Voice of the Imagi-Nation
| Zine | |
|---|---|
| Title: | Voice of the Imagi-Nation (VOM/VotIN) |
| Publisher: | Morojo, Forrest J. Ackerman |
| Editor(s): | Morojo, Forrest J. Ackerman |
| Type: | Letterzine |
| Date(s): | 1939 – 1947 |
| Medium: | |
| Fandom: | Science Fiction |
| Language: | English |
| External Links: | https://fanac.org/fanzines/VOM/ |
| Click here for related articles on Fanlore. | |
Voice of the Imagi-Nation was a Los Angeles-based letterzine published 1939-1947. It had 50 issues including three more special editions. The abbreviation VOM referred not to Le Vombiteur, but to Voice of the Imagi-Nation, which had begun as a letter column in Imagination!, nicknamed Madge: hence, Voice of Madge.[1]
Readers and contributors were sometimes called VOMettes and similar names. Some contributors and letter-writers tried to imitate Ackerman's unique jargon, which they called Ackermanese, Ackermanisms, Ackese, and so on.
Printing
At first, Voice of the Imagi-Nation was formatted using what Ackerman called "nonstoparafng" (among other spellings), a.k.a. "non-stop paragraphing". Instead of indentations, paragraphs within the same letter were separated using characters like ~~ or ' '. At least one other fanzine, Le Vombiteur, used the same formatting in its honor. VoM eventually introduced paragraphing around 1944.
Voice of the Imagi-Nation was printed in green ink. "When do we get black ink?" asked Ray J. Sinkiewicz in issue 14, writing as Rajocz."If green ink costs more, why not use black ink and reduce the expenses?"
The editors replied:
Femme friends of Ellay S. Effess' Mimi O'Graf will continue to come to U drest in green. Recently raised at a meeting of the imagi-natives of Shangri-LA was the question of an ink change but retention of the now-traditional color was voted so verdant will remain your Voice, Polaris, Novacious, Shangri-LA, Damn Thing, etc. FMZ Digest, Specula & other Astra Pubs are brot out in black because publisht on a privately ownd machine.Voice of the Imagi-Nation, issue 14 page 5 (May 1941)
About
In one fanmag-- Dick Wilson, "Trudy" Hemken, Paul Freehafer, "Doc" Lowndes, Louis Kuslan, Sam Moskowitz, Elmer Perdue, Forry Ackerman, Mark Reinsberg, Morojo, Ray Pauley, Julius Unger, CSYoud, Fritz Leiber, N Gilbert Dancy, Everett F Bleiler, Alan P Roberts, Thos Hinmon, Dave McLLwain, J Chapman Miske, Allen Glasser! THE VOICE OF THE IMAGINATION. Forum of Fandom...opinions, inquirys, explanations, informations, indignations, amuzations...all for a dime, 10c, the t part of a d!Early advertisement in Ad Astra volume 4, November 1939
"Voice of the Imagi-Nation", a magazine of letters to the editors, fills a needed place in the fan-field. It does not over-fill it, however, because the Journal appears but quarterly and, to be timely, such a magazine should appear at least monthly. However, Madge-Voice is not a crusadeur*does [sic] not suffer too much from infrequent publication.*and Its [sic] editors have expressed themselves firmly upon such occasions as when firmness and decision in defense and support of democratic [principles was] required. For the rest of the time they have contented themselves with being charming people and inveigling others into being likewise. Editors: Morojo and Fojak.Robert A. W. Lowndes in Scientifan issue 2 page 7 (January 1940)
VOM is highly satisfactory. The only really serious drawback is to be found in the attempt of some of the contributors to out-do '4SJ' (or '4E' or 'Fojak' etc., ad inf.) in the misapplication of the rules of phonetics to our uniquely ridiculous English orthography. (I nerli s'kumd 2 that insidyus dzeez, mselfl)Judging from this one (April) issue, VOM does not take sides (at least, very strongly) in the super-silly fan feuds which are so prevalent in the East. Bravissimo! At one time these feuds slopped over into the reader's departments of all the pro fiction mags. Consequently, for about two years, I didn't read a single letter in any mag. Then, in glancing through a copy of Astounding, I was pleasantly surprized to find no feud letters.(Did the editors ban them?) (Guess they just died a natural death, like the—er, uh, guess they just died a natural death...) I found the same thing to be true of other mags, and naively concluded that feuds no longer raged .What a sap I was! Shortly after some of my own letters wore published in some of the pro mags, I was struck by a mild barrage of sample copies of fan publications. My artless dream of a feudless fandom was rudely shattered—prontísimo y completamente.... I'm enclosing sixty cents for a year's subscription to VOM—but, if I find later that it is really just the 'house organ’ of some selfcentered group, I emphatically promise to demand my money back!
Last VoM rec'd and now I can definately say—'She ain't what she used to be!' Take a look at Nos. 2, 3,4,5&6 and compare with the last few issues. No, Fojak, my humble advice is—go back quarterly. ...In moderation, 4sjargon is OK, but when G. B. Thompon, Sienkiewicz and others start, well,.. Too much of anything is undesirable.Letter from Vol Moseworth, issue 11, page 8 (January 1941)
I sadly deplore the great lack of a satisfying quality in the contents of VoM lately; and all one needs to do is but glance at some of the other letters in recent issues to find that the writers are also beginning to entertain the same sneaking suspicions. What have you lost? I believe you have lost a frame of mind, a sense of responsibility and duty regarding the magazine. A frame of mind, used when making up an issue, is what appears as 'personality' in the finished product. VoM seems to have lost her mind and is rapidly forgetting her frame.Letter from Bob Tucker, issue 12 page 4 (March 1942)
Dear Editor Ackerman:The oft-repeated statement that VOM is to all intents and purposes a mirror of fandom, and that all fans are welcome in its pages, leads me to resume my letter-to-Vom habit. #32 is certainly ample cause in itself for me to write; while definitely not perfect, it is so great an improvement over previous issues that I cannot resist complimenting you.
Speer's remarks on the editorial policy of VOM are generally sound. If you insist on a high standard of both thought and expression from both artists and fans, you are bound to improve the magazine. You wish to mirror fandom; very well, fandom at its best is so far short of ideal that it is certainly not flattering either to fandom or to individual fans to mirror what often is its worst side. As Vom is now, it is no honor to appear therein; even if one does make a sincere effort at worthwhile thought expressed in a worthwhile manner, his letter is crowded in with a bunch of cheaply expressed and crude half-thoughts from slipshod individuals....
Another thing about the magazine is the regrettable fact that despite your obviously sincere efforts, it does not reflect a true image of fandom. While a discussionzine such as this will naturally tend to revolve around certain points (Tigrina, nudes, religion—to name three topics which have been rehashed ad nauseum), to make it a true mirror you will have to include material which covers all topics in which fans are interested.... I do believe, however, that you unconsciously encourage a great deal of silly ramblings and junk simply through a failure to wield a strong editorial eraser.
Francis Laney in VoM, issue 34 pg. 4 (1944)
WALTER ROOSTER, alias Liebscher, the Freak of Battle Creek, résumés the swap-happy days of the Nth Slanvention. But, first, he wants to mention; Congrats on the resurrected VOM. You are hitting your old stride again, rather your writers are hitting their old stride. Thank Ghu for the absence of nudes and the decline of religious argument, which never gets anywhere fast. Commendations also for the regularity of VOM. My pet peeve of late is the flash-in-the-panzines that 'hit the stands' for one or two issues, products of the editors over-exuberance, then disappear completely. So, all hail VOM on its anniversary.Walt Liebscher, letter to the editor in Issue 37 (December 1944)
Debates on the Nature of Fandom
In 1942 and 1943, a debate began on the nature of fans and fandom--whether fandom was significant, whether science fiction fans had the power to change the world, and so on.
Here's where Mr Gibson and I really agree. The guy can really do some straight thinking at times. Of course fandom means something in the world. Even though fans disagree strongly on every subject in the books ... so what ? That's what we want, A group who do a little independent thinking about the future. Don’t complain because the number is too small.No age has an overwhelming number of thinkers. Doesn't take much yeast to leaven the bread. No, I don’t think fandom will suddenly ever take over the reins of power and authority. That is neither necessary nor practical. I doubt if fandom could ever poll a large enough number of adherants for such action. And it is to be remembered that fandom is not of one mind. We look little to fanorganizations for any influence on the world. The influence of a few independent and far-seeing minds, no matter what their difference, is fandom’s gift to Terra Futura.
Jimmy Kepner: Getting away from The One Tract Mind. VoM issue 27 pg. 4 (Sept. 1943)
It is obvious that the child of slans will be a child with tremendous brain-power and intelluctual capacity, since it will have a background of scholastic ability and science. After the war, colleges will be full to overflowing, and the children of these college students will be few. The simple explanation of that is the sickening destruction now going on. Babies have increased during the war----they always do, but after the war, no one will have the heart or inclination to bring into a world as broken as this a soul and teach it to think. When the world has regained its balance, the birthrate will go up in cold, scientific waves. Children willl lay the foundation of the coming civilization, which will not miss far the beautiful tchinical cities and all the accrements of science-fiction.Barbara Bovard: Our slan-children. VoM issue 27 pg. 6 (Sept. 1943)
The subject seems to come up quite often as to just what fanzies should discuss and as to the Purpose of fandom itself. I think that both of those questions snould be left up to the individual fan and the individual fan editor. Fandom is ( supposedly) made up of a group of persons who are interested in Science, and in Science Fiction and Fantasy. I don't think that any subjects should be barred which in any way pertain to Science, the Future, Fantasy (in general) or to the peculiar activities of Fandom itself. Nor do I feel that any organization or magazine should attempt or claim to be representative of fandom as a whole, if it in any way would exclude persons or subjects or subjects of discussion because of any narrow definitions of fandom's aims.And the subjects I mentioned above could and should be stretched to include almost any topic that might arise. Suppose that certain fans are not interested in sociological discussion. So what ? Does that mean that because of one group, even if it should be a majority, the discussions should be censored? Fandom must be free. And it can hardly be said that Sociology has no bearing on Science or on the Future, In fact I think it one of the most important factors. Also, I feel that technical questions should return somewhat to fandom's forum.
Jimmy Kepner: Use your Nude-al. VoM issue 27 pg. 10 (Sept. 1943)
The world needs fandom duz it? The world has never even heard of fandom much less needs it. There was no fandom B 4 ,1930 and the world seems to have got around OK up 2 then without fandom. All fandom consists of is a bunch of 14 year old jerks; no one prominent......... Im not running myself down 4 I am not a fan, never was and never will be. I get fanmags 4 the same reason I get sports mags; for relaxation & enjoyment. Down with Gibson and up with technocracy.H. Loren Sinn: A cunning(ham) carbon copy. VoM issue 27 pg. 11 (Sept. 1943)
Actifandom is losing the one essential which makes it the greatest, closest-knit organization, but it has developed something which makes me very, very glad. It has developed sudden maturity, sudden realization that in its hands lies the future. Believe me, I'm not talking slush or tripe. You’ve got to believe in the future! I'm glad to see the sudden rows over science fiction's aim in this hodge-podge of existence....You run a half-dozen pubs, you write letters to everyone under the sun who has half a say in actifandom, you collect books, magazines, pictures, originals, dust, dirt and a slothfulness that is disgraceful. This, then, is the fan of the future, the one who will hold the world together when dawn comes. This man—or rare woman—with vituperative tongue, watery muscles and an education gained from thud and blunder stories of fantasy sets himself up to be the standard for the future. He has but one aim in life—to become as well-known as the other fan, to get his stories published, spill whatever little horse-sense he had and get into the swing of things.
Get into what swing, for the love of future? Show me, anywhere, what is being done to better the conditions of actifandom and I'll shut up for good and go home... I agree with the fellow who said we are not geniuses or even extra smart, but I’ll add this: Actifandom, working together, could accomplish more by just acting together than could one detachment of US Leathernecks, and brother, that’s going some! Our brains are no better than any other person’s on this dusty globe, but we have the power to think. You have proven that in your unrest, your mutterings, fruitless tho they are. You do think; you think harder and longer than any other type of human being today. But your thinking is so discolored with what you are going to do to the other fellows' theories that you can’t see you are putting up your own obstacles.
Actifans are terribly conceited. We won’t attempt to deny it, least of all me! Therein lies our trouble.... Now you can roar and rant about the extremists in individuality all you like, but you will admit in the end that no one exhibits less self-control than an actifan. Regrettably, we build from the top down instead of from the bottom up. If there are no repercussions from this, then I’ll know I have failed miserably in attempting to start the beginning. If there are results, good, bad, but Heaven forbid indifferent, then I'll know that someone, somewhere, is making the same start up toward the future that we have read about, written about, but have never done anything about. I'll accept the storm of results, whatever they may be, but please, let there be results.
Barbara Brovard: A broadside chat. VoM issue 27 pg. 13 (Sept. 1943)
At the end of issue 27, editors Ackerman and Morojo reprinted their own condensed and Ackermanese version of Bring Up a Child, a 1938 article by author Festus Pragnell, first printed in English fanmag Tomorrow:
My mother, & my grandmother more so, were intensely religious. All forms of amusement were to them inventions of the devil, practically every day for about 6 mos. when I was 10 yrs. old my grandmother woud make me stand up bfor her while she shouted & raved at me with the most insane excitement about the Lord & the Devil, the necessity of being "Saved", everlasting fire & torment... I was a sensitive child & I was terrifyd by this: My mind damaged to an extent from which I noe it can never properly recover. Such was a religious upbringing.Today we are slowly discarding seudo-religion for science in the training of children, & such terror as I sufferd is seldom the lot of any child today.
But such things do an enormous amount of damage to the minds of young & growing children; I am a "peculiar" fellow, difrent in my ways & outlook from others I meet, & I noe it is bcuz at the bottom I am not quite sane; I was driven mad by that fiendish woman, & by her dawter, my mother. My ways, my peculiaritys, made me a misfit. I succeeded at nothing & made enemys everywhere. My life in the workaday world became unbearable. I rote my first science fiction story; "The Essence of Life". That I can do good work I noe; I put on paper the dreams & fancys of my childhood, in which I sought to escape from the horrible terrors of my real life....
I REGARD SCIENCE FICTION AS A HOLY CRUSADE TO SPREAD SCIENTIFIC IDEAS & TO SAVE OTHER CHILDREN FROM THE HELL I SUFFERD.
VoM issue 27 pg. 15. (Sept. 1943)
I get a kick out of these guys that every so often talk about the ro-awakening of fan interest in vital subjects. Look: The Michelists temporarily gave up in 1938, but Lowndes and the others kept plugging it into 1939. The term was officially abandoned in 1939, but the CPASF didn't dissolve until early '40. Meanwhile, Technocracy had appeared early in 1939. In 1940 came the Pro-Scientists. You remember how all thru '40 and '41 we argued about the War and other things. Also in 1941 began the slan idea, and the seriousness of the quasi-neo-Michelists in VoM, and discussions of labor unions and such things in the FAPA. By 1942, to which Ericop refers, these latter three were simply going fuller blast. Whence then this idea that there's been a hiatus in the stream of serious stf thought?Jack Speer in VoM, issue 29 pg. 5 (Jan. 1944)
MacDonald's remarks on fandom emerging from the science-fiction stage don't entirely jell with me. While I’ll be the first to grant that a fan (or anyone else) should have a broad variety of mental interests, and not limit himself to any one field of human thought or endeavor, I fail to see the good in "emerging" from stf. Stf and its allied fields are the one great thing about fandom which truly appeals to me. Without stf, fandom would be a group of quite young, rather serious young people with radical ideas and a burning urge to express themselves. Certainly a futile bunch, except insofar as what personal satisfaction they might get. With stf, the picture changes. A detached point of view will show one that stf and its reading and collecting are futile as hell—but then, may I inquire WHAT HUMAN ENDEAVOR IS NOT AS FUTILE AS HELL??? For the extraordinary individual, for the person who differs in one iota from the common herd, life is a futile and pointless misery; made bearable only by the cushioning effects of books, music, art, and perhaps alcohol. With stf, now, there is a chance for some satisfaction. There is a definite feeling of accomplishment in filling out some rare old magazine file, or in picking up some rare book.Milty's letter on the purpose of fandom STINKS. WHY must fandom have a purpose anyway? Fans are fans because they enjoy it—-any other reason is highly superfluous, and smacks of Horatio Alger and the Junior Chamber of Commerce.... What I started to say, fandom NEEDS no high and mighty purpose. We enjoy fan activities--get our kicks therefrom—what more justification does the field need? Want to argue with me, Milty?
Francis Laney in VoM, issue 29 pg. 8 (Jan. 1944)
Yeah, why does fnadom have to have a purpose? Not that I advocate a philosophy of complete hedonism, but when a group of people with widely differing interests, environments, etc—and with only one thing in common—begins to have a concrete goal it advocates, something is psychologically abnormal; probably that curious catalyzing action known as mob psychology. God--excuse me—Ghu save us from the realistic Deglers!Ray Karden in VoM, issue 30 pg. 3 (March. 1944)
The conclusions reached by Lynn Bridges and I at the Second World Conference at Live Oak tend toward supporting this- claim, but I still believe that a science fiction fan is something more than an average person with a leaning toward Flash Gordon. It is very hard to divide "fans" from "nonfans", that is, intellectually speaking, and not bringing up whether the non-fan collects or corresponds, I believe that all of the fans exibit certain mental traits or tendencies, or still better, attitudes. One of the best editorials I have ever read in my years as a stf addict was Hornig's "In Tune With the Infinite" which I believe appeared in an early Science Fiction. That editorial certainly crystallized some sort of differentation between the science-fiction reader, and the ordinary Joe who cares not for such things.Also to be praised is Donald Wollheim's fine comments on the Cosmian League, sponsored a few years ago by Cosmic Stories. Anyway, if any of the index-minded people want to look up these two editorials they’ll get a better idea of what I think constitutes a fan....
Permit me to align myself with Forry and Larry in affirming my eternal loyalty to stf and fandom. May I never stop being a Cosworm and become a G.I. Joe, or something. I challenge the judgment of fandom’s superminds, Speer and Chauvenet, to the effect that Forry and others who do not outgrow fandom arc cases of arrested development. I agree with Warner that fandom is an infinitely small portion of the cosmos, but that small portion gives me satisfaction and the opportunity to produce creative material for minds similar to my own, so why should I desert it for other, wider spheres where I am a nobody, where few people think as I do, and where I do not feel that what talents I have are appreciated? For cases of arrested development, speaking on a broader sense, look at the human race, its vague, semi-pious, hypocritical devotion to religion, with the tremendous majority of the people really engrossed only in strictly local affairs, local gossip, and personal success, with no thought of contributing to posterity. Then appraise the sound cultural background of fandom, the interest in music, art, philosophy, science, etc, and tell me just who needs to grow out of an immature state of race prejudices, religious prejudices, oh, all sorts of prejudices, misconceptions, and narrow-minded perspectives.
Raym Washington in VoM, issue 33 pp. 4-5 (June 1944)
The discussions on religion are dragging out too long without any new ideas.I join those protesting against the nudes. They make it impossible for me to show VoM to anybody who might be interested in the discussions. I don’t like to make the explanation that the editor has some sort of mania for nudes, and insists on publishing them without regard to their connection with the rest of the mag. Don't you see that its this kind of stubbornness which has caused the trouble in the LASFS? Count the letters for nudes and against nudes and draw some conclusions.
Milton A. Rothman in VoM, issue 33 pg. 6 (June 1944)
Fandom has completed another cycle of purpose-seeking and is back to the matters of mags & maidens, fanews & fanudes, etc.... This ish was full of...echoes...fandom leading mankind...nudes...religion. Fans must someday make for themselves a secret haven where they can escape from mankind into an environment of their liking... this desire for some ideal "dreamworld" seems to come spasmodically. Perhaps if we had some sort of resort, like a "Martian city" in the desert or an outpost of an intergalactic civilization in some isolated area, which we constructed in lieu of the real thing, we might have something. That might possibly be just the sort of mental institution we need, if you want to take it that way. Or maybe the essential idea of this is good, if it were only presented in a different aspect.Joe Gibson in VoM, issue 33 pg. 9 (June 1944)