Hugo Nominees for 2021

Bick said:
He presented the previous year’s Hugo Awards, at the Worldcon’s request, and (a) struggled to pronounce a few nominee’s names and (b) mentioned John W. Campbell in positive terms.
Click to expand...
And those actions sufficed to prompt the thing mentioned in your posting #36?

Is the whole world going mad?

It seems sadly fitting, then, that the 2023 Worldcon is to be held in China. Uyghurs, Tibetans, Kazakhs... It is too bad that the sf world has become so toxic that to discuss its present state candidly would violate Chrons policy (a policy for which I'm thankful, though I've run afoul of it a few times).

Happily, last week I discovered an amazing archive of scanned fanzines at fanac.org, which, as well as providing one with holidays into less distressing fannish times, also provide leads (reviews, etc.) for books &c to look up. Thanks to a review I saw today, John Brunner's Day of the Star Cities, of which I happened to have a copy, moves to the top of one of my TBR bunches.

 
Extollager said:
It seems sadly fitting, then, that the 2023 Worldcon is to be held in China. Uyghurs, Tibetans, Kazakhs... It is too bad that the sf world has become so toxic that to discuss its present state candidly would violate Chrons policy (a policy for which I'm thankful, though I've run afoul of it a few times).
Click to expand...

The organisers may come to regret that. Particularly when they come to leave and they are bundled into a room and refused leave unless they sign a contract forcing them to come back the following year (true story).

Susannah Clarke - I loved Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrel, looking forward to reading Piranesi.

On Murderbot - Having read the first two entries, I am genuinely mystified how anyone can think this is award worthy. I know people seem to love it, but, come on...

I've genuinely not read anything from Tor that I've thought was any good. What am I missing? Tor just seems uber cliquey.

Is there a Chrons award for best books of 2021?
 
Last edited:
It seems to be between China and Canada. But still, to quote Deckard: "I was quit when I came in here. I'm twice as quit now."
 
The diversity part may be in some part a reversal of the anti-diversity "Sad Puppies" events, particularly of 2015 . Where certain nominees were pushed through. Though of course it is a common theme now anyway in many walks of life.

If free publications can be the source of nominees and winners, then probably they will be due to the amount of readership. Otherwise you would need nominations to be only made by professionals, or have some rule such as what type of publication they feature in.
 
Bick said:
See post 4 in the thread, pogopossum.
Incidentally, I see the committee never did remove the vile attack on an old, distinguished author in the nominations list. It stayed until the end, inviting readers to vote on it:
“George R.R. Martin Can F*** Off Into the Sun, Or: The 2020 Hugo Awards Ceremony (Rageblog Edition)”, Natalie Luhrs (Pretty Terrible, August 2020)

Who would wish to be associated with an award that thinks this is okay? (I 'starred' the obscenity due to this forum's rules, incidentally - it's spelled out in full in the nominations list).
Click to expand...
Bick,
I apologize for not going back and re-reading the entire thread.
I did read it when posted, back eight months ago, but did not remember the very detailed objections that you listed there.
Nor did I remember your, Werthead & J Zeb's discussion of some of the problems expressed.
Reacting to your recent generic comment re the Hugos with questions when you both introduced the thread and previously gave very specific reactions to the process was bogus.
You asked "Who would want to be associated with an award that thinks (the treatment of GMM) is okay?" Going back, Werthead did speak to the situation - that the organizers or arbitors were in a "Hands tied" situation. We can all agree that since the extended slur did not win, better voices prevailed.
Earlier we all spoke to balance, with my proclivities actually tending to your position, at least in terms of the preponderance of publication sources of those who get nominated for the shorter awards. But the question remains, if there is a lack of balance then what is the solution? Yours seems to be to go elsewhere. Others seemto agree. But you did think the Hugos worth starting the thread.
In terms of novels, it was asked what was left out? I named one that I thought should have been there. Were there others? If you read Jo Walton, ignoring quality is not new. You actually participated in the process. But votes did not get anywhere. You described that this should not be considered unusual, given the plethora of publication..
And whether there is a current gender or other bias, now or in the past, can be debated (and it was.)

I did suggest making a concerted attempt (dedicated thread?) to post all of the major award nominees, so that at least readers here would have alternatives to the Hugos in one place.

This is more of an apology than an attempt to re-start comment or re-hash what has already been said.
 
pogopossum said:
Bick,
I apologize for not going back and re-reading the entire thread.
Click to expand...
No apology necessary of course.

pogopossum said:
You asked "Who would want to be associated with an award that thinks (the treatment of GMM) is okay?" Going back, Werthead did speak to the situation - that the organizers or arbitors were in a "Hands tied" situation. We can all agree that since the extended slur did not win, better voices prevailed.
Click to expand...
I find the 'hands tied' argument entirely unconvincing. If the rules you're religiously following are your own rules, just say, "hey, new rule: rude and obnoxious attacks on other people are not eligible for nomination'. It's not rocket science.

pogopossum said:
But the question remains, if there is a lack of balance then what is the solution? Yours seems to be to go elsewhere. Others seem to agree.
Click to expand...
I'm actually not that interested in going elsewhere to be honest, and don't advocate for a different award. In thinking that the Hugo's are a broken tool, my preference would simply be for them to be scrapped. Replacement is not necessary, as awards for books are a little bit silly when all's said and done. Of course, I can mentally scrap them for myself simply by paying no attention to them in future, which I suspect is what I'll do.

pogopossum said:
In terms of novels, it was asked what was left out?
Click to expand...
Good question, but hard to answer. Two things to note: (i) I didn't really have an issue with the novels, it is the short fiction and related work awards that have become especially meaningless. (ii) I read very few new novels in that year upon which to comment. I think, if I recall correctly, I voted for The Eleventh Gate, by Nancy Kress (which got next to no press but which I really rather liked, and which I felt was better than Scalzi's disappointing Last Emperox, which I also read). But there were also novels from such big SF names as Adrian Tchaikovsky, William Gibson, Kim Stanley Robinson, Jack McDevitt, Peter F. Hamilton, and so on. Now, I've not read their books, so cannot put any specific one forward - so maybe it's a rubbish point - but I was surprised that none of them were even nominated, as I've heard good things about all of them.
 
Bick said:
No apology necessary of course.
Click to expand...
Not true, but you are polite.

In the US there is a constitutional prohibition against "ex post facto" law. To wit that you can change the law for the future, but not re-legislate against what was done under earlier law. Seems to be a good idea.

Some of us are interested in awards, or in my case nominations, as it does give us a lead for tracking down quality stuff. For some years I used Dozois' "Best" but I haven't hooked into anything that I liked comparably since he died three year ago, Sad - and scary. (We are (were) of the same age.) I have too many piles of potential reading, a lot not SFF, to look at the mags any more. Hugo & Locus do serve a purpose. I should look at other lists than Hugo. And non habitues will never dig through the plentitude of what is out there. I make it a point to suggest stuff to mildly interested folks, more out of friendship than any dediacation to spreading the word. Awards hopefully are an institutional way of doing that.
 
Awards and nominations are such a great source of books and authors for people to go to. While we may not like an awarded book, there is a good chance you might if it is in your preferred genre and many people have recommended it. If someone just says read what you like, you may just stick to the same few authors. Particularly for most people, even who like reading, only reading a small number of books per year.
 
I'm so out of touch with the Hugos it's not even funny. I used to look at these lists to find stuff to read all the way through high school and college and beyond. Now I just see stuff that mirrors the Goodreads best of lists.
 
Question:
To qualify for the Hugo best series, that series must total at least 240,000 words. To re-qualify after being nominated and losing, a series must have additional works with a word count of at least an additional 240,000 words. (About 2-5 full length books.)
A few series (yes I am talking about David Weber) would re-qualify with only one additional work. The ones that I value highly would have to go on for some time to make it.
It would be interesting to me to see if any series that I value have, or are close to requalifying.
Is anyone aware of a source that gives the word count of books? Pagination is easy. But word count?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Bick Hugo 2020 Short Story nominees Book Discussion 27
Victoria Silverwolf 2019 Hugo Nominees Book Discussion 14
Victoria Silverwolf 2018 Hugo Nominees Book Discussion 25
Victoria Silverwolf 2017 Hugo Nominees With Links Book Discussion 12
Victoria Silverwolf Hugo Nominees Announced Book Discussion 34

Similar threads


Back
Top