Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> In article <chenrich-043E1A.14281824012...@news.verizon.net>,
> Christopher Henrich  <chenr...@monmouth.com> wrote:
>> In article <Jv5pzF....@kithrup.com>,
>> djhe...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote:

>>> In article <nebusj.1201191...@vcmr-86.server.rpi.edu>,
>>> Joseph Nebus <nebu...@-rpi-.edu> wrote:
>>>> lal_truckee <lal_truc...@yahoo.com> writes:

>>>>> chuck c. wrote:
>>>>>> ... As someone once said, nothing ages poorly like old sci-fi, ...
>>>>> "someone" was wrong.
>>>>> Much of the old SF (NOT sci-fi!) is vastly preferable to the weaselly
>>>>> modern word processor prattle,
>>> Heh.  Now I'm remembering another Leiber, _The Silver Eggheads._
>>> "Wordwooze" is the word you want.

>> Ooohh. that's a good one.  I will strive to remember it.  It's
>> applicable in so many places, e.g. bubble-headed pundits on radio new
>> shows.

> Yes, but Leiber was applying it to the word-processed prattle to
> which you refer above.  Only it was worse.  In the future of _The
> Silver Eggheads,_ all popular fiction was written by word
> processors, with little or no human input.  However, most readers
> didn't want to realize that, so there were still "authors" who
> had funny names and funny bios and appeared on talk shows.  They
> finally rebelled; they wanted to write the things THEY wanted to
> write.  So they broke down the publishers' doors and threw bombs
> into all the wordmills.  Then they went back to their studios to
> write ... and discovered they didn't know how to put a sentence
> together.  This starts the plot moving.

> Also featured are robot sex and robot porn, and a lot of brains
> in bottles.