|
|
Uber User
Posts: 1057
|
Nominations for the 2015 Hugo Awards will open at midnight (PDT).
Nominations from eligible Worldcon members can be made here until midnight (PDT), March 16, 2015. Categories are: Best Novel
Best Novella
Best Novelette
Best Short Story
Best Related Work
Best Graphic Story
Best Dramatic Presentation (Long and Short Forms)
Best Semiprozine
Best Fanzine
Best Professional Editor (Long and Short Forms)
Best Professional Artist
Best Fan Artist
Best Fan Writer
Best Fancast
So, what 2014-published entries are you considering for nomination? Share your favorites here; there's still time for us to read them before nominations close. | |
| | |
Admin
Posts: 3942
Location: Dallas, Texas | Bump. | |
| | |
Extreme Veteran
Posts: 535
Location: Great Lakes, USA | I'm still reading books published in 2014, but so far, Annihilation by Jeff Vandermeer and Ancillary Sword by Ann Leckie are at the top of my list.
I don't read enough shorter fiction to really nominate anything. I didn't really like Scale Bright, so I wouldn't nominate it for anything. The Mothers of Voorhisville was decent enough. (still have visions of fat little cherubs flying around with bloody little fangs when I think about that story). If anyone can recommend any shorter fiction to read, that would be great. | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 794
| I'm behind the eight ball on 2014 books. Given the number of positive reviews I think The Martian is going to be a shoo-in. | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 770
Location: SC, USA | I just finished The Martian last weekend. I thought it was very good--with a nice mixture of humor, science and drama. I hope it is nominated for a lot of awards. I have The Quick, Station Eleven and The Bone Clocks on my shelf. I'm going to try to get to one of them very soon. | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 526
Location: UK | I see Annihilation getting a lot of nominations. Or will people go for the whole series? I've only read the first one so far.
I enjoyed The Martian, but maybe not as much as some. I think it probably has its best chance in the Hugo.
I'd like to see Adam Roberts' Bete pick up some nominations.
I don't have much to say about the other categories. I'd be happy to see What Makes This Book So Great? By Jo Walton get nominated for related work.
Edited by DrNefario 2015-01-16 2:14 PM
| |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1057
| DrNefario - 2015-01-17 7:13 AM I see Annihilation getting a lot of nominations. Or will people go for the whole series? I suspect people should nominate the Southern Reach trilogy as a series as they were all published in 2014, so that they don't compete with each other. The WoT nomination last year would set a precedent for this. I loved The Martian, Ancillary Sword, Lock In, Defenders, and The Chaplain's War. Trial By Fire was really good. The Mirror Empire was really good -- but I had a tough time keeping it all straight, which hardly ever happens to me. Cibola Burn was good but not in the same league as the previous entries in the series. I liked, but was very disappointed with My Real Children and The Three, as I was hoping to love them. I'm 2/3 done with Lagoon and I strongly suspect it's going to fall into the same category. I've still got at least a dozen or more I hope to get read before nominations close. | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1057
| For those looking for possible nominees, check: Books Published in 2014 Challenge Books Published in 2014 Thread with lots of lists and links to lists | |
| | |
Regular
Posts: 54
| The Goblin Emperor by Katherine Addison and Maplecroft by Cherie Priest were both very good--though not perfect--and I'd be happy to see either of them nominated. The Girls of the Kingfisher Club by Genevieve Valentine was even better, but that one I wouldn't want to see nominated, since despite the fact that it's a fairy tale retelling, it's not SFF in the slightest: just a really awesome historical fiction novel. For a flawed but interesting work I'll also mention The Bees by Laline Paull, which has a fascinating premise but an uneven execution.
I've read shockingly little short fiction from 2014, so I can't comment on those categories. Best graphic stories, though: Loki: Agent of Asgard vol. 1: Trust Me by Al Ewing is clever and funny and emotionally affecting. I doubt it'll actually make the ballot, since not only is it criminally under-read, but out of the thirty-ish graphic story Hugo nominations in the past six years there's been exactly one Marvel comic (and one DC comic). I'd love to be proven wrong, though. Slightly less amazing but still great were Avengers Assemble: The Forgeries of Jealousy by Kelly Sue DeConnick and Warren Ellis, Ms. Marvel vol. 1: No Normal by G. Willow Wilson, Red Sonja vol. 1: Queen of Plagues by Gail Simone, and Lazarus vol. 2: Lift by Greg Rucka. | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 526
Location: UK | I nominated Lazarus vol 1 last year. I haven't actually read the second collection yet, but it would be nice to see it make the ballot. | |
| | |
Regular
Posts: 54
| DrNefario - I nominated Lazarus vol 1 last year. I haven't actually read the second collection yet, but it would be nice to see it make the ballot.
It's practically as good as the first volume, in my opinion. I think you'll enjoy it.
And a point of discussion: is The Martian even eligible for this year's Hugo? Weir self-published it a few years ago; it just wasn't sold by a traditional publisher until 2014. | |
| | |
Regular
Posts: 54
| Answering my own question from above, I found this analysis of The Martian's eligibility that seems pretty persuasive to me and that concludes that the book is most likely ineligible for the Hugo. | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1057
| Jain - 2015-01-19 3:22 PM Answering my own question from above, I found this analysis of The Martian's eligibility that seems pretty persuasive to me and that concludes that the book is most likely ineligible for the Hugo. Oh! Thanks for that link! It leads to a couple of really good other posts: Chaos Horizon's 2015 Hugo Predictions 3.0 Chaos Horizon's 2015 Nebula Predictions 3.0 It would be a shame to see The Martian deprived of the chance for a Hugo nomination. If it had only been serialized on Weir's website, it would be a clone of Old Man's War and probably eligible. But sadly, the fact that it was self-published as an e-book on Amazon and sold 35,000 copies likely means that it will be declared ineligible. But I expect to see it highly-nominated anyway -- both from ignorance of the situation, and from protest that it's ineligible.
Edited by illegible_scribble 2015-01-18 10:44 PM
| |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1057
|
Those desiring a review copy of the Writing Excuses podcast gang's mini-anthology Shadows Beneath, with stories by Dan Wells, Howard Tayler, Mary Robinette Kowal, and Brandon Sanderson, can request a copy from the link on Brandon Sanderson's blog.
| |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1057
|
And Ken Liu is offering, upon request, a review copy of any of his eligible works which is not freely available online.
| |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1057
|
Jim Hines is offering a free review copy of Invisible, his related-work anthology of guest blog posts on Representation in SFF (by authors including Mark Oshiro, Katharine Kerr, Michi Trota, and others) upon request to jchines@sff.net -- or most of the essays can be read online for free here. | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1057
|
The 2014 Some of the Best from Tor.com short fiction anthology is available for free right now.
| |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 370
Location: Beaverton, Oregon, USA | I really liked The Martian as well. If it's eligible, I think it's a shoo-in as well. I usually don't read too many current books, since I'm mostly a library and used book store geek, but I did read The Bone Clocks and The Dark Defiles. I think the former is a shoo-in for the Nebula, but probably too literary for the Hugos, though judging from the author appearance I went to, David Mitchell has quite a cult following. The Dark Defiles was a really good ending to the trilogy, but not as good as the first.. Richard K Morgan also seems to have a cult following, but judging from the comments on his website, his fantasy wasn't as well received as his SF usually is. I don't think it's a contender. | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1465
Location: The Netherlands | One book that I think should definitely make the shortlist is Liu Cixin's The Three Body Problem. It was first published in English last year so it should be eligible. | |
| | |
Regular
Posts: 54
| Another worthy book is City of Stairs by Robert Jackson Bennett. Urban fantasy/mystery in an otherworld setting, with great characters and very interesting worldbuilding. | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1057
|
Gardner Dozois' The Year's Best Science Fiction: Thirty-second Annual Collection containing stories published in 2014 will, unfortunately, not be released until 7 July, 2015.
However, he has already announced the Table of Contents, and here are links to entries which are available to read for free online.
| |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1057
|
Locus Magazine has released their 2014 Recommended Reading list. Unfortunately, they haven't provided links to the shorter fiction entries which are available online for free  but I recommend searching for them, if you're interested. Free SF Online will often have links to novellas, novelettes, and short stories which are available online.
Edited by illegible_scribble 2015-02-02 2:49 AM
| |
| | |
Extreme Veteran
Posts: 535
Location: Great Lakes, USA | @valashain - I agree with The Three Body Problem making the short list. I am halfway through it and it is excellent. I also recently read Defenders by Wil MacIntosh, Lock In by John Scalzi and The Chaplain's War by Brad Torgersen all of which are also worthy of making the Hugo short list.
Edited by daxxh 2015-02-16 2:26 PM
| |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1057
|
Wow. I just got done reading Robert Jackson Bennett's City of Stairs. It's an absolutely fantastic blend of science fiction, fantasy, and mystery.
It's definitely going to be on my Top 5 list for Hugo Best Novel -- possibly THE top. I encourage you to get hold of a copy and read it, if you haven't already. | |
| | |
Extreme Veteran
Posts: 305
| I truly enjoyed City of Stairs also. Well written prose, interesting lot and intriguing plot.
BTW thanks for all the great links above! | |
| | |
Extreme Veteran
Posts: 305
| Interesting world building* | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 526
Location: UK | Finally got round to putting a provisional ballot in today. There are still a couple of books I'd like to read, but there's not much more than two weeks to go.
Also, I don't really know who's eligible for the Campbell. Maybe I need to research that. | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1057
| DrNefario - 2015-02-24 12:49 AM Also, I don't really know who's eligible for the Campbell. Maybe I need to research that. John W. Campbell Award Eligibility Page at Writertopia | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 526
Location: UK | Maybe I need someone else to research that for me. 
Thanks. | |
| | |
Extreme Veteran
Posts: 305
| The website for the Campbell award is pretty straightforward. The list of eligible authors is extensive. I've never voted but it looks daunting- although I recognize a number of names. I need to be on a larger screen than my phone to look at the links. | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1057
|
Read the Nebula and Norton Award Nominees online
(NOTE: For excerpt-only entries, I've included the Google Books Preview link when available, as this may provide a longer excerpt)
Novel
The Goblin Emperor, Katherine Addison (Tor) (excerpt) Google Books preview
Trial by Fire, Charles E. Gannon (Baen) (excerpt)
Ancillary Sword, Ann Leckie (Orbit US; Orbit UK) (excerpt)
The Three-Body Problem, Cixin Liu, translated by Ken Liu (Tor) (excerpts) Google Books preview
Coming Home, Jack McDevitt (Ace) (excerpt) Google Books preview
Annihilation, Jeff VanderMeer (FSG Originals; Fourth Estate; HarperCollins Canada) (excerpt) Google Books preview
Novella
"We Are All Completely Fine", Daryl Gregory (Tachyon) (excerpt)
"Yesterday’s Kin", Nancy Kress (Tachyon) (excerpt) Google Books preview
"The Regular", Ken Liu (Upgraded) (.epub and .mobi format only, part of Forever Magazine #1)
"The Mothers of Voorhisville", Mary Rickert (Tor.com 4/30/14)
"Calendrical Regression", Lawrence M. Schoen (NobleFusion) (.epub and .mobi format only)
"Grand Jeté (The Great Leap)", Rachel Swirsky (Subterranean Summer ’14)
Novelette
"Sleep Walking Now and Then", Richard Bowes (Tor.com 7/9/14)
"The Magician and Laplace’s Demon", Tom Crosshill (Clarkesworld 12/14)
"A Guide to the Fruits of Hawai’i", Alaya Dawn Johnson (F&SF 7-8/14)
"The Husband Stitch", Carmen Maria Machado (Granta #129)
"We Are the Cloud", Sam J. Miller (Lightspeed 9/14)
"The Devil in America", Kai Ashante Wilson (Tor.com 4/2/14)
Short Story
"The Breath of War", Aliette de Bodard (Beneath Ceaseless Skies 3/6/14)
"When It Ends, He Catches Her", Eugie Foster (Daily Science Fiction 9/26/14)
"The Meeker and the All-Seeing Eye", Matthew Kressel (Clarkesworld 5/14)
"The Vaporization Enthalpy of a Peculiar Pakistani Family", Usman T. Malik (Qualia Nous)
"A Stretch of Highway Two Lanes Wide", Sarah Pinsker (F&SF 3-4/14) click here to request a copy from the author
"Jackalope Wives", Ursula Vernon (Apex 1/7/14)
"The Fisher Queen", Alyssa Wong (F&SF 5/14)
Andre Norton Award for Young Adult Science Fiction and Fantasy
Unmade, Sarah Rees Brennan (Random House) (.pdf excerpt) Google Books preview
Salvage, Alexandra Duncan (Greenwillow) (excerpt)
Love Is the Drug, Alaya Dawn Johnson (Levine) (excerpt)
Glory O’Brien’s History of the Future, A.S. King (Little, Brown) (excerpt) Google Books preview
Dirty Wings, Sarah McCarry (St. Martin’s Griffin) (excerpt)
Greenglass House, Kate Milford (Clarion) (excerpt) Google Books preview
The Strange and Beautiful Sorrows of Ava Lavender, Leslye Walton (Candlewick) (.pdf excerpt) Overdrive Sample | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1057
|
DrNefario - 2015-02-24 10:51 PM Maybe I need someone else to research that for me. Thanks. Dlw28 - 2015-02-24 11:21 PM
The list of eligible authors is extensive. I've never voted but it looks daunting- although I recognize a number of names.. The last two years, Rampant Loon Media has produced a Campbellian Anthology with submissions from eligible authors. The 2015 edition was supposed to be available 15 January; however, they are apparently having difficulty getting it completed. I am checking periodically to see if it's been published yet. | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1057
| illegible_scribble - 2015-02-27 2:56 PM Short Story
"A Stretch of Highway Two Lanes Wide", Sarah Pinsker (F&SF 3-4/14) Sarah Pinsker has reached an agreement with The Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction to make her story publicly available for the duration of the Hugo nomination/voting period. You can read it here . | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1057
|
I've suspended my 2014 novel-reading as of 1 March to try and read as much shorter fiction as possible before the 10 March Hugo Nomination Deadline.
Here's my assessment of what I've read, novel-wise: Award-worthy (in approximate order of preference, though I still haven't decided my Top 5 to nominate yet) North, Claire - The First Fifteen Lives of Harry August - this novel is absolutely fantastic. It's very similar to Kate Atkinson's Life After Life, but is much, much better. It's got shades of Kage Baker's Company series. I am absolutely blown away by the fact that it was written by a 26-year-old. If you haven't yet read this, go do it. Right now. Grossman, Lev - The Magician's Land - I re-read The Magicians and The Magician King prior to reading this, and it made me remember just how fantastic the first two books in the series were. Grossman is a master at blending sly cultural references with damn good storytelling. I found this concluding entry incredibly satisfying.
Page, Shannon and Lake, Jay - Our Lady of the Islands - I really liked this. The worldbuilding is excellent, the plot is unique -- and it was so great to read a story with protagonists who are mature adults with rich life backstories instead of the usual nubile, gorgeous, twenty-something main characters encountered all-too-frequently in SF.
Leckie, Ann - Ancillary Sword - Leckie hits another one out-of-the-park, once again combining space opera and mystery into a can't-put-down book. I can't wait for the next entry in the series.
Scalzi, John - Lock In - This is a real departure from the author's trademark space opera, an excellent murder-mystery detective story in a near-future Earth where comatose plague victims live regular lives through the use of surrogate android bodies. I think there's a good basis for a series here.
McIntosh, Will - Defenders - This is such a complete departure from the author's previous Love Minus Eighty, but just as well done. It's a near-future Earth story paralleling the catastrophes experienced by Australia and New Zealand, where early colonists imported foreign animal species as predators for undesirable native species and ended up wrecking the countries' ecological systems. Except in this story, humans breed super-humans with altered psyches to fight invading aliens -- and end up with an even bigger problem than the one with which they started. Utterly believable.
Bennett, Robert Jackson - City of Stairs - A story of a mystery in a world once populated by magic gods. I really enjoyed the main characters in this story, and the worldbuilding and magic structure are excellent. Would totally be nominating if it weren’t ineligible due to prior self-publication
Weir, Andy - The Martian - An epic "left behind" near-future adventure with a snarky, inventive astronaut. A fast, really enjoyable read.
Right up there
Ramirez, David - The Forever Watch - This is a murder-mystery story set on a generation ship, with a great protagonist and excellent worldbuilding. Builds slowly to a really rewarding finish. Watts, Peter - Echopraxia - This is a loose sequel to Blindsight, which I re-read first (something I recommend doing for full appreciation of the sequel). This reminded me of how good Watts is -- he's not an easy read, but the payoff is worthwhile. Asaro, Catherine - Underworld - I hadn't read any of Asaro's Skolian Empire Saga prior to reading this -- something I immediately rectified by reading all the others after reading this one, because I liked it so much. Gannon, Charles E - Trial By Fire - An excellent follow-up to Fire With Fire, which kicked itself out of the Top 5 due to an implausible sub-plot-point. But it's still a fantastic military SF story, and I'm looking forward to the next entry in the series. Torgersen, Brad R - The Chaplain's War - A really, really good military SF novel in the tradition of Old Man's War and The Forever War. Missed out on being Top 5 because the author couldn't resist the temptation to try to tie everything up with a bow in the last 2 pages, but definitely a great exploration of what it is to be human.
Really liked, well worth reading
Gussoff, Caren - The Birthday Problem - Intertwining lives in a post-plague world, with a bit of a mystery and a satisfying tying-together of threads in the end.
Byrne, Monica - The Girl in the Road - Intertwining stories of two women from different times, including an epic journey with a mystery.
Shepard, Lucius - Beautiful Blood - I recommend (re)reading The Dragon Griaule before this one. Shepard's gritty fantasies are a refreshing change from the usual dragon fare.
Holmberg, Charlie N - The Paper Magician
Holmberg, Charlie N - The Glass Magician - These books were really enjoyable, with an interesting, slightly different magic realism basis which prevented them from being a Harry Potter clone. Wells, Jennifer Foehner - Fluency - I was surprised by how much I enjoyed this near-future space opera / alien spaceship encounter.
VanderMeer, Jeff - Annihilation
VanderMeer, Jeff - Authority - The Southern Reach Trilogy falls into the category of Weird SF -- and it is weird. But I enjoyed it far more than I expected to.
Close, but No Cigar (good, but they could have been great)
Sweterlitsch, Thomas - Tomorrow and Tomorrow - really, really good, but felt like a disappointing, slapped-together ending VanderMeer, Jeff - Acceptance - didn't tie up the series as well as I would have liked, I felt like I needed to re-read it to really understand it fully but wasn't compelled enough to do so.
Walton, Jo - My Real Children - Auuuugggghhh. Just as with Among Others, it was so, so frustratingly close to being great but ultimately was unsatisfying.
Lotz, Sarah - The Three - I was really hoping this wasn't going where it went. Had great potential; ended up being merely okay.
Okorafor, Nnedi - Lagoon - This Immortal meets X-Men. Really interesting for the insights into a different culture, but really hard work since much of the dialogue is in barely-comprehensible Pidgin English, and a storyline that's a bit disjointed.
Great, but Too Epic in Scale to take in completely in a single reading
Hurley, Kameron - The Mirror Empire - recommended reading, but not an easy read.
Great Series Entries which will no doubt unfortunately be ignored McGuire, Seanan - The Winter Long - October Daye #9
Stross, Charles - The Rhesus Chart - Laundry Files #5
Good Series Entries
Buckell, Tobias S - Hurricane Fever Corey, James S A - Cibola Burn Weber, David and Zahn, Timothy - A Call to Duty
Partly Read, but not gripping enough to supersede other reading (though I will probably go back and finish them at some point) Hamilton, Peter F - The Abyss Beyond Dreams Lord, Karen - The Galaxy Game
Christopher, Adam - Hang Wire Still to Read
Mandel, Emily St John - Station Eleven
Huang, S L - Zero Sum Game and Half Life
Liu, Cixin - The Three-Body Problem
Cambias, James - A Darkling Sea
Anderson, Kevin J - Dark Between the Stars
Edited by illegible_scribble 2015-03-03 6:00 AM
| |
| | |
Extreme Veteran
Posts: 305
| Appreciate your links, reviews and recommendations. There are always more titles to explore than I come across in my wanderings. Thanks. | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1057
| Dlw28 - 2015-03-03 11:54 PM Appreciate your links, reviews and recommendations. There are always more titles to explore than I come across in my wanderings. Thanks. I really appreciate getting other peoples' opinions and recommendations, too! Of course, I always jump on new releases by favorite authors. But when it comes to discovering new authors, there are so many books being released all the time, that other peoples' suggestions and synopses are really the only way I can narrow down the possibilities without wasting my time on a lot of stinkers or books that are decent but just aren't to my taste. | |
| | |
Extreme Veteran
Posts: 535
Location: Great Lakes, USA | @illegible_scribble - I also appreciate your links and recommendations. I have added a lot of books to my TBR list.
I am trying to read some short fiction this week so that I can fill out more of the Hugo ballot than just the novels section. | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1057
|
With 15 minutes to go, here's what I've come up with. There are WAY too many short pieces still unread – but this is far and away the best informed I've ever been for Hugo Nominations.
Best Novel:
The First Fifteen Lives of Harry August, by Claire North (Orbit)
The Magician's Land, by Lev Grossman (Viking Juvenile)
Our Lady of the Islands, by Shannon Page and Jay Lake (Per Aspera Press)
Defenders, by Will McIntosh (Orbit)
Ancillary Sword, by Ann Leckie (Orbit)
(note that Scalzi's Lock-In is not on my list, because I figure he's a shoo-in, anyway, and I'd like to offset some of the dreck that Sad Puppies sycophants are nominating; also, not Andy Weir's The Martian, because I'm pretty sure it's not eligible to prior self-publishing)
Best Novella:
Calendrical Regression, by Lawrence M Schoen (NobleFusion)
The Regular, by Ken Liu (Upgraded, ed by Neil Clarke)
Yesterday's Kin, by Nancy Kress (Tachyon)
Unlocked, by John Scalzi (Tor.com)
The Man Who Sold The Moon, by Cory Doctorow (Heiroglyph, ed by Cramer & Finn)
Best Novelette:
Collateral, by Peter Watts (Upgraded, ed by Neil Clarke)
Seventh Sight, by Greg Egan (Upgraded, ed by Neil Clarke)
Come From Away, by Madeline Ashby (Upgraded, ed by Neil Clarke)
The Magician and Laplace’s Demon, by Tom Crosshill (Clarkesworld, December 2014)
Best Short Story:
Covenant, by Elizabeth Bear (Heiroglyph, ed by Cramer & Finn)
A Better Way to Die, by Paul Cornell (Rogues, ed by Gardner Dozois)
Codename: Delphi, by Linda Nagata (Lightspeed Magazine)
Lady Sakura's Letters, by Juliette Wade (STRAEON 1)
The Meeker and the All-Seeing Eye, by Matthew Kressel, (Clarkesworld, May 2014)
Best Related Work:
Shadows Beneath: The Writing Excuses Anthology, by Writing Excuses (Dragonsteel Entertainment )
Lock In (song), by William Beckett (Equal Vision Records)
What Makes This Book So Great, by Jo Walton (Tor)
Best Dramatic Presentation (Long Form):
The Anubis Gates, by Tim Powers, Ruth Pe Palileo and Amy Flood (Worldcon 2014)
Worldcon (Loncon) Philharmonic Orchestra, Keith Slade, conductor (Worldcon 2014)
Predestination, The Speirig Brothers (Sony Pictures Worldwide)
Interstellar, Christopher Nolan (Paramount/Warner )
Best Professional Editor (Short Form):
Adams, John Joseph
Resnick, Mike
Gates, Jaym
Clarke, Neil
Best Professional Editor (Long Form):
Gorinsky, Liz
Gilbert, Sheila
Pillai, Devi
Weisskopf, Toni
Anders, Lou
Best Professional Artist:
Dillon, Julie
Dara, Galen
Dos Santos, Dan
Martiniere, Stephen
Harris, John
Best Semiprozine:
Lightspeed, edited by John Joseph Adams
Strange Horizons, edited by Niall Harrison, Brit Mandelo, et al
Beneath Ceaseless Skies, edited by Scott H Andrews
Interzone, edited by Andy Cox
Galaxy's Edge, edited by Mike Resnick
Best Fanzine:
Journey Planet, edited by James Bacon and Christopher Garcia
Best Fan Writer:
Luhrs, Natalie (http://www.pretty-terrible.com )
Meadows, Foz (https://fozmeadows.wordpress.com)
Bourke, Liz (http://www.tor.com/Liz%20Bourke)
Nussbaum, Abigail (http://wrongquestions.blogspot.com)
Oshiro, Mark (http://markreads.net/reviews)
The John W. Campbell Award (not a Hugo):
Charnock, Anne - 2nd Year
Huang, S L - 1st Year
Wong, Alyssa - 1st Year
Murphy, John P - 2nd Year
Machado, Carmen Maria - 2nd Year
Edited by illegible_scribble 2015-03-11 2:08 AM
| |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 526
Location: UK | Well, we have nothing in common in the Best Novel category. I was constrained by what I'd actually read, which doesn't yet include Ancillary Sword, although I did almost start it a couple of months ago. (I read a page or so.)
I nominated Shadows Beneath and What Makes This Book So Great? for related work.
I didn't nominate for any of the short categories. I'm just never that up-to-date on short fiction. | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1057
| DrNefario - 2015-03-12 1:39 AM Well, we have nothing in common in the Best Novel category. I was constrained by what I'd actually read, which doesn't yet include Ancillary Sword, although I did almost start it a couple of months ago. (I read a page or so.) I nominated Shadows Beneath and What Makes This Book So Great? for related work. I didn't nominate for any of the short categories. I'm just never that up-to-date on short fiction. Are you willing to share what you did nominate for Best Novel? I'm always interested to get others' recommendations. This is the first year I've really made a concerted effort to read Short Fiction. It's really not my favorite, in comparison to Novels, but I have to admit that I've found some very good stories and some new favorite authors by doing so. | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 526
Location: UK | Let me see if I can remember them without looking them up...
Annihilation - Jeff VanderMeer
Bete - Adam Roberts
Half a King - Joe Abercrombie
City of Stairs - Robert Jackson Bennett
The Boy With the Porcelain Blade - Den Patrick
To be honest, I'm not sure I'd really want the latter three to win it, but they were published in 2014 and I liked them. (I much preferred this year's Half the World, from Abercrombie.) | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1057
| DrNefario - 2015-03-12 8:16 AM Annihilation - Jeff VanderMeer
Bete - Adam Roberts
Half a King - Joe Abercrombie
City of Stairs - Robert Jackson Bennett
The Boy With the Porcelain Blade - Den Patrick I wouldn't argue with Annihilation or City of Stairs, they're both worthy. I haven't read the others. I've never read any Abercrombie, but I've heard lots of good things about him, so he's on my TBR list. | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1465
Location: The Netherlands | Well now, the nominations have been announced. The list ... er... interesting.
http://www.tor.com/blogs/2015/04/2015-hugo-award-nominees | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 593
Location: New Zealand | Interesting is not the word I used for it! | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1057
|
I think Scalzi has a well-thought out response to the list of finalists.
I'm really disappointed that some (IMO) incredibly worthy entries aren't there. But I've read the Kary English story and I quite liked it. English clearly had mixed feelings about appearing on the slate. I haven't read the Michael F Flynn story yet -- but I've loved everything of his that I've read. I'd never even heard of John C Wright before all this, so I'm not optimistic -- but I'm willing to be surprised. And I'm rather disgusted that a non-related work made the list for Related Work, pushing off something that genuinely deserved to be there. But, as always, I will read all the nominees (though I suspect that, like last year, there will be at least a couple which are so bad that I will struggle to read 20% before setting them aside, because life is just too short to waste time reading something I don't enjoy when there are so many enjoyable things waiting to be read). I'm disgusted that a group of spoilt, over-entitled crybabies have turned the Hugos into a joke as a way to advance their political beliefs. But as one commenter said, "You don't keep the high ground by digging a parallel trench." I don't believe that organizing an opposing slate is an appropriate response. I'm hoping after a few years of them submitting sub-par works that get surpassed by "No Award", they'll get bored and go off to try to ruin someone else's joyful celebration. | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1465
Location: The Netherlands | I think Scalzi is completely ignoring the fact that the ballot, especially in the shorter categories, has been hijacked on a scale we haven't seen before. I can put up with a bit of campaigning but this is disgusting in my opinion. If the best we can hope for is some categories is a no award the nominating system is broken.
John C. Wright is a rather well known name in science fiction. He's been nominated for a Nebula at least once that I know of but he is also known for his conservatism and outright homophobic statements. | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1057
| valashain - 2015-04-05 10:31 AM the ballot, especially in the shorter categories, has been hijacked on a scale we haven't seen before. I can put up with a bit of campaigning but this is disgusting in my opinion. If the best we can hope for is some categories is a no award the nominating system is broken. Agreed. But I don't think trashing the current process is the answer. I think the solution is for those of us who love SFF to get others who love it involved in the process as well. Calculations show that just 50 people voting in lockstep were likely enough to secure most of the SP finalists. 2,100 nominators is a tiny number of people, considering the number of people who actually read SFF, based on book sales numbers. I don't think we (as fandom who know how the Hugos work) are doing enough to publicize and draw in other fans, most of whom don't realize that it's not the purview of elites -- that anyone who pays a small fee is able to nominate and vote. It turns out that, contrary to claims that everyone on the Sad Puppies slate was asked if they wanted to be on the slate, at least 4 (likely more) of them weren't. One of the Fan Writer nominees was shocked to be notified that he was a finalist, and he removed himself from the ballot. He's done a very lengthy and thoughtful analysis of why he disagrees with SP's stated motivations here. (when I say lengthy, I mean lengthy) The fan writers at Lady Business had a Recommendations spreadsheet set up this past year for anyone who wished to submit books and stories they felt were awesome enough to win a Hugo (sadly, I found it only after nominations had closed). However, they've set up one for 2015 here. I've bookmarked this, and plan to both contribute to it, and get reading suggestions from it, as the year goes on.
Yeah, this sucks. But I think it can be turned to positive effect, if we use it as incentive to draw more SFF fans into the Hugo nominating and voting process.
| |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 770
Location: SC, USA | (1)I am certainly feeling a sense of deja vu from last year
(2) I'm going off to read the links that you provided illegible_scribble.
(3) I'd never heard of John C. Wright until I added some books that a member requested.
| |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1465
Location: The Netherlands | illegible_scribble - 2015-04-05 1:15 AM
valashain - 2015-04-05 10:31 AM the ballot, especially in the shorter categories, has been hijacked on a scale we haven't seen before. I can put up with a bit of campaigning but this is disgusting in my opinion. If the best we can hope for is some categories is a no award the nominating system is broken. Agreed. But I don't think trashingthe current processis the answer. I think the solution is for those of us who love SFF to get others who love it involved in the process as well. Calculations show that just 50 people voting in lockstep were likely enough to secure most of the SP finalists. 2,100 nominators is a tinynumber of people, considering the number of people who actually read SFF, based on book sales numbers. I don't think we (as fandom who know how the Hugos work) are doing enough to publicize and draw in other fans, most of whom don't realize that it's not the purview of elites --thatanyonewho pays a small fee is able to nominate and vote.
That is exactly it. For a popularity contest, only a very small number of people actually determine the ballot. With a bit of work on this it can't be that hard to get more people to vote. If they could even get it in the five digit range it would be a lot harder to manipulate (and probably a better reflection of what is popular). I've said something similar after Thomas Olde Heuvelt got himself nominated with a bit of clever campaigning a few years back. As much as I like some of his work, he had no business on that ballot (yet). | |
| | |
Veteran
Posts: 111
Location: Austin, Tx |
What a great blog! It makes some excellent points about Sad Puppies trying to change a fandom that they feel excluded from rather than building a fandom (or promoting a fandom) where they feel accepted. I've been very lucky to attend one Worldcon (when it was nearby in San Antonio) and it was a fantastic experience that I'd like to try again now that I've got better social anxiety meds and have decided that I won't go to another con where I'm not spending the extra money to stay in the hotel. Everyone seemed very nice and it was awesome to get to talk to people who have been going to Worldcon for 20 years (or more) and how their perception of genre and fandom has evolved. I also enjoyed getting to vote (though 2312 didn't win Best Novel as I had hoped), but was able to keep it in perspective of what the award is and is not. Personally, I've found other awards more closely match my tastes and have put effort into reading outside of my comfort zone.
...but as good as that blog is I've learned that you can't argue people out of their beliefs, even calmly and logically. In fact, trying to show someone where they are wrong usually leads to them digging in harder. I have hopes that they'll lose interest and that the Worldcon fandom can rally until then. | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 794
| It's kind of sad. I guess it's too much to hope that the books were going to be judged on their quality rather than their ideology put since the nominations process is a popularity contest it was always going to become political. Vox Day (who appropriately abbreviates himself as VD on his posts) points out that Scalzi, Stross and Tor have been dedicated log-rollers for years and that the Puppies have just done it better. If this continues the Hugos can only become less relevant over time and awards like the Campbell, Clarke and PKD become more prominent.
If anyone is interested this site offers a puppy free voting list http://deirdre.net/the-puppy-free-hugo-award-voters-guide | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1057
| justifiedsinner - 2015-04-07 2:40 AM Vox Day (who appropriately abbreviates himself as VD on his posts) points out that Scalzi, Stross and Tor have been dedicated log-rollers for years and that the Puppies have just done it better. Except that that's a hugely false equivalency, and the Sad Puppies know it, but they plaster it everywhere to justify their bad behavior, in the hopes that the people who see it will swallow it whole, and won't take the time and effort to go check for themselves. Scalzi does three Awards Eligibility posts every year. The first is his own eligible works (and he started doing this way back when, because he was inundated with requests from fans for the information, as he would be every year if he didn't post it):
The 2015 Awards Consideration Post He also, every year, provides an open thread for other creators (writers, artists, bloggers, whatever) to post a link to examples of their own work:
SF/F Authors/Editors/Artists/Fan Creators 2015 Award Awareness Post And he also, every year, provides an open thread for fans to post a link to examples of work they really like (writing, art, blogs, jewelry, whatever)
The 2015 SF/F Fans Award Recommendation Thread Doesn't look much "log-rolling", does it?
Here's Charles Stross' 2014 post. He lists 1 novel, and 1 novella:
Because people keep asking me...
Here's Stross' 2015 post. He mentions 1 novel -- but doesn't even give its title:
Sitrep That doesn't bear much resemblance to "log-rolling", either.
Here's Tor.com's 2015 post. They list 4 Novellas, 18 Novelettes, and 52 Short Stories. Given that nominators are only allowed 5 entries per category, it's pretty hard to see this as an attempt at nomination ballot-stuffing:
Tor.com’s Hugo and Nebula-Eligible Fiction from 2014
I couldn't find a Novel eligibility listing from Tor Books -- but that's hardly surprising, given the list for 2014 from isfDB (and this doesn't even include the 2014 novels from Tor subsidiaries).
A lot of authors posts lists of their eligible works for the past year. I, for one, really appreciate it -- because I often can't remember if something I read a year ago was published in that year, or the year before, and because I read so many novels (last year it was around 135) that while I try to take note of the best ones for nomination use later, I don't always remember to do so.
A lot of fans also post lists of their preferences (hey, I even did that at an earlier point in this thread) -- but I would hope you agree that my post bears no resemblance to "I voted for these, now you go out and vote for the same ones, too!", and I've never seen another fan list that comes even close to saying something like that, either.
Now, compare-and-contrast that to the Rabid Puppies and Sad Puppies lists, which are deliberately designed and promoted to be nominated as a slate. (I won't link to them, but if you Google each of those phrases, you'll find the lists and their accompanying exhortations easily enough. Though I don't recommend it, if you wish to keep your dinner in your stomach where it belongs.)
Sad/Rabid Puppies supporters have been openly admitting all over the internet that the intent is to completely fill the nomination slate with their selected entries and "take back" the Hugos from whatever sinister cabal their paranoid minds have conjured up.
And yes, if they continue to do this for several years, it will indeed continue to devalue the Hugo Awards to the point where they are meaningless. One highly-esteemed author of my acquaintance (whose books are the kind the Sad Puppies claim to support) told me "I'm glad I got my Hugos back when they still meant something."
| |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 526
Location: UK | Yes, one or two self-promoted works on a ballot aren't going to affect anything. There is still a choice. There is no choice, this year, in several of the categories. The puppies are so confident that their stuff is great that they haven't allowed any alternatives on the shortlists. And some of it is just outright trolling.
I'm out. I'm not interested in voting this year. I feel like a counter-slate is still a failure. I hope they get no-awarded this year, but that still means the Hugo has failed. It is probably not the case that there were no award-worthy short stories in 2014, but that's the slate the voters are left with. A small number of dedicated wreckers can ruin it for everyone. It is quite often thus.
The two main proposals for a solution seem to be to open the nominations wider - I'm not sure this helps, since it's actually pretty rare for people to read enough new material to make a nomination. 2014 was the first year I'd read more than 5 new books - or to make them narrower - restrict them to attending memberships, which might work, but could affect supporting membership numbers (and therefore Worldcon funds) badly.
Maybe it's just not worth saving. Does it even still have the same role, now it's possible for books to get buzz that even I can see, as a non-con-goer, through other means? | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1057
| DrNefario - 2015-04-07 11:51 PM I'm out. I'm not interested in voting this year. If you've already got a membership, I hope you'll still vote -- if only to make plain your disgust with the way that any slate, regardless of the politics or motivation behind it, ruins the awards. That's what I intend to do. | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 770
Location: SC, USA | I wrote a post the other day and lost it by hitting the return at the wrong time. (My old browser does not play well with this forum). Anyway, what I was going to say is what got lost in Saturday's announcement is that the Tiptree Award was also announced--Jo Walton and Monica Byrne as co-winners. And the honor list looks fabulous. http://tiptree.org/
So in light of a less-diverse Hugo slate (for the foreseeable future), I think the Tiptrees are a must for this site. And with the Tiptrees will come the ability to add short fiction works--the place where the Hugo's most spectacular fail happened. I am looking forward to having the ability to learn about good, new short fiction from those on the site who keep up with it. I used to depend on the Hugo nominations, but not anymore! My apologies to Dave and Warghoul who I know are working very hard in their real jobs and working to make the Tiptrees happen.
I can't think of any spectacular way to thumb my nose at the Puppies, so I have to act and think locally, and since I think of WWE as my "local" community, I want to help make it a place with more SFF diversity.
Rhonda | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 526
Location: UK | illegible_scribble - 2015-04-07 1:14 PM
DrNefario - 2015-04-07 11:51 PM I'm out. I'm not interested in voting this year. If you've already got a membership, I hopeyou'll still vote -- if only to make plain your disgust withthe way that any slate, regardless of the politics or motivation behind it, ruins the awards. That's what I intend to do.
I don't have a membership this year. It was last year's membership that gave me the right to nominate.
I'm kind of interested to find out what the real shortlists should have been, when the numbers are released after Worldcon. | |
| | |
Veteran
Posts: 111
Location: Austin, Tx | DrNefario - 2015-04-07 10:28 AM
I'm kind of interested to find out what the real shortlists should have been, when the numbers are released after Worldcon.
Ditto. It's a shame we won't know until August and that those authors didn't get the recognition boost that they deserve. I'm terribly curious to know if any part of the Southern Reach trilogy was nominated (though I know it was divisive enough that it probably wasn't and I was already disappointed that Authority, the 2nd entry, didn't make the PKD shortlist). | |
| | |
Veteran
Posts: 111
Location: Austin, Tx | Rhondak101 - 2015-04-07 10:06 AM
I can't think of any spectacular way to thumb my nose at the Puppies, so I have to act and think locally, and since I think of WWE as my "local" community, I want to help make it a place with more SFF diversity.
Likewise. Since becoming active here I've put a lot of effort into reading diversely and it has paid off so much that I am a little baffled by the anti-diversity backlash. It doesn't take being a "social justice warrior" to have the thought to reach for stories from people unlike myself and to realize the value of reading widely. | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 370
Location: Beaverton, Oregon, USA | I usually don't buy new books (the Golem and the Jinni was one exception), though I now have a nook linked to my ex-mother-in-law's account, so if she gets a new book, I have access to it. I'm kind of a library guy, and the waiting lists for new books are always so huge. So I can't complain because I don't vote, being usually at least a year behind on new titles. Still, I find the ballot box stuffing to be just abhorrent. This whole controversy just saddens me because I am just about to wrap up my going-on-three-year-long Hugo award challenge (two re-reads left). It turned into a labor of love and I don't regret it, even reading "The Forever Machine" :-P Ok,maybe I regret that one. But on a positive note, it was this effort that led me to jfrantz's old blog, which had a link to WWEnd. That's how I discovered this community. And I find books I want to read from the reviews, by reasearching for and seeing what others read for the challenges, and by looking at the other awards lists. This site and you folks are my SF/F community and I appreciate all of you. So ditto Karin and Rhonda! | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 526
Location: UK | The Forever Machine at least has the virtue of being short. | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1057
| pizzakarin - 2015-04-08 5:24 AM Rhondak101 - 2015-04-07 10:06 AM
I can't think of any spectacular way to thumb my nose at the Puppies, so I have to act and think locally, and since I think of WWE as my "local" community, I want to help make it a place with more SFF diversity. Likewise. Since becoming active here I've put a lot of effort into reading diversely and it has paid off so much that I am a little baffled by the anti-diversity backlash. It doesn't take being a "social justice warrior" to have the thought to reach for stories from people unlike myself and to realize the value of reading widely.
Exactly. I've never been just a niche reader; I've always read and liked a reasonably broad selection of SFF across various genres. And my reading has always included a fair number of the sort of books that the SPs say are "Real SF". But I'll be d*mned if I'm going to let them tell me that's all I get to read.I love the way that WWEnd has helped me to expand on my reading experience, especially with the challenges to read more books by and featuring women and LGBTQ. Sure, I've encountered what were, for me, a few "duds" -- but that has always been the case, and I've encountered way more new authors whose works I genuinely enjoy -- and whose works have undoubtedly made me a better, wiser person for reading them. And I really appreciate the genuineness and thoughtfulness of the members here who post reviews. I certainly don't agree with all of them, but the added perspective is hugely helpful. I love that the people here are all about reading the books -- ALL THE BOOKS -- and that everyone leaves their personal aggro at the door when they log in. This place is like the anti-Facebook. High-quality content and discussion, non-existent levels of aggro.
Edited by illegible_scribble 2015-04-07 9:12 PM
| |
| | |
Extreme Veteran
Posts: 535
Location: Great Lakes, USA | illegible_scribble - 2015-04-07 7:10 PM
pizzakarin - 2015-04-08 5:24 AM Rhondak101 - 2015-04-07 10:06 AM
I can't think of any spectacular way to thumb my nose at the Puppies, so I have to act and think locally, and since I think of WWE as my "local" community, I want to help make it a place with more SFF diversity. Likewise. Since becoming active here I've put a lot of effort into reading diversely and it has paid off so much that I am a little baffled by the anti-diversity backlash. It doesn't take being a "social justice warrior" to have the thought to reach for stories from people unlike myself and to realize the value of reading widely. Exactly. I've never beenjust a niche reader; I've always read and liked a reasonably broad selection of SFF across various genres.And my reading has always included a fair number of the sort of books that the SPs say are "Real SF". But I'll be d*mned if I'm going to let them tell me that's all I get to read. I love the way that WWEnd has helped me to expand on my reading experience, especially with the challenges to read more books by and featuring women and LGBTQ. Sure, I've encountered what were, for me, a few "duds" -- but that has always been the case, and I've encountered way more new authors whose works I genuinely enjoy -- and whose works have undoubtedly made me a better, wiser person for reading them. And I really appreciate the genuineness and thoughtfulness of the members here who post reviews. I certainly don't agree with all of them,but the added perspective is hugely helpful. I love that the people here are all about reading the books -- ALL THE BOOKS -- and that everyone leaves their personal aggro at the door when they log in. This place is like the anti-Facebook. High-quality content and discussion, non-existent levels of aggro.
Yes! I love this site because I've been able to find books that I probably would not have read otherwise. I like looking through other peoples' challenge lists for recommendations. I've found some really good books, e.g. Aliette de Bodard's Obsidan and Blood Trilogy, that I loved that I probably never would have discovered had I not been on this site.
I haven't decided if I will get a membership to Sasquan and vote. illegible_scribble is right in that if enough people like us vote, those with the political agenda will be outnumbered, so I probably will. I've read Ancillary Sword (loved) and am reading The Goblin Emperor now (too much clothing and jewelry and manners for me - hope it gets better). The Dark Between the Stars and Lines of Departure both look like something I would like. I haven't read any Jim Butcher and don't really want to start at book 15 in the series. (But the library has 4 copies on the new pb shelf, so I have ready access to it.)
Being a woman in a male dominated field, I've seen similar attitudes for years. It's nice to see that the younger generations don't seem to have the same biases and we can only hope that in the future, we can look back and shake our heads at those who feared change. . | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 526
Location: UK | I read both the Marko Kloos books in January, courtesy of the Kindle Lending Library (which coincidentally also got me two Sarah Monette books last year), and enjoyed them a lot. They don't do anything particularly original, but they are enjoyable chunks of mil-SF, provided the present tense doesn't bug you too much. I preferred the first one, Terms of Enlistment. The second one, Lines of Departure, didn't bring enough new to the table, for me, so it just missed out on my nomination. Terms of Enlistment was 2013, and so wasn't eligible, and if it had been I would have nominated it. I think I did nominate Kloos for the Campbell, but I guess he didn't have the Puppy backing for that (or is actually ineligible). He goes down in my estimation if he was complicit in the ballot-rigging, and I think he'll be harmed more than helped by it, which is a shame.
I've read the first Dresden book, and didn't think enough of it to read any more. I understand the first one is notably weak, and not representative, but I have plenty of other stuff to read. | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 794
| The Dresden Files books are pot-boilers but they get better as the series progresses (I got up to 9 before I moved on). He starts at a fairly high level of action and then keeps upping the ante which is what you want in these type of books. However given all the other possible nominees it is not one I would have nominated. While I wouldn't expect Memory of Water or Station Eleven to appear the lack of such novels as Annihilation or The Three Body Problem is ridiculous.
Edited by justifiedsinner 2015-04-08 11:09 AM
| |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 593
Location: New Zealand | I have to ditto pretty much everything illegible_scribble said. That sums up my reading and experience as well. What I am beginning to love and appreciate about WWEnd is that it leaves all the politics and ism's (sexism, racism etc) out and is just a like-minded group of people who love to read books. Everyone welcome.
I've tried Butcher's Dresden Files, and don't really get the fuss. I didn't care much for book 1, tried book 2 to see if it got better (it didn't), and haven't bothered with any more. I'm quietly obsessed with The Goblin Emperor, so I have my fingers crossed for it to win.
And I'm loving the Arthur C Clarke noms list. Now there is a short list I can get behind!
| |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 441
| What a debacle. I don't really have much to add to what's already been said, but it's been cheering to read everyone coming together on this.
As to voting, If you are eligible, I would urge you to do so. If you don't think that one or more of the nominees is Hugo worthy, then vote No Award. To not vote is a tacit endorsement of the Sad Puppy slate. It won't be the end of the world if there were a number of No Awards, and it would certainly spur changes to the process.
| |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1057
| That's what's most upsetting to me -- that they've turned something which I used to use as a Reading Guide (the Hugo Nomination longlist) into something that's less than helpful or meaningful, possibly next to worthless. I've no doubt that in the past there were tiny little groups who banded together to try to get a work on the ballot. But this utter repudiation of integrity, of good-faith, of letting the majority preference percolate its way to the top, is just disappointing and disgusting. And I'm not at all impressed by the people who are saying, "Hey, it's nothing to do with me!", but who are quite willing to ride the SP coattails to a Hugo nomination and maybe even a win. All we can do is hope that at some point, the nasty trolls will get bored, and wander off. | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1057
| Do you read a fair bit of SFF and would like to be able to express your opinions on what you read, in terms of nominating and voting for the Hugo Awards, but have not been able to afford to do so? Because of the current concern that the Hugo process is too insular, a bunch of SFF fans have generously offered to provide supporting memberships in order to broaden the community of nominator/voters. These memberships include the right to vote this year (and the voter's packet of full or partial copies of nominated works) and the right to nominate (but not vote) next year. The only requirement is that you be someone who reads and enjoyes SFF. If you'd love to participate but money has been holding you back, you can find the entry form here . | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 369
Location: Middle TN, USA | Ok I have made it no secret that I love to read the "unloved" novels the best,but after reading about the disgusting things going on with the Hugos. I have decided to pay my fees and get a membership. I will be voting next year because I'll be damned if I will let some whiney baby group will ruin it when I finally do get around to reading the nominees! | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 369
Location: Middle TN, USA | Ok I have made it no secret that I love to read the "unloved" novels the best,but after reading about the disgusting things going on with the Hugos. I have decided to pay my fees and get a membership. I will be voting next year because I'll be damned if I will let some whiney baby group will ruin it when I finally do get around to reading the nominees! | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 526
Location: UK | Now Marko Kloos has withdrawn his novel, and Anne Bellett her short story. | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 794
| @DrNefario. I just read that. Anne Bellett said she feels she was conscripted into a game of political dodge ball with herself both player and ball. Kloos says that he doesn't want to have anything to do with VD. | |
| | |
Admin
Posts: 3942
Location: Dallas, Texas | Can't blame them for pulling out under the circumstances. Hell, Connie Willis posted that she won't be a presenter this year. This situation keeps getting worse and worse. I feel for the folks that are caught up in it all. I haven't heard if there will be replacement noms for the folks that are withdrawing. More developments are sure to come. Is there a point at which they'll call it all off? | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1057
| Badseedgirl - 2015-04-16 7:51 AM Ok I have made it no secret that I love to read the "unloved" novels the best,but after reading about the disgusting things going on with the Hugos. I have decided to pay my fees and get a membership. I will be voting next year because I'll be damned if I will let some whiney baby group will ruin it when I finally do get around to reading the nominees! Badseedgirl, there are close to 100 free supporting memberships for this year made available by fans who care, for anyone who loves SFF. I encourage you to try asking for one. If you haven't bought one already, you can find the entry form here .
Edited by illegible_scribble 2015-04-15 6:41 PM
| |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1057
| justifiedsinner - 2015-04-16 9:42 AM Anne Bellett said she feels she was conscripted into a game of political dodge ball with herself both player and ball. Kloos says that he doesn't want to have anything to do with VD. Administrator - 2015-04-16 10:33 AM Can't blame them for pulling out under the circumstances. Hell, Connie Willis posted that she won't be a presenter this year. This situation keeps getting worse and worse. I feel for the folks that are caught up in it all. I haven't heard if there will be replacement noms for the folks that are withdrawing. More developments are sure to come. Is there a point at which they'll call it all off? Worldcon bylaws require that the Hugos be awarded (though a ceremony is not a requirement). The Hugo Admin will now be going to the next entries on the nominating ballot with the most votes, asking if they'd accept being on the voting ballot... and possibly the next, and the next, and the next... I don't envy the poor guy. And these people will now be facing the heartbreaking knowledge that if the Puppies hadn't decide to destroy the process, they'd have had a legitimate Hugo nomination this year.
It's just heart-rending that so many good people are ending up as collateral damage to a malicious, childish tantrum. | |
| | |
Member
Posts: 13
| This is so,so sad! I've read all but one of the Hugo winners (which I couldn't find anywhere.) I read books that I would not have otherwise read. I learned about authors I might not have discovered. I felt good about reading all the winners. I had felt that the Hugo winner represented who we were at a particular point so that future generations would know a little bit about us, like little time capsules. It is like our heart has been stolen. | |
| | |
Veteran
Posts: 111
Location: Austin, Tx | Just curious...which one couldn't you find? I haven't read them all, but I've collected all the Hugo winners in print and The Big Time was my unicorn. I got down to that one and refused to buy it online and then a new used book store opened near me and there it was. I'm pretty sure I made the girliest excited squeal when I found it. | |
| | |
Member
Posts: 13
| The Forever Machine 1955 Winner | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1057
| Kata - 2015-04-17 5:42 AM This is so,so sad! I've read all but one of the Hugo winners (which I couldn't find anywhere.) I read books that I would not have otherwise read. I learned about authors I might not have discovered. I felt good about reading all the winners. I had felt that the Hugo winner represented who we were at a particular point so that future generations would know a little bit about us, like little time capsules. It is like our heart has been stolen. That's pretty much the way I feel; you've described it beautifully. Kata - 2015-04-17 6:01 AM The Forever Machine 1955 Winner The 1955 winner was actually They'd Rather Be Right, which can be obtained in ebook form for 99 cents here. The Forever Machine is a collection consisting of They'd Rather Be Right with its two prequel stories, Crazy Joey and Hide! Hide! Witch!. If you're a completist and wish to own a physical edition, the paperback can be had for $8.95. Interestingly, They'd Rather Be Right is widely regarded as the worst book to ever win a Hugo Award. | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 794
| Mark Kloos novel has been replaced by Cixin Liu's Three Body Problem in the Hugo nominations. The ballot has now been sent to the printer. | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 794
| @illegible-scribble They are right, it is the worst and there are a few stinkers in there. | |
| | |
New User
Posts: 4
Location: Ireland | Rhondak101 - 2015-04-07 4:06 AM
...
So in light of a less-diverse Hugo slate (for the foreseeable future), I think the Tiptrees are a must for this site.
...
Rhonda
I agree - I'd really like to see the Tiptrees on here too. (and also have the BFS Awards sorted out - both the Derleth and Holdstock).
I can't add anything about the Hugos that hasn't been said better already, but I can recommend the 2015 Clarke list - it's about as diverse as it gets and the first time I saw it I thought "I'll HAVE to read all of those!". | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1465
Location: The Netherlands | Tiptree is a nightmare for the site though. It combines short stories and novels and we're not really equipped to handle that right now. Same with the Ditmar. That one is, if possible even worse. Someday though.... | |
| | |
Member
Posts: 19
| I'm not sure what all the hullabaloo is about. The "Sad Puppies" didn't do anything more or less than GRRM and other authors have done for years. They suggested authors/works they thought deserved a vote, the rest was up to voters to nominate or not. I've seen GRRM do that for years.
| |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 526
Location: UK | That's not really true. They put forward a complete, pre-canned voting package. If it had just been a recommendation list it would have been completely fine, and would probably have had more than five entries in each category. There is a difference between saying what you liked and asking people to vote for a specific set of works for reasons barely related to their quality, and even if there weren't I don't see how objecting to the Puppies' tactics means we don't also object to GRRM's, it just means that he never made enough of a difference for it to be a problem.
If you want to prove that your horses are the best horses, you can't do that by running a race where only your horses take part. | |
| | |
Member
Posts: 19
| So, your complaint is that they either nominated too many (a complete slate) or too few (not more than 5 in each category)? I'm sorry that doesn't make any sense. There is no way to see their "slate" as anything other than suggestions, unless you are just looking for a reason to complain.
| |
| | |
Member
Posts: 19
| As far as seeing who has the best horse, are you suggesting they should have recommended books they didn't like? Again, that doesn't make sense. I doubt GRRM or anyone else who made suggestions, put forward books they didn't enjoy.
| |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 794
| I think it's a reasonable assumption that a lot of the voters for the Puppy lists didn't read a lot of the works nominated but voted for them for political reasons. | |
| | |
Member
Posts: 19
| I'm not sure how anyone could "know" that. But even if some "Puppies" didn't read every book they nominated, do you really believe that wasn't happening already? There is/was no way to force people read the books they nominated before or now. If George Martin recommended a book, it is just as likely someone who liked him would nominate that book as it is for one of these "Puppies" to choose a book from their list to nominate.
| |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1057
| specficwriter - 2015-04-22 3:15 AM I'm not sure what all the hullabaloo is about. The "Sad Puppies" didn't do anything more or less than GRRM and other authors have done for years. They suggested authors/works they thought deserved a vote, the rest was up to voters to nominate or not. I've seen GRRM do that for years. This is a false equivalency, one the Sad Puppies have been trying to spread all over the net. The usual claim is that Scalzi and Stross have been doing the same thing for years. I've debunked that above, so now you've switched to claiming that GRRM does it. This is also a false equivalency. Here are GRRM's posts with this year's recommendations: For Your Consideration: Stuff By Me
For Your Consideration: Stuff Not By Me Here's what he's recommended: Novel: lists 1 suggestion
Dramatic Presentation, Long Form: lists 1 eligible series and 3 eligible films
Dramatic Presentation, Short Form: lists 5 favorite GoT episodes, plus 6 other TV shows
Editor, Short Form: lists 5 eligible people
Professional Artist: lists 6 eligible people
Fan Writer: lists 1 eligible person This is not a slate. This is not anything even remotely similar to what the Puppies did this year, which requested supporters to vote an entire slate "to stick it to the Social Justice Warriors". SAD PUPPIES 3: the 2015 Hugo slate
Rabid Puppies 2015 Notice the word "slate". Not "recommendations", not "suggestions". SLATE. And several Puppies around the web have even admitted that that is exactly what it's intended to be, an attempt to stuff the nominating ballot. Here's an example from one of the slate members who is listed for Related Work: Ken Burnside on 2015-02-03 at 12:22:24 said: I understand the hesitancy of being anyone’s “political bludgeon.” As this is the “make sure these titles get on the WorldCon ballot” phase, the odds of you getting a Campbell, or me getting a Hugo for “The Hot Equations” is slim. I doubt that anyone can read much of a political context into Hot Equations; if anything you can argue that it’s a fairly thorough evisceration and deconstruction of some SFnal tropes. This seems to be the “in thing” in some circles, though it doesn’t delve into the tone-poems of existential angst informing the reader of the hopeless oppression of nonseptunary polyphase-fluidic gendered androids. And their love of dinosaurs. (You only recognize four genders? You sexist fascist, you.) If you wish to make a case for anything different, you're going to have to provide actual examples, rather than making the usual vague Puppy handwavery claims. I await this with bated breath. I have not yet seen anywhere where a Puppy has been able to provide legitimate specific examples of their spurious claims. | |
| | |
Member
Posts: 19
| Your "argument" here is no more coherent than the one in your earlier post. Just because they "suggested" more works than Martin or various other people around the web then they are in the wrong? Surely you see the fallacies in that. So you are then obviously being purposefully obtuse in order to make your case.
The main complaint that people seem to have with the "Puppies" is that they were successful.
As far as researching what every person calling themselves a "Puppy" on the internet has to say about this, well I don't have the time or the desire to do so. What one or even dozens of people say they did on the internet does not have any real bearing on the intent of the "Puppies".
| |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1057
| specficwriter - 2015-04-22 10:13 AM Your "argument" here is no more coherent than the one in your earlier post. Just because they "suggested" more works than Martin or various other people around the web then they are in the wrong? Surely you see the fallacies in that. So you are then obviously being purposefully obtuse in order to make your case. My argument is quite coherent, and you have not provided anything concrete to counter it. I certainly see the fallacies in your claims. The Puppies did not "suggest" more works than Martin. They set up a slate, and they encouraged supporters to nominate it wholesale. Suggestions were taken in an earlier thread; but strangely, most of those suggestions never made it onto the slate, and the slate includes a significant number of entries which did not appear in the suggestion thread. In other words, the slate was drawn up with significant disregard for the suggestions which had been solicited supposedly in order to create it. Why weren't all the suggestions included on the slate? Why were a bunch of non-suggested entries added in? Why were the categories on the slate limited to no more than the number of positions available on the ballot? specficwriter - 2015-04-22 10:13 AM The main complaint that people seem to have with the "Puppies" is that they were successful. No, the main complaint is that the Puppies gamed the nomination system to stack the ballot. What they did was legal -- but it was certainly not ethical. Hugo nominators/ voters have been well aware for a long time that it was possible for the system to be gamed this way -- but they have deliberately chosen not to do so, because letting everyone have their say, and getting a genuinely wide range of nominations, was the goal. The reason the Hugos have been widely regarded as The preeminent Spec Fic award for many years is not because absolutely everyone who reads spec fic has nominated and voted. The Hugos have attained that high regard because the people who were nominating and voting were extremely conscientious about not gaming the system. While not perfect, it has worked well up to this point because the vast majority of participants operated in good faith. The Puppies have deliberately chosen to destroy that integrity and conscientiousness.
specficwriter - 2015-04-22 10:13 AM As far as researching what every person calling themselves a "Puppy" on the internet has to say about this, well I don't have the time or the desire to do so. What one or even dozens of people say they did on the internet does not have any real bearing on the intent of the "Puppies". Of course you don't have time to go find real examples of the claims you have made, because the claims you have made are false and you don't have any real examples to provide. What the Puppies themselves say (as I quoted above) about the intent of the slate certainly does have a bearing on the intent of the Puppies. | |
| | |
Member
Posts: 19
| I'm not sure what fallacy in my "claims" you are referring to, since I haven't made any claims that aren't factual. Other authors, etc on the internet have made Hugo suggestions on the internet for YEARS. No one gets all bent out of shape until someone does it successfully.
The only way anyone can make the claims that you are making is by jumping to conclusions and extrapolating (incorrectly) on a very few data points of so-called "puppies" who make outrageous posts.
No, what random people on the internet calling themselves puppies does NOT have a bearing on the original intent. That is just grasping at straws.
With that, I'm out of this conversation. You repeating the same, wrong talking points does not change the facts.
| |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1057
| specficwriter - 2015-04-22 10:45 AM I'm not sure what fallacy in my "claims" you are referring to, since I haven't made any claims that aren't factual. You only get to say your claims are factual if you can provide evidence to back them up. You have provided no such evidence. Therefore, your claims are not "facts", they are claims -- and spurious ones, at that. specficwriter - 2015-04-22 10:45 AM Other authors, etc on the internet have made Hugo suggestions on the internet for YEARS. No one gets all bent out of shape until someone does it successfully. People are "bent out of shape" because the Puppies gamed the system. You may call this "success". I call it reprehensible. specficwriter - 2015-04-22 10:45 AM The only way anyone can make the claims that you are making is by jumping to conclusions and extrapolating (incorrectly) on a very few data points of so-called "puppies" who make outrageous posts. No, what random people on the internet calling themselves puppies does NOT have a bearing on the original intent. That is just grasping at straws. With that, I'm out of this conversation. You repeating the same, wrong talking points does not change the facts. I've provided real, actual data points and facts. This is not "jumping to conclusions". It is evidence which supports my statements. People who appear on the Puppies slate are not "random people on the internet calling themselves Puppies". They are Puppies. And what they say does speak to the Puppies' intent. "Talking Points" are statements made with no facts to back them up. That is what you have been doing. Thanks for pointing out the vacuousness of your own statements. | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 441
| specficwriter - 2015-04-21 8:15 AM I'm not sure what all the hullabaloo is about. The "Sad Puppies" didn't do anything more or less than GRRM and other authors have done for years. They suggested authors/works they thought deserved a vote, the rest was up to voters to nominate or not. I've seen GRRM do that for years.
The putative reason for specficwriter's original post was to gain some understanding of why people were unhappy with the Sad Puppies and their methods. Several posters then responded with substantive explanations laying out their concerns. At this point, the appropriate response would have been something along the lines of "Oh, I see now, thanks." or "I disagree with your thinking, but now I have a better understanding of why there is a hullabaloo." Instead, specficwriter is dismissive of people's concerns and starts arguing with them. There is a word for this sort of behavior, and that word is trolling.
| |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1057
| Engelbrecht - 2015-04-22 12:47 PM The putative reason for specficwriter's original post was to gain some understanding of why people were unhappy with the Sad Puppies and their methods. Several posters then responded with substantive explanations laying out their concerns. At this point, the appropriate response would have been something along the lines of "Oh, I see now, thanks." or "I disagree with your thinking, but now I have a better understanding of why there is a hullabaloo." Instead, specficwriter is dismissive of people's concerns and starts arguing with them. There is a word for this sort of behavior, and that word is trolling. The Puppy minions have been doing this on posts all over Facebook and in comments on blog posts all over the Internet. They pop in, act as if they are disinterested observers trying to figure out what's going on, and drop in all of their spurious claims and Talking Points in the hope that no one reading has any idea what's going on and will be gullible enough to buy into their nonsense without bothering to check into it. Puppies are severely allergic to logic, facts, and evidence. When you use these on them, they have no intellectual defenses. They break out into a bad case of hives and run away. | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 369
Location: Middle TN, USA | My problem with this entire "Sad puppy" deal is I read an articlewhere the leader of the. group said if voters vote no award given they would see to it the award would never be awarded again. That is holding the award hostage. I will have to. go out and find the article and post it here. | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1057
| Badseedgirl - 2015-04-22 2:39 PM My problem with this entire "Sad puppy" deal is I read an article where the leader of the group said if voters vote no award given they would see to it the award would never be awarded again. That is holding the award hostage. I will have to go out and find the article and post it here. It's here, in a comment on File770. My take on it is that reports of VD's omnipotence have been greatly exaggerated. The Puppy attention span isn't that long (GamerGate is already dying a slow death), and a very large number of people who love spec fic and who genuinely care about the integrity and future of the Hugos have now been roused from their slumber. It's all very much a bunch of spoilt, infantile brats throwing a big tantrum because everyone else won't just hand over all their toys, isn't it? | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 526
Location: UK | specficwriter - 2015-04-21 4:53 PM
So, your complaint is that they either nominated too many (a complete slate) or too few (not more than 5 in each category)? I'm sorry that doesn't make any sense. There is no way to see their "slate" as anything other than suggestions, unless you are just looking for a reason to complain.
I don't know exactly how many works were nominated in each category by the Puppy slates. I'm not very interested in visiting their sites to find out. I'm pretty sure it was no more than 5 in each category, and I believe the RP slate filled in a lot of the gaps that the SP slate left. They did not recommend everything they liked - otherwise how could they have replaced items which were removed? - they recommended just enough to stuff the ballot and shout down other voices.
Their "suggestions" came with political spin which encouraged people to vote for them without caring whether they were good, to stick it to the imaginary SJW cabal.
Really, any process that leaves us with a poor set of shortlists is bad, in my opinion. Whether it's "fair" or not. The objective of the system has not been achieved.
Maybe the problem is me. Maybe my vision of the field is now marginal. I don't see how that is going to make me any happier with the shortlists. The fact that plenty of other people feel the same way I do suggests that it's not me who is marginal.
Edited by DrNefario 2015-04-22 7:49 AM
| |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 263
Location: Gunnison, Colorado | Just catching up on the forums after being buried in work for the last few months. I’m very glad to see that this debacle has increased awareness of how the Hugo works and the importance of the nominating process. The hope is that more people will get involved, so that such tactics become less likely to succeed in the future. I’ll be voting “no award” in some categories, but there are three novels on the ballot that IMO could be worthy winners (which is actually not unusually low, based on past shortlists), so they’ll move up the reading list. For a good discussion/review of the novel nominees, see this week’s Coode Street podcast! | |
| | |
Admin
Posts: 3942
Location: Dallas, Texas | Scott Laz - 2015-04-27 3:45 PM Just catching up on the forums after being buried in work for the last few months. I’m very glad to see that this debacle has increased awareness of how the Hugo works and the importance of the nominating process. The hope is that more people will get involved, so that such tactics become less likely to succeed in the future. I’ll be voting “no award” in some categories, but there are three novels on the ballot that IMO could be worthy winners (which is actually not unusually low, based on past shortlists), so they’ll move up the reading list. For a good discussion/review of the novel nominees, see this week’s Coode Street podcast! That's a good episode! I love that they completely bypassed the controversy and just talked about the books. Coode Street should be a staple for anyone interested in genre fiction. | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1057
| Scott Laz - 2015-04-28 8:45 AM For a good discussion/review of the novel nominees, see this week’s Coode Street podcast! Thanks for that; I'm on the third novel right now, so I'm going to bookmark it until after I've read the books. | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1057
|
Edmund Schubert has withdrawn from his nomination for Best Editor, Short Form.
“I can’t in good conscience complain about the deck being stacked against me, and then feel good about being nominated for an award when the deck gets stacked in my favor. That would make me a hypocrite. I can’t be part of that and still maintain my integrity.” “While I firmly believe that free speech is only truly free if everyone is allowed to speak their mind, I believe equally strongly that defending people’s right to free speech comes with responsibilities: in this case, the responsibility to call out unproductive, mean-spirited, inflammatory, and downright hateful speech. I believe that far too many of Vox’s words fall into those categories — and a stand has to be made against it.” And he's offering a very nice, curated sample packet from the Intergalactic Medicine Show's archives. "Of course, I always think more reading is a good thing. Reading is awesome. Reading — fiction, specifically — has been proven to make people more empathetic, and God knows we need as much empathy as we can possibly get these days. I also believe that when readers give new works by new authors an honest chance, they’ll find things they appreciate and enjoy." "In that spirit, I am taking the material that would have comprised my part of the Hugo Voters Packet and making it available to everyone, everywhere, for free, whether they have a WorldCon membership or not. Take it. Read it. Share it. It’s yours to do with as you will." | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 441
| So who else is waiting with bated breath for the Hugo announcements this evening? 
| |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1465
Location: The Netherlands | Ceremony starts at 5am for me so I think I'll just read the results tomorrow :P | |
| | |
Admin
Posts: 3942
Location: Dallas, Texas | Engelbrecht - 2015-08-22 3:12 PM So who else is waiting with bated breath for the Hugo announcements this evening? There's a live simulcast for the ceremony. I'll probably watch it so I can get the site updated right away. http://www.ustream.tv/hugo-awards
| |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1465
Location: The Netherlands | Well now, that was quite a beating for the puppies. No doubt they'll claim victory but I guess this proves that states won't win you an actual award. | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1465
Location: The Netherlands | Reading up on some of the fallout from the ceremony. So much bitterness. I have a feeling next year is going to be rocky for the Hugos as well. | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 369
Location: Middle TN, USA | I watched it on ustream last night and when it became obvious how the votes were going, I started to see some sour grapes in the comment section. But it was a non-puppy sweep and I also had a very bad feeling about next years awards. Regardless of what GRM said in the preshow, I'm afraid a rule change may be in line. | |
| | |
Admin
Posts: 3942
Location: Dallas, Texas | Badseedgirl - 2015-08-23 7:52 AM I watched it on ustream last night and when it became obvious how the votes were going, I started to see some sour grapes in the comment section. But it was a non-puppy sweep and I also had a very bad feeling about next years awards. Regardless of what GRM said in the preshow, I'm afraid a rule change may be in line. At least next year everyone will be on guard from the get go. There will be a counter campaign ready to go if needed. I'm afraid the Hugo has become a battleground rather than a celebration for genre fiction. | |
| | |
Admin
Posts: 3942
Location: Dallas, Texas | Here's the link to the full Hugo voting results: http://sasquan.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/2015_Hugo_Final_Report.pdf | |
| | |
Uber User
Posts: 1465
Location: The Netherlands | Hmm, Vox Day may give it another go but I do hope the sad puppies will see which way the wind is blowing. | |
| | |
Regular
Posts: 99
Location: Belgium | excellent, well-researched piece on the controversy:
http://www.wired.com/2015/08/won-science-fictions-hugo-awards-matte... | |
| |
|
2015 Hugo Awards Discussion