
by John Boston
The May Amazing grabs the eye with an attractive cover by Jeff Jones that seems to depict some sort of scientific or communications satellite or platform against a bright yellow and orange background—somebody’s exploring the Sun? No matter, it looks good and should get some attention on crowded newsstands.

by Jeff Jones
This is—it says above the title—the “45th Anniversary Spectacular!” Well, not precisely. The calendrical blunder of several years ago means that this magazine that started with April 1926 no longer has issues in April. And the celebration is muted, though probably not for that reason. In past years anniversary issues have been all or mostly reprints. Fortunately, this issue merely devotes ten pages to a portfolio of reproductions of the covers of past anniversary issues, unimpressive in black and white. It’s pointless but innocuous, and takes the place of the usual “Famous Amazing Classic” reprint, mercifully given the quality of recent selections.
Ted White’s editorial consists of a commendably compact and lively history of Amazing, warts and all—or as he puts it in conclusion, “unvarnished.” It’s well worth reading, since the post-1930s history of the magazine has been much less hashed over than its earlier days (admittedly, for good reason).
In other non-fiction, the book reviews are back; this time it’s the fanzine reviews that are crowded out. Dick Lupoff takes on Niven’s Ringworld, asserting that Niven represents the Jules Verne tendency in SF rather than the H.G. Wells tendency, cataloging his virtues and limitations (both considerable), and concluding: “I'm glad that there's a Larry Niven around writing his particular brand of science fiction, but I'm really glad that there's only one of him.” (Just wait—or so I predict.) Alexei Panshin reviews Terry Carr’s second New Worlds of Fantasy anthology, noting that some of it is actually “soft science fiction,” too many are “shallow, gimmicked,” but plenty are worthwhile—either for their treatment of outre ideas or their depth of characterization “and a narrative I could sink vicariously into.” Here’s Lupoff again, praising Michael Moorcock’s Behold the Man, which he says has more to it than to the novella version that won a Nebula: “It is such a good book that it transcends the usual limitations of genre fiction, and one trembles in anticipation of the old couplet: ‘This can't be good, it's science fiction/This can't be science fiction, it's good.’” (The couplet is grossly misquoted.) The longest review is editor White on James Steranko’s The Steranko History of Comics, Volume One, which he describes as “an amazingly thorough job” despite its numerous errors. In particular, he credits Steranko with recognizing and chronicling the influence of the pulp magazines on comics.
And there is of course the letter column, less interesting than some, since more of it than usual is devoted to readers’ opinions of the stories. (Since my opinions are obviously correct, these are superfluous.) Most interesting in terms of the magazine’s production is White’s reply to a letter from Carl Glover, who had previously commented on the larger type size and now also notes (as I somehow failed to notice) that the January issue was 16 pages shorter than the previous issues (132 pages rather than 148). White responds:
“When I initially prepared your letter for publication, we had no concrete plans for increasing the type size, and no plans for cutting back in pages. When we did decide to increase the type size, we intended to do so only for the fiction—retaining the smaller type for the features. But something went awry between our editorial offices and the typesetter, and for one pair of issues—the January Amazing and the February Fantastic, everything was in the larger type. When it became necessary to cut pages too, well, I was left feeling somewhat foolish, and only a piece of last-minute surgery on my reply to your letter in the January issue kept me from appearing yet more foolish. Hopefully, we've now settled down for an issue or two—but keep your fingers crossed. New changes in format are under contemplation, which should result in a superior package—if something doesn't go awry again.”
So the buried lede here is that they’ve cut the magazine by 11% without previous comment or explanation. This is not a healthy sign for its longevity.
Also interesting is White’s reply to reader Jerry Lapidus’s comments on artwork. Lapidus did not care for the cover of the January issue, the “totally blah . . . ‘flying saucer’ cover.” (I thought it looked more like a slightly flattened Saturnian planet or something knitted from fuzzy wool, but White says it was a galactic cluster.) More generally, Lapidus complains about the uniform format of interior illustrations (one column in a two-column page format, meaning tall and narrow), which White says is “imposed upon us by the medium in which we work,” without further explanation.
Continue reading [April 12, 1971] The Lathe of Heaven (May 1971 Amazing)





