Origins Game Fair Drops Larry Correia as Guest

Larry Correia won’t be one of the guests when the Origins Game Fair takes place June 13-17 in Columbus, OH. Shortly after publicizing that Correia had been added to the lineup, John Ward, the event’s Executive Director, received so many negative social media comments (on Twitter, particularly) that he announced Correia’s invitation has been rescinded.

Ward wrote on Facebook:

I want to discuss our invitation to Larry Correia a guest at Origins. By all counts he is a very talented author.

Unfortunately, when he was recommended I was unaware of some personal views that are specifically unaligned with the philosophy of our show and the organization.

I want to thank those of you that brought this error to our attention. Origins is an inclusive and family friendly event. We focus on fun and gaming, not discourse and controversy.

I felt it necessary to recend [sic] his invitation to participate in the show. I apologize again to those of you that were looking forward to seeing him at Origins.

John Ward, Executive Director

Many of the critical tweets mentioned Correia’s history with Sad Puppies.

Correia subsequently responded on Facebook with a statement that begins:

So I’m no longer the writer guest of honor at origins. My invitation has been revoked. It was the usual nonsense. Right after I was announced as a guest some people started throwing a temper tantrum about my alleged racist/sexist/homophobic/whatever (of course, with zero proof or actual examples), and the guy in charge (John Ward) immediately folded. He didn’t even talk to me first. He just accepted the slander and gave me the boot in an email that talked about how “inclusive” they are….

His statement also says “none of these people can ever find any actual examples of me being sexist, racist, or homophobic.”


BEFORE AND AFTER:


795 thoughts on “Origins Game Fair Drops Larry Correia as Guest

  1. Among those the Puppies targeted for harassment are a bunch of Origins regular attendees – there’s always been overlap between tabletop gaming and sf/f/h fiction. Letting Correia’s invitation stand would have, among other things, told all those people and all those concerned about them that trying to ruin the careers and lives of attendees wasn’t a problem as far as the concom’s concerned.

  2. Eric Ashley on May 14, 2018 at 8:55 pm said:
    Cora, yes, some people are due certain rewards as a matter of decent behavior.

    Awards. No-one is owed awards.

  3. Lol. Funny trolls today. I suspect they are having a fun time provoking us.

    I heard Kilauea is erupting?

  4. I’m vaguely bemused at Mr. Ashley’s contention that “you guys” have embarrassed yourselves (ourselves?) Is somebody here on the Origins concom? I’m pretty sure File770 and Origins are very separate entities…

    As for the whole deal…eh. Badly handled by Origins, but I suspect the concom are the primary ones who will suffer. As Correia’s made a whole marketing strategy about sticking it to liberals. I imagine he will ultimately be thrilled at more ammunition for his persecution complex, more people vowing to buy his books to stick it to Origins, etc, etc, it’s the circle of liiiiife… *holds lion cub aloft*

  5. Camestros, you are shifting the goal posts. Is Vox Day, a neoNazi was the question. I gave evidence to Jayn that he was not.

    I would rather talk to Jayn as I can almost see the heat rising from your screen. I doubt any convo we had would be more productive of light than heat. Thank you for your time.

  6. Pingback: The Conduct of Codes | Graffiti on the Walls of Time

  7. Cora, yes, some people are due certain rewards as a matter of decent behavior. If certain Others are not getting their due, then inquiry into why needs to be made.

    Awards, including the Hugo, are not given out for decent behaviour (and it is debatable how decent Larry Correia’s behaviour has been in recent years), but for the quality of the work. And while I accept that you may think that Larry Correia’s books are the best thing since sliced bread, a whole lot of people, including many Hugo voters, disagree with you. And for the record, many of my favourite authors are never nominated for awards either.

  8. Mr. Dalliard, rewards is just as useable as awards, so no. Also, we clearly disagree on the main point which is that rewards are due or not. The laborer is worthy of his hire, the hero his wreath, and the astronaut his Omega Sportsmaster watch.

  9. @Eric Ashley

    Attempting a pissing contest over who might have the biggest Read Books pile is certainly one of the more peculiar responses I’ve seen to a simple “Read any good books lately?” It was exactly what it looked like: A query as to whether you had recently read books that you considered to be good. We’re all fans here. We talk about books.

    Me, I recently finished Brandon Sanderson’s The Way of Kings – I’m working on my Hugo reading – and while I of course can’t speak for where it stands in the Best Series category* based on a single novel, I did think it was a pretty interesting example of fanfiction-style character-development-as-plot in published fiction. It’s more about how the characters become who they need to be to handle the rest of the plot than it is about the series plot as a whole. Enjoyed it, overall, despite an exceptionally weak early assassination scene which I was irrationally irritated by and have yet to shut up about. (How do you make a magical assassination boring!?)

    *Currently ranking Robert Jackson Bennett’s brilliant Divine Cities first, and Marie Brennan’s charming dragon-science-fantasy-of-manners Lady Trent series second, partly because with Best Series I really want things that work well as a series first and foremost, and I consider them to be the best so far. Although I have high hopes for Raksura so maybe..!

  10. Cora, I did not say awards are due for decent behavior. The decent or indecent behavior is on the part of those who give the awards. Please read more calmly. If the Olympic Committee did not give Jesse Owens his gold, that would be indecent, yes?

  11. Eric Ashley:

    “I’ve ran Champions, Mage, Vampire, judged in a Larp, Multiverser, and D&D *published two settings for that last. I’ve GMed at many cons, including DragonCon where one year I was signed up to run five games. I gave a speech. My first D&D was 2nd Addition. So, while I’m no where near midlist, I’ve been around.”

    You know, I have played all of those, but I’m not sure why that would be relevant? We usually talk books around here. Yes, some of us are role-players, but that is not what we usually talk about. This is not a dedicated game-site.

    ” I’m okay with Hampus’ standard for himself as long as he extends it to Arthur C. Clarke fans, Samuel Delany fans, and Mercedes Lackey fans, all writers who I suspect have done far worse things than have others think that they thought a racist thought. “

    Who gives a flying fuck about what you are okay with? Promote a neo-nazi and people will remember. If you are okay with Correia promoting neo-nazis, you will be judged by that.

  12. Mr. Dalliard, rewards is just as useable as awards, so no.

    Nope, not when we’re talking about actual prizes. Rewards for labor – absolutely due to the laborer. The Hugo Award is due only to to those who win the vote. Correia didn’t. And that’s what the Puppies were about. Correia’s all too happy to crow about the sales he earns and even the NYT bestseller lists he’s on. He gets the rewards for his labor. But he’s not due Hugos and GOH slots – honors – just for doing the work. And he’d agree I guess, given the general Puppy ranting about participation prizes.

  13. rcade, I’ve experienced bigotry in the things related to fantasy. I’ve heard it. Its one of the ways the PTB keep out unwanted ideas. Your sort aren’t acceptable. You can ask Sarah Hoyt about it, if you like. She speaks on it regularly on her blog.

    Show me any evidence that Sarah Hoyt is being persecuted for her political beliefs or has suffered damage to her writing career because of them. Her long bibliography would suggest that she’s doing well.

    Maybe she’s not doing as well as she’d like — and maybe you’re not doing as well as you’d like either. If so, this is a perception you would have in common with 99% of the writers on the planet.

  14. @Eric Ashley

    The laborer is worthy of his hire, the hero his wreath, and the astronaut his Omega Sportsmaster watch.

    Huh? This makes no sense, as Larry Correia is neither a hired laborer or a hero. Look, I tried to read the first Monster Hunter book. I couldn’t finish it, because it was superficial pulp, and not very well written wish fulfillment superficial pulp at that. If you like it, fine. It doesn’t hold a candle to N.K. Jemisin, or any of the books on this year’s ballot (and I didn’t particularly care for New York 2140 or Six Wakes, but both Kim Stanley Robinson and Mur Lafferty are better writers than Correia).

    If you want Larry Correia to win a Hugo, there has to be: 1) enough people to nominate him (and not a slate nomination) and 2) enough people to vote for him. There are neither, not now. If he doesn’t have the numbers, he doesn’t get the award. And by the way, nobody is “owed” an award.

  15. Bonnie, I’m being too poetic. The man who writes a book worthy of a Hugo deserves that Hugo.

    As to your opinion that no one is owed an award, you will be happy to note that this seems the consensus on this blog. I disagree.

  16. I wish people would actually read what I wrote.

    No, the First Amendment is not applicable here because there is no government interference in what Mr. Correia wrote in his weblog. I specifically said that. I referenced it as reflective of cultural and our particular sub-cultural norms with regard to disagreeable writing and speech.

    Perhaps I am being slow to realize a shift in what is considered the norm.

    I’ve seen fanzine writing which would scorch paint off wood and cat-claw eyes out, but at worst people pretended neither existed if they were both at a convention, something I myself have seen angry fan feuders do at least twice, so whatever he wrote in his fanzine-equivalent weblog can’t be much worse, if at all, I should think. And both parties back then might be called upon to be a convention GoH at some time or other.

    I never said that the Origins convention committee did not have the right or self-authority to do what they did, I said that the act they did was wrong, and I meant wrong with regard to manners and ethics.

    I think that there may be a disconnect with regard to the phrase “Guest of Honor” — I take the third word to be what it says, that the convention has chosen to Honor the invitee in recognition of her or his ongoing body of professional work, which is why I said that rescinding the invitation in this most embarrassing way possible for both the convention and Mr. Correia was an equivalent of a slap to the face.

    Perhaps the title of Guest of Honor has lost meaning through overuse, that the majority of fans don’t think the word ‘honor’ in this context really means anything at all, and I’m being a stickler for precision of language.

    I am familiar with the entire history of the Puppy kerfuffle. It was wrong and should never have happened. Maybe as a gamer con with sf only as part of its programming, people on this committee truly were unaware of this history when they issued the invitation. It isn’t impossible, the conglomeration of overlaps which is called “fandom” today is so large that nobody can know all the gossip and trouble as they did once upon a time. Or maybe they were and initially didn’t think it as important as others closer to it have.

    For me, this has affected my “strong sense of justice,” as Mike once described it to me. Personally, I think Internet mobs should never be given satisfaction. They are not motivated out of reasonable attitudes or they wouldn’t be mobs to begin with. The fannish equivalent of cries of “Boys, let’s string ‘im up!” don’t come from a desire to do a good deed.

    This same thing happened in St. Louis with an Archon fan guest just a couple of years ago, where a committee also abruptly folded in the face of an Internet mob and rescinded an invitation to a fan guest because he printed an old joke sent to him by a contributor to his fanzine which would be considered somewhat cringe-worthy today. All his actions as described by everyone who knows him personally have always been decent, honorable, and non-racist, and he was a long-time attendee and volunteer at Archon before being invited to be a Guest of Honor. But a campaign started by a fugghead in Chicago who decided this joke created a racist atmosphere in the entirety of the convention and supposed physical danger to his toddler, grinding the axe down to the handle, won over decent behavior and a good man and fan was thoroughly humiliated and insulted. I know Mr. Correia was wrong with the Puppy thing, but as nearly as I can tell most here seem to think it’s his weblog which should cause his dis-invitation, that many people here seem to be of the opinion that bad words = bad actions, and I’d like to think we haven’t traveled down that road quite that far yet.

  17. Rcade, go to her blog. Read many of her posts about how she had to hide her opinions to get work. How she had to go indie in order to be honest as an artist. Then get back to me, or not.

    Mr. Dalliard, I do not say one is due honors for doing work. I’ve done work. I’ve written novels. Its is the general opinion of the public that my novels are excellent………. for cat litter. However, if I did write a Hugo worthy novel, then yes, I am due my reward, and my honor.

    I understand quite clearly the simple point how voting works. What I allege is that the voting was prejudgiced by the forces Mr. Correia spoke about and corrupted by corporate power.

    It is shameful the way the Hugos were run. We, as science fiction fans, ought to be embarrassed by what we allowed to occur before the Sad Puppies came along, and showed to all the world our error.

    Now, I do not expect you will agree. I just want to make sure you understand what my point is. It would be so tiresome to be disdained for something I had not said.

  18. “The man who writes a book worthy of a Hugo deserves that Hugo.”

    No. There are more than likely at least 10 authors every year who writes books that are deemed Hugo-worthy. But only one of them that will win, regardless of who were worthy. Only the person who won deserved that Hugo, because only that person won the vote.

    Anything else is purely subjective opinion that has no relevance with regards to the award. You might as well say that they deserved to be Emperor of America and Protector of Mexico. And it would still only be hyperbole, unless you have managed to resurrect Joshua Norton

  19. Eric Ashley: The man who writes a book worthy of a Hugo deserves that Hugo.

    And here you are very, very wrong.

    The book which is deemed Hugo-worthy by the members of Worldcon — the people who actually own the Hugo Awards — deserves that Hugo.

    Lots of people write awesome books. That doesn’t make any those books deserving of a Hugo Award. A large number of Worldcon members deciding that that a book is Hugo-worthy is what makes that book deserving of a Hugo Award.

  20. Meredith, I apologize. I’m from the side of things that had Sarah Palin viewed as a non-reader because she fumbled a question. We, on my side, are supposed to wander about grunting. So, I thought it an insult.

    Thank you for telling me about the books you’re reading. It was a charming bit.

  21. Personally, I think Internet mobs should never be given satisfaction. They are not motivated out of reasonable attitudes or they wouldn’t be mobs to begin with.

    This seems like circular logic to me — call something a “mob” and conclude that because it is one the grievance must be unreasonable.

    There are large numbers of people on social media reacting to egregious mistreatment of black people, like the grad student who just had police called on her for napping in her own dorm’s common area. Is it your position that concern over this doesn’t deserve “satisfaction” because a lot of people share it?

  22. Hampus, if I had managed that resurrection then as you say, I would deserve that. I shall get my shovel, my lightning rod, and my tome of the Tax Code of the United States for the necessary Book of Things Man Was Not Meant to Know.

  23. David K. M. Klaus: This same thing happened in St. Louis with an Archon fan guest just a couple of years ago, where a committee also abruptly folded in the face of an Internet mob and rescinded an invitation to a fan guest because he printed an old joke sent to him by a contributor to his fanzine which would be considered somewhat cringe-worthy today.

    No, what actually happened was that a fanzine editor with a very long history of printing sexist and racist jokes in his fanzine was pointed out as perhaps not being the sort of person whose behavior a convention should be honoring.

  24. The man who writes a book worthy of a Hugo deserves that Hugo.

    Okay, so that’s your opinion, obviously. It’s not the opinion of the general Hugo electorate, and those are the numbers that matter. Your lone vote is not going to get Correia a Hugo.

    And why on earth would you think that anybody is owed an award? That’s silly. In my opinion, Correia is simply not a good enough writer. Even without all his ranting and raving and eff-you-liberal childishness, he was never good enough.

    Also, this:

    If the Olympic Committee did not give Jesse Owens his gold, that would be indecent, yes?

    is simply an idiotic comparision. As an objective matter of fact, Jesse Owens won his races by being measurably faster than the other runners. Because of this, of course he deserved his gold medals. In a subjective vote as to whether you like a book or not, it is the consensus of the voters that carries the day. That consensus is that Larry Correia is not the superior sort of writer who wins Hugos. Now, you may not like N.K. Jemisin at all, and that’s fine. But she had the consensus and the numbers, and Correia did not.

  25. Eric Ashley: As to Sad Puppies, he proved his point. There were certain Others who were never going to get the reward they were due because of bigotry. Some denied this, so he showed it to be true.

    What he showed to be true was that the Hugo voters didn’t appreciate people gaming the nominations, especially when Ted Beale arranged through his followers for whole categories to be nominations from his small press. This wasn’t a surprise, considering one of L. Ron Hubbard’s works got voted below no award at least a decade earlier after the Scientologists gamed its nomination.

  26. As a frequent attendee of Origins, I would like to take this moment to state my surprise that there are guests of honor.

    We sort of expect something (other than the event registration system) to fail every year, it looks this years winner is GOH selection process.

  27. Cora, I did not say awards are due for decent behavior. The decent or indecent behavior is on the part of those who give the awards. Please read more calmly. If the Olympic Committee did not give Jesse Owens his gold, that would be indecent, yes?

    Maybe you should express yourself more clearly then.

    And Jesse Owens fairly won his Olympic medals by being faster than the competition. However, Larry Correia did not win either the Campbell or the Hugo. He finished far below Lev Grossman and Ann Leckie respectively.

    And while you may think that Larry Correia’s works are Hugo-worthy, the vast majority of the Hugo electorate disagrees with you and did so before the Sad Puppies campaign took off. And for the record, a lot of the works I think are Hugo worthy don’t get nominated either, while works I dislike a whole lot are nominated.

  28. Eric Ashley:

    The man who writes a book worthy of a Hugo deserves that Hugo.

    I like the Monster Hunter books quite a bit, but they’re not nearly that good, sorry. Most of the other Puppy stuff I managed to read was unadulterated crap, and on occasion displayed hideous abuses of Latin grammar into the bargain, which is a firing offense in my view.

  29. “Perhaps the title of Guest of Honor has lost meaning through overuse, that the majority of fans don’t think the word ‘honor’ in this context really means anything at all, and I’m being a stickler for precision of language.”

    Seems like a good argument for letting the Guest of Honour go to someone honorable, instead of to Correia.

    “Personally, IPersonally, I think Internet mobs should never be given satisfaction. They are not motivated out of reasonable attitudes or they wouldn’t be mobs to begin with. The fannish equivalent of cries of “Boys, let’s string ‘im up!” don’t come from a desire to do a good deed.”

    That is a very good argument for not letting Correia become a Guest of Honour at a con.

    “…because he printed an old joke sent to him by a contributor to his fanzine which would be considered somewhat cringe-worthy today.”.

    If you want to drag in all old fan history and cases that have ever existed, please do. But then also do remember that these case have been discussed at length here and we know that your versions leaves a lot out and that in no way was about one and only one single joke written by someone totally else.

    Do not play us for fools.

  30. Eric Ashley on May 14, 2018 at 9:31 pm said:
    What I allege is that the voting was prejudgiced by the forces Mr. Correia spoke about and corrupted by corporate power.

    Please cite some evidence. He never did.

    It is shameful the way the Hugos were run. We, as science fiction fans, ought to be embarrassed by what we allowed to occur before the Sad Puppies came along, and showed to all the world our error.

    Indeed running an award process that was so easily gamed was embarrassing. I think we fixed that rather well.

  31. Eric Ashley is a frequent commenter at VD’s blog, and as far as I can tell with the use of Google, has never been to a Worldcon.*

    I do love how non-Worldcon attendees continue to think that they should be able to tell Worldcon members how their Hugo Awards should be given.

    * the fact that he refers to Hoyt’s utterly incoherent, unhinged rants as “speaking on her blog” does not do anything to enhance his credibility, either

  32. If Correia has a Scarlet Letter hung about his neck, he created it and put it there himself, freely and of his own will. Actions have consequences.

  33. @Eric Ashley–

    I understand quite clearly the simple point how voting works. What I allege is that the voting was prejudgiced by the forces Mr. Correia spoke about and corrupted by corporate power.

    It is shameful the way the Hugos were run. We, as science fiction fans, ought to be embarrassed by what we allowed to occur before the Sad Puppies came along, and showed to all the world our error.

    Mr. Ashley, you are confused.

    There is no corporate power able to control or corrupt the Hugo vote. It’s individual fans voting, in reasonably large numbers, and with protections in place to ensure only one ballot cast per voter.

    Also, it’s all about the individual preferences of the Worldcon members who chooses to vote. Unlike Jesse Owens running faster than anyone else, there is no agreed objective standard to apply. It’s what the fans who vote like, and it’s all inherently and unavoidably subjective. I like what I like; you like what you like. Neither of us can say the other likes the wrong thing. Or we can say it, but it’s a complete waste of breath, and we will not change each other’s tastes.

    And Puppy complaints, unfortunately, amount to nothing more than insisting that regular Hugo voters like the wrong things, and ground that assertion entirely in culture war politics. That and the stream of venom, bizarre accusations, and endless concoction of new nicknames intended to be dvastatingly insulting, olus the fact that most of what was on the Puppy slates was just objectively terrible fiction, ensured the No Award results.

    No one is entitled to an award unless they actually win that award according to the rules. Literary awards aren’t athletic competitions. They are all the result of the subjective judgments of whoever makes those decisions. For the Hugos, that’s the members of Worldcon who choose to nominate and vote. Their tastes prevail.

    You can say whatever you like about those tastes, but that won’t change the fact that that’s the standard embodied in the rules, and no, there’s nothing “corrupt” about the fact that it produces results that don’t match your tastes.

  34. The Facebook post where Origins announced the Correia decision has been taken offline. I saw around 40 comments and would estimate around 100 were posted. Most were against the dis-invitation and a lot of them openly admitted they don’t attend or care about Origins.

  35. Every year there are up to six (previously up to five) finalists in each category. All of them are considered Hugo-worthy by people who nominated them. Most of them will lose. That is rarely a slight against the Hugo Losers; being a finalist is in and of itself a career achievement that most people never get, including a lot of people who have most certainly produced Hugo-quality work.

    There just aren’t enough winners for everyone who writes Hugo-quality work to get their own Hugo. It isn’t a participation trophy; you don’t get one once you’ve sold enough books or got enough five star reviews on Amazon. You get one when the Hugo voters collectively decide that your work was the best.

    The last three years I could predict who would win Best Novel by pointing at whichever one I liked the least, but that’s just how it shakes out sometimes. I’m sure eventually the novel I ranked first will win it, and until then, I accept the will of the electorate with only the occasional bit of dark muttering about how Goblin Emperor wuz robbed.

    @Eric Ashley

    File770 has a tradition of asking new and occasional commenters what they’ve read and enjoyed recently. Doesn’t matter what viewpoint they have. Sometimes we have people turn up who are clearly just in it for the culture wars and not so much in it for the books but in general most people are fans and all fans are welcome to join the eternal book discussion Fileathon.

  36. Dear Eric,

    It is not bigotry to oppose a particular point of view. You do not have a damn clue what that word means. Or else you are being duplicitous. You’re choice, there is no Door Number Three.

    Being racist, sexist or homophobic is being a bigot. Indulging in religious prejudice is being a bigot.

    Refusing to indulge those who want to spread that sort of venom or provide cover to those who do, that is NOT bigotry. Black is not white, up is not down, and no matter how much you whine and bleat, we have not always been at war with Eurasia. Most of us know better.

    Tell us what sort of REAL bigotry you have actually been subject to, not oh wah
    wah wah they won’t honor my conservative principles.

    pax / Ctein

  37. Meredith:

    I accept the will of the electorate with only the occasional bit of dark muttering about how Goblin Emperor wuz robbed.

    It was!

  38. The man who writes a book worthy of a Hugo deserves that Hugo.

    Of all the dumb statements. There are 5 (now 6) books on every Hugo final ballot, all of which have been determined by a significant number of people to be Hugo-worthy. Only one of them can win. Does that mean that all the others have been cheated out of their due?

    Which, BTW, is exactly how this whole kerfluffle started. Correia was nominated, not for a Hugo, but for the Campbell. “It’s an honor just to be nominated” may be a cliche, but that doesn’t make it any less true. Enough people thought Correia was worthy of the Campbell to get him on the ballot. But there were 4 other people on the ballot, all of them also worthy, and only one of them could win. Do you feel that the 3 people besides Correia who didn’t win were also cheated out of their due?

    You really should think these nuggets thru a bit more before you put them out for general consumption. A polished turd is still a turd.

  39. Eric Ashley on May 14, 2018 at 9:02 pm said:
    Camestros, you are shifting the goal posts. Is Vox Day, a neoNazi was the question. I gave evidence to Jayn that he was not.

    I would rather talk to Jayn as I can almost see the heat rising from your screen. I doubt any convo we had would be more productive of light than heat. Thank you for your time.

    Oh I guess he’s gone…

    Anyway. No, not changing the goal posts. Advocating the murder of moderate leftists is pertinent to judging whether somebody is a neo-Nazi or not AND it is pertinent to the question of Larry’s poor judgement both of which were relevant to the topic. The evidence you provide was nothing more than the names Vox calls his rivals – there’s nothing new about feuding neo-Nazis. As it happens I have said that I think Vox Day is not *technically* a Nazi – ‘technically’ as in a large wallaby is not *technically* a small kangaroo.

    No heat rising from my screen. If I got cross every time I wrote about Vox Day, I’d be cross a lot more than I am. He’s more of a hobby – an unpleasant hobby perhaps, like collecting celebrity earwax or something but still.

  40. Origin gives out awards. Why did anybody is thinking its a good idea to invite someone who riggs awards, because he thinks “he is due”?

    (Which BTW shows how little he knows about the number of books being published)

  41. The man who writes a book worthy of a Hugo deserves that Hugo.

    If three people write books worthy of a Hugo that year, only one of them is going to win Best Novel, regardless of how worthy the other two are.

    Ten movies were nominated for Best Picture in the 1939 Academy Awards:

    Dark Victory
    Gone with the Wind
    Goodbye, Mr. Chips
    Love Affair
    Mr. Smith Goes to Washington
    Ninotchka
    Of Mice and Men
    Stagecoach
    The Wizard of Oz
    Wuthering Heights

    It’s a pretty impressive field, but only one of them — Gone With the Wind — won. That’s how it works.

    Lev Grossman wrote a novel worthy of winning the Campbell. Ann Leckie wrote a novel worthy of winning a Hugo. It’s sad for Larry Correia that other people wrote award-worthy novels the years he wanted to win something, but it’s not sad for the reading audience. The more good books come out in a year, the better for readers.

    But only one of them is going to win the Best Novel Hugo, no matter how many are worthy of winning.

    That’s just how things work.

  42. I see Puppies are still clueless about a large number of common English words.

    And then they wonder why they don’t get literary awards.

  43. I don’t know where ‘celebrity earwax’ came from

    From celebrity ears.

    Where would you think it came from? Really, Camestros. Logic. Reason. Biology.

  44. @Kurt Busiek: And since he apparently collects the stuff you’d think he’d know that…

Comments are closed.