Why I'm not sorry I missed Readercon

[msmemory_archive]

Someone IRL asked me about my opinion of Readercon, and whether I was sorry to miss this year's due to a date conflict.

Here's a lot of the reasons, much more articulately expressed than I can do:
http://coffeeandink.dreamwidth.org/1021385.html

You might think that since I am white, local, with a Seven Sisters education and more than 30 years reading SF, that I would fit right in. But I don't. Readercon is intimidating, because of its focus on pretentious literary criticism. I feel marginalized as a woman, and for my youth (under 50). (Somehow, after all this time, there's still a vibe "isn't it sweet that you young ladies read books about rockets?") There's no place to sit and smof, except the bar, a complaint I also have about Arisia.

The hucksters' room is important to me, because I like to buy books and I like being able to discover smaller press things or those personally recommended by some specific booksellers. I like the Kirk Poland competition for its silliness. I like running into old friends. Usually, I get to one or two panels. Are these features worth the price, both in dollars and time? I'm thinking lately "not really." Next year, I think I'll sit on my own deck, three miles away, and read a good book.

Comments

[gyzki.livejournal.com]

Inasmuch as that was coffeeandink's first Readercon, they seemed to review with a very broad brush--some of their gripes about programming in particular have not been true every year, some indeed may only have been true of this past con (though my own attendance and attention have been spotty, so I use a weaselly "may").

On the other hand, your reaction is your reaction, based on more exposure than coffeeandink's, so I can't argue with it.