Hugos, Hugos, fight fight fight

Music, books, movies, TV, games, hobbies, food, and potent potables. And forum games! Pour a drink, put on your smoking jacket, light a pipe (of whatever), and settle in.
Post Reply
User avatar
Eric the .5b
Posts: 11598
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 16:29

Re: Hugos, Hugos, fight fight fight

Post by Eric the .5b » 19 Apr 2015, 22:53

tr0g wrote:It's nice that you think I shouldn't get mad when someone, in almost complete ignorance of the subject, starts slandering people I know as racist and sexist.
It's nice that I've got a dear friend who's gay, female, and nonwhite, and who sees the Puppies as a remarkably popular effort to chase people like her out of fandom.

Have a tiny violin for your buddies' bad luck with PR.
"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
"Cyberpunk never really gave the government enough credit for their ability to secure a favorable prenup during the Corporate-State wedding." - Shem

User avatar
Stevo Darkly
Posts: 7242
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 19:13

Re: Hugos, Hugos, fight fight fight

Post by Stevo Darkly » 21 Apr 2015, 02:18

Eric the .5b wrote:A tally of the Puppy slates' nomination successes.

For all the attempts to separate the Sad and Rabid Puppies and blow off Vox Day as an inconvenient outlier, the Puppy groups shared most of their slates' successes. When it came to differences between the two, the Rabid Puppies actually had more independent successes than the Sad Puppies.
I admit that I don't fully understand the Hugo nominating and voting process. (And based on my quick attempt to research the matter, nobody else does, either.) However, the fact that there is an overlap in the successes of the nominations put forth by the Rabid Puppies and the Sad Puppies does not indicate, to me, that Sad Puppies are necessarily the same as Rabid Puppies.

Rather, what it says to me is that, however loony one group or the other may be, both are somewhat competent at picking some nominees that end up on the final ballot. I assume that happens because sufficient numbers of other nominators, part of neither group, also find those works worthy. In other words, the various Puppies pick some works that they both like, and some of those works are also liked by others, and they end up on the final ballot.

Or in yet other words, the shared nomination successes may indicate that neither group is completely tasteless or out of step with fandom out of whole when they select their nominees, and pick some broadly popular works.

Or, alternate explanation for the shared successes: The Sad Puppies and Rabid Puppies both, in fact, control more of the Hugo nominating process than they realize or admit, and have overlapping tastes.
"I don't know if you can call it a stereotype when I was in a room full of people actually doing it." -- Keith S.

User avatar
Stevo Darkly
Posts: 7242
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 19:13

Re: Hugos, Hugos, fight fight fight

Post by Stevo Darkly » 21 Apr 2015, 02:41

Various clarifications (not aimed at Eric):

- I was wrong when I said that "If You Were a Dinosaur, My Love" was a Hugo winner. It was only nominated to be a Hugo. In my opinion, that's still more attention than it deserved in the SF realm, but that's only my opinion. (It did win a Nebula, which probably further confused me into thinking it a Hugo winner. This Nebula win could, in fact, be evidence of story's high quality. Or it could be evidence of the story's political correctness appeal only if the Nebulas are also supposed to be taken up with political correctness. Are they? I do not know.)

- I don't know a lot about Vox Day. I know a lot of people have strong opinions about him. I suspect the negative opinions are mostly true.

- Notwithstanding, the fact that Vox Day holds or supports Position X doesn't tell me that Position X is necessarily bad or unsupportable, any more than the fact that Hitler was a vegetarian* necessarily means that vegetarianism is bad or untenable.

- I don't know or care much about Brad Torgersen, but I did read one of his recent blog posts at bradrtorgersen.wordpress.com/2015/04/14/tribalism-is-as-tribalism-does/ and he seemed pretty reasonable to me. I also read a ways into the comments, and that was also illuminating. I am also cheered to learn that Torgersen and George R. R. Martin, on the other side of the debate, are nevertheless on civil and even cordial speaking terms about this brouhaha.

*Allegedly. Many people, including historians and Hitler's latest-surviving food-taster, claim that he was. However, some quick Googling indicates that many vegetarians argue that he was not. (Again, I don't think it should be as important a point as many people seem to think it is.)

PS: Yes, Godwin, and I don't care. The zero-tolerance rule about never mentioning You Know Who online is stupidly over-applied. Sometimes the fact that Hitler is viewed as the worsty-worstest a human being can be is the point, not just a rhetorical tar-brushing. And so I claim here.
"I don't know if you can call it a stereotype when I was in a room full of people actually doing it." -- Keith S.

User avatar
Stevo Darkly
Posts: 7242
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 19:13

Re: Hugos, Hugos, fight fight fight

Post by Stevo Darkly » 21 Apr 2015, 02:49

Eric the .5b wrote:
tr0g wrote:It's nice that you think I shouldn't get mad when someone, in almost complete ignorance of the subject, starts slandering people I know as racist and sexist.
It's nice that I've got a dear friend who's gay, female, and nonwhite, and who sees the Puppies as a remarkably popular effort to chase people like her out of fandom.

Have a tiny violin for your buddies' bad luck with PR.
Eric, is it possible that your friend feels unnecessarily or excessively threatened by some of the Puppies precisely because of the misinformation that's been disseminated about them? She could be as much a victim of the misinformation as they are.

Lots of people have suffered from "bad PR" and misinformation/disinformation being spread about them by the ignorant and they malevolent, but that doesn't mean they deserved it. (The examples are so plentiful that there's no need to roll out the Godwin on this one.)
"I don't know if you can call it a stereotype when I was in a room full of people actually doing it." -- Keith S.

User avatar
Eric the .5b
Posts: 11598
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 16:29

Re: Hugos, Hugos, fight fight fight

Post by Eric the .5b » 21 Apr 2015, 04:16

Stevo Darkly wrote:I admit that I don't fully understand the Hugo nominating and voting process. (And based on my quick attempt to research the matter, nobody else does, either.)
You join the World Science Fiction Society. You send in the names of eligible works you want nominated under various categories before the nomination deadline. The ones that get the most submissions get nominated. Then you vote on those nominations for the awards, before that deadline. Results get announced at that year's convention.
Stevo Darkly wrote:However, the fact that there is an overlap in the successes of the nominations put forth by the Rabid Puppies and the Sad Puppies does not indicate, to me, that Sad Puppies are necessarily the same as Rabid Puppies.
They are two organizations with two slates. One is Vox Day giving a list of his preferred nominees. One is Brad Torgesen giving a very similar list. As far as distinguishing them goes, the evidence is that, despite a lot of insistence that Vox Day is this horrible outlier who it's just unfair and mean to talk about, his slate has pointed more support where it doesn't overlap Torgesen's than Torgesen's does when it doesn't overlap Day's.

However, I don't see it as particularly meaningful to distinguish the slates or the efforts. The main difference for the Sad Puppies is "We don't have Vox Day". They, however, have most of his slate and the same rationale.
Stevo Darkly wrote:Rather, what it says to me is that, however loony one group or the other may be, both are somewhat competent at picking some nominees that end up on the final ballot. I assume that happens because sufficient numbers of other nominators, part of neither group, also find those works worthy. In other words, the various Puppies pick some works that they both like, and some of those works are also liked by others, and they end up on the final ballot.

Or in yet other words, the shared nomination successes may indicate that neither group is completely tasteless or out of step with fandom out of whole when they select their nominees, and pick some broadly popular works.
OK. So, the claim of both slate organizers, over the course of a multi-year effort to encourage their supporters to join and vote, has been that the Hugos are warped by ideological forces, preventing good works from getting proper attention and giving bad works unfair attention, etc.

How exactly do openly political campaigns like the Puppies slates produce nominations that are any more valid that the prior ones? Why do these nominations only go from politically correct bilge to people just picking quality fiction when people vote like Vox Day?
Stevo Darkly wrote:Or, alternate explanation for the shared successes: The Sad Puppies and Rabid Puppies both, in fact, control more of the Hugo nominating process than they realize or admit, and have overlapping tastes.
They've had major success after a spurt of growth in WSFS memberships.
"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
"Cyberpunk never really gave the government enough credit for their ability to secure a favorable prenup during the Corporate-State wedding." - Shem

User avatar
Eric the .5b
Posts: 11598
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 16:29

Re: Hugos, Hugos, fight fight fight

Post by Eric the .5b » 21 Apr 2015, 04:21

Stevo Darkly wrote:Eric, is it possible that your friend feels unnecessarily or excessively threatened by some of the Puppies precisely because of the misinformation that's been disseminated about them? She could be as much a victim of the misinformation as they are.
No, I don't think so. Based on my conversations with her, she's researched the issue well and discerns what I think is a real hostility.
"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
"Cyberpunk never really gave the government enough credit for their ability to secure a favorable prenup during the Corporate-State wedding." - Shem

User avatar
Eric the .5b
Posts: 11598
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 16:29

Re: Hugos, Hugos, fight fight fight

Post by Eric the .5b » 21 Apr 2015, 05:12

Stevo Darkly wrote:- I don't know a lot about Vox Day. I know a lot of people have strong opinions about him. I suspect the negative opinions are mostly true.

- Notwithstanding, the fact that Vox Day holds or supports Position X doesn't tell me that Position X is necessarily bad or unsupportable, any more than the fact that Hitler was a vegetarian* necessarily means that vegetarianism is bad or untenable.
If Hugo voters are assumed to vote badly because of their claimed left-wing biases, why do Vox Day's politics and behavior have no bearing on the quality of his selections? You're asking that I give the benefit of the doubt on bias and judgement in a remarkably one-sided manner, there.

Day's an amazing onion of shittiness who starts with white supremacism and homophobia and gets worse the more you look. We're talking someone who's around the level of the Anarchrist at best, but with a bigger fan club. He doesn't actually have any credibility as a writer or editor. I'm really bewildered at the idea that we should look to the picks of a guy like this (or to picks that are just mostly the same as his) as a way towards better science fiction.
Stevo Darkly wrote:-- I don't know or care much about Brad Torgersen, but I did read one of his recent blog posts at bradrtorgersen.wordpress.com/2015/04/14/tribalism-is-as-tribalism-does/ and he seemed pretty reasonable to me.
I've read a number of his posts recently, and I find him incredibly melodramatic, puffed-up, and disingenuous. Not as much as Correia, but pretty bad. For all his talk about the awfulness of us-vs-them thinking, he's the one who took up reins of an effort to actively oppose some supposed SJW cabal that's ruining science fiction. For all his talk about how awful and unfair it is for people to associate him with Vox Day, he's enthusiastically riding on the guy's coattails. (And like Correia, he likes to wink about how he's totally separate from Vox Day's efforts, and Day is just Stalin to Correia's and his Churchill and FDR, who were never "allies" or anything...)
"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
"Cyberpunk never really gave the government enough credit for their ability to secure a favorable prenup during the Corporate-State wedding." - Shem

User avatar
nicole
Posts: 8433
Joined: 12 Jan 2013, 16:28

Re: Hugos, Hugos, fight fight fight

Post by nicole » 21 Apr 2015, 09:50

Which part of the following is incorrect?

On one side of the Hugos debate, there is at least one racist, sexist bigot who claims not to have voted on a specific slate for identity-related reasons, but whom most people here believe to be lying about that.

On the other side of the Hugos debate, there is a group of racist, sexist bigots who are part of a social movement committed to using identity as the basis of many activities as well as to advocating identity as the correct basis of many activities, and who explicitly discuss basing their decisions across a wide swathe of normal life on race, gender, and other immutable characteristics.
"Fucking qualia." -Hugh Akston

"This is why I carry a shoehorn.” -jadagul

User avatar
Jasper
Posts: 2631
Joined: 27 Apr 2010, 07:56
Location: Newyorkachusetts

Re: Hugos, Hugos, fight fight fight

Post by Jasper » 21 Apr 2015, 15:29

Heh.
"i'd like to move toward not combusting except on special occasions like arbor day." - dhex

User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 21497
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: Hugos, Hugos, fight fight fight

Post by Jennifer » 22 Apr 2015, 07:52

nicole wrote:Which part of the following is incorrect?

On one side of the Hugos debate, there is at least one racist, sexist bigot who claims not to have voted on a specific slate for identity-related reasons, but whom most people here believe to be lying about that.

On the other side of the Hugos debate, there is a group of racist, sexist bigots who are part of a social movement committed to using identity as the basis of many activities as well as to advocating identity as the correct basis of many activities, and who explicitly discuss basing their decisions across a wide swathe of normal life on race, gender, and other immutable characteristics.
Could you be more specific?
"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

User avatar
Eric the .5b
Posts: 11598
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 16:29

Re: Hugos, Hugos, fight fight fight

Post by Eric the .5b » 22 Apr 2015, 12:18

It's of a piece with the whole complaint, Jennifer. One side has a de facto leader whose politics can be reduced by any reasonable definition to "evil", whether we look at the homophobia, the scientific racism, the saying feminists should get acid thrown in their faces to protect the institution of marriage, or damn near anything else. (Mind, it's just rude to suggest that anyone supporting either slate does so out of any political or ideological sympathies with him, so he can be the only such person in the whole movement.)

But there's another side here, Jennifer. And on that other side? Holy shit, Jennifer. Some of those people are liberals!
"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
"Cyberpunk never really gave the government enough credit for their ability to secure a favorable prenup during the Corporate-State wedding." - Shem

User avatar
Eric the .5b
Posts: 11598
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 16:29

Re: Hugos, Hugos, fight fight fight

Post by Eric the .5b » 08 Aug 2015, 16:54

I'd done my Hugo reading and voting, so I was settled down to wait for what happens at WorldCon, with their largest membership and voting participation ever. Things had been quiet. Then I heard of a podcast—really, a on-air Google Hangout—of Puppy folks that Lou Antonelli, Puppy supporter and politically approved Hugo nominee, was on. During a discussion of David Gerrold, the Sasquan Guest of Honor whom Antonelli's occasionally been arguing with on Facebook, he declared:
I really didn’t know much about [Gerrold] before the Hugo nominations came out. Following his discourse and his level of discourse as a result, I personally wrote a letter addressed to the police chief in Spokane and said I thought the man was insane and a public danger and needs to be watched when the convention’s going on, and I mean it. I attached my business card. I said this guy’s inciting to violence. Somebody—a weak-minded might attack somebody because of his relentless torrent of abuse. I think, honestly, I think he belongs in a secure psychiatric facility.
Link to the time offset, where he doesn't sound at all like he's joking.

So now, I'm morbidly curious whether there'll be a SWATting attempt at the con if the Puppies aren't satisfied.
"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
"Cyberpunk never really gave the government enough credit for their ability to secure a favorable prenup during the Corporate-State wedding." - Shem

User avatar
Eric the .5b
Posts: 11598
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 16:29

Re: Hugos, Hugos, fight fight fight

Post by Eric the .5b » 08 Aug 2015, 17:49

And in a breaking update, Antonelli's apologized, now that this has blown up and simply saying he'd been drinking on the show hadn't helped.
"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
"Cyberpunk never really gave the government enough credit for their ability to secure a favorable prenup during the Corporate-State wedding." - Shem

User avatar
thoreau
Posts: 25265
Joined: 06 May 2010, 12:56
Location: Back to the lab again

Re: Hugos, Hugos, fight fight fight

Post by thoreau » 23 Aug 2015, 10:25

Well, the results are out.

I didn't follow it closely, but I am glad that Orphan Black won. And The Three Body Problem was excellent in all of the parts that had narration rather than dialogue.
"ike Wile E. Coyote salivating over a "4000 Ways To Prepare Roadrunner" cookbook without watching his surroundings, the Road Runner of Societal Inertia snuck up on them both and beepbeeped them off the mesa."
--Shem

User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 21497
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: Hugos, Hugos, fight fight fight

Post by Jennifer » 23 Aug 2015, 10:50

To quote something Charlie Jane Anders wrote in IO9:

http://io9.com/how-the-hugo-awards-sabo ... 1715469165
And some of the more articulate supporters of this self-styled “Sad Puppies”/“Rabid Puppies” revolt have kept making one argument in particular: That progressive science fiction authors have been stuffing the ballot box for years, and now the conservatives are just doing what the left has always done. ... This actually sounds like a compelling argument at first — but the saboteurs themselves have already disproved it. Their own success shows that their conspiracy theory is absolutely false. If there had been a left-wing conspiracy to stuff the ballot, it would have largely counteracted the efforts of Beale and his friends. The Beale strategem only succeeds if all the other nominations are scattered and disorganized. And that kind of disorganization is exactly what we saw in most nominations. It appears that everybody except Beale’s crew simply nominated whatever stories they happened to enjoy in 2014. Had there been a secret left-wing bloc nominating its own stories in lockstep, then Beale’s strategy would have failed....

Meanwhile, if you want to know the last word on this year’s Hugo mess, it comes from Beale himself. In the past week or so, there’s been a controversy over the fact that a Holocaust novel featuring a lovable Concentration Camp commandant was nominated for two RITA awards (the romance equivalent of the Hugos.) As Sarah Wendell of Smart Bitches, Trashy Books explained, “The stereotypes, the language, and the attempt at redeeming an SS officer as a hero belittle and demean the atrocities of the Holocaust.”

Beale has weighed in on this situation in an interview with Newsweek, and proclaimed that it’s the same thing as what’s been happening with the Hugo Awards. The book about the Nazis turning out to have “hidden depths and sympathies,” Beale says, is just like his own books and stories: terrific works of fiction, that have just been singled out for criticism by politically correct people. (And if you think that the Holocaust shouldn’t be portrayed as not all that bad, you’re a “Social Justice Warrior.” Congratulations.)
The Puppy insistence that "conspiracy" is the only reason attitudes or stories they dislike might prove popular strikes me as uncommonly similar to an attitude I've seen on openly white-supremacist sites, insisting that "brainwashing" is the only reason any full-fledged white person might disagree with them. Though on second thought, I shouldn't be surprised to discern such arrogance coming from a misogynist white supremacist who actually named himself "the Voice of God."
"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

User avatar
D.A. Ridgely
Posts: 17742
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:09
Location: The Other Side

Re: Hugos, Hugos, fight fight fight

Post by D.A. Ridgely » 23 Aug 2015, 11:32

I haven't thought out the implications of the suggestion to give voters one negative vote each as well as the usual vote, but it intrigues me.

What's with all the No Awards? I haven't followed the Hugos in decades, but I don't recall that ever happening before except in maybe one or two categories.

And when is someone going to write an allegorical story about the whole kerfuffle?

User avatar
thoreau
Posts: 25265
Joined: 06 May 2010, 12:56
Location: Back to the lab again

Re: Hugos, Hugos, fight fight fight

Post by thoreau » 23 Aug 2015, 11:50

We don't want allegorical stories, Ridgely. We want good, old-fashioned, non-allegorical SF.

Like Star Trek.
"ike Wile E. Coyote salivating over a "4000 Ways To Prepare Roadrunner" cookbook without watching his surroundings, the Road Runner of Societal Inertia snuck up on them both and beepbeeped them off the mesa."
--Shem

User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 21497
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: Hugos, Hugos, fight fight fight

Post by Jennifer » 23 Aug 2015, 12:06

thoreau wrote:We don't want allegorical stories, Ridgely. We want good, old-fashioned, non-allegorical SF.

Like Star Trek.
And we demand predictable books which can be accurately judged by their covers, as ol' Torgenson or Turgidson or whatever demanded:
A few decades ago, if you saw a lovely spaceship on a book cover, with a gorgeous planet in the background, you could be pretty sure you were going to get a rousing space adventure featuring starships and distant, amazing worlds. If you saw a barbarian swinging an axe? You were going to get a rousing fantasy epic with broad-chested heroes who slay monsters, and run off with beautiful women. Battle-armored interstellar jump troops shooting up alien invaders? Yup. A gritty military SF war story, where the humans defeat the odds and save the Earth. And so on, and so forth.

These days, you can’t be sure.

The book has a spaceship on the cover, but is it really going to be a story about space exploration and pioneering derring-do? Or is the story merely about racial prejudice and exploitation, with interplanetary or interstellar trappings?

There’s a sword-swinger on the cover, but is it really about knights battling dragons? Or are the dragons suddenly the good guys, and the sword-swingers are the oppressive colonizers of Dragon Land?

A planet, framed by a galactic backdrop. Could it be an actual bona fide space opera? Heroes and princesses and laser blasters? No, wait. It’s about sexism and the oppression of women.

Finally, a book with a painting of a person wearing a mechanized suit of armor! Holding a rifle! War story ahoy! Nope, wait. It’s actually about gay and transgender issues.

Or it could be about the evils of capitalism and the despotism of the wealthy.

Do you see what I am trying to say here?
Yes indeed: non-formulaic storylines do not belong in science fiction, and anyone claiming otherwise is promoting the SJW conspiracy.

(FWIW, I'd actually enjoy reading a well-written story where the dragons are the good guys and the sword-swinging humans are the oppressors. But then, I've always been a fan of what Asimov called "sociological science fiction," anyway.)
"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

User avatar
D.A. Ridgely
Posts: 17742
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:09
Location: The Other Side

Re: Hugos, Hugos, fight fight fight

Post by D.A. Ridgely » 23 Aug 2015, 12:21

Well, there's [img]Grendel[/img], which sort of counts.

I wonder if a Star Wars script from the Emperor's POV or the Romulan's side of Star Wars would have any commercial potential. Assuming, of course, copyright issues were resolved.

User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 21497
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: Hugos, Hugos, fight fight fight

Post by Jennifer » 23 Aug 2015, 12:24

D.A. Ridgely wrote:Well, there's [img]Grendel[/img], which sort of counts.

I wonder if a Star Wars script from the Emperor's POV or the Romulan's side of Star Wars would have any commercial potential. Assuming, of course, copyright issues were resolved.
I'd think so. But then, I also enjoyed the reddit thread describing the original three Star Wars movies as though they were in a biased, pro-Imperial history book, enough to share it here:

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=2068&p=268726&hilit ... on#p268677
An exploration of the events from Imperial Year 19 (IY19) to Imperial Year 23 (IY23) must first start from several decades earlier. A galactic civil war, commonly known as the Clone Wars in colloquial parlance, had ravaged the galaxy for four years. The Republic's ineffective bureaucracy had failed to quell the insurgents. In the end, in a stroke of luck, Chancellor Palpatine was able to send his apprentice and most trusted lieutenant, Anakin Skywalker, to assassinate the leaders of the terrorist rebellion, on the planet of Mustafar. However, Skywalker perished in the process, falling to his friend and former master, Obi-Wan Kenobi, who had been secretly aiding the insurgents.

The end of the civil war, however, led to a surge of popularity for the Chancellor, and he reluctantly accepted the rank of Emperor of the new Galactic Empire. This marked the first year of the Imperial calendar, and is known as IY1.

The Emperor was a highly competent leader and a wise negotiator, but was nonetheless hindered in several respects. To start with, the insurgency did not die with their leaders on Mustafar. A shadowy group of imperial senators took advantage of the power vacuum, and assumed leadership of the terrorist rebellion. Furthermore, there was widespread political resistance to the rule of the Empire, due to several individual star systems unwisely rejecting the fact that they would benefit from Imperial rule, both economically and militarily.

To resolve these niggling issues, the Emperor adopted a two-pronged strategy. Firstly, he dissolved the Imperial Senate, which meant that the inefficiency of bureaucracy could be replaced by a more streamlined decisioning process, thus greatly accelerating the pace of governance and legislation. Secondly, the Emperor ordered the construction of a space station known as the Peace Moon.

The Peace Moon was a marvel of engineering, as well as proof of what could be accomplished with unity and collaboration. It was the size of a small moon, several hundred kilometers in diameter, and held a small peacekeeping force of infantry and fighter craft. It also housed hundreds of thousands of support and technical personnel. These crew members were classified as non-combatants, which shall become significant. ...
"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

User avatar
D.A. Ridgely
Posts: 17742
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:09
Location: The Other Side

Re: Hugos, Hugos, fight fight fight

Post by D.A. Ridgely » 23 Aug 2015, 12:27

I probably stopped reading SF as such by the early 80s, but I don't recall a time when science fiction wasn't used allegorically or when at least a good number of authors (e.g., Heinlein) had plenty of social, political and cultural axes to grind. *shrug*

Bailey told me within the last year or so that the last fifteen years have produced very good SF but never gave me a promised list of suggested books.

User avatar
Painboy
Posts: 3399
Joined: 18 Feb 2013, 11:33
Location: Seattle

Re: Hugos, Hugos, fight fight fight

Post by Painboy » 23 Aug 2015, 12:30

Their own success shows that their conspiracy theory is absolutely false. If there had been a left-wing conspiracy to stuff the ballot, it would have largely counteracted the efforts of Beale and his friends.
It being the Hugos I really don't care much about this, but that line is incredibly ignorant. Small vocal minorities routinely take over the direction of a group due to the general indifference or ignorance of the majority. However if that minority goes too far in a direction the majority will tolerate, or had been previously unaware, there will be a backlash. This can result in a number of things from splitting apart the group and making a new group, to a hard shift the other way as the majority reasserts their preferences. Obviously there will be hangers on from any radical minorities from the opposite side of the issue as well who are going to attempt to profit from the shift. Of course the same thing will happen to them if they push too hard.

User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 21497
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: Hugos, Hugos, fight fight fight

Post by Jennifer » 23 Aug 2015, 12:38

D.A. Ridgely wrote:I probably stopped reading SF as such by the early 80s, but I don't recall a time when science fiction wasn't used allegorically or when at least a good number of authors (e.g., Heinlein) had plenty of social, political and cultural axes to grind. *shrug*

Bailey told me within the last year or so that the last fifteen years have produced very good SF but never gave me a promised list of suggested books.
What kind of stuff do you like -- sociological, technological or alien world/lifeforms? Nowadays, there's arguably a fourth genre that could be called "reworking classic scifi that's now in the public domain."

One book I recently read and liked (though a quick Google suggests it's not recent, but actually from the late 1990s) is War of the Worlds: Global Dispatches -- a set of short stories imagining that Wells' Martians actually did invade, and here's what other contemporary notables (Mark Twain, Joseph Conrad, Jack London, Teddy Roosevelt, etc.) wrote about it at the time.
"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

User avatar
D.A. Ridgely
Posts: 17742
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:09
Location: The Other Side

Re: Hugos, Hugos, fight fight fight

Post by D.A. Ridgely » 23 Aug 2015, 12:57

Jennifer wrote:
D.A. Ridgely wrote:I probably stopped reading SF as such by the early 80s, but I don't recall a time when science fiction wasn't used allegorically or when at least a good number of authors (e.g., Heinlein) had plenty of social, political and cultural axes to grind. *shrug*

Bailey told me within the last year or so that the last fifteen years have produced very good SF but never gave me a promised list of suggested books.
What kind of stuff do you like -- sociological, technological or alien world/lifeforms? Nowadays, there's arguably a fourth genre that could be called "reworking classic scifi that's now in the public domain."

One book I recently read and liked (though a quick Google suggests it's not recent, but actually from the late 1990s) is War of the Worlds: Global Dispatches -- a set of short stories imagining that Wells' Martians actually did invade, and here's what other contemporary notables (Mark Twain, Joseph Conrad, Jack London, Teddy Roosevelt, etc.) wrote about it at the time.
I can't say I'm especially fond of or especially dislike any of those sub-niches. Two things, in my entirely subjective opinion, tended to converge at some point, the result being my waning interest in the genre. (Which, btw, turned out to be a good thing because it opened my beach book reading list to mystery and detective fiction, a genre I'd mostly ignored before.)

Anyway, first, there was an increasing melding of science fiction and fantasy, the latter of which I've never liked. Too many dragons in space, metaphorically. Second, too much experimental prose style. Glad to tackle the likes of Faulkner, Joyce, etc. But I like my genre books nice and linear because the whole point, as far as I'm concerned, is to get lost in a ripping yarn without having to think.

User avatar
Eric the .5b
Posts: 11598
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 16:29

Re: Hugos, Hugos, fight fight fight

Post by Eric the .5b » 23 Aug 2015, 14:06

I have to admit quite a bit of schadenfreude last night after watching the stream (David Gerrold playing off a Dalek was funny) and checking Twitter. It was almost exactly like reading a liberal forum after a big Republican win, except with supporters quite confident that they were going to win. I watched one Puppy supporter go from admonishing everyone to not hate on Puppy winners to OMG you maniacs, you're blowing it all up. More consistent with watching wailing liberals, I watched another start at OMG you maniacs to Well, what you don't get is that this means we double-secret win in the end.
Painboy wrote:
Their own success shows that their conspiracy theory is absolutely false. If there had been a left-wing conspiracy to stuff the ballot, it would have largely counteracted the efforts of Beale and his friends.
It being the Hugos I really don't care much about this, but that line is incredibly ignorant. Small vocal minorities routinely take over the direction of a group due to the general indifference or ignorance of the majority. However if that minority goes too far in a direction the majority will tolerate, or had been previously unaware, there will be a backlash.
You're talking about the possibility of such a group, and that quote's talking about whether such a group actually exists. That such a group exists—and that they are the mainstream backlash against it—is the assertion of the Puppies. In actuality, the most organized and ideological effort against them was, "Well, here's the list of everyone else in every given category", and they got soundly beaten.* It's clear that the Puppies were the small, vocal minority attempting to take control of the group's direction, and they got a backlash.


In a related vein, Thoreau, I'd be curious to see your thoughts on the E Pluribus Hugo proposal for reforming the voting process against slate-voting.



* Even the Puppies I see online are failing to make straight-faced claims that anyone they supported "wuz robbed". They just go straight to "Ohoho, you SJWs didn't give an award to one of our nominees who was a woman!" So, in other words, the people disagreeing with them didn't hew to a stereotype of voting for women and minorities, heedless of merit. And by not doing so, they lost...somehow. (There, I'm reminded of arguing with liberals who go to some canned argument they imagine disproves libertarianism, as if they expect me to explode like a ST:TOS supercomputer given a paradox.)
"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
"Cyberpunk never really gave the government enough credit for their ability to secure a favorable prenup during the Corporate-State wedding." - Shem

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests