Schedule

Presented with all of SFF to review, how does a reviewer determine their beat? Should they read widely, and address work as a knowledgeable generalist, or read deeply within their specialty, and bring that specialty to bear? Reviewers will discuss their practices of how they choose what to review or not to review, their path to their current specialty, if any, and their intentions for future work.

From found families to werewolf clans to polyamory to alien hives, this panel will discuss the best (and worst) examples of alternate family structures in science fiction, fantasy, and horror.

This panel will cover what makes for a great review? How does one go about becoming a reviewer? Where would one go to read SFF reviews? What is the benefit of a critical review, and how does one write such a review well? If a reviewer makes a misstep in a review, how should an editor respond?

Speculative fiction readers are familiar with the tropes and techniques of genre fiction. How do teachers make genre fiction more accessible to students who aren’t frequent speculative fiction readers? Experienced teachers discuss their techniques for teaching speculative literature in a classroom, and trade recommendations for convincing administrators that speculative literature should be a part of school curriculums.

Everyone on this panel writes fanzines. What that means has changed over the years, but they are all passionate about them. The panel will talk about what excites them, what delights them, and what makes them nominate something for a Hugo.

Washington, DC, is a popular and compelling setting for mysteries and political thrillers, but what about speculative fiction? How is DC and its culture represented in science fiction and fantasy? How can you avoid reducing this complex city to a caricature? Which writers get it right, and how badly do some get it wrong?

What is it like for marginalized or underrepresented writers to navigate submissions and rejections in short fiction? How do such writers consider editorial feedback related to voice or relatability, when it’s possible that feedback could be coming from a place of bigotry or close-mindedness rather than a reflection of their craft?