Is it possible to buy too much science fiction?

Asking for a friend:

A stack of science fiction paperbacks with a cat sleeping behind it

I was coming home to Amsterdam from the office in Utrecht and since the Metro was passing through there anyway, I thought to stop off at Spui on impulse and see if the American Book Center there had anything good. What I failed to take into account was that it was a Friday and the weekly bookmarkt was just in the process of wrapping up when I arrived. I’d come there often before Covid but this was my first visit in three years or so and had completely forgotten about it. It has a dozen to twenty or so antiquarian and second hand bookstores particpating, not all from Amsterdam itself. Most of what they bring along is of little interest to me, local history, Dutch literature and art books and the like. But every other stand or so might have a some gem hidden among its stock and if that fails, there’s always Magic Galaxies, as the name suggests, a store that specialises in science fiction. It’s where this stack came from. One of those stores you always see at a book market like this, always with a large selection of secondhand paperbacks next to the glossy Star Wars or Star Trek popup books, always for extremely reasonable prices. It’s amazing that I can still get sixties, seventies or even fifties sf paperbacks in good condition for under five euros. I used to think their prices were a bit on the high side, but they stayed roughly the same while everything else became more expensive.

Cover of England Swings SF

Among that stack of paperbacks is the perfect example of what I mean: Judith Merril’s England Swings SF, a book I’ve spent literal decades looking for. A book I’ve known about, have read about for decades I yesterday finally got to hold in my hands. England Swings SF is an incredibly important book in the history of science fiction. A key work of the New Wave, a defining statement of what New Wave science fiction was all about. It’s Judith Merril’s defining work, the jewel in the crown of her work as an editor. You know how important and controversial it was just from the publisher writing its own introduction washing its hands of the whole thing.

Though it may seem strange now, the New Wave was revolutionary, was controversial because it set out to deliberately undo science fiction’s dogmas, both literally and politically. Worse, as it originated in the UK and its most important early writers were British like Moorcock, Ballard and Aldiss, it also upset the natural order of America as the centre of the SF universe. When England Swings SF was released in 1968, the controversy had been raging for almost half a decade between the upstarts and the SF establishment. Like the British Invasion in rock music of the same time, the New Wave also reinvigorated established pulp authors like Robert Silverberg, who would write his best works after the wave hit. It laid the foundations for the more socially conscious and politically engaged science fiction of the late sixties and seventies. The New Wave completely changed science fiction — even if there still people even now denying this — and England Swings SF was its flagship.

Judith Merril herself had been doing a yearly anthology of the best science fiction from 1956, which had been become increasingly progressive in its definition of what science fiction is and where it can be found. Science fiction had until then always prided itself on not being literary, not being concerned with style or technique, too much character development, let alone politics or sex. Judith Merril played a huge role in changing that. As a writer, she’s best known for “That only a Mother…” (1948) and Shadow on the Hearth (1950), two early stories about nuclear war that focused on how it impacts regular people rather than techno wizardry. She moved to Canada and into academia in the seventies, still active in science fiction but no longer writing or editing much. Finally owning her most important work is one personal goal ticked off.

Mist

for those of y’all still claiming Germans don’t have a sense of humour, let me introduce you to Bernd das Brot:

An anthropomorphic loaf of bread with short, stumpy arms and a pessimistic, cynical personality, Bernd comes from a German children’s tv series and has become a bit of a mascot for KiKa, the channel this was broadcast on. KiKa is aimed at children and only broadcasts between 6:00 AM and 9:00 PM, which means there’s a lot of dead air. So they decided to fill this air time with short movies like the one above, in which Bernd is basically put through a series of psychological and existential torture in Der KiKa Lounge. His attitude with which he undergoes these trials is what makes it hilarious and this particular one had me especially giggling. It’s just all very…

(And for all the nerd mockery on display in this video, it’s in the end actually very respectable.)

So if you’re ever in a German speaking country and late at night you’re flicking channels and come across a boxy, stubby armed muppet undergoing strange tortures in a white room, you now know what it is and no, it’s not a hallucination brought on by too much bratwurst and dunkelbier.

Being a volunteer does not make you free from criticism

Colette H. Fozard’s flouncing away from being co-chair of Discon III over at File 770 is a beautiful example of bad faith.

In my years of growing responsibility of working for Worldcons, I have become increasingly alarmed and upset at the level of abuse and vitriol spewed at the all-volunteer staff. So much so that I have now abruptly walked away from probably the best chance I had to improve matters ‘from the inside.’

After plonking down her credentials as a fan and conrunner, she opens with this beauty of a statement. Here she positions herself not just as a victim, but as somebody ‘alarmed and upset’ at how fandom apparently treats all Worldcon volunteers. It sets the tone for the rest of the post, which will keep bringing up general accusations of harassment but is light on specifics. What is also does is set up a juxtaposition between the “all-volunteer staff” and the rest of fandom, only presented here as a nebulous mass of complainers and harassers. Finally, it of course implies that it was harassment, not legitimate criticism that led to her resignation.

The proximate cause of her resignation was of course the Hugo Awards kerfuffle, in which Discon III announced by tweet that it would limit the number of people to be listed on the award to four in total. That Fozard describes it as “for the first time ever, all contributors to a Hugo finalist work would be listed and recognized as Hugo Finalists” is suspect and more than a little bit self serving. First, it’s obvious that this isn’t the part that anybody disagreed with. Second, this was not how this policy change was communicated. From what I remember (because of course the tweets in question have been deleted since), it practically lead with the restriction on the number of names allowed on the actual Hugo Award plaque. Though I understand from the ongoing debate since that limiting the number of names has been unofficial policy of multiple Worldcons, this was still the first time it was announced as official policy. Understandably this would upset people. To then to characterise the backlash like this:

NOT GOOD ENOUGH, said some of the worst abusers of Hugo Admin staff over the years. They twisted the announcement to meet their selfish ends and I had to watch my staff despair that people were yelling at us for a misunderstanding. Because there were concerns about the readability of the ballot (most vote electronically, but paper ballots are required by the WSFS Constitution) and the physical ability of how many people we could fit together in reception and ceremony spaces, we were accused of stifling BIPOC creators. A rich accusation from the white editors/gatekeepers who pride themselves on being performatively abusive, in a social media community where this is not just tolerated but rewarded.

Not. Helpful.

There are a lot of bald statements in this paragraph that needed, but didn’t get a citation: “worst abusers”, “twisted”, “white gatekeepers”, “performatively abusive”. The reality of it is that a) critics responded to the statements as put out by Discon III itself, b) it was both respectful and justified rather than abusive while c) the critics were a mixture of all kinds of fans, rather than some mythical white gatekeepers. In fact, some of the voices arguing the loudest against it where the same fans of colour who had reason to mistrust Worldcon already, what with how CoNZealand treated them last year. As I argued on Twitter, you have to put this faux pas in the context of the failures of CoNZealand to treat its Hugo finalists right. So much went wrong last year that Discon III had promised to do better and then they came out with this? Is it any wonder that people were vocal and public in their criticism?

Speaking of CoNZealand, it turns out that Fozard was involved in that fiasco as well.

If this were the first time The Internet rounded on Worldcon staff, I would be less worried, but it happens over and over. As a member of CoNZealand’s committee, I saw how upset the staff were when numerous Hugo Finalists loudly and publicly proclaimed how upset they were with their programming, did not give CoNZealand a chance to make modifications, and then ran their own programming scheme attaching the convention’s name to it without asking, and finally had the gall to remind everyone at the end that their programming might be eligible for a best related work Hugo Award.

Some sour grapes there, again being economical with the truth. Let’s be blunt here: CoNZealand fucked up and fucked up badly. It failed to include a large number of the Hugo Finalists in its programming despite many eager volunteers, it failed to respond to numerous attempts to correct this and only once the programming schedule went public leading to an equally public backlash did it finally try to put things right. All at the same time as it let George R. R. Martin and Robert Silverberg shit all over the finalists. Fozard should be embarrassed, not angry that it came so far that a fringe convention had to be set up to try and mitigate some of the damage. A fringe convention partially ran by CoNZealand staffers, I should add.

Worldcon staff are people. People who are working hard to do the right thing and put on a convention where all feel welcome. Worldcon staff should be, must be, and are held responsible to ensure their work is welcoming and inclusive as possible, but the endless cycle of assume-bad-faith, attack-without-mercy is wearying, toxic and destructive to the very community these people claim to be a part of and care about.

Let’s be clear: the one being “wearying, toxic and destructive” here is Colette H. Fozard, not some never mentioned by name group of people who get their jollies from oppressing innocent Worldcon staffers and I resent this continuous attempt to create and us vs. them situation of Worldcon staffers vs fandom. The criticism is coming from inside the house. I’ve volunteered on both of the physical Worldcons I’ve been to, even if not in such an exalted position as Fozard. I’m not the enemy. It’s an old, old trick to paint your critics as interloopers, only interested in destroying your community. That Fozard feels the need to use it makes it clear her resignation is for the best. We don’t need a Worldcon chair who sees fandom as her enemy, criticism as attack. Even as a volunteer you have a duty to do your job to the best of your abilities, to be able to handle justified criticism: if you can’t do that, you’re better off not volunteering in the first place. Certainly fandom is.

Futurecon — September 17-20

This looks interesting:

William Gibson once said that the future is already here, it’s just not evenly distributed. Geographical location and wealth could indeed limit access to considerable advances in technology. However, imagination is a more subtle power. It does not know borders or languages. From Beijing to Lagos, from Rio de Janeiro to Los Angeles, ideas are flourishing in the form of stories.

An online science fiction convention that has been intended from the start to be an online convention, which takes advantage of the ability of the internet to connect people worldwide. Why did it take a global pandemic for this to happen?

I’m glad it did however, because both the schedule as the invited guests look mighty tasty. According to one of the organisers, Cheryl Morgan, everything will be available on Youtube, in English, for free. It’s unclear whther there will be interactive Discord channels or other ways to participate in the con if you’re not on the panels. UPDATE: looks like there will be.

Futurecon is important because it’s an experiment in how to make science fiction more global. Or rather, how to learn to connect the various strands of global science fiction in a way that does so without needing a centre and its periphery. Traditional Worldcon fandom has always been revolving around American science fiction, with even UK and other English speaking countries being of secondary interest. As its name suggest, it also harbored under the illusion that it was the entirety of world fandom. With Futurecon we have what I think is the first English language attempt to make this boast true. A world fandom in which fans in China can find common interests with fans in South America and Africa, without having to rely on the goodwill of US/UK fandom. Where there’s equal attention paid to writers from Ghana even when they don’t publish in English.