Hugo Drama 2015

[beniowa]

Two new works have been added to the ballot to replace those withdrawn by their authors. The new short story is "A Single Samurai" by Steven Diamond, which is from the Sad Puppies slate. The new novel is Cixin Liu's The Three-Body Problem, which is not from either Puppy slate.

Ooo, I'm glad to see Three-Body Problem is one of the replacements as it was one of my nominations. Definitely one of the better works from last year.

[Talleyrand]

I've kind of been out of the loop so can anyone give me a quick run-down on what all this Sad Puppy stuff is? I tried googling it and all I got was their own websites (Which i'm guessing I shouldn't trust) and snippets of people on both sides calling each other twats

[Darth Richard II]

Oh my god just read the thread

[Talleyrand]

I have and I still have no idea what the fuck is going on, other than I think it might be like gamergate but with books

EDIT: NVM missed slogdin's post the first time through - its definitely sounding like gamergate but with books

[sologdin]

There is good science done at Christian Universities.

an old friend of mine is an english professor at a fundy university in dixieland, and he teaches queer theory and marxism, mostly. the trustees just re-upped his tenure. doubtful therefore that religious status of the university will be controlling of the work of researchers therein.

[mushroomshirt]

I can't say whether I think their strategy is sound or not because I do not truly understand their objectives. Why do they care about the Hugos so much? What are their long-term objectives? Stay like that year after year paying their supporting membership and involved in a fandom war? Prove that the voting process is very vulnerable to politicization?

It seems to me like the SPs have had success beyond their wildest dreams this year, but they have also unleashed forces they cannot control. The "silent majority" is waking up and they probably will have trouble from here on out. GRRM posted a link to supporting memberships on his not-a-blog and 1% of the people who read that will easily swamp the SPs.

As you point out, George will still be upset by this because this is changing the character of the Hugos by bringing in so many others from "outside". And now he himself is encouraging people to do it! But it really seems like the fairest way to deal with the issue within the current rules.

BTW I am very interested to read the three body problem. I have heard a feature on it on NPR. It is by a Chinese SF writer who lives in a remote rural village and was originally written in Chinese. He says: "I hope that one day, American readers will buy and read Chinese science fiction because it's sci-fi, not because it's Chinese," he says. "The calamities we face in science fiction are faced by humanity together." That day may have arrived with his Hugo nomination.

[Yagathai]

If you're still confused about what's going on, I wrote a thing: http://www.popsci.com/culture-wars-raging-within-science-fiction-fandom

[all swedes are racist]

Fantastic. Probably my favorite so far.

[Darth Richard II]

Fantastic. Probably my favorite so far.

Nice.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Sologdin,

an old friend of mine is an english professor at a fundy university in dixieland, and he teaches queer theory and marxism, mostly. the trustees just re-upped his tenure. doubtful therefore that religious status of the university will be controlling of the work of researchers therein.

As understand it Baptists in and around the Upstate of South Carolina sometimes get upset at the "godless" research and teaching that goes on at Furman University, a Baptist College.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Vox Day does appear to be the biggest cockroach in the cornflakes.

[Wulfram]

Fantastic. Probably my favorite so far.

Eh, democracy doesn't require that a "party" select it's candidates democratically. The democracy comes from people having the ability to vote for other people if they don't like the candidate presented.

[mushroomshirt]

Eh, democracy doesn't require that a "party" select it's candidates democratically. The democracy comes from people having the ability to vote for other people if they don't like the candidate presented.

Presidential candidates put forward by political parties in the US used to be selected this way (undemocratically) until about WW2 and vice presidential candidates still are. That doesn't make the US not a democracy. We're free to affiliate with any political party or none.

But I think what George is trying to get it is the question, are the SPs living up to their stated ideals or are they the "people's democratic republic of korea", neither democratic nor a republic despite their statements to the contrary?

[Xray the Enforcer]

And now he himself is encouraging people to do it! But it really seems like the fairest way to deal with the issue within the current rules.

GRRM has always invited and encouraged new people to join WorldCon if they're interested in experiencing that corner of fandom. On his blog, in interviews, in person. So his recent post about how obtain memberships is not out of the ordinary -- it just has a lot of context around it this year. :)

[Talleyrand]

I came across a fairly Sad/Rabid Puppy aligned forum where they claimed that proof of some SJW left wing cabal was that great white male sci-fi and Fantasy writers like Terry Pratchett and Iain M Banks had never won a Hugo and that now-days your books need to be about a "black feminist transgender dwarf" to win a Hugo.

Which makes no sense to me (obviously as its bloody insane as a statement) but I'm pretty sure Banks was fairly left wing and his books featured numerous transgender characters and protaganists

[David Selig]

I came across a fairly Sad/Rabid Puppy aligned forum where they claimed that proof of some SJW left wing cabal was that great white male sci-fi and Fantasy writers like Terry Pratchett and Iain M Banks had never won a Hugo and that now-days your books need to be about a "black feminist transgender dwarf" to win a Hugo.

Which makes no sense to me (obviously as its bloody insane as a statement) but I'm pretty sure Banks was fairly left wing and his books featured numerous transgender characters and protaganists

Not only that, but Banks' books were certainly amongst the most "literary" in SFF and he had also published plenty of well received mainstream literary novels. If what the puppies claim was true, he should have had 2-3 Hugo wins at the very least.

[Kalbear]

It also doesn't make sense as Terry Pratchett turned down his nomination and made it clear that he didn't want to get nominated.

[Cubarey]

"t's ludicrous, of course. if a far left clique or cabal or conspiracy were managing the awards for its alleged agenda, then the slates would've failed.

Same thesis applies to any grand conspiracy theory from lizard people to Elvis is alive. If they really were that powerful, why have you not been crushed like the bug that you are?"

You are forgetting the main thesis of the Sad Puppies, " It's a small hard left clique that runs the Hugo's. They pretend to be THE AWARD FOR SCI-FI/FANTASY but in actuality it is an award given out by a very small group of people who over the last 20-30 years have consistently honored those in their little group. The slates did nothing wrong, they followed the rules and nominated they thought merited it. The uproar is due to the Cliques ere at having "their" awards taken over.

Also on GRRM's posts on the matter, He seems totally unable to see reality for what it is my "favorite" of his statements :

"Connie Willis has issued a statement. If there is anyone worth listening to about the Hugo Awards, it is Connie. She has won more of them than anyone else. She has presented lots of them too. Her presentations are always hilarious, if excruciating for the poor sods who have been nominated. She is the funniest woman in science fiction. You would think that Connie might be someone that both sides in this fight would listen to with respect, since (1) her politics are liberal, (2) she is religious, a practicing Christian who attends church regularly and sings in the choir."

80%-85% of Americans consider themselves religious, the vast majority christian, but the Left-hard clique that controls the Hugo's is so secular that the best he can do when he wants to point out a person that both sides should be able to trust is Connie Willis? True a Christian but someone who is self avowedly hard left. Really? There are no other members of the clique that are people of faith with perhaps a less hard left political perspective? That Ms. Willis is in GRRM's view someone who should be acceptable to the Puppies, goes far to prove that the powers that traditionally decide the Hugo's are indeed a left wing cabal of which GRRM is a life member. Do not get me wrong I really do not care what GRRM's politics are I only care about the quality of his work, but his notions of what is happening with the Hugo's is colored by both his politics and the fact that he is part of the Clique that have longed ruled over the Hugo's.

One last thing, there would be no debate at all if in the last 25 years the number of pedaphiles who have received a Hugo did not outnumber the awards that have gone to avowedly conservative writers!

[jagilki]

I honestly have never paid attention to the Hugos before. Who's the "pedophiles" who have won?

[mormont]

One last thing, there would be no debate at all if in the last 25 years the number of pedaphiles who have received a Hugo did not outnumber the awards that have gone to avowedly conservative writers!

This would be the 25 year period that not only includes a Best Novel Hugo for Dan Simmons, but also no fewer than three Best Novel Hugos for the avowed libertarian Vernor Vinge?

It kinda gets tiresome hearing this same complaint and having to point out its falseness. But maybe, Cubarey, you don't count Vinge for whatever reason. So let me turn this back on you.

Which outstanding works in the last 25 years - works that are undeniably deserving of a Hugo Award - by 'conservative writers', however you choose to define that term, have been unforgivably omitted from the list?

You can't claim Pratchett and you can't claim Banks, that's clear. They're not at all 'conservative' but they were still left out. So you need to outweigh these omissions for your idea that the omission of these notable right-wing writers, whoever they may be, is definietely down to politics, not just similar reasons to why Pratchett and Banks never got a Hugo. One or two isolated examples won't cut it. You need a significant number. Start listing.