{"id":11038,"date":"2019-09-13T11:06:11","date_gmt":"2019-09-13T11:06:11","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/sfmagazines.com\/?p=11038"},"modified":"2019-09-13T11:19:13","modified_gmt":"2019-09-13T11:19:13","slug":"anthony-boucher-a-biobibliography-by-jeffrey-marks-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sfmagazines.com\/?p=11038","title":{"rendered":"Anthony Boucher, A Biobibliography, by Jeffrey Marks, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

ISFDB<\/a>
\nGoogle Play<\/a>1<\/sup>\/Amazon UK<\/a>\/USA<\/a><\/p>\n

_____________________<\/p>\n

Those readers who regularly visit this site will probably recognise the name of Anthony Boucher, either as the writer of a number of stories for John W. Campbell\u2019s Astounding<\/em> and Unknown<\/em> magazines in the 1940s, or as one of the founding editors of The Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction<\/em> (F&SF)<\/em>. As I plan to rewrite some of my early reviews of that latter magazine, it seemed like a good time to read this \u201cbibliobography\u201d of the writer.
\nThe book itself consists of two parts: the first is a comprehensive biography of the man and his work, the second is a straight bibliography. The first part is further subdivided into four sections: The Man<\/em>, The Author<\/em>, The Editor<\/em>, and The Critic<\/em>. We can already see from this structure that Boucher was so much more than just a writer and editor of SF, something that Gordon Van Gelder notes in his short Introduction<\/em>:<\/p>\n

What I like most about Jeffrey Marks\u2019 thorough and much-needed biography is that it makes clear how small a part of Tony Boucher\u2019s overall career was his work on F&SF<\/em>. If I really wanted to get to know Boucher, I\u2019d have to add to my magazine editing an additional career writing mystery novels, then spend several years writing scripts for radio dramas, and I\u2019d also need to break some ground as a translator, help found a professional writer\u2019s organization, and spend decades as a prominent and erudite reviewer. In my spare time, perhaps I could host a radio series like his \u201cGreat Voices\u201d program on Pacifica, edit a series of \u201cBest Detective Stories of the Year,\u201d and . . .\u00a0 p. 1-2<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The first section, The Man<\/em>, is a twenty page biographical essay which gives a broad outline of Boucher\u2019s2<\/sup> life, and it initially describes his childhood, his precocious intellect (he knew eight languages by the time he graduated), and his problems with asthma.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

He met his wife (Phyllis Mary Price) while a college student at Berkley, but their relationship was initially problematic:<\/p>\n

Phyllis found her first few dates with Boucher cognitively exhausting and wasn\u2019t sure if she would continue dating him. However, he persisted and she finally became used to the constant banter and erudite knowledge. Her trick, she would later say, was to just enjoy it without trying to keep up with his mind.\u00a0 p. 14<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The rest of this section details an initially shaky career writing reviews and mystery fiction in the early 1940s\u2014he was only able to marry Phyllis when he sold his first novel\u2014but his financial situation improved when he started writing for radio towards the end of the 1940s. When this job ceased (he and a co-writer were let go) he moved on to editing F&SF,<\/em> and also became the primary mystery reviewer for The New York Times<\/em> (\u201cHis family estimated that he could read a book with full comprehension in 2 to 3 hours\u201d).
\nThroughout all these multiple (and often parallel careers), Boucher had to cope with the asthma that had plagued him since childhood:<\/p>\n

Boucher\u2019s asthma problems hounded him all of his life. He could not make morning appointments, because in the first few hours after waking, he found it difficult to breathe. It would take several hours for Boucher to be able to get into a normal breathing pattern every day.\u00a0 p. 26<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Despite this, and his many other jobs (translation, book editing, etc.) and activities (politics, etc.), he also collected operatic recordings, amassing 9000 titles by the time of his death (this hobby led to another reviewing job with Opera News<\/em> and a radio program). Boucher was also a parent, was a lay reader with the Catholic Church, and had an active social life\u2014one wonders where he found the time and energy for all these activities.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

The second section, The Author<\/em>, describes, in detail, Boucher\u2019s stories. Most of this concerns his mystery fiction and, to be honest, I found the discussion of this rather boring\u2014the impression given is of far too many gimmicky locked-room stories. That said, the \u2018Nick Noble\u2019 series sounds interesting, and I may dig it out.
\nThere is also some interesting detail about Boucher\u2019s Rocket to the Morgue<\/em> (the novel is not SF but features pulp SF writers):<\/p>\n

Not only does Rocket to the Morgue<\/em> depict the pitfalls of mystery fandom in the 1940s, the author also borrowed conversations held at the Manana Literary Society surrounding the idea of blurring the boundaries between mystery and science-fiction. Chapter three of Rocket to the Morgue<\/em> contains a heated discussion over the continued segregation of science fiction and the detective story, pushing Astounding Stories\u2019 <\/em>editor John W. Campbell\u2019s belief that the genres could not be commingled. The Campbell character, Don Stewart, is visited by Lieutenant Marshall and gives a soliloquy on how the rules of science fiction would alter any attempt to have a locked room mystery. Stewart suggests that a time machine could be used to alter the alibis, a device that Boucher would use later in his O\u2019Breen short stories. The murderer could disassemble and reassemble himself atom by atom in the locked room. The character also discusses a method by which the character could enter the fourth dimension, enter the room, and leave by the fourth dimension again.
\n[. . .]
\nThe final chapter finishes with a somber note to a fun-filled romp through the science fiction community of the 1940s. Boucher sets the final chapter on December 6, 1941, the day before Pearl Harbor\u2019s attack. The seemingly innocent conversation between the characters is laced with the knowledge that in a few hours the United States will be at war following the Japanese attack.\u00a0 p. 56-57<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The third section is titled The Editor<\/em>, but leads off with a potted history of Boucher\u2019s SF writing (The Quest for St Aquin<\/em>, etc.). Marks notes, as he does elsewhere, how Boucher\u2019s liberal political ideas would occasionally find their way into his work:<\/p>\n

Boucher used elements of civil rights in [Robinc<\/em>]. The story includes some early respectful portrayals of gay men. In a time where genre fiction relegated homosexuals to victims or villains, such a move was risky; however, Boucher saw this as a part of the social justice that he championed through his writings.\u00a0 p. 68<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Marks also makes this more general point about Boucher\u2019s SF:<\/p>\n

Beyond Boucher\u2019s passions for religion and mystery, two themes repeated throughout many of Boucher\u2019s science-fiction works. The first was the concept of time travel, not an uncommon plot device in the genre. In a great many of his stories, Boucher looked at a society from the point-of-view of the outsider who travels to a future world. This viewpoint allowed the author to comment on the society itself and what man can become.
\nGiven that he wrote most of his short science-fiction works during World War II, it really shouldn\u2019t be a surprise that the other topic in many of his shorter works was totalitarian governments.\u00a0 p. 69-70<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Also in this supposed \u2018Editor\u2019 section is an account of Boucher\u2019s translation work for Ellery Queen\u2019s Mystery Magazine<\/em>, which began with his work on Georges Simenon\u2019s short stories. This did not end well:<\/p>\n

Simenon had not been able to speak English prior to the war, but in 1945, he moved to Canada and later the United States. His English improved as he stayed here, in what some critics call his best period. His grasp of English allowed Simenon to read the translations, and he was not pleased with the results from his novels or short stories. Too much had been removed or added. Simenon switched publishers in the early 1950s to maintain more control over his translated works.
\nDespite his work for the French author\u2019s reputation in the United States, Boucher had to defend himself against Simenon\u2019s charge later that he hated the author.
\n.<\/span>
\nMy dear God, sir!
\nI have spent well over 20 years under the impression that I was one of the foremost Simenon enthusiasts & advocates in America. I have reviewed, at a fast rough count, 49 Simenon books. Out of such a large number, there are, I\u2019ll admit, a handful that I haven\u2019t cared much for; but my enthusiasm for the corpus of your work has been so evident that the Times<\/em> selected me to write the long front-page feature article on The Bells of Bicetre<\/em> last spring \u2014 which your publishers quote on the jacket of The Blue Room<\/em>.\u00a0 p. 74-75<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

There were also translations of other writers, the most famous of which was Jorge Luis Borges\u2019 story The Garden of Forking Paths<\/em> in 1948.
\nAlso in this \u2018Editor\u2019 section is information on Boucher\u2019s radio plays, his membership of The Baker Street Irregulars (a Sherlock Holmes society), and the founding of the Mystery Writers of America.
\nEventually there is an account of Boucher\u2019s editorship of F&SF<\/em>. What did I learn from this?<\/p>\n

1. Boucher and McComas\u2019s initial approach to Spivak (the eventual publisher of F&SF<\/em>) was in January 1946.
\n2. They initially had stories by John Dickson Carr and H. P. Lovecraft lined up for \u201cFantasy and Horror\u201d.
\n3. The stories from Cleve Cartmill and Stuart Palmer in the early issues of F&SF<\/em> came via Boucher\u2019s personal friendship with the writers.
\n4. After many delays in launching the magazine, the suggestion to add SF to the mix came in February 1949, in a letter from general manager Joe Ferman (father of later editor Edward L. Ferman).
\n5. McComas had to get an advance from his sales job so he and Boucher could fly to New York from the West Coast for the 1949 launch party.
\n6. The first issue sold 57,000 copies.
\n7. F&SF\u2019<\/em>s future looked in doubt in 1953 after McComas retired. He wrote to Boucher saying:<\/p>\n

\u201cF&SF<\/em> is losing money all over the place and prognosis is for worsening, rather than improvement. JWF [Joe Ferman] blames this largely\u2014almost solely\u2014on our editorial job. We blame it on poor distribution. Mainly, with such matters as poor promotion . . . .\u00a0 p. 110-111<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

8. F&SF<\/em> was the first magazine \u201cto have wrap-around cover design,\u201d something later copied by Astounding<\/em>.
\n9. The circumstances that led Boucher to resign as the editor of F&SF<\/em> were complex:<\/p>\n

Boucher\u2019s continuing health problems, combined with his family\u2019s health, along with problems at the magazine finally made him step down as editor in 1958. \u201cI have been terribly overworked & in pretty bad health (my latest achievement has been coming down with erysipelas), & partly because Mother got much worse through a series of strokes & is now incapable of signing or even discussing anything.\u201d
\nBoucher\u2019s problems with the magazine at that point were two-fold.
\nFirst, he had a weekly column to write for The New York Times Book Review<\/em>, which involved reading, critiquing, and writing about 2 to 10 books a week. Additionally, the money at The Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction<\/em> had not improved much, although the magazine was now on sound financial footing. \u201cJust too many damned quarrels with Ferman, mostly about money,\u201d Boucher wrote in 1958.
\nThe science-fiction community was saddened, but understanding, about Boucher\u2019s decision. Isaac Asimov wrote, \u201cWhatever is best for you, Tony,\u2014that do. I know you have health problems and are generally overworked and I want you alive more than I want you as an editor. But how all s.f. will miss your editorial hand.\u201d\u00a0 p. 112-113<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

There is a final part to this \u2018Editor\u2019 section which covers Boucher\u2019s anthologies and introductions (and also his editorship of the short lived True Crime Detective<\/em>, a 1951-3 magazine published by a division of Mercury Publications, publisher of F&SF<\/em>).3<\/sup><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

The fourth and final section, The Critic<\/em>, begins with his reviews for the San Francisco Chronicle<\/em> and Ellery Queen\u2019s Mystery Magazine<\/em>. Here Marks points out that Boucher was a critic and not a reviewer:<\/p>\n

Boucher\u2019s columns were extraordinary for the way he dealt with not just the book at hand, but its place in the genre. The only way to do justice to his reviews is to let them speak for themselves. In this clip from one of his columns, he discusses the emergence of the spy novel in 1943. Obviously in the midst of world war, espionage came to the forefront of everyone\u2019s mind, and mystery was no exception. Not only did Boucher relate the books of 1943 to previous mysteries, but he also tied the trend to world events.
\n.<\/span>
\nThe most interesting current phenomenon within the scope of this column is the extraordinary development of the spy novel . . . . To be exact, of 103 novels I\u2019ve reviewed in 1943, at least 34 have had espionage or sabotage as a dominant element . . . . Spy novels were formerly the literary stepchildren of the mystery trade.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

At this point Marks also provides one of the few examples in the book which shows Boucher in a bad light, which is when the Chronicle fired him for bad-mouthing the publication to other writers. The publisher\u2019s letter was blunt:<\/p>\n

What I want to tell you is that I\u2019m afraid your contributions to The Chronicle<\/em>\u2019s book section had better cease. It has come to me that on more than one occasion you have expressed yourself\u2014once quite publicly to a group of writers\u2014as wholly dissatisfied with the arrangement you have with the paper, and while certainly you are privileged to be dissatisfied I see no sense in continuing a connection you yourself regard as unsatisfactory.
\nThe point is not altogether whether The Chronicle<\/em>\u2019s remuneration is, as you put it to a group of people, \u201ca pittance.\u201d It\u2019s rather, I think, that The Chronicle<\/em> had never paid anything to contributing reviewers until the time when you replaced, temporarily, Mr. Doyle. At that time I agreed to see if a space rate couldn\u2019t be arranged\u2014this for the first time for anyone. Further, when Mr. Doyle returned, The Chronicle<\/em> continued, at my suggestion, to pay you space for such reviews as you did in other fields\u2014again a \u201cfirst\u201d here. Perhaps The Chronicle<\/em> should do better; perhaps it shouldn\u2019t. The point is that this department did make some arrangement to pay you something, and it does not seem to me within the bounds of propriety that while it was doing so you should express yourself publicly as you have done.
\nFurther, it is reported to me that you stated flatly that \u201cChronicle<\/em> reviewers\u201d had to write \u201cto policy.\u201d Entirely aside from the question of just how this might enter into the reviewing of detective stories, it is a fact that the only changes ever made in any reviews you wrote for the paper were on the grounds of (a) what seemed to me to skirt perhaps too close to libel, and (b) what seemed to me to skirt too closely to the edge of good taste. Still further, I have been able to find no other Chronicle<\/em> reviewers who have this complaint to make, or, for that matter, any who feel that you are authorized to speak for \u201cChronicle<\/em> reviewers.\u201d Again it does not seem to me proper that anyone who either feels this to be true or says publicly that it is true, should continue to do reviews for the paper.\u00a0 p. 129<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The rest of the section goes on to detail Boucher\u2019s science fiction book reviews, and his eventual arrival at the big time with a job at the The New York Times Book Review<\/em> as a mystery reviewer. It concludes with an overview of his opera radio programs.
\nThe bibliographic part of the book finishes with The end and beyond<\/em>, which tells of Boucher\u2019s death in early 1968:<\/p>\n

His last ailment came on fast; Boucher suffered a fall and was rushed to the hospital with a broken rib. The X-rays revealed some problems in the lungs and he remained in the hospital. Phyllis White would later remember his last days: \u201cHe never knew about the cancer because it was very hard to diagnose him and by the time that they figured it out, he was out of it and couldn\u2019t be told anything. One of the doctors said to me, while they were all trying to figure out what was the matter with him, \u2018that everybody and his brother wants to get in on this.\u2019 I thought how much my husband would have enjoyed that. Like someone saying with relish, \u2018this will puzzle them at Scotland Yard.\u2019\u201d Boucher was diagnosed as having cancer, and he passed away within days.
\nAnthony Boucher died of lung cancer on April 29, 1968, at the Kaiser Foundation Hospital. Despite his attacks of asthma, Boucher had been a lifetime smoker. He was frequently seen holding a pipe in family photos.\u00a0 p. 156-157<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The aftermath of his death is also covered\u2014the founding of the mystery convention Bouchercon, the memorial SF and mystery anthologies,4<\/sup> etc.\u2014and concludes with this passage:<\/p>\n

Even with the tributes and conventions, Boucher\u2019s most enduring legacy has been his impact on the following generation of mystery reviewers. Though no one individual critic has Boucher\u2019s influence in reviewing, the people who now review for Ellery Queens Mystery Magazine<\/em> and the Times<\/em> bear a resemblance to Boucher\u2019s columns. Many of today\u2019s review columns are in a similar format to Boucher\u2019s work at The New York Times<\/em>. Additionally, most reviewers do a yearly round-up of top books of the year as well. In today\u2019s world with the increase in the number of subgenres in mystery Boucher\u2019s rule of treating each category with the same respect and consideration despite personal preferences is a standard that still holds true today.\u00a0 p. 160<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The remainder of the book contains forty-odd pages of bibliographical information.<\/p>\n

This volume is, as you can probably gather from the detail above, a thoroughly researched work. Nevertheless, I have a few reservations: first, it is probably best treated as a reference book rather than a casual read\u2014as I have already said it is rather dry bordering on dull in places, and I could only dip into it for half an hour or so at a time; second, structurally it is a mess\u2014if you look at some of the sub-sections above, they have no relation to the sections they appear in (the \u2018Editor\u2019 section in particular is a dog\u2019s breakfast). It would have been better to have had more single topic sections, and those framed by a chronological account of his life. Finally, the manuscript could have done with another set of eyes proofreading it\u2014there are a number of typos, etc.
\nProbably a volume for historians, who will be glad to have it.\u00a0 \u25cf<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

_____________________<\/p>\n

1. The Google Play offering was the only ebook option I found, and is the cheapest way of obtaining the title.<\/p>\n

2. Boucher\u2019s real name was William Parker White.<\/p>\n

3. There is a page of True Crime Detective<\/em> covers here<\/a>.<\/p>\n

4. The two anthologies, Special Wonder<\/em><\/a> (called \u201cSpecial Wonders\u201d here) and Crimes and Misfortunes<\/em>, were edited by J. Francis McComas, who was assisted (according to Marks) by R. Bretnor and Randall Garrett.<\/p>\n\"rss\"<\/a>\"rss\"<\/a><\/span>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

ISFDB Google Play1\/Amazon UK\/USA _____________________ Those readers who regularly visit this site will probably recognise the name of Anthony Boucher, either as the writer of a number of stories for John W. Campbell\u2019s Astounding and Unknown magazines in the 1940s, or as one of the founding editors of The Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[48],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-11038","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-reference"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p6Pcj7-2S2","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/sfmagazines.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11038","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/sfmagazines.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/sfmagazines.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sfmagazines.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sfmagazines.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=11038"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/sfmagazines.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11038\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":11066,"href":"https:\/\/sfmagazines.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11038\/revisions\/11066"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/sfmagazines.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=11038"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sfmagazines.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=11038"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sfmagazines.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=11038"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}