The Sword and Laser discussion

Paul wrote: “ Note: I do not actually believe that Brandon Sanderson uses cocaine.”

Too late! The Sword and Laser hive mind has decided that Brando Sando is a secret coke-head who does a line of blow every time he finishes a chapter. How do you think he manages to write so much? Mormons aren’t supposed to drink coffee.

Paul wrote: "But in spite of this compelling argument, it begs the question of whether any of the Chinese SFF authors have the same kind of celeb-power as national popstars, which I kind of doubt. Also, it's worth noting that while these examples do hold similarities to this situation, having fans spend money and act unilaterally is not a China-specific phenomenon."

You need to factor in the Chinese mindset, which is far different from ours. Money isn’t an issue, and they really behave nationally where “obeying the rules” doesn’t factor in. Pretty much the exact opposite of the Japanese.

There’s a reason why “building collapse in China” doesn’t make the news — it happens so frequently that it’s not news. The cutting corners, fraud, incompetence and insane level of competition to get ahead combine into multiple disasters a year. China’s decades-long “One Child” policy combined with the cultural preference for boys over girls has resulted in an excess of more than 30 million men, causing a lot of these problems. In order just to get a date a man has to be the best of the best, creating that mentality of getting ahead at any cost.

It’s also important to keep in mind that many of the examples of Chinese fans gaming the system were for such minor D-list celebrities that it’s baffling to us why they’d expend the effort. It seems like they can muster up a thousand people to support some relative nobody with a snap of their fingers. Considering the sheer number of Chinese incel guys over there, it’s not a shock that they can influence something as small as the Hugos with minimal effort.

Maybe I’m completely wrong, but after the number of Chinese sci-fi we’ve read here at S&L in recent years, I’ve done my usual deep dive into China’s history and culture, and it’s so completely alien that I’m sometimes boggled by the weirdness. That’s why I think it’s more likely that rather than another author. But again, I’m just speculating; I don’t know anything more than anyone else does. It just makes more sense to me.

John (Taloni) wrote: "Hm, this discussion makes me wonder. Chinese fans may be just as rabid, but with the relative wealth between China and the first world, $60 may have been too much. ..."

They got the money back, and it could be just a few guys. So many men in China have nothing to spend their money on, and their culture is so different with many bizarre little dark alleys and culs-de-sac that it doesn’t require a huge effort for them to gang up. They are also more inclined to follow a leader than even we are, because their whole society is set up with that central planning ethos built in.

I mean, how weird is it that a country that is basically the same size as the United States has one time zone? People in the far west of China have to obey Beijing’s clocks, despite being nearly four hours later. That’s the kind of strangeness we’re talking about here.

Steve wrote: "just passing to note that there is a *long* discussion about this in the Talk section of Gaiman's wikipedia page... As Tom says, this is probably best left undiscussed by S&L for the time being."

This is probably a better space to discuss the newsworthiness of the Gaiman allegations. My main point here is that calling the Tortoise into question dodges the question on whether to acknowledge what these women are saying. There is not "only one source" to this information, there are 5: the women are the primary sources. They spoke with their own voices, provided documents, and Neil Gaiman himself confirms that they are real people that he has interacted with. Denying the credibility of their statements is putting into question their experiences and minimizing their trauma.
I like Gaiman's work very much, and I wish this weren't true, but these 5 women are clearly speaking their truth, and I think we have to respect that, and listen as honestly and openly, just as we did when people said these things about more easily hateable characters.

The Wikipedia talk page Steve shared (ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ne... ) is certainly interesting, but sort of brings up more questions than answers.

The original challenge that Tortoise is a "right-wing TERF site" is just false if one bothers to do any research on the organization. They are a centre-left British news publication with a good reputation and staffed by experienced journalists with extensive CVs. They've won multiple awards in the last 5 years, and are known and respected for their deep-dives into issues that often don't get enough context from mainstream outlets. When I talked about this with my wife - a former mainstream news journalist and editor, and current media critic - she was shocked that the Tortoise's reputation is being questioned, because she's known about and listened to their work for years and considers their work to be very high quality. And she's uber-leftwing.
From what I can tell, the only reason the Tortoise is considered a "TERF" site was because in 2020 they provided nuanced coverage of the JK Rowling anti-trans debate, and discussed basically what TERF is and why there seems to be a generational divide among feminists about this issue. The interview does not take sides. What it does do is acknowledge that the older generation of feminists see pregnancy childbirth and having to take time off of work to raise and breastfeed babies is a predominant cause of economic inequality, and that it primarily (though not exclusively) affects biological females. https://www.tortoisemedia.com/audio/j...
I am very pro-trans rights, and I do not support anything Rowling has said or done in the last four years, but acknowledging that nuance is involved in an argument does not make a media outlet anti-trans or alt-right, it makes it good at providing context.

Also, as I stated in my Quick Burn, the 5th person to come forward did not go to Tortoise, but to a different podcast that features voices of traumatized women, not that that should matter. Rolling Stone and a number of other media outlets have covered the story that the Tortoise uncovered, and if Rolling Stone considers their journalism worthy of their platform, then who the hell are we to think that S&L should have higher journalistic standards than Rolling Stone??
Last I checked, we never required multiple media sources for a news update to be mentioned on the quick burns. We are a fan site, not a media company made up of accredited journalists. This story concerns an author that is frequently covered by S&L, and I think that it's important for SFF fans to know that this news is out there.

It seems obvious to me that the hesitation on the part of the SFF community has more to do with wanting to preserve Gaiman's integrity than any sort of journalistic standards. It's obviously up to Tom and Veronica what they wish to speak about on their podcast, but I don't think we should really be questioning whether or not to trust the accusations. Questioning the validity of the Tortoise is a false flag that (intentionally or not intentionally) ultimately questions the validity of the victims' experiences. And we're better than that.

Hey Trike, Chinese men are coming over to Thailand to find wives because of the gender unbalance.

Stephen wrote: "Hey Trike, Chinese men are coming over to Thailand to find wives because of the gender unbalance."

Yes. There’s also a huge problem with human trafficking. A lot of the stuff we hear about women being kidnapped is being driven by Chinese organized crime, particularly in Asia. Slavery is ongoing in China.

No, Trike. I am not talking about the Human Trafficking issue. Rather the normal boy meets girl & fall in love way to get a wife.

Stephen wrote: "No, Trike. I am not talking about the Human Trafficking issue. Rather the normal boy meets girl & fall in love way to get a wife."

Hence the “also”.

Seth writes: "Bookshop.org now sells ebooks. Like their print books, shopping there supports local booksellers. Here's their informational page: https://bookshop.org/info/ebooks

Nice to have options."

I am interested in buying ebooks from not-Amazon, not necessarily as a big political statement, but because I believe keeping some level of competition is a good thing.

Unfortunately, from bookshop.org, one immediate downside:

"Can I read my ebooks on my Kindle, Kobo, Nook, etc.?
Ebooks from Bookshop.org must be read on either our Apple or Android app, or via a web browser, with the exception of DRM-free titles."

I read on the Kindle and it's great. I'm not willing to jump through major hoops (de-DRM software, etc) to work around.

Tor.com ebooks are DRM free, but a quick look at a couple of Tor books reveals that their ebooks aren't available. (I didn't do a full survey, just a couple of titles). A glance at titles from other publishers seems like they are full DRM.

On the plus side, my local independent bookstore is one of the options.

"Ministry of Time" ebook is $15, same as Amazon, so pricing seem OK.

I'll try to remember to peek at bookshop.org before buying ebooks in the future, and see if I have any success.

Geoff wrote: "Seth writes: "Bookshop.org now sells ebooks. Like their print books, shopping there supports local booksellers. Here's their informational page: https://bookshop.org/info/ebooks

Nice to have optio..."
My e-reader is a Kobo. Kobo was originally a Canadian competitor to Amazon, it was later bought by a Japanese company, Rakuten. Still headquartered in Toronto. I don't recall ever looking for a book on Kobo and finding I had to go to Amazon for it instead. Don't think "Canadian = small", I read somewhere that Kobo has 40M users worldwide because of Rakuten's expansion.

Through Calibre, I can load non-DRM books onto it (I occasionally buy e-books from Humble Bundle, and can load them fine. Same for Gutenberg free books.) Kobo books themselves may be DRM-free or have DRM, depends on the publisher.

Kobo also works pretty seamlessly with Libby, probably the most common library-based e-book distributor. I say "pretty seamlessly" because I occasionally get an e-book from the library that just won't show up on my Kobo - it is rare but when it does happen I've never figured out why. I assume a technology/compatability issue of some kind. When that happens I read the book on my tablet, grumbling all the time.

Chris K. wrote: "Seth wrote: "Goodbye mass-market paperbacks, apparently.

https://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/b...

Publisher's Weekly reports that the book jobber who distributes to mass retailers (bookstores and big boxes) is going to cease working with books in mass-market paperback size. I have many memories of combing used-bookstore shelves for mass-market sci-fi titles as a kid - reading lots of Star Wars and Star Trek paperbacks, some until they fell apart.
"

I used to buy/read a ton of MMPB when I was younger/first building my personal library as a 20-something. However I don't buy a ton of physical books anymore and instead mostly purchase audio books and the occasional ebook.

When I do get a physical book it is hard cover for something I'm "collecting" more than for the convenance/price point of the format. I don't own a ton of trade paperbacks, they are almost all MMPB.

They mention that the market for MMPB has been dwindling. I doubt that has changed even with a bit of a resurgence in younger folks buying physical books. They are more of a boutique item I think. Special Editions/fancy "spredges" etc to entice you to spend more/collect the book.

Still it makes me sad.

Have lots of MMPBs on my shelves and still sometimes buy them. I tended to get a lot of hardcover books from SFBC for decades. And even outside that, I generally tend to prefer hardbound books most of the time.

There has to be a reason of some sort for me to choose audio format. That's always an active, affirmative choice that I want to listen to that specific book for some reason. It's never a default. I like ebooks for online book clubs because they make it easier to find an exact passage should it come up.

But yeah, it's sad MMPBs are going away.

Yes, I wonder if SFF publishers like Tor.Com saw the writing on the wall a while ago for MMPBs - seems like a lot of the new stuff is hardcover or the larger trade paperback size. But as a kid it was great to have a small size book to tuck in a backpack or whatever so you could read when you wanted. And, unlike hardbacks, to be able to afford them myself with whatever cash I'd scrounged up.

Moving over from "Quick Burns", discussing the Hugo nominees:

Rachel said "Wow I’ve read them all too! Unusual. I’m really glad Tchaikovsky is finally getting a Hugo attention"

Agreed. My first thought was "Well, Tchaikovsky can get another Hugo to go with his win for Children of Time, right? Wait, it didn't win? Wait, not even nominated?"

That said he did win Best Series for the Children series, so all isn't lost, but it is odd that none of the 3 were even nominated for best novel.

Yeah I was wondering how that happened and looked around last night and I believe the year children of time came out was the year The Fifth Season one - which is totally deserved. In fact either of those books would win handily this year I’d bet

Phil said "Looks like Amazon has cancelled the Wheel of Time. Is this sad news? I only watched an episode or two and was not won over. The curse of long series is that we never reach the end when televised"

I don't really remember season 1, but I thought season 2 was pretty good. Haven't watched season 3 yet. I guess I'm part of the problem.

Rings of Power next?

Phil On The Hill wrote: "Looks like Amazon has cancelled the Wheel of Time. Is this sad news? I only watched an episode or two and was not won over. The curse of long series is that we never reach the end when televised ."

I am a bit sad about that news - it seems I was one of the few people that watched each episode on the day it was released.

It wasn't without its flaws but those are mostly endemic within the fantasy genre ( such as the paucity of people in the background of scenes which makes cities seem more like small villages "small" - even GoT S1 had that issue ) but I think the cast and crew did a great job bringing the world and characters to life and trimming down all the book content into something manageable for the small screen. Especially with the Forsaken beginning to come into play.

I hope they can do an "Expanse" to continue the story.

I have watched all the episodes of The Rings Of Power and much preferred the Wheel of Time

They have to save money so they afford to do Warhammer 40k.

I didn’t like Wheel of Time or Rings of Power. I found them to be bad filmmaking. I haven’t read the WoT books so I was coming to it fresh, but it just didn’t win me over.

John wrote: "Phil On The Hill wrote: "Looks like Amazon has cancelled the Wheel of Time. Is this sad news? I only watched an episode or two and was not won over. The curse of long series is that we never reach ..."

Agree to everything you said. Really enjoyed that series and they stopped it after a very good, well-reviewed season.

Apple is now my go-to SFF platform, no hope with the others.

I am back, Baby! ;-)

We’ve all heard the debates about how to handle books, movies, or other media from creators whose views we find troubling. You know, loving Harry Potter but struggling with J.K. Rowling’s comments on trans issues, or enjoying Ender’s Game while feeling uncomfortable with Orson Scott Card’s stance on homosexuality.

But today, I’m thinking about the opposite dilemma: What happens when you really like or admire an author, but you just don’t like their writing?

This popped into my head while listening to an episode of the Coode Street Podcast featuring Charlie Jane Anders and Annalee Newitz. I hadn’t realized they were a couple, and the interview completely charmed me. Both are sharp, thoughtful, and full of fascinating perspectives on writing and the world. I found myself thinking, Wow, I’d love to have coffee with these two.

Here’s the twist. I’ve read Charlie Jane Anders’ debut novel, All the Birds in the Sky. It was nominated for a Hugo, it seemed to do well, but I just didn’t enjoy it. The story didn’t grab me, and the writing style wasn’t my cup of tea. I even made a point to avoid her later work.

Now, though, after hearing her speak, I’m tempted to pick up her new book coming out this month. Not because I expect to love the writing, but because she just seems like such a genuinely wonderful person.

So here’s my question for you: Have you ever felt this way? Admired the person, struggled with their work, but still felt pulled to give them another shot?

Kevin wrote: "So here’s my question for you: Have you ever felt this way? Admired the person, struggled with their work, but still felt pulled to give them another shot?"

Yep. Honestly it’s the worst because it feels like kicking a puppy, especially when they aren’t an established writer. Or worse, a relative or personal friend.

There's actually a book I bought (but haven't read) that tries to address this, consuming media generated by sucky people. Monsters: A Fan's Dilemma. It's in my queue.

terpkristin wrote: "There's actually a book I bought (but haven't read) that tries to address this, consuming media generated by sucky people. Monsters: A Fan's Dilemma. It's in my queue."

I read that. It explored some interesting ideas but the execution was middling - it meandered a lot and I didn't feel it really had a lot to say. It was more of a "ymmv but this is how I feel" narrative. The biggest message I took away - and I don't recall if she said it explicitly but it was addressed numerous times - is that it is easier for her to ignore the artist's issues if those issues are not part of their art. An example she talks about is Woody Allen vs. Roman Polanski. Both have had serious transgressions with respect to misogyny and underage women. Woody Allen tried to normalize some of his in his art - films like Manhattan where he cast himself as an old guy dating an underage Mariel Hemingway and brushing it off. Polanski's films have nothing in them to speak to his deep personal failings. She does not like Allen's films but still enjoys Polanski's for what they are: simply good film-making.

It is one of my issues with Lovecraft - he wasn't just a racist, he put that racism into some of his stories. In a similar - but slightly twisted - way it is what makes J.K. Rowlings' books such an issue. She wrote about a world where people who didn't fit society's standards of "normal" were able to find a home and friendship and acceptance. People viewed them as a safe space. Then it turns out she is one of those people trying to tell everybody how they should be and calling out those she doesn't view as "normal" - not safe at all. Her failings as a human being are completely at odds with the messages in her art and you can't help but feel that dissonance when you read Harry Potter.

In QB, Iain wrote: "The Hugo’s have been announced

Hugo Winners announced.

The winners are:

BEST NOVEL

The Tainted Cup by Robert Jackson Bennett (Del Rey, Hodderscape UK)
BEST NOVELLA

The Tusks of Extinction by Ray Nayler (Tordotcom)
BEST NOVELETTE

“The Four Sisters Overlooking the Sea” by Naomi Kritzer (Asimov’s, September/October 2024)
BEST SHORT STORY

“Stitched to Skin Like Family Is” by Nghi Vo (Uncanny Magazine, Issue 57)
BEST SERIES

Between Earth and Sky by Rebecca Roanhorse (Saga Press)

Taken from https://file770.com/2025-hugo-awards/

I am very disappointed in myself. I paid for an attending membership. I had planned to go. But life happened and I couldn't go and I didn't even attend virtually because I forgot it was happening. I also didn't download the voter packet (probably missed the email) and didn't vote for anything. I totally failed this year.

However, I really did enjoy The Tainted Cup so I'm glad it won.

The Hugo stats were published yesterday, but they didn't include nomination stats. I guess those will come later. That means we don't know if the Sword and Laser podcast was nominated. WorldCon 2025 is in Anaheim next year, Tom's back yard. Maybe we should try another push to get the podcast nominated.

I'm game to nominate and vote, but we gotta get the word out. They've been close to the final list a few times since being nominated in....Google isn't helping, I think it was 2018.

Alien Clay would have gotten my vote but I'm glad The Tainted Cup won. I really enjoyed it and can't wait to read A Drop of Corruption.

John (Taloni) wrote: "I'm game to nominate and vote, but we gotta get the word out. They've been close to the final list a few times since being nominated in....Google isn't helping, I think it was 2018."

The least nominations that actually got on the ballot this year was only 24, so it shouldn't be that hard.