It's that time of year again! Here are the current list of nominees. This years voting is a mixture of better than last year and worse.
Vox Day continues to troll and troll hard, and the rabid puppies slates managed to dominate all the fan and short form categories. That is why "Space Raptor Butt Invasion" currently has a Hugo nom. Which is both incredibly hilarious and also sad.
I actually have no complaints at all about Sad Puppies this year, since they switched to recommendations and most of them seem reasonable.
I'll probably buy a membership this year to vote (hey...free reads!). I expect Space Raptor Butt Invasion will give me many many good things to quote in my gchat conversation with my friends.
The vitriol express begins again... *sigh*
I've already heard speculation about the book Chuck Tingle will write to commemorate this...something about inappropriate uses of the Hugo award rocket.
That book is already released. Also, we prefer the term "unorthodox," rather than "inappropriate."
Outside of Novel and movies/tv, it doesn't take much currently to rig the Hugos. There are just so many shorter/fan works published in a given year and so many different avenues, that it's virtually impossible for one person to read them all. And I am willing to bet that a lot of people leave these categories blank; most of short fiction I read comes from "year's best" or from anthologies several years old. It's pretty rare that I read short fiction that is actually eligible for nomination.
So different people are going to have different favorites. So even a slate with modest participation is going to stack the deck.
yeah it feels like perhaps some of the categories need alteration. Novella and short story really should be combined, and it would be nice if series could maybe be recognized separately from stand alones.
yeah it feels like perhaps some of the categories need alteration. Novella and short story really should be combined, and it would be nice if series could maybe be recognized separately from stand alones.
There needs to be a video game category too. For all the Rabid Puppies success, none of their video game entries made it, which suggests they were disqualified for some reason.
You realize this was one of the biggest complaints Sad Puppies made, right?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You realize this was one of the biggest complaints Sad Puppies made, right?Which complaint?
Video games?
Different size categories?I don't really remember either of those, but I could be wrong.
That the categories no longer match what is actually being published, so things like multi-book series get completely ignored while the focus is on the short literature that doesn't actually pay authors enough to live on. Correia has had it as a major complaint since the beginning.
That the categories no longer match what is actually being published, so things like multi-book series get completely ignored while the focus is on the short literature that doesn't actually pay authors enough to live on. Correia has had it as a major complaint since the beginning.You realize this was one of the biggest complaints Sad Puppies made, right?Which complaint?
Video games?
Different size categories?I don't really remember either of those, but I could be wrong.
No. His biggest, and at the root of it, only complaint was that he and his buddies aren't getting nominated for them and claims that because stuff he doesn't like is beating him it has to be a left wing conspiracy. As opposed to, you know, the WorldCon membership not liking his books.
Of course it's all rubbish as the first librarian points out.
Have you actually read any of his complaints? Sure he is an acerbic a@@~&#*, but that doesn't mean he is wrong.
That the categories no longer match what is actually being published, so things like multi-book series get completely ignored while the focus is on the short literature that doesn't actually pay authors enough to live on. Correia has had it as a major complaint since the beginning.You realize this was one of the biggest complaints Sad Puppies made, right?Which complaint?
Video games?
Different size categories?I don't really remember either of those, but I could be wrong.
Do you have an early source for that? A quick look at the first Sad Puppies posts and few other places doesn't turn up anything about it. Lots of more political complaints stuff about message fiction vs good old-fashioned SF, but nothing about categories that I saw. I might well be wrong, I didn't dig that deeply, but I didn't see anything now and I don't remember seeing it from the Puppy side when I was looking at this last year.
The first place I came across it was here. Where it was raised as an alternate explanation, in contrast to the Puppies' claims.
Looking. now that I'm thinking about it, I think it was in his reason for continuing with Sad Puppies 2, not in his founding with 1. 1, 2 and 3 all had works chosen with different agendas in mind, to prove different points.
I'd have no issues with the existence of a separate video game category, but I feel video games really shouldn't fit into any existing category.
I'd have no issues with the existence of a separate video game category, but I feel video games really shouldn't fit into any existing category.I'd rather not have a video games category.
If you're going to have video games, you should have multiple video game categories. FPS/MMO/Strategy/etc. Even limited to SFF, they're all very different things.There are awards for video games already. I don't think they fit in the Hugo.
Why Not? The Hugos award Science Fiction, regardless of media. Video games are just as valid, and to many people are more valid, a media for telling a story as movies or books.
as someone who hasn't played a video game in...5 years? I am pretty indifferent to the whole affair
But that is a good point...video games are diverse enough and far enough afield that they probably don't need their own category within the Hugos (or need to be awarded one in an existing category).
Why Not? The Hugos award Science Fiction, regardless of media. Video games are just as valid, and to many people are more valid, a media for telling a story as movies or books.I'd have no issues with the existence of a separate video game category, but I feel video games really shouldn't fit into any existing category.I'd rather not have a video games category.
If you're going to have video games, you should have multiple video game categories. FPS/MMO/Strategy/etc. Even limited to SFF, they're all very different things.There are awards for video games already. I don't think they fit in the Hugo.
Partly, as I said, because you'd really nee d a whole bunch of categories and I really don't want to see them take over the Hugos.
Whatever, it's not a real strong opinion on my part, but I don't find it really fits. Yes, you can tell a story in video games, but would "story" actually wind up as part of the criteria?
I wouldn't be horribly opposed, but I'm not in favor.
I've spent a lot of time with people who lament that video games are not taken seriously as a storytelling medium and art form. I think it is important that we begin to recognize that they are not just for children.
at any rate I think it best we not go into the motivation and pros and cons of the sad puppies. This year they did distinguish themselves from the rabid puppies by not doing a voting slate and don't seem (IMHO) to be trolling the Hugos.
Although I am curious to see the reactions of the personalities involved. So far I can only find, from that faction, Larry Correia, who blames the Chuck Tingle nom on the Hugo's voting No Award. Which...err...yeah..doesn't make sense to me.
It's clear though, even if there was maybe a bit uncertainty last year, that the Rabid puppies slate is much more problematic, and almost certainly their efforts on putting tripe like dinosaur erotica on the nom lists will ensure that the proposed voting changes will pass this year.
at any rate I think it best we not go into the motivation and pros and cons of the sad puppies. This year they did distinguish themselves from the rabid puppies by not doing a voting slate and don't seem (IMHO) to be trolling the Hugos.
Although I am curious to see the reactions of the personalities involved. So far I can only find, from that faction, Larry Correia, who blames the Chuck Tingle nom on the Hugo's voting No Award. Which...err...yeah..doesn't make sense to me.
It's clear though, even if there was maybe a bit uncertainty last year, that the Rabid puppies slate is much more problematic, and almost certainly their efforts on putting tripe like dinosaur erotica on the nom lists will ensure that the proposed voting changes will pass this year.
They never were trolling the Hugos. Seriously.
I think Synova's comment about Straw Larry from Larry's post sums up a lot of the Sad Puppies feelings. They ignored Sad Puppies complaints when reasonable people were complaining, then mocked and made fun of them, so now they get the unreasonable people who just want to see them burn.
Again, can you point me to some of these original reasonable complaints? I quoted earlier from the Sad Puppies 2 slate post. Was that reasonable?at any rate I think it best we not go into the motivation and pros and cons of the sad puppies. This year they did distinguish themselves from the rabid puppies by not doing a voting slate and don't seem (IMHO) to be trolling the Hugos.
Although I am curious to see the reactions of the personalities involved. So far I can only find, from that faction, Larry Correia, who blames the Chuck Tingle nom on the Hugo's voting No Award. Which...err...yeah..doesn't make sense to me.
It's clear though, even if there was maybe a bit uncertainty last year, that the Rabid puppies slate is much more problematic, and almost certainly their efforts on putting tripe like dinosaur erotica on the nom lists will ensure that the proposed voting changes will pass this year.
They never were trolling the Hugos. Seriously.
I think Synova's comment about Straw Larry from Larry's post sums up a lot of the Sad Puppies feelings. They ignored Sad Puppies complaints when reasonable people were complaining, then mocked and made fun of them, so now they get the unreasonable people who just want to see them burn.
Yes. Calling some of the things I've seen nominated outside of the puppies screed is a compliment to excrement.
He didn't actually say they were. Though he might have meant it. Hard to say. He said they didn't seem to be this year.
Can we agree that Vox is trolling the Hugos? Or worse.
Cause as far as effects go, the Sad Puppies seem even less relevant this year than last. Whatever their intent, originally or now, the Rabid ones have taken over.
I generally don't believe the Sad Puppies are trolls. I don't like their politics nor do I care for many of the personalities involved. And I think some of their complaints in past years are baseless and myopic. But at least there is some sense that most of those involved at least have good intentions (even if I think they are horribly misguided). I don't see anything wrong this year in how they set up their recommendations, and even GRRM applauded SP 4 this year for how things were run.
This is really in contrast to Vox Day, who I am pretty sure just see Rabid Puppies as a source of attention and page hits for his website, and would pretty much be happy to leave Hugos a smoking ruin. On top of being a horrible human being in general. I'd like to think most people here would have similar views of Vox?
Anyway I would rather not wade into Sad Puppies, because they are not relevant in the 2016 discussion really, and I would like to avoid this thread being closed if at all possible. I am sure everything there is to say in that fashion was hashed out in the last thread.
|
Whenever the Hugos come around it makes me sad how I'm nowehre near qualified to vote in them, because I', lagging years and years behind current SFF publications. So much catching up to do, so many great books that were published in previous years. At this pace it feels like I'll never catch up, either. Other than Ancillary Mercy, which I might one day get to, the rest of the novels nominated all seem really great. The other categories don't interest me as much.
|
|
I still have no idea why I should care about this.
I think the answer is 'I should not' because I have no interest or investment in the Hugos.
I know I care because while as a reader I am a gronogard in inclination, it is still good to know that there's something resembling a centralized SFF community. What grants the Hugos specifically meaning, at least from my perspective, is that many of the authors I read care about it deeply. And, a seemingly obvious yet often forgotten aspect of book reading is that the authors are extremely important.
The Hugos feel important to me because I care about the people who care about them. I suppose that without that element, I wouldn't care either.
|
|
At least all the short works, but the novels can usually be found in libraries.Whenever the Hugos come around it makes me sad how I'm nowehre near qualified to vote in them, because I', lagging years and years behind current SFF publications. So much catching up to do, so many great books that were published in previous years. At this pace it feels like I'll never catch up, either. Other than Ancillary Mercy, which I might one day get to, the rest of the novels nominated all seem really great. The other categories don't interest me as much.Buy a supporting membership, it comes with all the nominated works.
Well, if you live in an English speaking country, I guess...
Why Not? The Hugos award Science Fiction, regardless of media. Video games are just as valid, and to many people are more valid, a media for telling a story as movies or books.
True, but video game storytelling has always been patchy. It's definitely gotten better recently, and I just finished BANNER SAGA 2 which had an absolutely superb story set in a memorable, fantastically-realised fantasy world. It would definitely deserve an award.
I think the objection is that including video games would "risk" turning WorldCon into a big media con (I'm unconvinced, as the TV and movie categories have not done that), and there's plenty of those around already. WorldCon is mean to celebrate novels and short stories above anything else and the long-term Hugo voters and fans are wary of it turning into something else.
The counter-argument is that the Hugo and regular WorldCon crowd is aging and more stuff needs to be done to bring on board young talent. GRRM and Gaiman have done a good job of that and the London WorldCon was hugely successful in attracting a lot of younger SFF fans whilst retaining the focus on the literary side of things.
The Hugo awards were presented last night...here are the winners:
Chuck Tingle worked fast. 'Pounded in the butt by my Hugo award loss.'
Chuck seems firmly opposed to such puppy nonsense, making statements that he will give the award to Zoe Quiin, as I remember. Plus he congratulated the winner and is relieved that he won't have to reveal his true form.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I was happy just to be nomin...er, longlisted. Of course, it would have to be in this year in the most heavily over-trolled category. Sigh.
I was happy just to be nomin...er, longlisted. Of course, it would have to be in this year in the most heavily over-trolled category. Sigh.
Belated nom congrats, Wert...
|
|
I was happy just to be nomin...er, longlisted. Of course, it would have to be in this year in the most heavily over-trolled category. Sigh.
Your spot on the list is well deserved, and goes a length of way to make the whole category less depressing. I hope you get to the top of that list one day :)
As for the big category - I won't be reading The Fifth Season because second-person is way too annoying to bear for any literary work longer than the text on a safety sign. However, Uprooted is now on my list - I loved the early Temariere novels. though lost interest in the series as quality declined dramatically in later parts. I assume the author is capable of greater things, and perhaps this change of context to a standalone fantasy is just what she needed to get good again.
Oh yeah? What were you nominated for? Congrats! :-D
|
|
I was happy just to be nomin...er, longlisted. Of course, it would have to be in this year in the most heavily over-trolled category. Sigh.Your spot on the list is well deserved, and goes a length of way to make the whole category less depressing. I hope you get to the top of that list one day :)
As for the big category - I won't be reading The Fifth Season because second-body is way too annoying to bear for any literary work longer than the text on a safety sign. However, Uprooted is now on my list - I loved the early Temariere novels. though lost interest in the series as quality declined dramatically in later parts. I assume the author is capable of greater things, and perhaps this change of context to a standalone fantasy is just what she needed to get good again.
I liked Uprooted a lot. More than Fifth Season.
Fifth Season was more ambitious though. But then I don't have a particular problem with second-person. I think it worked well here. And was only present for one of the three narrative perspectives. Probably less than a third of the book overall.
Definitely going to pick up the sequel. (And more of Novik's work as well.)
I need some filter to prioritize books. Second-person and present-tense don't pass the filter, and that's just it. It also kept me away from City Of Stairs, which sounded equally interesting.
About Novik's other books - The first two I enjoyed immensely, the rest of the dragons series goes downhill with tragic swiftness (or should I have gone with "plummets"?). However, if you played Neverwinter Nights 2, well - good job! You already tried some of her other works!