Signal Boost: WIP Big Bang art claims
Jul. 21st, 2025 08:03 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
Post 1
Post 2
There are many different large and small fandoms represented (books, TV, film, videogames…). Final due date for the art is 7th September.
Empire and Complicity
On an episode of the Coode Street Podcast, Emily Tesh discussed how recent authors (including herself, [Ann Leckie], Yoon Ha Lee, Arkady Martine, and Tamsyn Muir) have turned the space opera into an exploration not merely of classic themes of empire and rebellion, but of much more complex questions of complicity. We see characters who not only revolt against the evil empires they inhabit, but also contend with their own roles in building and maintaining empire, and the ways in which the evil empire has benefited them personally. What works have best threaded this needle, and what does this trend in storytelling tell us about our current literary moment?
Alexander Jablokov (moderator), Carl Engle-Laird, Constance Fay, Kate Nepveu, Tom Greene
I took a lot more notes on this one because I wasn't moderating.
I noted in my introduction that Ann Leckie was very definitely mentioned on the podcast. Carl: complicity one of two threads saw in SFF from 2010s until very recently; the other is empire perpetrated against people and fighting back from outside. very generally, these were split on racial lines. Neon Yang's Tensorate series is example of one that's both me: thank you for not making me be the first person to mention race. I was willing to have that be my role, but. (edit: I see on looking at con bios, while looking for Bluesky handles, that Tom Greene is biracial) Constance: offered two authors more on romance side, who I believe were Jessie Mihalik and Jennifer Estep. Alexander: what is it about space opera as a background for stories of complicity? Carl: equivalent to epic fantasy; scale makes it hard to avoid empire; larger organization leads to little cogs in machine struggling Constance: the remove makes it easier to absorb the message me: one of failure modes for me of general stories about systemic oppression: take a real-world problem, make a very clear magical/science fictional analogue for it, and then solve that problem by fictional means. feels trivializing and frustrating. space opera doesn't give me that problem because it's an extrapolation of our world, not a parallel to or set in ours. (I can't remember if I said this on this panel or somewhere else, but I've read Novik's most recent trilogy multiple times because it's very entertaining but taking the Omelas child, literalizing that into a magical device, and then fixing it is so not the point) Tom: All Quiet at the Western Front and Dune are really subversive of their structure Carl: Dune is revolution not complicity Alexander: is this about edge versus center? Carl: fantasy examples: The Traitor Baru Cormorant, Seth Dickinson: Baru tries to take down system by becoming expert in the master's tools (paraphrased). Robert Jackson Bennett, Divine Cities Trilogy, core-periphery recently swapped, journeying between. can do that swap faster in genre because of implausibilities. me: Some Desperate Glory: tiny space station of the few humans who didn't surrender after Earth destroyed by aliens, fascist leadership dangling return to their birthright of being in command someone: and Ancillary Justice definitely starts at core someone: says something about "critical theory-ish space opera" and asks whether the same audience is there for it me: gets irked, says reductive to call it that, all example works are bangers. not only that but Locked Tomb is somehow New York Times bestseller, Leckie and Tesh are Hugo winners, etc. Carl: cynical business take is that really commercially successful works get most of their success from their non-core audience anyway through snowball effect. also thinks on downswing of (idea that? books that?) think can do something about empire by writing about it. trend now for cozy and escaping. still some: a little in very popular Fourth Wing, Rebecca Yarros me: thread in Raven Scholar, Antonia Hodgson, which is new book getting a lot of buzz around my circles Constance, Tom: discussing Andor and how it shows why people cooperate with empire, how it starts out, the tendency of technical people to find purported technological solutions to problems and "order" appealing me: other failure mode of complicity stories is too much about appeal of empire and guilt/helplessness for being part of it; which I don't think applies to examples, which I all like very much, but others can disagree. I look for genuine change at end to reassure self that not "just dazzled by the glittering tinsel of neo-fascism" (tm Bujold) Carl: historically empires don't tend to fall to individuals (increasing inefficiency, slow degradation), which is problem for our genre with individualistic focus me: yes; Imperial Radch, changes around edges, but still matter (which got me drive-by calligraphy!); Machineries of Empire, last book shows a lot of group work being done audience: can't have enough tension if don't deal with both sides of complicity equation? (I did not understand this question, but Carl appeared to) Carl: is that: emotional tension by investing in oppressors and oppressed? sure. can go a long way by mechanisms that are non-personified or notional. Empire exists inside your head. audience: does space opera require an empire? cites more anarchic seen in Delany. Tom: also Le Guin, but environment naturally selects for it Constance: space opera is about (? I think) expansion, so if you don't see an empire, maybe it's you ... Carl: maybe no-true-Scotsman here, because there's no Platonic ideal of space opera And Yet ... also, on epic scale, expect to see ideology clashes. me: I haven't read any of the Star Wars novel set during the High Republic, so I don't know whether Republic is actually not empire, but they exist. also C.J. Cherryh. Constance: Farscape. And that was time.panel notes
spoilers for Naomi Novik's Scholomance series
I'm not entirely sure what I was hoping for from this panel, but (though entirely consistent with the description) I didn't feel like this was it, and at the time, I didn't know how to get it into something more satisfying to me. Now, I'm still not sure; maybe more about how specific characters/stories portray complicity, what brings characters out of it, what the journey is like? Talk to me, do.
+1 (thumbs-up, I see you, etc.)?
All Stories Are Really About _____
Conflict, change, love, consumption, human nature, and so on: commentators throughout history and across the internet have argued that All Stories are Really About (this one thing they spend all their free time thinking about). Surely one of them must be right, and in this panel our panelists will sort out which one it is, once and for all.
John Clute, Karen Heuler, LJ Cohen, Stephanie Feldman (moderator), W.B.J. (Walter) Williams
John: not going to come to conclusion unless decide that all stories are one story. thinks distinguishing characteristics of stories: "stories really really desperately want to get told." "next, they want to be twice told. no story wants to be a story that sits alone." Karen: simple: conflict and resolution, but that's not very personal warm cozy explanation. sometimes think all stories are about death because ultimately progress to an end, what's at the end? horror, death; mysteries, death; a lot of things that can (be related to?) concept of death in stories LJ: relationships. character's with other, place, idea, self, desire. Walter: an exploration of mystery. mystery may be death, sex, relationship: but looks into great unknown and attempt to make sense of it. Stephanie: also had idea that all stories are really mysteries in prior essay. answer for today: all stories about confrontation. not necessarily resolution, sometimes can end on unresolved note, just raises: confronting secret, truth. when do workshops, so often react that this story is about capitalism, which is another way of talking about power, hierarchy of relationships. Stephanie: hearing: talking about story on craft/mechanical level, thematic level. is there any kind of craft thing necessary to make it a story instead of some other kind of work? John: feel like a fox in coop here, find each of these interesting and appropriate in different contexts. each story is about something, seems to be second-order observation after what decide in heart what story is. story is grammar, which is amoral. until realize that raw undefinable circle in grass that is (something) about consciousness, not going to be able to come to answer (as probably comes across, I did not understand what John was saying here) Karen: had been talking about tools. what story really requires is emotional investment from the reader. LJ: what is purpose of story? why humans drawn to? impulse and absolute necessity of social communication and fact that we are meaning-makers, how we're wired. investment (I think, emotional investment), can have in a poem and don't think that is a story; other kinds of artistic expression, are they all story? Walter: flip on head, recognize that all are questioning creatures, basis of how we learn. all true but ignores fundamental curiosity that brings reader to work, which is another form of exploration. allows works that don't have satisfying endings to bring you into deeper thinking. Stephanie: do answers change depending on length of piece? John: do seem to be talking about contemporary written or oral stories. but? almost every story that is told, is a retelling. deep itch that is being scratched may be that it's been retold. Kim Stanley Robinson talking about slingshot ending, which has two or three different endings and leads in multiple directions: that's a 20th century artifact. (then something, didn't quite get, about needing background to communicate against) Walter: Jungian, ancient stories about historical figures turning into (I think) myth. all of us are too educated to create something truly original. (though Naked Lunch is) Karen: fairy tales, very often retold: most are lessons on how to survive in society. is a story a lesson of some kind? LJ: went through period of time where reading nonfiction books of the pattern, here is the story of world as told through salt, sand, dogs. could make argument that same with story, all of answers are correct, depends on lens viewing it Stephanie: how do we choose lens at any given time, all said "well my answer today is". do you have a lens gravitated to at point in career, or chose for specific reasons? Walter: need to have a deep theme LJ: ideas are everywhere and cheap, but if story is only idea, doesn't go far, unless has character and relationship John: in end what I see is rewriting, retelling, managed to get story partly told before. cannot think of successful story that close to that hasn't been birthed out of itself Karen: but that's a good thing, been told before gives it more weight, recognizability, authority LJ: like sourdough starter Stephanie: fairy tales, relationships: are all stories really about our relationship with society? do answers shift depending on genre? LJ: don't think stories differ based on, genre is window-dressing Walter: ditto John: as far as reading concerned, always looking for story in which final word is full recognition of what story is about. (self-described boast: contrived to do that in one novel that wrote) Stephanie: any examples of stories that changed mind about what stories can do? Walter: yes, if read a lot of Japanese stories discover not driven by conflict. Kafka on the Shore (by Haruki Murakami), very typical of 4-act kind. John: anyone remember Seiun Awards, ceremony would present awards and then second half was rehearsal in reverse. works that have temporal movement spiraling to different place. LJ: not sure exactly answer to question, book comes to mind was frustrating, Life of Pi (by Yann Martel): loved until last chapter which enraged because will go anywhere with author if they believe in story, "really all a dream". lack of trust in audience by author. Karen: Steppenwolf (by Herman Hesse), during reading it, decided had to have sex for first time, and did. Walter: ... another good answer to what stories are about, sex. audience: sounded like answers from Western tradition, other than Walt's answer, any additional? John: didn't have room to make cartoon of what story does for human beings Walter: why useful to go back to very very early pieces like Gilgamesh because where Western stories began to develop from John: Gilgamesh, may have been written by first woman writer, also really fragments of it, but our instinct to intuit story highly relevant Stephanie: answer in a negative form, reading Craft in the Real World (by Matthew Salesses), one of big critiques of The Workshop is its focus on individual triumph and individual versus world, very Western way of looking at world audience: since story is so malleable, any thoughts on what is story's antithesis or definitively not other audience: "This Is Not A Story," Denis Diderot John: very hard, like vampires, can't stop seeing stories everywhere LJ: our minds are good at holographical process, seeing little piece and filling in whole Walter: only way nonfiction can succeed is as story audience: thinking of own answer, which would ideally be correct across all genres and medium: pursuit of wants versus needs. then: does that make it a good story? new thought is depends on reader, what want to get out of. so question: what is one thing you are looking for, needs to be there, to find satisfying? LJ: emotional journey John: kind of always, when reading first time, looking for point where beginning to read it for the second, where feel like starting to get it. Karen: opposite, if story stops surprising me probably going to put it downpanel notes
+1 (thumbs-up, I see you, etc.)?
The first report from a panel I was on. I bring handwritten notes to my own panels and take notes likewise; but when I'm moderating, this unfortunately and inevitably means my notes are biased toward what I said, because I've got less opportunity for making notes on what others say. So while I always welcome corrections and expansions, I especially do for posts about my own panels—and especially this one, wow, my notes are almost nonexistent.
(Also, let's talk about it even, or especially, if you weren't there!)
Coherency in Storytelling
When Alison Bechdel sent her mother a copy of her frank memoir, Are You My Mother?, her mother's summary judgement was, "Well, it coheres." Most writing advice is based on the assumption that coherence of narrative is a paramount value in storytelling, but is that assumption borne out? Are there works of fiction that don't cohere, but in ways that still satisfy?
Kate Nepveu (moderator), Ken Schneyer, Richard Butner, W.B.J. (Walter) Williams
I began the panel saying that I'd submitted the idea because I'd seen this Tumblr post and been enormously struck by it, but I didn't really have a strong feeling about the questions posed by the description as revised by the lovely program team ... until I got emails from the other participants that were—to exaggerate for effect—generally "coherence! who needs it!" This led me to suspect that other people had a different definition of coherence, of something cohering, than I did. So I started by asking the panel their definitions. Walter: people expect stories to have cause and effect. most recent work, Johnny Talon and the Goddess of Love and War, is deliberately Surrealist, exploration of subconscious as a way of detective work (compare Dirk Gently, Holistic Detective). Richard: lacks coherence is different than, "this makes no sense." matter of writer and reader expectations. dream logic, e.g., David Lynch (my notes here are particularly unhelpful, sorry Richard) Ken: all parts somehow fit together and are related. however, mind creates coherence because humans are pattern making animals, very hard to avoid it. impossible for work not to have coherence because coherence is something reader imposes. me: like a ball of dough: may have different ingredients in it, but comes together into a single Thing. the Thing may be Surrealist or deliberately messy, but can point to various elements and say, I can see what this is contributing to the overall effect. however, I had a weirdly difficult time thinking of examples of a work whose problem was that it didn't cohere. I believe at some point, possibly here, I asked for examples of works that didn't cohere Walter: Calvino, If on a winter's night a traveler, in light of its nesting frame stories and frustration of the reader, based on definition that is narrower than mine someone I can't make out from my notes, possibly in the audience: works that can't cohere because creator never really finished making them, like Orson Welles' movies there were almost certainly more but I don't have them in my notes. some ideas I had for ways a work might not cohere under my definition, which were basically structural: (as a result, I disagreed with Ken about his idea that lack of coherence is impossible because coherence is inevitably created by the reader. I believe we eventually agreed that any given reader might not find coherence in a work?) at some point someone mentioned Naked Lunch, which Richard noted depended in part on the author's public persona. we had audience questions about how this varies by genre; how you find readers; and if there's an genre that gets its energy from asking questions rather than answering them. Walter suggested Haruki Murakami for the last one. It seemed like a lot of audience members walked out of this one in the first half, so I felt pretty unsure about how it was going; and by the end, I was worried that I'd browbeaten the rest of the panel more than a little. One or two people did say nice things to me about over the weekend, so ... I just don't know. (I do genuinely want honest, though not intentionally mean, feedback, on any of my panels!)panel notes
+1 (thumbs-up, I see you, etc.)?
The Body (of Work) Keeps the Score: Writing as Therapy
"Kill your darlings" is a common bit of writing advice. But how about killing your demons? Writing effectively often requires channeling emotional responses and personal memories, so it can also liberate them and be a cathartic experience for the writer. This panel will discuss works where the author was definitely working through some stuff, as well as the experience of using writing to exorcise one's inner antagonists.
Barbara Krasnoff (moderator), Melissa Bobe, Noah Beit-Aharon, Scott Edelman, Sophia Babai
Barbara: start by talking about story you wrote where you were working through stuff Noah: in current WIP, working through feelings re: loved one in abusive relationship, what it's like to feel like seeing person love but hearing person they're with through their mouth, so writing dybbuk story Sophia: very rarely know what working through at time of writing. apologies for geopolitics but am Iranian, half of family is in Iran; writing story with ghosts djinn etc. but in real world in 2026. what I am experiencing now, protagonist did a year ago; helps empathize with protagonist who is kind of terrible, but also having future perspective really helps self Scott: wrote essay "7 Things My Mother Told Me She Later Denied Ever Having Said" after she died, then realized should be fiction instead. could better work out feelings that way because in reality too worried about accuracy, fiction focused on themes. resulting story is on submission, now titled (approximately) "Inheritance Nobody Wants But Everybody Gets." nonfiction did not bring closure or forgiveness, but fiction did, would have thought other way around Melissa: like that talking about form, because as thinking about this question, two books applicable are both short story collections, written in 2016 and 2020: something about ability to move through different places, settings, characters in one collection, allowed to explore complicated feelings Barbara: father had cancer, wrote funny story about cancer; after he died, wrote funny story about death. lot of stories working through changes & losses in family, some of most successful probably because felt them more than just wrote them. question: do you find it's different when writing to exorcise political versus personal demons? Sophia: personally, no, because have a lot of abstract rage/despair/disapproval, not writing fiction about those, writing threads on internet/news articles/having conversations. writing fiction is deeply personal things. don't really think possible to write compelling long fiction that is big and impersonal, really is about characters. regardless so much of politics is personal, people dying having debt etc., that's what makes a story Noah: would also say that can be very hard, if even try, to separate between personal and political. writing about abusive people in this, the year of abuse, isn't going to come out apolitical. writing fiction when working through traumas or other deeply felt things, as opposed to nonfiction, nobody can fact-check your fiction. kind of freedom, about your feelings. can say, I think sucks, but not I think you're lying Sophia: (well they can try to fact check) Scott: when I write about "relative has undiagnosed anxiety disorder and making my life hell" can give myself closure; but writing about bigger pictures, did not make feel better Melissa: thinking about some writers who say, want to write in space that's void of politics, because I need a break. do you stop existing as a person when you're writing, such that you don't have a political identity? Noah: lots of people who don't want to think about politics as such, doesn't mean that their work isn't political, just don't want to acknowledge politics of what doing. Barbara: if writing about specific person, how much feel need to disguise? Sophia: wrote recent-ish short story that agent really liked, nervous because when writing, thought was writing about vampires, turned out to very clearly be story about my ex (audience rueful laughter)—yeah, you just learned so much from that sentence. no amount of fictionalizing will disguise that I had been in an abusive relationship, or that people will assume that was autobiographical—almost more nervous about reverse, adding fictional details that people will think are true. Scott: even if not relatives, think average reader assumes actually happened because don't understand where ideas come from Sophia: I keep killing sisters, multiple critique partners assumed has one. no: have brother, nothing bad allowed to happen him ever, which is why only nonbinary siblings and sisters allowed to die in stories Melissa: semi-flippant response: people care about are so humble that wouldn't assume it's about them, and people mad at, are too self-absorbed to notice. discusses readers without boundaries stalking romance authors and something I missed Scott: my dad did not meet Donald Trump Noah: my WIP, any loved ones will instantly know what it's about. if and when finish, think I do plan to publish if can, because it's that level of important to me to express, but even if don't, I am doing as description and writing as own therapy, essential to write as honestly as feeling. cross bridge when come to if feelings change in future and edit story as story Barbara: wrote story once as revenge, did nasty things to character who was doctor mistreated father. had fun writing, looked at, lousy story. other examples? Melissa: yes, not usually throwaways because doesn't do that, but set aside for long time to get distance, find thread where went off from catharsis to become narrative, pick up from there Noah: more honest I am when writing, better it comes out for me Sophia: journals a lot, also first drafts run long. but never had experience of wrote from deep emotion and therefore resulting story not very good; rather, story is too vulnerable for me. sometimes frustrating, don't always want feel like presented heart on platter Scott: is this a story or just a primal scream that hasn't been transmuted yet? if reader can see that working issues out that clearly, not art yet, just 1:1 of what going through. pause, go to journal to work that out through circular nonfiction criticism of self Barbara: asking Sophia, is cathartic angle more successful not just for you with editors and readers Sophia: varies widely. sound like a brag but it's a thing: my prose comes out beautiful, never had to work at sentences; but structure is weaker. so then going to come down to how deeply do you feel the emotions of this. but sometimes anger etc. makes sentences sloppier. however don't go into thinking this is going to be cathartic, see it after Noah: worthwhile to separate between different kinds of catharsis: saying what really mean and killing stand-in character are not the same. latter not necessarily going to yield something interesting. not same kind of emotional writing which think we mostly mean, writing from deep honesty Scott: probably most cathartic writing session ever had, flying back from con, upset about bad actors in community, wrote almost whole thing in longhand. "Boiling Point," in anthology Long Division: Stories of Social Decay, Societal Collapse, and Bad Manners. read it out loud at conventions, people come up and say, "I don't act like that," feel like story is calling them specifically out instead of being a general warning. goes back to what Melissa said about people not recognizing themselves Barbara: ever written more than one story about person/experience/personal demon/political thing, with each looking at it differently? Noah: multiple Orpheus/Eurydice. as kid story bothered me, some itch have to scratch by retelling many different ways. more recent days, started to feel more like Orpheus, find once again going back to Sophia: two answers, both answers are yes. am now writing third book in a row in which main character haunted by dead sister, again I don't have a dead sister. completely different every time, what she represents, relationship, but for some reason trope keep coming back to. second, swear do have traumas that aren't geopolitical, but family has survived three separate genocides, except for current book never set out to write about, but turned out to be. at certain point not that trying to process, but that only lens I've lived. personal, non-collective traumas, usually will write about one time and then I'm good, wrote what needed to write about that: not part of worldview, thing that had feelings about. suspect will figure out what dead sister thing about one day Barbara: was thinking about stories wrote about her/partner's grandmothers experiences, successful stories but sometimes wonder if should not have written because can't possibly imagine what was really like to have lived through that. are there stories that should be told because others not around to tell them, but how qualified am I just by virtue of listening to them? audience: ever written something in therapeutic mode and then realized something that completely surprised you? Melissa: feeding into processing Barbara's previous. can't stop writing about witches, think because am the friend you call in middle night to tell worst thing, that has to go somewhere and not comfortable with writing literally about. don't think realized until this conversation Scott: not him but others, author: "this is story that helped get over X." reader: "this? this is the most depressing thing ever read" Barbara: funniest stories ever written are about tragedies. partly because both are about father who was very funny man. Sophia: never done revenge catharsis story, realized that experiences have had with people who caused harm, always writing from their POV. healing from perspective of getting to walk in their shoes, sometimes compassion and understanding and sometimes how awful it must be to be them. sometimes surprised by depth of sympathy experienced. audience: anyone have safety tips or strategies for navigating writing a story that is kicking you in ancestral memory Sophia: yes! literally one of things I specialize in. really helps to have rituals before and after, to keep contained experience. closing ritual should help move emotions through body: if can, go outside and shake body. writing is just in your head, so didn't get to express in way that nervous system understands. when getting too much, as Scott said, pause and journal to self, you are feeling sad right now because (or from/to ancestor, like a letter)—in different way than fiction writing, handwriting if can. Noah: blessed to have number of people can talk to about writing, being able to do that is own kind of talk therapy, and talking about writing is enough removed from trauma itself, not waiting until work is perfectpanel notes
+1 (thumbs-up, I see you, etc.)?
I have, let's see, 16 panels to report on from Readercon this year. So let's get started.
(For those unfamiliar: if I'm in the audience, I bring my laptop and I type as I listen. I do not purport to transcribe, though anything in quotation marks is intended to be a direct quote. For posting, I spellcheck, expand abbreviations, lightly format, and add occasional links.)
Understanding Originals Through their Responses
An expected result of discovering books in conversation with each other is that reading the older book illuminates hidden aspects of the newer one. But what of the reverse case, when reading the response tells you something new about the original? Panelists will discuss the deeply satisfying experience of appreciating originals through the responses to them, including examples they've seen, what they learned from them, and how this shaped their experience of both books.
—Greer Gilman, Melissa Bobe (moderator), Michael Dirda, Rebecca Fraimow
Melissa: any response or original that made panelists want to be on this panel? Michael: uncertain about panel's focus, explain? Melissa: immediately thought of The Dark Descent of Elizabeth Frankenstein (by Kiersten White), fabulous re-imagining of Frankenstein; Hester Prynne's appearance in I, Tituba: Black Witch of Salem (by Maryse Condé), which is brief but great Michael: thought panel was about reading contemporary works and how affect precursors. essay by Borges, Kafka and His Precursors If I am not mistaken, the heterogeneous pieces I have listed resemble Kafka; if I am not mistaken, not all of them resemble each other. The last fact is what is most significant. Kafka’s idiosyncrasy is present in each of these
writings, to a greater or lesser degree, but if Kafka had not written, we would not perceive it; that is to say, it would not exist. (quoted from a PDF article called "Re-reading 'Kafka and His Precursors'" hosted by the Borges Center) Rebecca: how later memetic impressions affect. adaptation versus in conversation: get different things out of them. adaptation, what someone pulls out from original; go back and see, hadn't noticed that before. conversation, sometimes argument, His Dark Materials v. Narnia Greer: film script for Little Women turned understanding of book, which has known for so long, on head. script branches Jo into one that's in the book and one who is writing the book Little Women. very odd way makes it science-fictional, branched off Melissa: holds society in which Alcott was existing accountable in way. Mansfield Park film adaptation, fleeting but powerful moment that contextualizes it re: race & colonialism Michael: is that unfair in a way? undermining book, making think that it is something that isn't Rebecca: one of things that's really exciting about reading about books in conversations. reading a lot of Great Gatsby adaptations, now going back to original which hadn't read since high school: what people are pulling out that hadn't noticed when reading at 16. in Nghi Vo's The Chosen and the Beautiful, a character is actually paper: can see how that character in original isn't characterized. also see things that aren't being picked up by adaptations: there are three moments everyone does and some that no-one does, very interesting Melissa: "fairness," such fraught word, how we dare read or write in these ways Rebecca: we call it fair use Melissa: Winnie the Pooh slasher film, definitely not what Milne intended, at same time, for those of us who thought kid in Giving Tree a horror show... Rebecca: getting mad at responses can tell you something about original as well Michael: matters what order encounter in. if read Tolkien first, then Old English literature: see where Tolkien got all ideas. other way: Tolkien seems like watered-down Old English Literature. Greer: speaking of order, read Sir Thomas Browne before Moby-Dick. going back to Browne writing about sperm whale washed up on shore, he's trying to describe first contact. also realized that this is before they know how to use whales, sudden rush into world where weren't hunting (me, to myself: also Moby-Dick was before Origin of Species, which makes the classification chapter read a lot differently!) Rebecca: read Railsea before Moby-Dick, which contains riff where all captains talk about their obsessions and understand that white whale is a metaphor and an idea. then read Moby-Dick, yes, whale is a metaphor, I understand (me, to myself, because I'm like that: yes, but also "for the last time the whale is real and it ate my husband") Michael: are we saying that shouldn't read in context of time? Rebecca: put multiple lenses on a thing, very rewarding Melissa: we are of our own time, never going to be able to put self perfectly in reader of time Michael: why do we want to do these things? "distort" (me, to myself: I truly cannot tell if he is genuinely objecting or is exploring ideas) Rebecca: not distortion to lay two interpretations against each other and see where they differ. new Green Knight movie: half people I know considered it very medieval, half not. thinks movie's thematic concerns points out the (different) ones of the original Greer: "things just happening" was a medieval structure. very difficult effort to get head entirely Gawain-poet's mind: bits of you that don't fit, weren't educated to have those feelings. can reconstruct them, "that's the worst dishonor in the world," but difficult--wonderful thing to try Melissa: have been talking very much about contemporary re-imaginings of older texts, but lot of older texts did same with even older Michael: it's also criticism. T.S. Eliot said (I think) that each new work shifts our understanding of works in the past, that's not static. once Raphael was considered great artist, but sentimental works after him make look him like kitsch Rebecca: one of reasons excited about revisiting: if only seen kitsch, the shock of looking at original and finding that still has power. reading The Iliad for first time, not at all what expected to be Greer: always been interested in artistic and literary fakes, constantly true that it looks great--at the moment. Kenneth Clark looked at Botticelli and said, "that's a silent film star," and it was, but at time was the ideal of beauty. [I think these two comments were not connected, since Clark seems to have been a critic rather than a forger.] sometimes places where you're standing, can't see what book or work of art is, have to be in it or further away for it. "the 18th century had some damn weird Gothic," that is what they saw [clearly I missed something here, sorry] Melissa: Gothic chapbooks, or bluebooks, were frequently rushed copies of original higher-production texts, which permitted accessibility to public which didn't have to original. anyone who went to see Beethoven symphony when he was alive, would never hear again, transience. is that affecting how responding? Michael: Milton was Christian epic poet, until Blake came along and turned Paradise Lost into romantic outcast story. happens all the time. book about a devastated city [title of which I missed] which turns into climate fiction (to a present-day reader) Rebecca: also exciting when see thematic affiliation that was always there. Iliad: scene where throw up wall in one night; WWI poets always referencing that in making trenches. then Some Desperate Glory (by Emily Tesh) now is looking at WWI poets. Greer: sometime an artist will go back to younger self, say, no, that's no longer my world. LeGuin returning again and again to Earthsea, asking self, where is the feminism. TH White returning to The Sword and Stone, now this is about fascism. Michael: complicated. example comes to mind, Henry James, rewrote story to make much more prolix, some readers think original better. artist can decide what version want to send down to history, but is artist best judge? was LeGuin betraying younger self? Greer: first three Earthsea books are things of beauty. Shakespeare went back to Lear and made it grimmer [note: I am not sure if this is, Shakespeare revisited King Lear in a later play, or Shakespeare was revisiting an earlier play in Lear, or Shakespeare was making the story of Leir grimmer] Michael: Tehanu, powerful but didn't belong to the first few books. Melissa: tension between us as consumers of texts and the rights the artists have to their opinion. never fact-checked professor who said that on opening night of Mother Courage and Her Children, Brecht was appalled because audience gave Mother Courage a standing ovation: he ran through audience boo'ing trying to get them to boo (me: was audience applauding the performer not the character??) Michael: does that mean he failed as artist, by not achieving his intent Melissa: but we still read and perform. important: when respond, saying, this exists and should be read. kind of resurrection of work if fallen out of favor/public mind Rebecca: theater opposed to novel. play always continually reinterpreted, always possibility. don't think that that's as far away from novel as might think. engagement and conversation is always happening, having a text to point you to that conversation is generous and valuable, invitation to join Michael: are there are certain books that are strong, archetypal, have so many possibilities. The Odyssey. Little Women, so attuned to questions of gender, we want to make these texts fit our views. Shakespeare, should we perform as in Elizabethian times, have we lost something otherwise? very uncertain when came to panel Greer: (comment about tug of war between something and artist's soul that I could not get down) Melissa: Michael had asked earlier (in comment I didn't transcribe) if this question was something new, maybe that's what: aspects of text that weren't celebrated at time Greer: Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead, turns it inside-out Rebecca: doesn't take anything away from Hamlet that R&G exists. dream is to watch back to back with same cast Melissa: Wide Sargasso Sea Michael: asks Elizabeth Hand (in audience) to talk about her Hill House book, A Haunting on the Hill. what did you think about when decided to do this? Elizabeth: first thing I thought was, "oh no." told Estate going in that not going to do pastiche, backstory, explanation. wanted to write an Elizabeth Hand novel set in Hill House, is that okay? yeah, go for it. otherwise would not have been able to write, because those characters were Jackson's characters; so was Hill House, but it was also archetype in way that humans are not, because they don't have iconic stature that house did. own characters inhabit House and riff off of Jackson's. Elizabeth cont'd: listening to panel and thinking, why do we do this? return to work of others we admire? really don't know. fiction in last 20-30 years become much more malleable (like plays) than used to be, artists and writers and fanfic writers. very exciting time, I too enjoy reading all riffs on Great Gatsby Rebecca: one of foremost ways to keep a work alive, responses to it. le Carré's son just put out new novel about Smiley, father said to him on deathbed, please keep people reading Smiley, so guessed only way to do it is write new one Michael: Pratchett took total opposite approach Melissa: q to Greer: did you read Little Women as child? Greer: oh yes, very picky about it Melissa; my theory is based on small children. anyone experienced a 3 year old, whatever book they land on, need to have backup copies and will be so sick of by time they're 4. but most comforting thing in world to them. audience: response to Michael: modern mindset cannot see The Merchant of Venice in way original audience did. that said, The Tamer Tamed, written by Shakespeare collaborator 10 years later: frequently seeing those two performed together audience: thinking about "The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas" and its many responses: works that people find challenging and want to respond to, moves people, makes them want to think, wants to have conversations. hoping to hear about those kind of stories Rebecca: if come away from book wanting to argue with, feel like has internalized better. thinks why a lot of works are in conversation with Dorothy L. Sayers. audience: fanfic is entirely in conversation. Rebecca: some fans of TV show The Terror have become fans of historical polar explorers. fandom helped find bones because read original journals after being mad about way portrayed in show. (note: a quick look hasn't turned up a link on this, can anyone help?) fandom can drive changing responses to original. Greer: found Richard III, did not change narrative of Richard III in some people's minds audience: when read good book, look at what author read to write that, works well. (separately:) took 15 years after watching Howl's Moving Castle to know that Diana Wynne Jones existed. as authors, how can we convey importance of works that are adapting. (examples cite are all films) Greer: talk to Marketing? (me, to myself: surely this is what author's notes are for) Rebecca: wish books came with annotated bibliographies. reading about Alan Garner who over course of life, got more and more resistant to mentioning that was responding to something, felt was failure of work. in Owl Service, mentions the Mabinogion, but in Red Shift, have to know it's Tam Lin audience: thinking about being in engineering school and taking science fiction class, reading "The Cold Equations", other student wrote about how stupid the engineering design was. really think about how see engineering now as opposed to when written. other works like that? sadly, no, because we were out of time.panel notes
+1 (thumbs-up, I see you, etc.)?
Which 2006 Clarke Award Finalists Have You Read?
Air by Geoff Ryman
20 (37.0%)
Accelerando by Charles Stross
37 (68.5%)
Banner of Souls by Liz Williams
14 (25.9%)
Learning the World by Ken MacLeod
19 (35.2%)
Never Let Me Go by Kazuo Ishiguro
10 (18.5%)
Pushing Ice by Alastair Reynolds
10 (18.5%)
I have another 'who is this regionalised to' question. I use 'pike' as a verb to mean 'cancel on a social event'. Youngest has learned this from me, but tells me that none of their friends recognise it. Many of their friends are immigrants or children of immigrants, but not all, so you'd think at least the Skips would know it.
So: do you use it? Do you consider it to be a normal regional word?
(I am out of time, so no poll to find out the frequency of use)
Jimmy's not from around here either.
*Which of these look interesting?
The Bloody and the Damned by Becca Coffindaffer (April 2026)
13 (30.2%)
Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay: Sea Wardens of Cothique by Dave Allen, Dominic McDowall, Michael Duxbury, Jude Hornborg, Naomi Hunter, Steven Lewis, Simon Wileman, et al (4th Quarter, 2025)
1 (2.3%)
Boy, With Accidental Dinosaur by Ian McDonald (February 2026)
18 (41.9%)
Enola Holmes and the Clanging Coffin by Nancy Springer (February 2026)
12 (27.9%)
Some other option (see comments)
1 (2.3%)
Cats!
30 (69.8%)
I have been informed that Tess Williams passed away earlier this week.
Tess was a family friend*, a valued member of the local fannish community, and a gifted writer. I thoroughly recommend their books Map of Power and Sea As Mirror if you can get hold of them.
They will be missed.
*in this case, part of my mother's extended social crowd in my teenage years.
Original plans for today: get brunch (with Youngest and Artisanat), and go past the place that does the good peanut butter on the way home. Achieved! We went to 'The Little Olive'* in, hmm, probably-Melville. They had GF spinach and ricotta rolls, so that was breakfast. They also have an interesting range of sweets, so we got two to share between us. Stopped at Kardinya to get peanut butter; also looked for the good muesli bars in Coles (assumption: they have been discontinued) and got some alternatives; went to the UK Lolly Shop and got rhubarb and custard hard lollies.
And then home. Where my goal for the afternoon is not to waste time on the internet. Being on the internet is fine, just not faffing around. So far I've watched about an hour and a half on Obsidian, note-taking, and related topics while progressing the hat I'm knitting; read some of Room With A View (which I continue to be underwhelmed by) and am now closing old DW tabs (skimming, but not replying) -- there are over 200, because I open what I don't have time to read in the morning, and plan to come back 'later'.
Plans for the evening are date night, which will involve finding something I want to cook. Other wishlist items are cooking stock paste, and making bikkies. Also tidying the bedroom enough that the dog has somewhere to lie down while visiting.
* given I'm now at uni on Fridays, Saturday is the new Friday, and Coffee Fridays happen when they happen. This is the first new to us cafe in some time (not counting Albany, because we didn't actually end up doing brunch).