In Rememberence: Frederick S. Clarke

James H. Burns

Last week, when I first read that Fred Clarke, the publisher/edtor of CINEFANTASTIQUE, had passed away--

I was stunned.

'And hoped it was just one f those stupid "internet mitstakes..."

But it bugged me.

A lot.

And because I didn't want to inadvertantly start a rumor by calling a few of our mutual acquaintances, I did an internet search, for my info.

Nothing was coming up when it dawned on me that, had Fred died, there would have been an obituary in THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE.

(CINEFANTASTQUEi was centered in a Chicago suburb.)

I checked the TRIB, and, sadly, Fred's obit was there...

I don't know if it's pssible for today's fantasy film fans to totally gleem how important CINEFANTASTIQUE was to the history of the genre.

Today, virtually anything and everything you want to know about movies--not to mention anything else--is just a mouse-click away.

Even before the internet revolution, book store magazine shelves were filled with several mags on both the current scene, and the history, of fantasy and horror flicks.

But in the early '70s, there was just about nothing.

Nothing for adults, anyway.

At least, adults interested in in-depth coverage of films of the fantastic.

And nothing on a regular basis.

(CASTLE OF FRANKENSTEIN, Cal Beck's wondrous, strange newsprint magazine was--to this day--the only monster mag that was as likley to have a counterculture diatribe, as a look at the latest horror starlet, but it was published irregulary...

(THE MONSTER TIMES, published in a still-unqiue newspaper/tabloid format, was similarly hip, and fun, but hedged its bets by retaining a bit of FAMOUS MONSTERS' youthful approach... There was nothing wrong with that--in fact, for quite a while, iit was a terrific, fun, combination!)

And then, CINEFANTASTIQUE appeared.

Slick, on glossy paper, with beautiful photo reproduction, and professional journalism standards--

CFQ was really the first mag devoted strictly to science fiction and fantasy, that, on a regular basis, provided fascinating, in-depth. articles, with interviews, on the making of the genre's classics.

AND included--and was the ONLY magazine to do so, for many years--full previews, of upcoming movies.

In the mid-70s, when I discovered the mag, literally, as a kid--

It was a thrilling moment!

And until at least 1980, the magazine remained the BEST source for the field.

(And, if the editors of STARLOG and FANGORIA, are honest, one of the places that they also looked to for information--in addition to VARIETY and THE HOLLYWOOD REPORTER, in the earliest days of their mags...)

CFQ may have lost its way at some point in the early '80s, when, for a while, it became too much of a special fects mag, but it was always a first-class enterprise.

And some of CINEFANTASTIQUE'S "theme" issues of the '90s, were better book-length looks at their subjects, then many actual books, published on the same themes!

I don't know how much CFQ ultmately influenced the SF/FNTASY magazine biz.

STARLOG (and, hence FANGORIA), probably would have been published anyway, since STARLOG started--oddly enough--as a one-off STAR TREK magazine, from an outfit that had been doing soap opera magazines.

Other mags would inevitably have come along...

But I DO KNOW that many of today's top filmmakers were heavily influenced by CINEFANTASTIQUE, and the education they helped get, from its pages.

And the point is, CFQ was there first--and its mark of quality, endured far longer than that of most similar magazines.

I wrote for Fred Clarke only once, when he bought an article that had originally been done for ESQUIRE (and which ESQUIRE had to bump when the movie that it was about, was released AHEAD of schedule!).

We talked a few other times during the years, usually when he called to see if I would do a piece for one of his magazines.

Sadly, I didn't have the time.

But I always found Fred a fun, and nice guy, to chat with, on the phone.

(Remarkably, someone just told me that Dan Scapperotti, a contributor to CFQ almost from the beginning, also had never met Fred in person... All of their correspondence was by phone, mail, and later, I suspect, EMAIL...)

I was amazed to read in THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, that Fred was only 51.

Which means he was only in his early twenties, when doing CINEFANTASTQUE's earliest issues.

'All of which, of course, makes Fred's achievement, even more remarkable!

But, what haunts me, is that I hope Fred knew, at the end, how important his creaton had been, for so many years. to so many people.

I'm pretty sure I shared those sentiments, with him, during one of our phone calls, years ago.

I just wish I could be sure.

If I remember correctly, Fred was a little embarrassed by the compliment.

I hope he also knew, of course, that the complement was true.

CINEFANTASTIQUE will REMAIN a milestone--

In the genre that, here, obviously, all of us hold so dear.

Jim Burns
(James H. Burns)