Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Monday August 24 2015, @02:41AM   Printer-friendly
from the white-males-have-enough-awards dept.

So, last night the SJW types over at the Hugo awards decided they'd rather burn the whole thing to the ground than give out an award based on what the readers like instead of social justice reasons:

The members of the World Science Fiction Society rejected the slate of finalists in five categories, giving No Award in Best Novella, Short Story, Related Work, Editor Short Form, and Editor Long Form. This equals the total number of times that WSFS members have presented No Award in the entire history of the Hugo Awards, most recently in 1977.

Here are a few of the people on the #SadPuppies slate that should be quite surprised to learn that they were denied a chance at an award for being white males when they wake up this morning: Rajnar Vajra, Larry Correia, Annie Bellet, Kary English, Toni Weisskopf, Ann Sowards, Megan Gray, Sheila Gilbert, Jennifer Brozek, Cedar Sanderson, and Amanda Green.

takyon: Here are in-depth explanations of the Hugo Awards controversy.

Previously: "Rightwing lobby has 'broken' Hugo awards" Says George R.R. Martin (240 comments)


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 24 2015, @05:58AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 24 2015, @05:58AM (#226887)

    You have the Sad Puppies confused with the Rabid Puppies. The Rabid Puppies are openly conservative and reactionary. The Sad Puppies are a slate of diverse authors who are upset about Tor owning the SFWA and demanding that everybody agree with every little thing John Scalzi says to have a chance at winning the Hugo, which should be based on the merit of the work and not whose ass the author kisses. Art suffers under a dictatorship.

  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by ticho on Monday August 24 2015, @06:26AM

    by ticho (89) on Monday August 24 2015, @06:26AM (#226892) Homepage Journal

    Sad puppies, rabid puppies... Anyone else here confused and sadly wondering what happened to science fiction that they loved since childhood?

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 24 2015, @08:39AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 24 2015, @08:39AM (#226926)

      That is likely the only overlap between this fiasco and gamergate. Gamers never cared about gender or racial politics. They were in it for the medium itself. Don't worry, this will pass as those that are not doing it for love of the medium will burn out and move on to battle in other political arenas soon enough.

    • (Score: 4, Interesting) by mcgrew on Monday August 24 2015, @05:25PM

      by mcgrew (701) <publish@mcgrewbooks.com> on Monday August 24 2015, @05:25PM (#227127) Homepage Journal

      Anyone else here confused and sadly wondering what happened to science fiction that they loved since childhood?

      In my case, the authors are all dead. I'm the only one I know of who writes like that any more (although my stories may be a tad bit more insane). Personally, I'm sick of dreary stories of dystopian futures. It seems that all of today's authors want to be George Orwell, writing 1984s and Animal Farms.

      --
      Free Martian whores! [mcgrewbooks.com]
    • (Score: 3, Interesting) by bzipitidoo on Monday August 24 2015, @06:26PM

      by bzipitidoo (4388) on Monday August 24 2015, @06:26PM (#227162) Journal

      SF needs new blood. It's not so much that new ideas are needed as that authors should drop wrong ideas. The embarrassing part is that some of these ideas have been kicking around for decades.

      Among the worst are ideas on copyright and intellectual property. Unlike a lot of other ideas, that one arouses personal feelings and fears in authors. "How will I earn a living without copyright?" they wail. And so most can't write rationally about that subject. The futures many envision still have ridiculously strong copyright protection. Books are on the way to becoming a quaint relic of the past, entirely supplanted by digital copies, yet in a lot of SF, the paperless office has yet to entirely arrive.

      Then there's Faster Than Light travel. The reality we live in is that FTL travel probably is impossible. Every way we've thought up to do it takes absurd amounts of power, or exotic matter, or something else that is utterly impractical or flat impossible. Do the plots really need FTL tech? Mostly, no. Things would take longer, a whole lot longer, and of course some things wouldn't be possible or worth doing. Yet most SF has it. Why? Are they bowing to impatient audiences? Is it so we can act like visiting planets by spaceship is about the same as visiting cities by train? It may be that no FTL travel has kept us safely isolated from hostile aliens, and rather than pining for it, we should be glad it's impossible.

      Worse yet is traveling back in time. Forward is fine, nothing wrong with that, we all experience it always. If anything really ruins a story, it's unlimited ability to travel back in time. Any time anyone makes a mistake, just hop back in time and fix it. I suspect that not only is traveling back in time impossible, but that the very thought is a misunderstanding of reality, and we wouldn't even be talking about it if we had a better understanding. Typical time traveling stories restrict the time travel in essentially arbitrary ways, to keep it from being so powerful. Of course in many stories, time travel is the central mechanism that everything revolves around, and the story is an exploration of the ramifications, That's okay, but we have enough of those. It becomes as tiresome as yet another story of what it would be like if the world is flat and you could sail off the edge.

      Then there's overbearing space opera, the sort of drama which pushes perfectly valid and often blindingly obvious ideas aside for the sake of making things more dramatic. For instance, in Star Trek, why do they always, always send out an Away Team? Don't they have drones? Remotely operated robots? Probes?

      This touches on another problem, which is the desire of people to be the center of action. The amount of personal action needed to accomplish anything is just silly.

    • (Score: 3, Funny) by cafebabe on Tuesday August 25 2015, @10:54AM

      by cafebabe (894) on Tuesday August 25 2015, @10:54AM (#227516) Journal

      I thought that the Sad Puppies was a series of young-adult science-fiction books. Or maybe a graphic novel. I'm vaguely disappointed that it isn't.

      --
      1702845791×2
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 24 2015, @09:55AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 24 2015, @09:55AM (#226957)

    > You have the Sad Puppies confused with the Rabid Puppies.

    The rabid puppies got all of their nomination choices accepted, the sad puppies were not so successful. When there was a choice between sad noms and rabid noms, the rabids won and the sads lost.

    I can see how if you consider yourself just a sad puppy you want to distinguish yourself from the rabids, but there is tons of overlap between the two groups and the rabids got more votes over all, they are clearly leading the movement.

    • (Score: 1, Troll) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday August 24 2015, @10:15AM

      Sad suggested blocks of authors and said pick your favorites to vote for. Rabid laid out fixed blocks and said vote exactly like this. And when it came time to vote? Sad and Rabid both voted for the books they thought best while the SJWs took their flamethrowers to the categories.

      --
      My rights don't end where your fear begins.
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 24 2015, @10:18AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 24 2015, @10:18AM (#226965)

        Another non-sequitur response. Nothing you wrote contradicts the point that rabids were more succesful at getting their noms than sads were and thus are leading the movement.