Myrddin Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 But the blurb page for the novel, in which universe this novella is set in, is fun. It cites a bunch of sites and authors I've never heard of, which praise it to the skies, and even two "Amazon reviews", both of which mentions that it's much better than ASOIF. The latter seems par for the course for any overenthusiastic review of a fantasy novel these days. "INSERT AUTHOR is the new George RR Martin" is the new "INSERT AUTHOR is the new JRR Tolkien." /makes note to change his middle initials to "RR" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Werthead Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 But the blurb page for the novel, in which universe this novella is set in, is fun. It cites a bunch of sites and authors I've never heard of, which praise it to the skies, and even two "Amazon reviews", both of which mentions that it's much better than ASOIF. The latter seems par for the course for any overenthusiastic review of a fantasy novel these days. It's worth noting that VD, after (perhaps unexpectedly) liking the first few books, decided he didn't like ADWD and decreed that he could do better. Thus his fantasy series is meant as a, in his words, "literary rebuke," to GRRM. The only problem with this plan is that, based on the samples, VD's fantasy series is a smear of excrement so foul and heinous it makes you yearn to read a collaboration between Card, Goodkind and Kevin J. Anderson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davos Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Happy to see two Charles Stross works make the cut, particularily the "Equid" Novella. Brilliant, twisted bit of work, and probably the most truly horrific entry to his Laundry Series. I really don't like the inclusion of the whole of the Wheel of Time as an entry on the ballot. Even though I gave up on the series after book 7 (or was it 6, twas a long, long time ago), it is indeed a monumental achievement. Perhaps it should be given a special award of some sort. Nominating the series in its totality in the Best Novel category forces voters to do compare the merits of a vast work completed by two different authors and published over something like 25 years with novels being evaluated as individual works by a single author. Its hard to even began to create reasonable critia to base an comparative evaluation on, much less actually make a decision. There are two possiblities: 1. voters make cast their ballot for one of the other nominees either because of mixed feelings towards WoT or because they simply aren't comfortable with it in the category. This isn't fair to WoT. or 2. Voters cast their ballot for WoT out of sentimentality or out of recognition that just getting the last books out was a major acheivement. This would not be fair to the novels nominated in the category. Its simply a bad choice and makes the whole category problematic this year, regardless of what evetually wins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Werthead Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 That depends on the notion of what the Hugo Awards actually are. Despite repeated attempts by people to cast them as a literary award, they do tend to veer from being an industry award for rewarding commercial success (like the Brit Awards) to an award system more based on what in-crowds can be mobilised to vote for which authors on the basis of politics within the field (like, er, Eurovision). Viewed through the lens of commercial impact, Wheel of Time winning a Hugo Award could be justified on all sorts of levels: its importance in establishing Tor and effectively subsidising every 'risky' work Tor has ever put out; its impact on the field and its abolishing of the arbritary 'trilogy rule' for fantasy fiction (which might not be regarded as a good thing in some quarters, but it certainly is in others); and its role in the establishment and spreading of early online fandom. Certainly many of the first big SFF websites and forums that sprang up were based around the series. Taken on pure literary merit, you could argue that maybe it's not worthy, but then all of the other books on the list are equally problematic (or moreso) in their own way. The fact of comparative size and impact - an 11,000 page behemoth taking on a herd of minnows - is an interesting one, though. It does make me wonder if some sort of 'Special Achievement Award' might be warranted at this time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myrddin Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 BEST DRAMATIC PRESENTATION (SHORT FORM) (760 ballots) An Adventure in Space and Time written by Mark Gatiss, directed by Terry McDonough (BBC Television) Doctor Who: “The Day of the Doctor” written by Steven Moffat, directed by Nick Hurran (BBC Television) Doctor Who: “The Name of the Doctor” written by Steven Moffat, directed by Saul Metzstein (BBC Televison) The Five(ish) Doctors Reboot written & directed by Peter Davison (BBC Television) Game of Thrones: “The Rains of Castamere” written by David Benioff & D.B. Weiss, directed by David Nutter (HBO Entertainment in association with Bighead, Littlehead; Television 360; Startling Television and Generator Productions) Orphan Black: “Variations under Domestication” written by Will Pascoe, directed by John Fawcett (Temple Street Productions; Space / BBC America) Note: category has 6 nominees due to a tie for 5th place. Seeing that 4 out of six entries in this category are Dr. Who related, I'm assuming the Whovian vote will be split too many ways to have a winner. So it's between GoT and OB. As much as I loved the Rains of Castamere, I'd love to see Orphan Black get some recognition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Selig Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Seeing that 4 out of six entries in this category are Dr. Who related, I'm assuming the Whovian vote will be split too many ways to have a winner. So it's between GoT and OB. The Hugos use an Australian ballot system, vote splitting is not an issue there. Plus there are 2 or 3 Doctor Who episodes each year yet they keep on winning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
felice Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 I really don't like the inclusion of the whole of the Wheel of Time as an entry on the ballot... Nominating the series in its totality in the Best Novel category forces voters to do compare the merits of a vast work completed by two different authors and published over something like 25 years with novels being evaluated as individual works by a single author. The Silmarillion was written over more than sixty years, and completed posthumously by a second author. Do you think it would have been inappropriate for it to have appeared on the Hugo ballot if it had been nominated? Or is it really just the length of WoT you object to? Personally I'm more comfortable with a series like that being nominated as a single complete work than I am with separate books in a must-read-in-order series being nominated individually. Seeing that 4 out of six entries in this category are Dr. Who related, I'm assuming the Whovian vote will be split too many ways to have a winner. It's preferential voting; vote splitting isn't an issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alytha Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 The only problem with this plan is that, based on the samples, VD's fantasy series is a smear of excrement so foul and heinous it makes you yearn to read a collaboration between Card, Goodkind and Kevin J. Anderson. ...wow... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maester Llama Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Felice: By "defusing their criticism," I meant doing so for everybody else's sake, not theirs. I probably chose words poorly. They can feel as persecuted as they like -- and if Day in particular felt comfortable I'd be pretty worried about the subculture. But if voters [of which I'll probably now be one] default to "no award" in the case of these works, then these people have made us behave as they imagine we do. Will I be voting politically when I vote for an award like this? Absolutely, in that I take how a story represents people and ideas to be part of its "literary merit" and I probably won't vote for something I see as peddling representational crap. But if I auto-vote "no award" with the thought uppermost in my mind that I'm doing so because the author acted like an asshat rather than because I have read their story and found it to be bullshit, then in an obscure, symbolic sort of way I see them as having "won." I think we're ending up in similar places re the "no award" issue; I'm just nitpicking about the details of how one arrives at the decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
felice Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 I think we're ending up in similar places re the "no award" issue; I'm just nitpicking about the details of how one arrives at the decision. Yes, I think we're in agreement here; I just think it's particularly important this year to make sure people understand the importance of ranking No Award if they think any of the nominees are unworthy. Eg if the nominees are A, B, C, D, and E, then there's a huge difference between voting "1: C, 2: A, 3: E", and "1:C, 2: A, 3: E, 4: No Award", which isn't necessarily obvious if people don't think about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Werthead Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 As much as I loved the Rains of Castamere, I'd love to see Orphan Black get some recognition. Orphan Black is not going to win, although it deserves it. I'll probably vote for it anyway. But I think Day of the Doctor is going to walk it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
williamjm Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 It's preferential voting; vote splitting isn't an issue. And even if it was I'm sure they'd be voting for the 50th Anniversary episode in preference to the others. As much as I loved the Rains of Castamere, I'd love to see Orphan Black get some recognition. I'm slightly surprised that Variations Under Domestication is the episode that got nominated. Alison's increasing paranoia and her disastrous party were memorable (and very amusing), but I think several of the other episodes are stronger dramatically. In that category I don't think there are any bad choices out of the four things I've seen (not watched the two Dr Who spin-offs yet although I know that An Adventure In Space and Time did get some good reviews). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seli Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 And even if it was I'm sure they'd be voting for the 50th Anniversary episode in preference to the others. That depends, I've heard people preferring the docudrama (An adventure in space and time), and the Five-ish doctors over the episodes proper already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Datepalm Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 Five-ish was funnier and more charming than any of the actual episodes of Who that i've seen this year, which kind of ran to bombast and smarm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alytha Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 The 5-ish Doctors was one of the funniest things I've ever seen in my life. Probably going to put that as nr1, then Day of the Doctor, Name of the Doctor, Rains of Castamere. How do you vote "no award"? It's only the second time I'm a Worldcon member, so sorry for stupid questions ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. X Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 How do you vote "no award"? It's only the second time I'm a Worldcon member, so sorry for stupid questions ;)The way I remember the ballot usually working is that you get six slots (one for each of the five nominees and one for "No Award") where you write the numbers 1 through 6, in order of your preference. So to vote for no award, you put a number in that slot. If you really want no award at all for a category, I believe you just put a 1 for "No Award" and leave the rest blank.(And the number of slots changes with the number of nominations, of course.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alytha Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 So the "no award" concerns the entire category then, not just one entry as in "this is so bad that I won't even give it a 6"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mormont Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 That depends, I've heard people preferring the docudrama (An adventure in space and time), and the Five-ish doctors over the episodes proper already. I'll be voting for An Adventure In Space And Time, certainly. It was just so well done, and David Bradley's performance deserves an award. So the "no award" concerns the entire category then, not just one entry as in "this is so bad that I won't even give it a 6"? Basically, you put 'No Award' at the point at which you'd rather scrap the category than give it to any of the remaining nominees. So, if we have nominees A, B, C, D, and E, I might put: 1. B 2. C 3. E 4. A 5. No Award Which would indicate that I'd rather not give the award at all than give it to D, or even 1. B 2. C 3. E 4. No Award 5. A Which would indicate I'd rather not give the award at all than give it to A or D, but if forced to pick between them I'd prefer A. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bastard of Godsgrace Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 I quite often vote:1. B2. C3. E4. No Award5. A6. D meaning I think it would be really embarrassing if A wins and I prefer no award being given, but it would be even more embarrassing if D wins. You can rank works below no award, and IMHO you should, unless you really can't bring yourself to read them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Werthead Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 and David Warner's performance deserves an award David Warner was in it? ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.