aka Canine of Gore
Today’s roundup brings you Vox Day, Peter Grant, John C. Wright, Cat Valente, Lis Carey, Laura “Tegan” Gjovaag, Scott Kennedy, Camestros Felapton, Spacefaring Kitten, Mark Dennehy, and Fred Kiesche. (Title credit is due to File 770 contributing editors of the day Jane Dark and Rev. Bob.)
Vox Day on Vox Popoli
“Stage 2: snail mail” – June 24
Since Macmillan has yet to respond to any of the many emails it has received from hundreds of people, it’s now time to take things to Stage 2 of the Tor Books boycott. Mail a handwritten postcard or index card to each of the following three individuals informing them that as long as Irene Gallo is employed by Tor Books or Tor.com, you will not be purchasing any books published by Tor Books…..
It’s interesting, is it not, to contrast the way in which Walmart, Amazon, and Ebay were so quick to respond to totally nonexistent pressure to stop selling Confederate flag-related material with Macmillan’s non-response to receiving thousands of emails. This is the difference that SJW entryism makes. I’ve seen the BBC “react” and change its policies due to “outrage” that was later reported to be a grand total of 17 complaints.
Peter Grant on Bayou Renaissance Man
“The latest development in the Tor boycott” – June 24
I’d be very grateful if those of my readers who support my position would please send letters requesting the above to the addressees Vox has listed on his blog. That’ll add the weight of our numbers, and our more moderate requests, to those supporting his position. The SJW’s are lumping all of us together, whether we agree with that or not – they’re equal-opportunity blamers – so why not use our combined strength in numbers?
John C. Wright
“Tor and the Volunteer Thought Police Department” – June 24
Whatever the solution, I am confident my loyal readers who do not want my sale numbers to fall, so that the accountants continue to regard my work as a legitimate source of revenue, so that I can continue to write books for you. Hence I am sure you would like to see a speedy resolution to this matter.
In that spirit, and without expressing my private opinion about the right and wrong in this matter, I urge my readers to write to Tor and Macmillan to express your gratitude for their many fine publications you have purchased over the years, and your disappointment in the events that seem to be hindering that comfortable relationship, and eroding buyer loyalty.
…. The spirit of compromise would suggest that if I become half-honest, Tor’s upper management could tell half as many lies with half as much vitriol and bigotry.
It is in that spirit of half-honesty that I am pretending to be neutral in this matter. In truth, I am not willing to compromise on the question of having readers who like my work. Indeed, I would like more readers who like my work even more.
Which means I would like to get back to my job.
To get back to my job requires Tor’s editors, Mr Feder, Miss Gallo, and Mr Nielsen Hayden, to get back to the their job of editing books, and cease moonlighting as the racial conformity officers, Christ-hating crusaders for Sodom, defenders of fainting feminist damsels in distress, public scolds, soapbox preachers, cheerleaders for the Two Minute Hate, riotmongers, and volunteer thought police department for the science fiction genre.
Or so I might say were I to express an opinion, which I will not. You, however, my beloved readers, patrons, and employers, whom I live to serve with fearless pen, I invite to express your opinion to the addresses given above.
Scott Kennedy in a comment to Adam-Troy Castro on Facebook – June 24
If You Were a Dinosaur My Love is the #Benghazi! of the Sad Puppies
Vox Day on Vox Popoli
“An interesting admission and EPH analysis” – June 24
One of the more amusing aspects of File 770 is the way that the commenters there are both a) absolutely obsessed with me and b) hell-bent on denying that I am of any import whatsoever. So they repeatedly claim that they just want to talk about books while mostly talking about the Puppies; in the meantime, nary a link in the round-up has anything to do with anything that isn’t related to me, the Puppies, or the Torlings dutifully doing exactly what I assumed they would do from the start, which is destroy the village in the name of saving it.
I find the EPH proposal to be very promising in this regard, as it is designed by the Torlings at Making Light to permit Tor Books to avoid being shut out in the future and ensure it at least one nomination per category every year. Of course, it will hand the Puppies the same fixed claim on the Hugos, which will gradually turn the award into a five-faction competition, perhaps four if we continue to build our numbers to the point where we can reliably lay claim to two nominations per category. It’s a very parliamentarian proposal.
It means that DAW and some of the other smaller publishers had better decide quickly whether they are better off fighting amongst themselves for the 2-3 open slots or fight the proposal, because if EPH passes, some of them will never see another Hugo nomination after 2017… unless the TORlings are willing to give up one of their own seats on what will effectively be the Hugo Security Council.
It’s telling that the Torlings would rather hand us the equivalent of a permanent nomination slot than compete directly with us. It demonstrates that for all of the bluster and splashing about of the small fry, the bigger fish in the little SF pond realize that the Puppies are a serious force with which they must expect to reckon indefinitely.
I am neither endorsing nor opposing EPH or any other rules changes this year. The reason is that when those rules changes implode the awards as I anticipate, I want all responsibility for the changes to be credited to those who proposed and voted for them.
nerds of a feather, flock together
“Assessing the Hugo Reform Proposals” – June 24
There are currently three proposals for Hugo reform that will be discussed at the Sasquan business meeting. None are in the ballpark of the comprehensive reforms I’ve suggested, but are at least attempts to rationalize and/or streamline areas of the Hugo process that are either inefficient, inexplicable or path dependent to older models of the SF/F field. Here I assess their merits…..
Discussion thread: “Saga of the Sagas”
This years proposed Worldcon rule changes included one introducing a new Hugo Award, for Best Saga: A work of science fiction or fantasy appearing in multiple volumes and consisting of at least 400,000 words of which the latest part was published in the previous calendar year. Initially the new award was coupled with the removal of an old one: Best Novellete. This raised some objections and that part of the proposal was removed.
If the Best Saga Hugo is about following the market, I fail to see why the Best YA Hugo wouldn't come first.
— Catherynne Valente (@catvalente) June 24, 2015
Laura “Tegan” Gjovaag on Bloggity-Blog-Blog-Blog
“Hugo Reviewing – Fan Artist” – June 24
[Reviews all five nominees.]
In the end it’s a toss-up between Leggett and Schoenhuth for me. I like them both a lot, but I’m not sure how to decide between them. I’ll have to sleep on it. The other three are distantly behind, but none of them are so bad they don’t deserve an award. I think Aalto is on the bottom of my ballot, but the order of the other two is also up in the air for me.
Lis Carey on Lis Carey’s Library
“Strange Horizons, Niall Harrison, editor-in-chief” – June 24
Strange Horizons is a 2015 Best Semiprozine Hugo nominee.
Strange Horizons publishes speculative fiction, poetry, reviews, interviews, and essays. It’s possible, though not easy or obvious, to get to 2014 material. Unfortunately, I bounced off every piece of fiction I tried to read in it. That doesn’t mean it’s not necessarily excellent fiction; it means only that I bounced off it. My only further comment is that it doesn’t have the visual attractiveness of some of the other nominees.
“Let’s talk about puppy poo” – June 25
… Early on I ranked this as the worst overall of the Puppy Nominees but aside from that I haven’t reviewed it here for two reasons.
- Initially I was cross that such obvious rubbish had been nominated and I didn’t see much worth in an angry review.
- I decided not to spend my energies being mean to authors – even the weakest of writers us doing a brave thing by putting their writing out there. Additionally I thought Kary English made some good points here: http://karyenglish.com/2015/04/on-anger-power-and-displacement-in-the-hugos-part-one-of-possibly-several/
A couple if things have made me reconsider this. Firstly Wisdom from My Internet really us so genuinely awful that it is important in considering the legitimacy of the Sad Puppy campaign. Secondly Michael Z Williamson’s recent social media ‘jokes’ on the Charleston murders indicate that I needn’t be too concerned about hurting anybody’s feelings. Having said that, this isn’t a revenge review – the issue us the work not the author and the author clearly must have a sufficiently thick skin for me not to be too worried about inadvertently offending him.
Should Letters from Gardner by Lou Antonelli win a Hugo? My thumb points down. #HugoAwards http://t.co/yHbAEabegY
— Spacefaring Kitten (@SpacefaringK) June 24, 2015
@haunted_backlog A Hugo award winning book should leave you thinking about it for months. It should be the best thing you read that year.
— Mark Dennehy (@MarkDennehy) June 24, 2015
Ladies and Gentlemen, next year's Sad/Rabid Puppies nominee. http://t.co/bDrXXUY7DS
— Fred Kiesche (@FredKiesche) June 24, 2015
Bunglespleen and the Leg Sleeves
We’re a post-new-wave punkabilly rock zydeco blog. And right now, we’re reading Hugo Award-winning novels.
“In retrospect, it was perhaps a mistake to turn Ayn Rand’s reanimated corpse into the galactic empress.”
— Hyperion Shivered, Hugo winner 1973
#fake first lines#ayn rand#she leads them to glorious victory over the Slug Collective#but then her support of a completely unrestrained market leads to societal collapse and a lack of train service#capitalism
Tor & File770 insiders wonder if we voodoo. (Yes, with hearts and porcupine quills.) #SadPuppies
— Problematic Puppies (@sadrbtpuppies) June 24, 2015
[Voodoo? Who do?]
You’d waste less time if you stopped being obtuse and patronising.
Sure, I get it. Two wrongs don’t make a right is another observation.
JJ and Hampus really get my hackles up – but I’ll try to tone it down, thanks.
There’s a useful observation somewhere nearby that might come in useful in that regard.
Nigel, you’re right. While there is probably no way I’ll ever escape JJ’s generalized background anger, which seems to have originated shortly after the Big Bang, if people like Lis and Hampus show up to try and skewer me I should just get out of their way. Sorry.
@Kyra on June 26, 2015 at 5:00 am said:
That scene makes me giggle. “The Ten Seconds That Went Nowhere.” Hee.
There is also an actual sex scene between the protagonist and her boyfriend. It’s not very explicit itself, but the narrator makes an explicit post-coital observation about it. I believe the sentence begins, “I love the butterfly-wings sensation of…”
Umm, I do not think that is what Nigel said.
Brian Z, I have noticed a pattern where you seem to agree with someone but what you are saying you agree with is nothing like what they said.
Or you cite someone in your arguments but what you cite is nothing like what they said.
Perhaps you should consider that perhaps what you think people have said is not actually what they have said.
Brian, you’re great on filk, you’re great on books. When you talk about Puppies and Hugos, you come across as a relentless concern troll. Your attempts at witty ripostes are all too often indistinguishable from stone lulz-seeking idiocy and have a splash radius that inflicts collateral damage on people who aren’t even near the internet. I wouldn’t bother saying any of this to you, except I get actual pangs of sympathy when I see it happen. Obviously, you don’t have to believe me, and you shouldn’t feel obliged to let anyone else tell you what you should or shouldn’t post about, but there you go.
They were also mostly serialized to start with; some of the pacing issues in his stories become far more understandable once you recognize that and pick out where the original breaks likely were.
(Somewhere around here I’ve got books of some of Wells’ and Dickens’ stories, collected as they were originally serialized, with all story breaks and illustrations.)
For that matter, a lot of what I’m writing has been serialized in an APA I belong to. Which led to me tossing out one of my stories after realizing the format wasn’t working: survival horror requires far tighter control over the pacing than can be readily accomplished in a serialized form.
Nigel, I do see it is bad form to go for the lulz while people are using other people as a club to bludgeon you with. I’m sorry about that. Having a constant stream of attacks directed straight at you can become hard to manage well. In that respect, I promise to riposte less while I work on honing my wit.
But anyone who thinks that I’m talking to you folks because I’m a relentless concern troll is blind. SP3 was a well-meaning effort to get lots of new people involved in conventions and fan awards which went awry and had unexpected consequences. The responses around here and elsewhere since April have been horrifying.
I’ll give any advice offered to me sincerely my sincere consideration. I’m sure there have been times I’ve made a fool of myself. But I thought it was a genuinely important thing to do.
SP3 was exactly what a bunch of right-wingers accuse liberals of doing all the time: a calculated, self-serving effort by successful authors who feel entitled to more than they’ve gotten (which is more than most writers who are their peers have gotten or will get) to exploit people who feel underrepresented. But the actual effort is, and always ways, all about using others to promote the personal fortunes of the ringleaders. It has nothing to do with anything bigger than that and never did.
The same is true of SP1 and 2. Nothing went awry, nothing turned into something they never imagined: this is what they set out to do, and they did in fact use a bunch of people who needed better information, not pandering.
I will consider them well-meaning when they build a time machine, go back to when the ballot came out, and apologise profusely for screwing it up, while promising to never run another slate. 🙂 I think they got exactly what they wanted and have been sulking ever since that they can’t force us not to No Award any of it as easily as they foisted terrible nominees on us, or stop people from voting in a system that will prevent them screwing it up in the future.
Meredith, I think that people on both sides of the fence ought to pool their expertise in order to build that time machine. This is not one of my patented witty ripostes; I’m dead serious.
SP3 was a well-meaning effort to get lots of new people involved in conventions and fan awards which went awry and had unexpected consequences.
No. It wasn’t. From the “Nutty Nuggets” post to the “Worldcon voters are out of touch”, to the crying about secret cabals and evil SJWs and how this is all part of a culture war, the SP3 campaign was, from the start, a mendacious, self-serving, lie used by Torgersen and his buddies to get themselves Hugo nominations. There was nothing well-meaning about it. They didn’t want to get lots of new people involved in conventions. They didn’t especially care about getting new people involved in fan awards. What is clear is that they just wanted to trophies. Trying to spin SP3 as anything else to people who’ve been paying attention to this from the get-go is simply ridiculous.
@Brian Z: “But I care a lot about you guys, which is why I’ve wasted a lot of time trying to talk to you.”
Don’t you just feel the love, folks?
It occurred to me this morning that when I began covering Vox Day news a couple years ago, I refused to follow the widespread “He Who Must Not Be Named” trope, which persisted in various forums well into this year’s Sad/Rabid Puppies developments. The daily hammering of news and discussion has brought some of those forums around to the simpler practice of using his name or handle.
However, I’ve observed now that in the last six Vox Popoli posts that quote File 770, not only is there no courtesy link to the source, sometimes File 770 itself is not identified as the source. So yay me, as the new “He Who Must Not Be Named”?
Mike, think of yourself as the Shadow, and search engines and us here as your agents.
So say we all.
@Mike Glyer: Congratulations! You’ve just levelled up to Unnamed Enemy. You now do +2 damage with your Scathing Retorts.
No, they haven’t. This is pearl-clutching. This is asserting that the standing up to bullies is the same as being a bully. This is victim blaming. This is tone-policing. This is looking at consequences and seeing a cause. This is elevating peace and quiet over justice. This is holding one ‘side’ to an impossible standard. This is demanding collective control and responsibility over individual actions, as undesirable as it is impossible and profoundly unfair. Anti Puppies being ‘rude’ is not the cause of all this. Anti puppies somehow curbing their ‘rudeness’ will not provide a solution, even if such a thing was somehow enforceable. Try to redirect your concern; it’ll do your health good.
This is the last thing I want to say about this.
As if SP2 and the resultant flap over Vox Day’s Hugo nomination wasn’t a precursor to SP3. SP3 was not blithely well-meaning and the consequences of slate-voting weren’t unexpected given what happened the year before, although the puppy slate pile-on that happened after the RPs joined forces with the SPs was a shock to a lot of fans I encountered at Minicon 50 after the nominees were announced there. The claim that the SPs were about getting lots of new fans at conventions isn’t what the SPs were after either, they were first and foremost about beating out nominees who they felt were unfairly getting nominations and winning Hugos. The SP/RP slates that allowed a minority of nominee voters to dominate the nominations was a very unfair tactic of course, but the SPs won’t acknowledge that, which makes pleas of ‘why we can’t all get along’ ring pretty hollow.
@Mike “However, I’ve observed now that in the last six Vox Popoli posts that quote File 770, not only is there no courtesy link to the source, sometimes File 770 itself is not identified as the source. So yay me, as the new “He Who Must Not Be Named”?”
He doesn’t want his followers reading things in context here, it would be too obvious that he is lying about almost everything he says.
Brian Z: While there is probably no way I’ll ever escape JJ’s generalized background anger, which seems to have originated shortly after the Big Bang
I just recognized you for exactly what you are a little sooner than most of the other people here, that’s all. But you really seem to resent that I twigged to the fact that you’re a troll so quickly. It’s not as if it was hard — you seem to believe that you’re clever and subtle, when in fact your attempts to pretend to not be a Puppy were so clunky and obvious.
Stop pretending that you genuinely care about the people here — the ones that your Puppy buddies screwed over. Stop accusing the people here — the ones that your Puppy buddies screwed over — of being the ones who created the problem and the ones who are continuing it.
Your behavior is small, pathetic, and tiresome.
@Maximilian: He [Beale] doesn’t want his followers reading things in context here, it would be too obvious that he is lying about almost everything he says.
And apparently they are, or he believes they are, not likely to google a distinctive phrase or two to find the source????????????????????? I could hardly believe it, but I’ve been astounded how some of my students never think to Google anything despite the years-long fear-mongering about students never doing anything but Google (I mean, in some cases, Wikipedia could be fairly useful to them, sigh). [Like the student who drove 17 miles to ask me what “san serif” meant.]
It’s this Brian. Often when JJ & Hampus call you on your misrepresentations, I find myself nodding in agreement. I would have done the same (probably in a more polite manner) had I been willing to expend spoons. I know you have mad-skills at filk & are knowledgable on SFF. I have seen you write insightful concise comments, so it’s not like you don’t have the requisite writing skills, which is why it is so obvious when you don’t.
Only dropping in for a second, have to go read the Novella “Flow” and I freely admit I haven’t caught up on conversations by half nor read everything there is to read. I also admit I’m often the last person to spot a troll. But I did have one quick question for Brian Z…
Brian, will you be participating in next year’s slates?
Surely you are “He Who Shall Not Be Cited/ Linked”?