Let's be fair about the first one -- it's an interesting discussion about what appears to a somewhat Moribund Local Con -- and the old "it's not growing" arguments. A lot of the same stuff I hear about local cons that haven't tried anything new for awhile.
In general -- media cons (or media-based cons) will *always* draw from a larger pool than literary based cons. Hell, that's been true forever (The concept of shakespearean "penny seats" feeds right into that).
Does that mean Literary Cons are dead? I doubt that. Does it mean they're likely to have smaller attendance if they don't expand, even a little bit? Sure.
So some cons will continue to be small and literary and others will be HUGE and media based -- and, I suspect, some cons will find a happy medium with BOTH the Literary and the Media aspects represented -- making room for more than one kind of fan.
Good heavens, remember when "Gaming" was a dirty word? Sure, it still is to some, but I see more cons with good gaming tracks and gaming rooms I'm *not* afraid to bring my 10 year old Daughter into. That's progress (and yes, i know not everyone likes progress) -- it recognizes that geeks come in multiple flavors and like different things and that even those of us who are hard core LitCon lovers, like dropping in for an interesting game every now and then. Norwes did a GREAT job on that (from the casual gamer perspective) this year.
I honestly thing the argument over Con-Version (at that journal) is about a con that is in transition -- the arguments sound *very* familiar.
Now -- the problem with Cost at the Door becomes a real sticky wicket, depending on what you want to offer, who you want to invite and where you're located.
Any city that has a Big Con that only charges $7-$15 at the door makes it MUCH harder for the $50 weekend to happen. Is $50 a good deal? Sure -- but selling that idea becomes harder in light of the local Big Con that is cheap as heck. So -- the need for differentiation becomes larger.
I don't think We're Doomed -- I do think we may need to re-think some of our assumptions :>
no subject
In general -- media cons (or media-based cons) will *always* draw from a larger pool than literary based cons. Hell, that's been true forever (The concept of shakespearean "penny seats" feeds right into that).
Does that mean Literary Cons are dead? I doubt that. Does it mean they're likely to have smaller attendance if they don't expand, even a little bit? Sure.
So some cons will continue to be small and literary and others will be HUGE and media based -- and, I suspect, some cons will find a happy medium with BOTH the Literary and the Media aspects represented -- making room for more than one kind of fan.
Good heavens, remember when "Gaming" was a dirty word? Sure, it still is to some, but I see more cons with good gaming tracks and gaming rooms I'm *not* afraid to bring my 10 year old Daughter into. That's progress (and yes, i know not everyone likes progress) -- it recognizes that geeks come in multiple flavors and like different things and that even those of us who are hard core LitCon lovers, like dropping in for an interesting game every now and then. Norwes did a GREAT job on that (from the casual gamer perspective) this year.
I honestly thing the argument over Con-Version (at that journal) is about a con that is in transition -- the arguments sound *very* familiar.
Now -- the problem with Cost at the Door becomes a real sticky wicket, depending on what you want to offer, who you want to invite and where you're located.
Any city that has a Big Con that only charges $7-$15 at the door makes it MUCH harder for the $50 weekend to happen. Is $50 a good deal? Sure -- but selling that idea becomes harder in light of the local Big Con that is cheap as heck. So -- the need for differentiation becomes larger.
I don't think We're Doomed -- I do think we may need to re-think some of our assumptions :>