I wouldn’t call it interesting. It’s yet another inept analogy rather than the actual facts.
…says the guy who parrots the comparison of Dinosaur to Mouse.
I didn’t parrot anything. It was the first thing I thought of when I read it.
The analogy is just as silly as ‘shat in the punchbowl’.
I hadn’t read those comments, but they are disturbingly similar to those on Correia’s post linked to above. Imagine what the proverbial Martian anthropologist would make of the early comments vs. the later. I noticed that Jim van Pelt called it a poem. Very insightful guy.
I admit that the story is not f&sf per se, but uses imagery associated with fantasy/sf to make a metaphorical point. I’ve done it myself in poetry. Those upset that a story not a “true” fantasy made the ballot might contemplate this: Damon Knight, the founder of SFWA, denounced people who put fantasy stories on the ballot because only “true” science fiction was legitimate.
Absolutely at this point I take everything you say at face value.
It’s a lousy analogy based on the most superficial of readings, and doesn’t remotely rise to the level of criticism, as I said earlier.
…I have no idea what you’re getting at. Feb 2015? What happened then? I’m clearly missing your point.
And I can assure you that I have no idea–and until you mentioned it, never once thought about–the race of the attackers or the victims. It was (to me) a dull prose-poem about a woman who’s boyfriend was beaten up and she daydreams.
ETA: While (you’re right) that the hate does start around early Feb 2015, there’s one really thought-provoking comment “Think about this. It’s a story about a woman telling herself a science fiction story.”. Hmmmm.
You’re missing my greater point about the fact that the Puppies have criticized Dinosaur as not being sci-fi/fantasy yet nominating Parliament. Whether you think it’s interesting or better than Parliament (it is), for the Puppies to deride it as not worthy of Hugo consideration because of genre then to turn around and nominate Parliament ludicrous. Just like the “A book with a spaceship should be space opera” and the “Sci-fi should be hard and non-political” arguments.
It was around that time that the puppy brigade were gearing up. Right before Groundhog Day, however, a right-wing blogger wrote a scathing review of the story. Turns out she is one of the brigade herself. Quelle surprise!
The author in her blog says she’d never thought about the attacker’s race, either, or about their class, and that the gin-soaked line was not intended to point at working class people. Which, OF COURSE it isn’t, despite the insane over-reading. What self-respecting redneck in the US goes anywhere near gin?
Fenris, in case I’m not being clear, I’m not saying that only a racist would hate the story. You’re welcome to hate the story for all the wrong reasons you want to, and that doesn’t make you a racist. But those comments on the story, goddamn, some of those people are really wearing it on their sleeves, aren’t they?
AAAAhhhhh…I thought you were talking about nationally/internationally–and I didn’t think a Federal Judge temporarily halting Obama’s executive order on immigration was really all that relevant. 
At least for a period, in the UK, gin did seem to mean “lower class”. See 1984 for an example. That said, that only occurred to me after the time that class/race had been brought up.
Reno Nevada writes:
> More people attended Sasquan than any other Worldcon ever.
I believe this is wrong. The only number I can find online for the attendance at Sasquan was somebody’s guess that it was about 5,000. The biggest Worldcons so far have been the 1984 in Los Angeles and the 2014 in London.
The Hugos have always had a fair bit of blurring around the edges of the genre. Basically, the criterion they use is that if something is enjoyed by a lot of science fiction fans, then it counts as science fiction. So yeah, some winners might not exactly be quite properly science fiction… but then, look up the 1969 winner for Best Dramatic Presentation. That’s definitely not science fiction.
So he’s an even bigger idiot and asshole (assidole? idiast?) that hitherto indicated.
I think you mean the 1970 award, which was given for “News Coverage of Apollo 11,” published in the year preceding.
The 1969 presentation was to 2001: A Space Odyssey.
First time I’ve seen that. It’s almost compellingly insane, on the level of Timecube but in sentences. She would be perfect as a Doper.
You didn’t read my post. The puppies solicited others to tell them who to nominate (I spoke to one, and I know what that person selected for the ballot). Brad Torgerson took the suggestions. If he had read that book (and another that I’m pretty sure was solicited), why did he have to have someone tell him to nominate it? It means he either didn’t read it, or read it, didn’t think it was worth a nomination, and nominated it anyway. Also, given the time frame from when the nominations were solicited and when they were announced, he didn’t have time to read them.
It’s also quite clear that the Rabid Puppies slate was voted on by people who had not read the works. Again, there wasn’t enough time for them to read the entire slate. They voted for the works not on quality, not because it was the type of SF they like, but just because Vox Day told them to.
Re: “If You Were a Dinosaur, My Love.”
Love it or hate it (I loved it and gave it three stars – the highest rating – on Tangent Online’s Recommended Reading list that year*), that’s a side issue. The big issue is this:
No one on the SP/RP clique has ever come up with any concrete examples of stories they think are ruining SF other than that one. I see that someone in the thread (not the SP/RP, who always avoid the issue) has now pointed to a second. So two stories out of the hundred or so that have been nominated for Hugos in the past 15 years. This is somehow a threat to the genre?** :dubious:
The Puppies are incapable of understanding that the voting was due to the fact that people liked the stories they voted for. They can’t conceive of a world where anyone has any opinion other than theirs, and thus claim conspiracies.
But ultimately their issue is that some stories they hated won award, and some they liked did not. Just like with every award ever given for anything.
They remind me of Communists: trying to fit the square pegs of reality into the round holes of their misconception.
*I also gave three stars to Brad Torgerson’s “The Chaplain’s Legacy.” So what am I, a Social Justice Warrior or a Sad Puppy? Or maybe option 3, which the SPs and RPs don’t seem to think possible: someone who likes a great story.
**Not to mention all the popular works that won awards. As I pointed out, most of the best novel Hugos went to authors who are popular, but within the field and sometimes beyond.
I have comments about many of the posts here, but there are two of them I want to address directly.
In the sixteen years I have been a member of this board this is the single most condescending comment I have ever read. Unfucking believable. So it is your position that a college educated African-American woman is too stupid to know that the person she has been married to for for over 21 years is racist? You said that with a straight face and then have the gall to say that the sad puppies are racist? Yeah no racism on your side, nope none whatsoever.
See above
I’ll address the rest of your drivel later, but I have to address this one special. Of the 5 billion threads here is CS how many of them are active since August 16, 2015? Why do I ask, you say?
See that is the date I finished reading the book and posted a review on Amazon (go ahead check it is at 4.4 stars currently)
Unlike the puppy haters I don’t give a book thumbs up or recommend it or against it until I have read it.