On the Raging Child of Science Fiction Neo-Snobbery
On a foundational level, the most visible element of SF awards discussions concern subjective assertions about literary quality. I have participated in some of these discussions over the years, podcasting about nominees I disliked for whatever reason and otherwise raging against what I perceived as the absence of taste within certain award-giving communities (mostly the Hugos). The further away from those first instances I become, however, the more I realize how foolish these discussions really are. Why rage against a difference in literary tastes? I can no more tell someone what they should like than they can me. At best, I can make a case for what I consider to be “good,” but even then, the most effective arguments are those that explain why a text is interesting, not why it is qualitatively better, since the latter is, for the most part, impossible. What we consider “of quality” could make for a very confusing, intersecting Venn diagram.