Slashdot Mirror

Gabe's recounting has an obvious problem. Why would a dude who got thrown out of college himself (a story he retells proudly) snootily inquire if someone else "even attended college"?

Because he expected Gabe to answer 'yes' at which point he was prepared to once again retell his story proudly and proclaim his superiority over college boys: "You guys spend all that time in the system, and I still know more than you." That's the type of guy Harlan Ellison is.

If you look at Ellison's own account of the event, he tells a story of a misunderstanding, however he still sounds like an asshole. He says he didn't mean to tell Gabe to go fuck himself, he was saying that to a member of the audience while ignoring Gabe's comment. Gabe just thought that it was directed at him.

Seriously? He was telling a member of the audience to go fuck himself? Oh, and he knew the guy in the audience who apparently said something rude to him, so that makes it alright. Also, the college and high school questions, he was just curious about Gabe's level of education, he meant no disrespect. Because clearly the implication that a person with a certain level of education should have the word foolscap in his vocabulary isn't condescending at all.

"I don't know what is contract said, but if he's like most of us it's called "work for hire" and he's already been paid. Unless he has a contract that promises a percentage of the future royalties and licensing he's just upset that he didn't negotiate said type of contract back in the day."

Um...you should have done your research. According to Ellison's press release ( http://harlanellison.com/heboard/visitors/startrekpressrelease.html ), that IS what happened. Ellison's contract specified that he would receive royalties on material based on City on the Edge of Forever, Paramount and Pocket Books put out a trilogy based on it, and refused to honour the contract.

Harlan DID say that. See his press release:

Paramount licensed its sister-corporation Simon & Schuster, through its Pocket Books division, the right to publish a knock-off trilogy of paperbacks the Crucible series novels based on City, using Ellisons unique elements....

Slashdot links to a blog post by some jerk who dislikes Harlan intensely and makes fun of him (admittedly, Harlan is easy to dislike) with selective quotes and comments. Entertaining in its own way, but certainly not fair to Harlan.

Asking someone why they aren't putting on their jester's cap isn't necessarily nice, either. Oh, they left that part out of the CGW article, but it's on their web page:

http://www.penny-arcade.com/2005/09/26
So Tycho and I are up in front of the audience with Harlen, and Hank (the con organizer) presents us with some jester hats ("Fool's caps"). Tycho and I put ours on because we are polite, but Harlen - who is apparently too cool for school - refuses to wear his. I turn to him and say, "Don't you want your hat?" and he tells me to fuck off. This caught me off guard, I mean I have no clue who this fucking coot is. Then he points to a pad of paper he has and asks if I'm aware that his paper is also called foolscap. Now, I've never heard that term before, I pretty much just call it paper so I shake my head "no." This really isn't a fair question. I mean, it would be like me asking him about Photoshop or if he can remember what he had for lunch. The guy was essentially setting me up to look stupid in front of all these people. So then he asks me if I even attended college and I say "No, I did not." Then, he says "did you at least finish high school?"

Remember, Gabe and Tycho went into this expecting him to be a little testy, and with a plan to deliver a "zinger" when the opportunity arose, so I'm sure they took everything he said with that in mind. They theorized he was upset that he had to share the stage with them, and so tried to belittle them at the first opportunity. But it could just as easily be true that Harlan felt Gabe started it when he asked him to wear the hat.

As for Harlan, here's what he had to say:
http://harlanellison.com/heboard/archive/unca20050 926.htm
Geeewhiz, I seem to have aroused the feral bleats of Gabe & Tycho's aficionados.

Met the co-guests of honor at Foolscap for all of two minutes.

One of them seemed to me a pleasant man with a nice manner.

The other struck me as a superannuated teen-age golem with a slack jaw, a slow manner, a typical pointless surliness at a world unwilling or unable to accept him as Superlative, and on sum a twerp easy to dismiss.

But then, I'm known for my compassion.

Harlan

Harlan doesn't suffer fools, and especially not gladly. Gabe came off as a boob making snarky comments from the start, and when Harlan tried to engage him intellectually, Gabe showed further weakness by not knowing what he was talking about. Did Harlan take advantage of this to snark back? Sure, but rather than take it in stride, Gabe then went for the comment he had pre-planned to make... a comment which Harlan would regard as a pretty unsophisticated zinger at that, which only made things worse for Gabe.

In any case, perhaps Harlan through Gabe said something else. Or perhaps Harlan didn't say what Gabe thought he said. We do know for sure, though, that Gabe and Tycho entered the frey intended to provoke an exchange from Harlan, and they got exactly what they wanted. I don't see Harlan is to blame for that. Oh, but I see, you figure it's just "coincidence" that Harlan was hostile, that it wasn't Gabe's intent at all, and of course that just confirms your pre-existing evaluation of Harlan's personality.

In the final analysis, I don't know what exactly happened or who is to blame. But I do know something about talking with Harlan, and that's what I posted about. Yes, Harlan has probably pissed off more people in the sf arena than any other author, but the number of people who have managed to get along fine with him still far surpass those few incidents. The man's personality may have sharper corners than most, but that doesn't mean you should intentionally thrust your knee into one just to demonstrate that.

Bruce

"Individuals seem to think that they can allow the dissemination of writers' work on the internet without authorization, and without payment, under the banner of "fair use" or the idiot slogan "information must be free." A writer's work is not information: it is our creative property, our livelihood and our families' annuity. Why should any artist, of any kind, continue creating new work, eking out an existence in pursuit of a career, following the muse, when little internet thieves, rodents without ethic or understanding, steal and steal and steal, conveniencing themselves and "screw the author"? What we're looking at is the death of the professional writer!"

More flame-throwing corkers here.

As a longtime reader of local alternative rags, I can assure you that they are supported by advertizers - and do have ads on every page. Much in the same way local network television is supported by commercials.

You're right that, in general, many forms of free expression are currently still allowed. But I'm saying that outcomes *exist* where in the future this could not be the case. An example: say I give a tutorial on installing Linux in my blog. Some luser hoses his install, blows away all his data, and sues me for bad advice. But I'm not licensed or accredited or *anything* - never said to blindly follow my instructions without considering the "if"s. So the court rules that I'm not financially responsible. But now there's a ground swell to require liability insurance for all bloggers, and it passes into law. Now I can't afford the associated fees when all I wanted to do was teach newbies.

Another scenario is the recent case of the Canadian woman who reported various environmental hazards and nuisances against the construction company taking over her neighborhood, reported not long ago on Slashdot. The company's suing her for 2 million. Well, what if Microsoft sues every blogger who said "MS sucks, I'm going to use Linux/BSD/Macintosh..." Blogs go south, when you can only look forward to that kind of reward. What I'm pointing to is: suing keeps little people quiet.

But back to the case of the stolen story. A quote from Bill Gates' bio, courtesy of the Rotten.com http://www.rotten.com/library/bio/business/bill-ga tes/ library:

Bill's company had written a port of the BASIC programming language (previously seen on other machines, and which Bill neither designed nor paid royalties for the use of) and this software, retailing at over $600 in 1975, was freely traded among the different computer owners, since, well, six hundred dollars is a lot of fucking money. This drove the young Gates ballistic, and in that year he fired off what became known as "The Letter", or "An Open Letter to Hobbyists", in which he decried this outward theft of his (ported, design-lifted) product. The letter drips with ironies, as Gates asks a group of people to stop taking his software and using it for free, when in fact his entire distribution model had depended on these very groups, and his product wasn't his exclusively in the first place. Needless to say, these sort of demands became much easier once Gates' company essentially corralled the entire market under its wing.

Case one of other people's work being stolen and then copyrighted against them! Yeah, it could happen. But what about plain 'ol piracy? Yes, big companys do it *ALL* the time, if you follow Harlan Ellison's legal battles: http://harlanellison.com/home.htm you get a sense after all that nearly nothing we see in the media is bought and paid for. There's nothing all that particular about Harlan's work, it's just that he's one of those crusaders who refuse to give an inch; kind of the Richard Stallman of science fiction, only with the panache of H.S. Thompson. No, not every legal battle he engages in involves direct theft of his work. And no, not every case is Earth-shattering proof that big media companies steal (Ellison has been accused of being, ah, extreme). But a hell of a lot of them are!

This ain't all here for point-for-point refutal. I juct bring it up because it gives me reason to say, "Never say never!"

Historically the American voting public do change their minds in the face of evidence

Just *bursting* with faith in the collective wisdom of the human spirit, aren't you?

Huh?

TV is better now than it's *EVER* been in it's history. People are spending $50 a pop to buy a season of a TV series on DVDs -- would they do that if TV was garbage?

Look, I know it's cool and all to mention you're weaned off the glass teat and whatnot, but even Harlan Ellison is ranting on about how good LOST is (seach for 'Saturday, October 1 2005 14:48:10').

You aren't cool.

Don't forget some of his non-fiction (or at least non-fictionalized) works, such as, " The Three Most Important Things in Life: Sex, Violence, and Labor Relations" which can be found (apparently officially) at http://harlanellison.com/iwrite/mostimp.htm/ . Two suitably bizarre accounts, and then his Half-day employment by Disney.

Having read some of his personal essays, as well as the standards such as, "I Have No Mouth, but I Must Scream", I would say the operative adjective isn't "prickly" but rather "obstreperous".

Ellison "prickly"? You must be using some meaning of the word "prickly" that I wasn't previously familiar with.

Harlan was a wicked, wicked young man. His readings at Worldcon in NYC in the late 60's and early 70's were the stuff of massive panel debates. AND, fawning admiration by most of the attendees.

I can remember one piece that Harlan read an overtly raw sex piece from the dais at the Commodore Hotel, around the time that he published "I see a man sitting in a chair and the chair is biting his leg" in a collaboration with Robert Sheckley. I recall that Sheckley, Gunn, and Silverberg were all onthe panel and a room full of college kids had their first exposure to erotic literature.

The man wrote, and read, brilliantly. Yes, he has short-man's syndrome, but in his defense, he has taste and style and a willingness to explore just about anything as a writer.

From his Dangerous Visions anthologies to his scripts for Demon with a Glass Hand and City on the Edge of Forever to The Glass Teat and The Other Glass Teat, Ellison has cranked out a lifetime's work nearly every year for the first 20 years of his professional life. Only Isaac Asimov was more prolific.

Ellison had a legitimate, hard fought, lawsuit for copyright violation. Companies were reprinting his work and selling it without paying any royalty and Ellison had every right to fight for his property rights.

See, http://harlanellison.com/home.htm/ for Ellison's (way out of date) home page and,

See, http://www.authorslawyer.com/c-ellison.shtml/ for the copyright action.

Frivolity is apparently subjective, contingent upon whether or not one's income relies on the sale of copyrighted material. FYI, AOL has settled with Mr. Ellison.

I,Robot was a selection of short stories. Did you expect them to make a selection of short films?

Harlan Ellison wrote the correct screenplay for I, Robot . It's the story of Susan Calvin.

More info here. The making of the recent action flick rather than Ellison's script is a crime against art and against the human soul.

Agreed. Oryx and Crake is a great book. It shows off Margaret Atwood's strengths, the most important IMO is her way of making the fantastic seem plausible. By incorporating all those memes that surround us.. and that we fail to pay attention to anymore.. she creates a nightmare you can imagine with uncomfortable ease. (Check out the "pop-up ads" on the Web site. Nice touch. Good for a sardonic chuckle or two.)

In a way, I'm glad O&C could never be made into a movie (except maybe as animation). Hollywood could only fsck it up. (Hint to Ms. Atwood: talk to this guy before inking any movie deals. Please.)

And whaddya know.. I just handed over my copy to my wife, who in turn has put Atwood's The Blind Assassin (Booker Prize winner) in my hands. Life is good..

An addendum to my previous post:

Buy Simon the Sorcerer 1, 2, and 3D

Found out that Harlan Ellison's site has I Have No Mouth, and I Must Scream the computer game for $32.

Lucasarts has a few of their classics still for sale, buried deeply on their site: Grim Fandango, Full Throttle, a 3.5-pack with Day of the Tentacle, Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis, and Sam & Max hit the Road (the full Maniac Mansion game is included in Day of the Tentacle, hence the .5), Escape From Monkey Island, Curse of Monkey Island, and a Mega Monkey Bundle with Monkey Island 1-4 (look for promo link under Escape from Monkey Island).

Broken Sword III

Broken Sword I and II are still for sale here and there-- I couldn't find a good link. I did, however, find that Revolution (who makes these games) has released Lure of the Temptress along with Beneath a Steel Sky.

Beneath a Steel Sky and Flight of the Amazon Queen for download from ScummVM. Also, re-coded cutscenes for Broken Sword I and II to get the video working in ScumMVM.

Original text from Harlan here, perhaps someone reply with a bit of SHIFT-F3.

Harlan Ellison's webpage:

From his NEWS page he's been on a campaign to Kick Internet Piracy.

According to this site, he's been fighting to prevent unauthorized posting of books/creating work on the intarweb without the authors consent...he believes AOL was partly responsible for his works being posted.

TO PROTECT WRITERS' CREATIVE PROPERTIES.

WE FILED A LAWSUIT AGAINST THE ABOVE PARTIES TO STOP THEM FROM POSTING MY WORKS ON THE INTERNET WITHOUT PERMISSION. THIS IS COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT. RAMPANT. OUT OF CONTROL. PANDEMIC.

What I find surprising is that the lower court sided WITH AOL in what looks to be a one sided case in favor of Ellison. How can the lower court support the DMCA and still side with an evil corporation...are they that corrupt now? Do we need federal courts to provide simple justice to the common man now?

Harlan Ellison's webpage:

From his NEWS page he's been on a campaign to Kick Internet Piracy.

According to this site, he's been fighting to prevent unauthorized posting of books/creating work on the intarweb without the authors consent...he believes AOL was partly responsible for his works being posted.

TO PROTECT WRITERS' CREATIVE PROPERTIES.

WE FILED A LAWSUIT AGAINST THE ABOVE PARTIES TO STOP THEM FROM POSTING MY WORKS ON THE INTERNET WITHOUT PERMISSION. THIS IS COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT. RAMPANT. OUT OF CONTROL. PANDEMIC.

What I find surprising is that the lower court sided WITH AOL in what looks to be a one sided case in favor of Ellison. How can the lower court support the DMCA and still side with an evil corporation...are they that corrupt now? Do we need federal courts to provide simple justice to the common man now?

Harlan Ellison's webpage:

From his NEWS page he's been on a campaign to Kick Internet Piracy.

According to this site, he's been fighting to prevent unauthorized posting of books/creating work on the intarweb without the authors consent...he believes AOL was partly responsible for his works being posted.

TO PROTECT WRITERS' CREATIVE PROPERTIES.

WE FILED A LAWSUIT AGAINST THE ABOVE PARTIES TO STOP THEM FROM POSTING MY WORKS ON THE INTERNET WITHOUT PERMISSION. THIS IS COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT. RAMPANT. OUT OF CONTROL. PANDEMIC.

What I find surprising is that the lower court sided WITH AOL in what looks to be a one sided case in favor of Ellison. How can the lower court support the DMCA and still side with an evil corporation...are they that corrupt now? Do we need federal courts to provide simple justice to the common man now?

Here's Ellison's "press release" about the case. The overuse of ALL CAPS surprised me a little because he is a good writer, but I guess it shouldn't have given the man's personality.

Looking at it, it does look like he still has to clear several hurdles. So this isn't a sure thing. You can read about Harlan Ellison's general efforts to deal with protecting author's copyrights here.

Looking at it, it does look like he still has to clear several hurdles. So this isn't a sure thing. You can read about Harlan Ellison's general efforts to deal with protecting author's copyrights here.

that this article appears next to an article about Harlan Ellison, who originally reminded us, you don't fuck with the Mouse.

BAEN Authors?! Please don't put Gaiman in the same league as the Baen stable. Those guys will come to your house, wash your car, and watch your kids for a couple of hours if you buy their book. The promotional risks that are worth taking for the coffeeshop artists don't necessarily work for the major leaguers.

"Why should any artist, of any kind, continue creating new work, eking out an existence in pursuit of a career, following the muse, when little Internet thieves, rodents without ethic or understanding, steal and steal and steal, conveniencing themselves and "screw the author"? What we're looking at is the death of the professional writer!"

It wasn't all that long ago that artists where happy for people to hear their work, because if it was good enough more people would pay to see them, and that would keep the food on the table

And many artists still fall into that category. But some artists either don't tour or have limited promotional tours because their music doesn't translate over well "live." (Or do the trance/techno/post-modern-post-production guys not count?)

Then, of course, there are the other artists -- authors, movie-makers, for example -- for whom making a living by charging an audience to experience them "creating" has never been a viable option.

An artist should be able to say, "Look, I made something, here's a free sample; want more? Pay me this amount. Too high? Buy something else from someone else." The extent of the free sample, and the means whereby that free sampling is distributed, should be up to the artist or the artist's distributor/publisher/marketing guru. Some artists have concluded that extensive free samples is good for their business, others have a decidely different perspective. The point being, it is the artists' decision re how hs stuff is disseminated, not yours or mine.

Now, the artists under Jim Baen's imprimatur are in a league apart from the venerable Mr. Ellison, and as such I suspect (actually, I know) that both of their very different strokes are right for both camps. Phish is not Kraftwerk is not Al Stewart; one style of distribution, either completely open or traditionally restrictive, won't work perfectly for all.

Oops. Spoke a bit too soon.

It seems there's two versions of that article, that one and the one Newsweek actually published.

Here's the other

written in 1966 by Harlan Ellison, called Demon with a Glass Hand , which starred Robert Culp. A modern remake is being filmed too.

In Demon, the whole human race was digitized to protect it from alien invasion, not just individual personalities.

I'm a big fan of Baen books, David Weber's stuff in particular. (In fact, lemme plug him here again.) I'm also a big fan of Harlan Ellison's work, and Mr. Ellison's perspective is a bit different from Mr. Baen's.

One size does not fit all. The Rolling Stones and Harlan Ellison don't need or want their work freely dispersed to generate "a buzz." For a prolific but otherwise "B" genre author like Mr. Weber (and many of those under the Baen umbrella) the promotional interest the freebies generate for the back catalog outweigh whatever retail losses their might be as a result.

Do you think for a moment that if Tom Clancy signed with Baen he would allow them to do with his stuff what they've done to Weber's? Now, why would that be?

Someone needs to update their theory.

Update your own theory to account for individual author's popularity, prolific-ness, back catalog, and target audience, and get back to us.

I admit it, I didn't read the article, I skimmed the subject quickly, which brought to mind this story. To the comment's author, if you are inclined to participate as more than just a critic, why did you not provide the link yourself and demonstrate to the world + dog why your suggested approach is superior? Your comment makes sense, and in retrospect I would have done so if I'd have thought of it at the time.

I worked for Ellison very briefly in college -- I sold books at one of his speaking engagements after a conversation lasting several hours the previous evening. I suspect that he would prefer readers wanting to explore his works purchase them directly from the author. From my own experience he's a parsimonious fellow who guards his income jealously, and he appreciates direct sales. :)

As far as I know there is no + mod to my comment other than a karma bonus I forgot to remove. Whatever, mods giveth and taketh as they will.

A good script for "I, Robot" has existed for years.
Harlan Ellison did it over 20 years ago. You can
find a review here.

Mr. Ellison managed to weave the stories into a
cohesive whole. I have very low expectations for
Fox's version.

Those bastards aren't going to use Harlan Ellison's screenplay. So don't bother. I'm not surprised. Will Smith's version should be better than the execrable adaptation of Nightfall whose only dubious distinction is that it was filmed at Arcosanti, but it probably won't be better than Robin William's super-schmaltzy Bicentennial Man.

I know for a fact that there are a lot of digital copies of copyrighted works such as Frank Herbert's Dune series and The Lord of the Rings floating around the Net and I think the newsgroups as well.

Of course, there are. And why shouldn't there be? Information (and Entertainment) Must Be Free!

Just ask Harlan

Which reminds me, it's prolly not a bad idea to provide the Harlan KICK link here. Amidst the din created by the RIAA, MPAA, college kids and Linux SysAdmins, it doesn't hurt to hear the perspective of an artist periodically, particularly since, as far as ranting goes, Mr. Ellison holds a black belt

I haven't read his other works, but if they are anything like Paladin of the Lost Hour, then I'm a fan of Harlan Ellison.

Just about everything you need to know about Harlan can be found on harlanellison.com. And check out the quote on the first page. Way to make friends, Harlan.

I think it's fair to say that Lucas is trying to protect his own creative vision by not allowing new "stories" in his universe.

Lucas created it, and if he wants to have a limited contest, then he can. I don't see what the big deal is.
How many novels set in places like Middle-Earth weren't sanctioned by Lord of the Rings author JRR Tolkien?

I'm sure Harlan Ellison would have a few things to say about this. Get him to post here!

Donate money to Harlan Ellison to prevent authors' rights on the internet.

I am sure the money will be well spent.

This case might make industry think twice about the DMCA if the copyright work in question were owned by, say, Bertelsmann or another AOL-Time-Warner competitor. But as the suit was brought by some puny individual (no offense, Mr. Ellison, but you're not a mega-media conglomerate) and the Right Side won, this won't change the opinions of Anyone That Matters.

Almost a great correction, but you forgot the html, genius:

http://harlanellison.com/kick/

Now run along before you are destroyed.

Harlan Ellison had a great response to the question "So is it wrong to do so?". Never was a huge fan of his fiction (obviously brilliant, just never clicked with me), but my God the man can write a brilliant invective.

The first 20 or so issues of "Cerebus" were dynamite. Uneven at first, since Dave Sim didn't fully know what he was doing, but very biting and funny. The only comic book that ever made me laugh out loud. They are available online or at your local comic book shop, which probably needs the support. Issues 25-50 were decent. Since then it's just been a bunch of pretentious nothingness. It was a shame when Sim decided he was an Artist. The idea of a catalyst (in this case, the Net) which will allow comics to break through to the mainstream & finally be perceived as a respectable medium is far from new. It was a very big hope in the 80s, during which the direct sales market (i.e., comic book shops that didn't have the same restrictions as your corner drugstore) formed, the second wave of great underground cartoonists (such as Peter Bagge, Dan Clowes and Charles Burns) emerged, and the intelligentsia embraced Art Spiegelman's "Maus" (very overrated, I think, as are most things loved by the elite). This kind of optimism is understandable. People who dedicate their professions and lives to this medium know they are often creating, and are in the presence of, great art. They are greatly frustrated at not seeing the rest of the world share their recognition. I can't blame them. I don't think the Net is an appropriate medium for comics, pretty much for reasons previously mentioned: current monitor quality & resolution can't properly support it, and as the Web continues to become more dynamic, a comparatively static medium such as comics will inevitably give way online to more animation and other neat effects tricks. Strangely, though I agree Groth and disagree with McCloud, I consider McCloud to be a beacon of integrity in the comics industry and Groth to be one of it's biggest jerks. As a publisher, Groth has done much for comics (he has published all of the underground artists I previously mentioned), but as an editor, he has continuously abused his power. I'd never trust him to be putting his true opinion before his own self-interest (perhaps the case here?). Check out this 30,000-word article from Harlan Ellison's Website (reprinted from "Gauntlet" magazine) for an example of what I'm talking about. (However, if Groth were to ever admit that Jaime Hernandez rocked in the first six issues of "Love & Rockets" but has pretty much sucked since then, well, maybe then I'd start to change my opinion...)

You may be happy/shocked to hear that this truly was a case of mistaken identity. Shortly after this little encounter, Mr. Ellison asked Peter David to post a public apology to Usenet (to which I would provide a link if only Deja/Google were up), and he and I have spoken a few times on the phone. I re-expressed my concern for the estates of his deceased contributors, and he assured me that he is working to address those concerns. He sent my son an autographed book.

I haven't spoken with him since 1996, and I am still worried about the income that the families of his contributors are not earning due to his procrastination. Perhaps the KICK effort will help him to remember his own obligations with regard to intellectual property custodianship.

Here is an audio recording of one of his short stories, Paladin of the Lost Hour. From his official website. You should listen to it. It's really quite good.

Here is an audio recording of one of his short stories, Paladin of the Lost Hour. From his official website. You should listen to it. It's really quite good.

Lynch has disavowed the TV extended version to the point that it says "an Alan Smithee film" in reference to the Director's Guild pseudonym that is used when a film is abused by the studio w/o the director's consent.

That's interesting. Harlan Ellison uses the pseudonym "Cordwainer Bird" for the same purpose.

It's a space western, folks. Lots of people like John Wayne's movies, too, but that doesn't mean he didn't have to wrap his mouth around some of the lamest, most pretentious dialogue ever written. At least Alec Guinness has the presence of mind to take himself less seriously than the Duke.

Sure, Star Wars is entertaining. Many children's movies are. I enjoyed all four. But people who think they're high art need to get out more often.

Jamie McCarthy

Why won't they film Harlan Ellison's script of several Asimov novels I, Robot: The Illustrated Screenplay.

Erik

Has it ever occurred to you that God might be a committee?