Some more brief thoughts on the 2015 Hugo Awards

.

No, I have more to say than I did a few months ago when the finalists were announced.  I haven't really had much to say on those awards (or pretty much, any awards longlist or shortlist these past few months) because I have spent much of the year not reading.  It is interesting how one's perspective on things can change when removed from the immediacy of almost any situation.  I didn't care much for the way the shortlists were decided, but I just didn't have much of any real interest because there were some non-slate nominees (at least the initial list before an author withdrew from Best Novel consideration) that I thought were also mediocre to poor works.  

Since much of my Twitter feed is comprised of SF/F fans and authors (although I have several squirrel and sports feeds I follow there as well), I quickly grew bored with the same sentiments being reiterated over and over again.  Had nothing really to say; I have never really put much stock into the Hugo Awards because their finalists/winners rarely overlap with what I considered to be recent years' best fictions.  So I decided to wait until around the time the awards were announced (here's a link that shows the votes/nominations) before I would say anything really about this year's slate/winners.

I am very pleased to see that Cixin Liu's The Three-Body Problem won Best Novel.  Before it was added to the shortlist after Marko Kloos withdrew his novel from consideration, I thought every single one of the Best Novel nominees were not worthy of award consideration.  Needless to say, when it was added, I thought it was by far the best of the bunch and a deserving winner.  

As for the other categories and No Award winning over all of the slate nominees, nothing much to say other than people exercised their voting rights and that (like the slates did in nominating them) was that.  Nothing controversial about it in terms of procedures being followed, but I suppose there'll be months of factional arguments over next year's nomination/voting process and then maybe, eventually (right?) this will die down into the usual internecine sniping about age, group voting identities, and all the picayune things that can make SF fandom so tedious for outsiders.

But then again, I'm probably not the person to turn to these days for scintillating coverage of SF fandom awards.  I was too busy either getting in a late night 5.5 mile walk/jog or watching a replay of NXT Takeover:  Brooklyn (by the way, the Women's Championship Match was one of the best matches I've seen this year) to pay any attention to Twitter until hours after the winners were announced.  Priorities and all.  With that being said, time to rest, as I have another 10 miles I'd like to walk/jog before work Monday. 
 

The fissuring of "fandoms" and the 2014 Hugo Awards finalists

Earlier this afternoon, the 2014 Hugo Award finalists were announced via Twitter and livestreaming of the announcements from some SF convention or another.  As I followed the announcements on Twitter, it was interesting to seeing the alternations between squeeing (I think that is the word for the juvenile squeaky gasp) and groaning as the categories moved from the lesser-known fan-oriented categories to the fiction categories.  For the most part, I remained unmoved, even when I saw some good people get nominated for their works, because I sensed that the fiction categories would be, in the parlance of certain people in my social circle, a clusterfuck.  And indeed it was a clusterfuck beyond my wildest imagination, as the Best Novel category alone is the epitome of everything that I despise about popular-voted literary awards.

I am more familiar with several category finalists than in years past, so I will have more to say on the lesser categories than in years past.  I will be blunt:  the types of works/people nominated illustrate this perception that many people have had in recent years that SF and its so-called "fandom", never a monolithic entity whatever impression some people might have tried to give, is even more fissured and polarized now than even during contentious points (the 1930s and the red scare aftermath; Vietnam and the 1970s; third and fourth-wave feminism vs. MRAs) during the WorldCon's checkered past.  Some occasional readers, myself being but one, are often left feeling disengaged after the spats have repeated themselves for the nth time.  The stories nominated show signs of bloc voting along the lines of thematic and perhaps socio-political ideologies more than for any literary/storytelling merits that these stories might contain.  When I look at the works/authors that have been nominated that I have read or at least sampled in the past, I am dismayed by lack of scintillating prose or anything that would be more profound than something found in a Dan Brown or Terry Goodkind novel.

Some of this doubtless is due to my own particular tastes as a reader, but some of it falls squarely in the laps of those readers who choose these works.  While I am likely never going to be a voter for these awards, as a critic I do feel that those who do nominate and vote for these awards should take greater responsibility for what is nominated.  Then again, considering how fractious "SF fandom" is, perhaps it is more a matter of LCD works being selected more for their non-offensiveness than for their true challenging of the status quo.  It is disheartening to see certain "progressive" voices praise certain stories for their themes when those so-called "progressive" elements were addressed more forcefully in works published before I was born...before 1974.  When even the "revolutionary" stories are praised mostly for their long-overdue inclusion of "minority" characters/perspectives, when these perspectives were becoming more commonplace in stories written for non-SF/F audiences a generation or two ago, then there is something broken in a literary area where some pride themselves on being "forward-thinking."  The finalists for Best Novel are anything but "forward-looking" in their politics, in their themes, in their characterizations, or in their prose.  Much the same goes for the majority of the Novella and Novelette categories.

What can be done about this?  I perhaps am not the one best-suited to answer this, since I mostly observe from the periphery, reading what strikes my fancy, not esteeming those selected works more or less than what I read elsewhere.  Those who are the finalists for Fan Writer, Fanzine, and Fancast, most of whom are relatively new voices who are in their 20s and 30s, those are the ones who should be pressing harder for something different.  They should not be content to use their platforms just to praise works, but to criticize weaker elements even in the works that they enjoyed.  To them, which do excellent work, I would exhort them to not just "settle" for the "window dressing" of "progressive" elements within a stagnant story/theme, but to demand more, to note that those authors who are daring to do more should take greater chances, even at the risk of losing some readers or even publisher support.

Too often at times like this, SF/F supporters extoll the virtues of their beloved genre(s) by implicitly or even explicitly trying to create false comparisons between this genre and other literary genres.  As a reader of many fictional categories, I tend to scoff at these people, because I look at what is nominated and I think to myself, "these works are as ephemeral as mayflies.  The next generation will hardly glance at them without shuddering."  Some believe that based on some of the nominees in the fan, Campbell, and shorter fiction works, that a newer generation of fans and writers is emerging.  Perhaps that is so.  But what is emerging?  Bland works?  Fictions that look backward too much without saying much that is new?  Stories that want more to be made into movies than those that take greater advantage of the literary medium?  Are these things that readers will want to revisit years from now?

So yes, another iteration of the Hugo Awards has been announced.  Some will find much to enjoy in them and a lot to dislike.  And others wistfully shall find themselves wishing that there was something more than a display of polarization over stories that leave the occasional SF reader feeling cold.  And with this somber comment, here are the finalists (and for full disclosure's sake, two 2012 articles of mine appear in one of the finalists for Best Related Work):


Best Novel (1595 nominating ballots)

• Ancillary Justice, Ann Leckie (Orbit US/Orbit UK) - My review
• Neptune’s Brood, Charles Stross (Ace / Orbit UK)
• Parasite, Mira Grant (Orbit US/Orbit UK)
• Warbound, Book III of the Grimnoir Chronicles, Larry Correia (Baen Books)
• The Wheel of Time, Robert Jordan and Brandon Sanderson (Tor Books) - My reviews

Best Novella (847 nominating ballots)

• The Butcher of Khardov, Dan Wells (Privateer Press)
• “The Chaplain’s Legacy”, Brad Torgersen (Analog, Jul-Aug 2013)
• “Equoid”, Charles Stross (Tor.com, 09-2013)
• Six-Gun Snow White, Catherynne M. Valente (Subterranean Press)
• “Wakulla Springs”, Andy Duncan and Ellen Klages (Tor.com, 10-2013)

Best Novelette (728 nominating ballots)

• “Opera Vita Aeterna”, Vox Day (The Last Witchking, Marcher Lord Hinterlands)
• “The Exchange Officers”, Brad Torgersen (Analog, Jan-Feb 2013)
• “The Lady Astronaut of Mars”, Mary Robinette Kowal (maryrobinettekowal.com/Tor.com, 09-2013)
• “The Truth of Fact, the Truth of Feeling”, Ted Chiang (Subterranean, Fall 2013)
• “The Waiting Stars”, Aliette de Bodard (The Other Half of the Sky, Candlemark & Gleam)

Best Short Story (865 nominating ballots)

• “If You Were a Dinosaur, My Love”, Rachel Swirsky (Apex Magazine, Mar-2013)
• “The Ink Readers of Doi Saket”, Thomas Olde Heuvelt (Tor.com, 04-2013)
• “Selkie Stories Are for Losers”, Sofia Samatar (Strange Horizons, Jan-2013)
• “The Water That Falls on You from Nowhere”, John Chu (Tor.com, 02-2013)

Note: Category had only 4 nominees due to the minimum 5% requirement of Section 3.8.5 of the WSFS constitution.

Best Related Work (752 nominating ballots)

• Queers Dig Time Lords: A Celebration of Doctor Who by the LGBTQ Fans Who Love It, Edited by Sigrid Ellis & Michael Damian Thomas (Mad Norwegian Press)
• Speculative Fiction 2012: The Best Online Reviews, Essays and Commentary, Justin Landon & Jared Shurin (Jurassic London) - here's where my articles appear.
• “We Have Always Fought: Challenging the Women, Cattle and Slaves Narrative”, Kameron Hurley (A Dribble of Ink)
• Wonderbook: The Illustrated Guide to Creating Imaginative Fiction, Jeff VanderMeer, with Jeremy Zerfoss (Abrams Image) - Need to finish reading it, but it's a book I'd highly recommend to others.
• Writing Excuses Season 8, Brandon Sanderson, Dan Wells, Mary Robinette Kowal, Howard Tayler, and Jordan Sanderson

Best Graphic Story (552 nominating ballots)

• Girl Genius, Volume 13: Agatha Heterodyne & The Sleeping City, written by Phil and Kaja Foglio; art by Phil Foglio; colors by Cheyenne Wright (Airship Entertainment)
• “The Girl Who Loved Doctor Who”, written by Paul Cornell, illustrated by Jimmy Broxton (Doctor Who Special 2013, IDW)
• The Meathouse Man, adapted from the story by George R.R. Martin and illustrated by Raya Golden (Jet City Comics)
• Saga, Volume 2, written by Brian K. Vaughan, illustrated by Fiona Staples (Image Comics )
• “Time”, Randall Munroe (XKCD)

Best Dramatic Presentation, Long Form (995 nominating ballots)

• Frozen,screenplay by Jennifer Lee, directed by Chris Buck & Jennifer Lee (Walt Disney Studios)
• Gravity, written by Alfonso Cuarón & Jonás Cuarón, directed by Alfonso Cuarón (Esperanto Filmoj; Heyday Films; Warner Bros.)
• The Hunger Games: Catching Fire, screenplay by Simon Beaufoy & Michael Arndt, directed by Francis Lawrence (Color Force; Lionsgate)
• Iron Man 3, screenplay by Drew Pearce & Shane Black, directed by Shane Black (Marvel Studios; DMG Entertainment; Paramount Pictures)
• Pacific Rim, screenplay by Travis Beacham & Guillermo del Toro, directed by Guillermo del Toro (Legendary Pictures, Warner Bros., Disney Double Dare You)

Best Dramatic Presentation, Short Form (760 nominating ballots)

• An Adventure in Space and Time, written by Mark Gatiss, directed by Terry McDonough (BBC Television)
• Doctor Who: “The Day of the Doctor”, written by Steven Moffat, directed by Nick Hurran (BBC Television)
• Doctor Who: “The Name of the Doctor”, written by Steven Moffat, directed by Saul Metzstein (BBC Televison)
• The Five(ish) Doctors Reboot, written & directed by Peter Davison (BBC Television)
• Game of Thrones: “The Rains of Castamere”, written by David Benioff & D.B. Weiss, directed by David Nutter (HBO Entertainment in association with Bighead, Littlehead; Television 360; Startling Television and Generator Productions)
• Orphan Black: “Variations under Domestication” written by Will Pascoe, directed by John Fawcett (Temple Street Productions; Space/BBC America)

Note: Category has six nominees due to a tie for the final position.

Best Editor, Short Form (656 nominating ballots)

• John Joseph Adams
• Neil Clarke
• Ellen Datlow
• Jonathan Strahan
• Sheila Williams

Best Editor, Long Form (632 nominating ballots)

• Ginjer Buchanan
• Sheila Gilbert
• Liz Gorinsky
• Lee Harris
• Toni Weisskopf

Best Professional Artist (624 nominating ballots)

• Galen Dara
• Julie Dillon
• Daniel Dos Santos
• John Harris
• John Picacio
• Fiona Staples

Note: Category has six nominees due to a tie for the final position.
Best Semiprozine (411 nominating ballots)

• Apex Magazine, edited by Lynne M. Thomas, Jason Sizemore, and Michael Damian Thomas
• Beneath Ceaseless Skies, edited by Scott H. Andrews
• Interzone, edited by Andy Cox
• Lightspeed Magazine, edited by John Joseph Adams, Rich Horton, and Stefan Rudnicki
• Strange Horizons, edited by Niall Harrison, Brit Mandelo, An Owomoyela, Julia Rios, Sonya Taaffe, Abigail Nussbaum, Rebecca Cross, Anaea Lay, and Shane Gavin

Best Fanzine (478 nominating ballots) - #1, #2, and #5 are published by people whose opinions I do like reading, even when I disagree with them.

• The Book Smugglers, edited by Ana Grilo and Thea James
• A Dribble of Ink, edited by Aidan Moher
• Elitist Book Reviews, edited by Steven Diamond
• Journey Planet, edited by James Bacon, Christopher J Garcia, Lynda E. Rucker, Pete Young, Colin Harris, and Helen J.Montgomery
• Pornokitsch, edited by Anne C. Perry and Jared Shurin

Best Fancast (396 nominating ballots) - Same I said above for #3 and #4, even though I rarely listen to podcasts.

• The Coode Street Podcast, Jonathan Strahan and Gary K. Wolfe
• Galactic Suburbia Podcast, Alisa Krasnostein, Alexandra Pierce, Tansy Rayner Roberts (Presenters) and Andrew Finch
  (Producer)
• SF Signal Podcast, Patrick Hester
• The Skiffy and Fanty Show, Shaun Duke, Jen Zink, Julia Rios, Paul Weimer, David Annandale, Mike Underwood, and Stina Leicht
• Tea and Jeopardy, Emma Newman
• Verity! Deborah Stanish, Erika Ensign, Katrina Griffiths, L.M. Myles, Lynne M. Thomas, and Tansy Rayner Roberts
• The Writer and the Critic, Kirstyn McDermott and Ian Mond

Note: Category has seven nominees due to a tie for the final position.

Best Fan Writer (521 nominating ballots) - Same again for #s 1-4

• Liz Bourke
• Kameron Hurley
• Foz Meadows
• Abigail Nussbaum
• Mark Oshiro

Best Fan Artist (316 nominating ballots)

• Brad W. Foster
• Mandie Manzano
• Spring Schoenhuth
• Steve Stiles
• Sarah Webb

The John W. Campbell Award for Best New Writer (767 nominating ballots)
Award for the best new professional science fiction or fantasy writer of 2012 or 2013, sponsored by Dell Magazines. (Not a Hugo Award, but administered along with the Hugo Awards.)

• Wesley Chu
• Max Gladstone*
• Ramez Naam*
• Sofia Samatar* - I've enjoyed her works; haven't read the others yet.
• Benjanun Sriduangkaew

Kim Stanley Robinson, 2312

In a landscape so rumpled the light can suddenly jump the eastern horizon and leap west to strike some distant prominence.  Everyone walking the land has to attend to this possibility, know when and where the longest sunreaches occur – and where they can run for shade if they happen to be caught out.

Or if they stay on purpose.  Because many of them pause in their walkabouts on certain cliffs and crater rims, at places marked by stupas, cairns, petroglyphs, inuksuit, mirrors, walls, goldsworthies.  The sunwalkers stand by these, facing east, waiting.

The horizon they watch is black space over black rock.  The superthin neon-argon atmosphere, created by sunlight smashing rock, holds only the faintest predawn glow.  But the sunwalkers know the time, so they wait and watch – until – 

   a flick of orange fire dolphins over the horizon

   and their blood leaps inside them.  More brief banners follow, flicking up, arcing in loops, breaking off and floating free in the sky.  Star oh star, about to break on them!  Already their faceplates have darkened and polarized to protect their eyes. (Prologue, p. 3 e-book edition)

Nature, whether it be found on Earth or elsewhere, can be so beautifully enticing precisely because of its perilous qualities.  The loping of a wolf, the grin of a great cat, the tremendous thunder claps that follow in the wake of devastating lightning – yes, nature is something that we humans may try to tame and understand, yet it is the sheer beauty of its ultimately incomprehensible awe-inspiring wonders that suck us in.  Often one might encounter science fiction fans rhapsodize over this "sense of wonder," but too frequently whatever marvels that might be present in those tales are muted by pedestrian prose or tinny PoVs.  So in reading this opening section to Kim Stanley Robinson's 2012 Nebula, Hugo, and Clarke Award-nominated 2312, I was struck by just how well he captures this dual beautiful/perilous quality of an alien landscape (Mercury in this particular case, although similarly evocative prose is used later to describe other solar landscapes).

2312 is an extremely ambitious novel and at times some of its ambitions are thwarted or at least reduced in power due largely to its own complex narrative structure.  It certainly is not a novel that can be summed up with a few pithy sentences.  Some readers may find 2312's core to be its two main human characters, Swan Er Hong (a sort of futuristic renaissance woman who is equally an artist, a biosphere designer, and a quasi-provocateur) and diplomat Fitz Wahram, and their unraveling of a series of terroristic events that threaten the fragile stability of the various human communities spread throughout most of the solar system.  Others may find themselves more fascinated by the snippets of the novel's invented past and the commentaries embedded within them on ecology, human belief systems, gender/sex issues, and political forms of government.  Still others may find themselves most enjoying the descriptions of various terraforming activities that take place throughout the novel.  Yet 2312 aims to be more than the sum of its many fascinating parts but ultimately fails to achieve this, leaving behind a flawed work whose components merely serve as glimmers of greatness, as if they were shards of a large and perfectly cut gem whose shattering has dimmed its interior light.

By themselves, each component part tells a gripping story.  In particular, Swan and Fitz's relationship, which is filled with peaks and valleys of love and frustration with each other, is a perfectly fine story, one that benefits from Robinson's excellent prose.  Yet their story is stretched too thinly in places, as the two move from extraterrestrial locale to terrestrial locale and back again, with the sense that the story's momentum, like a pinball pinging against multiple walls and flippers, is uneven and subject to entropy.  The Extracts and associated lists, which serve to make deeper thematic commentaries on a possible path that humanity may be on here in the early 21st century, are perhaps too interesting, as they had the effect of making me pause to think of issues that Robinson didn't necessarily intend to address, even in passing, in 2312.  Some great stories work because the setting is so realized and predominant that the characters work to reinforce the tensions present within the setting itself.  Other stories succeed because the characterizations are so well-drawn that the setting and local color blend in with the characterizations and the narrative themes to create an excellent work.  2312 suffers at times because the setting, intriguing as it is, and the characterizations, which are gripping in their own right, do not mesh together seamlessly.  At times, there is a dissonance between the two, as though Robinson were dithering between which should be the central focus of the tale, with the result being a narrative that flies (and crashes) like Icarus.

This is not to say that 2312 is a "poor" novel.  It is far from that.  Most of its individual elements (leaving aside questionable extrapolations of human societal evolution that may leave this work feeling dated within a decade) on their own realize their potential.  Certainly 2312 has some thematic "heft" to it, as the questions it raises about our own contemporary socio-economic and political inclinations are thought provoking.  Yet these disparate elements frequently fail to achieve full cohesion; the narrative weld spots are often visible.  The result is a flawed yet ambitious work of literary SF in which the frustrations do not undercut the novel's successes as much as they reveal the limits to the literary scope that Robinson employs.  As a semi-"failure," 2312 still is one of SF/F's better novels of the past year and it is easy to understand why it has made three recent genre (industry, fan, juried) shortlists.  Even its "weaknesses," minor as they may be when considered in isolation, serve to create a spectacle-filled novel whose likes are increasingly rare in SF/F novels these days.  If only more "failures" could "fail" in this fashion.

Quick (but not fast) analysis of the 2012 Hugo Award nominees for Best Novel

One of the perks of being an online reviewer and critic who covers various literary genres is the ability to sit back, virtually puff a stogie (even if in real life I'm extremely sensitive to tobacco smoke), and airily note what the awards committees/fans got right and wrong.  The WorldCon-derived Hugo Awards especially generate conversation from SF/F aficionados, many of whom decry the perceived recent trend toward "middle of the road" conservatism in selecting finalists, especially in a few fields (the categories where there have been "fresher faces" incidentally seem to be the ones that are ignored due to a relative lack of awareness) such as Best Novel, Short Form Dramatic Presentation, and for a few reviewers amongst us, Best Fan Writer.  There is of course some legitimacy to these complaints, as there do seem to be an abnormal amount of "veteran" work that is being pushed despite a relative lack of critical praise from those who do read widely (if not always deeply) in various sectors of SF/F.


Best Novel

James S.A. Corey, Leviathan Wakes
Mira Grant, Deadline
George R.R. Martin, A Dance With Dragons
China Miéville, Embassytown
Jo Walton, Among Others

My first reaction, upon seeing this shortlist, was "well, at least there's no damn talking horses," although I suppose the alien civilization in Miéville's novel comes somewhat close to that description.  That reaction was followed by a "meh" sound, a feeling that hours later still lingers.  I have read all but the Grant on this list (it is the sequel to last year's Hugo-nominated Feed, whose zombie storyline did not interest me when I received a review copy).  I reviewed the Martin and Miéville books last year and will be reviewing the Walton within the next month.

These novels, for the most part, are "safe" choices.  They are works for the most part by well-established authors, with two being middle volumes in multi-volume works (Grant and Martin) and another being the initial volume of a space opera series (Corey).  Miéville and Walton published standalone novels after each previously had written several other novels.  Corey (or rather Daniel Abraham and Ty Franck) is perhaps the least well-known, relatively speaking, of the shortlisted novelists.

Yet veteran writers can still occasionally surprise readers with imaginative works that veer in unexpected directions.  However, this is not the case here with these books.  Among Others is a reflective piece, set at the beginning of the 1980s, is a nostalgia-driven piece.  Although I believe it is the most accomplished of the finalists I've read in regards to its construction and execution of thematic elements, there is nothing innovative about Walton's story.  It is a well-told reiteration of other reflective novels that contain traces of fantastical elements.  There is nothing really original about it, but it was a revisitation that also had very few narrative flaws.

Miéville's Embassytown I found to be an uneven work that is the latest in a line of Miéville's works to frustrate me.  Miéville has the ability to be one of those transcendent writers who can meld vivid imagery and memorable characterization into a work that would seethe with imaginative life.  Yet he never quite connects the pieces; his narratives are sloppy.  A main narrative theme here in Embassytown, that language can be shown to be a tool of imperialist hegemony, is weakened by the implausibility of the natives' "pristine" linguistic state (where Saussere's signifiers and signifieds are melded into one and no true semantic metaphor can exist) and the haphazard way in which this state is altered by the appearance of a fractious Ambassador duo.  The reader's main point of view portal, Avice, likewise is not a fully-realized character.  While some may find her character to be a realistic portrayal of a mostly passive observer, I noticed that there were times in which her actions did not suit this plausible character role, making for an inconsistent narrative/action sequencing, particularly for the second third of the novel.  It is very tricky to craft a smooth, well-fitting characterization and narrative structure around the thematic issues of language and imperialism.  Miéville's novel has too many exposed joins and leaking caulk for it to be a nearly-perfectly realized work.  It is not a "bad" novel, per se, but instead it is a sloppy narrative, which to some is about as damning.

Martin's A Dance of Dragons is the fifth volume in a best-selling epic fantasy series.  When I reviewed it last year, I found that I liked this prose, particularly in the scene with Tyrion and others sailing down a haunted river, really captured that elusive, horrific quality that heightens reader senses as they read a well-written passage.  The problem with this novel is that it has to do so much over its 1000 hardcover pages.  Series fans have complained about the "pace," by which I presume they mean how quickly they can get to "the good stuff" with their favorite characters, but for me the larger issue revolves around the fact that there is so much to cover that there are no true resolutions here.  Martin seemed to be trapped in a corner, having already had to divide the narrative in two with his previous 2005 novel, A Feast of Crows, with the consequence that both novels lack a cohesiveness that the first three volumes contained.  The plot has moved to the point of massive events poised to occur, but nothing really does here, at least in the sense of a true or even false climax such as those contained in a beheading, a battle, and a betrayal in the first three volumes.  This weakens the effectiveness of the scenes that appear here, as they come across as being (mostly necessary) set pieces that will not truly be at play for one or even two novels hence.

Grant's Deadline I cannot say anything on, as it is highly unlikely I will read the first volume, Feed, much less this second volume in her zombie series.  Not knocking the author, only noting that I am disinterested in reading this series.

I have a love/hate relationship with space operas, trending more toward the hate side in recent years.  Too often am I left feeling there is a false grandiosity to these tales.  Galactic or, if set "earlier," solar system civilizations that focus on macro-level issues with rather bland, utilitarian characters who seem to exist only to further some narrative point are another sticking point with me.  Leviathan Wakes reminded me of those elements that I despise in space operas.  I found the writing to have pretensions of saying something profound and eloquent, without the technical mastery to make either happen.  The characters were bland and seemed to be oriented more toward fitting in with role expectations associated with prior space operas than with anything that really felt "alive."  The plot was a retread and the execution was competent but nothing worthy of "best of year" status to me.  It took me months to finish reading this on my iPad after I received an e-galley as a bonus to my purchase of Abraham's The Dragon's Path (which was a superior novel to Leviathan Wakes, despite my reservations about the "lightness" of the setting and themes) because it was hard not to feel that I had read such reprocessed writing elsewhere.

Despite my mixed to negative comments on these shortlisted novels, I cannot say that I am surprised that they are on here.  I knew the Martin and Miéville books were very popular with many people and despite my criticisms, I can understand why many would love them enough to vote for them.  Cannot comment on Grant/McGuire's writing, as I have not read much past the cover blurbs, but she seems to have a passionate fanbase as well.  I know Abraham has his supporters (and I did like his previous fantasy series, which is what led me to even read this collaborative space opera) and Walton generally receives critical praises.  Yet this lack of true surprises I find to be disappointing.  Obviously, one cannot "fire" membership voting (even if it would be a folly to do this even with panel-selected works with which you disagree vehemently over a period of years), but one certainly can question if what is produced from these "fan" votes is as much an acknowledgement of something brilliantly written than a symbol of common denominators that will produce shortlists that hew closely to a certain "formula."  As long as there isn't an active critical base within these genre fandoms that make readers question what they are reading more and seeking out more than just reiterations of familiar, beloved works/genres, "safe" shortlists like this will continue to be produced.  Only caveat that I would add is that erstwhile critics better be aware of the social climes, or else they risk being just as "out of touch" as those voters with which they may tar with that brush.

Trying to sum up emotion for this year's Hugo winners

Let's see how much I fail at this, shall we?

• BEST NOVEL: Blackout/All Clear by Connie Willis (Ballantine Spectra)

I can count to two.  Apparently some others cannot. 

• BEST NOVELLA: The Lifecycle of Software Objects by Ted Chiang (Subterranean)

Apparently subpar Chiang wins on name recognition alone these days.  Surprised?  Not me.

 
• BEST NOVELETTE: "The Emperor of Mars" by Allen M. Steele (Asimov's, June 2010; also in audio)

My emotions are flatlining at this point.

 
• BEST SHORT STORY: "For Want of a Nail" by Mary Robinette Kowal (Asimov's, September 2010)

Didn't read; no comment on the story.

 
• BEST RELATED WORK: Chicks Dig Time Lords: A Celebration of Doctor Who by the Women Who Love It, edited by Lynne M. Thomas and Tara O'Shea (Mad Norwegian)

I'm sure this title fits the stereotype of those who vote for these things.

 
• BEST GRAPHIC STORY: Girl Genius, Volume 10: Agatha Heterodyne and the Guardian Muse, written by Phil and Kaja Foglio; art by Phil Foglio; colors by Cheyenne Wright (Airship Entertainment

          Shouldn't they rename this award the Phil and Kaja Foglio Award, since I don't recall anyone but them winning it?

• BEST DRAMATIC PRESENTATION, LONG FORM: Inception, written and directed by Christopher Nolan (Warner)

          Well, we can see that flash is more important than substance in these movie categories, n'est ce pas?

• BEST DRAMATIC PRESENTATION, SHORT FORM: Doctor Who: "The Pandorica Opens/The Big Bang," written by Steven Moffat; directed by Toby Haynes (BBC Wales)

           Yep, much be a real dearth of SFnal TV episodes on the syphilic SyFy.

• BEST EDITOR, SHORT FORM: Sheila Williams
  Usual Suspect
• BEST EDITOR, LONG FORM: Lou Anders
  Same here
• BEST PROFESSIONAL ARTIST: Shaun Tan
  Good choice.
• BEST SEMIPROZINE: Clarkesworld, edited by Neil Clarke, Cheryl Morgan, Sean Wallace; podcast directed by Kate Baker
  Another good choice.
• BEST FANZINE: The Drink Tank, edited by Christopher J Garcia and James Bacon
  Not my circle.
• BEST FAN WRITER: Claire Brialey
  Not my circle again.
• BEST FAN ARTIST: Brad W. Foster
  I'll never be in these circles.
• JOHN W. CAMPBELL AWARD FOR BEST NEW WRITER [Not a Hugo]: Lev Grossman

          I approve.  One of the very few story-related awards that jibes with my personal tastes.

The Hugos rarely appeal to me; I typically place much more value to the World Fantasy Awards and that certainly shall be the case this year.  What's funny is that I've found more stories of interest that could be labeled broadly as SFnal on the Booker Prize longlist than I found among the still-unread stories on the Hugo shortlist.  Taking two novels and combining them into one for award purposes I consider to be pathetic and bush league.  But I cannot summon up much vitriol because I've been moving on from this scene (well, it's never been my scene, but it's even less so in recent years than now).  It's just a generic ballot these days and while I'm sure I could fork over $50 or so to cast ballots for deserving books/stories, it'd likely end up being footnotes in the also submitted spreadsheet pages.

Best to look at these as gauges of what a particular subset of 1,000 or so people value than as any real indicator of quality that will endure longer than the time it takes to remove the decorations from the banquet.  Now to do more important matter, such as deciding whether to finish reading Mary Horlock's The Book of Lies first, or to continue alternating between Margaret Atwood's about-to-be-released In Other Worlds:  SF and the Human Imagination, Robert Irwin's The Arabian Nightmare, David Lodge's soon-to-be-released A Man of Parts (deals in fictional way with the life of H.G. Wells), or Anders Nilsen's humongous graphic novel, Big Questions.  Some things I value more than analyzing awards; reading new works would be one of them.

2010 Hugo Nominees

Saw this posted on John Scalzi's blog, so here's the full list (I'll highlight the ones I've read and italicize the ones I own but haven't read and provide short commentaries):

BEST NOVEL (699 nominating ballots)

Boneshaker by Cherie Priest (Tor)
The City & The City by China Miéville (Del Rey; Macmillan UK)
Julian Comstock: A Story of 22nd-Century America by Robert Charles Wilson (Tor)
Palimpsest by Catherynne M. Valente (Bantam Spectra)
Wake by Robert J. Sawyer (Ace; Penguin; Gollancz; Analog)
The Windup Girl by Paolo Bacigalupi (Night Shade)

Better lineup than I had expected, although I had no interest in reading the Sawyer novel, to be honest.  I thought the Miéville and Valente novels were strong, but too flawed to have made my Best of 2009 lists, but they are worthy of inclusion.  The Bacigalupi is a step below them in quality in my opinion.  Priest's novel is the best of this bunch that I've read, but I'll get to Wilson's before the awards are announced.

BEST NOVELLA (375 nominating ballots)

“Act One” by Nancy Kress (Asimov’s 3/09)
The God Engines by John Scalzi (Subterranean)
“Palimpsest” by Charles Stross (Wireless)
Shambling Towards Hiroshima by James Morrow (Tachyon)
“Vishnu at the Cat Circus” by Ian McDonald (Cyberabad Days)
The Women of Nell Gwynne’s by Kage Baker (Subterranean)

Morrow's novella was a fun read when I read it back in February 2009.  Haven't yet read the others.
 
BEST NOVELETTE (402 nominating ballots)


“Eros, Philia, Agape” by Rachel Swirsky (Tor.com 3/09)
“The Island” by Peter Watts (The New Space Opera 2)
“It Takes Two” by Nicola Griffith (Eclipse Three)
“One of Our Bastards is Missing” by Paul Cornell (The Solaris Book of New Science Fiction: Volume Three)
“Overtime” by Charles Stross (Tor.com 12/09)
“Sinner, Baker, Fabulist, Priest; Red Mask, Black Mask, Gentleman, Beast” by Eugie Foster (Interzone 2/09)

I'm hesitant to comment on anything read here and below, since I'm in the process of creating a longlist for Best American Fantasy 4, but I will note that Swirsky's story is available for free and that it is a must-read.  The other two are very strong as well.
 
BEST SHORT STORY (432 nominating ballots)

“The Bride of Frankenstein” by Mike Resnick (Asimov’s 12/09)
“Bridesicle” by Will McIntosh (Asimov’s 1/09)
“The Moment” by Lawrence M. Schoen (Footprints)
“Non-Zero Probabilities” by N.K. Jemisin (Clarkesworld 9/09)
“Spar” by Kij Johnson (Clarkesworld 10/09)

As with Swirsky, Jemisin's story is also up for a Nebula Award and I guess I should mention that I've recently interviewed both for the Nebula Awards blog, which should be posting their interviews in the next couple of months.  Do read the stories I highlighted; they're available for free.
 
BEST RELATED WORK (259 nominating ballots)

Canary Fever: Reviews by John Clute (Beccon)
Hope-In-The-Mist: The Extraordinary Career and Mysterious Life of Hope Mirrlees by Michael Swanwick (Temporary Culture)
The Inter-Galactic Playground: A Critical Study of Children’s and Teens’ Science Fiction by Farah Mendlesohn (McFarland)
On Joanna Russ edited by Farah Mendlesohn (Wesleyan)
The Secret Feminist Cabal: A Cultural History of SF Feminisms by Helen Merrick (Aqueduct)
This is Me, Jack Vance! (Or, More Properly, This is “I”) by Jack Vance (Subterranean)

Hrmm....First time in a couple of years that I've yet to read any of the related work nominees.
 
BEST GRAPHIC STORY (221 nominating ballots)

Batman: Whatever Happened to the Caped Crusader? Written by Neil Gaiman; Pencilled by Andy Kubert; Inked by Scott Williams (DC Comics)
Captain Britain And MI13. Volume 3: Vampire State Written by Paul Cornell; Pencilled by Leonard Kirk with Mike Collins, Adrian Alphona and Ardian Syaf (Marvel Comics)
Fables Vol 12: The Dark Ages Written by Bill Willingham; Pencilled by Mark Buckingham; Art by Peter Gross & Andrew Pepoy, Michael Allred, David Hahn; Colour by Lee Loughridge & Laura Allred; Letters by Todd Klein (Vertigo Comics)
Girl Genius, Volume 9: Agatha Heterodyne and the Heirs of the Storm Written by Kaja and Phil Foglio; Art by Phil Foglio; Colours by Cheyenne Wright (Airship Entertainment)
Schlock Mercenary: The Longshoreman of the Apocalypse Written and Illustrated by Howard Tayler

If I had nominated works, it would have included other fictions, but I will try to explore these later.
 
BEST DRAMATIC PRESENTATION – LONG FORM (541 nominating ballots)

Avatar Screenplay and Directed by James Cameron (Twentieth Century Fox)
District 9 Screenplay by Neill Blomkamp & Terri Tatchell; Directed by Neill Blomkamp (TriStar Pictures)
Moon Screenplay by Nathan Parker; Story by Duncan Jones; Directed by Duncan Jones (Liberty Films)
Star Trek Screenplay by Robert Orci & Alex Kurtzman; Directed by J.J. Abrams (Paramount)
Up Screenplay by Bob Peterson & Pete Docter; Story by Bob Peterson, Pete Docter, & Thomas McCarthy; Directed by Bob Peterson & Pete Docter (Disney/Pixar)

I rarely watch movies.
 
BEST DRAMATIC PRESENTATION – SHORT FORM (282 nominating ballots)

Doctor Who: “The Next Doctor” Written by Russell T Davies; Directed by Andy Goddard (BBC Wales)
Doctor Who: “Planet of the Dead” Written by Russell T Davies & Gareth Roberts; Directed by James Strong (BBC Wales)
Doctor Who: “The Waters of Mars” Written by Russell T Davies & Phil Ford; Directed by Graeme Harper (BBC Wales)
Dollhouse: “Epitaph 1″ Story by Joss Whedon; Written by Maurissa Tancharoen & Jed Whedon; Directed by David Solomon (Mutant Enemy)
FlashForward: “No More Good Days” Written by Brannon Braga & David S. Goyer; Directed by David S. Goyer; based on the novel by Robert J. Sawyer (ABC)

Same goes for non-sports/news TV.
 
BEST EDITOR, LONG FORM (289 nominating ballots)

Lou Anders
Ginjer Buchanan
Liz Gorinsky
Patrick Nielsen Hayden
Juliet Ulman

Nice finalist list.  No personal favorites, though.
 
BEST EDITOR, SHORT FORM (419 nominating ballots)

Ellen Datlow
Stanley Schmidt
Jonathan Strahan
Gordon Van Gelder
Sheila Williams

Still waiting for those who edit the major online and semiprozine magazines to crack this ballot.   Maybe in the near future?  Although I guess I should note that Datlow did edit an acclaimed online e-zine for several years before it closed a few years ago.
 
BEST PROFESSIONAL ARTIST (327 nominating ballots)

Bob Eggleton
Stephan Martiniere
John Picacio
Daniel Dos Santos
Shaun Tan

Very strong list, with the usual suspects.  Have always enjoyed Tan's illustrations just a tad bit more.
 
BEST SEMIPROZINE (377 nominating ballots)

Ansible edited by David Langford
Clarkesworld edited by Neil Clarke, Sean Wallace, & Cheryl Morgan
Interzone edited by Andy Cox
Locus edited by Charles N. Brown, Kirsten Gong-Wong, & Liza Groen Trombi
Weird Tales edited by Ann VanderMeer & Stephen H. Segal

For online fiction, Clarkesworld is the one I read the most, followed by Strange Horizons (not listed here).  For print fiction, Weird Tales is the only one on this list to which I have a subscription and I've been very pleased with the quality of the stories there.
 
BEST FAN WRITER (319 nominating ballots)

Claire Brialey
Christopher J Garcia
James Nicoll
Lloyd Penney
Frederik Pohl

I should start a faux campaign next year to get my name (or the name of any online-only commentator) to be on this list.  So sad I barely know any of these besides reading Nicoll's comments on occasion.  Pohl has a blog, I know, but I'm not very familiar with it.  Sadly, I don't even know if the others have an online presence at all.  Generational/technological gap, perhaps?
 
BEST FANZINE (298 nominating ballots)

Argentus edited by Steven H Silver
Banana Wings edited by Claire Brialey and Mark Plummer
CHALLENGER edited by Guy H. Lillian III
Drink Tank edited by Christopher J Garcia, with guest editor James Bacon
File 770 edited by Mike Glyer
StarShipSofa edited by Tony C. Smith

See my comments above.
 
BEST FAN ARTIST (199 nominating ballots)

Brad W. Foster
Dave Howell
Sue Mason
Steve Stiles
Taral Wayne

No freakin' clue.  Again.
 
THE JOHN W. CAMPBELL AWARD FOR BEST NEW WRITER (NOT A HUGO AWARD) (356 nominating ballots)

Saladin Ahmed
Gail Carriger
Felix Gilman *
Seanan McGuire
Lezli Robyn *
* Second year of eligibility

Tough choice for me between Carriger and Gilman among the novelists I've read.  Maybe Gilman just because it's his final year of eligibility?  Have heard of Ahmed, but sadly not the others.  Need to rectify that soon.

The Mouse That Wants to Roar

As expected, the various Hugo results have generated some discussion. I'll use Westeros as one example since it is, perhaps, the epitome of certain quasi-faction of spec fic fans who feel "alienated" and "left out" from the Hugo process. These are the people who have certain "favorite sons" (and daughters, on occasion, but more often than not, this is a male-centric bloc here) that they expect will be favorites for whatever categories they are nominated in (the other categories can go to hell as far as they are concerned).

But when the results are announced and someone like Mary Robinette Kowal wins over a Scott Lynch or Joe Abercrombie, after their initial "who the hell is she," the almost immediate reaction is a "Well, I knew these awards aren't for me!" or "The Hugos don't represent my tastes," and so forth. Some time ago, I felt much the same way, until I decided to explore a bit further and see what was out there that wasn't being discussed in the mega-forums of certain epic fantasy authors.

What I found is that SF fandom is quite a bit more diverse than what many might suspect. In fact, it's close to the point of there being no mutual intelligibility between the various factions. If I had to guess, I would say that the vast majority of those complaining at Westeros about the Hugo voting probably didn't raise an eyebrow at seeing Helix in the Semiprozine category, despite a rather vocal uprising a month or so ago about its editor's rather bigoted remarks and subsequent puerile behavior. Just as many are not likely to be aware of the creation of Shadow Unit as are those who are familiar with the rather asinine question of "paying" bloggers. So many groups, each with its own set of foci and satellite concerns, so little time to be aware of what's happening in other circles.

Although I don't have as much time at the moment to devote to SF matters due to the new school year beginning last week at a new school, I do try to stick my head in to get a sense of what is transpiring in many different circles. Some I somehow manage to miss most of the time; others I am kept well-informed. But it is rather amusing at times to see all the various mice in the genre trying to roar for attention, as if they were in virtually self-contained quarters that are sound-proofed against the other various currents active in fandom.

2008 Hugo Award Winners

Thanks to Cheryl Morgan for providing the live results from the awards banquet in Denver:


Campbell Award:

Mary Robinette Kowal (Lynch, Abercrombie, Durham were finalists here as well)

Fanzine:

Mike Glyer, File 770

Fan Writer:

John Scalzi (Langford is dethroned!)

Fan Artist:

Brad Foster

Professional Artist:

Stefan Martiniere

Best Semiprozine:

Locus

Related Book:

Jeff Prucher, Brave New Words, the Oxford Dictionary of Science Fiction

Best Dramatic Presentation, Short Form:

Doctor Who, "Blink" Written by Steven Moffat, directed by Hettie Macdonald (BBC)

Best Dramatic Presentation, Long Form:

Stardust (based on the novel by Neil Gaiman)

Best Professional Editor, Short Form:

Gordon Van Gelder

Best Professional Editor, Long Form:

David Hartwell

Best Short Story:

Elizabeth Bear, "Tideline" (appeared in the June 2007 issue of Asimov's)

Best Novelette:

Ted Chiang, The Merchant and the Alchemist's Gate (appeared in limited-edition chapbook form and in the September 2007 issue of Fantasy & Science Fiction Magazine)

Best Novella:

Connie Willis, All Seated on the Ground (limited-edition book from Subterranean Press; appeared also in the December 2007 issue of Asimov's)

Best Novel:

Michael Chabon, The Yiddish Policemen's Union



Edit: Detailed voting breakdown here.

All in all, some pleasant surprises. Despite thinking that Chabon was the best of the finalists that I did read, I was worried that he would be hurt by the book not being "SF enough". Nice to see I was mistaken there. I was also surprised to see that David Langford's streak of winning the Best Fan Writer award ended, but since authors are eligible for their blogs now and since John Scalzi's Whatever blog is very popular, I guess it shouldn't be that shocking now. While I thought there could have been more "adventuresome" books and stories represented on the lists, for the most part, it seems that those who deserved it the most won the awards. It seems to be a solid list, albeit not one that's going to hit my reading "sweet spot" much of the time. Regardless, congratulations to all of the winners!

Thoughts on the winners tonight?

Projecting the 2008 Hugo finalists for Best Novel

Been even more busy with beginning the school year than I thought (crashed three days this week before the sun had properly set!), so this will be a very truncated version of what I had planned. Unfortunately, I'll also have to project in some cases based on partial reads of the works, so my takes on these might not be as informed as I would like.

Michael Chabon, The Yiddish Policemen's Union

Why it will win: Already a finalist or winner of several awards this year, including winning the Nebula Award, this alt-history account of post-WWII Jews settling in Alaska after the failure to re-establish a Jewish homeland around Jerusalem works on many levels. There is a mystery element that appeals to many, but for others it is the combination of Chabon's prose and the under-the-surface examination of ethnicity and identity that made this an appealing book for many.

Why it won't win: For those hardline SF-only people, Chabon's book is not going to satisfy their desire to have a SF book win the Hugo. This book may get the majority of the first place votes, but if it doesn't have a good distribution among the other places, it quickly might be dropped from contention due to how the Hugo voting is done.


Ian McDonald, Brasyl

Why it will win: Brasyl is a clever story that intertwines three time periods and three diverse PoV characters to tell a tale that is intriguing, especially when considered at length. It too has been nominated for several awards and it won the 2008 British Science Fiction Award, so it too has to be considered a strong contender, especially if it receives a good distribution of second and third-place votes to stay afloat in the early rounds of voting.

Why it won't win: Some are divided on the ending, thinking it is a bit weak. Others might wish for a more overtly "SF" book and vote for one of the three contenders below instead. If Chabon doesn't win the award, McDonald would be my second choice and I expect it to come in at least 3rd place, if not 2nd or even 1st.


Robert J. Sawyer, Rollback

Why it will win: Sawyer is very well-known in the SF community and many of his previous novels and shorter stories have won numerous awards, including the Hugos. From many accounts that I have read, Rollback is a fairly decent Sawyer novel, which means it might get plenty of mid-place votes that'll keep it in contention into the latter rounds.

Why it won't win: With Chabon, McDonald, Stross, and Scalzi in the field, each receiving praise from various parts for their work, it'll be difficult for Sawyer to have more first-place votes than any of these others.


John Scalzi, The Last Colony

Why it will win: Scalzi is also very well-known in the SF community and his Old Man's War novels have been well-received by many. Winner of the Campbell Award a few years ago, he has the visibility necessary to garner a lot of votes spread out among the places.

Why it won't win: I haven't heard as much "favorite" talk for Scalzi's book as I have had for the Chabon, McDonald, and Stross entries and I am uncertain if in the latter rounds of voting that he'll receive more higher-place votes than any of these three.


Charles Stross, Halting State

Why it will win: Some have been wondering if this will be Stross's "year," after being a finalist numerous times the previous few years. In addition, his books are usually well-received with those who like the more "hard" SF elements in their fiction. Doesn't hurt that he too is very visible in the SF community.

Why it won't win: His prose isn't exactly appealing to those readers who might prefer something a bit more polished and "readable." While he might appeal to the tech-heads and others who like the "hard" SF stuff, the book may fail to garner a lot of first or second-place votes from those who value storytelling foremost.

And if I had to rank them based on what I've read and on past experiences with these authors, my ballot would look like this:

1. Chabon
2. McDonald
3. Scalzi
4. Sawyer
5. Stross

Doubtless, the final results (which ought to be announced tonight, I believe) will be quite different. Thoughts on the finalists?

Judging the Hugo Finalists Part I: Cover Art

Since 2008 is a Presidential Election year here in the U.S., I have decided that I'm going to examine the Hugo Award finalists for Best Novel according to some of the strict criteria that American voters apply to their Presidential candidates. So first, I shall look at it from the viewpoint of which finalist's cover art looks most "Hugo-like."

Ian McDonald, Brasyl.

McDonald's cover art has some good features - it is dark, with "cool" purples and other neon-like effects highlighting the "differentness" of his view of mid-21st century Brazil. There are vehicles moving around, which is always a plus, but he might take a hit for there not being any rocket ships or guns on display. While some might argue that the helicopter-like things gives a sense of air and perhaps even space transport, it isn't quite phallic enough in appearance to compensate for the lack of cone-like projectile transports. The overall appearance is pleasing to the eyes, but it might be downgraded in the eyes of some Hugo voters because of the lack of the aforementioned "Hugo accessories."



Charles Stross, Halting State.

At first glance, Stross's cover might appear to be too "simple" and blocklike. However, judging based on past Hugo covers, the cover art for Halting State does give a sense of distance and yearning that some Hugo voters might find appealing. If one stares at the image long enough, one can detact just the barest hint of a cone-like projectile arising, which ought to meet the phallic vision test. Furthermore, there is a block-like entity in the foreground above the title which might be a play on Arthur C. Clarke's famous monolith from 2001: A Space Odyssey. In a year in which SF fans are mourning the death of Sir Arthur, it might be a providential stroke of luck that could prove to be the difference.



John Scalzi, The Last Colony.

Scalzi has long been a favorite of the WorldCon crowd, having won the Campbell Award for Best New Writer a few years ago. But with the cover art for The Last Colony, Scalzi might have found the recipe for insuring himself of a high finish in the Hugo voting. There are spaceships! Spaceships, I tell ya! All in this image! Plus there is more than just the requisite phallic imagery rising prominently, but there looks to be some sort of battle going on! What Hugo voter steeped in the genre's past couldn't look at Scalzi's cover art and think how favorably it looks compared to the previous great Hugo winners? This perhaps might be the most "Hugo-like" of all of the covers displayed here, but only time shall tell, no?



Robert J. Sawyer, Rollback.

Canadian author Robert J. Sawyer has won multiple Hugo and Nebula Awards before for his work, but some voters might be divided based on this cover art. Sure, the huge gear-laden watch-like thing in the background looks cool, especially with the black backdrop, and perhaps the fuzzy humanoid in the foreground is intriguing in his/her/its vagueness, but where are the rockets? Where are the other hints of gadgetry that might make the reader stare at the cover for a long length of time and perhaps influence his/her vote? This is a rather bland cover and for those voters who are swayed by the images in their head, Sawyer's cover art might prove to be too bland to make a lasting impression on the Hugo voters.



Michael Chabon, The Yiddish Policemen's Union.

Sure, sure. We all know that Chabon has won a crapload of awards for his writing over the past few years and that he won the Nebula and Sidewise Award for this particular book. So while those who hold stock in things such as prosery and actual storytelling talent might be enamored with Chabon, those Hugo voters who take the time to judge the book carefully by its cover are going to take one glance at this and go, "Missile Command? In 2008?" But a further glance will show even a lack of any real cone-like projectiles that could serve to offset the first impressions of this cover. For those astute Hugo voters voting on the basis of the cover art, Chabon's likely would finish around the bottom, with even "No Award" giving it a run for its money.



And there you go, possible ways of judging this year's finalists based on the cover art alone. Later in the week, there'll be at least one more judging of the finalists based on other criteria. Hope this gave you food for thought.

The Hugo Finalists: Plans

Although I'm still mired in a reviewing slump, I do plan on doing a bit of prognosticating on the Hugo finalists for Best Novel in the next few days (once I read the Sawyer and Stross books; sadly, I was sent every Scalzi book but the contending one a couple of weeks ago, so there'll be a hole in my guessing, I suppose). Since I'll be in teacher training Monday-Thursday and then school starts on Friday, it might end up being only a single capsule-like commentaries on these books and not full-blown reviews. But hey, predicting things is the fun part, no?

Although I have reinstated the Hugo poll for the next few days, I'm curious to know your predictions. If you have a link, post it in the comments, or just comment below.