![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
kate_nepveuAdapted from my tweets.
Description:
On the Montreal Science Fiction and Fantasy Association blog, Danny Sichel suggested using the term municipal fantasy to describe works in which magic is integrated into a modern setting, to the point of being "an issue of public policy." What practical, political, and ethical concerns can be explored in municipal fantasy? How do municipal fantasy works address the ownership and regulation of magic? Is magic a good or a service, a weapon or a commodity, a utility or a monopoly?
Phenderson Djèlí Clark, Max Gladstone, Lauren Roy, Susan Bigelow (mod), Chris Gerwel.
I should say that though the panelists were mic'ed, I had trouble hearing some of them; I thought it was just me, so I didn't raise my hand, but I should've done.
Susan asks what books are "municipal fantasy"?
Max: my books, but that's a boring answer. If going define fantasy broadly, which should for these purposes, as works structured in fantastic ways: Omelas, explicit infrastructure of suffering (riff on WC Williams' "so much depends"). Describes a work that involves infrastructure falling apart and attempting to put back together by reconquest, missed what it was. Also Dhalgren.
(edit: this is identified on Twitter as The Divine Cities series, by Robert Jackson Bennett.)
Phenderson: magic being regulated, more specifically magic users: Powder Mage series (Brian McClellan), users can't just wander about.
(non-Twitter note: I haven't read those, but Chad likes them. (edit: I think he may have read and like dthe Divine Cities books, too!))
Chris: subscribes to past speakers' newsletters. Also type of fantasy very popular in UK: Ben Aaronovitch, Rivers of London; Kate Griffin, Matthew Swift; Neil Gaiman, Neverwhere: about how our everyday world interacts with and negotiates boundaries of magic world.
Lauren: JADE CITY by Fonda Lee, in which jade grants people augmented powers etc., and therefore is very heavily regulated; story is very political and commodities-based.
Susan: no-one mentioned Harry Potter, so excited, was next question. (panel: was sort of hovering over discussion) Is Ministry of Magic municipal fantasy? Is HP good example of trope?
Max: HP is great example of ocular focus to worldbuilding, meaning: eye doesn't work uniformly, even with 20/20 vision etc etc: eyes move around and brain stitches into picture that makes feel like full focus/depth/color. As long as just looking at Hogwarts, world feels full-featured. but once start asking questions about beyond that (gives various examples), crumbles around edges. Thinks there are amazing possibilities if assume everything in the books is true from perspective of a 13 year old with limited interests, but doesn't think that's what JKR is doing.
Phenderson: Magical Creatures movie interesting because explicitly about the bureaucracy, looking to see where goes.
(jokes about where wizards get breakfast, Hogwarts liability)
(it's so weird trying to remember what is actually canon and what's just sensible fanon)
Phenderson con't: likes that (the Magical Creatures movie? missed the reference) shows the everyday problems like interoffice communications, even with magic
Panelists suggest:
HARRY POTTER AND THE UNBELIEVABLE BUREAUCRACY
Harry going to the (UK equivalent of) the DMV
Susan: HP is self-regulated society, wizards regulate wizards; if there were magic users all over the world, who gets to regulate?
(me, at time: bets with self how long before Broken Earth is mentioned. spoiler: far too long.)
Chris: supply & demand, how many people have magic, very different depending. are there 3 people with ability to destroy world? maybe make friends with them, instead of regulating.
Lauren: comes down to who's having a say over somebody else, gets (messy? difficult? problematic?) very fast
Phenderson: if only 3 people can destroy world, going to have magical sentinels (this is apparently an X-Men reference)
Max: superhero comics in general are an under-recognized universe of bureaucratic fantasy
(there is then a recursive moment where Max comments on how transcription is making self think about sentences, which gets transcribed; yes, even though he can't see transcription)
Max con't: as goofy as CA:Civil War was, given capabilities of Scarlet Witch, Tony Stark, Bruce Banner ("when the anger management issues of repressed white men become city destroying"), do have to try to take uncanny and put into context. References Damage Control storyline in Marvel comics, and the Gotham Central series, which is like the Wire in Gotham where Batman shows up once in a while.
Susan: two favorite comics, Unbeatable Squirrel Girl & Ms Marvel, both deal with that
Susan: scenario: about 10% of world's population has magical powers, suddenly. Panelists are on government panel. What regulation do you propose?
Lauren: expect tons of studies, raising money to get them done
Chris: inevitably villain politician will be riling people up
Phenderson: talking about global scale, lots of cultures would be fine.
Max: Twitter meme, Mike Pence looks like X-Men villain
(no-one answers the question . . . )
Max: alternatively, maybe we don't need any extra laws, what enforcement powers do we need for existing laws? Expands on it with examples, including that changing someone into a newt seems like a tort. Panelists riff on law firm commercials that would result.
Chris: also all the follow-on questions, like OSHA: if co-worker gets pissed and turns you into newt, what does workplace safety look like. References She-Hulk story in which there's litigation over someone getting powers? at workplace; I think this must be a reference to Charles Soule's short-lived run.
(very interesting that no-one on panel imagined that they were in 10%, at least explicitly)
Max: also in She-Hulk, Dr Doom's son seeking asylum in US because doesn't want to be King of Latveria
Susan: tries to get panel to answer question about regulations again
Lauren: lot of time don't know what need to regulate, until have something to respond to
Max: would expect biggest questions to be economic, Storm's powers and agriculture for instance, vested business interests acting against potential disruption of their interests (no matter what percentage of population)
Phenderson like if alchemy suddenly shows up, gold is worthless.
Chris: can we exercise power over magic users?
Susan: how ethical is it for government to use magic workers? pave the road, track down criminals, military uses?
(WHERE ARE MY BROKEN EARTH REFERENCES??!!)
someone: can mutants be differentially drafted?
Phenderson: someone can cure cancer, doesn't want to
(note now: I feel like this is a short story and I can't place the reference)
. . . uncomfortable silence
Chris: very hard to talk about without context of given system of laws, Soviet Union would have come to very different end results
(some stuff I missed)
Phenderson: magic as commodity, people will have greater or lesser access; own story for Fireside earlier in year, "The Secret Lives of the Nine Negro Teeth of George Washington", told from POV of enslaved people who are kept away from magic so they aren't threats; this is part of the ethical question
(note now: this is a very good story, you should read it)
Max: question has 2 pieces. Individual sovereignty, what right as community to force individuals to do particular things. To what extent does governmental have the right to actively intervene in lives. Example of first: is it moral to chain Wolverine to a bed and make give organ transplants 24 hours a day? Example of second: what is reasonable search & seizure if Charles Xavier might be in government employ, if we know that psychics exist: does that remove our reasonable expectation of privacy in our thoughts? These seem different questions to me.
Susan followup: should magic users be licensed?
Lauren: comes back to access, how are we licensing, what groups are we making jump through hoops?
Chris: also we are approaching this through secular lens, how does religion shape/pressure response?
(this is where I said, on Twitter: note to self: disentangle discomfort with way mod is framing the questions being posed to panel.)
audience q: FINALLY a Broken Earth reference, thank you! (Hi Ken!) asks panel to react to.
(mod had very strict "no comments only questions" policy, which just leads to people saying "here is an example you didn't talk about. question mark.")
Phenderson: Max's Wolverine's reference reminded of nodes in that series.
audience followup: not so much that but such heavy regulation.
Phenderson: very dystopic version.
Max: enforced by, in addition, very strict social norms.
Lauren: no choice for magic users.
audience: Dragon Age universe?
Max: does a lot of things that are very good, but has issue in it showing that magic is so profoundly separate from religion as practiced in faux-Catholic Church; but in history, magic not treated as separate from Church, canonical magical battles St Patrick & druids so that aspect (is indicative of current ways of thinking, to heavily paraphrase)
Lauren: something I missed about mages and power to end world
q: conversation talking about magic as something people does, not something people are; what about Charlaine Harris where werewolves etc. are regulated?
Chris: regulating identity in urban fantasy very interesting, don't think society has good answers for, see that being worked out in a lot of recent fiction
Max: gets to heart of licensing debate that we've been talking about (me on Twitter: YES THIS)
q: Babylon 5, telepaths, licensing, have to join
Susan: example of how regulation goes really wrong
q: curious about perspective of someone who suddenly gets powers and how they would feel about regulation, imagine it was you
Lauren: Holly Black, THE COLDEST GIRL IN COLDTOWN. (adapted from book blurb: ) Coldtowns are walled cities where vampires are quarantined and no-one can leave. Main character gets bitten, knows just matter of time before gets infected, so takes self to a Coldtown, except little sister comes along.
Chris: also depends a lot on who individual is, privileged background react very differently
Phenderson: if only 10% of population, might think oh, doesn't have anything to do with me, and then it does; might turn into Che Guevara type
Susan: X-Men as metaphor for LGBT experience are kind of relevant to this: as grow, discover more about self, and encounter regulation as a result -- less than before, but
q: are panelists familiar with iZombie?
Lauren: love it! describes a little
q: to what extent does method of acquiring power, affect way regulate it? study for 20 years, roll out of bed and hit head?
(me, now: US antidiscrimination jurisprudence is very (though not exclusively) concerned with whether traits are immutable)
Chris: have to explore within context of the legal system: getting powers by slaughtering 30 people & bathing in their blood?
Max: which also is already illegal!
Phenderson: Harry Potter is sort of like roll-out-of-bed system, are people allowed to opt out of system?
Chris: is there any Ethics of Magic course at Hogwarts?
Phenderson: obviously not.
Susan: wrap-up question: what is coolest pedestrian use of magic found in other works?
Max: Dan Slott's SHE-HULK run, a shapeshifter is employed by law firm as process server
Chris: manga/anime ONE PIECE, characters eat devil fruits that give magical powers: can manifest arms wherever, very useful for fights but also making sandwiches
Lauren: Vivian Shaw, STRANGE PRACTICE, main character has job patching up the undead
Phenderson can't think of one.
/end
And here is where I navel-gave and try to figure out why I found listening to this panel extremely stressful, specifically the way Susan, the moderator, was framing the questions.
I think it was because many of the questions left open the possibility of really upsetting answers—which I trusted Max and Phenderson not to do, but I didn't know the other panelists, and of course you never know what an audience member is going to ask. Also, with such wide-open questions, I couldn't tell whether the mod recognized all the bad places that things could go, so that added to my stress because if things did go south, I didn't know if the mod was ready to deal with it.
For instance, the question "how ethical is it for government to use magic workers? pave the road, track down criminals, military uses?" leaves to those answering the responsibility of asking what aspects of that "use" are voluntary and of acknowledging the weight of historical examples of exploitation, at a minimum, of labor. And I would have preferred to proceed from the assumption that some things are off limits rather than hoping the panelists will come to that conclusion, you know?
I don't know, lunch isn't quite sitting right; of the people I polled afterward, at least one thought it was a fun light panel, and I don't think anyone found it actively distressing. So probably it's just me. But yeah.
In conclusion, I am going to finally finish THE STONE SKY, damn it.
Description:
On the Montreal Science Fiction and Fantasy Association blog, Danny Sichel suggested using the term municipal fantasy to describe works in which magic is integrated into a modern setting, to the point of being "an issue of public policy." What practical, political, and ethical concerns can be explored in municipal fantasy? How do municipal fantasy works address the ownership and regulation of magic? Is magic a good or a service, a weapon or a commodity, a utility or a monopoly?
Phenderson Djèlí Clark, Max Gladstone, Lauren Roy, Susan Bigelow (mod), Chris Gerwel.
I should say that though the panelists were mic'ed, I had trouble hearing some of them; I thought it was just me, so I didn't raise my hand, but I should've done.
Susan asks what books are "municipal fantasy"?
Max: my books, but that's a boring answer. If going define fantasy broadly, which should for these purposes, as works structured in fantastic ways: Omelas, explicit infrastructure of suffering (riff on WC Williams' "so much depends"). Describes a work that involves infrastructure falling apart and attempting to put back together by reconquest, missed what it was. Also Dhalgren.
(edit: this is identified on Twitter as The Divine Cities series, by Robert Jackson Bennett.)
Phenderson: magic being regulated, more specifically magic users: Powder Mage series (Brian McClellan), users can't just wander about.
(non-Twitter note: I haven't read those, but Chad likes them. (edit: I think he may have read and like dthe Divine Cities books, too!))
Chris: subscribes to past speakers' newsletters. Also type of fantasy very popular in UK: Ben Aaronovitch, Rivers of London; Kate Griffin, Matthew Swift; Neil Gaiman, Neverwhere: about how our everyday world interacts with and negotiates boundaries of magic world.
Lauren: JADE CITY by Fonda Lee, in which jade grants people augmented powers etc., and therefore is very heavily regulated; story is very political and commodities-based.
Susan: no-one mentioned Harry Potter, so excited, was next question. (panel: was sort of hovering over discussion) Is Ministry of Magic municipal fantasy? Is HP good example of trope?
Max: HP is great example of ocular focus to worldbuilding, meaning: eye doesn't work uniformly, even with 20/20 vision etc etc: eyes move around and brain stitches into picture that makes feel like full focus/depth/color. As long as just looking at Hogwarts, world feels full-featured. but once start asking questions about beyond that (gives various examples), crumbles around edges. Thinks there are amazing possibilities if assume everything in the books is true from perspective of a 13 year old with limited interests, but doesn't think that's what JKR is doing.
Phenderson: Magical Creatures movie interesting because explicitly about the bureaucracy, looking to see where goes.
(jokes about where wizards get breakfast, Hogwarts liability)
(it's so weird trying to remember what is actually canon and what's just sensible fanon)
Phenderson con't: likes that (the Magical Creatures movie? missed the reference) shows the everyday problems like interoffice communications, even with magic
Panelists suggest:
HARRY POTTER AND THE UNBELIEVABLE BUREAUCRACY
Harry going to the (UK equivalent of) the DMV
Susan: HP is self-regulated society, wizards regulate wizards; if there were magic users all over the world, who gets to regulate?
(me, at time: bets with self how long before Broken Earth is mentioned. spoiler: far too long.)
Chris: supply & demand, how many people have magic, very different depending. are there 3 people with ability to destroy world? maybe make friends with them, instead of regulating.
Lauren: comes down to who's having a say over somebody else, gets (messy? difficult? problematic?) very fast
Phenderson: if only 3 people can destroy world, going to have magical sentinels (this is apparently an X-Men reference)
Max: superhero comics in general are an under-recognized universe of bureaucratic fantasy
(there is then a recursive moment where Max comments on how transcription is making self think about sentences, which gets transcribed; yes, even though he can't see transcription)
Max con't: as goofy as CA:Civil War was, given capabilities of Scarlet Witch, Tony Stark, Bruce Banner ("when the anger management issues of repressed white men become city destroying"), do have to try to take uncanny and put into context. References Damage Control storyline in Marvel comics, and the Gotham Central series, which is like the Wire in Gotham where Batman shows up once in a while.
Susan: two favorite comics, Unbeatable Squirrel Girl & Ms Marvel, both deal with that
Susan: scenario: about 10% of world's population has magical powers, suddenly. Panelists are on government panel. What regulation do you propose?
Lauren: expect tons of studies, raising money to get them done
Chris: inevitably villain politician will be riling people up
Phenderson: talking about global scale, lots of cultures would be fine.
Max: Twitter meme, Mike Pence looks like X-Men villain
(no-one answers the question . . . )
Max: alternatively, maybe we don't need any extra laws, what enforcement powers do we need for existing laws? Expands on it with examples, including that changing someone into a newt seems like a tort. Panelists riff on law firm commercials that would result.
Chris: also all the follow-on questions, like OSHA: if co-worker gets pissed and turns you into newt, what does workplace safety look like. References She-Hulk story in which there's litigation over someone getting powers? at workplace; I think this must be a reference to Charles Soule's short-lived run.
(very interesting that no-one on panel imagined that they were in 10%, at least explicitly)
Max: also in She-Hulk, Dr Doom's son seeking asylum in US because doesn't want to be King of Latveria
Susan: tries to get panel to answer question about regulations again
Lauren: lot of time don't know what need to regulate, until have something to respond to
Max: would expect biggest questions to be economic, Storm's powers and agriculture for instance, vested business interests acting against potential disruption of their interests (no matter what percentage of population)
Phenderson like if alchemy suddenly shows up, gold is worthless.
Chris: can we exercise power over magic users?
Susan: how ethical is it for government to use magic workers? pave the road, track down criminals, military uses?
(WHERE ARE MY BROKEN EARTH REFERENCES??!!)
someone: can mutants be differentially drafted?
Phenderson: someone can cure cancer, doesn't want to
(note now: I feel like this is a short story and I can't place the reference)
. . . uncomfortable silence
Chris: very hard to talk about without context of given system of laws, Soviet Union would have come to very different end results
(some stuff I missed)
Phenderson: magic as commodity, people will have greater or lesser access; own story for Fireside earlier in year, "The Secret Lives of the Nine Negro Teeth of George Washington", told from POV of enslaved people who are kept away from magic so they aren't threats; this is part of the ethical question
(note now: this is a very good story, you should read it)
Max: question has 2 pieces. Individual sovereignty, what right as community to force individuals to do particular things. To what extent does governmental have the right to actively intervene in lives. Example of first: is it moral to chain Wolverine to a bed and make give organ transplants 24 hours a day? Example of second: what is reasonable search & seizure if Charles Xavier might be in government employ, if we know that psychics exist: does that remove our reasonable expectation of privacy in our thoughts? These seem different questions to me.
Susan followup: should magic users be licensed?
Lauren: comes back to access, how are we licensing, what groups are we making jump through hoops?
Chris: also we are approaching this through secular lens, how does religion shape/pressure response?
(this is where I said, on Twitter: note to self: disentangle discomfort with way mod is framing the questions being posed to panel.)
audience q: FINALLY a Broken Earth reference, thank you! (Hi Ken!) asks panel to react to.
(mod had very strict "no comments only questions" policy, which just leads to people saying "here is an example you didn't talk about. question mark.")
Phenderson: Max's Wolverine's reference reminded of nodes in that series.
audience followup: not so much that but such heavy regulation.
Phenderson: very dystopic version.
Max: enforced by, in addition, very strict social norms.
Lauren: no choice for magic users.
audience: Dragon Age universe?
Max: does a lot of things that are very good, but has issue in it showing that magic is so profoundly separate from religion as practiced in faux-Catholic Church; but in history, magic not treated as separate from Church, canonical magical battles St Patrick & druids so that aspect (is indicative of current ways of thinking, to heavily paraphrase)
Lauren: something I missed about mages and power to end world
q: conversation talking about magic as something people does, not something people are; what about Charlaine Harris where werewolves etc. are regulated?
Chris: regulating identity in urban fantasy very interesting, don't think society has good answers for, see that being worked out in a lot of recent fiction
Max: gets to heart of licensing debate that we've been talking about (me on Twitter: YES THIS)
q: Babylon 5, telepaths, licensing, have to join
Susan: example of how regulation goes really wrong
q: curious about perspective of someone who suddenly gets powers and how they would feel about regulation, imagine it was you
Lauren: Holly Black, THE COLDEST GIRL IN COLDTOWN. (adapted from book blurb: ) Coldtowns are walled cities where vampires are quarantined and no-one can leave. Main character gets bitten, knows just matter of time before gets infected, so takes self to a Coldtown, except little sister comes along.
Chris: also depends a lot on who individual is, privileged background react very differently
Phenderson: if only 10% of population, might think oh, doesn't have anything to do with me, and then it does; might turn into Che Guevara type
Susan: X-Men as metaphor for LGBT experience are kind of relevant to this: as grow, discover more about self, and encounter regulation as a result -- less than before, but
q: are panelists familiar with iZombie?
Lauren: love it! describes a little
q: to what extent does method of acquiring power, affect way regulate it? study for 20 years, roll out of bed and hit head?
(me, now: US antidiscrimination jurisprudence is very (though not exclusively) concerned with whether traits are immutable)
Chris: have to explore within context of the legal system: getting powers by slaughtering 30 people & bathing in their blood?
Max: which also is already illegal!
Phenderson: Harry Potter is sort of like roll-out-of-bed system, are people allowed to opt out of system?
Chris: is there any Ethics of Magic course at Hogwarts?
Phenderson: obviously not.
Susan: wrap-up question: what is coolest pedestrian use of magic found in other works?
Max: Dan Slott's SHE-HULK run, a shapeshifter is employed by law firm as process server
Chris: manga/anime ONE PIECE, characters eat devil fruits that give magical powers: can manifest arms wherever, very useful for fights but also making sandwiches
Lauren: Vivian Shaw, STRANGE PRACTICE, main character has job patching up the undead
Phenderson can't think of one.
/end
And here is where I navel-gave and try to figure out why I found listening to this panel extremely stressful, specifically the way Susan, the moderator, was framing the questions.
I think it was because many of the questions left open the possibility of really upsetting answers—which I trusted Max and Phenderson not to do, but I didn't know the other panelists, and of course you never know what an audience member is going to ask. Also, with such wide-open questions, I couldn't tell whether the mod recognized all the bad places that things could go, so that added to my stress because if things did go south, I didn't know if the mod was ready to deal with it.
For instance, the question "how ethical is it for government to use magic workers? pave the road, track down criminals, military uses?" leaves to those answering the responsibility of asking what aspects of that "use" are voluntary and of acknowledging the weight of historical examples of exploitation, at a minimum, of labor. And I would have preferred to proceed from the assumption that some things are off limits rather than hoping the panelists will come to that conclusion, you know?
I don't know, lunch isn't quite sitting right; of the people I polled afterward, at least one thought it was a fun light panel, and I don't think anyone found it actively distressing. So probably it's just me. But yeah.
In conclusion, I am going to finally finish THE STONE SKY, damn it.
no subject
Date: 2018-07-17 10:37 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-07-17 11:09 pm (UTC)