Your host will be on the road for a couple days attending Nic Farey’s wedding to Jennifer AlLee on February 29. I have prepared a couple of Scrolls in advance.
(1) CAN’T WE JUST ALL GET ALONG? Roz Kaveny tills the unsatisfactory middle ground between five recent studies of “Tolkien’s English Mythology” in the Times Literary Supplement.
In a sense, of course, The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit are offcuts from Tolkien’s principal and in the end unfinished and unfinishable work, parts of it published after his death as The Silmarillion, others as the Unfinished Tales. Although he was a Christian who absolutely believed in the literal and metaphysical truth of that body of stories, Tolkien was impressed enough by Elias Lönnrot’s assemblage of Finnish myths and legends as the Kalevala that he wanted to assemble, even forge in both senses of the word, a specifically English mythology that owed nothing to the Celtic or Norse pantheons, or to the Arthurian cycle (he also wrote his own version of that, as he did of Lönnrot’s story of Kullervo). Tolkien wanted to reclaim elves and Faerie from mere decorative prettiness and embed them in a narrative of fall and redemption that functioned as a secondary world; this was a spiritual as well as a creative enterprise, an attempt to understand God by doing imperfectly what He had done.
The success or failure of such an enterprise is in a sense irrelevant; what he produced in the main body of his legendarium is a heap of glorious moments rather than anything entirely achieved. Along the way, however, he wrote a children’s book called The Hobbit which might have been just another light work like Farmer Giles of Ham but turned out to be his gateway into a more approachable version of the legendarium, something that included a voice of the ordinary among gods, monsters and tyrants. In due course, his publishers’s and admirers’ desire for a sequel led to something considerably more ambitious but still puny by the standards of what he intended; one of the most attractive things about Tolkien is how he coped with being famous for something less than his lifelong ambition, not least because it achieved and exemplified some of his aims on a smaller scale.
This is why some of the complaints against him are beside the point – he had planned something compared to which Paradise Lost or the Prophetic Books of Blake would look modest, but if people wanted a superior adventure story, he would give them a superior adventure story with enough of his greater intention embedded in it to make itself visible in sudden vistas down narrative corridors. Whatever Tolkien thought about the literature of his time – not much, since he regarded, or affected to regard, everything that had been written in English after the late Middle Ages as a colossal mistake – he has a lot more in common with, say, T. S. Eliot than he or Patrick Curry would have been comfortable acknowledging.
(2) CCUBED. Those interested in gathering to talk about running conventions should look into ConComCon 2016, which will be held June 10-12, 2016 in Portland, OR at the Sheraton Portland Airport Hotel.
Marah Searle-Kovacevic says, “The theme will be ‘Building Bridges’ between different types of conventions, the convention and the hotel, convention staff and members, and other bridges. There will also be the usual discussions on hotel contracts, crisis management, parties and hospitality. There will also be a time Saturday afternoon for choosing topics that you want to talk about as programming items.”
You can also buy a membership or book a hotel room at the con web site.
Also, SWOC (founded as the Seattle Westercon Organizing Committee) is offering a scholarship to each convention for one person to attend CCubed. We would like this to be for someone who has not attended a CCubed before. If your convention is interested please contact Searle-Kovacevic through [email protected].
(3) CONTRASTING BLOODLINES. Doris V. Sutherland continues her comparison of non-slated with slated Hugo categories in “2014 Hugos Versus 2015 Sad Puppies: Related Works” at Women Write About Comics.
Sad Puppies founder Larry Correia presumably had this book in mind when he quipped that “the usual [Related Work] nominees are things like Transsexual WereSeals Love Dr. Who.” This seems unfair, as Queers Dig Time Lords has entertainment value—and that, after all, is something that the Sad Puppies are supposed to be fighting for. That said, I will have to admit that the book is closer to a fan blog than to a Hugo-worthy piece of media criticism…..
Given the book’s jack-of-all-trades approach, it is hardly surprising that Letters from Gardner is something of a mixed bag. To be honest, the fourteen-year career outlined here is simply too uneventful to make a particularly gripping biography. It is somewhat novel to see such an in-depth look at the beginning of a writer’s creative period—I can imagine Letters from Gardner inspiring many of its readers to try their hands at fiction themselves, with Antonelli making the process look easy—but too often the book gets bogged down in irrelevant details. The low point is when Antonelli spends multiple paragraphs waxing nostalgic about those Bic ballpoint pens with orange shafts, which are apparently hard to find in America these days.
(4) A NUANCED THEORY. Douglas Milewski explains “Why the Puppies Bid for the Hugos Failed”.
I’m not sure who taught Conservatives that SJWs only succeed because they browbeat everyone else. (Correct me if I’m mis-characterizing.) That’s the sort of information that sets you up to lose. SJWs win by building coalitions from the ground up, and they’ll take decades to do it. Most of this is done quietly, not because of secrecy, but because that sort of projects just takes time. This coalition building isn’t just a fanciful notion, but the cornerstone of their power. The number one weapon of the SJW is the narrative, building a story that holds the coalition together. A good narrative wins the battle. (Gay marriage is a fine example of this.) So who joined the SJW coalition when the fight got started? The best SF&F writers in the world joined, that’s who. They wrote the SJW narrative. That’s the sort of opposition that you must absolutely respond to, and the Puppies did not adapt.
One more analyst proves with geometric logic that writers, not fans, determined the outcome of their own award.
(5) TODAY IN HISTORY
- Feburary 28, 1996 – Tromeo and Juliet premieres.
(6) LIGHTS, CAMERA, MISSING-IN-ACTION. CinemaBlend says he is “The Indiana Jones Actor Who Refused To Come Back For Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull”.
John Rhys-Davies portrayed Sallah in the first and third entries of the Indiana Jones franchise. It turns out, he was asked to make an appearance in the fourth as well, but declined because they only wanted him there for a cameo. What’s worse, he tells Digital Spy that he wouldn’t even have been interacting with any of the other characters.
I was asked to be in the last one, but they wanted me to do a bit of green-screen – walk in, sit down and clap – and they were going to cut that into the wedding scene at the end. I turned it down because it seemed to me that that would be a bit of a betrayal of the audience’s expectations. Sallah is a popular character – there’s a greatness of soul about him that we all love and admire…
(7) H8TERS GONNA H8. In “How real is that Atlas robot video?”, The Guardian pooh-poohs a viral video I linked to the other day.
The Google-owned company’s most recent video shows the latest version of Atlas opening fire doors, prancing about through snow, being abused by an evil scientist wielding a hockey stick, and doing an uncanny impersonation of an Amazon warehouse worker. It looks incredibly impressive, but how much of it can we take at face value?
(8) THEY’RE TEASING. The Spaceballs 2 teaser poster has arrived….
Freaking out. pic.twitter.com/qao2YuRQSF
— Jake Baldino (@JakeBaldino) February 24, 2016
(9) BY POPULAR DEMAND. Here is bloodstone75’s take on Harry Chapin’s “Cat’s Cradle.”
Pup’s in the Manger
A man wrote some books the other day
With Monsters and Guns in the usual way
And they attained some scratch, and won some praise
New writer win? They said “Not today”And when he didn’t nab a Hugo, his anger grew.
He said “It’s ‘cause I’m not like you, right?
I’m never gonna be like you!”And the Pup’s in the manger, and he’s venting spleen,
Larry boy’s blue, and it’s making him meanWhen you giving up, Lar’
“I won’t say ‘when’; but I’m gonna vex the Fen;
You know I’m gonna vex those Fen.”A year went by, Larry couldn’t wait
He said “This time it’s mine, yeah, my story’s great.”
But he wanted revenge — they just had to pay!
“I got to make them cry,” he said. “Meet Vox Day
And he, he carved a slate, and his smile was so grim,
And said “They’re gonna choke on him, yeah.
They’re really gonna choke on him.”CH
Well, he passed his banner to another guy
So much like himself he just had to smile
And he scored a nom, but then he turned it down
He shook his head and said “I’m no clown.
All I really want now is to torment the lefties.
Won’t be happy ‘til they’re on their knees.”CH
So though he’d “retired”, he still mixed it up
He built a slate with the other Pups
He said “You made us do it; you rigged the vote.
I got my own cabal, now you can watch us gloat.”
But the Pox was ascendant, and the shit hit the fan.
And the backlash sign-ups began, yeah,
The fan enrollment began.
And as they read out the votes it occurred to him
Their rocket hopes were dim
His hopes were just so dimCH
(10) ALICE SEQUEL. Coming May 27, Disney’s Alice Through the Looking Glass.
In Disney’s “Alice Through the Looking Glass,” an all-new spectacular adventure featuring the unforgettable characters from Lewis Carroll’s beloved stories, Alice returns to the whimsical world of Underland and travels back in time to save the Mad Hatter. Directed by James Bobin, who brings his own unique vision to the spectacular world Tim Burton created on screen in 2010 with “Alice in Wonderland,” the film is written by Linda Woolverton based on characters created by Lewis Carroll and produced by Joe Roth, Suzanne Todd and Jennifer Todd and Tim Burton with John G. Scotti serving as executive producer. “Alice Through the Looking Glass” reunites the all-star cast from the worldwide blockbuster phenomenon, including: Johnny Depp, Anne Hathaway, Mia Wasikowska and Helena Bonham Carter along with the voices of Alan Rickman, Stephen Fry, Michael Sheen and Timothy Spall. We are also introduced to several new characters: Zanik Hightopp (Rhys Ifans), the Mad Hatter’s father and Time himself (Sacha Baron Cohen), a peculiar creature who is part human, part clock.
(11) INTERFACE. Kill Command opens May 16.
Set in a near future, technology-reliant society that pits man against killing machines.
[Thanks to John King Tarpinian, Will R., Andrew Porter, and Woodwindy for some of these stories. Title credit goes to File 770 contributing editor of the day Steve Davidson.]
Discover more from File 770
Subscribe to get the latest posts to your email.
I want to be the person my puppy thinks I am.
Author David Mack (probably best known for his numerous Star Trek tie-in novels) has posted a testimonial recommending Marco Palmieri for nomination for Hugo Best Editor, Long Form:
If we were to consider only those criteria, then I would urge readers to consider the following works acquired and/or edited by Marco Palmieri that were published by Tor in 2015:
• Barsk: The Elephants’ Graveyard, by Lawrence M. Schoen
• The Traitor Baru Cormorant, by Seth J. Dickinson
• Time Salvager, by Wesley Chu
• Last Song Before Night, by Ilana C. Myer
• Last First Snow, by Max Gladstone
• The Providence of Fire, by Brian Staveley
• Unbreakable, by W. C. Bauers
• When the Heavens Fall, by Marc Turner
• The Architect of Aeons, by John C. Wright
… also his editing and support of Kameron Hurley‘s upcoming (as of this writing) collection of non-fiction essays, The Geek Feminist Revolution.
#4. First reaction upon reading:
Puppies failed because they exist and operate in a bubble. They attacked something they did not understand or have any true knowledge or experience of. Patton said ‘study the road net’. They got caught by red rory: “Lieutenant! There’s TWO of them!”
Finished Holly Black’s The Darkest Part Of The Forest and while it was a very nice modern fantasy, it was not as exceptional as I would wish for a Hugo. It started with a very haunting mood that gave me hopes, but then went into more standard territory.
Will not nominate this one.
Puppies failed because they were, and appear to remain, sublimely oblivious to the fact many of the fans in Worldcons do not come from the US, do not want to live in the US, and sure as hell have no interest whatsoever in US culture wars.
Add to that the festering heap of steaming sludge, otherwise masquerading as allegedly award worthy works in the Puppy part of the Hugo packet, and you have the perfect storm; we voters had to read that garbage, and I, for one, emerged from that process feeling a great deal more pissed off than when I started…
(4) I think there is a core truth to the guy’s thinking, but it’s screwed up because he’s defined his terms, War, SJWs in a way that constrains that thinking.
It is fairly clear that Brad never expected to sweep the nominations, and was completely unprepared to lead anything other than a protest campaign. he didn’t see to grasp that having thrust himself to the attention of the mainstream he needed to get them onside rather than keep insulting them.
Fairly obviously the way No Award works escaped them. I can understand that. It’s never really been an issue in the time I’ve been aware of the voting. Just that little footnote.
I can’t really believe that he thought Rubbish I found on alt.funny was a viable contender. Just there to make up the numbers and flatter a friend.
Basically he planned for the nominations and flailed on winning.
What blokey fails to grasp is that the other core failing was the quality of the works. While ‘Related Work’ was the worst of a bad lot, had they gamed good works onto the ballot then they might have had a chance. There is good SF written by political conservatives, though it’s generally best when they avoid writing about their politics. And there is very bad stuff as well.
@JJ That’s quite a list of books Marco edited;. I’ve read more than half of them, too (and I talk to Marco on twitter with his authors). Hunh. It’s a solid argument.
As an aside, this popped up from Kotaku:
Science Combat
GIF art from an imaginary Street Fighter-style game, but with scientists! The Charles Darwin Natural Selection attack is awesome
This Tolkienist will endorse most of what Roz says. I see no need to elaborate, or to quibble, here.
Respectfully, I disagree. The dog whistles are very compelling with this one.
Milewski used a term of art, not just an enigmatically colorful-sounding phrase. It’s like a lawyer saying “battery”; it does not mean what you and I think it sounds like it means. It means something very specific and precise to the people who are intended to hear it.
The history and tactics of “asymmetric warfare” or the more euphemistic “asymmetric operations” phrase Milewski used are a topic of fascination in right-wing and military circles and think tanks and wargaming sites, precisely the places Puppies and their allies look to for philosophical justifications.
Asymmetric warfare, a.k.a. terrorism / insurgency / guerilla warfare, is spoken of in the context of two highly disparate forces in terms of size, resources, and tactics.
Now consider Milewski brought up the phrase right after he noted
That is a classic description of the power imbalance between sides, to be found wherever terrorist tactics are analyzed.
In many ways Milewski’s essay reads like a war report, an after the fact analysis of a military campaign.
Look, when I Googled about this to double check my facts, I got one Wikiipedia definition of “asymmetric warfare”, a large number of military and conservative think tanks — and a page about the Night of Long Knives.
Whatever else is going on here, nobody who uses the code words Milewski is using in his conclusion can be honestly said to be calling for people to “Be nice”.
4) This may insult current puppies by saying they’re too…balanced. I guess you have to walk before you can crawl.
Rabids kind of often use the term “asymmetric warfare”. As far as I’ve seen, it seems to mean “join together to dogpile random person or site”.
More or less a fancier term for being assholes.
Afraid I can’t shake the connection between “asymmetric warfare” and “I lick their pieces”. Damn you Theophilus Pratt.
> “Finished Holly Black’s The Darkest Part Of The Forest and while it was a very nice modern fantasy, it was not as exceptional as I would wish for a Hugo.”
I had much the same reaction. (I will say that it was actually tentatively on my Hugo longlist very early on, but it was also the first 2015 book I read, since I got it when it came out in January of last year. It got bumped off by other things.)
I ran across Sarah Hoyt’s definition of “asymmetric warfare” as “using force to get us to do things we otherwise wouldn’t”
( http://accordingtohoyt.com/2015/04/08/social-ignorance-warriors-bill-reader/ )
That seems to be about the kindest way to describe a campaign of harrying and provocation.
The main thing is it clearly demonstrates there is nothing “nice” about that essay.
Peace IMMN:
Well … if you’re trying to say that he is calling for violence, I strongly disagree with your interpretation. Yes, he uses references to military strategy, but they are metaphorical. There’s no call to actual arms there. (And I don’t think it’s a coincidence that he says “assymetrical operations” and not “..warfare”.)
In military terms, “assymetrical warfare” is to use tactics where a small force can tie up a larger force. The point in the last paragraph is that the puppies must either consciously build coalitions to become a majority, or find tactics where they can win without being a majority.
I don’t know what those tactics would be, though. (I suspect Milewski don’t know either.) And sure, there’s a fair chance that it will involve things the rest of us will consider unpleasant. But we’re talking rethoric and the sort of “clever” 4GW stuff we’ve seen already, not bombs.
NickPheas
Me neither. 🙂
If you’re going to see Helsinki, be sure to wear some (metaphorical) flowers in your (metaphorical) hair.
“Asymmetric” rhymes with “rhetoric” in some dialects.
Some of my favourite reading is when Gandhi was accused of not playing fair.
(4) Well and the part about some of the finest writers writing the SJW narrative was just plain wrong. What happened at the Hugos was hordes of fans outside the circle the Pups had drawn around their feet being upset over what the Pups had done to the nominations, and figuratively trampling–in the way that infuriated but disorganized groups of people sometimes do–anybody who, like GRRM, tried to get out in front and lead but departed from the way the rest of the group wanted to go.
GRRM tried to tell us to treat the slate nominees as if they were honest, and with the exception of GotG he pretty much failed. Scalzi (vote on the merits) didn’t (AFAIR) even try to lead this time. To the extent that writers advocated for what ended up being the final outcome it was people like Sarse Moen and (I think?) Jim Hines, who are unlikely to have swayed large numbers of fen beyond alerting them that the No Award option existed.
Puppies might be able to find fellow feeling among some of the Hugo Voters but they’d have to give up on slating and concentrate on getting out the conservative nominators without using obviously political rhetoric that pisses off the rest of the fans, and they’d have to be led by people who aren’t obviously doing it for their own benefit or the benefit of personal friends. Which brings up a metaphysical question–if they did that would they even be Puppies anymore?
Cat:
I disagree. It’s just that an honest appraisal of the slate nominees looked an awful lot like no-awarding them for slating.
Ah, the 29th of February: liminal time. What can one do on a day that doesn’t exist?
(This is probably sounding bitchier than I really mean it to): Deirdre Saoirse Moen apparently has self published two short stories (based on what appears on Amazon UK). She is almost certainly a very nice person as well. But two short stories. If you’re looking for Writers trying to exert undue influence then she’s a poor example.
Mike, just a note that this post is marked as being posted in “Poor Trufan’s Almanac” rather than in “Pixel Scroll”. I suspect alphabetical adjacence …
[ticky]
Hey, fellow Hugo voters – have any of you started filling out the online ballot? I spent some time on it yesterday and when I click any of the “Submit Ballot” buttons to save it, all of my entries get re-ordered. Novels stay in the novel category, and authors stay on the same line, but not in the order I put them in. And this happens to every category I have more than two entries in on both current and retro ballots.
I’ve reported this to the admins, but I am wondering if anyone else is experiencing this issue?
DMS: Yes, I noticed the same. I don’t consider it a problem. It’s a minor nuisance when I’m comparing the ballot with my notes, but not a critical problem. Reordering is somewhat common thing when things are saved and retrieved from a database, unless the developer have thought about explicitly adding a sort order.
In military terms, the Rabid Puppies assembled the militia that could, while the SJWs assembled a veteran field army complete with a propaganda machine.
So long as the Puppies continue to believe that there was a propaganda machine working against them, they will continue to be bewildered that they continuously fail to gain any support outside of their tiny circle. The Puppies weren’t the victims of a propaganda campaign that made them look bad. Their problem wasn’t phrasing or marketing. Their problem was the message itself. Almost no one found their complaints credible, or found their position appealing because their complaints were groundless and their position was silly, not because some media campaign made them look bad.
I am concerned that the Puppies are using military terms as excuses for ruthless and uncivil action.
I don’t for one second believe any Puppies mean *literal* bombs and booby traps when they use terms like “asymmetric warfare”.
But I do think they use the mindset as a sort of rationale for doing and saying outrageous things.
It’s similar to the Gamergate belief that journalists are incapable of using Google or forming opinions.
Thanks, Johan P. Just making sure it isn’t only me seeing this.
@DMS:
I have that issue too. I noticed it because I was entering things in a particular order which made sense to me and when I saved they got shuffled.
@NickPheas Fairly obviously the way No Award works escaped them.
It had been used against SP1 and SP2. It was talked about on fairly high profile blogs such as Scalzi during SP2 (I can’t remember SP1). So all this talk about it taking them by surprise is because they ignored 2 years of previous talk and action. Let’s not let the puppy leader narrative confuse us.
@PIMMM
I went and read the article on SAHs blog.
What I did see was a complete misunderstanding of what SJWs believe. The guest author thinks if you bombard an SJW with conservative facts an SJW will either see the light or continue on in their state of denial.
Do you believe this year or after their works are again NA they will begin harassing each individual they hold responsible?
I’ve noticed my entries getting re-ordered as well – I’m just glad I’ve got a working nominations form, to be honest, and so long as my entries are still there, I’ll be happy with that!
One other thing I’ve noticed is that it barfs on inverted commas – I put in some nominations for Pro Artist with examples of book covers, and put the titles of the books in quote marks, and they came back with rogue semicolons inserted (“Planetfall” became “;Planetfall;” for example, and then “;;Planetfall;;” next time I updated). Taking the inverted commas out seems to have solved that problem, though.
Minor niggles, though. The positive thing is, I’ve very nearly filled in my 2016 nominations, and I’ve made a start on 1941! All I need now is a propeller beanie and a lifelong feud or two, and I will start feeling like a proper fan.
@Tasha Turner:
I hardly dare speculate what Sarah Hoyt or any other Puppy supporter will do.
I do think they have a constrained view of reality which is causing them endless headaches.
@Steve Wright:
Oh yes, I noticed the glitch on quote marks as well and went around removing them from my nominations.
I found it lightly amusing because on at least one forum I hang out on :;,;: is the code for a face of Cthulhu.
@Tasha Turner:
Thinking about it, I am finding it just a little disturbing that more than one Puppy web page contains both an analysis of alleged SJW tactics and mindsets and a mention of “asymmetric” warfare.
ETA: Oh, hah. I didn’t even look too closely at the context of the page Ms. Hoyt’s quote was embedded in. What a lot of overconfident nonsense. If that is what the Puppies believe their straw enemies think like, no wonder they mishandled the Hugo campaign so very badly.
Thinking about it, I am finding it just a little disturbing that more than one Puppy web page contains both an analysis of alleged SJW tactics and mindsets and a mention of “asymmetric” warfare.
It would be more disturbing if they hadn’t demonstrated over the last couple of years just how bad they are at both understanding the people they describe as “SJWs” and executing effective or coherent plans.
Yeah, it seems like they finally got PIN issues sorted out, which is so much more important.
The form appears to have been designed for a larger resolution than what I’m using. The nested scroll bars are an annoyance since the full width of the ballot form doesn’t fit on my screen, but I have to scroll down to get to the scroll bar that controls that and then scroll back up to enter stuff. Just how little of the form I see at once really makes the re-ordering stand out. I’m almost done, though.
And thanks for the tip about special characters – I’ll avoid those!
Also, regarding the 1941 nominations – apparently I’ve read more novelettes from 1940 than 2015.
@Tasha
I think it depends on ‘For certain values of “they” ‘. I think most of the puppy foot soldiers last year had no real idea what they were doing, so No Award was a surprise to them. It may well have been a surprise to the likes of JCW as well.
It was obviously no surprise to Teddy, but then nothing is a surprise to a sooper genius.
@PIMMM
The puppy leaders are frequently in lockstep. Their language matches. They reuse ideas. They are bringing a cultural war into the Hugos. They love military analogies. What’s stated in these posts looks to me more like they are figuring out the words for what they’ve been doing since SP1.
At the same time they get to continue claiming SJWs are full of cognitive dissonance, selfish, think everyone looks like them, have no clue about the wider world, and we don’t need a secret cabal because we waste our lives building coalitions.
I guess since SP1 I’m used to insults, threats, doxxing, swatting, trying to get someone fired from job, that other than guns (this year) or a possible bomb (last year) at Worldcon it’s hard to see what more they could do. I could say more but I’m not inclined to provide ideas for them.
There might be nuances I’m not getting, but — isn’t “asymmetric” warfare what the Puppies already did, with the slates? A minority coordinating their efforts in order to have an outsized effect relative to the majority?
Ah, the 29th of February: liminal time. What can one do on a day that doesn’t exist?
Apparently a number of people are getting married (@Mike Glyer isn’t the only one going to a wedding today).
@Peace Is My Middle Name – But I do think they use the mindset as a sort of rationale for doing and saying outrageous things.
I’m still trying to think of Puppies as individuals (because they are, although certain inferences can be made about group dynamics), but generally I’ve observed an embedded us vs. them, little guys vs. vast conspiracy, embattled majority/minority vs. flavor of the month, so it’s almost inevitable the group would be characterized as militia/insurgents against an existing power structure. In other words, as a group they have generally picked an identity that offers a rationale for doing and saying outrageous things, because that lets them off the hook for civil behavior.
Wow. Just … wow. That entire essay is like a fun house mirror reflection of reality.
ISTR that it was Karl Rove who said, “You guys are missing the point: WE create our own reality.” when discussing why journalists kept insisting that everything Bush, Cheney, et al were saying had no basis in fact. (I’m paraphrasing, of course.)
This attitude continues to this day. ‘Facts’ have no place in the current GOP presidential campaigns. Flat-out lies are accepted, the ‘BASE’ accepts ‘six impossible things before breakfast’, and Donald Trump attacks the Pope but worries about the tender fee-fees of the Ku Klux Klan. Oi.
re (4) PIMNN
So at the moment, I’m inclined to think that this talk of asymmetric warfare is just that. I think it’s a case where rhetoric is being mistaken for action of any sort, from people who talk a big talk while dislike the sight of rare steak much less real blood. These are blowhards LARPing as Revolutionaries, whose talk about weapons is a front for a terror of the outside world that bars them stepping outside without a weapon of some sort.
So here’s why I have to say I share a few of Peace’s worries. Everything I said above is true, and like any group descriptor it’s true because it describes the great majority of the Puppies. It’s the outliers who do crap. The more talk about asymmetric warfare, the more the idea of going to a MAC II in a region where there’s a cultural movement about the Manliness of ignoring the signs banning a concealed carry.
Direct action has some meanings. To most of the people saying it, it’s a meaning in the abstract, and not the reality. But it’s always a few, of this armed, siege mentality, highly paranoid crew that I worry about, as we head up to a business meeting where their toy is going to be taken away. I’d rather not be part of a news story about someone’s totally unforeseeable, bolt from the blue, out break of “mental illness” not all foreshadowed by their lengthy social media postings.
@NickPheas
Yes the lack of research to understand the Hugos while accusing the SJWs of corrupting them is a problem. I have a problem in today’s age of information where it was easy to find out how SP1 and SP2 had been treated as well as how previous single campaign issues had been treated in the past and why NA was created to be sympathetic to those who can’t be bothered to do the research.
So yeah people were taken by surprise because they did no thinking even though they’d heard NA might be used. My heart bleeds for them. Ignorance can be fixed. Knowledge is a click away.
Wow. Just … wow. That entire essay is like a fun house mirror reflection of reality.
I couldn’t get past her completely ignorant assessment of the history of the American Revolution and the fall of the Roman Empire. She seems so supremely confident that her completely wrong account of history is the right one.
@TechGrrl1972:
I am recalling a fundamentalist Christian person who was something of a liaison for President George W. Bush, who recalled President Bush expressing bewilderment that Christian groups were disenchanted with him when he had given them so much, and the liaison tried to gently break it to the President that he had repeatedly and confidently *promised* them things he had never carried through.
Making up your own version of reality only leads to suffering, no matter how pretty you look in it.
@Aaron:
That’s a guest essay by Bill Reader, not Sarah Hoyt.
Under the circumstances, the sneering at strawman Lefties as ignorant of history is pretty ironic.
Rail on February 29, 2016 at 5:21 am said:
In many categories, yes, absolutely.
But there were several good editors in the editor categories who would probably have reached the ballot honestly in the absence of the Puppies, who hadn’t asked to be slated, or agreed to it, who would have made perfectly reasonable Hugo winners, and who were resoundingly No Awarded in the scrum.
This is probably because the Editor categories are hard for readers to judge in any given year anway, and rather than stand back as I suspect they usually do, people who didn’t know which Editors were merit-worthy nominees just No Awarded everything to be sure.
@NickPheas
I am willing to call Sarse Moen a writer since she has two stories published, but it’s okay if people want to say she’s not really a writer as wossname appears to meant it–someone who can change the shape of the story of the Puppies in people’s heads because she has lots of fans who will tell things her way.
My larger point is pretty much precisely what you said: there’s not much in the way of writers influencing fen among nonPuppies.
@Aaron: the Puppies *are* the victims of a propaganda campaign that made them look bad–their own. They looked bad because of the things their leaders said to attract people.
@McJulie
Isn’t “asymmetric” warfare what Puppies already did the slates?
If we assume it’s meant figuratively, then yes. It certainly fits, anyway.
@TheYoungPretender
Yeah, I’ve been saying that the Puppies make the most sense as an elaborate LARP since SP3 came out. But LARPers are generally no danger, and I think it is unlikely that any of the Puppies will be different.
The world is imperfect, uncertain, and sometimes even dangerous. But I’ve faced my corner of it barehanded since I was a kid and it has gone okay.
That’s a guest essay by Bill Reader, not Sarah Hoyt.
Then it is he who is ignorant of history, not necessarily her. His assessment of Roman history is especially egregiously bad, and full of typical counterfactual conservative dog-whistles.
Perusing his other guest posts on that blog, it seems that Reader is just a regular bundle of historical ignorance and stupidity.