What Makes an Aurora “Nominee”?

Tamara Sheehan believes Aurora Award webmaster Clint Budd has verified that her short story “Twenty” was an Aurora nominee, based on this statement in his e-mail of yesterday:

I have your name (as part of a list kept for other reasons) and the name of the story – “Twenty” but no record of the number of nominations. So, yes, you’re right – the story was nominated, but didn’t reach the short list.

Do I need a better understanding of what’s regarded as an Aurora nominee?

The inference is that there is an Aurora “long list” as well as a “short list,” and that anything on the long list is also a type of nominee, like the finalists.

However, the official Aurora Award site says otherwise. The Canadian Science Fiction & Fantasy Association gives this description of the Aurora nominating process:

The Aurora awards are closest to the style of the Hugo awards (which are presented by the SF Worldcon) in the method by which they are selected. First there is a nomination phase to select a short list. Then a voting phase to pick the winner from the short list using the Australian voting method (this method has the voter rank their choices in each category).

Since the CSF&F follows the usage of the Hugos, then they presumably do not characterize as nominees the works or people named on Aurora Award nominating ballots that fail to make the final ballot.

In Hugo usage nominee and finalist are synonymous. If you’re not a finalist you’re not a nominee.

A different case is the long-list/short-list arrangement used in the early years of the Nebula Awards where items on the long list were characterized as nominees and published in a preliminary ballot.

SFWA adopted a two-ballot system for the 1970 Nebulas. It circulated the member-recommended long list of nominees on a ballot for a preliminary vote and put the top vote-getters on the final ballot. That year 45 short stories were nominated and 7 made the final ballot. Works on the preliminary long list were regarded as nominees and recorded as such in Don Franson and Howard DeVore’s A History of the Hugo, Nebula and International Fantasy Awards (1978 edition).

If there are any Canadian fans who know the history and usage of the Aurora Awards and want to comment on this I’d welcome your participation. While I think Tamara Sheehan has made an innocent mistake, if the error is mine I’d be happy to correct it.

4 thoughts on “What Makes an Aurora “Nominee”?

  1. Sorry Mike, I am confused. You have a copy of an email from the appropriate parties, a willingness to have the information verified with said parties that explains yes, Twenty was nominated (stated explicitly) but did not make the short list.

    I am not sure at what point Tamara Sheehan “believes” remains appropriate. Tamara Sheehan was told – and that has been verified. If you have an issue with the internal/external processes regarding the Aurora, I would urge you take that up with them and not continue to malign an author.

    So, in answer to your question – yes, apparently you do need a better understanding. They have verified (“So, yes, you’re right – the story was nominated”), you continue to question. Aside from an attempt to generate traffic to your site, I see no rationale or sense for your continuation of this. It’s a bit sad really.

    When you made your initial comment, I felt it was likely made in good faith, if poorly done. Now I find myself unable to continue believing that.

  2. Flannelberry, I’ve known Mike for 33 years. I’ve seen him be pissed off at people for various reasons — including me — some of which were justified in my view, some of which weren’t justified in my view. I have never once seen him use his publication of a news item for purpose of a fannish feud.

    When writing with his “news voice” (as compared to his “commentary voice” or “editorial voice” or “satire voice”) Mike is remarkable for his ability to put aside his feelings and opinions and report as objectively as he is able.

    I don’t know the background and whys and wherefores of this dispute, but regardless of that I respectively suggest that you look again carefully and reconsider before making this kind of accusation. You may find you owe Mike an apology.

  3. “So, yes, you’re right – the story was nominated, but didn’t reach the short list” does seem quite clear.

    When the official statement is that: “The Aurora awards are closest to the style of the Hugo awards (which are presented by the SF Worldcon) in the method by which they are selected. First there is a nomination phase to select a short list. Then a voting phase to pick the winner from the short list using the Australian voting method (this method has the voter rank their choices in each category),” what this means is that saying you were “nominated” means that at least one person put your work down on their nominating ballot.

    That’s nice. And if someone wants to point to that credit, clearly they should do as they desire.

    As it happens, hundreds of people and pieces of work are also “nominated for the Hugo Award” every year, if we engage in this usage, and thousands of people are “nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize” every year. (A usage that is, in fact, commonly engaged in by newspapers and major media, which causes anyone who knows what it actually means to slap themselves on the head whenever they read or see it.)

    Hey, I was “nominated for the Hugo Award” myself, by this definition, once upon a time, as it happens. I probably should tell more people about this.

    Tamara Sheehan writes: “I can’t tell you the feeling of horror and shock I had when it looked like I’d spent the last two years lying to every one of my publishers, editors, friends, readers and critics.”

    If anyone has accused her of “lying,” it hasn’t been at this website. All that appears to have happened is that Tamara Sheehan was a bit unclear about how the Aurora Awards work, and what being “nominated” for one does and doesn’t mean.

    If, now that she’s had the meaning clarified, she wishes to go on telling people that her work was “nominated for the Aurora Award,” she’s obviously free to do so, and she’ll be telling the truth.

    I’m sure most people will give that fact all the respect it’s due.

Comments are closed.