That consensus is over. Fandom needs to be asking: “What’s next?”
 |
| The Peace Arch in British Columbia represents how easy it has been for citizens of the USA and Canada to cross the border. (Image via Chilliwack Progress) |
Although the first ‘World’-cons were held in the 1930s and early 1940s, the handful of pre-war events were set in the United States and the number of attendees from elsewhere minimal. When Worldcons resumed in 1946, they did so in an era governed by an uneasy consensus of US-centric international relations that fostered cooperation, stability, and collective security. This enabled international organizations built by the new world order to thrive. Increasing international mobility for travellers, greater trust between nations, and a relative sense of communal good made international conventions more common.
The scope and reach of the event grew massively from the first post-war Worldcon which reportedly had a “handful of Canadians” as the international contingent, to the last pre-pandemic Worldcon (2019 in Dublin) that boasted attendees from more than 60 countries. Worldcon thrived as it became increasingly globalized, but never lost its abiding connection to the country in which it was born. The World Science Fiction Convention remains a predominantly US event. With the sole exception of the 2023 Worldcon in China, US citizens have made up the largest single contingent at every single Worldcon.
The ties Worldcon has to the United States are deep; as a volunteer-run and volunteer-organized event, it takes an enormous amount of goodwill and institutional knowledge for a Worldcon to happen. There are pools of volunteers in the United Kingdom, Canada, and in China who would be able to put together a Worldcon every few years if called upon, but it seems unlikely that they could do so every single year. In the United States, there are communities of con-runners scattered across the nation; West Coast, Chicago, Midwest, New England, and more. Even with the greying of a core of US fandom, these communities account for the majority of Worldcon expertise and volunteer hours.
In light of recent political events, and the destabilization of the post-war consensus, it seems likely that the era of growth in its country of origin is over for Worldcon. Travel to and from the United States is declining rapidly. Countries such as France, Germany, and Ireland have updated their government websites advising a degree of caution in planning trips to the country. There are concerns about the low number of international fans registering for the upcoming two Worldcons (Seattle in 2025 and Los Angeles in 2026). Some non-US finalists for this year’s Hugo Awards have indicated they do not feel safe attending the ceremony in person.
Many of the disruptions that Worldcon currently faces are tied to decisions made by the current US administration. But even if there is a change in power in the next four years, international trust will remain precarious. Travel plans remain contingent on the whims of a mercurial electorate. Holding a Worldcon within the United States will consequently be challenging.
Worldcons in challenging locations are not a new phenomenon. The 1951 Worldcon in segregated New Orleans shouldn’t have happened. The Worldcon in Chengdu in 2023 received a significant amount of criticism. Bids to host Worldcons in Saudi Arabia, in Israel, and in Uganda have all been floated — and greeted with skepticism by many.
Of course, it will never be possible to host a Worldcon in a location where every science fiction fan can attend. Every Worldcon that is in a physical location will be exclusionary to some degree. As such, there is a great value in having Worldcon hosted in as many different and disparate locations as possible in order to ensure that as many different people as possible can attend. Travelling to China in 2023 may have been off the table for a lot of US fans, but those fans had US-based Worldcons for the two previous years. If Rwanda’s Worldcon bid succeeds, it would provide African fans — who often have troubles getting travel visas for North America — the chance to attend a Worldcon. There is an enormous value in giving a variety of local communities of fans their turns.
The scope and reach of the event grew massively from the first post-war Worldcon which reportedly had a “handful of Canadians” as the international contingent, to the last pre-pandemic Worldcon (2019 in Dublin) that boasted attendees from more than 60 countries. Worldcon thrived as it became increasingly globalized, but never lost its abiding connection to the country in which it was born. The World Science Fiction Convention remains a predominantly US event. With the sole exception of the 2023 Worldcon in China, US citizens have made up the largest single contingent at every single Worldcon.
The ties Worldcon has to the United States are deep; as a volunteer-run and volunteer-organized event, it takes an enormous amount of goodwill and institutional knowledge for a Worldcon to happen. There are pools of volunteers in the United Kingdom, Canada, and in China who would be able to put together a Worldcon every few years if called upon, but it seems unlikely that they could do so every single year. In the United States, there are communities of con-runners scattered across the nation; West Coast, Chicago, Midwest, New England, and more. Even with the greying of a core of US fandom, these communities account for the majority of Worldcon expertise and volunteer hours.
In light of recent political events, and the destabilization of the post-war consensus, it seems likely that the era of growth in its country of origin is over for Worldcon. Travel to and from the United States is declining rapidly. Countries such as France, Germany, and Ireland have updated their government websites advising a degree of caution in planning trips to the country. There are concerns about the low number of international fans registering for the upcoming two Worldcons (Seattle in 2025 and Los Angeles in 2026). Some non-US finalists for this year’s Hugo Awards have indicated they do not feel safe attending the ceremony in person.
Many of the disruptions that Worldcon currently faces are tied to decisions made by the current US administration. But even if there is a change in power in the next four years, international trust will remain precarious. Travel plans remain contingent on the whims of a mercurial electorate. Holding a Worldcon within the United States will consequently be challenging.
Worldcons in challenging locations are not a new phenomenon. The 1951 Worldcon in segregated New Orleans shouldn’t have happened. The Worldcon in Chengdu in 2023 received a significant amount of criticism. Bids to host Worldcons in Saudi Arabia, in Israel, and in Uganda have all been floated — and greeted with skepticism by many.
Of course, it will never be possible to host a Worldcon in a location where every science fiction fan can attend. Every Worldcon that is in a physical location will be exclusionary to some degree. As such, there is a great value in having Worldcon hosted in as many different and disparate locations as possible in order to ensure that as many different people as possible can attend. Travelling to China in 2023 may have been off the table for a lot of US fans, but those fans had US-based Worldcons for the two previous years. If Rwanda’s Worldcon bid succeeds, it would provide African fans — who often have troubles getting travel visas for North America — the chance to attend a Worldcon. There is an enormous value in giving a variety of local communities of fans their turns.
 |
| Not every passport will get you into every country in fact, so every Worldcon location is a choice about which fans are welcome to attend. (Image via Boundless.com) |
In the past, the World Science Fiction Society (which governs Worldcon organizing) employed a rotation system. The convention was supposed to be held in three different zones on a rota. One year would be the West Coast of the US, the next would be the East Coast, and finally a Worldcon would happen in the central US. (Non-US bids could fit anywhere in that rotation.) Given the sparsity of Worldcon bids some years, the intention was difficult to realize. But it’s a premise that has merit.
Because of the voter base, institutional knowledge, and enormous fan base, US Worldcons will and should always occur. But perhaps there should be an increased willingness among fandom to support overseas conventions in locations that present logistical hurdles for North American travellers. If we may be so bold, perhaps we as fans should encourage the practice of having a Worldcon outside of North America every second year.
In an age of US truculence, Worldcon needs to embrace friends and allies around the globe without turning its back on the generations of fans and volunteers who have built it as an institution.
I appreciate that you recognize something many others ignore, which is the extent to which Worldcon relies on volunteers and institutional knowledge, and that a lot of that comes from the US.
ReplyDeleteI did want to point out an error, however, which is that under the old Zones system, a non-North American location could bid in against ANY zone. It was not limited by year as the other regions were.
Thanks. Have updated the blog to correct that error.
DeleteIt relies on institutional knowledge *and* seems to huck that institutional knowledge out the window by requiring a shiny new concom for every Worldcon. How many more places might be willing to bid, if they didn't have to build a team from scratch just to throw their hat in? Obviously you want people who have conrunning experience, but the lack of institutional continuity seems odd.
DeleteThere's a ton of continuity. A shiny new concom isn't a requirement, and (having just looked at the last several years of committees for something I'm working on) there's a TON of overlap from year to year. Yes, the corporate structure behind the con changes, but where would you propose legally locating the single institution that you want to be able to run the convention in all these disparate countries? And how much would it drive up the costs of hosting a Worldcon if such an international organization had to be maintained? Especially given the increasing legal issues about people and information travelling between countries? Having a single organization would bring some benefits, yes. But it does not solve all the issues and creates a whole slew of new ones.
DeleteEleri: I've been on three locally-based Worldcon committees and had major roles on three other Worldcons; by experience, a Worldcon takes a huge amount of time and effort over a couple of years -- more than any one unpaid group can do unless they're wealthy enough that they don't need to work. There are professional conferences that have permanent staff -- but those are for a single country (e.g., American Chemical Society, American Contract Bridge League), a form that as Tammy notes would be very difficult to extend across borders.
DeleteAnd as Tammy also notes, the expertise is not thrown away; e.g, the 1978 Masquerade was run by much of the 1980 committee (itself extended from 1971), and the 1992 Exhibits division staff was mostly the 1989 committee. (Personal example: I've done space design for four different cities and advised for a fifth.) The expertise is there -- and concoms that don't ask for help from around the country (if not the world) are objects of derision.
I think requiring "every other year" unnecessarily constrains bids, because there are lots of factors that make certain years better or worse. But looking overall, your goal is about to be met or exceeded.
ReplyDeleteFrom 2000 to 2014 27% of Worldcons were held outside of North America, 40% outside the US. From 2015 to 2029, 47% of Worldcons will be outside North America, and 60% outside of the US.
I don't see that changing in the 2030s. If anything, it will need to get much more international. US convention running fandom is in serious decline. Lots of local cons are struggling or ending. Even if the US political landscape was not what it was, it would be impossible for the US to run 60% of Worldcons today. If the Worldcon manages to continue, then I think we're looking at something more like 1 in 3 or 1 in 4 Worldcons in the US. The big question is if there are global convention running fandoms interested in and able to fill in those gaps. I hope so!
Well, "global convention running fandoms not prone to being hijacked by government interests". You could probably get frequent Worldcons in the PRC, but I'm pretty sure we don't want to do /that/ again anytime soon after Chengdu.
DeleteI think Europe is probably good for 2-3 a decade right now, while Australia/New Zealand is good for one a decade, as is Canada (I've volunteered to help Edmonton). But the workload involved means that at least for now, that's pretty close to the load limit for the moment since in addition to bidding/running a Worldcon being about a 4-6 year commitment, the folks involved often then need a few years off.
Also, even if you want to "encourage" it, the fact is that when people want to run their bids (or when space is available - Nice collapsed because of convention center renovations, IIRC?) isn't always going to sync up nicely with when the hypothetical "we" might want to encourage them to do so, and I don't think we want any more of a "hard bar" on bids - Winnipeg and Memphis were both the victim of actual (Discon) and presumed (Seattle) exclusion zones shooting serious holes in the map as to where we even "could" go - for example, Terry couldn't bid Montreal (for want of about ten miles) and Toronto was also blocked out.
I agree that adding more constraints (like mandating every other year) is a bad idea. Especially since we're already at 50%. Interesting point re exclusion zone - we might need to get rid of/change that if the US/North America is to continue to be able to run anywhere near 50% of Worldcons. I already think there's a dearth of groups in the US who want to bid. But I think there are a bunch of European bidders gearing up right now, who could hopefully move into a rotation to replace the US sites that have dropped out of rotation. Given the size of Europe, it's conceivable that the exclusion zone might be an issue there too sometimes.
Delete"If we may be so bold, perhaps we as fans should encourage the practice of having a Worldcon outside of North America every second year."
ReplyDeleteIs that really a bold thought? Four of the past six -- five of the past eight -- Worldcons were held outside North America.
In that post-World War II era of "cooperation, stability, and collective security" (for who?), the US violently meddled in dozens of countries abroad, and built repressive institutions at home. That infrastructure is being put to full use in today's authoritiarian turn, and will likely have a huge effect on the Seattle and Los Angeles Worldcons.
ReplyDeleteI understand, and share, the hope that things will improve in the coming years. I note also, though, that the party those hopes are pinned on is actively complicit in what is happening in the US now. Sadly it is more realistic to expect that the US will be highly unattractive for visitors for the foreseeable future.
I would argue that for a "World" event, a high degree of reliance on any one country is a weakness in need of redress. I'd also argue that many SF readers and fans have never even heard of Worldcon, let alone attended one. This is not to denigrate the commitment and effort of US fans and volunteers. But it seems to me that a radical rethink is required, not only a further broadening of venues but also a very strong turn towards online accessibility (what I have heard about plans for Seattle is encouraging in that respect).
We can't suggest holding Worldcons in places other than the US for safety concerns because of US governmental actions without addressing the fact that many other countries are also NOT SAFE for Fans.
ReplyDeleteThe Worldcon membership has got to implement some methodology for assessing a country's suitability prior to even bidding for an event.
Free countries only. Only countries that line up with Fannish ideals of inclusiveness and acceptance.
Steve, do you think your proposed methodology for assessment would have eliminated the US as a viable site for bidding when the site selection votes were held in 2023 and 2024? If not, then there's always the chance for Worldcons to be held in places which are no longer suitable, because - as we've all learned - conditions can change rapidly after Worldcons are seated.
DeleteVery interesting. I think that a key factor are the actual fans in non-US countries, who have the desire to bring the Worldcon to their country and who have more fans who are happy to undertake the vast work that is involved with running a Worldcon, that's key. Have you people in mind?
ReplyDeleteAnd if the fans have a potential venue (and that might be different to what is expected by some, fine by me), I think many fans will offer to lend a hand. So that knowledge, support can go to them too.
Build it, build excitement, build enthusiasm and they ,both fans and volunteers will come.
Not everyone wants to volunteer all the time, but bids in new countries have faced problems that are not about an unwillingness to travel to a new country per se but a problem with that specific country. I do think that is valid?
I think saying " If we may be so bold, perhaps we as fans should encourage the practice of having a Worldcon outside of North America every second year." is lovely, who are you encouraging, how do you plan to find them, to nurture, to mentor, to enthuse? What's the plan?
I'm excited to hear the tangible steps that fans or you think are needed and what's needed to find success with this, and who and where should be encouraged. Happy to encourage!
I mostly agree with your points, but you should fix "the handful of pre-war events were mostly set along the East Coast of the United States"; the first three Worldcons were held in New York City, Chicago, and Denver (that's three of the four time zones in the contiguous US) and the fourth (first post-war) was in Los Angeles (in the fourth time zone). See http://www.smofinfo.com/LL/TheLongList.html for the complete history.
ReplyDeleteThanks. Have fixed it. I don't know why I thought the second Worldcon was in Philly. I blame the Mandella Effect.
DeleteGranted it is a nitpick, and the majority of bids under the old zone system were US Bids, but it was a North American Zone System. Canada and Mexico were included in the zones. So Winnipeg in 1994 was a Central Zone WorldCon, as technically was the Chichen Itza 2012, the "End of the World-Con" Hoax Bid.
ReplyDeleteThere was discussion of making it a 4 zone system when the Western Zone was pre-empted by Europe twice in a row (Consipracy in Brighton followed by ConFiction in The Hague), however it was decide that the rest of the world wasn't ready. It probably would be now but we went to 0Zone since then.
"If we may be so bold, perhaps we as fans should encourage the practice of having a Worldcon outside of North America every second year."
ReplyDeleteI mean, 2019/2020 AND 2023/2024 were both non-US (indeed, non-North American) Worldcons. For the most part, non-North American Worldcon bids have been unopposed...but so have, in effect, most of the recent North American bids (Jeddah's last-minute entry against Chicago seems to barely count). The only case of a formally-contested bid in close to a decade has been 2023, and there I dare say the reluctance of fandom to just let Chengdu have that one proved well-founded.
So we're running at around 50%, with most variations just being down to who wants to run when (it doesn't seem like non-North American fandom is /quite/ ready to do one every other year, given that various groups seem to only be up for it about once a decade).