2018 Hugo Nominees To Be Revealed on 3/31

Worldcon 76 will announce the finalists for the 2018 Hugo Awards, the John W. Campbell Award for the Best New Writer, the World Science Fiction Society (WSFS) Award for the Best Young Adult Book, and the 1943 Retro Hugo Awards on March 31.

They will be announced live at three locations by Worldcon 76 at 12 noon Pacific / 8 p.m. British Summer Time.

Live announcements will be held simultaneously in three locations: the 7 Stars Bar & Grill, located at 398 S. Bascom Ave, San Jose, California, at Follycon (Eastercon) in Harrogate, UK, and Norwescon in Seattle, Washington.

The Hugo Awards, first presented in 1953 and presented annually since 1955, are science fiction’s most prestigious award. The Hugo Awards are voted on by members of the World Science Fiction Convention (“Worldcon”), which is also responsible for administering them.

The John W. Campbell Award for Best New Writer is awarded by Dell Magazines and administered by WSFS. This award is given annually to the best new writer whose first professional work of science fiction or fantasy was published within the two previous calendar years. The prize is named in honor of influential science fiction editor and writer John W. Campbell.

This is the first year that the WSFS Award for the Best Young Adult Book will be presented.

Since 1993, Worldcon committees have had the option of awarding Retrospective Hugo Awards for past Worldcons (1939 onwards) in years when awards had not been presented. These awards may be presented for years that are a multiple of 25 years prior to the current year’s convention, with the exception of the hiatus during World War II when no Worldcon was convened. In 2017, a revision to the rules was ratified, giving Worldcon 76 in San Jose an opportunity to present Retro Hugo awards for the best science fiction works of 1942 which, if neglected, won’t return for another quarter century.

A video announcement will follow an hour later on the Worldcon 76 website

The Hugo Awards ceremonies will be held at Worldcon 76 in San Jose on August 16-20, 2018 at the San Jose McEnery Convention Center.

[Based on a press release.]

31 thoughts on “2018 Hugo Nominees To Be Revealed on 3/31

  1. Well, that’s fast. They must have EPH down.

    So when’s the deadline for voting? Middle/end of July?

    More time to read!!

  2. Well, that was fast!

    Usually April is the month where I read some great speculative stuff that’s not eligible for any current Hugo awards, but depending on how much of the ballot I haven’t read this time around, I may have to consider revising my plans …

  3. Anne Goldsmith: Well, that was fast!

    Last year was faster, too. Perhaps it’s because they’ve gotten the software and the process more refined.

    2018: March 16 – March 31 (15 days) E
    2017: March 18 – April 4 (17 days)
    2016: March 31 – April 26 (26 days)
    2015: March 10 – April 4 (25 days) E
    2014: March 31 – April 19 (19 days) E
    2013: March 10 – March 30 (20 days) E
    2012: March 11 – April 7 (27 days) E
    2011: March 26 – April 24 (29 days) E
    2010: March 13 – April 4 (22 days) E
    2009: February 28 – March 19 (19 days)
    2008: March 1 – March 21 (20 days) E

  4. Ah, yes, I remember a few years ago Scalzi posting that he thought it was a really bad idea to make the announcement between Good Friday and Easter Sunday. But that’s when it often happens.

  5. Laura: Ah, yes, I remember a few years ago Scalzi posting that he thought it was a really bad idea to make the announcement between Good Friday and Easter Sunday. But that’s when it often happens.

    That’s a deliberate choice on the part of fandom, because Eastercon (UK Natcon) and Norwescon (Seattle) are always held on Easter weekend every year, and they’d rather prioritize their own fun by having a big simultaneous announcement at those conventions during the weekend than prioritize the best interests of the Hugo Awards by having the announcement during prime news time. 😐

    A Plea to Current and Future Worldcons, re: Announcing the Hugo Nominations

  6. @Bonnie McDaniel: Surely the hard part is vetting the ballots to make sure that every potential nominee is identified in just one way? Once you’ve done that, and entered into your computer the few paper ballots you might have gotten, I’d expect the actual process of returning the shortlist to take less than a second.

    Then of course you have to get in touch with all the potential shortlistees and make sure they accept the nomination.

  7. David Goldfarb: Surely the hard part is vetting the ballots to make sure that every potential nominee is identified in just one way?

    Yes, the normalization is definitely the biggest part of the process, but… they are able to figure out a normalized form for each of the nominated entries, on an ongoing basis, as they come in after nominations open in January, and set up an equivalency file and script which says “if it’s this, then use this standardized form”. They can also use this time to figure out any uncertain entries.

    And again, as nominations start to come in, they can keep a running tally of the top 10 or 15 in each category, check eligibility, and start working on getting the contact addresses for those authors / artists / editors who seem most likely to make the ballot.

    So when the deadline hits, the only normalization left to do is from the last-minute nominated entries, and then they can let the existing tabulation software plug-and-chug the results, and all that’s left is to notify the finalists and ask if they accept.

  8. @JJ

    …they’d rather prioritize their own fun by having a big simultaneous announcement at those conventions during the weekend …

    That makes sense, and it certainly doesn’t bother me. I imagine we might hear the news here before they even get the video up.

  9. Laura: That makes sense, and it certainly doesn’t bother me. I imagine we might hear the news here before they even get the video up.

    It bothers me, because while as a fan I totally love the idea of having that at-con experience, as someone who cares deeply about the Hugo Awards I would prefer that they do what’s best for the awards. 😐

    I am sure that someone at one of the 3 announcement locations will be live-tweeting them and we can follow along as they are announced.

  10. @Charon D.: I’m hoping for some stuff I have read. 😉 ‘Cuz that will mean some of my picks are finalists!

  11. One of the challenges of the nomination process is that most of the nominations arrive during the last few days. (No, they don’t arrive in a nice smooth stream; it’s more of an curve with a burst at the beginning and a much bigger one at the end.) The Hugo Administrators — particularly Dave McCarty, chair of the Hugo Administration Subcommittee this year — have not been getting a lot of sleep lately.

  12. We need to show proper appreciation. SERPENTINE!!!!

    (Seriously, it’s a hard job; thank you to the Hugo admins.)

  13. Thank you, Hugo Admins! Looking forward to the finalist list and to start reading (again!)

  14. I suspect there were many fewer nominations this year, given that the puppy threat has evaporated. In particular, I’m sure people felt less urgency to have five things in every category.

  15. @Greg
    Glad that the puppies seem to have gotten tired of this game. But a little sad (ha!) about fewer noms. It’s not easy, but it’s a lot of fun. I didn’t do 5 in every category, and I left ya and series blank. I’m just behind in series reading, and I need to get more familiar with ya. I had some things lined up to read, but didn’t get to them in time. I look forward to what gets nominated.

  16. Yep, it’s something of a bathtub curve.

    I’m personally surprised that people feel some sort of obligation to fill all of the slots on their ballots. I never have done so myself that I recall, and from the days when I was personally watching ballots come in (not this year!), hardly anyone even came close to doing so.

    What troubles me is that there seem to be at least some people who think that they’re not allowed to nominate unless they fill every slot, and because they can’t think of things in every category, they don’t participate. But then again, it’s been my experience that some folks out there think the Administrators are trying to find excuses for disqualifying voters, when in fact we prefer to count everything we possibly can.

    The same is true of site selection. Every count in which I’ve participated, the tellers have tried to come to an agreement as to what the voter’s relative preferences were, even if they didn’t precisely hit the marks. It’s only when we couldn’t agree what the voter was trying to tell us — usually we agreed that the voter didn’t know what they really wanted to say anyway — that we had to declare the ballot an “illegal vote.” (Which, BTW, is not the same thing as a blank or No Preference ballot. The later doesn’t count toward the total needed to determine a majority, whereas an illegal vote counts toward the total cast for the purposes of determining a majority. This has never actually made a difference that I recall, but it’s technically possible, especially in a very tight race.)

  17. it’s more of an curve with a burst at the beginning and a much bigger one at the end

    There’s probably a real name for it, but in 1984, we were calling it a “bathtub curve” and the big finish was the “shower”. (Think of an old-fashioned tub with the shower being an attached vertical pipe.)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.