Larry Correia Strikes a Blow Against Puppy Related Sadness

[jordan179]

Natalie Luhrs is annoyed that Larry Correia is encouraging people to vote for himself and other writers he likes for the Hugos this year.  That is, she argues, properly a privilege that belongs to her and her own snooty friends on the Left.  And we certainly shouldn't link to Correia's post

Comments

[xiphias]

Out of curiosity, do you personally think that the Vox Day story is worth a Hugo nod?

[jordan179]

I do not know, as I've never read the story. Or anything of Beale's.

The concept, as stated, reminds me a little bit of Poul Anderson's The Merman's Children, though Poul Anderson probably did it better -- because he did everything better.

I was linking to it because I was offended at the attempt of whatsername ot act as a gatekeeper.

I do think that some of Correira's writing might be Hugo-worthy. though I've never read his Grimnoir books, only his Monster Hunter International stories.

[xiphias]

I haven't read Correira's stuff, but it does sound like the sort of thing I'd enjoy, so I'll probably pick it up at some point.

I think the issue here is twofold: Vox Day is obnoxious on a completely different level than most people -- he's not expressing opinions that I disagree with, so much as expressing opinions which are not congruent with society, and that the work itself is weak enough that it is blatant that the only reason people would vote for it was out of support for the author, not the work.

As such, when you're already in a situation where the supporters are voting based on a personality, it's not unreasonable to suggest NOT voting based on the same rationale. If the work was actually the topic under discussion, there wouldn't be an issue, since it wouldn't have been nominated in the first place.

Double Standards, Part I

[jordan179]

I sense a huge double standard here.

Vox Day argues dubious science (creationism) on religious grounds, and he argues dubious sociology (Blacks and Hispanics less able to form and participate in civil society than Whites) based on outdated theories of eugenics. He does not, please note, argue for theocracy or for Nazi-like racial wars.

Now, many of the luminaries of Leftist science fiction argue dubious economics (socialism) on ideological grounds so irrational that they amount to "religion," and even argue for hostile treatment of others based on their class -- a folly which the history of the 20th century shows can be as lethal as racism. They have publicly expressed support for regimes and organizations which practice intense violence, often in defiance of the Rules of War, and often for racial and religious reasons

[philmophlegm]

"...expressing opinions which are not congruent with society

[marycatelli]

Nebula is SFWA's award -- so, no.

[philmophlegm]

Good point!

We definitely need a new award then.

[carbonelle]

There's the Andre Norton award, which is only lightly touched by the po-mo madness. Getting teens to read the academic-darling khreppe is nearly impossible, so you can almost always find an excellent story within the ranks of the nominees.

[inverarity]

Even though in the past I've said I think it's reasonable to refuse to support someone whose views you find noxious, I am actually getting rather sick of the outrage. It's no longer "I will not support someone I find offensive," it's "You must join me in ritually condemning someone I find offensive or you are as bad as he is."

It's pretty bad when "my" side is almost tempting me to vote for Vox Day just to spite them.

I'm definitely nowhere near either Vox Day or Larry Correia on the political spectrum, but I have enjoyed Correia's Grimnoir chronicles. And I'm reading VD's novelettes now. (Yes, I will review them when I'm finished.)