Well deserved; the first person I told this to said “I thought he was a Grandmaster already” (or words to that effect).
A lot of people have had that reaction. This is an undisputably good choice.
A well-deserved honor for an author whose works I can’t stand.
Eh, call me old-fashioned, but to me, the Grandmasters are Heinlein, Asimov, and Clarke. The title is cheapened when it’s thrown around as much as it is.
Well, the award itself was a bit controversial in SFWA. It was established by Jerry Pournelle primarily to honor Heinlein and other authors who were important in the genre and pro science fiction in general, but who weren’t likely to win any Nebulas. (Oddly, the second Grandmaster, Jack Williamson, did eventually win one at age 93).
Damon Knight, who founded SFWA, disliked the entire idea of the award, and after his death, it was named after him. :smack:
However, I think that Chip is well deserving of the award. His work in the 60s was groundbreaking and, no matter what you think about it, Dhalgren is one of the landmarks of the field.
Very well put! I was going to say something along those lines. He’s a grand master, truly… But I just do not like reading his stuff.
(I kind of liked The Einstein Intersection. But I couldn’t get past the first forty pages of Neveryona. I was alternately bored and disgusted.)
The lesson from this is to celebrate diversity. How gloomy a world it would be if we all liked the same books. I’m delighted at Delany’s recognition, because he has given pleasure (and thought!) to many millions of writers. His meat may be my poison, but he has fed the millions. Congratulations to him! The choice is a good one.
You’re old fashioned! 
Honestly, Delany should have been given this years ago. The rest of his class got their Grand Masters in the 2000s: Brian W. Aldiss, Philip José Farmer, Ursula K. Le Guin, Robert Silverberg, Anne McCaffrey, and Harlan Ellison. Obviously Roger Zelazny would have won one if he had lived and probably John Brunner as well. (It can only be awarded to living writers. Why? Mostly because Damon Knight had whims of iron.)
If you say the Grand Masters are just the Big Three, you’re saying science fiction died 50 years ago. Some people do in fact believe this, but it’s not a position that can be taken rationally. It’s as antagonistic to the field as the most extreme literary snobbism. And heck, Delany’s first novel was published 51 years ago. Shouldn’t he sneak in?
Oh, I’m not against continuing to honor great science fiction writers (which Delany certainly is). Just pick a new name for the award and I’m fine with it.
I’d go as far as maybe ten worthies, but it’s become far too extended.
When it was my turn, I referred to Heinlein as the Grand Master and cheerfully take the heat for it. 
If you were really old-fashioned, you’d say Heinlein, Van Vogt and Clarke (or possibly Smith, Campbell, and Hamilton).
If you have to have just one, he’d be the one. But if you’re going to have a couple of dozen or so, Delany is a good one to have on the list. I haven’t read much of his work but what I’ve read, I’ve liked (also I heard him talk once when I was a college student - he gave two lectures and I figured they’d both be about science fiction, so I went to the one that fit my schedule better (and dragged my parents along, too - it was Parents’ Weekend) - and heard him give a terrific lecture about opera…).
Wouldn’t surprise me if Niven was named next year.
Wait, with all the people who have been named Grand Masters, Niven still isn’t one of them? OK, now I find it really hard to take the title seriously.
Here’s the list from wikipedia
1975 Robert A. Heinlein (1907–1988)
1976 Jack Williamson (1908–2006)
1977 Clifford D. Simak (1904–1988)
1979 L. Sprague de Camp (1907–2000)
1981 Fritz Leiber (1910–1992)
1984 Andre Norton (1912–2005)
1986 Arthur C. Clarke (1917–2008)
1987 Isaac Asimov (1920–1992)
1988 Alfred Bester (1913–1987)
1989 Ray Bradbury (1920–2012)
1991 Lester del Rey (1915–1993)
1993 Frederik Pohl (1919–2013)
1995 Damon Knight (1922–2002)
1996 A. E. van Vogt (1912–2000)
1997 Jack Vance (1916–2013)
1998 Poul Anderson (1926–2001)
1999 Hal Clement (Harry Stubbs) (1922–2003)
2000 Brian W. Aldiss (1925–)
2001 Philip José Farmer (1918–2009)
2002 not conferred
2003 Ursula K. Le Guin (1929–)
2004 Robert Silverberg (1935–)
2005 Anne McCaffrey (1926–2011)
2006 Harlan Ellison (1934–)[5]
2007 James Gunn (1923–)
2008 Michael Moorcock (1939–)[6][7]
2009 Harry Harrison (1925–2012)[8][9]
2010 Joe Haldeman (1943–)
2011 Connie Willis (1945–)
2012 Gene Wolfe (1931–)[10]
2013 Samuel Delany (1942-)
Niven was born in 1938, so there are only three GMs born after him.
How did Bester make it?
I can’t say that I’ve read anything of Delany’s except for the first 300-odd pages of Dhalgren, and that I gave up after that. Mostly because I was 15 years old and the abundance of non-linear plotlines and gay sex was a bit offputting.
On the basis of what I recall of those pages, though, I’d say the award is deserved.
The award was given at a ceremony in 1988, but Bester was named as the recipient in 1987, while he was still alive.
It actually wasn’t officially announced until the Nebula banquet that year, which was after Bester had died. However, the decision had been made previously and Bester had been notified. They decided to go through with it, since he had been named while alive.
<slow pitch>
What about Ray Bradbury?
</slow pitch>
Lets give him his due credit then. My personal opinions only, of course.
He did five enjoyable but minor short novels for Ace from 1962 to 1966. Then came Babel-17 and The Einstein Intersection, both of which won Nebula Awards. They are very much New Wave books and if you don’t like the 60s New Wave you probably won’t like these much either. (In the famous quote from James Blish, who was very old school, “when his The Einstein Intersection won the same award in 1968, I stepped quietly out into the kitchen and bit my cat.”)
His growth as a writer was remarkable and the following year he put out Nova, which is a major novel by any standard and tremendously influenced the entire cyberpunk movement, though he shouldn’t be blamed for it.
At this point, after nine novels, he started writing short stories. (From the timing there was some overlap towards the end, but still.) Nobody else ever had a career progression quite like that. Or had such jaw-dropping success. 1971’s *Driftglass *collection (later expanded as Driftglass/Starshands) contained his first 10 short stories. They picked up four Hugo and three Nebula nominations spread over five stories, winning both for “Time Considered as a Helix of Semi-Precious Stones,” one of the finest stories in the history of the field. Period. And I’ve argued that “The Star Pit” is even better.
As with Zelazny, his genius dimmed once the 60s were past. I didn’t care much for *Triton *and *Dhalgren *is an unreadable blockbuster that sold a million copies in an era when you could count the number of million-selling sf books on one hand. The Neveryon series (add accents to taste) was interesting if eventually pedantic, but the novel *Neveryóna *was one of his best. And I have to admit that I never finished anything of his since.
Admiring Delany is like one of those baseball arguments between peak power and career value. At his peak in the 60s, he was simply awesome. I prefer Zelazny, but Delany was better at times, in the same way that I prefer The Beatles but the best 60s Stones were unbeatable. Then he simply stopped caring about his readers and wrote for himself and you either accepted it for what it was or rejected it completely.
He also gave the single best lecture on science fiction I’ve ever heard.
It’s also true that I haven’t reread much of his work in decades. Maybe I’d dismiss most of it today, or maybe I would have matured as a reader to understand it better. You can’t reread everything all the time; there’s too many new books being written every year. I’d still defend Delany as an automatic, no-argument candidate for the honor.
Ray Bradbury was a great author, and a science fiction author, but he was not a great science fiction author.
His work is also so morbidly depressing that I have a very hard time reading it, but that’s a question independent of his greatness.