More on David Brin and Jo Walton at Boskone
David Goldfarb
at Boskone. Mr. Brin has posted his version of things in a comment thread
in Jo's LiveJournal. The main portion is at:
<http://www.livejournal.com/users/papersky/49836.html>
with more a little down the street at:
<http://www.livejournal.com/users/papersky/50358.html>
--
David Goldfarb <*>|
gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu | "Boom. Sooner or later. Boom!"
gold...@csua.berkeley.edu | -- Babylon 5, "Grail"
Dan Kimmel
"David Goldfarb" <gold...@OCF.Berkeley.EDU> wrote in message
news:b694t4$t3i$1...@agate.berkeley.edu...
> There was some discussion here of the incident between Jo and David Brin
> at Boskone. Mr. Brin has posted his version of things in a comment thread
> in Jo's LiveJournal. The main portion is at:
> <http://www.livejournal.com/users/papersky/49836.html>
> with more a little down the street at:
> <http://www.livejournal.com/users/papersky/50358.html>
Thanks for providing that. There's no need to bring the debate (if we are
to dignify the digital lynching going on as debate) over here. People will
see what they want to see.
Personally, both my encounters with David Brin were pleasant, helpful, and
ego-free. The first time was when I patiently stood in line back in '89 at
Noreascon to have autograph a book. I mentioned to him that I had recently
returned to reading SF as an adult and he was one of three authors who got
me back into it. Without missing a beat he replied that there were many
other good authors out there (indicating the others there with significantly
shorter autograph lines) and I should try them out. (By contrast, another
author with whom I had a similar encounter -- and who I will not name --
replied, "Oh, you found others?")
Prior to this Boskone I interviewed David Brin via e-mail for an article for
a Jewish newspaper on Jewish SF writers. (The article was primarily on
Brin, since he was GoH, but given the paper, Jews and SF was the hook.) He
was helpful, answered my questions, and mentioned other SF authors
influenced by their Jewish backgrounds for me to include in the article.
I subsequently learned that his father was failing at this time and died
about a week before he came to Boskone. In short David Brin was a mensch.
I was at Boskone but didn't witness the brouhaha. However since some seem
to take a special glee in getting their licks in, I thought a word on a
different aspect of the author was worth noting.
Vlatko Juric-Kokic
<dan.k...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
(David Brin)
>However since some seem
>to take a special glee in getting their licks in, I thought a word on a
>different aspect of the author was worth noting.
I also did a (quasy) interview with David Brin, for the fanzine down
in sig. And he was also quite pleasant and helpfull.
But what was written over there in LJ under his name is neither
pleasant nor helpfull.
vlatko
--
http://www.niribanimeso.org/eng/
http://www.michaelswanwick.com/
vlatko.ju...@zg.hinet.hr
Priscilla Ballou
gold...@OCF.Berkeley.EDU (David Goldfarb) wrote:
> There was some discussion here of the incident between Jo and David Brin
> at Boskone. Mr. Brin has posted his version of things in a comment thread
> in Jo's LiveJournal. The main portion is at:
> <http://www.livejournal.com/users/papersky/49836.html>
> with more a little down the street at:
> <http://www.livejournal.com/users/papersky/50358.html>
Point of clarification needed: He refers to the Tor party at Boskone as
being in his honor, since he was GOH at the con. Is that accurate?
Does every party at a con count as being in honor of the GOH? That
seems a little, hmm, self-aggrandizing to me, to take that view.
My sole previous contacts with Mr. Brin being his GOH scold -- ooops! --
speech at Boskone and reading _Startide Rising_, the conclusion I'm
rapidly coming to is "how could he have written that?"
Priscilla
--
"I don't feel comfortable with a boot with my name on it on the throat
of the rest of the world." -- Alan Winston in rec.arts.sf.fandom
Niall McAuley
> Point of clarification needed: He refers to the Tor party at Boskone as
> being in his honor, since he was GOH at the con. Is that accurate?
Well, he said partly in his honor, which is true, but see the reply from
pnh further down. The Tor party is for all Tor authors, Jo Walton as much
as David Brin.
--
Niall [real address ends in se, not es.invalid]
Rebecca Ore
> "Priscilla Ballou" <vze2...@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:vze23t8n-183AF3...@news.verizon.net...
> > Point of clarification needed: He refers to the Tor party at Boskone as
> > being in his honor, since he was GOH at the con. Is that accurate?
>
> Well, he said partly in his honor, which is true, but see the reply from
> pnh further down. The Tor party is for all Tor authors, Jo Walton as much
> as David Brin.
Given that his father had just died, I would imagine he was even more
prickly than usual at Boskone, but he's known to be prickly and
throwing coke on him isn't going to change that.
--
Rebecca Ore
http://mysite.verizon.net/rebecca.ore
Manny Olds
> There was some discussion here of the incident between Jo and David
> Brin at Boskone.
I wonder what rock Brin has been living under. One of the basic points
that the women's movement has made and conveyed reasonably successfully is
that it is pretty damned insulting to inject comments on a woman's
appearance into a conversation that touches on her professional
competence.
He's lucky they don't work together. If he did it to a co-worker in the
USA, she could file a harassment or discrimination complaint against him.
--
Manny Olds (old...@pobox.com) of Riverdale Park, Maryland, USA
The Coyote could stop anytime -- IF he were not a fanatic. "A fanatic
is one who redoubles his effort when he has forgotten his aim"
-- George Santayana.
A.C.
news:b69t9q$t8q$1...@news1.radix.net...
> David Goldfarb <gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu> wrote:
> > There was some discussion here of the incident between Jo and David
> > Brin at Boskone.
>
> I wonder what rock Brin has been living under. One of the basic points
> that the women's movement has made and conveyed reasonably successfully is
> that it is pretty damned insulting to inject comments on a woman's
> appearance into a conversation that touches on her professional
> competence.
There is also a code of behavior stating that you shouldn't react physically
to what you perceive as a verbal attack. It's a childish, petty thing to
do.
Manny Olds
Yup. I see that Walton said essentially the same thing in her Livejournal
comments on it and tried to apologize in email as well. It is wrong to
react that way, but not uncommon or surprising.
I was expressing surprise that Brin had committed his faux pas in the
first place--I would have expected the clue fairy to have visited him
sometime closer to 1970.
--
Manny Olds (old...@pobox.com) of Riverdale Park, Maryland, USA
"Miss Manners is sorry to be harsh when society has become so generous
about granting fresh starts. But if we do not judge people on their own
deeds, upon what do we judge them?" -- Miss Manners (Judith Martin)
Nancy Lebovitz
Manny Olds <old...@pobox.com> wrote:
>David Goldfarb <gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu> wrote:
>> There was some discussion here of the incident between Jo and David
>> Brin at Boskone.
>
>I wonder what rock Brin has been living under. One of the basic points
>that the women's movement has made and conveyed reasonably successfully is
>that it is pretty damned insulting to inject comments on a woman's
>appearance into a conversation that touches on her professional
>competence.
>
>He's lucky they don't work together. If he did it to a co-worker in the
>USA, she could file a harassment or discrimination complaint against him.
Could he sue for minor assault or somesuch?
--
Nancy Lebovitz na...@netaxs.com www.nancybuttons.com
Now, with bumper stickers
Using your turn signal is not "giving information to the enemy"
A.C.
> A.C. <nomadi...@removethistomailmehotmail.com> wrote:
> > "Manny Olds" <old...@pobox.com> wrote in message
> > news:b69t9q$t8q$1...@news1.radix.net...
> >> David Goldfarb <gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu> wrote:
> >> > There was some discussion here of the incident between Jo and David
> >> > Brin at Boskone.
> >>
> >> I wonder what rock Brin has been living under. One of the basic points
> >> that the women's movement has made and conveyed reasonably successfully
is
> >> that it is pretty damned insulting to inject comments on a woman's
> >> appearance into a conversation that touches on her professional
> >> competence.
>
> > There is also a code of behavior stating that you shouldn't react
physically
> > to what you perceive as a verbal attack. It's a childish, petty thing
to
> > do.
>
> Yup. I see that Walton said essentially the same thing in her Livejournal
> comments on it and tried to apologize in email as well. It is wrong to
> react that way, but not uncommon or surprising.
> I was expressing surprise that Brin had committed his faux pas in the
> first place--I would have expected the clue fairy to have visited him
> sometime closer to 1970.
Of course, we're all assuming that Walton's account of the incident is the
correct one, while Brin's isn't.
Some of his essays have irritated me to a certain extent, so I'm sure he can
be equally exasperating in real life, but I still think he was the victim
here. If she honestly has tried to avoid a public argument about this, then
her hangers-on share the blame as well (though the kind of people attracted
to the hanger-on lifestyle aren't known for their consciousness of dignity).
A.C.
news:fr%ha.128$rn.1...@newshog.newsread.com...
> In article <b69t9q$t8q$1...@news1.radix.net>,
> Manny Olds <old...@pobox.com> wrote:
> >David Goldfarb <gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu> wrote:
> >> There was some discussion here of the incident between Jo and David
> >> Brin at Boskone.
> >
> >I wonder what rock Brin has been living under. One of the basic points
> >that the women's movement has made and conveyed reasonably successfully
is
> >that it is pretty damned insulting to inject comments on a woman's
> >appearance into a conversation that touches on her professional
> >competence.
> >
> >He's lucky they don't work together. If he did it to a co-worker in the
> >USA, she could file a harassment or discrimination complaint against him.
>
> Could he sue for minor assault or somesuch?
He should have just poured his drink on her head and evened things up.
Joel Rosenberg
No, he shouldn't have. Regardless of the relative accuracy of the
accounts -- which seem pretty consistent in the major details, all in
all -- that's the sort of thing that could easily escalate, and get
real, real bad. What if one of the bystanders, for example, didn't
understand that his intent was to just "even things up"? That could
easily have escalated, very badly, and somebody could have gotten
seriously hurt.
Regardless of who behaved badly and how, responding physically to what
was, at worst, a very minor assault would have been a very bad idea.
--
------------------------------------------------------------
http://islamthereligionofpeace.blogspot.com
James J. Walton
On 31 Mar 2003, Manny Olds wrote:
> I wonder what rock Brin has been living under. One of the basic points
> that the women's movement has made and conveyed reasonably successfully is
> that it is pretty damned insulting to inject comments on a woman's
> appearance into a conversation that touches on her professional
> competence.
This is not a comment on the Brin/Walton problem but a comment in general
about your statement.
In many newspapers when a woman is interviewed, profiled, etc. there is
always a paragraph talking about how she is dressed, her hair and her
make-up. I find this very demeaning and I don't know why it continues.
It usually takes away from the message the lady is trying to deliver.
As you say, such statements really don't belong in anything touching on
the woman's professional competence.
Several years ago, when I was getting my Journalism degree, I asked a
guest speaker, an editor for a local paper, why reporters continued to
include such fluff. His answer was that if such info is not included, no
matter what, the paper got dozens of letters and phone calls asking for
the fashion info.
Robert Sneddon
Walton <jjwa...@telerama.com> writes
>
>In many newspapers when a woman is interviewed, profiled, etc. there is
>always a paragraph talking about how she is dressed, her hair and her
>make-up. I find this very demeaning and I don't know why it continues.
When a male businessman or politician is being interviewed, his dress
can be taken as read -- sober suit with tie, neat hair. If there is
something "odd" such as Al Gore's beard then it becomes news and worthy
of spending some precious column inches to describe. Ditto for, say,
Richard Branson's sweaters.
Since there isn't such a uniform for women in business and political
life then mention is often made of what they wear.
>Several years ago, when I was getting my Journalism degree, I asked a
>guest speaker, an editor for a local paper, why reporters continued to
>include such fluff. His answer was that if such info is not included, no
>matter what, the paper got dozens of letters and phone calls asking for
>the fashion info.
Give the people what they want. This surprises you?
--
Robert Sneddon nojay (at) nojay (dot) fsnet (dot) co (dot) uk
Elisabeth Riba
> Of course, we're all assuming that Walton's account of the incident is the
> correct one, while Brin's isn't.
First of all, having read both accounts, I don't see either one as
"correct" or "incorrect" just different perceptions of the same event.
Jo Walton's original account was posted at
http://www.livejournal.com/users/papersky/35050.html
David Brin's account was posted first in response to the above, at
http://www.livejournal.com/users/papersky/35050.html?thread=414698
http://www.livejournal.com/users/papersky/35050.html?thread=415466
And then in a more recent post of hers, Brin repeated and elaborated:
http://www.livejournal.com/users/papersky/49836.html?thread=419500
http://www.livejournal.com/users/papersky/49836.html?thread=419756
http://www.livejournal.com/users/papersky/49836.html?thread=420012
Brin made further comments in this thread:
http://www.livejournal.com/users/papersky/50358.html
Comparing their respective descriptions of what happened that evening,
they don't seem that incompatible, especially if one takes a Rashomon
approach that perceptions vary, especially when recounting
emotionally-charged events.
In fact, most of the disagreement involves one party taking offense at
something the other meant harmlessly, and the other party not recognizing
the intensity of the other's feelings until everything exploded.
That said, I have noticed some factual errors in Brin's account that make
him appear egocentric, such as the way he describes the party ("Jo
Walton... came to a party my publisher threw partly in my honor" fails to
acknowledge that Walton is also a Tor author) and the Tolkien panel they
shared previously (it was "Did Tolkien Harm Fantasy?" not "Tolkien and
romantacism" and the description makes no assertions it was "set up to
discuss assertions from" Brin's essay in Salon. I did not attend the
panel, so can't address his comments about what happened during it, but
http://www.geocities.com/evelynleeper/bosk40.htm#tolkien is a con report
and http://www.livejournal.com/users/papersky/35050.html?thread=248042
has some further comments from the days immediately after the con.
In her initial complaint, Walton acknowledged she was impulsive and
intemperate, but said she felt she was condescended and patronised to.
So, the fact that many of Brin's responses have also had a condescending
and patronising tone, does give a certain credence to her story.
Again, I'm not accusing Brin of lying -- I'm sure his account is how he
sees it -- but the way he's responding is reinforcing some of the opinions
he's railing against.
> If she honestly has tried to avoid a public argument about this, then
> her hangers-on share the blame as well (though the kind of people attracted
> to the hanger-on lifestyle aren't known for their consciousness of dignity).
Hangers-on??? Now, I think that's unfair.
I'd like some names or links for those who you're blaming this on.
Since Brin's recent revival of the issue, I searched the web for other
mention of this incident. I found it mentioned in two con reports, and I
saw a lot of curiousity among fen about happened, which seems utterly
reasonable when there's a dispute between two authors at a con.
Would you characterize these as "hangers-on"?
http://www.steelypips.org/miscellany/boskone40.html
http://www.infinitematrix.net/columns/langford/langford66.html
Langford followed that up with more detail, because "[s]everal people
have demanded -- none more loudly than Pat Cadigan -- to be told every
gory detail" (http://www.ansible.demon.co.uk/cc/cc138.html)
Now, I'll admit, I mentioned the story in my journal, too.
I hadn't heard about the coke incident in my initial con report:
http://www.osmond-riba.org/lis/journal/2003_02_16_j_archive.htm#90332716
I was just describing how Brin's keynote speech rubbed me the wrong way.
In the wake of Walton's anecdote, and all the responses from other people
who had similar issues with Mr. Brin's apparent high-handedness, I
provided a link to the story because it seemed to reinforce what I said
earlier and because I found it somewhat comical.
http://www.osmond-riba.org/lis/journal/2003_02_16_j_archive.htm#90336382
I'm neither person's hanger-on nor am I devoid of "consciousness of dignity"
Frankly, I've read much much more of Brin's work than Walton's.
I wish that Brin had received Walton's apology when she sent it the
following day (http://www.livejournal.com/users/papersky/35725.html)
so this whole thing can be put to rest.
I wish that Jo and David could patch things up, and I hope one day they
both look back on this and laugh (it's a great anecdote)
Insulting people and trying to force people to take sides is not a good
way of going about it.
--
--------------> Elisabeth Anne Riba * l...@osmond-riba.org <--------------
Looking for work in the Boston area. Dynamic professional with over
10 years experience with software interface design, library science,
documentation and end-user support. See http://www.osmond-riba.org/lis
Elisabeth Riba
> I wonder what rock Brin has been living under. One of the basic points
> that the women's movement has made and conveyed reasonably successfully is
> that it is pretty damned insulting to inject comments on a woman's
> appearance into a conversation that touches on her professional
> competence.
As a tangent, this thread made me think of some of my own reactions, and
I'm wondering whether other women in fandom have similar
feelings/experiences or if this is just me.
I was unpopular in high school, and my appearance was a frequent target
for ridicule.
Although I'm a bit better about it now (finding fannish crowds to hang out
with certainly helped) I still feel insecure and self-conscious about my
looks. My initial gut reaction to compliments about my appearance is not
to be flattered, but more often to wonder whether the other person is
serious or just teasing/mocking me.
I've seen surveys that most women are dissatisfied with their looks, but
I'm wondering among fandom whether other women have this kind of response?
Thanks
David G. Bell
gold...@OCF.Berkeley.EDU "David Goldfarb" wrote:
> There was some discussion here of the incident between Jo and David Brin
> at Boskone. Mr. Brin has posted his version of things in a comment thread
> in Jo's LiveJournal. The main portion is at:
> <http://www.livejournal.com/users/papersky/49836.html>
> with more a little down the street at:
> <http://www.livejournal.com/users/papersky/50358.html>
He's posted comments to at least one other entry of Jo's.
I don't think he groks the culture he's intruding on.
From what Charlie Stross wrote, this would appear to be an old weakness.
--
David G. Bell -- SF Fan, Filker, and Punslinger.
"Let me get this straight. You're the KGB's core AI, but you're afraid
of a copyright infringement lawsuit over your translator semiotics?"
From "Lobsters" by Charles Stross.
Kris Hasson-Jones
<l...@osmond-riba.org> submitted the following for your consideration:
>Manny Olds <old...@pobox.com> wrote:
>> I wonder what rock Brin has been living under. One of the basic points
>> that the women's movement has made and conveyed reasonably successfully is
>> that it is pretty damned insulting to inject comments on a woman's
>> appearance into a conversation that touches on her professional
>> competence.
>
>As a tangent, this thread made me think of some of my own reactions, and
>I'm wondering whether other women in fandom have similar
>feelings/experiences or if this is just me.
>I was unpopular in high school, and my appearance was a frequent target
>for ridicule.
>Although I'm a bit better about it now (finding fannish crowds to hang out
>with certainly helped) I still feel insecure and self-conscious about my
>looks. My initial gut reaction to compliments about my appearance is not
>to be flattered, but more often to wonder whether the other person is
>serious or just teasing/mocking me.
>
>I've seen surveys that most women are dissatisfied with their looks, but
>I'm wondering among fandom whether other women have this kind of response?
Not here. I think I'm gorgeous (and I'm being quite sincere here),
and while I appreciate positive comments they don't make a huge
difference to me. (Well, they matter as to my opinion of the person
giving the compliment; naturally I think better of people who can
manage to give a graceful compliment. One of the nicest things anyone
has ever said to me -- and it was at a con -- was "If there's ever a
time when you don't have a man on your arm, I'd be glad to offer you
mine." It was gallant and touching and a very sincere yet
unobjectionable expression of a desire to spend time with me.)
--
Kris Hasson-Jones sni...@pacifier.com
The Talmud says, when a man comes to kill you, kill him first.
Dorothy J Heydt
Elisabeth Riba <l...@osmond-riba.org> wrote:
>
>I was unpopular in high school, and my appearance was a frequent target
>for ridicule.
>Although I'm a bit better about it now (finding fannish crowds to hang out
>with certainly helped) I still feel insecure and self-conscious about my
>looks. My initial gut reaction to compliments about my appearance is not
>to be flattered, but more often to wonder whether the other person is
>serious or just teasing/mocking me.
I always assumed the other person was trying to pull one over on
me. It couldn't, after all, possibly be true, so what does he
really mean and what does he really want?
In more charitable moments I would think, oh well, he's just
trying to be polite, since [as mentioned upthread] traditionally
every woman is more concerned about her appearance than anything.
Dorothy J. Heydt
Albany, California
djh...@kithrup.com
http://www.kithrup.com/~djheydt
Dorothy J Heydt
Kris Hasson-Jones <sni...@pacifier.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 31 Mar 2003 19:20:59 +0000 (UTC), Elisabeth Riba
><l...@osmond-riba.org> submitted the following for your consideration:
>>I've seen surveys that most women are dissatisfied with their looks, but
>>I'm wondering among fandom whether other women have this kind of response?
>
>Not here. I think I'm gorgeous (and I'm being quite sincere here),
>and while I appreciate positive comments they don't make a huge
>difference to me.
Wow. I would take off my hat to you if I were wearing one. (I'm
being sincere too.) I don't think I have ever met another human
female whose self-esteem is so secure that she can be pleased with
her own appearance rather than merely resigned to it. How did
you manage it?
David Dyer-Bennet
> In article <20030331134121...@pong.telerama.com>, James J.
> Walton <jjwa...@telerama.com> writes
> >
> >In many newspapers when a woman is interviewed, profiled, etc. there is
> >always a paragraph talking about how she is dressed, her hair and her
> >make-up. I find this very demeaning and I don't know why it continues.
>
> When a male businessman or politician is being interviewed, his dress
> can be taken as read -- sober suit with tie, neat hair. If there is
> something "odd" such as Al Gore's beard then it becomes news and worthy
> of spending some precious column inches to describe. Ditto for, say,
> Richard Branson's sweaters.
>
> Since there isn't such a uniform for women in business and political
> life then mention is often made of what they wear.
Christ on a stick. That almost makes sense.
Goes to show how fanatical people's obsession with dress is. It's
amazing how little impact it's had on my life (at least that I know
about).
--
David Dyer-Bennet, <dd...@dd-b.net>, <www.dd-b.net/dd-b/>
Photos: <dd-b.lighthunters.net> Snapshots: <www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/>
Dragaera mailing lists: <dragaera.info/>
Anna Feruglio Dal Dan
I'm pleased with my appearence, despite not being gorgeous.
--
Anna Feruglio Dal Dan - ada...@despammed.com - this is a valid address
homepage: http://www.fantascienza.net/sfpeople/elethiomel
English blog: http://annafdd.blogspot.com/
Blog in italiano: http://fulminiesaette.blogspot.com
Annette M. Stroud
I'm pleased with my own appearance, but aware that I am probably
delusional.
When I look at myself in the mirror or in pictures, I think: "There's a
person I can trust."
Annette (near-sightedness may play a role, too.)
Kris Hasson-Jones
Heydt) submitted the following for your consideration:
Actually, that's a hard question. There are a lot of things I've done
to change my self-definition that partly apply to this particular
point. Part of it was examining what I thought "beautiful" meant and
changing it; part of it was observing my responses to other people's
looks, and feeding that information into my definitions. Another part
was evaluating other people's compliments as sincere and valuable
opinions, rather than discounting them (it's rather insulting to them
to assume people would only compliment me if they have an ulterior
motive).
Grasping that I only see some people (such as magazine models) when
they've been worked over for hours by professionals, and so have no
measuring stick for what they look like first thing in the morning, or
after a hard day, or when they're sick, also helped. And getting made
up for a Glamour Shots photo session helped, too--I look at those
pictures and I'm astounded at how beautiful I am. And it's me, those
don't look false as if I were made up to look like someone else--it's
just me with fancy jewelry and clothing, a little makeup and a real
hairdo instead of my usual pull-a-comb-through-the-wet-hair-and-go
casual look. So the beauty is mine, it's there all the time;
polishing it up helps, of course, but it's still there even without
the polish.
And deciding that if some clothes aren't flattering it's because the
designer screwed up, not that my body isn't attractive-it is, in the
right clothes, or out of them for that matter. That one was just
telling myself that, over and over, until it sunk in and was true.
I have also, all my life, as a game when traveling, looked at people
and imagined what their lover would say was their best feature--eyes,
hair, face, shoulders, what have you. Looking for the beauty in
others helped me find it in myself.
So, it's complicated, and I've been doing it for a long time.
Mark Jones
Well--it helps that she _is_ gorgeous....
Anna Feruglio Dal Dan
> I have also, all my life, as a game when traveling, looked at people
> and imagined what their lover would say was their best feature--eyes,
> hair, face, shoulders, what have you. Looking for the beauty in
> others helped me find it in myself.
I've been doing that myself. Looking at a lot of non-glamour photos
helped this way - you can't pass through a Salgado exibition and don't
come away with a new and wonderful, and deeply touching, definition of
beauty.
Joel Rosenberg
Yeah, but I've known other gorgeous women who were obsessed about the
significance of physical failings that, it seemed to me, were either
nonexistent or preposterously trivial.
--
------------------------------------------------------------
http://islamthereligionofpeace.blogspot.com
Dorothy J Heydt
We could say necessary-but-not-sufficient. I have seen a goodish
number of gorgeous people in my life, but never before one who
thought so herself.
Andrew Plotkin
> A.C. <nomadi...@removethistomailmehotmail.com> wrote:
>> Of course, we're all assuming that Walton's account of the incident is the
>> correct one, while Brin's isn't.
> First of all, having read both accounts, I don't see either one as
> "correct" or "incorrect" just different perceptions of the same event.
> Jo Walton's original account was posted at
> http://www.livejournal.com/users/papersky/35050.html
> David Brin's account was posted first in response to the above, at
> http://www.livejournal.com/users/papersky/35050.html?thread=414698
> http://www.livejournal.com/users/papersky/35050.html?thread=415466
> And then in a more recent post of hers, Brin repeated and elaborated:
> http://www.livejournal.com/users/papersky/49836.html?thread=419500
> http://www.livejournal.com/users/papersky/49836.html?thread=419756
> http://www.livejournal.com/users/papersky/49836.html?thread=420012
> Brin made further comments in this thread:
> http://www.livejournal.com/users/papersky/50358.html
> Comparing their respective descriptions of what happened that evening,
> they don't seem that incompatible, especially if one takes a Rashomon
> approach that perceptions vary, especially when recounting
> emotionally-charged events.
> In fact, most of the disagreement involves one party taking offense at
> something the other meant harmlessly, and the other party not recognizing
> the intensity of the other's feelings until everything exploded.
They also disagree about intent. ...I just deleted a two-paragraph
parallel-structure summary of the whole mess, which was clarifying to
write but won't improve life here.
However, David Brin starts out saying:
> Actually, my first response was amusement. It could have settled as
> a minor, weird event if not for the subsequent campaign of
> justification and rationalization, spiralling with each telling,
> making the victim out to be a terrorizing bully. How familiar. And
> what a damnable lie.
(The "campaign" being attributed to Jo Walton and (variously) her
"posse", "group", "pals".)
This goes way beyond the original event, and into the actions of
everyone who has said anything about it in the month and a half since
then.
As far as I know, Jo has not commented on the incident in any public
or semipublic (weblogish) forum, except for her original account on
Feb 17, and a comment on Mar 30. (The latter is solely an apology
reposted from email.) The original account does not refer to David as
a terrorizing bully. It says "smugly condescending and patronising and
sexist", and it says he deserved to have a Coke poured on his head.
Anything beyond that is, to use a future-fictional idiom I made up,
Net foam. Some people said stuff, some of which might have been that
severe, or less so; and some of them might be more or less
well-informed; and some of them might be more or less personally
invested in what they said; but so what. It's the Net. People say
stuff. It's no more organized or definitive than the "dogpile"
incidents we get on RASFF.
*My* opinion is that David Brin is wearing intensely mud-colored
glasses in his perception of the scale, intensity, malice, and
Jo-Walton-mastermindedness of the comments he's read.
Or, more bluntly, he's in Freak-Out Mode and not particularly talking
to reality on this issue.
--Z
"And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these were the borogoves..."
*
* Make your vote count. Get your vote counted.
Kris Hasson-Jones
submitted the following for your consideration:
>Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
[I am proud of my appearance]
>> Wow. I would take off my hat to you if I were wearing one. (I'm
>> being sincere too.) I don't think I have ever met another human
>> female whose self-esteem is so secure that she can be pleased with
>> her own appearance rather than merely resigned to it. How did
>> you manage it?
>
>Well--it helps that she _is_ gorgeous....
Thank you, dear.
Another big piece of liking your appearance is having it be acceptable
when people are attracted to you because of your appearance. For
example, Mark spotted my cleavage at a party and decided to lean over
the arm of the couch I was sitting on to get better acquainted. <g>
Unbraiding finding physical attributes (of anything, not just other
people) attractive from automatically meaning a person was shallow
(and bad) was another thing I did. It's had wonderful, serendipitous
effects.
Pete McCutchen
Lebovitz) wrote:
>In article <b69t9q$t8q$1...@news1.radix.net>,
>Manny Olds <old...@pobox.com> wrote:
>>David Goldfarb <gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu> wrote:
>>> There was some discussion here of the incident between Jo and David
>>> Brin at Boskone.
>>
>>I wonder what rock Brin has been living under. One of the basic points
>>that the women's movement has made and conveyed reasonably successfully is
>>that it is pretty damned insulting to inject comments on a woman's
>>appearance into a conversation that touches on her professional
>>competence.
>>
>>He's lucky they don't work together. If he did it to a co-worker in the
>>USA, she could file a harassment or discrimination complaint against him.
>
>Could he sue for minor assault or somesuch?
Of course he could. By her own account, Jo committed a battery upon
him. But the cost of such a lawsuit would exceed whatever dubious
benefits might be achieved by pursuing it.
--
Pete McCutchen
Pete McCutchen
But that's where he does indeed have a valid point. I've never met
Brin, but he describes himself as being a large man. Jo has described
herself as being a small women. If a small woman commits a minor
battery against a large man, he is precluded from responding in kind.
If another man of approximately equal perceived physical prowess had
dumped Coke on Brin's head, there's at least some chance that he'd
have punched the guy in the nose. But because of gender and size
differences, Brin was precluded from so responding. And Jo knew that.
--
Pete McCutchen
A.C.
news:98kd8vkvve3069erf...@4ax.com...
> But that's where he does indeed have a valid point. I've never met
> Brin, but he describes himself as being a large man. Jo has described
> herself as being a small women. If a small woman commits a minor
> battery against a large man, he is precluded from responding in kind.
> If another man of approximately equal perceived physical prowess had
> dumped Coke on Brin's head, there's at least some chance that he'd
> have punched the guy in the nose. But because of gender and size
> differences, Brin was precluded from so responding. And Jo knew that.
True. In his case I might have done it anyway, but I've never considered
myself very gentlemanly.
Vicki Rosenzweig
18:04:59 GMT:
>In article <b69t9q$t8q$1...@news1.radix.net>,
>Manny Olds <old...@pobox.com> wrote:
>>David Goldfarb <gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu> wrote:
>>> There was some discussion here of the incident between Jo and David
>>> Brin at Boskone.
>>
>>I wonder what rock Brin has been living under. One of the basic points
>>that the women's movement has made and conveyed reasonably successfully is
>>that it is pretty damned insulting to inject comments on a woman's
>>appearance into a conversation that touches on her professional
>>competence.
>>
>>He's lucky they don't work together. If he did it to a co-worker in the
>>USA, she could file a harassment or discrimination complaint against him.
>
>Could he sue for minor assault or somesuch?
Anyone can sue for anything.
Given that he put his hands on her, without permission, first, I doubt
that he could win the lawsuit. I don't know his intentions--unlike David
Brin, I don't believe that I know the intentions of the other people who
were at that party--but I observed his actions. He is, as noted, larger
than Jo Walton. He was speaking loudly, interrupting her when she tried
to answer, and was standing between her and the door.
Her action did him no physical harm (by his own testimony).
I don't think there's a lawsuit there.
--
Vicki Rosenzweig | v...@redbird.org
r.a.sf.f faq at http://www.redbird.org/rassef-faq.html
Mark Jones
> On Mon, 31 Mar 2003 14:03:13 -0800, Mark Jones <sin...@pacifier.com>
> submitted the following for your consideration:
>
>
>>Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>
>
> [I am proud of my appearance]
>
>
>>>Wow. I would take off my hat to you if I were wearing one. (I'm
>>>being sincere too.) I don't think I have ever met another human
>>>female whose self-esteem is so secure that she can be pleased with
>>>her own appearance rather than merely resigned to it. How did
>>>you manage it?
>>
>>Well--it helps that she _is_ gorgeous....
>
>
> Thank you, dear.
>
> Another big piece of liking your appearance is having it be acceptable
> when people are attracted to you because of your appearance. For
> example, Mark spotted my cleavage at a party and decided to lean over
> the arm of the couch I was sitting on to get better acquainted. <g>
Uhhmm...I'd like to point out that I wasn't nearly as obvious about
ogling her as it may seem from this description. Kris didn't even
notice (though her companion did, and mentioned it later).
A.C.
> Comparing their respective descriptions of what happened that evening,
> they don't seem that incompatible,
Actually they seem to differ widely as to the nature of the
conversation.
> That said, I have noticed some factual errors in Brin's account that make
> him appear egocentric,
Oh, I have no doubt.
>such as the way he describes the party ("Jo
> Walton... came to a party my publisher threw partly in my honor" fails to
> acknowledge that Walton is also a Tor author) and the Tolkien panel they
> shared previously (it was "Did Tolkien Harm Fantasy?" not "Tolkien and
> romantacism" and the description makes no assertions it was "set up to
> discuss assertions from" Brin's essay in Salon. I did not attend the
> panel, so can't address his comments about what happened during it, but
> http://www.geocities.com/evelynleeper/bosk40.htm#tolkien is a con report
> and http://www.livejournal.com/users/papersky/35050.html?thread=248042
> has some further comments from the days immediately after the con.
>
> In her initial complaint, Walton acknowledged she was impulsive and
> intemperate, but said she felt she was condescended and patronised to.
Which isn't really a justification. Especially for a professional
writer who you would think could come up with a witty comeback. I
guess I just don't really understand the mindset. I guess I could
pour soda on someone's head in an argument, but I certainly couldn't
do it spontaneously; I'd have to psychologically work my way up to it,
overcoming a lifetime of programming that says that kind of behavior
is unacceptable.
> Now, I'll admit, I mentioned the story in my journal, too.
> I hadn't heard about the coke incident in my initial con report:
> http://www.osmond-riba.org/lis/journal/2003_02_16_j_archive.htm#90332716
> I was just describing how Brin's keynote speech rubbed me the wrong way.
> In the wake of Walton's anecdote, and all the responses from other people
> who had similar issues with Mr. Brin's apparent high-handedness, I
> provided a link to the story because it seemed to reinforce what I said
> earlier and because I found it somewhat comical.
> http://www.osmond-riba.org/lis/journal/2003_02_16_j_archive.htm#90336382
From your page:
Ian and I were trying to figure out what separates him from Harlan
Ellison, who also has a reputation for disagreeability. But the
difference is that Harlan seems to do his homework and respects
thinking people who challenge him.
I guess it's a matter of opinion. What I think separates Ellison from
Brin is Ellison's resort to physical retalation over arguments (think
Charles Platt). I guess from reading the other messages on this
thread I have a harsher appraisal of this kind of behavior than
everyone else, while a greater tolerance for verbal obnoxiousness.
> I'm neither person's hanger-on nor am I devoid of "consciousness of dignity"
> Frankly, I've read much much more of Brin's work than Walton's.
My "hanger-on" comment was referring to the people who seem to post
regular replies to Walton's livejournal page, and made snide comments
and ad hominems against Brin while claiming the cola pouring was a
good thing.
> I wish that Brin had received Walton's apology when she sent it the
> following day (http://www.livejournal.com/users/papersky/35725.html)
> so this whole thing can be put to rest.
> I wish that Jo and David could patch things up, and I hope one day they
> both look back on this and laugh (it's a great anecdote)
Eh, nothing wrong with hostility between authors.
> Insulting people and trying to force people to take sides is not a good
> way of going about it.
It's a side-effect of the propensity towards cliques in fandom I
think.
Rebecca Ore
> Or, more bluntly, he's in Freak-Out Mode and not particularly talking
> to reality on this issue.
>
In this case, his dad had just died, what two weeks before. Cut the
man some slack. Being a *famous*[1] s.f. novelist doesn't make anyone
invulnerable or always emotionally on track.
[1] Except for a very few exceptions, and Brin's not one of them, SF
novelists aren't famous in any real sense. Most of the public would
see having s.f. published as equivalent to being a web designer or
writing computer games.
--
Rebecca Ore
http://mysite.verizon.net/rebecca.ore
Kate Nepveu
>"Priscilla Ballou" <vze2...@verizon.net> wrote in message news:vze23t8n-183AF3...@news.verizon.net...
>> Point of clarification needed: He refers to the Tor party at Boskone as
>> being in his honor, since he was GOH at the con. Is that accurate?
>Well, he said partly in his honor, which is true, but see the reply from
>pnh further down. The Tor party is for all Tor authors, Jo Walton as much
>as David Brin.
And random Tor readers, frankly, too. *raises hand*
(I think it was the 2002 Boskone that people kept asking me if I
worked at Tor. "No, I just read a lot of their books.")
--
Kate Nepveu
E-mail: kne...@steelypips.org
Home: http://www.steelypips.org/
Book log: http://www.steelypips.org/weblog/
Kate Nepveu
>Elisabeth Riba <l...@osmond-riba.org> wrote in message news:<b6a3qv$99g$1...@reader2.panix.com>...
>> I'm neither person's hanger-on nor am I devoid of "consciousness of dignity"
>> Frankly, I've read much much more of Brin's work than Walton's.
>My "hanger-on" comment was referring to the people who seem to post
>regular replies to Walton's livejournal page,
Normally those are called "friends." (In the non-LJ-specific sense.)
>and made snide comments
>and ad hominems against Brin while claiming the cola pouring was a
>good thing.
The problem I have with the phrase is that it seems to imply to me
that Jo should take some responsibility for the alleged "hangers-on,"
which I don't really think is fair. She said she shouldn't have done
it, she apologized. It seems to me that's as much as she could do.
A.C.
news:bpmh8v8bi6evnsdp8...@news.verizon.net...
> nomadi...@hotmail.com (A.C.) wrote:
> >Elisabeth Riba <l...@osmond-riba.org> wrote in message
news:<b6a3qv$99g$1...@reader2.panix.com>...
>
> >> I'm neither person's hanger-on nor am I devoid of "consciousness of
dignity"
> >> Frankly, I've read much much more of Brin's work than Walton's.
>
> >My "hanger-on" comment was referring to the people who seem to post
> >regular replies to Walton's livejournal page,
>
> Normally those are called "friends." (In the non-LJ-specific sense.)
You argue with friends. You tell them when they've dumb something wrong.
You don't validate every action they do.
> >and made snide comments
> >and ad hominems against Brin while claiming the cola pouring was a
> >good thing.
>
> The problem I have with the phrase is that it seems to imply to me
> that Jo should take some responsibility for the alleged "hangers-on,"
> which I don't really think is fair. She said she shouldn't have done
> it, she apologized. It seems to me that's as much as she could do.
I never said she should do more. And the term "hanger-on" does not imply
responsibility on Walton's part; in fact, the phrase itself denotes the
other person is doing the action. If I felt she had responsibility or
control over them, I'd refer to them as "flunkies".
Marilee J. Layman
(David Goldfarb) wrote:
>There was some discussion here of the incident between Jo and David Brin
>at Boskone. Mr. Brin has posted his version of things in a comment thread
>in Jo's LiveJournal. The main portion is at:
><http://www.livejournal.com/users/papersky/49836.html>
>with more a little down the street at:
><http://www.livejournal.com/users/papersky/50358.html>
>
I see he thinks he's a "giant."
--
Marilee J. Layman
Handmade Bali Sterling Beads at Wholesale
http://www.basicbali.com
Marilee J. Layman
<vlatko.ju...@zg.hinet.hr> wrote:
>On Mon, 31 Mar 2003 12:03:52 GMT, "Dan Kimmel"
><dan.k...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
>(David Brin)
>>However since some seem
>>to take a special glee in getting their licks in, I thought a word on a
>>different aspect of the author was worth noting.
>
>I also did a (quasy) interview with David Brin, for the fanzine down
>in sig. And he was also quite pleasant and helpfull.
>
>But what was written over there in LJ under his name is neither
>pleasant nor helpfull.
I love how patronizing he is when he does his "dutch uncle chiding" --
he really doesn't have a clue.
Marilee J. Layman
Minions! You missed minions!