![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Renovation, Day Four (8/20)
Aug. 31st, 2011 06:51 pmFor some reason, my notes for Saturday are very sketchy. I went to Biscotti's for breakfast - a frittata, very tasty - and then wandered over to the convention center, where I sipped a mocha and finished reading Quest Crosstime.
The first panel of the day was on physics errors - the ones that SF books and TV have propagated, and leave genuine physicists tearing their hair. Unfortunately, this soon wandered off track; there was an interesting discussion of the difficulties of energy storage, but not much else of note. A panel on "The Real Middle Ages" was more interesting, as the panelists - historians, professional and amateur - defended the period against the canards of popular thought. Not much of what they said was new to me, unfortunately. I went to another linguistics panel, this one on constructing believable languages, whether for fiction or for fun. (I think I goofed in the last post; it was this panel that mentioned the typology of constructed languages.)
The panel on steampunk vs. alternate history was kind of unfocused, but there was an interesting discussion of the tendency of alt-historians to focus on the political and military, at the expense of social or economic changes. The latter, of course, are harder to handle, since it's difficult to identify a specific turning point. I suggested that one possibly-interesting economic turning point might involve accelerating or delaying the discovery of silver in Bohemia in the early Middle Ages, which was critical in reviving the European economy. One panelist pointed out that this would probably not meet with favor from a publisher (true, but beside the point, to my mind); another ranted about the idea that specie had to be gold or silver as being a Western obsession, and that they could have done equally well by choosing some other basis for their currency. (I tried to point out that the reason for the need for specie was the trade imbalance with the East: it was the Arabs, Persians, Indians and Chinese who were demanding it. I don't know if I got that across. Dammit, I've looked into this topic!)
Somewhere around there I began reading Tactics of Mistake.
Another panel featured a Poul Anderson retrospective; his widow and daughter were among the panelists. The discussion focused more on the man than on his works, which was kind of disappointing to me; on the other hand, I hadn't known that Anderson was an active filkwriter. (Must look up "Bouncing Potatoes"....) I also hadn't known that Mrs. Anderson was Poul's historical beta-reader, and that she had often had to correct historical errors on his part. A bit of clay in those feet, I guess.
The last panel had to do with supplying anthropological/archaeological backstory in SF/fantasy. I don't recall much of the discussion, but it's notable that LMB received praise for her handing of social issues in the Vorkosigan saga.
The final event of the day - and the final event of the con proper, for me - was the Hugo awards ceremony. On the whole, it was entertaining; others have chronicled the Garcia Moment, which was indeed moving. The Foglios' acceptance of their Graphic Work Hugo, and their announcement that they were withdrawing from consideration for next year, was another highlight. As for the rest of the awards, I was pleased that "The Life Cycle of Software Objects" and "The Emperor of Mars" won their categories, and absolutely stunned (and not in a good way) by Connie Willis' victory in the Novel category. (Connie is a delightful person, and she's written some wonderful novels, but Blackout/All Clear wasn't one of them. I had ranked it fifth of five on my ballot. It is small consolation to know that Feed - to my mind, the rightful winner - placed second.)
That was Saturday.
The first panel of the day was on physics errors - the ones that SF books and TV have propagated, and leave genuine physicists tearing their hair. Unfortunately, this soon wandered off track; there was an interesting discussion of the difficulties of energy storage, but not much else of note. A panel on "The Real Middle Ages" was more interesting, as the panelists - historians, professional and amateur - defended the period against the canards of popular thought. Not much of what they said was new to me, unfortunately. I went to another linguistics panel, this one on constructing believable languages, whether for fiction or for fun. (I think I goofed in the last post; it was this panel that mentioned the typology of constructed languages.)
The panel on steampunk vs. alternate history was kind of unfocused, but there was an interesting discussion of the tendency of alt-historians to focus on the political and military, at the expense of social or economic changes. The latter, of course, are harder to handle, since it's difficult to identify a specific turning point. I suggested that one possibly-interesting economic turning point might involve accelerating or delaying the discovery of silver in Bohemia in the early Middle Ages, which was critical in reviving the European economy. One panelist pointed out that this would probably not meet with favor from a publisher (true, but beside the point, to my mind); another ranted about the idea that specie had to be gold or silver as being a Western obsession, and that they could have done equally well by choosing some other basis for their currency. (I tried to point out that the reason for the need for specie was the trade imbalance with the East: it was the Arabs, Persians, Indians and Chinese who were demanding it. I don't know if I got that across. Dammit, I've looked into this topic!)
Somewhere around there I began reading Tactics of Mistake.
Another panel featured a Poul Anderson retrospective; his widow and daughter were among the panelists. The discussion focused more on the man than on his works, which was kind of disappointing to me; on the other hand, I hadn't known that Anderson was an active filkwriter. (Must look up "Bouncing Potatoes"....) I also hadn't known that Mrs. Anderson was Poul's historical beta-reader, and that she had often had to correct historical errors on his part. A bit of clay in those feet, I guess.
The last panel had to do with supplying anthropological/archaeological backstory in SF/fantasy. I don't recall much of the discussion, but it's notable that LMB received praise for her handing of social issues in the Vorkosigan saga.
The final event of the day - and the final event of the con proper, for me - was the Hugo awards ceremony. On the whole, it was entertaining; others have chronicled the Garcia Moment, which was indeed moving. The Foglios' acceptance of their Graphic Work Hugo, and their announcement that they were withdrawing from consideration for next year, was another highlight. As for the rest of the awards, I was pleased that "The Life Cycle of Software Objects" and "The Emperor of Mars" won their categories, and absolutely stunned (and not in a good way) by Connie Willis' victory in the Novel category. (Connie is a delightful person, and she's written some wonderful novels, but Blackout/All Clear wasn't one of them. I had ranked it fifth of five on my ballot. It is small consolation to know that Feed - to my mind, the rightful winner - placed second.)
That was Saturday.
