MANTICHORE
THE HORROR NOVELS OF 'PETER
1, No 1 (Dec 2005)
A Contribution by Leigh
Blackmore for SSFWT
Leigh Blackmore, 78 Rowland Ave,
Wollongong, NSW 2500. Australia.
Email: lvxnox@iinet.net.au
Due to my joining this organisation rather
hastily, and due to having various
commitments that seem overwhelming at
present, this first issue of Mantichore is
being put together from a grab-bag of older
material which has not seen print elsewhere.
I hope other members will forgive me for
this, and await more promising issues in
2006.
The following article was written about
fifteen years ago! At the time, many of the
‘Peter Saxon’ novels were still around, but
now this seems like ancient history.
However, I present the piece for what it’s
worth; there are still unanswered questions
about the authorship of some of these
books.
THE FABULOUS BAKER BOYS:
SAXON' & 'ERROL LECALE'
By Leigh Blackmore
© 1991
Peter Saxon is a name that most horror
readers will have seen at one time or another.
It is one of those names which do not conjure
up great enthusiasm for the literary quality of
the author's output, but his novels, most of
which appeared in the late 1960's, are all
entertaining excursions into various types of
encounter with the supernatural. I remember
THE TORTURER was one of the first horror
novels I ever read, at about the age of 14 - it
was perfectly suited to my age at the time, for
the writing is pitched only a step above
hackwork.
Probably Peter Saxon's greatest claim to
fame is that the novel THE DISORIENTATED
MAN was adapted for the movies as
SCREAM AND SCREAM AGAIN - a film
notable for its co-billing of three major horror
stars - Christopher Lee, Peter Cushing and
Vincent Price (and incidentally, the delectable
Yutte Stensgaard, the busty lovely who
fuelled many a teenage horror fan's wet-
dream in the early seventies with her
performance in Hammer's LUST FOR A
VAMPIRE) - but otherwise fairly
undistinguished. Saxon's series featuring
those battlers of occult evil, The Guardians,
also deserves some praise. However, I am
not going to discuss the novels' contents at
length here; rather, I want to explore the
identity of this admittedly second-rung horror
novelist. The name Peter Saxon does not
appear at all in the PENGUIN
ENCYCLOPEDIA OF HORROR AND THE
SUPERNATURAL; however, the following
reference works do give some information,
and they are my principle sources for this brief
article:
Adrian, Jack. "W. Howard Baker". MILLION
magazine (May-June 1991), p. 11.
Ashley, Mike - WHO'S WHO IN HORROR
AND FANTASY FICTION
Reginald, R. - SCIENCE FICTION AND
FANTASY LITERATURE (2 vols)
Rock, James - WHO GOES THERE?: A
BIBLIOGRAPHIC DICTIONARY OF
PSEUDONYMOUS LITERATURE etc..
Tuck, Donald H. - THE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF
SCIENCE FICTION AND FANTASY (3 vols)
Probably no one will be surprised to know that
'Peter Saxon' is a pseudonym. However,
there seems to be some haziness about how
many writers used this pseudonym, and
exactly which novels are attributable to those
writers known to have used it.
The writer chiefly responsible for 'Peter
Saxon' seems to be one Wilfred Glassford
McNeilly (1921- ), a friend of author and
publisher W (illiam) Howard Baker, though he
used other pseudonyms. As by Baker,
McNeilly published a novel called THE
GUARDIANS in 1967 (Mayflower pbk), which
seems to have spawned The Guardians
series.
There were three earlier 'Peter Saxon' novels,
however. The exact order of their publication
is unclear. The titles, and the editions I have
traced, are as follows:
THE DISORIENTATED MAN. Mayflower pbk
Sept 1966; reprinted in hardcover library
edition (not listed in Reginald, Tuck or Rock)
by Howard Baker [Publishers] 1967; reprinted
as SCREAM AND SCREAM AGAIN,
Paperback Library, Dec 1967. (The title
change seems to have been instigated by the
publishers rather than the filmmakers. The
movie did not appear until 1969 - or 1970 in
some sources - Presumably SCREAM AND
SCREAM AGAIN was a more saleable title
than the science-fictionish THE
DISORIENTATED MAN, though the original
title more clearly represents the novel's sf
content). Ashley and Rock attribute the novel
to McNeilly; Reginald and Tuck do not (i.e.
they consider the attribution is unclear).
THE DARKEST NIGHT. Mayflower hardcover
1966; pbk 1967; reprinted by Paperback
Library, Sept 1967 (not listed in Reginald,
Tuck or Rock). Five Star pbk (UK, early
1970's?). All sources attribute the novel to
McNeilly.
THE TORTURER. Mayflower hardcover
1966; pbk 1967; reprinted by paperback
Library, April 1967 (not in Reginald, Tuck or
Rock). All sources attribute the novel to
McNeilly.
Before going any further, let's look at how the
various sources view the Peter Saxon
material overall. Ashley seems to view
McNeilly as solely responsible for all the
Saxon novels; he does not mention the use of
the name as a 'house pseudonym'. While
Tuck's main entry says 'apparently a house
pseudonym'; he cross-references to one
Thomas Hector Martin but not to McNeilly
(see Vol 2, p. 379). However, in Vol 3 of
Tuck's work his Pseudonym Index gives the
identity of Peter Saxon as 'Thomas Hector
Martin; Wilfred McNeilly; others'. Rock
attributes all the novels to McNeilly except
THE CURSE OF RATHLAW, which he
attributes to Thomas Hector Martin. Reginald,
who gives the most detailed information,
attributes four novels to McNeilly, THE
CURSE OF RATHLAW to Martin, and does
not attribute the others specifically - the
implication is that 'Peter Saxon' masks the
identity of one or more authors still to be
identified.
If 'Peter Saxon' is a 'house pseudonym', it is a
curious one. Usually a house pseudonym is
given to a group of writers by one publishing
house (whether it be a book or magazine
publishing house). The various writers use a
'house style' to produce a series ('James
Workman' for the Sydney publisher Horwitz is
a case in point). Yet in the case of Peter
Saxon, the novels appeared under a number
of different imprints in the UK and the US. It's
likely that the house pseudonym originated at
Howard Baker Publishers; then the reprints
merely followed suit by using the Peter Saxon
pseudonym.
The other Peter Saxon horror novels are as
follows:
SATAN'S CHILD. Mayflower pbk 1967;
reprinted by Lancer Books, 1968, pbk;
reprinted by Lodestone Books, 1968, pbk;
reprinted by PBS/Five Star, 1973, pbk. From
the Five Star reprint, of which I have a copy, I
have deduced the existence of various other
Peter Saxon novels in Five Star editions. All
sources attribute the novel to McNeilly.
THE CURSE OF RATHLAW. Lancer Books,
1968, pbk. Reprinted by Magnum/Prestige
Books, 1968, pbk. All sources (save Ashley,
who neglects to mention it at all) agree that
this novel is attributable to Thomas Hector
Martin, and that it is Martin's sole contribution
to the Saxon novels. This novel is part of the
Guardians series, but it is not numbered.
(Later Guardians novels are numbered #1-#4,
but if THE GUARDIANS by Baker, and THE
CURSE OF RATHLAW and THROUGH THE
DARK CURTAIN are included, the series
consists of 7 novels).
BLACK HONEY. Mayflower pbk, 1968.
Reprinted by Five Star (UK, early 70's?).
Authorship unattributed by Reginald.
CORRUPTION. Sphere pbk, 1968 (Tuck
gives 1967). Authorship unattributed by
Reginald.
DARK WAYS TO DEATH. Howard Baker
[Publishers] hardcover, 1968; reprinted by
Berkley Medallion pbks 1969 as GUARDIANS
#2: DARK WAYS TO DEATH; reprinted under
the original title by Mayflower, 1970, pbk;
reprinted by Sphere, 1975 as Dennis
Wheatley Library of the Occult #32, with an
introduction by Wheatley, giving Wheatley's
usual reactionary views on the occult. Note
that Ashley comments that Wheatley inspired
McNeilly in the first place! Authorship
unattributed by Reginald.
THE KILLING BONE (Guardians #1). Berkley
Medallion pbk, June 1969. Authorship
unattributed by Reginald.
THE HAUNTING OF ALAN MAIS. (Guardians
#3). Berkley Medallion pbk, Aug 1969.
Authorship unattributed by Reginald.
THROUGH THE DARK CURTAIN. Howard
Baker hardcover 1968 (listed in Rock but not
Reginald); Lancer pbk 1968. Part of the
Guardians series but not numbered.
THE VAMPIRES OF FINISTERE. (Guardians
#4). Berkley Medallion pbk, 1970. Authorship
unattributed by Reginald.
VAMPIRE'S MOON. Belmont pbk, Mar 1970;
reprinted by Five Star (UK, early 1970's?).
Authorship unattributed by Reginald.
On the balance of the evidence, McNeilly
seems to be responsible for the greater
number of Peter Saxon titles, with T.H. Martin
as author of THE CURSE OF RATHLAW
only. It is a matter of speculation whether the
novels not attributed to either author by
Reginald are in fact by one or the other; or
whether there are other authors involved. As
both McNeilly and Martin are still alive, it may
prove possible to resolve this more
accurately.
I should also mention a series of three novels
under the pseudonym Peter Saxon, which are
outside the horror field. These are THE
ENEMY SKY (1969? - see Rock), THE
UNFEELING SKY (1968) and THE
WARRING SKY (1970). These were all
published by Corgi books and are set in the
First World War, the action revolving around
members of the Royal Flying Corps. Rock
attributes THE ENEMY SKY to McNeilly, so
it's a fair assumption that he authored the
whole trilogy. (Adrian says, however, that
Baker wrote them).
McNeilly and Martin both wrote other novels,
horror and otherwise, under various
pseudonyms - for instance, McNeilly's series
about The Specialist under the pseudonym
'Errol Lecale’ (Ashley is in error when he gives
the pseudonym as Error (!) Lecale). I hope to
explore the works of these writers further....
Biblical references to HORROR.
These were found with the use of my handy
Biblical concordance.
"And when the sun was going down, a deep
sleep fell upon Abram; and, lo, an horror of
great darkness fell upon him" (Gen 15:12)
"Fearfulness and trembling are come upon
me, and horror hath overwhelmed me".
(Psalm 55:5).
"Horror hath taken hold upon me because of
the wicked that forsake thy law" (Psalm
119:53)
"They shall also gird themselves with
sackcloth, and horror shall cover them; and
shame shall be upon all faces and baldness
upon all their heads" (Ezek 7: 18)
"Be astonished, O ye heavens, at this, and
be horribly afraid, be ye very desolate, saith
the Lord" (Jer 2:12)
"He brought me up also out of an horrible
pit, out of the miry clay, and set my feet
upon a rock, and established my goings"
(Psalm 40: 2)
COLUMN FOR CULT FICTION
© JAN 1997
Cult Fiction was a magazine
planned by my colleague Chris Sequeira,
comics writer and former co-editor with me
of Terror Australis magazine. It was to have
a mix of graphic (comic) stories, fiction, and
non-fiction that would appeal to a hip inner
city audience. Chris asked me for a punchy
column for the first issue, which I delivered
in a short space of time as follows; however
plans for the magazine were shelved and
my column remained unpublished.
___________________________________
Thank God for endorphins! I've been
generating a lot of 'em lately, and my current
reading has a lot to do with it. Why? I'll tell
you in a moment. Endorphins, as many of
you may know, are naturally occurring
biological opiates in the body. They can
make us feel good, providing a 'natural high'.
For that reason, exercises like aerobics are
popular because these feel-good chemicals
are generated by any exercise similar to a
strenuous aerobic workout. But endorphins
actually work primarily by blocking or dulling
pain" Reading some recent horror fiction by
Australian authors has led me to reflect on
the nature of pain in more ways than one.
Pain is something that we all experience at
times, and experience as individuals in
different ways. Not only that, but our culture
expects us to behave in certain ways in
response to pain. Ironically, as journalist
Diane Ackerman points out in her wonderful
book A NATURAL HISTORYOF THE
SENSES, what we define as pain differs
according to circumstance. For instance, the
torture we (especially women in twentieth
century Western society) inflict on our
bodies is the name of beauty is not
considered to be torture, because of its
ultimate end, which is considered desirable.
Even more ironically, the torture that
Australian publishers are currently inflicting
on devotees of the horror genre is
considered by them to be 'jumpstarting' the
genre in Australia. Strange and wonderful it
is, the way they can view positively a
process which, as a longtime reader and
reviewer of horror, even as one who is
inured to ghastliness in my reading matter,
is causing me intense pain. And
jumpstarting my endorphin production into
the bargain.
For the year of 1996, the second year of the
Aurealis Awards, which are awarded by
AUREALIS magazine for excellence in
science fiction, fantasy and horror, the
judges have been unable to locate a single
horror novel published in Australia that
might qualify for the category of Best Novel
in this genre, and have consented to a 'No
.I\ward' vote. Can't say as I blame' em, folks.
The rules of the awards sensibly allow for
such an eventuality, and while it may be a
little weird to actually have an award and not
be able to present it, there is at least (and
plaudits to the judges for this) some realistic
recognition of the sparsity of quality horror
fiction in this year's 'no award' vote.

This year's judges of the horror category no
doubt faced similar problems I did when I
voted on the 1995 awards. They had to
consider whether any of the handful of
novels published in this country in the last
12 months that were 'packaged' as horror
truly deserved to be called the "Best" horror
novel. (An aside: 'packaged' is the usual
marketing term that refers to how a book
has been presented -what genre slot it is
seen to fit into, what cover design has
accordingly been given it, what typography
has been used to enhance that impression).
There were two or three such novels this
year packaged as genre offerings, which
evidently the judges felt unable to
distinguish by nominating them for the
award.
The judges also had to take into account
what was happening in 'mainstream' novel
publishing. Were there any novels by
established writers that were not 'packaged'
as horror that nevertheless were deserving
of being awarded the Best Horror Novel?
Last year, I was able to suggest several.
This year's judges were evidently unable to
do likewise.
This situation highlights the problems that
the horror genre faces in Australia. Firstly,
there are too few novels -this year, in point
of fact, none -that are packaged as horror
that are worth the paper they're written on.
So what would have been the contenders?
EVIL SEED OF THE FATHER by James
Tatham was one of the most hotly touted
horror novels of the year (by its publisher,
Random House). According to its publicity
release it was 'a bloody combination of
WAKE IN FRIGHT, RAZORBACK and THE
EXORCIST' with 'all the markings of classic
outback Australian horror' .It was perceived
as' splatter horror with more blood and guts,
than another horror novel from the same
house, MY BEAUTIFUL FRIEND by Venero
Armanno. (The latter, while wrong-headedly
promoted as genre horror, was at least
competently written with good local colour
and holds its own as a thriller with Anne
Rice-ish overtones).
Tatham, known for his 'autobiographical
novel KISS TOMORROW GOODBYE,
which draws on his dark crime-
connected past, failed dismally to dent
the horror market with EVIL SEED. The
book got my endorphins a-juicin’ right
away in response to the pain I felt on
reading the first few chapters. By
book’s end, I was mighty high – not
from the clean adrenalin rush one gets
from a really good page-turner, but
from the chemical reaction of my body
spitting out opiates to combat the
mental anguish that engulfed me as
EVIL SEED’ s plot grew, by swift yet
clunky turns, more outré and yet more
unbelievable.
I could have more concisely (if more
unkindly) reviewed this novel with one word:
WOOF. In my blunt judgement, the book
was a complete dog, as one publisher's rep
of my acquaintance says of books that 'bark
all the way out from the warehouse and bark
all the way back' (when unsold copies are
they are returned by the bookseller). Lest it
be thought I am unduly negative, perhaps
even biased, in this view, I may mention that
another who read the book, and to whom I
have spoken of these profound matters, told
me that they thought EVIL SEED's plot ''as
full of holes as a Swiss cheese". (Another
aside: Let no-one think, due to my vitriol,
that I am accusing the book's publishers of
having been venal or greedy enough for fast
bucks to shove this novel out into what they
perceived to be as a lowbrow market that
would lap up whatever slop was put in front
of it. But let no-one think either that we
readers of the horror genre do not have
standards and taste merely because our
literary poison of choice is the conte cruel,
the supernatural or the grisly and gruesome.
And in this column I have been given carte
blanche to tell it like I see it. Unless those of
us who value the horror genre speak up
against these Emperors with No Clothes in
the guise of 'classic Australian horror', we
shall have more of these inept concoctions
foisted upon us, and a market which could
expand and grow if nurtured with quality
writers and writing will be strangled at birth
But let us proceed what was wrong with this
particular book? Well, not only didn't it sell, it
didn't deserve to sell. It was shoddily written;
not merely dull and silly, but consummately
and howl-evokingly dumb. That the
Australian reading public conspicuously
failed to take notice of it was probably the
kindest fate that the author could have
hoped for. More disturbing to me by far than
the book itself, is the fact that Tatham (living
in Bondi) is said to be writing a sequel to
EVIL SEED wherein its beasts (there are
these beasts you see...but frankly, I can't be
bothered to explicate) propagate and take
over the outback. Will this mooted sequel
enhance or even marginally contribute to the
state of the art in Australian horror fiction?
The headspin I feel when I contemplate this
sequel and the endorphin rush I get in
consequence tells me in no uncertain terms
-NO.
The situation not be so bad if at least one
decent horror novel had crept through during
this year. Perhaps the problem of definition
is part of the difficulty. Victor Keller's
STORYMAN was a rivet tingly dark tale,
quite conceivably categorisable as horror,
but packaged as a crime novel and therefore
possible discounted from consideration by
the Aurealis judges.
GM Hagues' latest, THE DEVIL 'S
NUMBERS, continues the push to make him
the number one bestseller in the genre in
Australia, but the problem it seems to me is
that the genre is horribly misunderstood by
the publishers, hence the current offerings
are largely horrible misconceived. Here is a
novel that has (yes) supernatural
occurrences and has (yes) hints of ghostly
transcendence and (yes) some shocks; but
is structurally more of a historical spy thriller,
not an exceptionally well-written one at that.
Granted, it's not strictly necessary for a good
writer to be familiar with terms like 'negative
dialectics' or 'postmodernity' or
'transavantgardism' or the 'paradigm of
referentiality' to write a literate novel in the
'90's; but in these times of stylistic change
and innovation in the mi an stream field, it is
disheartening to read local fiction that has all
the eclat of the lower spectrum of American
horror novels of twenty years ago.
Let's diverge from these weighty
considerations for a few heartbeats... The
nineteenth-century poet Baudelaire took an
attitude to himself (and by extension the
nature of man) that underlies much of
modern horror As paraphrased by the critic
Georges Pulet in his book EXPLODING
POETRY, it was this: "I am a man, that is to
say, a fallen being, ashamed of existing,
doing evil, trampling in mud that is no
different from me. Moreover, in my misery
as in my baseness I discover that I am a
poet...eminently representative of human
vileness. My situation is unexceptional, but
the consciousness I have of it is in itself
exceptional. Not for an instant do I forget the
fact that my nature, like that of the entire
human species, is one of degradation, and
that the mud in which I trample fills a place
essentially low and dark -a place into which
the whole of creation, by reason of a Fall
that occurred at its origin and irrevocably
altered its essence, has forever slipped".
Baudelaire of course, greatly admired Poe,
the father of the modern horror story, and
might be considered a distant great-uncle of
horror. Certainly his poems collected as
"The Flowers of Evil" provide a unique
insight into that degraded state of man's
nature that Baudelaire delineated so well.
But Baudelaire only saw one side of the
coin. The horror novel, in my view, ought to
provide a sense of transcendence of this
side of man's nature. The richest, most
readable novels of the genre are those that
portray not just evil or debasement, but its
potential opposites. I can (and will) say a lot
more along those lines about horror. But for
Australian horror fiction to work, it has to
begin to grapple with that one side of the
coin and do it well, before it can even dream
in its wildest most phantasmagoric dreams
of depicting both sides. Maybe in the next
twelve months we will see a novel published
that attempts to do so and I would be the
first to applaud it (along with the Aurealis
judges I'm sure). Meanwhile, I reiterate my
thankfulness for those internal drugs, the
blessed endorphins that drop the lily of ease
and Lethe on the brow of the sufferer who
delves into the current crop of local horror .
NOTES FOR PANEL AT ‘MAGIC
CASEMENTS FESTIVAL’ 13 Sept
2003
Due to the exigencies of being on a panel –
other panelists, time pressures, etc, I didn’t
get to deliver thee notes as prepared below
at the event for which they were written up.
Perhaps the thoughts expressed are still
worth passing on? I will let other members
be the judges.
‘WHAT’S HOT & WHAT’S NOT” Some
thoughts by Leigh Blackmore
Written 11-09-03
Firstly, Terry Dowling has often made the
point that there is no genre, there is only
good or bad story. This is, I think, true on an
exalted plane, BUT in fact for better or for
worse the publishing industry clearly
delineates areas of genre and subgenre in sf
and fantasy, and separates these from
‘mainstream’ fic. For the most part,
publishers categorise the fantasy they
publish as epic fantasy in the mould of
Eddings/Feist etc, or as urban fantasy in the
mold of Charles de Lint, or as ‘romantic’ high
fantasy like the novels of Cecilia Dart-
Thornton, or as historical fantasy like Sara
Douglass. Most other authors are packaged
to appear between the poles set by the big
sellers. SF authors are slightly less
strictured perhaps, but there are still
numerous perceived subgenres such as
cyberpunk, military, space opera and so on.
I don’t believe it’s necessarily a bad thing to
genrify, but as readers we need to be
discerning enough to know what’s really
HOT and what is merely warmed-over pap.
Genre distinctions generally work well, due
to the reader’s predominant tendency to
come to the bookshop seeking something
similar to what they have read before. If
some of a thing is good, more of the same
must be better, right? The whole publishing
of sf and fantasy is predicated around this
concept and without undue cynicism about
the willingness (or otherwise) to take risks of
the audience, this is reader-driven –
because most readers do not demand
difference, they demand quantity. Publishers
cater to the demands perceived – it seems
almost accidental sometimes that real
quality will arise within the formulaic notions
of what constitutes good and entertaining
fantasy.
Readers by and large are reluctant to
venture out of their comfort zones, to try new
writers and new themes. I would say this is
more typical of the fantasy reader than the sf
reader. Because sf is often forward-looking
and idea-driven, readers seem more willing
to embrace a book by a writer they know
which is very different from the one before it
– or to try a new writer – they are looking for
ideas at the edge of the envelope.
Unfortunately heroic fantasy writing, it
seems to me, is often saddled with a
conservative political outlook and is much
slower to embrace tropes which vary from
the norm. This isn’t to say there can’t be fine
writing in fantasy – Llyn Flewelling is a good
example of a writer who pays close attention
to style as well as plotting.
I speak as a bookseller; what’s HOT of
course includes the new Robert Jordan or
the new Tad Williams or the new up and
comer such as Greg Keyes or [author of
Fifth Sorceress]. What’s NOT of course
includes the decaying Star Trek franchise.
What’s hot is Tolkien because of the movies.
What’s not is Red Dwarf and Magic the
Gathering – popular series that have passed
their peak of popularity. But I’d prefer to
dwell on what’s HOT than not. Naturally
there are trends, peaks and troughs in the
popularity of given subgenres. It’s quite
possibly good that the likes of EE Doc Smith
are no longer HOT, although see his
influence (and that of the pulps in general)
on the New Space Opera.
As a bookseller one is continually wanting to
steer readers towards the new and different,
of which there is an abundance. So what’s
hot in the bookseller’s mind (REDSHIFT
anthology, Ted Chiang in SF, Jeff
Vandermeer and the whole ‘new weird’ style
of fantasy vanguarded by China Mieville and
others) are merely what the readers
perceive as hot. Fortunately there are quirky
books like the Jasper Fforde which do
become a cult success and tend to blur the
boundaries of what constitutes fantasy –
which in my opinion can only be a good
thing. Of course Terry Pratchett is a great
example of a writer who sells by the
bucketload and doesn’t feel the need to
write doorstoppers, which is always cause
for hope.
Also, in a broad sense, novels are hot and
short stories are not. This is a pity, because
most of the exciting work in the field is being
done in the short story. But as far as sales
go, anthologies are not hot. It’s all you can
do to sell a Year’s Best anthology of sf or
fantasy, which should be being snapped up
by readers keen to sample the wide variety
the field has to offer. The reluctance of
readers to sample short fiction (which after
all is a much quicker way of checking out
what’s around than trying to read 800-page
blockbuster novels) naturally leads
publishers to resist short story collections
and it becomes a vicious cycle. In my
opinion, if you want to know what’s REALLY
hot, it’s the collections from small presses
that represent the leading edge of the field –
the most current ideas, the best writing, and
the trendsetting that will dictate the direction
of the field in the decade ahead. So to see
what’s HOT you should be reading the
magazines – AUREALIS, ASIM etc locally,
and whatever you can get from overseas
(Interzone and the like), and the anthologies.
US and UK small presses both have
incredibly exciting work coming out, in sf and
fantasy and also in horror.
Again, in a broad sense, in the marketing
sense fantasy is HOT and sf and horror are
not. Fantasy is hot in the sales sense in that
it’s possible to move a vast quantity of
trilogies and multi-part series, and there’s
nothing wrong with this. These works are the
Victorian triple-deckers of our time.
Popularity based on quantity of units sold is
not necessarily a measure of poor quality,
either. There are genuinely intelligent and
innovative writers working the fantasy field,
as well as hacks rehashing the well-trodden
plot coupons of a thousand doorstop novels
that came before.
Horror seemed virtually moribund in the
nineties, with the sales boom of the King,
Koontz, Barker and Rice days of the eighties
dying well down; but exciting writers are
revivifying its mouldy corpse – eg Tim
Lebbon, Tom Piccirilli, Jeffrey Thomas and
others (also the very popular Lauren K
Hamilton). So horror is becoming a little
HOTTER than it has been for some time.
Sf sells comparatively poorly, although there
is enough momentum there to keep it going.
Sf occupies a kind of middle ground, ,a kind
of well-heated but rarely sizzling position.
There are peaks of HOTNESS as for
instance when a new Peter F Hamilton or
other popular space opera writer brings out
a new book, or when (commendably)
readers pick up on the great writing of a Kim
Stanley Robinson (Hugo winner for YEARS
OF RICE AND SALT). Those that follow sf
also recognise the HOTNESS factor of the
writers actually forging new frontiers, like the
whole British space opera school (Alistair
Reynolds, Ken McLeod etc) with their focus
on fabulous old-fashioned adventure along
with cutting edge science based in
everything from AI to quantum physics.
I think what I’m saying is that what’s HOT
and NOT depends very largely on where
you stand. If you’re a fourteen year old
schoolboy it’s probably true to say that what
SEEMS hot is the latest Raymond Feist
Krondor novel in which he further
sharecrops the roleplaying game he wrote in
college. And yes, there’s a place for
Dragonlance novels and MechWarrior
novels – let us not decry their presence,
although we may hope that their readers
move on to more substantial fare later.
If you’re an experienced fantasy reader you
may see what’s HOT as China Mieville or
the increasing tend to romance/fantasy
crossovers – e.g. 2001 Nebula winner
Catherine Aasaro and the latest Harlequin
line in the US. As a sf reader you may see
what’s hot as William Gibson continuing to
write excellent cool books like PATTERN
RECOGNITION, or Neal Stephenson
opening up the idea of what sf is (as he has
done since CRYPTONOMICON to
reexamine historical developments and so
on (QUICKSILVER et al). If you are a
devotee of Dr Who you will of course
perceive the ABC’s action in repeating the
series on TV as HOT at the moment.
If you’re really sizzling you will know that’s
what’s HOT is often in what has been
variously referred to as INTERSTITIAL
fiction, SLIPSTREAM fiction etc. I’m talking
about writers like Jeff Noon, Carol
Emshwiller, etc whose work is not easily
slotted into the typical fantasy pigeonholes
but who clearly are advancing the genre
from within and expanding its scope
simultaneously. This is a technique and a
school revolving around what Gary Wolfe
terms (and I love this) – the ‘interpenetration
of discursive modes’. You can have a HOT
time simply tracking down and reading all
those writers who are chucking those
discursive modes in the pot and mixing them
around – consider their books the sharp
sauce at the dish of more formulaic fantasy.
There is plenty that is HOT in all the genres
of fantasy. What’s currently NOT is as much
to do with fad and fashion as anything.
There is nothing to say that we won’t see
LOST RACE novels become HOT again, or
a resurgence in the sales of writers like
Verne, Wells, MP Shiel and all the great old
masters of imagination who started it in the
first place. Modern readers with short
attention spans often don’t delve back into
these writers, but I never give up hope – and
it is fantastic to see series like the SF
Masterworks and Fantasy Masterworks
keeping these classics before readers who
have not encountered them.

Another thing that’s HOT is the trend to

Books on Demand. Cite Wildside Press,
Cosmos and Prime Books,etc, who give us
the work of lesser-known but excellent
contemporary writers, and can also reprint
the old classics at will. This contributes to a
richness and variety in the field that only be
welcomed.

I agree that really there is no genre. Of

course all writers are paid liars, and all
fiction is fantasy – made up stuff. But in the
‘real’ world of writing, publishing and
bookselling, I’m quite happy to see sections
of bookstores where the fantasy and sf
books congregate. Genre does not have to
imply ghettoisation, pace Margaret Atwood
(ORYX and CRAKE). I would love to see a
fantasy or sf novel winning the Booker prize
– no reason why a good one shouldn’t,
except the oftimes prejudicial attitude of the
literary establishment. But I am happy to say
what’s HOT in sf and fantasy is generally
HOTTER than most of what’s happening in
the mainstream. It’s an exciting time, with no
end in sight, and for fantasy and sf (as in
Broderick’s THE SPIKE), the end is out of
sight, yet about to happen. Rich, varied,
incredibly adept at looking at all the issues
which confront the human race, and also
terrific at offering simple escapism and
entertainment, the speculative fiction
happening now is as HOT as you could wish
for – you just need to take a few risks, know
where to look and not be content to sample
only the tried and true fare that’s out there.