Worldcon Thoughts

Before it slips too far into the mists of memory, I should probably post some summary thoughts about Nippon 2007, the World SF Convention in Japan that Kate and I attended last week. To some degree, this will be inside-baseball stuff, but if you're not interested in fannish stuff, rest assured, there is some good, weighty physics stuff coming later. Also, some utter fluff. We aim to please, here at Chateau Steelypips.

So, the Worldcon in summary. Basically, I think it was an enjoyable experiment, and while I wouldn't call it an unqualified success, I'd be in favor of doing it again, several years down the road.

Before I get more specific about the strengths and weaknesses, one important caveat: This is only the second Worldcon that I've ever been to, and it's only the second convention period that I've attended that wasn't run by the Boskone/ Readercon crowd. I gather from people with far more experience of con-going fandom than I have that it's really not fair to compare other cons to those run by the Boston group, who are preternaturally competent.

That said, there were some glitches, only a few of which were really the fault of the organizers. There were the usual and unavoidable technical problems-- AV equipment failures, rooms that were too big or too small, etc.-- and the Dealer's Room was a little skimpy, but it's hard to blame them, given the exorbitant cost of shipping books across the Pacific. None of that is really the fault of the people who put the con together.

I wasn't terribly impressed with the programming, though. Many of the panel topics were lifted more or less verbatim from past Boskone or Readercon panels, and with few exceptions, they were better the first time around. There wasn't as much of an attempt to engage in a cross-cultural dialogue as I would've hoped, either. There were a handful of English or bilingual panels on Japanese SF, but surprisingly little about anime and manga and such things.

There was also a failure to engage with the Japanese setting in a lot of the programming that could've addressed it. I went to one panel on alternate histories that was being translated into Japanese as they went, but there were no Japanese panelists. I eventually asked the translator whether alternate history as a sub-genre was popular in Japan-- the answer is a qualified "yes": apparently, there are a bunch of alternate-WWII stories out there in which Japan wins (in some cases because the context changes-- one that was mentioned had the US supporting the Nazis, and Japan allied with Britain), and a thriving subgenre in which Oda Nobunaga was not assassinated in 15mumble. That was fascinating to me, and I would've loved to hear more discussion of that stuff, but as usual, the panel got bogged down in tedious minutiae about European history.

Similarly, someone who went to one of the panels on science and religion in SF complained that more or less the whole panel was spent talking about Christianity, and particularly American variants thereof. Which is a shame, given that the panel took place surrounded by a hundred million people who aren't Christian. Are there good stories out there dealing with Buddhist themes, or the interaction between modern science and Shinto beliefs? That would be infinitely more interesting to hear about than yet another pass through the stuff I delete from my RSS feeds every morning.

This is probably at least partly a result of the demographics of the attendees. This con skewed older and nerdier than any other convention I've been to, by a large margin. It shouldn't be a real surprise-- given the expense and difficulty of travelling to Japan, the only American fans attending were, of course, those with the money and dedication to get there. That's not going to include a whole lot of college students and twenty-somethings.

This did have a definite impact on the programming, though. I suspect that the lack of English-language programming about Japanese culture and SF was a reflection of a lack of interest in those topics by the people who were able to go to the convention. The population also lent itself more to discussion of Robert Heinlein and Forrest Ackerman than, say, John Scalzi and Naomi Novik.

On one of the panels I was on-- "How Much Science Should SF Contain?"-- I was the youngest panelist by a good twenty-five years. At one point, we were asked to suggest favorite works that taught science concepts well, and I dithered for a long time without coming up with much, because I was trying not to cite the same Heinlein and Asimov stories as the others. I like "The Dead Past" and "The Billiard Ball" as much as the next guy, but I was trying to come up with works published within the last forty years. A somewhat more balanced panel might've come up with a better selection. (To be fair, Ted Chiang was originally supposed to be on that panel, but backed out of the con late in the process.)

That said, the organizers deserve a lot of credit for taking on a really difficult task. Given the near-total lack of language overlap, their efforts to facilitate communications between Japanese and non-Japanese fans were really commendable. I was particularly impressed with the translators who worked the panels I went to, who really did an excellent job. (Of course, I don't remember their names, because I'm a Bad Person, but they really did excellent work.)

And, to be sure, I could've done more myself to engage with Japanese fans. Except for the last night of the con, when a couple of the Japanese committee members came over to a group of us and struck up a conversation, I mostly just talked with Europeans and Australians. I feel a little guilty about that, because I did have a really good time talking with those guys, but I plead exhaustion and jet lag.

Anyway, I don't mean to be completely negative, here. I had a very good time at the convention, and don't regret going in the least. There were some real highlights-- the panel I did on Monday with Patrick Nielsen Hayden, Paul Cornell, Adam Rakunas, and Yoshio Kobayashi on blogs and LiveJournals in SF was a blast, and the panel with PNH, Charlie Stross, Cory Doctorow and Robert Silverberg talking about Mundane SF and Singularity SF was amazing. I had a great time drinking with some Australian and Scandanavian fans at some of the room parties, and it was great to catch up with the various people I only see at conventions, like Mary Kay and Jordin and James Cambias and Diane Kelly.

As I said up top, I wouldn't call it an unqualified success, but I think they did about as well as could possibly be expected, given the huge obstacles they had to overcome. If the experience hasn't completely put them off con-running forever, I'd happily support another bid by this group (it'd need to be several years down the road, though...).

(See also Kate's wrap-up post. If anybody has collected links to reaction posts from around the Web, I'd love to see more of them.)

More like this

The following will be of interest only to people who were at Boskone, or who for some reason care deeply about what I did there, so I'll put the bulk of the text below the fold. We arrived at about 3:00 Friday afternoon, parked in the hotel garage, and discovered that the trunk of my car would no…
We are back in Niskayuna now, where SteelyKid is using her new powers of bipedal locomotion to help me burn off some of the excess calories from the weekend in Montreal. She's only been walking for a couple of weeks, but she can really move. I'm pretty fried, even after napping for two hours…
I'm up way too early with jet lag, looking over Twitter, and ran into Nick Falkner's report on the TED panel I moderated at Worldcon, which reminded me that I never did write anything about the con. Late is probably still better than never, so here are some quick long-after-the-fact comments about…
The first panel I was on was travel advice for the Japanese Worldcon: Visiting Japan, If we attend the Worldcon in Yokohama this August, what knowledge should we bring along? What ten phrases are essential? What societal differences should we be prepared to accommodate? What are Japanese SF fans…

Ahem, she said meaningfully. Some of us can discuss and/or follow discussions of both Asimov/Heinlein and Scalzi/Novik. I'm probably not the best person to comment on recent stories which are good on scientific concepts though, and Jordin mutters a lot about errors of scale in being all too common in recent sf.

I didn't get to take in much programming since I spent a lot of time at the Denvention table. One hopeful note for increasing cross-cultural communication is that we (Denvention) sold quite a few memberships to Japanese folks who aren't worldcon regulars. It will be interesting to see if that trend continues.

MKK

I'm not fool enough to claim that no older fans are able or willing to discuss new authors. Many of the fans who were there, though, seemed vastly more interested in discussing Heinlein and Asimov than anybody working today, and I think the programming was the worse for it.

"Many of the fans who were there, though, seemed vastly more interested in discussing Heinlein and Asimov than anybody working today, and I think the programming was the worse for it."

have any practical ways for the geezer fan to get up to speed? i've yet to see a sci-fi focused reasonable sized bookstore and even though it is not doubt a big margin of chains, this seems to be the last section you get any reasonable recommendations or arranging that highlights the quality.

I'm thinking review blogs/sites or something but the problem is that most fans want to discuss the books. And that means spoilers.

oh and if you want to discuss Card and Brin does this make one a geezer fan? how recent is recent?

"Many of the fans who were there, though, seemed vastly more interested in discussing Heinlein and Asimov than anybody working today, and I think the programming was the worse for it."

have any practical ways for the geezer fan to get up to speed? i've yet to see a sci-fi focused reasonable sized bookstore and even though it is not doubt a big margin of chains, this seems to be the last section you get any reasonable recommendations or arranging that highlights the quality.

I'm thinking review blogs/sites or something but the problem is that most fans want to discuss the books. And that means spoilers.

oh and if you want to discuss Card and Brin does this make one a geezer fan? how recent is recent?

Long time lurker, first time poster:

So Chad, now that you've had some time to think about it, can you think of a list of books/stories with a really good treatment of science concepts?

I'll start the ball rolling with Larry Nivens "Neutron Star" (tides) and follow up with Greg Egans "Luminous" (mathematical proof). There just has to be more out there...

Game of quantum soccer anyone? (Egan again, "Border Guards")

Drugmonkey, I think booklogs are probably what you're looking for. The review bloggers are usually very careful to avoid spoilers, or provide spoiler protection if necessary, and while older books do get reviewed on them, what's new and hot is much more likely to attract attention (and thus readers).

Chad's "Books" links to the immediate left of where I'm typing this into his comment box are a decent place to start...

It's disappointing they ignored anime, as that's the medium of most high quality SF and fantasy series. There's nothing in U.S. or British TV that approaches the depth at which series like Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex or Serial Experiments Lain look at concepts like AI and identity. Most US/UK series dealing with AI like Battlestar Galactica or Dr. Who are still stuck in the 19th century mindset of Frankenstein.

I also think the large number of anime series and the fact that they're often planned for only 13 or 26 episodes allows Japanese TV to target small audiences who are interested in deeper SF, while the higher cost of U.S. series causes American TV to go for the broadest possible audience and to continue series well past their expiration dates.