|
|
Uber User
Posts: 794
| Wow. The complete list is something else. The puppies seem to have swept the board. Included in the short list are "Space Raptor Butt Invasion" and an episode of "My Little Pony" (I kid you not). Breitbart has a the full list included who slated them:
http://www.breitbart.com/big-hollywood/2016/04/26/sci-fis-hugo-awar... |
|
| |
|
Uber User
Posts: 526
Location: UK | Is there a link that doesn't involve wading into that sewer?
I thought the novel and novella lists looked pretty good. I haven't read any of them yet, but I'd be happy to read all ten and have several of them on my wishlists. Further down there seemed to be some obvious trolling garbage.
Seems weird how the left want a free market while the right indulge in anti-trust cartel practices.
Anyway, I'm probably not taking part this year. The supporting membership seems a bit steep. |
|
| |
|
| I too think the Novels and Novellas list are fine and not really affected by any "slate" voting. I have not read any of the Novels yet but I have read two of the Novellas and they were both excellent and worthy of inclusion. By coincidence, two of the other Novellas are on my wish list with Amazon so looking forward to reading them as well. |
|
| |
|
Uber User
Posts: 1465
Location: The Netherlands | The novel and novella selections look decent but there are mostly still puppy choices. Pretty sure that without the slate the shortlist would have been very different. Nevertheless, it is nice to actually be able to pick something worthy this year. Unfortunately many of the other categories are just as filled with rubbish as last year. |
|
| |
|
Uber User
Posts: 263
Location: Gunnison, Colorado | The puppies had some "mainstream" picks this time. I don't know if this was done to gain respectability, or so that they can claim they "won" when one of these picks gets an award. Or maybe to see if voters will pick "no award" over their mainstream options...? |
|
| |
|
Uber User
Posts: 369
Location: Middle TN, USA | Personally I'm done with the Hugos until this nonsense works itself out. I have lost respect for the nomination process and the award. Maybe I am letting the puppies win, but I don't have time to wade through all the BS. For now I am suspending my personal challenge to read all the Hugo winners. I think I'll look at Locus winners for now. It's just such a shame.
Edited by Badseedgirl 2016-04-29 9:57 PM
|
|
| |
|
Uber User
Posts: 1057
| LodgeLion - 2016-04-29 4:41 AM
I too think the Novels and Novellas list are fine and not really affected by any "slate" voting. They were hugely affected by slate voting. Two of the novels and four of the five novellas were slated works. The only "redeeming" feature this year is that the slaters deliberately included some works which were quite popular, along with their dreck works. Which means that we have a few decent options, but they're not competing against the other popular works they should have been up against. It's a bit of a dog's breakfast, really -- but at least not as bad as last year. It will be interesting when the nominating totals come out after the ceremony to see which works would have made the ballot if the slaters had not participated. |
|
| |
|
Veteran
Posts: 111
Location: Austin, Tx | While I have stopped caring about this year's Hugos, I am hoping that the rule change put into place last year, effective next year, will make me care again. We'll see if the puppies find a way to game that. If they don't, I hope the Worldcon organization tries to turn some of this momentum into actual attendance numbers. I really enjoyed Lonestarcon when it was in San Antonio a few years back (right before the puppies started their stuff) and would hope that every scifi reader would give the Con a shot. |
|
| |
|
Uber User
Posts: 1465
Location: The Netherlands | Personally I still think only a massive increase in the number of people nominating will really solve the problem. Right now it only takes about 200 people to mess up the whole system. |
|
| |
|
New User
Posts: 1
| Hi. I searched the forums but couldn't find, can you link me where it is explained why Hugo and Nebula are on different year pages in the awards list?
Edited by booky 2018-07-18 6:52 AM
|
|
| |
|
Uber User
Posts: 1057
| booky - 2018-07-18 11:51 PM
Hi. I searched the forums but couldn't find, can you link me where it is explained why Hugo and Nebula are on different year pages in the awards list? booky, that's because SFWA calls the Nebula awards that they handed out this year the "2017 Nebulas", but WSFS calls the Hugo awards that they hand out this year the "2018 Hugos". It's down to different practices by the two organizations. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 27
| Any thoughts on the Hugos this year? I really hope Jemisin three-peats for Stone Sky, and if not that Scalzi takes it home. In my opinion, I don't understand what Six Wakes is doing on the list. I thought it was had an interesting concept but the writing was completely mediocre and sloppy. Usually I respect the finalists even if I don't enjoy them but I'm baffled by this one. Also surprised to see Provenance on the list. It's good but nowhere near the Radch trilogy. Seems more like a default inclusion because people like Leckie. Much more deserving books out there but oh well.
Murderbot is basically a lock, but the other two fiction categories seem up in the air to me. I'd put my money on Series of Steaks, and Welcome to Your Authentic Indian Experience. |
|
| |
|
Uber User
Posts: 1057
| pgcarron - 2018-08-04 9:07 AM
Any thoughts on the Hugos this year? I'm just the opposite. I've loved Jemisin's two other series, but while I can appreciate the craft in The Broken Earth trilogy, I don't love those books, and feel as though they've already been well-rewarded. The Stone Sky does not stand on its own at all, which is part of my criteria for Hugo Best Novel. I loved Six Wakes, and it was first on my ballot. I really enjoyed The Collapsing Empire, but don't feel it's quite up to what I expect in a Hugo winner. Provenance is not as good as the Ancillary books, but it's still very good, and it does stand alone. It took me a couple of tries to really get into the Machineries of Empire series, but once I did I really enjoyed it; however, I don't think Raven Strategem works well on its own as a Hugo. And New York 2140 I found to be really tedious with cardboard characters about whom I didn't care a whit, and it went below No Award. For Novella, I thought Murderbot and below that And Then There Were N-one were levels above the rest. For Novelette, I thought "The Secret Life of Bots" and "A Series of Steaks" were by far the best. I had "The Martian Obelisk", "Sun, Moon, Dust", and "Welcome" in the first 3 places and put the others below No Award. For Series, I thought Divine Cities was the best by leaps and bounds, but Raksura and Lady Trent fought a tight battle for second place. InCryptid I didn't care for at all (although I love October Daye) and Stormlight Archive doesn't even pretend to be a complete story yet, so both those went below No Award. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 27
| I mostly feel the same about Raven Stratagem and NY 2140. NY is one of those books that I respect if not necessarily enjoy. Points for ambition if nothing else. And I completely agree about Divine Cities. I love that series and have my fingers and toes crossed that it wins. |
|
| |
Hugo Awards