Annie wrote:
Louise Rutter:
<< People's beliefs as to where the right to privacy starts and finishes vary wildly. If you can accept the religious objections to homosexuality, why can't you accept the different standards that Ashton Press has from your own? Is it purely because of the less tactful way that Annie puts her
case?
I wasn't aware I'd "put" my case any way at all, tactfully or otherwise.
That's the first accurate statement I've seen from you in a long time.
First off, I don't feel the need to defend or justify my fanzines and
what
they contain.
Well, you can't defend the indefensible. Perhaps this also counts as another honest answer from you, Annie.
They are written and illustrated by a huge range of fans
(some issues had 40 or more contributors) stretching back close to 20
years
in various fandoms.
Yes, but you are the editor and publisher. You can't get away from the fact that you are the one ultimatly responsible for what goes into an Ashton Press publication.
Furthermore, early issues of the adult zines featured
no artwork whatsoever as a matter of policy other than the front covers.
So they do feature artwork then.
If > >anyone thinks any of those covers are "explicit" I'd have to say they
simply have dirty minds.
Unless you tell us or show us what those covers feature, we only have your word for it.
Later issues began to feature some interior
artwork, none of it that I can recall, I might add, drawn by Leah
But was it explicit art? And if it was, did the actor object? And if he did, how did you respond?
other
than probably some CARTOONS.
Cartoon can also be explicit. What kind of cartoons?
Quite a lot of fans have enjoyed Leah's
artwork and cartoons over the years and have been very happy that it has appeared at conventions, in fanzines, on our website and in professional publications such as Starlog.
Leah is a good artist. I am sure that she has done work that a lot of fans find enjoyable. But you are still avoiding the question. If Leah's art has appeared in professional pubications such as Starlog, I bet they were just normal cartoons, and didn't feature material or themes that could get Starlog sued.
The conversations about "why" Leah or I might want to be part of Blakes 7 fandom are extremely flattering, I must say. I had no idea that we were considered such an interesting subject of conversation.
It's not *who* you are, but *what* you are doing that is getting so much attention. Don't confuse the two. And don't be flattered by it.
Let's see. In the
last 20 years we have collectively published dozens of fanzines, written well over 100 fan stories (many of which are available on our website nowadays),
That's hardly unique. So have many other people.
drawn artwork and cartoons (many of which I now publish to our
website),
I know, and that's part of the problem.
helped run numerous conventions,
Yes, I've been hearing about that. Scorpio, wasn't it?
published photographs (many of
which are also now available on our website)... and I think I can truthfully say that we have had fun doing it
I'm sure you have.
and, unless hundreds of people
have been lying to me in letters and at conventions, we made a lot of
fans
happy over the years.
I'm sure you did. But from what I've been hearing, you also made a lot of people very unhappy indeed.
Shane
Largo: Why do I feel as if I'm on trial here? Avon: Why do I feel that you should be?
Who needs Cupid? Matchmaker.com is the place to meet somebody. FREE Two-week Trial Membership at http://www.matchmaker.com/home?rs=200015