Mixed Doubles (Starsky and Hutch/Professionals zine)

You may be looking for the Australian multi-fandom zine called Mixed Doubles.

Zine
Title:	Mixed Doubles
Publisher:	Carla A. Salveta out of Scotland/A Teddy Bear Press Production
Editor(s):	Carla A. Salveta and Linda Watt
Type:	letterzine
Date(s):	1984-1989
Frequency:
Medium:	print
Size:	digest sized
Fandom:	Starsky and Hutch & The Professionals
Language:	English
External Links:
Click here for related articles on Fanlore.

Mixed Doubles is a slash and gen British Professionals & Starsky & Hutch letterzine which was produced from 1984 to 1989.

There are sixteen regular issues.

While the letterzine included both fandoms, the focus, especially in the later years, was The Professionals.

Issues contained letters, fiction and poetry, newspaper articles and ads from fans buying and selling fanzines and other items.

In addition to regular letterzines issues, special editions or supplements were printed which only contained clippings about the actors of the two TV shows in later endeavors; Martin Shaw in Are You Lonesome Tonight?, and Lewis Collins in various theater productions are some examples.

Carla Salveta started "Mixed Doubles" shortly before her Starsky & Hutch letterzine, APB, folded.

For other Starsky and Hutch, and Professionals, letterzines, see List of Letterzines.

Same Title, Different Zine

This letterzine is not the same as the Australian multi-fandom zine called Mixed Doubles, which started a bit later in the same year.

Some Terminology

The sexual relationship between Bodie and Doyle, and between Starsky and Hutch, was called "/" for the first year of this letterzine. It was in the sixth issue that the word "slash" was used.

The much less used British term, stroke, was used only once, and this was in the second issue.

"The premise" is used a few times, as well as "'/' premise" and "slash premise."

"/" remains the dominant term throughout the run of this letterzine.

Introduction: From the First Issue

MIXED DOUBLES has come about as a response to the number of Professionals fans I know, who did not have a forum to discuss their favourite characters, and being greedy I decided to include my other favourite duo as well.

In common with most other letterzines, MD is a mixture of letters, cuttings, artwork:, fiction/poetry and, most importantly, imagination. I must apologise for the delay in getting the first issue out, but before starting on such a venture, I had to find out just how many people were interested, not only in buying, but also in contributing - I can't do it all myself! I found the interest in buying there, but getting contributions took some strong arm tactics, hopefully things will improve with each issue.

Well what do we have? The Letters Section is straightforward, but I've introduced various other sections such as Speaker's Corner - where you can discuss a particular topic; Scenes from the Cutting Room Floor - an opportunity to fill in the 'missing scenes’ from episodes (your imagination can run riot here, as long as it's not explicitly graphic, as I don't think our photocopying girls would understand); Bit's & Pieces - for cuttings, comments, articles and so on; and The Trading Post -for adverts of zines and anything else you want. The Fiction Section welcomes short stories of 1-3 pages in length and poetry and artwork are always welcome. I'll also be on the lookout for suggestions from you - the readers, for items you'd like to see.

Sprinkled throughout the zine (used as page fillers really) will be snippets entitled Did You Notice - these are the funny, interesting things, or the mistakes sharp eyed watchers noticed in episodes. We're always looking for these to share. With this first issue we're also giving away an Episode Guide as an apology for the delay in getting out this first issue.

MD will be coming out on a six weekly cycle, at first anyway. At the present time there are not enough people buying from the USA to make it worthwhile using an American agent, so you'll have to send $ for the present, but if numbers increase, I will make arrangements to have money paid within the USA.

I'd like to thank Linda Watt for giving me the encouragement to start this endeavour and for all the help she has given me to get it out; I know she is a Professionals fan, so she has no excuses for not contributing!! I'd also like to thank Crystal Ann Taylor who inadvertently reawakened my passion for 'The Professionals and for assuring me that there were a lot of Americans who needed something like MIXED DOUBLES - without the American connection, this venture would never have got off the ground.

Well without further rambling from me, read and (hopefully) enjoy this first issue of MD and then get those pens out for issue 2.

Issue 1 (June 1984)

Mixed Doubles 1 was published in June 1984 and contains 27 pages.

cover of issue #1, B&D by David Bowden, S&H by Sandi Chapman

The supplement is an episode guide.

• Editorial (1)
• Your Letters (3)
• Here for You, poem by "Abby" (Starsky & Hutch) (16)
• Speaker's Corner: Why Bodie and Doyle? by Valerie Piacentini (puzzlement about why male partners are always referred to in a consistent order: Kirk and Spock, Bodie and Doyle, Starsky & Hutch - it's not due to rank, alpha order, dominance, age, physical type, syllable count, but perhaps due to putting the more extroverted and easier to understand character first, and the more enigmatic and complicated character second) (17)
• Two and Two Make..., fiction by Fiona Rule (Last paragraph: "When Bodie disappeared into the kitchen, Doyle dived for the bedroom, quietly picked up Archie and stuffed him into the wardrobe, After all, he didn't want Bodie to know that he sometimes slept with his childhood teddy bear.") (Professionals) (19)
• Scenes from the Cutting Room Floor (continuity errors and bloopers) (22)
• Lyric Page: "Now" by The Carpenters from the album "Voice of the Heart" (23)
• Trading Post (zine ads and descriptions) (24)
• Centrefold by Lyndy Harding (Starsky & Hutch)

• 

  sample page from issue #1

• 

  from issue #1, centerfold by Lyndy Harding

Issue 1: Excerpts from Letters

As interesting as Star Trek, also fan-written stories are always better than stories written for money:

Why 'The Professionals'? I suppose is as good a place as any to start. I think because for as long as I can remember, my favourite plots have always tended to be those with strong male characters. (You'll probably be too young to remember my first love. Jet Morgan.) Minus the statutory love interest. those stories usually had better plots, moved faster, and held my interest longer.

In Bodie, Doyle and Cowley I found characters who interested me almost as much as Kirk, Spock and McCoy do. I wanted to know more about them, and if the producers won't tell me, the fan writers would. One of the most interesting and enjoyable things any fandom offers is the opportunity to have a 'sideways look' at the characters through the eyes of someone who is writing out of love, not-for profit. You may not always agree with what you read, but it's rarely dull, and even a badly written story can have a degree of commitment that is usually lacking in pro writers.

And oh yes having reached years of discretion, I'm not ashamed to admit that I enjoy a good healthy bout of lust as much as the best (or worst) of us.

What about the violence?:

One thing that does puzzle me is the criticism I've read recently stating that the programme is too violent. Ye gods and little fishes! Are we to be doomed to a perpetual diet of 'Watch with Mother'? This is a programme intended for adults, concerning men in a dangerous profession; of course there will be must be a certain amount of violence unless we are to descend to the comic-book level of programmes like 'The A-Team'. Compared with such programmes as 'The Sweeney', or 'ZCars', ‘The Professionals' seems to strike a reasonable balance between realism and make believe.

Frankly, programmes like 'The A Team' worry me far more, as I consider that its treatment of violence is far more dangerous. Spray the surrounding countryside with machine gun fire, blow up cars... but don't worry, the victims pick themselves up and walk away. Nonsense!

Now, I don't want to go to the other extreme and see people disemboweled in slow motion and glorious technicolour, but it seems ridiculous to disinfect violent behaviour in such away. Bodie and Doyle get HURT; so do their opponents; but there is usually a reason, and no-one pretends that it's desirable. But it IS necessary sometimes. That's the way life is, warts and all, and I'd sooner have honesty than hypocrisy any day of the week.

Regarding violence on the screen:

It has been said that 'The Professionals is a very violent programme, and it probably is more violent than many though I maintain that programmes like 'The Sweeney' leave 'The Professionals' at the starting post when it comes to the violent life; that 'Starsky & Hutch' is less violent, that they think more about what they are doing, if and when they shoot. But 'The Professionals' are facing, not just criminals, but terrorists: they have to shoot first and ask questions later, S&H would last about five minutes in a Professionals plot.

But in spite of the violence, I find more character inter-relationship between Bodie & Doyle than I do between Starsky & Hutch. It's frequently understated, but it's there.

Starsky & Hutch, on the other hand, for me they try too hard to be buddies. It's more obvious than between Bodie & Doyle, and for me it misses; it's all on the surface.

Yes, they care:

... Bodie and Doyle care for each other as much as Starsky and Hutch do; Bodie shows this in DISCOVERED IN A GRAVEYARD when he goes on a single minded search for those who shot Doyle and at the end of the same episode when Doyle is discharged from hospital.

Some comparisons:

To a lot of people the main in difference between the two series was the overt friendliness/caring in S&H and the apparent lack of it in 'The Professionals' - I disagree that there was no friendliness and caring, in the latter, but B&D are certainly more reserved than S&H (it might just be British stiff upper lip) and it certainly took longer for them to 'like' each other; but there were many incidents in 'The Professionals' which showed the caring between B&D and I 'saw' an intimate relationship between them, a lot faster than I did between S&H.

In S&H the touching/caring was so overt it seemed almost to be sexless - they were only good friends. I always saw the intimacy in their relationship occurring post SWEET REVENGE; that Starsky's brush with death was the catalyst for Hutch to finally tell Starsky how he felt, and also the time was right for Starsky to accept those feelings.

In ‘The Professionals' I think the end of the third season was the turning point for Doyle who finally decided to take Bodie in hand after WILD JUSTICE and that by the fifth season they were fully committed to each other. I'd love to hear other people's views on 'when' and for that matter 'why', especially in relation to 'The Professionals' as I know this topic has been discussed in other forums in relation to S&H before.

Not big on cop shows:

I'm not really a fan of cop-type shows) all my life I’ve preferred science fiction, and I read very little else. I'm not much of a TV fan either; for the most part I don't follow many series and with one notable exception don't break my heart if I miss an episode.

If I must choose between 'Starsky & Hutch' and 'The Professionals', however, I'll go for 'The

Professionals every time even although (shame, shock, horror!) I must admit that I find it very difficult to remember what Bodie looks like! I find that for me Lewis Collins has a very forgettable type of face. Which is probably why I prefer Doy1e... though I think I prefer Doyle's character too.

Not a big fan of Pros, but willing to be educated:

To be honest, I'm not quite sure what I'm doing here. Writing to MIXED DOUBLES I mean. Well,

I'm not exactly what you'd call a 'Professionals' fan. Don't get me wrong, I've watched and enjoyed the series from the start, go out of my way not to miss the repeats and I've even read a (very) few pieces of fan-fic. The difference is, I’ve never been motivated by it the way I have been by other things. I guess you could say I'm here to be educated. Expand my horizons.

Of course, the fact that this is a 'Professionals' AND 'Starsky and Hutch' letterzine may have something to do with it. I'm one of those infuriating people who believes that the main link between the two is the fact that there WAS no real link. Bodie and Doyle may have been designed as the UK answer to S & H, but they grew in a whole other direction. Which means making comparisons can be thought provoking as well as fun.

As far as character preferences go - friends from the realm of S & H will Know that I am, and always have been, a Starsky person through and through. The blond is pretty (sometimes) but I tend to go for the dark and curly. Of the other two it just has to be the bionic gollywog. I agonised every bit as much over DISCOVERED IN A GRAVEYARD as I did over SWEET REVENGE. And before anyone mentions it, I am aware that Doyle and Starsky are opposites. But then, I never could do things the easy way.

Why does Starsky put up with Hutch:

I like the deep caring Bodie and Doyle have for each other, like the main characters in my favourite programme Kirk and Spock. With Starsky and Hutch I don't know how Starsky puts up with the way he is treated by Hutch. If I knew someone with Hutch's nature, I would break

off that friendship as quickly as possible, (mind you I’d probably thump him first!).

Sexy elbows:

Oh yes, I'm a Doyle fan by the way. I'd love run barefoot through his hair, Now he HAS got sexy elbows. I must say he looked gorgeous in his outfit in WILD JUSTICE.

Issue 2 (September 1984)

Mixed Doubles 2 was published in September 1984 and contains 48 pages.

cover of issue #2

The supplement contains news clippings from British media and news sources.

There is much discussion about comparing the two shows and their characters, some respectful thoughts on gen and slash fans and fanworks, but despite a request for tolerance, a anti-slash fans tosses in a opinionated grenade.

• Editorial (1)
• Your Letters (3)
• Artwork: Starsky by Sandi Chapman (7)
• Lyric Page: "Through the Years" by Kenny Rogers from the LP "Share Your Love" (32)
• Bits 'N Pieces (news and info, Professionals-centric) (34)
• Niagara Blues, part one, fiction by Eros (36)
• Speaker's Corner: Caring and Concern, essay by Carla A.M. Salveta (differences between demonstrations of caring and affection in the two shows) (42)
• Listen to Me, poem by "Abby" (The Professionals) (44)
• Trading Post (45)

• 

  from issue #2

• 

  from issue #2

• 

  from issue #2

• 

  from issue #2

Issue 2: Excerpts from Letters

From the editor, "Commodore has a lot to answer for":

I wasn't entirely happy with the first issue of MIXED DOUBLES in terms of layout - and I've been looking at different ways of tackling the problem, I'm restricted however by the capabilities of my printer (and believe me, despite the astronomical cost, it's limited in what it WILL do. Commodore has a lot to answer for!!) Anyway I was happy to see so many people interested in MD and had to run to a second printing of the first issue because of the numbers of people who were looking for a copy. Interest has been shown not only in Britain, but in America, Canada, Australia and even Austria!!

Also from the editor, remarks on slash content:

I know several people are offended by "/" artwork, and I would ask that those of you who don't like it to let me know, and I'll make sure that you don't receive any in your copy of MD. No point in upsetting people unnecessarily. I would like to make it clear however that the "/" premise is quite acceptable to the editor of MD and therefore while those opposed to the "/" concept are quite entitled to their own opinion, those who enjoy discussing this concept are also entitled to do so. I also intend to mark any stories/poetry which are obviously “/" on the index page and therefore you can avoid reading them. Anyone who considers the "/" concept anathema should perhaps re-consider whether they really want to subscribe to MD. Any subscriptions for future issues will be refunded on request.

A fan of clams and still waters, and Bodie:

When I read the letters in the first issue of MD, I was somewhat surprised to find the contributors were Doyle fans. I like Doyle very much - who couldn't - but my heart belongs to Bodie who seems to be a much underrated character. I suppose it's because he doesn't appear a very approachable type of man, or wear tight jeans. Perhaps he doesn't 'bleed' openly when someone dies and he is, most certainly, made uncomfortable with displays of emotion, but after years of Trek, surely we've learned that these contained types are like icebergs - 9/10ths below the surface. I am a Kirk fan so I know what 'response' is all about but there is undeniable pleasure in watching Spock, analysing why he does things, trying to catch him letting slip a little bit of caring. So it is with Bodie. We've only seen the first 2 series here in Canada, but it is very apparent that Bodie cares a great deal about Doyle though the caring manifests itself in more unusual ways. I don't doubt the existence of love between the two men; they cover it well with humour and ribbing, but throughout the episodes when least expected. It is understated, but after years of STARSKY AND HUTCH, where it was blatant, it's a pleasure to view.

Regarding violence, and the power (and laziness) of the media to determine opinion:

It's a sad reflection on present day life that everything must have a label. Sad, comical, violent -- it is, after all, just the opinion of that particular person, yet when said within the media it has seemingly limitless power to lead the masses, It’s not easy to argue with a machine, or newspaper, and the critics are remarkably clever at never being available for comment, therefore word becomes law. Joe Blogs of the Dally Chronic says such-and-such is violent, so violent it must be. As a mother I would far rather have my children see the reality of THE PROFESSIONALS or even ‘The Sweeney' where they can see cause and effect, than have them witness the 'glamour' of the Tom and Jerry violence of ‘The A Team.'

Comparing the two shows:

I understood MIXED DOUBLES was going to be a mixed S&H/B&D l/z. That's what I thought, but reading the first issue, I was struck by the number of people who either ignore S&H completely or prefer Bodie and Doyle. Well, thought I, after gnashing my teeth, it is plainly up to someone to state the case for the Other Side here. And, always one to stick my neck on the chopping block, here I am.

Why Bodie & Doyle rather than S&H? frankly, this puzzles me. I enjoy S&H for the caring, the concern, the obvious love between the characters - I'm not talking "/" here. I don’t see that in the aired series. I'm talking AFFECTION. It's something more than a good working relationship. They care about each other (and about other people too) and they aren't afraid to show it. That was what hooked me and held me and continues to do so. I could forgive the often inept scripts and plotting for the rare and beautiful moments between them.

Like Carla, I was interested by the advance billing of THE PROFESSIONALS as a Brit STARSKY AND HUTCH - and I watched for that reason. I didn't see a Brit S&H. I didn't see anything approaching S&H. I saw a well-plotted, well-acted action-adventure drama series, with believable people in (almost) believable situations. But there was no chemistry. I've since discovered this was intentional, but that's incidental. There is no doubt that Shaw and Collins are both quite watchable. I'm not disputing that. But aside from a working relationship, what have they got? Hardly even friendship, to begin with (though it did develop later) and certainly none of the affection I saw between S&H.

Don't get me wrong here. I'd like to see that "intimate" relationship Carla mentions. I’ve bent over backwards to see it, in fact. I still can't. Sex is one thing - a love affair and a commitment is quite another.

Where's the straight Professionals fiction? (with a reference to fans "growing" from straight to stroke, the British term meaning slash):

I realise that most of THE PROFESSIONALS fan-fic is very much on an underground basis, mainly because of the Hatstand genre (and yes, yes, I did invent the term. So sue me!) but thinking of the early days of S&H fan-fic, with the ZEBRA THREE series and those that followed. I'm wondering where the comparable standard in B&D has got to. There must be writers as talented - is it that we've all leapt straight in with B/D, and ignored the growing period? Where are the straight stories? To my knowledge there have been only THREE 'straight' B&D zines printed in three years. In Trek and S&H fandoms, in a comparable time, there were uncounted numbers.

In Trek and S&H, straight outstripped stroke by miles. I can't believe that we all subscribe to the view expressed by an Australian fan, that straight B&D is too boring for words. One wonders why she watches the show. And I would hesitate to tell Ken Blake (in either of his incarnations) that his novelisations are ’boring'. But I'm certain the fans can do [fiction] as well, if not better. S&H fan-fic outstripped the Max Franklin books easily. And let's face it - it has to be easy to write about Brits rather than Americans. No de-Briting problems....

So why don't I write B&D, you may ask. You may well. Firstly - I've tried. I don't consider it worked . Also, I can’t write about anyone I dislike, and Bodie gets right up my nose. And finally - I'm far too busy writing S&H, not to mention my other writing projects, I told you I didn't need any more involvements.

More comparisons:

I don't really know why B&D attract me so much (aside from the physical, of course!) With S&H, what immediately bowled me over (beside PMG, and his ass in particular) was their VERY obvious, blatant love and affection for each other no holding back with the touching, hugging, emotional displays, etc. I guess I first started watching THE PROFESSIONALS because I'd heard it was "Britain's answer to S&H", but I soon found they've got a style all their own. I don't find them openly demonstrative in their love and caring for each other thinking about it, maybe that's what intrigues me and fascinates me so much about these guys, the relationship, the love and caring IS definitely there, but it's subtle understated and when those 'glimmerings' come through, and I've found lots of priceless lines and scenes and interaction between the two, I find it's worth all the watching and waiting for such displays! With S&H, you always knew just how they felt about each other; with B&D, it's more of a challenge, and that excites me. It's almost as how I've always felt about Kirk and Spock. There was nothing blatant ever shown with them, and yet, you knew there was SOMETHING going on there. And, anyway, I don’t really think you can compare S&H with B&D - each relationship can be taken on it’s own terms, and enjoyed that way.

More comparisons:

I, for one, think that comparing S&H and THE PROFESSIONALS is worthwhile there ARE more differences than similarities, but isn’t that what comparison is for? We used to call that IDIC, didn't we? I’ve always been against looking at a series in total isolation. In fact I find it pretty impossible.

More comparisons, banned episodes, and an example of fandom silos:

I would not go so far as to say that S&H stories are wishy-washy? There is some very strong drama in the series (some of it, naturally, in the banned episodes). But I see that Bodie and Doyle deal with tougher problems, generally, than US TV would be willing to handle believably. (Also the BBC, no doubt. ALL the episodes of 'Star TreK’, ha! Talking of which, who are these people who get the letters into Radio Times? Anyone in fandom ever heard of them?)

Which shows support fandoms?:

You are so right about “wanting to know more" being the starting point for fandom. Generally the series with fan followings are those where everything about the characters is NOT readily observed on the screen, and THE PROFESSIONALS is a good example of this. With S&H it is almost the opposites I heard about this new show in (amazingly) our often useless local paper and thought, is this another partnership like Kirk & Spock, Napoleon & Illya, Scarlet & Blue, Doug & Tony? From that lovely "who do we trust" moment in the pilot I knew I was right. With THE PROFESSIONALS I got hooked much later - either it clashed with something else when ATV first showed it, or I thought "S&H ripoff - it can't be as good." Bodie and Doyle are in many ways more intriguing than S&H, because the emotional interplay is not so obvious - but definitely there, for me.

Comparing the two sets of characters:

Bodie and Doyle would be inclined to regard Starsky and Hutch as (possibly) a bit naive and not experienced by their criteria. Starsky and Hutch would regard Bodie and Doyle as far too violent and callous. Starsky especially would think this of Bodie, though he might understand Doyle, Hutch would be totally at a loss to understand either of them. We can go into really deep discussions the letters we exchange, along with everything else, if you like.

Different worlds:

True, S&H would last five minutes in a PROFESSIONALS situation, but B&D would last the same length of time in a STARSKY & HUTCH situation ... Bodie and Doyle would be kicked off the force and/or brought up on charges for shooting before they thought.

Getting comfortable in a new fandom, a new culture:

I know how you feel about lack of background knowledge; I felt the same may when entering the 'sacred Kingdom' (that’s a bit how it felt to me) of S&H fandom. I still feel a bit overawed. I've got years to make up before I can go in depth about S&H like you do. Maybe MIXED DOUBLES will help me there.

Getting into a new fandom:

I'd first heard about the series two years ago when a friend in Australia rambled on incessantly about these two guys Bodie and Doyle who I'd never heard of, and since the show never appeared here on the Eastern Seaboard, I forgot about it. Then I was introduced to it at a Convention by way of videotape and became instantly hooked, which means I watch the worst generation dupes , where the voices speak and then the mouths move, because nothing better is yet available. It tops American police programmes as all we get over here is 'sanitised' violence, that is, it's for the most unrealistic. And Bodie and Doyle care for each other without getting over-sentimental/silly as they frequently do on shows over here. It's the characters themselves that draw me to watch the episodes over and over

Big fan of George Cowley:

COWLEY is wonderful. Such a love. Not an Alexander Waverly, of course, but he comes close. Sure the lads trust him; he's been

there already, in most of the situations they face. He'd soon put S&H (especially Starsky) in their place, the way Dobey often doesn't.

Regarding Cowley:

I think Bodie and Doyle have a love-hate relationship with Cowley. Doy1e, as the sequence in DISCOVERED IN A GRAVEYARD would indicate, is inclined not to trust him, to defy him, and to rebel against him. Bodie, on the other hand, simply doesn’t trust Cowley. The incident in A MAN CALLED QUINN, where he double bugs Cowley, is proof of this, But I think they both have a certain loyalty and affection for him why else would they call him the 'Cow'?

Knowledge of an actor affects opinions about a character:

In the later series, too, Martin Shaw's dissatisfaction with the role made Doyle less convincing as a hero.

Likes the title of this letterzine, but not an Australian editor's appropriation of it:

Let me compliment you on the choice of name. Besides being very apposite, that is one of my favourite PROFESSIONALS episodes. A pity some Aussie editor has now chosen it for a series of fiction zines as well. This will get confusing! (I must order the Aussie zine(s) though -- a zine intending to deal with media partnerships should have my support.)

Seeing slash:

I know this is strictly a matter of opinion, but I don't see B&D as having a 'romantic' sort of love at all. I always saw S&H that way, but I feel B&D's relationship is more grittily realistic and harder (poor choice of words?). I think one of the best stories I’ve read that illustrates the contrasts between the S&H and B&D relationship is 'Crying for the Moon', in Code 7 #3. I realize all may not agree with that interpretation, but it worked perfectly for me. This story showed that B&D ARE in love with each other - very much so - however, aside from time actually spent in bed, unlike S&H, they haven't yet learned how to SHOW each other the true depth of their need for each other they can't allow themselves to admit that degree of vulnerability -- unlike S&H, they haven't yet COMMITTED themselves to each other. As I said, that's how I see the two relationships, but others may disagree with me entirely. Maybe we could all discuss this in a future issue? Being American, maybe it's harder for me to get the true 'feel' of a British-made series!

Not a slash fan, but tolerant:

You make "sexless" touching and caring sound pretty terrible - how odd! Sex isn’t everything (well, I don’t think it is, anyway!) - humans need other kinds of love too. "Only" good friends? I follow C.S. Lewis's interpretation that friendship is the least selfish, least dependent kind of love.

For the record I'll just say that the premise doesn't make sense to me for either duo, nor is anyone likely to convince me otherwise. But I don't want to argue about it - I'll let those who want to talk about the idea get on with it.

[...]

Centrefold and APB cover : I disapprove. Your S&H fandom gets even weirder. But it’s the only one in Britain, so...

Then, a militantly gen fan tosses in a bit of a grenade:

I enjoyed the little story [in the last issue], TWO and TWO MAKE..., but it had me going for awhile, thinking Doyle was sleeping with Bodie! Thank god it turned out differently and not made into ‘one of those' type of stories, I for one do not want to see yet another letterzine heading in the wrong direction.

Issue 3

Mixed Doubles 3

The supplement contains news clippings from British media and news sources.

• Operation Impossible, fiction by Brian Clemmens (official showrunner) (topic: how Bodie and Doyle met, originally printed in "TV Times")
• a questionnaire
• other unknown content

Issue 4 (February 1985)

Mixed Doubles 4 was published in February 1985 and contains 56 pages.

cover of issue #4, Maria A. -- A fan in the next issue wrote: "Congratulations on a beautiful cover - one of the finest portrayals of Doyle I've seen. This is a case where you really must, please, do a matching Bodie."

The supplement contains news clippings from British media and news sources, mostly about Lewis Collins.

From the editor:

You'll notice that the questionnaire results are not in this issue, There are two reasons for that; firstly I have received only 50% of the questionnaires back which wasn’t a great return, and Iwas already up to 56 pages without it, which is about the maximum I can staple, So if any of you want to return the questionnaires for next time, I would be grateful.

I hope you enjoy the cuttings booklet with this issue. I know the cuttings are not all recent, and I expect most of the British readers have seen them, but I’m sure the overseas readers will appreciate some of the articles, and perhaps understand why LC, at least, is getting a bit sick of the press.

• Editorial (1)
• Your Letters (3)
• Niagara Blues, part two: It Was A Dark and Stormy Night, fiction by Eros (34)
• Survivor, poem by Jean Chabot (The Professionals) (42)
• Speaker's Corner (43)
• Niagara Blues, part three: Love's Labor Lost, fiction by Eros (48)
• Trading Post (51)
• For My Friend (Things I cannot say), poem by Jenna Bruce (back cover) (The Professionals)
• a four page supplement with pictures and captions

• 

  from issue #4

• 

  from issue #4

• 

  from issue #4

• 

  from issue #4, back cover

Issue 4: Excerpts from Letters

I agree with your statement that the affection between Bodie & Doyle is subtle. I enjoy watching for it, too. For me, one warm glance between the two of them is worth much more than the blatant affection between Starsky & Hutch, although that too was satisfying in a different way.

I want to offer an observation, for all it’s worth, that occurred to me while reading all the letters that said B&D didn’t love each other. I'm not trying to argue that anyone is right or wrong in a particular viewpoint, for we are each entitled to our own, but I wonder if the negative viewpoints don't stem from too close a comparison with the way things were done on STARSKY & HUTCH (ie B&D don't act like S&H and hence don't truly love each other) and not enough consideration to the fact other men might act differently and still be as close.

I am probably the only one in PROFESSIONALS fandom for whom S/H does not work. Without going into the details of why it doesn't, let me say I did try, and, back in the days when S&H fandom was first getting started, I even tried to fantasize/write S/H, so I have spent time thinking about why it didn't work for me. But that isn't important. What is important is the fact that when I think of male/male relationships, I never think of S&H. And when I just actually sat down and started paying attention to THE PROFESSIONALS on the screen in front of me, it struck me immediately how much more blatantly loving, it not downright sexual, B&D were on screen than any other male/male partnership I had ever been fond of. While they might not have occurred with any regularity, the looks and touching struck me as far more intimate than anything I was even used to, and practically every show I've ever been crazy about in my life has had two strong male leads in it (witness my lack of interest in the popular Dr Who). So it makes me wonder what the people who don't see B&D as loving each other might see in the relationship it they weren't using S&H as their relationship model.

Not gay yet:

I am not a "/" fan, of either genre, although I will read it occasionally, more just to see if anyone can come up with a plausible scenario for them actually turning homosexual. I'm still looking.

About slash:

Now I'd just like to ask a favor. You've come right out, honestly, and admitted that "/" is acceptable to you. Well, I'll be honest and say that I don't particularly care for "/" myself; ,it doesn’t make much sense to me. But please allow us our say. I don’t mind discussing the subject. So far, I’d say there's a nice mixture, not too far either direction. It should make for some interesting conversations, but please don't close us non-"/'" people out. We need so me where to talk about our love of THE PROFESSIONALS and STARSKY AND HUTCH, too.

Regarding slash aka hatstands:

I think the reason THE PROFESSIONALS hatstand (yuck, I hate that word) started off so fast was because of 'Starsky & Hutch' and 'Kirk & Spock'. They paved the way as it were. I wish there were more straight zines. I'm going nuts trying to find them. Personally, I don't see [/] in the program either, but then I don't see it in 'Star Trek ' or STARSKY & HUTCH either.

Slash is silly:

The "/" idea to me, too, is silly, I just don't see it between Bodie & Doyle, or Starsky & Hutch.

Slash as an alternate universe:

I have to admit I don't see a "/" relationship, either. I can read "/" all right and enjoy it (but the characterization has to be very well done so I can suspend my belief), but for me, it's as if it's happening in an alternate universe.

Chicken or the egg?:

Fanfic can influence the way we think. Maybe I can never see B/D because I saw the show first and the fanfic after. But then, I saw S&H on screen , and was writing S/H before I ever saw the fanfic, so that argument bites the dust, doesn't it?

Not that friendly:

S&H never doubted each other? Really, What do you call SVsH, then? Friendly teasing? Hutch's treatment of Starsky in that episode was no way affectionate or not how I'd class affection, anyway.

The Bullshitters as fanfic parody:

I nearly hurt myself over THE BULLSHITTERS. Delightful. But what (or who) have they been reading? The gravel pit scene sounded like some of the worst fanfic dialogue, and was about as likely in setting, Well, really. would you start declaring your passionate love for your partner in the middle of a shootout? (Those who respond with 'Just give me the opportunity!' should check in at the Home for the Very Bewildered.) There's a time and place for everything... I did hear that MS had seen the show and was much amused by it, but LC was less than pleased, any truth in that?

Were the actors fans of a parody of their own show, The Bullshitters?:

I hope you managed to get a little of the flavour of THE BULLSHITTERS from the bit I did last time and that some more of you will get a chance to see it. I watched it again recently and was even more captivated by it. During an interview on television (which I haven’t seen - YET!) MS was asked about the show and said he loved it but was rather annoyed that Foyle was not allowed to wear black briefs also. I've heard from other sources that LC was less than pleased. These reactions surprised me as in recent years reactions to that kind of thing would have been exactly the opposite - maybe MS is mellowing in his ’old age' and with some of the press LC has had recently, I can perhaps understand why he was less than enamored.

The joys of a new fandom:

I always enjoy a new fandom because - there is usually so me - things in it that pushes my brain in a different direction. With the lads, it's Bodie's past, and exploring that wonderful life brought me to the amazing world of the SAS. Anyone who feels that Bodie has nothing to offer anyone should take a little time to read about that very elite group of men. It's a shame that so little is mentioned of this time. As a zine editor and Bodie lover I would dearly like to see some stories that highlight this important period of his life and its subsequent effect on his time with CI5 and Doyle.

Did a writer for the show read fanfic?:

A friend of mine reckons that INVOLVEMENT was written after its author had read some fan fiction (presumably ST or S&H, as it’s about all that had been written at that time!) and I'm tempted to agree. It has all the classic 'corny' but enjoyable elements outside a straight wallow: hero forced to choose girl or career, hero rows with boss and best friend over girl, girl rejects hero... All that seriously worries me about it is that Doyle thought she looked attractive!

Copyright and photos in this letterzine:

I'm a bit worried about you photocopying photos - you do realise it's a breach of copyright, strictly? I mean, I'm sure no-one would bother to object, but it could give a bad impression, you know. Of course, artwork is more appropriate in a zine than photos (so it's all fan-produced zine) - if you can get it. What's happened to C Casey, PROFESSIONALS artist extraordinaire? I haven’t been keeping her that busy with MFU stuff...

[Ed's comment! It's photos or nothing as the artwork I have is limited, and I'm sure most people appreciate something to break up the print, even if the copies are not as clear as I would like. As to copyrights - well, we probably break those in every issue, but until I'm threatened with legal action. I'll continue.

That didn't take long!:

I’ve turned into an absolute nut about THE PROFESSIONALS in about four months time, A friend kept raving about them and as they are shown in this area, I decided to take a look. One show was all it took. Now I wait (not very patiently) every week for it to come on. Now, if one of my stations would just show STARSKY AND HUTCH. Sigh.

Show the effects of violence:

I also agree about the violence. After years of sanitized shows where people die but seldom bleed, or get into terrible car accidents and walk away, THE PROFESSIONALS is a welcomed relief. They don't show real violence here because 'they say' it teaches violence. I think a show like 'The A Team' is much more dangerous because of the lack of believable violence. It teaches that you can drive like a maniac and not [get in a] wreck, or if you do, you can walk away. Or if someone gets shot, they get a small neat hole. I work in a Hospital Emergency Room, and I've seen what these things can do. If our TV showed what really happened, maybe people would think twice before doing some of them.

Teddy bears and Frogs:

Teddy bears are just a fan fantasy (more's the pity), but the other fan motif of the frog comes from a line [of dialogue] in WILD JUSTICE where Doyle tells the female psychiatrist that if she puts him under her pillow, in the morning when she wakes up, he may have turned into a frog!

Issue 5 (April 1985)

Mixed Doubles 5 was published in April 1985 and contains 50 pages.

cover of issue #5, Maria A.

The supplement is a photostory by Trevor J. Wayne. This issue also contains news clippings from British media and news sources.

This issue is almost all Pros-centric.

The cover is by Marie A.

• Editorial (1)
• Your Letters (3)
• Chalk and Cheese, poem by Siame (The Professionals)
• Bits 'N' Pieces: Questionnaire Results (results from a questionnaire sent out in an earlier issue, topic was character preferences, 42 sent out and 24 were returned (25)
• An In Depth Look At... (focuses on an individual episode of The Professionals: "Old Dogs with New Tricks") (31)
• Niagara Blues, part four, The Faces of Strangers, fiction by Eros (40)
• Speaker's Corner by an unnamed fan, recounted by Valerie Piacentini (A fan's description of seeing Lewis Collins in Stoke doing a pantomime: "I hope you’ll find this account as pleasant and amusing, and as interesting an assessment of Lewis's character, as I did. Okay, so we all know actors, by their very natures, are usually pleasant to fans but it seems to me from this account that he went out of his way to demonstrate that in his case he is really genuinely interested - and as I think you will agree, at least one group of his fans appreciated it." ) (43)
• Trading Post (48)
• After Midnight, poem by Sue-Anne Hartwick (back cover) (likely Starsky & Hutch)
• Photostory Supplement by Trevor J. Wayne

• 

  from issue #5

• 

  from issue #5

• 

  from issue #5

• 

  from issue #5

• 

  from issue #5

Issue 5: Excerpts from Letters

About meeting Lewis Collins at a pantomime:

He is incredibly nice. Not a bit 'look at me, I‘m a star' or 'I'm so macho it hurts'. I don't think he's even aware just how ruddy beautiful he is. He's just a nice, ordinary, boy-next-door type and not one tiny little bit like Bodie. Not even close. Lewis sometimes appears on-screen peeking out of Bodie, but Bodie doesn't have any part of Lewis, if you follow me. He did 'do a Bodie' at one point - he saw we were a little diffident when he wanted to buy us a drink - well, there were twelve of us, and it did seem a bit much - and he sort of drew himself up and grew about six inches (he's only between 5'9 and 5'10, no taller), his shoulders got about four inches broader, and he said 'When Bodie says you drink, you drink.' For just those seven words, he became Bodie, it was uncanny to see it happen that quickly, and almost scary. The other nice thing was that he didn’t push alcohol on those that didn't want it. He just bought us what we asked for without arguing, and I 1ike that.

I recall noting at one point that even close to it isn’t easy to see what colour his eyes are in the sort of dim light you get in pubs. But yes, I’d say they are darkish blue, but maybe not midnight. His eyelashes really are that long, simply incredible, and those funny eyebrows are also very real and dead cute.

He's a natural 'toucher' without being nasty about it. By that I mean he's quite happy to put a hand on you to steady himself while he leans across to hand glasses around, or to move you to one side if he wants to get by, or while talking to someone behind you, and so on. You should have seen us all afterwards exchanging 'He touched my shoulder', 'His hand brushed mine’, 'He put his arm right round me when he passed so-and-so her drink’, etc, etc.

He’s very good at evading things he doesn't want to answer directly without being at all rude. He does it so nicely it isn't until later you realise he hadn't actually answered the question. Not that there were many things he didn’t reply to. One thing - I asked if I could ask something he needn’t answer if he didn't want to - whereupon I got the wickedest grin and a recommendation to ask his doctor if it was that personal - because I wanted to know what he thought of The Bullshitters. He was a little noncommittal, said he thought it was amusing, and then went off into a scurrilous story about 'a celebrity’ and what he thought of it. (He LOVED it when they took their trousers off!) By the time we'd all finished laughing, he was talking about something else - very subtle and nicely done.

[...]

The projected series with Paul Michael Glaser has run into problems but may still come off. We've promised to keep fingers, etc, crossed for him. Oh, yes rather endearingly, he called him P.M. Glasier every time! My god, if the series does come off, it’s going to cause some problems when the fiction planes intersect.

Comments on The Bullshitters:

Yes, wasn't Bullshitters just divine; either a lot more people say "/" than we gave them credit for or they know someone involved in fandom.

From the editor:

I hope the Bits 'n' Pieces section with the cuttings is of general interest also and I'm sure you'll enjoy the photostory which was put together as a birthday present for one of our readers, by her brother. Thank you again to [Courtney Grey] for another beautiful cover. I have a really special drawing of [her's] with both of them together which I hope to produce as a centrefold or cover in a future issue.

Terri Beckett explains "F-Factor" (something she'd mentioned in an earlier issue) and how it relates to Bodie:

And, in response to popular request, I shall now explain the elusive 'F-factor'. If, after this, you want to get some to make your men more Bodie-like, I shall enroll the lot of you in Masochist’s Anonymous. The F-factor is rated on one’s ability to carry out orders - WITHOUT QUESTION. Examples of high-f-factor groups are the Spartans (at Thermopolae), the Roman legions, the Nazi SS, the US Marine Corps, and our own SAS. Discipline is of primary importance. You may note that these groups can be capable of outstanding heroism - Thermopolae, Khe Sanh, the Falklands - and horrifying brutality - Goat's Creek, Alesia, 'the Final Solution', My Lai. A general note here - since, in the main, the histories of war are written by the victors, 'our' forces are portrayed as heroes, and 'theirs' as villains, whereas the f-factor rating maybe more or less equal. I hope we can discuss this little psychological quirk in more depth in subsequent issues. Check it out on yourself would YOU question the order of a superior officer if (an extreme example) you were told to go and kill the guy who lives across the street? He may be a spy, an enemy agent, a molester of small children and puppy-dogs - but you don’t KNOW that when the order is given. Do you obey (because your commanding officer knows best and you trust him? or do you say 'Why?’.

One fan's proof that Bodie and Doyle are not gay, but don't let that stop fans from writing what they like:

Gratuitous information time... Civil Servants in the security-conscious positions (MOD, DWS, etc) are subject to positive vetting, I wasn't aware of just how wide-ranging this could be until a relative of mine was subjected to it. And since then, I'm quite convinced that there is not even the remotest possibility of Bodie or Doyle being anything other than straight-down-the-middle heterosexual. Anything else, and CIS wouldn't hire them. Sorry about that. And don't let it put you off. There are a multitude of alternative universes out there where Her Majesty's Government couldn't give a toss!

Do Starsky and Hutch have a complicated relationship?:

You said that S&H's relationship is 'reasonably uncomplicated'. I think that depends on how you see the relationship. I do agree that the AIRED S&H have a much less complicated relationship than that of AIRED B&D. However, if you believe in S&H -- well, I’ve been writing S&H since '81, after first having written them ’straight’ for five years, and their relationship is anything BUT uncomplicated! Actually, if you think about it, 4th season S&H (widely hated by fans), was full of disturbing 'complications’ in their previously ’smooth’ relationship (maybe THAT'S why it was so hated?)

Acrimony between the actors and not liking the first season because of it:

... from what I've read, Clemens didn't want [Bodie and Doyle] to be best buddies at the beginning and I think the scripts bear that out, especially since he wrote most of the first season scripts, There's a lot more nasty remarks made to each other in the first season than in the rest of the series. Shaw was originally working with Anthony Andrews (whom he knew from Operation Daybreak) in the part of Bodie, and it didn't work because the two men were too friendly. So they brought in Collins, and if acrimony was what Clemens was after, he certainly got it. I wonder what would have happened if Shaw and Collins hadn't found a basis for friendship? I certainly don’t believe that episodes like MIXED DOUBLES could have worked. There may be a lot of superficial friendliness in first season but for me the underlying tension between the 2 actors is so obvious, and so affects the characters that I have a hard time watching first season now. And as I said in [my] last letter, it took me 3 episodes to decide if I liked the show.

Canon is canon, whether or not you like it:

I don’t think you can arbitrarily decide that an episode cannot be included in the universe of the series. Whether you like it or not OPERATION SUSIE was screened and therefore it happened. If it had been fanfic, you could rule out. But it wasn't. I’ll agree that the script is weak in logic and execution, but nevertheless it has some interesting things to say about the characters, especially their attitudes to death and dying and being up the sharp end with no way out. I know it’s tempting to prefer that an episode never happened (Spock’s Brain, for instance...) but you can’t say it didn’t just because you didn't like it.

In it for characters, not actors, plus comments on an article by Maria Harper in "that shining example of good taste and literary merit. 'The Sun'":

Let me say first that I am not, and never have been, actor-orientated: if I take an interest in a programme like Trek or PROFESSIONALS, it is the characters that attract me though. If pushed I will admit that Lewis Collins has rather more than his fair share of physical appeal.

However, articles such as the one quoted tend to annoy me very considerably, whoever the unfortunate victim may be. I find it manifestly unfair that some bit-part 'actress', whose morals seem to be about as adequate as her clothing, should be able to gain cheap publicity by expressing her opinion as though it was a matter of fact. I know nothing, and care less, about Lewis Collins' performance in the bedroom, but I do know that when I was being taught the facts of life, there was a name for women who behaved in that fashion. As nasty a piece of gutter journalism as I've seen in a while.

What is this obsession people seem to have nowadays with smearing the names of those who have managed to accomplish something in life? It's even reached the point where I find I cannot watch Martin Shaw's performance as Scott of the Antarctic because of my reading of the book on which it is based . Of course the man made mistakes, and with the benefit of hindsight it is easy to see them, but is it really necessary to denigrate what was, after all, a considerable achievement? I wonder if the author or the producer could have done half as much.

More dislike of serialized fiction (which Niagara Blues was):

Now will you join me in my campaign to make 'serial' a dirty word in fandom? When I think of the number of times I've been left high and dry because a serial has not been finished...

About Niagara Blues:

...my "/" fix will be withheld if Niagara Blues isn't finished, Seriously though, we're all enjoying it.

Comments on the serialized story:

Niagara Blues... NOW what happens? I am struck with admiration at Ray's ability to use the loo without opening his eyes. Neat trick. But somehow I doubt that 'In the dark all cats are grey' will excuse Hutch's error of judgement. More?

The differences between Harold Dobey and George Cowley:

Cowley does what he thinks is necessary, regardless of who gets hurt or killed. While respect and even affection might exist in such situation, surely there must always be for Bodie and Doyle the thought at the back of their minds that sooner or later Cowley is going to let them down. I think they accept this, it’s part of the job, but it certainly cannot make for the same trust that S&H have for Dobey, for example.

Regarding slash discussion in this letterzine:

I would never expect non "/" fans to sit back with their lips sealed. Just because I’m saying MD accepts the concept. All I am pointing out is that it will be discussed and therefore for people who find the concept totally abhorrent, MD may not be acceptable. I enjoy reading everyone's views on how they see the characters, but I don't want MD to turn into a forum for a slanging match.

Differing views of love:

Different people do

act differently, and just as some of us see S/H and not B/D, and vice versa, not forgetting those who see both, so Bodie and Doyle may express their feelings in a different and more reserved fashion that S&H. No one is arguing with that, I trust?

However even setting my feelings for S/H aside, and not using them as a role model for the "/" relationship, I still can't see B&D being anything other than close fiends and a fine team. I guess a lot depends on your definition of 'love'.

Regarding twisting of arms and touching:

No one, thank god, is twisting arms to make anyone else see "/" in B&D.

If that was so, I wouldn't be writing in. Forgive me, but a wicked part of my mind responded to your comment about apples and oranges with 'a fruit is a fruit is a fruit'. Sorry. Just my antic sense of humour there.

[...]

I agree with your point about the 'touching' - one of the things I love about fandom is the uninhabited CONTACT. If touching is a sign of sexual attraction, we in fandom must be the most promiscuous bunch since Heliogabalus' party-guests. British men, as a whole, do NOT use touch or contact as a sign of caring. Sad, but true.

NOT a lesbian:

I guess that I get riled about "/" because I was accused of being lesbian by a ’friend’ who thought that because I have a close girl friend well of course I mean, if you give each other a hug, well, isn't it OBVIOUS?

Regarding a comment in the last issue by a fan who did not see Bodie "playing with" Doyle's hair in an episode, but simply a quick touch:

It's amusing what inferences someone can draw from words that may have indicated a bias but certainly didn't offer an interpretation, I

consider Bodie to be playing with Doyle's hair, even if it is only for a brief second and it is one of my favorite little relationship scenes precisely because it is a warm and intimate little gesture and the two of them are comfortable and relaxed enough with each other to allow such demonstrations of affection. To me, it is very appealing and worthy of reminding people that is exists. It was you, not the DID YOU NOTICE comment, that interpreted it in a sexual sense. It was you that inferred the statement was a defense of the idea, that the implication was that Bodie was making a sexual advance. No where did that section of MD say that it was anything else than a teasing reminder of something someone found appealing and a desire to share a bit of that fun. Neither anyone cares to interpret that scene any further or at all is entirely their own concern, but to put 'words into the mouth’ of the comment is to do it an injustice and to detract from the sense of fun this should all be.

The whole purpose of this section was to bring to people's attention some of one's favorite appealing moments, not to have them sliced apart and analyzed for possible meanings, I'd hate to think of what you'd come up with if I offered Did you notice how Doyle passed out in Cowley's arms in FEMALE FACTOR or Did you notice how Cowley stroked down Bodie‘s cheek when B&D had been gassed? Especially, if you can't laugh off your own interpretation.

The discussion over whether B&D care for each other has been fascinating because it is interesting how differently people view the same scenes but I do hope we don't get bogged down in the do they/don't they arguments that racked Trek fandom in the beginning of K/S.

I don't mean to single out any one person in particular I think we all have to be careful in any fandom or idea of leaping to conclusions. Isn’t there a pleasure in the pure knowing that the two love each other? Just in the concept alone? Regardless of how it is expressed?

I remember in the late ‘60’s when Star Trek first ran and we didn't yet know how the series would go. I remember jabbing my best friend in the arm each time there was some kind of affectionate exchange between K&S and saying "See, they do love each other”. And except for the episode ’Metamorphosis,' "/" was the furthest thing from my mind.

Issue 6 (July 1985)

cover of issue #6

Mixed Doubles 6 was printed July 1985 and contains 45 pages.

The 16-page supplement contains news clippings from British media and news sources.

• Editorial (1)
• Your Letters (3)
• Bit 'N' Pieces (some news clippings) (32)
• The Morning After, fiction by Eros (part 5 of the Niagara Blues universe, a SH and BD crossover) (Professionals) (34)
• Roses, poem by Sue-Anne Hartwick (Professionals) (39)
• Trading Post (40)
• a fan writes that both she, and Cowley, feel Bodie to be the more "child like, less adult" member of the duo
• fans unanimously agree that Starsky is the one that suffers most beautifully

Issue 6: Excerpts from Letters

• about dismissing uncomfortable canon:

  I agree with you about not being able to ignore certain episodes and 'pretend they 'never happened'. Just because you may not happen to like that episode. That goes for S&H, too. You'd be amazed at how many people adamantly ignore STARSKY VS HUTCH, preferring to say it never happened - because, after all, 'OUR' S&H Just don't fight that way. I hate that episode, too, but it DID happen - being a firm believer in S/H, I have a very strong theory as to WHY that particular episode happened. All throughout 4th season, there was a very strong underlying current of tension and strain between the guys that HAD to be resolved - eventually. Kira was just the catalyst for the blowup that resulted due to the REAL problems between S&H. But that's another story...

• about a moment of betrayal in Starsky & Htuch:

  I'm thinking of is from THE SNITCH - when Starsky agrees to 'turn over' their snitch to the powers-that-be. The look that Hutch shot him was very full of hurt, and betrayal - shaken faith, badly so. Of course, later on it was all right, when Starsky threw away HIS badge, too - letting Hutch know he was STILL with him, throughout it all. And, after all, Starsk had to be feeling just a little guilty - for Lionel's death. If he'd stayed with the man <as his job dictated> instead of running outside to see if Hutch was dead, or alive.

• on touching:

  Yes, Starsky and Hutch touch, but for me it looks forced. I've come to the conclusion that for me their timing is wrong - the contact is either too long or, in the one episode where it nearly worked (I don't know the episode titles, sorry) it was just a fraction of a second too short to be completely effective. I stress that this is for me.

• slash as reality?:

  Granted security checkups etc, but if any department can overlook promiscuous heterosexuality I don't see why they shouldn't overlook discreet permanent-partner homosexuality, which is in fact less blackmail-worthy material. But anyway, the point of most '/' stories is two basically heterosexual men who become gay for each other but for nobody else, after they've been checked out by whatever department they work for. Besides, surely the fun of fiction is that it doesn't have to be 100% factually accurate - 'in another universe...' I don't have to believe in the '/' premise to enjoy the story provided it's well written and that while I'm reading it I can suspend disbelief.

• on practical jokes:

  Trust - if I was Starsky, I wouldn't be able to trust Hutch. I couldn't trust anyone who played the sort of hurtful practical jokes that Hutch pulls at Starsky's expense. An American friend pointed out to me recently that American males seem to find it acceptable to play jokes that embarrass or humiliate their friends - sorry, I can understand shows of affection through insults but not through deliberately embarrassing. And Bodie and Doyle , whatever else they do or say don't deliberately set out to embarrass or humiliate each other.

• a fan points out what she feels to be a difference in British and American television characterizations:

  Bodie's prejudice in (KLANSMAN). It shocked me, too, more for the fact that it was shown rather than that it existed. It did make him much more realistic, although I was glad to see him become more open-minded at the end. US TV would never show a serious lead character with such a prejudice, even in to show him growing and changing, for fear of causing an uproar.

• about trust between the respective partners:

  I can see how you see S&H as more trusting - but as I have pointed out before S&H had known each other for several years before first season - B&D were relatively new to each other. If we had seen S&H faced with such a crisis early in their relationship, I'm not so sure they would have acted any differently.

• on the difference between Captain Dobey and George Cowley:

  The relationship between them and Dobey is way out of line for reality, of course. Bad-mouthing their Captain the way they do would have earned them enough black-marks to blot out Greater Los Angeles. B&D may never trust Cowley the way S&H trust Dobey - but they sure as hell show him some respect.

• regarding slash:

  Have you noticed that the people who object strongly to the '/' premise are the first to 'see' it in perfectly innocent items? In view of the perennial paranoia regarding '/' fanfic of any genre, I find it confusing that it's often seen where we, the writers, don't intend it. Actually, I find it best to Keep a straight face and admit nothing. Or deny nothing. Take the Fifth. After all, those who interpret scenes literally probably believe that one about the gay rats.

• a fan dips a toe into the water on the other side:

  To be honest, I have been reading some '/' material lately, and I do find a certain kind of perverse pleasure from it, but all I have to do is look at a picture of Bodie & Doyle or watch an episode and I say 'No Way I.' But I do enjoy reading it, if it is well written. A friend of mine says she imagines the '/' in an alternate universe. Yes, I can accept it as that. I guess that makes me a 'semi-slash.'

• a fan wishes to bury a hatchet with another and states:

  I think one thing we have all over looked with Bodie and Doyle, is that on one fact '/' and straight can agree, Bodie and Doyle do love each other, we only seem to get into trouble when ue discuss how they would express that love and what form it would take.

• regarding whether homosexual partners would be tolerated:

  The first whiff of anything irregular and the would have been out. All this business of George patting them on the hands and giving his blessing is crap. As if he'd risk his organisation so that two agents could play slap and tickle in the rest room between frenzied bouts of violence! HA!!!

• she reads it but doesn't agree with it, or apparently like it:

  Since I do not consider '/' a valid premise for B&D or S&H (although I concede there could be a possibility with S&H) all my comments are directed towards aired relationships. Laying my cards on the table, folks, I don't consider any '/' premise valid where it is foisted onto an established heterosexual couple, be they male or female. (I'm dreading a '/' Cagney and Lacey, but since the fandom is predominantly female I can't see it.) You want to give me a planned shift from straight to gay (as in the Vas & Jon series) and I'll agree all the way. That's not to say I won't discuss it, or find it offensive (in the sense that it is about homosexuality, that is.) I read '/' fiction, and for the most part find it pretty terrible. Hardly any of it is well written, or convincing. Most of it is just an excuse for fantasy wish fulfillment and a string of torrid sex scenes -- which make me wonder whether the writers know any thing about homosexuality. It's all so romantic. Yuk. Chris Power is the only person I've yet to read who comes anywhere close.

Issue 7 (September 1985)

Mixed Doubles 7 was published September 1985 and contains 40 pages.

front cover of issue #7, Marie A.

The editor of this letterzine commented: "I really like the Bodie illo this time round. It also looks good on my wall as it balances up with a Doyle drawing you did earlier. I promise to try and include the illo of the two of them together next time round."

The supplement contains news clippings from British media and news sources.

The front cover is by Marie A., the back cover is blank.

Editorial staff: Carla Salveta and Linda Watt.

This issue contains many photos of Martin Shaw and his sixteen-year old son, Luke.

The editor states she only received three letters for this issue.

From the editorial:

I have just acquired a new daisywheel printer and a new word processing package and this is the end result. I hope you are as pleased with the new look of MIXED DOUBLES as I am.

[...]

I'm hoping to make a S&H get together in London in October and have justified it (to myself) by combining it with seeing 'Are You Lonesome Tonight' - I'll let you know what I think of it.

The editor, who also runs the letterzine, APB, admits to getting the two mixed up at times:

Yeah I'll admit that sometimes MD appears where APB should and vice versa - the excuse, well I use the disc copy of the previous issue as a starting point for the next issue and as MD and APB alternate I have been known to miss changing the initials - another 'hazard' of word processors.

• Editorial (1)
• Your Letters (4)
• Speakers Corner: Panto Adventure by Joan S. (17)
  • a report/description of seeing Lewis Collins in the panto, "Cinderella," in Plymouth in January 1985, also of meeting him personally (which was a perk arranged for for members of his fan club and explained in that club's newsletter), see this an excerpt from this fan's experience below
  • a report/description of several visits to see Lewis Collins local in a local theatre production as Robin in the Babes in the Wood panto in December and January 1984, "Each time I went to the theatre, I went round to the stage door, Lewis was sitting in this little office, and we had to just pass our programmes, photos, autograph books, or what ever through, for him to sign," She also met Collins backstage in his dressing room. This fan has a bit of trouble on her last visit: "I almost didn't make it to the last night, as on my way home, from our family shop, I got caught up in the football crowds, who were smashing windows and fighting, and the police were chasing them, with shields and truncheons, it really was awful. I almost got trampled in the crush, but I did get there, and went to the stage door, for the last time. [...] When I got home, I thought over how nice the experience had been - looking forward to going to the Panto, then enjoying the show, then talking to Lewis a few minutes, then going home and looking forward to the next Monday, and here I was, with nothing to look forward too, as I don't ever seem to go out evenings. I did get invited out after all the next Monday [...] I had to go; but it wasn't as exciting as my recent evenings - it was a TUPPERWARE party."

• Bits N' Pieces, a review by May Jones of Martin Shaw in Are You Lonesome Tonight? (24)
• To Bodie - From Doyle, poem by Sue-Anne Hartwick (35)
• Trading Post (36)

Issue 7: Excerpts from Letters

[Joan's description of meeting Lewis Collins at a panto]: I went up to the bar, but as there was quite a crowd, I waited for most of them to go, then I went forward and said hello to Lewis. I showed him my membership card to his fan club and he wrote 'nice to meet you' on it and we talked for a while. I asked if I could take his photo, and he said "No problem, but let's wait till the crowd thins out", so we talked again. He said his fan club had over 8,000 members now, some just for 1 year to see what it was like, but also many old faithful fans. The girls who ran it were getting very over-worked and did I have any good ideas on running a fan club. Then I went to take his photo and the flash didn't work; I tried again, but it still didn't work, then Lewis had a fiddle with the camera, but couldn't get it to work - so I got my instant print camera out. I warned him I would have to take 3 or 4 photos, in the hope of getting one good one, as I cut left ears off and/or right shoulders, or tops of heads. So I took one, and he said he thought he had blinked, so we put the photo on the bar, to develop and sure enough he had. So I took another, and a laugh went round the room, as he had turned his head slightly and was poking his tongue out at someone - I can see where a person is through a wide view finder, but can't see any faces, so hadn't noticed what he was doing. Then he said we would have one taken together, and although I said I didn't like my photo taken, he insisted. Someone took a picture just as I turned slightly, I was making a funny face, and the dark shades of my glasses weren't down properly, so we had another one taken. I was smiling but Lewis was saying "Wait until we are ready" and the photo was taken as he said wait; so he looked rather stern, so I like the one where he is smiling, the best. Someone asked if they could use my camera, and I said yes, so Lewis and I talked some more - he held my hand while we talked; he really was so easy to talk with, like an old friend. He said he knew we had met before and he had been trying to think where it was and he thought it had been at one of his discos (which he had once or twice a year for his club members). I said I was too old for discos, I was more the afternoon tea dance, with the Palm Court orchestra type. He had a good laugh and said his dad always went, he had turned 70 and always enjoyed the evening, and he made me promise to go to the one in March. I said I would try and get a ticket but they were probably all gone by now, but he said I had to go. My camera finally came back and it was empty, so Lewis asked if anyone else had an instant print camera. Someone did, so I finally got a picture of him leaning on the bar.

I thought I had better go, I didn't want to, but knew I had to leave sometime, so put my cameras away and photos, got my coat on, which Lewis helped me with - he did the buttons up and as he did the top one up I made an exaggerated 'arghh' and he undid it again. I put out my hand and said goodbye - he took my hand in both his hands and smiled so lovingly. He said it had been very nice meeting me, he would see me at the disco in March, and I said how pleased I was to have got to Plymouth and it has been a lovely evening, at the Panto and then meeting him. As I turned away he put his hands on my shoulders and turned me towards him and said this is the way friends say goodbye - he kissed me. I heard a cheer run round the room, although it seemed to be a long way away. I then turned and asked the man behind the bar if he could phone for a taxi for me, I think my voice was more or less normal, as I felt rather full of mixed feelings. I was happy, embarrassed, tired and I don't know what else.

[...]

I thought what a nice man Lewis was, how good he had been in the Panto, and how pleasant he had been letting me take the photos, and talking for such a long time. Yes, it really had been a lovely day. [Later], I wrote for a ticket for the disco, but heard a month later that it was being postponed as Lewis had an unexpected, important commitment that week, to do with his career, so it was to be held at a later date, when he could attend. Unfortunately the fan club closed some time later, so I never did get to a disco.

Going through a video-watching phase (Karen, dear heart, you have seen that one...) with my antipodean friend is not conducive to coherent thinking. I start getting 'glasered' around the eyes, if you get my drift.

I think your problem with the 'touching' in S&H is purely a Brit mind-set - since contact between males is still essentially rare, we are far more sensitive to it on screen. I personally never found anything wrong with it, and in fact it was one of the things that got me hooked on the show, as I'm sure I've said before. And in a perfect world, I grant you, no one should cast stones at permanent-partner homosexuality, particularly when the 'straights' are bed-hopping like butterflies. However, in today's social climate, that isn't so. I understand that promiscuous heterosexual behaviour is also frowned upon by the Powers-that-be, by the way - to please the security-conscious in HM Government, it is as well to stick to the missionary position with the lights out. Sexual peccadillos are a no-no. I do agree that one doesn't have to agree with the '/' premise to enjoy a story - but sadly, so much of '/' is badly-written to the point of being nauseating - and then I find it impossible to suspend my disbelief!

To be fair, all I can say about your novella is that I enjoyed it, and I'm very picky indeed. I could almost wish that I could devour every kind of fiction with the same indiscriminate palate that I possessed in the olden days of my entry into S&H fandom, when if it was S&H I read it all with unsated hunger - but I seem to have developed a critical eye somewhere along the way...

Which is not to say I disliked NIAGARA BLUES, because I did like it, in parts - for its lightness, its implausibility, and its sense of fun. I can have too much of the 'payne & aguny' fiction - and the romantic gunk - and this sort of thing restores my faith in fanfic. We all tend to take ourselves and our writing a tad too seriously at times, after all. The occasional banana-skin slip-up is good for our karma!

I enjoyed Niagara Blues. I found it very tongue in cheek and I could quite happily see the characters as written, but then I'm always convinced of the validity of a given situation/character by a good writer.

About, NIAGARA BLUES - sorry, but I just didn't like the conclusion. Up to the last chapter, I really was enjoying it, too, but the 'resolution' just fell flat for me. Doyle just didn't seem in character, somehow. Guilt-tripping Ray ("he'd blame himself for the invention of gunpower," as Bodie has said) taking it all so casually. And, as for Starsky -- we all know what a possessive, little bastard he is. I think he probably would've killed Ray - maybe even HUTCH, too, although he tends to forgive Hutch for everything. As far as that goes, I see all FOUR guys as being extremely possessive and jealous of each other, and I can't believe this whole 'situation' would be so quickly and easily resolved, over breakfast. I just didn't like the way it was done. It was handled almost as though the whole thing was a JOKE. And Ray seemed very much as if he didn't care if he lost Bodie, or not (the way this story was set up, I can't even believe B&D even WERE lovers - here, they really don't even seem to like each other very much! Unless it was just for the sex).

Great issue last time, as always - especially loved the MS supplement. Pity the 'Elvis' thing wasn't a movie, and not just a play, so we could all see it - oh well. Onwards...

As far as 'straight' B&D fanfic goes - I can recommend the story DEAD BLUFF from the MEDIA RARE zine. It's about 60 pages long, and besides being a good 'action' story, B&D are right in character, and they play off each other exactly as they did in the better episodes of the show - and we get to see Bodie as the 'hero', and what he goes through to rescue Doyle from a sadistic madman. I don't own the zine myself, but a friend made a copy of the story for me - I think it was the major story in the zine. Anyway, I'm really looking forward to the MIXED DOUBLES II zine, too - for Karen's novella [Seven Nights In Bangkok]! I love B/D, and prefer the B/D relationship, but 'straight' B&D stuff is so hard to come by, I grab it up every chance I get!

Have just been perusing Terri's copy of MD6. An excellent read, as per usual. Has anyone noticed what an intelligent bunch we all are? And how, on the whole, we can put forward differing opinions without an automatic assumption that it's a personal attack? Looks like we have a reasonable IDIC going on here. Long may it reign!

I have a great deal of difficulty with your statement. 'Surely the fun of fan fiction is that it doesn't have to be 100% factually accurate.' If you're not going to bother to be accurate, why bother at all? I would say that lack of accuracy and believability is one of the major problems in bad fanfic. Just because fanfic is derivative, rather than original is no excuse for ignoring the basic rules of writing. To me, it is a part of artistic integrity to make sure that what I write is as factually accurate as possible. How can you say to yourself 'this is only fanfic, it doesn't matter?' Surely this is an insult not only to yourself, but to your reader and the subject you write about? What 'other universe' do you mean? These programmes are set in our universe. Organizations like CI5 would not allow practising homosexuality to continue once it had been discovered within the department. It is far too politically sensitive - as you must know from recently publicized events in this country. To pretend otherwise is to ignore the facts where alternate universe theories are accepted. We're writing contemporary fiction set in this universe.

And we, as fanfic writers, aren't writing fantasies

What do you mean, Bodie and Doyle don't deliberately set out to embarrass/humiliate each other? What about the first season episode (title escapes me) where Doyle deliberately calls Bodie's girlfriend by the wrong name? And HIJACK, where Bodie does a joke sick call, forcing Doyle to dump his girlfriend? And while I agree that it seems a poor way of showing affection, since males in our society are so often denied 'legitimate' channels through which to demonstrate affection, it is often the only way. It seems crazy to us, but then we're female.

If you were Starsky, you wouldn't be able to trust Hutch? Granted, Hutch CAN be a bastard at times, and his 'practical jokes' seem a bit excessive - but, really, you couldn't trust a guy who's risked his life for you, countless times - who's often disregarded his own life, in order to protect yours? How about what Hutch did for Starsky in SHOOTOUT? COFFIN - BLOODBATH? And not just physical protectiveness and caring, but so much emotional/psychological support and 'hurting' too numerous to mention - you still couldn't trust a guy like that? Hmmmm...

And, as far as Bodie & Doyle not 'deliberately setting out to embarrass or humiliate each other' - really? What do you call that scene at the beginning of one of the early episodes (I forget which) where Bodie deliberately set Doyle up to look like a fool in front of that girl in the gym? (the one doing the judo flips). Bodie knew what was going to happen to Doyle - there was potential for physical injury to Doyle, too - that wasn't 'hurtful'? How about Doyle's fondness for bursting in on Bodie (in the privacy of Bodie's own home) when Bodie is 'entertaining' in bed? That's not 'embarrassing' or 'humiliating'? Another good example is the glee Doyle always seems to show whenever Bodie embarrasses himself in the face of authority. I think it was in HEROES when Bodie was making disparaging remarks about Cowley over the R/T, not realizing that Cowley could hear him. Doyle initially tried to warn Bodie, but it didn't seem as though he tried very hard - he was clearly enjoying himself. We've seen Bodie stand Doyle up for a double date (FALL GIRL) - Doyle sticks Bodie with the bar bill in HUNTER/HUNTED - and I've only seen 26 of the episodes in the series! For all I know, these guys might've done even worse to each other! See what I mean? I could probably go on nit-picking for hours, but all I'm saying is - let's be fair, and realistic. Starsky & Hutch love each other - Bodie & Doyle love each other - but they can also be bastards to each other, too! This is what makes them HUMAN.

[An observation], we seem to have a bit of an imbalance in our letters, with more B&D than S&H. I know, I know, I'm just as guilty. I wonder why? Is it because S&H fandom has been going longer? Or that for many, B&D is fresher in memory than S&H, as in my case? And what can we do about it - or do we not care?

Issue 8

Mixed Doubles 8.

The 16-page supplement contains news clippings from British media and news sources.

At the back of the issue the editor apologized saying:

Some of the articles are extremely distasteful to my mind, but they are included so that fans, especially those overseas, can see the kind of press Lewis [Collins] has been getting in this country lately. The cuttings on both the front and back covers were sent in by J.S. as were the ones scattered throughout which are in German, but as [n]either Joan nor I speak German we don't really know what they are about.'

Issue 9 (July 1986)

Mixed Doubles 9 was published July 1986 and contains 45 pages. Front cover: Bodie and Doyle by David Bowden, Starsky & Hutch by Sandi Chapman.

back and front covers of issue #9, David Bowden and Sandi Chapman

supplement for issue #9

The 10-page supplement contains news clippings from British media and news sources.

• Editorial (1)
• Your Letters (2)
• Film Review of Whiskey Galore (21)
• Poetry: Until by Sue-Anne Hartwick (Pros) (23)
• Fiction: Treat for Treat by Paddie Bryce (Starsky & Hutch) (24)
• Fiction: Never-Ending Game by Paddie Bryce (Starsky & Hutch) (26)
• Poetry: Innocent Victim by Sammie (Pros) (31)
• Report: Hot Shot Wellie Thrower by Kathy Hills (article written about Lewis Collins attending a village competition) (32)
• Trading Post (38)
• Bits 'N' Pieces (this is the news clipping supplement)
• the TOTM is "What were they like in 1972?"
• there is much fannish discussion on the differences and similarities between the two shows, specifically how Captain Dobey and George Cowley compare, the likenesses between B&D and S&H...

Issue 9: Excerpts from Letters

• one fan writes about how Bodie & Starsky and Hutch & Doyle are like each other:

  I can't discuss Hutch terribly well, but I see several possibilities for Doyle seeming so vulnerable yet well able to cope with the world which might apply to Hutch, too. For one thing, Ray sees the world as it is while still not forgetting how he would like it to be. He seems to be an idealist, yet he's very realistic about it at the same time. I don't think the world is capable of surprising him very often, and it's easier to cope with a thing that's understood and expected. On the other hand there's Bodie who keeps reaching out to people only to be disappointed by them - except for Doyle. No wonder Ray is the most precious thing in Bodie's life. I think Ray's environment was tough earlier in his life than was Bodie's, and it made him vary worldly-wise end able to cope more easily with the nasty little surprises life dumps on us all now and then. I don't know a thing about the given early lives of S&H, so it will be up to you SH fans to tell me if that's all nonsense if applied to them.

• another opinion:

  ... underneath it all, Hutch and Doyle are actually more able to cope with things, even though on the surface they 'appear to be more vulnerable'. Well, in my opinion, they appear to he more vulnerable because they are really more vulnerable! Take a look at Hutch, for starters. I don't think he ever had any 'street smarts' at all - it was something he acquired solely on the job, and largely due to Starsky. Hutch's propensity for 'guilt' is well-known - he seems very much to be the 'humanitarian' of the pair, the one who has the outwardly greater 'sensitivity', the one who cares more about the 'world' as a whole, rather than his own immediate survival. Isn't he the one who seems to attract most of the 'losers'? (Most of his 'girlfriends' - people like Luke Huntley, etc). Even his ex-wife! I think Doyle parallels a lot of these traits, too - he, too, has a large capacity for guilt (even Bodie has observed that about his partner); Doyle, too, is much more the 'humanitarian' of the pair...

• regarding a trend:

  One of the things I did like about The Professionals was that neither of the main characters was divorced, with messy complications like children and ex wives hanging around. British TV seemed to go through a period, maybe 15 years ago, when every single hero of a series was divorced. Of course, most of them were cops, and it's supposed to be a tough life but surely all cops' marriages don't end in divorce?

• a fan comments on how her letters are different when they are typed on a computer:

  When I have to type my letter myself onto the computer, they're short. When I scribble it down leaving Linda to decipher my handwriting it's much longer as I can write as fast as I think, but can only type about a 1/3rd of that speed.

• a letterzine leaning?:

  I thought, reading some beck issues of MIXED DOUBLES, that there seemed to be a definite bias towards the Profs series. And while I'm a fan, and have been for years, Starsky and Hutch are my firm favourites, and I'd like to join In with the S&H enthusiasts as there is no longer a British letterzine solely for them around.

• the differences between Pros and S&H:

  It was very interesting listening to people comparing the two shows - though I find it difficult to make intelligent comparisions myself. I know that I find the Profs episodes on the whole more believable, better written and better produced, though not necessarily better acted - Bodie, on occasion, especially during the first season, could be dreadfully wooden, (ie JUNGLE ENDS where he says "I really loved that girl" - Aaargh). But there is a lovely warmth about the feeling between Starsky and Hutch that I find sadly lacking between Bodie and Doyle. So I can forgive the few bad scripts, the, at times, week plotting and dreadful continuity, for the sheer pleasure of watching the love between those guys. Even the antagonism between them, as in S vs. H, is enjoyable because the love is still there and that's why they're tearing each other apart. Of course my favourite episodes ere COFFIN and SHOUTOUT; but the last four shows of the fourth season culminating in the marvellous SWEET REVENGE have to be among the most satisfying they ever made.

• regarding slash:

  Regarding the '/' premise, I can't see it at all in the Professionals - I'd like to, I've looked for it, but, sadly, no. It doesn't work. And when I first watched S&H, I didn't see it during the aired series; quite frankly, it never occurred to me, sweet little innocent thing that I am. It was when I started reading the fan fiction that I thought, "Crikey!" Took me by surprise, but I loved the idea.

Issue 10 (October 1986)

back and front covers of issue #10, David Bowden and Sandi Chapman

inside art from issue #10, Debbie Sontag

Mixed Doubles 10 was published October 1986 and contains 42 pages. Front cover: Bodie and Doyle by David Bowden, Starsky & Hutch by Sandi Chapman. Additional artwork by Debbie Sontag and June Bushell.

The 16-page supplement contains news clippings from British media and news sources.

• Editorial (1)
• Your Letters (4)
• Poetry: Masquerade by Sue-Anne Hartwick (Pros) (23)
• Speakers Corner (24)
• Fiction: An English Garden by Eros (Pros/Starsky & Hutch) (26)
• The Complete Professionals (review) (33)
• Trading Post (36)
• Bits 'N' Pieces (this is the news clipping supplement)
• the TOTM: "We saw how Starsky and Doyle bear up under the strain of being accused of killing people in... episodes, how would Hutch and Bodie react under similar circumstance?"
• this issue has much discussion about who's more of a "toucher" and each characters propensity for feeling guilt

Issue 10: Excerpts from Letters

• a fan asks:

  Has anyone else ever thought it's strange that Ray is the acknowledged "humanitarian" of the pair — the one who agonizes over everything, and everybody, and feels responsible for same, and suffers massive "guilt trips" — and yet, DODIE is the "toucher" of the two? Mr "Look out for 1?" Why do you suppose that is? With S&H, HUTCH was the "humanitarian," and he was the one always first to reach out to "victims" in need, etc- The only one Starsk ever seemed to reach out freely to was Hutch) Well, let me see — maybe I've just answered my own question, right? On The Professionals, whenever Bodie "reaches out" to anyone, (other than one of his "birds"), it's always Ray. Whether you believe in B/D or not, you can't deny that Bodie had his hands on Doyle an incredibly frequent number of times. Ray was never much of a "toucher", but I never saw him seem upset at Bodie's contact with him...

• about guilt, a common comment:

  Hutch is more likely to have guilt feelings over things that are not really his fault at all. In a clear-cut, no choice situation such as this, he would so upset about what happened, but he'd handle it more calmly and dispassionately than Starsky did.

• more about guilt:

  I can't agree about Hutch's vulnerability. I think he (and Doyle) suffer guilt trips, because they feel they should he guilty about what they have to do. Also the 'guilt trips' appear to ease their conscience and then they get on with life. Bodie (and perhaps Starsky) hide everything deeper. They are the ones who are over controlled when it comes to their emotions - almost like Spock. I'd watch out for Bodie, one day everything is going to come apart and everyone within reach had better beware! Bodie and Starsky are sensitive - they just don't make a song and dance about it whereas Doyle and Hutch let everyone know when they're hurt or upset.

• a fan writes of the SH episode, "Pariah":

  If Hutch had shot Lonny, I think he may well have taken temporary leave and then sent in his resignation - which would have forestalled Prudholm's efforts; yet at the same time, I can see him acting in the same way as Starsky. Bodie, on the other hand would not have shown any of the emotion Doyle did, He said (in HEROES, I think) "The difference is, Doyle, I don't enjoy it" in reference to killing people, he would hove rationalised it as an accident, the way he did to try and get Doyle out of his depression. Although Bodie wouldn't show his feelings, I believe he would he deeply disturbed. Deliberately killing someone because they pose a threat or you have a reason is one thing, that situation is another. It wouldn't surprise me that Bodie was plagued by nightmares, not the occasional one that the other would have after a bad incident but consistent, bad nightmares, because he never (rarely?) consciously rationalises what he does.

• a fan has this suggestion:

  Any chance of doing a discussion on a piece of fan fiction every issue? That's one of the facets of Torino Times, the British S&H letterzine, which I particularly enjoy. I haven't read nearly as much B&D as S&H and would be most interested to read all about the zines, past and present, and what people thought of them. [The editor interjects: I certainly hope people will discuss their favourite stories/zines, but unlike S&H fandom where most people have read all the zines around, even the older ones, because of the way Professionals stories are distributed, I doubt you would find as many people who had read a particular story, so trying to pick ones everyone had read would be nigh on impossible!]

• a bit on The Magic Circle:

  Just a word to say how interesting I found your remarks about Bodie and Starsky keeping their partners 'sane'. This is especially true of Hutch. I should have thought he was a prime candidate for a nervous breakdown over the ills of the worlds if he didn't have Starsk to keep him on balance. On the surface, Bodie appears the one in the Profs partnership to keep Doyle steady, but I don't know...remembering WILD JUSTICE, Bodie came pretty near to cracking up himself there for a while. There's a lot hidden in Bodie's depths underneath that veneer of arrogance and self-confidence.

• about the differences between US and UK stories:

  ... the concept of 'first time' B/D stories and the differences between these and equivalent S/H stories. The bulk of such stories... do not put Bodie and Doyle through the guilt and agonising that Starsky and Hutch went through in the beginning. [Name redacted] speculates that fandom itself has matured to the point where the writers just get into the sex without the hangups. She considers that the characters' attitudes differ in that (Bodie and Doyle have a more 'down to earth' approach to sex than S&H. Maybe they're more willing to risk everything - the partnership and friendship - to odd another dimension to the relationship, to gain a lover. What say the writers out there! Does the situation in the US and Britain differ significantly? For example, would [whoever made the first approach] consider the whole situation in more depth, before making that approach because of the attitude to 'gays' in the Secret Service of which CI5 must be considered a part going by episodes like Operation Susie, or Spy Probe? What is the American view of gays in the police force especially in more 'progressive places like LA? A second scenario could be that B&D know they have a limited time with CIS - high mortality rates and no reason to keep on older agents. A few might stay on for training [eg Brian Hacklin and Barry Martin] but we saw relatively few older men. S&H, on the other hand, expected to spend their working life with the Department [or so I would assume, despite the 'badge' scene in Targets] and no doubt expected promotion. Would their lifestyle have curtailed such a future, therefore the agonising over taking that first step, continued even after they had become lovers?

• about alternate universes in both fandoms:

  I'm also interested in the fact that I have seen a number of 'Alternate Universe' B&D stories as well as many historical and fantasy, but can only remember seeing 1 historical and 1 fantasy S&M. Are there any logical reasons for that? Unlike Trek which lends itself to 'alternate universe', stories set in current times are more difficult. On the other hand , I've seen fewer stories about B&D's lives pre-CI5 than S&H ones either set pre-Metro or stories which incorporated flashbacks or memories of early life. Does anyone think there is any correlation between the format of stories and the difference in styles, ie because S&H stories were written (almost entirely) for publishing in zines, stories were unlikely to be historical or fantasy but liked to explore previous history and guilt trips etc; the reverse being true of BAD written on the whole not for publication per se?

Issue 11 (March 1987)

back and front covers of issue #11, David Bowden and Sandi Chapman

inside art from issue #11, Dani Lane

Mixed Doubles 11 was published March 1987 and contains 42 pages. Front cover: Bodie and Doyle by David Bowden, Starsky & Hutch by Sandi Chapman. Additional artwork by Dani Lane.

The 20-page supplement contains news clippings from British media and news sources.

• Editorial (1)
• Your Letters (4)
• Poetry: Married by Sue-Anne Hartwick (Pros) (16)
• My Bodie and I Alive by Martin Shaw (17) (article which appeared in THE MAIL ON SUNDAY'S Colour Supplement YOU, September 21, 1986)
• Poetry: Bodie on the Moor by Jay Trent (20)
• Speaker's Corner ("A Confession of Sort" -- an essay about meeting the actors, and how awful the fans were in Stockport, and "An American Point of View" -- an essay about meeting Lewis Collins, "How Lewis Collins Reacts to His Fans," and "How I Was Converted to Professionals Fandom" -- meeting Lewis Collins) (22)
• Trading Post (36)
• Bits 'N' Pieces (this is the news clipping supplement)
• the TOTM: "Come up with a realistic 'alternative' universe for one of each pairing, in one of the each pairing must be the screen Bodie/Doyle/Starsky/Hutch but the other half is somebody different - what would he be?"
• the editors note that their subscription/rate of purchase is 65
• the editors plea for more contributions as they've been sparse
• the editors write that this letterzine was started as a Pros and SH letterzine, but folks seem to be more and more interested in the actors themselves and that they will accommodate this drift

Issue 11: Excerpts from Letters

• from the editor:

  I would however like people to let me know if they are happy... as there is no point in me putting out MD if no-one will buy it. MD has been losing a little money with each issue - I am prepared to keep it going only if there is interest. If the number of buyers falls below 60 it would not be worth keeping on. I used to put out an S&H l/z but in the last months before I stopped putting it out, the number of readers fell drastically. Whether this was because of better S&H l/z's in circulation or because no-one liked what I was putting out I'm not sure, but I'd rather stop now than keep fighting to put it out - so please let me know. To the best of my knowledge there is only one other Professionals l/z and that is '/'. Much as I enjoy '/' (and I do) I feel there is a need for a predominantly (though not exclusively) 'straight' l/z, and I hope there is a place for MD.

• a fan writes:

  As for TOTM, the LAPD attitude toward gays is that a few 45 rounds through the head and gut will redeem most flaming queens nicely. There are no gay cops. There are gays and there are cops. There are no gay cops. Get it? Seriously, most police forces are homophobic as hell, and LA has always been a very intolerant, inflexible and bigoted department even among their peers. There are still, now even as we speak, an incredible under representation of women, blacks and latinos on the force, and this in the face of more than a few lawsuits designed to force active recruitment, there are no, I repeat, no gay cops.

• regarding the popularity of certain genres in both fandoms:

  Why are there more fantasy and historicals among Pros stories? Because Brits are weird? No? Well, actually, and this is just off the cuff but it sounds good, I think that the writers in fandoms try one thing, wear it out and then go on to try something new even as the fandoms they happen to be in change with the seasons. In other words, a writer who started out writing and/or reading Trek relationship stories (where the relationship was friendship) may have been ready to try a little warmer 'friendship' just about the time she got into S&H, worn out many of the possibilities of that and been ready to try fantasy or alternate world stories by the time she got into B&D. Most of us did start out in other fandoms before Pros, didn't we? And the newbies who come in just in time for this phase just got swept along with the tide? Does that sound plausible? I know the '/' got started earlier and earlier with each fandom I entered — Pros was this first one I knew, though, that started out slash... As for the question of the "alternate universe" or fantasy stories, I think a lot of it has to do with the fact that many of us have just "skipped" the "straight" stage of the B&D relationship, unlike with S&H. For years, all you ever saw were "Straight" S&H zines (in my own case, I wrote S&H "straight" for five years before I progressed to the stage in which they became lovers), but with B&D, most of us just "jumped right in" and started writing them as lovers! Seeing as how so many of us DID start out at the "advanced" level of their relationship, I think we then looked for even more "creative" things to do with the characters, and so the fantasy and "alternate universe" stories began. Not that I don't think there's not a lot to explore in B&D's relationship and life together as lovers still, but the "side-trips" into fantasy keep your interest and creativity fresh, I think.

• about first time stories in both fandoms:

  It probably does have alot to do with the "maturity" of the writers involved; a lot of us have gone through all that traumatic "first-time" stuff with S&H, and by the time we got to B/D, we were just simply tired of it all! And then, too, I think a lot of it has to do with the differences in the characters themselves. I admit that I haven't read all that many B/D circuit stories, so I can't really speak about the frequency or intensity of the "first-time agonizing" that may go on there; however, in most of the B/D zines to date, it seems a large number of the stories DO have them going through all sorts of hell as they both decide whether or no they should take "the plunge". At least, a great deal of the stories in DISCOVERED ON A ROOFTOP, TEO TORRIATTE, and IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST have a lot of "first-time anguishing" in them. Look at the reasons in most of these stories, though—almost universally, if either Bodie or Doyle is reluctant or frightened at all to reveal his feelings to his mate, it's usually because of fear of a loss of independence, or because one or the other of them has never "really" been in love before, so they have no experience of what they truly ARE feeling. That's the impression I always get, anyway. Whereas, with S&H, THEIR hesitance usually stems from one or the other of them being horrified that they've turned gay! I don't know why, but in the majority of S/H I've read, both guys have always been "straight", and only just happened to fall in love with each other—neither of them ever had fallen in love with another guy before. While, with B&D, for some reason or another, most of us who write stories have quite happily accepted that one or both guys are gay, and always have been, or at least "bi". Again, don't ask me why, but for those of us who believe in B/D, this just seems "natural" for the lads.

• pairings of a different sort:

  I always thought Ray and Starsk would be wonderful together (which is why I've written two rather long "alternative universe" stories to that effect, and may do a third one — in some ways at least, Ray is very much like Hutch, Starsky is very much like Bodie. I guess you could make the same argument for the Bodie/Hutch teaming, but I haven't explored that yet.

Issue 12 (June 1987)

back and front covers of issue #12, David Bowden and Sandi Chapman

Mixed Doubles 12 was published June 1987 and contains 45 pages. Front cover: Bodie and Doyle by David Bowden, Starsky & Hutch by Sandi Chapman.

The 15-page supplement contains news clippings from British media and news sources.

cover of the news clipping supplement

The editor, who was worried that interest in the letterzine was drying up, says she is now optimistic and plans to continue it another year -- it will, however, become quarterly: June, September, December and March

• Editorial(1)
• Transatlantic Exchange (a proposed section to explain different terms and vocab) (2)
• Poetry: Blue Eyes by Sue-Anne Hartwick (3)
• Your Letters (4)
• Fiction: Lost and Found by Pat Charles (Starsky & Hutch) (first published in Torino Times #6) (26)
• Martin Speaks Out by Martin Shaw (32)
• Speakers Corner (38)
• Trading Post (41)
• Bits 'N' Pieces (this is the news clippings supplement)
• the TOTM: "As they get older, S&H and B&D would change. Assuming that they stayed with Metro/CI5 would their jobs remain the same, would they drive the same type of cars, dress the same and would they retain the same lifestyle?"

Issue 12: Excerpts from Letters

• a fan explains her fannish drift:

  Many writers do start out writing in one fandom and develop at different stages as they go to the next. Usually they have better writing skills and go beyond the hurt/comfort syndrome. (All pain and suffering — no story or plot, no motivations that make sense, etc. In other words, reality flys out the window!) I left K/S fandom for different reasons but I sure didn't miss it's fiction very much. S/H doesn't often 'grab me' either and I think it's because there is an awful lot more of h/c than in B/D. At least, when Bodie or Doyle get hurt and comforted there is a sound basis for it as well as being contained in a for h/c is 100% better reading. I really prefer '/' Professionals writings. There are only a handful of 'straight' stories I can say rate very high in my top '100'; maybe not even that many.

• about background and demonstrative touching and tension:

  I think the background information we have on B/D changes our image of their sexuality. Where there is less, there is the ability to create one's own viewpoint. (And with the 'murky' side of the mercenary's lifestyle, well...) Do Starsky and Hutch have a background to indicate their experience or viewpoints on sex? I'm asking because I don't know. I agree with you about S&H showing more physical expression because they are just naturally more demonstrative. I personally find S&H somewhat boring because of it, I like the undercurrent tension with B&D, better, more exciting, I think.

• speculating on the future:

  As for what both sets of partners would do as they got older, but still stayed with the LAPD and CI5. Well, I know this has been written about before, but S&H would probably become Lieutenants, at least—I'm not sure how much higher they'd actually go than that—I can't actually see either of them in any kind of an "administration" position, since they both hate the "paper-work" side of it so much; then again, since they WOULD change as they got older, who can tell, especially after the damage done to Starsky in SWEET REVENGE? Starsk would need more education in order to go for any kind of a "higher position" in the department, but he could do it. If they both didn't go for some kind of an "administrative" position, then I can see them working in Child Welfare, or something, the way that lady did in CRYING CHILD. Or they might work in drug abuse, or whatever. As for how they'd dress, cars they'd drive, and lifestyles—who knows! S&H were all ready changing a lot by 4th season, as if they were "switching roles" with each other — who knows how far that might've continued? In my own "universe", they're "married lovers", and I don't ever see that changing for them. They're "faithful" to each other, they don't live a "gay" lifestyle, they don't "cruise", or anything.

• as lovers, could they stay together on the job?:

  Some stories - INJURED INNOCENTS comes immediately to mind - hove introduced plausible ways of allowing B&D. anyway, to be lovers but to remain with CI5. To a certain extent MURDER ON SAN CARMELITAS does the same for Starsky & Hutch. I have to see them as lovers and so in my own mind I can justify their lifestyle being accepted.

Issue 13 (September 1987)

back and front covers of issue #13, David Bowden and Sandi Chapman

from issue #13, Debbie Sontag

Mixed Doubles 13 was published September 1987 and contains 42 pages. Front cover: Bodie and Doyle by David Bowden, Starsky & Hutch by Sandi Chapman with additional artwork by Debbie Sontag.

The 10-page supplement contains news clippings from British media and news sources.

• Editorial (1)
• Your Letters (4)
• Poetry: It Must be Love by Elaine Leeks (Pros) (17)
• Why I've Stopped Hitting Women by David Soul (an article from Woman's Own magazine August 15, 1987) (18)
• Carly's Web - A Review by Darien Duck (25)
• Fiction: The Bunny's Tale by Eros (Pros) (27)
• Transatlantic Exchange (33)
• Poetry: Music by Sue-Anne Hartwick (35)
• Poetry: Fair Warning by Elaine Leeks (35)
• Trading Post (36)
• Bits 'N' Pieces (news clippings supplement)
• the TOTM: "What do you think are the most significant memories (good or bad) that Starsky & Hutch, and Bodie & Doyle have from their time with Metro/Cl5? It can be an incident referred to in the series or something you think happened, the consequences which appeared in the aired series."
• the editor comments that the questionnaire regarding future letterzine content (which must have been sent out with the last issue) had a poor response rate
• the editor is puzzled why the number of subscribers has dropped -- at the peak there were 100 subs, issue #11 had 60, #12 had 50 and this "issue has dropped even lower"

Issue 13: Excerpts from Letters

• about crossovers:

  I don't read S&H or S/H material, but in the PR stuff I've read I've noticed a tendency that concerns me as a PR fan. I've read a lot of crossover stories between PR ond other story lines - such as PR/UNCLE, PR/S&H, PR/Mission Impossible, PR/New Avengers to note a few. In almost every story so far, The Professionals has come off second rate. To name one instance, there was a CI5/UNCLE story where the villain/assassin looked like Illya. Through the whole story they had Solo and Illya saying how good CI5 and B&D were. Then at the end they had Doyle acting like an inexperienced rookie, in a manner that could have cost Illya his life. That's only one instance. In other, in NIAGARA BLUES Bodie and Starsky had a friendly battle before having sex to see who was to be 'top' man. And Starsky won? Aw, come on now. Much as I love Starsky, I don't believe he could take Bodie, especially considering the prize, for one thing cops, even S&H would not be in the condition of a C15 agent. Another, I find it difficult to picture Bodie, ex mercenary, ex para, ex SAS, being taken in that kind of battle.

• about kidfic and mpreg:

  I've read quite a few stories lately, in several fandoms, both '/' and straight, which revolve around the male couple acquiring or producing offspring. Poor James T comes off worst, several times undergoing a sex-change (temporary, usually.) The most usual source, however, is for them to bring up one partner's child by one of their women, or a variation on the adoption/foundling theme. I am not convinced that men like B&D would feel a desperate need for children - in fact, given their precarious life styles, I think they'd go out of their way to avoid having them. And if you admit a '/' relationship, well, I don't know about in the States, but in Britain a gay couple would find Authority heavily weighted against then if they attempted to bring up a child. Even today Society in general would react with horror...

• about Niagara Blues:

  In NIAGARA BLUES Bodie and Starsky had a friendly battle before having sex to see who was to be 'top' man. And Starsky won? Aw, come on now. Much as I love Starsky, I don't believe he could take Bodie, especially considering the prize. For one thing cops, even S&H would not be in the condition of a CI5 agent. Another, I find it difficult to picture Bodie, ex mercenary, ex para, ex SAS, being taken in that kind of battle.

Issue 14 (December 1987)

back and front covers of issue #14, David Bowden and Sandi Chapman

art from issue #14, Elaine Leeke

Mixed Doubles 14 was published December 1987 and contains 45 pages. Front cover: Bodie and Doyle by David Bowden, Starsky & Hutch by Sandi Chapman with additional artwork by Elaine Leeke.

The 16-page supplement contains news clippings from British media and news sources.

• Editorial (1)
• Your Letters (3)
• Fiction: Me and My Santa by Pat Charles (Starsky & Hutch) (33)
• Trading Post (41)
• Bits 'N' Pieces (news cuttings supplement)
• there is a mention that The Who Do We Trust Times has just ceased publication
• the TOTM: "Do you think that any of the four characters need to have a 'normal' relationship, ie wife and kids, and if so why. Do you see any of them being prepared to have that type of life and also have a relationship with their partner."
• the editor says a record number of letters were received, so much that she had to leave her own out
• this issue has a long, agitated, and hostile review of Straight Shooting, see that page

Issue 14: Excerpts from Letters

• the editor also comments on the tone of letters: We want to:

  remind people that letters are not censored, and to date, all letters received have been printed, but we have noticed that a slight 'bitchiness' is beginning to creep in from some writers - please, this trend has finished more letterzines than anything else. Everyone is entitled to an opinion and you're not going to change other people's minds by going on ad nauseum.

• on kidfic:

  I suppose that this all might boil down to what we'd like to see in a show or in fanfiction. I have two children of my own, so I never fantasize about them. Any mother can tell you that kids can be a real drag and you really wouldn't want to inflict Bodie or Hutch with them. And any time you add characters to a given premise, you change it. It can't be helped. (I think a notable exception to this is the story BLOOD TIES, if only because it was so moving and didn't saddle Bodie with a child. Even if the child had lived, I didn't get the impression that Bodie would have stayed in America or taken his new 'family' back to England with him.) Besides, I like my men rough and ready and unencumbered.

• a fan comments on greener grass:

  ...since I am married and have two kids, I would rather read and watch shows about people who are not. Does it work in reverse? Do you single gals like to marry the guys off or give them children? Do you like to have them make a physical and emotional commitment to women or each other in order to 'settle' them down? It's like the saying goes...The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence. In most '/' fiction I read, I sense this overwhelming desire to have the guys settle down into a cozy, monogamous relationship. 1 can understand this, if only from the point of view that since I live a cozy, monogamous relationship, I find the dangerous, one-night-stand or the violent, on-the-edge encounter much more intriguing.

• a fan comments on Pros slash:

  Doyle becomes so stereotyped as the 'tiny dainty fragile' creature that you want to barf. Bodie, on the other hand, isn't turned into that but becomes Spock during pon farr! (Only he's not logical about any of it.) He's constantly raping the poor virgin Doyle, who of course loves the first brutal assault and begs for more, when in reality he should be screaming in pain, beating off Bodie and running for the door (if he can). Many of the people who are writing slash don't know the first thing they're writing about; they should consult "The Joy of Gay Sex" to see what really can be done. B&D entangle themselves in positions that only a snake could manage. There are over 900 '/' stories circulating through the world's postal systems, and only about 5% of them are worth investing the time to read them. The other 95% lack coherent plots, have B&D so unrecognisable, or the dialogue is acutely embarrassing to read ... it makes the Barbara Cartland romance books look like Pulitzer Prize material.

• a fan writes:

  I will admit that I do read '/' - I'll read almost anything in the hopes of finding something good. I use the lending library, along with several other sources, but I only xerox the stories which (a) contain a good plot, (b) the characters are not badly distorted, and (c) are unique. Some are hysterically funny, others realistic. To sum it up, I don't mind people talking or writing '/', but I don't like people shoving it down my throat and saying 'this is what the show is all about' because it's not. I've run into that attitude and it's discouraging to see some fans so adamantly zealous that it spoils the fun of fandom... I have no complaint with people writing slash. I just wish they'd write good slash!

• two fans write a letter together and say:

  We enjoy watching the horrid copies of the Professionals we have on videotape, and just wish that fan fiction could be more like what we saw on the screen.

• regarding why the episodes "The Fix" and "Klansman" were banned in England:

  The only reason I can see for THE FIX and KLANSMAN being banned is that the British much have a very low tolerance for faults in their leading men. KLANSMAN was (I would guess) a very topical subject to delve into in England and perhaps the censors would let it slip by if all the KKK were portrayed as ignorant black-haters, but this excellent episode dared to show that Bodie, our hero, our patriotic law enforcement agent, was prejudiced... thereby stating that it is a disease that permeates even the best of our society. No natter what his excuse or how it had its origins (which, thankfully, the writers also felt were irrelevant), he was suddenly imperfect! This is very telling since in other episodes, Bodie is allowed to show many other less-than-desirable traits, (eg, his attitude toward what constitutes a 'nice' woman in OLD DOG and his amoral view on dum-dums in MIXED DOUBLES.) Was there alot of racial unrest in England at that line or what? Would any episode of the Pros that dealt with race differences have been treated the same way?

• about the future:

  If we were talking about the 'straight' setting, sad to say I don't see B&D staying together very long if they weren't partners anymore; and, if one or both of them did eventually get married (if they were no longer in CI5), I think they'd completely drift apart. Of course, in my own 'personal universe,' I don't have that problem - my S&H are lovers, and my B&D are lovers, and that's all the 'family' either set of partners ever needs. In the '/' setting, even if S&H were no longer cops, they'd still be together - regardless if they were even working together anymore, or not. Same for B&D. As lovers, they'd stay together whether they were in CI5 or not. I guess the 'conclusion' I just came to is that, in a 'straight' setting, I see S&H's relationship not changing, even if one or both of them were married; with B&D, nothing would ever be the same for them again, friendship or partnership-wise. Think I'll stick with '/'!

Issue 15/16 (June 1989)

back and front covers of issue #15/16, David Bowden and Sandi Chapman

inside art by Anja Gruber

inside art by Anja Gruber

Mixed Doubles 15/16 was published June 1989 and contains 61 pages. Front cover: Bodie and Doyle by David Bowden, Starsky & Hutch by Sandi Chapman with additional artwork by Anja Gruber and Alberto Liserio. It was the last issue.

The 24-page supplement contains news clippings from British media and news sources.

• Editorial (1
• Your Letters (4)
• Poem: Mutual Discoveries by Diana Romero (Pros) (26)
• Poem: Ghosts by Sue-Anne Hartwick (Pros) (27)
• Fiction: The Not So Professionals by MAD Magazine (a reprint from the magazine) (28)
• Bits 'N' Pieces (35)
• Poem: Bodie by Elaine Leek (36)
• Poem: Doyle by Elaine Leek (38
• Poem: Words by Sandra J. Ferriday (39)
• Fiction: Payback by Karla Simon (40)
• Poem: A Fighting Chance by Elaine Leek (Starsky & Hutch) (47)
• Scorpio Con - A personal View by Carla Salveta (48)
• Poem: A World Gone Wild by Diana Romero (51)
• Poem: Angel Light by Diana Romero (Starsky & Hutch) (53)
• Trading Post (54)
• Poem: Enough by Diana Romero (Pros) (69)
• there are a number of comments about the letter by [S-A H] regarding the zine Straight Shooting
• the TOTM: "The series' show Bodie, and imply that Starsky had military backgrounds. The implication is that Doyle and Hutch did not. Would it have changed the characters significantly if Hutch and Doyle had been military and Starsky and Bodie had not, or would they have essentially remained the same?"

Issue 15/16: Excerpts from Letters

• the editor explains why she is ceasing publication:

  I like being involved in Professionals and Starsky & Hutch fandom and have enjoyed putting out MIXED DOUBLES, but the pressures of putting out a letterzine, even on a quarterly basis, have become more and more onerous. Although MD has only had 14 issues to date, it has spanned almost 5 years and because of the falling number of subscribers has become a harder task with each issue and recent issues have had to be produced some distance away in order to keep costs down. The final deathblow however, was that the letters received were becoming more and more offensive to a greater number of readers, to the point where people were no longer willing to contribute and were not happy about subscribing to future issues if the trend continued. I'm not prepared to start censoring letters because if I do, then I may as well write them all myself. There is at least one letter in this issue which, I've no doubt, will offend a number of people. I didn't find the letter particularly pleasant or constructive myself but the writer felt that she had the right to 'answer' previous letters and as she had taken the trouble to write, I felt there was little else I could do.

• Sue-Anne Hartwick writes another letter (also very vitriolic), one that takes an earlier letter to task; she defends the quality of writing in slash fanfic:

  I found some of your remarks concerning slash to be...' fascinating' , but unfortunately, not even approaching any 'Spock-like' logic. Number One: Your sweeping generalization (which was totally untrue) that 'Many of the people who are writing slash don't know the first thing they're writing about. I see you mentioned The Joy of Gay Sex. May I assume that YOU have read it, and are therefor an expert in various positions and such? I can tell you that many of us who do write slash also have friends who are gay, and are involved in one way or another in the gay community. I think it's safe to say we know a lot more about the subject then you do. As far as 'positions' go, when I really want a good laugh, I'll read a Mary Sue story from Pro's fandom. Talk about unrealistic and ridiculous: EVERY single one of these lovely 'heroines' always has an orgasm! (Are we allowed to say that word here? GASP!) Not only that, but an amazingly large number of these 'Heroines' are blushing virgins who don't know the slightest thing about what to do with a man: considering the number of virgins that turn up in these stories, you'd expect there'd be blood that first time, but there never is. Oust one of the many things I hate about 'Mary Sue' is that ALL the little 'details' are conveniently never mentioned, and the entire sexual act itself is so romanticized as to make ME 'want to barf! Our heroes NEVER get carried away in the heat of passion with these delicate little creatures; never once does any women's breast get bitten; no woman ever complains afterwards of a sore back, or of being so sore the next day she can hardly sit or walk. The sheer MESS of sex is always totally glossed over: at least the '/' stories are realistic! As a good friend of mine described it, the writers of Mary Sue stories are doing it out of 'juvie wish fulfillment.' I couldn't improve on that description. If I didn't know that a lot of these women were married with kids, I'd swear they WERE teeny-boppers who'd never been with a man before! Their stories make Barbara Cartland look like Jackie Collins. I personally find Mary Sue stories VERY embarrassing. Think about it, these people are putting down on paper for all to read THEIR personal fantasies about what they'd like to do with one or both of the guys! As I said last time, I have my own fantasies, but I'll be damned if I'm sharing them with anybody else, especially strangers.

• a fan comments:

  I will be sorry if this is the list issue of to but as I recognise many names of people who get MD in Beauty and the Beast fandom, which is a show I love end am now getting involved with. I hope we will be able to keep in touch through this fandom if not through Professionals fandom.

• another fan writes about slash as a sort-of Mary Sue:

  I write slash because when I imagine myself in a fictional universe, it is as one of the heroes, not as one of the heroes' girlfriends. Given that fact, writing the hero (me) as romantically and sexually involved with a woman is boring at best end more than slightly perverse at worst. Myself, I've read many perfectly straight Mary Sue stories that were as badly written as the worst slash. It's all in the type of poison you prefer.

• the state of letterzines:

  Although zines in both fandoms seem, particularly at the moment, to be in a healthy state, the same cannot be said of the letterzines. There are three S&H publications about, including the letterzine FRIENZ, the newssheet SNITCH and the fiction zine THE FIX. Pros fandom is sparser only having the letter/fiction zine HATSTAND EXPRESS. I understand however, that THE is also facing problems because of rising costs and falling subscriptions and may become a story zine only (as THE FIX does in S&H fandom.)

• a fan writes and pokes a little fun at herself:

  I have been re-reading [Mixed Doubles] from the first issue, because I have suddenly become a "born-again Professionals fan', if there is such as thing! Anyway, I couldn't believe I had written such dumb letters!"