By the numbers, this was a very ordinary Comic Expo for me.
$200 spent. 3 panels attended. 1 photo op. 6 hours spent roaming the convention floors.
The only anomaly in that geek arithmetic, as far as my routine goes, is the photo op. I've never bought one before, mainly because I've never seen anyone in the Expo lineup that I honestly looked at and felt an overwhelming desire to be seen beside. Of course, then they had to go and book Karen Gillan. Scottish + Redhead + Short Haircut + Sci-Fi Actress = SWOON.
And, in some ways because of that anomaly, I feel that I probably won't ever go back.
It's not what you think. I'm not upset with my experience, or even slightly disappointed. Nope, it's the exact opposite. It's that I've done it. I've done the Expo. I got to take a picture with one of my personal heroes, I got to wade into the thick of one of the largest exhibitions of nerdiness in North America (with a 90,000+ attendance this year, they may have even broken the top 5), and I had a fantastic time. But now I feel like I've gotten everything I could have ever wanted.
I'm not saying with absolute certainty that I won't attend again. However, I do know that I won't be attending in the future as a passholder. If I go back, it'll (hopefully) be as a volunteer, exhibitor, or guest.
I know that probably sounds arrogant. Let me try to explain. I feel that I've gotten as much out of the Expo as I possibly can as a fan. Now I want to get as much out of it as possible as a creator. That's not a sleight against the Expo. If anything, it's a compliment. The people who run it and participate in it are industry professionals of the highest order. They inspire the attendees, including myself, to get up and do something with our lives.
So when I say that I won't be back to Expo as a fan, I hope my meaning is clear. This was a great time. Let's take a look at that in more detail, shall we?
First off, it must be said that Calgary Comic Expo has some of the best, friendliest and hardest-working volunteers I have ever seen at an event. I had to ask about 5 different volunteers for information or directions at various points during my time at the Expo. They were all immediately friendly, never dismissive, welcoming, and on two occasions even approached me as I stumbled about awkwardly in my nerd haze.
The information they gave was always accurate and easy to understand. They were also spaced out around the grounds such that I never felt like I was straining to find someone.
Superb job, volunteers.
The signage, on the other hand, was a bit lacking or confusing at times. I understand that this was the first time the Expo had expanded to include almost all of the Stampede grounds, so it's not altogether surprising that some of the directional indicators were a bit cryptic at times. By and large, though, signs were frequent, large, and visible, so no major complaints there.
I hadn't been to the Expo for the years I was in Toronto, but I'd heard there were some major complaints in previous years about overcrowding and traffic patterns. I only have Fan Expo 2013 for comparison, and let me tell you, the Calgary Comic Expo was a vast improvement.
As I mentioned, they spread this year's con over nearly the entire Stampede grounds, utilizing the Big Four Building, the BMO Centre, the Grandstand, and even had a large Pavillion tent. They also wisely set it up so that each building was given a sort of "designation" i.e. this building is photo ops and autographs, this building is the exhibitors, this building is for large panels, etc.
This had the advantage of spreading out traffic so that despite a 50% increase (!) from last year's attendance, it never felt overly crowded. To be sure, there were still some points of congestion, especially around the food services at meal times, but as somebody who hates crowds, I didn't once have a Sartre-esque episode of "Hell is Other People."
If I had one complaint about traffic and people-minding, I'd say they just need to up the number of food trucks on hand and maybe consider some outdoor seating. That said, the weather on Saturday certainly wouldn't have allowed for this, and I understand the Expo has moved their dates up a week to mid-April for 2015. So maybe this isn't a possibility. Still, something to think about.
In terms of quality of booths, guests, and panels, I'd say this was on par with any of the major cons in North America. A-list, currently relevant guests were plentiful and (generally) accessible, although some of the fees for photo ops and autographs were unquestionably exorbitant (important to note this is not the fault of the Expo; guest agents and managers set the rates for the people they represent).
The last thing I'll mention is the program book and map. This year's program book had a lot of great editorial content, and it's wonderful to see the Expo Etiquette fully in line with their campaign of "Cosplay Does Not Equal Consent." I could be wrong, but to me there was a measured reduction in creepers, and by and large when people were taking pictures of cosplayers there was a definite atmosphere of security and well-being. More people were asking to take pictures rather than simply taking them, and the response to me was very positive. I credit the Expo's dedicated information campaign for these results.
So there you have it. All in all, one of the best and tightest-run Cons that I've ever attended. And I won't be back. Not in the same way, anyway.
$200 spent. 3 panels attended. 1 photo op. 6 hours spent roaming the convention floors.
The only anomaly in that geek arithmetic, as far as my routine goes, is the photo op. I've never bought one before, mainly because I've never seen anyone in the Expo lineup that I honestly looked at and felt an overwhelming desire to be seen beside. Of course, then they had to go and book Karen Gillan. Scottish + Redhead + Short Haircut + Sci-Fi Actress = SWOON.
It's not what you think. I'm not upset with my experience, or even slightly disappointed. Nope, it's the exact opposite. It's that I've done it. I've done the Expo. I got to take a picture with one of my personal heroes, I got to wade into the thick of one of the largest exhibitions of nerdiness in North America (with a 90,000+ attendance this year, they may have even broken the top 5), and I had a fantastic time. But now I feel like I've gotten everything I could have ever wanted.
I'm not saying with absolute certainty that I won't attend again. However, I do know that I won't be attending in the future as a passholder. If I go back, it'll (hopefully) be as a volunteer, exhibitor, or guest.
I know that probably sounds arrogant. Let me try to explain. I feel that I've gotten as much out of the Expo as I possibly can as a fan. Now I want to get as much out of it as possible as a creator. That's not a sleight against the Expo. If anything, it's a compliment. The people who run it and participate in it are industry professionals of the highest order. They inspire the attendees, including myself, to get up and do something with our lives.
So when I say that I won't be back to Expo as a fan, I hope my meaning is clear. This was a great time. Let's take a look at that in more detail, shall we?
First off, it must be said that Calgary Comic Expo has some of the best, friendliest and hardest-working volunteers I have ever seen at an event. I had to ask about 5 different volunteers for information or directions at various points during my time at the Expo. They were all immediately friendly, never dismissive, welcoming, and on two occasions even approached me as I stumbled about awkwardly in my nerd haze.
The information they gave was always accurate and easy to understand. They were also spaced out around the grounds such that I never felt like I was straining to find someone.
Superb job, volunteers.
The signage, on the other hand, was a bit lacking or confusing at times. I understand that this was the first time the Expo had expanded to include almost all of the Stampede grounds, so it's not altogether surprising that some of the directional indicators were a bit cryptic at times. By and large, though, signs were frequent, large, and visible, so no major complaints there.
I hadn't been to the Expo for the years I was in Toronto, but I'd heard there were some major complaints in previous years about overcrowding and traffic patterns. I only have Fan Expo 2013 for comparison, and let me tell you, the Calgary Comic Expo was a vast improvement.
As I mentioned, they spread this year's con over nearly the entire Stampede grounds, utilizing the Big Four Building, the BMO Centre, the Grandstand, and even had a large Pavillion tent. They also wisely set it up so that each building was given a sort of "designation" i.e. this building is photo ops and autographs, this building is the exhibitors, this building is for large panels, etc.
This had the advantage of spreading out traffic so that despite a 50% increase (!) from last year's attendance, it never felt overly crowded. To be sure, there were still some points of congestion, especially around the food services at meal times, but as somebody who hates crowds, I didn't once have a Sartre-esque episode of "Hell is Other People."
If I had one complaint about traffic and people-minding, I'd say they just need to up the number of food trucks on hand and maybe consider some outdoor seating. That said, the weather on Saturday certainly wouldn't have allowed for this, and I understand the Expo has moved their dates up a week to mid-April for 2015. So maybe this isn't a possibility. Still, something to think about.
In terms of quality of booths, guests, and panels, I'd say this was on par with any of the major cons in North America. A-list, currently relevant guests were plentiful and (generally) accessible, although some of the fees for photo ops and autographs were unquestionably exorbitant (important to note this is not the fault of the Expo; guest agents and managers set the rates for the people they represent).
The last thing I'll mention is the program book and map. This year's program book had a lot of great editorial content, and it's wonderful to see the Expo Etiquette fully in line with their campaign of "Cosplay Does Not Equal Consent." I could be wrong, but to me there was a measured reduction in creepers, and by and large when people were taking pictures of cosplayers there was a definite atmosphere of security and well-being. More people were asking to take pictures rather than simply taking them, and the response to me was very positive. I credit the Expo's dedicated information campaign for these results.
So there you have it. All in all, one of the best and tightest-run Cons that I've ever attended. And I won't be back. Not in the same way, anyway.
OOGH. Yes, the updates have become sporadic. No, I don't know when it'll be fixed. Maybe when my day job becomes less crazy. Or when someone pays me for my writin- HAHAHA. So anyway. Here's the third member of my first Inquisitor warband, following on the heels of The Rogue Trader and The Rogue Enforcer.
He is...the mercenary.
This fellow's had the least amount of conversion work done to him, though I still tried to put in some effort to make him feel unique from the standard line of Inquisitor models.
Basically, he's most of the Damian Bloodhound kit, which itself was a limb-and-head swap with the Slick Devlan kit. I kept the shotgun hand and the head the same, but I swapped out the open hand in favour of a closed fist. That decision had little to do with this figure, and more to do with another conversion I had in mind that required the open hand.
I also thought it'd be fun to give my merc a somewhat flamboyant flair, and that meant giving him a vest. I was feeling somewhat Han Solo that day, all right? So, I chopped off the annoying shoulder-pad bit that was in the way, and slapped some putty on him. While I was at it, I also filled his holsters with some blobs of putty so that it wouldn't look like he just threw his old guns away for no good reason.
In terms of a colour scheme, I went with dull browns and red to contrast with the black and blue of the other warband members. I did this to make my Merc stand out, but also because I just felt like a change of pace was a good thing.
If there's one thing I'm not happy about, it's that the putty I was using was cheap and awful and cracked in places on his vest. In retrospect, the stuff I used wasn't really meant for sculpting so much as gap filling. Lesson learned!
There's one more member of this motley crew to go. Next week it's the Ex-Soldier!
He is...the mercenary.
This fellow's had the least amount of conversion work done to him, though I still tried to put in some effort to make him feel unique from the standard line of Inquisitor models.
Basically, he's most of the Damian Bloodhound kit, which itself was a limb-and-head swap with the Slick Devlan kit. I kept the shotgun hand and the head the same, but I swapped out the open hand in favour of a closed fist. That decision had little to do with this figure, and more to do with another conversion I had in mind that required the open hand.
In terms of a colour scheme, I went with dull browns and red to contrast with the black and blue of the other warband members. I did this to make my Merc stand out, but also because I just felt like a change of pace was a good thing.
If there's one thing I'm not happy about, it's that the putty I was using was cheap and awful and cracked in places on his vest. In retrospect, the stuff I used wasn't really meant for sculpting so much as gap filling. Lesson learned!
There's one more member of this motley crew to go. Next week it's the Ex-Soldier!
WOE BETIDE YE WHO ENTER HERE. THIS POST BE FULL OF SPOILERS.
 |
| Bryce Womeldurf via Compfight cc |
Ye have been warned.
So Sunday night I watched Game of Thrones, and it seems I had the same reaction that most of the internet had: "whoa. " At the time, I was perturbed but not completely upset, as the remainder of the episode played out, Tyrion gave some good one-liners, Daenerys was a badass, and things seemed fine. So I went on the AV Club after watching, cause I wholeheartedly enjoy reading their reviews about the show, since they offer both a set for book readers and a set for non-readers. I like to read both just to see what people from each side think. The expert review for this episode, "Breaker of Chains," mentioned another article on the site by Sonia Saraiya that talked about Game of Thrones and sexual assault.
It's a terrific read, by the by, and everyone should take a moment out of their day to give it a read.
I'm less confident in the thesis of the byline on the article (which could have been the AV Club itself rather than Saraiya, who knows), which reads "Why are the Game of Thrones showrunners rewriting the books into misogyny?"
Are they? To be sure, last episode's controversial scene was an especially sticky wicket, one which I'll get into from a storytelling perspective on Friday. Right now, though, I want to take a hard look at this show and see if it can fairly be categorized as a program that promotes the "hatred, dislike, or mistrust of women."
 |
| Âtin via Compfight cc |
A Song of Ice and Fire, the book series on which Game of Thrones is based, is widely hailed as being one of the most progressive fantasy epics of all time, with broad portrayals of women both weak and strong, all of whom have believable motivations, backgrounds, and development. Although not strictly speaking a feminist work in that it does not take a firm stance on women's issues, it presents a world where women's voices are routinely drowned out or marginalized, and presents a wide range of perspectives on that type of universe.
Much has been made already about how the TV series has changed from the books, but the rape scene (for it was unquestionably rape) was particularly noted as an anomaly. Still, there have already been points of divergence that could lead one to believe the series is taking on a decidedly unfriendly stance towards women.
The most egregious example, of course, is the other rape-where-there-was-none, also mentioned in Saraiya's article: Khal Drogo's assault on Daenerys Targaryen. Without going into too much detail, suffice it to say that in the book this is an explicitly consensual encounter, with Drogo asking permission, and Daenerys taking the lead on saying yes. In the TV series, Drogo's query - "no?" - is now a command, a refusal of Dany's refusal.
The problem with this shift isn't just that it was quickly forgotten both by the showrunners and the viewers alike. It's that it completely changes the dynamic of Dany and Drogo's relationship. Indeed, it shapes Dany's character for the remainder of her sexual experiences. In the books, Drogo recognizes Daenerys has been abused by her brother and has been controlled by men for the entirety of her life. His decision to respect her boundaries and her subsequent decision to permit their consummation is the first time she has met a man who is asking her what SHE wants. Indeed, Drogo continues to support Dany in her development and even follows her request that the Dothraki stop their standard rape-and-pillage tactics. It's vital to her later development as a strong, independent queen.
Contrast this with the TV show. Dany is taken by Drogo in a brutal scene where she weeps openly. Subsequent scenes of their sex life show him roughly assailing her from behind as she distracts herself with thoughts of her dragons, or with a pained expression on her face. Only later does she call upon the advice of a handmaiden, Doreah, and discovers the miracle of woman-on-top intercourse. She does this, however, out of a desire to "make the Khal happy." Now, far be it from me to complain about woman wanting to make a man happy in bed - indeed I encourage all people everywhere to make their sexual partner happy in bed - but the point is that there is no smooth transition from the earlier rape scene to this point. It simply doesn't make sense for Dany to love Drogo in the TV series. He's an impeccable specimen of masculinity, sure, but you'd think she'd hold the whole "rape" thing over him a while longer.
In fact, I'd go as far as to say that there is a wider sexual disparity occurring all through the TV series. If you're not sure what I mean, let me introduce you to College Humor's "HBO Should Show Dongs" video. It's pretty damn funny. It's also 100% true. The sheer volume of female nudity as compared to male nudity is overwhelming. Now, there's all kinds of plausible reasons for this, numero uno undoubtedly being network guidelines governing the portrayal of genitalia (male and female) vs. the portrayal of bare breasts. There is, of course, also the simple fact that women's breasts are the great sexual inequalizer in Western society. Shirtless male = day at the beach, shirtless female = sexy fun time a go-go.
It's worth pointing out that the society of Westeros is wholly a male-dominated society, so it's not altogether out of the realm of possibility that a significant number of women would turn to prostitution as a form of self-sufficiency. Still, the frequency of women disrobing to men disrobing is hardly limited to the whores of King's Landing. Melisandre, Ygrette, Osha, Talisa and even Brienne have all been full or partially nude, in scenes that either called for it or didn't.
Speaking of Brienne, the show has gone to great pains to keep her "warrior-woman" spirit intact, which I wholly applaud. But has anyone else noticed that she seems to be the ONLY warrior woman in Westeros?
Oh, sure, there's Osha and Ygrette, but they're both wildlings. There's also Meera Reid, but she hasn't demonstrated any substantial fighting prowess, and for that matter Meera and Jojen both kind of exist on their own, rather than actively fighting for an army. One could perhaps argue that Arya will become a warrior woman, but thus far she's relied on men to do much of the dirty work for her. In her most recent "action" scene, she aided the Hound, but the men she felled were already well wounded or taken by surprise.
Brienne, on the other hand, is a professional soldier and fighter who bests some of the toughest combatants in the Seven Kingdoms. Here's the thing. In the book, while it's established that "warrior women" are a rarity in Westeros, we do encounter some. A whole family, in fact. If you're a TV watcher only, you'll have heard the name "Mormont" a number of times, but only in reference to two men (and now only to one): Jeor and Jorah Mormont.
What's been cut from the TV show is the huge female branch of house Mormont, a group of sisters who rule Bear Island under matriarch Maege Mormont, Jeor's sister. See, Jeor, as a member of the Night's Watch, surrendered all lands and titles when he took the job. They would have passed to Jorah, but - and this IS mentioned in the show - Jorah sold slaves, and his father disowned him Maege, meanwhile, had only daughters, and as such the rights to Bear Island will pass to a female Mormont no matter what.
To be sure, these characters are bit parts. The largest is probably Maege and her daughter Dacey. Dacey figures in Robb's story arc as one of his bannermen, and she meets her end at the Red Wedding with an axe to the gut. Ick.
But they serve a key purpose: to demonstrate how a household, no matter how rarely, can in fact end up being run exclusively by women. At the same time, they show how these women have to be tough as nails to make sure their voice is heard amongst the other banners.
So there's the problems. Are there things the TV show does BETTER?
Yes, actually. Shae is now a full-fledged character, who genuinely seems to care not only for Tyrion but also for Sansa. In the books, she isn't given much to work with, mainly because her part is viewed through Tyrion's perspective.
Talisa Stark, despite her gruesome end, is also given a greatly expanded role. In the books, she is Jeyne Westerling, and Robb only marries her because he feels it is only right after they go to bed together. Though Jeyne is still alive in the book universe, she isn't much of a character and largely served to compliment Robb's development as an echo of his father.
Ros is a character created by and for the TV series that adds some depth to the intrigue of King's Landing. Unfortunately, it's hard to overlook the fact that she begins as a prostitute and meets her end in a sort of sexual torture scene by Joffrey's hand (though the actual violence is not seen, only the end result). It's hard to see this as either a net gain or loss for the series in their portrayal of women.
At the end of the day, is the TV show Game of Thrones outright misogynist? I'm not yet prepared to go that far. I will say that it's treading a fine line, and it best be careful not to alienate a large chunk of its audience with many more of the kinds of scenes like we saw last Sunday. On Friday, I'll talk a bit more about sexual assault, rape, and storytelling. For now, I leave it at that: probation. Let's hope it doesn't break it.
Much has been made already about how the TV series has changed from the books, but the rape scene (for it was unquestionably rape) was particularly noted as an anomaly. Still, there have already been points of divergence that could lead one to believe the series is taking on a decidedly unfriendly stance towards women.
The most egregious example, of course, is the other rape-where-there-was-none, also mentioned in Saraiya's article: Khal Drogo's assault on Daenerys Targaryen. Without going into too much detail, suffice it to say that in the book this is an explicitly consensual encounter, with Drogo asking permission, and Daenerys taking the lead on saying yes. In the TV series, Drogo's query - "no?" - is now a command, a refusal of Dany's refusal.
The problem with this shift isn't just that it was quickly forgotten both by the showrunners and the viewers alike. It's that it completely changes the dynamic of Dany and Drogo's relationship. Indeed, it shapes Dany's character for the remainder of her sexual experiences. In the books, Drogo recognizes Daenerys has been abused by her brother and has been controlled by men for the entirety of her life. His decision to respect her boundaries and her subsequent decision to permit their consummation is the first time she has met a man who is asking her what SHE wants. Indeed, Drogo continues to support Dany in her development and even follows her request that the Dothraki stop their standard rape-and-pillage tactics. It's vital to her later development as a strong, independent queen.
 |
| skARTistic via Compfight cc |
In fact, I'd go as far as to say that there is a wider sexual disparity occurring all through the TV series. If you're not sure what I mean, let me introduce you to College Humor's "HBO Should Show Dongs" video. It's pretty damn funny. It's also 100% true. The sheer volume of female nudity as compared to male nudity is overwhelming. Now, there's all kinds of plausible reasons for this, numero uno undoubtedly being network guidelines governing the portrayal of genitalia (male and female) vs. the portrayal of bare breasts. There is, of course, also the simple fact that women's breasts are the great sexual inequalizer in Western society. Shirtless male = day at the beach, shirtless female = sexy fun time a go-go.
 |
| Chris Hunkeler via Compfight cc |
It's worth pointing out that the society of Westeros is wholly a male-dominated society, so it's not altogether out of the realm of possibility that a significant number of women would turn to prostitution as a form of self-sufficiency. Still, the frequency of women disrobing to men disrobing is hardly limited to the whores of King's Landing. Melisandre, Ygrette, Osha, Talisa and even Brienne have all been full or partially nude, in scenes that either called for it or didn't.
Speaking of Brienne, the show has gone to great pains to keep her "warrior-woman" spirit intact, which I wholly applaud. But has anyone else noticed that she seems to be the ONLY warrior woman in Westeros?
Oh, sure, there's Osha and Ygrette, but they're both wildlings. There's also Meera Reid, but she hasn't demonstrated any substantial fighting prowess, and for that matter Meera and Jojen both kind of exist on their own, rather than actively fighting for an army. One could perhaps argue that Arya will become a warrior woman, but thus far she's relied on men to do much of the dirty work for her. In her most recent "action" scene, she aided the Hound, but the men she felled were already well wounded or taken by surprise.
Brienne, on the other hand, is a professional soldier and fighter who bests some of the toughest combatants in the Seven Kingdoms. Here's the thing. In the book, while it's established that "warrior women" are a rarity in Westeros, we do encounter some. A whole family, in fact. If you're a TV watcher only, you'll have heard the name "Mormont" a number of times, but only in reference to two men (and now only to one): Jeor and Jorah Mormont.
What's been cut from the TV show is the huge female branch of house Mormont, a group of sisters who rule Bear Island under matriarch Maege Mormont, Jeor's sister. See, Jeor, as a member of the Night's Watch, surrendered all lands and titles when he took the job. They would have passed to Jorah, but - and this IS mentioned in the show - Jorah sold slaves, and his father disowned him Maege, meanwhile, had only daughters, and as such the rights to Bear Island will pass to a female Mormont no matter what.
To be sure, these characters are bit parts. The largest is probably Maege and her daughter Dacey. Dacey figures in Robb's story arc as one of his bannermen, and she meets her end at the Red Wedding with an axe to the gut. Ick.
But they serve a key purpose: to demonstrate how a household, no matter how rarely, can in fact end up being run exclusively by women. At the same time, they show how these women have to be tough as nails to make sure their voice is heard amongst the other banners.
Yes, actually. Shae is now a full-fledged character, who genuinely seems to care not only for Tyrion but also for Sansa. In the books, she isn't given much to work with, mainly because her part is viewed through Tyrion's perspective.
Talisa Stark, despite her gruesome end, is also given a greatly expanded role. In the books, she is Jeyne Westerling, and Robb only marries her because he feels it is only right after they go to bed together. Though Jeyne is still alive in the book universe, she isn't much of a character and largely served to compliment Robb's development as an echo of his father.
Ros is a character created by and for the TV series that adds some depth to the intrigue of King's Landing. Unfortunately, it's hard to overlook the fact that she begins as a prostitute and meets her end in a sort of sexual torture scene by Joffrey's hand (though the actual violence is not seen, only the end result). It's hard to see this as either a net gain or loss for the series in their portrayal of women.
At the end of the day, is the TV show Game of Thrones outright misogynist? I'm not yet prepared to go that far. I will say that it's treading a fine line, and it best be careful not to alienate a large chunk of its audience with many more of the kinds of scenes like we saw last Sunday. On Friday, I'll talk a bit more about sexual assault, rape, and storytelling. For now, I leave it at that: probation. Let's hope it doesn't break it.