Sponsor Me!

Currently, I'm publishing sporadically (as in, there has been a span of 10 months between the last post and the current post). I'd like to write and publish more. Unfortunately, I'm a super busy person, especially since I work a 9 to 5 job five days a week. If you want to help me free up more time, so I can write and publish more, please buy me a coffee or sponsor me through recurring Patreon payments (so you don't forget!).

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com


Become a Patron!


Showing posts with label Dawn Xiana Moon. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Dawn Xiana Moon. Show all posts

Sunday, May 05, 2013

C2E2: Part 1 of My Response, including a John Scalzi panel and the changing forms science fiction media


My response has turned out longer than expected. I’ve broken it up into a couple entries. More will come after this one.

C2E2 ranks up there as one of the most strenuous activities I do in the year. Sounds sad, but really, stumbling around for 24+ hours in a weekend, trying to avoid people and trampling them, gets taxing for mind and body.

Didn't help that allergies muddled my mind, either. Social and cognitive activity didn't work well. This response won't have much for concrete events. I will focus more on my reactions and thoughts that bubbled up in the process.

This attendance makes for my third trip to the Chicago Comics & Entertainment Expo (C2E2). It has occurred four times in the last four years. We skipped the second one when I vacationed in Costa Rica. A tough decision, seriously, but glad I went to Costa Rica.


C2E2 has provided a great experience every year. Any general complaints I may have come from me not falling into the primary demographic. I don't get into merchandise much, don't read too many comics and don't connect so much with visual art. By nature, I don't get into permanent, materialistic things or visual mediums. Comics, I admit some prejudice in my youth and haven't found time since to explore them.

The stands had A LOT of Doctor Who merch, though. I mean, A LOT, as in about a football field’s worth of stands. Talk about oversaturation of a market. I wonder how much individual stands sold. Many other stands had a lot of similar stuff. Does the market really have that level of demand?

This remark comes from half of a couple that purchased sandblasted steins with a Dalek and a Cyberman on them. They came from a stand that had a wide variety of geek graphicked steins and mugs, though. I’m also the type of guy who spend hours at a time researching Doctor Who canon for no good reason.


My interest lies more in tabletop board and role playing gaming, TV, cultural production and literature. I find myself lacking in the latter category, even. I have more familiarity with the "golden age" of science fiction than any other. These other categories have their own cons. I should go to one of those.

I could have also partook in the gaming room run by the Chicago Game Lovers. With so much to do and people to see at C2E2, though, breaking from the familiar didn't feel appealing. Getting involved in a game then having to run off to get in a line for a panel didn't strike me as fun.

C2E2 organizers did a great job with the floor this year. They got the most gigantic room yet. A lot more stands could squeeze in. Having the dungeon bathrooms in the middle proved a godsend (especially since no one else found them, no line!). Artist alley didn't get squeezed all the way in the back, even though I didn't find it until the next day (again, gigantic!).

The floor felt well organized. Stands settled into themed neighborhoods (e.g. merchandise, comics, Artist Alley, celebrities, etc.). If managed my time better, it would have been perfect.

I only found one game stand: Chicagoland Games/The Dice Dojo. If there were more, I blame myself. I didn't have the clarity of mind to take in everything and manage my time better. Like with the gaming room, though, getting in line for the panels proved a pesky detriment.

Organization of the panels makes for the biggest shortcoming this year. Michi cited a statistic that the panel audience this year equaled the people roaming the floor. (Michi - formerly, The_Wife. . .now won't hesitate to use her name since her name has become something of brand.) Panels have elevated C2E2 above other fan/comic/pop culture conventions I've attended. This statistic goes to show that other fans have a similar opinion, if not the same.

I made the misfounded complaint that few of the panels looked interesting. Looking at the schedule now, it overwhelmed me while at the convention. This year I didn't prep by studying the schedule beforehand or use my computer to schedule and decide between conflicts. Fault on me there.

At worst, few of the panel titles jumped out at me and the schedule grid just had so much on it. I don't know how much of that has to do with me failing to prep before going. Having so many panels shows their success.

Titles failing to grab attention could contribute to making things look a little bland. At the same time, I'm not the prime demographic for these cons (even though past years had panel names that stood out). Maybe their titles attracted the attention of other people attending.

Long lines and small rooms for panels made for big disruption. I already mentioned that I didn’t partake in some activities because I didn’t want them disrupted by having to run for a panel.

The first year of C2E2, nothing to worry about rooms filling up or long lines. I had faced more trouble finding panel rooms in the labyrinth of McCormick Place. Getting in and finding a good seat had proven little difficulty.

Michi and some others tried to get into the Fierce Females of Television panel without luck. They got in line too late. Apparently the organizers had divided rooms in half for most panels. Doing so helps provide many panels and a variety of topics. Having to turn people away at the door or disrupting other activities sucks, though. Talk about huge opportunity cost to sit in on a panel.

Of course, C2E2 is still young and learning. I have to give them credit for trying to increase the variety of panel topics. I also think the increased industry and celebrity presence caused disruption. Typically those panels should get prime attention since they draw people to the con.

Panels with less assumed drawing power in the past have done a lot to build the C2E2’s reputation for great panels and contributed much to this year’s equal attendance for panels and floor. A difficult balance to strike, but I think giving more credence to topic-oriented and less-assumed audience drawing can go a long way.

Less panels with bigger rooms also might help. After all, anything that doesn’t make the schedule can get scheduled for the following year.

Has it become obvious that I didn't attend too many panels. I only went to three:
I had some personal connection or interest in them all:
  • FUTURISTIC FRIGHT, I read John Scalzi's blog on a regular basis
  • Peter Davison portrays my Classic Doctor Who
  • Exorcising the Spectre of the Fake Geek Girl, Michi put it together
FUTURISTIC FRIGHT PANEL

For FUTURISTIC FRIGHT, John Scalzi and Alex Hughes had a fairly free form discussion about
  • Imagining the future
  • Their own imaginings and story ideas
  • Navigating the publishing industry to market their imaginations
  • Some of the parodies we all make about
    • Red Shirts of a landing crew
    • Reversing polarities to save the day
    • Varied reactions to Tolkien’s writing (or dramatizing his world building)

A moderator helped to start the conversations by asking some questions. Scalzi, Hughes and the moderator all had good presence. They had a pretty good rapport with audience. I don't have the best recall of topics other than ideas and the development of technology make for an interesting interaction.

I regret that I don’t remember much about Alex Hughes. She made a great remark, though, about how to deal with an author having an idea that scientists and engineers are developing. Make your story better than reality, she said.

Michi bought Hughes’s first book, Clean. Michi liked it a lot and plans on reading the sequels. I plan on giving it a shot, too. Being the first time I heard of Hughes, my brain hadn’t calibrated that much for emotional investment at the panel.


Scalzi provided a lecture on the evolution of the form taken by science fiction media. In the beginning, science fiction came as small pulp magazines in the supermarket.

The industry somewhere along the line decided to consolidate the wholesale distribution channel from a lot down to two or three. Book stores came into the picture, especially big stores like Barnes & Noble. They asked for science fiction to come in the form of a book with page counts between 120 to 300 or so as we have become used to.

Now we find ourselves in the electronic Internet age. Many other medias have gone through chaos: music, movie and TV. The story of Internet music distribution has all but been finished by the acceptance of iTunes and other means. We see the stories of movie and TV unfolding in the news every day with Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Prime, Youtube and Bit Torrent.

The evolution of electronic distributing stories, fiction and poetry doesn't make it into the news that much, though. Scalzi has jumped to the front of experimenting with this realm. He wrote The Human Division. It’s a series of related but not directly connected episodes all released separately, about a week apart from each other. TOR will collect it into an individual volume and release it soon.


Episodic short-form fiction makes or an expensive undertaking in the time of paper. Especially if the industry pushes to have it in book form of 120 to 300 pages. Episodic short-form issued electronically makes for a less expensive of an undertaking.

I bet this approach has other advantages, too. I can't think of it all. Releasing something new on a regular, shorter basis keeps a brand on the mind of consumers. Infrequent releases of something longer form may not stay in the public’s mind as long. In this day and age when there's so much going on, publishing something often like The Human Division will keep Scalzi on peoples' radars.

I have no illusions that one paradigm is better than another, just better suited for a situation. History and anthropology show us that humanity organizes technology to adapt to their environments, whether that be natural or socially human created. Human adaptation creates feedback loops that have gotten us where we are now and will get us to where we go in the future.

I respect Scalzi and everyone else who can keep up with all this change. Albeit they have more of an immediate necessity than I do at the moment. They get their everyday livelihood by keeping abreast of these things and staying ahead of everyone else.

My fear comes from feeling behind. Right now, I'm just working on developing material to market and distribute. Whereas Scalzi and others have an interesting interplay of how their ideas interact with distribution. . .I'm somewhat stuck in an old paradigm, the novel. I'm hoping to make enough of a splash with a novel that I can write another one because people want another one.

It's great to see people thriving in this environment and willing to share their knowledge about it. Despite all that, it's kinda scary and intimidating to a beginner. I just hope to figure out how to navigate all this someday. . ..

More forthcoming. . ..

LINKS OF INTEREST:

Wednesday, July 11, 2007

Inspiring into Flowing Writing Technique

Since the wedding, I haven't been as inspired as I had in the relatively recent past. Whereas I had written four or five pages easy on Sundays and even got to writing two or three pages on weekday nights before, with much glee at that, I've written a lot less and it had felt like drudgery.

Now, don't get me wrong. As I mentioned in an old entry about Flow and discussed a little with Dawn in that entry, I've pushed myself to write, even though I didn't necessarily feel all that inspired about it. I've gotten about five or so handwritten pages (which, with my handwriting on the big pages I use, can turn out to be longer when typed up) so far, and the page tonight felt pretty good. I finally hit a point of real drama where tensions were created.

I can think of at least two reasons why I don't really feel all that inspired:

1. Focusing so much of my attention on the wedding, whether it be organizational or emotional, took me out of the Flowa of writing.

2. Getting frustrated with the ethical/moral themes in utopianism and the predicted final disappointment mixed with good learning while reading Alasdair MacIntyre's A Short History of Ethics: A History of Moral Philosophy from the Homeric Age to the Twentieth Century hasn't necessarily filled me with tons of hope. Nonetheless, I'm not facing the same kind of disappointment I had in the past. I've refined my own ethics and also how they apply to my project/novel a little more, but I didn't necessarily find the Answer I was looking for, even though the information in that book has helped me to come closer to making my own semi-original answer.

I think the main thing that's making the writing something of a drag (until now) is that I'm trying to practice some different techniques and experimenting a little. Normally, exploring boundaries and seeing what happens gets pretty exciting, but most of what I'm doing is injecting more description and having things around the characters happen that provide some atmosphere and help to characterize the culture, society and such.

I'm not just injecting all this stuff in there to do it, either. A bit of this inspiration comes from a writing textbook that the wife brought home from class. It has had some pretty good ideas, and I've only read the first 50 or 70 pages over the last three or four months. Pretty much the reason I'm trying to inject more description and such into the story is to avoid saying things like "minutes passed," "some time passed," "[a character] pauses," etc. etc. Throwing in descriptions of the area around characters and bringing up the actions of non-characters that are part of scenery do a good job of
(1) showing that time passes rather than telling of its passing and

(2) as I said before, characterizing the surroundings, culture, society and working to bring the reader that much more into the world that I'm creating.

If I'm getting a little bored writing it, though, I can't help but think that my audience might very well have the same problem with it all. How much description do people want? How much will they feel it distracting them from the story? At the same time, though, I've been building this world for the last 10 or 11 years. It has changed here and there, but I know it pretty well. I'm describing a very familiar place with very familiar people. Of course, dwelling on the same ol' same ol' will bore me. At the same time, though, my audience will generally be reading the story for the first time, so it will be all new to them.

In the end, I'll need to find a balance. Writing the first draft, as I've mentioned millions of times, I'm not holding myself back, even if I think I'm writing something dumb. Instead of just having one thing happen after another, though, I've started throwing in details and descriptions. Maybe they'll eventually become too much for the story or maybe I'll figure out a better way to describe things. I'm simply just throwing in another element while drafting the story, just to get done. Once it's done, I'll be going back, moving stuff around, taking things out and putting others in, utterly changing stuff and so on and so on. It's a process, and I'm learning quite a bit doing it.

I like to think so, at least.

Sunday, January 28, 2007

Another Confession: Acting too Generic

Since I can't seem to manage my time well enough to actually work on my writing, today's entry will center on my acting like an ass last night. To some degree it touches upon writing, or characters in writing, as Denis McGrath has addressed it in The Eyeballs of Men. I don't really know how much I can add to it here, but maybe something will come out of it.

Small lead up: after my day of work on Friday, when my immediate supervisor had the day off, I metaphorically slapped myself a couple times because I slacked off big time. I really should have tried to learn more and take on more responsibilities, especially if I want to get a raise after my 6-month review.

Thinking about my slacking there also brought up my feeling deficient about not really acting very outgoing in the office. At least, not like my dad, who got into some actually itneresting conversations with people while selling and maintaining insurance policies. Who would have thought that a trip to your insurance agent could provide for an interesting experience? And why couldn't I do the same thing? Then after seeing him do it all the time, I see new my employers doing something similar, instead they go out to meet people.

Friday night, the fiancee and I went out to Naperville (which inspired me to come up with: "Where Chicagoans go to die.') to see Dawn play. I didn't care too much about going out into public or really getting too social, except that I knew I should do it. I should do it to feel more comfortable in social situations and get that gift of gab.

Back when I worked at Blue Green, I had to gab. I had to get into conversations with people. Other people did better than me, but I had gotten to a good point of talking with people. Sure, they all had the goal of getting them make an appointment for a tour. Nonetheless, that position got me to push myself.

Then, at Fannie Mae, I got into some pretty natural, organic conversations with some co-workers. I had a good time there until they dropped me all the sudden. And now I'm working at an insurance agency, again, not really knowing how to have conversations again.

And last night (Saturday), I feel like I had a revelatory moment, one of those times that it feels like life hits you between the eyes. I won't go into too many details, but I pretty much tried to enter into conversations with a mostly female crowd in a male fashion. To summarize for people not familiar with the differences, men regularly rag on each other and focus more on action-oriented experiences while, supposedly, women actually have conversations and talk about feelings.

Before I go on, for the people who read this blog and were at the karaoke bar, please, let's not talk about specifics on this here blog. As for even talking about specifics, I will gladly take the blame for dumbness. I feel like I acted like something of a dumb ass that night.

I think I've been entering into conversations in a semi-male fashion lately, too. Not so much in regards to ragging on people, but in the way that I approach a topic head on, even as I argue against the way I approach the issue. I've approached conversations more from an "ethics of justice" approach rather than an "ethics of care" approach. There's a place for "ethics of justice" as much as we need to make room for an "ethics of care" approach. Nonetheless, I don't like taking a solely "ethics of justice" approach.

My problem with the "ethics of justice" approach originates in the fact that it relies on people's rights. Yes, rights have provided civilization with a good stepping stone for treating people in better ways than in the past.

From where do rights originate, however? I won't get too deep into the matter. I'll just say that a political right comes down to a person demanding that they get treated in a certain way. And from a political philosophy reference, those rights come from individualism, possessive individualism or the economic rational man.

In other words, Western political philosophy has essentially established certain negative rights because without people agreeing to them, we would supposedly have anarchy. But, in the long run, until very recently, only white men got those rights.

White men essentially got those rights and freedoms of individualism because everyone else provided them with a supportive foundation for economic and rational freedom. Without that supportive foundation (in other words, if men had an equal share of domestic or reproductive responsibilities), they wouldn't necessarily have come up with all their innovations, or at the very least, individualism wouldn't have the form it has now.

Political philosophy would probably have more emphasis on the community and a person's embeddedness in that community. But by trying to rag on people Saturday night, trying to have them give me their rapt attention and provide me with a degree of support (at the fiancee's birthday party, at that!), I found myself supporting the dominator, male individualism at the center of my culture. Instead of trying to have a sincere conversation between people, I tried to create my own personal supportive foundation.

I doubt my co-diners have had the same reaction as me. Nonetheless, after coming home, I found myself somewhat distraught and angered by the whole experience. I, admittedly, had felt self-righteously wronged. After starting to read a book called Conversationally Speaking: Tested New Ways to Increase Your Personal and Social Effectiveness by Alan Garner, I began to see the error of my conversational strategies of late and the opportunities they've made me miss.

The Blue Green position had taught me some useful skills for having conversations, especially active listening, which includes focusing more on what you want to say than actually listening. I came to see that approach as useful for the event marketing situation, though, and eventually had just started approaching each encounter formulaicilly. Find people with just the slightest interest in the product (walk away from the ones I could sense didn't have an immediate interest) then build up the excitement for the product and me. Until that last crazy woman, this approach worked pretty well and got results I wanted.

Getting dropped by Fannie Mae didn't necessarily help. Thinking back to it, the actual dropping didn't get to me that much. The temp jobs I got afterward did. A couple companies asked me back a couple times, one to do receptionist work with very minimum activity or any real intereaction and the other, to take notes and transcribe market research interviews. Social interaction reduced to a minimum. I think my social skills got a little rusty, and my self esteem took something of a beating without getting responses to my job querying.

In the end, I need to actively work on my conversational skills. Conversing like a guy doesn't help me at work nor do I necessarily want to act like a generic guy. Sure, I could somewhat miss out on something of a full experience. Looking back into my history, though, I can see myself experiencing life more fully when not conversing like a guy. Sure, I wanted attention just as much and didn't get it when I REALLY wanted it, but when things worked, THEY REALLY WORKED.

This whole experience and some research I'll do into it has provided me some interesting data to use for writing. I can apply it quite a bit to the main character of that short story I want finish relatively soon. In addition, though, this whole experience has provided me with an interesting direction to think about my personally perceived dysfunctions. Possibly, I don't have some crazy deep psychological emotional abandonment issue, as I had thought at times. Maybe I just never really had good conversation skills taught to me in the past, which then led to not so positive encounters with people. Just the possibility of this having occurred gives me tons of hope, not only of having good conversations in the future but also for reconciling negatively perceived past relationships.

If that doesn't provide for plenty of story fodder, I don't know what will. . ..



Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com