Harrison Ruffin Tyler, last surviving grandchildren of President John Tyler, dies

Sad news: Harrison Ruffin Tyler has died at the age of 96. Through a family quirk (marrying twice and fathering children late in life), his grandfather was far and away the earliest president to have living grandchildren. Harrison’s father, Lyon Gardiner Tyler, was born in 1853, and died in 1935 (when his son, Harrison, was six years old). Lyon’s first wife died in 1921, after they had three children, and Lyon married Sue Ruffin, who was 35 years younger than he. Lyon and Sue had three more children: Lyon Jr. (1925–2020), Harrison (1928–2025), and Henry, who died in infancy. Lyon’s father was tenth US President John Tyler (born in 1790). John and his first wife, Letitia, had eight children. Letitia died in 1842, a year and a half after President William Henry Harrison died, making Tyler the first vice president to succeed to the presidency. In 1844, Tyler married Julia Gardiner, who was 30 years younger than he. After leaving the White House, they had seven children (Lyon was the fifth). The president died in 1862, when Lyon was eight years old.

In addition to his family pedigree, Harrison lived a full life. After graduating from Virginia Tech, he worked for Virginia-Carolina Chemical Corporation. He received a patent in water treatment pertaining to shiny aluminum. In 1963, Virginia-Carolina Chemical Corporation was acquired by Mobil, and Tyler left the company to found ChemTreat, Inc. (a water treatment company headquartered in Glen Allen, Virginia) with partner William P. Simmons. In 2000, Tyler led an employee stock ownership program at his company. ChemTreat was acquired by the Danaher Corporation in 2007.

Tyler married Frances Payne Bouknight in 1957. They had three children: Julia Gardiner Tyler Samaniego (born 1958), Harrison Ruffin Tyler Jr. (born 1960), and William Bouknight Tyler (born 1961).

Tyler purchased the Sherwood Forest Plantation—President Tyler’s home—from relatives in 1975 and oversaw its restoration. In 2001, he donated $5 million and 22,000 books and documents from his father to the College of William & Mary department of history.

Frances died in 2019, and Tyler broke with family tradition by not remarrying. He suffered a series of mini-strokes in 2012, and died in the nursing home where he was living on May 25, 2025.

If thou art god, why art thou pissing off everyone else?

In one of Allen Steele’s Coyote novels, he introduces the alien religion known as Sa Tong Tas, which the humans come to translate as “thou art god.” When first I read it, it was an interesting concept for an ideal world, but I know that I do not live in an ideal world, so it just percolated in the back of my mind.

In the last few days, several real-world experiences have brought this concept to the forefront of my mind. On Thursday, riding the bus home from Boston, the woman behind me did not stop pulling on the back of my seat, except for the hour and a half she was speaking loudly on her speaker phone in a foreign language. It was only as we were arriving in New York that I realized she was not being malicious; she simply did not think about the fact that her actions affected anyone else.

Saturday morning, at the convention hotel, I went swimming. There was one woman in the pool when I got there, but she left soon after I arrived. I met her Saturday evening, and she explained that she had to get out because the water had become too rough while I was swimming. I try not to flail about or splash or make a big production of my swimming, and she said it was not my conscious fault, but I am a large person, and when swimming at my regular speed, I tend to leave a wake. In a smaller hotel pool, that wake reflects off the walls of the pool, interfering and combining to make larger waves and splashes. Sunday morning, while I was swimming by myself, I tried to be a bit more conscious of what I was doing to the surface of the water, and realized that I do tend to swim fairly smoothly, but indeed, I’m leaving a wake. There is not much I can do about this other than not swim, but now I will be more conscious of how my swimming affects others.

The reason I am writing this is because of an incident that occurred Saturday night at a party at the convention. I was talking with a writer, new to me, who is very successful. He has about two dozen books in print, and makes six figures a year from his writing. He was giving me advice and suggestions and talking about the business, which could have been extremely valuable to me. The problem, however, was that a struggling writing also joined in the conversation. It wasn’t the art of writing we were talking about; it was the business, which comes after the writing is done. The successful writer’s method was to describe a problem he’d encountered, a hurdle to overcome, a general condition that interferes with success, and then to talk about what he’d learned, how he overcame the problem, what he does to be successful. Unfortunately for me—and for the struggling writer himself—the struggling writer heard the problem, and then felt the need to interrupt to detail his own form of the problem and why it was so vitally important to solve it. If the struggling writer had realized the successful writer was offering some of the potential solutions the struggling writer was seeking, the struggling writer might have clammed up, and both he and I could have benefitted from the successful writer’s willingness to share his accumulated wisdom. Instead, by not noticing how his actions affected anyone outside himself, he deprived us both of a fantastic chance to learn to be more successful.

I’m not saying we should diminish ourselves for others’ benefits. But simply realizing that no action occurs in a vacuum, that what we do—consciously or not—affects others may cause us to think about those others, may make the world a better place (and incidentally, benefit ourselves in the long run).

N.B. — This is not directed at anyone with whom I may have had a telephone conversation during the past week.

“Pairs” of Songs

Working with music playing—as I always do—I’m thinking about paired songs. That is, songs that go together (at least in my mind), but weren’t necessarily released together. So, not “We Will Rock You” and “We Are the Champions” by Queen, not “Hard to Say I’m Sorry” and “Getaway” by Chicago. I’m thinking of “I Know You’re Out There Somewhere” by the Moody Blues and “When You Close Your Eyes” by Night Ranger, or “Scary Kisses” by Voice of the Beehive and “Kiss Me Deadly” by Lita Ford.

Got any other interesting pairs of songs that really ought to go together?

Science Fiction Convention (5th of 2025)

Next weekend (not this weekend), May 23–26, I’ll be at Balticon in Baltimore’s Inner Harbor. As usual, I’ll be spending a lot of time in the dealers’ room (specifically: Friday 2–7pm, Saturday and Sunday 10am–7pm, and Monday 10am–2pm). But this year, I have a serious request: I’m currently experiencing a severe case of tendinitis (my doctor called me an over-achiever: I’ve got tennis elbow AND golfer’s elbow, simultaneously, in my left arm [the last round of golf I played was three years ago, and I haven’t played tennis in more than a decade]). As a result, I’m going to have trouble lifting the boxes of books, so if I can find a willing volunteer or two to help me unload the car and get the stuff to the dealers’ room on Friday, and/or to truck it back to and reload the car on Monday, I’d be grateful. Thank you.

And if you’re looking for me on panels, seek me out:

Friday at 8:30pm in Mount Washington: “When Writing Advice is Rong” with Scott H. Andrews, Joshua Bilmes, Dan Jolley, and Mark Painter.

Saturday at 11:30am in Gibson: “Traditional Publishing Scares Me: How to Traditionally Publish Your Book” with Joshua Bilmes, Silvia Moreno-Garcia, Sydney Olivia, and Brie Tart.

Sunday at 10:00am in Federal Hill: “Ducks and How to Make Them Pay” with Martin Berman-Gorvine, Flappy, Kelly Pierce, and Naomi S.

Sunday at 2:30pm in Mount Washington: “Jews In Space: Jewish SF On and Off The Page” with Martin Berman-Gorvine, Randee Dawn, and Alex Shvartsman.

Sunday at 8:30pm in Mount Washington: “Eye of Argon Reading” with A.L. Kaplan, Mary G. Thompson, and Jean Marie Ward.

Monday at 11:30am in St. George: “Short Fire Readings” with Scott Edelman, Miguel O. Mitchell, Mark Painter, and Andrija “Andy” Popovic.

Hoping to see many of you there!

Even door-to-door canvassers represent the campaign

A fellow wearing a New York Police Department T-shirt just rang my doorbell, campaigning for Heshy Tischler. I told him that a political campaigner wearing that T-shirt made me uncomfortable, and he started yelling at me that he had a First Amendment right to wear the shirt because he has a relative who is a police officer. I didn’t get his name as I closed the door in his face, yet I heard him continue to yell through the door. Based on that interaction, I am far less likely to vote for Tischler for New York City Council in the upcoming special election.

The things that influence our votes.

Keeping Promises

Associate Justice (retired) David Souter has died at the age of 85. Appointed to the Supreme Court by the first President Bush in 1990, he retired in 2009.

Reading his obituary on CNN, I was struck by this passage:

He was often understated in his opinions. In a 2009 concurrence in a case involving Navajo Nation mineral rights, Souter put down only two sentences.

“I am not through regretting that my position” in an early case “did not carry the day,” he wrote. “But it did not, and I agree that the precedent of that case calls for the result reached here.”

That comment is resonating with me because of an internal Mensa discussion we’re currently experiencing. Several people in the discussion seem to have difficulty understanding the fact that leaving an office does not absolve one of promises made when taking that office. Specifically, that a promise to respect the confidentiality of certain discussions must survive beyond the end of one’s term of office.

In that quote, Souter is saying that joining the Court obligated him to follow the precedents set by the Court before and during his tenure. Just as any other board of directors may debate an issue, with strong proponents on both sides, but once the body reaches a decision, it is the duty of all the members of that body to support it, or at the very least not publicly disagree with it.

Young Adults are Not Happy

I find it ironic that two of the news channels both quoted the same Harvard Youth Poll, which was taken by the Institute of Politics at the Harvard Kennedy School (see it here: https://iop.harvard.edu/youth-poll/50th-edition-spring-2025), this afternoon. On CNN, they touted the finding that—among young adults—President Trump’s approval rating is 31%. On Fox, they touted the finding that—among young adults—the approval rating of Democrats in Congress is 23%. Neither one (at least, while I was watching) mentioned the approval rating of Republicans in Congress (for the record: 29%).

A little more color on those numbers. Previous iterations of the poll were run in Spring 2017 and Fall 2020. Those numbers (in order) were:
Trump: 32%, 29%, 31%. So he’s been remarkably steady, and the only one to improve since the previous poll.
Republicans: 28%, 31%, 29%. Again, steady.
Democrats: 42%, 48%, 23%. The biggest drop of the three. They should be embarrassed.

Both used the poll to show that those on the other side of the political aisle are in trouble, by quoting one or two specific numbers. But hearing them both within minutes of each other made me wonder: just what do those young people approve of? So I went dug out the poll itself. The answer, at least among the top ten issues this report is talking about, is “not much.” This group of young people is not happy with pretty much anything having to do with the government, world, or social issues.

They have very little sense of community, almost none of them think the country is heading in the right direction, their life goals are not the same as their forebears’, and very few of them trust the federal government to do the right thing.

Both CNN and Fox used the survey to make political hay, though only briefly and in passing. But neither, it seems, took the time to realize the survey says something far more important: it doesn’t matter which political party you support, your party is not doing a good job of serving the people, and the next generation is noticing. Bloviating and blaming the other side is easy, but it’s not enthusing anyone who isn’t already a dyed-in-the-wool supporter of the bloviators and the blamers.

“Not attacking” is a concession?

Taking questions in the Oval Office with the prime minister of Norway sitting next to him, President Trump just responded to a question of what concessions Russia is willing to offer to end the war in Ukraine. His response? “Stopping the war, not taking the whole country.” That’s a concession? That’s something Russia would give up to end the war? Do we blame this answer on speaking off-the-cuff, or on President Trump’s Russian patriotism?

Publishers Weekly Makes a Mistake

In response to Publishers Weekly’s new policy, which they announced in a letter stating:

“Publishers Weekly’s reviews editors handle a huge number of submissions and produce roughly 7,000 editorially chosen, prepublication reviews each year. Rest assured that our process and standards for how titles are selected for review is not changing.

We are making a change in the submission process. In order to effectively manage the growing number of submissions we receive, as of March 24, 2025, titles submitted for PW review consideration incur a $25 fee.

I’ve just sent the following letter to the editor of PW:

I’m disappointed to learn of Publishers Weekly‘s new pay-for-reviews policy. Reading the FAQ on the web page, I see

Does the $25 submission fee apply to BookLife Reviews, which are different than PW reviews?

No, the submission fee does not apply to BookLife Reviews. BookLife Reviews are an entirely different process; BookLife Reviews are paid reviews.

As a publisher, I find this disingenuous. And as a reader, I don’t see the difference. Pay for a guaranteed paid review, or pay for a chance for a regular review. Either way, it’s paying for a review, whether you call it a submission fee or a paid review.

How long will it be before PW goes to a free distribution model, just to keep your circulation numbers up to justify the review fees?

With regrets,

Science Fiction Convention (4th of 2025)

I’ve mentioned that this weekend is another convention weekend for me. I’ll be in Glen Allen (Richmond), Virginia, for RavenCon, and I’m hoping to see you there!

If you’re looking for me, I’ll be (as usual) at the Fantastic Books table in the dealers’ room (which is open Friday 3–9pm, Saturday 10am–6pm, and Sunday 10am–2pm).

I’ll also be on programming. They’ve front-loaded my schedule to Friday evening, so make sure you get to the con early.

Friday at 6pm in the Henry room (in the Jefferson building): “Editors Are Not the Enemy” with Debbie Manber Kupfer, Bishop O’Connell, and Evan Ratke.

Friday at 8pm in Henry (Jefferson): “Short Stories as a Marketing Tool” with JM Lee, Pamela K. Kinney, and Mike Jack Stoumbos.

Friday at 9pm in Buckingham (Jefferson): “The Finances of Running a Small Press” with JM Beal, Jason T. Graves, and Shane Gries.

Saturday at 10am in Dinwiddie (Jefferson): “How to Write Realistic Dialogue” with R.S. Belcher, David Godwin, and Cass Morris.

Saturday at 8pm in Henry (Jefferson): “Grammar Goodies (Ask an Editor)” with JM Lee, Cass Morris, and Gray Rinehart.

I’ll be hitting the road before dawn on Friday, so it’s going to be a very long day for me; be gentle.