We Are Sad Puppies If You Please; We Are Sad Puppies If You Don’t Please 5/23

Posted on by

aka One Hundred Days of Being Stuck in a Crate Just Because You Ate the Goddamn Plum Pudding Again, if you Didn’t Want Me To Eat It You Shouldn’t Have Put it on the Table, Signed, Maggie, Your DOG

There are familiar and new bylines in today’s roundup: Bradley Armstrong, David Gerrold, John C. Wright, Michael Senft, John Ohno, Andrew Hickey, Vox Day, Amanda S. Green, Lis Carey, Elisa Bergslien, Patrick May, Rebekah Golden, Joseph Tomaras, and Spacefaring Kitten. (Credit for the alternate title goes to File 770 contributing editor of the day Greg.)

Bradley Armstrong on Screen Burn

“Solitair vs. The Hugos: Introduction” – May 22

I’ve seen Correia and company get a lot of bad press for this latest battle in the American culture war, but after a few arguments online I’m going to cool my jets. At least Sad Puppies is not as disgusting as this other movement from last year I won’t dignify with a name. Correia has been acerbic in arguing his case, but he hasn’t crossed any lines of decency unless you see the slate voting as an immoral-in-spirit rigging of democracy via statistical loophole. He was even harassed and slandered online, which I can’t approve of no matter the cause. I flipped my lid about the epidemic of that same thing springing from that-which-must-not-be-named, and I’m not going to go back on that because it’s happening to someone I disagree with.

Correia has my condolences, but I do still disagree with him on this matter. Matthew David Surridge, in declining his Puppy-backed nomination, wrote the most clear-headed and sensible summary of this whole affair I’ve seen on the internet by a wide margin, and my position mostly reflects his. In short, I see no evidence that there is a conspiracy to culturally control the Hugos, at least not one that is in any way recent, and I like stuff with literary aspirations just as much as modest pulp fare, if not more. I thought that high-brow art was what awards were for, since bestseller lists aren’t going to give the good ones the recognition they deserve. As far as the preachy sermonizing goes, I and everyone else who saw James Cameron’s Avatar knows that pain, but I don’t know what the Puppies’ threshold is for that. Are they objecting more strongly to badly-written garbage, or the presence of progressive stances in fiction?

 

David Gerrold on Facebook – May 23

[A long post that explains what Gerrold told the Wall Street Journal reporter during a 45-minute call, of which he says only three out-of-context sentences were used. The following is a short sample.]

When you get that many nominees dropping out and when you get so many major voices in the field condemning the slate-mongering, this is not just a casual disagreement. It is evidence that there is a widespread perception that the slate-mongering was a miscalculation on the part of Torgersen and Correia — and a deliberate attack on the field by Vox Day. (Vox Day has publicly declared his intentions to destroy the Hugos.)

That’s the situation. And that’s pretty much the gist of what I told the reporter from the Wall Street Journal — okay, in the interests of journalistic integrity, I also let the reporter know that I too share the views of Martin, Willis, Castro, Flint, Scalzi, Kowal, and others — that the slates were a bad idea and that this is the year of the asterisk.

And that brings me, finally (yes, I know you’re exhausted, me too) to the most important point I want to make. I know some of the people who ended up on the slates. They’re good people. They’re the real victims of this mess.

I’ve known Kevin Anderson for a long time and have a lot of affection for him. He’s had an enviable career. He’s a good man. I can’t imagine that Kevin would have been a knowledgeable part of any attempt to rig the Hugo awards. Likewise, I’m pretty sure that Tony Weiskopf and Sheila Gilbert would not have been either. They’ve all been around long enough to know better. They have great reputations, fairly earned by a lifetime of hard work.

Unfortunately, despite the integrity of the nominees, there’s still an asterisk on this year’s awards. It’s not their fault, but there it is.

 

John C. Wright

“No One Cares About Your Hooey” – May 23

….Anyone clicking through the link there will come to this:

  • I believe, profess, and unambiguously support the view that homosexuals must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity.
  • I believe, profess, and unambiguously support the view that every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.
  • I believe, profess, and unambiguously support the view that These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.
  • I believe everything the one, true, holy, catholic and apostolic Church teaches.

So, from your reaction, I take it you did not click through the link….

 

Michael Senft interviews Ann Leckie for The Arizona Republic

“Ann Leckie on ‘Ancillary Justice’ acclaim and breaking the pronoun barrier” – May 21

Q: One common comment about the Imperial Radch books is that you are writing a “genderless” society. That doesn’t seem an accurate interpretation.

A: Yeah, it’s been very interesting to me to see some of the discussion surrounding Radchaai and gender. The assumption, for instance, that the Radchaai must have “eradicated” gender in that society, when that’s really nowhere in the text. Or that, as you say, gender doesn’t exist, or that Breq “doesn’t understand” the concept of gender. Not infrequently someone will comment that it’s really stupid to think that a being as smart as Breq couldn’t get her head around the idea of gender, which is probably true, and that’s not really the problem Breq has, is it.

 

Michael Senft on Relentless Reading

“Ann Leckie on Hugos, pronouns and Genitalia Festivals” – May 23

And in an outtake from the story, she weighed in on the Hugo Awards, offering some advice to readers and members and why we she doesn’t worry about them too much:

“I probably shouldn’t comment on the Hugos this year. Though I will say what I would say any year, and that is that if the Hugos matter to you, you should nominate and vote. Sometimes I hear people comment that they don’t think they’re qualified because they don’t read enough, but I think the Hugos have always been about what the voters love, and if you love something and think it’s worthy of an award, you should be able to nominate it.

Beyond that—well, honestly, I figure I could spend my time worrying about awards, or even more pointlessly worrying about people’s opinions of awards, or even more pointlessly worrying about people’s opinions about who does or doesn’t “deserve” those awards — or I could spend my time writing. And I didn’t get into writing for awards. There are no guaranteed outcomes from anything, much less writing, and if I wanted a sure track to acclaim and fame and fortune I sure as heck wouldn’t have chosen writing to get that. I write because I want to tell stories, anything after that is extra. And fortunately I’ve got plenty of writing to do, and plenty of readers waiting for me to do it.”

 

John Ohno on The First Church of Space Jesus

“Utopianism and sci-fi as machine-lit” – May 13

There are several popular ways to look at science fiction as a genre. I have my own preferences. That said, the major opposing perspective — what I’d term the ‘machine-lit’ school of thought — has its merits, insomuch as it highlights a set of common tendencies in science fiction. I’d like to take this space to highlight the basic premise of machine-lit, the tendencies it breeds, and why I find most machine-lit to be relatively uninteresting.

(The third major perspective, what I call the spaceship-on-the-cover style, I find wholly uninteresting and is the subject of other essays; however, this perspective is becoming historically important lately because of some drama surrounding the Hugo awards being gamed by groups who prefer this style, so it’s worth mentioning in passing.)

 

Andrew Hickey on Sci-Ence! Justice Leak!

“Hugo Blogging: ‘Best’ Short Story” – May 23

….As a result, I do not believe a single story on the ballot is on there legitimately, and so I will be ranking No Award at the top of the list.

I would perhaps have some ethical qualms about this, were any of the nominated stories any good. However, happily, they range from merely not-very-good to outright abysmal. I shall rank the stories below No Award as follows:

Totaled by Kary English. This story is not in any way bad. It’s also, however, not in any way *good*, either. Were it in an anthology I read, I’d read through the story and forget it immediately, maybe remembering “the brain-in-a-jar one” if prodded enough. Perfectly competently put together, but with no new ideas, no interesting characters, and no real reason for existing. Certainly not Hugo-worthy…..

 

Vox Day on Vox Popoli

“Hugo Awards 2015: Best Novel” – May 23

This is how I am voting in the Best Novel category. Of course, I merely offer this information regarding my individual ballot for no particular reason at all, and the fact that I have done so should not be confused in any way, shape, or form with a slate or a bloc vote, much less a direct order by the Supreme Dark Lord of the Evil Legion of Evil to his 367 Vile Faceless Minions or anyone else.

  1. The Three-Body Problem
  2. Skin Game
  3. The Goblin Emperor
  4. The Dark Between the Stars
  5. No Award

 

Amanda S. Green on Nocturnal Lives

“A few thoughts” – May 23

I’m busy making my way through the Hugo packet. My goal is to read everything included in it. Once I have, I will vote for those works I feel best deserve the Hugo. So far, only a few things have thrown me out from the beginning because the author forgot that you can get your message across without beating your reader over the head. And, no, not all of them are anti-Puppy supported works. Will I post my ballot? Probably, but only after I vote.

 

Lis Carey on Lis Carey’s Library

“Cedar Sanderson Hugo Nomination Fanwriting Samples” – May 23

The distinctive feature here is that she congratulates herself on being feminine and a lady, as well as, of course, strong–unlike, we are given to understand, those silly and obnoxious feminists. She demands equality, and likes it when men put her on a pedestal, and doesn’t seem to notice the contradiction. Feminists are women seeking notoriety based solely on their femaleness, and want to grind men under their heels. There’s a long rant about lazy, wish-fulfillment fantasy, which does in fact say some useful and interesting things….

 

Elisa Bergslien on Leopards and Dragons

“My Three Body Problem problem”  – May 22

When I started this book, I was really looking forward to it.  I actually had it in my wish list at Amazon months ago because it sounded so cool. Now that I have finished it, I am really disappointed.  With all the hype about how deep, insightful, and exciting the book is, I have been left wondering if I read the same book. It wasn’t all bad I guess, but for me it definitely didn’t even remotely live up to the hype and I honestly don’t know if I will ever bother to pick up the next book to see what happens with the human race. As it is presented in the book, you kind of have to wonder if anyone is worth saving.

 

RogerBW’s Blog

“The Three Body Problem Liu Cixin” – May 23

This is a perversely fascinating book that gains far more interest from the problems it sets up than from the way it resolves them….

 

Patrick May

“2015 Hugo Award Novelette Category” – May 23

[Ranking is preceded by comments on all of the novelettes.)

My Hugo ballot for this category is:

  1. The Journeyman: In the Stone House
  2. The Triple Sun: A Golden Age Tale
  3. Ashes to Ashes, Dust to Dust, Earth to Alluvium
  4. Championship B’Tok

I am not including “The Day the World Turned Upside Down” on my ballot.

 

Rebekah Golden

“2015 Hugo Awards Best Professional Artist: Reviewing A Pollack” – May 23

His imagery is clear, epic, sweeping and fun….

 

Rebekah Golden

“2015 Hugo Awards Best TV Show: Reviewing Doctor Who” – May 22

I knew a guy who was a virgin and didn’t know what the big deal about sex was. Then he had sex. Then he wanted to have sex all the time. I’ve watched a few episodes of Doctor Who but I admit while I liked it I didn’t know what the big deal was. Now I know what the big deal is.

 

Joseph Tomaras on A Skinseller’s Workshop

“Novelettes, Novellas and Fan Writers” – May 23

Of the Analog stories, that leaves Rajnar Vajra’s story with the deceptively stupid title “The Triple Sun: A Golden Age Tale”. The title is clearly meant to pander to nostalgia for this-boy’s-life-in-space military SF stories of the so-called “Golden Age,” and insofar as it was selected by both sets of puppies for their slates, it succeeded. The title, however, bears little resemblance to the story itself, which can be read as subverting the tropes in which it superficially seems to glory. There is a valid argument to be had about whether subversion-of-tropes has not itself become a trope in contemporary SF, and a redundant one. I sympathize with that argument, but Vajra’s story is at least a better-than-average exemplar of the type, which held by interest start to finish and left me with a smile on my face. I encourage Hugo voters to read it with an open mind, and those who are not WorldCon members to seek it out.

 

 

John Scalzi on Whatever

“A Brief Note About Me Reviewing the Hugo Nominees” – May 23

I’ve been asked a few times if I plan to write any reviews of the Hugo nominees this year after I’ve read them. The answer: No, I don’t. One, if you look at my general modus operandi around Hugos, I don’t ever really comment on what I think of the merits of the individual nominees* until after the voting window has closed. Two, this year, this policy seems even more advisable as there are excitable people who would point out any reviews on my part as scale-tipping, regardless of what the review said. Three, as a general rule, in public, I try not to say negative things about the work of other writers. I will make exceptions from time to time. But generally, I avoid it….

 

https://twitter.com/voxday/status/602074475337805824

 

Discover more from File 770

Subscribe to get the latest posts to your email.

567 thoughts on “We Are Sad Puppies If You Please; We Are Sad Puppies If You Don’t Please 5/23”

  1. I’m NA-ing the whole Best Fan Writer category, but giving my #2 vote to Mixon purely because she isn’t a slate nominee. I don’t think a single piece of work should be sufficient for Best Fan Writer, I find her usage of stats problematic for what is otherwise an important and well-argued piece, and I agree with Matt Foster that any category where there is only one non-slate finalist has already been damaged beyond repair. However if by some awful chance No Award doesn’t win the category, I would prefer it to go to her than to any of the slate nominees.

  2. @MickeyFinn – “I’m not sure Bujold Needs More Hugos is a banner that anyone needs to die under.”

    Well, since I have already challenged you to a duel, I won’t yell more, but I feel that Bujold should have *all* of the Hugos.

    And yes, if I had to award them in order, I would start with the ones you mentioned.

  3. Maximillion
    No, Illyan says it to Ivan during his breakdown. When Miles goes to confer with the doctors leaving Ivan alone with Illyan.

    Countless readers burst into tears at that line. Even on re-reading.

    Granted, they do that in Cryoburn, too. But it’s not as unexpected. The whole book was building to that line.

    In Memory, the *entire series* is behind that line. It packs quite a punch.

  4. I would have to check the timing, but I sometimes wonder if the end of Iain M. Banks’ “Surface Detail” was not a challenge to Bujold on the “How much can we wobble things with a last line” category.

    It may just be that I read the Banks after hearing so much about the Bujold (my social media blew up over that one.), but the thought still charms me.

  5. @MickeyFinn “…and elephants”
    Oh, thank you. It’s time for me to read that one again.

    I also need to dig in and find whichever Miles book has ‘It’s too fast to be that big! It’s too big to be that fast!’ about the Prince Serg. That line has always made me think about the ore WW I dreadnaught race.

  6. >> But it occurred to me, not that she is afraid of panning any particular book, but that she might be reluctant to wade too deep into the controversy of the last four or five years of what some people say were lousy nominees and whether the Hugo process is now broken. Is that more clear?>>

    Let’s review:

    Brian said that Jo Walton didn’t go on past the year 2000 in her essays on the Hugos because “she was too tactful to say why she couldn’t keep going.”

    This was a lie, because Walton had forthrightly said why she couldn’t keep going. So Brian decided that what he’d really been saying was that sure, she did say why she couldn’t keep going, but maybe there were additional reasons, and maybe she was too tactful to specify them.

    This is just completely making stuff up, and on top of that there’s no backing off from the original dishonest claim, but what it turns out is going on is that Brian won’t say that the Hugos are all messed up, except that right after he says that he says he believes they’re all messed up, and they’ve been messed up from 2011-2014 (this may suggest he doesn’t think they’re messed up now, in which case wow), and he starts reasoning out ways that Jo Walton agrees with him on this and didn’t discuss them in her essays for the reasons he’s making up for her, and…

    No. Stopp digging, Brian. She wrote the essays in 2010-2011. Even if she’d taken them all the way up to the then-present (and she didn’t, and she said why), she wouldn’t have been talking about all but one of the years you’re talking about, because good a writer as she is, she does not see the future.

    Making up reasons why she didn’t cover the 2011-2014 period in an essay series that ended in 2011 is absurd. She didn’t cover 2001-2011 for the reasons she gave.

    She didn’t cover 2012-2014 not because she secretly agreed with you that the Puppies are right and was too tactful to say so, but because THEY HADN’T HAPPENED YET.

    So I guess that question about “Are we done?” is answered. No, you’re still making crap up and desperately trying to blame others for being mean to you when called on it.

  8. @MickeyFinn – “I’m not sure Bujold Needs More Hugos is a banner that anyone needs to die under.”

    I dunno, I think:

    Bujolda iterum Hugenda est

    has a certain ring to it.

  9. >> Also, you and Kurt and SocInWorrier have gone on to refer to Brian Z. being “run out of town” or “booted from ML”, suggesting that he’s been banned.>>

    I don’t think of being booted as being banned. They both involve being kicked out, but banned is an ongoing thing. Being told “stop participating until you can follow the rules and play nicely” is still booted.

    I don’t think I’ve ever said he was “run out of town.”

  10. Brian Z – yes, I think you are being too kind to previous shortlists. I’ve backed the winner only four times in the last fifteen years, including two of the last three – though the most recent period has also included Redshirts and Blackout/All Clear, which I thought unworthy winners. Then again, Hominids, which won in 2003, is far worse than either.

  11. Brian,

    I realy liked The Hundred Thousand Kingdoms. Good world building, real characters and fresh ideas of Goddhood.

  12. Youch, Mike, I wasn’t trying to insult them. Sorry it was heard that way. I was reacting to how utterly unsexy the proper sexual functioning sounds according to JCW’s phrasing ( is there a less sexy word for sexy fun time than copulating?) I was saying, too sarcastically I guess, that however potentially morally exalted his endorsed sexual lifestyle may be, I’m happy I was hard wired with a different option because his way of life ain’t for me.

    I grew up conservative Catholic and had theology similar to JCW’s drummed into me and spent a lot of years miserable as a result. I suppose that, coupled with my anger over the damage done by self righteous bigots like him and the Duggars (who have been on my mind the last couple of days) to vulnerable people makes me react in a way that overshoots the specific mark. Apologies.

  13. Kurt Busiek – So I guess that question about “Are we done?” is answered. No, you’re still making crap up and desperately trying to blame others for being mean to you when called on it

    You missed that now he’s saying it was snark.

    I’m still trying to get my head around him saying that he thinks the Hugos should be for awarding master authors at the height of their work to disqualify Ancillary Justice, but two different years Bujold was up he didn’t feel those books were worthy of being nominated (to be fair I’m paraphrasing, he said in 2011 The Dervish House was the only book that deserved to be there, and again with 2013 with the the book 2312).

    Maybe it’s another joke.

  14. @Tintinaus “I realy liked The Hundred Thousand Kingdoms. Good world building, real characters and fresh ideas of Goddhood.”

    Yes! That was an excellent book, loved the exploration of religion.

    Am I allowed to be an SJW if I wasn’t all that impressed with Redshirts?

  15. Kurt Busiek, if you missed it, I admit I was wrong. I retracted that comment. It was neither logical nor amusing. I should have thought a little more carefully before posting.

  16. >> It’d take a little more than basket accounting to turn $340,000 per year into a non-lucrative deal.>>

    And heck, during my relatively brief career as a literary agent, I was not a terribly experienced agent, but even I knew to put “No Basket Accounting” into any multi-book deal.

    I’m sure Scalzi’s agent is more experienced than I was.

  17. Maximillian:

    Am I allowed to be an SJW if I wasn’t all that impressed with Redshirts?

    No.

  18. @Kurt Busiek

    The way I see is that if a pub landlord “asks you to leave” because you* are annoying the other patrons with importunities and aspersions, everyone else will say that you were booted or thrown out of the pub, even though neither boot nor arm was employed to facilitate your velocitous extramuralization.

    *The “you” here being a purely hypothetical you not even remotely related to Kurt Busiek. I would shrink, nay I would blanch, from even metaphorically bearing false witness against a noble soul and gentleman of virtue such as Mr Busiek.

  19. Hmm, I thought AJ deserved its run of collecting all the awards, and was the best hugo best novel winner since 2005. so, ummm, opinions differ.

    ULTRAGOTHA: if I remember correctly, it is Ky Tung gibbering enthusiastically about the Prince Serg after it has just arrived in system?

  21. Tintinaus, was The Hundred Thousand Kingdoms a great first novel by a new author? Or is it going to hold up on the shelf with Dune, Hyperion, The Dispossessed?

    What are we going for? A book that fun to read? Something with pretty good writing and pretty interesting ideas? Something so good that it changes you as a person when you read it?

  22. I am sure someone’s done this, but still, it seems appropriate in the light of impending Bealesqueals about Scalzi’s Supremacy:

    All Tomorrow’s Puppies

  23. >> You missed that now he’s saying it was snark.>>

    Yeah, I hadn’t got that far yet. It was snark that he kept rationalizing and rephrasing and justifying, because that’s what one does with snark, when it doesn’t go over.

  24. >> The way I see is that if a pub landlord “asks you to leave” because you* are annoying the other patrons with importunities and aspersions, everyone else will say that you were booted or thrown out of the pub, even though neither boot nor arm was employed to facilitate your velocitous extramuralization.>>

    Yes. That’s being booted. It’s not being banned. Once I* sober up, he may let me come back, particularly if I owe him for my tab.

    >> *The “you” here being a purely hypothetical you not even remotely related to Kurt Busiek.>>

    *Uh, right! Of course not! Me neither!

  25. Brian Z: As I read The Hundred Thousand Kingdoms I had just about reached agreement with people who nominated it for a Hugo when I arrived at some disclosures near the end that really threw me, because it seemed to me that if everybody in the fictional society knows these things are true (which nevertheless had been withheld from the reader up to that point), then the society would have operated COMPLETELY DIFFERENTLY than the way postulated by the book.

  26. Nicolas Whyte,

    yes, I think you are being too kind to previous shortlists. I’ve backed the winner only four times in the last fifteen years,

    To clarify, I’m not demanding my personal favorites make the shortlist – that almost never happens. I’d define a successful shortlist as a set of works that would challenge me to think about which one of them is among the best of the year. That hasn’t happened recently, and in 2014 there was no novel I was willing to vote for. (Though maybe I’m being too hard on Stross.)

    To take 2003, yes it is ludicrous that Hominids might be called best of the year. But at least there was a rich field of competition. Years of Rice and Salt wasn’t the best of Robinson, but it did break new ground. There was The Scar by Mieville and Bones of the Earth by Michael Swanwick. I have no idea what people thought they were doing when they nominated The Kiln People, so no, not the strongest year. But not anywhere near as bad as 2013-14, and recently I’m starting to wonder if there is a pattern I don’t know that there is; I’m just trying to figure it out.

  27. Maximillian – Am I allowed to be an SJW if I wasn’t all that impressed with Redshirts?

    Not if those SJWs are Scalzi Justice Warriors.

    For whatever the hell SJWs are today I’m not sure Social Justice requires liking a Sci-Fi book. Besides, everyone knows you need a Siamese cat.

  28. >> What are we going for? A book that fun to read? Something with pretty good writing and pretty interesting ideas? Something so good that it changes you as a person when you read it?>>

    Best Novel of the Year. That’s more or less what it says on the tin, right?

    Some years, the best novel of the year may be life-changing. Some years it may be something that was extremely fun to read. Some years a great book by a new writer.

    I hope it’s never merely something with pretty good writing and pretty interesting ideas. But I would presume that depends on what else came out that year and how liberal the voters are with No Award.

  29. Mike Glyer: I just think authors of uneven first novels, even if they are mostly great, should probably get the Campbell. Or maybe a best first novel category?

  30. >> I’m not sure Social Justice requires liking a Sci-Fi book.>>

    Social Justice is a party ship a galaxy or two over from the Radch Empire.

    Social Sword and Social Mercy are its sister ships.

    The staff on the ships doesn’t recognize gender, just hashtags.

  31. Matt Y,

    two different years Bujold was up he didn’t feel those books were worthy of being nominated

    Feel free to push back on Bujold, I’m just giving my opinion that I don’t feel motivated to give Bujold a bunch of Hugos.

  32. There are scads of first time novelists who aren’t eligible for a Campbell. Ann Leckie, for example.

  33. I think it is time for me to take my Glittery Hoo Ha off to bed, and be grateful that heterosexual women aren’t automatically inclined to beat me to death with ax handles.

  34. ULTRAGOTHA

    There are scads of first time novelists who aren’t eligible for a Campbell. Ann Leckie, for example.

    That doesn’t mean those novelists should get extra consideration for the Best Novel Hugo, in my opinion. How about some special recognition for a best first novel instead?

  35. Brian Z – You’ve said 2013 (we’re down to ’13 and ’14 now!) was a bad year with little worthy of contention, is the work from Bujold unworthy or did you disqualify it because the author has won so many Hugos? If it’s the latter than that’s still quality work being considered for the year.

    What pattern are you starting to wonder about?

  36. @Kurt – Social Justice is a party ship a galaxy or two over from the Radch Empire.

    Social Sword and Social Mercy are its sister ships.

    The staff on the ships doesn’t recognize gender, just hashtags.

    Well, there goes another keyboard.

  37. How about some special recognition for a best first novel instead?

    What if voters felt that the author’s first novel was also the best novel of the year? Leckie could’ve taken home two Hugos! You might disagree on the worthiness of it, and I’m not a fan of the story told, but it won nearly every ward last year, so I think it’s safe to say that the majority of voters and other people felt that it was worthy.

    So Bujold doesn’t get consideration of worthiness because he’s won many times. Leckie doesn’t because she’s a new author. Are there other criteria other than what people felt was the best book that year we should consider?

  38. is the work from Bujold unworthy or did you disqualify it because the author has won so many Hugos? If it’s the latter than that’s still quality work being considered for the year.

    To my mind, one part of what makes the best science fiction novel of the year is that it breaks new ground, preferably the ideas, possibly the form, the craft of the writing. Some writers might deserve getting multiple Hugos because they constantly strive to push themselves to new heights. Does Bujold fall in that category?

  39. Kurt – The staff on the ships doesn’t recognize gender, just hashtags

    Woah, be careful how you flaunt those hashtags, there might be #children on this ship

  40. @MickeyFinn “ULTRAGOTHA: if I remember correctly, it is Ky Tung gibbering enthusiastically about the Prince Serg after it has just arrived in system?”

    I’m pretty sure that it’s a sensor tech reporting before they are entirely certain who the ship is there to help.

  41. Brian Z – To my mind, one part of what makes the best science fiction novel of the year is that it breaks new ground, preferably the ideas, possibly the form, the craft of the writing. Some writers might deserve getting multiple Hugos because they constantly strive to push themselves to new heights. Does Bujold fall in that category?

    You know what book does fall into that category? Ancillary Justice. It broke new ground with familiar ideas, with a bunch of new ones, challenged the standard form and craft of Sci-Fi writing. Which is why though I’m not a fan of the story I totally get why it won. Seems like other than it was the authors first book it fits your criteria!

  42. You’ve said 2013 (we’re down to ’13 and ’14 now!)

    Don’t forget 2015! and there were problems with 2011 and 2012 too. I don’t know if there is a pattern, but it is starting to feel like one.

  43. @Will “Has anyone done The Ringworm Engineers?”

    Wow. Just… Wow.

    *golf clap*

  44. Brian Z – I don’t know if there is a pattern, but it is starting to feel like one

    What’s this pattern look like?

  45. I am at a complete loss at how a debut novelist is getting “extra consideration” by being nominated. They are, if anything, at a disadvantage over more established writers.

    But by all means, if you are a member of WSFS, send your proposal for a Best First Novel Hugo category to Kevin Standlee. The deadline is August 9, I think.

    If you want to change the Campbell Award eligibility rules, you’ll need to lobby Dell Magazines.

  46. Jim Henley @ 2:50 pm- I disagree. The central issue so far as SF/F fans should be concerned is whether John C. Wright can write. Whether he approves or disapproves of gays is besides the point.

    Why is his opposition to homosexual behavior a central issue?

    Nata @ 2:57 pm- So you are criticizing a passage in his Hugo nominated work, which is why some are discussing his views on homosexuality? If so, fair enough.

    Matt Y @ 2:58 pm- John C. Wright’s Golden Age and Everness series are truly excellent, in my opinion. I have not yet read his Orphans or Count to a Trillion series.

    Chris Henley @ 3:01- John C. Wright could be a horrible man, for all I know. I personally doubt it; my suspicion is that he is decent human being who is also a hard core Catholic which is not that unusual. But good person or bad person, that has nothing to do with whether he’s a good writer.

    Stevie @ 3:14 pm- I agree, in that I’ve seen late converts sometimes take a harder line in religion than those who’ve grown up with faith. I’m not sure why that is, but it seems to be not unusual (though I hesitate to claim it is more common than not). Personally, as a life long (albeit a poor) Christian (Methodist) I think all human beings are sinners. So whether one sins doing A or sins doing B, we’re all sinning. The question is not whether we don’t sin (we all do and will), but whether we ask for forgiveness and have faith that Jesus Christ is our Lord and Savior.

    John C. Wright is not perfect. He sins. I sin. You sin. We’re all human; it’s part and parcel of the condition.

    For Hugo purposes, however, the question is not whether John C. Wright or Steve Moss or a hypothetical homosexual are sinners (we are) or how we are sinning (only God should judge), but whether he’s a good writer. I’d like to focus on the stories and the writing, and less on personal failings (real or imagined).

    And fair enough if you think his nominated works are good enough. I disagree, in that I think what I’ve I read so far is very good, but it’s your call.

    Lori Coulson @ 3:53 pm- Yes. I’ve seen people from both sides act like it’s in the bag, which makes me scratch my head. The only way to tell who is “winning” is to count the votes.

    Maximillian @ 8:28 pm- Curse of Chalion was an excellent novel, but so was American Gods.

  47. @BrianZ –
    I’m not certain that it was as good as Dune, but I still have a very clear memory of The Thousand Kingdoms and the discussion of god hood and what it meant to be the God of Children. It was very good.

  48. >> I don’t know if there is a pattern, but it is starting to feel like one.>>

    A pattern of what? Can you describe it?

    Me, I have no idea, because I’ve been so far behind (and a non-Hugo-voter until this year) that I can’t judge, but it seems like if there’s a pattern, one should be able to say what it’s a pattern of, rather than just vaguely using the word “pattern.”

    If they were awarding excellence every year, that’s a pattern, after all.

  49. @cmn – I’ll admit that your earlier post made me think, ‘hey, that’s not quite right’, but I will swear to having absolutely no intention of hitting you or yours with an axe handle.

  50. Kurt: the Socials are much more friendly versions of the Ancillaries?

    Matt Y: yeah, its one of the reasons a first novel from a new author or the first novel from a new series by an old author might have a better shot than a novel that continues a series, even if its an incremental improvement. The construction of an interesting new world from scratch isn’t possible in the nth book in a series.

    Maximillian: hmm, apparently its been too long. I might have to do a Vorkosigan re-read from start after I’ve finished doing the hard yards reading this years nominees.

Comments are closed.