CONvergence - Day One
Jul. 4th, 2013 07:26 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
lydamorehouseWow, that registration line, huh?
Holy cow!
I was one of the lucky ones, as a panel participant and a former GoH, I got to stand in the "expedited" line. This meant I only waited a half hour to get badged. I last heard that the going rate for regular con attendees (of which, btw, this year hit 7,000) was FOUR HOURS. I saw volunteers running up and down along the lines making sure people had cool water and snacks if they needed one, because while I was waiting someone fainted... at least I presume so from the term "medical emergency."
I'm not sure why the wait was so long. The badges weren't pre-printed which may have been part of it. I think, perhaps, too, that the number of people who turned up on the 4th of July was unexpected. It's possible that the concom didn't quite anticipate the logistics of lots and lots of people with the day off work (and likely to want to register today rather than tomorrow, when they very likely have to go back to work...) I'm not sure CONvergence has actually ever started on the 4th before.
I should say that I think the volunteers and staff were working overtime to make things right. It's just that everyone showed up kind of at once, which is unusual. Mostly people trickle in over the day. But, I came right about when the con started and there were already lines.
But, the nice thing about standing in line for a while is that you see a lot of people passing by. I got a chance to hang out with![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
jiawen and catch up a little with her. I chatted with Aaron Vander Giessen I also got to see Sigid Ellis for a few moments. Had enough time to start a feud with Birdchick Sharon Stiteler, and get to my first panel... which I had honestly not been looking forward to. I'd been making faces in the hallway about the dumbness of the title: "Books I Hate That Everyone Else Loves." I was expecting my contribution to go like this: "Lord of the Rings. Never finished it. Thought it was dull, dull, dull" cue: angry fan mob, the end.
But I'd forgotten how wonderful my fellow panelists were. Will Alexander is always a treat as is David Schwartz. So, we managed to make the panel fun (and I hope) interesting. Probably the best moment was when one of the panelists (whom I shall not name to protect his or her livelihood) mentioned that he or she disliked AMERICAN GODS. After I high-fived them, I noticed a DEADLY silence in the audience. You dare! The sacred Neil Gaiman may not be dissed! (Never mind that earlier someone in the audience admitted to hating on LEFT HAND OF DARKNESS by Ursula LeGuin.) I really actually thought that the audience might turn on us at that point. We had to quick make a joke and get back to books by other people that had failed us.
We never managed to actually discuss, more than in passing, what makes a book get on this list. I think Will Alexander brought up the idea that often books that are "hated" were once loved, but they turned some unforgivable corner. The author made us feel manipulated (as in ENDER'S GAME) or otherwise betrayed the contract with the reader (Sheri S. Tepper's FAMILY TREE). We also talked a lot about books we loved when we were twelve that horrified us when we returned to them as experienced, better informed readers (Anne McCaffery's DRAGONRIDER OF PERN) or books that turned us off with repulsive, unredeemed characters (Stephen R. Donaldson's LORD FOUL'S BANE.) I also confessed to bouncing off the first Harry Potter book because it had read too much like wish fulfillment to me. That lead to books that everyone loved (ie were bestsellers) that we found sort of mundanely or even poorly written, (cue the usual suspects, ala Stephen King).
I'm not sure the discussion was deep, but it was interesting. People bounce off books for lots of reasons. We even briefly discussed the fact that some books don't work for us the first time, but we find we can read when we're in the "right mood" for them.
Also... in breaking news, a surprising amount of classics don't work for SF/F people. (I actually long knew this. I got an English major, after all, and we read no SF/F, despite the fact we could have read Frankenstein or anything by HG Wells.)
I then followed Dave and Will to the programming participant's gathering in the bar, but I had to bail early tonight because last year we missed fireworks because I was a GoH and didn't quite get the message from my family that THIS WAS IMPORTANT, and thus, partied, while my son sobbed, which made me a VERY BAD PARENT. Thus, this year, I promised a dozen times that I would NOT miss this. In fact, we're going to head out super-early to get a good seat. So I'll be leaving in about a half hour.
Anyway, I'm hopeful that the con will be a good one this year. It's shaping up well so far.
Holy cow!
I was one of the lucky ones, as a panel participant and a former GoH, I got to stand in the "expedited" line. This meant I only waited a half hour to get badged. I last heard that the going rate for regular con attendees (of which, btw, this year hit 7,000) was FOUR HOURS. I saw volunteers running up and down along the lines making sure people had cool water and snacks if they needed one, because while I was waiting someone fainted... at least I presume so from the term "medical emergency."
I'm not sure why the wait was so long. The badges weren't pre-printed which may have been part of it. I think, perhaps, too, that the number of people who turned up on the 4th of July was unexpected. It's possible that the concom didn't quite anticipate the logistics of lots and lots of people with the day off work (and likely to want to register today rather than tomorrow, when they very likely have to go back to work...) I'm not sure CONvergence has actually ever started on the 4th before.
I should say that I think the volunteers and staff were working overtime to make things right. It's just that everyone showed up kind of at once, which is unusual. Mostly people trickle in over the day. But, I came right about when the con started and there were already lines.
But, the nice thing about standing in line for a while is that you see a lot of people passing by. I got a chance to hang out with
jiawen and catch up a little with her. I chatted with Aaron Vander Giessen I also got to see Sigid Ellis for a few moments. Had enough time to start a feud with Birdchick Sharon Stiteler, and get to my first panel... which I had honestly not been looking forward to. I'd been making faces in the hallway about the dumbness of the title: "Books I Hate That Everyone Else Loves." I was expecting my contribution to go like this: "Lord of the Rings. Never finished it. Thought it was dull, dull, dull" cue: angry fan mob, the end. But I'd forgotten how wonderful my fellow panelists were. Will Alexander is always a treat as is David Schwartz. So, we managed to make the panel fun (and I hope) interesting. Probably the best moment was when one of the panelists (whom I shall not name to protect his or her livelihood) mentioned that he or she disliked AMERICAN GODS. After I high-fived them, I noticed a DEADLY silence in the audience. You dare! The sacred Neil Gaiman may not be dissed! (Never mind that earlier someone in the audience admitted to hating on LEFT HAND OF DARKNESS by Ursula LeGuin.) I really actually thought that the audience might turn on us at that point. We had to quick make a joke and get back to books by other people that had failed us.
We never managed to actually discuss, more than in passing, what makes a book get on this list. I think Will Alexander brought up the idea that often books that are "hated" were once loved, but they turned some unforgivable corner. The author made us feel manipulated (as in ENDER'S GAME) or otherwise betrayed the contract with the reader (Sheri S. Tepper's FAMILY TREE). We also talked a lot about books we loved when we were twelve that horrified us when we returned to them as experienced, better informed readers (Anne McCaffery's DRAGONRIDER OF PERN) or books that turned us off with repulsive, unredeemed characters (Stephen R. Donaldson's LORD FOUL'S BANE.) I also confessed to bouncing off the first Harry Potter book because it had read too much like wish fulfillment to me. That lead to books that everyone loved (ie were bestsellers) that we found sort of mundanely or even poorly written, (cue the usual suspects, ala Stephen King).
I'm not sure the discussion was deep, but it was interesting. People bounce off books for lots of reasons. We even briefly discussed the fact that some books don't work for us the first time, but we find we can read when we're in the "right mood" for them.
Also... in breaking news, a surprising amount of classics don't work for SF/F people. (I actually long knew this. I got an English major, after all, and we read no SF/F, despite the fact we could have read Frankenstein or anything by HG Wells.)
I then followed Dave and Will to the programming participant's gathering in the bar, but I had to bail early tonight because last year we missed fireworks because I was a GoH and didn't quite get the message from my family that THIS WAS IMPORTANT, and thus, partied, while my son sobbed, which made me a VERY BAD PARENT. Thus, this year, I promised a dozen times that I would NOT miss this. In fact, we're going to head out super-early to get a good seat. So I'll be leaving in about a half hour.
Anyway, I'm hopeful that the con will be a good one this year. It's shaping up well so far.