the hugos
I haven't been a regular con-goer for an age. Oh, I usually manage our local regional convention. Not this year due to budgetary issues, but most of the last 10 years. And I've been to WorldCon. I used to go quite regularly, even worked a couple of them. As a grunt for the Masquerade, once as an underling on the Programming Committee. I've run conventions, headed committees, and worked at all levels. I think I've voted for the Hugos, but frankly can't quite remember. I went to one of the award banquets once. They had crab.
The awards themselves did mean a lot to me, long before I ever thought of attending or working on a convention. I used them as a reading list, a list of what others who read more deeply in the field thought was the best. Generally I agreed, liked what won, and used it to move on to other works by the same or similar authors.
I remember the New Wave, and the calls of 'I want my SF back!' from those who preferred the old style ‘hard’ sf. Dangerous Visions is regarded as one of the seminal anthologies of New Wave and I perused those stories over and over, using them as also as a guide. Of course I found DV originally because of its editor Harlan Ellison, through his Star Trek script City on the Edge of Forever. Star Trek was a revolution in fandom. I remember the advent of gaming fandom. I fought it myself, hating how it took over the groups I belonged to (I still don’t get the appeal of gaming. But I have gamers for sons as a punishment.) I remember the supernova explosion of media fandom with the coming of Star Wars.
The Hugo awards are a strange beast. Part popularity contest, part elitist due to rather obscure and arcane voting rules. I always found it endearing the peer pressure against campaigning for your own books, though I gather that's gone a bit by the wayside. There were often rumors about this book or another being touted or blackballed but it usually seemed what won was what you would expect to have won.
So this year the nominations largely came from a slate put together by a group of people calling themselves the Sad Puppies. They think the Hugos have lost their way--that people are voting for unworthy books out of a sense of political correctness. Also that there's a cabal of woolly-headed liberals ruining things for everyone else and running things behind the scenes. So they put up a slate of the good stuff, right-minded works, some by right-minded people, some not. Encouraging friends and supporters to join WorldCon and vote, they got most of the slate they wanted.
It's gaming the system, but legal by the rules. Obeying the letter of the law but breaking its spirit.
I don't think there is a way to fight this, frankly. It'll either blow over or it won't. The Puppies will win, and win again, and perhaps tire of winning eventually. Or not. Some people won't take the award seriously any more. You can probably include me in that. The awards banquet will be popular with some, but not as well attended by others. Fandom will split again, and it may not be reconciled this time.
Whenever you have to take something back it's never the same. You can't go back. You can't force other people to go back. You can't force other people to like what you like.
One of the things I found saddest about the Puppies agenda is that they believe that if they nominate their favorites, the voters will be forced to read these works, out of fairness, and acknowledge their superiority. They'll have to vote, solely on what's been nominated. Their works will win. It's amusing that they demand fairness from a group of people they castigate for unfairness.
There are bad actors in the Puppies, those who just want to blow things up, for spite, or to prove something. But I think there are also those who think they are righting a wrong. They are taking back the awards. They want everyone to see things the way they see them.
There is no One True SF. People like different things, you see. They really do. I don't think people were voting out of political correctness the last few years. I think they liked the works they nominated and voted for. Some like exploring space and some like exploring sexual identity. Some like both…sometimes in the same book. I think the Puppies like the works they nominate and vote for, too. The two sides are not going to agree. Not anytime soon. Especially given the tidal wave of words that has already flowed over this matter.
So the Hugos won’t be what they were. Things change, and not always for the better. Fandom will change, and change again, and survive. Obsessing over things we love is a human trait, after all.
This entry was originally posted at http://vjs2259.dreamwidth.org/366735.html. Please comment there using OpenID.
The awards themselves did mean a lot to me, long before I ever thought of attending or working on a convention. I used them as a reading list, a list of what others who read more deeply in the field thought was the best. Generally I agreed, liked what won, and used it to move on to other works by the same or similar authors.
I remember the New Wave, and the calls of 'I want my SF back!' from those who preferred the old style ‘hard’ sf. Dangerous Visions is regarded as one of the seminal anthologies of New Wave and I perused those stories over and over, using them as also as a guide. Of course I found DV originally because of its editor Harlan Ellison, through his Star Trek script City on the Edge of Forever. Star Trek was a revolution in fandom. I remember the advent of gaming fandom. I fought it myself, hating how it took over the groups I belonged to (I still don’t get the appeal of gaming. But I have gamers for sons as a punishment.) I remember the supernova explosion of media fandom with the coming of Star Wars.
The Hugo awards are a strange beast. Part popularity contest, part elitist due to rather obscure and arcane voting rules. I always found it endearing the peer pressure against campaigning for your own books, though I gather that's gone a bit by the wayside. There were often rumors about this book or another being touted or blackballed but it usually seemed what won was what you would expect to have won.
So this year the nominations largely came from a slate put together by a group of people calling themselves the Sad Puppies. They think the Hugos have lost their way--that people are voting for unworthy books out of a sense of political correctness. Also that there's a cabal of woolly-headed liberals ruining things for everyone else and running things behind the scenes. So they put up a slate of the good stuff, right-minded works, some by right-minded people, some not. Encouraging friends and supporters to join WorldCon and vote, they got most of the slate they wanted.
It's gaming the system, but legal by the rules. Obeying the letter of the law but breaking its spirit.
I don't think there is a way to fight this, frankly. It'll either blow over or it won't. The Puppies will win, and win again, and perhaps tire of winning eventually. Or not. Some people won't take the award seriously any more. You can probably include me in that. The awards banquet will be popular with some, but not as well attended by others. Fandom will split again, and it may not be reconciled this time.
Whenever you have to take something back it's never the same. You can't go back. You can't force other people to go back. You can't force other people to like what you like.
One of the things I found saddest about the Puppies agenda is that they believe that if they nominate their favorites, the voters will be forced to read these works, out of fairness, and acknowledge their superiority. They'll have to vote, solely on what's been nominated. Their works will win. It's amusing that they demand fairness from a group of people they castigate for unfairness.
There are bad actors in the Puppies, those who just want to blow things up, for spite, or to prove something. But I think there are also those who think they are righting a wrong. They are taking back the awards. They want everyone to see things the way they see them.
There is no One True SF. People like different things, you see. They really do. I don't think people were voting out of political correctness the last few years. I think they liked the works they nominated and voted for. Some like exploring space and some like exploring sexual identity. Some like both…sometimes in the same book. I think the Puppies like the works they nominate and vote for, too. The two sides are not going to agree. Not anytime soon. Especially given the tidal wave of words that has already flowed over this matter.
So the Hugos won’t be what they were. Things change, and not always for the better. Fandom will change, and change again, and survive. Obsessing over things we love is a human trait, after all.
This entry was originally posted at http://vjs2259.dreamwidth.org/366735.html. Please comment there using OpenID.