Reflections From a Murky Pond

In January of 1945, during the final months of WW2, the already renowned science fiction author Robert Heinlein wrote a letter to one of science fiction’s greatest fans, Forrest Ackerman who many consider the founder of science fiction fandom. In the missive Mr. Heinlein offered his sincere and heart-felt condolences over Mr. Ackerman’s brother, Alden’s death during the Battle of the Bulge on New Year’s Day 1945 while he serving in the 11th Armor Division, 42nd Tank Battalion, D Company as the battalion was fighting its way to Bastogne to relieve the 101st Airborne.

Alden Ackerman was 21 years old at the time of of his death from a German air strike on the battalion which was securing Rechrival, Belgium.

Robert Heinlein did more than offer his condolences though. He also launched a blistering and cruelly accurate attack on the bulk of science fiction fandom of the time. Heinlein passionately condemned the inaction of most fans and, not without cause, blamed these fans for the death of Forrest’s brother, Alden.

The transcript and scan of Heinlein’s letter is from Letters of Note.

311 S. Hicks St.
Philadelphia 2, Pa.
28 Jan 1945

Dear Forry,

Our hearts are sore at your loss and there is nothing we can say to relieve your personal anguish. Your brother died a noble and heroic death. It is my belief that he did in fact die to make a better world; it is for us who live on to see to it that a better world is accomplished. I am heartened that you regard it as your duty to follow through on his unfinished work.

I will not be able to supply an article for the fan publication you propose to publish in his memory. I dislike to have to tell you that I will not be writing for you, under the circumstances, and I feel that you are entitled to a full explanation. Forry, every day I am writing things which are, literally, dedicated to Alden, and to the many, many others who have died and are dying. My daily writings are dedicated to getting the war won quicker with the fewest number of deaths of our own. My writings are laboratory instructions, engineering reports, letters to manufacturers, and other things having to do with the tedious work of scientific research for war. It takes up all of my energy and all of my imagination and I have none left over for other matters. If I had any energy left over, I would know that I was not doing all that I could do and I would then, in truth, be disloyal to your brother’s memory.

(I have, not a belief, not a conviction, but a knowledge of personal survival. You said on your post card that you wanted to discuss the matter with us someday. We will be honored to do so.)

Forry, you have sought my advice on matters which worried you in the past. You have not sought my advice in this matter, but I am going to presume on our old friendship to offer you some. I know that you are solemn in your intention to see to it that Alden’s sacrifice does not become meaningless. I am unable to believe that fan activity and fan publications can have anything to do with such intent. I have read the fan publications you have sent me and, with rare exceptions, I find myself utterly disgusted with the way the active fans have met the trial of this war. By the fan mags I learn that many of these persons, who are readily self-congratulatory on their superiority to ordinary people—so many, many of these “fans” have done nothing whatsoever to help out. Many of them are neither in the army nor in war work. Many have found this a golden opportunity to make money during a war boom—by writing, by commercial photography, through the movies, or by other worthless activities—worthless when compared with what your brother Alden was doing. These bastards let your brother die, Forry, and did not lift a hand to help him. I mean that literally. The war in Europe would have been over if all the slackers in this country had been trying to help out—would have been over before the date on which your brother died. The slackers are collectively and individually personally responsible for the death of Alden. And a large percent of fans are among those slackers. Alden’s blood is on their hands.

As for persons who are guilty not merely by sins of omission but who actively threw their weight against us, like that traitorous little bastard Jocquel, I have no words to describe them. It is a bitter thing that he should be alive while your brother is dead. It would be well for him to stay out of my sight when this is over. As for any of them, unless they have fought this war in every way they could to the best of their ability, I will not meet with them socially when this is over. I will not shake hands, speak, sit down, nor eat with them.

I am not alone in this opinion. You will find that my opinion is shared by Carnell and by Franklyn Brady. You will find it shared by many others of the grown-ups who know that a war is going on and know that it is not a game nor a joke nor a piece of fiction but a tragic business in which men like your brother Alden meet their deaths, too young and too horribly.

Forry, I want you to dedicate yourself to Alden’s memory. To be faithful to him we now have two jobs to do. The first is to win this war as quickly as possible. You can do that by volunteering for something more useful than you are now doing. General Lear has said that he needs thousands of limited-duty clerks and such behind the lines in Europe to release able-bodied men for action. Or, perhaps, a re-examination will find you no longer limited in duty. In either case a Wac can edit your camp paper. The second job is, now and after the war, to see to it that it shall not happen again. There are many ways to do that and each must select his own—political activity of every sort, writing intended to stir people up, the willingness to combat race hatred, discrimination, limitations of civil liberty, generalized hates of every sort, whenever and wherever they show up. But I am damn well sure that fan activity is not the way to serve Alden’s memory. Fandom has had a chance to prove itself and it has failed. I find the mags crowded with escapism and other nonsense; I find that fans now call themselves “Slans” (God save us!) on many occasions. I find many other evidences of group paranoia and of psychotic infantilism—and unwillingness to face up to adult problems and to cope with them. Forry, you may write the most inspiring things for a better world possible; if you direct them to this group, they will be worthless in carrying on with Alden’s unfinished work, for they will fall on sterile ground. I am not generalizing; there are a few adults among them and there was a fair percentage before the war. I do not indict any who are carrying their load. But there are many (and you know that I am right) who are doing nothing and did nothing to save your brother’s life. A bunch of neurotic, selfish, childish, insensitive and unimaginative, vicious bunch of jerks! It is time you quit associating with them and tackled the problems of the real world.

We are very fond of you, Forry. You are a fine and gentle soul. This is a very difficult letter to write; if I did not think you were worth it, I would not make the effort. This letter is for your eyes only; the ideas in it you are free to use but the letter is for you only.

I am very sorry your brother was killed; You may be sure that Leslyn and I will be faithful to his memory with all our strength.

Love,

(Signed, ‘Bob’)

What was true in the 1940s is just true today and Robert Heinlein would likely be no fonder of many within science fiction fandom today than he was of many of those during WW2. “A bunch of neurotic, selfish, childish, insensitive and unimaginative, vicious bunch of jerks,” who are afflicted with an odd and pernicious sort of , “group paranoia and of psychotic infantilism—and unwillingness to face up to adult problems and to cope with them,” still aptly, if unflatteringly and uncharitably, describes a solid majority of fandom today.

I’m not talking about the larger body of fans of science fiction, but rather the active members of “fandom.”

I’m not sure if I can properly describe and define that distinction because I have long been involved with the science fiction and fantasy scene and am, to some extent, effected by the same affliction and attitudes of the rest of them. Suggesting that you review the movies, Trekkies and Galaxy Quest, is the best that I can offer.

This is not to say that there are not good Americans and true within fandom’s ranks, for that would be a rank falsehood. It is just that such men and women are in the minority, just as they were when Heinlein wrote this letter to Ackerman.

This is truly a sad and bitter fact. Fandom had much to offer America but has failed to do so many, many times since its members, when not actually adhering to the philosophies of our enemies, hold themselves aloof as if they were too good to soil their hands with honest work in service to the nation that provides them with the freedom to pursue their pleasures.

A simple, but not particularly gentle, reminder to the civilian people either of or within America – every freedom you enjoy came at a cost of blood, sweat, and tears. The brunt of that price was paid for our soldiery who put themselves in harm’s way in order to provide those freedoms.

It Is The Soldier Who Gives Us Liberty, Bought With His Blood

These fallen soldiers are long past review, and I sincerely doubt that our dead care overmuch about our opinions of their lives; they’re now past our flawed judgments. But we should certainly care about what their judgment of us and how we’ve used the freedoms they bought for with their privation, pain, and deaths would be.

Official US Military Totals: 1775 – 1991

Yes, a simple reminder on this Memorial Day weekend – America is the Land of the Free because of the Brave. Every single freedom we have was bought with their blood and what have so many within the US done with those hard-earned freedoms?

The people’s of the Civilized World have been repeated told, most often stridently, by Muslims and their dhimmi sympathizers and supporters that any and all representational or figurative depictions of the Muslims’ prophet, Muhammad are and have always been disallowed by Islam and considered highly offensive. This is, of course and unsurprisingly, quite far from the truth.

It was quite common among wealthy Muslims during the Middle Ages to have illustrated copies of the Qur’an and hadith that had within their pages pictures of Muhammad. It was especially common during the early 14th century Ilkhanid dynasty in Persia but continued to be commonplace during Persia’s Timurid dynasty of the 14th – 18th centuries, and the Ottoman Empire had many artistic depictions throughout the 14th – 16th centuries.

Between the Timurids’ Gurkani Alam and the Ottomans’ Devlet-i Aliye-yi Osmaniyye the two empires ruled essentially the whole of the Muslim World until the mid-18th century when Western powers entered and conquered Asia Minor. That perforce means that depictions of Muhammad were not always forbidden (haram) under Shari’a.

Muslim Art Depicting Muhammad

Such illustrated Qur’ans and Hadith could happen in those Muslim empires because there is no direct prohibition against representational artwork, whether it be of Muhammad or not to be found in the Qur’an. The closest that can be found is a strong prohibition against polytheism and idolatry.

God does not forgive the joining of partners with him: anything less than that he forgives to whoever he will, but anyone who joins partners with God is lying and committing a tremendous sin.

– Qur’an, Sura 4 (An-Nisa)

So their God has not forbidden representational or figurative art – even depictions of Muhammad – but does condemn those would worship such images or the subjects thereof. The problem would only arise if the disturbingly intense reverence for Muhammad  crossed over into worship, apparently something that imams have feared since the 8th century.

If, however, one reads, studies, and lends credence to the accuracy of the Muslims’ hadith, it quickly becomes clear that their prophet, Muhammad, had serious issues with representational art in any form and for any purpose at all.

Narrated Abu Talha: The Prophet said, “Angels do not enter a house in which there is a dog or there are pictures.

– Sahih al-Bukhari,
Volume 7, Book 72, Number 833

~*~

Ibn ‘Umar reported Allah’s Messenger (PBUH) having said: Those who paint pictures would be punished on the Day of Resurrection and it would be said to them: Breathe soul into what you have created.

– Sahih Muslim,
Chapter 19, Book 24, Number 5268

~*~

Narrated [Muhammad's wife] ‘Aisha: Allah’s Apostle said, ‘The painter of these pictures will be punished on the Day of Resurrection, and it will be said to them, Make alive what you have created.

– Sahih al-Bukhari,
Volume 9, Book 93, Number 646

~*~

This hadith has been reported on the authority of Abu Mu’awiya though another chain of transmitters (and the words are): ‘Verily the most grievously tormented people amongst the denizens [inhabitants] of Hell on the Day of Resurrection would be the painters of pictures.

– Sahih Muslim,
Chapter 19, Book 24, Number 5271

~*~

Allah, Most High said: “And who is more unjust than those who try to create the likeness of My creation? Let them create an atom, or let them create a wheat grain, or let them create a barley grain

– Sahih al-Bukhari,
Volume 9, Book 93, Number 648

~*~

Narrated ‘Aisha: The Prophet entered upon me while there was a curtain having pictures (of animals) in the house. His face got red with anger, and then he got hold of the curtain and tore it into pieces. The Prophet said, ‘Such people as paint these pictures will receive the severest punishment on the Day of Resurrection.

– Sahih al-Bukhari,
Volume 8, Book 73, Number 130

~*~

Muhammad went to Fatimah’s house, but turned back when he saw a figured curtain.

– Sunan Abu Dawud,
Volume 3, Book 21, Number 3746

So, while there is no Qur’anic prohibition against depictions of Muhammad, there has been concern that such images by or in the hands of Muslims could lead to them committing the sin of shirk – placing something or someone as an equal or partner to Allah. Such a prohibition, of course would make no sense if applied to nonbelievers or if the images of Muhammad were “unflattering” in nature.

Yet seems that Muhammad himself was very deeply offended by representational or figurative art in general and would likely have been utterly and maddeningly outraged by representations of himself. Muhammad’s hatred of such forms of art may have a great deal to do with the Muslims’ being offended by such artwork, even on those occasions when it is not purposefully designed to be offensive.

Many Muslims seek to emulate Muhammad, often to extremity. Since they believe, based upon the Hadith, that he reviled such art, it’s hardly surprising that they choose to as well. It is much the same as their dislike of dogs and fondness, or at least tolerance for, pre-teen “brides;” Muhammad thought  that way so it must be the right way to think.

It’s odd though – or seems so to me – that the Qur’an has strict prohibitions against placing anything or anyone on par with their God, Allah, yet the Muslims’ “issues” with pictures of Muhammad is largely based on his idiosyncrasies instead of their God’s revealed will. Maybe those old imams were right to fear their flocks growing to worship Muhammad.