![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
calimac1. Panel on e-publishing. Panelists seemed mostly very savvy, audience comments somewhat less so. John D. Berry (panelist and master typographer) kept reminding us that matters of layout and typeface affect how we read, which is for damn sure. What I disagreed with was others' brushing away of difficulties with e-readers as merely transient technical glitches. (And the absence of any mention of the biggest current flaw: you can't lend anyone an e-book without giving up the whole device, and anything else on it, for the period of the loan.) The problem isn't what can or can't be done in computerized reading or writing, it's what, in practice, is or isn't done: how they shape our minds. There's nothing preventing someone from writing a novel made up of 140-character twits, I mean tweets, for instance; and, judging from some people's love of the medium, they'd read it, but so far it's just not much done. I think of affordances, Donald Norman's useful term describing the ways a device invites you to use it, and how it therefore is used, even against large signs warning you not to do that. I also think of John Adams' warnings about how he can recognize music written on composing software.
2. Panel on the Book of Honor, Zelazny's Lord of Light. This being 2010, the panel was all about the topic du jour, cultural appropriation. Lapsed Catholic author writes about Hinduism and Buddhism, well? Fortunately he got a pass. Even the Hindus who find the theology full of clangs weren't bothered. This is mostly due to the realization that it's not the author who's appropriating cultures, it's the characters, and the perils of doing so are clearly marked. As one panelist said, the lesson of Lord of Light is that "it's easier to be a god than to become enlightened."
Some discussion of depth of plot. That a follower of a fake Buddha becomes, in all practical sense, the real Buddha was deemed a very Buddhist irony. Mention of W.S. Gilbert's The Mikado as a similar work. (Similar in irreverence towards the culture depicted, maybe, but not otherwise. Gilbert's characters aren't appropriating Japanesehood, they're English lightly disguised by the author as Japanese.)
The question left unraised by this panel was the author's responsibility towards his characters. The ex-human gods of Lord of Light didn't decide to become Hindu deities on their own; the author chose to write that story. Le Guin points out in "From Elfland to Poughkeepsie" that Zelazny writes about fake gods all the time; why is he afraid of real gods? Though it didn't address the question, the panel provided part of an answer: because humans aspiring to godhood and failing to achieve it is such a rich source of story about who we are and what we want to be.
3. The dealers' room. Couldn't resist buying the Harvard Lampoon satire of Twilight. Bought The Wiscon Chronicles 3 because I'd attended that year; told L. Timmel Duchamp, who I bought it from, that I'd been moved by her speech on running smack into sexist dismissal in a music composition program. Asked her what kind of music she wrote. Interesting 60s experimental stuff, very soundscapy from the description. Discussed the "ears" needed to hear different types of music. Tried to dictate the name of a composer I thought she'd like: S - C - E - L L - no, just one L - I - no, S I. Scelsi, that's it. First name Giacinto.
4. Con suite. Discussed politics and LoCs with![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
fringefaan, homemade modern music recordings with Carl J., trash bags with janeehawkins, the height elevation of the balcony with the reappearing Victor, Tolkien with a woman who thought he'd written a story called "Leaf by Nigel," an interesting variant. randwolf, who would know, pointed out that there was a Barcelona Chair in one corner that nobody else had noticed. I went and sat in it so I could say I had.
5. Dinner out. Only two of these: Thai with Andi and Stu, just spicy enough for me; and shawarma (Mid-east deli meat, last encountered by me in Davis, California) withjuliebata and holyoutlaw - we left the place with more fans than when we arrived. All most satisfactory.
Came home as part of committee for next year's Potlatch, yes indeed, and initial contact with the same hotel as last year was the errand of potential future import that I mentioned last week. Onwards!
2. Panel on the Book of Honor, Zelazny's Lord of Light. This being 2010, the panel was all about the topic du jour, cultural appropriation. Lapsed Catholic author writes about Hinduism and Buddhism, well? Fortunately he got a pass. Even the Hindus who find the theology full of clangs weren't bothered. This is mostly due to the realization that it's not the author who's appropriating cultures, it's the characters, and the perils of doing so are clearly marked. As one panelist said, the lesson of Lord of Light is that "it's easier to be a god than to become enlightened."
Some discussion of depth of plot. That a follower of a fake Buddha becomes, in all practical sense, the real Buddha was deemed a very Buddhist irony. Mention of W.S. Gilbert's The Mikado as a similar work. (Similar in irreverence towards the culture depicted, maybe, but not otherwise. Gilbert's characters aren't appropriating Japanesehood, they're English lightly disguised by the author as Japanese.)
The question left unraised by this panel was the author's responsibility towards his characters. The ex-human gods of Lord of Light didn't decide to become Hindu deities on their own; the author chose to write that story. Le Guin points out in "From Elfland to Poughkeepsie" that Zelazny writes about fake gods all the time; why is he afraid of real gods? Though it didn't address the question, the panel provided part of an answer: because humans aspiring to godhood and failing to achieve it is such a rich source of story about who we are and what we want to be.
3. The dealers' room. Couldn't resist buying the Harvard Lampoon satire of Twilight. Bought The Wiscon Chronicles 3 because I'd attended that year; told L. Timmel Duchamp, who I bought it from, that I'd been moved by her speech on running smack into sexist dismissal in a music composition program. Asked her what kind of music she wrote. Interesting 60s experimental stuff, very soundscapy from the description. Discussed the "ears" needed to hear different types of music. Tried to dictate the name of a composer I thought she'd like: S - C - E - L L - no, just one L - I - no, S I. Scelsi, that's it. First name Giacinto.
4. Con suite. Discussed politics and LoCs with
fringefaan, homemade modern music recordings with Carl J., trash bags with janeehawkins, the height elevation of the balcony with the reappearing Victor, Tolkien with a woman who thought he'd written a story called "Leaf by Nigel," an interesting variant. randwolf, who would know, pointed out that there was a Barcelona Chair in one corner that nobody else had noticed. I went and sat in it so I could say I had.5. Dinner out. Only two of these: Thai with Andi and Stu, just spicy enough for me; and shawarma (Mid-east deli meat, last encountered by me in Davis, California) with
juliebata and holyoutlaw - we left the place with more fans than when we arrived. All most satisfactory.Came home as part of committee for next year's Potlatch, yes indeed, and initial contact with the same hotel as last year was the errand of potential future import that I mentioned last week. Onwards!
