The difference between a worldcon and a Worldcon

[dalekboy]

The below is my opinion. No one has asked me to write this and if you have any problems with what I'm saying, take it up with me and no-one else.


There are a lot of pro-authors at this con, a chunk of whom I have met at other Worldcons, conventions and events. What has been amazing to me, and gratifying because I have some dear friends who have been responsible for the program, is that every one of them without exception has said that this is the most interesting and diverse Worldcon program that they've seen in ages.

Now I haven't been responsible for any of it. They have no reason to tell me this beyond simple conversation and the enthusiasm they feel for the program.

These people have been around for years, been to a lot of conventions, and they are seriously impressed, not just because it's a good program, but because it's a program so good they want to go to a lot of it. They've also commented on the way the programmers worked with them very favourably.

I mention this because there's stuff that has not been allowed to happen here.

The base reason seems to come down to - this is Worldcon, and you aren't allowed to do this, this, and that, because we don't do things that way. This is why the madcap entertainment events that are pretty much a staple of the evening program at many Australian conventions aren't happening here, because Worldcon doesn't do that.

I think the elephant in the room here is this - what is the bloody point of having the Worldcon in different countries if they have to do everything the same? Seriously, why even bother? It's like travelling all over the world and instead of eating in a variety of restaurants, only ever eating at McDonalds.

I would think the reason for having a World convention that moves from country to country would be to experience those other fandoms. Yes, there will be stuff you don't like, but there will also be the surprises. It's the difference between having a worldcon and a Worldcon.

I'm not saying that there isn't a lot of good advice to be given, a lot of experience to help avoid common perils and pitfalls, but there is a huge difference between offering help and knowledge, and dictating terms. And let's face it, even with all that pressure to do things in very particular ways, there are still Worldcons that are utter disasters.

So if even with all the pressure to do things the 'right' way it all goes hideously wrong, is there any point to trying to force the cookie-cutter convention on people? Why not instead help people to run their Worldcon, complete with all those exciting differences? Help them find ways of introducing people to the unique ways they celebrate they genre in their country, not to mention the individuality of the country itself.

Or is this need for things to be just so yet another example of that old fannish paradox, that the people who are in theory looking excitedly at a new and different future, are deathly afraid of anything remotely resembling change?

Comments

[kremmen.livejournal.com]

"Traditional worldcon dates" is exactly the same thing. Whose tradition? Who cares? Certainly not Aussie fans, 90% of whom never attend a worldcon outside Australia.

Where have the last several Worldcons been run? Oh, in the Northern hemisphere. The US-preferred traditional dates work fine for other Northern hemisphere cons. It totally makes sense for other worldcons to stick with US tradition when there is no downside for them. Would anyone want Glasgow to hold a con other than in summer? I doubt it.

Winter/early spring dates can be okay for a local con here that's in one building, but worldcons are long and spread over an area. Walking back to the Hilton from the Crowne Plaza at 2am was predictably nasty. October/November would have been lovely. Why would anyone choose "traditional" Northern hemisphere dates that pretty much ensure crappy weather here for a Melbourne Worldcon? Tradition is an appalling answer that basically amounts to "because that's what US SMoFs expect".

[angriest.livejournal.com]

Is it SMOFs dictating that, though, or a convention committee's perception of the desires of the "rank and file" international fans?

I don't know the answer myself.

[kremmen.livejournal.com]

That is indeed unknown, as I said. How much divergence from the norm would upset enough of them? Nobody knows unless they test the waters. Even then, I'm sure it's not an absolute. The attitudes of the long-term US fan base are going to be made up of many judgments concerning different aspects of the con.

smofbabe claims that "voters and attendees have a right to expect that you pay some attention to worldcon tradition" and yet leaps to the fanciful and disingenuous conclusion that I'm paranoid to think that those exact attitudes don't influence the con committees, but I'm sure you won't fall for that.

I'll certainly admit that I can see why that fear is there, as a worldcon is a big, expensive undertaking. Let's face it: it's the easy choice to keep the US fans happy. Nobody wants theirs shot down, or even to receive less help from the experts, so they will tend to err on the side of caution.

It will be interesting to see what happens if the NZ bid becomes reality. Many of us are going to attend a worldcon in our own country no matter what, so A4 being timed to attract US fans makes some sense for pure numbers, even if it was detrimental to the experience. However, NZ is close enough be on the radar for many Aussie fans, but far enough and expensive enough not to be an automatic entry in the diary. If the choice is to pick winter for the Americans or to pick a pleasant time of year that everyone will enjoy, I wonder which way they will go?

[smofbabe.livejournal.com]

I did not think you were paranoid to think that worldcon tradition should influence con comittees. I do think that you tend to see conspiracies involving "US SMoFs" where none exist. This isn't the first time you've invoked this bogeyman.

[kremmen.livejournal.com]

Wow. I don't actually think this is a huge issue. It was just an example in response to the original post. However, if you do think it's worth discussion, how about keeping to something of substance, rather than all the attempts at emotive and/or ad hominem distractions. "Bogeyman", "paranoia", "conspiracy", "this isn't the first time", blah, blah, blah.

It's pretty clear to me that my use of the word "few" should be a hint that "conspiracy" is an inaccurate characterisation of my opinion on this. If I'd said "lots and lots", that might have been a fair response.

What is the difference between "conspiracy" and "influence", except for one's subjective assessment of the merit of the effect? (... and your desire to frame your opinions as inherently good and other people's as bad.)

[smofbabe.livejournal.com]

It's not a matter of my opinions being good and other people's being bad. I just prefer to see claims based on facts rather than guesses and suspicion.

And, actually, no, I don't think it's worth much further discussion.

[smofbabe.livejournal.com]

Keep in mind that you are part of a parade of worldcons that are coming before your con and after yours. Significantly changing the months in which worldcon is run would, among other things, screw up the Hugo nomination and voting intervals, and also mess with the next year's worldcon dates and timing.

In addition, a large number of fans came from overseas for this convention, and Northern Hemisphere summer is when they tend to be able to get leave.

Finally, it's not like the committee submitted some other dates that were knocked back by some mysterious cabal - this mainly seems to be your own strange paranoia about "US SMoFS."

If you want to run a large Australian-centric convention and bring in guests, feel free. However, if you bid to run the worldcon, it is a trust. That doesn't mean you have to slavishly adhere only to things that have been done in the past, but at the same time, voters and attendees have a right to expect that you pay some attention to worldcon tradition.