Tunneltalk/Issue v.1 n.12
Tunneltalk is a Beauty and the Beast (TV) letterzine edited by Barbara Storey, Victoria Clark and Sharon Himmanen.
There were 17 issues.
This zine began after the letterzine Passages ended.
From the August 1991 issue: "This publication is intended as an outlet for fans; it will not be sent to either Witt-Thomas or Republic, or anyone else connected with the show, so don't be afraid to say your piece."
v.1 n.12
Tunneltalk v.1 n.12 was published in February 1991 and contains 65 pages. It contains the short fiction by Ellie Johnson called "An Incident in 1986... To Those Who Can Hear the Mermaids."
- there are several comments, including those from the the author, of Black Cover, see that page
- an installment of Lights of Winterfest
- a review The Closet Beast and Beyond, see that page
- a review Promises to Keep, see that zine
- a review of When She Comes Home, see that zine
- a review of Possibilities #1, see that page
- a review of Love Bade Me Welcome, see that zine
The letterzine has a long one-page supplement from the editor asking for forgiveness on the lateness of the issue, and promises others will not be late. She implores fans not to give up on Tunneltalk in anger as the letterzine is not about her and errors, but is part of a bigger community: "But don't take it out on TT by giving up on it, please. TT is much more than just me; it belongs to all of you who have made it a success this past year, who have helped make it a safe place in B&TB fandom, a place where every voice has a right to be heard."
v.1 n.12: Excerpts from the Letters
[Barbara S]: I've been wanting to answer some questions I've been hearing about the May con in New York. Please be aware that this Is not MY convention — it is Creation's convention, and they have, very graciously, asked me to help them with the programming--which includes panels, art auction, zine reading room, trivia, a video contest, costume call and a few other things, I have nothingto do with hiring the guests who will be appearing at this convention; that is Creation's province, and since it is their organization, that is as it should be. They told me who they were planning on asking, and I made suggestions to them (specifically, Linda & Shelly), but the decisions were theirs. If you have any questions about any of those guests, I can only recommend that you mention them to Creation. My hope is that you will all enjoy the activities that are planned for that weekend, and that I will see you there. Did I mention that Jane Freeman has created a new miniature B&TB room—her greatest yet, believe me! -- that will be displayed at the May con? See you there!
[Barbara S]: Lastly, it appears that we may have a very serious problem in our fandom. Two people who produce zines have recently received "cease and desist" letters from Republic Pictures, telling them that they must stop "any further manufacture, distribution, sale, advertisement, or offer for sale of any product or merchandise based on or depicting the show BEAUTY AND THE BEAST, its characters, theme, or any of its story lines" or they (Republic) would "take any and all appropriate legal action required." When one of these fans called Republic and asked why they were being singled out, they were told that all fans producing merchandise of any kind would be receiving letters as well. It seems that CarolCo has experienced sagging sales lately, and are sure that zines are the cause of their loss of revenue — so they have asked Republic to stop all such activity. See the rest of this letter at The Beauty and the Beast Cease and Desist Letters.
[Sharon W]: Before I get into "it," I just want to say this. We all have different tastes in food and no one gets condemned or put down for it. I hate avocados, mushrooms, and strawberries, which are usually on the top fifty of most people's lists. The same goes for art. If you're a traditionalist, you don't call someone who likes progressive modern art names, you just don't share their tastes, right? Can't we in fandom extend the same graciousness? After all, we have the ideals of the tunnels as our models in this. If our fandom can't do it, then things have gotten pretty sad indeed. I also want to say to Sherry that some people actually liked third season. You honestly felt that CBS, Koslow & Co. did it to somehow hurt the fans. Even though I felt the third season was a major mistake in many respects, I don't feel that Mr. Koslow was out to hurt us. As we have heard from Linda Campanel1i and Shelly Moore, the men on the writing team just could not see it. They were really jazzed about what they were doing. They thought they were right, George R.R. Martin still does; just read his interviews in Starlog recently.
[Sharon W]:Yes, Diana and Catherine are two different women. One was Vincent's love, the other just wished she was. No, I'm not being cruel, but it was obvious from the glances she gave Vincent and her dream that she, like the majority of the females who will read this, had it bad for the big furry guy. Who could blame her? Besides, she was created to be the ultimate Mary Sue character, to be our surrogate in the show. It's just too bad that one character doesn't exactly fit all of us. I found it a million times easier to relate to Catherine than to Diana. Why? Well, perhaps because the way Diana was portrayed, she was very Spock-like, not easily showing emotions (which is the very reason some of you can sympathize with her ).
Patty asked if Catherine has to be Vincent's only love. Yes. For me it is totally unbelievable, out of character, and against all we were lead to believe in the classic seasons to think Vincent could fall in love again. From what I've learned, Perlman felt the same way. Would Romeo go chasing the next skirt that came along? Would Tristan? Lancelot? I'm sorry, but when you have a great love, one beyond anything anyone else has ever had because of the special bond, there's no second love. Not that Vincent showed any interest in Diana other than as a friend. I think insinuating that he has is an insult to both of them.
[Linda M]:Having been a subscriber from conception I've read, reviewed, disagreed with, agreed with, mulled over, and generally enjoyed each letter in every issue. Now, I'm hoping that your open forum will allow me to speak, and Heaven knows I can count on one hand the number of LOCs I've written to ANY zine.
#1 attended Tunnel Con and came back home with the devout belief that Fandom Would Survive. Being basically an unknown face in fandom, I'm usually content to sit back and do my writing, keeping in contact with mostly editors and the occasional brave penpal. And so it was with great anticipation that I sent in my money to attend South of Oz in June of 1991.
Now, I have been bombarded with the most atrocious of news, to which I called several of my friends (some of whom are also my editors) to either confirm or deny these rumors. Those rumors are that South of Oz is going to be a Third Season Con. — Not true.
South of Oz will basically be the same as Beauty and the Beast con)|TunnelCon. TunnelCon had third season material present, but that did not make it a third season con — although third season material was not as prevalent then as it is now be cause the season was still unexplored (and painful) territory. Yet since then, nearly (if not) every editor has written or included a third season story in a zine, even if its plot was "she's not dead/Catherine comes back."
All I know for sure is that this con is going to be another way for fans to show their love and support for this wonderful show, which promotes kindness, generosity, and tolerance. It'll give us a chance to collect autographs from actors who've never attended a con before, and allow us to renew those friendships and acquaintances that were born at Tunnelcon. (Remember how good you felt?) I'm supporting South of Oz. And if you decide to go, too, stop me and say "Hi!" We'll have a ton of fun! (Once again—an editor's note! It seems the best way to immediately answer certain questions or comments. First of all, Linda, I think we have to admit that people have different definitions of 'third season' content, in zines or cons. To you, it seems to mean anything that has anything to do with the third season of B&TB, positive or negative. To many others, a 'third season' con or zine is one that favors the third season—or B&TB in any form—at the expense of the first two. To those people, both of the conventions you mention qualify as "third season," since they prominently feature(d) and honor(ed) members of the fan community who have advocated acceptance of the third season as a criteria of being a true fan of B&TB. We are not anxious to travel to an event where we are likely to be labeled with the tiresome and ridiculous label of 'naysayer' or to be blamed for the demise of B&TB by those who are desperate to preserve Vincent pat any cost, even Catherine's life or Vincent's own integrity. I don't believe I would have 'a ton of fun' at such an event. Secondly, I would like to address the issue of duplicate personal statement letters to letterzines, something that seems to be epidemic lately. When you submit a letter to several publications, you should let all editors concerned know that you are doing this. I only discovered that your letter, Linda, was also in OUT...IN by accident. I'm afraid also that subscribers will start to get annoyed at paying for two or three different letterzines and finding the same material repeated in each one. We have received some other duplicate material (which we were advised of by the writer) concerning the issue of the zine Black Cover, which we are going to print, but after that, we would like to declare a moratorium on duplicate personal statements. What do the rest of our subscribers think?)
[Ellie J]: I'm told [The Family Channel which was re-airing Beauty and the Beast] afraid of bestiality. Well, on their commercials they show a man kissing a horse (The Black Stallion) and a boy kissing a dog (Rin Tin Tin). Now why isn't that bestiality?
[Kathryn C]: Do any of the producers or writers for B&TB ever read fanzines? (Ed: Yes, Kathryn, they have read several of them — B.) Sometimes I think they should.
[Laura J]:I just had to write a LOC about the treatment the fans of B&TB have been getting from the Family Channel. Can you believe it—we have been lied to again. The Family Channel said that they knew there were millions of loyal fans of B&TB — fans that would and work at a mundane job to pay the bills, be so happy to have the show back on television. They acted like they knew how much we cared for this wonderful series, and they said they wouldn't edit the episodes. Well, so much for that promise. After viewing the first two hours on September 7, I was so upset. As if it wasn't bad enough to edit several scenes from the show, they also cut the scene from the pilot that had Carol telling Catherine who the men were who attacked both of them, and why they were attacked. I mean, wasn't that a major point in the plot? I watched the second set of reruns on September 21, and again there were several scenes missing. After the Family Channel said that they would show B&TB uncut, I find it strange that they would decide to do this. Didn't they think we would notice? I guess they're just like CBS, only interested in the "almighty dollar." I hate to think what they're going to do to the remaining episodes, and what scenes will be missing.
I was going to tape B&TB when it was aired on the Family Channel, because I don't have all the episodes. Now I'll have all the episodes, but they won't be complete--the way they were meant to be. That's really too bad. I'm sure many fans of the show were planning on starting or completing their collection of B&TB episodes. I hope when this series goes to other networks in syndication, these networks will understand that the reruns should be shown in their entirety.
[Carol]:The fan club I belong to is folding in a few months. They gave the reason, but I think it is partly because of losing hope. It made me sad to read this. We must always have hope. Our beautiful show will die if we don't keep fighting to bring back some movies.
Someone made a statement that it was just a show. It isn't just a show to me, and never will be. B&TB is the best show that has ever been on the screen, and has really touched me deeply. Let's all keep the faith.
[Ellie J]: I've begun receiving my fanzine orders in the mail. So far, I'm impressed by the quality, both of the writing and the printing. Seems like quite a departure from many Star Trek fanzines I remember. Is it just changing times and better technology, or do B&TB fans simply take more time and care to make their fanzines more appealing? (Ed: I hate to keep butting in, but I have to answer that question, as someone who has produced a ST zine since 1978—the former is true, not the latter. B&TB fiction is improving all the time, but it still hasn't achieved the level of excellence that ST zines have in 25 years—I believe it will happen, but it takes time, just as it did in ST fandom.—B.) The artwork is amazing, especially Beth Blighton's.
[Richard B. G]:I feel I must take issue with some of the points Beth Blighton made in her letter in TT #8.
I hold no brief for censorship in any form. I support Robert Mapplethorpe's right to make his photographs and I support Dennis Barrie's right to exhibit them.
Beth, however, does not seem to realize that the National Endowment for the Arts is, in itself, a form of censorship. Yes, the NEA sponsors many "dance troupes and community theaters around the country." But there are many, perhaps more, that are denied a government subsidy. Some art is deemed worthy of support, preservation, performance, exhibition or whatever. Some is not. "(And just who will be the genius who decides . . .)"?
Anyone who believes that "covering your body with baked beans" is art, is welcome to his belief. Further, he is welcome to practice it. I draw the line, however, at requiring the taxpayers to buy his baked beans. One man's art is another man's obscenity.
"I, for one, do not need anyone telling me what is right and proper entertainment for me or my family." Substitute the word "art" for "entertainment." I don't need the NEA to spend my money for me. I support the work of artists whose work pleases me by buying it, and, in one case, by marrying the artist. I have no reason to believe that the government is any wiser than I am and more than a few reasons to believe that it is not.
[snipped]
Beth thinks that "If we lose the NEA... galleries will close, artists of all types will not be able to find work. If we limit the NEA, then we will also limit the creativity of artists; each new idea will then be judged not on it's (sic) merits of originality and validity, but by someone else's moral and sexual standards."
Somehow I doubt it. I don't really expect Beth to stop producing her drawings because of the lack of a grant from the NEA. I don't expect Kathy Cox to close down Destiny Press because the NEA goes out of business. Will Cynthia Hatch cease writing and publishing because there was to support her?
Most artists must create as a sideline and work at a mundane job to pay the bills. A very few become so good at what they do that they can support themselves as artists. Quality will survive, schlock will not. Art comes from the heart, not from government subsidies .
[Caro H]:[regarding the recipes in a previous issue]: William's secret stores? Does William have secret supplies of goodies just for special people, or for himself? That whole idea bothers me, for it is so opposite the spirit of sharing and one-for-all that I perceive as existing Below. And the ingredients in those recipes! The money it would take to make two cups of that dip would buy hot dogs and bread to feed forty people! The price of nuts, cherries, and chocolate syrup for the other recipe would also make it prohibitive.
Now, I don't know about the rest of you, but the delightful things on page 26 are beyond my budget, and I have a job. Those are not recipes for poor people, or even lower middle class. These are the things you would make if you had some money to spend at the end of a paycheck. So I have decided that these are not things William really makes. These are his secret fantasies. These are what he would make if only someone would donate the right materials. These are what he longs to be able to provide for his people. As he stands there trying to make a cabbage soup which will appeal to people who have had to have cabbage soup three times already this week, he dreams of being able to whip up a Serpentine Dip. He probably has secret files of recipes of foods he plans to serve only once a year, at Winterfest, that being the only time the right ingredients are donated. His would be a tough job. How do you decide who gets something if only a small amount is donated? Milk goes to the kids, of course. He would like to make sure that older folks had softer foods or hot tea, that younger ones got all the vitamins a growing body needs, and there would be some instances, happening more often than he would like, in which he would not be able to pro vide what was needed. That is depressing, it drags you down.
[snipped]
Anyway, I suggest keeping the recipes and changing the title of the column, and I'd really like to see what recipes he could come up with for folks on limited budgets! (Ed: Caro — I'm sorry to disappoint you, but "William's Secret Stores" was not really intended to be a column; we just wanted to share the recipes that Ritch gave us with our readers. But, if you're interested in exploring life in the tunnels on a pragmatic basis — how does it run? — in a column-type format, I, for one, would be glad to read it. Not necessarily about food, but the tunnel culture and social structure . . . government, how responsibilities are handled, where do they get their power, etc. What does everyone else think? —Barbara)
[Sherry K]:As we watch Season One, we really see Catherine develop and change. I person ally can't think of another character on TV who did that. I love Vincent, (but) he never really changed (until the third season, when he became the Incredible Hulk). Vincent wasn't able to face his fears to the degree that Catherine did. I sometimes would feel a lot of frustration with Vincent, because he wasn't able to change, and face his own fear, to have a relationship with Catherine. Most people who are in love will do anything to make that relationship happen. I can appreciate that Vincent had a lot of old demons to exorcise—but it does get old after a while when Catherine looks at him with such love and longing and he doesn't do anything about it. I know that Vincent was inexperienced, but Catherine would have lovingly showed him the way, and expressed that desire with her patience toward him. I doubt if I would have been so patient. I'm afraid I would have said something like, "Either you want me or you don't— but you need to make up your mind."
Thank goodness for so many zines that show Vincent the way I wanted to see him. I highly recommend M. Sue Waugh's zines. There are three of them, and each one is wonderful. Sue also has the most unique cover art I have ever seen.
[Sharon McC]:I loved what [Marie H] had to say: ". . . we are sitting here wringing our hands and projecting the attitude to the producers (more people with money and power) that they have the right to produce anything they like and we will accept it. Well, I don't buy a laundry detergent that I don't want, and I will not meekly accept the remnants of a show that someone was rewritten into oblivion." Bravo, Marie! I will not accept anything they throw at me. I can think for myself and decide on what I want to spend my time and money. I choose to spend my time and money on Classic B&TB tapes, fanzines, and other merchandise. For me, B&TB IS Vincent and Catherine and their relationship.
I'm also happy that there is a legitimate arena to exchange ideas. TT serves a wonderful purpose in allowing us to air our opinions in a nonjudgmental forum. Thanks, Barbara, Vicky, and Sharon, for opening the lines of communication. True communication can ease tension between a divided fandom. Believe me, I know — my best friend loved Season Three (yes, we're still friends!)
[Adele S]: George Martin suggested in STARLOG that killing Gabriel with Catherine's gun brought the whole thing full circle. He also said that the only thing different about Season Three was Catherine. I am still at a loss to understand what it was that he saw in Seasons One and Two and then in Season Three—I don't think we saw the same show. What frightens me is that this seems to be the "party line" that he and Koslow are advancing. I still worry about what they will do with a film. A year later, and they still refuse to acknowledge our anger and disappointment. Ivory towers must be nice places to live.