Fair warning: This is about that Hugo mess. I won’t be offended if you decide to read Scalzi instead.
I am a Depressed Doggie. I would call myself a sad puppy, but there are connotations I don’t want to invoke. Besides, the Sad Puppies are the root of the problem. Them and their Hugo ballot. Because you know what? For all that they want to “save” SFF, and for all that they champion real science fiction, the good old stuff of rocketships and blasters and alien invasions and fun stuff…
…their taste stinks.
Okay, maybe that’s too harsh. In most categories (disclosure, I read only the novella, novelette, and short story categories), I was able to read all the way through nearly all of the selections. And most of what I read (all the way through) was competent. Not surprising, since it had all been published, sometimes by top-flight markets into which I would love to break. But it wasn’t Hugo-worthy.
I’ve had some discussions with friends about what exactly makes a story “Hugo-worthy,” and the results have been mixed. In the end, I know it when I see it. To draw on a personal example, my first story in Daily Science Fiction, “Grinpa,” received a very nice review from Diabolical Plots. In fact, it was their only Recommended story that month. In explaining his choice, the editor said, “I should point out a recommended qualification is a story that makes me go ‘Wow!’ after I read it.” That’s how I feel about the Hugos. If a story didn’t make me go “wow,” it’s just not special enough to merit an award as “the best.”
And only one story out of everything I read even approached a “wow.” Frankly, in another year, I wouldn’t have voted for that one, but I felt like I had to vote for something. Because in every other fiction category I voted No Award. And after this one story, I voted No Award in that category, too.
How sad is that?
I know that the Puppies claim they had no agenda but to promote under-appreciated authors, but really? Maybe they’re under-appreciated for a reason. Most of the stories (though not all) were readable, even good, but that doesn’t make them great. Good doesn’t win awards; great does. I published a story that was eligible last year. It was readable; it was good…I think it was equal to most of what the Puppies put on the ballot. But that’s the problem: it was equal to most of what the Puppies put on the ballot. It was good, and readable, but not great. Not great enough for a Hugo.
That’s not easy to admit. But it does make me a better writer.
A Hugo-worthy writer? We’ll have to wait and see.
[…] Hugos were being manipulated by block voting, I did think that I had an eligible story which was equal to anything the block voters were putting up). In fact, I have my doubts that I ever will write […]