On the Hugo Awards: Two Scholarly-ish Projects to Come
As you may well be aware, I am currently working on two projects related to the Hugo Awards. I know I’ve mentioned both of these at some point, though the second is certainly the most visible of these projects. I’m also sure you know that the Hugo Awards have been enormously controversial this year, earning mainstream attention in major newspapers and entertainment sites such as The Guardian, The Wall Street Journal, Entertainment Weekly, NPR, Boing Boing, and so on. That conversation is still happening; one need only look at File 770 to see it.
My #HugoAwards Final Ballot (To Be Submitted in the Future)
Over the weekend, I explained why I intended to use No Award and Blank Spacing as a response to the Sad Puppies / Rabid Puppies campaign to manipulate and take over the Hugo Awards. Since I am fundamentally opposed to slate-based voting measures, I can’t in good conscience support works which appear on this year’s ballot as a result of the SP/RP slates. And so I won’t. Others, of course, may have different views. TheG intends to give most things on the ballot a fair shake under the guise that voting No Award would unfairly punish those that are on the ballot but are otherwise not really part of the SP/RP world. He admits, though, that this is hardly a strong response. Where we do agree, however, is that there are some problematic cases here. Some folks are on the ballot who didn’t know they were included in the SP/RP slate and would have declined if they had known. However, I’m of the mindset that support for anything on the ballot may be perceived as tacit support for the entire campaign — a point on which Abigail Nussbaum and I agree. With that said, voting will be rather easy for me, since the SP/RP folks have taken almost every slot on this year’s ballot. Here’s what my ballot will look like when I’m allowed to submit it (feel free to lob your disagreements or what have you in the comments): Best Novel Ancillary Sword by Ann Leckie The Three-Body Problem by Cixin Liu The Goblin Emperor by Katherine Addison No Award Best Novella No Award Best Novelette The Day The World Turned Upside Down by Thomas Olde Heuvelt (Lightspeed Magazine, April 2014) Best Short Story No Award Best Related Work No Award Best Graphic Story Ms. Marvel Vol. 1 Saga Vol. 3 Sex Criminals Vol. 1 Rat Queens Vol. 1 No Award Best Dramatic Presentation, Long Form Interstellar Captain America: The Winter Soldier Guardians of the Galaxy Edge of Tomorrow The Lego Movie No Award Note: I’m going to make an exception for the long/short form media categories because it’s unlikely the works listed wouldn’t have made it anyway. Best Dramatic Presentation, Short Form Game of Thrones: “The Mountain and the Viper” Orphan Black: “By Means Which Have Never Yet Been Tried” No Award Note: I haven’t yet watched the others yet, so I may include them in the end. The Doctor Who piece is unlikely to make it because I’ve completely bounced off the show. Best Editor, Short Form No Award Best Editor, Long Form No Award Best Professional Artist Julie Dillon No Award Best Semiprozine Strange Horizons Beneath Ceaseless Skies Lightspeed No Award Best Fanzine Journey Planet No Award Best Fancast Galactic Suburbia Tea and Jeopardy No Award Best Fan Writer No Award Best Fan Artist Ninna Aalto Brad W. Foster Elizabeth Leggett Spring Schoenhuth Steve Stiles John W. Campbell Award (It’s a Fucking Hugo SHUT UP) Wesley Chu No Award I strongly encourage you to use “No Award” if you are opposed to ballot stuffing and the blatant politicization of the Hugos, as has clearly happened this year. Leave everything off the ballot that was on the SP slate. Send a message. Gaming the Hugos will not be tolerated.
“No Award” and “Blank Spacing” the #HugoAwards — The Only Response I Can Make to What is to Come
The Hugo Award ballot has been announced, and if you’ve been paying attention to Twitter, it’s certainly controversial. Not controversial because a novel everybody loved didn’t make it. Not controversial because a novel a whole lot of people didn’t love did make it. Controversial because some people have taken it upon themselves to game the system in order to create and relish in political chaos. That last sentence would certainly sound melodramatic if not for the fact that the proponents of a certain ballot-to-be-copied hadn’t already publicly stated that one of their guiding purposes for last year’s rendition of this political fiasco was as follows: “We got in [7 or 8] Hugo nominees [out of 10 or 11 that we pushed]…and ah man, all hell broke loose. It was the end of the world. So we had a lot of fun with that. We made our point. I said that if people who are not politically acceptable to these clicks are nominated for an award, the other side will have a come apart…and then, they pretty much did exactly what I said in a very public manner. And we had fun with it.” In short: they sought to create chaos and unrest in order to make a political point. And when they succeeded, they relished in it. Perhaps this is all facetious dribbling, but it does illustrate a clear contradiction: this whole thing has never been about the quality of the work. If it were, the intent would not be so blatantly political and so blatantly at odds with the spirit of the awards. That any of these folks can utter something like the above in one breath and claim to respect the Hugo voter and the Hugo nomination process in another is a supreme sort of cognitive dissonance. That some involved in this campaign can also claim that the act is not capital-P political is like courting madness with Cthulu. As a result, the ballot has been flooded by Sad Puppies. If this whole thing had begun simply as people sharing their love of X, I would not have to write this post. I would not have to think of my ballot as a political tool, either. I could look at what was there and make a judgment about the works, not the intent behind their inclusion. Voting is already political enough, even in something as seemingly innocuous as the Hugo Awards. I don’t appreciate being put into a position where “intent” actually matters, since the only thing that should matter is the work. But that’s not how this began. It was and remains a political campaign to game the system for personal and political gain. It’s not the same as Wheel of Time fans realizing they can all nominate their favorite fantasy series and then doing so. It’s not the same as fans who love X nominating X. It’s people with a political ax to grind taking advantage of that system to make a point. This action shifts the voting process from small-p political, whereby one’s everyday politics organically produces certain taste values or perspectives, to cap-P Political, whereby voting itself is treated as a political act separate from the preservation of small-P political interests. That’s the difference between “I love this thing because it’s about the kind of stuff I enjoy” and “I’m nominating this thing to make a point to people with whom I disagree.” I take the Hugo Awards seriously as an award and as a process, and so I can’t offer my support for any campaign of this type, whether it comes from liberals, conservatives, anarchists, socialists, feminists, capitalists, etc. I don’t care about the particulars of the politics. I do not believe the Hugos should be a battleground for sf/f’s infighting. For that reason, I believe that if your intent is to use the Hugos to make a political point first and foremost, then I am obligated and justified to use my ballot to make a clear statement about the works which will be nominated as a result. In this respect, I view the Hugos in much the same way as Abi Sutherland: My Hugo nominations and votes are reactions to that broadening-out of my mental universe. As such, they’re intimately, intensely personal. And that’s part of the visceral reaction that some fans are having to the Sad Puppies’ slate: it looks like the institutionalization of a private, particular process in the service of an external goal. It comes across as a coarsening and a standardizing of something that should be fine-grained, unpredictable, and unique to each person participating. It seems like denial of variety and spontaneity, like choreographed sex. As such, I suspect I will leave a good number of items off of my ballot in protest. Since the Hugo Awards use a preferential voting system, any item which appears on your ballot will receive a vote of some kind when the ballots are counted. Putting No Award as the last item on your ranked list means anything left off the ballot doesn’t get any “points.” This is not preferable, since the “No Award” should be used to say “I don’t actually think this is good enough.” Last year, I mostly used the “No Award” for its intended purpose; in fact, some of the works on last year’s ballot from people who I’m sure are part of the “evil liberal conspiracy to destroy science fiction” didn’t make it far on my ballot because I just didn’t enjoy them. Because that’s how I normally vote: based on my subjective sense of the quality of the work, which is, to varying degrees, influenced by my small-P political values. This year, however, it is clear that there is no reasonable way to treat the ballot as a reflection of what people loved in the sf/f field. It is a manipulated ballot. A broken ballot. And I suspect that it will result in a lot of bad blood within sf/f for years to come. Nobody
My Complete 2015 Hugo Awards Nominations Ballot (Finished on 3/10/15)
It’s that time again. Hugo Awards time. Since the nomination period closes on March 10th, 2015, I figure it’s time to start sharing my ballot with the world. Note: this list is extremely incomplete and will be periodically updated as I find things to add to unfilled categories. Categories are also subject to change. If you have suggestions, feel free to leave them in the comments (seriously; I’m very scatterbrained at the moment, so I’m missing all kinds of things). Here goes: Best Novel (Just Let Me Nominate 12 Novels…) City of Stairs by Robert Jackson Bennett Ancillary Sword by Ann Leckie Memory of Water by Emmi Itaranta Breach Zone by Myke Cole The Mirror Empire by Kameron Hurley Best Novella Scale Bright by Benjanun Sriduangkaew (Immersion Press) Grand Jeté (The Great Leap) by Rachel Swirsky (Subterranean Press) Where the Trains Turn by Pasi Ilmari Jääskeläinen (Tor.com) The Mothers of Voorhisville by Mary Rickert (Tor.com) Hath No Fury by Kat Howard (Subterranean Press) Best Novelette “From the Nothing, With Love” by Project Itoh (Phantasm Japan) “The End of the End of Everything” by Dale Bailey (Tor.com) “Among the Thorns” by Veronica Schanoes (Tor.com) “Reborn” by Ken Liu (Tor.com) “The Bonedrake’s Penance” by Yoon Ha Lee (Beneath Ceaseless Skies) Under consideration: “Three Partitions” by Bogi Takács (Giganotosaurus) Best Short Story “A Whisper in the Weld” by Alix E. Harrow (Shimmerzine) “Autodidact” by Benjanun Sriduangkaew (Clarkesworld) “A Stretch of Highway Two Lanes Wide” by Sarah Pinsker (F&SF) “The Vaporization Enthalpy of a Peculiar Pakistani Family” by Usman T. Malik (Qualia Nous) “Makeisha in Time” by Rachael K. Jones (Crossed Genres) Under consideration: “Never the Same” by Polenth Blake (Strange Horizons) “Resurrection Points” by Usman T. Malik (Strange Horizons) Best Related Work Jodorovsky’s Dune (dir. Frank Pavich) Special Needs in Strange Worlds (SF Signal; ed. Sarah Chorn) Speculative Fiction 2013 (Ana Grilo and Thea James) Rocket Talk (Justin Landon; Tor.com) Best Graphic Story Ms. Marvel Vol. 1: No Normal (G. Willow Wilson and Adrian Alphona) The Wake (Scott Snyder and Sean Murphy) Saga Vol. 3 (Brian K. Vaughan and Fiona Staples) Saga Vol. 4 (Brian K. Vaughan and Fiona Staples) Uncanny X-Men: The Good, the Bad, the Inhuman (Brian Michael Bendis, Chris Bachalo, and Kristafer Anka) Best Dramatic Presentation (Long Form) Interstellar (dir. Christopher Nolan) Snowpiercer (dir. Bong Joon-ho) Edge of Tomorrow (dir. Doug Liman) Big Hero 6 (dirs. Don Hall and Chris Williams) Guardians of the Galaxy (dir. James Gunn) Reconsidering: Captain America: The Winter Soldier (dirs. Anthony and Joe Russo) Best Dramatic Presentation (Short Form) “Tempest Fugit” from Sleepy Hollow (Season One)(written by Mark Goffman; dir. Paul Edwards) “Turn, Turn, Turn” from Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. (Season One)(written by Jed Whedon and Maurissa Tancharoen; dir. Vincent Misiano) “The Watchers on the Wall” from Game of Thrones (Season Four)(written by David Benioff and D.B. Weiss; dir. Neil Marshall) “The Children” from Game of Thrones (Season Four)(written by David Benioff and D.B. Weiss; dir. Alex Graves) “The Last Stand” from Legend of Korra (Season Four)(written by Michael Dante Dimartino; dir. Melchior Zwyer) Best Editor (Long Form) Anne Perry (Hodder & Stoughton) Jenni Hill (Orbit UK) Lee Harris (Angry Robot Books) Amanda Rutter (Strange Chemistry and Angry Robot Books) Julian Pavia (Crown/Broadway) Best Editor (Short Form) Neil Clarke (Clarkesworld) Andy Cox (Interzone) Julia Rios (Strange Horizons and Kaleidoscope) Alisa Krasnostein (Kaleidoscope) Ellen Datlow (Tor.com) Best Professional Artist Victo Ngai Stephen Martiniere Abigail Larson Kekai Kotaki Kentaro Kanamoto Under consideration: Sam Burley, Richard Anderson, Galen Dara, and Noah Bradley. Best Semiprozine The Book Smugglers (Ana Grilo and Thea James) Interzone (ed. Andy Cox) Strange Horizons (ed. by a legion) Giganotosaurus (ed. Rashida J. Smith) Crossed Genres (eds. Bart R. Leib, Kay T. Holt, and Kelly Jennings) Best Fanzine A Dribble of Ink (Aidan Moher) Nerds of a Feather, Flock Together (TheG and Vance Kotlra) Bookworm Blues (Sarah Chorn) Ecdysis (Jonathan Crowe) Lady Business (Renay, Ana, and Jodie) Under Consideration: SFF Mistressworks (Ian Sales) Best Fancast Doorway to the Hidden World (Jeffrey Pelton, who is totally not Kevin Lux) The Incomparable (Jason Snell) The Book Was Better (???) The Writer and the Critic (Kirstyn McDermott and Ian Mond) Best Fan Writer Sarah Chorn Paul Weimer Foz Meadows Abigail Nussbaum Natalie Luhrs Best Fan Artist Alice X. Zhang (OMG YES) Finnian MacManus (OMG YES) euclase (some of the best still lifes ever) Evankart (loving the Winter Soldier work) Sandara (more beautiful art; should be making book covers) The John W. Campbell (YES IT IS A FUCKING HUGO SHUT UP) Award S.L. Huang (author of Zero Sum Game) Benjanun Sriduangkaew (author of Scale Bright) Usman Malik (author of “Resurrection Points”) Brian McClellan (author of the Powder Mage Trilogy) Michael J. Martinez (author of The Enceladus Crisis) ——————————— Disclaimer (because we need these now, given the current Hugo Awards climate): This list reflects what I think are worthy works. It is not intended for any sort of logrolling. It is not my effort to tell anyone “this is what you should vote for.” Vote for whatever the hell you want. My only hope with this list is that it introduces some folks to things they might otherwise have missed (or that it will reveal gaps in my reading/viewing that need filling).
Hugo Award Reading: Suggest Shorts/Novelettes/Novellas (Final Open Call)
The title says it all. I’m working on my nomination ballot for the Hugo Awards, and I need more suggestions for the shorter-than-a-novel categories so I can get a proper survey. If you have a suggestion, please leave it in the magic comment box (links to online stories are appreciated). By the way, I had nearly 1,000 pages of reading last year thanks to everyone’s suggestions. It was totally worth it. Alright, off to work!
On the Hugo Awards “Best Fancast” Category: Eligibility, Vote Value, and the Unlikelihood of Change
Recently, I had a Twitter discussion* with Nerds of a Feather about the “Best Fancast” category for the Hugos.** Briefly, Nerds’ Hugo Nominations Draft Ballot contained several podcasts which I had thought weren’t eligible because of their association with a pro site (Tor.com). This discussion continued today with Justin Landon’s comments about nominations, which I’ll discuss farther down on the page. First, some factual bits and pieces: The Hugo Award categories page lists the following definition for Fancast: “Awarded for any non-professional audio- or video-casting with at least four (4) episodes that had at least one (1) episode released in the previous calendar year.” Most podcasts would be eligible for this category if not for the word “non-professional.” According to the Hugo rules, [the] definition of what is a “professional” publication is somewhat technical. A professional publication either (1) provided at least a quarter the income of any one person or, (2) was owned or published by any entity which provided at least a quarter the income of any of its staff and/or owner. Basically, this means that any podcast hosted by a professional publisher or a professional website is considered a “pro publication” even if the individual creating that podcast does not individually qualify in either category. Tor.com podcasts, in other words, appear to be ineligible. A lot of podcasts, in fact, are out, since they use sponsors that pay upfront or are funded by donations that go to pay staff, etc. There’s a reason for this, of course. The fan categories, as archaic as they might seem, are designed to preserve the space that separates strictly “fan” activities from the professional (i.e., paid work) activities on the other side. In principle, that’s fine, but in practice, it’s questionable. While fans are right to be concerned about the “invasion” of their space by professionals, the fancast category is already one where that is true anyway. Professionals are producing “fancasts.” And they are winning awards (or not, as the case may be). So the rules don’t actually prevent this, but they do prevent the “mega podcasts” (The Nerdist, etc.) from dipping into the fan well. And that sounds nice, except the writing of the rules also means legitimately “fannish” efforts are ignored simply because they are associated with non-fan entities. Tor.com podcasts are, I’d argue, fan endeavors, but they appear to be out of the running simply because Tor.com is a professional market. Other fannish podcasts may be excluded for similar reasons. This is almost like “guilt by association,” and it’s that unintentional thematic which rubs me — and others, I suspect — a little raw. But the rules are as they are. Their intent may be noble and their practice seriously flawed, but they will still affect the makeup of the upcoming final ballot anyway. This leads me to the next part: Change: A Beast That Bites Way Too Much Nerds and I had a long discussion about the need to correct the absurdity of the categories in the Hugos. I noted that we tried talking about this in 2013, but to little effect. The way the Hugos function on a “legislative” level are such that change is almost impossible, or just downright ugly. And you’re unlikely to make headway on creating a Pro and Fan Podcast category given that so many people in the Hugo voting pool literally want the Fancast category to die (or because getting involved requires an extraordinary amount of effort and patience, which most of us probably don’t have a lot of, to be honest). Yes, the Hugos need to be changed. They need better categories, updated language, and more inclusion. But to get there requires a lot of effort that I suspect most fans won’t put in, not because they don’t care about their favorite whatever, but because they’ll just go elsewhere when they realize how much easier it is to celebrate their favorite whatever in a space where their opinions aren’t routinely rejected. The people who want change tend to be from that younger generation or outside of traditional fandom, and short of the fluke that was LonCon3, they’re just not going to Worldcon or giving as many shits about the Hugos as those of us who have something invested in it (myself: a podcast). Exceptions, of course, exist. That creates a lot of tension. I spoke with someone at a con last year who lamented the disdain members of the older generation(s) have received from the younger generation — in general, undeserved. The notion that the older generation(s) should get out of dodge and make room for new ideas came up a number of times. I mentioned that the coin works the opposite way, too, a fact that becomes apparent when one looks at the 2013 Hugo Awards fiasco. But the tension that exists between these generations has produced a massive divide in which two fandoms with a lot to offer one another are frequently found doing the mystical game of avoidance (intentionally or otherwise). I noted as much at LonCon3 during a panel on conventions, because it seemed to me that older fandom were just not as engaged in the same spaces as younger fandom, sometimes because the two had decided they didn’t get along and shouldn’t bother. This is a critical mistake for the sf/f community, and it will have serious impacts on how the Hugos and any other traditional sf/f space develops over time. One cannot create respect for a tradition on the basis of having been static for so long; that creates resentment, not love. And in a rapidly evolving geek culture, it’s so much easier to discard those traditions for other spaces, ones where a newer fandom can get what it wants without compromise. Hopefully, we can see the potential for a cycle here. Your Vote Matters: Eligibility and Vote Value While I wish more people of the newer generations of fandom were interested in the management of the Hugos, I think it’s unlikely they will