Amusing fact
May. 22nd, 2004 05:28 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
thebitterguyMy proposal for the Margaret Atwood panel read
"Title: The Great Canadian SF writer
Description: Canada has produced one of the greatest SF writers of the modern day. But Margaret Atwood feels that she doesn't write SF, because of the negative connotations of the word. How can we drag the genre into respectability? Or must it be consigned to the sludge pit of media crossovers and endless trilogies, with every shining jewel covered with dross?"
The panel description reads
"The Handmaid's Tale and Oryx and Krake are two of the best known SF books of the past twenty-five years, but their author, Margaret Atwood, feels she doesn't write SF, because of the negative connotations of the word. Why doesn't Margaret Atwood simply come out of the SF writing closet? And why has the mainstream press and publishing industry been inclined to agree with her?"
Was I too harsh?
"Title: The Great Canadian SF writer
Description: Canada has produced one of the greatest SF writers of the modern day. But Margaret Atwood feels that she doesn't write SF, because of the negative connotations of the word. How can we drag the genre into respectability? Or must it be consigned to the sludge pit of media crossovers and endless trilogies, with every shining jewel covered with dross?"
The panel description reads
"The Handmaid's Tale and Oryx and Krake are two of the best known SF books of the past twenty-five years, but their author, Margaret Atwood, feels she doesn't write SF, because of the negative connotations of the word. Why doesn't Margaret Atwood simply come out of the SF writing closet? And why has the mainstream press and publishing industry been inclined to agree with her?"
Was I too harsh?
no subject
Date: 2004-05-23 03:26 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-05-23 03:27 am (UTC)