| Author | Message | ||
     Gcw (Gcw) Username: Gcw Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.156.38.102 |
Home safe & a bit frazzzled...Soozy & I had a great time at Fcon, in fact we enjoyed it even more than last years, it was great to meet up with everyone again, and also good to talk with some new faces who we maybe didn't know well enough to talk to last year. A huge thanks from me to everyone who bought 'A Paralellogram Of Suitcases'. You don't know how much it means to me to know my music is out there in the world, I do hope you enjoy it and PLEASE - give me your comments, I do need to know. Gawd bless, better go - It's a school day tomorrow  gcw (& Soozy) | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.26.90.161 |
It was a blast and a ball! I was so delirious at one point that I decided to headbutt the floor in celebration. Thanks for helping me cope with the aftereffects, GCW.  Oh, and can you get Soozy to email me for membership details? | ||
| Kathleen (Kathleen) Username: Kathleen Registered: 09-2009 Posted From: 93.96.181.75 |
I had a lovely, lovely time and it was great to finally meet so many of you! Thanks to you all for making me feel so welcome. | ||
| Mick Curtis (Mick) Username: Mick Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.176.7.50 |
It was a good'un, to be sure, and nice to meet you, Kathleen! A weekend of drinking, excitement and book-buying - can't be beat! | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.26.90.161 |
GCW: Silly me! Brain scrambled. She already gave me them. I'll log her in now. | ||
| Allybird (Allybird) Username: Allybird Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 80.47.230.153 |
You feeling better Gary? | ||
| Allybird (Allybird) Username: Allybird Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 80.47.230.153 |
That would be Gary F.. | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.26.90.161 |
Not so bad, thanks. I've got a massive bruise on my chin, my left facial cheekbone hurts as well as my left knee and my left hand. But brain is fine, thanks. (That's debatable! - ed.) Went to docs today and had a blood test, but it should all be OK. | ||
| Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.47 |
That sounds like an extreme curry to do all that to you... | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.26.90.161 |
No, I had a fight with Ramsey Campbell and he got me a good one with a Scouser's haymaker. | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 82.38.75.85 |
Blimey! Sounds like you had a great con, Gary! Seriously, what happened to you? And are there any pictures?  Glad everyone had a great time anyway - I just wish I could have been there too. | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.26.90.161 |
I collapsed, Caroline. Nowt serious, it turns out. Here's the best thing, though: in my delirium, I realised that GCW had been assisted in taking me to my room by Stephen Volk . . . a man who, in Afterlife, wrote a story about a psychologist with a brain tumour. What a mindfuck! | ||
| Kate (Kathleen) Username: Kathleen Registered: 09-2009 Posted From: 93.96.181.75 |
Next time, Gary, ask someone to loosen your stays before dinner so you don't swoon. Curry and corsets are a dangerous combination.  | ||
| Skunsworth (Skunsworth) Username: Skunsworth Registered: 05-2009 Posted From: 78.148.91.60 |
Spend any length of time with Stephen Volk and your mind tends to get a bit fucked! I never had a chance to talk with you this weekend, Gary - sorry! FCon either needs to be longer, or they need to limit the number of people they allow in, I can't get round everyone the way things are... S | ||
| Steve Bacon (Stevebacon) Username: Stevebacon Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 90.209.11.186 |
hope you're feeling better, Gary F. | ||
| Soozy (Soozy) Username: Soozy Registered: 09-2009 Posted From: 86.156.38.102 |
Wooooo Hoooooo.....I have my own log in now.....so no more messages from me pretending to be GCW! Soozy | ||
| Des (Des) Username: Des Registered: 06-2008 Posted From: 86.169.218.237 |
I, too, hope you're feeling better, Gary. des | ||
| Gcw (Gcw) Username: Gcw Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.156.38.102 |
Gawd. gcw | ||
| Allybird (Allybird) Username: Allybird Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 80.47.38.76 |
Great to have you here Soozy! | ||
| Mark_lynch (Mark_lynch) Username: Mark_lynch Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 217.171.129.69 |
Howdy, Soozy. We haven't met: I'm the good-looking one. The others keep me invisible in a cage, cos they're so ugly they're jealous... Well, they think they keep me in a cage. Because I'm invisible, I just walk by and rattle the bars to make them think I'm in there. Hey, Gary - hope you're feeling better soon. You're fast approaching the age where you don't bounce any more. Stay well, matey. | ||
| Soozy (Soozy) Username: Soozy Registered: 09-2009 Posted From: 86.156.38.102 |
Hi Mark! | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 82.38.75.85 |
Oh dear, now you've got me feeling all sorry for you, Gary. Nothing like a strange collapse to bring out the mothering instinct in me. You look after yourself, d'you hear? | ||
| Mick Curtis (Mick) Username: Mick Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.106.220.19 |
Welcome aboard, Soozy! | ||
| Kate (Kathleen) Username: Kathleen Registered: 09-2009 Posted From: 93.96.181.75 |
Soozy - a voice of your own at last! Since I'd never met any of you guys (well, make that *most* of you) I couldn't help but imagining you speaking with a male voice before, the vague "GCW" voice I had in my head when I'd read his postings.  And I hope you're better too, Gary. Too much excitement maybe. I'm certainly feeling the emotional drop now that all the fun is over. | ||
| John Llewellyn Probert (John_l_probert) Username: John_l_probert Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.47 |
I'll just pop in here next to Kathleen and say welcome, Soozy! It was lovely to see you & GCW on the weekend! When did GF fall over? I had my trepan kit with me if his brain needed decompressing. | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.26.90.161 |
Simon Kurt U: I couldn't get a word in edgeways - you and McMahon were like a couple of old wives hanging over the backgarden wall. Thanks for good wishes, folks. I'll be okay. I just think a few long weeks caught up with me. | ||
| Mark_lynch (Mark_lynch) Username: Mark_lynch Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 217.171.129.73 |
Must be the Beatles albums reissue... 8 Days A Week... I won't ask about the Norwegian Wood... It'll only invite lewdity. | ||
| Steve Jensen (Stevej) Username: Stevej Registered: 07-2009 Posted From: 82.0.77.233 |
Blimey, hope you're 100% again soon, Gary. Oddly enough, this isn't the first incident of this kind I've read about since FCon ended...although the others concerned might have passed out due to booze or the lovely shock of winning awards. | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.26.90.161 |
At least feeling woozy kept me off the booze. I saved about £50 compared to years before! | ||
| Soozy (Soozy) Username: Soozy Registered: 09-2009 Posted From: 86.156.38.102 |
Hello Kate & John! (she says in a girly voice this time)....It was lovely to see you John and an absolute joy to see you happy and with a big smile and it was a pleasure to meet the lovely Kate | ||
| Steve Jensen (Stevej) Username: Stevej Registered: 07-2009 Posted From: 82.0.77.233 |
There's a couple of FCon/BFS Awards mentions in the Guardian today, folks: http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2009/sep/22/horror-sexism-fantasy-society http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2009/sep/21/graham-joyce-british-fantasy-award | ||
| Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.47 |
Why does the gender of the writers impact on the quality of the stories inside? If you're going by quality of story and the impact it had on you, the type of genitals belonging to the writer should not be a consideration. Noone would care if a collection of stories by wimmin was released. why is it an issue that the compiler has chosen stories by people with dangly bits between their legs? | ||
| Kate (Kathleen) Username: Kathleen Registered: 09-2009 Posted From: 93.96.181.75 |
Yeah, it's a slippery slope. (No sniggering at the back, please.) I cringed a bit reading about the "oversight" because, while there certainly are plenty of female writers whose work perhaps SHOULD have been represented, it's not because equal space is owed to both genders. The work should stand on its own or before you know it you've got a PC-mad anthology with every gender, racial group, sexual orientation, religion and nationality shouting discrimination. | ||
| Barbara Roden (Nebuly) Username: Nebuly Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 216.232.181.247 |
The book in question isn't an anthology, Weber; it's a series of interviews (16 in all) with writers of horror, not one of whom is a woman. Now, I'm not saying or implying anything against any of the men who were interviewed; but the fact that not one woman is represented does give a rather skewed and biased look at the field of horror, particularly to anyone not overly familiar with the genre, leaving the impression that it's purely a man's world, and that women don't write horror, which is bollocks. I haven't read any of the interviews, but I'd imagine that a woman writer of horror might have slightly different perceptions and insights, and it would have been nice to see these represented. It's not as if there's any lack of women writers of horror out there, many of whom are at least as well known as some of the men who were interviewed. As to fiction: no, it doesn't matter a toss who wrote a story, as long as it's good. | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 82.38.75.85 |
Barbara - well said! Yes, it was a bit of a faux pas on the part of the BFS to include an all male line-up of horror writers in their series of interviews, giving the impression that women just don't write horror (let alone read it). It doesn't help newbie female horror writers feel that they've got much chance in the business. But, of course, when we've got people like Ally winning a BFS award with her first collection, we know that's not true - but it just gives the wrong impression. And as for a fiction anthology, of course it doesn't matter what gender, ethnic origin, or what ever the writer is as long as it's a good story. But the problem is, the BFS were inadvertently giving out misleading signals to those who aspire to write horror who aren't white males. Women shouldn't get special treatment, but they do want to feel they have a level playing field. | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.26.90.161 |
I agree that this is an editorial oversight. In James's defence (I spoke to him personally while he was working on the interviews), I'll say that his criterion for inclusion in the book was simply those authors whose work he was familiar with, the better that his questions would be meaningful. Sadly, that didn't include any women. It was a labour of love for him, this project. But I agree that the fact that no women ended up in there should have been spotted, and certainly that maybe someone with good knowledge of some of the key female authors in our field should perhaps have been recruited as co-editor. Incidentally, I've just spoken on the telephone to the journalist who wrote that story. She called me. | ||
| Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.47 |
I admit I didn't read much of the article past the accusation of sexism. I'm still not sure that the shape of your genitalia dictates your worthiness to be interviewed either. When you consider that the bestselling genre writer at the moment is probably Stephanie Meyer I don't think it's really much of an issue. I'm sure most readers are well aware of the female influence in the genre. The compiler has just picked the people who he admires most. To call him sexist as a result seems a little peurile. | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 82.38.75.85 |
I don't think anyone's calling James Cooper sexist - I'm certainly not anyway. I'm just saying it gave an unbalanced view of the main players writing in the genre today. And presenting such an unbalanced view isn't good for the BFS, nor for aspiring female horror writers. | ||
| Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.47 |
The article calls him sexist. The headline states "lazy sexism". A touch of overreaction methinks. | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 82.38.75.85 |
Ah well, that's just journalism for you. The poor guy's probably mortified by all this as I'm sure he didn't mean anything by it. | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.26.90.161 |
It can be sexist even if it isn't deliberate. Like saying, "The American citizen and his wife flew in today from New York . . . " The sexism is subtle, yet there. But James is a good guy - a teacher, in fact. This is an unfortunate episode. No harm was meant. But I do think it points to a problem in the horror genre. I do think women are overlooked. | ||
| Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.47 |
His wife might not be an American citizen... it could be strictly accurate. | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.26.90.161 |
Jeez. OBVIOUSLY if she was an American citizen. Didn't think I needed to add that. | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.26.90.161 |
But you know, even in your example, there'd be a kind of sexism going on. Why accord him a national identity and deny her one? Why refer to her in relation only to him and not as an individual with her own noteworthy characteristics. | ||
| Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.47 |
| ||
| Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.47 |
She's his wife, she's discarded the right to an identity of her own by taking on his name... Where's that "This is a JOKE" emoticon gone? | ||
| Kate (Kathleen) Username: Kathleen Registered: 09-2009 Posted From: 93.96.181.75 |
I have dual citizenship. **looks for the "non-sequitur" emoticon and fails to find it** | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.26.90.161 |
It's right next to the "trying to worm myself out of it" emoticon. | ||
| Steve Jensen (Stevej) Username: Stevej Registered: 07-2009 Posted From: 82.0.77.233 |
Blimey...I only posted that link because Sarah P was interviewed; how ironic. | ||
| Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.47 |
 | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 82.38.75.85 |
>>She's his wife, she's discarded the right to an identity of her own by taking on his name...<< Weber, there's an army of angry women marching towards your house as we speak. (and I know you only meant it as a joke, don't worry) | ||
| Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.47 |
 | ||
| Steve Jensen (Stevej) Username: Stevej Registered: 07-2009 Posted From: 82.0.77.233 |
I'm not entirely convinced that this kind of furore actually helps women; it surely is an unfortunate oversight and not an example of any hidden agenda. And, truth be told, there are many publishing companies (and magazines) which only publish female writers - this can be seen as somewhat unfair & yet very few people would be inclined to question it (it's up to the publisher/editor, after all...). | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.26.90.161 |
The other thing is that Guy Adams commissioned the BFS Yearbook which has five stories by women in it, as well as an introduction by a woman. | ||
| Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.47 |
My point of view exactly Steve. Thank you. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.96.240.106 |
For the record, I would just like to state that I like women. I thank you. | ||
| Mark_lynch (Mark_lynch) Username: Mark_lynch Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 217.171.129.74 |
On a far more serious matter, I notice GCW has titled this thread 'What a great con' and then bragged about selling a bunch of CDs for three quid a time out of a suitcase... Hmmm. | ||
| Allybird (Allybird) Username: Allybird Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 80.47.38.76 |
The book in question isn't an anthology, Weber; it's a series of interviews (16 in all) with writers of horror, not one of whom is a woman. Now, I'm not saying or implying anything against any of the men who were interviewed; but the fact that not one woman is represented does give a rather skewed and biased look at the field of horror, particularly to anyone not overly familiar with the genre, leaving the impression that it's purely a man's world, and that women don't write horror, which is bollocks. I haven't read any of the interviews, but I'd imagine that a woman writer of horror might have slightly different perceptions and insights, and it would have been nice to see these represented. It's not as if there's any lack of women writers of horror out there, many of whom are at least as well known as some of the men who were interviewed.' You really, really, need to know the field well to put a series of interviews together like that - even if it is a labour of love. And if you are aware of them and yet do not put them in...It is supposed to be representative of the field. Women horror writers are upset because it does still happen sometimes and it shouldn't - at all. | ||
| Joel (Joel) Username: Joel Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 91.110.167.26 |
I would have thought it was pretty obvious that to exclude women altogether from a book of 16 interviews with leading horror writers is stupid and wrong. Calling something 'politically correct' doesn't make it ridiculous any more than calling something 'politically incorrect' makes it above reproach. Ally and Barbara are both perfectly right that the exclusion of women from such a book is not acceptable. What would be 'politically correct' would be insisting that half of the interviews should be with women. While that would be very easy in the USA (with writers such as Kathe Koja, Poppy Z. Brite, Elizabeth Hand, Kaitlin R. Kiernan and Melanie Tem among the field's current or recent leaders), in the UK it's harder to find more than a few leading female horror writers – Lisa Tuttle, Muriel Gray, Tanith Lee and Sarah Pinborough spring to mind as being well-established professionally, though others are well-known in the small press. | ||
| Joel (Joel) Username: Joel Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 91.110.167.26 |
P.S. The proportion of women submitting work to a horror anthology is often very low, and for there to be no female contributors might conceivably be a fair selection, on grounds of quality, on occasion (though even that is unlikely). But this is not an anthology of original stories. It's a selection of established writers who collectively represent the genre. Not including any women makes an obvious statement. | ||
| Steve Jensen (Stevej) Username: Stevej Registered: 07-2009 Posted From: 82.0.77.233 |
It's not sexism that's a danger to the small press world, it's self-absorption. As a newcomer to the business, I must say I've been absolutely appalled at the 'sour grapes', bias, cronyism and half-hearted 'congratulations' expressed on various fora and personal websites (though thankfully not here at RCMB). People, particularly some of the male contingent, need to grow up - behaving like petulant children if you or your friends don't happen to win awards should be unworthy of you; a philosophical outlook, a little magnanimity, and respect for one's peers are surely the hallmarks of a mature professional. Sadly, it's this myopic small-mindedness which encourages others to look down on the horror genre as much any purported sexism. We, the small press authors, publishers and editors, have enough of a battle to get noticed as it is without in-fighting and selfish triviality. | ||
| Mark_lynch (Mark_lynch) Username: Mark_lynch Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 217.171.129.74 |
Oh, the small press hasn't cornered the market in small-minded pettiness and nastiness, alas, Steve. It's just more notcable because fewer people are involved in it. I'm always somewhat baffled when someone throws a major hissy fit when they hear someone else has sold a tale/book or won an award. I mean, they're not in the same foul mood when the new Danielle Steele comes out, and they have their own work to think about and to worry about, not someone else's. Does seem somewhat unfortunate - at best - not to have included any women in the interviews collection, but it's done now. As long as the objections are raised and noticed and acted upon next time, then it's one of those shake your head in sadness that it's happened and move on things... | ||
| Mark_lynch (Mark_lynch) Username: Mark_lynch Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 217.171.129.74 |
Mmm. It's early in the morning and I seem to have lost my socks. (There could be a socksims gag in it somewhere but I'm not yet fully awake enough to work it out, darn it.) | ||
| Joel (Joel) Username: Joel Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 91.110.248.20 |
Caitlin R. Kiernan, sorry. It was late. It's now early. I am rarely wide awake. | ||
| Joel (Joel) Username: Joel Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 91.110.248.20 |
Steve, well said. You have to ask: what happened to professional dignity and respect? The main answer is: the Internet happened. Boorish sarcasm and aggression are so much the norm on the Internet that people who should know better get used to it. It even happens in the elevated world of 'serious' literature – not long ago, a writer (for whom I otherwise have great respect) who had been shortlisted for a major literary award launched a satirical attack on her website on the writer (also female, and on the same publisher's list) who had won. Only on the Internet could that be considered anything other than a bad thing to do. Writing, like life, happens offline. It's quite nice there, I'm told. | ||
| Des (Des) Username: Des Registered: 06-2008 Posted From: 86.169.218.237 |
Above talks of 'leading horror writers' vis a vis the gender issue. However James Cooper in his statement says (regarding the last 20 - 25 years): This meant I was particularly interested in writers who had a special relationship with various small press imprints, or were uniquely involved in the day-today operation of an independent press. There are men missed out from that book on that basis as well as women. On the gender issue, many of my favourite writers have always been women: Elizabeth Bowen, A.S. Byatt etc. And it is the British Fantasy Society, not just Horror. I imagine the Cooper book of interviews is a good personal book in itself but should not have been published by the BFS as a Convention showcase of the BFS .... in hindsight. How do I get a copy as a BFS member who didn't attend the Convention? des | ||
| Allybird (Allybird) Username: Allybird Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 80.47.38.76 |
How do I get a copy as a BFS member who didn't attend the Convention? des I'll try and find out for you Des. Steve and Joel. The sour grapes thing and professionalism - astounding wasn't it? And that it can go on year after year (and the same person involved). All he's succeeding in doing is making more enemies. Me being amongst them now. It went to third tier voting this year. Hundreds of votes cast between the short-list. He lost I won. He'll just have to get used to it. | ||
| Allybird (Allybird) Username: Allybird Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 80.47.38.76 |
And it isn't any of the people who post on here. Well not for a long time anyway. | ||
| Stu (Stu) Username: Stu Registered: 04-2008 Posted From: 86.29.179.174 |
The idea for the interview book has been around for ages and I was under the impression that a complete contents list had been released back when Humdrumming was going to bring it out. How comes this is the first time anyone -- male or female -- has mentioned the sexism? Or has there already been a big row about this that I missed out on? Just curious. | ||
| Allybird (Allybird) Username: Allybird Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 80.47.38.76 |
Sexism? Big row - yes. You need to check out the BFS forum to catch up with one. Way behind :>) | ||
| Allybird (Allybird) Username: Allybird Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 80.47.38.76 |
It is actually all settling down now, Stu. | ||
| Steve Jensen (Stevej) Username: Stevej Registered: 07-2009 Posted From: 82.0.77.233 |
Regardless of the rights and wrongs in this controversy, it was a little disingenuous of the Guardian journalist to aim the article at the 'mainstream' Book News rather than place it in the newspaper's Books Blog - the Blog allows comments whereas the main stories/articles very often lack this feature. A healthy debate in a Comments section would have been enlightening for the writing community as a whole, in my view. | ||
| Stu (Stu) Username: Stu Registered: 04-2008 Posted From: 86.29.191.152 |
That thread still only kicked off from that article which was dated 17/9/09. I was under the impression that the contents list was made public long before that. Did no one -- male or female -- pick up on the lack of female writers until after the article was published? | ||
| Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.47 |
Who would have turned a hair if the entire selection had been female? No one would mind. It seems that if you're male it's fine to exclude you on the basis of gender but you get called a "lazy sexist" if your selection process of "people whose work influenced you most" happens to not include a woman... There is a distinct double standard appearing. | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 82.38.75.85 |
>>That thread still only kicked off from that article which was dated 17/9/09. I was under the impression that the contents list was made public long before that. Did no one -- male or female -- pick up on the lack of female writers until after the article was published?<< I'd never seen a contents list until now, Stu - but maybe I'm just behind the times with it anyhow? As to the sour grapes thing, I don't think this is just something that happens in the writing profession, or in the small presses. As someone involved in academia, you'd be amazed (or maybe you wouldn't) at the amount of in-fighting which goes on between professors and the like re getting awards, gaining funding, etc. I think it's just a dog-eat-dog world where ever you are nowadays, with many people beating each other up to "win" things. And I was wondering whether anyone could buy this book, or whether it was just available at the con or to non-members too. Thinking about it, this incident has provided a lot of free publicity for the BFS! | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 213.219.8.243 |
I was interviewed for that book about 3 years ago, Stu. It's gone through 3 publishers before actually hitting the shelves. None of them picked up on the lack of female writers. make of that what you will. | ||
| Steve Jensen (Stevej) Username: Stevej Registered: 07-2009 Posted From: 82.0.77.233 |
I just feel that, if there is a genuine problem with sexism in the writing/publishing sphere, journalism such as the Guardian's take on this matter does little to rectify the situation. As I mentioned earlier, there's not even a 'centralised' platform for debate on the issue, given that the story appeared in the Guardian's main literary news section. This, unfortunately, makes me wonder whether this was a story published simply for controversy's sake (and after all, it's certainly attracted many readers to the Guardian website). I visit the site each day and, I can tell you, that story would ordinarily be placed in the Book Blog, where everyone could have their say... This whole business is unfortunate. For the reasons stated above (and others), I just feel that this particular story isn't the ideal one to highlight supposed sexism in the industry...especially as the valid opinions arising from the story are spread all over the 'net rather than in one place. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 213.219.8.243 |
I'd also like to add that I admire Guy for respnding immediately with an apology. he's a good bloke, that Adams. | ||
| Allybird (Allybird) Username: Allybird Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 80.47.38.76 |
I second that about Guy, Gary. Admirable. No delay - straight in there to respond. | ||
| Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.47 |
I think he's a ****. Never met him but according to the papers he's just some kind of lazy sexist. | ||
| Des (Des) Username: Des Registered: 06-2008 Posted From: 86.169.220.250 |
I think this is a new article on GenderPortalGate: http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/booksblog/2009/sep/23/sexism-horror-novels-row | ||
| Skunsworth (Skunsworth) Username: Skunsworth Registered: 05-2009 Posted From: 89.242.185.98 |
Would like to weigh in here to also say that I think Guy Adams response was timely, honest and appropriate. He said it at the AGM, and his statement since is, I think, excellent. | ||
| Stu (Stu) Username: Stu Registered: 04-2008 Posted From: 86.29.183.136 |
I don't think this article has been mentioned yet. http://www.thebookseller.com/news/97844-horror-publishers-deny-sexism-charge.htm l | ||
| Mick Curtis (Mick) Username: Mick Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.176.127.96 |
I think Jo Fletcher's comments are interesting. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.96.240.106 |
Has anyone pointed out yet that the lovely Sarah Pinborough's award-winning short story was published in a women-only collection? http://www.newconpress.co.uk/BookDetail/tabid/57/ProdID/2/RtnTab/70/PageIndex/1/ CatID/-1/Default.aspx I mention this only in the interest of a balanced debate. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.96.240.106 |
Just to clarify: by award-winning, I mean that it won this year's BFS award for Best Short Story. | ||
| Steve Bacon (Stevebacon) Username: Stevebacon Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 90.209.11.186 |
I'm not joking when I say this, but I thought Guy's statement was tongue in cheek when I first read it. It suggested irony. I winced, thinking such humour might be viewed as being in poor taste. | ||
| Steve Jensen (Stevej) Username: Stevej Registered: 07-2009 Posted From: 82.0.77.233 |
I'm not convinced that these journalists actually have the best interests of female writers at heart - this whole debate seems (to me) to be an exercise in stirring up controversy when, ordinarily, journalists hardly give a damn about the likes of us - they'd much rather feature, say, Thomas Hardy's first drafts than new works by new writers, male or female. In my opinion, to have any genuine credibility re: sexism, any articles published since FCon should surely have concentrated on the fact that two female writers had broken the (assumed) mould, won the awards & therefore triumphed over their male rivals. This should have been a time for the celebration of female authors' talent and success, not an occasion for the media to gain 'cheap' website hits and therefore advertising revenues by way of taking a false, 'concerned' position guaranteed to cause controversy. | ||
| Huw (Huw) Username: Huw Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 218.168.178.198 |
I agree, Steve. | ||
| Mick Curtis (Mick) Username: Mick Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.176.127.96 |
As far as cheaper journalism goes, the media's raison d'etre is simply to generate interest in itself. | ||
| Joel (Joel) Username: Joel Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 91.110.245.49 |
There are occasionally anthologies restricted to female contributors, yes. But they invariably declare themselves as such. I've seen lots of all-male anthologies that simply claimed to be the 'best of' something or other or to be 'the new' something or other. I have to hold up my hand and admit that my 2003 anthology BENEATH THE GROUND only had one female contributor. But I only received three submissions from women (in retrospect, there was a second I should have taken). The book was edited in 2001 and I didn't have as many contacts then. | ||
| Des (Des) Username: Des Registered: 06-2008 Posted From: 86.169.220.250 |
With all this controversy going on in the Horror fiction industry about sexism, perhaps the only way to try to avoid any prejudice whatsoever is - at least as an experiment - do things the Nemonymous way. | ||
| Stu (Stu) Username: Stu Registered: 04-2008 Posted From: 86.29.183.77 |
>>In my opinion, to have any genuine credibility re: sexism, any articles published since FCon should surely have concentrated on the fact that two female writers had broken the (assumed) mould, won the awards & therefore triumphed over their male rivals. Well, no I don't agree. The cause for celebration should be for the individual writers' success. Not the fact that -- gasp! --they're WOMEN! Otherwise the celebrations just fall into the whole argument of Women are crap/Men are brilliant vs Women are brilliant/Men are crap. It is actually possible to say nice things about people without having to slag off someone else in the process. This whole "us and them" mentality pisses me off. (Steve, I'm not having a go at you here, your post just seemed the most convenient one to respond to address this issue.) | ||
| Joel (Joel) Username: Joel Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 217.37.199.45 |
I think the awards help to demonstrate the fault with the book of interviews. Criticism should be levelled at that book, not the BFS as a whole. And the criticism having been made, everyone concerned should move on. But as long as there are bloggers with too much time on their hands, that will never happen. | ||
| Stu (Stu) Username: Stu Registered: 04-2008 Posted From: 86.29.183.77 |
Thinking about it David Howe edited a woman-only Fantasy antho for the BFS a few years back. I may be misremembering but I seem to recall that a few months after he opened it to submissions he was complaining that he didn't have enough contributors. He found enough in the end though. | ||
| Steve Jensen (Stevej) Username: Stevej Registered: 07-2009 Posted From: 82.0.77.233 |
The cause for celebration should be for the individual writers' success. Not the fact that -- gasp! --they're WOMEN! Yep, you're quite right, Stu. I guess I really meant that: 1. It's a shame that some wonderful success stories (ie Allyson & Sarah winning major awards in a field deemed to be male-dominated) have been overshadowed by controversy. 2. This (the Guardian story) is perhaps the only major media attention the Awards have had, and it's negative attention - it's as if the journalists believe they need a controversial angle in order to highlight the Awards at all. And personally, I don't believe these journalists truly care about the very heart of the debate: sexism and how it supposedly affects female authors. Perhaps I'm naive but I don't think the 'cause' of women writers is best served by mainstream journalists. Yes, some implicitly-sexist male attitudes need changing; yes, the hoary old roles of women as victims, men as heroes or anti-heroes in fiction needs rethinking, even though these tropes may not be as clichéd and fundamentally insulting to women as some believe (yes, this appears to be a controversial viewpoint, but I can & will explain myself if asked); but the motives of those fuelling this controversy worry me - some are simply 'using it' for publicity, others don't really give a damn about literary women, which is a crying shame and detracts from what is actually a very important debate. Apologies for the ^world's longest sentence^. | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 82.38.75.85 |
>>Thinking about it David Howe edited a woman-only Fantasy antho for the BFS a few years back. I may be misremembering but I seem to recall that a few months after he opened it to submissions he was complaining that he didn't have enough contributors. He found enough in the end though.<< That's a good point, Stu, about not having enough submissions from women. I was involved in helping Coral King out with "The Thinking Man's Crumpet" at one point, and the same thing happened there. It was started as women-only, in order to help new female writers gain confidence that they COULD get published, but in the end Coral had to open it up to all contributors as there weren't enough coming in just from women. But that's related to one of my points above - if women continue to get the feeling that they're not wanted, or they've no chance, in what appears to be a male-dominated genre, then we'll never break the cycle of women feeling that way. And, sadly, this incident with the BFS book of interviews - no matter how unfortunately/innocently it happened - perpetuates that view in a lot of women's minds. Des - good idea about anonymous submissions a la Nemonymous. In academia, in top-ranking journals, it's common practice for all articles submitted to be peer reviewed blind. I can never understand why that doesn't happen more with creative writing either. | ||
| Stu (Stu) Username: Stu Registered: 04-2008 Posted From: 86.29.176.191 |
Steve, yeah, I agree that some of the people banging on about this subject are just doing so because it's a "hot" issue. That's why I was interested to know when the book's contents list was first made public -- if people within the field, including women, knew about the contents months ago then why did no one say anything before? But I'm not sure exactly when the full contents was made public or if it was widely advertised. >> if women continue to get the feeling that they're not wanted, or they've no chance, in what appears to be a male-dominated genre, then we'll never break the cycle of women feeling that way. And, sadly, this incident with the BFS book of interviews - no matter how unfortunately/innocently it happened - perpetuates that view in a lot of women's minds. I can see how some women might draw the conclusion that they're not wanted but I'm thinking that if they're interested enough in horror to be aware of the BFS book then they're aware of Anne Rice, Nancy A Collins, Sarah Langan etc. They already KNOW women can succeed in the field. Which is not to say that sexism doesn't exist within publishing but as far as I can tell James Cooper is being villified just 'cos his favourite writers happen to be male rather than female. | ||
| Joel (Joel) Username: Joel Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 217.37.199.45 |
If the book includes US writers then the total exclusion of women is really shocking. Female writers are quite well represented among the major names in US horror. | ||
| Allybird (Allybird) Username: Allybird Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 80.47.198.192 |
'If the book includes US writers then the total exclusion of women is really shocking. Female writers are quite well represented among the major names in US horror.' Exactly. Ray Garton Greg F Gifune Brian Keene Joe R Lansdale Norman Partridge Tom Piccirilli Jeffrey Thomas - can't think... too tired. | ||
| Des (Des) Username: Des Registered: 06-2008 Posted From: 86.169.220.250 |
Des - good idea about anonymous submissions a la Nemonymous. ======================= As well as Nemonymous there is also now HarperCollins ANONTHOLOGY: http://www.fifthestate.co.uk/2009/08/anonthology-update-and-a-word-from-nemonymo us/ | ||
| Stu (Stu) Username: Stu Registered: 04-2008 Posted From: 86.29.184.29 |
Time to play devil's advocate yet again. Okay, I'm confused. Some people are saying Cooper's book is sexist because there aren't many female horror authors about and so they need all the exposure they can get. But other people are calling the book sexist because there are so many female horror authors about that they MUST be included in the book to give a representative view of the genre. Which is it? I'd still be interested to know how many people were aware of the book's contents before the blog that kicked this all off but I think I'm pissing in the wind on that one. Just for the record as far as I can recall I saw the contents list a few months ago (possibly earlier if Humdrumming ever went public with it) and I didn't notice the lack of female writers. At the back of my mind I just asssumed that Cooper just went for the biggest names that he could get. 'Cos the really big guns -- King, Barker, Straub, Herbert and Rice (oh look, a woman) --aren't in the book. Anyway, while we're discussing -isms in publishing does the fact that the book doesn't contain any interviews with black horror writers mean that Cooper is guilty of lazy racism as well as lazy sexism?* And us too as we've been discussing this for ages and no one's pointed out this oversight? Come on, he could've had Tananarive Due, Maurice Broaddus, and Wrath James White. The bloggers could have a field day with that one. *It tickles me that the charge is LAZY sexism, as if it wouldn't have been so bad if he'd put some effort into it. | ||
| Barbara Roden (Nebuly) Username: Nebuly Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 216.232.181.247 |
Stu: I have no idea if/when the contents list was revealed, but I had no idea until the book was out and this whole thing blew up. Your comment about 'I didn't notice the lack of female writers' is interesting. I think it bears out that people see what they expect to see, and by and large, that's people like themselves. In my (admittedly not extensive) reading around this subject, and the comments, I find it telling that all of the people who've said something along the lines of 'Hey, I don't see anything wrong with the contents' are men, and all of the people saying 'Hang on a minute, there's a glaring omission here' are women. We see what we expect to see. I haven't seen any comments saying 'There aren't many women in horror, so the ones who are there need all the exposure they can get', but I have seen a number saying 'There are a lot of great women writing horror, maybe the editor should've cast his net a bit wider.' I don't think Cooper set out to exclude women; I think it's more a case of what I said above, that people tend to stick with other people who are like them. Cooper's a bloke, he reads and is familiar with works by other blokes. Nothing wrong with that, necessarily (although I can't help thinking he's missing out on some good writing), but it does seem to indicate to me a lack of familiarity with the genre as a whole, which is an unfortunate failing in an editor putting together a volume of this sort, which I presume is meant to be an overview of the current horror scene. | ||
| Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.47 |
>>>I find it telling that all of the people who've said something along the lines of 'Hey, I don't see anything wrong with the contents' are men, and all of the people saying 'Hang on a minute, there's a glaring omission here' are women<<< Joel, is there something you need to tell us? Have you had the op? | ||
| Barbara Roden (Nebuly) Username: Nebuly Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 216.232.181.247 |
Weber: I didn't mean that it's ONLY men saying 'No problem', and ONLY women saying 'Hang on a minute'. What I do mean is that I haven't seen any women saying 'No problem'; but I have noticed a lot of men (including Joel) saying 'There's a glaring omission here.' | ||
| Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.47 |
>>>and all of the people saying 'Hang on a minute, there's a glaring omission here' are women<<< | ||
| Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.47 |
Please don't contradict yourself. It cheapens any argument you might make. | ||
| Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.47 |
Which specific part of "All of the people...are women" includes men? | ||
| Barbara Roden (Nebuly) Username: Nebuly Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 216.232.181.247 |
Apologies, then, Weber, for not making myself clearer. As I clarified: I have not seen any women saying that there is no problem with the list of interviewees; any comments to this effect have been by men. On the other hand, women and men have both said 'There is a problem here.' I hope that's clear enough, and apologies again for not being as precise as to meaning as I should have been. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.96.240.106 |
I don't think anyone can seriously argue that there hasn't been a glaring omission. The thing to remember here is that it was an oversight, and all parties involved (the BFS and the editor) have made full and public apologies. Like I said somewhere above, the book has been through 3 different publishers and not one of them mentioned anything about it - so clearly it was a simple mistake to make. Let's hope that we can all learn from it, eh? | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 82.38.75.85 |
.. and I also inferred, in one of my posts above on the subject, that non-whites weren't represented either. But, sadly, that particular -ism tends to get less exposure and is less noticed, possibly? Once again, I'm definitley not saying Cooper or Adams or the BFS are sexist (or racist) - just that if you are publishing a book which is supposed to represent the current state of the genre, then the full range of participants in that genre need to be represented. | ||
| Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.47 |
If I was to put together a list of my 16 favourite genre writers, there's only kathe Koja who would stand a chance of getting that high (if you count Mo Hayder as horror rather than crime then she'd be there as well but that's semantics). Does that make me a lazy sexist? No. Does this mean I have no awareness of women in the genre? No. The poor sod who edited this book and is highly spoken of as a good chap by several people on this board (including at least one female) is being vilified and belittled and called all kinds because his favourite writers are men. As Stu points out above, the really big guns in the field aren't there at all. That includes King, Herbert, Rice, Meyer etc. I'd say that missing someone like King or Herbert out of the book is a more glaring omission than some small press writer who happens to be a woman. This is a non-story created by the Guardian and I'm really feeling sorry for the poor editor. | ||
| Des (Des) Username: Des Registered: 06-2008 Posted From: 86.169.220.250 |
I've not yet seen the James Cooper book, but, possibly, 16 male writers *could* honestly give more of a representative view of the 'male' and 'feminine' spirits than, say, 8 men and 8 women. Some men contain more of the 'feminine' spirit than some women do. | ||
| Barbara Roden (Nebuly) Username: Nebuly Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 216.232.181.247 |
I didn't think that the book was supposed to feature the editor's 16 favourite horror writers, Weber; it's supposed to be an overview of the horror genre as it exists today, in 2009. That the editor either couldn't, or didn't, interview King, Herbert, Rice, or Meyer is a shame; that the editor couldn't, or didn't, interview anyone currently active in the genre who isn't a white male is unrepresentative of the genre. Simple as that. But I suspect we will have to agree to disagree on this one. | ||
| Stu (Stu) Username: Stu Registered: 04-2008 Posted From: 86.29.184.29 |
>>I haven't seen any comments saying 'There aren't many women in horror, so the ones who are there need all the exposure they can get', I was paraphrasing comments such as this: >> if women continue to get the feeling that they're not wanted, or they've no chance, in what appears to be a male-dominated genre, then we'll never break the cycle of women feeling that way. And, sadly, this incident with the BFS book of interviews - no matter how unfortunately/innocently it happened - perpetuates that view in a lot of women's minds. | ||
| Stu (Stu) Username: Stu Registered: 04-2008 Posted From: 86.29.184.29 |
Caroline, apologies for missing your comment about non-whites when I made my comment about racism. Barbara, I think the book is tagged as interviews with 16 leading horror writers. That doesn't necessarily mean that they're the best or that anyone not included in the book isn't a leading horror writer. | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 82.38.75.85 |
But that's not what I meant by that comment, Stu - sorry. I meant there are some women who feel that horror is a male-dominated genre and that they won't get published, purely because they are women. Of course, it's not true - they WILL get published if their stories are good enough. But there is, I think, that misconception amongst some would-be women horror writers. I definitely don't mean "they need all the exposure they can get", simply that aspiring female horror writers need to feel it's a level playing field. | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 82.38.75.85 |
Sorry, Stu - we're posting at the same time. My last post refers to your post paraphrasing my post! Does that make any sense? Oh dear, I'm getting confused now .. | ||
| Stu (Stu) Username: Stu Registered: 04-2008 Posted From: 86.29.184.29 |
Not trying to be snide with that last comment. But as far as I can tell (without having actually met James Cooper or having read his book) this is what he intended. | ||
| Stu (Stu) Username: Stu Registered: 04-2008 Posted From: 86.29.184.29 |
My last comment [not trying to be snide etc] was addressed to Barbara. Caroline, I probably distorted your meaning a little, sorry about that. But still, in order for the women you mention to feel they had a level playing field they would need female horror authors in general to get as much exposure as possible. Ugh, my head hurts. Can't cope with posts on serious topics that last longer than five words. Am I even typing in English anymore? | ||
| Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.47 |
Nein | ||
| Steve Jensen (Stevej) Username: Stevej Registered: 07-2009 Posted From: 82.0.77.233 |
I realise that perhaps few will agree with this, but...it might be the case that the omission of female authors is indicative of their equal status in the business. The very fact that the editor didn't even recognise such a glaring omission might well be a compliment, of sorts, to women writers - rather than 'lazy sexism', the fact that Mr Cooper didn't even think of featuring women arguably indicates that: a) Rather than sexist, most men in this business are actually 'gender blind'; as an example of this, just look at the help established male authors often give to female 'rising stars', the up-and-coming women writers, on the basis of their talent not their alone... b) Female authors, such as Shirley Jackson for example, are so widely admired - by men - that this argues against any inherent sexism in the writing/publishing community. Those women whose work is often denigrated - S. Meyer, for one - are dismissed by writers (male and female) for their craft, or the lack of such artistry, not because they are female. No-one dismisses, say, Dan Brown's work because he is male; no writer I've ever known dismisses Meyer's books because she is female. Re: The argument about women as victims in horror culture...obviously one can't defend the stereotypical 'slasher'-type films and books - these, let alone so-called torture porn, are not to my taste and women are right to rail against them. However, a major part of the male creative imagination happens to be inspired - for better or for worse - by women in archetypal roles, even if said roles include 'women as victims'. Sometimes, there are good reasons for this supposedly clichéd thinking - so many ghost stories, for example, are driven by the inversion of female traits; this is why especially creepy stories often have a female character who is not maternal but menacing in fact. A similar inversion can be seen in the well-established trope of 'horrific' or ghostly children in fiction, all those spooky nursery rhymes etc - this is because we associate children with gentleness, innocence, non-violence and so on; much the same as women, seen from a male viewpoint. The unfortunate frequency of female fictional characters as helpless victims, as tearful soon-to-be-killed-or-rescued innocents is simply the trope without inversion. Male characters in horror fiction are arguably less effective than women and children (except in cases when the writer has genuine talent) because, sadly, we are all so familiar with men as killers - whether in war, in society or in fiction itself. Therefore, to many male authors, malevolent male characters aren't quite so interesting to write about as are women. Honestly, I've yet to read any serious examples, in this debate, of the 'widespread' discrimination against female authors. The days when women had to change their published names to male monikers are long gone - now, you're just as likely to see male writers masquerading as females in order to sell romantic or YA works. Yes, it genuinely is regrettable that the BFS book fails to feature women but I truly doubt that this was an instance of sexism. But that is just my opinion and, of course, I may be mistaken...I might be as culpable as the journalists who stirred up the hornet's nest and then 'forgot' the (very important) debate about sexism and ran off chasing other stories; I might be as misguided as the female writers who considered the debate a neat way of publicising themselves and their books; I could be (thought I doubt it) as idiotic as the male authors who denigrate female award-winners not for the lack of quality in their work but because they or their friends failed to triumph over 'airhead women who write about soppy crap likes vampires'. But even men such as these aren't strictly 'sexist'; they're morons, and are recognised as such by other men. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.96.240.106 |
I didn't think that the book was supposed to feature the editor's 16 favourite horror writers, Weber; it's supposed to be an overview of the horror genre as it exists today, in 2009. This, I think, is how the omission has happened, you know. The book was originally put together as being a interviews with bunch of horror writers James Cooper liked or admired. Somewhere along the line, the BFS edition has somehow been launched as a supposedly representative overview of the entire field. It was never meant to be that kind of overview. Just some writers James likes. The book itself has been misrepresented, I feel. Once the shape and scope of the project changed, the ToC should have been re-examined, and this omission would not have happened. It's very unfortunate, really. | ||
| Allybird (Allybird) Username: Allybird Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 80.47.198.192 |
'It was never meant to be that kind of overview. Just some writers James likes. The book itself has been misrepresented, I feel. Once the shape and scope of the project changed, the ToC should have been re-examined, and this omission would not have happened. It's very unfortunate, really.' TOC/Change. which stage? 2007 2008 2009? With which publisher? | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.96.240.106 |
The BFS. As I state above. You know, when I say: "Somewhere along the line, the BFS edition has somehow been launched as a supposedly representative overview of the entire field." | ||
| Allybird (Allybird) Username: Allybird Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 80.47.198.192 |
You've just tweaked my memory Zed. I seem to remember something of the initial premise on Shocklines well before the BFS were involved. I'll go and look. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.96.240.106 |
You're a nutter, you. Go and get some writing done instead! | ||
| Allybird (Allybird) Username: Allybird Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 80.47.198.192 |
Actually - I'm not. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.96.240.106 |
Well, I am. | ||
| Allybird (Allybird) Username: Allybird Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 80.47.198.192 |
Just when I want to get angry with you - you make me smile - slightly :>) :>( | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.96.240.106 |
It's impossible to get angry with me. I'm far too nice.  | ||
| Allybird (Allybird) Username: Allybird Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 80.47.198.192 |
Now...you are pushing it :>) | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.96.240.106 |
 Btw, have you read Finchy's story in Best New Horror? I think you'll like it. It's one of his horror/British folklore tales. | ||
| Allybird (Allybird) Username: Allybird Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 80.47.198.192 |
James said on his BFS apology...the remit of ‘In Conversation’ was to provide a general overview of life in the horror genre in the first decade of the new millennium. | ||
| Allybird (Allybird) Username: Allybird Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 80.47.198.192 |
'planned as a small press venture that would seek to interview 10-12 writers of horror fiction....Still, 'the remit of ‘In Conversation’ was to provide a general overview of life in the horror genre in the first decade of the new millennium.' |