letterzine] going quarterly, or is this yet another sign that S&H fandom is in what a friend of mine calls a 'chrysalis' stage? Dormant over winter? In hibernation? Or what? It certainly doesn't seem to have the same drive and enthusiasm that I remember of my early days. Or maybe I was seeing things through rose-coloured glasses. Whatever, I certainly hope things start to pick up soon.

[Lyndy H]:

Oh Lord! This really is very embarrassing - and before I go any further I'd like to apologise to the eds. for what I am about to write. We all owe the eds. an apology - and a big one at that!

It truly amazes me to read statements heralding Shootout as the best l/z in production today. C’mon ladies - who are you kidding!? Shootout is rapidly becoming what I can only describe as an inferior forum with very little to offer S&H fandom, though I must emphasize here, this is through no fault of the eds. After all, they can only print what they receive. If it was up to me I’d toss the majority of your letters in the waste paper basket where they belong. You certainly don’t deserve the effort put into producing even a l/z of Shootout’s minimal proportions. I’ve tried it, so believe me when I say I know what I’m talking about. It’s hard work and takes a lot of time and frankly, with the amount and kind of support the eds. are receiving, I’m surprised they’ve stuck it out this long.

I was greatly saddened by Issue 9. Put yourselves in the place of a newcomer to S&H fandom. You pay £1.50 of your hard-earned money for an article you hope will educate you, amuse you and expand the world of S&H fandom. What do you get? An inadequate forum containing 10 letters, a few snippets of information on DS and PMG - and two short vignettes which could only be described as ’stop-gaps’.

Issue 9 was only saved from complete devastation by Sue-Ann Hartwick’s unmistakable talents, tho’ the other ’poetical’ contributors made a fair attempt.

Out of ten letters printed there were nine references to David and/or his movies, eleven references to Paul and/or his movies and a mere four references to S&H, those being brief and uninteresting. The remaining, contents of your letters were little messages to each other, thank yous for previous comments, a repetition of the past 3 or 4 l/z's and a geography lesson. Ye Gods - each of you must have taken at least 5 minutes to knock all those sentences together. Have any of you stopped to wonder why S.O. is now to be issued quarterly? It's s damn obvious. to me.

I suspect I've gained the reputation of being ever-so-slightly-bitchy in the past and I stand guilty as accused. Mea Culpa, and all that, but this letter is not written with any individual in mind and I'm not being bloody-minded, though those of you with little imagination will probably think differently. Whatever - I'l1 tell you what I am - I'm very concerned about S&H fandom in general and the future of Shootout. In the U.K., APB holds the monopoly on healthy, intelligent discussion. However, this does not mean there is no room for two high-quality productions. There is, and it's up to us, the subscribers to rescue a fast sinking ship. We owe it to the eds, ourselves, and most of all S&H fandom. As a matter of interest, I used to wonder why a lot of you failed to subscribe to and support APB - I realise now that some of you can't cut the cloth - you've proved that by your lack of imagination in S.O.

Yes - my words are harsh, they're meant to be, but I believe the sensible amongst you will be touched by them. I don't want or need futile, angry retaliations in the next issue. You'd only be taking up valuable space which, hopefully some may choose to use for interesting discussion.

For God's sake girls - pull your socks up. Reserve your little pleasantries for private correspondence. If you feel you*d like to mention Soul or Glaser and their acting abilities do so by all means - but don't make it the basis of your whole letter. A large chunk of your contribution should be dedicated to the discussion of S&H, the show, or S&H fan-fic. The series has been back on the air recently - weren't your imaginations fired, didn't you ask yourselves any questions, were none of you inspired? There are so many aspects to the relationship, personal and professional which are open for discussion. Do you people think at all?

For heaven's sake let's try and reprieve what we have left, which is precious little. It's our last chance. If you don't make up your minds to put pettiness and indifference behind you, we'll lose this forum once and for all, and don't you think a big effort on your behalfs would be a nice way of saying 'thank you' to the eds. for sticking by us all this time.

Issue 11

Shootout 11 was published in July 1985 and contains 36 pages.

front cover of issue #11, from a commercial t-shirt design
back cover of issue #11, a flyer for a proposed con called Bullet
From the editors:

First the good news. It is particularly pleasing to see S&H "being discussed at some length in your letters this tine. The different viewpoints make interesting reading - something we're always aiming - and hoping, for.

However, from your letters for this issue and also our private correspondence, we know that many of you are concerned about the content of some of the letters printed recently. The views expressed are not necessarily those of the editors, but all shades of opinion are given space. We are grateful to all our subscribers, whether they contribute or not, without your support, there would be no SHOOTOUT.

In recent issues, certain letters have been outspoken about what is wrong with fandom generally and S.O. in particular. These views have been given a full airing. We therefore feel it is only right that we should print your replies anti reactions, but the subject now seems to have reached saturation point, and the time has cane to declare it closed.

We have also decided to do a little judicious 'editing', so, as from this issue, we are deleting comments which we consider have no place in a S&H zine. We hope no one will find this restrictive. It is not intended to be, we want full and frank discussions of our favourite show to continue and expand. We merely seek to discourage the more personal type of comments which are best left to private correspondence between the parties concerned. With your cooperation, we feel the amount of editing will be very small.

We have always envisaged S.O. as more than just a letterzine, which is why we include fiction, poetry, artwork, photos, and news items in each issue. However, the letters are an integral - and important - part of the zine. We have to say it again - ALL your letters are welcome; we need them if this forum is to contribute anything to S&H fandom.
A fan in the next issue commented upon the policy decision to moderate the letters:

I enjoyed issue 11, and it's good to see things getting back to a more friendly feeling again. The Eds. know that I agree with their decision to edit comments that might be harmful, and they have my support in aiming to make SO the best that it can possibly be.

Sample Fan Comments: Issue 11

[Linda M]: Re the editorial and the non-appearance of new zines, I think you made a valid point Joan, suggesting some nervousness on the part of new authors - perhaps they feel the climate is wrong to put their toes in the water, it's up to all of us to remedy that.
[Linda M]:

What do we want from fandom? I'm reminded of a line from a very beautiful John Denver song "Love is why I came here in the first place". That's what I'd like to see in fandom - the love and happy feelings we used to share. Respect for different opinions without the rudeness and hurtful words that seemed to have surfaced of late. I'm sure those good days can come back, after all isn't love the thing that brought us all here in the first place?

Which leads me to the question of Paul and David being given a mention in l/z's. I never want to see the day when they're left out. They instilled the magic into S&H that made us love them so much. Also, lots of fans aren't lucky enough to know fans in the States who can tell them what the guys are doing now and it's nice to be able to keep up with their careers, but of course, talk about the show too.

[Linda M]:

"Death in a Different Place"? There's two theories which venture into S/H and as this isn't the forum for that I'll just mention the surface ones. Hutch is very open-minded about gay relationships, he came across it a lot at college and had lots of gay and straight friends, Starsk on the other hand, is in his "good Jewish boy" frame of mind, remembering all his teachings, his roots are acting up on him, plus, he feels dumb, here he is, the street-wise kid and he's known this guy all this time and he didn't even know he was gay. He is also confused at Hutch's easy acceptance of it. What struck me as odd about this episode was that you'd think, knowing each other all this time and being close, that SM would have discussed their views on this subject. "

[Jean D]:

Oh my that White Knight.... A large size poster please, June; you know my weakness for knights. My living room was full of fans when Cathy arrived bearing SO 10 and when we saw that illo the room was noisy with oohs and ahs. Must not forget that lovely cover from Ruth, and the back cover made me wish for the T-shirt.

There has been less fiction lately but in my view SO is worth buying for the artwork alone. I certainly do not think it is overpriced.

[Jean D]:

I really enjoyed "Thunder Man". I have only recently discovered Bruce Springsteen. Sandy must have been lucky enough to see him live to capture the spirit of the concert so well.

How nice to read a review of a zine that did not give away the story, I too enjoyed Long Road Home, so much so that I sat down and wrote an LOC to Regenia straight away.

I am sure many of us have been grateful to Linda Walter over the years, very nice to read about her and see her with Paul and her collection.

[Jean D]:

There are lots of S&H fans who do not write to LZ's but contribute quietly in other ways, one doesn't have to go "public" to be part of fandom.

10th anniversary, yes, it should be celebrated, well some of us will be together at SoulMates and can raise a glass or two. And we can organize our own smaller groups; lack of a

DCon is no reason not to celebrate.
[Jean D]:

Your statement that you would throw away our letters just about sums up your attitude to free speech and your intolerance of the other person's point of view. I do not intend to waste a lot of time and space replying to the rest of your arrogant outburst, except to wonder just why you continue to subscribe to SO. We would be delighted to get on with writing about S&H and Paul and David. Why don't you try this and leave your unpleasant, personal remarks in your own waste bin? Your insensitive and sneering comments are totally unproductive and must discourage prospective writers. Are you so assured of your own superiority that you feel qualified to pass judgment on the rest of us? You appear to have the view that it is your prerogative to attack anyone but should they dare to reply to you, and you are quick to object and to call them retaliatory. You sound like an old-fashioned schoolmarm, correcting pupils' work and awarding grades and telling them to be silent and not answer back. I think you must be a very unhappy person to be so vindictive to people who have done you no harm.

[Lyndy H]:

A definite improvement. I was extremely pleased to see some of you had taken the time to answer the questions I posed in Issue 9. Let's hope that we can progress from here and make S.O. really interesting.

[Judy S]:

Regarding your suggestion about one-day meetings in various places, of which I'm in agreement with, if they worked. I've tried twice. The first time I had one reply, the second time - for April 13th, I had two replies, I don't feel it's worth my while "farming out" my hubby and daughter and catering a lot of food for a mere three of us. I don't want to sound offensive, but I feel a little upset that no one else is as bothered as you and I seem to be, but thanks to [C] and [T] who replied this tame, I hope you understand why I've decided to let it pass on, I'd hoped it would be of more interest to genuine fans.

If you're interested in Soul Mates, Sara, contact Jackie Allison [address redacted in London], and she'll be only too happy to send you the latest bulletin and names of folk - well, I should say, members, and when and if you write to her, let her know which radio station you listen to most, your choice of record and when your birthday is, and she'll add your name to the list, that way the radio station of your choice will be informed of your birthday and choice of David's record to be played. Hope that answers your question. "Soul Mates" is an independent "body" purely for David Soul fans, and we add our own comments etc, for the bulletin.

I've no intention of withdrawing from S.O. as I enjoy S&H Just the same as other subscribers, which is why I write, and I don't see any reason why Soul Mates members should withdraw because they prefer David, I could carry on, but won't, but I think you'll understand, and hope this makes my point.

[Lyndy H]:

Your "constructive suggestion" was interesting and I'm certain some will be quite supportive of the idea. How ever, I'm afraid a one-day meeting would not gratify me personally. There are many people in fandom who interest me greatly -- people whose ideas and involvement in S&H fandom fascinate me. I don't wish to embarrass anyone by mentioning names, but the people I write of have played an extremely valid part in the development of S&H fandom. One of the main reasons I enjoy attending a week-end convention is the fact I get to spend a substantial period of time with these people, talk with them and exchange views etc. Unfortunately, they live in various and scattered parts of the country so it would be impossible for me to attend a one-day meeting.

There are also other factors why a 'one-day event' may not work. Fans have varied interests. Agreed, most of us like to discuss the S&H phenomena as often and as long as we can. But what of the fans who like to watch videos? Those not fortunate enough to own or have access to a VTR. A 'convention' is the only opportunity some fans have to sit and watch S&H in action. 1 believe we need at least 2 days to make a meeting or convention in the name of S&H successful and interesting for everyone.

[Lyndy H]:

I know little about [Soul Mates] so I'm afraid I couldn't enlighten though I'm certain several fans will be able to do so. However, I would like to say the group is not a section of S&H fandom. It is a society formed by, and for fans of David Soul. As I've stated continuously, this is their prerogative. They have every right to celebrate D.S. in whichever way they choose. I have absolutely nothing against these people personally. On the contrary, I admire their loyalty. The only objection I raise is the fact that S&H l/zs are used as a 'platform' to discuss David's life and activities.

I'm not certain, Sara, whether or not you are a regular subscriber to S.O. and APB, so I can only assume you are familiar with the discussions and exchanges of opinions in these forums lately. Whatever - I certainly don't want to bore everyone by rehashing old 'differences', I believe everyone knows my opinions over the issue. I admit I'm about as subtle as a freight-train, but, like others, I am what I am.

I've always considered you to be an intelligent person, Sara, so I'm a little surprised you found my comments in previous issues of S.O. ambiguous and unjustifiable. Can you, then. Justify hate mail, slanderous comments made when I am not there to defend myself and pure hostility merely because I stated David was far from perfect - being, in fact, a human being?

How many times must I repeat: I admire Soul and Glaser, and respect their talents and craft, but Soul and Glaser are not the main reasons I'm involved in S&H fandom. It's the characters of Ken Hutchinson and David Starsky that continually fascinate me. Of course I realise Soul and Glaser breathed life into these characters and for that reason I shall be eternally grateful to the actors but we, the fans, have taken the characters beyond the original concept of the aired series, thus creating for me a far deeper interest in Starsky and Hutch than I ever could have developed for Soul and Glaser. I don't want to discuss the actors in a S&H forum and others share that opinion.

We're all agreed that certain information about Soul and Glaser's careers etc. is most welcome but S.&.H letterzines were formed solely for the purpose of discussing the S&H phenomena, not the actors themselves.

I've tried to introduce topics for discussion within the pages of this forum and encourage other subscribers to join in. I was pleased to read some of the replies in last issue. However, I was disappointed to read that out of twelve letters only seven contained references to S&H.

Sara asked me to define a true S&H fan. I would have thought it self-explanatory. However, I'll explain again. A S&H fan exactly that - a person whose interests lie in the show and the characters etc., the actual actors them selves should take second place.

[Sara S]:

Lyndy, if fandom means as much to you as you say it does, then I have to assume that you will want to do whatever is best to maintain its well-being. Having established that, I should like to put two points to you.

1. Since you appear to be so unhappy with *'Shoot Out', why don't you consider withdrawing your subscription? I think it highly unlikely that all the other people who buy SO and write to it will change their ways and attitudes to suit you - why should they? - and the exhortations and, to my mind, destructive criticism which you have sometimes voiced are perhaps as tiring for you to write as they certainly are for me to read. For example, I suspect that you will have given the thumbs down to my idea of one day meetings in this latest issue of the sine. To what purpose? idea was meant as a helpful suggestion, nothing more.

2. If you don't like the first option, would you consider writing a few letters to SO which are deliberately low-key and confined to comments about the series itself? Something along the lines of the excellent letter you wrote to the last issue of "Between Friends".

I think you will perhaps admit that your letters to SO have been somewhat controversial at times. Of course people are going to be distracted with discussing S&H when they are faced with letters such as yours which accuse them of 'lack of imagination' and lack of support, and of course they are going to want to put their own point of view. I admit to being distracted myself. Therefore, if you write purely about the series perhaps we can all concentrate on that.

If, on the other hand, your letters continue to be as aggressive as they have sometimes been in the past then despite the motives you claim as the reason for some of the unpleasant things you have said, I shall be forced to conclude that, un like many other people, you have no respect or liking for this fandom, for the series which began it, or the people involved in it.

Please accept, Lyndy, that I am, in my own way, also committed to this fandom and that I have not made the above comments and suggestions without some thought. I can only hope that you will do me the courtesy of considering what I have said.

[Lynn C]: Lyndy - Do you think that maybe people wouldn't need to write angry retaliations if they didn't feel they were being attacked? I have plenty of imagination, and the above statement was not an angry retaliation, just an observation. I understand and appreciate what you're aiming at in trying to stimulate and encourage people to contribute more to "Shootout," in fact, I agree with most of your comments, but I just don't feel insulting people is the right way to go about it. This is just an opinion, which I am entitled to - yes? I'd like to say that if any of my comments annoy or anger you, please write to me direct and then we won't take up valuable space in "Shootout" - okay?
[Lyndy H]:

You're right, Debra, I know very little about the group or about those involved, but you yourself have proved one can belong to a DS Club and S&H fandom without allowing your interests to clash. You have played a valid and productive part in S&H fandom, while only ever mentioning Soul and Glaser briefly in your letter. I only wish others would follow your lead. You are a shining example of the kind of fan S&H and DS fandom needs.

[Lyndy H]:

I was extremely surprised to read you know nothing of the rumours circulating in fandom recently - but I'll say no more on the subject. Let us hope all the unpleasantness is in the past and that we may all learn from it.

[Lyndy H]:

I'm working on that H/J vignette and will forward it to you a. s.a.p. Problem is, Johnny's so engrossed with Minnesota, I beep losing him - I have to keep him away from the Hutchinsons.

[Lyndy H]:

The future of S&H fandom. It's been discussed a lot in recent issues of the L/z's and it would appear most of us would like a weekend convention. Well, you'll get what you want. Tiger and I will make all the arrangements and you should know from past experience we won't let you down. However, with out your support the whole exercise would be pointless. Please support S&H fandom and register with us for "BULLET" - an anniversary convention celebrating ten years of S&H fandom. Each and everyone of you is welcome to celebrate a decade of Starsky and Hutch with us in Wales. Let's make it a weekend to remember. See our ad in this forum and drop us a line. We'll look forward to hearing from you - lots of you.

[Lynn C]:

I can't agree that APB holds the monopoly on healthy intelligent discussion. Recent issues have also contained their share of unrelated trivia and a great deal of space has been taken up in angry rebukes toward those of us who were not attending the last Con, instead of of discussion. Neither zine is inferior, they both have a place in fandom, so let's make the most of them.

[Ruth K]:

I consider myself "sensible" yet I am quite comfortable in a mostly happy letterzine like SHOUTOUT, something that fills a place in my life that is as needed as are any deep, intellectual discussions. APB is no more totally intelligent than any other letterzine, and I believe I have read them all. Sigh, The whole idea is to share the pleasure of S&H. Can't we just enjoy our differences and our different moods and take from each letterzine what we like and leave the rest to others? There is so much good in each of them and we need all the "meeting-places" we can get to share our lovie for S&H and each other.

[Tracey H]:

if you want to know any thing more, I'm willing to help. I agree totally that fandom shouldn't lower itself to the point of people conforming to other people's ideas - we'd end up with no fandom at all if we started that. You have good ideas about holding a one-day meeting/s.

You're right, most people who attended the Soul Mates weekend aren't involved in the Dobey Con side of fandom. As you know, my whole interest in S&H is due to David and Paul that's why I'm in Soul Mates and of course a lot of us are the same, that's not to say we don't love S&H, but David and Paul more.

[Regenia M]:

I would have to say that yes, while there are few too many zines being published, I think stories are still being written. I myself have submitted six to various zines which have yet to hit print. I know some of my pen pals write S&H because I've read some of their work, but as to whether they plan to submit it... There are a number of reasons for this. Some, like me, find themselves caught up in other series. For me — as you can tell from my stationery — it's MIAMI VICE, a show that greatly excites me because of its potential. While the chemistry between the two main characters is nowhere near that of S&H, we ARE getting to watch the partnership and friendship develop, getting to watch each faltering, step in the direction of a good, solid, trusting friendship. Needless to say, I am hooked...totally.

Then we have SIMON & SIMON. Ah, yes. Another exciting show packed with love and caring, humor, spats, loyalty.. .but most of all the love and caring. I have discovered quite a few other SH fans already in this fandom. There is, of course, no dissension among the ranks as far as S&S vs. S/S goes simply because the guys are brothers. (Also, there should never be any in MV either as we found out more or less where they, specifically Crockett, stood with regard to that in "Evan"). So no time is spent in arguing over "are they or aren't they?"

Mixed media is coning into its own. A number are finding themselves enjoying Hardcastle & McCormick, Riptide, A Team, Remington Steele, Scarecrow and Mrs. King, Magnum, Knight Rider (Lorraine Bartlett just put out an excellent KR zine).

And lastly (here I go again), I think SH writers are intimidated by the your editing standards. And for good reason, I still maintain (uh, yes, Tabby, that a part of my own peculiar speech pattern) SH editors, on the whole, are tougher than pro editors. Why? Because the majority of the SH stories that finally do hit print are much better edited than the majority of pro books I've read. Which is, of course, a compliment to ye SH editors...as well as to the writers.

[Regenia M]:

Maybe I failed to mention Soul & Glaser giggling like machine-guns when asked that particular question be

cause on the video I have there is HD Glaser at all. Just David and Dinah.' Hmm.
[Regenia M]:

I have to say one thing for you, Lyndy. Whether intentional or not, you make people think. And act.' Good for you. I don't always agree with you ... sometimes I downright burn, but at least my brain is in gear and not just setting there.' You remind me of Wally George who can get more people up in earns than Hitler.' But he achieves his aim: Get off yer duff and DO something!

[Terri B]:

One-day Cons? Sure. If they are within reach, I'll attend. BUT — let's be very clear what such a Con would be able to offer. What do attendees want from a Con? I'm not bothered about videos, personally, because I have a VTR myself. But there are still those who do not, and would relish the chance to sit and absorb episodes. And it is fun to watch in company. Panels — I like to listen to and be involved in discussions. Not just conversation, but discussions. If sane- one can expound on a relevant subject, then I'll happily sit and listen. I think, having experienced one-day Cons in other branches of fandom, that in fact more travelling is required —a London-based Con, for example, notched up a remarkable seven hours of travel (by PT) from Southampton — not something I'd recommend or like to do too often. A weekend, on the other hand, does give one time to relax and unwind before having to travel hone again.

So my vote goes to a fully-fledged Weekend Con (and it looks like we may be getting one this year after all.') but I'll make the effort to attend any gathering, within reason. Just tell me where and when.
[Terri B]:

As for those who wish to discuss S/H being asked to go and start their own zine — we were and we did. We also respect the SO editors' decision not to discuss the subject herein. Frankly I don't care if any of you have purple hair and two heads — if you enjoy SH, that's enough to make you a fan.... I dunno what a 'true' S&H fan is ~ but I think I'm one. What is a fan? That sounds like a soapy Patience Strong quote,..A fan is someone who bites her nails over COFFIN, no matter how many times she's seen it. She gets paranoid about the BBC taking the repeats off. She has been known to call out the TV or VTR repairman in hysteria because "it has to be fixed in time for S&H." She pounces on the mail in the morning, hoping for l/zs, zines, or letters from other fans. She spends a week's family allowance on a new zine, and doesn't regret it. She gets vitriolic in defence of a premise, belief, or aspect of fandom she cares deeply about. There are many ways to be a fan — maybe as many as there are fans. All any of us can say is 'I know what I like.'

[Terri B]:

The only news I can offer on SCALES OF JUSTICE is that the artwork is nearly finished, and when I know more (price, availability, etc.) I will let you know via the usual channels. The artwork, by the way, is plentiful and stunning...

I'm wondering about the shortage of new writers, too, Joan. Intimidation may be the answer — the standards are high. That could put some writers off. But I'd written 14 mediocre stories before I discovered MOJAVE CROSSING — and reading that just made me want to write more, and bring myself up to (or at least as close as I could get to) that standard. Nor did criticism put me off, and I got enough of that. I still wanted to write, and I wanted to share. I think there are quite a few who want to write, and are writing, but for one reason or an other don't want to share. That's our loss. I also think it's theirs, because it's possible to be too close to your writing and unable to see faults that someone else could pick up and help remove. I'm not talking a full-scale edit — but little things like British idiom, or errors in procedure. ... We can't force people to share what they write, we can only hope that someday they may feel confident and generous enough to do so.

After all, it's one way of 'paying back' all the enjoyment we get out of fandom. No one has to publish a zine, or share a poem, or story, or piece of art — but aren't we grateful that someone does?

Issue 12

Shootout 12 was published in October 1985 and contains 36 pages.

front cover of issue #12, Ruth Kurz
back cover of issue #12, Ruth Kurz

There was no official editorial in this issue. This is the second issue in which the letters were also apparently (possibly heavily) moderated to remove hurtful personal statements.

  • Consequences, the round robin installment by Brenda Kelsey has been stuck in the mail, and will hopefully be in the next issue
  • art by June Bushnell
  • some photos and small clippings about David Soul
  • Come Out, Come out, Wherever You Are, poem by Leah S
  • A Question of Trust, fiction by Sue-Anne Hartwick (12 pages)
  • Azrael, poem by Sue-Anne Hartwick
  • Hey Presto!, fiction by Sue Parkinson (3 pages)
  • illo by Tabby Davis
  • Personalities: Spotlight on Cathy Buckett
  • Can We Talk?, fiction by J.B. Birch (2 pages)

Sample Fan Comments: Issue 12

[Carol R]:

I was pleased to see the S&H discussions continuing in SO 11.

[Ruth K]:

As always I enjoy receiving SO, especially with one of my favorite posters on the cover. I still love remembering them "the way they were" as well as the way they ended fourth season an d even the way they are now, ten years later. All aspects of S&H appeal to me. And it is nice to discuss them with other smitten fans like myself. Sharing the pleasure. All of us see them in our own ways, but I have no trouble accepting the views of any fans of those lovely men with their caring relationship, and of the men who created them.

[Ruth K]:

Thanks much, Lyndy, for the story that follows DOUBLE PLAY. It is a logical reaction for Johnny to want to investigate and I like what you've done with it, leaving the Hutchinsons even more of a question to answer.

[Ruth K]:

I really can't blame fan writers much for having Starsky go back to active duty after SRev, just as he did after COFFIN, and Hutch after PLAGUE. It is part of the TV myth that a thousand rounds can be fired without hitting anyone, and cars can crash and roll without ever hurting anyone. Once in a great while I've seen someone walk away from such a crash, but the rest of the sights nobody wants to see. When I was four I saw my first bloody brains on a windshield and have never forgotten it. Unfortunately, I've seen a lot more since, but this is a happy zine and I won't inflict those horrors on anyone. But in light of the TV code, Starsky could go back to work after SRev. In light of reality — and we know this is far better than reality or why would we be writing and reading it — probably he would not.... Realism is either boring or horrifying, and would be hard to work into a weekly series without exaggerating the drama, frequency, and coincidences to the point of disbelief. Goes with the territory.

[Ruth K]:

I'll be at Paul Muni, wish I could shoot right over for Bullet, too, and all the one-day get-togethers planned to celebrate ten years of loving S&H together.

[Judy S]:

I don't wish to take sides and/or defend any body, but can't we keep the bitchiness/frankness out of l/zs and stick purely to fandom of S&H. I'm more interested in views about the fandom etc. than in what people think about each other. And leaving Soul and Glaser out of the discussion is, to me, like not having a tree at Christmas. They were the mainstays for getting fandom going.

Lynn C]:

I was a little surprised to hear that because Simon and Simon are brothers you thought it unlikely that S/S could exist in some fans' imaginations. I have read and enjoyed several short stories on that very premise. I was a little surprised myself at first, but could soon see why S/S fans could see this special relationship between the two brothers, though I'm not a fan of the show myself.

[Terri B]:

I waited this long to write this letter simply because the editors would have exercised their decision to 'edit' my comments had I put my thoughts on paper. I'm not that much calmer now, but I'm trying to see things in perspective. Bear with me. S&H, after all, is not my reason for living, and I can get by very well without fandom. So what do I care if the essence of SH, of the unique and wonderful enjoyment, is gradually slipping away? I do care. I think Linda was right last time with that John Denver quote. Love is the core of SH, and should be the core of SH fandom. Such things as 'banning, blacklisting, and bigotry' should have no place in it. That's my opinion. I'd like to hear from anyone who differs, okay?

I would also like to hear from anyone who might like to attend a S&H get-together, or who might be thinking of organising one. Because as Debra says, the years since DCon 5 are just too long without a chance to meet up and chat. Those of you who don't need that kind of fix have to be the lucky ones — me, I can't get enough. Ask anyone who's visited with me...

[Terri B]:

Thank you for that pat on the back re RUE WITH A DIFFERENCE. It's one explanation for [the episode] DIADP, but only one. Personally, I enjoy discussing those 'missing scenes' from the aired episodes, and I think that if any fledgling writer wants to try filling in some of the gaps, that's a good way to start. Peeling out the characters, the way they think, act, speak, is one of the hardest parts of writing fanfic — it isn't enough to be a good writer, it's necessary to get in side these two men. This is often where Brit writers make elementary errors, and where U.S. help is invaluable.'

[Terri B]:

I think you're bending over backwards to excuse that Hutchinson mean streak by saying that he was only doing what he did [in the episode "Starsky vs Hutch"] to show Starsk the error of his ways. I've watched that show with a variety of different people, some of who are dedicated Hutch-fans, and no one can excuse that man's crass behaviour.' How about breaking it to him gently? Or was that what he was trying to do when he strolled out of the bedroom tucking in his shirt? Nooooo. That was calculated cruelty, and it's proof of the strength of their friendship that Starsky ever spoke to him again.

[Terri B]:

News on SCALES OF JUSTICE ~ I'm told that Connie and Jan hope to have it ready in time for the Paul Muni Special. If you want a copy and you haven't ordered either through Jan or through me, please get your order in NOW. There'll be a very limited run, and this is one sine that is sure to sell out fast. SAE will get you up-to-date information, SAE and deposit will reserve you a copy. Don't prevaricate.

[Terri B]:

I'd like to say one final thing, and I hope our editors will do me the courtesy of printing it — Lyndy, you did your best. You tried, you went more than halfway. No one can lay blame at your door — so don't give upon us? You have contributed more than a little to fandom yourself, and if you've tended to speak out or tread on a few toes, Just remember that without leaven in the lump, the dough don't rise. Wouldn't it be a dull old world if we all agreed about everything IDIC, my friends — Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combination. It might originally be a TREK motto, but it does pretty good for S&H, too.

[Sandra J. F]:

I've decided to surface again, folks.' Unfortunately, I don't have a lot to say, but have enjoyed past issues of S.O - art work, poetry. Consequences, etc. ..You all had so much to say this time (S.O.ll) pleasant or unpleasant. It's good to read l/z's without feeling angry or incensed for a change - I'm sure we all need that feeling. I suspect some did feel angry however. I have found the best way around it is to be diplomatic, and forget it, hard as it may be.

[Sandra J. F]:

Are you still in the land of the living, Sue-Anne? Guess you must be since you contribute such good poetry. I've not heard from you since Xmas, despite my writing twice this year. Did I offend you, or something? I would like an explanation of why you've suddenly stopped writing "out of the blue". I did enjoy receiving your letters.

[Linda M]:

With regard to the / potential in the series, I know that quite a few of fandom's writers didn't actually see it in the series but wrote imaginative stories from their own minds, how it could be.

[Linda M]:

I agree with you about the enjoyment of VTR's at Cons. And even if you're too nervous to get in a long confab with someone, lots of asides and quips are exchanged while a tape is running.

[Debra W]:

Having been at the get-together in London, I have to say that I do think one-day meetings can be very 'gratifying'. I realise not everyone can get to London; but I see no reason why those meetings (one-day ones, that is) couldn't be held in other parts of the country, wherever there is interest and someone to act as an organiser. It all depends on what people want, of course. But we do need Cons, and. I for one am sorry that it seems there are still people who don't feel they can support them. The one-day meetings were never intended to take the place of Cons - really, I believe fandom would benefit if we could have both. Perhaps smaller, local meetings throughout the year and one more central Con for all to attend? What do others think?... Maybe we shouldn't call them 'one-day Cons' - maybe 'get-togethers' (which is really what they are, anyway) is a better description.

[Debra W]:

Must admit, I was a little surprised to see you calling me "a shining example [of a "good fan"]" Do you want the fiver in cash, or will you take a cheque?!! Seriously, without wanting to sound immodest, it's nice to be appreciated in that way.

Issue 13

Shootout 13 was published in January 1986?

Issue 14

Shootout 14 was published in April 1986?

References

  1. ^ from a letter of comment in APB #35
  2. ^ from "Shootout" #6
  3. ^ Sounds like that old joke: "Boy, the food at this place is really terrible." The other one says, "Yeah, I know; and such small portions."