As Others See Us

[kevin_standlee]

It's a Festival, Jim, But Not as You Know It

A look at what Worldcons look like to someone who has attended one and enjoyed it, but continues to be mystified at why it doesn't act like "proper" book festivals.

It's yet another data point in how Worldcon in particular is organized in a way that looks odd to the point of insanity by anyone who hasn't grown up with it.

Comments

[kalimac.livejournal.com]

I'd correct "anyone who hasn't grown up with it" to "anyone who's grown up with something else." The obvious sticking point is in his conversation with the other author, where what she doesn't communicate to him is that everybody, including the authors, goes to cons primarily to enjoy themselves. That authors get to call it "work" and take it off their taxes (actually, I don't know if UK taxes operate that way) is gravy. The work stuff - promotion, contacts - is embedded in the fun.

I'm particularly numbed by the fact that he can't figure out that there's one name for the series of conventions and another name for each individual one. I want to tell him: It's like naming individual episodes of a TV show, you clown. There are plenty of professional conferences that do the same thing.

(And is that "Jim" in his post title a Star Trek allusion? He seems to be capable of thinking like we do ...)

I've suspected that a lot of the demands by Worldcon neos that we instantly reconfigure our entire system to fit their expectations is because they have preset expectations from some other fandom, where they're already BNFs and expect to have everything their way.

[jcfiala.livejournal.com]

I'm pretty sure that's his conversation with his wife, trying to explain he's going off to a convention for a weekend so she'll need to be the only one taking care of the kid, and his wife's pinpointing that it is, indeed, a fun thing and not really related to work after all.

Which is a conversation all fans with kids have to have with their spouses - happily I met my wife at Philcon, so the conversation is more along the lines of who will be in charge of the kid when. (Amusingly, my wife keeps getting the better end of the deal so far. :)

[totient]

... or we could, you know, have childcare that meets our program participants' needs. This isn't easy or cheap, but right now the demographics of Worldcon and similar conventions are such that childcare is a very big reason why people who're first getting interested in the community can't actually get involved. As this post demonstrates pretty clearly.

[jcfiala.livejournal.com]

Well, to be fair, the local conventions that my wife and I do enjoy provide some childcare, but they're not willing to take on a 2 year old. Once my little sprout hits about five or six, we'll be able to lend her off to the childrens programs and get a little more time for our own pursuits.

The main reason I'm not involved in Worldcon is because it's not a priority for me - I'm not willing to commit the resources and time to travel to them. (Some folks do - a couple in my scifi group started with Denvention and has hit just about every Worldcon since then, and of course so does Ken.) I'm happy enough with our local fannish experiences alongside my other hobbies... I don't expect Worldcon to change to suit me, but on the other hand, Worldcon doesn't expect me to change to suit it. :)

[scott-sanford.livejournal.com]

Some conventions do; my main local convention, OryCon, has had childcare for years, and children's programming as well. This may not work for every con, and Worldcon is weird in several ways. Frustratingly, one Worldcon might find providing childcare easy while the next finds it impossible - and the lack of predictability benefits nobody.

[totient]

demands by Worldcon neos that we instantly reconfigure our entire system to fit their expectations

Or you could look at this as us demanding that Worldcon neos instantly start working on our cons, our way, and them explaining why it is they're not doing that. We don't have to change what we're doing to suit them, but if someone says "I can only afford to do this if I don't have to lend the convention $120 in the form of a reimbursed membership" and we *don't* change what we're doing because Worldcons Don't Do Comps, we don't get to bitch if they don't help out.

[delosharriman]

This piece touched an odd note with me.

The author seems to be suggesting that it's the responsibility of someone other than those of us who care about it (ie, the fans) to organize events for the appreciation of science fiction. Perhaps more than that, he seems to be suggesting that such events ought naturally to be in the nature of commercial fairs for promoting the latest output of authors & publishers. And yet, he admits that the one instance of such a thing that he can bring to mind died because its outside funding source dried up.

Yes, there is a sense in which a membership convention is inefficient, compared to a trade fair, or a festival sponsored by an arts agency (when you can get one to take SF seriously), but doesn't it give us, in addition to ownership of something we care about, the opportunity to shape it to suit us? Not that we necessarily do the best job of it, but having it even nominally out of our hands would seem a much bigger obstacle to satsifaction.