TAFFluvia 2

TAFFLUVIA: number two, a further report on the Trans-Atlantic Fan Fund from current North American administrators Patrick & Teresa Nielsen Hayden at 75 Fairview #2B New York NY 10040 212-942-6832. Current European TAFF administrator is Rob Hansen, 9A Greenleaf Rd, East Ham, London E6 1DX UK. This issue free to those North Americans who voted in the last TAFF race, and available to anyone else for an SASE; however, since we aren't sure we can find addresses for everyone in that first category, if you hear of any voter failing to receive this, just let us know where they can be reached and we'll send their copy along. August 1985. Printing thanks to Ron Ontell.

HEREWITH, THE FIRST INSTALLMENT of our TAFF report: we went, we came back, we had a marvelous time. Next, the details -- and that's where it gets harder.

Oh, we made plenty of notes. We also brought back 465 snapshots, twelve hours of dictaphone cassette tape, and a large paper sack full of printed ephemera ranging from Northern Irish tourist pamphlets (a little earnest, but they try hard) to an authentic crumpled receipt from a Wimpy bar. Documentation, y'know.

And it doesn't really help; merely trades one set of problems for another. We'd planned to avoid the usual pattern of making detailed notes for the first three days and indecipherable jottings thereafter, leaving the hapless writer six months later desperately struggling to recall the possible significance of "BSFA mtg./spkr RR/ forester jk/!" (Though to be honest, we too have notes saying things like "Mdln: crphlly/[pi]/how do y mk yr hat do that?") So what we've got instead is the whole of, or at least the most of, what seems to be a grossly improbable, inexplicable, untidy tale connected in some way to Woofie Bear, a demitasse spoon with a picture of the Queen Mother on the handle, a poodle-shaped balloon, a tabletop covered with scattered dominos and the contents of an overturned ashtray, Chuch Harris at a series of typewriters, a faded notebook with "I hope the hotel doesn't sue" still legible across one page, Teresa prone on assorted floors, a twenty-cup capacity teapot, Tom Weber Jr. being dragged down a flight of stairs by grinning hooligans, a tape of a roomful of fans inexplicably breaking into Blake & Elgar's "Jerusalem," a great many pint mugs, Harry Bell on top of Durham Cathedral, a pebble-sized chunk of Scrabo Tower, Oxford's justly-famous spires and unjustly-neglected doorways of exactly proper height (5'5" to 5'8" -- why do you ask?); plus a large and peculiar sheepdog, John Jarrold playing air-guitar to destruction, extensive demonstrations of the ancient peasant sport Falling Down at the One Tun, hundreds of people at Yorcon (all of whom seem to be either dancing or amiably sitting about with one hand cupped around an ear), and all those pictures Patrick took of sheep that didn't turn out (the pictures, that is; we don't know how the sheep are doing).

The worst patch in the record seems to be Saturday night at the Eastercon, which probably wouldn't have taken us quite so much by surprise if we hadn't been telling each other for years that British conreports are by custom composed largely of hyperbolic exaggeration. There'd been a steady light rain of anecdotes drizzling down all that day, making things a touch slippery underfoot but still manageable. Around early evening the downpour started and we all got soaked; memory thereafter is fragmented, brief moments of fitful illumination. We may never figure out exactly what we did that night, and in what order; but claiming to be hazy about what happened after dinner on Saturday is one custom of British conreporting that we did get right, and a very merciful literary convention it is, too.

Some things are easily recalled. The hospitality we encountered was generous beyond acknowledgement (we'll try, though), the friendliness of the fans ditto; we haven't run into so much good conversation in years. The food came as something of a shock, since all the guidebooks said it would be mediocre at best, and in fact we've been missing it since we came home. The weather was... er... easy to ignore, what with all the other splendid distractions to hand.

The problem in writing our trip report, then, won't be one of scraping together enough to say about it. Not hardly. There's enough for a book there, though we're not planning to write one. Beyond minor details like transcribing all those hours of tape, it becomes a problem of approach: How the hell does all this fit together? There's the pastoral "Traveling in Britain," the domestic sitcom "Patrick, Teresa, and Sometimes Tom in London and Leeds," the incisive, analytical critical essays (Key and Sue Williams explaining the Silicon Method; Harris, Hansen, Vin¢ Clarke, both Langfords, and both Willises on wherefore and whither TAFF, with later added commentary from ATom, Peter Weston, &c.; not to mention the best panel discussion of fanzines & fanzine criticism we'd ever seen), the postmodern, non-linear, epic party and convention sequences; and of course the trivial yet terribly important bits and pieces and heaps of stuff about people and personalities, British fandom in the individual and specific sense, rather than as an abstract collective.

Well, we'll get an article out of this somehow.

IN THE MEANTIME, WE'RE PAYING the piper: administering the fund so it can go on sending people back and forth. Which has its dreary moments, but isn't really too bad; we had the best time of our lives (so far), and it's good to be able to pass something like that along. If you got the first TAFFLUVIA, you may recall our Fine Intention to publish a second before leaving for Britain; at this late date, mostly what we can say to that is well er um. (Or: illness, overwork, the sudden death of Teresa's father a week after we returned.) Better late than never, though, particularly given the number of details we need to announce. First, though, the thanks: to all those who, despite our inactivity on this front, contributed money, saleable items, and/or material help to the North American fund since last issue --

Frank Balazs Lise Eisenberg Ken Josenhans
Sheryl Birkhead Gary Farber Jerry Kaufman
Harold B. Bob Moshe Feder Dave Langford
Velma Bowen Mike Glyer Ron Ontell
Brian Earl Brown Chuch Harris Greg Pickersgill
Avedon Carol Chris Hatton Louise Sachter
Cathy Doyle Terry Hughes Stu Shiffman
Malcolm Edwards Brian Tompson

Additionally, Noreascon II donated $15 (prorated down from the $50 they've been offering for each full-length trip report published) in recognition of Terry Carr's article-length report on his 1965 TAFF trip in BAFFLES #8 ($2 from Stu Shiffman, 19 Broadway Terrace #lD, New York NY 10040). LACon sent along a stack of Neo-Fan's Guides which you'll see listed for sale elsewhere in this issue. Pat Mueller, Leah Zeldes and Dick Smith of the Austin NASFiC were of invaluable assistance in setting up the auction we've arranged to happen at that convention. And finally, in an act of generosity the occasion for which we deeply regret, Glenn and Doris Clements of Seattle sent TAFF the fanzine collection of their late son Dave, a Seattle fan who was murdered last month. This touches us in a number of ways: first, because we liked Dave Clements a great deal and miss him; second, because it's unusual and wonderful for the mundane next-of-kin of a fan who has died to comprehend the importance of fandom and its artifacts (like fanzines) to the deceased. Dave wasn't hyper-active in fan fund affairs -- he was too new to fandom for that, though he did vote in the last TAFF race -- but I suspect he'd approve of his fanzines finding a new home with someone who'll appreciate them, instead of being tossed out like so much of our community's fragile history is. Thanks, Glenn and Doris Clements, very much.

IT'S A LITTLE EARLY for North American fans to be gearing up candidacies for the next NA-->UK TAFF race, but not too early to set schedules both for that race and for the UK-->NA contest which precedes it. Here they are, then...

1986 race (UK to 1986 Worldcon in Atlanta)
Nominations open: November 1, 1985 }
Nominations close: December 31, 1985 } 2 months
Ballots available: January 15, 1986 }
Voting deadline: May 15, 1986 } 4 months
Worldcon: August 27- September 1, 1986 } 3.5 months

1986-87 race (North America to 1987 Eastercon, site undetermined as yet)
Nominations open: June 15, 1986 }
Nominations close: August 15, 1986 } 2 months
Ballots available: September 6, 1986 }
Voting deadline: December 31, 1986 } 4 months
Eastercon: April 16-20, 1987 } 3.5 months

... suitable for posting on your bulletin board. And if you're that interested -- say, if you've been asked to stand as a candidate, or want to nominate someone -- you might also want to send us an SASE requesting our pamphlet, The Complete TAFF Guide, which explains and clarifies the various rules and procedures used over the years by what Neil Rest so appealingly (well, we liked the phrase) referred to as "the apostolic succession of TAFF administrators." Lest anyone feel intimidated at the prospect of confronting a Book of Rules, though, the short version is that anyone active in fandom by or before two years prior to the actual convention that will be attended by the winning candidate, is eligible to participate. Candidates need three nominators from their own side of the Atlantic, two from the other side, a $5 bond, and a platform of 100 words or less. Everything else is fine-tuning. Certainly, we hope at least three candidates stand both times; we'll settle for two if we have to, but more makes for a better race.

ALL OF WHICH INEVITABLY brings to mind some of the built-up stresses in TAFF that became so evident in the last race. Representing one point of view, there were a fair number of people in North America who felt, in the wake of Martha Beck's name not appearing on the official ballot, that schedules for nominations and for the race itself had not been announced early enough, and that procedures for becoming a candidate were not made clear either.

A great deal was said about this at the time.

Softly: we don't propose here to attempt to sort out every misunderstanding between various parties that subsequently ensued. In the normal way of fandom, doubtless the people involved will either sort it out among themselves, or not. As far as TAFF is concerned, though, whereas our predecessor was handling TAFF in line with procedures used by her predecessors, clearly some of these informal procedures are no longer, as they say, viable.

TAFF in North America has for years been run on an informal basis: a couple of newszine announcements were sufficient since word of mouth would cover any ground the announcements missed, and of course anyone interested in standing would know to contact the administrator well ahead of time and make sure they knew what was required of them. So it ran, on the whole, for a long time.

Does time run forward and not backward? Does fandom get bigger every year? Is the Pope Catholic? (Pop quiz! -- pay attention.) It wasn't until a lot of hard feelings and a vast amount of confusion had been generated that the truth sank in: a system that had largely been based on oral transmission of information had broken down in the face of increasing scale. For instance, why was Martha kept off the ballot for getting her materials in after the deadline, when Kevin Smith had extended the nominating deadline to get D. West onto the ballot in 1983? Answer: because in the latter case, a deadline extension was necessary in order to have two candidates. In the race Martha missed the ballot for, the two-candidate minimum had already been achieved. (Nor was Martha the first candidate ever excluded from the ballot for missing the deadline; in some past instances, candidates have been excluded for missing it by 24 hours.) Well, okay, comes the response, but where does it say that? Where's it written down? Ummm.

New realization: Get It Into Print and Keep It There. In response to this, we're doing just that, publishing TAFFLUVIA, producing and making available The Complete TAFF Guide, publicizing schedules well in advance of the races, and generally trying to get everything clearly labelled and on the table. This isn't a complete departure from previous practice; some administrators have done things like it in the past, though most haven't, or have made only a minimal effort. From now on it can probably be assumed, with no prejudice to any of our predecessors, that semi-regular newsletters, clearly announced schedules, and explicit policies covering any reasonably likely eventualities, are less optional than they are essential.

ALL WELL AND GOOD, BUT THAT wasn't all anyone found to protest about the last TAFF race. In the US, riled by Martha's exclusion from the ballot (and also motivated by their quite understandable feeling that she'd be a fine TAFF winner), Martha Beck's supporters mounted an intense write-in campaign, heavily promoted at Midwestern conventions. Approximately a month went by before any copies of this campaign's literature reached Britain. When a few -- and only a very few -- copies did, great umbrage was taken.

What was this outbreak of umbrage about? As nearly as we've been able to discover, not the idea that someone might win TAFF who hadn't received a majority of votes cast in the host country. This has in fact happened a number of times in both directions, yet TAFF has somehow survived. What really rankled with the 121 Brits who signed the petition of protest seems, rather, to have been their perception that American fandom, with its vastly greater numbers and crowded convention schedules, could conceivably inflict on them someone in whom they had no interest whatsoever. In the end this didn't happen, but it appears to have left them feeling that they very easily could be thus disenfranchised, any time North American fandom decided to throw its collective weight around.

And, overwrought or not, they do have a point there, though the scenario may strike some readers as implausible. There are more fans on the Midwest convention circuit alone than in the whole of British fandom; the write-in campaign collected a number of votes equivalent to the total cast for all candidates combined in any other race of this decade. When you get right down to it, there are times at a North American worldcon when there are enough fans in one room to overwhelm a TAFF election -- and we've seen hotshot public performers (Harlan Ellison comes to mind) get such crowds worked up to the point where they were cheering wildly for ideas that, in retrospect, make less sense than writing in a vote to send someone to Britain.

Which doesn't mean that such a thing will happen, or that anyone wants it to happen; just that British fandom, geopolitically, feels a lot like Canada does in mundane politics, or as someone might who's getting laid by an elephant: essentially friendly, but wary all the same.

In a narrowly legalistic sense, having a TAFF election swamped by some enormous North American turnout would be legitimate that is, it could be done without infracting any of TAFF's very lenient voting rules. The question is, would that be good? Would it promote greater and more amicable transatlantic contact, which after all is the whole idea of the Fund? (No, of course not. Getting rhetorical here.)

So there we were at Yorcon, up on the TAFF panel, facing an audience composed of what looked to us like a cross-section of British fandom in all its variety: not just the short, hirsute figure in the third row proposing to "Shoot them all" when North American fandom was first mentioned, but also hucksters and conrunners and costume fans, sercon academics and prudent conservative types with their neohoods forty years behind them, and we asked the obvious question: what would be an acceptable minimum from the host country? Specifically, say that Martha Beck had won TAFF, and in doing so had received at least 27 European votes out of the 134 cast: 20% --? To our considerable relief, the unanimous response was that 20% of the vote is a real constituency: a core group of people who're interested enough in that candidate to put them up, take them out touristing, introduce them to other fans, get to know them, and generally show them a good time. All anyone -- even the Hairy Heckler -- really objected to was the idea that someone could win without any support from the host country at all.

Which seemed reasonable enough to us (not to mention a distinct improvement on proposals we'd earlier heard, such as limiting the franchise to the host country, or somehow "weighting" British votes to take into account their smaller numbers. Non-starters all). As Terry Hughes later pointed out, given that in most years no more than a hundred or so people vote on either continent, it's hardly a vast challenge to write twenty letters asking people on the other side to vote for you. Certainly such a requirement wouldn't automatically limit TAFF to "fanzine fans" or exclude "con fans", whatever those are -- assuming such categories actually exist as separate species -- since neither of us can come up with an example of a fan of any stripe who can't write letters or make phone calls.

A further suggestion was that candidates should he required to get 20% of the vote in the home country as well. No one could think of any objections. It's fair, it maintains parity; what's sauce for the goosed is sauce for the gooser, and all that sort of thing. Besides, if TAFF had had it as a rule since day one, it wouldn't have affected the outcome of a single election.

And that's how the 20% solution was first proposed.

We turned the idea down to "simmer," set it on the back of the stove, and kept talking to British fans. Again, what impressed us most was the consistency of opinion expressed; not as if they all Spoke With One Mind, but certainly as if the whole issue had touched a collective nerve. (Up to that point we would have sworn that if you asked one question of three fans anywhere, you'd get five answers.) Without names and faces attached to the fact "121 British fans signed the protest petition" it was somewhat possible to think of it as a bit of rabble-rousing among an essentially limited group; but deep in conversation with various fans who supported it despite their having little-if-anything in common with the petition's originators or any of their friends, it became harder to see it that way. Of course, fandom being fandom, some contrary opinion is bound to turn up, and in fact since returning we have heard of some Brits who dissent from these views -- but one of them didn't feel strongly enough to talk to us about it (we tried) or to show up to the panel, while the other says that, on reflection, he's willing to see the 20% solution given a try.

WELL, EVENTUALLY WE HAD TO come to a decision. At this point, a complex tradition of consensus comes into play. TAFF has no formal provisions for changing TAFF; despite that, TAFF has been changed over the years, nominally by fiat of the administrators. Nonetheless, a wide consensus is important. By tradition and precedent, any major change in the selection process itself requires something like a consensus of past TAFF winners. Specifically, the last time change was effected at this level, in 1965, administrators Terry Carr and Arthur Thomson did so by mustering all the previous administrators in one room at the London Worldcon that year. (The change? Institution of the preferential ballot, and permanent addition of the write-in line.) It's been a while since then, and some previous administrators are now dead; others are also uncontactable (by us, anyway), though for different reasons. Still, we made a serious attempt to get a representative sample of past TAFF winners' opinions, starting with a meeting at Yorcon attended by Walt & Madeleine Willis, A. Vincent Clarke, Chuch Harris (TAFF co-founder), Dave & Hazel Langford, Rob Hansen, and ourselves, at which the final form of the 20% solution was drafted. From there, we proceeded to consult with as many other past TAFF winners as we could. Of the 28 still living (counting Willis as a "TAFF winner" by virtue of his historical status as beneficiary of the special fund which later grew into TAFF, authorship of many of its basic protocols, and position as the Fund's first European administrator), we eventually managed to get in touch with 23; one, while approving the idea of reform in principle, declined to endorse the proposal without seeing it in print first. The remaining 22 out of 28, who have given us permission to cite them by name as approving the 20% solution, are:

Walt Willis (1952) Peter Weston (1974)
A. Vincent Clarke (1954) Roy Tackett (1976)
Ken Bulmer (1955) Bill Bowers (1976)
Lee Hoffman (1956) Peter Roberts (1977)
Ron Bennett (1958) Terry Hughes (1979)
Eric Bentcliffe (1960) Dave Langford (1980)
Ethel Lindsay (1962) Stu Shiffman (1981)
Arthur Thomson (ATom) (1964) Kevin Smith (1982)
Terry Carr (1965) Avedon Carol (1983)
Steve Stiles (1968) Rob Hansen (1984)
Len & June Moffat (1973) P & T Nielsen Hayden (1985)

We think this represents a fair consensus of TAFF's stewards over the years.

SO, YOU ASK, WHAT IS this change in its final form? Pretty simple, actually: for the exact wording, see the specimen ballot stapled into this TAFFLUVIA following this page. To win, a candidate must have received, on the first ballot, at least 20% of the vote from the host country and at least 20% of the vote from the sending country. Any candidate not meeting both minimums on the first ballot will be eliminated from subsequent ballot countings just as if they had placed last in overall votes on the first ballot, and the second-place votes on their ballots reassigned to the remaining candidates. This may (but probably won't, usually) mean that more than one candidate is eliminated after the first ballot is counted. It may also mean that even if a candidate receives an absolute majority on the first ballot, further ballots will be necessary -- if (the situation the new rule is designed to prevent) the candidate receiving the majority fails nonetheless to meet both 20% minimums.

Its greater implications are clear. Alleviating host-country fears, no one will be able to win TAFF without making at least some effort to get some host-country support. Alleviating other possible fears, correspondingly, no one will be able to win TAFF on a campaign pitched exclusively to the host country, either; if you're charming as hell in print but 99% of your home fandom knows you pick your nose and eat it, you may similarly have problems. Since TAFF is about transatlantic fannishness, we don't think a system that selects for people able to meet these minimums is at all unreasonable; the already-existing rule requiring nominators from both sides was (we have it on good authority) drafted with a similar concern in mind. The 20% solution points in the same direction, albeit more strongly; in the final analysis, we think it's a modification which will enable TAFF to continue to function, in a somewhat changed and certainly more fragmented fandom, as it was originally intended.

MOPPING UP: For those interested in comparing the ballot facing this page to the TAFF ballot as used in recent elections, a few changes seem worth pointing out. Most of the changes in sections other than the "Voting Details" are pretty minor, clarifications of exact meaning and rearrangements for greater emphasis of details we've had problems with (like the plea to stop sending us checks made out to "TAFF"). However, it's worth noting that "Details of the voting will be kept secret" has been clarified to read "Voting is by secret ballot." In the [continued on page 9 -->]

Not quite the
1985-86 TAFF Ballot

What is TAFF? The Trans-Atlantic Fan Fund was created in 1953 for the purpose of providing funds to bring well-known and popular fans across the Atlantic. Since that time, TAFF has regularly brought North American fans to European conventions and European fans to North American conventions. TAFF exists solely through the support of fandom. The candidates are voted on by interested fans all over the world, and each vote is accompanied by a donation of not less than $1 or £1. These votes, and the continued interest and generosity of fandom, are what make TAFF possible.

Who may vote? Voting in the 1985-86 race is open to anyone who was active in fandom prior to September 1984, and who contributes at least $1 or £1 to the Fund. Contributions in excess of the minimum will be gratefully accepted. Voting is by secret ballot: only one vote per person, and you must sign your ballot. "Write-in" candidates are permitted. You may change your vote at any time prior to the deadline.

Deadline Votes in this race must reach the administrators by 15 May 1986.

Voting details (1) TAFF uses a preferential ballot system which guarantees automatic runoffs until a majority is obtained. You rank the candidates in the exact order of your preference for them. If the leading first-place candidate does not get a majority, the first-place votes for the lowest-ranking candidate are dropped, and the second-place votes on those ballots are counted as first-place votes. This process repeats itself until one candidate has a majority. It is therefore important to vote for second, third, and fourth place on your ballot. Also, it is a waste of time to vote for any candidate in more than one place. (2) One other requirement obtains. To win, a candidate must receive at least 20% of the first-ballot first-place votes cast on both sides of the Atlantic, separately. Any candidate failing to receive this minimum percentage on either side will be dropped, and the second-place votes on their ballots counted as first-place votes in the next ballot count. It is therefore important for candidates and their supporters to canvass fans on both sides of the Atlantic. It should be noted that, while you may send your ballot to either Administrator, it will be tabulated with the other votes from the side of the Atlantic on which you reside. Finally, votes from fans not resident in either Europe or North America will not be counted toward either 20% minimum (but are almost certain to affect any given race anyway, so don't let this stop you from voting).

Hold Over Funds This choice, similar to "No Award" in Hugo balloting, gives voters the chance to vote for no TAFF trip this year, if the candidates don't appeal to them, or if they feel TAFF should slow down its trip frequency. Hold Over Funds may be voted for in any position, and is exempt from the 20% requirement: thus, should it ultimately receive a majority of votes on the final ballot, no TAFF trip will be held this year, regardless of how many votes Hold Over Funds received on the first ballot.

Donations TAFF gratefully accepts freely-given donations of money and of material for auction; such generosity has sustained the Fund for over thirty years. If you are ineligible to vote, or do not feel qualified to make a choice, why not donate anyway? TAFF is fandom's oldest travel fund, and one of its worthiest causes.

Candidates Each candidate has posted a bond, promising -- barring Acts of God -- to travel to the 1986 World Science Fiction Convention in Atlanta if elected, and has provided valid signed nominations and a platform, reproduced overleaf along with the ballot.

SEND BALLOTS AND CONTRIBUTIONS TO: NORTH AMERICAN administrators: Patrick & Teresa Nielsen Hayden, 75 Fairview #2B, New York NY 10040 USA, or
EUROPEAN administrator: Rob Hansen, 9A Greenleaf Rd, East Ham, London E6 1DX UK.

IMPORTANT: Make checks payable to one of the Nielsen Haydens or to Rob Hansen, please, not to "TAFF," and make them payable in that administrator's home currency. Thank you.

For a pamphlet detailing TAFF's rules, customs, and precedents, and the procedures for becoming a nominator or candidate, send a SASE to either Administrator.

Reproductions of this form are encouraged provided that the text is reproduced verbatim. Persons reproducing it should substitute their own names below.

This version produced by Ford Madox Ford.

Definitely not the
1985-86 TAFF Ballot

UMBERTO ECO Once it had landed the silence was gone -- like an illusion that is destroyed when the curtains of a stage are pulled aside. The silence was broken by metallic noises. Harsh, clanking, jarring metallic noises. Things were stirring within the disc ship. Strange metallic things; things that were alien to the soft green grass of earth. Terrifying things, steel things; metal things; things with cylindrical bodies and multitudinous jointed limbs. Things without flesh and blood. Things that were made of metal and plastic and transistors and valves and relays, and wires. Metal things. Metal things that could think. Thinking metal things. Terrifying in their strangeness, in their

Nominated by: McGeorge Bundy, Northrop Frye, A.L. Morton, Tristram Tzara, and Angus Wilson.

F. R. LEAVIS peculiar metal efficiency. Things the like of which had never been seen on the earth before. Things that were sliding back panels... Robots! Robots were marching, and were about to spread havoc and destruction across the earth, and as yet the sleeping earth knew nothing of their coming. As mysterious as anything in the great mysterious universe. The robots in their disc ship had arrived... There were strange flickering lights around the ship. Terrifying lights, weird lights, uncanny lights, awful lights, inhuman lights, alien lights, robot lights; and all around a great hemispherical glowing shield sprang up. A thing with a pale greeny blue luminescence. An electronic

Nominated by: T. S. Eliot, Harriet Monroe, Stephen Spender, Hugh Trevor-Roper, and Gore Vidal.

LEONARD & VIRGINIA WOOLF thing, a mechanical thing. A thing that was part of the robot genius. A thing that was as strange as the ship and its occupants. A force field, a glowing greenish blue force field... Once it had landed the silence was gone -- like illusion which is destroyed when the curtains of a stage are pulled aside. The silence was broken by metallic noises. Harsh, clanking, jarring metallic noises. Things were stirring within the disc ship. Strange metallic things; things that were alien to the soft green grass of earth. Terrifying things, steel things; metal things; things with cylindrical bodies and multitudinous jointed limbs. Things without flesh and

Nominated by: Fernand Braudel, John le Carré, Gary Snyder, Lionel & Diana Trilling, and Rebecca West.

Before voting, please read both sides of this sheet

I VOTE FOR (rank 1-2-3-4)

[ __ ] Umberto Eco

[ __ ] F. R. Leavis

[ __ ] Leonard & Virginia Woolf

[ __ ] Hold Over Funds


NAME AND ADDRESS (Legibly, please):

Enclosed is __________ as a contribution to TAFF. Please make checks, etc., payable to Rob Hansen or to one of the Nielsen Haydens, please, not to TAFF, and payable in the currency of that administrator's home country. If you think your name might not be known to the administrators, then in order to qualify to vote please give the name and address of an active fan who is known to them and to whom you are well known, in the space below:


past, it's occasionally been necessary to announce that votes are coming in too slowly; Ron Bennett (in SKYRACK 5, 28 July 1959) even printed a list in mid-race of fans who had voted so far, which certainly seems to us a lot more inherently revealing of voting trends than the remark our predecessor was pilloried for. In the same section, it is made clear that voters may change a vote they have already cast; no past administrator at our Yorcon caucus could recall ever having thought otherwise, but again, it seems some voters have been assuming that one could, and some that one couldn't. Elsewhere, we have removed the plea for publicity: not that publicity for TAFF isn't a Fine Thing, but even the most messianic among us would probably be given pause to wake up one morning to find TAFF's scope expanded to take in the readership of STARLOG, most of whom probably think of themselves as "fans," even "active fans," according to their definition of the term. We'd prefer to see publicity left in the hands of the administrators, candidates, and their supporters. (Personally, we view the proper outward limits of TAFF as being that community to which the Worldcon is in some way of especial historic importance -- a definition of "real fandom" which we feel offers flexibility while retaining meaningfulness.) Finally, we have removed "fan groups" from the line asking for references "if you feel your name might not be known to the administrators"; this anachronism has produced cryptic responses which have puzzled administrators for some years now. Really, we'd prefer real people be cited; if nothing else, they answer their mail faster, and can usually be reached by phone.

In other details, the Yorcon protocols of the elders of TAFF reveal a few remaining decisions: (1) The UK voting fee is henceforth raised from 50p to one pound, thus making voting on that side more expensive than over here for the first time in many years. This is because their fund is poor and needs more money. Ours can hold out for a while yet. (2) It was noted and reconfirmed that, as per precedent, if a TAFF winner is unable to make the trip, funds are held over to the next race, not given to the runner-up. (3) It was clarified that TAFF's primary nature has never been as a charity for "poor fans," and agreed that care should be taken to make sure that donors realize this. TAFF is an honor, not a charity. Voters may of course vote on any basis they like. (4) It was noted that the last North American TAFF winner to attend a British worldcon, as opposed to the more normal Eastercon, has since said that he would rather have gone to the Eastercon that year. (We later reconfirmed this with Terry Hughes. He pointed out two things: first, that it's hard to stand out or feel special among 500 other visiting North Americans, and second, that the Eastercon is quintessentially a manifestation of UK fandom in just the same way as a North American worldcon manifests the atmosphere of its home-base fandom, and a British worldcon doesn't.) Since the current schedule calls for a NA-->UK race in 1987, we tentatively decided to break with precedent and run that race to the Eastercon that year anyway, subject to the approval of the three fans who'd already expressed interest in running in that year. (Since then, we've checked, and Brian Earl Brown, Allyn Cadogan, and Jeanne Gomoll all agree that Eastercon Is Best. Failing any really strenuous objections, then, that's it.) Finally, (5), the caucus formally passed a resolution offered by Walt Willis affirming confidence in previous TAFF administrators and noting that any changes to TAFF that we may have found necessary are the result of changed circumstances and new demographics, not of fannish malfeasance from any quarter.

TAFF REPORTS: Yes, ours is coming along fine, thanks very much. Meanwhile, Bruce Pelz informs us that A FAKEFAN IN LONDON (Bob Madle, 1957) and THE SQUIRREL'S TALE (Ron Ellik, 1961) are available from him for $1 plus 50¢ postage, while TAFF BAEDEKER (Don Ford, 1959) and THE MOFFAT HOUSE ABROAD (Len & June Moffat, 1973) may be similarly had for $2 plus 75¢. Bruce Pelz, 15931 Kalisher St, Granada Hills CA 91344. In other TAFF-report news, Dave Langford's is forthcoming in one volume from Rob Jackson, Chinthay, Nightingale Lane, Hambrook near Chichester, West Sussex P018 8UH, UK; write to him and [make fun of his address] nudge him to hurry it up. Also, Avedon Carol's is written, and Dave Langford is reportedly going to publish it (come again? now, does Avedon publish ours, while we publish Stu's, and...?). More poop on the esoteric twilight world of TAFF reports in TAFFLUVIA #3.

AT LAST, THE FUN PART: well, better than seven pages of tedious discussion of Rules, anyway. Sorry about that; had to be done. Less next time. Will try harder. Look on the bright side: if you slogged through that, the following display of typically venal and avaricious fan-fund huckstering will doubtless seem positively... scintillating... by comparison, right? Of course right. Why, you're getting your wallet out even now. Don't worry, you can afford it. Trust us...

We mentioned a mail auction last time; here it is. How it works: Each item put up for auction will be listed in three successive TAFFLUVIAs; in the third, we'll announce a deadline for final bids shortly following the publication date of that issue. Since, obviously, all items in this first installment will be on the same three-installment cycle, there's no need to specify which cycle any of these is on. In future issues, however, we'll figure out a system to keep it all straight.

Anyway: Bidding deadline for this first installment of Cycle 1 is October 30, 1985 we plan to have the next TAFFLUVIA (a somewhat shorter issue, God wot) out in November, and the one after that at the same time as ballots for the next race, in mid-January. Also please note that, whereas this issue is going to everyone in North America who voted last time, future issues will be distributed on a catch-as-catch- can basis; TAFF can't afford mass mailings six times a year. Therefore, if you want to make sure you get every issue, you'd be well advised to send stamps. (Bidders get the next issue free, however. See the boxed statement on the back, above the mailing cover.)

Naturally, it goes without saying that donations of auctionable materials are the lifeblood of this sort of thing. Most of the material we're starting with comes from either our collection or pass-alongs from previous administrators; exceptions are noted. In particular, we think the auction is a good place to sell prime old fanzines. Other forms of selling to benefit TAFF will be detailed at vast length further along.

Ready, then: steady, go. We'll start with the Irish Fandom items, since they seem to have received the most spirited preliminary bidding, even before we could get this first installment into print.

ALSO FOR SALE, the following items of which we have several copies: FANTHOLOGY 1981, Patrick's collection of the best fanwriting from four years ago. 66pp mimeo, $2.50; stocks dwindling fast. SWEETMEATS, Jerry Kaufman's collection of fannish writing by Sandra Miesel; 34pp mimeo, profusely illustrated, not bad. $1.25. THE NEO-FAN'S GUIDE by Bob Tucker with a star-studded cast of revisers and updaters; LACon edition, wonderfully illustrated by Brad Foster, $1. We also have a few copies of Linda Bushyager's 1978 edition of the GUIDE, with interior illustrations by a variety of fanartists and a stunning, utterly fannish cover by Taral; $1.00 for the collectors among you. DEAR BRIAN, REGARDS, DEREK (aka THE DEREK CARTER ALPHABET) is available, not from us, but from Brian Earl Brown, 20101 W Chicago #201, Detroit MI 48228, all profits to TAFF and DUFF. An amusing conceit: 26 letters, literally letters, of comment by ace Canadian fanartist Derek Carter; suitable for coloring. GONAD THE BARBARIAN COMES AGAIN, published by Dave Langford in 1978, is an 11-page sword-and-stupidity round-robin featuring the deathless efforts of Langford, Kevin Smith, Rob Hansen, Joseph Nicholas, Jim Barker, Eve Harvey, and others too awesome to mention. Sterilize yourself with fear for only $1. THE ENCHANTED DUPLICATOR by Walt Willis and Bob Shaw, ConStellation edition illustrated by Dan Steffan, is $2 the copy; also note the signed edition of this for sale in the mail auction. Finally, we have millions of copies of the program booklet for the 1982 Norwescon stage production of THE ENCHANTED DUPLICATOR; this ten-page fanzine includes copious historical notes and high-minded observations on T.E.D. by Gary Farber and Patrick, as well as other stuff too silly to mention. 75¢ each or -- be still your beating heart -- free with any order over $10. (Bids excluded.)

LETTER COLUMN: Well, no. Those of you with long memories will perhaps recall that in our first issue we offered this fanzine as a forum for discussion of the issues surrounding TAFF. We then presented a series of decimally numbered propositions representing our then-current understanding of TAFF, its ideals, and its functional workings, and asked the rhetorical question "What's yours?" Contrary to Mike Glyer's implication (in FILE:770 54) that vast subterranean roilings are still going on over TAFF in fandom's collective mind, in fact with 500 copies of that TAFFLUVIA distributed, we got back exactly four letters of comment, three of which (from Brian Earl Brown, Terry Hill, and Neil Rest) were basically just encouraging notes, for which we thank them. The fourth, from Ben Yalow, raised a question of some substance: what, precisely, did we mean in proposition 1.3, "Transatlantic fannish contact is a special interest in its own right, and should be treated, and run, as such" --? Ben quite legitimately worried that this might come perilously close to asserting that TAFF is properly the bailiwick of a limited, special-interest group. Well, no; and we're sorry if anyone else got that impression. What we meant was that TAFF is an institution created for a specific purpose, with its own agenda -- promoting greater transatlantic amity between fans -- and should not be used as a mechanism for pursuing unrelated issues; no more than, say, the Hugos should be used as an exercise in block-voting by a group with an ideological axe to grind, rather than in recognition of the single outstanding work nominated. This point was to some extent a response to some regionally chauvinistic rhetoric present in certain campaign literature from the last race, but the authors of that literature have since then explained that they meant it as more of a joke than anything else; thus, we're inclined to forget about it. It didn't read to us like a joke at the time, but. possibly we were overwrought. In any case, we thoroughly agree that TAFF belongs to fandom at large, and besides, no rule ever written can prevent fans from voting according to their own notions of Right Criteria -- regional identification, perceived fanpolitical stance, or inseam length. The best we can do is try to make the rules clear, hold TAFF's fundamental ideals high, and try to remember the difference.

We did receive one other letter, but upon reading it proved to be a feud-letter written to a third party, which its author instructed us to regard as commentary on TAFFLUVIA. After intensive study it still looked to us like a feud-letter written to a third party. We filed it accordingly.

Anyway, sorry to condense our mail so drastically, but as you can see a lot of other things had to go into this issue, and TAFF can't afford to publish a discussionzine if so few people have anything to say. If the future brings us a wad of inquiring and/or protesting mail on TAFF policy, then we'll spend the money to provide a "public forum." But if 500 copies of an invitation to start a discussion, followed by fourteen unminced statements of principle, yield a grand total of four letters... we suspect we can assume much of fandom's talked itself out on the topic. Of course, we could be wrong.

RECAP: Schedules for the next race enclosed; nomination deadline for the next race, UK-->NA, is 31 December 1985. This issue is going to everyone who voted in the last race, less those we can't find addresses for; anyone who doesn't get one, and should have, is encouraged to complain. Due to cost, future issues will be distributed more sporadically; therefore, if you want to make sure you receive them all, send stamps. (Canadians may feel free to send Canadian stamps.) The one exception is auction bidders, who get the next issue free.

75 Fairview #2B
New York NY 10040


Bulk Rate
U.S. Postage
New York, N.Y.
Permit No. 5366