Showing posts with label hugo awards. Show all posts
Showing posts with label hugo awards. Show all posts

Tuesday, July 7, 2015

The Sad Puppies Hugo Issue.

In an earlier post I mentioned the current controversy stemming from the 73rd World Science Fiction Awards. I chose not to address what was going on at the time because I wanted to speak without bias about the nominees. As the time for voting draws to a close I think I’m ready to elaborate on what’s been going on as well as my thoughts on the matter.

Currently there is a faction of science fiction writers and readers going by the name Sad Puppies. This group is interested in righting a wrong they feel has been done to them and their like in the field as of late. According to them good, old-fashioned science fiction has fallen out of favor with awards because the conventions are overrun with a liberal agenda. They feel that while the books they’re writing are still popular with audiences their dedication to more traditional tropes of the genre have taken them out of the running for awards. They’ve pointed to several of the more recent ballots claiming that they are overrun with women and people of color authors.

The three main talking heads in this debate for the Sad Puppies side are Larry Correia, Brad Torgersen, and Vox Day. All three are white, Christian, conservative men. My first run in with the Sad Puppies opinion was in an article that Brad Torgersen wrote on his blog. In it he addressed what he felt is a big issue in the genre. His main complaint stemmed from the idea that science fiction as a genre was losing sales and it was because people had expectations that were not being lived up to. Essentially, people were picking up science fiction books expecting the genre to have not matured or evolved since the 50s.

My first issue with all of this is that this movement is based in three authors who haven’t been nominated for an award recently, and it comes across just as an attempt to whine their way into the awards. They say that the voting is skewed, but the voting for the Hugo Awards is done by fans. These are the books the fans are choosing. These are the books that are popular.

My second issue was that they’ve taken a stand against the literary bent they feel has infected the genre. Is pulp truly out of style? Well, maybe. But is there really anything wrong with the genre becoming more technically sound and intellectually stimulating?

My third issue is with the idea that there is something wrong with stories being more than what they appear on the surface. If I wanted a story about space travel would it really be so bad to also have that story be about sexism and gender equality issues? If the issues are presented solidly so that neither one detracts from the other then I don’t see the issue. Science fiction is notorious for doing that sort of thing!

And after reading all the nominees for the award I found it to be a particularly weak selection. Is this because it’s a result of slate voting taking over? I can’t say. It could be that this year was weak for science fiction, though there are still strong selections on the ballot. I went into the readings without the prior knowledge of how they got nominated so it can’t be that my politics are blinding me. I read and judged everything based purely on its merit as entertaining science fiction. The Sad Puppies' nominees just didn’t do it for me.

Monday, June 29, 2015

The 73rd World Science Fiction Convention.


In August the World Science Fiction Society will present the Hugo Awards in Sasquan, Washington. This is an award for science fiction fans by science fiction fans as the nominations and voting is open. This year is notable for the Hugo Awards due to the intense controversy surrounding the ballot. A group of science fiction writers and fans calling themselves the Sad Puppies instituted a “hacking” of the voting process by using slate voting. This sort of thing isn’t against the rules and might not have even been a big deal except that they are doing it under the claim that the Hugo Awards, and the science fiction fandom, has been corrupted by left-wing political-correctness and social justice warriors. It’s a little ridiculous and I’m not really interested in getting into my own thoughts on it right now. Instead, I want to talk about the nominees and who I predict (or rather hope) will win in four of the categories. Best Novel, Best Novelette, Best Novella, and Best Short Story.

Best Novel
  • Ancillary Sword, Ann Leckie
  • The Dark Between the Stars, Kevin J. Anderson
  • The Goblin Emperor, Katherine Addison
  • Skin Game, Jim Butcher
  • The Three Body Problem, Cixin Liu, Ken Liu translator
My prediction...
 The Three Body Problem by Cixin Liu

Best Novella
  • Big Boys Don’t Cry, Tom Kratman
  • “Flow”, Arlan Andrews, Sr.
  • One Bright Star to Guide Them, John C. Wright
  • “Pale Realms of Shade”, John C. Wright
  •  “The Plural of Helen of Troy”, John C. Wright
My prediction... 
 “Flow” by Arlan Andrews, Sr.

Best Novelette
  • “Ashes to Ashes, Dust to Dust, Earth to Alluvium”, Gray Rinehart
  • “Championship B’tok”, Edward M. Lerner
  • “The Day the World Turned Upside Down”, Thomas Olde Heuvelt, Lia Belt translator
  •  “The Journeyman: In the Stone House”, Michael F. Flynn
  •  “The Triple Sun: A Golden Age Tale”, Rajnar Vajra

My prediction...
 “The Day the World Turned Upside Down” by Thomas Olde Heuvelt

Best Short Story
  • “On A Spiritual Plain”, Lou Antonelli
  • “The Parliament of Beasts and Birds”, John C. Wright
  • “A Single Samurai”, Steven Diamond
  • “Totaled”, Kary English
  • “Turncoat”, Steve Rzasa
My Prediction...
  “On A Spiritual Plain” by Lou Antonelli


When I was reading I made a point of not looking into anything about the authors or who they were nominated by. I wanted to enjoy the works for themselves and not be tainted by outside information. I guess I have to wait until August to see how well my predictions turn out!