A helpful commenter posted a great idea in the Wheel of Time: Hugo Refresher discussion thread: “Can we get a Hugo General discussion thread? I think some of us would really like a place to make comments, but keep putting them in any thread that touches on the Hugos. Yet we might be getting into spoiler area for those that haven’t gotten there yet.”
In the interest of encouraging people to vote in all the Hugo categories, we’re happy to provide an open discussion thread for awards below. Please note that spoilers are allowed here—read at your own risk! And this goes without saying, but we’re saying it anyway, in the words of Kurt Vonnegut Jr: “God damn it, babies, you’ve got to be kind.” Stay polite, stay respectful, stay on target, and we’ll be able to have a lively conversation about this year’s packet!
And with that…start the conversation below!
I’m a big fan of Victor Hugo. And Hugo Weaving is a truly great actor. Hugo Boss used to be cool and now he’s not.
Can’t think of any other Hugos to discuss, sorry. You can shut down the thread now.
Hugo Weasley?
Hi,
Having been a reader of SF and fantasy over the past 50+ years, I am grateful to both Tor.com and LB bringing the Hugo voting to my attention and I will be participating this year for the 1st time. I for one have no problem the WOT being nominated, as it has been to my mind one of the best novels/series I have ever read.
I feel that I am fully qualified to vote, and I have already read the epack novels, which have ben supplied I am also grateful
to BAEN books for supplying the complete Grimnoir series which I have just finished reading.
I will now go on to read all the other categories, and make an informed vote.
Mike
RobMRobM@1:Grin. But, you’ve forgotten Hugo Gernsback, Hugo the killer whale and a whole movie named Hugo. So, yes the thread must remain! ;-)
Thanks Tor.com.
I didn’t know that Baen was providing the whole Grimnoir series. That’s pretty cool.
I’ve been very busy reading my Hugo packet. Lots of great stuff.
My hope is that the 20% rule does not get invoked due to the extreme interest the Best Novel category.
Cool! Bragging Rights!
@1, RobM2: very nice. How many Hugos can you name?
@5, toryx: The Grimnoir series was pretty good. But read all three. Otherwise the you miss the world building and good character development.
Also Rachel Swirsky short story, while not in the voters packet, can be found at this link:
http://www.apex-magazine.com/if-you-were-a-dinosaur-my-love/
General suggestion for the anal or the unorganized.
I made a spreadsheet to help me vote, and while reading.
Becasue I can’t keep it all refreshed in my head.
Headings:
Title / Read? / Impression after Reading / Rank (1-5)/ General Notes
I pulled all the titles from the Tor post of the nominees. It’s been very helpful to me. Hope the suggestion is useful to others.
http://www.tor.com/blogs/2014/04/announcing-the-2014-hugo-award-nominees
@1
I think Hugo Strange is one of the most underrated Batman villains of all time. Let’s hope he appears, even if for a brief time, in the Batman v Superman movie.
@1: Hugo Danner, from Philip Wylie’s proto-superhero novel Gladiator comes to mind, along with Hugo Drax from Moonraker.
Hugo Reyes! Jesus Christ is not a weapon!
I have a lot of reading to do in a short amount of time. Thankfully I re-read WOT in preparation for AMOL. I think best novel will be between WOT and Ancillary Justice (which I’ve also read).
Thank God there is no Hobbit 2 in best long form. I caught most of it on a transatlantic flight. Probably a good thing I wasn’t in an exit row. I haven’t seen the other movies, but Catching Fire is going to be tough to beat for my vote.
Can I really properly appreciate Dr. Who having never seen it? Between Orphan Black and Game of Thrones there, I think. I’ll have to reaquaint myself with which Orphan Black ep that is.
I’m disappointed noone from my full slate of nominees for the Campbell award made it, but I’m reading Three Parts Dead now and it’s blowing me away.
Noah Ward should do well this year.
I liked all three of Ancillary Justice, Neptune’s Brood and Parasite. That is the (fairly close) order I would rank them at the moment.
The pronouns are what get mentioned a lot in Ancillary Justice and I liked how that pointed out some interesting characteristics of the groups in the novel and my default assumptions (more later).
I really liked how the book dealt with the subject of distributed consciousness by using Breq’s parts in the various stories, the ships and the leader of the Radch. In the past, we learn (quickly) that Breq was once a part of a distributed consciousness. Her point of view is contained in multiple bodies all of which are ancillaries for a military star ship. Leckie explores this mode very well as we see a scene through multiple vantages but within a discrete tale. In the present, Breq, tells us the story of her quest to find a weapon with which she can fight the Lord of the Radch. We gradually find out what this means and who and what Breq is. In the past, Breq also narrates the events that led her to the present and we see what she was like. The flow of the book is done quite well with these inter-leavings and they each add to our knowledge of the story and the world that Leckie is building.
The methodology of having the language of the Radchaai to not usually use gendered pronouns allowed for a really interesting feel both in the book and in myself. Breq has to make an effort to assign pronouns when she is in non-Radch space and her default mode is to use the pronoun she. I found this really interesting in that at first, I kept trying to figure out the gender of whomever Breq was thinking about. Eventually, I was able to relax my mental background processing and go with it, but it displayed how immersed our culture is in pronoun assignment. This, even more than the multiple-consciousness, really helped to underline that the Radch was a very different culture from our own. A very interesting and simple way of injecting a feeling of alienness into a story. This was a very enjoyable book and I am very much looking forward to more of Leckie’s work.
I found the base quest/mystery/thriller story to also be entertaining and the world building with hints towards what is to come was nicely laid out. Highly recommended.
The sub-light economic system of Neptune’s Brood was masterfully done and I enjoy things like that. The squid miner-collective is an amazing example of a non-human species. They seemed to really be throwing off much of the baggage still left over from the biological human “ancestors.” They modified their neural architecture from the human norm in order to perform their team mining more easily. That’s an nice example of self directed evolutionary action. In addition to the desired mining effects, it also seems to have resulted in (or enabled) the interesting social/political changes for the squids. They seem to be the nicest people that Krina encounters.The background universe of NB with its post-biological human basis has all sorts of room to develop interesting ideas that point back to biologicals and forward to trans human ideas.
Parasite was a nice take on a cause of “zombieism.” I liked the exploration of what it means to be human from the non-zombie worm beings perspective. The narrator didn’t quite gel with me. I figured out the reveal about her fairly early on and part of her personality was almost certainly related to that.
The main character seemed to have a bit of being stopped from figuring things out for narrative purposes. There seemed (to me) to be a bit of artificialness about that. All of the various actions and discrepancies added up to a picture of someone who was very different (not a bad thing). I think that this was all probably intentional on Seanan’s part as then the reveal doesn’t seem particularly out of place. For me, this created a bit of a remove from Sal. I’m not sure if this was intentional or not. The character Tansy was great fun. I liked her although with the caveat of not ever actually wanting to be anywhere near her.
I read through Warbound. I was fairly unimpressed with both the style and the plot. The writing was often turgid. For example, here is a bit from the Prologue:
The copy text for the book claims that it is meant to be noirish, but Correia seems to have taken that to mean pot-boiler with graphic violence. Then, there were the numerous Randian messages embedded amidst the info dumps. Lot’s of awkward telling rather than showing. I won’t be putting Warbound on my Hugo ballot as it didn’t really seem to measure up to the other candidates to me.
I haven’t yet decided what to do with the Wheel of Time. I had read through about book 6 or so when they came out and then stepped away from the series. I haven’t yet picked up where I left off from the Hugo packet, but I have been watching the various discussions. So, more to come on that later.
@14: I haven’t really got into McGuire/Grant’s novels: zombie stories don’t really interest me.
In the interests of fairness, I have read a Grimnoir story (“Detroit Christmas”) and part of the first novel. More “hardboiled” than “noir” in my view: sometimes reminiscent of Mickey Spillane (which may be the desired effect). If you like this sort of thing, this, possibly, is the sort of thing you’ll like.
I haven’t read a great deal of Jordan (the novella version of “New Spring”, a rather distracted skim through the first three) because long-form epic fantasy tends to concentrate on things I don’t find especially interesting: worldbuilding for its own sake, chosen ones, etc. I’d rather spend my time with the likes of Jirel and Cugel.
I’ve been starting with the short fiction and graphic works. Here’s what’s impressed me so far…
“The Lady Astronaut of Mars” is favorite of everything so far. Beautiful space-age alternate history story.
“If You Were a Dinosaur, My Love” is sad, sweet and delightfully bonkers. I think the shortest of the short stories has my vote in that category.
“The Waiting Stars” is a nicely done space-opera short, but the twist at the end seemed jarringly unexplained to me.
“The Truth of Fact, the Truth of Feeling” was an enjoyable meditation on technology, but I thought the story frame was a bit forced toward the end.
“The Water That Falls on You From Nowhere” felt like a waste to me–an imaginative premise wasted on a small, claustrophobic family drama.
The Girl Genius comic was an incredibly baroque and confusing mess to this first-time reader of the series.
I’d never read the original short story of The Meathouse Man, but I knew two pages in this was some powerful, 200-proof 70’s dystopia!
I really liked Ancillary Justice. While the story itself was just ok, what made the novel for me was Breq. I really enjoyed being inside the head of such a different and interesting character, especially when she was in several places at once. So that’s what I’m pulling for.
On another note, Vox Day? Seriously?
Re the nominated Orphan Black episode Variations Under Domestication (Season 1 – Episode 6) – better known as the Pot Luck Party from Hell episode.
This is the one that got me fully hooked on OB. Complete insanity with several key developments, including the Craft Room glue gun torture, Sarah brilliantly impersonating Alison in front of her husband and the entire neighborhood, the first real introduction to Delphine, the DYAD Institute and the Neolutionists, and Paul being made aware of what’s really going on.
The most complete recap is the one from the Tor.com sister site Heroes and Heartbreakers – link follows (assuming it is not eaten up by the site):
http://www.heroesandheartbreakers.com/blogs/2013/08/orphan-black-season-1-episode-6-hiatus-rewatch-recap-neolution-is-the-new-black.
Rob B’s post from this site:
http://www.tor.com/blogs/2013/10/orphan-black-rewatch-variations-under-domestication
@14, SH:
I then I saw it as “Body Snatcher” story, and comments on powerful corporations. I wrote this comment after reading it: “Unique concept and take on the body invasion – we did it to ourselves.”
But yes, by chapter 3 I had figured out the big secrete. And does she not really know, or is she just in self-denial?
I’m just left wondering how the one (bad) host is so much more ‘human normal acting’ than the others we’ve meet so far.
Re: Neptune’s Brood, agree with you about the economic systems. And I never thought Forensic accounting would be fun to read about. Plus he threw in a modified Jane Austin quote that I found hilarious.
Ancillary Justice, while I liked the story, and Breq’s singing – I found the “she” distracting. Not in the “oh, author should have used ‘he’ for neutral.”
But in: The CULTURE does not recognize gender. Great, very different. IMO, a culture of that nature would “translate” their pronouns into something different than modern English “he / she.” Any of the following examples would have worked, for me: vir, hir, de, etc…
And those could be just as great for forcing the discussion of being non-gendered.
Braid_Tug@19:Yes, Parasite isn’t just a straight zombie book. It mixes in “body snatcher”/invasion in very interesting ways.
What was the Jane Austin quote/take?
Agree with @18 on “Variations Under Domestication”. Loved the mix of hard science, character-based drama, and expertly handled tonal shifts from horror to black comedy and back.
Among the short fiction, “If You Were a Dinosaur, My Love” blew me away with its daring and humanism in treating a painful and very real topic (just read it–don’t have me tell you what it’s about). I was also strongly impressed by the execution of “The Waiting Stars”, and I wasn’t as bothered about the lack of infodump about the twist; I kind of feel that short fiction is entitled to dispense with explaining everything in a way that long-form is not. I enjoyed “The Lady Astronaut of Mars”, but something indefinable about it doesn’t quite grab me–maybe it’s that the Oz allusion seems to fall flat and not develop in a thematically relevant way.
“The Exchange Officers” bored me spitless and I hated, hated, HATED “Opera Vita Aeterna”. Not a political statement, though I know that politics is a big thing; I genuinely thought they weren’t well written. Slightly dreading the obligatory slog through Correia as well; just doesn’t look like something I’m likely to enjoy. But, onwards!
@12 Herb, as to whether or not you can appreciate the Doctor Who without seeing more of it – I can only speak to the nominated episode ‘Day of the Doctor,’ but as far as that episode goes, I would say absolutely yes. That was the only episode of Doctor Who I’ve ever seen (mostly because some friends were having a DW party and got together to watch it, so I joined in), and I enjoyed it immensely. Actually, as one of the geekiest people there, I think I appreciated and understood the episode better than some of the people there who do watch Doctor Who, but are not so geeky ;) But maybe that’s a little presumptious of me.
I also agree that “The Day of the Doctor” is enjoyable without following Doctor Who in depth. Not so for “The Name of the Doctor” or either of the related works. (I do honestly wonder why “The Five(ish) Doctors” was a permissible nominee in Best Dramatic Presentation rather than Best Related Work. It’s hilarious and touching. . .but it’s not actually sci-fi, unlike “An Adventure in Space and Time”, which is, by the skin of its teeth.
But then, I’m also planning to vote Gravity below No Award, not because it wasn’t good, but because it wasn’t speculative fiction. It was a realistic drama that took place in space with contemporary technology. If “it’s in space” equals “speculative”, then I think we may be contributing inadvertently to the ghettoization of sci-fi.
Can someone give me some ideas on how to judge something like best editor? (First time Hugo voter here.) It almost seems like I would have to see an edited manuscript to make a judgement! What criteria do you guys use?
Re the movie choices, I’d favor Catching Fire – brilliantly designed and acted across the board, and a substantial step up from the first movie. The other nominees were enjoyable but not in its class IMO.
@16: There hasn’t been much discussion of best graphic story so far. I understand your confusion regarding the Girl Genius comic: it’s apparently volume 13 of the series. I have read the original “Meathouse Man” but not the comic: it’s an escapee from TLDV, a very strong but very disturbing story.
@19 & 20: “It is a truth universally acknowledged, that every interstellar colony in search of good fortune must be in need of a banker.” (Neptune’s Brood, page 41)
@21: I’m hoping for a collection of de Bodard’s Xuya stories: one of the most interesting new SF universes out there. I got Lights in the Deep as part of a book bundle a while back: I didn’t think any of the stories were anything more than standard Analog rumir.
I quite liked “The Chaplain’s Legacy” and “The Waiting Stars”. “The Truth of Fact” was good, and even though I saw the ending coming, and knew what it was probably going to be, I still liked it. I just finished “Wakulla Springs” and I’m trying to figure out what to do with it. I really liked it, but I’m not sure how it stacks up against the others. “Equoid” is probably going to get my vote.
I started WOT and I’m 2 chapters in. The first book. And it’s taken me several days. Don’t think I’m gonna make it.
@24: A general long form overview: Ginjer Buchanan was the editor-in-chief at Ace for thirty years before retiring in March.
Sheila Gilbert is the owner and editor of DAW Books.
Liz Gorinsky works at Tor with authors such as Mary Robinette Kowal.
Lee Harris is senior editor of Angry Robot Books.
Toni Weisskopf is the editor and publisher at Baen.
Jedikalos: I take it you mean Best Editor Long Form? For Short Form, as they are editors either of magazines or of anthologies, you just look at the works in question. But for Long Form – you may well ask. The only plausible way to do it is look at the list of the works edited by them in the past year, which is helpfully included in the Hugo Packet, and decide who is responsible for the most impressive list of works – though of course we have no way of knowing what the editor’s contribution was in each case.
I honestly don’t understand why “If You Were a Dinosaur My Love” is winning awards. It has no plot, no character development, and no SF element (no, daydreaming about dinosaurs doesn’t make it an SF story). It rips off the story structure of a famous children’s book, but ends as nothing more than a violent revenge fantasy.
@24: Short form: John Joseph Adams edits the online SFF magazine Lightspeed and its companion horror magazine Nightmare. He is also an anthologist: his 2013 titles were The Mad Scientist’s Guide to World Domination and Oz Reimagined.
Neil Clarke edits the online SF magazine Clarkesworld which features stories by authors such as Robert Reed, Aliette de Bodard and Ken Liu.
Ellen Datlow has acquired stories for Tor.com and published three anthologies in 2013: Hauntings, Queen Victoria’s Book of Spells and Telling Tales. She has won the Hugo Award for Best Professional Editor on four previous occasions.
Jonathan Strahan has edited Eclipse Online and Subterranean Online. He edited the fantasy anthology Fearsome Journeys in 2013.
Sheila Williams is the editor of Asimov’s Science Fiction. She has won the Hugo Award for Best Professional Editor on two previous occasions.
I’m tired of people whining that something on the Hugo ballot “isn’t science fiction.” If you’re saying that it is not eligible for the Hugo, then contact the award administrators and let them know.
Otherwise, ask yourself:
Did this story make me think about the world in a way I had not before?
Did this story bring me into a setting I had never experienced before?
Did this story stick with me long after I’d finished it?
Was this story well-written? Have memorable, believable characters?
If any of those are true, maybe you need to expand your boundaries and definitions of genre.
Can anyone, honestly, define “science fiction” (or fantasy) for anyone other than themselves?
Vote for the best story, the brilliant story, the story you will not forget.
Don’t vote for your second choice in order to somehow defend the honor of Hugo purity.
@32: Alan Peterson:
I totally agree. I wouldn’t nominate something that I didn’t think was science fiction or fantasy. But I’d hate to vote for an inferior story over a superior story, so once a story makes the ballot, I don’t worry about those definitions any more.
Nimdok@27 – one bit of caution/perspective heading into WoT.
The first book, while enjoyable, is very similar in feel to Fellowship of the Ring. The other books are not Tolkeinesque at all, and have their own pretty unique look and feel. Series really kicks in for me in Book 3 and stays strong through Book 7 before becoming more uneven. Book 11, the last one Jordan wrote before his illness, is particularly great and a return to form. I like the final three Sanderson books but they differ in style from the best of the RJ books.
stevenhalter@14,
My choices to date in Best Novel are close to yours. I may need to give Neptune’s Brood another read-through, as it didn’t grab me on first go. As for Ancillary Justice, I felt that the POV details allowing us to see how a multi-bodied intelligence could work was amazing.
I just started the short fiction reads, snickering my way through Equoid.
@32. Alan Peterson:
I disagree. If we’re to judge the best speculative fiction, but a story fails to speculate about anything, that should absolutely be a mark against it, whatever its other merits.
30. Agreed. I might be stupid and missing something but that sub short story has the quality of some kitchy junk you come across in a JC creative writing class. I was for sure nominated by a sympathy vote or a clique vote type thing.
On another note, “The Lady Astronaut of Mars” was great in my opinion.
I’m thinking specifically of “Wakulla Springs,” published right here at Tor.com, which is not only the best novella I read all year, but probably the best piece of short fiction, period.
Yet every time it’s mentioned online, readers — who call it brilliant, lyrical, thought-provoking, and “best thing on the ballot” — end with, “but it’s not SF, so I’ll vote for something else.”
I hate to think that’s how we honor great work.
I’ve been working my way through the packet. I probably won’t vote on the best novel category since I’m a fairly slow reader, and there is no way I can read all of the works in that category. I’ve read all of the short stories, and am working on the novelettes now. I’m also reading through the graphic stories and listening to the fan casts. So far I have 6 categories finished and my vote decided and written down on Evernote.
@@@@@Braid_Tug
I have a spreadsheet to keep track of all the nominees too. No way I could remember what I think of them all without it.
—-
I think McGuire/Grant is an excellent writer but the topic of most of her stories don’t do much for me. I always grade her high on craft and low on material. She’s been on the Hugo ballot so often I’ve read a ton of her stuff, but I wish she’d do something different.
I’m simultaneously bummed and grateful that a lot of the best novel noms didn’t provide full novels in the packet. I wish I could read the whole things but I definitely don’t have time to finish them all.
Novellette:
I enjoyed The Lady Astronaut of Mars quite a bit. I rather liked the Oz parallel and the writing style was grade A.
The Truth of Fact, The Truth of Feeling was well done and I enjoyed it although there was, for me, a bit of a feeling of disconnection from the story. I think that may have been on purpose as a subtext to the paralleling of writing and digital memory.
The Waiting Stars was also nicely done although it didn’t appeal to me quite as much as the previous two.
The Exchange Officers could have shaped up to a decent enough piece of action fluff with some good editing. As it stands, the writing was awkward enough to detract from the story flow.
Opera Vita Aeterna is not good. The plot manages to both meander and rush. The writing style is clunky and the philosophy trite. This work is not at all at the level I expect from a Hugo candidate.
Thanks to everyone for the tips on how to look at the editing category. I have a clearer idea of it now!
OK, I’ve just finished reading Ancillary Justice, and here are my impressions:
It’s a very, very good space opera. All the reviews tended to talk about were the whole gender thing, but nobody should be put off by this book because they’re afraid it’s a sociology lecture. This is a crackerjack political space thriller almost at the level of The Vor Game.
But it’s not perfect. The plot depends heavily on two staggeringly, vanishingly unlikely coincidences. I hate it when authors do this sort of thing–Leckie has painted a breathtakingly vast universe and then depends on Breq stumbling across people from her past as though they all live in the same small town. I spent the whole book unwilling to believe these were coincidences, waiting for an explanation of how Breq was a pawn in some larger plot…but no. And the ending chapter reads like a sequel-enabler tacked on at the last minute when the publisher asked her for another book in the series.
Still, this is a very good first novel and I look forward to reading more from Ann Leckie.
And the ending chapter reads like a sequel-enabler tacked on at the last
minute when the publisher asked her for another book in the series.
Actually, that comforts me. I knew it ended in medias res, and I was afraid that meant it was half a book: I’d much rather have a whole book with a tacked-on chapter than that.
Working my way through the stuff slowly, but at the moment my favourite novel in the Hugo packet is A Stranger in Olondria – which unfortunately isn’t nominated for Best Novel.
Campbell Memorial and Sturgeon winners are out: Strange Bodies by Marcel Theroux and “In Joy, Knowing the Abyss” by Sarah Pinsker respectively.
So I finished the novellettes and moved on to the novellas.
My vote is going to “The Waiting Stars,” because it was the only one to capture that good ol’ sense of wonder and leave me wanting to know more. “Lady Astronaut” was second; it was moving, but the SF was far from groundbreaking. I’ll rank “Opera Vita Aeterna” third, because even though it was the most poorly-executed, I liked what it was trying to do. Religion in SF is ususally either background fluff or an outright villain; I want to see more fantastical creatures grappling with theological crises. “The Truth of Fact” was written well enough, but it felt too much like an essay, and it was tepid in its examinations. “The Exchange Officers” ranks last for me because it was a purely military conflict. There was no character development, and the tech was yesterday’s news.
@RDNinja
Nice write-up on the novelettes.
My rank-ordering:
1. “The Truth of Fact, the Truth of Feeling” Ted Chiang
Exploring the effects of technology on the human condition is one of the definitions of science fiction that has often been bandied about. Of course, that definition is way too narrow. But this story actually fits within that definition; and fits powerfully, despite the detached, reportorial tone that is common to Ted Chiang’s fiction. An easy choice for #1 in this group. Ted Chiang is a Hugo-winning juggernaut. He has had 8 previous Hugo nominations. The first four times he was nominated, he lost. But he now has a four-nominee winning streak, and he may well be about to extend that streak.
2. “Opera Vita Aeterna” Vox Day
The two main characters here were vividly (and economically) drawn. I thought the evolution of their relationship was nicely portrayed. Hey, it was a more interesting relationship than the one between Elma and her husband Nathaniel in “Lady Astronaut of Mars.” It had more passion in it, too. Though somewhat foreshadowed, the ending sort of came out of nowhere for me. Still, it had impact.
3. “The Waiting Stars” Aliette de Bodard
Though the story captured my interest, the ending here was wacky even by science fiction standards. Talk about a bridge too far! What seems to be the main theme of de Bodard’s work (Asians gotta be Asians, let Asians be Asians, don’t be trying to colonialize the Asians!”) doesn’t really resonate with me. I’m just not big on ethnic solidarity. Also, I have no clue why the Galactic Federation was doing what it was doing to the mind-ships/girls. Seemed like a lot of trouble to me.
4. “Lady Astronaut of Mars” Mary Robinette Kowal
An aging astronaut, one possible final mission, a dying husband…adds up to a Hugo nomination, I guess. Elma the astonaut has this unquenchable desire to be in space. We’re supposed to just accept this. Look, I’m a long time science fiction reader. I think it would be cool to go in space. I also think it would get old fast. After all, what is Elma signing up for? Years of solitary confinement in a tiny room that will definitely be damaging to her health. (Sounds awesome. Sign me up!) Anyway, it will get her away from her dying husband, which she seems to regard mostly as a perk. Except for the guilt she’ll feel. But Doctor Fangirl will look after him (I guess her medical practice isn’t that busy). I really disliked the final line. It’s supposed to make us feel better that she has a metaphorical means to “let my husband fly.” But that poor, magnanimous dude isn’t flying anywhere, literally or figuratively. The story contains the sentence: “That the need to explore is necessary.” Kowal has done better.
5. “The Exchange Officers” Brad R. Torgersen
Torgersen gives us no reason to have a stake in the outcome.
I think it’s going to be a battle between Chiang and Kowal. I’m pretty confident de Bodard will finish third.
My rank-ordering for the Best Short Story category:
1. “If You Were a Dinosaur, My Love” Rachel Swirsky
Maybe not REALLY SFF, but the way this story is revealed is quite artful. It does have some emotional power, for sure.
2. “The Water That Falls on You from Nowhere” John Chu
For the first few pages I thought it was going to be eye-rollingly bad. Not exactly good, in my view, but it creates some distinctive characters and sustains them. If the “water falling” phenomenon described in this story actually started happening, the effects on society would be far greater than what is implied by this story!
3. “Selkie Stories Are for Losers” Sofia Samatar
Rather oblique, and it never really builds up a head of steam for me. A lot of wistfulness in this story.
4. “The Ink Readers of Doi Saket” Thomas Olde Heuvelt
I was not amused, and I think I was supposed to be.
My best guess is that “Water Falls” will edge out “Dinosaur” for the Hugo. In 8 of the last 9 years, the short story I’ve ranked last has finished last in the voting. I suspect this year will make it 9 of the past 10.
OK, I read the novellas, and I wasn’t hugely impressed overall:
“Wakulla Springs” didn’t have an SF element at all, and also lacked any kind of plot. Sure, lots of somewhat interesting things happened, but they seemed to be connected only by theme.
“The Chaplain’s Legacy” was OK, but the whole “human and alien combatants must work together to survive” plot is overdone.
“Sixgun Snow White” was interesting, but the ending was bizzare, ambiguous, and unsatisfying. It will probably get my third spot.
“Equoid” was interesting, and is vying for my top spot. My only complaint was that the narrative voice was trying too hard to be clever. It was packed so full of witticisms and allusions, I had to check myself a few times to make sure I understood what he was saying.
“The Butcher of Khardov” is also fighting for my top spot. The story structure reminded me (bizarrely) of “500 Days of Summer,” in the way it used a non-linear plot to overlay happy scenes with despair of what we know is coming. As tie-in fiction for a game I’m not at all familiar with, I never felt I was missing out on crucial informatikn about the setting.
@50: the connecting theme in “Wakulla Springs” is that is followed one family line from the 1920’s – 1980’s (?). But yes, it was light on SF elements, unless you count the dream monkey interview, and the glimpse of a webbed hand at the end.
I’ve read all the Novels, Short Stories, an Novelettes (expect the Vox Day), thus far. making inroads on the Cambell writers. Funny how they seem to be the most generous with their work for consideration.
The Novels really highlight the wide spectrum that is SF to me. Each on was so different in what the genre embraces. So really it comes down to what is your cup of tea.
Novelettes: I plan to read the Vox Day entry. I understand it was an organized campaign of his fans that won the nomination. So even if the guy does have personal beliefs I object to, I’ll give the story a fair shake.
I’m torn between Kowal’s “LAoM” and de Boadard’s “The Waiting Stars.”
But Ted Chaing’s work? Oh, can I see technology going that way. And it scares me.
Torgersen was a good, fun read – but nothing over the top for me.
Did anyone else expect a horror show of murder from “Meathouse Man?”
I was pleased it didn’t go down that rout, but also surprised I’ve not hear more people object to it.
Glad the guy actually searched for love and companionship with real people before he just switched to the “dolls” all the time.
But then there is the thought, of where do all these young strong bodies come from? both for the meathouse and for the games he becomes the master at? That’s its own line of horror.
Funny (to me) observation – I’m doing a Wheel of Time re-read (I’m up to the Eighth Book) – probably my fifth or sixth but first since AMOL came out – and it feels like one continuous story. The nomination is making sense to me at the moment.
@53, RobM: Good. That’s one reason why it’s fans nominated it that way. Book 13 does not stand on its own. You need the rest of the story to make it pay off.
Much like I’m happy Larry Correia provided the other two Grimnoir books. All three are needed for the payout of book 3.
PSA: the Retro Hugo packet is out, though my understanding is that it doesn’t contain everything.
@55: Thanks for the update!
PSA: The Leckie, McGuire and Stross ebooks all seem to have been reduced to £1.99 (c. $3.39 USD) during Hugo voting in the UK (backpedaling much?). If you haven’t got them yet, now’s the time!
Ok, I finished with my novel reading.
I’m not even touching Wheel of Time. I don’t like epic fantasy, and I don’t think a 15-book series belongs on the ballot.
I breezed through the sample of “Parasite,” and was surprised I finished so quickly. So it was very readable, and the characterization was good. But the plot was moving at a glacial pace. This is a zombie novel, right? 100 pages in, and there was not so much as a nibble! I might have read the whole thing if I got it in the packet, but the sample did not inspire me to go buy the full novel.
I’m not sure why, but “Neptune’s Brood” just failed to grab me. I’m willing to chalk it up to a matter of taste, but I didn’t finish the sample before I got bored.
I really wanted to like “Ancillary Justice,” so I gave it more of a chance than I normally would, in hopes of seeing why so many people loved it. But… I still don’t get it. There wasn’t even the faintest hint of a plot before the end of chapter 5, and the characterization of the protagonist was shallow and unengaging. After the first few chapters, I knew more about a fishing rights dispute thousands of years in the past than I did the protagonist’s goals and motivations. I’m honestly struggling to find what so many people enjoyed about this book.
“Warbound” is easily my top pick. The characters and worldbuilding were fun and engaging, and Correia’s action scenes are the best I’ve seen.
@58:
I saw “Parasite” more as a body snatchers type story. But read the whole book, not just the sample provided. But no, it remains rather a slow build up for a reveal I figured out in chapter 3. I might read other peoples reviews of the next two books to see where the story goes, but don’t have much interest in the books themselves.
And while they do attack, it’s not the “brains…” of normal zombie stories.
Ancillary Justice, part of me thinks people love it because the concept of Berq as the last remaining part of a larger AI with lots of ancillaries. It is a very cool concept. But yes, you have to stick it out and deal with the unexplained flashbacks for a long time to understand her.
I’m sad to hear you are not even given WOT a chance. Until a “Best Series” category is created for the Hugos, it was ruled a legal nomination. But others feel like you do.
There is Leigh Butler’s summary of it here on Tor.com,
http://www.tor.com/blogs/2014/06/the-wheel-of-time-hugo-refresher
So if you only want to read it and the last book, you will have read at least a sample.
I didn’t think that I would finish WOT before the end of July, but I did. Not that it changes my vote which I had already cast after reading upto book 3, I think the first three books give a sufficient feel for this series for voting purposes.
Regarding the nomination, I rather admire the WOT fans for finding the loophole that allowed this to be nominated and making it happen. It does violate the spirit of the Hugos, but so what, we all love it when the protagonists in the books find similar ‘ loophole’ ways to get what they want.
Are there any thoughts on the retro categories? My ranking of the novels there would be:
1: The Sword in the Stone. The first and most recognisable volume of White’s fantasy classic.
2: Out of the Silent Planet. My favorite Lewis, however, while the fantasy solar system is well-conceived, Lewis’s philosophy is far from subtle.
3: The Legion of Time. Fun early Williamson but he went on to write better books.
4: Galactic Patrol. Doc Smith’s space operas were influential at the time but his work got overtaken quite fast.
5: Carson of Venus. Not very interesting: Burroughs tries to recapture something of the early Barsoom novels but the result reads like self-plagarism.
Anyone else find the bright background colors on the Retro Fanzine pages hard to deal with? The items are fine, but the pages bright yellow hurts!
@62: I agree that it’s irritating (I think Novae Terrae might take it: I’m sure there are still enough British fans who remember the later New Worlds). However, I’m slightly more concerned about the fact that the 1938 R.U.R. (from Best Dramatic Presentation) no longer seems to exist, though surely the Welles War of the Worlds has that category sewn up.
From this link? I got the MP3s to play, but not anything else.
http://www.mercurytheatre.info/
And yes, I think War of the Worlds will win based on recognition and influence. Who has not heard the story of it coming out, and people thinking it was real?
@64: Yes, that War of the Worlds will get a British and American fanbase behind it, though I think the panic was rather overstated. William Tenn nonetheless wrote this rather good essay about it, “Welles or Wells”: http://dpsinfo.com/williamtenn/welles.html.
I’ve seen a few people mention putting No Award in various places in their ballots and I thought that I would mention how No Award actually functions as it can be a tad confusing and not necessarily work as expected. No Award is essentially treated like other nominees with a special caveat of the final No Award test. This means that if you place multiple nominees below No Award they can actually end up contributing to the final winner. The eventual winner must also have had won more votes than “No Award” in a final test. Also, at least 25% of people who voted in any of the other categories must have also voted in this one, else no Hugo is awarded for this category.
Here are a few scenarios that I culled from discussions on Making Light and the Hugo site that I found helpful:
Suppose that for one of the categories we have nominees with the titles of Awesome Sauce, Nifty Idea (that’s been done many times before), Boring Crap, Rusty Nail Soufflé, and Poison Ivy Casserole.
A voter decides that none of the works deserve a Hugo and votes as:
1. No Award
2. Nifty Idea (that’s been done many times before)
3. Awesome Sauce
4. Boring Crap
5. Rusty Nail Soufflé
When the votes are tallied, the first thing that happens is a tally of 1st place votes. If a nominee gets more than 50% 1st place votes, it’s the winner (with the previous caveats).
If that doesn’t happen, then the nominee that has the fewest 1st place votes is eliminated & people who voted it as their 1st place get their 2nd place preference redistributed to the remaining non eliminated nominees. Typically “No Award” has the fewest 1st place votes, so “No Award” gets eliminated. So the 2nd place vote, is now added to Nifty Idea. If this redistribution allows Nifty Idea to hit that 50% threshold, then Nifty Idea wins.
Otherwise, the remaining nominee with the fewest number of votes is eliminated (in this example let’s say it is Poison Ivy Casserole ), and everyone who voted PIC for their 1st place now get their 2nd place vote redistributed among the nominees still in play. And so on until a winner is found.
The second example shows putting No Award in second place and not voting for Poison Ivy Casserole:
1. Awesome Sauce
2. No Award
3. Nifty Idea (that’s been done many times before)
4. Boring Crap
5. Rusty Nail Soufflé
In the first round of tallying, no nominee got a majority, but No Award was the least most popular. So it gets eliminated. The ballot going into Round Two is effectively:
1. Awesome Sauce
2. Nifty Idea (that’s been done many times before)
3. Boring Crap
4. Rusty Nail Soufflé
Let’s say Poison Ivy Casserole is the least most popular in Round Two, so in Round Three, this ballot is effectively the same.
This time, we find that Awesome Sauce is the least most popular in Round Three. The new effective ballot is:
1. Nifty Idea (that’s been done many times before)
2. Boring Crap
3. Rusty Nail Soufflé
And now the derivative Nifty Idea wins the Hugo, with the initial #3, below No Award, contributing to the win.
So, if you really don’t want to vote for more than one of the nominees, it is best to leave them off the ballot. So, the previous ballot could have been:
1. Awesome Sauce
2. No Award
And then the voter would not have contributed to Nifty Idea (that’s been done many times before).
@66: Thank you for that information.
This is only my second time voting, so was not sure how the No Award worked. And the voting system makes me feel like I should be placing a number next to everything.
@stevenhalter
But in the case you use as an example the voting
“1. Awesome Sauce
2. No Award”
instead of
“1. Awesome Sauce
2. No Award
3. Nifty Idea (that’s been done many times before)
4. Boring Crap
5. Rusty Nail Soufflé”
could actually lead to Boring Crap winning instead of Nifty Idea, which might not be what the voter wanted at all. And it does not give “Awesome Sauce” any better chances at winning, or does it?
Kah-thurak@68:Yes, if you would rather have Nifty Idea win than have Boring Crap win, then it should be mentioned on the ballot.
1. Awesome Sauce
2. No Award
is saying that the only nominee that you think deserves an award is
Awesome Sauce . After that, you don’t have a preference but don’t want to contribute to any winning.
1. Awesome Sauce
2. No Award
3. Nifty Idea (that’s been done many times before)
4. Boring Crap
5. Rusty Nail Soufflé
Means that you really only want Awesome Sauce to win, but if it doesn’t and if No Award doesn’t win, you prefer Nifty Idea and then Boring Crap over Rusty Nail Soufflé.
So, placing nominees below No Award is perfectly fine, but has slightly different results than I have seen some people think it has. A common first misunderstanding that people have is that none of the nominees below No Award count.
It’s actually even more complicated than stevenhalter is saying. One of the classic mathematical theorems of all time is Arrow’s Impossibility Theorem, which basically says that no voting system (with at least 3 possible choices) can ever be “fair.” Here are some specific examples:
1. According to the voting rules outlined in the U.S. Constitution, it’s possible for a person to receive 11 total popular votes and be elected President. (There is exactly one voter in each of the eleven most populous states, and they all vote for that candidate. The state-by-state winner-take-all Electoral College then gives that candidate a majority of the electoral votes. The opponent gets all eligible voters in the other 39 states plus D.C.—for a total of several tens of millions of votes—and loses.) (It’s actually possible to get zero votes and win, as the Electoral College voters are not technically required to vote for a state’s popular winner, but that’s another story.)
2. Specifically in the Hugo voting system (HVS), you can construct an example where one work beats each of the other four head-to-head, but ends up in 3rd place. (I think you ought to be able to get it into 4th place, but I can’t quickly construct an example. You definitely can’t get it into last place.)
3. Related to #2, in the HVS, it’s possible to have “No Award” even if four of the five works beat “No Award” head-to-head.
4. In the HVS, if you prefer A to B, you can construct scenarios where in order for A to win you need to rank them B-A.
5. In the HVS, suppose that a group of voters prefer A to B. It’s possible to construct a scenario where keeping all other votes the same,
a. If the entire group give their true preferences, B wins.
b. If a certain portion of the group gives their true preferences and the rest omit both A and B from their ballots, A wins.
c. If the entire group omit A and B from their ballots, B wins.
Some of these weaknesses are inherent in the way the HVS runs, but no matter what voting system you choose, there will potentially be odd scenarios.
As a follow-up to my previous post, I just wanted to say that after seeing those facts (and a lot of the others that can happen in a preferential voting system with instant-runoff), a natural reaction is to throw one’s hands up and give up on democracy. So let me just say that (and this is intuition, rather than hard mathematics like my last post) I suspect that in most cases where your vote can actually swing the election, it probably pays to enter your true preferences. There will always be scenarios like #4 above where lying would be better, but without knowing everyone else’s votes, I suspect that the probability of getting the result you want is almost always going to be higher if you use your true preferences.
One more follow-up: I looked up the actual Hugo voting rules in the WSFS Constitution (not just the summary page), and according to the tie-break procedure, I’m pretty sure you can have a “Condorcet winner” (one that beats each other candidate head-to-head) who actually comes in last in the HVS. (This is because the voting procedure allows tied works to either simultaneously win or be eliminated; so modifying the example I have for it to be 3rd place should be possible. This also gives a way to have it be 4th place.)
I think I realized today what it is that I dislike about so many of the stories that are doing so well at the awards. In many of them, the protagonists do very little in the way of pursuing their own goals or overcoming opposition; instead, they merely passively experience suffering.
In “If You Were a Dinosaur, My Love,” one character experiences suffering off-screen, and the other does nothing in response but fantasize about revenge.
In “The Water that Falls on You From Nowhere,” the protagonist passively weathers abuse from his sister, until another character (his mother) shows him that his situation is not as bad as he thought.
In “Wakulla Springs,” the first protagonist has a goal at the beginning (saving money for college), but that quickly falls by the wayside as soon as she gets a job, and she spends the rest of her section passively experiencing racism. Likewise, her son in the next section has no clear goal, and passively experiences the world around him until (off-screen, in between sections) he becomes a successful business owner.
…and so on. Many of the other stories had the same problem to a lesser extent. So now I’m curious. Why does there seem to be such a fascination with passive protagonists?
There are also a number of very active protagonists. Breq in “Ancillary Justice” is on quite the active quest, Bob in “Equoid” has to take the reins of the situation and Krina rockets into action several times in “Neptune’s Brood” just to name a few.
So, I don’t think passivity dominates the slate.
For “If You Were a Dinosaur, My Love,” “The Water that Falls on You From Nowhere” and “Wakulla Springs,” I think that the general beauty of the language is what brings them to the fore.
Totally with you on the beauty of the language in the stories you mention, stevenhalter! Reading them almost made me feel like I was dreaming (I love it when language transports you like that). Finally, that’s why “Wakulla Springs” gets my vote: it simply enchanted me.
PSA (last one, I think): Ballots have to be in before 23:59 PDT Thursday 31st (that’s 07:59 BST Friday 1st). If you haven’t sent in your vote already, now would be a good time.
I have everything but the artist entered with the Hugo Awards. I’ve been looking at the art, but have tried not to let the name of the person sway me, so I have to double check the names.
Don’t forget the Retro Hugos too!
It will be interesting to see how it all falls out this year.
And thank you to those who explained how the “No Award” should work. I had to alter a few votes to make it work.
And thank you Tor.com for giving us this space!
Retro Hugo UStream is on, with the usual suite of technical issues.
ETA: Alright, I can’t lip-read all that well and there’s no closed captions for this unexpectedly silent ceremony, so I’m out.
It’s Hugo night at 20:00 BST. You can watch on the UStream channel (http://www.ustream.tv/hugo-awards) but when that gets pulled for vaguely-defined copyright reasons, there’s text coverage at http://www.thehugoawards.org/hugo-history/2014-hugo-awards-live-coverage/.