dsgood at VISI.COM
Tue Jun 22 04:34:01 UTC 1999
>Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 22:36:30 -0500
>From: Mike Salovesh <t20mxs1 at CORN.CSO.NIU.EDU>
>Subject: Re: fannish
>Mark_Mandel at DRAGONSYS.COM wrote:
>> Barry is investigating the dialect known as fannish or fanspeak. Concerning
>> "stf", on which he quotes as follows ---
>> FANTASTIC ADVENTURES, August 1951, pg. 120, col. 1:
>> Pardon my ignorance, but what does "stf" stand for? "S-F" is obviously
>> science-fiction; is "stf" a variant?
>> _S-F stands for science fiction; while STF is just a variation meaning
>> scientific fiction, ................Ed._
>> -- it's pretty much obsolete, AFAIK, but was pronounced, or -eable, /stef/, and
>> had the virtue of yielding the adjective "stfnal" /'stef.n at l/ [@=schwa]
>You're dang tootin it's pretty much obsolete. Hugo Gernsback, editor of
>Amazing Stories, preferred "stf" in his editorial comments circa
More precisely, it's the abbreviation for "scientifiction".
By the way -- Hugo Gernsback started 1) the first science fiction
magazine; 2) the first radio magazine; 3) the magazine called Sexology
(and possibly a few more that I've forgotten).
His first spoken language was probably Letzeburgish; he probably
learned German and French before he learned English. His first
written language was probably French; with German and possibly Hebrew
learned before English. I don't know how much this affected the
contents of his magazines.
>One of his successors, Ray
>A. Palmer, continued the custom some 20 years later; that was only one
>of his peculiarities.
>I vaguely recall that Gernsback used stf as and abbreviation for
>"science type fiction". Sfandom's general adoption of the term "sf"
>(and, arguably, the term "science fiction" itself) probably was
>influenced by the title of the leading sfzine from the late 1930s to
>perhaps the early 1950s: _Astounding Science Fiction_, usually called
I believe (though I'm not certain) that Gernsback also coined "science
>P.S.: No, I wasn't around in 1930, but I was an ardent fan
>in the 1945 to 1955 Golden Age of SF. (Only an utter barbarian would
>argue that 1945 to 1955 was not a Golden Age for sf. I wouldn't care to
>debate whether it was the "original" Golden Age, or only the second or
>third of its ilk, since that's partly a matter of taste.)
"The golden age of science fiction is twelve." Pete Graham.
dsgood at visi.com
Whatever you wish for me, may you have twice as much.
More information about the Ads-l