2015 Hugo Award Nominees

Tough. Beale carjacked the sad puppies, who are now sitting in the backseat, their hands holding imaginary wheels, while shouting “We’re still driving! We’re still driving!” Correia refused to repudiate him, saying "Look at it like this. I’m Churchill. Brad is FDR. We wound up on the same side as Stalin.”

That’s one thing if the other side is literally actually Hitler. It’s not the case here. That line undercut any claims to morality they might ever have had.

That says:

One last time. The two Puppies sides did not want real diversity nor were the Hugo nominations in previous years exclusively by authors who all thought the same way. That’s a Big Lie. However, telling the other side they were Hitler did have the unintended consequence of banding all of the vastly dissimilar Hugo voters together like the real-life Allies to defeat an unthinkably awful foe. Irony burns, doesn’t it?

The reality is that a record number of voters voted to excise part of the ballot as they would a malignant cancer and keep the rest of the ballot alive and well. That is the exact opposite of burning the awards down.

Ironically, because of them, this year’s Best Novel Award (The Three-Body Problem by Cixin Liu) went to a bloodless, characterless, intellectual exposition of vast ideas. It was not a page-turner. It was not fun to read. It did not explore the worlds of women or minorities or gays. China’s Cultural Revolution was depicted with real horror but who would argue otherwise? Its plotline is driven by the proposition that humanity is so awful that aliens should come exterminate it. Beale could be the poster child for the book’s dark side. In years to come people will see nothing but the Best Novel label, read the most science-fictiony Big Ideas book, and come away (at least after the full trilogy is translated) with a forceful argument against individual hatred and for social justice. Again, irony. Burning irony, the only thing about the whole affair that burns.

Will the Puppies return? Probably. Will they continue to try to do damage? Probably. Will they succeed in their aims? No.

There are lots of different kinds of racists – there are “I hate all [slur for black people] and they should all die/go away” racists; there are “I don’t hate black people but they are inferior” racists; there are “Not all black people are inferior, but most are” racists; there are “black people are fine and I have no problem with them as long as they act like white people” racists; and many, many more. Many of these types of racists (and maybe even most) wouldn’t really have a problem marrying a black person, as long as it was the ‘one of the good ones’ (or whatever).

Whenever someone puts up a black friend/relative/spouse/etc. as supposed “proof” that they are not racists, it makes me suspect pretty strongly that they don’t really understand what racism is, beyond the “I hate all [racial slur] and they should die/go away” kind of racism.

On the other hand, when you call somebody with a black spouse and a lot of black friends a racist, you can’t very well be surprised when he concludes you’re hell-bent on labeling EVERYONE who disagrees with you as a racist, and just tunes you out.

Will anyone outside the shrinking and geriatric core of lit-sf fandom care? (Probably not.)

IMVHO, 75 years or so of various players trying to piss in each other’s coffee is enough. Time to grow up, especially the ones on Social Security. The juvenile horseshit started by the Futurians should never have been allowed to define fandom… beginning with the term “fandom.”

I read very little science fiction or fantasy, and almost none of what I HAVE read is contemporary. So, I’m not entitled to an opinion as to the quality of the books that were up for consideration this year or the political arguments of either the Sad Puppies or their foes.

I will merely ask a few questions:

IQ1) IS there, in fact, a large and growing gap in the sci-fi world between what’s popular and what wins awards and critical acclaim? There certainly IS such a gap now when it comes to modern movies and movie awards (the public at large goes to see the new superhero movie at the multiplex, while the critics’ awards go to subtitled films about LBGT issues). That’s not necessarily a bad thing- I’d much rather see*** Avengers: Age of Ultron *** than anything currently at the local arthouse, but I don’t delude myself that it’s a cinematic masterpiece or a work of art.
IQ2) HAVE there, in fact, been any serious miscarriages of justice in the Hugo or Nebula voting based on politics? I honestly have no idea- ARE there any conservative writers who’ve been denied awards for their political views? ARE there any mediocre books that have won awards for their political stances only? Or are conservative sci-fi fans just whining about nothing?

Bolding mine. This is just the 500th pissy faction/“political” fight* in the realm since its inception, and O So So Im Portant.

*For definition of “fight” here, see any 1950s movie featuring a slapfest between effeminate men, wink wink nudge nudge giggle giggle.

I don’t know if he’s a racist and I haven’t called him one.

I don’t care one bit about fandom. I didn’t go to Worldcom. I didn’t vote. I haven’t commented on the Puppies anywhere except this one thread.

Hating Ted Beale has nothing to do with fandom. That’s just the bottom-line duty of being a human being.

There are two major awards in science fiction: The Nebula and the Hugo. The Nebula is voted on by science fiction authors, and does tend towards “arty” works. The Hugo (what’s under discussion here) is voted on by fans, and so is inherently about what’s popular, at least among that segment of the population that’s interested enough to vote. The Avengers did, in fact, win the Hugo award for its year, as did Guardians of the Galaxy, and a large number of other popular films have at least been nominated.

Wasn’t addressing you, specifically. I was among/bound to Fandom just long enough to become proud to call myself a Reader. Every time sf fandom wanders past, though, it reminds me of the deadly insight of that Shatner skit.

The Hugos and the Nebulas often have nominated and thereupon awarded the same works. Often is not always, and there may be more divergence in some times than others.

What’s interesting about the Hugos is that overall the fans have been overwhelmingly successful at separating out Most Popular from Best Work. Robert Heinlein won four Hugos for Best Novel. But when he started writing gibberish, the fans kept buying his works and kept reading his works but they stopped giving out awards to his works. George R. R. Martin has never won a Hugo for A Song of Fire of Ice even though he is the most popular writer in the genre world today. J. K. Rowling did win once for a Harry Potter and then people said, that wasn’t a good idea, and she never won again. There are many, many complaints about the Hugos but lack of diversity isn’t one of them, nor are accusations that they bow to popularity or totally ignore it.

From this thread you wouldn’t know that Brad Torgeson and Larry Correia got three Hugo nominations last year. And that Torgeson had a story nominated for both the Hugo and Nebula in 2012. Or that John Scalzi, whose books are frequently labeled Heinleinesque, presumably exactly what the Puppies advocate for, has been nominated four times for Best Novel Hugo and won once, but that his nominations don’t count because he is an outspoken liberal and an anti-Puppie.

IOW, this is not an issue of fairness. It is not related to fandom or its preferences. It is divorced from any actual reality as an outsider would see it. It’s just another battle in the cultural war created by those who are losing it. That’s the critical point, the aspect that needs to be pointed out to casual fans and readers. Individuals may have good intentions, but their side is inherently wrong and must be treated as such.

FWIW, while I wouldn’t call The Three-Body Problem fun, I enjoyed it immensely. There were three or four moments in the book where I grinned or laughed aloud at the audacity of an idea. Yes, it’s science fiction of ideas more than it’s science fiction of characters, no question at all. But, oh, the ideas!

I can enjoy both types. TBP was firmly in the ideas camp, but was a spectacular example of that camp.

“We left this person tied and bound in the middle of a freeway but it’s your fault they got run over! :(:(:(:(:(”

Nope, not gonna fly.

Here’s a list of Hugo best novel winners since 2000:

2000 A Deepness in the Sky by Vernor Vinge
2001 Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire by JK Rowling
2002 American Gods by Neal Gaiman
2003 Hominds by Robert F Sawyer
2004 Paladin of Sould by Lois McMaster Bujold
2005 Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell by Susanna Clarke
2006 Spin by Robert Charles Wilson
2007 Rainbow’s End by Vernor Vinge
2008 The Yiddish Policeman’s Union by Michael Chabon
2009 The Graveyard Book by Neil Gaiman
2010 (tie) The Windup Girl by Paolo Bacigalupi & The City and the City by China Mieville
2011 Blackout/All Clear by Connie Willis
2012 Among Others by Jo Walton
2013 Redshirts by John Scalzi
2014 Ancillary Justice by Ann Leckie
2015 The Three-Body Problem by Cixin Liu

Of these, Vinge, Bujold, Clarke, Chabon, Gaiman, Rowling, Willis, and Scalzi (for some reason, the puppies froth at the mouth whenever his name is mentioned, but his books are very popular) are extremely popular authors in the field (and some outside of it). Ancillary Justice spent more months on the Locus bestseller list than any other book that year, so people were buying it.

Most of these books were the type of SF adventure the puppies claim to want to see.

The puppies and their supporters have only give one specific example of fiction that is what’s wrong with the field (“If You Were a Dinosaur, My Love”). They have never come up with any other concrete examples of what they mean. They are big as pointing to straw men, but when it comes down to specifics, the leave the conversation.

No. Hugo voters select the stories they like. Before the puppies, there was no one working to get any particular slates of stories on the ballot. The puppies were able to get on the ballot because they organized and stuffed the ballots (it was allowed under the rules, but the rules assumed people would vote honestly for their favorites).

I know for a solid fact (from someone who was connected with the Sad Puppies at first) that the ballot included works that the people who put it together had never read. They had no idea if the book was good or not, but bloc voted on it anyway.

So, yes, they’re whining about nothing. And the proof is that they can only come up with one particular example to “prove” their point – and that work was nominated but did not win (and it could not have possibly won, given the nature of the Hugo balloting).

As for the Sad Puppies having nothing to do with the Rabid ones, the Sad Puppies announced their choices one day; the Rabid Puppies the next. And the two groups both unveiled matching logos by the same artist, something that couldn’t have been done without some coordination.

And, BTW, the Sad Puppies were notably ineffective on putting works on the ballot; not a single Sad Puppy recommendation was nominated. It was the Rabid Puppies who took over the ballot; nearly all the original nominees were from the Rabid Puppy slate – the only reason the Sad Puppies had any nominees at is was solely due to the Rabid Puppies’ efforts. It’s like the Working Families endorsement in New York State politics – they endorse Democratic candidates, but no one thinks their candidates are anything other but Democrats. And no one should think the Sad Puppies’ nominations are anything but what the Rabid Puppies wanted.

Ultimately, the Sad Puppies are very big on insults and attacking straw men, but rarely have any facts on their side, and when facts are presented to them, they walk away from the argument.

So how pray tell did the puppies try to hijack the award? It is supposed to be a fan award open to fan that buy a membership in World Con. the puppies bought membership, read books discussed what they liked an nominated them.
How is that any different than any other year? Oh yeah we are wrong fans we aren’t FANS. We can’t sit at the cool kids table. An to show us how unwelcome we are at the cool kids table, the SJWs block voted No Award, and fucking cheered when no award was announced.
Two comments on how little class the organizers and the MC had
First off at the pre party they pasted out an award to all the nominees for all the ! this year had (most votes, most this most that in history) There were six in total. The award is conveniently arranged in a circle like this * Yep a fucking asterisk. You know what they put in the sports record book to show you really didn’t win the award. Classy real fucking classy.
Secondly when people cheered and booed the no award, the MC David what’s his face told people not to boo, but say nothing about people cheering no award. Yup lots of class and no sign of any partisanship there. Dickhead. BTW did you watch him? Christ he made a 9th grade student at his first school assembly look good. He was painfully bad at being an announcer.
Larry Correia wrote about this on his blog Here is most of it. I urge you to read it.

As something of a hijack, the only other dorky award controversy I know about is Diana Wynne Jones resigning from the World Fantasy Award Judges Panel the year that Tim Powers’s book Declare won. Looking at the other nominees, it was a kickass year:

I’ve read all of those except for Volsky’s, and of them I think Declare was the weakest (I really enjoyed several of Powers’s other books, but thought Declare wasn’t particularly well done, especially by his standard). Does anyone know why Jones resigned? A bit of Googling isn’t turning up any juicy details.

Certainly if leftist loonies had taken over fantasy fandom, you’d expect Mieville or Pullman to have won.

By urging people who have never even read the books, or had any real interest in science fiction to vote as a bloc for the nominees. It was legal and exploited a flaw in the system, but the effect is the same if someone bussed in thousands of Democratic voters, gave them housing, and registered them to vote in the district in order to elect a Democratic candidate.

And, please, point to ten examples (other than “If You Were a Dinosaur, My Love”) of the type of story the Puppies are talking about that was nominated for a Hugo. I’m betting you can’t and you won’t.

Finally, here’s a neat analysis from Slate.

Goddamn, that man is a fucking whiny self-pitying tool. He shit in the punch bowl, and is sad that people wouldn’t drink it. He needs to get the fuck over himself.

Seriously, cite or retract. I’ve seen this kind of claim from Puppies for months and not ONE of them substantiated it.

You mean like this? :