(1) INDY 5 IS GO. Consequence of Sound has the story.
Walt Disney Company chairman and CEO Bob Iger, has confirmed that a fifth Indiana Jones movie is indeed happening.
During a recent interview with Bloomberg, Iger spent much of his time talking about the franchise possibilities that are opening up with the massive success of Star Wars: The Force Awakens. When he got to comparing Disney’s acquisition of Lucasfilm to that of Pixar and Marvel, however, he noted that taking on Lucasfilm’s intellectual properties also meant “Indiana Jones, by the way, which will be coming.”
(2) ABOUT FACE. Kameron Hurley posted a funny gallery of GIFS to illustrate the “Faces I Make When Reading Reviews”.
A lot of people think authors take reviews personally, and I suppose there are many who do. Those are the folks who should really steer clear of reader reactions to books, or rather, what some readers believe the books say about the author, which is always far more amusing.
There are great reviews with insightful criticism of my work, and glowing reviews about how it changed people’s lives.
But, this being the internet and people trying to poke an author for a meltdown, I’m often asked about my reaction when reading negative reviews of my work. What folks don’t get is that I find most negative reactions endlessly amusing. Not the real criticism that points out real flaws, no, but the reactions that say far more about the reader than the writer.
(3) MIND MELD. SF Signal’s latest Mind Meld, curated by James Aquilone, posts the question “What are your favorite new genre (SF/F/H) TV shows of 2015?” – with replies by Alex Shvartsman, Sarah Pinsker, Matthew Johnson, Robert Davis, Carlie St. George, Erin M. Hartshorn, Andrew Liptak, Rob H. Bedford, and Sally Ember, Ed.D.
(4) CHOOSE FEAR. Here’s how David Brin’s Mars mission would start.
Go to Phobos before landing on Mars itself? I have pushed this idea for twenty years and now some at NASA agree. Not only is the larger moon far easier to reach and might serve as an ideal research platform, it also has two advantages never mentioned in this article. It can serve as a logistics hub where supplies might be pre-positioned and tended without complex orbital management. It also might (some figure) be carbonaceous chondritic material, containing volatiles like water. If these could be mined and stored and prepared, subsequent Mars landing missions would find all the water and rocket fuel they need, lowering both cost and risk by an order of magnitude.
(5) ZICREE ON FAN-MADE TREK FILMS. Marc Scott Zicree on Facebook.
Science fiction has a long and honorable tradition of fan fiction — in fact, many of the top professional writers started out writing fan fiction — and these fan films are the logical extension of that tradition. More than that, speaking as a professional who’s written extensively for all the major studios and networks, the reason I chose to do “World Enough and Time” was that I felt Michael Reaves and I, along with our creative team, could bring as high a level of professional quality to that project as anything we had ever done for the studios and networks. I wanted to work with George Takei, the powers that be were never going to choose to do the ultimate Sulu story we wanted to tell, and it was something we could share with the whole world.
CBS/Paramount views Star Trek as a money machine, and that drives their decision on what or what not to make. This is perfectly justifiable. But it’s not what led Gene Roddenberry to create Star Trek, nor is it why Renegades or Axanar are being made. I think often taking a step back, gaining perspective and saying, “How can we create a win/win situation here?” is a good idea. It’s what led George Lucas to not only allow Star Wars fan films, but to hold an annual contest recognizing the best ones.
(6) GERROLD ON SUIT STRATEGY. David Gerrold on Facebook:
…But this lawsuit also suggests that CBS and Paramount might be missing the more important point. The fan productions are about the hunger for new Star Trek. They’re not competition as much as they are signs that the franchise is alive and well. Keeping the fans engaged is the best thing that CBS and Paramount can do to keep the franchise alive.
I understand the corporate desire to protect their rights to the franchise, but that cat got out of the bag a long time ago. If they weren’t going to shut down Star Trek New Voyages and Star Trek Continues and Star Trek Renegades and Star Trek Farragut for “copyright infringement” — and those productions use Kirk, Spock, et al, and the original enterprise — then they’re going to have a much harder case with Axanar which barely touches the same specific content of the original series.
I suspect that the lawsuit isn’t about copyright infringement as much as it’s designed to intimidate Axanar’s producers. I’ll be interested to see how this proceeds….
(7) CAVEAT TWITTER. Business Insider reports “Mark Hamill is protecting fans from fake signed ‘Star Wars’ merchandise on Twitter”.
He apologized to fans who have spent money on fraudulent items and urged them to look at real copies to learn how to confirm his signature on their own. When asked why he wasn’t tired of responding to people, he said, “Because I owe it to all true fans to protect them from being victimized by dishonest dealers.”
(8) FORCE A FEW DOLLARS MORE. Steven Harper Piziks opines about writers who are “Riding the Coat Tails of the Force”.
These and other similar articles mean absolutely nothing, of course. They’re written by people who have no real cred. For example, Lili Loofbourow, who wrote the desperate-sounding “emotional blind spots” article above, is a freelance reporter. She’s not a professor of media studies, or an experienced film reviewer, or a film maker. She has a computer and a contact at Salon.com and ticket stub for THE FORCE AWAKENS. Same goes for all the others. They’re just riding along on TFA’s coat tails, trying to make a few dollars for themselves.
Well, at least I got a blog entry out of it.
(9) PICACIO PLUGS COMPETITION. Today John Picacio commented on George R.R. Martin’s pro artist Hugo recommendations and added six more names (with links to their work).
Thanks so much for the shoutout, George. It’s an honor to be be considered in any year, including this one. That said, winning any major award comes with responsibility along with hardware and glory. It’s always great to win, but as a past winner, I want the Pro Artist Hugo list to reflect the extraordinary range and evolution of the field. So while I’m not recusing myself, I would like to take this opportunity to shine light on some of sf/f’s art stars that have had an outstanding year and deserve Hugo consideration in this category:…
(10) HITCHHIKER’S HOMECOMING. Think how much more effective Lazlar Lyricon 3’s “about” statement would be if it hadn’t stopped with just four reasons for holding this convention? I hope the concom will treat themselves to one or two fifths as part of their launch celebration.
Dateline: The Old Kings Head Pub, London, 21 November 2015. Today, ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha (the Official Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy Appreciation Society) Annual General Meeting authorised a committee to run Lazlar Lyricon 3. This is the third (coincidentally) in a series of conventions celebrating The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy and Douglas Adams, the first having occurred in the 1980s.
Lazlar Lyricon 3 will take place on 9-11 June 2017 at the Quality Hotel in Stoke-on-Trent.
Committee members Stefan Lancaster, Emma J. King, David Haddock and Alan Sullivan, amongst others, were on hand to discuss plans, answer questions and receive the imprimatur of the AGM. They were also given ‘seed money’ of £500 towards the costs, which was greeted with much cheering!
The first two Lazlar Lyricons were part of a series of conventions in the 1980s, 90s and early 00s colloquially called ‘Fun Cons’, which also included the Incons, Dangercons, and several one-off conventions such as Year of the Wombat and Aliens Stole my Handbag. The aspiration is to ensure everyone has a great time (and not panic!), with fun, loosely Hitchhikers-inspired programme items such as crab stomping and towel-based martial arts. The announcement that the first and foremost in appointments will be a ‘beer liaison’ was greeted with more cheering!
(11) SPEAKING OF LAUNCHING. Gail Z. Martin on “Making the Most of Your Launch Day” at Magical Words.
Book launches are on my mind since Vendetta, the second book in the Deadly Curiosities urban fantasy series, just launched yesterday. So I thought it might be fun to pull the curtain back on what can go into a book launch, and let you pick and choose the elements you feel best suit your own circumstances.
Social media is is your biggest bullhorn to the world. Long before your book comes out, you should be creating a presence on Facebook, Twitter, Goodreads, Wattpad, a blog, and a web site. These are the places you can gather your tribe–the people who have read and liked your work, your friends and others who wish you well and are happy to help spread the word. Make sure you let your friends and followers know in advance when the book is coming out, and how they can help.
(12) ON RECONCILIATION. Joe Vasicek’s “Response to Steve Davidson on Reconciling with the Puppies” is a commentary on Steve Davidson’s Amazing Stories post “Reconciling with Puppies – ‘…to dram, the impossible dream, to reach the unreachable star…”.
Mr. Davidson’s post is interesting, and worth reading. We obviously don’t see eye to eye on a number of things, but it would be rather petty to go through our disagreements line by line. Instead, the part that I want to respond to is his call to action at the end:
Want to reconcile? Here’s what puppies must do.
1: Stop scamming the system. If you want to recommend works that you think are worthy of the award, go ahead and do so. But drop the political agenda (you’re dragons are imaginary) and eliminate the hateful, snarky commentary
If you’re looking for “hateful, snarky commentary,” I’m sure that you’ll be able to find it. On the fringes of both sides, there are a lot of people with blogs and strong opinions. I’d count myself as one of them—while I align with the Sad Puppies, I’m not a leader or organizer by any stretch, just another guy with opinions and a blog. Don’t be so quick to look for ammunition, because there’s a lot of it lying around.
Kate Paulk, one of the Sad Puppy organizers, has pointed out that Sad Puppies 4 is open to nomination suggestions from anyone, which appears to be what you’re calling for. And honestly, I think a lot of us don’t want to see conservative writers edge out everyone else so much as to see them go head to head with more liberal writers on a more equal playing field. It’s not about slaying imaginary dragons so much as breaking down walls.
So on this first point, Mr. Davidson and I tend to be in agreement. This seems like a reasonable step for reconciliation, and it’s one that the Sad Puppies 4 already appear to be taking.
(13) YOUR RANCOR MAY VARY. Brad Torgersen’s “Sad Puppies and the future”, prompted by Martin’s “reconciliation” post, says many familiar things.
Many people have already seen George R. R. Martin’s optimistic (and well-intended) commentary at his LiveJournal. However, just as with George’s hood ornament Alfie awards (also well-intended) there is more than one way for a thing to be perceived. My perception — and I am not alone in this — of George’s desire for an end to the rancor, is that George still seems to think that a) the rancor was flowing almost entirely one-way, from the Puppies’ side to the Trufan side, and also b) none of the Puppies are themselves fans. Not Fans (caps f) and certainly not Trufans. No. Puppies are still an outsider bunch, who carry an outsider’s stigma.
There is also a bit too much parentalism in George’s tone: dear kids, I hope you’ve learned your lesson, now wipe those dirty looks off your faces and come give your mother a hug!
(14) DO YOU FEEL SAFER? And in the comments, national security consultant Arlan Andrews, Sr. gives MidAmeriCon II members something to look forward to:
I for one will never forgive anyone who appeared in that pre-Awards “90-minute-hate-the-Puppies” TV show, nor anyone who called me a neoNazi. Though some were, I had thought, nice acquaintances if not actual long-time friends, their behavior before, during and after the Hugos simply meant that I shut them out of any future consideration of any kind, meaning no purchasing of their products, no voting for their works, no attendance at any function at which they are honored or prominent, no reviews of anything they are involved with, and no defense of any criticism of them. As a very minor player in fandom/prodom, despite 60+ years of fanlife and 35+ years of prolife, those people will seldom notice nor long remember what I do here, but if thousands of others do likewise, the effects may be meaningful. All of the SP3 experience this year has been enlightening, and a tiny reflection of the national schism between those who cherish Freedom and those banding together to enforce Collectivism. I thank Brad and Larry and the Jovians for graciousness in the face of fire. And next Worldcon, I will definitely attend. (Does Missouri have Concealed Carry?)
(15) HOOKY HEADLINE. “9 things ‘Starship Troopers’ totally nailed about today’s technology” is a pretty bold claim about a movie that showed space infantry fighting in shoulder-to-shoulder formations like at the Battle of Waterloo.
(16) CHRISTMAS CONFLATION. When I read the headline of io9’s post “Chewbacca Comic Finally Answers A Question Star Wars Fans Have Pondered For Years” I mentally filled the blank with, “Does Chewie sleep with his whiskers outside or in?”
(17) REEL CONSPIRACY. At Star Wars Minute, “How Kylo Ren Got Darth Vader’s Helmet.” A fan theory based on some events in Disney/Lucasfilm comics and novels.
(18) TONIGHT ON JEOPARDY! A Bradbury-themed question.
Literary Characters for $200
Answer: Beatty is the captain of the fireman in this Bradbury Novel
Question: What is Fahrenheit 451
(19) IF YOU WERE A DINOSAUR…BUT WAIT, I AM. “Retaliation for getting coal in my stocking!” says YouTube poster Ralph the Rex.
[Thanks to Will R., John King Tarpinian and Brian Z. for some of these stories. Title credit goes to File 770 contributing editor of the day Will R.]
Discover more from File 770
Subscribe to get the latest posts to your email.
Thanks for the suggestions. If anyone else feels moved to make more, please do!
Lexica: I was only interested in the BVC post, I didn’t go over and read Lili Loofbourow’s article. What did you think of the piece itself?
@Lexica: I had not heard of Lili Loofbourow–but clearly I should check her work out. In terms of the entry and quoted post, I thought it sounded like a bunch of sour grapes–so it’s not surprising that his evaluation was worthless. Don’t people realize that other people can look things up on the internet and, you know, check their accuracy?
Hmmmm….
Google search results for Lili Loofbourow: 10,300 results
Google search results for Steven Harpoer Piziks about 5,220 results
*snirks*
Originally I was strongly on the side of thinking the asterisks were a fuss over nothing (and I still think that the fuss is disproportionate) but people here have persuaded me that it was, at the very least, tone deaf and inappropriate. I don’t think Gerrold should apologise for it, particularly, but I agree that “but charity” is not a great defence. I also really wish he hadn’t shared that bloody meme on facebook…
@Stevie
If I recall correctly there are two reasons why asterisks in and of themselves can be controversial:
1. Vonnegut once compared them to arseholes.
2. American sports use them to mark achievements that are somehow less achievementy than other achievements.
So, yes, partly a fannish thing, partly an American thing. Since most of the involved parties were from North America I think we can allow them the cultural difference on this occasion. 😉
Note about spoilers: I’m reading Lili L’s piece on Star Wars (it’s at salon): I think it’s excellent but it’s RIFE with spoilers. I’m going to talk about it here and will put a few quotes in but will rot13 them because did I mention Spoilers?
(I am not terribly spoiler averse, and am so not a fan, so went ahead and read anyway.)
@Lis
I have heard both Welcome to Nightvale and Thrilling Adventure Hour are both great episodic podcasts
No way I’m going to MACII. And while I would love to visit Helsinki someday (my maiden name is Heikkinen) Trans-Atlantic travel is likely not in the cards as soon as 2017 unless I get a publishing contract or a miracle. Especially as I’d want to stay extra time to see the place; I’ve been in Toronto enough (just barely) that spending most of Torcon at the Con was acceptable, but I wouldn’t want to do that in Finland.
I just want to say, officially, that there is no establishment that gave me any orders what to vote for or where to put No Award on my ballot (Not only was there ongoing disagreement about whether, and how, to use the process among the blogs and comments I read, I followed none of them anyhow. For example, I put Sheila Gilbert above no award and Toni Weisskopf below, and I get the impression that was a minority position). If anyone were to find an establishment representative to apologize, they will not be speaking for me. I will not apologize for making up my own damn mind.
I did not like the asterisks but it was a way to acknowledge the slating of the ballot in an indirect manner. I would have rather it been a bit in the speech without any physical tokens of ‘appreciation’.
@ Meredith and others about the asterisks:
If I recall correctly there are two reasons why asterisks in and of themselves can be controversial:
1. Vonnegut once compared them to arseholes.
2. American sports use them to mark achievements that are somehow less achievementy than other achievements.
So, yes, partly a fannish thing, partly an American thing.
Thanks for posting #1 — I knew about #2, but though I read a slew of Vonnegut back in the Day (erm, late 70s, I think it was), I did not recall the comparison. I guess that explains the ongoing references to anal cavities in the Puppy posts about the asterisks — I think I’m (slightly) relieved because I thought all the focus on assholes and references to sodomy that I was catching in excerpts was because of American homophobic conservatives’ obsession with a bigoted stereotype of gay men and anal sex.
But….I still cannot see it as all that major a deal (and suspect that just about anything Gerrold did would have caused outrage along with what he didn’t do–i.e. just by being there and breathing, he was an outrage to them).
And I suspect it’s very much more likely to be a macho/male north american and/or fannish thing.
I think Gerrold should apologize for the asterisks because it was the wrong thing to do. It wasn’t the worst thing anyone ever did, but we should apologize for wrong things we do even if they are not the worst thing anyone ever did. Even if we didn’t (mostly) intend any harm by it. It is entirely reasonable that someone would take the asterisks as a slap in the face, and it was entirely foreseeable that some people would. Are some Puppies fingering the scab a bit too lovingly? Sure. Doesn’t matter. It was the wrong thing for Gerrold to do. That’s all that matters for the question of whether Gerrold should apologize.
Past tense for Thrilling Adventure Hour, right?
Personally both the short and long form editor are confusing to me. I don’t really know how to evaluate or vote on them.
From other postings, it seems to be a longevity and popularity award. How this metric is calculated is unclear but almost seems like a lifetime achievement award from how it has been discussed before and the furor over the results from the last WorldCon
It’s soo much easier to whine and insult strawmen than to actually come up with your own “superior” award. Why aren’t they running “Brad, Larry, and Teddy’s Approved Manly Nuggety Awards”? (Guaranteed free of gayness, uppity women, literary-quality prose, non-Christian heroes, and too much melanin.) (And yes, until the Sads come right out and say they reject Teddy, they’re stuck with the Rabids).
No Award has been in the Hugo rules for a long, long time. I’ve used it a bunch, including when Puppies were but zygotes as it were. I’ve No Awarded people who have gotten Hugos before and since in years when IMO they get a stinker on the ballot. I’m sure many others have as well. I’ve voted works by friends of mine below other works by strangers that nevertheless were more WOW to me. Because it’s about the work, not the person or their tribal affiliation.
So yeah. Half a dozen deeply insecure whiny writers and a hundred or so assholes with internet connections do not need to be accommodated and kowtowed to, versus thousands of people over six decades. If the Puppies really had self-confidence, they’d be secure about getting onto the ballot on merit (As indeed a couple of them have before this). Do they fear deep down that they just aren’t that good? And why are they so fussed about external validation by people they hate?
@Bruce Baugh re: Highlander — heh! So true. princes of the uuuniverse
@Foreigners: it really isn’t as bad as it sounds. Puppies are just ranting about guns to scare off non-Puppies. They fear EPH is going to succeed, so they want to make sure that people with 21st Century attitudes towards other folks don’t show up and vote. Also, you’d miss Kansas City barbecue, which is outstanding.
I think the final winners of “Hey, Have A New Calendar” here at File 770 are myself OGH, and Rose unless anyone’s lucky enough to be in Hawaii tonight. Still 5 (heh) hours to go, though the fireworks have been going since sundown. I have a local bubbly chilling and an assortment of carby, fatty foods in the oven.
I should probably have specified “fictional” or “cartoon” flying ace: I was thinking of Snoopy, from Peanuts, the beagle with a rich fantasy life about being a war hero. (The time machine has brought me home to December 31, 2015 at 7:04 p.m. EST.)
Whatever the rights and wrongs of the asterisk issue (and it does all seem rather obscure and tendentious to my British sensibilities), I am very sure that anyone who is still butthurt about it half a year on is a twat.
Past tense for Thrilling Adventure Hour, true, but there are still over 200 episodes available for free. I like some bits better than other bits (I never did like their Creature from the Black Lagoon serial) but there’s some good writing there. I especially like the Beyond Belief and Sparks Nevada segments.
@Cally and James
Yes the live shows have ended, but podcasts are still being produced at present.
Lis, here are some of the audiobooks I’ve enjoyed recently. (I listen to about one per week.):
Castle Hangnail, by somebody or other. Great fun.
The Scandalous Sisterhood of Prickwillow Place, Julie Berry. More fun; I loved Smooth Kitty.
The Slow Regard of Silent Things, Patrick Rothfuss. A little slow, but Rothfuss is an excellent narrator.
The Coldest Girl In Coldtown, Holly Black. YA Vampire novel, but it usually takes a pretty good one for me to read or listen to it.
Snoopy? Duh! Of course. Should have caught that.
Frank Luke came first to my mind because he was a local fellow. I live only a few miles from Luke Air Force Base, named after him.
@Iain Coleman: The thing is, the bulk of the Pups in attendance were from the US and thus subject to the full cultural context of the gesture. As for whether one is a twat for being bothered by a massive humiliation six months after the fact, as a card-carrying Ess Jay Double Ewe, I’m poorly placed to gainsay another’s emotional pain. Regardless, what matters ethically is not whether the recipients of the asterisks are enacting victimhood in the proper proportion, but whether it was the wrong thing to do. Any effort to put the onus on the Pups for how they felt about the asterisks is derailing.
Let me be perfectly clear: The Pups deserved to be mass No-Awarded and that too was going to hurt, and I’m happy to own the willingness to cause them that degree of humiliation: it’s proportional to the offense (slating) and directly responsive to it (take away the reward for slating). But the asterisks were gratuitous: not just tripping the bully up but rubbing his face in dog-doo.
Now, someone might say, “This too is well-deserved because we need to make it really sting, either to drive the lesson home or just for revenge.” But in that case, Gerrold should own that, and not hide behind the fundraising and “thought it would be fun” excuses.
Iain Coleman: Since you don’t even know that six months have yet to pass since the Worldcon, perhaps you should read up on the issue so you won’t find it so “obscure.”
I thought the asterisks were hysterical. The pups should adopt them for their own convention. They could call it the Walmart Award. Probably get funding for their convention too.
Who cares if anyone ever reconciles with the pups. Larry and Vox and Brad keep this stirred up for target marketing purposes. They will always do that; it is who they sell books to. But unless the business meeting reverses on EPH next year, what the pups think/want/rant/conjecture becomes irrelevant. They will have only influence in proportion of their voting numbers which is currently small and will diminish over time.
After reading Lexica’s post which quoted Lili Loofbourow’s bio (which sounded fascinating), I thought, heck, why not go read the “emotional blind spots” piece, so I googled. And lo and behold, it’s on Salon. As I noted above, major major SPOILERS, so avoid because if you don’t like spoilers and especially if you are a SW fan (I’m not), you don’t want to even get close to this piece. And then, what the heck, I read Piziks’ blog entry.
Piziks is complaining about “self-defined gut-wrenching, academic, deep-thought critiques” of Star Wars which……strikes me as an odd line-up of adjectives, actually. And other than that bit of snark, there’s not much else to his blog entry.
I admit I am biased since I’ve been on the receiving end of the anti-academic, anti-meta type of fan grump before—in fact, one reason I left organized fandom in the early 1990s was some of that same kind of commentary in the APA I was in. I was writing my dissertation at the time, and I was being academic all over the place and still do. Although from my perspective, one of the main bennies to being an academic is that I get paid to read and write, and to talk at exhausting length about all sorts of books and a few films I love, and therefore it is the perfect job for a fan who sneakily got a Ph.D. so she can teach sff at the university level, hah, that was my SEKRIT agenda. One of them anyway.
Since I’m all about the academic deep-thought, I liked it. Gut-wrenching—I didn’t see that in Loofbourow’s piece myself, but his mileage may vary, and maybe his gut is more sensitive than mine, or perhaps it’s sarcasm, heh.
What I see her main point as being (in non spoilery terms) is that the TFA (and I think in general the SW franchise) is “leaching” (her word) off mythology in ways that are problematic, in effect (as I read it), using mythic patterns (I would use the “a” word here, but Jungian terminology makes me break out into hives) to create an emotional impact without doing the work to create characters and plotlines that would create the impact, and also resulting in hand-waving, of sorts, of some major issues which she ties to American exceptionalism as well.
I tend to agree with some of those points – although I don’t quite buy the idea of the conscious evoking of myth to excuse the lack of other elements (another bias of mine, mythic litcrit in general makes me break out into hives). Basically, I don’t think Lucas cared enough or knew enough to get all myffic back in the day, and I think it was a lot more to do with relying to stereotypes than mythic patterns.
But I think she raises some good points, and one of her major ones (in the second paragraph down) I agree with (and I think it’s also true of the first three films released—I didn’t see the three later ones). If I were ever to teach SW, I could see assigning this as one of a range of online review/discussion (her post got over 240 commnents, and those would be assigned as well) for the students to read.
Two key quotes from the piece, rot13-3ed.
Guvf vf glcvpny: “Fgne Jnef” graqf gb yrrpu bss zlgu gur jnl gur yngrfg, ovttrfg Qrngu Fgne Fgnexvyyre guvat qenvaf gur fha. Engure guna cebivqr tebhaqrq, fcrpvsvp zbgvingvba, vg anzrf n eryngvbafuvc (hfhnyyl “sngure” naq “fba”) naq rkcrpgf gur nhqvrapr gb jrrc. Gur ubcr vf gung jr’yy cebwrpg fbzr pbagrag bagb n eryngvbafuvc gung’f nyzbfg nqzvenoyl srngheryrff.
. . . .
Gnxr, sbe rknzcyr, gur naavuvyngvba bs frireny cynargf, naq gur jnl jr’er vaivgrq gb ertneq gurz nf fb znetvany gb gur fgbel gung ab bar rira frrzf gb erzrzore vg unccrarq ol gur raq. Jura lbh’ir npghnyyl vairagrq n gentrql gung’f uhaqerqf bs gubhfnaqf bs gvzrf ovttre guna gur Ubybpnhfg (va n svyz gung cebzvaragyl ersreraprf Anmvf) bayl va beqre gb guerngra gung gurl’er nobhg gb qb vg ntnva, va n znggre bs frpbaqf, LBH PNAABG NFX LBHE NHQVRAPR GB PNER GUNG FBZR THL NAQ UVF FBA NER JNFGVAT GUBFR RFFRAGVNY FRPBAQF UNIVAT N ZBZRAG BA N OEVQTR.
Generally speaking, I’m thrilled to see more wide spread discussion of sff texts all over the media/internet, not only in fan communities and discussions, but in pieces in the media (yeah, a lot of it’s in the entertainment/infotainment media, but heck, it’s still cool to see so much discussion about sff). I’ve been looking up online reviews for the six sff novels I’m teaching in the spring, and it’s fascinating to see how wide-spread discussion of the recent novels (especially Leckie’s and Jemisin’s) is. That’s just so cool!
Shambles — Short form editor can be treated as a surrogate for best prozine/ best anthology. For long form, I suppose you are supposed to look at your favorite novels of the year, and see if they have any editors listed in common, but it’s hard for anybody not in the business, that is, not an author, agent, editor, or publisher, to evaluate a long-form editor.
Maybe you should ask on Making Light — the long/short split for editor was PNH’s proposal.
I thought you were making a deliberate joke.
@snowcrash,
Honestly, no apologies necessary. I’m fully aware that my name does not map neatly to a gender, and given I don’t go out of my way to state it, and the most famous Soon Lee* is probably Klinger’s wife from M*A*S*H, your assumption was entirely understandable. FWIW, I’m amused when someone assumes I’m female, nor do I mind if people assume I’m male; it’s just not a big deal to me.
(Speaking of which Wayne Rogers who played Trapper John has died) .
*Rosalind Chao who played Soon Lee was also Keiko, Chief O’Brien’s wife in Star Trek: Deep Space 9.
ASTERISKS:
To me, the asterisk thing at the Hugo ceremony was a miss-step. It might have been an attempt to lighten the mood with humour & mention the elephant in the room without going overboard, but it came across as clumsy. As a non-Puppy, I winced thinking what the Puppy
over-reactionresponseoutrageto it would be. (While I’m sure those who self identify as Puppies would have have found reasons to be outraged regardless, I wish those producing the ceremony would have been more clueful about likely reactions to the asterisks.)The sad thing seems to be that most of us don’t, most of the time.
Jim: As a bit of a fan of rubbing bullies’ faces in the shit, I agree with you that Gerrold would probably be better to own that interpretation. However, I’m not sure his “thought it would be fun” is quite as disingenuous as you make out. It seemed to me at the time as a way of defusing some of the tension. It wasn’t just the Pups who were upset at how things turned out, it was the rest of fandom as well, and the asterisks did seem to be about the con giving an unofficial gesture to the non-puppy fandom that they recognised how fucked-up this year had been, and that it was OK to have a tension-breaking laugh about it. And if that upset the people who had tried so hard to fuck up the awards, well, world’s smallest violin.
Mike: Feel free to patronise someone else.
I’mmm thinking maybe some of the anti-gun, anti-gun fans stuff is getting a bit too generalised..? I don’t like guns or the USAmerican culture around guns but, I dunno. Some of it seems to be applied with quite a broad brush?
@Lenora Rose
I also took that position. 🙂 Mine looked like this:
Because I was miffed about the lack of Baen info and (iirc) flipped a coin to pick what order the Baen editors went in, since they didn’t give me a good way to split them.
@Shambles
Next time I’m going to vote No Award full stop because I think the category is badly designed. I’m really hoping at least some of Kevin Standlee’s proposed changes get approved at the business meeting, and I’m sad I won’t be there to support the motion.
@Robin
The Puppies insisted for awhile that Vonnegut was explicitly referenced at the Hugo ceremony during the asterisks segment and That Proved The Real Intention, but after awhile they realised that we could, y’know, rewatch the Hugo ceremony and provide timestamped evidence that Gerrold didn’t actually say that. So they’ve mostly stopped that bit now, but they’re still going on (and on and on) about anatomy every time. I think they’ve just decided that CHORFhole sounds really clever.
@Robin: The Sequel
It might be worth making that comment in the Star Wars spoiler thread instead. 🙂
@Jim Henley
I think you’re probably closer to right than I am. I just find it very hard to care about Puppy victimhood. (I also think the apology wouldn’t change anything, because of how they responded to Gallo’s, but as we established a few days ago an apology is not made and should not be made as half of a transaction in which forgiveness is required, whether the apology would “work” isn’t relevant.) It would be a decent gesture if Gerrold could find a way to make an honest apology. I find that even if I don’t want to apologise for [x] I can usually find a [y] that I can feel sorry about and that works out medium-well.
@Iain Coleman
Not how I would put it, but… Puppies are very fond of nursing grievances.
To be honest, I think it’s partly because it happened at the ceremony at the same time as the No Awards were announced and right before people found out the numbers and how badly the Puppies had lost. Up until that point no-one knew for sure who the supporting memberships were supporting, so just as the clapping was an expression of deep relief on the part of Worldcon attendees, so did the rout come as a shock to the attending Puppies. The humiliation of being considered less worthy than not handing out the award must have been many times greater, but they can’t admit that because then they’d have to admit that the Hugo awards did mean something to them. That the Hugo awards do matter. So instead that humiliation gets transferred onto the one thing that they can complain about without losing face: The asterisks.
This is, of course, all theory and I could be talking complete nonsense.
@Peace Is My Middle Name:
The sad thing seems to be that most of us don’t, most of the time.
*sigh*
I mean, I’m used to my students not (I often mumble that even reading an entry or two in WIkipedia would be useful), but thinking that it’s widespread is a bummer. (I’ve started posting useful links to resources on my assignments, and still some students never click!).
And I know time is often a factor (was very glad snopes.com has a facebook which helps me more quickly identify false fb memes/posts), but still….it’s so wonderful to be able to check things out.
@Meredith:
Well, to be honest*, that File 770 meetup at Capclave with Aaron, BethZ, John F. Ziegler, Michael Walsh and me? We were all packing.
—————————————–
* This is a lie.
@Jim Henley
*snerk* 🙂
I think you can still stand some more work, with your driveby namecalling.
Iain Coleman: In addition, I have to say it’s remarkable how often someone, in taking offense, seizes upon the very word that describes the behavior he was indulging in to begin with.
This is why Jim is a true SJW and a 5th !
Packing books or ereaders, perhaps…
I thought the asterisks, whether they stemmed from sports, where an asterisk on a record diminishes the accomplishment relative to non-asterisked records, or from Vonnegut’s equating asterisks and assholes, were in poor taste. That they raised money for charity didn’t change that opinion, nor has the passage of time. In fact, I actually think worse of the idea than I did initially, because of the non-answer of but charity!
Tasha Turner: @Jim thanks for mentioning my comment earlier. I find it interesting the number of people who responded to your posting of the same sections I posted which got no response except your comment and resposting of points. Some days I feel like a woman in a meeting where I make a point and a few minutes later a guy makes the same point & everyone is all over what the guy has to say.
Granted I’d put my commentary after each point so it was harder to read…
Our unconscious bias and institutional sexism at work everyday.
You’ve made comments in other threads similar to this, about how you don’t feel that your comments get the attention they deserve from other commenters, and that it’s because of “sexism and female invisibility”.
I totally understand that you really like getting that validation from other commenters. We all do. And sometimes we’re mystified that something we said doesn’t generate the response that we thought it should. But if everyone else here complained that they don’t think they’re getting enough attention due to bad behavior on the part of others, well… it wouldn’t be a very nice place.
Please consider that if people don’t respond to some of your comments, there are a number of kinder, more benign reasons why they might not have done so, and please stop accusing people here of being sexist because you didn’t get the attention you felt you deserved.
Peace Is My Middle Name: I think Vivienne acquitted herself rather well the other day when she was brought up short by someone’s sincerity, which makes me inclined to view her a little more kindly.
I view her even less kindly because of that, because it emphasized that she regards everyone here by default as not being sincere in their condemnation of horrible behavior — and is only subsequently willing to grant them that sincerity if they can demonstrate personal damage by that behavior.
No one should have to prove their ethics and sincerity to her; the default amongst civilized, intelligent people should be that she assumes those unless demonstrated otherwise.
I feel a bit bad for Gerrold, honestly–twenty years from now, an aged Torgersen is still going to scream every time he posts anything with an asterisk, even a footnote, because it PROVES…whatever. A piece of punctuation rendered forever unusable because of drama!
…nobody do a semicolon gag at this next con, my heart can’t take it.
Mark: Snowcrash pointing out that BDP wasn’t NA-ed about ten times
…each time followed by a Puppy insisting that 2,500 Hugo voters deliberately No Awarded all slate entries simply out of animius, and they didn’t know why the slated BDP entries weren’t No Awarded.
Of course, they repeatedly refused to accept that it was because voters judged those works to be of sufficient quality to be deserving of a place on the Hugo ballot, regardless of whether they appeared on a slate. That didn’t support their “horrible 2,500 No Awarders” narrative.
@David and Meridith
Thanks for those explanations on the long and short form editor categories. I went and looked at the proposal at Kevin Standlee’s site. It makes a lot of sense and I am still pondering how a Best Publisher award would work.
I am leaning towards ‘No Award’ for the long form category in general at present.
@Meredith: @Robin: The Sequel
It might be worth making that comment in the Star Wars spoiler thread instead.
*ponders*
Should I admit to not knowing there WAS a SW spoiler thread………or not…..
@JJ: Do you think some of the voting for BDP was also driven by the sense that the folks behind the works were surely not witting participants in the Slate, being too big to care about the Hugos? I didn’t end up buying a membership, but I thought about it, and that was certainly my own reasoning as I considered what I’d do.
@Peace @Jim I guess I can claim to be today’s TAFF. Morning was London, tonight is Springdale UT. And I have some rather good timelapses from the plane thanks to my new GoPro…
@robinareid
Could you repost your tFA piece un-rotted over on the dedicated discussion thread? It is an interesting point I think people would like to chew over.
@PIMN & Bruce Arthurs
I thought that too. Possibly because I use it as a humour technique myself.
I think Gerrold should apologize for the asterisks the minute the Puppies, oh… quit making up stupid acronyms, quit using what in most countries is regarded as hate speech, quit threatening to wear weapons to intimidate people who have a differing opinion about awards, quit actively wishing harm to people and trying to get them fired/injured and maybe if CUL will stick to any of his claims about stepping back from cons and social media.
Or, maybe, ya know, just STOP LYING about facts that everyone can double-check easily online.
Then some little pieces of wood that were intended to comment on something in a humorous fashion could be apologized for.
@Tintinaus : OK, will copy it over (may take me a few moments to find it since I wasn’t kidding with Meredith–I missed there was a dedicated SW thread!).
@soon Lee. Hunh. I didn’t realize the same actress was in MASH and in DS9. Never made the connection before.
@Robin
Here!