The Sword and Laser discussion

Minor correction: SFWA is the Nebulas. The Hugo awards are from Worldcon members

Keep an eye on Brad's site if you want to know what the Sad Puppies are all about.
https://bradrtorgersen.wordpress.com/

You might not like their point, but they do have a point, and it should not be ignored. This year they are also pushing to get gaming and media included in at least one category. (Star Wars, Trek, etc.)

Also...the rocket on the campaign patch cracks me up.

Lindsay wrote: "Minor correction: SFWA is the Nebulas. The Hugo awards are from Worldcon members"

Ooo, thanks. I'll fix that.

Thane wrote: "Keep an eye on Brad's site if you want to know what the Sad Puppies are all about.
https://bradrtorgersen.wordpress.com/

You might not like their point, but they do have a point, and it should not..."

Looks to me like a bunch of strawman arguments. For example, on the orthodoxies of WorldCon voters:

RULE #3: thou shalt not publicly criticize Worldcon or “fandom” proper.

Either he's being disingenuousness, or he's so far removed from fandom that he doesn't know what goes on inside it. Between RaceFail, the WisCon mess, and the recent rehashing of the Breendoggle, it's hard to see how the same people who object to Torgersen and his clique are unwilling to criticize fandom.

The whole popularity argument is idiotic.

First, any decent marketing department can make a book a bestseller. But if the book doesn't have quality, it's going to go the way of Jonathan Livingston Seagull, The Celestine Prophesy, and The Bridges of Madison County. Does anyone really think Larry Correia's Monster Hunter series is going to remain popular a decade from now?

Second, something being popular doesn't mean everyone who buys it thinks it's the best thing ever. I'm sure everyone here eats at McDonalds at least once in a while, but if we picked our Top 5 restaurants, would any of us put it on the list? I wouldn't even put it on a list of my Top 5 fast food restaurants.

Sean wrote: "Thane wrote: "Keep an eye on Brad's site if you want to know what the Sad Puppies are all about.
https://bradrtorgersen.wordpress.com/

You might not like their point, but they do have a point, and..."

*shrugs* I disagree. But that's my opinion. If I'm the sole Sad Puppy supporter of the Sword & Laser, then so be it. Hm. SSPSSL???

Someone said Ancillary Justice was just kind of handed an award last year, and I tend to agree. I'm looking over the S&L posts, and I'm not seeing anything overwhelmingly positive about it. Does anyone even remember anything about this book except for the pronouns?

Now look at the ongoing Sparrow discussion. Big religious discussions. Personal reactions. Someone wants to have dinner with the characters.

How about Night Circus? There's a post called "The Point at Which I Fell in Love."

AJ? Yeah. Not so much. I'm not seeing the love. Just pronouns and an award.

And yes, I do think Correia's MHI will be popular a decade from now. Larry's a turbo powered writer for sure, but a decade isn't that long in terms of a book series. ISN'T THAT RIGHT, MR. G.R.R MARTIN.

Thane wrote: "Someone said Ancillary Justice was just kind of handed an award last year, and I tend to agree. I'm looking over the S&L posts, and I'm not seeing anything overwhelmingly positive about it. Does anyone even remember anything about this book except for the pronouns?"

I bought it the day after it won the Hugo and found that it absolutely and totally deserved the award. I thought it was the best SF novel to come out since The City & The City (also a Hugo winner). They keep giving the awards to books like these and I have no problem with whoever does the voting.

Thane wrote: Someone said Ancillary Justice was just kind of handed an award last year, and I tend to agree. I'm looking over the S&L posts, and I'm not seeing anything overwhelmingly positive about it. Does anyone even remember anything about this book except for the pronouns?"

Ehh I didn't like Ancillary Justice, but it had other good ideas the whole split/broken AI lead thing was really cool and why I was so hyped to read it. It spent too much time floundering around on the planet early on for my tastes, then the actual ending/resolution it wasn't bad but it also felt a bit too convenient.

The other thing is Sparrow I feel has more to talk about while Ancillary Justice which I felt was pronouns, POV shenanigans, Imperialism=bad.

Also you will not be alone on that Sad Puppy ballot.

Aaron wrote: "
Also you will not be alone on that Sad Puppy ballot. "


DUAL Sole Sad Puppy Supporters! Like the Lone Gunmen.

Thane wrote: "Keep an eye on Brad's site if you want to know what the Sad Puppies are all about."

“And when the three puppy astronauts — Ray, Isaac, and Frank — observed the lay of the alien land on Hugo World, they let out a forlorn howl. For they saw nothing but tedious ‘message’ fiction, depressing talk-talk stories about amoral people with severe ennui, and literary MFA novels. Not a rocketship nor a ray gun in sight.

Assuming "Ray, Isaac, and Frank" are a reference to Bradbury, Asimov, and Herbert--are we talking about the same Bradbury, Asimov, and Herbert? The Bradbury who wrote a literary, melancholic piece about colonialists wiping out, then mourning an ancient civilization as their own extinguished itself? The Asimov who constantly examined the intersections of technological advancement and cultural institutions with human society? The Herbert who skewered the notion of Messianism and the Great Man of History?

Because that seems to run counter to this sentiment from an earlier post:

I’ll say it again: the Hugos (and the Nebulas too) have lost cachet, because at the same time SF/F has exploded popularly — with larger-than-life, exciting, entertaining franchises and products — the voting body of “fandom” have tended to go in the opposite direction: niche, academic, overtly to the Left in ideology and flavor, and ultimately lacking what might best be called visceral, gut-level, swashbuckling fun. The kind of child-like enjoyment that comes easily and naturally when you don’t have to crawl so far into your brain (or your navel) that you lose sight of the forest for the trees.

What is this "opposite direction?" When have the Hugos ever been about "visceral, gut-level, swashbuckling fun?" Does he mean Starship Troopers, a novel that has maybe two battle scenes and endless discussions about civic engagement, the nature of state-sponsored violence, and the meaning of citizenship? The Golden Age writers were all about raising SF above its populist, pulp roots into a literary and commercial genre acceptable for adult readers. How many past Hugo winners qualify as "visceral, gut-level, swashing buckling fun?" Maybe Lois Bujold's Vorkosigan books, in between their political scheming and detailed characterization? Ironically, Redshirts is probably the most recent winner to fit the description. That and Ancillary Justice had more rocketships and ray guns than the previous dozen Hugo Winners put together.

It's rather confusing to want recognition for the populist, crowd-pleasing SF works (apparently sales and a devoted fanbase aren't recognition enough?) while simultaneously invoking the forebears who spent their careers defining and defending the genre as something more than mere populist, pulp entertainment. It comes across as something like, "It was okay that the Golden Age writers were literary and message-oriented, because they also had rocketships and ray guns. But SF today shouldn't be about messages or writing craft or philosophy, and should have more rocketships and ray guns"--even while actual science tells us interstellar travel and energy weapons are less and less likely to happen this century, if at all. Is there an actual cohesive mission statement here, or is it just "I want my friends and imprint-mates invited into the Hugo clubhouse?"

Thane wrote: "*shrugs* I disagree. But that's my opinion."

Of course you are allowed your own opinion on books and so forth, but everyone isn't allowed an opinion on what other peoples opinions are. And the idea that fandom isn't self-critical is clearly hogwash. As this entire thread has shown.

I thought Ancillary Justice was great and clearly the nominated book that should've won. I mean I might've liked Neptune's Brood a bit more, but I understand interstellar economics isn't for everyone. :)

Joe Informatico wrote: "Thane wrote: "Keep an eye on Brad's site if you want to know what the Sad Puppies are all about."

“And when the three puppy astronauts — Ray, Isaac, and Frank — observed the lay of the alien land ..."

All interesting points worth considering. Of course, back when those literary giants were winning the awards SF/F and its fandom was not even close to the explosive force it is today. We're talking movies, tv, games, apps, etc. We've got to consider what SF/F looks like today. If the Sad Puppy authors sell enough books and have enough fans to get themselves nominated, they probably should have been there all along.

Don't get me wrong. If I read all the books on the SP slate and then read a nomination from off the slate that just blew them all out of the water, I'd vote for it over the slate. That's how it should be, instead of pretending "those people" don't exist for purely political reasons.

Olivia wrote: ""SJWs" - "Sad Puppies" Can we cut the petty, political, agenda driven BS and just talk about books here please?..."

Well, yeah. That's one of Sad Puppies main points!

I too am behind on Cibola Burn. Hope to get to it next. I wouldn't let it being part of a series stop me from voting for it, if it's as good as I hope it will be.

Thane wrote: "Olivia wrote: ""SJWs" - "Sad Puppies" Can we cut the petty, political, agenda driven BS and just talk about books here please?..."

Well, yeah. That's one of Sad Puppies main points!

I too am beh..."

Yes. Exactly. Being on the other side doesn't make it right. Where's my $5?

Olivia wrote: "On a non-book related note, aside from Interstellar, what does everyone think is going up in the Best Dramatic Presentation Long Form Category?

Reboot of the Planet of the Apes and Edge of Tomorrow.

And oh dear battling heavens I just realized we're going to see an Avengers vs Star Wars fight in 2016 aren't we? "

Mad Max will grind them to dust.

Movies and TV shows are decidedly off-topic, though I appreciate the pivot. Regardless they deserve their own thread, which I have started:

https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

Especially put your nominations for best TV episodes there, it is harder to sort out.

Thane wrote: "Sean wrote: "Thane wrote: "Keep an eye on Brad's site if you want to know what the Sad Puppies are all about.
https://bradrtorgersen.wordpress.com/

You might not like their point, but they do have..."

I'll declare my undying love for AJ then. The point I fell in love? The immensely suspenseful sequence were Justice of Toren gets destroyed (not a spoiler, that's the premise of the story). Or maybe it was the bit where One Esk was singing from multiple viewpoints. Hard to say. And guess what? I thought Ancillary Sword was even better, overall.

If you really think Ancillary Justice could rake in all those awards and high praise from critics and fans alike just because it used "she" a lot, then I really don't know what to tell you. And I guess there's not a lot of point in discussing it anyway.

It's a divisive book for sure, but it's a heck of a lot more fun and imaginative than Torgensons turgid crap.

Kevin wrote: I'll declare my undying love for AJ then. The point I fell in love? The immensely suspenseful sequence were Justice of Toren gets destroyed (not a spoiler, that's the premise of the story). Or maybe it was the bit where One Esk was singing from multiple viewpoints. Hard to say. And guess what? I thought Ancillary Sword was even better, overall."

Certainly the most I've seen anyone discuss anything that happens in the book. Thanks.

Joe Informatico wrote: "Assuming "Ray, Isaac, and Frank" are a reference to Bradbury, Asimov, and Herbert--are we talking about the same Bradbury, Asimov, and Herbert? The Bradbury who wrote a literary, melancholic piece about colonialists wiping out, then mourning an ancient civilization as their own extinguished itself? The Asimov who constantly examined the intersections of technological advancement and cultural institutions with human society? The Herbert who skewered the notion of Messianism and the Great Man of History?"

You don't even have to look at their writing. Before he became a writer, Asimov was part of the Futurians, a group dedicated to making the genre more political.

In fact, if you want a list of authors who were down with politicizing the genre, you can't go wrong with this, which includes both Asimov and Bradbury, along with a hundred some more authors.

The last book in Elizabeth Bear's Eternal Sky Trilogy, Steles of the Sky could make a great Hugo nomination as I have heard nothing, but great things about the trilogy. Many of my Goodreads friend and myself want to start the series this year.

Yes, that series is on my to-read list as well and I've only heard good things about it.

Here's what I put on my Hugo nomination for for Books. They were just the five sci fi/fantasy books I enjoyed the most this year.

The First Fifteen Lives of Harry August
World of Trouble
City of Stairs
Ancillary Sword
My Real Children

No nominations for Hannu Rajaniemi? The Causal Angel ought to be in the running. It's the third in the trilolgy, but that shouldn't stop anyone here. All of them are fantastic and only get better on multiple reads.

As for popularity contests, I think these will be on a slow burn, unfortunately, until a wailing sea of fans rise up in a decade to demand a franchise.

In my humble opinion. :)

Yea the main problem with the Hugos is the obvious thing: the 2014 books get nominated by folks in early 2015. That isn't much time! People say it is a popularity contest, but really it's whatever books have the most buzz as they are published. Slow burns will all get missed by Hugo and by most other awards really.

I thought the Quantum Thief and it's sequels were excellent but I would describe the series as having a significant barrier to entry. A couple of friends of mine bounced off these pretty hard.

Maybe a Nebula nomination (although I don't think it's likely if the first two weren't nominated), but I don't see it having a wide enough appeal to get up for a Hugo nomination.

Lindsay wrote: "I thought the Quantum Thief and it's sequels were excellent but I would describe the series as having a significant barrier to entry. A couple of friends of mine bounced off these pretty hard.

Ma..."

I ended up lemming that one. I just couldn't relate to the characters and I had a little difficulty following the action. I had similar trouble with not relating to the characters in Iain M. Banks' Culture novels even though the settings were unbelievably varied and often quite genius. I don't have much in common with a character living post-Singularity, although a story in the beginning or midst of a singularity can often be interesting because watching humans handle disruption is often interesting.

Thane wrote: "How about Night Circus? There's a post called "The Point at Which I Fell in Love.""

To be fair, the reason I created that post was because the fact that I fell in love with the book caught me totally by surprise. I didn't expect to like The Night Circus at all, mostly because I thought it was going to be about sophisticated vampires.

Joanna wrote: "Thane wrote: "How about Night Circus? There's a post called "The Point at Which I Fell in Love.""

To be fair, the reason I created that post was because the fact that I fell in love with the book ..."

Understood.

I'm just now actually reading The Sparrow and get the dinner party thing now. Who knows if I'll get to Night Circus, but posts like that push it closer to the top of the list.

Though it may be hard to find a copy, bat.country should get a mention - in terms of abstraction alone it's an odd piece

Ulmer Ian wrote: "I also think we'll probably see a second round of sad puppies and/or other groups doing a similar set ballot now that Larry Correia has demonstrated the viability of that strategy.

Agh how depress..."

Here's the thing. The Hugos haven't had disorganized voting for years. Larry is simply trying to even the playing field, as the Hugos are now based on authors' politics as much as good books. And that's what's sad.

Wilson wrote: "Here's the thing. The Hugos haven't had disorganized voting for years. Larry is simply trying to even the playing field, as the Hugos are now based on authors' politics as much as good books. And that's what's sad. "

Just because Brad Torgersen and Larry Correia say something doesn't make it so. As far as I'm aware there have been no "left wing" political voting slates put up. The only ones I've seen referred to in their writing have been prediction lists not unlike the one I did in this thread back in September.

What we have been seeing is the rise of authors as internet celebrities (John Scalzi, Seanan McGuire/Mira Grant and Charlie Stross for example) who have huge blog readerships which push their works to the forefront of people's awareness. People attend WorldCon for all sorts of reasons, not just because they like literary works and all WorldCon attendees can nominate. It's not surprising that in the absence of strong feelings about best works that popular authors would get nominated.

As far as the Sad Puppies thing goes ... I don't agree with a lot of their assumptions. Looking at the Hugo Award Novels for the last 5 years the sole instance of "message fiction" I see is The Windup Girl back in 2010. Even overly literary works aren't hugely represented.

But all that being said, I don't find their voting slate to be terribly egregious. Mostly unremarkable stuff, but nothing hugely offensive like last year's.

Wilson wrote: "Ulmer Ian wrote: "I also think we'll probably see a second round of sad puppies and/or other groups doing a similar set ballot now that Larry Correia has demonstrated the viability of that strategy..."

Oh please. All this harking back to good-old-days-that-never-were makes me role my eyes so hard I'm getting friction burns on my eye balls. Hugo voting has always been about in-crowds and cliques and politics. The only things that are different now is *which* in-crowds and their politics are at the forefront.

Besides that, Correia gets no sympathy from me: everyone who throws himself in with the likes of Beale is on his own as far as I'm concerned.

Lindsay wrote: "As far as the Sad Puppies thing goes ... I don't agree with a lot of their assumptions. Looking at the Hugo Award Novels for the last 5 years the sole instance of "message fiction" I see is The Windup Girl back in 2010."

Uhhhhh Ancillary Justice 2014?


Artsy awards basically always lean left it's just a thing, and I think your right about the rise of internet celebrities bloggers probably just focused/organized the group a bit better. I think it's more of a focusing/organization of the rightwing/pulpy authors the above would ignore.

I think that allying with Beale was part of the point of showing that people would vote against a book just because they hated the author.

http://uncannymagazine.com/article/po... This blog post from Jim Hines seems relevant. I basically agree with everything he says except I thought that Harry Potter's politics weren't actually all that great, despite Rowling's intentions.

So what is saying is by not challenging the norm, you are making a political statement. I do agree with there is a political statement behind power corrupts and good underdog scrappin though yes and I see how that is a political statement.

The difference between a political book and a non political book is if the politics and the message is largely the point. Look at Atlas Shrugged this is a book in my mind that is a political book the point of the book is a political message. Compare this to well lets go with the Dresden Files where it's far less political, because the primary goal is him trying to do a small current good not some overwhelming overwrought political stuff.

I think another thing that people sometimes see is the strength of a new idea, many times these more "message" fiction that tends to break the rules a lot more tend to get a lot more notice and people love them because they break the rules and it is something new. However these same books on average are far less refined and if it's idea was the norm it wouldn't of ever gotten published because it's sub par. I personally find Ancillary Justice more under this category where like an ~broken~ AI protagonist that has multiple bodies/partitions whatever is a cool concept but if you have seen it before, or at least stuff similar before, you will want something more.

Aaron wrote: "The difference between a political book and a non political book is if the politics and the message is largely the point."

Under this definition Ancillary Justice most certainly isn't a political book.

You might not have liked it, but a lot of people found it a genuinely fun and entertaining read that has a good deal more to offer than just its concept (which was awesome).

Kevin wrote: "Hugo voting has always been about in-crowds and cliques and politics. The only things that are different now is *which* in-crowds and their politics are at the forefront...."

Well there ya go! Admitting there is a problem is the first step to recovery.

Thane wrote: "Kevin wrote: "Hugo voting has always been about in-crowds and cliques and politics. The only things that are different now is *which* in-crowds and their politics are at the forefront...."

Well th..."

I never said there was a problem. It's the nature of public/popular rewards like this. It's the nature of people. That's never going to change. The only "cure" are juried rewards by a limited organization. But they bring their own issues. I vastly prefer (gated) popular voted rewards, even when I almost never agree with the outcome (well, 2 out of 5 for the last 5 Hugo's isn't that bad, honestly).

I'm just happy the current in-crowd is a lot wider and diverse than it has appeared ever before.

Kevin wrote: "The only "cure" are juried rewards by a limited organization. "

Which in this case would be the Nebula.

I attended Worldcon several times and never knew enough about that year's releases to vote. It did occur to me that given how cheap supporting memberships were, it would be easy to job the system.

For me the quality of an author has little to do with awards received. I'm glad when authors I like receive them, or read a book years after the award and find I enjoyed it. But there are plenty of authors getting awards that I don't like at all. I suppose I'll leave the awards to those who care.

Actually the Hugo's having a pay-wall to vote does help by making it so only the more dedicated fans get to vote and that normally helps lower the power of super popular stuff. Giving everyone a copy of all the books is also nice is it takes away an excuse for you to not read all the things.

Kevin wrote: "Aaron wrote: "The difference between a political book and a non political book is if the politics and the message is largely the point."

Under this definition Ancillary Justice most certainly isn'..."

It's largely a sliding scale. Also I'm pretty sure it's all the blog posts talking about how genius moving past binary gender was that got everyone fired up. Then if you read the book for a 100 pages where basically nothing happens except post binary gender and imperialism is bad then your suspicions just get confirmed and if you notice almost none of the blogs recommending the book actually talk about the actual plot of the book, nope they talk about post binary gender. So while the book actually does do things that aren't political in the book many of which are pretty cool mostly in the 2nd 1/2, pretty much all the media/hype surrounding it was political.

Aaron wrote: "Actually the Hugo's having a pay-wall to vote does help by making it so only the more dedicated fans get to vote and that normally helps lower the power of super popular stuff. Giving everyone a c..."

Strange. Most people, who are fans of the book, I've chatted with and read reviews from focus on how great the characters of Seivaarden en Breq, and the dynamics between them are. Or the fantastic writing in the "multiple simultaneously PoV's from the same character" scenes or the way the author creates such cultural and political diversity across the galaxy with some small touches here and there without falling into infodumbs. True the plot is very simple. It's the final part of a quest and the subsequent revenge arc. Both very straightforward. The reason people don't talk about it, is because there isn't very much to talk about. Good thing it's not a plot driven book, but a character driven one.

Don't read the second one. It has even less plot and more anti-imperialism. Lot's of talk about tea too. I loved it though.

My comments on the book from a different goodreads group:

"AJ seemed to me like a Mil-SF book that starts where most books finish. The normal big space battle laser pew pew climax of many novels is just the backstory, AJ deals with what comes after: the moral hazards of occupation and resistance. There was a LOT going on in this novel, to focus only on gender is, I think, a disservice."

"If you follow Ann Leckie on twitter it makes it seem like she was actually writing about tea."

If we're going to hold up some book as evidence of some shadowy voting conspiracy I wouldn't choose AJ, I'd choose The Windup Girl since I personally disliked that book, and believe the fact that other people liked it to be incontrovertible evidence of corruption.

Kevin wrote: "Aaron wrote: "Actually the Hugo's having a pay-wall to vote does help by making it so only the more dedicated fans get to vote and that normally helps lower the power of super popular stuff. Givin..."

I would agree most people I talked to in person or one on one chat did say those things or they had my opinion. But almost all the media press on it was on the post binary gender with a quick mention of multiple simultaneously PoV's from the same character. Also the characters were okay but they all felt like characters in some literary fiction I was forced to read in high-school where everyone and everything was somehow made boring. Actually that's probably what turned me off note I still gave it a 2/5, if it was just the second half I would of probably given it a 3/5. It's more it got hyped and I got disappointed that drove me nuts.

I don't think there was any shadow conspiracy ever in Hugo's. If you want to go unbelievable Redshirts was the unbelievable win for me, I liked that book but it was really trashy/guilty pleasure and the writing wasn't good. AJ feels a good bit more like an award winner it's artsy literary writing. I wonder if that's why I didn't like Name of the Wind either everyone raved about that but I found it dull and mediocre, while everyone talks about how pretty the writing is or something.

Aaron wrote: "Kevin wrote: "Aaron wrote: "Actually the Hugo's having a pay-wall to vote does help by making it so only the more dedicated fans get to vote and that normally helps lower the power of super popular..."

My impression is that you just don't like character driven books. Since that's what both NotW and AJ mainly are. You should try Among Others, another Hugo winner that I adored and which I dubbed: "The best book ever in which nothing actually happens.":p

Kevin wrote: "Aaron wrote: "Kevin wrote: "Aaron wrote: "Actually the Hugo's having a pay-wall to vote does help by making it so only the more dedicated fans get to vote and that normally helps lower the power of..."

NotW almost didn't have character development that was one of my issues with it. Kvothe was a magically competent asshole with zero common sense who never learns from his mistakes pines after some girl that enjoyed hanging out with him but couldn't just be with him because reasons. This basically never changed; he never really learned; he never really listened to his friends. It was like watching episode after episode of Seinfield...only it wasn't funny. Maybe he has development in the second book but that first book was pretty long.

Aaron wrote: "Kevin wrote: "Aaron wrote: "Kevin wrote: "Aaron wrote: "Actually the Hugo's having a pay-wall to vote does help by making it so only the more dedicated fans get to vote and that normally helps lowe..."

Hmm, seems about 99% of what's actually happening in that book went right past you. :p

I'm having similar problems with The Long Earth / War / Mars. Nice concept of infinitely parallel earths easily accessed once you know how, Simak came up with it in City but the start is interesting. Then pretty much nothing happens the whole book. Then some action is shoehorned into the end. It's a fairly interesting concept, just handled poorly so I read the second book, expecting some answers. Nope, same thing. Long Mars, same structure. At this point it's only my OCD that's keeping me reading.

Aaron wrote: "Kevin wrote: "Aaron wrote: "Kevin wrote: "Aaron wrote: "Actually the Hugo's having a pay-wall to vote does help by making it so only the more dedicated fans get to vote and that normally helps lowe..."

I have a theory that there's magic involved. If you're curious, check out Jo Walton's reread thread. There's lots of hints in subtle places that seem to indicate that not all is as it first appears.

EDIT: I was talking here about Name of the Wind. This is the part I was actually replying to: "Kvothe was a magically competent asshole with zero common sense who never learns from his mistakes pines after some girl that enjoyed hanging out with him but couldn't just be with him because reasons. "

Joanna wrote: "I have a theory that there's magic involved. If you're curious, check out Jo Walton's reread thread. There's lots of hints in subtle places that seem to indicate that not all is as it first appears."

Magic interference with the Hugo's! That explains everything... oh. Darn. You meant Among Others. This was about to get exciting.

Thane wrote: "Magic interference with the Hugo's! That explains everything... oh. Darn. You meant Among Others. This was about to get exciting. "

Heh! I actually meant Name of the Wind. I seem to have mis-replied. Let me see if I can clarify that.

Aaron wrote: "I think that allying with Beale was part of the point of showing that people would vote against a book just because they hated the author."

That'd be a great argument if Beale were a talented writer who was being unfairly overlooked due to his politics. But he's not. His story that got nominated last year was on the level of Dragonlance.