aka The Genre That Day Stood Still
In the roundup today: Craig R., L. Jagi Lamplighter Wright, Sanford Begley, George R.R. Martin, Sarah A. Hoyt, Brad K. Horner, Lis Carey, Patrick May, William Reichard, Fred Kiesche and mysterious others. (Title credit belongs to File 770 contributing editors of the day Daniel Dern and Glenn Hauman.)
Craig R. on Boston Progressive
“’Just this one teensy, tiny little change…’” – June 4
One of the great divides in SF/F right now is between groups of readers that want to claim SF and Fantasy as purely descriptive entertainment, the epitome of escape literature, just living in shared authorial moments of the storyteller entertaining us at the fair, or in the tavern, with no other motive express, implied or accepted. You pays your pennies on the drumhead for the entertainment and that’s all you want to see and hear.
On the other side of the table or those who say that all stories have some ulterior external dimension, some subtext, some “message.” There is no choice, there is always subtext, whether the author means for inclusion or not. It is inevitable.
In the Interests Of Full Disclosure, I will tell you that I belong in the second camp: not from any skill at analysis, nor any training in critical literature theory, just cause it seems like the way things are.
From my viewpoint, the very act of reaching for the ability to entertain, or the ability to make any kind of contact with the intended audience requires an assumption of commonality of fundamental background points.
L. Jagi Lamplighter Wright interview for Superversive SF
“Interview with Hugo Nominee: Arlan Andrews, Sr.!” – June 4
1) All the Sad Puppies selections came from a list of stories that fans felt were their favorites from 2014. What about your story do you think brought it to the attention of whomever suggested it?
Presumably, because they liked the setting, the characters, and the story of my novella, “Flow.” “Flow” was the sequel to 2013’s “Thaw,” (the cover for which won the Analog Reader’s Award for Best Cover of 2013). The whole series of stories takes place after the next Ice Age (a politically incorrect supposition in itself), and the protagonist, Rist, is himself quite politically incorrect, though dark-skinned; he is a diminutive, sexist smartass (as are most males in the primitive society in which he was raised) and his mouth gets him literally into deep shit. The story, actually a vignette, ends in a (literal) cliff-hanger that will be followed by “Fall,” where Rist descends into yet another kind of society existing some 30,000 years from now. It will likely be called non-PC as well, though I have to remind people that authors are not necessarily the same as their characters.
Alex on Ada’s Technical Books and Cafe
“Madeline Ashby: Fiction Writer and Futurist” – June 4
One particularly poignant statement we both picked up on was made in the context of the controversy surrounding the 2015 Hugo Awards. Madeline [Ashby] said that we all have a tendency to “presume people think like (we) do, but generally, they don’t.” Though perhaps a bit of an obvious statement, I think it is equally powerful. Whether positively or negatively, humans must regularly navigate the disparity between our processes of thinking. Imbuing your actions with a recognition of difference may be a way to bridge gaps between people approaching a conflict in different ways, or at least a way to mitigate frustration when questionable (or outright despicable) decisions are made.
Alanaburke.com
“Local editor earns prestigious science fiction/fantasy award nomination – Ottawaherald.com” – June 4
“I was quite stunned and surprised [when I first heard] frankly due to the fact that I’ve just been executing this for concerning 6 years and I’ve just got four anthologies under my belt,” Schmidt said. “I’m relatively new, so to me it seemed earlier in my job compared to I would certainly have actually expected for something adore that to happen. I was thrilled and humbled at the exact same time that people believe I’m great enough to receive a nomination due to the fact that it is a fairly prestigious award. There was a great deal of excitement and happiness mixed in there as well.”
That happiness will certainly travel along with Schmidt to Spokane, Washington, where the awards will certainly be presented Aug. 22 at the 73rd Globe Science Fiction Convention. The Hugo Awards, named after pioneering science fiction magazine “Incredible Stories” founder Hugo Gernsback, are provided annually for the very best science fiction and fantasy functions of the previous year, according to a news release.
Sanford Begley on The Otherwhere Gazette
“The Puppies need to thank these recruiters”
The Sad Puppies really do need to thank some people who are not of their number. I’ve been watching this fiasco as someone who is in sympathy with the SP movement without being one myself. The truth for the rank and file SP members is basically that they were informed that they could vote on the Hugos and actually get books they liked on the ballot. From the point of view of the rank and file Puppies this was information on how-to and some recommendations they could follow, but were not required to. Most of the rank and file used some of the suggestions and substituted others as they saw fit. Admittedly this did cause those who did not have enough recommendations in their own reading to use the list as a source for filling out the rest of the nominations. After all, they knew a bit about Brad Torgerson and Larry Correia and could rely on them to suggest good books. Which they could then read in the voter packet and vote upon.
[This author needs to correct a tendency to misspell everybody’s name – “Brad Torgerson,” “Teresa Nielson Hayden,” “Patrick Hayden Nielson,” “Betsy Wolheim,” “N.K. Jemison.” I leave aside one other that was clearly intentional, but always remember, intentional misspellings are meaningless when true errors abound.]
George R.R. Martin on Not A Blog
“Catching Up” – June 4
— Conquest was cool. The KC fen throw a great con. And I was heartened by all the people who came up to thank me for my posts about the Hugos. Even in the nation’s heartland, it seems, there is considerable fannish anger about the Sad and Rabid Puppies pooping on our awards,
— Yes, Puppygate has continued, though I’ve been too busy to post about it. The Sad Puppies continue to be clueless, moving their goalposts almost daily. The Rabid Puppies continue to be venomous. Lots of other people are reading the Hugo nominees and reviewing the finalists. That’s what I am doing myself, though I am way behind in my reading,
Sarah A. Hoyt
“The Condescension of the Elites” – June 4
In fact, if one wades into the Sad Puppy mess (here, wear galoshes. You’ll need it) the side that says things like “You’re not true fans” or “your tastes are just low” or “your writing is bad” or “Our opinion of what is good IS the maker of what is good” or “you’ll never work in this town again” or “for daring talk against us, you’ll never win a Hugo” is not the Puppy supporters.
This is because the “power” at least if understood as traditional publishing power, in this field is NOT from puppy supporters. The people opposing the puppies (not their lickspittles running around blogs shouting the crumbs that fall from their masters’ tables) are powers in the field: well established editors with power of the purse; writers who get publicity campaigns and push and huge advances; critics who have for years been reviewing the “well regarded” stuff and establishing a taste that is Marxism with a mix of glitterati, or in other words, positional good leftism.
You’d think that people who have been extensively indoctrinated in Marxism would understand the difference between “establishment power” and “economic power” and the revolutionaries who come in saying “But you’ve been going wrong by alienating the reading public; we don’t give a hot damn what your political opinions are, but you need to tell stories people want to read, and if you don’t people should be able to participate in the intervention to make you see why your print runs keep falling.”
I.e. they would understand that they are in fact on the side that is being condescending by virtue of having all the power in the field, including power of the purse.
Brad K. Horner
“Flight of the Kikayon: A Sci-Fi Novelette by Kary English” – June 4
My rating: 4 of 5 stars
This is a crisp and gloriously clear adventure story of a woman trying to escape her abusive husband with the help of her clone. I was touched. It really had heart.
Of course, the planet where she eventually wound up, swiss family robinson style, had one hell of a fascinating sea monster in it, so that’s a huge plus.
The story made me think about love and children, but not exclusively, and not oppressively. It was warming, not frantic, and I really enjoyed the ride. Crisp and gloriously clear sums it up very nicely, from writing, to imagery, to themes. Nothing was out of place and it felt inevitable. Which is very strange, considering that she wound up stranded and losing everything. Who am I to argue about the vagaries of fate or authorship?
I read this in preparation for the Campbell nomination of 2015, and I’m proud to say I read it, regardless. It shines.
Lis Carey on Lis Carey’s Library
“The Sci Phi Show, presented by Jason Rennie” – June 3
The Sci Phi Show discusses major philosophers and schools of philosophy illuminated in science fiction, fairly broadly defined. In the sample episode, it’s Nietzsche and the movie The Dark Knight. It’s an intelligent, thoughtful discussion, with good production values, accompanied by odd, distracting sound effects. There’s also opening and closing theme music that tries hard to give me a headache.
Patrick May
“2015 Hugo Award Novella Category” – June 4
[Each nominee is analyzed, then this conclusion — ]
My Hugo ballot for this category is:
- Flow
- Big Boys Don’t Cry
- The Plural of Helen of Troy
- No Award
- One Bright Start to Guide Them
- Pale Realms of Shade
Aside from the first two, the entries in this category are disappointing. There were far better novellas published in 2014 in Analog and Asimov’s alone. “Big Boys Don’t Cry”, while not as good as “Flow”, is certainly no worse than some nominees and winners in the past. I’m leaving “The Plural of Helen of Troy” slightly above No Award solely because Wright plays with (and occasionally loses to) some classic science fiction concepts. Overall it’s not really Hugo worthy, though.
William Reichard
“Apres Hugo” – June 4
After a lively day of schussing down the slippery slopes of unwinnable arguments, you’re pleasantly stupefied. Now you just want to relax and kick back, are we right?
That’s why when you get back to the toasty comfort of your own ideological hearth, you should reach for Hubik.
Hubik has everything a tired mind craves: a refreshing illusion of efficacy, a promise of persistent meaning, and a soothing anesthetic effect that will help you drift off to an untroubled sleep. Just spray a little around your armchair, and presto! The perfect ending to another day of lovely mountain sport.…
https://twitter.com/ShiftlessBum/status/606575118580482048
https://twitter.com/FredKiesche/status/606530903175778306
Discover more from File 770
Subscribe to get the latest posts to your email.
Long ago when I was agonising over my decision to switch to English for my writing somebody pointed me to a list of people writing in a second language. Beckett and Brodsky also belong on that list.
In the case of Conrad, though, or Josef Konrad Korzeniowski to call him with his native name, English wasn’t even his second language. Actually, it wasn’t even his third. Born a Polish speaker, he spoke Russian and French, and only became fluent in English in his twenties. He never lost his very strong accent.
@Chris Hensley: SP Are Not True Fans: Remember all of the times Puppies have been accused of being “GGers in disguise” and people try to question their fannish credentials?
Hmm. Yes. I wouldn’t say that there’s been consensus on this one at all, and I have seen that a few times. I *feel* like the stuff I’ve read has generally been more nuanced than *that*, though.
It’s no surprise that the Gators would have everyone on edge. They really were the Internet’s biggest shitshow of 2014, and I think for some people it was their first experience of “the asshole part of the Internet is leaking”.
It seems to me that a real proportion of the SPs are indeed fans. Churlish, intellectually incurious, prone to rationalization, but definitely fans. RPs just seem to be in this at the behest of their cult leader.
Good reply and thank you.
@ Chris Hensley
I agree with you about acknowledging our sins. I strongly disagree with the notion that we bear responsible for the sins of anyone else whom other people believe to be on “our” side.
With your list you are essentially ceding the argument by taking responsibility for every Guy With A Sign writing against the puppies. Who speaks is important. If David Gerrold had said those things, if Mike had linked to it approvingly, something like that, then Hoyt would have a point. Some random people on twitter or in comments somewhere do not constitute “the side, that” Hoyt is refering to. For that these would either have to be majority sentiments or statments those perceived as leaders make repeatedly without being challenged.
fenella: You know, as frustrating as this whole mess is, I really am grateful for all the book recommendations that keep appearing on these threads and elsewhere.
picklefactory: I am completely in agreement. It’s been incredible. Also I went back and picked up some Cherryh that I hadn’t been able to find in ebook format. Whoever mentioned closed-circle.net — I’m so sorry I don’t remember your handle, but thanks.
The person who pointed out Closed Circle (where C.J. Cherryh, Lynn Abbey, and Jane Fancher sell the books from their backlists) was Joe H in this thread.
For those who are interested in obtaining books that have gone out-of-print, there’s a similar site called Book View Cafe, where more than 50 authors, including Ursula K. LeGuin and Vonda N. McIntyre, sell books from their backlists.
And you can send your own books to, or (for $1 extra) buy inexpensive used books from online bookstores and have them sent to, 1DollarScan, which uses a destructive scanning method to provide you with an e-book version of the book for a few dollars (price depends on the quality options you select). (Note that the hardcopy gets destroyed.)
Gah. Mike, please release my post from Moderation Jail when you have a chance, thanks.
The paranoia from Hoyt and the other Mad Geniuses about “the powers” going after their careers is fascinating. After all, one of the results of this sorry debacle is that the puppies are getting a lot of traffic from sff readers who had either not heard of them before or never previously visited their blogs. Set aside all the drama, shouldn’t this at least be seen as a professional opportunity?
Shouldn’t they be trying to convince all these new visitors of the fun that might be had in reading their books? Shouldn’t they be welcoming? Entertaining? Shouldn’t they present themselves in a way likely to expand their readership?
Instead, they post screed after screed barking contemptuously at those who don’t think just like them. When someone who is clearly not a regular posts a comment or question, the response is immediate rudeness followed by a pile on of mockery by the regulars.
I think, “You do get it, right? The people you’re saying such nasty things to and about? You get that these are the people who BUY BOOKS in the genre you’re writing, right?”
Chris Hensley: SP Are Not True Fans: Remember all of the times Puppies have been accused of being “GGers in disguise” and people try to question their fannish credentials? Yah, that’s what Hoyt is talking about here. Seriously, cut it out.
Mostly, what I’ve seen is when people like Tuomas and Lamont Cranston III show up and opine on something in a way which makes it clear that they’re not reading SFF books and are here as part of the Culture War (and, by their own admission, as Gabriel F. says, “In which case they are literally not fans”), rather than as Puppy fans. The latter are not dismissed as “not being true fans”, they are asked to join in the discussion about the pros and cons of various works.
I wonder how much bad feeling there’d be right now if the Rabid Puppies had chosen a less similar name to the SPs. I feel like a lot of the anger and accusations aimed at “Puppies” really goes to the RPs (for voting in lock-step) and the leaders of the SPs (for bringing a US-based culture war into the global SF community).
The SP supporters — many of whom have claimed to have read the suggested works but chosen to nominate other works — must be feeling upset and confused at the level of anger seemingly directed at them. So they lash out or retreat (I’ve seen commenters on Hoyt’s blog discussing how to tell if a book is published by one of the “big 5” so they will know not to buy it) in the face of apparently unjustified attacks.
If the RPs had instead called themselves something like, oh, I don’t know, Weird Angry Nettlesome Knavish Evil Rabbits then perhaps things wouldn’t have grown so confused.
Also, a huge thank you to the commenters who mentioned the Steerswoman series. I’ve just finished the first book and, seriously, what a delight. So many things to love: the wonderful, believable friendship between Rowan and Bel; the power of scientific thought; the incredible world-building (I loved the idea of Guide Stars just apparently hanging motionless in the sky); the way Rowan managed to get out of difficult situations in creative and unpredictable ways. LOVED it.
@ https://file770.com/?p=22933&cpage=3#comment-275764
Exactly! Exactly that. Now, imagine all those people uprooted from their homes and moving inland. The potential for human suffering caused by just a few meters of sea level rise is frightening.
Terrie: Shouldn’t they be trying to convince all these new visitors of the fun that might be had in reading their books?
I think there’s more than one goal — and that marking one’s tribal borders can be a very effective way to get more people to vote one’s slate onto the ballot. Whether it’s an effective way to get people to read one’s books is another question. It seems that some folks are having a go at the slated works, so the short-term answer may be yes — one fan’s vinegar being another’s honey, apparently.
@fenella
Apparently these people do not exit. Or are hiding really well. At any rate, they are not speaking up for themselves. As such I don’t find it particularly useful to speculate on what they might or might not be thinking.
Quite apart from that it isn’t very difficult to distance oneself from the target of the anger (RP/VD), critically evaluate the consequences of slates after the fact and point out that one exercised independent judgement. It’s only hard when one is wrapped up in the culture war, us vs. them, SJW cabals thinking the puppy leaders continue to promote.
Case in point, if one has trouble recognizing that Torgersen never explained the “open and democratic process” that led to the slates, the problem isn’t “apparently unjustified attacks” but a mind so clouded by aforementioned memes that critical thought is really, really difficult.
Same goes for pretty much any paragraph in Hoyt above. If your fictional “SP supporters” existed they’d have to distance themselves in droves.
I think l’ve found the solution.
http://www.mtv.com.au/travel/news/shaving-dogs-into-cubes-is-a-new-japanese-craze-and-we-cant-stop-staring
@mk41
I’m trying my best to be charitable, basically.
There are people in my life who get very defensive and aggressive if they perceive an attack and I see some of that behaviour in the comments at Hoyt’s and Torgersen’s blogs.
A non-SF example: I observe to my mother that current WHO guidelines suggest breastfeeding for 2 years; my mother gets very defensive because she did not breastfeed for that long; then she gets aggressive because she feels under attack and tells me that I have always been strange. At no point did I attack her or even intend to criticise her, but once she feels threatened it would be easy to slip into a full-on argument. We avoided it that time as I said she doubtless did the best she could with the information available at the time, which deflated things nicely — but it took a lot of self-control not to descend into name-calling etc.
they are not speaking up for themselves
But they are, in the comments on the SP’s blogs.
The paranoia from Hoyt and the other Mad Geniuses about “the powers” going after their careers is fascinating.
“The powers” don’t need to do anything. All that needs to happen for Hoyt’s career to be sabotaged is for people to read her blog posts. I’ll say it again: The worst thing that can happen to the reputations of most of the Puppies is people reading their works.
@ picklefactory
Hey, can today’s thread not turn into 100% unmarked spoilers for Radch books? I haven’t finished either of them.
*shamefaced* Sorry! I’m pretty sure I instigated that. It’s still going on in the other thread so you should be safe. Mea Culpa for my part, I was just super excited to have the discussion.
My biggest objection to the whole “anti-puppy side” is that really, there is no side. There’s the Puppies, they have made themselves a side. And there’s… well, a bunch of disparate people who don’t like what they’ve done. Scalzi’s not my leader – I’ve never read the guy. The Haydens aren’t my leaders, even though Tor publishes some stuff I like. I guarantee none of the Puppies have read my published stories because signal-to-noise is pretty high in sff these days. So if someone is standing on the corner throwing doo instead of reasoned discourse, I’m not responsible for them, We’re not a side.
The Puppies are at least somewhat responsible for what their leaders say, because they are willingly identifying themselves as following that movement and defending those leaders.
It’s like the WBC, if I may be so bold. I was once told by a friend that Christians should do a better job “policing their own” if they don’t want everyone to tar them with the WBC brush. I’m an agnostic atheist and that’s baloney. Who’s in charge? What denomination? What religious leader? Who exactly should be “doing something” about them and what can they actually do? All ANY of us can do is wave our own “Don’t be dicks” signs and tell the people throwing rocks to knock it off.
Also: the best way to whip up a frenzied mob to follow you is to make them afraid of an enemy they can’t identify clearly. Those “terror level orange” warnings come to mind.
If you smell something, pee on something.
You are right on point about “policing”. That being said, I think it is important to not cheer on people behaving badly because you agree with them. If you are criticizing behavior in people you disagree with, it is hypocrisy to not criticize the same behavior in people you agree with. Cheering on bad actors, or merely excusing them, only encourages the behavior.
Like I said, we need to tell people throwing stones to knock it off. But I’m not with them just because we happen to be protesting the same bad behavior.
@ Anna Feruglio Dal Dan
Thanks for this info. I work with people who speak up to 9 languages, while I have nearly 2 (English and pieces of 2 others). It’s very humbling.
(Plus you have a really great name.)
@fenella
Funny you should say that, I had the breastfeeding argument with my mother as well. I pointed out that my position is based on current peer reviewed research, her’s isn’t and that her qualification to opine in the matter amounts to “I did it twice decades ago” which doesn’t impress me in terms of sample size and scientific rigour. I made it clear she was following the best advice available at the time and I wasn’t blaming her, but she was nonetheless dead wrong as far as science is concerned. No name-calling necessary.
On topic, I understood that you were trying to be charitable. My point was and is, that that only works when you either can’t walk away (e.g. your mother) or the other side is open to reasoned debate. These (fictional) people aren’t children, they are supposed to be adults. And if they want to have a rational discussion, it’s upon them to get a grip on themselves and start acting rational. All I see in Hoyt’s comments is a circle jerk and plenty of name-calling. No reason to bend over backwards for these people. They want to have a rational debate, sure, any time.
My roommate suggested
The Awards that Time Forgot
@mk41 “Case in point, if one has trouble recognizing that Torgersen never explained the “open and democratic process” that led to the slates…”
As far as I can tell, Brad claims to have answered this, his answer was that people openly and democratically sent him suggestions, which he then largely ignored and put his friends on the slate.
I saw people asking him about that on his site, his followers jumped on anybody who questioned it, especially folks like James May- They claimed that it was just taking things out of context for ‘gotcha’ questions.
@Chris Hensley –
?? The only time I can recall that was brought up here at FILE770 was as a snarky comment about VD being able to and having no scruples to prevent it, ’cause of Aristotle, or something
Hmm, I don’t recall the puppies saying their own writing was bad. They may have, but not to the extent that the rest of the world has. Most of the stuff in the Hugo packet is of a quality that we used to pass around at Slushpile readings in convention parties, usually accompanied by lots of booze, and exceeding quantities of snark. If anything, while we may have wanted the booze, we *have* been going light on snark, considering.
No, we have had several occurrences here in the comment threads of the roundups where there have been commenters what have admitted that they don’t read SF, they are only here to cause trouble and they are annoyed when we say “lets talk books, not video games.” And I think that pretty much one of the things we can agree on is that, to be a “fan” of written SF/F one has to read the works, not skim Amazon or GoodReads reviews. So, no, I will *not* “cut it out.” Besides, you can’t make me, so *there*.
The stuff about the puppies hurting their future writing careers? All people did was point out that, absent the talent of a Harlan Ellison, acting like a hyperactive insult and alienation machine is going to cause most agents, editors, publishers and convention planners to avoid having business dealings with people who have shown no effort to be civil or polite, and who seem hell-bent on alienating huge pieces of the base of the *paying customers*.
The cite requests you are responding to here are about words Hoyt put between quotation marks as if they were actual quotes made by actual people in the contexts Hoyt is claiming.
Under the circumstances it is reasonable to ask “Who said *that*?”
The inflammatory and belligerent nature of the alleged quotes make the request even more important.
@Maximillian: Thank you, that makes more sense. My apologies to Lamplighter! If I’d gone out to the link I would have realized, and I should have done, but I’ve clicked on some frustrating things over the last few weeks and I’m in once-bitten-twice-shy mode.
I reserve the right to keep scratching my head over Arlan Andrews’ comments, though.
I can’t wrap my head around the political argument that directly quoting from someone, while including the citation so anyone can view the context of it, can in any way be considered a gotcha game. Granted, as anyone can actually blow the point they meant to make, but isn’t the answer to that publishing a retraction, clarification or apology as appropriate? I have found most of the commenters here to be people of good will and believe that, if I had missed a post of this sort, someone would point it out with a link. Then, if I ignored it and continued to belabor my point, commenters would begin to express annoyance. This is why I lurk here when I should be walking the dog.
What I don’t understand is who has the time and energy for all the outrage? It’s just exhausting reading it.
Mk41
At the risk of failing to connect with your point, asserting that something is supported by peer reviewed work isn’t actually a knock down punch; all of the major medical and science research publications acknowledge that there are vast problems with peer review. We keep it until we can get something better, but it most certainly is not ‘proof’; consider all the wonder drugs which turned out to be exceedingly unwonderful.
WHO’s position is based on third world conditions, where breastfeeding up to two can save a lot of lives. But no-one has ever conducted even one Gold Standard trial with babies allocated at random to a variety of groups within first world countries, much less the number of trials needed in order to provide compelling evidence.
And without Gold Standard trials we have no evidential basis for the claim…
@Source Decay “Thank you, that makes more sense. My apologies to Lamplighter!”
Don’t apologize too soon- She did say that, “1) All the Sad Puppies selections came from a list of stories that fans felt were their favorites from 2014.”, and we know that this is untrue. I think they are trying to move away from people asking Brad how the hell the stories were picked. Or, possibly, they are counting the members of the ELoE as ‘fans’ and trying to slip the card up their sleeve that way.
I seem to recall way back in the bad old days there were a comments talking about VD buying votes, using his personal wealth or his father’s hidden untaxed wealth. As I said, those ideas got shot down pretty quick. Using it as an attack against anti-Puppy commentators in general is bogus, but that doesn’t mean those accusations have not been made at some point. Denying it outright just feeds the trolls.
I perhaps should have been more clear. The Puppies have accused works they don’t like of just being bad. The continued hammering of Dinosaur and the Ancillary series comes to mind. The point I was trying to make is that while their statement is strictly speaking true, it just reflects the sort of neutral commentary that they themselves are engaged in.
Brian Z –
Those look like they were carved out of Styrofoam!
No, you *cannot* stop staring.
Re: breastfeeding
Its important to remember that, 1. you feed the baby you’ve got, and some babies can’t or won’t breastfeed to an ideal schedule, or at all; 2. not all women can breastfeed at all, are around their children constantly in order to breastfeed, can pump, have the time to pump, can access or afford the equipment to pump; 3. what Stevie just said. There’s so much judgement and conflicting information flying around about breastfeeding, lets not throw any more at anyone, eh?
—
Re: Things said about Puppies
This all makes the mistake of thinking that “anti-Puppies” is an organised group. It isn’t. I’m not responsible for what a random person says on Twitter just because we both agree that Slates are bullshit. I’m definitely not responsible for what random person says on Twitter if they’re trying just as hard as the Puppies to make the Hugos a front in a USA culture war.
That being said… Show me someone trying to claim that people like Steve Moss or Jeffro Johnson aren’t fans and I’ll get in line to tell them they’re wrong. 🙂 I might disagree with them on slates, but they’re definitely fans.
PS. Some of the Puppy nominations really are badly written. Up to a point its all subjective, but the nuts and bolts have to be at least competent or the whole doesn’t work.
Bruce Baugh on June 4, 2015 at 9:44 pm said:
That rings a bell. I remember being struck by how differently (some) Puppies responded to the question, “So, what SF/F do you like?” They acted like it was an interrogation, a demand to see their fannish credentials. Whereas if they were really fans you’d expect them to be eager to talk about the books and authors they love! My personal conclusion was, it’s hard to consider someone a fan who considers fannish discussion to be a chore or a shibboleth rather than a fun pastime.
I have since revisited that question with a little more empathy, though. If you feel like the people asking the question are already hostile to your opinions on SF/F, you may find yourself looking for the trap in the question. Goodness knows I was bristling with self-defense mechanisms against that sort of thing last time I went to Gen Con, simply because the “fake geek girl” meme was hitting its stride then.
Which isn’t to dismiss Bruce’s point about people who straight up said they don’t read SF/F and were only in it for the culture war. But the hostile response to “Let’s talk about books and movies!” certainly has other possible motives beyond “not really a fan.”
As for Making Light – now, I do recall someone, possibly TNH heslf, in one of the 1,000-comment threads there, making the observation that the slate-mongers appeared to want to be given the community award without themselves having any respect for or fellow-feeling with the community giving the award. Which seems pretty self-evident to me from the Puppy Manifestos which are simply steeped in contempt WSFS membership and for WorldCon as both a convention and a community. But I suppose it could be interpreted as “they’re not really true fans,” by someone who came to it slathered with enough disingenuous selection bias.
“Roughly one in 10 persons in the world lives in this low-elevation coastal zone,” Balk says.
And when you consider where economic and cultural activity is concentrated…
Anyway, there was a brief period where it was reasonable to speculate that an immediate result of accelerated global warming might be a catastrpophic shutdown of the ocean currents leading to an immediate freeze, causing polar ice to take over large parts of the world. Models don’t look like that now, but that’s no reason to think it’s courageous to build something similar for a story setting. It’s just special pleading as usual to try to take credit for being a bold thinker when one is actually just out of date.
@Maximillian
Yeah, I’ve asked this a few times on Brad’s blog. The regular response seems to be that Brad’s answered it many times, and when asked for a link or a pointer it turns to a free-for-all of anti-strawman arguments.
They’re on permanent attack/ defensive mode over there that it’s impossible to get any sort of useful perspective.It’s *incredibly* annoying, especially when considering that you’re giving them a chance to get their narrative out there.
As I pointed out at the time, someone who uses the name “Lamont Cranston” who doesn’t know even rudimentary stuff about his alter ego isn’t a fan.
“Lamont Cranston? Isn’t that the guy who dresses like John C. Wright?”
Nicole – “So, what SF/F do you like?” They acted like it was an interrogation, a demand to see their fannish credentials. Whereas if they were really fans you’d expect them to be eager to talk about the books and authors they love!
Yep, it’s not so much an interrogation as the fact that the majority of conversations around the Hugos are going to be about books people liked/didn’t like alongside the discussion of what was nominated. That’s just trying to include folks in the broader discussion, though if someone does identify as only being interested in fighting culture wars and don’t care about the genres then people are going to ask questions as to the motivations of that person.
@anna That has always amazed me. IIRC, Conrad said he thought in Polish, wrote in French, and then translated into English. And produced some of the greatest English language ever.
@Glenn Hauman
Does it involve lots of purple crushed velvet with an accessorized martyr’s crown?
Yup; it can be seen here: wasn’t it a pseud with a name along the lines of S1Al who didn’t vote for the Hugos, didn’t nominate, but came to intervene because he “saw” that the SJWs were always lying—who then went on to engage me about the details of Kevin J. Anderson’s Hugo-nominated novel which I had read and he had not?
Conrad said he thought in Polish, wrote in French, and then translated into English. And produced some of the greatest English language ever.
It’s not dissimilar to some artists who pencil on one side of the paper and ink on the other side using a lightbox. The act of transposition reveals problems in ways that might not be clear otherwise, and forces reexamination.
Chris Hensley
in re SP/RP vote-buying: As I said, I hadn’t seen mention of it as a possibility. My own recollections about when it was tried in the past, and how vividly it turned to fail! probably let me subconsciously bypass it. But yes, there certainly was no shortage of the puppies claiming that with the offer to let *anybody* who wanted to to get a supporting membership get one from the donations pool to be “vote buying.”
Oh, you were clear, I was just feeling snarky…
What annoys me about the puppies is that their barrier for “bad writing” encompasses entire genres of work, just for being of a type, regardless of craft. The difference I’ve seen here is that the non-slaters may be picking apart individual works aggressively, there hasn’t been the wholesale condemnation of a working being awful, just because it is part of a particular or subgenre.
I know plenty of people who find military-based SF as boring, but they will tell you that they don’t read it ’cause it’s not their cuppa. Not dismiss all the writing in it as “bad writing” because of the subgenre.
I like huge amounts of the Mil-SF stuff written. But there’s also a lot of crap written, as in many fields. If I were not already a fan of Mil-SF, if I were presented “Big Boys Don’t Cry” as representative, I’d never pick up another one. It’s simply poorly written. As someone who grew up reading Laumer’s works in Fantastic and Amazing, I was appalled by BBDC – there have been imitators of Laumer’s BOLOs, but BBDC could have been written so much better. Admittedly, it’s a real hard row to hoe when you try following in those footsteps, but at least try to get the level of craft up. And BBDC doesn’t come close to earning the battle honors that any of the Dinochrome Brigade earned for craft, expressiveness and invention in writing. And this was one of the pieces that the slate engineers picked to be representative of the quality available in the field? No. It is not.
Nick Mamatas – surely you mean the puppies are Leninists, rather than Marxists? Vanguard being more of a Leninist term after all.
Right with you on that one. A good example is the detailed descriptions of military hardware. It is fair to call Correia’s stuff, BBDC and Turncoat gun porn. Hell, the editor of Baen books refers to the Monster Hunter books as gun porn. Which is fine, if that’s what you like, but it is gun porn for the sake of gun porn. Compare the to the BOLO series, where description of weapons were often essential to establishing the drama of the book. A typical scenario involves individual weapons being stripped one by one, the feeling of the Bolo and/or it’s commander as that happens. Or having a BFG that could end the enemy threat, but the rules of engagement disallow it setting up conflict.
Randomly, I’m reading Sterling’s classic ‘The Hacker Crackdown’ and there’s a paragraph that jumper out at me with him establishing that the birth of the hacker psychology started with teenage male telephone operators.
“Technical power” is not for everybody; for many people it simply has no charm at all. But for some people, it becomes the core of their lives. For a few, it is overwhelming, obsessive; it becomes something close to an addiction. People — especially clever teenage boys whose lives are otherwise mostly powerless and put-upon – love this sensation of secret power, and are willing to do all sorts of amazing things to achieve it.
Gamersgate and the SP/RP all summed up.
All Leninists are Marxists, though not all Marxists are Leninists.
@glenn Good point! I’ve heard Murakami say some interesting things in that regard…that translating back and forth sometimes helps him find a kind of unobtrusive style that he likes.
@glenn Not that doing so automatically makes things bland…just that the back-and-forth helps triangulate.
The dominant impression I have of the Puppies – both as writers and bloggers – is that they don’t stop to reread their own work and think it through in terms of the individual sentences and how they combine to form paragraphs. There’s a repetitious, clunking verbosity to their narrative prose plus a sense of generic adjectives being inserted largely because the writer hadn’t seen one for a while and was getting lonely. There’s little sense of how a scene should cohere, no sustained attempt to think through how dialogue flows back and forth between people. As for their attempts to argue their case – in all its remarkable varieties and transformations – they seem to think that asserting a point is the same thing as proving it, and if challenged their response is either to screech louder or else to collapse into a self-pitying heap of misplaced modifiers and cry aloud that they are being bullied by whichever mythical group of conspirators was most recently on their minds.
@ Nick Mamatas
Yup, that’s the guy I was thinking of. The one who claimed that asking him what books he liked was literally asking him to show his “cred” and he wasn’t really in to SFF anyway.