Skip to main content

Finding the Last Straw

I just got home from Bubonicon. Bubonicon is the Science Fiction convention held in Albuquerque this weekend. I just get one day of it this year and for the most part had a great time. Hopefully next year I'll make the whole weekend.

What I want to talk about now that I'm not at the Con is... politics. And you know, I did this same post last year. I really did. The same exact post.

I have simply had it with Connie Willis.

I have had it.

If anyone has been to a science fiction convention anywhere they know that diversity is the norm. Lots of people seem to really love going to conventions because it's one place where they can really feel comfortable when they normally feel that they don't fit in. But somehow some people seem to think that in the area of religion and politics, the two really big social pit falls, that there is no diversity at a Con and no tolerance required. Sure, there are a lot of people who are politically liberal at a Con. Probably the majority. But there are political conservatives, libertarians, and social conservatives and any number of other people enthusiastic about fantasy and science fiction in its various forms. And they are there, too.

There are some very famous authors on the panels that I know are conservative in various ways and quite a few that I know are liberal... and they all manage to behave decently, respectful of others and respectful of diversity and at the very least having the good manners to avoid airing their personal political hobby-horses.

Connie Willis does not have good manners. She wouldn't know good manners if they bit her in the ass. It doesn't matter what the subject is, she will find a way to bring up politics and ridicule those she feels deserve ridicule. Ridicule has one purpose, and that is to allow someone to avoid having to even acknowledge that contrary opinions exist. Someone who deserves ridicule need never be engaged. And Connie Willis will find a way to bring politics into a non-political discussion just so that she can express ridicule. She will find an excuse.

The first time I heard her do this a few years ago I was annoyed but excused her. I figured that emotions were high and people were frustrated and while it was rude of her to give vent to that, I figured it was due to frustration at current events and would pass.

It hasn't passed.

Any number of other authors I know for certain are flaming liberals refrain from bringing up politics, political personalities or expressing ridicule while on panels in front of an audience. The authors I know are conservative manage to refrain from bringing up politics and political personalities. It CAN be done. My usual habit of trying to find a reason, to put the best possible interpretation on bad behavior, is all used up. I've found the last straw.

Other than THAT, I did have a great time.

I got to talk to Betsy James, who I had taken a class from last February. It was a great class and talking to her reminded me that I need to get my rear in gear and write!

I spent some time talking to Kirt Hickman and David Corwell in the dealer room. Kirt has a book on revising and editing fiction out that I intend to review here sometime soon. I actually have an early draft version of it that he'd test driven for my daughter's Girl Scout troop. I hadn't seen David in a long time (I knew him from Southwest Writers and LERA, the local romance writer's group) and it was great to catch up a little bit. It was also very nice to talk to people who already knew that I wrote. (I feel like such a wannabe poseur explaining "I write" to anyone at a Con.)

I got the last installment of the Long Price Quartet signed by Daniel Abraham. I enjoyed the first book a whole lot and had decided that it would be easier to wait until I had them all rather than tease myself with the anticipation between each book and then having to wait *again*... but now I have them all, nice hard-back first editions and all signed... so now I can finally read the whole quartet. Yay!

(Halfway to town I realized that I probably had unsigned books by Steve Stirling and I knew I had unsigned books by George R. R. Martin, both of whom would be at the Con... and I left them home. DRAT! But I didn't go back to get them.)

I also, and most wonderfully, got to talk to Suzy Charnas some more this year and got to attend a talk by her. There are so many times in this life where I will make some observation or other and be met by blank stares... if I'm lucky. (My husband is an exception. He's not always as interested in what I have to say as I am, but I never doubt he understands me.) When Suzy participated on rec.arts. sf.composition there were many times that I found myself in accord with her when normally I'd be entirely alone in my opinion or observation, despite us not really having anything similar in our world views... or not seeming to. I've noticed the same thing in small moments during panels at the Con other years. It's just NICE to feel, when I'm so used to no one seeing my point, that someone else sees the same connections in some odd thing or other as I do.

This time at her talk, which was entertaining and encouraging in so many ways, I found myself listening to her explain that every choice we make for something is a choice against any number of other things and that we edit our lives this way, eliminating all these other possibilities that might have been, and that those possibilities, while gone forever, might hover like ghosts over our life..... or something sort of like that. And it reminded me of something I'd said to Lois Bujold on a forum: I did not really want more Miles Vorkosigan books because as long as they were unwritten all potentials existed, that writing another book would collapse all of those potential futures Miles had and destroy them. She sent me a short, positive e-mail that she thought that was interesting and it was clear she understood what I meant. But here Suzy was pretty much explaining the same concept of eliminating possibilities. So I mentioned my Bujold story, of preferring the unwritten unlimited potential than to have all of those possible futures destroyed and while I'm probably relating this *very* badly, it was very much yes, of *course*. She got it.

And it is just so NICE to talk with someone who, when I open my mouth, doesn't look at me like I'm an alien that grew another head.

Comments

Sounds like a good time... mostly.

Do you think that George Martin will EVER finish his fire and ice series? I've been waiting for his Dance with Dragons edition forever.

sigh.

I found myself listening to her explain that every choice we make for something is a choice against any number of other things and that we edit our lives this way, eliminating all these other possibilities that might have been, and that those possibilities, while gone forever, might hover like ghosts over our life..... or something sort of like that

I likened it to alternate futures or alternate time lines. The you that didn't decide to go to college exists somewhere, and the you that didn't have children etc. Maybe when we have dreams that are deja vu-ish or vivid about ourselfs in different circumstances we are connecting briefly with the alternates. I thought that would be a good plot for a sci fi short story.

I talked to my hubby about it and he got the concept except to point out that every little decision or fork in the road shouldn't count. Like the you that decided to have vanilla icecream instead of chocolate pudding. Not important enough and where do you draw the line. Otherwise there just wouldn't be enough space for all of the alternate yous and alternate everybody else. He is so practical.
Also. What if YOU are the alternate and not the main time line stream and some one else is dreaming about you.
Synova said…
Mr. Martin was on a few panels I went to but I didn't hear him talk about his own stuff.

I'm not sure what I read of his or not. I started, but I really don't remember how many books I read. I stopped when it became clear that the end was NOT in sight. I don't like that at all. I'd rather have all the books, no matter how many, and read them.

I have a relative who's done some artwork for his stuff... for a dragon picture book and I think for a card game based on Thrones.
Trooper York said…
Martin has been hemming and hawing for a long time. He is one of your more liberal types but he tells a great story.

I hear they are making his first book into a TV series with Sean Bean and other big names.

That could be interesing.
Trooper York said…
That conventions sounds like a lot of fun.

I wish I could have run into SM Stirling. I got his new "Sword of the Lady" on the first day it came out and read it that night.

I want to know why I don't have the next one already.

What a lazy dude.

Popular posts from this blog

Some times some people.

 

It's Not Projection

Take the case of "fascism". When you can see clear as day that the person who is accusing you of fascism is a fascist, they aren't projecting. They're talking about something ELSE. Basically, in the case of fascism, the basic set of fascist government controls are the default assumption of reality for a whole lot of people. The government is supposed to control every part of your life. The government is supposed to make you moral and good and reflect "justice". The government is supposed to do this by picking winners from the good people and losers from the bad people. The government is supposed to control the way people do business, how businesses (and farmers) function and what they produce. And people should be made to cooperate with this control because they are part of society and society is dependent on everyone being in compliance. This is simply the Truth. It's how the world works and how the world is supposed to work. The Socialist Nationalism, ...

Tyranny.gov vs Tyranny.com

Compulsion is Compulsion, no matter who does it.  This is Brilliant Theft is Theft, no matter who does it. Freedom of Association has no room in it for *private* action   that takes that away Freedom of Association. If I have a business and have voluntary associations such that I choose to serve some people and to not serve others, that might make me a jerk and it might lose me business, it might make me smart and it might gain me business, but it's got to be my choice.  If I would normally serve the current disliked minority in my shop except for the fact that if I'm SEEN to serve them by the wrong people I'll have a private campaign against me as those people do everything possible to ruin me by preventing me from doing business physically or by attacking my customers or suppliers, then I am NOT free to make those choices. Does it really make a difference to losing my CHOICE to voluntarily associate if there's a law that says I may not serve "those people" o...