![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
SF Monoculture and Hugos.
Apr. 17th, 2015 11:34 amMy friend ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
jeff_duntemann, when he's not at dog shows, writes and reads science fiction. (Actually, if he has any down time at the show, he probably reads SF. But with three active dogs, I doubt there's much time to be down.) He's also stated an opinion that science fiction, or at least the stuff that wins awards, is not to his taste. He's in fact signed on to the "Human Wave" movement. In his own words:
The Human Wave is about allowing things, not forbidding things. Yes, what the Human Wave stands against is mostly a certain brand of pessimistic literary fussiness.
I like Jeff, but I'm not seeing this "literary fussiness" of which he speaks. Then I read this lengthy and interesting commentary on the Hugos from Eric Flint. Again, it's lengthy, so summary is dangerous. But to attempt summary, Eric demolishes the "politics of the author" idea, and cites two objective and one subjective factor. They are:
Objective 1 - the field is too damn big. With ~300 novels per month, nobody can read everything in SF. So we tend to read our favorite authors while ignoring non-favored ones.
Objective 2 - the awards don't reflect working writers. Nobody is making a living writing short fiction, yet 3 of the 4 literary awards are for short fiction. There "should" be awards for best series, best short novel, best YA, etc.
Subjective - "you also get an ever-growing division in peoples’ attitudes about what constitutes “good writing” and what doesn’t." He uses, pace Mr. Duntemann, the example of the popular definition of a good dog and that as defined by a dog show attendee.
The more I think about it, the more I'm in agreement with Eric. I consider myself somewhat of being in both camps, here defined as general public and dog show attendee, and given things like The Avengers winning Hugos, there is significant overlap between the two camps. But when it comes time to nominate for the Hugos, there are some novels that I enjoyed *cough* Jack Campbell's Lost Fleet *cough* that don't qualify as "Hugo-worthy" in my mind.
Eric offers no real solution. One could, I suppose, create a "People's Choice" award for SF, but that requires somebody to actually organize and fund it. It doesn't really fix the Hugos, although I'm not sure that they need "fixing." I mean, the Academy Awards, the Emmys and a host of other awards go not to the most-watched movies and shows but those "of merit."
jeff_duntemann, when he's not at dog shows, writes and reads science fiction. (Actually, if he has any down time at the show, he probably reads SF. But with three active dogs, I doubt there's much time to be down.) He's also stated an opinion that science fiction, or at least the stuff that wins awards, is not to his taste. He's in fact signed on to the "Human Wave" movement. In his own words:The Human Wave is about allowing things, not forbidding things. Yes, what the Human Wave stands against is mostly a certain brand of pessimistic literary fussiness.
I like Jeff, but I'm not seeing this "literary fussiness" of which he speaks. Then I read this lengthy and interesting commentary on the Hugos from Eric Flint. Again, it's lengthy, so summary is dangerous. But to attempt summary, Eric demolishes the "politics of the author" idea, and cites two objective and one subjective factor. They are:
Objective 1 - the field is too damn big. With ~300 novels per month, nobody can read everything in SF. So we tend to read our favorite authors while ignoring non-favored ones.
Objective 2 - the awards don't reflect working writers. Nobody is making a living writing short fiction, yet 3 of the 4 literary awards are for short fiction. There "should" be awards for best series, best short novel, best YA, etc.
Subjective - "you also get an ever-growing division in peoples’ attitudes about what constitutes “good writing” and what doesn’t." He uses, pace Mr. Duntemann, the example of the popular definition of a good dog and that as defined by a dog show attendee.
The more I think about it, the more I'm in agreement with Eric. I consider myself somewhat of being in both camps, here defined as general public and dog show attendee, and given things like The Avengers winning Hugos, there is significant overlap between the two camps. But when it comes time to nominate for the Hugos, there are some novels that I enjoyed *cough* Jack Campbell's Lost Fleet *cough* that don't qualify as "Hugo-worthy" in my mind.
Eric offers no real solution. One could, I suppose, create a "People's Choice" award for SF, but that requires somebody to actually organize and fund it. It doesn't really fix the Hugos, although I'm not sure that they need "fixing." I mean, the Academy Awards, the Emmys and a host of other awards go not to the most-watched movies and shows but those "of merit."
