The 1964 Hugo Awards were given in Pacificon II in Oakland, California. (For earlier posts in this series, see Index.) It’s lovely to think that I was born in the year when Way Station (post) (aka Here Gather the Stars) won the Best Novel Hugo. I didn’t know anything about it at the time, obviously, but it makes me happy now. Way Station is a gentle pastoral hard science fiction novel with aliens and ideas and a quiet man going for walks and thinking. It isn’t really like anything much else, and I applaud the Pacificon voters for selecting such an excellent book. It’s in print in a gorgeous hardcover from Old Earth Books, and it’s in my library.
We have four other nominees and I’ve read them all.
Cat’s Cradle by Kurt Vonnegut Jr is a better book than The Sirens of Titan, but I don’t see how it was eligible for the 1964 Hugo as it was first published in 1960. It’s almost a cosy catastrophe, it’s about the world ending because of a form of water that freezes at room temperature, but it’s a weird comedy. I loved it to bits when I was thirteen. It’s widely in print, but it’s not in the library.
“Dune World” by Frank Herbert, is the serialisation of the first chunk of Dune, I’m not sure how much. Dune itself won the next year, so let’s leave it for now. It’s in print, and in the library in French and English.
Glory Road by Robert A. Heinlein is one of my least favourite Heinlein. It’s a transdimensional romp, and it doesn’t work for me. I think it’s one of Heinlein’s weakest books—it’s as if he’s trying to do sword and sorcery but making it SF and not taking any joy in it. It’s in print in an Orb edition, and it’s in the library, so despite the fact that I don’t like it I have to admit it’s lasted well.
Witch World by Andre Norton is another case of fantasy thinly disguised as SF. A man from our world finds his way through a gate to another world where magic works. It’s much more fun than Glory Road, though very light and far from Norton’s best. Another female novel nominee, for anyone counting. (I think people knew Norton was a woman, despite the faintly male name?) It’s in print in an audio edition, and in the library.
Other books that strike me as possibilities (again, using Wikipedia’s not-entirely-reliable list of 1963 books): John Brunner’s The Stardroppers—a very minor novel but I like it; Walter Tevis’s The Man Who Fell to Earth; Pierre Boulle’s Planet of the Apes; H. Beam Piper’s Space Viking (post); Samuel R. Delany’s Captives of the Flame; Philip K. Dick The Gameplayers of Titan. In YA—which mostly wasn’t considered at the time but certainly is now, there’s Alan Garner’s The Moon of Gomrath; Robert Heinlein’s Podkayne of Mars; Joan Aiken’s The Wolves of Willoughby Chase and Arthur C. Clarke’s Dolphin Island.
Looking at these, it’s clearly a strong year, with all kinds of SF being written. I’d put the Piper above the Norton and the Heinlein, and certainly Dune being eligible twice (and thus taking two slots) is annoying. If I was making a list of “Jo’s favourite SF from the year she was born” it wouldn’t be this shortlist. But Way Station is an excellent winner, and the five nominees do give a good snapshot of what people liked at the time.
Other Categories
SHORT FICTION
- “No Truce With Kings,” Poul Anderson (F&SF Jun 1963)
- “Code Three,” Rick Raphael (Analog Feb 1963)
- “A Rose for Ecclesiastes,” Roger Zelazny (F&SF Nov 1963)
- “Savage Pellucidar,” Edgar Rice Burroughs (Amazing Stories Nov 1963)
Now that’s an odd result. No Truce With Kings is a pretty good Anderson novella, but “A Rose For Ecclesiastes” is one of the best short pieces ever written. Depending on what you count as “New Wave,” is this the first New Wave nomination?
SF BOOK PUBLISHER
- Ace
- Ballantine
- Doubleday
- Pyramid
Interestingly, by 1964 we have enough publishers publishing SF that they could start a category. The Locus Awards still have this category, won annually for the last eleven thousand years by Tor, but the Hugos have given up on it. Well, I’d have given it to Ace in 1964 too. Think of those lovely Ace Doubles!
PROFESSIONAL MAGAZINE
- Analog, John W. Campbell, Jr.
- Amazing Stories, Cele Goldsmith
- F&SF, Avram Davidson
- Galaxy, Frederik Pohl
- Science Fantasy, John Carnell
PROFESSIONAL ARTIST
- Ed Emshwiller
- Virgil Finlay
- Frank Frazetta
- Roy Krenkel
- John Schoenherr
AMATEUR MAGAZINE
- Amra, George Scithers
- ERB-dom, Camille Cazedessus, Jr.
- Starspinkle, Ron Ellik
- Yandro, Robert Coulson & Juanita Coulson
Look what there isn’t! Not just no award, no dramatic presentation category at all! I expect the oracles told them that somebody was about to be born who would be pleased to hear it. Or maybe the genre films were all rubbish that year, like a lot of other years.
Jo Walton is a science fiction and fantasy writer. She’s published two poetry collections and eight novels, most recently Lifelode. She has a ninth novel coming out in January, Among Others, and if you liked this post you will like it. She reads a lot, and blogs about it here regularly. She comes from Wales but lives in Montreal where the food and books are more varied.
A very strong year, as you said. I probably would have voted for Cat’s Cradle if presented with it on the ballot, but given the odd eligibility, Way Station is an excellent winner. Of the other books you mention, only Podkayne would seem to be a contender of any sort.
I’m also a bit astounded that the Zelazny didn’t win the short fiction category. I’m also very puzzled by the presence of ERB on the ballot. The man had been dead for a dozen years. Sure, there was a sort of revival going on, but still…
The only new artist is Frazetta. Another big name who would go on to great things.
I like Glory Road much better than that but I would never describe it as a romp – in my view the relative lack of joy in it is quite intentional and stands in sharp contrast to some of the juveniles like Tunnel in the Sky where the adventures with a purpose and for a good cause explicitly continue.
Arguably the setup denies Oscar the frontier in a reversal from Heinlein’s common ad astra per aspera theme.
I was very happy with Way Station. I still have a copy here too. Simak is one of my faves and this was one of his very best.
Of the other books nominated, I am not a Vonnegut fan anyway, and that book was already in cycle. I would have added Space Viking, which is one of those books I pick up and reread every few years.
I disagree about Podkayne over Glory Road. I enjoy Glory Road a lot, the primary reason being that I get a feeling of joy when I read it. Poddy was, to me, his weakest juvenile.
I dont know that I would have call Rose for Ecc new wave, but I definately agree it should have won.
Anyway, great year for books!
I’m not sure Wolves would really be eligible — I don’t recall the alternate history aspects of the series being overt in that one, though it’s possible I simply didn’t notice. I grew up with that one, and didn’t know until much later that there was a series.
The AU for Wolves is pretty subtle, if you don’t know/remember that wolves were extinct in Britain at the time the story is set. IIRC, when I first read it, I thought “Wolves? What?” then shrugged, kept reading, and forgot about it.
The next book in the series, Black Hearts in Battersea is much more obviously AU, something that confused me no end when I first read it (and also left me with serious misconceptions for YEARS about the actual succession of the British monarchy).
Nolly, Teka Lynn: OK, maybe it wouldn’t have been eligible. It always seemed pretty clearly Alternate History to me.
Confusing you about the actual history isn’t good — it’s the reason people say you shouldn’t do this kind of thing in a children’s book.
Wolves is unquestionably AU: James III is on the throne, and the wolves entered Britain through the Channel Tunnel (which did not exist in the 19th Century, or indeed at the time of publication).
I don’t think it it would have occurred to Aiken that she was deceiving anyone about the royal succession; she would have taken it for granted that ‘James III’ is an obvious indicator of AU-ness, since everyone knows the succession of monarchs in the same way that they know the alphabet.
It is true that the series begins as rather mild alternate history with a fairly recent point of divergence, and becomes more wildly fantastic as it goes along. (Later books have werewolves, for instance, and it turns out that South America has been occupied by Romans and Celts since ancient times.) So I’m doubtful the early works really count as SF – they are Alternate History in the way that political thrillers with an unreal President/Prime Minister are Alternate History, but the alternateness isn’t their point.
I am also unsure whether it should be called YA. I think these books are sold simply as children’s (9-12, or the like).
There’s no arguing with the winner from 1964. Way Station is a beautiful book, almost the equal of Simak’s earlier masterpiece, City. Still, The Man Who Fell to Earth is an interesting work and I’m surprised it didn’t make the final ballot that year — but I’ve always thought it an under-rated book. Of the other possibilities, I’m glad Planet of the Apes wasn’t considered. It was a vastly superior movie (the original version, that is) than novel.
And speaking of movies, 1964 gave us Robinson Crusoe on Mars. Despite the hokey pretext, it’s a thoughtful exploration of the loneliness of space travel and a well-made science fiction movie.
Walter Tevis was a very interesting fellow. He moved effortlessly from SF to literary novels to noir and back again, and pretty much all of his stuff is still worth reading, though much of it has fallen out of print. I’m a big fan of _The Queen’s Gambit_, which has to be one of the best written and most plausible “poor orphan makes good” story I’ve ever read.
He’s not remembered as much as he should be, because (1) he did move from genre to genre — people just may not realize this is the same guy who wrote _The Color of Money_; (2) he wasn’t that prolific, writing just half a dozen novels and a couple of volumes of shorts over ~25 years, and (3) he died at the age of 56. It’s a damn shame, because pretty much everything he wrote is worth reading, and much of it is excellent.
_The Man Who Fell to Earth_ does not read like a book written in 1963! I read it as a kid after the movie came out — 1977 or thereabouts — and sincerely thought it was a contemporary novelization of the film. It just doesn’t come across as having been written in the Kennedy administration.
The wikipedia article on Tevis has this interesting quote:
One of the many other things it is, in Tevis’s own words, is ‘a very disguised autobiography,’ the tale of his removal as a child from San Francisco, ‘the city of light,’ to rural Kentucky, and of the childhood illness that long confined him to bed, leaving him, once recovered, weak, fragile, and apart. It was also — as he realized only after writing it — about his becoming an alcoholic. Beyond that, it is, of course, a Christian parable, and a portrait of the artist. It is, finally, one of the most heartbreaking books I know, a threnody on great ambition and terrible failure, and an evocation of man’s absolute, unabridgeable aloneness.”
ISTR it was orginally marketed as mainstream fiction — in which case, it was the first book so marketed to get nominated for a Hugo.
Doug M.
I’m pretty sure Cat’s Cradle was in fact published in 1963, so it was fully eligible for the Hugo. A recall a diatribe from someone — maybe Harlan Ellison — about the stupid fans failing to recognize the superiority of Vonnegut’s novel … that seems to me profoundly unfair. I liked Cat’s Cradle, but I think it I liked it more when I read it (sometime in the ’70s) than I do now — I think it’s a bit dated, a bit full of Vonnegutisms that seem vaguely precious to me now. Still, I think it would have been a reasonable Hugo pick, but I like Way Station a lot, in its quiet way, and it’s also a good Hugo winner.
Doug, I believe The Man Who Fell to Earth was indeed marketed as mainstream, but it was not nominated — it’s just a plausible alternative Jo suggested. However, Cat’s Cradle, I’m pretty sure, was also marketed as mainstream, so it would qualify … except that I think Sylva, from the year before, was ALSO marketed as mainstream, so it gets the nod as first mainstream novel to be nominated for a Hugo.
I recall seeing the book version of Planet of the Apes in my school library back in 1975 or so and it was called Monkey Planet. (I see from Wikipedia that it has been published in English under both names.) Planet of the Apes is clearly a better title, and more zoologically correct to boot.
The eligibility of The Stardroppers for the Novel Hugo is arguable. For one thing, the title The Stardroppers was first used several years later on a revised version of the book. Listen! The Stars! is the title of both the 1962 Analog novella, and the slightly expanded 1963 Ace Double. Even that book version is only about 28,000 words long, so by today’s rules it would be a novella. Back in 1964, I think book publication trumped everything, and it would indeed have been eligible as a novel. I do like it, though like many of Brunner’s novels of that era, it seems a bit rushed. I also like another Brunner novel from 1963, Castaways’ World (later significantly expanded for DAW in 1974 and retitled Polymath). In fact, I would in general recommend lots of and lots of early Brunner as very enjoyable reading.
Jo’s list of plausible novel nominees seems about right to me, though I wonder how she could ever have left off the eternal classic Galaxy 666, by “Pel Torro” (Lionel Fanthorpe). Other enjoyable novels (though mostly not really Hugo nominee potential) include Daniel F. Galouye’s Lords of the Psychon, two by H. Beam Piper: Junkyard Planet aka The Cosmic Computer and Space Viking, Sign of the Labrys by Margaret St. Clair (famous for the horrendous original blurb), and The Million Cities, by J. T. McIntosh.
Finally, one serial that seems a legitimate contender, and that I suppose will show up next year in its book form: “All We Marsmen”, by Philip K. Dick, from Worlds of Tomorrow. It was published under the title Martian Time-Slip in 1964. It would certainly have been a worthy Hugo nominee, and I think it’s better than The Game Players of Titan.
Now for the short fiction. Not a bad nomination list, except for the odd inclusion of the ERB piece. “Code Three” is little remembered now, but it was decent Analog stuff of its time. Not on a par with the other two, though.
“No Truce With Kings” is very good, but “A Rose for Ecclesiastes” is magnificent, one of my very favorite SF stories ever. It clearly should have won, and I assume Anderson’s familiarity with readers — Zelazny was still a new writer — carried the day. By the way, I would NOT call “A Rose for Ecclesiastes” new wave.
Other potential short fiction nominees:
Another Anderson story, “What’ll You Give”, published under his pseudonym “Winston P. Sanders” (and also known, when reprinted in his fixup novel Tales of the Flying Mountains, under the French version of the title, “Que Donn’rez Vous?”).
And one more Anderson piece, “The Three-Cornered Wheel”.
“The Totally Rich”, by Brunner
Peter S. Beagle’s “Come Lady Death”, though that appeared in 1963 in the Atlantic Monthly, and probably wasn’t seen by many SF readers until its 1966 reprint in F&SF.
“Die, Shadow!” by Algis Budrys
“Drunkboat”, “On the Gem Planet”, and “Think Blue, Count Two” by Cordwainer Smith
“Green Magic”, by Jack Vance (a favorite Vance story for me)
“The Great Nebraska Sea”, by Allen Danzig
“What Strange Stars and Skies”, by Avram Davidson
“The Time Tombs”, by J. G. Ballard
“They Don’t Make Life Like They Used To”, by Alfred Bester, one of his best stories, and not well enough known.
“Thin Edge”, by “Jonathan Blake Mackenzie” — Randall Garrett
“Bazaar of the Bizarre” and “X Marks the Pedwalk”, by Fritz Leiber
If I was making a nomination list, I’d keep “No Truce With Kings” and “A Rose for Ecclesiastes”, and add Bester’s “They Don’t Make Life Like They Used To”, Vance’s “Green Magic”, and either Davidson’s “What Strange Stars and Skies” or Leiber’s “Bazaar of the Bizarre”, or maybe Beagle’s “Come Lady Death”.
But no matter what, “A Rose for Ecclesiastes” is my choice for Best Short Fiction of 1963.
I reread Glory Road over Christmas, and agree that it doesn’t really square the fantasy and sf circle, but it is interesting in the context oof the discussion about Heinlein writing aliens that were smarter than humans. Maybe Star is a bit Mary Sue, but she is the leader of a huge alien civilization.
There are three novels that I think are the best of the year – Cat’s Cradle and The Man Who Fell to Earth are both wonderful in very different ways, but Way Station is on my top ten of all time SF list and has been for years. Great novel by an unjustly forgotton author. And, Jo, you can’t blame them about nominating Dune World, as no one knew that two more sequels would eventually complete the novel. (Not to mention novels ad nauseum from that point on.)
The short fiction possibilities that haven’t been mentioned but should be included in the mix are: “Bernie the Faust” by William Tenn – brilliant story, “New Folks Home” by Clifford Simak – these were his best writing years, I think , “Fortress Ship” by Fred Saberhagen – first of the Berserker series, “The Faces Outside” by Bruce McAllister, “The Pain Peddlers” by Robert Silverberg (the basis for Thorns in 1967) and “If There Were No Benny Cimoli” by Philip K. Dick.
Hard year to pick my favorite nominations, but “Rose for Ecclesiastes” is what I consider the best one as well. Beautiful and haunting.
By the way “Savage Pellucidar” had it’s first printing in Amazing of that year so it was eligble for the award. In fact the novel was then reprinted with this novella in it’s proper place and it was nominated for best novel! The committee decided that since the other three portions of the novel were reprints it wasn’t eligible for the novel award. It must have been pretty exciting for the field to turn up a new ERB story. It got the hightest nominations in the short fiction category, but came in last place.
For the record the voting went as follows:
Novel:
Way Station – 63
Glory Road – 54
Witch World – 54
Dune World – 51
Cat’s Cradle – 30
Short Fiction:
“No Truce With Kings” – 93
“Code Three” – 67
“A Rose for Ecclesiastes” – 47
“Savage Pellucidar” – 44
Information from: Franson and Devore, A History of the Hugo, Nebula and International Fantasy Awards.
Doug M: I bought my copy of The Man Who Fell To Earth around the time the David Bowie movie was released (for $1.50). It actually has a picture of Bowie on it and is probably the same edition you read. When I finished reading it, I remember telling my wife that books like it were the reason I loved science fiction.
Bob — I missed “Bernie the Faust” on looking through the list of ’63 fiction. It is indeed a good good story. The Dick story you cite is pretty good too.
WAY STATION is the clear winner, in my opinion.
“A Rose for Ecclesiastes” should have won, little doubt about it, although I’m also tempted by Smith’s “Drunkboat.”
I admit that I like Glory Road, and the way it plays with what it means to “get the girl.” Podkayne, on the other hand, is my least favorite Heinlein and one of the few novels that I would even consider actively trying to keep out of the hands of a child. If it had been nominated for a Hugo, I would have been quite upset 46 years on.
I enjoy Glory Road and come back to it every now and then. But I think the thing that stands out most to me is the commentary on Vietnam, even though it was first published in 1963.
I’ll pile on with the love for Rose for Ecclesiastes. Truly awe inspiring piece of short fiction. I checked in on it at the time the Amber re-read was starting on this site (query – what happened to that anyway) and was shocked to find out it wasn’t a winner. R
The source that told you Cat’s Cradle dates from 1960 is flat out wrong. It was published in 1963.
DBratman: It’s the copyright page in my (British, 1970s) edition. It could be a typo I suppose.
Ecbatan@10, right you are.
Ecbatan @11, how could you not call “Rose” New Wave? It’s a very deliberate subversion and inversion of a bunch of SFnal tropes, done in a high and self-consciously ‘literary’ style. I know that trying to define “New Wave” is a mug’s game, but what more would you want?
Doug M.
Doug, I think I see “New Wave” as for one thing more consciously experimental. I.e. not just “literary”, but experimentally so. (Even if, as many have mocked, some of the experiments were echoes of things done decades earlier in the mainstream.)
Also, I see it as more deliberately pushing for “new” subject matter, new themes, new attitudes.
“A Rose for Ecclesiastes” is deliberately quite old in its root subject matter. (If you can find it, compare “Lake of Fire”, by Frank Belknap Long (Planet Stories, May 1951).) Its language is a mix of contemporary sophistication (consistent with “New Wave”) and lush romanticism (not consistent). But most of all, though it is on the one hand aware of the need for subversion and inversion of its tropes (and aware also, I think, of the fundamental preposterousness of most of the “science” behind the story), it is also desperately fond of those tropes, and of the Mars it depicts. It knows, perhaps, that this Mars is false in many ways, but it still LOVES it. It is not looking towards a new future of SF writing — it is lovingly mourning the dead past of SF writing.
In 1963, essentially only one writer, J. G. Ballard, was truly doing what I think of as New Wave. By 1965, to be sure, many more were. And it’s fair to say that reading what new writers like Disch and Delany and Zelazny were doing in 1963 you could see (especially in retrospect) that by 1965 they would be “New Wave” writers, in my view they weren’t there yet.
—
Rich Horton
I’ll add my vote for A Rose for Ecclesiastes–a wonderful story.
Well, I have to disagree. The setting is deliberately, self-consciously retro — but right there, that deliberateness and self- consciousness is a break with the past. (Are Moorcock´s and M. John Harrison´s fantasies not New Wave because they´re consciously riffing on Howard and Vance?)
And in that deliberately faux-Barsoom setting, Zelazny drops a confused antihero who doesn´t get the girl (the girl, it turns out, doesn´t want to be gotten); who is a hero very much against his will; who solves the problem not by swordplay, fisticuffs, or inventing a new zeta-ray, but by reciting poetry; and who ends the story trying to commit suicide.
We love this story in retrospect. But I’m going to venture a guess that, back in 1963-4, a lot of people really, really didn’t like it.
But anyway: mug’s game, agree to disagree.
Doug M.
Doug, I think it’s simply a matter of defining the “New Wave” differently. As you say, such definitions are a mug’s game. I’m happy to agree to disagree.
For what it’s worth, I definitely don’t think of Moorcock’s fantasies as “New Wave”. His Jerry Cornelius stories? Yes. But Elric? No.
M. John Harrison is a different story, but note how much later he came, not until the ’70s as I recall. But I can see the argument for The Pastel City as “New Wave” (or post New Wave), and even more so the later Viriconium stories.
(Actually, I can see your argument for all the stories you cite — but that’s for a different “New Wave” than my definition.)
It’s lovely to think that I was born in the year when Way Station (post) (aka Here Gather the Stars) won the Best Novel Hugo.
Perhaps you’ve invented a new form of SF horoscopes. Predict your future based on the award-winning novels of the year that you’re born. I myself was born in the year of Leibowitz.
I’ll shamefacedly admit that even thought _Wolves_ is one of my favorite of Aiken’s books (and one I hand people who like ‘children’s gothics’ and have finished all of the trashy Lemony Snicket stuff and are looking for more to read), I didn’t have the faintest idea it was AU until reading this thread. (Which is why I don’t tend to read a lot of it. I never know where the points of divergence are, and if you’re not startled or charmed by those, many AUs are written in a fairly pedestrian and not interesting way, at least that’s been my experience.)
Very pleased that the Simak won of course; it’s a great book, and he was a local.
I’ve always been very very fond of Zelazny’s “A Rose For Ecclesiastes”, back to when I first read it (which was probably an early anthologization, not first publication), but I liked the Anderson a lot too. The title and theme of that may have been an early sign of the libertarian strain in fandom.
I do like Glory Road very much. It’s unusual for Heinlein, and doesn’t have most of the flaws that his later books took on when they abandoned what he used to do so well, so that makes it pretty much unique. It seems to me a more mature book than most of his, and it takes the maturing of the character rather further — to the point where he’s giving up the high life of the Hero and buckling down and studying engineering. Also was interesting to see that “getting the girl” wasn’t a permanent state, even if they remained on very good terms. And you’ll note that it’s her devotion to her career that really forces the separation.
I also like the blatant wish-fulfillment of “This whole mess will clear itself up if you take that man there — you, what’s your name? — out back and shoot him. Do it now.”
And it wasn’t the first time that Heinlein had played with “alternate” forms of government, but it was one of the stranger alternatives he ever came up with.
Dune ended up being the longest serial Analog ever ran. Two halves of four installments each. (I’m not bothering to look up the exact dates right now.)
The cover of the issue of F&SF for “A Rose for Ecclesiastes” was the last piece Hannes Bok over did, and it’s a treasure.
The permeation of the “hippie” “movement” by science fiction is mostly lost in the mythologization. (The lyrics of Jefferson Airplane’s “Crown of Creation” are a paragraph from John Wyndham’s The Chrysalids.) The corporate holding entity which owns rights to all the Grateful Dead’s music is Ice Nine Publishing.
ecbatan has picked out some more great stories. “Totally Rich” is tremendous; and to the best of my knowledge, the least great Cordwainer Smith is wonderful; and “They Don’t Make Life Like They Used To”? wow
You are entering the apogee of Playboy. It was a life style magazine, not just a skin mag, and Hefner’s liking for science fiction paid Skeckley, Vonnegut, Bradbury, and Clarke, among others. The “U. K. LeGuin” anecdote is well-known, too. If you find a link to a list of Playboy’s science fiction, follow it. You’ll be impressed.
Neil in Chicago said:
“Dune ended up being the longest serial Analog ever ran. Two halves of four installments each.”
Actually it was one of three installments and one of five, not two of four each. I see what he means by “longest serial” but I don’t think I agree, since it was technically two serials. Doc Smith’s GALACTIC PATROL ran in six (consecutive) installments back in 1937/38 and while the total wordage of that book of course does not match the wordage of DUNE (in book form), I think it’s a more legitimate “longest serial.”
If there had been a Dramatic Presentation category in 1964, nominees could have been:
The Outer Limits
The Mouse on the Moon
The Nutty Professor
X- the Man with the X-Ray Eyes
Day of the Triffids
Not a terrible list. I’d vote for Mouse on the Moon.
The Hugo for Best Dramatic Presentation should have gone to Ikarie XB-1, the excellent movie version of Stanisław Lem’s The Magellanic Cloud. Probably one of the most influential SFF movies ever made; you can see Kubrik mimicking the shots a few years later in 2001. You can see the crew dynamics and plots getting re-used in Star Trek.
And before anyone suggests that “fans wouldn’t have been aware of it,” Brian Aldiss was in the contemporaneous fanzines telling people to see it. It won an award at the Trieste Film Fest, and got a US release (with a changed ending.)