Sad Puppies 4 List

Sad Puppies 4 logoKate Paulk has posted the Sad Puppies 4 List at Mad Genius Club.

She included only works with at least two recommendations on the list. Works are listed in order of the most recommendations received.

Paulk’s spreadsheets tallying all the recommendations can be viewed here.

I have noted in every category the range of votes received. In nine Hugo categories the top work had 5 or fewer recommendations.

Campbell Award for Best New Writer (2-9)

  • Andy Weir – The Martian
  • Brian Niemeier – Nethereal
  • Alyssa Wong – “Hungry Daughters of Starving Mothers”
  • Natasha Pulley – The Watchmakers of Filigree Street
  • Becky Chambers – The Long Way to a Small, Angry Planet
  • Scott Hawkins – The Library at Mount Char
  • Charlie N. Holmberg – The Paper Magician
  • John Sandford & Ctein – Saturn Run
  • Sebastien de Castelle – Greatcoats series

Best Fan Artist (2-3)

Best Professional Artist (2-4)

  • Abigail Larson
  • Sam Weber
  • Frank Cho
  • Larry Elmore
  • Dustin Nguyen
  • Richard Anderson

Best Fan Writer (3-9)

Best Fancast (2-4)

  • Tea and Jeopardy
  • Geek Gab
  • Hello Greedo

Best Fanzine (2-3)

Best Semiprozine (3)

  • Sci Phi Journal

Best Editor – Short Form (2-5)

  • Jerry Pournelle – There Will Be War vol X
  • John Joseph Adams  – Lightspeed, and Nightmare
  • S. M. Sterling – The Change anthology
  • Jason Rennie – Sci Phi Journal
  • Paula Goodlett – Grantville Gazette
  • Bryan Thomas Schmidt – Mission: Tomorrow

Best Editor – Long Form (4-14)

  • Toni Weisskopf – Baen
  • Jim Mintz – Baen
  • Tony Daniel – Baen

Best Dramatic Presentation – Short Form (2-8)

  • Daredevil Season 1 Episode 2
  • My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic
  • Person of Interest Season 4 Episode 11: If-Then-Else
  • Kung Fury: Laser Unicorns
  • TIE Fighter animation by Otaking 77077
  • Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D: Melinda
  • Daredevil Season 1 Episode 13
  • Doctor Who: Heaven Sent
  • Gravity Falls: Dungeons, Dungeons, and More Dungeons
  • Gravity Falls: Northwest Mansion Mystery

“There’s something like a 15-way tie for 6th place, so I’ll just list down to 10.”

Best Dramatic Presentation – Long Form (3-11)

  • Mad Max: Fury Road
  • The Martian
  • Predestination
  • Ant-Man
  • Star Wars: The Force Awakens
  • Inside Out
  • iZombie (Season 1 as a whole)
  • Person of Interest (Season 4 as a whole)
  • Witcher 3: Wild Hunt
  • Ex Machina

Best Graphic Story (2-5)

  • Order of the Stick
  • Stand Still Stay Silent – any 2015 plot arc
  • Schlock Mercenary Book 15
  • Empowered Volume 9
  • Saga Volume 5
  • Erfworld
  • Fables: Farewell Volume 22
  • Gunnerkrigg Court Chapter 15: Totem
  • Invisible Republic Volume 1
  • Lazarus: Conclave

Best Related Work (2-12)

  • Sad Puppies Bite Back – Declan Finn
  • Appendix N – Jeffro Johnson
  • Safe Space as Rape Room: Science Fiction Culture and Childhood’s End – Daniel
  • A History of Epic Fantasy – Adam Whitehead
  • Atomic Rockets – Winchell Chung
  • Legosity – Tom Simon
  • There Will Be War Vol X – Edited Jerry Pournelle
  • You’re Never Weird on the Internet (Almost) – Felicia Day
  • Frazetta Sketchbook Number 2
  • Galactic Journeyhttp://galacticjourney.org/

Best Short Story (2-11)

  • “Tuesdays With Molakesh The Destroyer” – Megan Grey
  • “Today I am Paul” – Martin L Shoemaker
  • “… And I Show You How Deep the Rabbit Hole Goes” – Scott Alexander
  • “Asymmetrical Warfare” – S. R. Algernon
  • “Cat Pictures, Please” – Naomi Kritzer
  • “Damage” – David Levine
  • “A Flat Effect” – Eric Flint
  • “Daedelus” – Niall Burke
  • “Hungry Daughters of Starving Mothers” – Alyssa Wong
  • “I am Graalnak of the Vroon Empire, Destroyer of Galaxies, Supreme Overlord of the Planet Earth. Ask Me Anything” – Laura Pearlman

Best Novelette (2-4)

  • “And You Shall Know Her By The Trail Of Dead” – Brooke Bolander
  • “Pure Attentions” – T. R. Dillon
  • “Folding Beijing” – Hao Jingfang translated by Ken Liu
  • “If I Had No Head and My Eyes Were Floating Way Up In the Air” – Clifford D. Simak
  • “Obits” – Stephen King
  • “Our Lady of the Open Road” – Sarah Pinsker

Best Novella (2-4)

  • Binti – Nnedi Okorafor
  • Penric’s Demon – Lois McMaster Bujold
  • Slow Bullets – Alastair Reynolds
  • Perfect State – Brandon Sanderson
  • The End of All Things 1: The Life of the Mind – John Scalzi
  • Speak Easy – Catherynne M. Valente
  • The Builders – Daniel Polansky

Best Novel (9-25)

  • Somewhither – John C Wright
  • Honor At Stake – Declan Finn
  • The Cinder Spires: The Aeronaut’s Windlass – Jim Butcher
  • Uprooted – Naomi Novik
  • A Long Time Until Now – Michael Z Williamson
  • Seveneves – Neal Stephenson
  • Son of the Black Sword – Larry Correia
  • Strands of Sorrow – John Ringo
  • Nethereal – Brian Niemeier
  • Ancillary Mercy – Ann Leckie

Retro Hugos (2)

  • If This Goes On  – Heinlein, for Best Novel
  • “Requiem” – Heinlein, Best Short Story
  • “The Roads Must Roll” – Heinlein, Best Short Story.

187 thoughts on “Sad Puppies 4 List

  1. @Greg

    As a recommendation list, it didn’t get anywhere near the participation it needed.

    Interesting point. As a comparison, the Hugo recs spreadsheet has 42 recs for novella, SP4 manages 7. Other categories have a similar disparity.
    There was very little promotion of SP4 outside of the “core” puppy leaders. I think the best piece of coverage they got (absent F770) was in Tangent quite late in the year. A couple of fairly low-profile authors were able to self-promote themselves onto the novels list, etc.

    I’m starting to think that the main point of SP4 was to simply not admit defeat while converting it in to a more palatable form that can be used to colour the previous years in a better light.

  2. The shortness of the list could be a result of the small pool actively nominating. The most votes any work got was 25. One improvement is that there is not any one person dominating multiple categories. With luck, there will be less rancor.

  3. Mark on March 19, 2016 at 9:05 am said:

    There was very little promotion of SP4 outside of the “core” puppy leaders.

    I think another issue is that Larry Correia is the guy with the networks. Correia just knows more people and from different fields. With him pulling away from SP this year it becomes primarily the network of people centered around Mad Genius.

  4. @Mark

    I’m starting to think that the main point of SP4 was to simply not admit defeat while converting it in to a more palatable form that can be used to colour the previous years in a better light.

    I think it was an honest attempt to “do the right thing,” but the organizers way underestimated how hard this is to do and way overestimated how many supporters they really had. They put in a lot of work, got little support, and they produced something that even they must know will have almost no influence. Look at what a restrained announcement they made for it–it reads like a sigh of relief and a desire to forget about it.

    I expect this was a very depressing experience for the people involved with it. For all the disagreements I have with them, I still feel sorry for them.

    @Kate Savage

    With luck, there will be less rancor.

    It’s hard to feel rancor towards people you feel sorry for.

  5. @Camestros

    True, and the MGC were focused on their current audience; there was very little attempt at outreach. With Larry already taking a backseat role, Brad dropping back, and none of their attempts to tap bigger names like Butcher or Andersen working out, it was a niche effort. They may get more support at nomination time than they did through the year, of course.

    @Greg

    Well, the right-er thing at least.

  6. Mark: Interesting point. As a comparison, the Hugo recs spreadsheet has 42 recs for novella, SP4 manages 7.

    The Hugo Nomination Wikia has 37 Novellas, 50 Novelettes, and 128 Short Stories.

    Apparently, it’s easier to get a wide range of participants when you’re not flying a political agenda flag associated with a lot of malicious words and actions. Who knew?

  7. Mark on March 19, 2016 at 3:03 pm said:

    @Camestros

    True, and the MGC were focused on their current audience; there was very little attempt at outreach. With Larry already taking a backseat role, Brad dropping back, and none of their attempts to tap bigger names like Butcher or Andersen working out, it was a niche effort. They may get more support at nomination time than they did through the year, of course.

    Sarah Hoyt has posted something on SP4 now but it isn’t interesting.

    The only other thing I note is that Larry C had said he didn’t want a nomination but the only place I can see him doing so in the specific context of SP4 was a comment at Declan Finn’s blog (and it isn’t even clear it is Larry).

  8. @Camestros

    In amongst the repetition she seems to be saying they’ll note removal requests in some fashion:

    As for us, we shall make some note you requested removal, in some way that YOU insult the fans who went through so much trouble to nominate you and who up-voted your work enough times to get it on our list. We won’t insult them for you.

    As for Larry, I guess it’s mostly supposition based on him withdrawing last year, but you’re right that I haven’t seen anything more substantive. I really doubt he’d be prepared to pick the standard back up again but it’s possible. If withdrawals on SP4 get noted then we’ll find out soon enough.

    @JJ

    Who knew? Not them, unfortunately. As you say, the wiki shows a similar story about how SP4 has struggled for participants. Either the SP4 target audience was smaller then they claimed, less likely to read new works than they hoped, or less enthused than they needed.

  9. @Camestros

    Sarah Hoyt has posted something on SP4 now but it isn’t interesting.

    Oh I wouldn’t say that. It’s at least interesting how even she couldn’t be bothered to link to the SP4 list of actual works, and instead was focused on the fight! narrative.

    Sadly, after a couple of times where she managed to move beyond it, she’s regressed to her Marxists! ways.

  10. snowcrash: It’s at least interesting how even she couldn’t be bothered to link to the SP4 list of actual works, and instead was focused on the fight! narrative.

    It’s really quite amusing how the Puppies insist on characterizing “remove me from your list” requests as insulting conservatives or insulting readers and fans, instead of what they really are: “You people have behaved like assholes, and I don’t want my name or my works associated with you in any way.”

  11. One of the ongoing Sad Puppy narratives has been that of Wrong Fans, which – given their perspective that this year they did a recommendation process open to all and then merely collated the results and most definitely did not slate – is now being reinforced. After all, if you’ve been told it’s slating that is wrong, not your politics (so long as you’re not homophobic, racist, misogynistic troll) and there are authors scrambling to disassociate themselves from your recommendation list, much of which derived from sincere appreciation*, that underscores the correctness of your Wrong Fan perception.

    * I’m excepting any favorable mentions of that execrable Safe Space, etc. POS.

  12. Cheryl S.: ,if you’ve been told it’s slating that is wrong, not your politics (so long as you’re not homophobic, racist, misogynistic troll) and there are authors scrambling to disassociate themselves from your recommendation list, much of which derived from sincere appreciation*, that underscores the correctness of your Wrong Fan perception.

    Only if you’re too much in denial to admit that the Sad Puppy brand is utterly tainted by the fact that its leaders, and many of their adherents, have behaved like major assholes for several years now.

    The “But we’re behaving so much better this year!” argument does very little to mitigate that. And if you’re a nice person who hasn’t behaved like an asshole, but who continues to claim membership as a Sad Puppy, well, at this point, you can hardly legitimately claim offense at being judged by the behavior of the leaders of the cause you’ve signed onto and subsequently chosen not to walk away from.

  13. @JJ, Sad Puppies is not only a brand, it’s also a kind of tribe. If my politics put me in that camp, I’d be horrified by James May, Tank Marmot and the rest of the frothers, but I doubt I’d identify with or feel responsible for them any more than the real me does with the some of the people who post regularly on File 770. I still feel a kind of tribal affiliation with the commentariat here, even if my thinking is at odds with some of the regular participants.

    The leaders of Sad Puppies almost invariably have me rolling my eyes, at best, but I read those recommendation lists (although I never commented) and there was sincere appreciation from real fans of the work they were recommending. I’m always looking for common ground with people and groups I don’t belong with and I found it in their fan squees. So, I’m going to feel some empathy as their Wrong Fans Having Wrong Fun narrative is confirmed.

  14. So a local eatery that’s been serving tolerable pizza has been pregressively going downhill over the last three years, until last year, it was shut down for multiple hygiene violations. This year, they’ve reopened, the assistant manager is now the manager who says they’ve cleaned up their act, and their pizzas are now *really* *good* and won’t make you sick. How willingly would you eat their pizza?

  15. @Soon Lee
    Not at all willing but I worked in the restaurant business for a couple years when I dropped out of college. I’m afraid of many food places when it comes to food safety and hygiene. 😉

  16. Cheryl S.: I doubt I’d identify with or feel responsible for [the bad actors in my tribe]

    You’re a more generous person than I am.

    The Puppies aren’t just a tribe, like “conservatives”. They’re a named, branded movement to which people have publicly declared affiliation.

    My stance on this is the “individual accountability” philosophy — which says if a bunch of people in the “tribe” to which you’ve publicly declared affiliation are behaving abominably, then you need to decide whether or not you wish to maintain that affiliation — and if you do, then you are signing on for all that entails, including responsibility for what your movement does.

    If I’m an openly-declared member of the ALF, then I’ve accepted that I’ve chosen to be affiliated with their acts. If I don’t like being held responsible for that, then I have the choice to walk away from being affiliated with their group.

    Puppies want to have their cake and eat it, too. It doesn’t work that way. If they want the cake, then they have to be willing to accept credit for all of the ingredients that go into making it.

  17. SPIV* is too betwixt and between to be much of anything.

    As a “make them SJW heads explode” effort — that is: a cause, a righting of wrongs, a slate — it has so little to offer that the firebrands and trolls have not rallied round it. This is because, unlike last year, it has not been hand-picked (however hamfistedly) with this goal in mind. Simply put, it lacks CHORF.**

    The Official SPIV Site still carries a defiant “The Bitches are Back” motto, but there’s hardly any bark (with the exception of defending their laissez faire, “herding cats” nomination approach), let alone bite. And I have seen no real “litter-ati” endorsements of this list anywhere. Maybe I missed them. Larry? Brad? JCW? VD? Bueller?

    And considering the results, their subtitle — “The Embiggening” — well, that’s just truly sad, isn’t it?

    And yet there is still schadenfreude to burn, because as a straight rec list it comes wrapped in the moldy shroud of SP3 and all its attendant ugliness. SPIV can’t just be a hands-off, look-how-neutral-we-are list; let’s not forget that then newly selected banner-carrier “Kate the Impaler” was cackling with glee even before SP3’s overbearing (and RP-boosted) results were released about how happy the Sads were going to be on April 4, 2015, and how she couldn’t wait to carry on that excellent effort next year.

    The Sad Puppies was never a rec list***; it was a front in a culture war mixed with personal grievances crafted to be an attack on a phantom menace. Absent that purpose, it has little reason to exist.

    SP3 crashed and burned, which turned SPIV into a poisoned chalice, and everyone knows it — most especially its nominal leaders, who have somehow morphed into “head collators”. Even that job was done badly (see weird Best Dramatic Presentation – Short Form result), thanks to their being dogmatic at having ten recs per category.

    I sure haven’t seen anyone step up to spearhead SP5.

    * I’m always going to have trouble not laughing, what with the word “spiv” and all.

    ** Thus far, RP2 has the same problem to some degree, because all the ironic/strategic/Aristotelian choices muddy the water considerably. But people keep thinking there’s another shoe to be chewed there, plus there’s still red meat on the list and it’s a real slate and all that, so it’s wait and see for now.

    *** Maybe SP2

  18. So, I’m going to feel some empathy as their Wrong Fans Having Wrong Fun narrative is confirmed.

    But it isn’t being confirmed. What is happening is that people are asking to be disassociated from a tainted brand. When rumors spread that Proctor and Gamble’s logo was Satanic in origin, Proctor and Gamble denied they were true (because the rumors were, to put it bluntly, ridiculous), but also changed its logo. SP4, on the other hand, ran out under the same style banner as SP3 had. Because of how its leadership behaved in SP1-3, the SP brand is toxic and probably always will be, no matter what is done under the SP name going forward.

  19. @Soon Lee – This year, they’ve reopened, the assistant manager is now the manager who says they’ve cleaned up their act, and their pizzas are now *really* *good* and won’t make you sick. How willingly would you eat their pizza?

    That’s an interesting question and I think my answer would depend on first how I had been personally affected (because solipsism is a thing) and then on the larger harm its previous iteration had caused. Restaurants in general are hazardous, often unhygienic places, something I keep in mind every time I eat out.

    What I wouldn’t do, though, is decide all of its regulars were, without exception, equally to blame for the establishment’s many health code violations.

    @JJ, I am a feminist in spite of Andrea Dworkin, the lesbian sex wars and second wave feminism’s despicable stance on trans women, even though each has given me giant qualms. Should I walk away from feminism?

  20. Cheryl S.: I am a feminist in spite of Andrea Dworkin, the lesbian sex wars and second wave feminism’s despicable stance on trans women, even though each has given me giant qualms. Should I walk away from feminism?

    But that’s not at all the same thing as Sad Puppies, is it? It would not be accurate to claim that “feminist” is a specific movement or campaign, any more than “conservative” is a specific movement or campaign.

    Like it or not, “Sad Puppies” is a very specific brand and campaign, just as ALF is — whereas “conservative” and “animal lover” are not.

  21. @Cheryl S.,
    I could include a description of the boorishness of the eatery’s regulars but I fear to stretch the analogy past its breaking point. 😉

    I think/hope the point I’m making is clear: current actions do not happen in a vacuum but in the context of past history. The Sad Puppies have plenty of history and whether or not you think it’s deserved, that is how I & many others are basing our judgement.

  22. Each of us has always to make up our own minds and part of the making up of those minds is based on very individual criteria. One of mine is what is being done now rather than then, because no matter how many regrets one might (or might not) have, the past is immutable. So, whatever I think of the Sad Puppy movement, I’ll wait until I have actual cause to be incensed in the present moment. I’m not sure if that’s pragmatism or just the result of years of trying to be more like my dogs (er, no, not a pun).

    @JJ, I think of feminism as very much a specific and personal thing, one which has in the past caused me a great deal of pain. It’s not doing it now, as I’m not trans and Michigan doesn’t directly affect me, so I can pretty much declare myself a feminist without too much tsoris. Other years not so much. That and the (not always sure I want to touch it with a 10 foot pole) potential for community is why I referred to it.

    @Soon Lee, I think your point is clear and I thought your analogy was a charming illustration of it. I only wish I could eat pizza. 🙂 That I am currently taking a different tack doesn’t mean I don’t understand how and why you arrived at your position. Nor does it mean I think anyone is wrong for considering the septic history of SP1-3.

  23. I’d just like to say that after recent threads I thought Soon Lee was asking what he should do about a literal pizza place in his hometown. Was amazed to learn I was wrong about that.

  24. @Jim Henley

    I’d just like to say that after recent threads I thought Soon Lee was asking what he should do about a literal pizza place in his hometown.

    Same here! I was about to come over here and reply that yes, I would give them another chance, because pizza. Mexican food, pizza, Thai food, Indian food… any of those, yes I would definitely give them another chance. I’ve given such restaurants a new chance every six months when they were nearby and convenient, even when I end up with mild food poisoning.

    Within the intended context… I tried to give the Puppies another chance at the beginning of SP4, but found it difficult to continue interacting with them in the light of their continued rants against their imagined CHORF, SJW, Morlock, and Marxist enemies. It’s a toxic environment. On the one hand, they seem to have successfully put out a rec list, rather than a slate. On the other hand, pretty much the entirety of the rest of their campaign has been just as shrill and whiny as every other year.

  25. For me, if it was an actual pizza joint, I would give it another try if they had cleaned up their act & got an acceptable hygiene grade. But then our Food Hygiene certifications are done by the City Council inspectors, which makes a big difference.

    You can find the current grading of a particular establishment easily. The grades are A, B, there is no C, D (for dodgy) and E which is *this* *close* to the premises being shut down. If it’s not an A or a B, I don’t eat there.

  26. The Sad Puppy question seems much more straightforward to me, and Charles Schulz could illustrate it in three panels.

    How many times does Lucy have to yank the football away before Charlie Brown stops trying to kick it?

  27. @Tasha:

    He got suspicious, but he always took the bait. We should learn from his experience.

  28. I don’t remember Charlie Brown ever deciding that this would be the time he wouldn’t take a chance at the football. Even as a kid, I didn’t think that made him foolish. Each time I’d hope along with him that this time would be different.

  29. There was a restaurant near me where I’d have like a 50/50 chance of feeling like crap the next day from the food.

    They made a hell of a tamarind salad though.

  30. Pingback: Keymasters and Gatekeepers? | Font Folly

  31. Pingback: Pixel Scroll 3/21/16 The Incredible Sulk | File 770

  32. Pingback: Two More Hugo Nominees Stay In | File 770

Comments are closed.