Ok, so lots has been said over the past several days about GayRomLit this year. I debated for a while about whether I wanted to share my thoughts publicly. Despite having opinions on almost everything (just ask my husband), and talking about books on the blog with no problem, I am actually a pretty non-confrontational person and I have no interest in fighting with anyone. But I realized those voices in my head were screaming to be said out loud and so I finally decided to take a moment to share them.
So, a few days ago the organizers of GRL sent out a quick newsletter letting folks know registration is coming and highlighting a few things about the event. It included a brief mention of some changes, as well as some wording that disturbed many, and very quickly the internet was full of discussion and reactions, much of it negative. The organizers responded by the next day with a much more detailed newsletter explaining more specifically the things mentioned the first time around. In addition, they held a webcast where Heidi and other folks answered live questions, which I watched. So before I go any further, I encourage all of you to read the official newsletter from the GRL organizers if you haven’t already. There is an incredible amount of misinformation still being circulated out there despite the fact that there is clear information online. I encourage you to read it and form your own opinions, and if you don’t hear it directly from someone affiliated with GRL, at least ask them before assuming it is true.
Ok, so I read both newsletters, participated in the web chat, and have read many (MANY) online response through Twitter, Facebook, and various blogs. I am not here to tell anyone that they are wrong for having feelings about this or that my opinion is the only right one. You are entitled to your feelings (and should feel the shit out of them as Dan Savage often says). But I do want to take the time to throw mine out there for you to consider. And that is basically that I think the organizers are doing their best and making decisions based on what they believe readers want.
I think at its core, there are two decisions that seem to be causing the most conflict right now. First, the organizers made the decision to cap the number of “official” authors in attendance at 100, versus 130 last year. This doesn’t mean more authors can not come as regular attendees, but it does mean that there is a limit on how many can participate in an an official way with author badges, roles in spotlight events and signings, etc. Now this decision worries a lot of folks, and I understand why. This is a great conference and no one wants to be shut out of an author spot.
But. This decision was not made in a vacuum. The organizers got overwhelming feedback from readers at the event asking for a lower author/attendee ratio. I was there, and I can tell you I heard this comment over and over. I even heard it directly told to the organizers over and over. It was hard with so many authors to manage things from a reader end. Hard to find the authors you wanted to meet. Hard to figure out which sessions to attend with so many authors in competing time slots. Hard to navigate through an enormous signing. So readers responded through surveys and other forms of feedback and the organizers listened and gave people what they asked for.
Now was it a good decision? I think so, but many don’t and that is fine. But what I hope people understand is that the organizers of GRL made it because they were doing their best to give us what we wanted. They listened and tried to respond. Just making a bigger conference as some have suggested is not really a viable option, at least right now. First of all, this hotel was booked long ago. The manager of the Atlanta hotel was at GRL in ABQ checking things out. The organizers have been reviewing feedback and making decisions since then. They can not suddenly find a new venue for next year. And even if they could and even if it was financially feasible (and Heidi explained on the web cast why it is not right now), do we really want a conference of 2000 people? I don’t. I loved that by the end of the week I knew many names and recognized most faces. I loved that I would see the same people over and over, that I could make a friend in one session and see them later to sit with at another. I have no interest in an big anonymous event. I went to GRL having met exactly 2 people in real life and left with tons of friends. I don’t think that would have happened the same way at a bigger event.
The second decision that the organizers made is to invite a smaller group of authors to sign up for the conference in advance of the main author registration period. Unfortunately the wording used on the original newsletter referred to these authors as reader “must-haves” and this led to a lot of people with hurt feelings. I totally get that. I can imagine how someone can feel hurt hearing that wording and it can lead to a sense of feeling out of the club. I don’t think that is how it was intended, but I get that this is how it sounded.
So just to back up a bit, there will be 70 featured authors spots out of the total 100 authors. The remaining thirty of those spots are being held for up-and-coming authors. They pay less and get fewer promotional opportunities, but this will be a way for newer authors not to get lost in the shuffle. So out of the 70 general author slots, 30 are potentially being taken by invited authors. Meaning the organizers are asking certain authors to come, they have a small window in which to sign up, and then any remaining open slots from this group go back for everyone.
So why do this at all? Basically, because once again they are responding to what they believe readers want. Everyone has their favorite authors (just like they have favorite actors, favorite athletes, etc). Organizers asked readers for the authors they most wanted to see at GRL. Many of us filled at surveys after the event asking this very question (among others). Yes, not everyone got the survey and not everyone had the chance to complete one. And yes, asking some authors in advance means fewer spots for everyone else. Now I seriously doubt all 30 will accept, but if they do, that limits the remaining featured author pool to 40 (plus the 30 newer authors). I’ll be honest. I am not sure how I feel about this one. I understand the reasoning, but I am not sure if I feel it is necessary.
But the bottom line for me is that the organizers asked readers who they wanted to see at GRL and then attempted to deliver. Whether they made the best choice, or the only choice, they did not act out of an attempt to create a class system, or stratify authors, or hurt people’s feelings. They listened to readers and tried to give us what they thought we wanted.
Now I will say that I have heard people calling for transparency on the list of invited authors and I will tell you I think this is a horrible idea. Once registration starts, there will be no divisions between featured authors. Everyone in that group of 70 will be treated exactly the same. They will pay the same, get the same reader access, and no one will ever know. And I think that is great. Do we really need to publicly list out who registered when? For everyone complaining that this decision divides the community, how does publicly stating who is in which group do any good? By the time GRL starts (and in fact, I think by the time the first couple days of registration end), this will all be over and no one will know who was invited when and I think that is for the best.
So what is my take away here? Some changes were made and not everyone is happy with them. Honestly, I don’t think they are as dramatic as they may seem. Author caps at conferences are very routine. In fact, I can name two other cons off the top of my head that cap the numbers of official authors, both of which have large numbers of m/m authors and readers. I can also name cons that pre-invite select guests in order to meet attendee wishes for who they will see there. Yes, GRL is not officially a conference, but I think the point is the same. And again, everyone is entitled to like these changes or not.
But for me, here is the bottom line. I loved GRL last year. You have only to read my recaps of the event and look at my pictures to see that. It was an amazing experience. Aside from running my blog and talking to my fellow readers, it was easily the best experience I have ever had as a reader. Now GRL is not the only con I am going to this year. And hopefully it will not be the only one I am going to next year. But I will be going. Because it was amazing, and I truly do not expect that the changes organizers are making will take away from the wonderful time I had there. And if they do the littlest bit, I am ok with that. Because these organizers have worked their butts off. They put in hundreds of hours. They don’t get paid. GRL makes no profit. They are putting aside their jobs and their personal time to make a conference that they hope will be wonderful for us readers. And they asked what we wanted and tried to give it to us. And for that I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. I will be there in Atlanta and I hope to see many of you there as well.
Well written and thought out, Jay, more so than I’ve seen from many people making snap judgments without hearing everything out first. It’s unfortunate that it got blown out of proportion as it did, and it’s bemusing that the people who days ago were screaming bloody murder are now the ones saying they’ll be going. Oh, the joys of the internet where everyone gets to opine on anything anywhere as soon as they want too!
Thanks TJ!
Ah, transparency.
Yeah, I could have done without the must-have language. *grins* And I think the only transparency I’d want is how many pre-invites there were so we could see how many slots were left open…worst case scenario.
I enjoyed GRL. I want to enjoy GRL. I’m not going to delude myself into thinking I’m a “must-have” or fan-favourite and honestly, that’s okay. 😀 Really. I do have to plan what I’m going to do and how it works into the business of being an author.
I’m fine with the cap. Not so sure about the number divide but that’s okay too. I’d also have been okay with the pre-invites being a number on top of the 70/30 ratio. Most of all, I had questions… some were emailed to me from people who said “I don’t want to ask them because of one reason or another” and then I said, okay…questions answered, didn’t like the language much but I’m going back to writing *grins*.
Most of all, I liked the people I met and the times we had. It was much fun. I’d hate to have that change. *nods* That’s pretty much it.
Oh, and not to have to haul swag around. Damn that crap’s heavy.
Thanks Rhys! And you are definitely a must have author to me! Thanks for commenting
*snorts* Hey, I have so many must-haves, it’s insane. 😀
I agree that this was a well-thought out, even post about the storm of controversy over the last week. It’s disheartening that I registered for RT and RWA far easier than I will be able to attempt to register for GRL, though I understand the reasoning. I’ve been to the last two retreats and it is by far the one where I feel most at home.
With respect to the author/reader ratio – I doubt that will change much even with the cap. I can absolutely see authors who:
1. Miss the very limited featured author spots
2. Do not qualify as a supporting author
3. Can’t afford to go as a featured or supporting author
sign up as readers just to be there, which will not help their ratio. Being unable to spotlight or drop stuff in the swag room doesn’t take away from the books you’ve worked to bring to readers. An author who signs up as a reader is still an author and will be sought after by the readers who appreciate their books no matter what color their badge holder is. They’ll still sign books in the hallways, collaborate with other authors over dinner, and talk up their latest release to whoever will listen.
On a side note, I agree with raising the cost of the event for authors, because it will help to limit the spots to the authors who really want them and will take advantage of the opportunities. I just wish they were going to be easier to get for those of us who do.
Thanks JP! Yes, I think regardless of reasons or intentions, there will sadly be some authors who are left out of the limited spots, which stinks, and seems to be just the downside of the adjusted ratio. I am actually ok with the idea of authors coming as “attendees” though. I know some folks are worried about the numbers, and whether readers will be left out. But I think there will be more readers slots than last year and in the past they haven’t all filled. And many authors are just as much fans of the genre as readers. So I would be thrilled to see folks still come, whether or not they have a formal author spot.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
Well said Julie. I intend to be there as well. I had a hard time finding authors last year and I completed the survey – as did almost all of the attendees that I know. My hat is off to the organizers for creating and running this event. Unfortunately it kind of seems like it has lived up to the old adage of no good deed goes unpunished in the last couple of days 😉 This is the only thing I am going to this year – most likely my only vacation – and I’m looking forward to seeing the friends that I’ve made – both IRL and online – and the authors that will be there.
Thanks Sadonna! I enjoyed meeting you last year and look forward to seeing you again in Atlanta!
Excellent post. Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts. 🙂
Thanks Belinda!
Julie, well said. At GRL, attendees get the most for the convention dollar, along with the wonderful atmosphere engendered by the organizers, who truly take every scenario into consideration. I don’t care that I’m probably not one of the “must haves” because I’m happy to be a part of such a wonderful group of people.
If done by a poll, the designation of “must have” depends upon so many different factors. For as many people polled, you will get varied answers, and those answers will span a wide range depending upon what sub-genres they prefer, even what author they spoke to last. Maybe the author that was nicest to them, hugged them, gave the best swag, etc.
Hopefully I will get a slot so I can go as an author. If not, I don’t. My ego won’t be bruised, nor was it when the newsletters came out this week. If you have enjoyed past GRL’s, you must have faith that any changes made are for the benefit of all. They haven’t let us down yet.
I planned the Boxer Falls event last year and nearly lost my mind. I can’t imagine what the organizers of the entire con go through. Bless them all for their hard work.
Yes, I think you are right Brita. People’s reasons for writing down an author’s name vary widely. And yes, I trust that things will all work out and the event will be great.
Well said!!!!
Thanks Foretta! I enjoyed meeting you last year!
Thank you for your post and your support, Julie.
The hardest thing for the organizers to balance is that the needs of authors and the needs of the readers are not always the same.
Thanks Heidi, and yes, I can imagine that authors and readers definitely have different ideas and wish lists for how things should go. As I reader I really appreciate that you guys have taken our needs and interests so strongly into account.
Wow, I came out from under anesthesia and saw this huge kerfluffle. I honestly think the organizers revealing that they are “pre-inviting” author was an idiot idea. Every con does that but I could have told them there would be a bunch of angry authors that they were not the authors who are “invited”. We all love to believe we are superstars but the fact is there are only so many spots at the top.
As far as GR2013 for me, I’m going as a reader because frankly going as an author was very hard work last year. I enjoyed meeting my fans, and chatting with tons of people but the fact is i got into this business because I love to read. I will have cards on hand to sign if people want them but I’m going to have fun. (If I’m able to)
Thanks Lori! And I will look forward to seeing you there!
This post helped a lot with my understanding of what’s going on. I had no idea how GRL did things before, but I did see their newsletter a couple of days ago and wasn’t sure what it meant exactly. Still don’t know much about cons, but I’m slowly learning–and this helps!
Thanks!
Thanks J.A.! And I hope I can talk you into coming this year! Assuming you want anything to do with me after hanging out with me at AAD! 😉
I am counting on AAD being the best. weekend. ever. I so want to go to GRL…as long as I can dress as a vampire hunter for that too.
OMG, you can be a vampire ALL WEEK at GRL! The funny thing is that no one would look at you twice…
My first reaction when I saw the original newsletter was well, heck. Guess I’m screwed as an author now that GRL got so popular, because there’s no way in hell I’m part of the “must-have” list. My second reaction was “big mistake”, because I knew the wording would ruffle feathers, and then some.
But that was it.
I didn’t feel offended, or belittled or slighted or anything like that. I’m a newbie author, and not being on that list has absolutely nothing to do with my writing, or sales, or ratings, or whatever else. It only means I haven’t reached the point in my career where readers will want to meet me and ask questions and find out what am I working on. Maybe someday I’ll make the list, or maybe I won’t. I’ll try to get one of the author spots. but whether I get it or not, I’ll continue to attend GRL. It’s tradition! The one time a year when I get to see my online friends, and my readers, and all the people I like. I look forward to it, and nothing’s going to change that.
GRL was conceived a s a retreat. A set time for us authors, readers, reviewers, et al of the genre to meet in person, talk about the stories we all love without being frowned upon, and have fun, and in the past two years you could feel the attendees’ joy as we did just that. The enthusiasm for the event grew as we all shared nothing but great anecdotes upon our return home, and so it was only natural that everybody would want to be part of it. And like a very good friend told me, GRL is “evolving” to accommodate us all.
The organizers have my respect for taking this humongous task on and dealing with the responsibility that is putting together an event of this magnitude . I know they’re doing their best to fulfill readers and authors’ needs, and sadly they won’t be able to please everybody, but I know they’ll try to be as fair as they can to all parts involved.
Thanks Taylor! And I think you have the right outlook on this. Look forward to seeing you again in Atlanta!
P.S. Great post!
🙂
Thanks for a great post. I’ve attended the past two years and I plan to keep the streak alive in 2013, even if I need to register at General Registration. 🙂 I know how hard the organizers work, to not only try to make it the best event for all attendees, but also to foster a welcoming atmosphere that I personally haven’t seen matched at any other cons I’ve attended. They’ve succeeded in both of these goals in the past, and, this week’s events notwithstanding, I’m sure this year will be just as wonderful as we’ve come to look forward to. Can’t wait to see everyone in October! 🙂
Look forward to seeing you there Devon!
Great post Jay! I’m happy that you mentioned filling out the survey, I was beginning to think I was the only one! LOL There were so many people bitching the other day about “this mysterious survey” and how they never got one. Not sure how that happened, clearly these people don’t check their email or something. I remember getting it, and was excited to fill it out and I took a good amount of time with it.
I don’t remember the specific wording of the author question, I know I only listed a few names, only authors who were not there. (And two of them are not from the US so I can understand if they couldn’t be)
I didn’t realize so many people had issue with the author/reader ratio last year. Yes there were a lot of readings/panels going on all at the same time and I missed some I would really have liked to have gone to. But that is going to happen, they can’t schedule one thing every hour, we’d be there for two weeks! I remember the only thing I commented on was the difficulty of finding authors during the signing — it would have been easier if they were all listed alphabetically or by some kind of order.
Yes, there was a bit of poor communication with the newsletter–the must-have thing, should never have been mentioned. We don’t need to know how authors are picked or even that there was a pre-reg. But as you said, this is a huge undertaking by the organizers and a lot of work and they are doing their best to put on the best GRL there can be.
I had very little bad to say on my survey because I LOVED GRL it was such a blast, and the best time I’d had all year. Going to Atlanta for me and my roomies was already decided before the conference was even over. I remember hearing that the plans were to always keep GRL as small as possible and you’re right, a larger conference with more people will take away from the intimacy of it. I too loved that you could meet people at one event and then repeatedly see them throughout the rest of the weekend.
I was sad the other day to see people saying they wouldn’t attend because of what the newsletter said, etc. etc. But glad now to see so many still supporting GRL and planning to come. I have been looking forward to it since last October and can’t wait for Atlanta!! 🙂
Thanks CJ!
Thank you for writing such a carefully considered and accurate post to counter some of the hysteria which has unfortunately been so evident elsewhere! As you say, the organisers are doing their best to give the readers want they want. They took the trouble to ask for feedback and then they acted on it – and then they get criticised for it! I have to admit that I can’t see what was getting everyone so upset – it all seemed sensible to me. I agree with what you say about the overall size, and once one has that constraint then the steps the organisers have taken are logical and make perfect sense.
Thanks HJ!
Nicely said :). I’ve managed to get an Author spot so I really hope to see you there!
Yes, I saw that Clare! I am so excited to get to see you again!
Good post Jay x