As of Monday, dozens of writers and other creators had withdrawn from participation on panels a the World Science Fiction Convention, also known as WorldCon, and the convention’s schedule was being redone top to bottom. While this may seem like an item of concern only to science fiction authors and fans, it’s actually a story about diversity, privilege, and how institutions of all kinds can act to either improve or exacerbate these issues.
It may not be getting the attention of most protests, but in many cases authors and creators are laying significant money on the line, and even putting their careers at risk, in an effort to improve the diversity of writers and writing in the science fiction community. That’s an effort that needs to be given attention and support. Because diversity will not happen unless it is given active support.
The most direct precipitating event leading to the withdrawal of numerous authors was the mis-gendering of trans author Bogi Takács, an error that was made worse because convention officials failed to own up to the mistake and tried to place the onus on Takács. While that event may seem like a pretty minor flare-up in a convention that typically involves hundreds of authors and more than 10,000 fans, it came on the heels of several years of actions by both convention organizers and others in the publishing community that have turned the WorldCon into a highly visible battle that’s not just about progressives vs. conservatives, but about the value of diversity versus attempts to stifle both creative freedom and the voices of those outside of power.
Since 2013, the largest award ceremony at WorldCon, the Hugo Awards, has been plagued by a group of almost exclusively white, almost exclusively male writers actively fighting to decrease diversity. This group has complained that the award was too often going to writers who weren’t white, or weren’t male. They put out slates of nominated books that were dominated by right-wing themes, some of them thinly-disguised attacks on progressive authors, and called the Hugos "an affirmative action award." In response, science fiction fans at the convention have consistently bypassed the books put forward by the alt-right “Sad Puppies” to pick … damn good books that deserved to win.
But another factor that’s roiled the waters (and primed this year’s convention for a revolt from the left) has been the way that big-name authors have been getting more and more of the speaking time to the exclusion of writers just breaking in or those with small audiences. It’s a fight that mimics what’s happened in the publishing industry during the last two decades, where many publishers have moved to a Bestseller-or-Nothing mentality, pushing more money at a few established names while savagely chopping away at those who failed to immediately scramble to the top. And while it might not sound like it, that is also a story about diversity.
It’s understandable that fans want to see their favorite writers. And in most cases, those behind conventions like WorldCon are just that—fans. But if packing panel discussions with an all-star lineup is one way of making sure every discussion hall is packed to the rafters, it’s also a way of excluding those writers and creators who are not currently at the top of the bestseller lists. That can be new writers whose careers are just taking off. If can be writers who work in areas like poetry, where audiences are never that huge, or authors whose prose is fantastic, but who haven’t had either the breakthrough hit—or the simple publisher promotion—to become a certified big name.
Those writers most likely to be excluded are those who are young, differently gendered, writers of color, or all of the above. It also, by the way, applies to writers who are old, and whose resume doesn’t include some time spent on a fandom-sustaining television show. Nailing the participation on WorldCon panels down to those currently in power is another way of simply saying those who are out of power … are out. Even writers who were currently nominated for the Hugo Awards were left off panels because they were judged not important enough to secure a chair.
And if that seems like a minor thing, a little squabble among people who may own at least one plastic light saber or have a painting of a dragon on the wall, here’s my personal testimony: It’s not. When I came to the Chicago World Science Fiction Convention in 1991, I had only sold a few short stories. But the organizers at the time were nice enough to put me on several panels, all of which had enough big-name authors to pack the room. And all those big names were kind enough to throw a few questions to the newbie. Those few days were not just a magical time in terms of getting to meet people for whom I was also a fan, they helped me establish connections that became contracts. I never entered the ranks of those big names, but events that grew out of that day helped keep my family eating for years.
Right now, the publishing industry looks more open than it has ever been in the past (“Now anyone can be an author!”), but the truth is just the opposite. In the face of the self-publishing wave and the profit-eating effects of retailers like Amazon, the publishing industry has reacted by cutting back, cutting back, cutting back—with the cutting starting at the bottom. They are much less likely to welcome a new author than in the past, and much more likely to drop that author if they do not immediately proceed to the ranks of bestsellers. The industry that used to develop authors over years and volumes no longer exists. And why should they? They can keep filling the shelves with the names of the same people who readers have purchased over and over, if if someone happens to break from the ranks of self-publishing they can always pick them up later—after the guaranteed movie deal, and after much of the work of establishing a name has been done for them.
It’s a system that by its nature protects that value of the establishment over the possibility of the new. It’s intrinsically anti-progressive, even when the people who are carrying it out at both the publishers and the conventions think of themselves as part of the left.
But what’s happening at WorldCon, like what’s been happening in the #MeToo movement over the last year, is important not just because those on the outside are fighting to get in. It’s that many of those on the inside are also fighting for change. They’re laying down a chance to connect with thousands of fans. That’s true even of writers who aren’t big names, but only “medium names.” Names that could easily be brushed aside if their next novel comes up just a few thousand sales short.
Because building a system that values diversity doesn’t happen by accident. And building a system that preserves the status quo is almost automatic. But science fiction fans and writers are considering the implications of those ideas deeply, in detail, on something they treasure.
That’s an event worth watching.
Quick note #1: The image is actually taken at ComicCon, which is a very different venue. Good luck finding images from WorldCon because a convention that’s about bringing together readers and writers comes with many fewer people in Avengers costumes. News crews don’t turn out to look at WorldCon.
Quick note #2: Yes, I have two plastic light sabers in my office, along with a large model of the Iron Giant, a statue of Gollum, a nice model of the Enterprise, and a complete U.S. vs. USSR chess set where all the pieces are different rockets. And there’s a dragon painting, but it was an illustration for one of my stories, so it doesn’t count.
