# Explain the Sad Puppies (Science Fiction Controversy) **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Tags:** books-writing-myths\ **Created:** [December 2, 2020, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-sad-puppies-science-fiction-controversy/927019 "2020-12-02T16:26:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 15
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2020, 3:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-sad-puppies-science-fiction-controversy/927019/282 "2020-12-23T03:31:03Z")
I am not sure if it is even a problem, but in many awards , Most Popular stopped getting awards. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2020, 3:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-sad-puppies-science-fiction-controversy/927019/283 "2020-12-23T03:37:40Z")
Interesting cite. From it: _What has become equally obvious, to anyone willing to look at the situation objectively, is that a third of a century later the situation has become transformed. Today, there are is only one author left who can regularly maintain the bridge between popular appeal and critical acclaim. That author is Neil Gaiman. And there are no more than a handful of others who can manage it on occasion. Perhaps the most prominent in that small group are Lois McMaster Bujold, Ursula LeGuin and George R.R. Martin._ _Once you get beyond that very small number of authors, the field diverges rapidly. That handful aside, there is no longer any great overlap between those fantasy and science fiction authors whom the mass audience considers the field’s most important writers—judging by sales, at any rate—and those who are acclaimed by the small groups of people who hand out awards._ “…a third of a century later…” more or less when I said the Hugos stopped being given out to Popular authors. Again, popular does not= great. But for decades, the great books were also popular. Now, - not so much. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2020, 3:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-sad-puppies-science-fiction-controversy/927019/284 "2020-12-23T03:49:49Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > I am not sure if it is even a problem, but in many awards , Most Popular stopped getting awards. You were talking specifically about the Hugos. Therefore, for credibility’s sake, name the _popular_ books since 2009 that have _not_ been getting Hugos. Also, just because Amazon’s algorithms put a book into a category does NOT necessarily mean it’s in a niche market. Amazon loves to slot books into categories. Many categories. Right now it’s showing the book in: - #11 in [Gothic Romances](https://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/books/276240011/ref=pd_zg_hrsr_books) - #36 in [Action & Adventure Romance (Books)](https://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/books/11764651011/ref=pd_zg_hrsr_books) I’m not sure in this case whether dismissing a book that Amazon decided has a lesbian following a niche book is merely ignorant or a slur. And really, you have to stop saying that the individual and varied membership of a convention are _judges_. Nobody else in the world uses the word that way. I’m know we’re talking about science fiction, but you don’t get your own special reality to do so. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2020, 4:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-sad-puppies-science-fiction-controversy/927019/285 "2020-12-23T04:00:16Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > I’m not sure in this case whether dismissing a book that Amazon decided has a lesbian following a niche book is merely ignorant or a slur. I simply quoted what Amazon listed as it’s best sales categories. And I hardly dismissed it, I said it was _close to being a best seller, in a niche market._ It is very easy to find lists of “best Science fiction for the year XXXX” harder to find “best selling SF”, so i used Amazons sales figures. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2020, 4:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-sad-puppies-science-fiction-controversy/927019/286 "2020-12-23T04:15:28Z")
I’m not convinced that it’s a problem at all. If I want popular books, you’re right–bestseller lists are a great proxy for that, and I can find them easily. On the other hand, if I want _well-written_ books, awards are a helpful place for me to go. Sure, I’d like for the well-written books to be popular, but the solution isn’t to change awards, it’s to encourage more people to read well-written books. To the extent that there’s divergence, and to the extent that it’s a problem, we should get people to read the good stuff. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2020, 4:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-sad-puppies-science-fiction-controversy/927019/287 "2020-12-23T04:47:03Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > You were talking specifically about the Hugos. Therefore, for credibility’s sake, name the _popular_ books since 2009 that have _not_ been getting Hugos. You’ve made the claim that popular books are no longer winning the Hugos multiple times. I asked you to back up that claim. Please do so, without the dodging. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2020, 6:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-sad-puppies-science-fiction-controversy/927019/288 "2020-12-23T06:01:01Z")
You know, there may be one thing that we are missing. Some of the most popular writers are writing books for _their_ fans and for the money. Note I said “their fans” and not “the fans”. Some series became quite craptastic towards the end- Piers Anthony, Jordan, Corriea, and yes, even one of my faves- Butcher. (Ok, not craptastic in Jims case, but not up to the quality of his earlier books) Perhaps in some cases the most popular books- by sales- werent all that well written. Heck even Asimov, one of the greats- Foundation trilogy- none of the sequels or prequels were remarkable at all. Perhaps that’s part of the problem. ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2020, 7:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-sad-puppies-science-fiction-controversy/927019/289 "2020-12-23T07:26:13Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > You were talking specifically about the Hugos. Therefore, for credibility’s sake, name the _popular_ books since 2009 that have _not_ been getting Hugos. I was going to say Brandon Sanderson, but then I noticed that he actually won a Hugo (Best Novella) and had been nominated for Best Novel and Best Series. I still think that some of his individual novels should have won (and more should have been nominated), but he has the disadvantage of writing “classic” fantasy and “epic” series, both of which rarely win Hugos. ---
**Author:** ![Andy\_L](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c67d28/32.png) [@Andy\_L](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Andy_L)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2020, 12:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-sad-puppies-science-fiction-controversy/927019/290 "2020-12-23T12:20:22Z")
Yes. For some reason, you mentioned its rank in small categories, but not its high rank in the bigger category - even though you mentioned the bigger category for other books. You also didn’t notice that the rank is among other books that don’t qualify for the 2020 Hugos. What books are higher ranking that “Gideon” and qualify for the 2020 Hugo - if any? ---
**Author:** ![Andy\_L](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c67d28/32.png) [@Andy\_L](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Andy_L)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2020, 12:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-sad-puppies-science-fiction-controversy/927019/291 "2020-12-23T12:35:21Z")
typo alert - “did not _note what_ the rank was among books that _actually qualify_ for the 2020 Hugos” ---
**Author:** ![puzzlegal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puzzlegal/32/3827_2.png) [@puzzlegal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puzzlegal)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2020, 1:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-sad-puppies-science-fiction-controversy/927019/292 "2020-12-23T13:21:45Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > > [@DrDeth](#): > > > > I am not sure if it is even a problem, but in many awards , Most Popular stopped getting awards. > > You were talking specifically about the Hugos. Therefore, for credibility’s sake, name the _popular_ books since 2009 that have _not_ been getting Hugos. > > Also, just because Amazon’s algorithms put a book into a category does NOT necessarily mean it’s in a niche market. Amazon loves to slot books into categories. Many categories. Right now it’s showing the book in: > > - #11 in [Gothic Romances](https://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/books/276240011/ref=pd_zg_hrsr_books) > - #36 in [Action & Adventure Romance (Books)](https://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/books/11764651011/ref=pd_zg_hrsr_books) > > I’m not sure in this case whether **dismissing a book that Amazon decided has a lesbian following a niche book is merely ignorant or a slur.** > > And really, you have to stop saying that the individual and varied membership of a convention are _judges_. Nobody else in the world uses the word that way. I’m know we’re talking about science fiction, but **you don’t get your own special reality** to do so. This post is getting unnecessarily personal (see bolded parts). Cafe Society is a one of our friendly categories. Please try to make your point without brushing close to insults. ---
**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2020, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-sad-puppies-science-fiction-controversy/927019/293 "2020-12-23T17:18:20Z")
> [@Thudlow\_Boink](#): > > So now I’m laughing, thinking “Cthulhu would be such a nice guy, if only he weren’t so racist.” To be fair, for all Cthulhu’s faults, I don’t think racism is one of them. As _The Call of Cthulhu_ shows, Cthulhu would gladly eat or drive insane anyone, regardless of race, creed, or sexual orientation. For that matter, although people seem to call Cthulhu “he”, I don’t think it was ever established that Cthulhu has a definite sex. Equal opportunity horror ---
**Author:** ![MrAtoz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@MrAtoz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrAtoz)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2020, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-sad-puppies-science-fiction-controversy/927019/294 "2020-12-23T18:21:58Z")
_The Call of Cthulhu_ does put Lovecraft’s racism on pretty clear display, though. The worshippers of Cthulhu, when captured, prove to be “men of a very low, mixed-blooded, and mentally aberrant type. Most were seamen, and a sprinkling of negroes and mulattoes, largely West Indians or Brava Portuguese from the Cape Verde Islands…” Pretty much all of Cthulhu’s minions in that story seem to fit this general description. It may well be that Cthulhu himself doesn’t much care, but Lovecraft does seem to suggest that the folks who worship him are…you know…_those_ kind of people. ---
**Author:** ![Odesio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/odesio/32/20003_2.png) [@Odesio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Odesio)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2020, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-sad-puppies-science-fiction-controversy/927019/295 "2020-12-23T18:24:01Z")
> [@MrAtoz](#): > > _The Call of Cthulhu_ does put Lovecraft’s racism on pretty clear display, though. The worshippers of Cthulhu, when captured, prove to be “men of a very low, mixed-blooded, and mentally aberrant type. Most were seamen, and a sprinkling of negroes and mulattoes, largely West Indians or Brava Portuguese from the Cape Verde Islands…” Pretty much all of Cthulhu’s minions in that story seem to fit this general description. You’re right. It’s not in all of his stories but when they’re there you can’t miss it. One of my favorite stories, “Herbert West-Reanimator” has some painful descriptions of a black boxer. ---
**Author:** ![gdave](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gdave/32/3683_2.png) [@gdave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gdave)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2020, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-sad-puppies-science-fiction-controversy/927019/296 "2020-12-23T18:31:54Z")
But in _The Shadow Over Innsmouth_, those who carry the Deep One taint all seem to be of good WASP bloodlines. And, as someone-who-I-can’t-recall pointed out (maybe Ken Hite), the “negroes and mulattoes” and such that feature in Lovecraft’s stories are pretty much always faceless, low level cultists. The named sorcerers and cult leaders almost always solidly “white” Europeans, usually WASPs. Blacks and other “undesirables” generally lack the moral force in Lovecraft to even be proper villains. Just to be clear: dude was racist. Just, like, _super_ racist. As pointed out upthread, he was racist even by contemporaneous standards, which we know because his contemporaries noted how racist he was. But for the most part, his actual fiction didn’t really reflect that, beyond the standard sidelining of anyone who wasn’t a white male. It’s definitely there, and it’s definitely problematic, but it wasn’t really what his fiction was _about_. His concern with “polluted bloodlines”, for example, seems to have had a _lot_ more to do with a father who died in an asylum of syphilis, and a number of other cases of mental illness in his family, than with miscegenation. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2020, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-sad-puppies-science-fiction-controversy/927019/297 "2020-12-23T19:11:46Z")
That is what was shown. I even copied and paste what I saw. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2020, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-sad-puppies-science-fiction-controversy/927019/298 "2020-12-23T19:52:32Z")
The point is that what is shown on any given view is only a sampling of the total number of categories and so cannot be used by itself to slot a book into a particular niche. BTW, you’ve posted several times without giving any examples of the asked for list of popular books that aren’t being nominated for Hugos. Could you please finally do so or admit that your claim has no foundation? ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2020, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-sad-puppies-science-fiction-controversy/927019/299 "2020-12-23T20:03:08Z")
I think [there’s some merit to that claim](https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/best-sellers-science-fiction-fantasy). Consider these authors who sell super-well: Ernest “Ready Player 1” Cline Terry “DogTurds of Shannara” Brooks Timothy “More Star Wars” Zahn Patricia “Sexy Werewolves” Briggs There are lot more authors that sell pretty well but don’t hit the awards circuit. That’s fine. Again, McDonald’s sells a lot more food than the French Laundry, but that doesn’t mean they deserve a Michelin star. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2020, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-sad-puppies-science-fiction-controversy/927019/300 "2020-12-23T20:03:27Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > And the list of awards does nothing but prove my point. _Popular_ books stopped getting awards. Popular enough to gather enough votes is popular enough to win the award. The only “problem” I can see is that your own opinion as to who should win the Hugos doesn’t seem to be…popular. ---
**Author:** ![Ruken](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f475e1/32.png) [@Ruken](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ruken)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2020, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-sad-puppies-science-fiction-controversy/927019/301 "2020-12-23T20:12:30Z")
> [@gdave](#): > > But in _The Shadow Over Innsmouth_ , those who carry the Deep One taint all seem to be of good WASP bloodlines. I’m assuming the intent was to make that even more horrifying. What’s the one where the character finds out he has gorilla ancestry or something like that? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-sad-puppies-science-fiction-controversy/927019.md?page=14) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-sad-puppies-science-fiction-controversy/927019.md?page=16)