No permanent, paid staff to do the fundamental donkey work.
Conflicting ideas among Worldcon attendees about what it should be and who for, resulting in changing identities each year.
No “little Black book” of Worldcon organizing, so a checklist for what WSFS meetings need to be scheduled, what staff members are needed (and their job descriptions) doesn’t automatically exist making planning the event harder. Anything that makes it harder to plan than necessary takes time away from innovation.
There are several ways we could encourage people outside the Worldcon community to participate:
For local bids create a sense of community ownership in the bid, as Dublin is doing by working with local fans to get them excited about it because it’s something that could come to their home town.
For those without much con or fan experience, focus on the variety of things on offer. Don’t rely on the Hugos as the selling point, most media fans haven’t heard of the Hugos or if they have they don’t care about them—the media industry don’t care about them, why should they?
Tailor advertising, such as leaflets, conventions, one–on–one chats at con tables to your audience.
Provide programming and events that people want to go to and make sure it happens every year. There is no point having a great comics program one year if the comics audience turn up the following year and have nothing to enjoy.
Free or reduced tickets for Young Adults, People of Color, and other special interest groups who might not come are good but costs of travel and subsistence are still prohibitive for many. Larger scale fan–funds are needed, perhaps officially organized through a separate committee with a rolling annual fundraising program of some kind.
Encouraging inter–con involvement and outreach between different kinds of events.
Support volunteers and staff who show promise but come from outside traditional fandom, so that they feel enthusiastic about continuing with staffing events and getting more heavily involved.
Pay attention to trends in how diversity is discussed in broader/younger fandoms which may be more aware of current social justice issues. For example, by providing gender– neutral toilets, welcoming LGBTQ groups to run parties or have exhibit stands, etc. (this is helpful for explaining asexual/pansexual/demisexual/aromantic et al).
Ultimately, however, we also need to accept that not all conventions are for all fans, nor should they be. We all like different things. The trick is to not fail to reach out to new members needlessly.
Helen Montgomery: True Story: At all of the Science Fiction Outreach Project events (going to give away free books at a Comic Con), there have inevitably been people who say, “I don’t read.” That is unbelievably depressing to me on So. Many. Levels. There has to be some acceptance that there will be people who simply aren’t interested in leaving their playground to come over to ours, even for a brief visit. And that’s okay—they’re happy in their playground and that’s cool.
I definitely agree with Emma on the identify/branding issue, but I’m not sure I agree about the permanent volunteers though. Not having a permanent paid staff can be a hurdle, although I think it’s also a strength in some ways. No one gets burned out on it and if someone is doing the job and they suck, no worries about needing an HR department to figure out how to legally fire them.
Regarding conflicting ideas about who and what Worldcon is for being a hurdle, I wonder if it’s actually more the opposite? A large number of attendees do have similar ideas about what it should be and who for, and who struggle with the idea of it changing.
Emma England: True, lots of people don’t want it to change, but looking at the program books (many thanks to the ever–wonderful Vincent Docherty), reading Sam Moskowitz, etc., and speaking with various people, it does seem like there has been a permanent flux and constant “In my day” attitude. Some years it changes more than others. This is coming from me as someone who has just joined the community though, so I’m basing my interpretation on research rather than experience.
Helen Montgomery: I think a lot of Worldcon organizing is handled through the people who do volunteer year after year, but agreed that having it written down somewhere (that isn’t the WSFS Constitution, which is a beast to read all the way through!) like a “little black book” is a great idea. All bids should be working to create a sense of community ownership for bids, and I believe that most do. The question is: How successful are they at selling it to the local fan groups?
Michael Lee: Helen, the “I don’t read” comment is definitely depressing. One of the challenges is that pretty much every not–for–profit con–running organization lists encouraging literacy as one of its goals, so trying to reach the people who love science fiction but aren’t yet readers should be part of that. This isn’t something that I would expect a single solution to, and you won’t necessarily improve someone’s desire to read by one singular encounter on an exhibit floor.
Helen Montgomery: On the plus side, when you’re giving away the books for free, people are a bit more willing to take a risk on something new. For people who are new to reading the genre, we often encourage them to get an anthology so they can be introduced to multiple authors.
Emma England: When people say they don’t read, that is often shorthand for “I don’t read books,” or even “I don’t read books other than paranormal romance/YA/female–centric urban fantasy,” (among whom I largely count myself these days). Of my fanfiction reading friends, most of them don’t read fiction unless it is fanfiction (many of these are academics who read plenty of non–fiction). I don’t think that’s depressing. Worldcon might not be the place for all of these people—but it is good to try.
Michael Lee: Speaking purely for myself and idealistically, and even with all of our continuing challenges with diversity, is that my involvement with fandom is one place where I have learned more about the value of diversity than any number of corporate–led–diversity events. And one part of that is even as we have our differences, the shared foundation of love of the genre can be a potential to bring us together.
I also believe that Worldcon has even more of an opportunity to showcase that diversity than any single local or regional convention over the years—especially when it lives up to its international potential. It’s not easy, as everyone comes with their own unique backgrounds, but the potential is hopefully there.
Helen Montgomery: Absolutely. I was, in fact, just talking with someone about this yesterday, and he noted that fandom tends to be much more open and accepting of individuals (at least publicly) who are more marginalized in the real world, such as people who identify as transgender.
Emma England: Regarding diversity, I think the responses to Worldcon from many people from the fanfic/media/Tumblr communities etc., (especially in comparison with 9Worlds—which had flaws in other ways) show that Worldcon has a lot of work to do. That isn’t to say it doesn’t compare favorably with many non–fannish communities, just that we must never be complacent.
Pablo Vasquez: When people tell me they don’t read, the comment that usually gets them to prod on for recommendations is “Bad books and textbooks happen to good people.” Most folks, when it comes to reading and especially the last few generations, have been forced to connect reading solely with standardized testing, institutionalized schooling, and guided dissection of the works. There is little to no encouragement of independent critical thinking, getting lost in the text for sheer enjoyment, and so on, creating this feeling of not wanting to read in their free time because of the associations it carries.
Sure, we should definitely work to change that, but it’s very difficult to work against something drilled into them since day one of schooling and while that is true, outreach efforts like Helen’s are an amazing way to get people to jump in. Who doesn’t like free things? Also, SF/F expresses itself in so many varied ways outside of literature, so perhaps set up a TV playing some SF/F movie/show with a Handy List of Recommended Viewing for people to pic
k up? What about the music fans who could benefit from such a list geared towards new discoveries in the SF/F musical field?
Emma England: I love this! In the TV program at Loncon, there were three sessions each showcasing three shows. The trailer for each show was screened and a fan gave a presentation with Q&A about the show to encourage people to watch it. Each session was packed (approximately 200 people) and received great feedback. I totally agree with Pablo and think we could do more with this as an idea/format/selling point.
Regarding independent critical thinking and reading, I don’t think this is the problem—if there even is a problem. One of the fun things about the fandoms I mainly hang out in is that they are extremely critical. Type “queerbaiting” into Google and most results will be from Supernatural fans (Gavia Baker Whitelaw, who wrote the Daily Dot article that prompted this conversation, has written on this a fair bit). One of the main actors in Sleepy Hollow, Orlando Jones, gives lectures on fandom at Fan Studies conferences and universities. This kind of thought process has been going on since genre TV started, especially post–Star Trek. And then look at other forms of media and something like Gamergate or the Bechdel Test or “fridging.”
If people are reading less SF/F (and I’m not sure they are—just the forms of it change), it could be because there are more things to eat time than ever before. It takes longer to read a book than watch a movie. Plus, reading is solitary, other forms of SF/F aren’t.
Perhaps we could have crossover media sessions? If you like this show, try this book/game/comic/play/band etc. Or how about for something like the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) sessions we have with people positively suggesting how to go about entering the comics universe? Or fans of the TV shows like Arrow trying to persuade the comics fans to watch the show? Or having them on the same panel together?
Steven H Silver: There is no one–size fits all convention and no convention should expect to make everyone happy. Even within the confines of Worldcon, different attendees have different ideas about what the Platonic Worldcon looks like. In order to continue, I think Worldcons first need to continue to cater to the traditional membership, which forms the backbone of the volunteers and the attendees, and only after it has created the convention that is expected by those attendees should it look at ways to expand for potential new members.
One of the issues I’ve seen recently, with regard to both the Hugos and the Worldcon, is an attitude I perceive from people who haven’t attended (or have only started to attend) which seems to be that they love the history of the Hugos and the Worldcon, but they appear to have no interest in learning about that history and exhibit the feeling that any traditions that they don’t know about should be jettisoned as a stumbling block to admission of new attendees. While I have no problem jettisoning things that don’t work, or revising things that can be done better, I want to know why things should be removed. “We’ve always done them that way” is not an adequate argument for doing something, but it also isn’t an adequate argument for getting rid of something. For those who have been attending Worldcon for years (or decades) it comes across as somebody walking into your house for the first time and trying to rearrange the furniture.
While Emma says that not having a “Little Black Book” hinders innovation, I don’t believe that is true. Having that sort of checklist means that people will only innovate in areas that aren’t covered within that checklist and the checklist items would grow stale. The first time I worked a Worldcon, it was only the second Worldcon I attended, so I had only a few preconceived ideas about what should be done. I sought advice from some people who had attended numerous Worldcon, and I tried a variety of things, some of which had never been tried before, many of which worked, and a few of which failed. I’ll be running programming again in 2016, and I’ll continue to try to innovate, and while I certainly hope some of my innovations will work, I fully expect some to fail, otherwise I won’t be trying enough new and different things.
Emma England: If we do one before the other, won’t we continue to hit problems with hierarchies? For Dublin we’ve already started outreach among gaming and comic fans as well as more traditional fans. Finding volunteers early on and seeking information about what would appeal to a variety of potential attendees as soon as possible enables a convention to be built up around diverse interests. I worry appealing to the traditional fans first will leave less room for inclusivity.
As one of the newbies, I’d love to know how many people really think this. I have no interest in the Hugos for example, but would never try and expunge them, while I think other traditions are awesome. Despite being a veggie, I was overjoyed to see the pork pie race, having never seen it before. On the whole, my impression is that newbies feel chuffed to be part of a long–running event and want to be included and made to feel welcome. Could it be that some people who have been going a long time don’t like it that people have different views and even reasons for attending and feel threatened? The truth is, like most things, probably somewhere in between. It comes back to that patience, love, and community mantra Michael was talking about.
Helen Montgomery: I find it incredibly frustrating that people bash Worldcon online simply because it isn’t their cup of tea (or they think it won’t be and therefore have never even gone!). If I go to a restaurant and think “Eh, it was okay, but the service was kind of crappy, don’t think I’ll go back,” I’m not going to start a massive online campaign to shut it down and have the chefs blackballed from ever cooking again. Other people will like that restaurant, and have great service—same thing with cons.
I’ve been to Dragon Con. Totally not my cup of tea and won’t go back, but I am making an informed decision, not just basing it off stuff I hear online, and I’m not going around saying it’s awful. I say there are some cool things, but it isn’t for me. For whatever reason though, right now it seems to have become fashionable to say Worldcon is this awful thing.
I think both Steve and Emma are right about “the little black book” point. There are some things though that I think would be helpful—stuff that is required by WSFS to happen, that there should be a fannish inquisition at Worldcon; that sort of thing would be good. But only things like that which are very specific.
Steven H Silver: We’ve spoken about setting expectations, and Emma talked about appealing to media convention attendees. I’d like to take a few moments to look at those two areas together. While Hollywood used to send props, trailers, and stars to Worldcon, the economics have changed over the years, as has the technology; and they can now reach a much larger audience with a viral video. Continuing to appear at SDCC is different because, despite its name, for Hollywood, it is essentially a trade show and has the mainstream media supporting it to add to the buzz.
However, when Hollywood reaches out to Worldcon (or vice versa), there is a culture conflict. Worldcons do not pay appearance fees and Worldcon attendees do not expect to have to pay for autographs. People coming from Hollywood expect appearance fees and the ability to sell their autographs (best case scenario for the con is that they request a guarantee of income against sales). Having worked on a con that runs on the Worldcon model, I’ve found that even if the con agrees to the actor’s terms, the majority of the attendees aren’t willing to change their expectations of the con, and everybody winds up dissatisfied. The actors don’t sell their merchandise (even if they receive their guarantee from the convention), the convention loses money, and the fans are disappointed that the actor doesn’t interact the way other guests do.
Conventions do need to reach out and grow and change, and some recent conventions have demonstrated ways to do it. Detcon1 ran a very successful outreach program to fans who typically do not attend WSFS events; other conventions have made a concerted effort to expand the con in anime or costuming. One of the important things to remember with fan/volunteer run conventions is that in order to be successful in any area, people who care about that area must be active. I’ve worked on a convention where s
omeone quit because the convention wasn’t as active in social outreach as that person wanted it to be. However, that person wasn’t willing to do the work, and expected it to be done by others.
In theory, Worldcons draw enough of a membership that there will always be people who care to take on the jobs that cover areas important to them. In fact, however, Worldcons, and fandom in general, are not always as good at recruiting and retention as they could be, and people who demonstrate ability are often over–booked with their responsibilities, with the result that we often burn out good people faster than we should.
Michael Lee: I think the relationship between celebrities and conventions is more complicated than that, and I think the media landscape over the last decade has changed this some.
First of all, there are more options than just actors that are connected to media SF—writers and behind–the–camera people (and not just directors) are usually far more accessible as both participants and guests of honor than actors. And you can get some exciting cross–format communication, for example a highlight of my con–running life at CONvergence this year was seeing Steven Brust and Emma Bull excited to meet genre television writer Amy Berg from Leverage, Eureka, and others.
But certainly to do this correctly, it’s not just adding a few people, certainly not without proper expectations set to all involved, and isn’t something you can just jump into and be successful (and my experience with CONvergence backs this up) that you can be media–friendly without being celebrity–heavy. And today’s landscape is transmedia anyways, where different entertainment forms feed off of each other. I think Loncon managed that balance very well this year.
That conventions need to reach out, grow, and change, is something I strongly agree with. The most effective way to make change in a volunteer culture is to get involved and help the events you want to attend, and recognize that the event is going to be a collaboration between all of the people working on it, with a wide variety of not–always–agreeing views.
Uncanny Magazine Issue One Page 12
