Unabashed

In a tumultuous series of blog posts, begun by Charlie Stross, and then spreading to John Scalzi, Warren Ellis and Cory Doctorow, it seems the SFWA is once again churning amidst its members’ dissention. For an outsider looking in, it’s got a kind of soap opera appeal, especially since the SFWA is the beacon to which all (or most at least, I am sure) writers of SF&F are drawn. It appeals to me because the target of most of the rage seems to be Andrew Burt, most famed for founding and moderating the Critters critiquing forum, a forum in which I have been a member in the past. Little did I know, however, that Burt was so controversial in his beliefs, specifically those relating to e-piracy and licensing. Unfortunately for Burt, I regard the opinions of Scalzi, Stross and Doctorow very highly (Ellis is not an SFWA member, he’s only watching the soap opera the same as me), and I’m usually in total agreement with Doctorow when it comes to licensing and piracy.

Another reason this interests me is because I am a writer of SF&F, and when I look for places to publish my work, having already had a smattering of success in the non-SFWA markets, lately I’ve been looking almost exclusively at the SFWA-qualifying markets–they pay better and my goal has been to eventually qualify to join up. The reasons I’ve had for wanting to join don’t really have anything to do with health insurance–I’ve got a full-time job with benefits–or protection from copyright infringements, but mainly because of the reputation that automatically accompanies membership. Members have privileges non-members can only salivate over. Some SFWA markets will only allow SFWA members to use the email submission process; all others must use post. And though it isn’t a general policy, I have to believe non-SFWA slush piles may mysteriously disappear in the dead of night sometimes, never having been read. If a pair of writers, one a member and one not, submit an identical, quality manuscript to ten markets, I believe the SFWA member would have twice as many acceptances as the non-SFWA writer. Plus, I want to get my book published, and though it may not help much, if at all, it can’t hurt to be able to say “SFWA member” on the cover letter. In theory, it adds instant creditability.

But this fiasco has me thinking, and I have to wonder if this type of dissention can weaken the SFWA’s legitimacy. Probably not, but it can’t help.

The plot thickens: now Tobias Buckell has publicly renounced his membership from SFWA.

But, seeing another huge flame war getting ready to brew over this, and just my general ‘tired’ feeling when I saw what was happening, I thought, it’s time to take a break.

I’m not demanding anyone step down, it’s not even a protest leave. I’m not sure if it’s a forever leave, there’s always the possibility that someone will report that the private areas are no longer acidic and nasty to people. It’s just that I’m tired and I have a writing career that needs close attention. I have books that need my love.

I’ve read Andrew Burt’s response to all this ruckus and from that it seems he has no intentions of resigning his post as chair of the Copyright Committee or as VP of SFWA. He hopes everyone will judge him based on his future performance and let bygones be as they are. Of course, the problem with that is that the members of the SFWA have effectively cast a vote of no confidence against him and are now resigning or threatening to resign under his leadership. I think it’s time for Burt to realize that he’s dealing with some very intelligent people who have very large fan bases and can very rapidly build a majority opinion that Burt is a moron who needs to step down. Whether it’s true or not, Mr. Burt, won’t matter. The outcry has already sounded, your own survival now depends not on how well you respond or how well you adapt, but how stubborn you are. Nobody wants you now. 

written by Matt Mitchell