I had the good
fortune to serve as a moderator in both conferences I attended this year,
Bouchercon and Creatures, Crimes, and Creativity. I’ve been going to writer’s
conferences since 2004, and pretty much annually since 2008. I’ve been on
panels at either Bouchercon or C3 or both every year but one since 2012. In
that time I’ve been lucky to work with moderators who were uniformly excellent
and also had differing styles. It was only natural I’d want to try my hand one
day after seeing how effortlessly Sandra Parshall, Peter Rozovsky, Jim Born, et
al pulled it off for me.
It ain’t as easy as
they make it look.
I have no doubt
there are moderators who don’t think twice about getting up in front of a
couple of hundred people and asking a handful of writers questions off the tops
of their heads. We’ve all seen them and can probably identify them. By and
large they’re the shitty moderators. The panels roam, the questions either
don’t give the writers anything to talk about that’s informative and
entertaining (a good panel is both), or is so vague no one knows what to do
with it. I’m sure some people can pull it off. I’m sure I’ve seen a panel or
two where that happened. I’m also sure there are moderators out there right now
who do this and think they pulled it off. They’re probably wrong.
Preparation is
important because there’s going to be a lot of stuff going on the moderator has
to keep track of. “How much time is left” may be the most obvious, and it’s
close to most important when considered in conjunction with other elements.
Sure, there’s a volunteer there to tell you when you have 10 minutes, five,
two, clear out there’s people waiting. What do you do if you’re 25 minutes into
a 50-minute panel and you’re three-quarters of the way through your questions?
Even worse, what if you’ve been coming up with questions more or less off the
top of your head, realize you’re running out of ideas, look at your watch and
realize you still have half an hour? I saw this happen at Bouchercon—I won’t
say in which panel—and the moderator depended on the audience to fill the last
20 minutes. That’s not right, and it’s not fair to anyone.
In addition to
tracking time you’re also gauging the audience. Anyone who’s done a reading,
sat on a panel, or given any kind of public performance knows not all audiences
are created equal. If a certain type of question is dying, change up. It’s
probably a good idea to have at least half again as many questions as you think
you’ll need, covering different aspects of your topic. That allows you to switch
off if what you thought would be clever just lies there and rots.
It’s also important
to know your panelists. Not necessarily personally—though that never hurts—but their
writing. A good moderator should probably read at least one book by each
panelist, but at the very least should be familiar with their work through
reviews, synopses, and excerpts. Specific questions may present themselves, but
you’ll also know what kinds of questions will work better for the group as a
whole. Another benefit to this relates to the previous paragraph, except in
reverse: a line of inquiry goes well and you run out of related questions. Then is a good time to go with the flow.
The last thing you want to do is to get everyone in a good mood—your panel is
revved up, the audience is revved up—and you decide to talk about something
else. Buzzkill.
This year’s
Bouchercon was my first moderator gig. Five writers (including one good friend,
Terrence McCauley, yay me) including multi-bestseller Heather Graham, so I knew
there would be a decent crowd. I polled a few moderators I’d seen before and
thought did a good job—including the Master of Moderation, Peter Rozovsky—and
started my research and working on questions several weeks in advance.
One panelist had to
pull out due to an illness in the family. I felt bad for him, but the panel was
not in danger. I had plenty of material. Stepping onto the dais I learned
another panelist had taken ill and was missing.
Now I’m down to
three. Fast math in my head. Fifty minute panel. Enough questions to allow five
panelists to speak for half again that long. (So I hoped.) Only three
panelists. Should still come out to about 45 minutes. Leave five to ten minutes
for audience participation and I’ll be fine.
Then the real
benefit of preparation made an appearance. Our other panelist—a fine writer and
nice man based on our conversation in the Green Room—had never been on a panel
before, got nervous and vapor locked. It happens. I’ll not name him as I don’t
want to embarrass him, and after the event I felt badly for him. During the
event I mostly felt bad for me, wondering what the fuck I was going to do to
fill the time.
Some say luck is
where preparation meets opportunity. In my case it was more like where
preparation met Heather Graham and Terrence McCauley, both of whom stepped up
to give more expansive answers as time went on. Shared a few anecdotes
tangentially related to what was under discussion.
Therein lies the
biggest lesson I learned: be generous with your panel and they’ll reciprocate.
Take the time to make your best effort to understand their work and ask
questions to help them put their best feet forward and they’ll carry you. The
more attention the moderator can place on the panel, the better.
And should my
third, nervous panelist read this: I’ll do a panel with you again anytime.
3 comments:
It was a challenging situation being down two people and you performed admirably.
And yes, Mr. Rozovsky is a great model for the format.
Thanks, Seana. What I should have mentioned i here as well is how much fun it was, all things considered, though I have to admit not having as much of a memory of it as I have of those panels where all I had to do was run my mouth.
I hope you get to moderate at whatever your next conference is. And definitely at Bouchercon Toronto.
Post a Comment