Wealhtheow's comments
(member since Aug 20, 2007)
Wealhtheow's comments from the Think Galactic group.
(showing 1-17 of 17)
Heh, if we averaged your exquisitely spare nickname and my own excessively complicated username, we'd have a nice, normal name. (ps: thanks for the reminder of "moniker"--totes gonna use that word as often as possible!)And thank you for chiming in--you expanded and explained a great deal that I only referred/alluded to.
Mat, very well said. "Sure, it's a lot more work and it's a lot harder to put together a good project (anthology or anything else) if we hold ourselves to those standards. But creating a community that fosters the best work requires that effort. How am i supposed to believe that the sf community has not overlooked some really awesome potential talent if the majority of cross sections of experience aren't even represented in the majority of sf anthologies? It just doesn't add up, conspicuously so." is precisely what I was thinking, but much more eloquently stated.
Ceridwen, agreed on footnotes. They give everything just that tinge of absurdity that I adore. I know you loved Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrel--have you had a chance to check out Jonathon Stroud's Bartimaeus trilogy yet? Gritty neo-Victorian fantasy as told by a snarky demon, complete with footnoted footnotes. So much love!
Dudgeon, I don't need experience *editing* to know that white males are not a majority in the spec fic (or even just sf) world. I read.
I did not point out the problematic imbalance in your anthology as an attack. I pointed it out because I hope you'll be willing to look beyond your comfort zone the next time you edit.
If you'd read any of the links I posted above, you'd see that every one of your objections has been said before and dismantled quite neatly.
Why are 95% of the spec fic writers you chose male?
Why are "the majority of spec fic authors which [you know:] white males"?
Why do you assume that including a woman's work in your collection would force you into accepting "substandard" work? Do you seriously think that women do not write spec fic as well as men, or that there aren't just as many women writing excellent work as men? SERIOUSLY?
You asked 6 women to contribute. You obviously asked at least 19 men to contribute. So how is the gender imbalance of the contributing authors "just coincidence"?
Apparently you're not aware, but imbalanced anthologies like yours have been the subject of much debate this year, in the sf/fantasy community. Here are some links:
On the all-male, all-white "mind-blowing sf" anthology: here, here, here, here and at Tor. Like I've said, yours is not the first instance of a collection that "just happened" to be made up almost entirely authors from majority and privileged groups. It is a pattern, and it needs to end. K Tempest Bradford has some great posts about how to break the cycle here and here.
I hope you'll be on the forefront of the people striving for a richly diverse genre.
"I asked a half a dozen other women to contribute stories, but they declined."
Well, you clearly asked more than 6 men to contribute!
I'm not bringing this up to hurt anyone--but it's something to think about, the next time you put one of these together. This is not the first time an anthology has been predominately one gender or sexuality or race or class, and I'm sure it won't be the last. I think it's important to ask yourself whether your submission/acceptance criteria is biased (unconsciously or not) toward an already privileged group?
Submissions from a diversity of genders/races/classes/cultures can only make your anthology better. (Personally, I know I am far more likely to check out a collection if it looks a little less homogenous.) I know it can be hard to tap writers you're not already aware of, but the the Angry Black Woman is really helpful on this subject.
Out of 20 contributing authors, 19 are male. Did this give you pause at all?
Don't forget, we're discussing Heinlein's (in)famous The Moon is a Harsh Mistress tonight at Myopic Books, at 7:30pm.
The Iron Dragon's Daughter is super good--don't forget to read it before our meeting on the 11th! You don't want to miss discussing elvish addictions, willing human sacrifice as power sources, or the dragon...
Does anyone have a copy of the first DMZ trade? I'm willing to read it crouched on your floor, if you're unwilling to lend it out.
I love this interview!
I'm so excited to discuss this book with y'all tonight (7:30pm, 1564 Milwaukee Ave, Chicago)! The first time I raced through it in a single afternoon. It was nice to have a second, more leisurely look at Wilhelm's examination of identity, choice, and survival. I was particularly struck with this story's resonance with Tiptree's "Houston, Houston, Do You Read?"
The first few books feature a strong heroine who has some serious principles, and I like the world (in which vampires, weres and psychics are common knowledge but operate as ill-trusted minorities). If LKH had chosen to explore her world in the subsequent novels, I'd like them a lot more. Instead, Hamilton started using the various supernatural powers in the books as excuses to get Anita to A)wear pretty outfits and B)have lots of not-very-consual sex. By the last few novels, Anita is literally raping her friends. Soooo...there's a lot of discussion that could happen about LKH, but the books are so lazily written after the first few that I'd prefer to do book group discussions on layered stuff like Ryman or Marks.
Another big thing, for me at least, was that violence was rarely the answer to Harry's problems--far more often the solution was found in books or through kindness. Tangentially, Rowling put a great deal of emphasis on the idea that while one group of sentients (goblins, for instance) is oppressed, all other beings around them are made lesser because of it. And in regards to that, I was impressed that she didn't let her characters get involved in blame-throwing and guilt-tripping(see Griphook vs. Ron at Shell Cottage) about why oppression was happening, but rather focused on what could be done about it.
The only one that springs to mind is Elgin's Earthsong, which posits that by freeing themselves from the need to eat through song, women can finally force equality upon humankind. Given that the first book in the trilogy, Native Tongue is wildly excellent, it's odd that the last book is so unbelievably silly. All the men are foolish monsters; all the women are saints. It's very frustrating!
HP has never felt all that radical to me, but I thought Rowling did a very good job of showing that even Wise Old Mentors can do bad, and Mean, Traitorous Bastards can do good. I really hadn't expected that Dumbledore would be shown to have feet of clay, and really pleased that he was.
