dalekboy | Readdressing the Balance

Current Mood: quixotic

Entry tags:

Readdressing the Balance

So, after my post on how Media and Lit Natcons were joined, and how media fandom as a whole got thoroughly screwed, general consensus was that the whole situation sucked.

So what are we going to do about it?

Well, as it happens, there is a Natcon in Adelaide this weekend. With a business meeting. That would be a great place to start. I can't afford to go, but I know a fair chunk of you will be there. Do you want to set things in motion, and back each other up?

The fact that the original business meeting notes vanished may be down to accident, incompetence, or deliberate mishandling is neither here nor there. What matters is that it's well past time the situation was fixed. The deal was that in exchange for merging their Natcon with the Lit one, media fandom would get fair representation, in the awards and by extension, the programming. That's not happening.

There's no doubt that there will be resistance. But you know what, fuck it, a deal was made. And it was broken. There's no doubt that it will take years to rebuild things, to get that side of fandom even caring that there's a Natcon, let alone coming to it. And some would argue there's no point. But there is a point.

It could have gone the other way.

The Ditmars could have been lost, the Lit Natcon no more. They easily had the numbers to do this at a time when the Lit Natcon was not doing well, and they still gave up their awards, and their Natcon, with expectation of a fair deal they never received.

I didn't set out to try and get this thing fixed, I just wanted to make the point that we used to have more awards. But fuck it, now I'm angry. Because you know, I read and love books, but if I had to choose which box I fit in, I've always thought of myself as a media fan. Most of us watch films and TV shows, and love them. In our everyday lives, the Lit/Media divide doesn't exist, but our Natcon is skewed ridiculously heavily towards Lit.

Media fandom believed in community, and for over a decade that community has let them down.

And I think that's long enough.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I am going and I find the awards situation annoying. the Asfmas had best fanzine, best fanwriter, best fan artist, best fan production--dammit they were fan orientated, where the Ditmars are being pulled to being professional writing awards, because I suspect having "Ditmar award winning title" on the cover sells books. They also have this stupid rule about how many awards are presented, so that things are not consistant year to year.

It is probably more accurate to say that some people think that winning a Ditmar will be of help in a writing career. They are wildly naive or quite delusional. But the Ditmars are currently the plaything of the micro-press people who like to play at being professionals. Being able to point to their "Professional" award no doubt bolsters their unworthy egos.

BTW James and Danny, do you think Jacob Blake would be a good Fan GoH of Dudcon 3?

"But the Ditmars are currently the plaything of the micro-press people who like to play at being professionals. Being able to point to their "Professional" award no doubt bolsters their unworthy egos."

That's a bit harsh Paul.

While the Ditmars might just be nothing more than a popularity award, I admire anyone whose willing to run a small press of their own. Considering it's usually their own money and time, then if they do get an award their often deserving of it.

A bit harsh perhaps, but it pisses me off to see good things crowded off the ballot by the block self-nominations. If we were just talking about "Best Collected work" then maybe fair enough, but it spills over into a lot of the other categories too. If it were other people doing the nominating than I would be less bothered, but they are nominating themselves. What else, but ego?

I think this year people have made a concerted effort not to block nominate or block vote.

In my case, I told people not to nominate or vote for Midnight Echo Issue 1 unless they read it.

I also think the quality of the nominees is quite high this year.

I think it's also worth pointing out that there's has been a genuinbe transitions away from fannish things like fanzines and fan art and the like and toward more pro endeavours. This is because the fans who wrote the fanzines and drew the art have become pros in their own right. So the disappearance of more fannish categories, might be more to do with the growing professionalism of the Aussie spec fic scene, rather a dismall of fannish creativity. I mean, it's not like there's hundreds of fanzines or fan productions out there being ignored by the elite.

Just my penneth worth.

See? The word Ditmar appears and boom!

I'm not sure the fan turning to pro argument works too well as a reason for the change in the award categories. That shift from fan to pro has been happening regularly for decades without impacting so strongly.

That said, this year is the first time we've only had 3 named fan categories in a very long time, compared to most of the recent years where there was usually 5 or so. So Paul's argument about small press doing the damage doesn't quite hold water either. Why start so late, given small press has been going strong in Australia for most of the last decade?

Maybe small press are behind the shift this year, but it could just be statistical aberration, a screw-up on behalf or the Ditmar committee, or... something involving flying monkeys.

Why do people always blame the monkeys?
:(

Because they can't keep their stinking paws off of us, those damned dirty apes!

Hey, I've trained my flying monkeys to wash their hands before putting their paws on fans. I mean, they don't need monkey shit on them when they got enough shit from each other. Of course, all my monkeys need disinfecting after being in the same room as you lot.

I love the "you lot," as if you're not one of us.

Keep that up and I'll have to start scanning my old photos and putting them up...

I don't need to hang fans anymore. I've got hairy, gruntish, snot-eating primates that think they can fly to do my bidding. So, no real difference there then.

*grin*

... and monkeys throw poo.

Sorry if what I said was a bit unclear, it wasn't meant to be about Pro taking over from Fan, but more about an unlevel playing field. There was a lot of self-nomination this year, whether that is more or less than other years I couldn't say. I find it quite tacky.

I'm not really sure what categories would best represent current media fannish activity. Maybe fan film? The other issue is that until media fandom reconnects with the convention scene the there will be nobody to nominate for any category that we might come up with. A bit of a chicken and egg situation there.

I can't understand why fanzine is off the ballot. we had a realy good representation at Convergence with Ethel, Captains Log and other media zines on there, because committee actively went out and got a bit of involvement. the Fact that it was stil won by a more 'lit' focussed zine is representative of who attends the conventions and therefore votes.

Yep, I was naughty, nominating my stuff, hell, even voting for it. Awards have always been a way of saying to the wider community, "Hey I am here, let's play fandom" as indeed as fanzines. Lucy Schmeidler(i think spelled right) once said about the efforts of Singular productions (me and Phil W) "Chutzpah is not enough", which is true, but it is a beginning.

Damn, posting as anoymous again. So far today i had to get a new mobile phone as the old ones keyboard died and now i am using a grotty internet cafe computer, as I cannot get the netbook to connect. ah, the good old days of pen and paper...

I don't think Ditmar bloc voting is as extensive as people think. Most of the nominating and voting these days is done by online fans and the influx of neo-pro writers within the last 5 years. The Australian Horror Writers Association, for example, has brought in nearly 300 new members to the spec fic community (mostly aspiring or neo-pro writers), so there will be a tendency for fan works these people are familiar with (eg. HorrorScope or perhaps ASif) to dominate the Ditmar shortlists. This could also explain the high number of horror-related works as finalists in the pro categories.

I tend to agree, though I think one of the Ditmar committees should release the full results of both the nomination process, and eventual voting, to allow some proper analysis one year, to finally put those accusations to bed (or not, I guess).

It's not the voting that's the damaging bloc, but the nominations. And it wasn't as bad this year, but last year it was quite terrible.

I think winning a Ditmar can help a career at a certain point. It is a big public vote of confidence that sometimes really helps a writers public profile and confidence - but I don't think it really sells books, and I don't think it helps a writer whose career is already established.

Yes, as i said in person, Jacob Blake would be good for Dudcon 3. Danny, what do you think?

Why not? Sadly I sold his artificial leg before we moved to Canberra.

So he has only one leg to stand on, eh 8))

BTW, thanks for the text, it came right in the middle of the business meeting, such timing.

The Ditmars have not had that rule about how many awards are presented for nearly a decade. It got taken out when the minimalist 'Jack Herman' constitution was replaced by the separate Ditmar rules in 2000 - which was actually the first year in which the Ditmar awards were combined with the ASFMAs. And they have been pretty consistent since then. And the Ditmars have best fan writer, best fan artist, and only just combined fan production and fanzine into fan production last year. Sorry, this is bringing up problems we more or less fixed nearly a decade ago.

Which isn't to say the Ditmars as they are now don't have problems, but they have different problems.

Oops, LOL, OK, I have not been paying attention. Yeah, it was during 1999 that I had that discussion about number of awards. I just haven't discussed it recently, as I have been busy and was not about to set off another controversy over the ditmars. I think coming to the natcon has re-ignited my interest.

Hi Strangedave, sorry about the anonymous comment, see other for today. Yep, it was me, Jocko.

There is, to be fair, nothing that prevents the awarding of more than one set of awards at the NatCon - only a rule that mandates the presentation of the Ditmars.

Rather than fucking about with the NatCon rules and starting yet another round of media fan/lit fan arguments, why not just form a committee to organise categories, voting rules, nominations, etc for the presentation for a set of media awards for next year.

If that coincidentally happens at the NatCon, well so much the better.

Given the existence of awards (particularly ones that they don't have to administer), I'm sure the NatCon committee will find space and time for them to be presented. And maybe even a budget to have a statuette made in your own image to give to the deserving winners.

Actually, my little rant here doesn't quite work because I mentioned the awards a couple too many times, so that's what people have fixated on.

My main concerns with regards to the Natcon are broadening the programming so that it's not so Lit-centric, and actively trying to draw the media fans back to the National Convention, since it's meant to be theirs as well.

I think my main problem voicing this was I was making an effort not to make it sound like I wanted new rules enforcing a 50/50 mix in the program or anything as horrifically bureaucratic and unworkable as that. That and the awards were my original starting point for this whole thing.

Get the people turning up, the awards will sort themselves eventually.

As to your suggestion regarding the look of the statuette - you may like the idea of having me sat on your mantle so you can perve on me all the time, but I don't think it would work for most people. But ask nice and I'll send you a picture you can stick over your bed.

Indeed, Swancon Natcons always award the Tin Ducks as well, and often other awards (such as the Chandler, or the McNamara award) are presented at the same ceremony.

But seriously, I think adding categories to the Ditmars (if you think there is a need for them) is a much better idea than starting an additional set of awards. Running a set of awards is a major pain in the arse (believe me, if I didn't already know, I would have learnt that one in the last few weeks) and the number of categories is a relatively small factor in that.

Because changing the rules to expand the Ditmars (again) won't create wank and drama at all...

Oh, expanding the rules clearly would create wank and drama -- but creating a whole new set of awards would create another independent ongoing source of wank and drama for years.

Absolutely, but given that:

a) I don't really accept Danny's central contention that media fans have been hard done by over the last 10 years; and
b) agree with

angriest that the current problem with cons is that they're too insular, too focused on fannish activity and not enough on the genre's content;

I'd rather the wank and drama over who gets the national award for the production of the best songvid etc. happen around the people who really want them to awarded, and see a need for them - rather than getting foisted on some random future Con committee.

I'm not a big fan of changing the rules to make other people do the work on something you want to see happen.

It's not really fair, it mostly doesn't work, and it's an an open invitation for wank and drama when those people then don't do exactly what was envisioned by the people who, essentially, didn't want to do it themselves.

Regarding a) How many eastern eastern states media conventions did you go to in the nineties, and so are in a position to be able to see the difference between then and now? WA has had the media/lit issues, but never to the degree of the east. Media fandom in the east is more marginalised now than at any time I can remember since 1979, which is when I joined fandom.

RE: b) Yep, totally there with you and

angriest on the insular side, but don't think the blame can only be leveled at the fannish aspects of cons when our whole culture is geared to 'have fun, but on our terms.'

Most cons advertise poorly outside their immediate fan community. Outsiders look at the cost of the cons and think they're a rip off. How many people go to the effort of talking to someone who is new at a con?

The way we run cons in general is outdated when it comes to the 'net generation.' We don't give them the sorts of stuff that appeals to them, and because we aren't them, it's hard to figure out what will work. There's no easy fix, but fannish activity is only one of several issues, not the main one.

I'd rather the wank and drama over who gets the national award for the production of the best songvid etc. happen around the people who really want them to awarded, and see a need for them
You mean the sort of people who would enjoy a Media Natcon, maybe with it's own set of awards. Be nice if we had one of those, eh?

I'm not a big fan of changing the rules to make other people do the work on something you want to see happen.
The Media Natcon constitution was rewritten so it matched a lot more closely with the Lit one. Why? Because it would make a merge of the two cons easier. Why did we need a merge? Because at the time the Lit Natcon wanted one because it seemed incapable of doing the work to save itself.
So by that logic, media fandom should have let the Lit Natcon die. Way to build community.

Regarding a) How many eastern eastern states media conventions did you go to in the nineties, and so are in a position to be able to see the difference between then and now?

All cons were better when we were young. And VB was a real beer back then,the music was real music, and the girls had sunshine flecked eyes and valued brains over bodies, back in the halcyon days of our youth.

Rose tinted glasses, dude.

WA has had the media/lit issues, but never to the degree of the east.

And, while I may not have been at those Melbourne media cons, the noise of bitching and moaning and wank and drama at that time, about those cons, was pretty audible even on this side of the Nullarbor - fixing those problems was one of the major reasons that SwanCon became the template for the way NatCons should be run.

Media fandom in the east is more marginalised now than at any time I can remember since 1979, which is when I joined fandom.

I haven't seen any concrete evidence that that this is the case - I would argue that (leaving the awards aside) many of those things that were then associated with media fandom have disappeared because the technology and the world has changed.

Video rooms being the most obvious example, but certainly more broadly than that.

If people are focussing on the awards, it's because there's been no articulation of anything outside of that.

There are more lit guests than media guests, yep - they're cheaper, and easier to get. Plenty of recent cons have tried to get media guests, but have failed on issues of scheduling and cost - SwanCon '07 was lucky to wind up with a guest of the quality of Rob Shearman, for example, after its initial pick fell through.

And programming is always at the direction of the committee, and is always subject to criticism of those people who didn't see their specific interests represented well enough (in their view) during the con.

Cont.

Most cons advertise poorly outside their immediate fan community. Outsiders look at the cost of the cons and think they're a rip off.

vs.

when our whole culture is geared to 'have fun, but on our terms.'

There's a tension here that I don't think you're addressing - 'our community, our rules, our fun' vs a more corporate con that's more accessible to "outsiders'.

How many people go to the effort of talking to someone who is new at a con?

I don't want to rehash this discussion except to say, again, that it will be pretty much the same proportion of people that would do so in any other sub-culture or community. Probably a greater proportion, in my experience, because the fan community tends to think about those issues a little more than others.

So by that logic, media fandom should have let the Lit Natcon die. Way to build community.

Maybe they should have, but they didn't. But I'd also refer you back to my comment about rose tinted glasses.

Here's my fundamental problem with what you're arguing:

You seem to be casting media fans community as the victims of a conspiracy of an organised and united lit fan group that's dedicated to marginalising their interests and using their money to run Cons full of things they don't like.

I think that's bollocks.

These days more than ever the divide (if there ever was one) is less than it ever was before. To be a hard core media fan in the 90s was pretty hard work - tracking down imported vids, comics, tv shows etc was more work than most people whose primary introduction to the fan community came through books could manage.

Now its easy, and every 'lit fan' I know has easy access to all the movies and TV series they could ever want - the divide has shifted in favour of media fans because you don't have to work as hard to get into the material.

And, similarly, the opportunities to discuss and share experience in those fandoms has also expanded, and cons aren't the only place they happen anymore.

On a programming front, maybe that means the pressure isn't on committees in the way used to be to provide those opportunities at cons - I dunno. Like I said, I don't really accept the argument that programs don't reflect media fandom on a more or less equal basis, but neither of us has any figures to back that up, so it's pretty much a moot point.

I think that divide was always a little artificial, and it's even more so now.

Actually, I'm not saying cons were better when I was younger, I'm mainly saying there was more of them. I went to some bloody stinkers run by both camps.

If the media natcon hadn't been closed down, would east coast media fandom have survived insurance issues, internal fan politics, big companies like Paramount looking over their shoulders, and the impact of the internet? No idea. But with at least one yearly convention actively geared towards pulling them together, it's reasonable to assume it might have kept things chugging along through the hard times. Or it might not. Like you, I have no crystal ball.

The issues of media guest availability and pricing goes back to the 80s, when suddenly US cons started paying people stupid amounts of money because they were in a series no-one had watched in five years. Personally, I find that the vast majority of actors are seriously over-rated as guests. Give me a Howard Waldrop over almost any 'big' genre actor you want to name.

For media guests I would much prefer decent screenwriters, directors, effects people, etc.

Constantinople's carefully balanced program of lit and media panels meant both sides complained they'd been under-represented, so it was seen as a success by the committee. Fans like to argue and complain, as we're both showing :)

With Continuum, we very carefully avoided calling it a science fiction convention, just because of the stigma associated with that term in the general public. People assume a requirement that attendees wear Trek costumes and pointy ears.

We were certainly doing a fair job of getting new people along to their first con, and we got a fair number of those returning to later cons. In fact a portion of the current committee found fandom through Continuum.

That said, I still think we've got a long way to go before I'd say we were anywhere near having a significantly broader appeal. Which is difficult to do without 'mainstreaming' it, which the expos do much better.

I do hope that as we get more and more new folks on board that they'll start to steer things in bold new directions. Of course I may not like the way the cons change, but there were a lot of old farts that hated video rooms when they first came in, too. If their success means that I no longer have a place there, so be it.

And no, I don't think there was a conspiracy to destroy media fandom, nor have I claimed that. I would be surprised if it was anything more than pure laziness on the part of organisers. 'This is what we know and like, other people will just have to deal with it.'

Which is fine to some degree, because you can't please everybody and it's insane to try. But it's also stupid to cut yourself off from the potential bigger audience.

And no doubt that the divide is artificial. It always has been. And while I'm using the terms lit and media, it's mainly because those are terms most people get, plus I don't necessarily have better ones.

Is there any way to sort the situation? No idea. But us disagreeing with each other matters less than the fact we're having the discussion. The only way to get things moving and to find out one way or the other if things need to, or can, be fixed is to talk about it.

After the conjecture business meeting, I am looking for Australian fanzines. I can already put my hand on about 6 or 7 titles, but looking for more. Any suggestions or copies to Jocko, 261 carrick Drive, Gladstone park Vic 3043.

Maybe this is another way that Perth differs from anywhere else, but with the possible exception of Neutral Zone (which I wasn't involved with), I don't know that there's ever been a coherent "media fandom" in Perth. There's an anime fan club, a Doctor Who fan club, and may still be a Star Trek fan club... but with the possible exception of SwanCon 19, I don't remember a time when they ever joined up to organize a multi-media con or any similar event.

I've always thought that the reason that SwanCons have done so well is that Perth fans mostly don't talk to each other between Cons, outside of already existing friendships.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Readdressing the Balance

The Ditmars are not the fan drawcard they should be

Re: The Ditmars are not the fan drawcard they should be

Re: The Ditmars are not the fan drawcard they should be

Re: The Ditmars are not the fan drawcard they should be

Re: The Ditmars are not the fan drawcard they should be

Re: The Ditmars are not the fan drawcard they should be

Re: The Ditmars are not the fan drawcard they should be

Re: The Ditmars are not the fan drawcard they should be

Re: The Ditmars are not the fan drawcard they should be

Re: The Ditmars are not the fan drawcard they should be

Re: The Ditmars are not the fan drawcard they should be

Re: The Ditmars are not the fan drawcard they should be

Re: The Ditmars are not the fan drawcard they should be

Re: The Ditmars are not the fan drawcard they should be

Re: The Ditmars are not the fan drawcard they should be

Re: The Ditmars are not the fan drawcard they should be

Re: The Ditmars are not the fan drawcard they should be

Re: The Ditmars are not the fan drawcard they should be

Re: The Ditmars are not the fan drawcard they should be

Re: The Ditmars are not the fan drawcard they should be

Re: The Ditmars are not the fan drawcard they should be

Re: The Ditmars are not the fan drawcard they should be

Re: The Ditmars are not the fan drawcard they should be

Re: The Ditmars are not the fan drawcard they should be

Re: The Ditmars are not the fan drawcard they should be

Re: The Ditmars are not the fan drawcard they should be

Re: The Ditmars are not the fan drawcard they should be

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

Jocko looking for fanzines.

no subject

no subject