Why SFWA?

[chris_gerrib]

So I mentioned in yesterday's entry that I would have a comment about SFWA (the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America) and Novelists Inc. jeff_duntemann had asked at one point "what is SFWA for?" Observant followers of the latest SFWA circular firing squad exercise regarding copyright may have noted a certain, well, religious fervor in the debate. Arguments to the effect that "people giving out e-copies have more sales" were rejected as being against the principle of copyright.

I think there are two types of artist's organizations. One type, best typified by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences (the folks who award the Oscars) is a "normative" organization. Their goal is to "advance the art" and define stuff as "good" (gets an award / nomination) or "bad" (not nominated).

The other type is a trade organization. To stay in the same industry, consider the Writers Guild. Although they do in fact give awards, they're really not in the business of defining "good" or "bad" writing. Their goal is to make sure that writers are able to advance their career. Novelists Inc also appears to be a trade group, and cares little for what you write - they just want you to make money doing it.

SFWA has the Nebula Awards, with which the writers try to define the art, but it also does a lot of writer service work. As an outsider, it appears that SFWA hasn't decided what group they fall in, trade or normative. I don't have a dog in this fight, but not deciding the organization's focus can make life interesting for the membership.

Comments

[timakers.livejournal.com]

I've been kicking around the thinking behind SFWA a lot in the last couple months. When I started my starry-eyed writer's life, I dreamed of the day I would qualify for membership. I only submitted to markets that met their pro standards. I scoured their website for advice. And there's some good stuff there, but I soured about a year in to the whole thing with your aptly named "circular firing squad." SFWA seems to make a living trying to ruin itself. A lot of their positions baffle me. A lot of their nominations baffle me. I switched from "actively interested in joining" to "actively opposed." I mellowed at some point, about the same time that I gained a lot of confidence in my abilities. What I think their main failing could be, however, is that there's too much of a social club aspect to them. It's all internal politics and committees and whatever.

I don't know. They do some good things. They do some marginally bad things. They do some embarrassing things. I don't really know where I stand on it anymore. It's worth thinking about, out loud.