That Readers vs. Writers Thing on Strange Horizons (or, Some Disconnected Nonsense From Me)
I’m sure you’ve all heard about this Strange Horizons column already. If not, go read it, then come back and read what I have to say (or don’t…up to you). As I pointed out by way of a link-laden question the other day, I really don’t understand what the frak is going on in the SF/F community right now. It’s like a whole group of fans, writers, and bloggers decided they’d all take crazy pills as part of a New Year’s resolution, and unlike every other resolution (to lose weight, to drink less, to tell your significant other that you’ve fathered (or mothered) nine children with an alien from Mars), they seem to have actually gone through with it. And the crazy really hit the fan this month. So here are some random thoughts about everything, written as such to avoid treading too far onto ground so many others have already covered: Authors Commenting on Blogs Honestly, I’ve never had an issue with authors commenting on this blog, though I haven’t stated as such before. But I’ve also never had (at least, in recent memory) one of those experiences where an author shows up and has a hissy fit in my own space. If authors feel inclined to post here, they are free to do so (encouraged, even), but under the following caveats: You understand that you do not control interpretation; it is the domain of readers. You avoid being an asshole. (Note: this only applies to posts about the author or the author’s work, of course; outside of such posts, the only rule I have is “don’t be an asshole,” but that applies to everyone, not just authors.) Do I think there’s necessarily anything wrong with an author posting in spaces where his/her work is being discussed? No. I also don’t think it’s a terribly good idea, in most cases. It all comes down to how you engage, really, and I’m not the type of person to tell someone the proper method for engaging in such scenarios. I can only tell you what not to do (see one of the sections below). The Big Deal? Maybe it’s just me, but I never interpreted what Renay said as absolutist. Even if what she said was absolutist in form (there are some lines here or there in the comments that give that impression), it doesn’t follow that she’s necessarily right (obviously, she and I don’t agree on this point) and it doesn’t mean you’re somehow beholden to what she says authors should do. After all, Renay is just a reader and a fan (a great reader and fan, I might add); she’s not God. The idea that her words should be viewed as gospel seems anathema to the concept of a fan writer, or a semi-pro zine featuring articles by fans. So when the reaction to the whole scenario devolved into name-calling (yous bullies and idiotas!), misdirection, merry-go-round arguments, and, eventually, threats of sexual assault against Renay and others, I couldn’t help feeling a bit lost. What exactly did these folks say to justify such behavior (in the minds of people who think such behavior could be justified, of course)? In other words: WTF? The lesson writers and readers should have taken from the whole thing seemed obvious to me: some people are uncomfortable talking with authors about their work on their own blogs, and those that are comfortable are probably pretty obvious about it (see the above section). And, well, the point Renay tried to make (and what others also tried to point out in the comments sections at various places) got completely lost. It’s not about whether an author is allowed to comment somewhere, but whether doing so is a good idea. And there were a number of interesting reasons for why authors shouldn’t: Authors can stifle honest, open discussion (public blogs provide the illusion of this; our culture is so voyeuristic, that all one really needs is the appearance of privacy, since all of us know, on some level, that we’re always being watched…) Authors can sometimes impose their interpretation of their own work onto the reader, which can present a conflict between reader and writer (namely, a conflict about the appropriate interpretation). This can also stifle discussion. Authors can sometimes be assholes. Really big assholes. I’ll cover that last one in the next section. Basically, in the relationship between “reader” and “author,” the positions are not equal — at least, not in the minds of some folks (their perspectives are valid). While I understand Ben Aaronovitch’s contention that “he’s just some guy who writes books,” I think he (and I) sometimes forget that in the universe of books, authors are our celebrities. I’m sure a lot of movie stars would love to get ignored like the rest of us in their everyday lives, but we all know that won’t happen. They’ve reached a different plane of existence(?) that, however artificial, puts the movie star above the movie viewer. The same thing happens with authors. In fact, I still struggle with this myself. I’ve admitted before (here or on The Skiffy and Fanty Show) that I sometimes have a hard time talking to authors in person. This is mostly true for authors whose work I’ve been following for a while. I get nervous. Yes, they are all “just people” like me, but they are also the folks who have made things I love. They are Joss Whedons in a book world. While that’s changed a lot in the last few years (mostly by actually interacting with authors I admire), I still understand that there are sometimes unequal relationships. That’s not the way it has to be, of course, but it’s crucial to understand that for some readers, the hierarchy exists, even if only on a psychological level. Some of us will move beyond it, as I’ve worked to do over the past few years, but others may choose to keep the distance for their own reasons. Appearances Are Weird