E.E. Smith

I didn't understand all the technical stuff about space drives and what not Doc's characters were spouting in Spacehounds Of IPC but it sounded so convincing and had such a smooth internal logic (at least to me) that I couldn't help but breathe it in as gospel.
 
I thought you'd appreciate this costume from Wonder Con...

620403o.jpg

Virgil Samms?
 
I didn't understand all the technical stuff about space drives and what not Doc's characters were spouting in Spacehounds Of IPC but it sounded so convincing and had such a smooth internal logic (at least to me) that I couldn't help but breathe it in as gospel.

It took me a while (and a read of Nicola Tesla's' research) to figure out that in the late 19th to early 20th century; secondary batteries (lead acid like your car starting battery) were often called accumulators of course, the very nearly extinct, vacuum tubes (valves for you folks on the right side of the pond) were the most wide spread electronics tech. (television was still a laboratory thing). The space drives/vision system and power transmission over a beam/weapons and a lot (most) of the "chemistry" was fictional, made up to sound good..
SF is often a mater of "suspension of disbelief" (a form of fantasy) to some extent.

Some of the "colloquialisms like "All X"are better read "all check" (as in a checklist) IMO, other may even have been a part of popular speech (similar to some of the popular language in the very early Doc Savage Magazine (later re-published as books) but now seem almost a foreign language.

I believe "Spacehounds" was first published, perhaps as a serial maybe as a sequence of shorts in a magazine then later compiled into a book... no matter; I still do a re-read every couple of years & like it.
It and Campbell's Mightiest Machine hold places of honor on my bookshelves.

Enjoy!
 
Last edited:
Smith just got another entry in Project Gutenberg

Screenshot_20220625-163524.jpg


That 60 cent price would make that a mid 60s cover.

The cover says the original title was "Vortex Blaster" but that is already in PG and it is much smaller. ???
 
Last edited:
The cover says the original title was "Vortex Blaster" but that is already in PG and it is much smaller. ???
The book is a fixup/connected collection of stories (which does have a couple of titles) and the other is probably the individual story.

It's a fun one, btw - people should go get it if they don't already have it. :)
 
With a little retooling , this could be an interesting tv series.
 
The main reasons to read it are for 1) the dizzyingly hilarious purple prose 2) historical importance to the genre 3) actually quite a lot of interesting ideas - one I like is that, for example, creatures are basically described as "human" depending on whether they are generally orientated towards (what are taken to be) the progressive values in the novels, not biology. And the aliens are really strange - more strange than alot of modern stuff, to be honest.
I read "Triplanetary" first, but could start with "First Lensmen" then read the former one last. "Vortex Blasters" can be read at any time, I think - probably the best written one, in terms of normal assessments of prose at least!
 
Between reading other things, I’ve started First Lensman today. I read Triplanetary recently and will work my way through the Lensman books. I’m loving it so far - a load of entertaining, lovely, old nonsense! :)
 
Review: First Lensman - E.E. 'Doc' Smith

first_lensman.jpg


First Lensman (1950) is the second volume, by internal chronology, of Edward E. Smith's classic 'Lensman Series', though it was the final volume to be written. Between 1937 and 1947, Smith originally serialised in Astounding what became four books in the series, starting with Galactic Patrol. In 1948 he reworked Triplanatery (which was first serialised in the magazine in 1934 as a standalone novel) as a prequel, and then wrote this second novel to act as a bridge between Triplanatery with the original Lensman stories.

Triplanetary (reviewed below, on 25th December 2021) was very episodic, and certainly came across as a reworked and expanded earlier novel. While it introduced some background to the galactic politics between two ancient and powerful races, it did not introduce the 'lens' apparatus or its wearers. First Lensman is in contrast a much more cohesive book, and is relatively well structured. It's certainly a better book, and more readable. Virgil Samms, one of the heroes of Triplanetary, is encouraged telepathically to visit the planet Arisia, home to the great, ancient and benevolent Arisians. There, he receives a 'lens' - a bracelet that confers telepathic abilities, and which can only be worn by the individual who meets the requirements to have one. Samms therefore becomes the first 'Lensman' and he goes on the select others who meet the requirements for lensmanship, who then each also acquire a lens. The novel then follows the Lensmen setting up a 'Galactic Patrol', to make the galaxy safe from wrongdoers of all kinds. In this volume, the target of the Lensmen and their new Patrol is a drug-smuggling operation of interstellar scale, run in part by an Earth-based politician.

So, is First Lensman much good? Well, its very old, and while it was written in 1950, it was written to fit into a space opera conceived in 1937, by an author who wrote much of their work in the 20's and 30's. It therefore unavoidably falls down in several aspects, though one must make allowances for the era it comes from. It has often been noted that Smith's work is very male-centric, though in fact, capable women are certainly not absent here. A failing of much old SF is that it plays fast and loose with physics; but again, this is not such a failing here as I would have expected. Smith tries where he can to follow natural laws. In space-ships everyone is weightless, so he gets one over on Star Trek and Star Wars in this regard.

There is also a good deal of clever invention here. One might expect lots of daft 'handwavium', but more often than not Smith comes up with intriguing solutions to physical problems. How could an alien species live on very cold planets, such as Pluto? Smith suggests they partially exist in hyperdimensions as well as the three we see, which effects their energy use and requirements. Indeed, his invention of aliens is really pretty good. The least reasonable aspects of the plot are not his aliens, or high technology inventions, its the (almost absurd) degree of efficiency with which the Lensmen and their allies can fulfill projects. I suspect this stems from the belief that we will become very efficient as we gain new technological insights, and this doubtless reflects an optimism typical of SF of this era, which seems strange now. As an example, in what seems like only a few months, the Lensmen identify a empty planet, recruit many thousands of skilled workers to move there and set up factories, and then build 6 (six!) superdreadnought space-ships, and a fleet of smaller craft. Despite the simple issue of manufacturing impossibility, where did they get the money to do it? Paying for stuff is not a problem the Lensmen have to consider it seems. However, such unbelievable productivity is probably the single greatest weakness of the book, which is otherwise an exciting and entertaining romp, and one of the founding pillars of the space-opera subgenre.
 
The least reasonable aspects of the plot are not his aliens, or high technology inventions, its the (almost absurd) degree of efficiency with which the Lensmen and their allies can fulfill projects. I suspect this stems from the belief that we will become very efficient as we gain new technological insights, and this doubtless reflects an optimism typical of SF of this era, which seems strange now.
It's not unreasonable to me and it's not that we will become so efficient--it's that we were so efficient. He's simply transposing into the future what the US, UK, Canada, ANZAC, and other allies had just done. ;)

Good review, though!
 
It's not unreasonable to me and it's not that we will become so efficient--it's that we were so efficient. He's simply transposing into the future what the US, UK, Canada, ANZAC, and other allies had just done. ;)

Good review, though!
Well, yes that's a very good point I hadn't considered; WWII ships were built very quickly, which is perhaps where this comes form. Except that a Fletcher class destroyer like the one below still took over a year to build and fit out. Some transports and freighters could be built in less than a month, and the quickest 'Liberty' ship was finished in less than 5 days! I don't see this happening these days. Nonetheless, I'd still like to know where the Lensmen got the money!

1660112181822.png
 
Last edited:
Just by-the-by, I find it funny that Smith made such a deal of his doctorate as a SF author, when it was awarded for his thesis on food chemistry, specifically the effect of nitrogen oxide bleaching of wheat flour on the quality of bread! Not exactly cosmology was it! He spent most of his 'scientific' life working on doughnut mixtures. :giggle:
 
The thing I find hardest about them is the sheer gung-ho relentless unashamed vigilantism of the Lensmen. Judge jury and executioners - no mention of the process of law anywhere. People killed, entire city block razed, whole planets destroyed (sometimes by whacking other planets into them) because someone on them has a name with too many harsh consonants and incompetently deals a bit of smack. To extend J-Sun's point Kimbal and all the rest are Elliot Ness and the Gangbusting G-men writ large.
 
The thing I find hardest about them is the sheer gung-ho relentless unashamed vigilantism of the Lensmen.
Yes, I can see that too, for sure. This aspect did niggle on occasion, I won't lie. I'm reading them in large part for historical interest, as I enjoy the fact that, as my reading widens and deepens over the years, I gather a decent amount of context in which to appreciate (or criticise) other SF work. I enjoy giving myself that context and knowledge. But no, they are clearly far from perfect! But they are 'important' and have their moments, and this novel was much 'better' in some ways than I suspected would be the case. Especially the aliens.
 
To what degree do you have to take the social psychology of the dominant culture and how it has evolved over the last 500 years into account when looking at SF and how it has evolved over 200 years?


Wait, you mean starships replaced sailing ships?
 
Nonetheless, I'd still like to know where the Lensmen got the money!
Deficit spending! :)
Just by-the-by, I find it funny that Smith made such a deal of his doctorate as a SF author
To be fair, I think it was Gernsback who made it a deal because any time he could stick a Ph.D. on someone, he felt it made his magazine more respectable. And, in the case of people like Isaac Asimov's father, it may have worked (thank goodness). I may be wrong about all that, but it seems like I remember it correctly.
The thing I find hardest about them is the sheer gung-ho relentless unashamed vigilantism of the Lensmen. Judge jury and executioners - no mention of the process of law anywhere. People killed, entire city block razed, whole planets destroyed (sometimes by whacking other planets into them) because someone on them has a name with too many harsh consonants and incompetently deals a bit of smack. To extend J-Sun's point Kimbal and all the rest are Elliot Ness and the Gangbusting G-men writ large.
True, though I think they attained some sort of official Defenders of Humanity sort of thing from Humanity, so weren't exactly vigilantes - either way, though, the vigilante vibe still applies. If it's read like political and judicial philosophy, it doesn't fly too well, but this was just "The Good Guys are good because they're Good and the Bad Guys are bad because they're Bad and, when the Good Guys beat the Bad Guys, all's right with the worlds." Whether it's the Lone Ranger (or Ness) or Star Wars or whatever, it's not some personal weirdness of Smith. I'm glad not everybody wrote like he did, but I'm also glad he wrote.
 

Similar threads


Back
Top