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!
Pete McCutchen
If you or I were to do it, we'd be at risk in a way that Jo was not.
--
Pete McCutchen
Pete McCutchen
wrote:
>>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
It's not always a battery to put your hands on somebody. If you
accidentally bump into somebody on the street, for example, that's not
a battery. You might be negligent, if you're not looking where you're
going, but it's not a battery. Nor is it a battery to tap somebody on
the shoulder, to ask them to move. Which is what he claims he did.
She says he put his arm around her, and that could well be a battery.
But that would be a question of fact, for the jury. If the jury
believed that it was minor, socially-acceptable contact, then it would
be OK. If they thought he was trying to grope here, it wouldn't be
OK.
I suspect that he subjectively believes he merely tapped her on the
shoulder, and that she subjectively believes he put his arm around
her. Not having been there, I make no comment on which story seems
more plausible.
>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.
How large was the room? Was she trying to leave?
>
>Her action did him no physical harm (by his own testimony).
No, but it was a battery. A battery is a harmful or offensive
touching. Jo can't claim that this is socially-acceptable mild
contact, like tapping somebody on the shoulder.
>
>I don't think there's a lawsuit there.
Of course there's not a lawsuit there.
--
Pete McCutchen
Pete McCutchen
wrote:
>>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.
Not really. Maybe Brin was being an egomaniacal jerk. From some of
the things that he's written, I suspect that he was. Perhaps he's
full of himself. He was probably very condescending.
But the fact is that Jo Walton poured Coke all over the guy, and not
in a friendly way. She committed a minor assault, subjecting him to a
certain degree of public humiliation. And he's right that this is an
essentially cowardly act, because he couldn't respond as he would if
the person pouring Coke on him was another man his size.
I have a temper, and I've done things I regretted later. I might very
well do something like that. But I wouldn't then brag about it on the
web.
Oh yes, she said she was a bad girl, and that she shouldn't have done
it, but in reading the account, you could see the smirk on her face.
If I did something like that, I'd be embarrassed about it. I wouldn't
write self-justifying accounts about how he deserved it and I then put
in a little mischievous caveat about how I'd been bad boy. She
humiliated this man in public and then bragged about it. Maybe he's a
jerk, but it seems to me that he's a jerk in a clueless, oblivious
sort of geeky way. She was being intentionally cruel.
Then her groupies start this round of "way to go, Jo!" postings. Now,
maybe she was embarrassed by the fulsome praise she received for her
actions, but she didn't lift a finger to stop it. She let the
"Attagirls!" roll in, apparently enjoying them. Frankly, I thought
the follow up posts were truly disgusting. Some of us here have bad
experiences with bullying and ganging up on people. Well, what do you
think that was? A bunch of people cheering on the local bully, that's
what. Did it make them feel big and important to give the person who
poured Coke on David Brin a virtual pat on the back? Pathetic.
Finally, when he complains about being treated this way, she gives
this half-assed "I'm sorry but you're still a jerk" apology. And
what's more, Brin actually accepted it! If somebody did something to
me like that, and then had the gall to publicly post that sort of
half-assed apology, I'd tell that person to fuck off. Maybe he's a
jerk, but Brin actually showed some class.
I haven't met Jo in person, but I have met her online, and I like her.
Or at least I did like her. I don't particularly like David Brin's
authorial persona, and I can see how maybe he might grate on people if
he's half as conceited in person as he seems to be. But I have to
tell you, I think less of Jo Walton and her supposed friends as a
result of this incident. I don't think she covered herself with glory
at all.
--
Pete McCutchen
Elisabeth Riba
>> 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.
The problem with that explanation is that, according to his comments, he
wasn't freaked out about it at the time; he thought it could be laughable.
It's *now* -- 6 weeks later -- that he's gotten all freaked out 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
David Bilek
>In article <b69t9q$t8q$1...@news1.radix.net>,
> Manny Olds <old...@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>> > There was some discussion here of the incident between Jo and David
>> > Brin at Boskone.
>>
>> 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.
>
>incident (I didn't even hear about it till this thread started), I won't
>claim to have knowledge enough to take sides. But throwing a soft drink
>on a person at a con is very seldom appropriate behavior. If I were in
>a position of responsibility at a con where this happened, I'd insist on
>a very good explanation from the person who threw it. If I wasn't
>satisfied with the explanation, I'd treat it as grounds for expulsion
>from the con. "He made insulting comments about my appearance" wouldn't
>count as a satisfactory explanation.
From what I understand, he made *complimentary* comments about her
appearance. Not insulting comments.
-David
A.C.
> If you or I were to do it, we'd be at risk in a way that Jo was not.
What do you think would happen? I mean, I can't see either of the parties
being taken seriously by the police.
David Bilek
>On Tue, 01 Apr 2003 00:26:03 GMT, Kate Nepveu <kne...@steelypips.org>
>wrote:
>>
>>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.
>
>Not really. Maybe Brin was being an egomaniacal jerk. From some of
>the things that he's written, I suspect that he was. Perhaps he's
>full of himself. He was probably very condescending.
>
>But the fact is that Jo Walton poured Coke all over the guy, and not
>in a friendly way. She committed a minor assault, subjecting him to a
>certain degree of public humiliation. And he's right that this is an
>essentially cowardly act, because he couldn't respond as he would if
>the person pouring Coke on him was another man his size.
>
(snip rest of post because it's very long)
Pete, I agree with what you've quoted so far. But I think you're
drastically misreading Jo's apology. I think Jo was clearly sincere
and is honestly sorry to have lost her temper. It wasn't a smirking
non-apology, it was real. Maybe you've read something I haven't, but
I don't see how you got most of your analysis from the apology I saw.
That said... the chorus of "atta girls!" also disgusted me. How many
of the people jumping on with those were bullied in high school?
Well, guess what? You're no different.
-David
David Bilek
He doesn't mean "at risk" from the police. He means "at risk" from
being punched in the nose. He's right about that part.
-David
Elisabeth Riba
> 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
Why are you writing about "Jo" and "Brin"?
Shouldn't it be either "Jo" and "David" *or* "Brin and "Walton"?
By using her first name and his last name, you're making the same kind of
"poor little female" distinction that you're complaining that she's taking
advantage of.
A.C.
A.C.
> Pete McCutchen <p.mcc...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> > 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
>
> Why are you writing about "Jo" and "Brin"?
>
> Shouldn't it be either "Jo" and "David" *or* "Brin and "Walton"?
>
> By using her first name and his last name, you're making the same kind of
> "poor little female" distinction that you're complaining that she's taking
> advantage of.
If he considers himself to consider Walton (I've been using last names
throughout, but that's me) an acquaintance, then he's justified in making
the distinction. It would be incongruous to refer to Brin as "David" if he
doesn't have the same kind of acquaintanceship.
A.C.
news:c46ia.57$DT2.1...@twister.nyc.rr.com...
> If he considers himself to consider Walton (I've been using last names
> throughout, but that's me) an acquaintance, then he's justified in making
> the distinction. It would be incongruous to refer to Brin as "David" if
he
> doesn't have the same kind of acquaintanceship.
I should have added to the end of that, "and it would be rude to refer to
her as Walton if he had previously been on a first name basis with her."
Randolph Fritz
> Andrew Plotkin <erky...@eblong.com> writes:
>
>> 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.
>
He also probably hasn't experienced a net-style pile-on--what I
sometimes call gang-flaming--before. All that hostility from so many
people can be devastating.
Randolph
David Bilek
>Pete McCutchen <p.mcc...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>> 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
>
>Why are you writing about "Jo" and "Brin"?
>
>Shouldn't it be either "Jo" and "David" *or* "Brin and "Walton"?
>
Because we know Jo from RASFF and RASFW. I expect Pete doesn't know
Brin at all. He'll correct me if I'm wrong, I'm sure.
It's for the same reasons that I use "Pete" and "Brin", but certainly
mean no disrespect to Mssr. McCutchen.
-David
Christopher K Davis
> If you or I were to do it, we'd be at risk in a way that Jo was not.
Yes, but there's very little chance that Brin would try to call me
"good-looking" or "beautiful". (YMMV.)
--
Christopher Davis * <ckd...@ckdhr.com> * <URL:http://www.ckdhr.com/ckd/>
Of course I feel old. The videos I used to watch on MTV (back when they
still showed videos) moved to VH1, and now they're on "VH1 Classic".
David Dyer-Bennet
> Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> > In article <hk6h8vkkt6302fomd...@4ax.com>,
> > 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?
>
> Well--it helps that she _is_ gorgeous....
It's good to have a completely independent, objective, observer verify
that observation.
(Not to say she *isn't* gorgeous. She probably is. Just couldn't
resist the other part.)
--
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/>
K-Mac
<rand...@panix.com> wrote:
>In article <m3wuifh...@pyrophore.ogoense.local>, Rebecca Ore wrote:
>> Andrew Plotkin <erky...@eblong.com> writes:
>>
>>> 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.
>>
>
>He also probably hasn't experienced a net-style pile-on--what I
>sometimes call gang-flaming--before.
Oh, he has, he has.
Pete McCutchen
I thought I remembered that you'd said that your were male. If not,
disregard my comment.
A male who tosses a Coke on another male risks the possibility of
fisticuffs.
--
Pete McCutchen
Pete McCutchen
<l...@osmond-riba.org> wrote:
>Pete McCutchen <p.mcc...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>> 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
>
>Why are you writing about "Jo" and "Brin"?
I know her, at least on-line. If she were to show up here, she could
call me "Pete," and I'd call her Jo. If Brin were to show up, I
assume I'd soon start calling him by his first name, but we are not
presently on a first-name basis.
>
>Shouldn't it be either "Jo" and "David" *or* "Brin and "Walton"?
>
>By using her first name and his last name, you're making the same kind of
>"poor little female" distinction that you're complaining that she's taking
>advantage of.
No. See above.
--
Pete McCutchen
Pete McCutchen
<ckd-...@ckdhr.com> wrote:
>Pete McCutchen <p.mcc...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
>
>> If you or I were to do it, we'd be at risk in a way that Jo was not.
>
>Yes, but there's very little chance that Brin would try to call me
>"good-looking" or "beautiful". (YMMV.)
Don't shortchange yourself; I'm sure you're a very handsome fellow.
--
Pete McCutchen
David Friedman
Rebecca Ore <ogoen...@verizon.net> wrote:
> [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.
Which is what strikes me as neat about the phenomenon of fandom in
general and conventions in particular. You get someone who to his
neighbors has no particular status together with a set of people who
regard him as a celebrity, to the mutual benefit of both. Gains from
trade.
David Dyer-Bennet
> Elisabeth Riba <l...@osmond-riba.org> wrote in message news:<b6a3qv$99g$1...@reader2.panix.com>...
> > 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.
Sure. Any professional writer could. In about 6 months. Unless they
turned the manuscript in a few months, or a few years, late, in which
case that much longer.
Coming up with witty repartee *in realtime* is not part of the job
description at all.
Nancy Lebovitz
Pete McCutchen <p.mcc...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
>Oh yes, she said she was a bad girl, and that she shouldn't have done
>it, but in reading the account, you could see the smirk on her face.
I talked with her the day after, and she wasn't smirking. She seemed
genuinely upset about her behavior.
That smirk is something you're imagining.
--
Nancy Lebovitz na...@netaxs.com www.nancybuttons.com
Now, with bumper stickers
Using your turn signal is not "giving information to the enemy"
David Dyer-Bennet
> Then her groupies start this round of "way to go, Jo!" postings. Now,
> maybe she was embarrassed by the fulsome praise she received for her
> actions, but she didn't lift a finger to stop it. She let the
> "Attagirls!" roll in, apparently enjoying them. Frankly, I thought
> the follow up posts were truly disgusting. Some of us here have bad
> experiences with bullying and ganging up on people. Well, what do you
> think that was? A bunch of people cheering on the local bully, that's
> what. Did it make them feel big and important to give the person who
> poured Coke on David Brin a virtual pat on the back? Pathetic.
What *I* have heard about these comments is that it was the other
victims of the local bully aplauding the person who *finally* stood up
to him.
Rebecca Ore
Or *really* irritating.
--
Rebecca Ore
http://mysite.verizon.net/rebecca.ore
Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr
>Pete McCutchen <p.mcc...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>> 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
>
>Why are you writing about "Jo" and "Brin"?
>
>Shouldn't it be either "Jo" and "David" *or* "Brin and "Walton"?
>
>By using her first name and his last name, you're making the same kind of
>"poor little female" distinction that you're complaining that she's taking
>advantage of.
Another possibility -- which is actually what I thought Pete was doing --
was to use the first name of someone with whom you've interacted (in this
very newsgroup) and the last name of someone who is to you only a public
figure. In the unlikely event that Pete had poured a coke on Ursula K.LeGuin
I might well, in a context where people would have interacted with Pete and
not with Ms. LeGuin, say "Pete poured a coke on Ursula K. LeGuin. Pete says
she deserved it, but LeGuin disagrees."
-- Alan
===============================================================================
Alan Winston --- WIN...@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU
Disclaimer: I speak only for myself, not SLAC or SSRL Phone: 650/926-3056
Paper mail to: SSRL -- SLAC BIN 99, 2575 Sand Hill Rd, Menlo Park CA 94025
===============================================================================
Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr
>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.
>
>Since I'm quite close to Boskone, and have no firsthand knowledge of the
>incident (I didn't even hear about it till this thread started), I won't
>claim to have knowledge enough to take sides. But throwing a soft drink
>on a person at a con is very seldom appropriate behavior. If I were in
>a position of responsibility at a con where this happened, I'd insist on
>a very good explanation from the person who threw it. If I wasn't
>satisfied with the explanation, I'd treat it as grounds for expulsion
>from the con. "He made insulting comments about my appearance" wouldn't
>count as a satisfactory explanation.
>
The degree to which "He made insulting comments about my appearance" isn't the
explanation offered in the actual case is really quite startling.
Also, would you feel justified in expelling somebody from the public part of
the convention for something that happened at a function that wasn't an
official part of the convention?
Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr
But the thing that I think is distinctive about traditional fandom is that
the celebrity then becomes part of the neighborhood without stopping being a
celebrity; that is, so and so may be a Hugo-winning novelist, but they're also
helping to move tables or sitting in a party _listening_.
A.C.
wrote in message news:00A1DB3C...@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU...
The excuse is "he sounded patronizing", which isn't exactly a better excuse.
Jim Bailey
David Brin is one of the sorts of people who wade into flame wars wearing
gasoline-soaked polyester pajamas.
Best,
Jim Bailey
Kris Hasson-Jones
submitted the following for your consideration:
>Mark Jones <sin...@pacifier.com> writes:
>
>> Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>> > In article <hk6h8vkkt6302fomd...@4ax.com>,
>> > 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?
>>
>> Well--it helps that she _is_ gorgeous....
>
>It's good to have a completely independent, objective, observer verify
>that observation.
Giggle. Except that, you know, it doesn't matter to me whether anyone
else thinks I'm gorgeous. In fact that is part of the point, that
what I think of myself is more important than what others think of me,
in this context.
>(Not to say she *isn't* gorgeous. She probably is. Just couldn't
>resist the other part.)
I keep telling Mark we need to put up some pictures of the dog in our
web space; I'm in some of them. <g>
--
Kris Hasson-Jones sni...@pacifier.com
What Would Aragorn Do?
Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr
I wasn't commenting on the merits of the argument _at all_. I was commenting
on the difference between the claims of either side and how Gary had them, the
distance between "he patronized me by trying to divert an argument of substance
with a bogus and irrelevant compliment on my physical appearance" and "he made
insulting comments about my appearance."
Since Jo was unhappy with her own actions and apologized, incidentally, I'd say
what we're arguing about is an explanation, not an excuse.
Rebecca Ore
Not all that many published s.f. writers in the field who are
celebrities even to fans. I'm not.
Two, I think William Butler Yeats said something about the shift
around 1912 from a poet being a particular man with a particular
income to be a culture god. It wasn't healthy for poetry.
Dan Kimmel
"Rebecca Ore" <ogoen...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:m3wuifh...@pyrophore.ogoense.local...
> Andrew Plotkin <erky...@eblong.com> writes:
>
> > 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.
>
> 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.
Well, there's famous and there's famous. He's not Asimov, Bradbury, Clarke
famous, and he's not necessarily a recognizable brand name author to people
outside the field, but he did have a novel made into a major movie
(regardless of whether the movie was any good, the book's still in print),
and he does get published and speak outside the field, such as in Salon.
Who would you classify as among the few exceptions working today?
Dan Kimmel
> ""Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr"" <win...@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>
> wrote in message news:00A1DB3C...@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU...
isn't
> the
> > explanation offered in the actual case is really quite startling.
>
> The excuse is "he sounded patronizing", which isn't exactly a better
excuse.
I agree, and have previously expressed my respect for Brin.
Still, you have to admit it's a better excuse than Bush has come up with for
invading Iraq.
Elisabeth Riba
> 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'd never heard the Charles Platt story, nor any other tales about Harlan
resorting to violence. Can somebody sum it up or point me to an account of
what happened?
--
--------------> 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
> "A.C." <nomadi...@removethistomailmehotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:CZ6ia.74$DT2.2...@twister.nyc.rr.com...
>> The excuse is "he sounded patronizing", which isn't exactly a better
> excuse.
> I agree, and have previously expressed my respect for Brin.
> Still, you have to admit it's a better excuse than Bush has come up with for
> invading Iraq.
Too bad George Bush couldn't've been satisfied by just pouring coke on
Saddam Hussein's head. :)
Avram Grumer
> I have a temper, and I've done things I regretted later. I might
> very well do something like that. But I wouldn't then brag about it
> on the web.
>
> Oh yes, she said she was a bad girl, and that she shouldn't have done
> it, but in reading the account, you could see the smirk on her face.
> If I did something like that, I'd be embarrassed about it. I
> wouldn't write self-justifying accounts about how he deserved it and
> I then put in a little mischievous caveat about how I'd been bad boy.
> She humiliated this man in public and then bragged about it. Maybe
> he's a jerk, but it seems to me that he's a jerk in a clueless,
> oblivious sort of geeky way. She was being intentionally cruel.
I couldn't see a smirk, and I've met Jo in person, which I think gives
me a better sense for the correlation between her written words and her
spoken tone and facial expression. As far as I can tell, she was
genuinely embarassed by what she'd done, and (I suspect) posted partly
as a form of penance.
--
Avram Grumer | av...@grumer.org | http://www.PigsAndFishes.org
"There are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns --
that is to say, there are things that we now know we don't know but
there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we do not know we
don't know." -- Donald Rumsfeld
Avram Grumer
Pete McCutchen <p.mcc...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> 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.
"Responding in kind" to having a beverage poured on one's head means
pouring another beverage back. Punching counts as escalation, in my
book.
Rebecca Ore
Honestly, other than William Gibson, I don't think anyone under 60
writing now is famous to most people the way that say, King is.
Looked at one point that Lucius Sheppard was going that way, but I
haven't seen much from him lately. Sterling is, like Pournelle, known
best for non-fiction, again, outside SF circles.
My other world was poetry and more non-traditional fiction -- Allen
Ginsberg was at one time famous in a way that I don't think any SF
writer has ever been. Most people, on the other hand, wouldn't know
who Michael McClure was, and Lawrence Ferlinghetti thought Philip
Lamantia was dead already. William Burroughs was famous in certain
cirlces, but as much for being part of the Ginsberg circle as anything
else. Ginsberg was both an amazing promoter and someone who came
across in contacts with him as being utterly without ego about being
famous.
Lucy Kemnitzer
Dal Dan) wrote:
>Dorothy J Heydt <djh...@kithrup.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <hk6h8vkkt6302fomd...@4ax.com>,
>> 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?
>
>I'm pleased with my appearence, despite not being gorgeous.
>
If that picture that was on your website a while back (I'm embarrassed
to say it's been a while since I've been back) is really you, I
wouldn't be sure you don't fall into the gorgeous category. But your
features, if they were yours, as they appeared in that photograph, are
the kind that I am imprinted to think are beautiful.
Lucy Kemnitzer
Pete McCutchen
wrote:
>In article <98kd8vkvve3069erf...@4ax.com>,
> Pete McCutchen <p.mcc...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
>> 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.
>
>"Responding in kind" to having a beverage poured on one's head means
>pouring another beverage back. Punching counts as escalation, in my
>book.
Yes. But it's a predictable escalation, and one that a man would have
to consider.
By the way, Joel was quite correct in observing that he was right not
to respond it kind.
--
Pete McCutchen
Pete McCutchen
Lebovitz) wrote:
>In article <gvrd8vs6lm2iuk653...@4ax.com>,
>Pete McCutchen <p.mcc...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>
>>Oh yes, she said she was a bad girl, and that she shouldn't have done
>>it, but in reading the account, you could see the smirk on her face.
>
>I talked with her the day after, and she wasn't smirking. She seemed
>genuinely upset about her behavior.
Then why didn't she seek out Brin and apologize to him then? And why
brag about it online?
>
>That smirk is something you're imagining.
I think it was a reasonable reading of the tone of her comments. If
she can react to Brin's tone, I can certainly react to hers. She said
she was bad, but then undercut this by telling us what a jerk Brin
was, and how much he deserved it. Look at the comments her account
elicited -- she was congratulated. Her groupies were reacting to the
same tone I was reacting to. They certainly wouldn't have been so
adulatory if she had conveyed any genuine sense of shame or remorse.
--
Pete McCutchen
Pete McCutchen
<l...@osmond-riba.org> wrote:
>Rebecca Ore <ogoen...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> Andrew Plotkin <erky...@eblong.com> writes:
>
>>> 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.
>
>The problem with that explanation is that, according to his comments, he
>wasn't freaked out about it at the time; he thought it could be laughable.
>It's *now* -- 6 weeks later -- that he's gotten all freaked out about it.
After he found out that he was being ridiculed by Jo and her groupies.
--
Pete McCutchen
Pete McCutchen
<rand...@panix.com> wrote:
>In article <m3wuifh...@pyrophore.ogoense.local>, Rebecca Ore wrote:
>> Andrew Plotkin <erky...@eblong.com> writes:
>>
>>> 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.
>>
>
>He also probably hasn't experienced a net-style pile-on--what I
>sometimes call gang-flaming--before. All that hostility from so many
>people can be devastating.
Note that Jo did _nothing_ to reign in that hostility.
--
Pete McCutchen
David Friedman
Rebecca Ore <ogoen...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > Which is what strikes me as neat about the phenomenon of fandom in
> > general and conventions in particular. You get someone who to his
> > neighbors has no particular status together with a set of people who
> > regard him as a celebrity, to the mutual benefit of both. Gains from
> > trade.
>
> Not all that many published s.f. writers in the field who are
> celebrities even to fans. I'm not.
Not to all fans or not to any fans?
I would have thought that you would have some extra status at an sf con
that you wouldn't have in most other places, even if not as much as
someone who had published more and was better known. And, while I can't
speak to you, a lot of people enjoy the feeling of extra status.
Lis Carey
news:I8Wha.36358$ja4.2...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:
>
> "David Goldfarb" <gold...@OCF.Berkeley.EDU> wrote in message
> news:b694t4$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.
He was perfectly sweet and polite when I asked him to sign your book and
mine, and he stands out as one of a relative handful of authors who've
taken the time to _look_ at how my name is spelled (with an "s", not a "z")
rather than just writing it the more common way. I think in a lot of ways,
he's a polite, thoughtful, respectful guy.
But his interaction with Jo wasn't covering him with glory even before this
latest round.
(And I'll note in passing that neither you nor I were doing anything that
would have been remotely challenging to a tender ego.)
--
Lis Carey
http://www.nesfa.org/reviews/Carey/index.html
Kris Hasson-Jones
<p.mcc...@worldnet.att.net> submitted the following for your
consideration:
>On Tue, 1 Apr 2003 01:28:59 +0000 (UTC), Elisabeth Riba
I think that the various words used to refer to the people who have
supported Jo are pretty insulting. It's not as if some sekrit email
went out, instructing us all to pile on Brin; and calling us
"groupies" isn't exactly complimentary, as what I think of when I see
that word are the women who'd have sex with anybody on a rock band
tour just to share the glamour. I don't see any relationship between
that behavior and people who have read Jo's account of what happened
deciding to add a supportive message, or chime in with their opinion
of Mr. Brin based on their personal knowledge of him.
Avram Grumer
Pete McCutchen <p.mcc...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Mar 2003 22:37:56 -0500, Avram Grumer <av...@grumer.org>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <98kd8vkvve3069erf...@4ax.com>,
> > Pete McCutchen <p.mcc...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> >
> >> 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.
> >
> >"Responding in kind" to having a beverage poured on one's head means
> >pouring another beverage back. Punching counts as escalation, in my
> >book.
>
> Yes. But it's a predictable escalation, and one that a man would
> have to consider.
Among some groups, getting punched would be a predictable reaction to
putting your hand on another guy's shoulder and telling him that he's
attractive. That doesn't make it the right thing to do.
Rebecca Ore
I had more unambiguous status as a minor poet in San Francisco.
Conventions, basically, scare me.
Nancy Lebovitz
Jon Meltzer <jmeltzer.at.pobox.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 1 Apr 2003 02:03:37 +0000 (UTC), Randolph Fritz
><rand...@panix.com> wrote:
>
>>> Andrew Plotkin <erky...@eblong.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>
>>
>>sometimes call gang-flaming--before. All that hostility from so many
>>people can be devastating.
>
>surprised.
It's quite possible to know about a thing in theory, and not realize
how painful it is until it happens to you.
Did the _The Transparant Society_ have anything about what it's like
if a whole lot of people dislike you?
--
Nancy Lebovitz na...@netaxs.com www.nancybuttons.com
Now, with bumper stickers
Using your turn signal is not "giving information to the enemy"
Lis Carey
news:9a%ha.7$DT2....@twister.nyc.rr.com:
> "Manny Olds" <old...@pobox.com> wrote in message
> news:b69t9q$t8q$1...@news1.radix.net...
>> David Goldfarb <gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu> wrote:
>> > There was some discussion here of the incident between Jo and David
>> > Brin at Boskone.
>>
>> I wonder what rock Brin has been living under. One of the basic
>> points that the women's movement has made and conveyed reasonably
>> successfully is that it is pretty damned insulting to inject comments
>> on a woman's appearance into a conversation that touches on her
>> professional competence.
>
> There is also a code of behavior stating that you shouldn't react
> physically to what you perceive as a verbal attack. It's a childish,
> petty thing to do.
Yes, but Jo knows that, and was deeply embarrassed about her own behavior
almost immediately after she did it.
Lis Carey
news:dq%ha.10$DT2....@twister.nyc.rr.com:
> "Manny Olds" <old...@pobox.com> wrote in message
> news:b69vnl$1m1$1...@news1.radix.net...
>> A.C. <nomadi...@removethistomailmehotmail.com> wrote:
>> > "Manny Olds" <old...@pobox.com> wrote in message
>> > news:b69t9q$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.
The incident occurred at the Tor party at Boskone.
Which is to say, there were many witnesses.
<snip>
Marilee J. Layman
Nope, didn't set herself up as queen, or even duchess.
--
Marilee J. Layman
Handmade Bali Sterling Beads at Wholesale
http://www.basicbali.com
Lis Carey
news:gvrd8vs6lm2iuk653...@4ax.com:
> On Tue, 01 Apr 2003 00:26:03 GMT, Kate Nepveu <kne...@steelypips.org>
> wrote:
>
>>>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.
>
> Not really. Maybe Brin was being an egomaniacal jerk. From some of
> the things that he's written, I suspect that he was. Perhaps he's
> full of himself. He was probably very condescending.
>
> But the fact is that Jo Walton poured Coke all over the guy, and not
> in a friendly way. She committed a minor assault, subjecting him to a
> certain degree of public humiliation. And he's right that this is an
> essentially cowardly act, because he couldn't respond as he would if
> the person pouring Coke on him was another man his size.
>
> I have a temper, and I've done things I regretted later. I might very
> well do something like that. But I wouldn't then brag about it on the
> web.
>
> Oh yes, she said she was a bad girl, and that she shouldn't have done
> it, but in reading the account, you could see the smirk on her face.
> If I did something like that, I'd be embarrassed about it. I wouldn't
> write self-justifying accounts about how he deserved it and I then put
> in a little mischievous caveat about how I'd been bad boy. She
> humiliated this man in public and then bragged about it. Maybe he's a
> jerk, but it seems to me that he's a jerk in a clueless, oblivious
> sort of geeky way. She was being intentionally cruel.
>
> Then her groupies start this round of "way to go, Jo!" postings. Now,
> maybe she was embarrassed by the fulsome praise she received for her
> actions, but she didn't lift a finger to stop it. She let the
> "Attagirls!" roll in, apparently enjoying them. Frankly, I thought
> the follow up posts were truly disgusting. Some of us here have bad
> experiences with bullying and ganging up on people. Well, what do you
> think that was? A bunch of people cheering on the local bully, that's
> what. Did it make them feel big and important to give the person who
> poured Coke on David Brin a virtual pat on the back? Pathetic.
>
> Finally, when he complains about being treated this way, she gives
> this half-assed "I'm sorry but you're still a jerk" apology. And
> what's more, Brin actually accepted it! If somebody did something to
> me like that, and then had the gall to publicly post that sort of
> half-assed apology, I'd tell that person to fuck off. Maybe he's a
> jerk, but Brin actually showed some class.
>
> I haven't met Jo in person, but I have met her online, and I like her.
> Or at least I did like her. I don't particularly like David Brin's
> authorial persona, and I can see how maybe he might grate on people if
> he's half as conceited in person as he seems to be. But I have to
> tell you, I think less of Jo Walton and her supposed friends as a
> result of this incident. I don't think she covered herself with glory
> at all.
>
>
Pete, I was at Boskone, I missed The Incident, but I saw Jo the next day.
She was _deeply_ embarrassed about her behavior; you're imagining the
smirk.
Nancy Lebovitz
Pete McCutchen <p.mcc...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>On Tue, 01 Apr 2003 02:17:36 GMT, na...@unix1.netaxs.com (Nancy
>Lebovitz) wrote:
>
>>In article <gvrd8vs6lm2iuk653...@4ax.com>,
>>Pete McCutchen <p.mcc...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>Oh yes, she said she was a bad girl, and that she shouldn't have done
>>>it, but in reading the account, you could see the smirk on her face.
>>
>>I talked with her the day after, and she wasn't smirking. She seemed
>>genuinely upset about her behavior.
>
>Then why didn't she seek out Brin and apologize to him then? And why
>brag about it online?
>
I don't think she was bragging about it online.
>>
>>That smirk is something you're imagining.
>
>I think it was a reasonable reading of the tone of her comments. If
>she can react to Brin's tone, I can certainly react to hers. She said
>she was bad, but then undercut this by telling us what a jerk Brin
>was, and how much he deserved it. Look at the comments her account
>elicited -- she was congratulated. Her groupies were reacting to the
>same tone I was reacting to. They certainly wouldn't have been so
>adulatory if she had conveyed any genuine sense of shame or remorse.
There were people who were pleased with Brin having had a coke dumped
on him before Jo had posted anything. This suggests that what Jo
wrote isn't entirely responsible for their reactions.