Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Media Sci-Fi

CNN Interviews with Harlan Ellison, Bruce Sterling 147

Posted by Zonk
from the mona-lisa-listening dept.
half_cocked_jack writes "Over at the CNN Podcast area they have a program titled 'Hollywood's SciFi Summer'. It sounded interesting, so I downloaded it. Much to my surprise, the host, Renay San Miguel, seems to really know SF, and he interviewed Harlan Ellison, Connie Willis, Bruce Sterling, and Len Wein on their views on how Hollywood handles SF. Great listening!"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

CNN Interviews with Harlan Ellison, Bruce Sterling

Comments Filter:
  • by sedyn (880034) on Friday July 01, 2005 @10:44PM (#12966885)
    he interviewed Harlan Ellison, Connie Willis, Bruce Sterling, and Len Wein


    Does anyone else think that this placing is unfortunate? I know that I misread it on first-pass.
    • by lheal (86013)
      My mind filled in: "oh, the Twilight Zone guy".

      Then I realized that Rod Serling was probably dead of lung cancer by now, and that I didn't know who Bruce Sterling was.
      • Then again, with the parent post misreading as "Bruce Willis", that could be "the Twilight Zone guy" too... Bruce starred in the New Twilight Zone episode based on one of Ellison's short stories, "Shatterday".
    • Let me guess: all Harlen Ellison talks about is how great a writer he is and how much better his script for "City on the Edge of Forever" was than the one filmed for Star Trek.

      Am I right? I mean, that's ALL this guy talks about.
      • "Let me guess"
        Why guess? You can listen for yourself, and spare the rest of us your ignorance.

        Oh, and his first name is spelled "Harlan", BTW.
        • Nah...I'd rather guess and try to be clever than to actually spend time actually RTFA...er...L(isten)TFA I guess in this situation.

          I mean, this IS Slashdot. And you of course fulfilled the other Slashdot requirement of correcting someone's spelling when it doesn't matter at all.

          Bravo! Good to see someone keeping the old traditions alive.
      • Ellison is known to be willing to share his strongly-held opinions about many other topics.
  • by ChipMonk (711367) on Friday July 01, 2005 @10:49PM (#12966907) Journal
    Because, you know, it's illegal in Sweden [slashdot.org] to download copyrighted material.
  • by Nova Express (100383) <lawrenceperson.gmail@com> on Friday July 01, 2005 @10:55PM (#12966927) Homepage Journal
    Not many people know that Harlan "discovered" Bruce. He attended a very early Turkey City Writer's Workshop [rr.com], bought Bruce's first novel (Involution Ocean), and then paid Bruce's way to the Clarion Writer's Workshop. Harlan is a prickly character, but he does have a fine eye for talent (and a gift for making the right enemies).

    Bruce has "paid it forward" by helping a number of new writers (myself included) with their careers by subjecting them to the bracing fire of a Sterling critique...

    • by grolaw (670747) on Friday July 01, 2005 @11:28PM (#12967040) Journal
      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/ [harlanellison.com] for Ellison's (way out of date) home page and,

      See, http://www.authorslawyer.com/c-ellison.shtml/ [authorslawyer.com] for the copyright action.
      • >Ellison "prickly"? You must be using some meaning of the word "prickly" that I wasn't previously familiar with.

        "Prickly" as in "Every single science fiction writer older than myself I know can tell you a story about how Harlan Ellison was a complete asshat to them at one time or another." Most also have a story about how Harlan went out of his way to do something nice for them as well.

        There are legions of Harlan Ellison stories in science fiction. Like the time he flew across the country to punch out Charles Platt. (Like I said, he has great taste in enemies.) Or the job he did on Andy Porter (IIRC) in Short Form. Or check out Christopher Priest's the Last Deadloss Visions (AKA The Book on the Edge of Forever.)

        Make no mistake about: At the top of his game, Ellison was probably the best short story writer in the field, and I fully expect "I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream" to be read 100 years from now. But in no way, shape or form is he a saint.

      • Not Firefly, the movie by Wheadon.

        That was a disturbing book as much for its fundamental premise as for its denoument as for its cast of characters. (A paedohile who is a victim of his young 'victim'.)

        This was a great book which made me think.
      • by cei (107343) on Saturday July 02, 2005 @02:20AM (#12967578) Homepage Journal
        I have one of the collections of Ellison erotica written under the pen-name "Paul Merchant." I was able to get Ellison to sign it using his preferred nom de plume (which the publisher wouldn't let him use), D.S. Merchant (for Dirty Smut Merchant). I wasn't really sure how he would handle being handed a copy of Sex Gang at a signing, but he was in good spirits. He doesn't normally sign those, but he hadn't seen a copy in a while.
      • 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.

        That is about as much bad spin as you'd likely find in a SCO press release. Do you work for them, per chance, gvien that your nick seems to be a rip on "groklaw"?

        Hell, even your links show you're wrong - basically, people on Usenet were pirating Mr. Ellison's work, and instead of going after them h
        • I predate "groklaw" and wouldn't rip Heinline's "grok" from Stranger in a Strange Land. Shame that paralegal decided to start a blog without an original name - still a nice blog that.

          I've had this nick since 1987 when I started using it on The Well and BIX. That was the year I started law school.

          As for the case: the law makes you take certain steps. In Chess you must open with a pawn or a knight. Period. Them's the rules..

          For Ellison - who acted through his attorney - and it was the attorney came up
          • Ellison had been fighting print pirates for years - this was just the war on a new front. He won and AOL lost. How many people have the guts to bring a suit and risk losing and paying a massive attorney's fee award to AOL? Check the pleadings. There is a fee petition in there and the Court denied it...but it could have bankrupted Ellison had the decision gone the other way. Fee petitions are decided by judges - not juries.

            And this is why people hate lawyers. You completely ignore the fact that AOL was in
            • I'm rarely interested in flame wars, but *this* may be an exception.

              You SUPPORT AOL?

              Change the hypo: It's Walmart selling illegal copies (e.g. copies of your book that you (and/or your publisher) didn't authorize and the sale is one from which you don't receive a royalty - but Walmart receives their cut from every book sold.

              Now, do you want Walmart stopped from making a buck from you?

              AOL was the largest single source of downloaders that could be identified. AOL made a buck from the thieves.

              AOL had NO
              • I don't support 'AOL', I support *any* ISP, university or network that provides Usenet access to do so without threats made against them based on the irresponsible actions of some on the network. If you want to stop copyright infringement, attack the pirates, not the network.

                Your reasoning will lead to the MPAA/RIAA getting my ISP(and yours) shut down because a bunch of asshats decide to pirate movies over it.

                Your analogy is flawed, because Wal-mart directly controls and procures everything in their store
                • Censorship never entered this discussion - this was about theft and profits running to third-parties arising from the theft.

                  Walmart does not publish - it sells. The hypo remains valid. AOL's (then) vast userbase made them the right target. The tollway analogy fails because the bridge is a single route - all traffic uses the same route. Were Walmart is only one source (albeit a very big source) of the stolen property then it makes sense to shut down the retail outlet's ability to sell the stolen goods.
      • Ellison had a legitimate, hard fought, lawsuit for copyright violation. Companies were reprinting his work
        He also suggested completely shutting down USENET during some legal action after some of his stuff was posted on the net - prickly and not really interested in looking at details or worrying about consequences. At that time USENET was actually useful and not the morass of spam and possibly russian child porn it is now.
        • In the law you ask for more than you can get. Nobody opens with their bottom dollar.

          As for the strategy, USENET wasn't hurt by Ellison. Usenet, and the Internet have been hurt far more by the few hundred individuals who spam and crap all over everything.

          Ellison was a leader in exploring individual legal rights over Internet matters. His argument advanced individual rights. Exactly what is the problem with that?
        • At that time USENET was actually useful

          In 2000?! No way. At the time, the endless september [wikipedia.org] had already come and (never) gone. Think about it: that is how this suit got a footing: AOL turned on the idiot stream, Harlan noticed, Kersplat!

          TO call USENET useful at this point, I suspect you've got the same definition as I do: Useful compared to it being gone, but a faint shadow of itself and only useful thanks to deja-news and massive killfiles.

    • by mbrother (739193) * <mbrother@nospam.uwyo.edu> on Friday July 01, 2005 @11:58PM (#12967118) Homepage
      Ellison also discovered a lot of other writers, too, including Dan Simmons. While most people see his growly, larger-than-himself public persona, he can be an incredibly generous man. He called up one friend of mine who'd reviewed a story of his because Ellison wasn't sure he'd appreciated some of the subtlies of the story -- and then they talked for an hour. A guy I knew in college had written a complaining letter to him about why he was years late on a Star Trek project, and Ellison called him up to bitch back and explain, and then they talked like buddies for an hour. Interesting, talented guy.
    • Another fact some people might forget is that Ellison was the technical advisor for Babylon 5
    • FWIW, in the introduction to "Prayers to Broken Stones", Harlan exclaims that it was he who "discovered" Dan Simmons at a writers workshop (and that when he is long forgotten for his own work, he will be remembered for that fact alone). Dan Simmons, of course, went on to write the early Hyperion Cantos books soon afterwards and win the Hugo. Dan acknowledges the discovery in that introduction (although his recounting of the events is somewhat different).
  • by Qwertie (797303) on Friday July 01, 2005 @10:56PM (#12966930) Homepage
    A story so boring that it's only got 6 comments 15 minutes after being posted!
  • Would anyone be so nice as to briefly, or not, explain who these four people are? What they have done that people would recognize? etc? I surely don't recognize their name.

    Are these people worth reading about, other than the fact that they got slashdotted?
    • Your showing both how young you are and the fact that our schools are failing.
      These are some of the bigger names in Science Fiction.
      Never heard of "A boy and His Dog"?.
      • I remember that one!

        See Spot.
        See Spot run.
        Run Spot, run.

        I think we moved on to Hooked on Phonics after that ... or maybe it was the one where Spot gets a ball. A red ball. A big red ball.

    • Connie Willis -- Mulitple Hugo award winning sf author. Best known novel is probably DOOMSDAY BOOK. Harlan Ellison -- Multiple Hugo award winning sf author. Best known for short stories like "I have no mouth and I must scream." Also did some TV (e.g., Star Trek, Outer Limits) and movie work. Bruce Sterling -- one of the founders of the cyberpunk movement and still a big tech guru publishing regularly in Wired. He's won some of those Hugos, too, I believe. Try the ground-breaking cyberpunk anthology h
      • by mbrother (739193) *
        Ack, I blew it on Len Wein! L. Neil Smith is the author of THE PROBABILITY BROACH. Len Wein has done some media and comic book work.

        Well, I said he was the least well-known of these four in SF circles. Guess I just proved that assertion with a data point.
    • Re:Who are they (Score:5, Informative)

      by Sangloth (664575) <MaxPande@NOSpam.hotmail.com> on Saturday July 02, 2005 @12:36AM (#12967239)
      Bruce Sterling is a founding father of cyber-punk, next to William Gibson. Despite the role-playing world's that come to mind when cyber-punk is mentioned, Sterling's worlds are believable and his stories aren't very action oriented. One of his latest books was about politicians in the US in about 40 years. Bruce more looks at social trends then technology, that's not to say tech isn't in his books, but in general they are about society.

      Connie Willis wrote the Doomsday book, a story about a time traveler stuck in Europe during the plague. There was a very heavy historical emphasis, in practice it was a historical novel. She's written other timetravel stuff. Her books aren't so much fun as interesting.

      Harlan Ellison's books are fun. He is a brillant writer who should not be let out in public(The man is very easily offended, and not afraid to attack with a chair or what not when he is offended. If he's not violent, he's shouting furiously, and it really doesn't take anything intentional to set him off). He wrote I have no mouth and I must scream and Repent Harliqin said the Tick Tock Man. Harlan's books, and Harlan have a extreme cynical viewpoint that's very entertaining. Harlan started out attending sci fi conventions, and has many big sci fi writer friends. I don't know that his writings really fall in a sci fi category (To be clear, Harlan's books pay no attention to science at all, it's more experimental modern writing), but they are good reads.

      I've read a ton of Sci Fi, and I've never heard of Len Wein. A quick google says he's a comics guy invovled heavily with X-men, fantastic 4, hulk, and the watchmen series. Some one else will have to give a perspective here.

      All three authors are big names in Sci Fi, although none of them give more then lip service to the sci part. I can barely think of who else might belong on this list over them. (Well...Philip K. Dick, Asimov, Heinlien, Bester, Clarke, Cambell(Editor, not an author) a couple other golden oldies. Of living people under 70, Bear, Guin, Stephenson, Kress, and Gibson...Still that's a wish list... )

      Still, these are the names of real Science Fiction in the last 20 years (Star Trek and such belong in fantasy or action). I'm not trying to be elitist. These are big names... If you don't know these people, you don't know science fiction...

      Sangloth
      I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis...it doesn't even have to agree with me.

      • might as well throw in David Gerrold to the list, too. Larry Niven. Maybe even Jerry Pournelle.

        If anyone has gotten the "alien invasion" right, it's Gerrold. Anyone who disputes this obviously has not seen Mother Nature in action (i.e., kudzu, himilayan blackberry, thistles, morning glory/bindweed, reed canary grass, et many al) when it comes to "alien" species slowly, then quickly, overwhelming an area in the span of about 1-3 years.

        It starts out slow. there's a few here, a few there. We'll pull them ou
      • Connie Willis wrote the Doomsday book, a story about a time traveler stuck in Europe during the plague. [...] Her books aren't so much fun as interesting.

        I never did manage to finish The Doomsday Book but I really enjoyed both To Say Nothing of the Dog and Bellwether and I would consider both of them to be great fun.

        Willis tends to alternate between funny and dark. Doomsday was of the latter while the other two were more of the former. If you're curious, check them out or try one of her short-sto

    • In this mostly planned economy, that too often verges on and grows ever closer to a socialism, why would the public school system teach anything about SF? They are already bogged down trying to teach multi-ethnic understanding, the extremes of bipolar(atleast politically) secularism, not equal opportunity but equal reality, social irresponsibility and trust in federal courts for all matters moral and ethical, and the many other view "new" initiatives in place today.

      Can you really blame any graduate from th
      • They should make students read "Player Piano", by Kurt Vonnegut.

        Capitalism? Only on eBay, auctions and garage sales. Otherwise, might as well call it corporate socialism. Govment makes more and more policies that are solely for benefit (or punishment) of industries or enterprises. That people might be involved is paid at best lip service.
      • They are already bogged down trying to teach multi-ethnic understanding, the extremes of bipolar(atleast politically) secularism

        That would be an argument for teaching more SF. SF has long been a force for social change, usually in a liberal, multi-ethnic, secular* direction. If the schools were the subversive influence that you claim, SF would be required reading.

        * secular not necessarily meaning anti-religion, but the bronze-age religions (Zoroastrianism, Athenian mythology, Hinduism, Judaism and its

  • by chill (34294) on Friday July 01, 2005 @11:29PM (#12967043) Journal
    Bruce is pretty hardcore into cyberpunk. Check out the links, including a LEGAL digital copy of his "The Hacker Crackdown" at http://project.cyberpunk.ru/idb/library.html [cyberpunk.ru]

    -Charles
  • although I'm unsure it really did more than simply reaffirm what we already knew: that Hollywood often fails at accurately representing the genre of Science Fiction.
  • Ellison on Religion (Score:3, Interesting)

    by mcleodnine (141832) on Saturday July 02, 2005 @12:12AM (#12967169)
    With this summer's wanna-be blockbuster shrouded in the cloak of Tommy Cruises' Scientology rant, I'm dead curious to hear what insight Harlan has to offer on this topic.

    C'mon. You know you want to tell us.

    Please?
    • by Stormbringer (3643) on Saturday July 02, 2005 @01:02AM (#12967345)

      ...back in the 80's. Hour 25 [hour25online.com] is now online-only, but it was a 2-hour Friday-night program on KPFK-FM in Los Angeles, hosted by Mike Hodel and Mel Gilden, at the time, and Harlan was a frequent guest. No doubt, Eric Foss has the entire broadcast archived on tape somewhere [hour25.us].

      From what I recall, Ellison said something like, "I attended a party in New York, along with some other writers, including L. Ron Hubbard, and Hubbard was saying something about 'Y'know what I should do? Invent a new religion. That's where all the real money is.' And, next thing you know, he came out with his next book, 'Dianetics'."

  • I'm stone deaf, you insensitive clod!
  • Is there any slashdotters that really hold Ellison high for his works? I had a paperback of some of his short tales and I just couldn't get into it.

    My only other real knowledge of Ellison is a ST:TOS episode and his rants on the late CNet from sci-fi. And when it comes down to it rants are rants; much like assholes everyone has one and normally since most are based on opinion alone very few of them ever mean anything.

    I know the man has an extensive work pool but I've never met anyone with a seriously high
    • Well... It's like I think he's super great... but you are pretty much guaranteed to get a good read with his works, rather than the crap shoot you get with other authors.
    • Re:Ellison (Score:3, Informative)

      by julesh (229690)
      Is there any slashdotters that really hold Ellison high for his works? I had a paperback of some of his short tales and I just couldn't get into it.

      Ellison ain't for casual reading, that's certain. Try some of his screenplays if you can't get into his stories: there are several episodes of the original Outer Limits series that he wrote; "Demon with a Glass Hand" is often considered the best, and is frequently cited as an important source of the inspiration for "The Terminator".

      Also, some of his best wor
    • Re:Ellison (Score:2, Insightful)

      by OSXCPA (805476)
      Ellison is known mostly for his 'human-centric' science fiction. Best example, IMHO, is "I have not mouth and I must scream". Not for the exclusively 'hard' sci-fi fan, but thought-provoking nonetheless. He also did some work on the original Trek, and between then and now had published a LOT of work. He's like a less-emotionally blasted, bitterer version of P. Dick. Basically, I like him because he treats his characters like people, rather than cutouts, which I see a lot in fiction in general, and Science
    • Re:Ellison (Score:4, Informative)

      by graikor (127470) on Saturday July 02, 2005 @12:30PM (#12969204) Journal
      I've been a huge Ellison fan since the first time I read "Repent, Harlequin!" Said the Ticktock Man in the early 80's.

      A few other very good Ellison stories include:
      Mefisto in Onyx
      Grail
      Djinn, No Chaser
      Pretty Maggie Moneyeys
      Shattered Like a Glass Goblin
      Paingod
      The Deathbird
      Anywhere but Here, With Anybody But You
      Chatting With Anubis
      Midnight in the Sunken Cathedral
      Paladin of the Lost Hour

      and many others I'm too lazy to type out.

      The thing about Ellison's writing that grabs so many people is that he expertly blends fantastic settings and situations with real human drama. The events descibed might be bizarre or possibly futuristic (although Ellison's work usually has a timeless quality), but the emotions the characters are dealing with are very real and familiar.

      /My personal Ellison story - Harlan had a huge line for autographs at Dragoncon '99, and I was too far back to be able to get my book signed before he had to leave. He came back on his own time to sign for all the people who got cut off in that line. A real stand-up guy!
    • Re:Ellison (Score:3, Insightful)

      by swordgeek (112599)
      I love Ellison's work. No question that he's something of an asshole, but he's an entertaining one, and often not nearly as serious as people think he's being.

      Since no one else has mentioned it yet, find a copy of "The Deathbird." If you can find the collection called Deathbird Stories, it has many of the other recommended works posted here. Also read "A Boy and his Dog," and then rent the movie (one of the only real SF movies ever made).

      Now, why do I like his works? First of all, they're uncompromising--
    • Re:Ellison (Score:2, Insightful)

      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/ [harlanellison.com] . 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
  • by DynaSoar (714234) * on Saturday July 02, 2005 @03:53AM (#12967808) Journal
    mbrother (739193) sez: "At this time in tech history, I think it's to a writer's advantage to give away their work online"

    Unless things have changed a great deal recently, at this time in legel history it's all but necessary for writers to keep their work off the net unless the publisher releases it for that.

    Almost all writers' contracts require that they sign over e-rights to the publisher as part of their contract, whether or not the publisher intends to do anything with them. The writer signs away the e-rights, or doesn't sign the contract.

    Note that e-rights are rights to publish, not ownership. The writer still owns them.

    Along comes the work, posted online. The author has to make an effort to protect the work, because signing the e-rights gave the publisher the right to release it. If the writer doesn't, they are in violation of their contract and the whole thing can be cancelled.

    A few writers like Harlan can afford to take on a case like this themselves, and can afford to refuse to have an e-rights clause in their contract. Most can't. If they want to get the contract, they sign the whole thing, and they're stuck having to do their own police work.

    If a writer has signed a publishing contract for the work that includes an e-rights clause they can't publish it on line, and they have to try to prevent others from doing so.

    At least that's the way it was explained to me by Charlie Petit, Harlan's lawyer during the lawsuit, while I was serving as material witness and slated as expert witness. Harlan was protecting his own work because he wanted to, not because he had to, because he didn;t have to contend with these silly e-rights issues in contracts. He also did so because newer authors didn't have the resources to be doing things like this all the time, and he wanted to see this made public so they wouldn't get screwed out of being able to be authors.

    • Along comes the work, posted online. The author has to make an effort to protect the work, because signing the e-rights gave the publisher the right to release it. If the writer doesn't, they are in violation of their contract and the whole thing can be cancelled.

      Rubbish. Why then do none of the other thousands of authors whose work you can find online do this? As long as the author himself has not put the work up, which would violate most publishing contracts which give the sole right to publish to the p

      • He made a deal with the guy who posted the files, the person who directly and knowingly violated his copyright, so he would give evidence against AOL, which WAS NOT the news server the files were posted from, merely one which carried the newsgroup with deep pockets.

        And refused (or rather, incompetently failed) to remove the material when requested to do so, thus losing their legal protection against such things. His stance on AOL was entirely fair, I believe.
        • And refused (or rather, incompetently failed) to remove the material when requested to do so, thus losing their legal protection against such things. His stance on AOL was entirely fair, I believe.

          Do you know anything about Usenet? It's practically impossible to comply and run a decent feed. Usenet is ephemeral anyway. Articles expire in days or weeks; and no single ISP could delete a post from every other server. And as I said, it did not originate with AOL, they have no authority to delete it from oth

          • Do you know anything about Usenet?

            Yes. I've been a user on and off since '94, and have wasted away a lot of time on various groups.

            It's practically impossible to comply and run a decent feed. Usenet is ephemeral anyway. Articles expire in days or weeks; and no single ISP could delete a post from every other server. And as I said, it did not originate with AOL, they have no authority to delete it from other servers.

            Yes, but they could have complied with Ellison's actual request, which was to remove it
            • Yes, but they could have complied with Ellison's actual request, which was to remove it from their own servers. And, legally speaking, were required to do so. Which was why, when they failed, they were sued.

              I don't know if that's true -- "legally required" how? Doesn't really matter anyway, that was susbsidiary to my point, which I won't bore you by repeating. Also, after looking up the status of this case, Ellison has settled with AOL and they've kissed up now. I wonder how much he screwed them for.

              El

We want to create puppets that pull their own strings. - Ann Marion

Working...