On the World Fantasy Award and H.P. Lovecraft

Reading Time

(Correction:  a previous version of this post attributed the Guardian article to Damien G. Walter rather than Daniel José Older.  That has been corrected below.  My apologies for the mix-up.)

We’re still talking about the World Fantasy Award and H.P. Lovecraft’s bizarrely shaped award-specific head.  Daniel José Older, who created the original petition to replace Lovecraft’s bust with that of Octavia Butler, recently revisited the discussion in his Guardian column, remarking that “the fantasy community cannot embrace its growing fanbase of color with one hand while deifying a writer who happily advocated for our extermination with the other.”

I won’t rehash the whole discussion here.  If you don’t already know the happenings, then you can use the links I’ve provided here to fill in the blanks.  As for Lovecraft:  his racism is infamous enough that it required its own section on his Wikipedia page (albeit, a somewhat sanitized section).  I won’t go into all the nitty gritty details about Lovecraft’s views on race; rather, I’ll point you to this post from Slate (which is hardly an extensive or thorough analysis of Lovecraft, but it’ll get you on the right track).

My personal view on this subject is fairly basic:

  1. It’s almost impossible for anyone in our community to stand up to the scrutiny of future generations.  Our social values evolve, and what might be considered acceptable for one generation could very well become taboo, immoral, or offensive in the next.  There are certainly exceptions, but the farther back you go, the less likely that person would stand up to the values of the present.
  2. If individuals are unlikely to stand up to scrutiny, it makes little sense to choose a person as the “face” of an award, no matter how great they might look today.  Again, exceptions may exist.
  3. I agree with Carrie Cuinn that a person is not representative of an entire field.  Fantasy, after all, is global in scale and encompasses a wide range of identities.  There is no single individual who represents fantasy as a genre, nor is there a single individual who by any stretch of the imagination represents the people who participate in fantasy in any capacity.  There is no such thing as a single fantasy fan who is all nationalities, all races, all genders, all sexualities, etc. etc.  If the problem with Lovecraft is that he doesn’t represent the fantasy field today, then how can we say that anyone else represents that field?
In light of that, I can see why many would like the award to be changed.  Indeed, I think it should be changed for reasons that have nothing to with whether Lovecraft was a racist (though that’s valid, too, and should not be discounted).  I don’t understand how Lovecraft can remain as the figurehead of the World Fantasy Award when he is a) not a universal figure, and b) hardly a writer of fantasy at large.  Yes, he wrote fantasy, but he is recognized for a particular brand of fantasy.  He wasn’t an epic fantasy writer.  He didn’t write fantasy for young adults.  He didn’t write urban fantasy.  He didn’t write whatever weird fantasy might exist.  He wrote his particular form of fantasy and had a profound influence on the field as a whole.  That makes him important from a historical standpoint, but it doesn’t make him, in my mind, a valid figurehead for an all-encompassing award.
The World Fantasy Award needs to account for all of fantasy.  Not just the fantasy of the one particular form.  Not just the fantasy written by one particular author identity.  Not just Octavia Butler or H.P. Lovecraft or J.R.R. Tolkien or George R.R. Martin or N.K. Jemisin or Nalo Hopkinson or John Chu or Laura Anne Gilman or whomever. 
ALL of fantasy.  Anything less would be exclusionary by default.  And that’s no good.
Email
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Digg
Reddit
LinkedIn

2 Responses

Leave a Reply

Follow Me

Newsletter

Support Me

Recent Posts

A Reading List of Dystopian Fiction and Relevant Texts (Apropos of Nothing in Particular)

Why would someone make a list of important and interesting works of dystopian fiction? Or a suggested reading list of works that are relevant to those dystopian works? There is absolutely no reason other than raw interest. There’s nothing going on to compel this. There is nothing in particular one making such a list would hope you’d learn. The lists below are not an exhaustive list. There are bound to be texts I have forgotten or texts you think folks should read that are not listed. Feel free to make your own list and tell me about it OR leave a comment. I’ll add things I’ve missed! Anywhoodles. Here goes:

Read More »

Duke’s Best EDM Tracks of 2024

And so it came to pass that I finished up my annual Best of EDM [Insert Year Here] lists. I used to do these on Spotify before switching to Tidal, and I continued doing them on Tidal because I listen to an absurd amount of EDM and like keeping track of the tunes I love the most. Below, you will find a Tidal playlist that should be public. You can listen to the first 50 tracks right here, but the full playlist is available on Tidal proper (which has a free version just like Spotify does). For whatever reason, the embedded playlist breaks the page, and so I’ve opted to link to it here and at the bottom of this post. Embeds are weird. Or you can pull songs into your preferred listening app. It’s up to you. Some caveats before we begin:

Read More »

2025: The Year of Something

We’re nine days into 2025, and it’s already full of exhausting levels of controversy before we’ve even had a turnover in power in my home country of the United States. We’ve seen resignations of world leaders, wars continuing and getting worse and worse (you know where), the owner of Twitter continuing his tirade of lunacy and demonstrating why the billionaire class is not to be revered, California ablaze with a horrendous and large wildfire, right wing thinktanks developing plans to out and attack Wikipedia editors as any fascist-friendly organization would do, Meta rolling out and rolling back GenAI profiles on its platforms, and, just yesterday, the same Meta announcing sweeping changes to its moderation policies that, in a charitable reading, encourage hate-based harassment and abuse of vulnerable populations, promotion and support for disinformation, and other problems, all of which are so profound that people are talking about a mass exodus from the platform to…somewhere. It’s that last thing that brings me back to the blog today. Since the takeover at Twitter, social networks have been in a state of chaos. Platforms have risen and fallen — or only risen so much — and nothing I would call stability has formed. Years ago, I (and many others far more popular than me) remarked that we’ve ceded the territory of self-owned or small-scale third party spaces for massive third party platforms where we have minimal to no control or say and which can be stripped away in a tech-scale heartbeat. By putting all our ducks into a bin of unstable chaos, we’re also expending our time and energy on something that won’t last, requiring us to expend more time and energy finding alternatives, rebuilding communities, and then repeating the process again. In the present environment, that’s impossible to ignore.1 This is all rather reductive, but this post is not the place to talk about all the ways that social networks have impacted control over our own spaces and narratives. Another time, perhaps. I similarly don’t have space to talk about the fact that some of the platforms we currently have, however functional they may be, have placed many of us in a moral quagmire, as in the case of Meta’s recent moderation changes. Another time… ↩

Read More »