aka A Bark and Hungry Puppy Arises
June is bustin’ out all over which may account for one of the longest roundups ever. The pack includes lead dog Brad R. Torgersen, Alexandra Erin, Ian Gillespie, Jim C. Hines, John Scalzi, John C. Wright, Larry Correia, Dave Freer, Laura “Tegan” Gjovaag, Vox Day, Chris Kluwe, Lis Carey, Dave M. Strom, Pluviann, Chris Gerrib, Russell Blackford and Brianna Wu. (Title credit goes to File 770 contributing editors May Tree and Soon Lee.)
Brad R. Torgersen
“Sheepdog staring at the horizon” – May 31
As my friend and author (and Sad Puppy critic) Eric Flint recently noted, he’s put his body on the line for what he believes. Other people spew a lot of hot air about being “warriors” for social justice. Eric’s a man who can actually claim that title, and be taken seriously; by allies and opponents alike.
So you will pardon me if I can’t spare much serious thought for those who think being some guy who gets pissed off on the internet, is somehow going to make a difference — a real, lasting, actual difference.
Which takes me back to a point Larry Correia and I have both made, about the Hugo awards: loads of people loved to complain about how the Hugos suck, and almost nobody was doing anything to make an impact. I say “almost” because there were interested parties working hard to effect the kind of change they wanted — Seannan McGuire didn’t get five Hugo nominations in a single year on accident — they just didn’t conduct their operations in broad daylight, nor on a scale to compare with Sad Puppies.
Which takes me back to a comment Michael Z. Williamson once made: we’re bad because we’re competent?
Well, whatever people have against Sad Puppies 3 — legit, or imaginary — it’s clear that the various narratives will continue without my input. I can only restate the obvious, in the hope that it sticks with people who have not decided to be dead-set against us. We (Sad Puppies Inc.) threatened nothing, demanded nothing, and closed no doors in any faces. We threw the tent flaps wide and beckoned to anyone and everyone: come on in, join the fun!
If someone can explain how promoting a slate hand picked by one man advances the cause of "anyone can nominate anyone", I'll join SP4.
— Alexandra Erin | patreon.com/AlexandraErin (@AlexandraErin) June 1, 2015
Ian Gillespie
“Blank Slate” – May 31
Putting aside the reasoning behind the Puppy slates – which is, admittedly, thoroughly objectionable to many of us all on its own – I’ve yet to see anyone offer a cogent, clearly articulated explanation for what makes the machinations of these melancholy mutts categorically different than what’s been done, without controversy, in years past.
I’d like to humbly suggest that the anti-puppies have been sucked into debating a strawman. While most of the prominent denunciations of the dispirited dogs have focused on their use of slates, the real problem with the pessimistic pups isn’t about slates at all, but rather tactical voting.
By linking their Hugo recommendations to a larger cause – namely, putting those insufferable progressives in their place – the Puppies have effectively encouraged their small-but-loyal pack of supporters to nominate works based on a political agenda – not the works themselves, not even their own individual preferences. That’s the issue. Not campaigning for particular works, but rendering the works themselves a meaningless consideration.
Ian Gillespie
“Paulk the Vote” – May 31
According to Erin, Kate Paulk has been tapped to take over the dog pound, and she’s already promised that next year’s puppy-approved slatecraft will be done in a “transparent and democratic manner”.
If this is truly the case, I have a modest proposal to make:
Let’s rock the vote.
No slates. No cheating. Just show up 7 months from now and vote for the same SJW message fiction, or the same gun-totting monster mashups, you were gonna nominate anyway. If it’s really democratic, then the outcome won’t be any different than a normal, unpuppied process anyway. Right?
Jim C. Hines
“Publishing 101” – June 1
In the wake of Scalzi’s Big Book Deal, folks have been saying some rather ignorant or ill-informed stuff about how publishing works. I wanted to address a few of those points here.
Let’s start with the easiest, in which folks over on Theodore Beale’s blog claim that by Tor giving Scalzi a $3.4 million advance, they’re “squeezing out” approximately “523 initial advances to new science fiction authors.” In other words, Beale claims that “Patrick Nielsen Hayden and John Scalzi have combined to prevent more than 500 authors from getting published and receiving paid advances.”
This is a particularly egregious bit of ignorance coming from Mister Beale, who fancies himself a publisher.
Publishing is a business. As a business, Tor not only spends money on things like acquiring and publishing books, they also earn money by selling said books. Assuming Scalzi shut out 500 authors assumes that Tor is simply pissing away that $3.4 million. This is a rather asinine assumption. John Scalzi has repeatedly hit the NYT Bestseller list, earned a Best Novel Hugo, and has several TV/film deals in development for his work. Tor buys books from John Scalzi for the same reason they buy books from Orson Scott Card: those books sell a hell of a lot of copies, and earn Tor significant profits.
Very often it’s those profits — the income from reliable bestsellers like Card and Scalzi — that allow publishers to take a chance on new and unknown authors.
Someone out there think the reason I don't write more about Hugos/Puppies is that I'm worried about being controversial. This is dumb. (1/3)
— John Scalzi (@scalzi) June 2, 2015
One, I write about it enough. Two, the idea that my positions on Hugos/Puppies are "controversial" is alternate universe fantasy. (2/3)
— John Scalzi (@scalzi) June 2, 2015
Three, unlike apparently some people, I have a life and career outside of Hugos/Puppies. There are other, more important things. (3/3)
— John Scalzi (@scalzi) June 2, 2015
John C. Wright
“You Got My Attention By Libeling Me and Desecrating What I Love” – June 1
With a combination of pity and dismay, I read this
https://file770.com/?p=22824&cpage=3#comment-272798….
I suspect the Rabids aren’t fans of SF so much as they are “members of the cult of Vox Day.” Partly, this is the only thing that truly seems to explain the works on the slate — the ones that aren’t published by Beale’s own press anyway — the point isn’t that they are any particular thing, the point is that he chose them, and there they are.
But to my infinite amusement, I read the reply: There are, as of last count, 367 vile, faceless minions of the Dark Lord of the Evil Legion of Evil Authors.
https://twitter.com/damiengwalter/status/605445248924282880
Larry Correia on Monster Hunter Nation
“Back from New York, BEA Recap, and Updates” – June 1
I had some very interesting business conversations, many of which I can’t post about in public. I was worried that I’d catch flack because of all the negative media attention related to Sad Puppies, and the many CHORFs screaming about how I’ve ruined my career, will never work in this town again, blah, blah, blah. Basically, most of the publishing industry hasn’t heard or doesn’t care about the Hugos, it is a non-issue to them, and those who did talk to me about it were either on my side, or weren’t on my side but thought the stagnant little pond still needed a rock thrown in it.
There were also some interesting political conversations. The vast majority of the publishing folks live around and work in New York and are usually politically liberal. Everybody is nice, but at party conversations, people like me are a weird fly-over, red state curiosity. No, really, I do own like that many guns. I had a fascinating and too brief conversation about how Simon & Schuster realized after Bush’s reelection that there were actually lots of people in America who are not liberal and did not think that way, and maybe they should start some imprints to publish conservative political books, and New York publishing was all like no way, nobody believes that stuff. But S&S started some imprints aimed at conservative audiences and shockingly enough, made buckets of money.
Alexandra Erin on Blue Author Is About To Write
“This JUST In” – June 1
So if you are a Puppy reading this, here’s how you convince the rest of the world that you mean all those high-minded ideals more than the snipping and sniping:
Next year, try actually spreading awareness of the open nature of nominations. Don’t buy into the slate. Don’t take your recommendations and hand them off to someone who may ignore them while assembling a slate of their own picks. Instead do what countless other people have done for years: post your own recommendations directly, as recommendations.
Add an explanation that anyone who buys a supporting membership to Worldcon can nominate their own picks, and bam… you will have just raised awareness of the nomination process.
What does participating in a slate do that furthers that mission? What does making vague, unfounded accusations that past nominees/winners benefited from some shadowy affirmative action program do to advance the cause? What does all the noise and mess and deliberate provocation and stirring up controversy have to do with anything? What does it add?
Dave Freer on Mad Genius Club
“Signals across the void –awards and other signs.” – June 1
Of course people can argue about what the signal meant in the first place. Take the various ‘literary’ awards. What were they intended to do?
1) A recognition of excellence by one’s peers?
2) A recognition of excellence by the public?
3) Promote such excellence – signal to others that that is excellent and they should look?
4) A pat on the back for one of the ‘in’ literary clique’s chums?Different awards have different purposes, and different values. As a reader and writer only (3) ‘Promote such excellence – signal to others that that is excellent and they should look at the work’ is worth much. Most awards, without careful custodianship, head for (4). At which point they lose their historical value and gradually vanish. They have less and less value as (3), and really (1) and (4) are something only the insecure want, unless they feed (3) – which (4) never does and (1) does badly. To put it brutally, if you need and support an award being (1) or (4) you’re a loser, not big enough for what is a tough profession.
(2) is a different kettle of tea. In real terms you could only get there by systematic polling. It does have a lot of (3) value too, because, true enough, we’re not that different. A book which is really the most popular book around, is worth a look-in. The nearest approximation in sf-fantasy is the Hugos. And it isn’t a great approximation (the sample of readers, by who attends/supports Worldcon is obviously inaccurate, and various problems in the nomination have been exposed by the Puppies. (they’re game-able, they’re not demographically representative of the sf readership) – but it’s the best we’ve got right now. As such it could do a good job for sf. It used to.
Laura “Tegan” Gjovaag on Bloggity-Blog-Blog-Blog
“The Hugos again” – June 1
Of particular interest to me is this notion of giving people who you don’t like bad reviews on books you haven’t read. Let me make this absolutely clear: This is bad behavior. It is wrong. If you have read a book and don’t like it, then it’s fine to give it a bad review.
If you attempted to read a book and found you couldn’t finish it because it was so bad, then yeah, give it a bad review.
But if you simply don’t like the author? Giving their book a bad review without reading it or trying to read it (in good faith) is every bit as bad as, say, nominating a bunch of works for the Hugo awards without reading them first because somebody put together a slate. Yeah, I’m comparing people who give bad reviews based on how they feel about the authors to the self-called “sad puppies” and “rabid puppies”. Both actions are bad faith. Both actions are wrong. Both actions are not worthy of intelligent people.
As David Gerrold says, “If you’re claiming to be one of the good guys, you gotta act like it.”
Vox Day on Vox Popoli
“The descent of literary criticism” – June 1
Natalie Luhrs will be live-tweeting her feelz about THE WAR IN HEAVEN, beginning June 11. I wonder if she’ll like it?:
Before Theodore “Vox Day” Beale was the central figure in the Sad/Rabid Puppies Hugo Awards hacking, he wrote a series of religious-inspired fantasy novels for Pocket Books. And blogger Natalie Luhrs is going to live-tweet his debut novel, Eternal Warriors: The War in Heaven, for charity. Here’s how it works: You donate money to RAINN, a charity that operates the National Sexual Assault Hotline. (Or to a similar organization in your own country.) You send proof of your donation to Luhrs. And for every $5 you donate, Luhrs will livetweet a page of the book, starting June 11 with the hashtag #readingVD. She will also republish her tweets, with additional commentary, on a chapter-by-chapter basis, on her site, Pretty-Terrible. If people raise $2,000, she’ll do the entire book. (She is currently at $920.)
Yeah, probably not. I’d be considerably more impressed if she’d chosen A THRONE OF BONES instead. And it’s kind of a pity that she didn’t choose THE WORLD IN SHADOW, I would have been genuinely interested to see her reaction to that. I’m rather dubious that 300 tweets that alternate between snarking about how bad the writing is and how stupid the author is will prove to be very entertaining for long.
Chris Kluwe in a comment on io9 – May 29
As someone who livetweeted Milo Yiannopolous’ “poetry” book, Eskimo Papoose, all I can do is wish her the best of luck. That shit is more toxic than Godzilla poop on a radioactive dump site.
Geeky Library Voting Guide
[Combination infographic and voter survey, with a page for each category. Need to log into Twitter to vote.]
Lis Carey on Lis Carey’s Library
“Tangent SF Online, edited by Dave Truesdale” – June 1
One of the 2015 Best Fanzine nominees. This is a review zine, focused on reviewing science fiction and fantasy short fiction. I did not find that its style or judgments engaged me at all. However, that said, it’s perfectly competent and professional, and for those who connect better with the tone and approach of Tangent Online, this is a valuable service.
Lis Carey on Lis Carey’s Library
The prose is pedestrian, and just to be absolutely clear: “Pedestrian” prose is not “transparent” prose. Transparent prose requires real skill and craft. The prose here is no more than adequate. It’s certainly no compensation for diffuse and distracting plotting and barely-present character development.
https://twitter.com/samdodsworth/status/605426485881663488
Dave M. Strom on Dave M. Strom: author of Holly Hansson, superheroine & writer
“Sad Puppies? Or Eye of Argon?” – June 1
At least the Eye of Argon was consistent about spelling out numbers. Although it violates hulls in a slightly grander fashion.
“The disemboweled mercenary crumpled from his saddle and sank to the clouded sward, sprinkling the parched dust with crimson droplets of escaping life fluid.”
There’s more. The same supposedly Hugo-worthy short story [Turncoat by Steve Rzasa] has this sentence. So much wrong in so little space.
“Disabling an enemy warship is not enough; they must be crippled, damaged, destroyed.”
I’m jerked from singular to plural. My sense of opposites is assaulted: in this context, disabled is a synonym for crippled and damaged. I offer this rewrite.
“Disabling an enemy warship is not enough; it must be destroyed.”
Simple, short, and direct. Even a Dalek would smile at that. As for these puppy stories, I urge a vote of no award.
Pluviann on The Kingfishers Nest
“The Parliament of Beasts and Birds – John C. Wright” – June 1
The ‘The Parliament of the Beasts and Birds’ is a beautifully written work. It opens with some excellent scene setting. Look at how wonderfully crafted this description is: ….
So, all in all, it was a bit odd. There are some very minor quibbles I can make: the past tense of shine is shone when the verb is intransitive. And Fox trying to wriggle out being called a thief by protesting that he stole meat not animals doesn’t really make sense. But overall, it was well done. The story started strong, meandered along fairly slowly but amusingly, and then took a decided turn for the strange at the end.
Chris Gerrib on Private Mars Rocket
“Hugo Thoughts, Novels” – June 1
I’ve been reading my Hugo packet. Over the weekend I finished The Goblin Emperor and abandoned all hope of reading The Dark Between the Stars. I’ll discuss why and what that means for Hugos below.
My problem with Stars was that I lost track of who was who in the zoo. Nearly every chapter brought new characters, with new conflicts. There were at least three main plot lines opened, and no obvious link between them. Also, I kept feeling that I was missing important bits of back-story, namely the war and relationships between the humans and the aliens.
Now, Goblin Emperor is by no means light reading. It has name issues, in that characters have different names and titles based on marital status and age. Having said that, I found it much less opaque. This was for two reasons – one, Sarah Monette (Addison is an open pen name) kept the point-of-view to one character, who as an outsider needed to have stuff explained to him. Second, the story was not set in a world where there were seven previous books written.
Russell Blackford
“Some more on the 2015 Hugo Voting Packet” – June 1
2. Rat Queens Volume 1: Sass and Sorcery – written by Curtis J. Weibe and illustrated by Roc Upchurch (nominated for Best Graphic Story). This bawdy fantasy romp, set in a Tolkienesque secondary universe complete with elves, orcs, and trolls, entertained me from beginning to end. The characters who make up the eponymous Rat Queens – a band of magical (female) adventurers – are unfailingly fun to watch, and are strongly distinguished in their individual designs and personalities. The action is fast-paced, and I’m all for the non-stop violence and low comedy. It’s a hoot, but does it have sufficient gravitas to merit a Hugo Award? Debatable, perhaps… but I wouldn’t be wanting to stand in its way. I rate it a bit below the next item, but it has its attractions.
3. Saga Volume Three – written by Brian K. Vaughan and illustrated by Fiona Staples (nominated for Best Graphic Story). Here we have a potential winner. I rate it below Ms. Marvel, but an earlier volume of this complicated, engaging space opera has already won a Hugo Award (in 2013). The characters are worth caring about; the storyline is intriguing; and the overall narrative, when it’s complete, could become a classic of its kind.
Alexandra Erin on Blue Author Is About To Write
“Sad Puppies Review Books: Alexander and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day” – June 1
Reviewed by John Z. Upjohn, USMC (Aspired)
Alexander and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day is the tale of a young man persecuted past the point of all reason. Only in the sick world of so-called Social Justice would he be held up as a comic figure rather a tragic one to be rescued or, failing that, avenged.
Our story begins when the main character wakes up with gum in his hair. Yet when he went to sleep, it was safely and responsibly in his mouth, where gum belongs. I am sure the SJWs would say that it is his fault for chewing gum in the first place, that he was somehow “asking for it”. They hate victim blaming until the victim is a white straight “CIS-MALE” and then suddenly everything is the victim’s fault. I ask you, is this morality where a person is always wrong 100% based on the gender and race?
If you say it is Alexander’s fault that the gum wound up in his hair, then you are saying he shouldn’t have had it in his mouth. If you are saying that he shouldn’t have had it in his mouth, you are saying he shouldn’t be allowed to chew gum. Who are you to say that he shouldn’t chew gum just because he is a straight white male, or as normal people who don’t notice sex or race would say, a normal person?
My husband Frank has four Hugo awards. Half of everything he owns is mine.Ergo, Brianna Wu has two Hugo awards.
— Brianna Wu (@BriannaWu) June 1, 2015
Discover more from File 770
Subscribe to get the latest posts to your email.
Aaron – I’ve read so much Heinlein that he would have to rise from the grave and write more for me to be able to read any more by him. Do you think Hoyt would accept me as being qualified to opine that Heinlein had some problematic sexism in several of his stories?
No way, you’re either a cool-kid or so deep under the spell of those that are that she doesn’t trust you to think for yourself. Because a difference of opinion means you’ve been brainwashed.
For a while, in my youth (roughly 9-15 years old), I loved every Heinlein that I had ever read, to varying degrees. The sexism sailed right over my head — what I wanted was girls having space adventures, and he wrote that, so I was good. (My absolute favorite was The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, and I’m still a little baffled at the way modern American libertarians seem to think that book is about them. )
My enchantment started to decline when — at the age of 16 or so — I read I Will Fear No Evil and hate-hate-hated it. It even came recommended by a friend, so my negative reaction came as a bit of a rude shock. It seemed to me that the book was nothing except various characters lecturing each other about the universe as it is and should be according to Uncle Bob, PARTICULARLY regarding the nature and purpose of women, sex, and childbirth/childrearing. The term “mansplaining” hadn’t been coined yet, but I certainly recognized it when I saw it.
I continued to read some Heinlein after that, but there were two problems — his later books had a lot more of that “lectures from Uncle Bob” stuff, and now that I’d noticed it, I saw the glimmers of it even in the earlier books.
Anyway, I think Heinlein’s work isn’t misogynist at all. But it is full of gender essentialism and other sexist ideas — mixed in with strongly progressive feminist ideas.
Connie Willis has given some very interesting talks on that particular subject.
Tuomas – So yeah… argument knocked.
I’d hope so since it was only created for the purpose of arguing against!
Thankfully clothes for men were cheaper, cost less to clean and were more easily replaced otherwise they would’ve had to walk around in aprons as well and that’s just ridiculous. Men, in aprons? My god.
Dear dog, are we arguing Heinlein is sexist, again? The answer is “yes, and also Shakespeare, Milton, Swift, Pope, the Bible, and pretty much everything ever.” Even modern feminist literature is sexist, because one can’t swim in the water without breathing it. Acknowledging sexism, racism, et cetera, is a good thing, and allows us to move forward into a (hopefully) less ism-ed future. Why is acknowledging the bias inherent in structures such a big effing deal to these people that they need to rage so fracking hard? Smile, nod, and move the frack on, already. Jiminy crickets.
Also, I am quite fond of my aprons. I sew them myself in my pinko, librul, commie, feminist, separatist lesbian craft room on my pinko, librul, commie, feminist, separatist lesbian machine. They’re awesomely useful in my SJW(itch) kitchen and garden for keeping SJW dirt and splashes off my pinko, librul, commie, feminist, separatist lesbian clothing.
Title suggestion: A Puppy Proposal for Preventing the Novels of Non-Puppies From Being Awarded Hugos by Their Fans or Peers or Readers, and for Making Them Unavailable to Worldcon Members
(hat tip Jonathan Swift)
You know, I’m a man and last week I wore an apron. To bake a cake in fact.
Therefore Heinlein wasn’t sexist to depict women in aprons as men wear them too; Hoyt is right for the wrong reasons. QED.
Not exactly. Some people are arguing tiresomely and yet again that he was not.
Karl-Johan Norén : Puppy-Kings of Gor
The Hugo Award cringed as its owner brought forth the voting minions. “I am a Hugo Award!” it cried indignantly. “How dare you slate vote for me! Guards!” it called. “Guards!”
VD, its owner, sent off his instructions to his toadies and looked at it. “You will be swindled,” he said.
“You do not dare to swindle me!” laughed the Hugo.
“You will be swindled,” said VD.
“Do not swindle me!” wept the Hugo.
“You will be swindled,” said VD.
We watched this exchange. Truly, we believed the Hugo would be swindled. It was shiny, and on Planet Puppy it had no rights. Perhaps on Earth, in its permissive society, which distorts the true role of science fiction, which forces both Hugo and hack to go unhappy and constrained, which forbids the swindling of awards to stroke massive egos, such might not happen. Perhaps there, it would not be swindled. But it was on Planet Puppy now, and would undoubtedly find its true place, that of a trophy for untalented hacks. It was Hugo. It would be swindled at will. Such is the way with anything shiny.
VD sent forth his voting morons, and muchly voted on the award. The Hugo cried out. “No, Master! Do not swindle me!” The master continued to swindle the award. “Please, Master,” begged the Hugo, “do not swindle me!” The master continued to swindle the Hugo. It was shiny. It could be swindled at will.
(Swiped from here – http://www.rdrop.com/~wyvern/data/houseplants.html)
Dex says:
Top of the US, anyhow. One hears about media cons in Asia from time to time in the 200k-300k attendee range. Not sure how many of them are nonprofits vs. for-profits.
Demand has so outstripped supply that you’ve got to enter a lottery just to find a place to park.
@Dela: If you’re wondering about Sarah Hoyt, I’m wondering about Dave Freer. The Dave Freer I got to know was always rooting for the underdogs/grunts, deeply sceptical of authority, and highly egalitarian.
Then he moved to Australia from South Africa, somewhere between 2005 and 2010.
What they do have in common is that they’re both emigrants and both got a decent start on a writing career that stalled. I don’t have any real data to back this up, but I have an impression that emigrants become more susceptible to conspiracy theories and similar stuff.
Tintinaus
*reads the stuff in question*
Damn, that was vicious. And entirely deserved.
How to Suppress Women’s Hugos.
Meredith on June 2, 2015 at 1:52 pm said:
Awesome! I suspect that commentary might ebb a bit here a month or two after Worldcon, but there are similar communities that might appeal to you. John Scalzi’s Whatever is very civil and wide ranging. Making Light is a little too intensive for me, but my dips there have been pleasant and informative–the folks at ML are generally welcoming and courteous, in my experience.
Re: Ignoring evidence that runs contrary to ideology
There’s some research aimed at explaining Anti-Vaxxers that talks about how evidence can be dismissed because ~reasons~ and leads to people gpdigging in more rather than re-evaluating.
Re: Heinlein discussion
This all hinges on the idea that something being called sexist (or racist) is the Worst Thing Ever, much worse than suffering the results of sexism (or racism), and therefore requires extraordinary proof. Its basically a disconnect between perceived realities: For people who accept that the water they’re swimming in is more likely to have sexist (or racist) undertones, saying any specific thing s sexist is much less of a big deal than it is for people who think that the world in general is not sexist (or racist) and therefore that something must be significantly different from the every day to count as sexist (or racist).
Dela : The Sarah Hoyt that I met, talked casually with a few times that weekend years ago, and saw on panels was pleasant, charming, kind of intellectual, friendly, a little diffident, had a dry, self-deprecating sense of humor that came out a lot, and never once mentioned or alluded to anything remotely political (and certainly never mentioned Marxists). So I was really surprised to see, years later, her blog is being written by a toxically nasty, ignorant, hypocritical, humorless, paranoid hate-monger who sees Marxists everywhere (!) and can’t seem to go a day without shrieking about her (far-right) politics.
The scene – a pretty blonde woman lolls sleepily in a bathtub, bubble bath tastefully keeping this scenario PG-rated. Moving stealthily over the floor towards her, we see a slimy alien slug – with a wee hand waving a miniature Stars and Stripes…
@cpaca I’ve been reading Puppet Masters, and it’s not far off that.
@mintwitch
I’ve been lurking on Whatever for a few years. I really ought to poke my head up at some point, you’re right, the community there has always looked appealing.
The layout at Making Light tends to have brain-melting tendencies for me, sadly; I think because its quite busy. I like clean layouts like the one here and the one at Whatever much better, and they’re much easier on my spoon-count. 🙂
@meredith at 1:52 pm: “The comment threads here have prompted me out of perpetual lurkerdom, which has been a very cheering experience. I’m fairly isolated most of the time (mostly housebound), so having a community, even if it only lasts til after Worldcon, is quite nice.”
I second the suggestion to find a few online blogs where you feel you might be compatible. Online blogs have much of the same function as the APAs (Amateur Press Associations) which glued together much of my most active time in fandom, 1970s-1980s. For me, it was how one got to know people without travelling to conventions.
There’s a part of recognizable fandom which has colonized LiveJournal. LJ, because it is structured to favor lengthier writing, looks even more like old-time personal fanzines & APAs.
Will : @cpaca I’ve been reading Puppet Masters, and it’s not far off that.
Thinking of something more recent –
http://latetothemovies.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Slither-bathtub-1.jpg
mk41: the Hugos are frequently described as people’s choice awards. To me it’s more accurate to describe them as an award for excellence from longtime fans, trufen or nonprofessional experts if you will.
The Puppies keep insisting that the Hugo Awards can not possibly be science fiction’s most prestigious award unless anyone and everyone who reads SFF gets to nominated and vote for free. This is, of course, false. No one is claiming that the Hugos are science fiction’s most democratic award — that title would probably go to the SF category of the GoodReads Reader’s Choice award.
The Hugo Awards have become science fiction’s most prestigious award because of the conscientiousness and care that SFF-loving fans have put into the awards program over the decades. There is nothing contradictory about this — no matter how much Puppies insist otherwise.
I’ve been reading Puppet Masters, and it’s not far off that.
Puppy Masters?
Puppet and puppy have a similar word origin. A puppy was originally a toy dog and not a young dog. Whelp was a young dog.
Will: I really don’t think the Sad Puppy “leaders” ever imagined it would be an actual “thing.” Their investment in it has been pretty halfhearted, and they themselves seem torn between whether they’re Sad Puppies, Rabid Puppies, or neither. Rabid Puppies get uniforms and badges and orders. Sad Puppies get…left to their own devices, pretty much, because there aren’t any leaders, really. Nobody wants to own the Sad Pups. Poor pups. I’d be confused too.
Are you serious? You’ve not seen Brad Torgersen’s endless bloviating and his and Hoyt’s over-the-top continual Sad-Puppy-It’s-Us-Against-Them-War-Rhetoric? They’ve made a huge personal investment of time and energy in the campaign — so much so, that I wonder how someone who is supposedly on active military deployment can possibly find so much time to pompously prattle on and on on their own Facebook and blog, as well as sniffing around on Facebook leaving self-righteous posts on so many other peoples’s walls.
There are a number of words which would describe the Sad Puppy leaders and their rhetoric, but “half-hearted” is not one of them.
@JJ Rabid Puppies get badges and actual orders.
@cpaca Eww.
@Ken Josenhans
I’ve been “shopping” around a little bit based on the roundups here, and I do have a very old LiveJournal (created in 2004l last public post in 2012) that I’ve been thinking of dusting off and resurrecting. Most of the people I knew on there left for dreamwidth and then tumblr, but I’d noticed that there were quite a few livejournal types turning up in the roundups.
I haven’t seen anywhere I like as well as here yet, but there’s still time! 🙂
Will: @JJ Rabid Puppies get badges and actual orders.
And thank you for your complete failure to actually respond to my post.
> “I do have a very old LiveJournal … that I’ve been thinking of dusting off and resurrecting.”
Heh, I’ve been thinking of doing the exact same thing. These days I use it to very occasionally comment on the blogs of a few authors that use LJ, like GRRM or the amazing P. C. Hodgell. (Oh, no! I praised a Baen author! Apparently my secret cabal masters will have to punish me now!)
(Seriously, though, for those not familiar with her, P. C. Hodgell has been quietly writing one of the best fantasy series of all time since 1984. I cannot recommend her stuff highly enough.)
RE: David Mack. I did a binge-read of many of the contemporary Trek tie-in novels a few years ago, and his were consistently the best. Well worth trying if you’re into the universe.
At the risk of making a point that someone else may have made 187 comments back…
Torgersen’s referral to himself as a sheepdog is a reference to Dave Grossman’s essay, “On Sheep, Wolves and Sheepdogs.”
http://www.donotlink.com/fe8x
The premise being that the sheepdogs (and several more militant right-wing gun-loving sf fans refer to themselves as such) are the ones guarding us poor deluded sheep/sheeple from the big bad wolves. It’s a way for them to pat themselves on the back while parading around in their tactical (e.g., black with pockets) gear at various conventions.
“Sheepdog” has become one of their shibboleths; if you know what it means, you probably are one (that’s the line of thinking, anyway).
“We sleep safely in our pastures because rough dogs stand ready in the night to visit violence on those wolves who would harm us”
@nightengale @Jack Lint: It’s Hard Out Here for a Pup
nightengale: “It’s a way for them to pat themselves on the back while parading around in their tactical (e.g., black with pockets) gear at various conventions.”
So any similarities between the Puppies and actual fascists are in fact entirely intentional?
nightengale “Sheepdog” has become one of their shibboleths; if you know what it means, you probably are one (that’s the line of thinking, anyway).
it is frighteningly appalling because the analogy has a nasty assumption – the wolves are from the outside and are not of the sheep. The sheepdog in the story has no duty to serve or protect the wolves. Except, even soldiers now find themselves in conflicts in which there is not a simple line between the civilians you are to protect and the enemy you are supposed to be fighting. A domestic police officer subscribing to this viewpoint? Not good for anybody – police or community.
@ JJ: “They’ve made a huge personal investment of time and energy in the campaign — so much so, that I wonder how someone who is supposedly on active military deployment can possibly find so much time to pompously prattle on and on on their own Facebook and blog, as well as sniffing around on Facebook leaving self-righteous posts on so many other peoples’s walls.”
Not only deployment, he’s also got a day job and a family who probably expect to spend some time with him each evening or weekend. And it’s not like he was a prolific writer to begin with. He’s been publishing for about 5 years and has only written one novel.
(Note, by the way, that in the exact same amount of time, i.e. 2010 to today, Seanan McGuire aka Mira Grant, whose Hugo nominations Torgersen finds so suspect, has released more than a dozen novels, as well as releasing more-than-double the quantity of shorter fiction that Torgersen has released in that time. Gosh, is it possible that WORKING A LOT MORE at her craft is one possible explanation for her Hugo nominations exceeding his? Oh, no, no, it MUST be conspiracy!)
It’s hard to understand how a slow and little-known writer like Torgersen, with only one book out (and not a book that made a splash and got attention) and limited writing time (what with two jobs and a family), decides that the best thing for his writing career now is to spend lots and lots of time feuding online and making a name for himself as “that Puppy guy.”
A writer in his situation making a decision like that is why I think of all the Sad Puppies, he’s the one likely to discover that this Puppy thing was a big mistake for him. Because he seems like the one probably losing the most writing productivity to this Puppy thing, like the one who most needed to be productive now, and the one who’ll be most identified as a Puppy from now on INSTEAD OF as a writer (since he’s the one who most people know of now because of this rather than because of his name on book covers).
A post which our host Mr Glyer chose to delete because it contained a distasteful phrase… it had a suggestion of mine for the daily roundup title.
I’m not going to repeat it here, because then this post would be deleted again. But if you’re familiar with the work of JG Ballard… it’s an allusion to his controversial story about the man who was President of the US during the 1980s. The title’s pronoun has been replaced with the word “puppies”. As a whole, it could be considered a reference to the political conservatism common in Puppydom.
Brad is actually solidifying his career, such as it is. His main publisher is Baen, and even if his second book does as poorly as his first, he’ll just be put to work finishing books from outlines created by the more popular Baen authors.
In short fiction, he has all but guaranteed continued publication with ANALOG thanks to his support of the magazine, and outside of that, his two major publishers for short fiction are Kevin J. Anderson (now a Hugo nominee thanks to Brad) through Wordfire press and “writer dad” Mike Resnick (now a Hugo nominee for short fiction editing), who edits GALAXY’S EDGE
So he’s set. This is why he is happy to denounce Moshe Feder as a shirker who doesn’t edit his midlist on Facebook, for example. He has nothing to fear. He’ll be able to continue to shit out books and stories at his own pace indefinitely, utterly immune from the vagaries of the market, for his yeoman work as a Puppy.
Dela: It’s hard to understand how a slow and little-known writer like Torgersen, with only one book out (and not a book that made a splash and got attention) and limited writing time (what with two jobs and a family), decides that the best thing for his writing career now is to spend lots and lots of time feuding online and making a name for himself as “that Puppy guy.”
On Facebook another author had commented (it appears to be deleted now — I wonder if the author was the recipient of the same legal threats that were issued to various news outlets which covered the Hugo/Puppy story) that some years ago, he had cautioned Brad about his obstreperous posts on Scalzi’s and others’ blogs, saying that it would behoove Brad as a fledgling author to moderate his online presence to avoid alienating fans/prospective fans. Brad’s response was something along the lines that his behavior was a calculated act, and that he was deliberately positioning himself for a career catering to heavily-right-wing customers.
Dela: And it’s not like he was a prolific writer to begin with. He’s been publishing for about 5 years and has only written one novel…
… which was a fix-up of two previously-published novellas plus some additional material.
At this point, he may have to make a choice between being an SFF writer and a right-wing-outrage blogger, because you’re right: presumably his family expect to be able to spend some time with him when he’s not working or off drilling with the army reserves.
My personal take on it is that he grossly miscalculated: he took on the Puppy campaign thinking that he was in charge, everything would go smoothly because, after all, this is what the SJWs have been doing for years, anyway, so how could they complain?, and no one would bat an eyelash when the slates took over some of the Hugo ballot.
Instead, he was used as a puppet by VD, Corriea had wisely detached himself to leave Torgersen hanging in the breeze, and fandom reacted quite vehemently against the ballot being completely subverted by the Puppies. There was no way in hell he was going to say “Oh, shit, this was not at all what I intended, I’m sorry”, he doubled- and tripled-down instead: and now he’s committed to having to endlessly try to defend and justify the Puppies against the huge online blowback.
Things are not going to end well for him and his career in the long run, I suspect.
Danny Sichel: You mean this one about having sexual intercourse with President Reagan? That’s been up all day, even though I did vote for the guy.
However, I did dump a different comment about Mr. Beale.
I’m not sure I’d’ve kept the Reagan one, and I didn’t nor would I have voted for him, were I eligible… I find it a little weird how often I see complaints about moderation here, when the evidence of my lying eyes suggests that its as hands off as it could be short of allowing threats and insults beyond the pale.
Is it seemly for one low selling minor author to constantly take cheap shots at another low selling minor author? Considering most authors are lucky to sell 1,000 copies of a book, even with a pro press, snarking on someone for not being a Scalzi level seller is awfully petty.
Torgensen has done and said enough horrible things to criticise him on, without descending to “and you don’t even make much money” levels of insult. Especially when that can be turned right back on the person saying it.
Meredith: with occasional flare ups of automatic spam and “not published, awaiting moderation” filters. Which is no worse than most blogs these days, at least for the ones which don’t have comments sections full of spam.
@ Nick Mamatas – Okay, I was thinking about this differently (as a reader, looking for books by favorite writers, buying all the books of a writer I like, eager to buy the next one, recommending to my friends that they buy those books and buying books my friends recommend to me, etc.) and think that’s the kind of name and career writers want to build. And plenty of writers do, it seems.
But with what you’re saying, I see there are other perspectives. Brad wants to keep writing for Baen and, oh, look! he got 2 Baen editors on the Hugo ballot this year. He wants to write short fiction for Analog, Anderson, and Resnick, and, oh, look! he got Anderson, Resnick, and a bunch of Analog writers on the Hugo ballot.
So, okay, maybe Brad’s Puppy thing has in large part been about trying to curry favor with certain editors and publishers? And maybe he thinks getting them on the ballot gives him such a secure safety net that he can be a jerk to everyone else with impunity–because he doesn’t need anyone else? Maybe spending so much time on this stuff *is* a career plan for him, instead of (what it sure looks like to me) neglecting his fledgling career in favor of online feuding.
It’s a perspective on his behavior I hadn’t considered. I would say it seems really sleazy and shortsighted… but that’s not really a valid objection, I guess, considering that what I’ve seen of Brad Torgersen online is that *he* seems pretty sleazy and shortsighted, after all.
But just think how tragic it would be for Brad if the only publisher who wants him were to founder on the rocks of forwarding planning.
Forward planning is where the suits come in, to decide whether the brand is making a profit, or nor, as the case may be. It never ceases to amaze me how few people comprehend the existence of the suits…
I kinda look at the Puppy-Slate vs Random-Unnamed-Liberal-Conspiracy nominations as the difference between active campaigning for office and a “superpac” putting out advertisements to publicize your run for the same office.
Technically (and we really don’t have to get into the inherent bullshit corruption involves in the actual PRACTICE of PACs) the candidate is not allowed to talk to, contact or instruct the PAC on how to use their money or advertising. Yet they very seriously campaign for that person.
So if Seannan McGuire got on the Hugo ballot 5 times because her fans were actively and loudly advocating for her – that is NOT her fault and isn’t due to any liberal conspiracy putting her forth. It’s because her fans really love her work.
Compare and contrast to putting forth a public, set slate in all categories by a bunch of dudes that are trying to get an IDEOLOGY on the ballot and there’s really nothing in common between them.
CF: it is frighteningly appalling because the analogy has a nasty assumption – the wolves are from the outside and are not of the sheep. The sheepdog in the story has no duty to serve or protect the wolves. Except, even soldiers now find themselves in conflicts in which there is not a simple line between the civilians you are to protect and the enemy you are supposed to be fighting. A domestic police officer subscribing to this viewpoint? Not good for anybody – police or community.
It has several nasty assumptions written into it:
i, The sheep are unable to protect themselves.
ii, There is no possibility that the sheep will be able to protect themselves
iii, The sheepdogs get to tell the sheep what to do. For their own protection.
iv, Sheep are scared easily. They must be kept in the dark when in danger.
v, Sheep should obey the sheepdogs. Sheep that do not obey are a threat to the flock.
vi, The sheepdogs and the wolves can be distinguished from each other.
vii, The sheepdogs obey the master, and understand him more than the sheep. They are thus justified in doing whatever it takes for the greater good – as understood by them.
viii, And lastly, sheepdogs eat meat. It is only right that the sheep provide, one way or another…
“And lastly, sheepdogs eat meat. It is only right that the sheep provide, one way or another…”
Yeah well that analogy quickly became a very nasty horror story 🙂
Anyways I thing I’ll go and watch ‘Babe’
CPaca: “..viii, And lastly, sheepdogs eat meat. It is only right that the sheep provide, one way or another…”
I wouldn’t have predicted someone would be able to overcome my own negative reaction to Torgersen’s arguments with geometric logic like that, but darned if I don’t feel more sympathetic to his analogy now that you’ve deconstructed it for me.
Tintinaus
Holy fish. I would also note that it contains substantive criticism of one of the works nominated, and so is definitely worth a read.
Still thinking about the ramifications what Nick Mamatas said… and, wow, the Sad Puppy slate makes a lot more sense if you think of each nominee in terms of, “Whose favor was Brad Torgersen or Larry Corriea trying to curry with this one?”
Sorry, Mike – I can’t parse your comment. Could you elaborate?
Well, that is the second post which has disappeared into the Cybervoid today. I’m far too sensible to enquire what the hell is going on…