Re: Campbell discussion, I have lived in America for almost half of my life now, but I do not come from an American background. The first US SFF I read was in translation. I am very interested in what got translated under the Soviet regime, and what was not translated.

I have written some about this (I think most sharply in my Letter to Tiptree), and I plan to write a lot more about this. Translations were huge under the Soviet regime, some great translators were working... They translated only certain things. There was Asimov, Clarke, Bradbury

Some Heinlein - although selectively, and parts of it were censored/changed, which is interesting. What was not translated? Any feminist SF from the 60-70s or onward. Le Guin was not really translated until late 80s when the Soviet Union was ending. Russ was not translated -

- until much later (I do not think there was a single thing translated under the Soviet regime, but I am still in the middle of my research). Some Tiptree stories, but I think from before they knew Tiptree was Sheldon. For Butler I think I only found Dawn translated in 2001.

So there was an erasure of Western feminist work in translation, which is what I'm working on, +related issues (will take me a while to write this up).

Thing is, when I read "In the n the 60s, 70s in the US, SF turned towards pulp", I see a different but similar erasure

The field was complex in the US, with many things published, mainstream and in zines and in so many ways. The question always is, what is the conversation you are paying attention to. What is the narrative you are centering? Whose narrative you are centering?

So yes, maybe for some people Campbell dominates the narrative because that's the narrative they are centering, the narrative that SERVES them the best. It does not mean that we need to mindlessly repeat this very. narrow narrative as if no alternatives exist. We can do better.