2016 Locus Awards Shortlist

The 2016 Locus Awards Finalists have been posted at Locus Online.

There is considerable overlap with the Vox Day’s slate for this award due to the slate having included a lot of frontrunners. Altogether, 26 of the 75 items on the Locus Awards shortlist also appeared on Day’s slate. The slate scored zero in the Best Short Story (no Chuck Tingle!), Best Nonfiction Book, and Best Editor categories. However, there’s no way of knowing whether editorial judgment was exercised on the finalists.

In the Magazine category, File 770 was nominated along with Asimov’s, Clarkesworld, F&SF, and Tor.com. Make of that what you will.

The winners will be announced during the Locus Awards Weekend in Seattle WA, June 24-26.

[Thanks to Emma for the story.]

48 thoughts on “2016 Locus Awards Shortlist

  1. Given that most of the overlaps were likely to be very popular and that Locus has more controls in place to prevent ballot-stuffing, I suspect that a lot of the work they slated would have probably done well in any case. That won’t prevent Mr. Day from claiming “victory” of some kind.

    Tanith Lee’s collection, for example. Gaiman’s collection as well.

  2. I don’t think that the Rabid Puppies had any effect on the Locus List.

    Based on what I’ve read on various review sites and blogs during the last year, every single item on that list had enough widespread buzz and support to make it on its own merits.

  3. You should be proud, Mike. The Little Fanzine That Could is competing with some heavyweights.

  4. A fine list indeed.

    I very much doubt VDs slate had a real effect. Firstly, no John C Wright or SJWs Always Lie.
    Secondly, while there are a fair number of his “shields” on there, there are plenty of spots where even his popular picks didn’t break through, such as Golden Son, Son of the Black Sword and The Aeronaut’s Windlass in novels or Obits by Stephen King in novelette.
    If he couldn’t brigade the non-fiction sections, and couldn’t bandwagon decent works in fiction, then he had no real effect.

  5. Nothing he tried to have written in made it, and multiple things on the Locus list he tried to slate (Teaching the Dog to Read in Novella, The Buried Giant in Fantasy, and The Best American Science Fiction and Fantasy 2015 in Anthology) didn’t make it. (Hell, he tried to slate Del Rey in Book Publisher and they’re not on the finalist list.) Toni Weisskopf isn’t on there, Analog isn’t on there . . . I’m not seeing anything here that could even remotely be tied to the Turd or his fellow travelers. (Baen is on there, but Baen was a Locus Finalist as recently as 2013.)

  6. Congratulations Mike for the File770 result!

    @Mark-kitteh & @Emma,
    The Locus poll organisers have acted in the past to alter how the shortlist was derived; they are not restricted like the Hugo admins are by the WSFS constitution. I would be unsurprised if ballot-stuffing got dealt with quietly behind the scenes.

  7. @Emma

    Good point re the write-ins, I didn’t think to check that.
    Baen have been finalists well over half the time in the last 20 years, so as you say they are unlikely to have made it because of VD.

    ETA: @Soon Lee, fair point, but equally Locus being more focused could have helped against any slate effect. I guess it’ll be clearer when they release the full results.

  8. Hanzai Japan was on the RP list, but I think fans of VIZ Media generally, who read the book, and who follow @VIZMedia (127,000 followers) on Twitter helped with us.

  9. @Nick

    Yep, I think you can rest easily on that score. And congratulations.

  10. Interesting . I had no idea he made a list for the Locus. However his choices got 1/3 of the finalist spots. Maybe his choices were more mainstream that many thought?

    Nah, of course not.,right?

  11. The list was based significantly on the recommended reading list Locus already put up.

    But like you said, you had no idea…

  12. ‘Aight, I think Locus, with it’s controls in place, can serve as bona fides for Slow Bullets, Folding Beijing, and Penric’s Demon having support that doesn’t wear white hoods and brown shirts.

    Also as confirmation that Sad Puppies was the echo of a fart in terms of effect.

  13. Wow. Congrats Mike, and great to see F770 in such company

    Anything on the Rabid list that wasn’t on the reading list make it (fiction categories only, I don’t think the RL puts up anything else)?

  14. @snowcrash: Just checked – all the finalists are on the reading list.

  15. I am remiss! It of course also serves as bona fides for OGH as well; him needing any was much too far from my mind for their ever to have been a question!

  16. I am especially delighted to see the works in the Non-fiction and Art Book categories getting some much-deserved recognition. All of my Best Related Work Hugo nominees are there.

  17. That YA list is very male for a year that included some amazing books by women who write YA.

  18. The Locus YA award skews male in a field that skews female overall. It also looks a lot like a “Oh right that guy I like has a YA novel, I should vote for that” list. Gaiman, Pratchett, Mieville, Bacigalupi, Abercrombie…

    In a way, I suppose it might be the best argument against a YA Hugo. If all that’s going to happen is adult authors the voting body likes get recognized whenever they write YA, it’s unlikely to have the (AIUI) intended effect of broadening the appeal of Worldcon and its award.

  19. That YA list is very male for a year that included some amazing books by women who write YA.

    The YA list is usually very male. More men have been nominated than women, and aside from Jane Yolen (who co-wrote a book with a man), the only woman who’s ever won it is Cat Valente.

    In a way, I suppose it might be the best argument against a YA Hugo. If all that’s going to happen is adult authors the voting body likes get recognized whenever they write YA, it’s unlikely to have the (AIUI) intended effect of broadening the appeal of Worldcon and its award.

    I disagree wholeheartedly. The major problem with the YA Locus is the YA section of the Locus Recommended Reading List, which . . . tends to favor writers who write adult SFF. I don’t know who’s responsible for the YA section of the Recommended Reading List, but it doesn’t look like those people read primarily YA.

  20. Nicholas Mamatas
    Yep, Sorry for not being as obsessed over VOX day list as your evidently are since I had no idea he did a list for Locus. Still his list seems pretty mainstream As Bartimaeus says all the finalists are from Locus reading list.

    I do hope Lois wins in her novella slot. I liked that work a lot.

  21. Emma – I agree that it doesn’t look like a list created by people who read a lot of YA. Older and Pratchett didn’t surprise me. The former had one of the more popular, well-received YA fantasy’s of 2015, and the latter is not only much-beloved and dearly departed, but also has proven that he can write children’s and YA books (he has two Printz Honor books).

    I’d just like to see some of the amazing YA I read last year get some love. I mean, where is Bone Gap, for example?

  22. Congrats Mike Glyer another great showing. Hopefully the list will help a few authors put to bed their fears they only got on the Hugo shortlist due to RP slate. It will be interesting when the longlist is released to compare the two. Good to see books I nominated for the Hugo get some love.

  23. Mike, I’d also like to offer my congratulations for the File 770 Locus Poll nomination. You’re having a terrific year so far . I see at least one award in your future and very good chance at all three. Well deserved!

  24. I disagree wholeheartedly. The major problem with the YA Locus is the YA section of the Locus Recommended Reading List, which . . . tends to favor writers who write adult SFF.

    Of 2015’s 19 suggested reads, 11 are by YA authors, 3 I’m not sure of, and the remainder are by adult authors. Ten are by women. So while I’d agree adult authors are probably over-represented on the list, I do not believe that is sufficient to explain the makeup of the finalists. Bone Gap, Nimona, Magonia, The Lie Tree? I doubt very much the voters read these and then decided on the merits to vote for Abercrombie twice. Though, of course, I may be mistaken.

  25. Well, the key assumption here is that people read those books.

    From my friends who work much more closely with YA than I do (I work with children’s and adult books, but also read a fair amount of YA), there are a lot of complaints about the majority of the YA list being populated by books that aren’t YA. The Abercrombie books are interesting in that regard, as they were presented in the major review journals (Kirkus, LJ, Booklist, etc) in the US as adult fiction. However, Abercrombie describes them as YA on his website which makes me wonder if they were published as YA in other countries. The Gregory book was also reviewed as Adult in those journals. So, I understand why they are upset when books that were not categorized as YA here are suddenly on the list for a YA award. The fact that those men potentially took the place of some of the wonderful works by women who write YA makes it all the more disappointing for them. I get their disappointment.

  26. So while I’d agree adult authors are probably over-represented on the list, I do not believe that is sufficient to explain the makeup of the finalists.

    I absolutely agree—my comment was more in the context of the Hugo comparison. I think the YA Locus rec list skews the YA Locus Awards nomination stage in ways that it wouldn’t skew a YA Hugo nomination stage. If you don’t read YA, the Locus list nevertheless gives you a set of preselected choices already on the ballot (leading, I suspect, to certain people who don’t read YA just casually nominating familiar names—overwhelmingly, the names of male writers who also write adult SFF). In the Hugo nominating stage, these people would most likely just leave that section of the ballot blank, because they don’t read the category and it wouldn’t have already been seeded with choices. The people nominating there (freepage aside) would be people who actually read widely in YA.

    I also kind of get the impression that a lot of people didn’t realize you can vote without subscribing to Locus.

  27. Ah, well now you’ve walked me through it I find your case convincing. I might still expect a weaker, more diffuse version of the effect (“gee Bob, I haven’t read any ya this year. ” “Abercrombie had a ya novel published this year, you could try that) but probably not sufficient to meaningfully impact the category presuming reasonable numbers of nominations. Thanks for being patient with me

  28. In re: Locus YA category, the problem you have here is pretty much the same problem you have with some of the categories on the Hugo ballot. You have a relatively small group of people who typically vote in the Locus poll and there are likely more people voting in categories like SF Novel, Fantasy Novel and the short fiction categories than there are in YA Novel. Apart from a few instances where I read some of Jane Yolen’s YA novels and listed them, I don’t usually vote in the category at all because I don’t read many YA novels. I rarely read first novels these days, so I don’t vote in that category either.

    If you don’t like the distribution/results and you vote, then the best thing for you to do is spread the word among people you know who read YA that they should vote in the Locus poll for the works they like. If you don’t like the distribution/results and you didn’t vote, then perhaps you might want to consider doing so next year. If you don’t vote for your favorites, then your inaction contributes to the results you see.

  29. @Emma: “All 5 of my First Novel picks are finalists!”

    Yahtzee! 😉

    @Soon Lee: Yes, I wouldn’t be surprised if Locus did something. Last time, they announced it, but it was a this-time-plus-going-forward thing. If they just did a one-off “meh let’s toss anything that matches that slate,” I could see them not mentioning it, or at least not now (maybe later?). But of course, after their last rules changes, they’re a bit tougher to game. 😉

    Hmm, maybe WSFS should consider just making “current Worldcon” nominations worth twice as much. I’d be okay with that, as a frequent supporting member. Is this a wacky idea? I mean, it’d be better than @Kevin Standlee’s idea (which he keeps repeating over and over again) that maybe WSFS should just drop the next/previous Worldcon nominating rights. Maybe this would be a nice compromise.

    @Bartimaeus: Thanks! I was wondering whether all finalists were from the Locus drop-downs/lists or not, and how the Beale list compared.

    Speaking of which, I’ve never liked how they stack the deck with their pre-set drop-down lists. I know they have write-in slots, but IMHO this still skews their results – presumably they want that, but it’s felt for years to me like stacking the deck because they don’t trust their readers’ tastes. It would be amusing if people voted for a significant number of things outside the list of what Locus wants them voting for. 😉 I wonder how often something off-list actually makes it as a write-in.

    /remembering-to-Locus-stalk

  30. Kendall: It would be amusing if people voted for a significant number of things outside the list of what Locus wants them voting for. I wonder how often something off-list actually makes it as a write-in.

    I actually put 4 write-ins in on Best SF Novel and 3 or 4 on Best Fantasy Novel.

    I’m very disappointed at the lack of recognition Scott Hawkins’ The Library at Mount Char has gotten, not just by Locus, but anywhere.

  31. @JJ: Good for nominating off-list! it’s silly of me, I know, but I like the idea of people nominating off-script for the Locus Award. 😉

    I suspect it’s rare for something off their list to make it, though. And why do I keep writing “make it” when I mean “win”? Sorry if that wasn’t clear.

    Re. the Hawkins book, I’d read something quite some time ago here that turned me off the book. I don’t remember the details, but it somehow got onto my mental list of “oh yeah I don’t really want to read that.” Yet I keep reading positive things about it here and elsewhere, so methinks I should shift it off that mental list. :-/

  32. Kendall: Re. the Hawkins book, I’d read something quite some time ago here that turned me off the book. I don’t remember the details, but it somehow got onto my mental list of “oh yeah I don’t really want to read that.” Yet I keep reading positive things about it here and elsewhere, so methinks I should shift it off that mental list.

    You need to know that it’s pretty much got all the triggers: child abuse, emotional abuse and bullying, physical and sexual abuse, murder.

    That is because it portrays a pretty brutal world, but I found the story incredibly imaginative and amazing.

    Whether you wish to read it will likely depend on whether you can keep all the triggery stuff at an emotional distance. I hold no blame for anyone who chooses not to read it; it’s definitely not going to be for everyone.

  33. I’m now thinking about how much fun it would be to work to get actual teens to vote on that YA shortlist. I can pretty much assure you that the results would be much different if that happened.

  34. apologies if this has been asked and answered already … how does one vote on the Locus Awards? The website lists attending and supporting memberships .. is that all that’s necessary? Thanks!

  35. @clif: Voting is done via the Locus website. You don’t have to purchase any kind of membership, although if you are a subscriber to the magazine your vote will count for more than if you are not.

    Unfortunately, the voting for this year’s Locus Award is already over. Locus announces the short list, but they already know who won. The short list is merely the top five vote getters in each category of the the online poll, with the top vote getter being the winner. They just don’t announce the winners until the Locus Award Weekend in late June.

  36. I confess I ended up abstaining from voting in the Locus awards because of the way the ballot was largely pre-filled. To me, that seemed like a guarantee that the writing the reviewers had picked as the best / their favourite would have the best chance of winning. This is not to say that the list, and the awards, aren’t full of great work – although my other qualm was that, whenever I read a magazine I’ve seen reviewed in Locus, I end up liking the stories they didn’t, and vice versa!

  37. I must say I am rather doubtful of the idea that the YA Hugo will, or should, draw in lots of new voters. As I’ve often said, I don’t think one awards process can represent everyone interested in SFF; the field is too diverse. I see the YA award as providing a particular perspective on the world of YA, just as, say, Graphic Story provides a particular perspective on the world of comics; and I don’t see anything wrong with that.

    That said, I do find these selections rather surprising. Hugo voters will probably have some kind of bias, but perhaps not the same bias.

    If I may mount my hobbyhorse for a moment, is the Locus YA category confined to YA in the publishing sense (well, apparently not, as it includes works published as Adult, but I take it that’s inadvertent), or does it also include Middle Grade/Older Children’s, which is often called YA in fannish circles?

  38. Having looked at Mr Day’s list, I’m not entirely convinced it has had no effect. Clearly, he has not succeeded in getting his absurd nominations on the list; everything that is there must have had some broader support. But he may have helped a couple of things over the edge.

    Also: I note that Sorcerer of the Wildeeps and Wylding Hall are novels, and that The Fifth Season is fantasy.

  39. @Andrew M

    I suppose it’s possible there was some marginal effect, but I honestly can’t spot anything that he championed that’s made the list but that looks out of place.

    I don’t know the Locus wordcount rules (and google fails me), but Wildeeps was in the grey zone for the Hugos at over 40k words. Maybe Locus take a stricter view.

    I think the best you can say about The Fifth Season is that it seems to be mostly fantasy in this book. If there is a switcheroo to come then maybe the sequels will place in another category!

  40. I was initially surprised by JJ’s comment that The Library at Mount Char hadn’t received recognition from Locus because I had just gotten around to opening my copy of the February (Year in Review) issue and it was the first recommendation I saw, on Ellen Datlow’s “Top Ten for 2015”. But I see it didn’t make the long list. In case you are curious, Datlow’s comment concluded with

    A fabulous, exceedingly dark fantasy about the monstrosity of gods. By turns funny and horrifying, it hits every mark. While I don’t want to oversell it, this is the finest, most satisfying dark novel I’ve read in 2015.

    Congrats to OGH on making the Magazine short list.

  41. I was interested to see “A Borrowed Man” as one of the science fiction novel finalists. Wolfe is evidently still a pretty popular writer.

  42. Andrew M: I note that Sorcerer of the Wildeeps and Wylding Hall are novels, and that The Fifth Season is fantasy.

    The first two fall right on the border of novella and novel, within the 5% margin. I considered them novellas for the purposes of nominating for the Hugos (although I did not nominate either, as I had 5 novellas I liked better); I saw other people say they were nominating one or the other, and sometimes those people were considering them novels, and sometimes they were considering them novellas.

    The Fifth Season is, in my opinion, both SF and Fantasy. There are technological remnants from a fallen civilization; in my mind, that takes the novel into SF territory.

Comments are closed.