Hugos V: E Paucibus Drama

[felice]

What felice says. Slates are going to be a bane of the awards unless there's a massive increase in nomination process participation. If that happy event happens, I don't think anyone will mind letting EPH sunset.

 
I expect there'll be no reason to let it sunset, though. At worst, EPH gives the same results as the old system; any differences are improvements (in the sense of representing more nominators's choices, which I think is the only objective measure), even in the absence of deliberate slates (eg EPH resulting in one Doctor Who finalist instead of three). After five years, people will be used to it, and there's no downside to keeping it.
 
But I still think the only real solution to the slate problem is a longlist stage. EPH helps, but not enough. And a massive increase in non-slate nominations can be countered by a small increase in slate nominations, because the non-slate nominations will be diverse. Giving voters the chance to pick their top five from a longlist to determine which works make the final ballot would result in much broader support for the finalists, and make it much harder for slates to sweep the ballot. A couple of examples:

2015 Best Novel Longlist 
[spoiler]
Ancillary Sword - Ann Leckie
Annihilation - Jeff Vandemeer
The Chaplain’s War - Brad Torgersen
City of Stairs - Robert Jackson Bennett
The Dark Between the Stars - Kevin J. Anderson
The Goblin Emperor - Katherine Addison
Lagoon - Nnedi Okorafor
Lock In - John Scalzi
The Martian - Andy Weir
The Mirror Empire - Kameron Hurley
My Real Children - Jo Walton
Skin Game - Jim Butcher
The Three Body Problem - Liu Cixin
Trial By Fire - Charles E. Gannon
Words of Radiance - Brandon Sanderson
[/spoiler]

2015 Best Short Story Longlist
[spoiler]
The Breath of War - Aliette de Bodard
This Chance Planet - Elizabeth Bear
Covenant - Elizabeth Bear
Jackalope Wives - Ursula Vernon
A Kiss With Teeth - Max Gladstone
Makeisha in Time - Rachael K. Jones
A Single Samurai - Steve Diamond
On A Spiritual Plain - Lou Antonelli
The Parliament of Beasts and Birds - John C. Wright
Toad Words - Ursula Vernon
Totaled - Kary English
The Truth About Owls - Amal El-Mohtar
Turncoat - Steve Rzasa
The Vaporization Enthalpy of a Peculiar Pakistani Family - Usman T. Malik
When it Ends, He Catches Her - Eugie Foster
[/spoiler]

 

I'm confident having a longlist this year would have resulted in a far, far better final ballot.

[Howdyphillip]

ASoIaF is no where close to the most influential work in SFF.

I should have prefaced that statement as the most influential work of the last 20 years....

[Darth Richard II]

I should have prefaced that statement as the most influential work of the last 20 years....

I can go with that.

[felice]

I was there, howso?

I assume the idea is that not giving awards to crappy books is meant to be the same as burning books. Yay hyperbole?
 

I should have prefaced that statement as the most influential work of the last 20 years....

It's highly influential in the subgenre of epic fantasy, certainly; that's not what the Hugos are for, though. And the last three volumes have all been finalists, so it's hardly being ignored.

[Howdyphillip]

I assume the idea is that not giving awards to crappy books is meant to be the same as burning books. Yay hyperbole?
 

It's highly influential in the subgenre of epic fantasy, certainly; that's not what the Hugos are for, though. And the last three volumes have all been finalists, so it's hardly being ignored.

It is unquestionable the most culturally relevant work for the entire sci-fi/fantasy genre with the exception of the Harry Potter books, and there is a very valid argument that it has surpassed even these recently. It is also one of the most accessible and most cherished work in the genre. For five of the novels to not be awarded the best novel does not bode well for mass fandom of Science fiction and fantasy. I understand that they have been nominated, but if this series can't win, what does that say about other books that have general appeal?

 

The Hugos are for the best science fiction and fantasy books. This is what the award claims to be. I am not saying that the best books are the ones that sell the most by any stretch of the imagination, but it seems like that in the last 20 years or so, our winners are not even close to the most beloved books that were released in a particular year. I'm also not saying that the winners are bad books, because by and large, I have enjoyed reading the work that takes the prize. What I am saying is that less and less importance is being placed on work that has broader appeal. 

 

[Darth Richard II]

You need to read more, methinks.

And the last two books were certainly not "cherished". I don't even know where to begin with that one.

[ChillyPolly]

 

George has won for ASoIaF: Blood of the Dragon (all of Dany's AGoT chapters combined into one novella) won the Hugo Award in 1997 and GoT won four years on the trot, including for the entirety of its first season. He's missed out on the Best Novel Award, sure, but the series has been recognised more than most. 

 

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.

[mormont]

EPH makes no change at all to the nomination process for nominators; it's purely a change in the tallying process, and it's perfectly straightforward.

 
This just isn't true. Yes, the mechanics of what the nominators are asked to physically do is the same. No, this does not mean there is no change to the process from the nominators' point of view. The EPH system is considerably less transparent from the nominators' point of view: this is a huge change. Nominators need to understand how their nominations become a shortlist to properly participate in the process. We've been over this a number of times and I understand that you don't concede this point, but it remains true, and EPH remains an overly complicated and bad solution.
 
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. I predict that next year, you'll see at most one or two slated works on each shortlist - and that in future, the Sad Puppies at least will react to EPH by simply nominating a single work in each category, something that as I understand it EPH can't prevent. They don't need to sweep the board to make their statement: indeed, I think that was never what they intended.
 

[Howdyphillip]

You need to read more, methinks.

And the last two books were certainly not "cherished". I don't even know where to begin with that one.

I generally read around 100 books a year. I would read more, but I just can't find the time for it.

 

Since there is a whole other part of this forum to discuss the books, I will not go on a long description of how I believe the last two books in ASoIF are actually some of GRRM's best writing because this isn't really the place for it. What I will say is that without question these two books are cherished by the general public. If they were not, then there would not be the fervor of the overall fandom clamoring for more of them.

 

ChillyPolly does have a point about not awarding an incomplete work, but historically the Hugos have not functioned in this way.

[felice]

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. I predict that next year, you'll see at most one or two slated works on each shortlist

It was always obvious that the puppies were a small minority; the problem wasn't that they might get awards (never a likely prospect), but that they prevented more deserving candidates from being recognised. What makes you think this year was a freak result? They've tried it three years in a row, growing each time, and there's no reason to think they won't keep going, with the advantage of being far more widely known than before.
 

and that in future, the Sad Puppies at least will react to EPH by simply nominating a single work in each category, something that as I understand it EPH can't prevent. They don't need to sweep the board to make their statement

 
If they don't sweep the board, then nobody cares if they make their statement or not. The puppies getting a single work in a category just isn't a problem; that still leaves voters with four other decent works to choose from.

[Darth Richard II]

I think I was a happier person before I found out what Poe's Law is.

[David Selig]

 

It is unquestionable the most culturally relevant work for the entire sci-fi/fantasy genre with the exception of the Harry Potter books, and there is a very valid argument that it has surpassed even these recently. It is also one of the most accessible and most cherished work in the genre. For five of the novels to not be awarded the best novel does not bode well for mass fandom of Science fiction and fantasy. I understand that they have been nominated, but if this series can't win, what does that say about other books that have general appeal?

So the Hugo voters should have predicted that there would be a super popular GoT TV series made years later and voted accordingly? Because that's the only reason the series became super popular and culturally relevant. Before that it wasn't even close to being as popular as WoT and a number of other fantasy series/novels among the general public.

[Darth Richard II]

Pfft, logic and facts. That's crazy talk.

[Ran]

Sound like a broken record, but "what felice said". Interest groups [i]have[/i] gotten individuals up there that wouldn't have made it if there wasn't a concerted effort to get them there. That's not new. People have admitted as much. The problem is when one interest group sweeps the field and leaves no choice but "No Award".

 

Vox Day is entirely willing and prepared to get a slate to stuff the final ballot like they did this year, and then will merrily dance when a bunch of No Awards follow. Sarah Hoyt of the SPs is doubling down with her rhetoric, too. I think there are a lot of fellow-travelers who will see $40 as a small price to pay to "show up" the left/liberal/SJW/Marxists who "control" the award by forcing them to basically not give any awards in as many categories as possible (according to Vox, over 300 people were in a chat room with him "celebrating the demolition" of the awards as one No Award followed another). I suspect the one correction Vox will make is to make sure that everyone on his slate is absolutely sure that they will accept the nomination and not back down, thereby locking up categories even more tightly. I suspect he won't neglect Best Graphic Work, as well.

 

The outsized voting this year [i]may[/i] mean that a Vox Day-led RP slate won't have as much impact, if a substantial portion of those voters go on to nominate.  We don't actually know that that will be the case eight months from now. We do know the SP folk are still planning to get a slate going, and one can be sure Vox is going to put together his slate too. If they have no impact next year, then people can rightfully argue that they need not worry about the situation and EPH can die at the business meeting in KC.

[mormont]

It was always obvious that the puppies were a small minority; the problem wasn't that they might get awards (never a likely prospect), but that they prevented more deserving candidates from being recognised. What makes you think this year was a freak result? They've tried it three years in a row, growing each time, and there's no reason to think they won't keep going, with the advantage of being far more widely known than before.

 
There's ample reason, starting with the fact that so many people participated in the process this year. All of those people get to nominate next year too. And most of them are now very motivated and aware of the Puppy threat. The thin margins by which the Puppies got onto the ballot next year look very vulnerable to an increase of interest: a couple of dozen more votes is all it would take, and it's very likely that next year, there will be anti-Puppy slates and logrolling going on to concentrate votes behind certain candidates.
 
At the same time the number of eligible nominators is hugely increased, the number of Puppies is very likely to decrease, IMO. Some of them will feel their point has been made. Many of the Sads will not want a repeat of this year's acrimony. Some of the Rabids will lose interest, because the limits of their mischief have been very clearly shown up, and trolling is less fun if you get slapped down. As I pointed out in a previous post, it's going to be much harder to get people to agree to be on slates, too.
 
Beale is full of bluster right now, but his raving is mere empty threats. He's a busted flush. If he can't get the numbers this year to ensure that even one of his nominees won, with all the free publicity and controversy, then he can't get the numbers to wreck the ballot in future. He will not get a better chance than this year: he will not sweep the board, or even get close, again. Count on it.
 

If they don't sweep the board, then nobody cares if they make their statement or not. The puppies getting a single work in a category just isn't a problem; that still leaves voters with four other decent works to choose from.

 
I think people will care, though clearly not as much: but that's not the point. The point is, if they don't sweep the board, then EPH is a distraction, a pointless overreaction. It makes the process less transparent, to combat a threat that IMO is very likely to turn out to be a one-off. I hope it dies a death.

[Howdyphillip]

So the Hugo voters should have predicted that there would be a super popular GoT TV series made years later and voted accordingly? Because that's the only reason the series became super popular and culturally relevant. Before that it wasn't even close to being as popular as WoT and a number of other fantasy series/novels among the general public.

You have a fair and valid point here. I am however looking at things through my own perspective. I picked up ASoIF in 2000 with the release of ASoS. Upon reading the first three books, they immediately became my favorite current work in the genre and I knew that they were a game changer. It is perfectly understandable for everyone not to see that at the time though.

 

Speaking of WoT and the other work that was unquestionably more relevant, where was the winners from that group? I know that I have said earlier, that sales shouldn't be the only indicator of whether a piece of work is worthy of an award, but since 1988, there have been only two authors that are in the top 100 highest grossing Sci fi writers that have won a best novel award.* Neil Gaimon, and JK Rowling are the only two to do so. Certainly some of the other popular work wasn't all not worthy of that title.

 

* referenced Wertzone  

http://thewertzone.blogspot.com/2015/03/the-updated-sff-all-time-sales-list.html

[felice]

since 1988, there have been only two authors that are in the top 100 highest grossing Sci fi writers that have won a best novel award.

Yes, it's terrible miscarriage of justice that Tolkien didn't win a Hugo after 1988 ;) There have only been 27 best novel awards since 1988, so obviously most of the authors on that list have to miss out. Many of them are known primarily for pre-1988 work (Tolkien, CS Lewis, Edgar Rice Burroughs, Arthur C. Clarke, and Andre Norton just in the top 10), and others are simply not good, despite selling well (unless you want to claim Eragon deserved a Hugo?).

[David Selig]

You have a fair and valid point here. I am however looking at things through my own perspective. I picked up ASoIF in 2000 with the release of ASoS. Upon reading the first three books, they immediately became my favorite current work in the genre and I knew that they were a game changer. It is perfectly understandable for everyone not to see that at the time though.

Even if people saw it somehow, so what? You are supposed to vote for the works you liked best in a given year, not for the ones you think will end up the most popular, culturally important and influential.

[Darth Richard II]

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

[mormont]

The other factor you have to account for is the Hugo voters' preference for sci-fi over fantasy. It's not universal, by any means - lots of fantasy has won the Hugo - but it's easier for sci-fi novels.

 

(Strangely, fantasy fans have not yet risen up against this manifest injustice... Sad Dragons, anyone? :p)