serdog Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 I do think it a fair question as should the Hugo be popcorn novels (for exsample I enjoy the Temeriare serise alot but its real just pure fun ) or literatry novels that stick with a person (looking at 1990 for two great exsamples Boat of a Million Year and Hyperion both a lot of fun but have that hontingg nature to them) however I wonder if some of the nomintes delveler either Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Richard II Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 Ug, thats right, Dan Simmons has a Hugo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sci-2 Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 Ug, thats right, Dan Simmons has a Hugo. I'd say it's deserved, regardless of how I feel about the man's politics. Hyperion is incredible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 Yeah, Orson Scott Card has a Hugo too. Most of the time, when a book comes along that has massive widespread appeal the Hugos get it right as far as awards go. It's the quieter years where it can suck a bit. Though looking back on the olden days - I think that's something that's missing, an author or set of authors that are both very good and astoundingly prolific. Heinlein, Clarke, Asimov, Niven, LeGuin, Herbert, Farmer, Zelazny - those are titans of the sci-fi world, and they were nominated or won several years in a row. I'm trying to think of any author that could remotely be nominated several years in a row nowadays. Charles Stross is basically it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Richard II Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 Wasn't Mira Grant nominated several years in a role? Too lazy to look now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 Yeah, from 2011 to 2014. Like Stross, she's never won it. And unlike the Great Golden Days of Awesome, it's not the same people competing in and out with just knockout books left and right, where all of them have won at least once. I can kind of understand why Hugo voters are often about that great time - because there really were some giants of the industry back then at the height of their popularity and success, and they were all going at it against each other. Also, fuck Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. Seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Richard II Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 Yeah a lot of those uh, "greats" I am very much not a fan of. :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lokisnow Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 I don't mind good conservative fiction being nominated. Speaker for the dead for instance has an ending that inverts the crucifixion by having ninja Jesus be the crucifier, because that's the harder thing to do, you know, being the executioner is totes worse than being executed! And it's combined with sci-fi extrapolation of Mormon theology on the soul. It's fascinating especially given the omnipresent woe-is-me tone and poor-little-smart-kid rationalizations for all actions by the nominal protagonists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 I'd say it's deserved, regardless of how I feel about the man's politics. Hyperion is incredible. Agreed. What's actually shameful is they then nominated The Rise of Endymion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 Yeah, Orson Scott Card has a Hugo too. Most of the time, when a book comes along that has massive widespread appeal the Hugos get it right as far as awards go. It's the quieter years where it can suck a bit. Though looking back on the olden days - I think that's something that's missing, an author or set of authors that are both very good and astoundingly prolific. Heinlein, Clarke, Asimov, Niven, LeGuin, Herbert, Farmer, Zelazny - those are titans of the sci-fi world, and they were nominated or won several years in a row. I'm trying to think of any author that could remotely be nominated several years in a row nowadays. Charles Stross is basically it. I generally feel like fantasy has sort of switched places with sci-fi in that respect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kat Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 Yeah, Orson Scott Card has a Hugo too. Most of the time, when a book comes along that has massive widespread appeal the Hugos get it right as far as awards go. It's the quieter years where it can suck a bit. Though looking back on the olden days - I think that's something that's missing, an author or set of authors that are both very good and astoundingly prolific. Heinlein, Clarke, Asimov, Niven, LeGuin, Herbert, Farmer, Zelazny - those are titans of the sci-fi world, and they were nominated or won several years in a row. I'm trying to think of any author that could remotely be nominated several years in a row nowadays. Charles Stross is basically it. Because all the books have to be like 600 pages these days, maybe, so it's hard to publish them frequently? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Richard II Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 Yeah it pains me at times to admit it but Hyperion is pretty awesome. Those two follow up books though, well, we've had this discussion before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ran Posted April 7, 2015 Author Share Posted April 7, 2015 There's no reason to feel pain. For one thing, Dan Simmons didn't go batshit (or at least publicly batshit) until after 9/11, so works prior to that time are pre-Batshit and easy to approve of even if artist and art are closely bound together in your mind. Same with John C. Wright, there's a pre-Batshit era for him as well (which basically is The Golden Age) before the Virgin Mary, Jesus, and God came over for a party and decided to move in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Richard II Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 Well, I think it bothers me because at the end of the day, I don't want to recommend the mans other work to someone, particulary all his post Iliiim stuff, though I will admit watching people's reactions to The Abdomible ending on good reads has brought me much amusement. :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polishgenius Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 I've no interest in reading it (or any of Simmons' novels really, despite hearing great things), so I went and looked up spoilers for The Abominable and, erm... how does someone who's clearly a good author and intelligent man arrive at the idea that that is a clever conclusion?I find it interesting how some authors were affected by 2001. Iain M Banks for example clearly was, although not by turning into a hate-monger.Also, to bring it back to the Hugos by a circular route- people often bring up that Banks never won a Hugo and was only ever nominated once (for one of his worst works), and that's shameful, but apparently Terry Pratchett was never so much as nominated. I mean, what the fuck, guys? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ran Posted April 7, 2015 Author Share Posted April 7, 2015 Yeah, Banks was very under-appreciated by the Worldcon fandom. Being British was part of it, though: The Player of Games was published in the UK in 1988, but didn't get a US publication until 1989... and it didn't get a paperback edition in the US until 1990. So it's not a great surprise that a lot of people hadn't heard of him, and I suppose it's why that book was only 22nd on the 1989 Locus Poll. Looking at the Locus Poll is fairly illustrative. His best placement in the 90s was 10 for Against a Dark Background. In 1999, he showed up as 20th in the Best SF/F Novelists of the 90's (directly behind one George R.R. Martin). Then Look to Windward was 7, The Algebraist was 5 (that's the one that got the nom), and his very best placement was 2nd place for Matter... which, weirdly, got no nomination at all despite the fact that the Locus Poll suggests it had gone over quite well. As to Pratchett, humor is something that the Hugo crowd largely relegates to short fiction categories. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polishgenius Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 Being British was part of it, though: I did assume this, but it's only partly an excuse: China Mieville gets nominated for just about every adult book he writes, for example, and Gaiman has won twice.I know it's not entirely on the Hugos that Banks wasn't properly pushed in America till well into the 00s, but still. The existence of a comedy gulag is something one can argue over anyway, but confining Pratchett to it is an unforgivable crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
felice Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 apparently Terry Pratchett was never so much as nominated. I mean, what the fuck, guys? He was nominated but turned it down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 Sci,I'd say it's deserved, regardless of how I feel about the man's politics. Hyperion is incredible.Indeed. Hyperion is a great book. Shryke,I enjoyed Rise of Endymion. DR,Have you read The Terror? It's not political and a hell of a novel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polishgenius Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 He was nominated but turned it down.Fair 'nuff. My knowledge is evidently spotty.Further reading suggests that if he had accepted the nomination that year, Banks would not have got the only one he has. That's not a comfort. :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.