Adrian Tchaikovsky has announced on his website that due to the revelation of major problems with 2023 Hugo administration he will no longer acknowledge the Best Series Hugo presented to Children of Time.
A Statement on the 2023 Hugo Awards
When the Children of Time books won the 2023 Hugo for best series I was overjoyed. The Hugos have been a major feature of the genre fiction landscape for decades. It should be a signal honour to be shortlisted for one, let alone to win.
Over the last month or so, a cascade of information has been released or uncovered demonstrating that those responsible for administering the award for the 2023 Worldcon (held at Chengdu, China) took a variety of actions that significantly distorted the result.
For details, I’ll direct you to Abigail Nussbaum’s writing here which is up to date as at the time of this statement. However the TLDR is:
-
-
- Several works receiving large numbers of votes were ruled ineligible for unstated reasons, which from leaked emails appears to be the US-based administrators unilaterally deciding that they might cause political offence.
- A number of Chinese-language nominations appear to have been entirely disallowed.
-
The second, in what seems to be a mass disenfranchisement of Chinese voters, means that the composition of the shortlists, as they were presented to be voted on, was entirely unreliable, with an unknown number of Chinese nominees denied their chance at contending.
Based on this information, I cannot consider myself a Hugo winner and will not be citing the 2023 award result in my biographical details, or on this site.
The Hugo awards have the potential to be a respected pillar of the international fan community. I would be delighted to be considered, honestly and on my own merits, for such an award in the future. I look forward to systemic changes so that future awards can be administered with an eye to clarity, equity and accountability.
[Thanks to JJ for the story.]
Discover more from File 770
Subscribe to get the latest posts to your email.
There are multiple levels of Hugo existential crisis. On the one hand, there are the fan constituencies–the Worldcon go-ers and the Hugo voters–which makes for a Venn diagram that is not a circle, but does capture the people who have some degree of involvement in how the award is administered and awarded. In that context, the 2023 debacle is one in a long line of debacles, reflecting yet another clash in fannish subcultures and priorities, and it will presumably shake out the way it has in the past (a mixture of inertia, rule changes, influx of newly interested parties, and flouncing or quiet withdrawal of those who lose interest/illusions/power.)
The other levels may have a larger long-term impact on the award. It’s obvious that winners/nominees/should’ve-beens are all effected. But having winners retroactively declare their disinterest in being winners is, if not completely unprecedented, at least a Really Big Deal on the industry side. Authors aren’t just being vocal. A series writer doesn’t want the honor–and presumable sales/discoverability bump–associated with multiple books (and all future books published). A debut novelist is taking it off her cover, with the Locus becomes the preferred replacement. That’s the industry perspective: not just the preferences of authors, who saw enough of how this year’s sausage was made to decide they didn’t like it, but also a decision agreed to by marketing. The Hugo Award isn’t worth it; certainly, the 2023 Hugo Award isn’t. If a sense that the award is rigged persists, then we’ll probably see more multiple-award-winners whose Hugo is deprioritized in marketing.
And when that happens, the Hugo Award ceases to be a contemporary mark of quality. (I am certain that there are plenty of readers and book buyers who know very little of the ins-and-outs of various awards, but they know what they’ve been taught by cover copy and reading experience.) If the latest-and-greatest Hugo winners aren’t touting their Hugo wins, then “Hugo Award winner” becomes synonymous with “classic book.” That’s when the trust thermocline and the irrelevancy thermocline start to come together.
I will have to say, I’ve commented privately that I’d be curious to look at the bookshelves at my local bookstores to see how many authors still say “Hugo Award Winning” on their covers versus now in, say, October. And I’m not just talking 2023. If we see authors who won earlier awards removing it, then we can see where the industry is taking a harder line.
2023 winners choosing to discount their winning of a Hugo is an honorable decision to be making under the circumstances, although I will not hold it against someone to still be claiming it anyway.
Lynn Crouch: I will have to say, I’ve commented privately that I’d be curious to look at the bookshelves at my local bookstores to see how many authors still say “Hugo Award Winning” on their covers versus now in, say, October.
You know that’s not how print publishing works, right? The books on the shelves now, and the books on the shelves in October, were all set up for printing at least a year ago.
Duh, you’re right… I forget sometimes they’re printing upwards of two years of books.
So I’ll look at the shelves come Seattle WorldCon.
Committees sometimes have the authority for extended eligibility, e.g. Steven Cooper’s Asimov bibliography in 2021. Works which received the necessary nominations but which were incorrectly excluded from one year’s Hugo ballot might be eligible for the following year. Nominations for this year’s Hugos are open now; I’ve been suggesting renominating the suppressed, and will now also nominate Children of Time.
As mentioned earlier here, Children of Memory is eligible for Best Novel this year due to its 2023 US publication date.
Extensions for this year were done at 2023’s business meeting. Any new eligibility extensions would only be considered at this year’s business meeting.
@JJ
“The books on the shelves now, and the books on the shelves in October, were all set up for printing at least a year ago.”
Big decisions, like scheduling of major releases, cover artist selection, etc, are indeed made far in advance. But something minor, like a blurb from a cover with no other changes, can be done on a much shorter time scale.
For example, the Jemisin’s novel “The Fifth Season” won a Hugo in Aug 2017. The Brazilian edition was published in November and carries a Hugo blurb on the cover.
bill: Jemisin’s novel “The Fifth Season” won a Hugo in Aug 2017. The Brazilian edition was published in November and carries a Hugo blurb on the cover.
The Fifth Season won the Hugo Award in August 2016. The Brazilian edition was published 1.25 years later.
@JJ You are correct. I misread the dates.
A better example is The Three-Body Problem, which won in Aug 2015. The Head of Zeus edition of 12/3/2015 has a Hugo blurb on the cover.
Or, The Windup Girl won best novel in Sep 2010, and the edition of Dec 2010 had a Hugo blurb.
That’s nice but to get the message across he should donate any cash award he may have received to the Falon Gong or the people of Taiwan and Hong Kong.
The Hugo doesn’t come with a cash award. Only a trophy.
@Rich Kent–
Aside from the fact that the Hugo doesn’t come with a monetary award of any kind, while the Chinese government are definitely bad guys, Falun Gong aren’t the good guys. Their media empire includes The Epoch Times, which promotes Qanon and antivaccine conspiracy theories, as well as far-right politicians in Europe.
There are likely some fine Taiwan and Hong Kong organizations that could use any money you would like to donate, to actually help people.
Pingback: On my radar in February - Reading Delicacies
Pingback: Æresgjest: Adrian Tchaikovsky – Norcon 30: Science fiction- og fantasy-festival 2.-4. aug 2024
Pingback: The 2024 Hugo Awards Heralds the Clearing of Corruption - WWAC %