Hugos V: E Paucibus Drama

[Gasp of Many Reeds]

I've always found ASoIaF game changing status to be way overblown.

Yeah, when I started reading ASoiaF it was still seen by most people, even in the fantasy community, as 'just another fantasy series'. Yes, lots of people who had read it thought it was really, really fucking good, but I didn't get the impression that they all thought George had reinvented the wheel. The problem is that most mainstream readers hadn't even heard of another fantasy series, or read one, since Tolkien and C.S. Lewis (hell, Wheel of Time and Feist's work were far more popular than ASoiaF in the early 2000s, but they generally remained under the mainstream's radar except as 'long books nerds read). Against Tolkien and Lewis, Martin certainly looks a radical shift. But that would be to ignore a whole host of preceding fantasy writers who adopted a more dark and cynical tone than Tolkien and Lewis.

[Darth Richard II]

I Always figured we have the WFA for that;

[Darth Richard II]

Yeah, when I started reading ASoiaF it was still seen by most people, even in the fantasy community, as 'just another fantasy series'. Yes, lots of people who had read it thought it was really, really fucking good, but I didn't get the impression that they all thought George had reinvented the wheel. The problem is that most mainstream readers hadn't even heard of another fantasy series, or read one, since Tolkien and C.S. Lewis (hell, Wheel of Time and Feist's work were far more popular than ASoiaF in the early 2000s, but they generally remained under the mainstream's radar except as 'long books nerds read). Against Tolkien and Lewis, Martin certainly looks a radical shift. But that would be to ignore a whole host of preceding fantasy writers who adopted a more dark and cynical tone than Tolkien and Lewis.

This. Too tired and on phone to elaborate much, but there were many authors writing in the grimdark style before agot landed.

[David Selig]

Just got to share Wright's latest inanity with you - http://www.donotlink.com/gfq4

 

Apparently Patrick Nielsen Hayden turned Vox Day into a total bigot just by arguing with him on the Internet. Amazing skill to have. He has also single-handedly controlled the Hugo awards for decades. Obviously he is really wasting his time at Tor instead of taking over the world with his amazing powers.

[Lies And Perfidy]

Patrick’s surname is “Nielsen Hayden”, not “Hayden”. HTH.

 

No, it is not. Please do not be absurd.

 

While Mr Hayden might wish that it were the custom that married men changed their family names in deference to their wives here in the West, in fact, we do not. His wish is irrelevant in this case. He does not get a vote on how Western civilization naming conventions go.

 

Please do not treat personal preferences and quirks, fads and stage names, as being of the same dignity with long established traditions, laws, and facts. 

 

The first quote's a commenter, the second quote is JCW. I just find this an illuminating example of what a petty little prong that fella is. "No his name isn't his name!"

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

David,

I keep waiting to be invited into the "Hugo Award Control committee".

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

LandP,

What a douche. I suppose he ignores the latin american custom of adding matrilineal name as part kids names.

[David Selig]

The first quote's a commenter, the second quote is JCW. I just find this an illuminating example of what a petty little prong that fella is. "No his name isn't his name!"

His explanation is also really dumb. US law allows you to choose whatever name you want (as far as I know, Scot should correct me if I am wrong, I am basing this claim on an episode of Friends ;)). If Hayden wanted to rename himself Fred Flintstone or XYZPHFD after his marriage or whenever, that would have been perfectly legal.

[Lies And Perfidy]

LandP,

What a douche. I suppose he ignores the latin american custom of adding matrilineal name as part kids games.

That's a good point. What, precisely, excludes these Western-hemisphere, largely Roman Catholic cultures, from being part of Western civilization? I wonder.

[Reny of Storms End]

Here's another quote from that linked blog.

"I am, in all modesty, a skilled author, one of the finest writing today."

Sure ya are buddy.

[MinDonner]

"long-established traditions, law and facts" :lmao:


Holy crap, the Puppies keep on delivering. They're almost cute at this point.

[Darth Richard II]

"long-established traditions, law and facts" :lmao:


Holy crap, the Puppies keep on delivering. They're almost cute at this point.

They are highly entertaining at times. :p

[Kalbear]

I love what GRRM did with the alfies. Absolutely brilliant way to effectively give a giant twist of the knife to the puppies, and even smarter to have press at the private party.

[Howdyphillip]

I love what GRRM did with the alfies. Absolutely brilliant way to effectively give a giant twist of the knife to the puppies, and even smarter to have press at the private party.

That really was awesome... For those who didn't know, I am linking a pretty good article about this weekend...

 

http://www.wired.com/2015/08/won-science-fictions-hugo-awards-matters/

[SerHaHa]

I came to link that Wired article as well - probably one of the best pieces written, regarding BOTH sides of the issue.

 

I'm a libertarian person so far as politics go.  I probably have more in common with the SPs then most of the old guard/other side/whatever with regards to people involved in the Hugos. 

 

Bearing this in mind, I think the entire puppy movement is ridiculous, particularly the methods used, and the negative waves put out there from them.  As others have stated already, sci-fi and fantasy is a pretty progressive are of interest - is that not what it's really all about for the most part?  Wert, Ran, Mormont, Ser Scot, and many others have already written some really excellent stuff, but IMO, the 500 pound gorilla in the room is this - Conservative writers...just don't WRITE as well as "liberal" writers do in this genre, at least in the majority of cases.

 

Merit.  This word has been used by many, but I think Scalzi has said it most frequently.  Hugo awards should be awarded based on merit.  Merit based on the strength of the  stories.  Despite having more in common so far as political/world views goes, I just feel that most of the writers who share some...certainly not all...but a lot of the same viewpoints about the world as I do, just don't WRITE as well.  There is no shame in this either.  It's just that stories are for the most part a form of escapism, are they not?  Who wants to escape to lands of stick up the ass conservative viewpoints?  Entire novels with nothing but Mormon curse words, attacks on those of different genders, sexual attractions, whatever.  Nope.  Not for me.  And like I said, being libertarian puts me  on the side of most of the writers like Scalzi, Liu, Chu, Martin, and so forth, as frequently as  Correia, Vox Day, Brad T, and so on.  In my case the politics of the situation sort of zero themselves out.  I read everyone's work, from both sides, and truly, IMO, again, the 500 lb giant ape thing - the puppy side authors just aren't as good at plying their trade.  And all the politics surrounding both reality and how it seeps into writing of every author really doesn't have much effect on that bottom line.  I wasn't saddened for an instant seeing the nuclear option engaged in those 6 categories, although Tony Weiskoppf did get a ton of votes, and was IMO the only one closest to deserving of getting a rocket, she still didn't quite get there in terms of merit, again, IMO.

 

Example - say Correia's Monster Hunters Inc was up against Scalzi's Old Man's War.  I enjoyed both books, they were in my top 50 or so in the year I read them, and I read about a book a day on average (full disability and retired now).  Scalzi would win any award, anywhere, any time IMO, in a shoot out with Correia.  Even if it was voted on blind.  Yet, from Correia's standpoint, if that was to have happened, somehow he and his side believe that it's based on his real life story - gun store, NRA support, Mormon, whatever.  I don't discount that there will ALWAYS be people who vote based on what they think of an author, and not his work, but in the case of nearly every category of the Hugos, this fact DOES NOT MATTER.  Merit.  The stories and work from the puppy side just aren't as good.  Period.  I firmly believe this, and think THIS is why the puppy side has been excluded in the past.  In the future, if a conservative gun store owning Mormon, or something along those lines, writes a stupendously good book and is shut out, then there will be more validity to their complaints.  Until this happens though, it's an empty shell of an argument from their side.

 

 

 

I know many are saying that the new rules might keep this issue in check.  I agree with much of what Ran said, but the situation needs to be monitored closely in the future.  It only takes money.  If Vox or anyone else was able to get a few hundred K from a guy lose with money and much to burn (say a Dan Bilzerian type), that's all it would take for much damage to be done, in terms of buying up 40$ memberships, and getting enough votes next time for the "no award" votes to be overwhelmed.  Unlikely, yes, but possible, which is why I think more rule changes are still needed, an an eventual board of experts in the genre to be the ones who have final say on voting in some manner.  People like Martin, Scalzi, Gerrold, and so forth.  Just my opinion.

 

I'm happy to see how it went down, I wish I could have attended, but I really enjoyed watching them live on Ustream.

 

Finally, having read GRRM's not a blog religiously for a couple years now, I think that when George put his oar in the water and started inserting his views and arguments, it had a very calming effect at a critical juncture so far as the online "battle" was going.  I didn't agree with everything Martin said, but certainly supported his overall views and concepts, and think that the Hugos and fans in general are very blessed to have had him take such an active role in the matter.  Especially considering how busy he must be right now.  Same goes with the mods here at Westeros that allowed free speech but kept a lid on a lot of the nonsense.  Again, being libertarian I'm a fan of no moderation  in most cases, and think that everyone here did a great job when this topic came up in various places here.  I hope this continues going forward.

[Gasp of Many Reeds]

Thoughtful post SerHaHa. The real issue as I see it isn't that Conservative writers write badly - a lot of them don't, or at least we can say Sturgeon's Law equally applies across the political spectrum. The issue is the inability to judge on merit, as you said. And whilst there may have been some low level identity politics influence in how previous Hugo awards were chosen, conscious or unconscious, the Puppies approach wasn't to critically analyse this perceived bias, it was basically to use sledgehammer tactics to try to explicitly bias the award towards their own version of identity politics. You can't complain about 'merit' not being respected and then try and force your own ideologically-approved slate on fandom - it is beyond hypocritical. And it's not like judging on merit is impossible - hey, I will happily state The Moon is a Harsh Mistress is one of the greatest works of classic science fiction, but I massively disagree with Heinlein's libertarian politics. This does not mean I can;t admire it as a work of storytelling, or even as a work of propaganda, just as film buffs can admire Battleship Potemkin and not have to agree with its propagandist communist message. 

[Clueless Northman]

As for the future, I have no doubt that next year we'll see some slates, much log-rolling, and so on. EPH will not prevent that. But if this year's results have shown anything, it is not that EPH is necessary: it's that it's an overreaction. The Puppies did not have the numbers to make their slates a success, and this year's nominations list was a freak result.

That would probably be the best move to de-escalate the whole infighting, from what I can guess. And even if people think the Puppies aren't that numerous and will be even less relevant next year, better not use that argument as the main reason - it will only work as "Challenge accpeted" and will invigorate their leaders, Vox Day first of all, at least for next year (after that, less likely).

Then, depending on how the system changes, if Puppies routinely get one single nomination out of 5 or 6 in the future, and they feel a little bit vindicated, that doesn't seem to me that big a damage, compared to the current level of shitstorm.

Right now, I think the first priority should be to make sure Vox Day cannot game the system to the extent he wishes to. Changing the system to piss off or neuter the Sad ones isn't nearly as crucial to the survival of the Hugos. But the system can be rigged by a determined group of rabble-rousers - the risk has been there all along, as previous shenanigans proved, except that people tended to do it for specific work/author, not systematically.

For next year, best to assume that Sad ones, Rabid ones, and "trufans" (or backlash against puppies, or something else if you want) will see some degree of increase in their ranks. Some will also get bored or disinterested, but that obviously will happen to all sides.

I think that when George put his oar in the water and started inserting his views and arguments, it had a very calming effect at a critical juncture so far as the online "battle" was going.

Oh yes. I think things would've been far worse, had he not intervened, both in trying to calm down some of the most vocal on his side and in trying to discuss with the adults on the Sad side. He obviously was pissed off at times, thought that many Puppies' arguments were bollocks, but still tried his best to be polite and reasonable, and probably risked to get some nasty flak from his side when stating that a full No Award was madness and that all works, even Puppies-slated ones, should be judged on merit (I don't think he was that happy that Weisskopf was downvoted that much).
Heck, if I compare that to another shitstorm, if there were people acting adult like he did on both sides of Gamergate at the beginning, that whole mess would've been over in a few weeks instead of festering for months. So, one can see the effect GRRM had on all this, and what he's worked hard to prevent (however nasty things will be from now on) - makes me wonder if someone will nominate his blog for "best fan writing" next year :D

[Errant Bard]

Conservative writers...just don't WRITE as well as "liberal" writers do in this genre, at least in the majority of cases.

Which is totally meaningless since awards are all about exceptionalism: you don't need to be in a majority to be the best. As can be verified by checking the Hugo winners and their political orientations.
 

I read everyone's work, from both sides, and truly, IMO, again, the 500 lb giant ape thing - the puppy side authors just aren't as good at plying their trade.

That only means that their nominations sucked. Why didn't they nominate someone like Gene Wolfe, a conservative yet awesome author?

See, you're buying into their worldview here, the "liberals" versus the "conservatives" fighting for the Hugo, and it's bollocks: It was only fans of works with merit versus assholes promoting bad (and their own) works by duping morons with a specific political ideology.

[David Selig]

Just imagining Correia and Torgersen reading Gene Wolfe makes me laugh. They will give up after 100 pages max, his work is way too "literary" and "snobbish" for them.

[Werthead]

 

Maybe there just isn't a category for "best book-length episode in an unfinished novel".  Blood of the Dragon is semi-workable as a semi-completed story arc; and having gotten an award for that, he's already gotten a Hugo for A Song of Ice and Fire in its unfinished form.  It's only fair that any further Hugos, if any, should await completion.

 

I don't think episodes of a longer serial should be excluded: previous winners include plenty of individual books in a series, including several Vorkosigan novels, Foundation's Edge (Book 4 of 7), whilst both Ancilliary Justice and The Three-Body Problem are the opening volumes of trilogies.

 

However, I do think that it's likely that, the appearance of a total unexpecting masterwork notwithstanding, the final ASoIaF novel will likely pick up an award in recognition fo the whole series (as with the LotR movies at the Oscars).

 

They will give up after 100 pages max, his work is way too "literary" and "snobbish" for them.

 

I don't know, Wolfe is a Christian white dude and his books involve swords and spaceships, they're probably fine with them, even if they don't understand them ;) And of course Wolfe has never won a Hugo, showing the inherent bias in the system, or something.