Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
2015/04/08 21:09:34
Subject: Hugo Awards Kerfuffle--Gamergate meets sci-fi books?
Has anyone been following the brewing storm over the Hugo sci-fi awards? There is apparently a backlash among some science fiction writers and readers regarding the genre's direction and there have been claims of Gamergate-esque motivations among some in the literary sci-fi world regarding the progressiveness of contemporary sci-fi.
After reading this article I was curious on Dakka's feelings on the matter. I operated under the notion that Science Fiction's was rooted in progressive themes, so I am surprised by the backlash.
What on Earthsea is happening with the 2015 Hugo Awards? On Saturday, nominations for the prestigious science fiction and fantasy prizes were announced. As usual, the finalists were determined by ballot; any member of the 2014, 2015, or 2016 WorldCons (that is, any fan who shelled out the requisite $40 to sign up for one of those conventions) could vote. And yet the names and works that rose to the top provoked a tsunami of controversy. That’s because a group of rightwing activists managed to game the selection process, proposing a fixed slate of nominees and feverishly promoting it. Since small margins are sufficient to secure Hugo nods, what emerged was what many are calling a strange, ideologically driven, and unrepresentative sample of fiction.
How earthshaking is this, really? As Will Shetterly points out on his blog, people have been manipulating the Hugo nomination processes for decades. (Shetterly recalls watching Orson Scott Card glad-handing his way through various gatherings, penning glowing reviews of fellow sci-fi travelers for his column, and otherwise using his superior resources to mount an effective awards campaign.) And it’s true that, in the past, authors and fans often ignited individual crusades around books they wrote or liked. Writer John Scalzi in particular was famous for opening the threads on his blog to sci-fi and fantasy scribes who wanted to remind the community that their work was Hugo-eligible.
But, Scalzi told me on the phone, explicitly anointing and championing a full group of titles, while not illegal, violates convention. It is unprecedented. (At least, it is for the Hugo awards. Read Arthur Chu for a better sense of the long, inglorious history of “freeping,” a strategy beloved in reactionary cesspools, whereby a diabolically galvanized fringe creates the illusion of majority by flooding a space.) Anyway, it is the agenda behind the 2015 ballot, as much as the effectiveness of the tactic, that has prompted so much anger and anxiety.
A long, long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away (last year), the Hugo Awards seemed to undergo a seismic change. Top prizes recognized a generation of younger, more diverse writers, with names like Ann Leckie, Kameron Hurley, and John Chu, and fans celebrated what appeared to be enriched levels of awareness/receptivity in the air. But then things took a distinctly Gamergate-tinged turn. Authors Brad R. Torgerson and Larry Correia re-upped a campaign called Sad Puppies (originally “Sad Puppies Think of the Children,” an ironic send-up of liberal bleeding hearts) that had achieved modest success in 2014, elevating a few ordained works to that year’s Hugo longlist.
The ostensible raison d’puppy—which multiple sources for this article, including Scalzi and sci-fi scholar Gerry Canavan, took pains to tell me is a perfectly legitimate subject for debate—is the belief that SFF now underserves a particular type of fan, writer, and work. The age of space operas—fun, swashbuckling, populist—may have passed into something less triumphal and more shaded. (At least, that’s the generous framing. To me Torgerson still sounds like he’s blaming SFF’s “decline” on the PC demands of boring scolds.) In his words:
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.
But now:
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…
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.
No longer interested in adventure, argue the Puppies, the Hugos have grown elitist, academic, and overly ideological—irrelevant to the average fan.
The Puppies aimed to right this wrong by using wholly legal freep tactics to advance a better slate of Hugo authors. And it worked. As the Daily Dot observes, the SPs—and their even more extreme cousins, the Rabid Puppies, led by Vox Day—swept all the main categories. “Three of the five Best Novel nominees come from the Sad Puppies list, while the Best Novella shortlist is identical to Vox Day’s own recommendations—including three separate nominations for works by John C. Wright, an author notorious for his homophobic views.” (And not much else, I might add. Wright has not a single bestseller to his name, operates out of a tiny Finland-based publishing house that is run, not coincidentally, by Vox Day, and perhaps wrought his most eternal turn of phrase when he called the creators of the Legend of Korra “disgusting, limp, soulless sacks of filth.” Their crime? Confirming that two female characters in the franchise liked women.)*
A quick sidebar on Vox Day, one of a handful of this saga’s bold-faced names. In addition to writing sci-fi, he’s a video game designer and early proponent of Gamergate, which, he argues, resembles Sad Puppies in that “both groups are striking back against the left-wing control freaks who have subjected science fiction to ideological control for two decades and are now attempting to do the same thing in the game industry.” He is the second human being to be expelled from the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America (SFWA), after he used the organization’s official Twitter feed to slam the award-winning black novelist N.K. Jemisin as a “half-savage.” He questions the need for women’s suffrage. And he believes that our national ills can be partially attributed to “the infestation of even the smallest American heartland towns by African, Asian, and Aztec cultures.” Yes, Aztecs. ANYWAY.
Day is far from the only writer to invoke Gamergate as a model for the Puppies. Not only do Torgerson, Correia, and co. seem animated by a similar leeriness of minority voices and perspectives, but Teresa and Patrick Nielsen Hayden have tried to document Twitter cross-pollination between the movements.* Correia in particular appears unperturbed by the Gamergate-SP connection. On his blog, he refers to his progressive enemies as SJWs (“social justice warriors,” a Gamergate coinage describing a shadowy conspiracy of liberals and identity politickers out to trample white male freedom). And he endorses nicknaming the Puppy movement “the slate-ening,” an apparent callback to “The Fappening,” hackers’ approving term for the 2014 celebrity photo leaks. That unauthorized distribution of nude images from starlets’ phones—a delectation to which some dudes felt entitled by, I don’t know, an aggrieved apprehension of looming irrelevance—is an obvious spiritual cousin to Gamergate’s death threats and doxes.
I could go on trying to convince you that these Puppy people are unsavory characters. (Two more charming names they dreamed up for the pro-diversity crowd: CHORFs, or “Cliquish, Holier-than-thou, Obnoxious, Reactionary Fanatics,” and the HPPC, or “Hyper-Progressive Pissypants Club.”) Or I could try to poke additional holes in their pretexts. (The “science fiction and fantasy has become too literary” critique, for example. Is that more the case now than back in 1975, when ballots were studded with the likes of Ursula Le Guin and Isaac Asimov? Not to mention the elitist charges. In 2013, The Avengers, Torgerson’s example of a neglected lowbrow masterpiece, actually won a Hugo!) But it’s maybe more interesting to look at how various authors on and off the Puppy-powered slates have reacted.
Matthew Surridge declined his nomination for Best Fan Writer, citing “strong” aesthetic and ideological disagreements with Torgerson.
Kameron Hurley seemed inclined to wash her hands of the Hugos altogether. (And this is a danger for the SFWA—that instead of fighting to take the prizes back, mainstream fans will defect for climes untouched by reactionary swill. As Arthur Chu eloquently argues, the Puppies’ success should motivate WorldCon to rework its voting procedure before the trolls tank the entire operation.)
Deirdre Saoirse Moen crafted a new list of nominations, minus Puppies.
And a whole bunch of Hugo voters are pretty excited about a mysterious dark horse candidate, Noah Ward. (Say it out loud, slowly.) He is the perennial lurker on every ballot, in every category, and the last recourse of WorldCon members disenchanted with their options. I’ve crossed my fingers that he gets lots of love come August.
*Correction, April 8, 2015: This post originally misstated that the creators of the Legend of Korra revealed that a male character liked men. They revealed that two female characters liked women. It also misidentified Teresa and Patrick Nielsen Hayden as the founder of Tor Books. They are the founders of Ansatz Press.
Katy Waldman is Slate’s words correspondent.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/04/08 21:34:43
2015/04/08 21:16:02
Subject: Hugo Awards Kerfuffle--Gamergate meets sci-fi books?
Apart from that...I have no idea what Hugo is about etc. but what is the actual problem? If anyone is allowed to vote, then what's the problem with one party lobbying for votes? Would those people also have problems with democrats making advertisement during voting times? I don't get it. Can anyone explain? :/
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/04/08 21:25:27
DarkTraveler777 wrote: I operated under the notion that Science Fiction's was rooted in progressive themes, so I am surprised by the backlash.
It is. The whole issue is driven by a bunch of whiny s who want to return to the good old days when Heinlein wrote all of those completely non-political adventure stories (lol) and the original Star Trek never dared to feature a left-leaning agenda. Once you look at all at the history of science fiction it's pretty clear that their complaints are really just a cover for their real objection: that "SJW" stories and authors get more attention than the right-wing ideology they embrace.
The only unfortunate thing here is that voting in unison for the political agenda instead of for the works each individual voter prefers gives them voting power far beyond their actual numbers and destroys the credibility of the award. If they didn't have this disproportionate voting power they'd be an irrelevant minority that nobody pays any attention to.
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
2015/04/08 21:29:16
Subject: Hugo Awards Kerfuffle--Gamergate meets sci-fi books?
Sigvatr wrote: If anyone is allowed to vote, then what's the problem with one party lobbying for votes?
The problem is not just lobbying for votes and letting the best work win, it's that they've given a list of "anti-SJW" works to vote for and their entire group is voting in unison according to the instructions of their leaders instead of for the works they actually prefer. So the "mainstream" vote is split between a bunch of different books because everyone has their own preferences, while the anti-SJW vote is united behind a single approved winner. Now the award is no longer about which work is the best, it's about which ideology is best at getting its followers to vote as a united whole to make a political point.
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
2015/04/08 21:36:41
Subject: Hugo Awards Kerfuffle--Gamergate meets sci-fi books?
Peregrine wrote: The problem is not just lobbying for votes and letting the best work win, it's that they've given a list of "anti-SJW" works to vote for and their entire group is voting in unison according to the instructions of their leaders instead of for the works they actually prefer. So the "mainstream" vote is split between a bunch of different books because everyone has their own preferences, while the anti-SJW vote is united behind a single approved winner.
You've just summed up the difference between how the Democrats and Republicans choose their Presidential candidates
2015/04/08 21:39:10
Subject: Hugo Awards Kerfuffle--Gamergate meets sci-fi books?
You've just summed up the difference between how the Democrats and Republicans choose their Presidential candidates
This basically is what it boils down to...isn't it? Conservatives have Sad Puppies lobbying for their votes, Leftists have their fellow SJW lobbying for their authors...so...where's the problem? If Sad Puppies have such a huge influence, then they represent a majority...and if SJW then keep howling wolf...then they don't understand how democracy works. Unless there's something I'm missing about the entire issue. As stated before, not familiar with sci-fi literature at all.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/04/08 21:40:18
You've just summed up the difference between how the Democrats and Republicans choose their Presidential candidates
This basically is what it boils down to...isn't it? Conservatives have Sad Puppies lobbying for their votes, Leftists have their fellow SJW lobbying for their authors...so...where's the problem? If Sad Puppies have such a huge influence, then they represent a majority...and if SJW then keep howling wolf...then they don't understand how democracy works. Unless there's something I'm missing about the entire issue. As stated before, not familiar with sci-fi literature at all.
What follows is based only on the two articles in this thread, so I may be off base. Like you I don't follow sci-fi literature closely at all.
But the problem seems to be that the Puppies gamed the voting system so well, and lobbied in such an unprecedented manner, that the flaws in the Hugo nomination system became apparent. Sorta a RAW vs RAI situation.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/04/08 21:45:42
2015/04/08 21:48:02
Subject: Hugo Awards Kerfuffle--Gamergate meets sci-fi books?
Looks like the same conclusion I get from it. To me, it just seems like Sad Puppies know their stuff and how to do business and the other side is just overwhelmed by it and thus frustrated.
That is how a fair voting system works, though...it's the same for any bigger vote. I mean, everyone gets his respective vote. Every side does their best to win as many people as possible. Hm.
You can go the Oscar's way and have a fixed jury, but you then end up, mostly, ignoring your voters and ending up with even more lobby problems.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/04/08 21:49:07
If I am recalling correctly, back when I read up on Sad Puppies a few years ago as they started, there was an issue of 'conservative' authors being ignored in the nominations, regardless of the quality of their work. Similarly, any writing that could have been considered 'pro-gun' was taboo.
Correia (the only person who's stuff I have read), being the fire arms enthusiast and conservative that he is, battle back with the Sad Puppies campaign, arguing that the literature and not the personal politics should be considered.
Fast forward a few years later after I've failed to follow the whole thing, and it appears to be a caricature of what it once was.
It's certainly not a surprise to see a group 'gaming' the Hugo's selection process,
but it's not novel either, just more visible in this day of facebooks, twitters and authors blogs that get read by more than a select few
It's also not surprising there is a right wing/conservative push back against the leftwing/liberal consensus of the past few years, looking back you can see it's happened before
that said the apparent arguments of the 'puppies'
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…
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.
No longer interested in adventure, argue the Puppies, the Hugos have grown elitist, academic, and overly ideological—irrelevant to the average fan.
do sound like a load of rubbish, good authors can and do produce enjoyable stories that can have a main theme (eg war story) and, gasp, also address other stuff too (eg gay/transgender issues)..,.
but sadly the Hugo's are voted for by attendees and hit the same problems as the New York Times best sellers list...
people in general tend to pick not necessarily the lowest common denominator, but certainly not the most sophisticated
(whereas critics would tend to pick more complex stuff the general public might not)
the best method (but not actually much use for promoting new work) would be to see what was still selling in 20 years time.... good stuff is much more likely to still be around
2015/04/08 21:56:23
Subject: Hugo Awards Kerfuffle--Gamergate meets sci-fi books?
Peregrine wrote: The problem is not just lobbying for votes and letting the best work win, it's that they've given a list of "anti-SJW" works to vote for and their entire group is voting in unison according to the instructions of their leaders instead of for the works they actually prefer. So the "mainstream" vote is split between a bunch of different books because everyone has their own preferences, while the anti-SJW vote is united behind a single approved winner.
You've just summed up the difference between how the Democrats and Republicans choose their Presidential candidates
I was going to make a similar joke about Canadian Politics. But more people here recognize the US, so let's go with that one.
Q: What do you call a Dinosaur Handpuppet?
A: A Maniraptor
2015/04/08 22:08:09
Subject: Hugo Awards Kerfuffle--Gamergate meets sci-fi books?
A small group committed to a certain agenda influenced the genre. Then another small group committed to a different agenda influenced the genre. Why does only the work of the second group merit criticism?
Apart from that...I have no idea what Hugo is about etc. but what is the actual problem? If anyone is allowed to vote, then what's the problem with one party lobbying for votes? Would those people also have problems with democrats making advertisement during voting times? I don't get it. Can anyone explain? :/
The problem is that the Hugo Award is supposed to be representative of the field of Science Fiction, a roadmap of where it has been and where it is going. The Hugo awards are supposed to be (but often aren't) the best novels, stories and media in the genre. Many new readers start out reading books straight from the Hugo Award Winner list because they believe they will get quality and a good idea of what science fiction is. Honestly, I object to this more because it promotes crappy books than because of their ideology. Then again, OSC's win for Speaker for the Dead pretty much disillusioned me, so this is just more of the same.
Imagine if some group purposefully set out to politicize the Oscars and make them into a big, irrelevant joke. Just imagine. Now picture that happening to Sci Fi.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
hotsauceman1 wrote: Sci-fi has always been about exploring issues in a way contemporary fiction can't. It's just to the forefront now
Not really. Much of the space opera and milSF subgenre was quite reactionary. Heck, Baen books pretty much banks on the eagerness for more hard-right SF in the market.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/04/08 22:15:30
Manchu wrote: People seem to be assuming this is the first time politics played a major role in the nominations process ...
To this extent. I could believe politics determining the best novel category easily, but novellas, short stories and even fanzines? That's just too far!
Before the internet, it was really, really difficult to organize a politically-motivated rigging of the system on such a scale. It happened some, but I feel like the publishers and authors themselves were more to blame for any corruption in the Hugo Award nominations.
Besides, no Hugo Award season will ever be as contentious as the year Babylon 5 went up against Deep Space Nine.
It is. The whole issue is driven by a bunch of whiny s who want to return to the good old days when Heinlein wrote all of those completely non-political adventure stories (lol) and the original Star Trek never dared to feature a left-leaning agenda. Once you look at all at the history of science fiction it's pretty clear that their complaints are really just a cover for their real objection: that "SJW" stories and authors get more attention than the right-wing ideology they embrace.
The only unfortunate thing here is that voting in unison for the political agenda instead of for the works each individual voter prefers gives them voting power far beyond their actual numbers and destroys the credibility of the award. If they didn't have this disproportionate voting power they'd be an irrelevant minority that nobody pays any attention to.
Have you actually seen the list of those nominated? The list in no way reflects a right-wing ideology. The current list of nominees represents a broader range of race, creed and sexuality than it ever has.
Curious how you have come to the conclusion how those behind Sad Puppies are right wing idealogues.
40k:
Infinity: (PO & CA)
Planetfall & Firestorm Armada
2015/04/08 22:42:38
Subject: Hugo Awards Kerfuffle--Gamergate meets sci-fi books?
Has anyone here read 'If You Were a Dinosaur, My Love' which was nominated for the 2014 Hugo Award for Best Short Story? I haven't, but I'm curious if it does or doesn't fit the bill for 'Science Fiction'
Michael Rennie was ill the day the earth stood still
But he told us where we stand
And Flash Gordon was there in silver underwear
Claude Raines was the invisible man
Then something went wrong for Fay Wray and King Kong
They got caught in a celluloid jam
Then at a deadly pace it came from outer space
And this is how the message ran:
Science Fiction - Double Feature
Dr. X will build a creature
See androids fighting Brad and Janet
Ann Francis stars in Forbidden Planet
Oh-oh at the late night, double feature, picture show.
I can't take the first article seriously when it uses this.
As Arthur Chu eloquently argues, the Puppies’ success should motivate WorldCon to rework its voting procedure before the trolls tank the entire operation.)
Arthur Chu? Really?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/04/08 22:56:18
2015/04/08 22:59:04
Subject: Hugo Awards Kerfuffle--Gamergate meets sci-fi books?
Manchu wrote: Yeah, one of the guys who has been lobbying the opposite way.
That and having read his thoughts, the man isn't eloquent, and he's just quite unpleasant in general, not to mention with his hiding of known rapists... Urgh.
2015/04/08 23:06:51
Subject: Hugo Awards Kerfuffle--Gamergate meets sci-fi books?
Should've put it better, he knew of stalkers and rapists and never reported them.
But I don't want to get this to far off track.
As it is though it just seems like another political issue, one side fights, the other side fights back, and now that the second side is fighting the first side wants the rules changed.
2015/04/08 23:14:31
Subject: Hugo Awards Kerfuffle--Gamergate meets sci-fi books?
5000pts 
6000pts 
3000pts
s who want to return to the good old days when Heinlein wrote all of those completely non-political adventure stories (
