Werthead Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 Congrats for winning the Hugo, you mean. It's absolutely certain he'll win for a number of factors.If you think otherwise you're delusional. Or wait a few months and you'll see I'm right.George said yesterday he'd be surprised if he did win. The Hugo SF Purist crowd is a strong force and he thinks they'll work hard to ensure ADWD doesn't get it. He actually said he doesn't care, as he was rooting for Leviathan Wakes anyway (which he thought might win just for being old-school space opera, which hasn't won for some time).ADWD failed to even get nominated for the Gemmells, which was a big shock at Eastercon. Everyone was expecting to get nominated and curb-stomp everything in sight. Joe Abercrombie was quite chipper as now he thinks he has a sliver of a chance against Patrick Rothfuss's beard :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ran Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 Kind of forgot about the Gemmells entirely. Had meant to publicize it a bit, which may have made a small dent for ADwD, but .. yeah, slipped my mind with all the site trouble and TV show-related writing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry. Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 Very underwhelming novel shortlist (had read all but the Grant/McGuire before the announcement, thought the Walton achieved its modest goals more than did Martin or Miéville and I found the Corey to be a stale rehash of space opera tropes with some questionable scenes regarding one of the main female characters), yet it seems to be following a trend of weak SF/F shortlists announced so far this year. The Clarke Award shortlist certainly isn't any better this time (the Tepper was atrocious, the Bear tepid, the Miéville flawed, Stross' previous novels contained abominable prose, Magary I need to finish reading, and the Rogers I can't buy here in the US until it comes out in mid-May), the Nebula is meh-ish (Walton was good, yet I didn't like the nostalgia tint; Jemisin is decent so far but not quite best of year quality, see above on the Miéville, I refuse to read any McDevitt anymore, Hurley might be the best of the bunch yet even that wasn't uniformly brilliant, and the Valentine I found to be spotty), the BSFA had perhaps the strongest shortlist (do want to read the Priest and Roberts, Tidhar's book was very good, the Lakin-Smith was so-so, and again, the Miéville). The Dick Award contained few books that interested me (still intending to finish the Magary, the McHugh was good but not great, currently reading the winning selection, the first volume of Morden's trilogy, not inclined to read the other finalists), the Tiptree was OK (Hairston's winning book was good, but I thought it paled to some of Zora Neale Hurston's novels set in a similar milieu, haven't yet read the Duchamp and Jones, although I have them on my iPad for reading in the near future). The Gemmell shortlist is such a joke that I'm amazed that anyone outside of those who live and breathe multi-volume "fat fantasies" could ever take them seriously in regards to prose, characterization, and thematic development.The irony of all these award shortlists/winners so far is that the book that potentially could be the best of the lot for me, Priest's The Islanders, was written by an author who stirred the pot quite a bit recently talking about how putrid SF (and presumably fantasy) was in 2011 (before going into questionable territory, to many at least). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedEyedGhost Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 I know it's been discussed before, but does anyone even read semiprozine or fanzines? I don't know /anyone/ that reads that shit, although i'm not as entrenched in the nerd subculture as most, but I try to stay connected. Does anyone on here read them? Are they even relevant anymore?SF Signal is great, but the other 4 Fanzines don't look that interesting to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grack21 Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 What we need to do is take the Hugos for the past ten years or so, melt them all down, make a GIANT HUGO, and give it to Gene Wolfe. :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bastard of Godsgrace Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 George said yesterday he'd be surprised if he did win. The Hugo SF Purist crowd is a strong force and he thinks they'll work hard to ensure ADWD doesn't get it. He actually said he doesn't care, as he was rooting for Leviathan Wakes anyway (which he thought might win just for being old-school space opera, which hasn't won for some time).I don't think this is going to a strong factor. The SF Purist crowd is far weaker than it used to be with a great number of new voters in the last two years (no Vinge and Stross on the ballot, yes? It was probably the biggest surprise to me). Besides, what they have to choose from? Leviathan Wakes is too low profile and Embassytown probably too unaccessible to most of them.ADWD failed to even get nominated for the Gemmells, which was a big shock at Eastercon. Everyone was expecting to get nominated and curb-stomp everything in sight. Joe Abercrombie was quite chipper as now he thinks he has a sliver of a chance against Patrick Rothfuss's beard :)My money are once again on the Warhammer novel. It is an Internet poll, after all. :bang: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seli Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 ...The Gemmell shortlist is such a joke that I'm amazed that anyone outside of those who live and breathe multi-volume "fat fantasies" could ever take them seriously in regards to prose, characterization, and thematic development....The problem seems to be at least partly that the nominations are not for the things you would want them to be. For example the Gemmell does not seem to care one bit about 'prose, characterization, and thematic development' in the way it is set up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry. Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 The problem seems to be at least partly that the nominations are not for the things you would want them to be. For example the Gemmell does not seem to care one bit about 'prose, characterization, and thematic development' in the way it is set up.Of course part of it is my own personal opinion, but much of it is also based on how the voting is conducted and the perception by many (not just myself) that the awards do not recognize merit as much as they denote internet popularity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Werthead Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 There did seem to be a lot of people at Eastercon, including some people involved with the Gemmells, who were now favouring a move towards a juried award. Whilst it's good when the award goes to non-English, low-profile-in-the-West authors (Sapkowski and Pevel, most notably), it going to mediocre tie-in books (and not even notably good ones) is going to be a problem. If the Warhammer book wins again this year, I think there'll be much more serious consideration given to a change of that nature.And yeah, The Islanders not being on any of the lists (er, apart from the BSFA, which it won) is pretty ridiculous, the author's later comments notwithstanding. It wipes the floor with Embassytown (which I liked anyway) and is much more focused than ADWD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seli Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 Of course part of it is my own personal opinion, but much of it is also based on how the voting is conducted and the perception by many (not just myself) that the awards do not recognize merit as much as they denote internet popularity.That is a different problem. All of the voted awards are bound to have a partial popularity contest character, in part because if people vote for what they know the popular stuff will rise to the top. And that is before considering the votes that are more for a person or body of work than for the book that is actually on the list (See Oscars, Hugos, Nebula etc etc etc.). And the juried awards have the same problem that there is so much out there that ought to be considered that it is a Herculean task. With still the matter of taste and intent influencing the result (compare the different year's best anthologies).But even with a different system, wanting a book on the gemmell list (and even Hugo, Nebula, Clarke or Tiptree) considered mostly for literary character is probably missing the point of those awards. If the literary character should be more of a focus is a different discussion completely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdiddyesquire Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 I wrote up some thoughts on all the nominations, if anyone is interested: http://staffersmusings.blogspot.com/2012/04/comments-on-hugo-short-lists.htmlLarry also had a nice write-up, albeit less specific, http://ofblog.blogspot.com/2012/04/quick-but-not-fast-analysis-of-2012.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdiddyesquire Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 The biggest problem with the Hugos are how the the short lists are generated and the barriers to entry.Gemmells are a popular vote. Fine. No barrier to entry.. it's pure mob rule.Clarke Awards are pure panel. Fine.Nebulas are mob rule, but have a very large barrier to entry -- i.e. you have to be a member of SFWA. Similar to the Hugos, except there's less of an enclave. I think of it like the Screen Actor's Guild Awards. Lots of recognition of the old vets. It's transparent about what it is.Hugos are mob rule, but have a monetary barrier to entry. For $50 you can vote, and have your voice heard. Don't throw in your $50, you can take a hike. With only 1,000 ballots submitted this year (or something like that) that makes for a very homogeneous voting pool.Personally, I think the answer for the Hugos would be to have a juried short list, and then allow the membership to vote on the winner. I think it would make for a stronger product. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grack21 Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 Larry, I don't think you know what the Gemmell awards are supposed to be for.Maybe you should start the Larry awards, or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob B Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 My main problem with the Novel short list is the disconnect with the Long Form Editor list. Two books from Orbit, no Orbit editor on the list. Pyr/Lou Anders and Betsy Wollheim/DAW, but no books from either publisher on the short list.FWIW, after reading Larry and Justin's posts, I nattered on about it on my blog:http://blogorob.blogspot.com/2012/04/hugo-awards-shortlist-2012-my.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry. Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 Larry, I don't think you know what the Gemmell awards are supposed to be for.Maybe you should start the Larry awards, or something.I am quite aware of the award's intent. I just happen to believe that it has less importance and cachet than the Slammies do for WWE fans.As for starting something of my own, well, there was this posted early this morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterbound Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 Larry, I don't think you know what the Gemmell awards are supposed to be for.Maybe you should start the Larry awards, or something.Hmmm.. I think they've already got some pretentious reader awards floating out there in the world. Maybe he can get on the board for the pulitzer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sci-2 Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 Y'all made me curious about the Gemmells:Legend AwardThe Heroes - Joe AbercrombieThe Wise Mans Fear - Patrick RothfussBlood of Aenarion - Willian KingAlloy of Law - Brandon SandersonBlack Veil - Kristen BritainMorningstar AwardPrince of Thorns - Mark LawrenceAmong Thieves - Douglas HulickThe Unremembered - Peter ORulloanThe Heir of Night - Helen LoweSongs of the Earth - Elspeth Cooper Unremembered was nominated for the best debut? I'm suspecting voter fraud, bribes, or some combination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grack21 Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 Y'all made me curious about the Gemmells:Unremembered was nominated for the best debut? I'm suspecting voter fraud, bribes, or some combination.I've actually looked into it's popularity a bit and it seems to be genuinly liked by sff/fantasy fans. I don't get it. It boggles my mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sci-2 Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 Damn. I've criticized Wise Man's Fear as overrated, but the prose and overarching story makes it hard to deny that it deserves a shot at the Gemmells. Heroes is genuinely Joe A's best work to date, Prince of Thorns had good prose and refreshing pacing.Unremembered....yeah, I don't see it or understand it.=-=-=@TannerSack: I think a lot of people just didn't get around to King's novel, I know I planned on reading it but didn't.Heroes getting a nomination would not be a bad thing, luck of the draw.I need to go back to Among Others, but Walton did craft something outside the cliches IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grack21 Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 Maybe certain copies of The Unremembered came with cocaine?Never before has there been a book that I just DID NOT GET like this one. I can even understand some of the Tairy Fairys at some base level. But this one just baffles me. It's not even terrible in an original way. If anyone other then TOR had published it Robert Jordan's estate would be suing out their ears.Have we lived and died in vain? Yes we have. Um. Except I'm not dead yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.