John C. Wright's Blog, page 32
February 24, 2015
Suggested Reading List for Racialist Whineloons
Right Fans posts the list:
Commentary: If You Want to Avoid Reading White, Straight, Cis Male Authors for a Year…
.. have I got a list for you!
Sarah A. Hoyt, for example, is a first generation Portuguese immigrant who grew up in an impoverished village (at least by our standards). She is also a winner of the Libertarian Futurist Society’s Prometheus Award, which honors outstanding fiction with pro-liberty themes.
Larry Correia is also a “writer of color” who grew up in disadvantaged circumstances. As he relates in a recent post, “I grew up with all that fancy Portuguese Dairy Farmer Privilege, where I got to have an alcoholic mother and a functionally illiterate father… where I got to spend my formative years knee deep in cow shit at 3:00 AM, so that I could later work my way through Utah State.” Despite starting life on the bottom rung, however, Larry persevered and is now a multiple-award-winning urban fantasy author.
Jason Cordova is yet another “writer of color” and a survivor of sexual abuse who was bounced from group home to group home in his formative years. After a childhood fighting the oppression of “the system,” he went on to write some pretty fun kaiju novels. The one at left is especially noteworthy.
And let’s not forget James Young, an up-and-coming African American writer who has dipped his toes in both military science fiction and alternate history. An Unproven Concept is an excellent place to start sampling his work.
Originally published at John C. Wright's Journal. Please leave any comments there.
David Warren on Hobbes and Hobbits
This is your must read column for this month, dear reader. It is a meditation on the rights and duties of sovereign power, including Shakespeare’s and Tolkien’s refreshingly Mediaeval take on the issue:
http://www.davidwarrenonline.com/2015/02/23/on-legitimate-government/
The idea of the autonomous “prince” is modern. The mediaeval idea of hierarchy precluded it. The man at the top was lynchpin for a regime consisting of persons in various ranks of nobility, but in a curiously invertible pyramid, for though each in his place is servant to a master above him, he is also servant to the servants of those below him in station, pledged to their defence. The idea of “public service” survives today, but with a much different flavour. This is because the individual has ceased to be defined as a soul, a “being,” with duties. He has been redefined as a cypher or “function” with “rights.” Where to the old Christian view, rights followed from duties in the same man, to our post-Christian view the arbitrary rights of one man translate to duties for unaccounted others. (My right to a free lunch translates to your duty to pay for it, &c.) In this sense, all modern political thinking is in its nature totalitarian.
At the opposite extreme are the politics of Hobbitry: in its nature mediaeval, or if you will, sane. This I gather from perusing recent works on the political views of J.R.R. Tolkien, principally that of Jonathan Witt and Jay W. Richards in, The Hobbit Party: The Vision of Freedom That Tolkien Got, and the West Forgot. […]
The Hobbits of the Shire live under a system of Hardly Any Government. Almost everything is decided at the family level, which leaves, on the Catholic principle of subsidiarity, hardly anything else to decide. But it is better than this, owing to qualities in the Hobbits themselves. It appears that they have no understanding whatever of the concept of “fairness,” and no intellectual ability to distinguish redistribution of property from theft and rapine. They see things rather as they are. On the other hand, they have a perfect understanding of self-defence, engaged when they are occupied by liberal do-gooders. The solution to the problems these do-gooders create is thus very simple. Get rid of them. It is a task which everyone can join in.
Saruman, his Orcs, and their contrivances, provide the metaphor to liberal do-gooders and their obsessions with “process” and technology. They proved their value in resisting evil, arguably, once upon a time, until they became evil themselves. They would not understand Christ’s mysterious instruction, “resist ye not evil,” nor the parables in which He shows that “fairness” is of the Devil. They arrive in power with a do-gooder agenda, and in this are typically modern men. They toggle between damnable efficiency, and damnable inefficiency. They care not which, for over time their project is to create such a cat’s cradle of inter-dependencies that all freedom of action expires, and they may feed on human souls unchallengeably. (Whenupon, God destroys them.)
Hobbits lack agendas of any kind, which is what makes them pushovers, when dealing with the guileful. Instead they have customs, such as the meal times for which they are famous (breakfast, second breakfast, elevenses, lunch, afternoon tea, dinner, supper, &c). Their outlook is redemptively mediaeval. But how to protect them from e.g. Saruman and Orcs?
That is where thinking on kingship comes in. My suspicion is that the authors have been led by Tolkien’s whimsy into thinking him more naïve than he was. True enough, Tolkien the man hated democracy, and particularly hated tax collectors. Put more simply, he hated evil. He cannot have failed to understand that his Hobbits were in need of some sort of protection. They were not, however, in need of being changed. As a scholarly mediaevalist, Tolkien would have seen this plainly. I’m not sure Witt and Richards see it.
Originally published at John C. Wright's Journal. Please leave any comments there.
February 23, 2015
Larry Correia on Portuguese Dairy Farmer Privilege
Larry Correia is a fisking genius. Certain works of art cannot be analyzed, only admired in speechless awe. His line by line analysis and snappy answers to stupid comments written today is one such.
Seeing Larry Correia perform a Low Single Leg Takedown Duckunder Fireman’s Carry throw followed by a Knife-Hand Throat-Lock Stand-Up Peterson Hip Heist segue into a Triple Camel Backspin Vulcan Death Grip on a brainless Leftwing loon with a fat head and loud mouth is a joy and a wonder.
The creature (some nobody who has never published anything I’ve read — who is this again?) is asking you to stop reading anything written by Jews for a year, because of their long-nosed Jewish privilege has contaminated the field of Science Fiction literature. DOWN WITH THE UNTERMENSCHEN!!
Or, if it was not Jews, it was some other ethnic group or identity group, I forget which one. Maybe Larry knows. The words below are his:
The Social Justice Warrior Racist Reading Challenge, A Fisking.
I’ve got work to do. I’ve got to finish the rough draft of a novel for a gaming IP by the end of February, and then I’ve got two short stories due the first part of March, but Monday morning I see this nonsense. How could I not take a minute to fisk it?
As usual, the original is italics and my comments are in bold.
I Challenge You To Stop Reading White, Straight, Cis Male Authors For One Year
Bold headline. Short answer? No.
I thought: what if I only read stories by a certain type of author?
On purpose? Then you’d probably be a racist.
K. Tempest Bradford
Pick any whackadoo Social Justice Warrior controversy in sci-fi/fantasy publishing over the last few years and you’ll find K. Tempest Bradford in the middle of it. She is perpetually outraged that someone may be out there, right now, having fun wrong.
Read the rest: http://monsterhunternation.com/2015/02/23/the-social-justice-warrior-racist-reading-challenge-a-fisking/
Milords, Ladies, and gentlemen, there is only one way to fight this. The author the creature was mocking is Neil Gaimen, who is one of the few bona fide big-name rock star level writers working in the field today. I have met him at Cons: he is personable, professional and all around nice. To have his name blackened by this modern overweight version of Gollum is intolerable, unacceptable, and inconceivable.
Go to Amazon right now and buy a copy of TRIGGER WARNING by Gaiman, photograph the receipt, and mail it to K Tempest Bradford, cod.
Then buy a Larry Correia Monster Hunter book, because those are fun reads.
ADDENDUM:
Nip over to Superversive SF, and see the farcical facial fish slapping of sarcasm that takes place there. http://superversivesf.com/2015/02/24/take-sjw-reader-challenge-today/
The money quote:
So in the spirit of taking this challenge seriously, I will be making an effort to avoid such writers and see what it does for my outlook. So I guess I should make a list of authors that are “acceptable” to read because they aren’t “cis white het males” to make it easier for anybody that wants to join me.
So lets see what is in?
Sarah A. Hoyt – POC Womyn
Larry Correia – POC
L. Jagi Lamplighter – Womyn
Tom Simon – Differently abled, apparently K.T. is ableist
Lloyd A. Behm – Differently abled
Cedar Sanderson – Womyn
Jason Cordova – POC
James Young – POC
Kate Paulk – Womyn
Amanda Green – Womyn
Vox Day – POCand out
John Scalzi – Cis Het White Male
Jim Hines – Cis Het White Male
My comment: allow me to quote one Patrick Chester quoting Larry Corriea, from his comment over at Larry Correia’s MHI page:
I challenge you to read books based upon what you think sounds awesome, and never give into the finger shaking scolds.
Can we give the finger shaking scolds the finger?
Allow me also to quote one Josh from Vox Day’s page, regarding the statement by Gollum that Or you could choose a different axis to focus on: books by people from outside the US or in translation. Josh wryly remarks:
We should heed her call for diversity in reading and read more books in translation.
Homer, Aristotle, Virgil, Cicero, Caesar, Thucydides, Herodotus, Marcus Aurelius, Ovid, Tacitus, Origen, Athanasius, Augustine, Bede, Aquinas, Dante…
Originally published at John C. Wright's Journal. Please leave any comments there.
February 21, 2015
Pedantolatry
I cannot speak for other village atheists, whom I have not read, but I can take the tenor of man on this topic after even short notice, since I used to be the champion and paladin of the forces of atheism, and I can tell true atheists from false.
True atheists worship nothing. That is the point of atheism and the definition. True atheist do not give a tinker’s damn about the damns of tinkers, because true atheists do not believe in damnation, nor salvation, not any other supernatural folderol.
True atheists do not believe in magic. Hence the true atheist fears no symbols for he holds that symbols are arbitrary and manmade conveniences used by men to convey ideas, one mind to another, having no supernatural powers, eliciting no awe, worthy of no worship. True atheists do not bow the knee to idols for the same reason true Christians do not: because we love the truth, and will not bow to anything false and undeserving.
True atheists do not make and idol out of anything, no, not even science, and we certainly do not make an idol out of atheism. That would be somewhat against the point.
Back when I was an atheist, I had no respect for Mr Dawkins and thought him an embarrassment if not a calamity to the noble cause of godlessness he and I both served. I was a champion of reason over superstition. I could not imagine what in the world he pretended to be.
A champion of reason uses fact, and the logical deductions from facts, as the basis for his beliefs. He does not use falsehood. Why bother? No man shoots blanks at a foe when he had bullets. Only a desperate man does that, one whose arsenal is empty, who hopes mere loud noise might startle the foe.
Likewise, no champion of reason uses unreason, nor thinks so poorly of his foe, as if mere loudness of noise were a substitute for a well laid argument.
I will not in this place recite the arguments and their refutations, nor fisk Mr Dawkins’ many public statements shown repeated to be in error, and not corrected by him. Others have done this ably enough, and the matter would fill a book. If you are not convinced my assessment of Mr Dawkins’ public behavior is just, look for yourself. The matter is public. Read and decide.
For me, my conclusion is this: Mr Dawkins believes the worst of Christianity not because he has examined the evidence, and, after full and fair consideration, decided Christianity is bad. He hates Christianity for reasons no one outside his own heart knows, and he invents flimsy reasons to support and justify the hate.
I do not know what is in his heart, but I know a flimsy reason when I see it. This is not a case of someone sincerely looking at the history of science and concluding that the Church opposed rather than aided it. This is a case of someone losing one religion, and finding another.
In this case, science is being treated not as an efficient and honest method of determining the truth of empirical theories. For him, science is Baal, and idol to whom he bows the knee, and serves and loves, and, like all lovers, inflated the worth with high words of the beloved; and, like all idolators, losing all sight of the plain truth when he bows his trembling head in submission to his false and absurd little godling.
Science, the skeptical study of natural phenomena, makes a bright, splendid, great, fine and honorable branch of philosophy. Science makes a wretched, low, nasty and unsightly idol.
The worship of science inevitably boils down to the worship of professors and grad students, astronomers and botanists, which is to say, un-skeptical acceptance of the authority of anonymous pedants whose work you never check.
Who is less worthy of worship than a pedant?
What is more directly antithetical to skeptical inspection of scientific claims than the gullibility of adorers?
What is more foolish than thinking science can save your soul or build the shining towers of utopia the day after tomorrow, when science never has, never can, and never will make any such claims?
As idols go, Uranus or Apollo, Serapis or Isis, Kannon or Baldir the Bright have far more dignity when placed on a pedestal and worshiped.
Originally published at John C. Wright's Journal. Please leave any comments there.
The War of Ignorance versus Faith
Hmph. I just came across another antieducated sophophobe who declared there to be a war between science and faith, especially the Roman Catholic Church.
I asked him to name the Papal Bull or Encyclical, or any other official document of the Church prohibiting or condemning the practice of scientific inquiry. He did not know what a ‘bull’ was.
I asked him if he knew anything about science and the history of science, and he said yes. I asked him for the evidence of any Catholic interference, or even lack of enthusiastic support, for any scientific inquiry of any kind, in any time or place?
He mentioned Galileo. I asked him if he knew the circumstances of Galileo’s trial, or what Galileo was accused of? He said no. I asked him if he knew who Cardinal Bellarmine was. He said no.
I asked him if he had read Dialogues Concerning Two New Sciences? He did not even know what the book was, much less who the characters in it were, or what positions in the contemporary debates they represented.
(Do I need to mention that I read this book in school? I went to a good school, where the education is what mathematicians call a ‘positive sum game’ that is, I ended up more educated than when I went in. His school left him with less education than when he went in.)
I did not bother to ask him if he knew what, precisely, Galileo had discovered, or what proofs he gave to support his various theories.
I did not ask him to tell me what the Galilean satellites were, much less name them (off the top of my head: Io, Europa, Callisto, Ganymede. If I am wrong, and Amalthea is one of them, shame on me. If got them in order, more to my glory.)
Calibrating my questions to the level of someone without a Saint John’s College level of education, I asked him if he knew who Abertus Magnus, William of Ockham, Roger Bacon, Nicholas Steno were. He said no.
I asked him who invented the mechanical escapement used in clockwork. Or when. He did not know what mechanical escapement was. (Villard de Honnecourt circa 1237, in case you are wondering.)
Recalibrating my question to the high school level, I asked him if he knew who Pascal was, Copernicus, Descartes. He said no. Mendel. No. Still no.
He then told me that all the European inventions in mathematics and medicine came from the Muslim world. I asked him if he knew where Andalusia was, or when the Reconquista happened. Did not recognize those terms. I asked him what religion the people were in the lands conquered by the Muslims in the Seven, Eighth, and Ninth Centuries, et cetera? He guessed that they were some sort of pagans.
I did not bother to ask him if he knew who Abu Hamid al-Ghazali was.
He did not even know enough to raise and throw intro my face the old, tired, false and oft-refuted slander about Hypatia the neoplatonic philosopher (always described as a female scientist) being flayed to death by a Christian mob wielding sharpened clamshells for being a female scientists.
In other words, I could have argued in favor of the War between Science and the Church better than he. He had not even memorized his side’s own talking points.
He was a disgrace to the forces of evil.
Another ignoramus, far less ignorant (but still woefully uniformed), told me that it was fortunate that Newton lived in a Protestant nation, or otherwise his work would have been suppressed by the Church.
Yes, the same Church that invented, maintained and supported the university system, invented and defended the idea of Academic Freedom, founded every major university in the Old World, and funded, supported, published and spread every major scientific accomplishment of the Continent, not to mention all the progress, scientific, social, or otherwise from the Fifth Century to the Fifteenth. That is the Church this ignorant man was breathing a sigh of relief Newton had escaped.
It is appalling to me that in the modern age, when anyone with the touch of a button can read any book in the public domain back to the Epic of Gilgamesh could not bother to inform themselves about the basic facts of the world in which they live.
It is not merely the ignorance that bothers me. It is the ingratitude. It is like a sullen and empty-eyed princeling spitting in the face of a king on his deathbed, the the wars he fought and the kingdom he won to give to his son, the ungrateful brat does not even know where any of it came from.
As a public service, I would like to list other people who, if only I could, I would call to the witness stand to give their opinion about the war between Science and the Church.
I would even call Giordano Bruno to the stand, if he would tell us the reason why he was burned as a heretic. It was not for his scientific work.
Let us rank them in alphabetical order, with links, shall we?
Originally published at John C. Wright's Journal. Please leave any comments there.
The War of Ignorance versus Faith
Hmph. I just came across another antieducated sophophobe who declared there to be a war between science and faith, especially the Roman Catholic Church.
I asked him to name the Papal Bull or Encyclical, or any other official document of the Church prohibiting or condemning the practice of scientific inquiry. He did not know what a ‘bull’ was.
I asked him if he knew anything about science and the history of science, and he said yes. I asked him for the evidence of any Catholic interference, or even lack of enthusiastic support, for any scientific inquiry of any kind, in any time or place?
He mentioned Galileo. I asked him if he knew the circumstances of Galileo’s trial, or what Galileo was accused of? He said no. I asked him if he knew who Cardinal Bellarmine was. He said no.
I asked him if he had read Dialogues Concerning Two New Sciences? He did not even know what the book was, much less who the characters in it were, or what positions in the contemporary debates they represented.
(Do I need to mention that I read this book in school? I went to a good school, where the education is what mathematicians call a ‘positive sum game’ that is, I ended up more educated than when I went in. His school left him with less education than when he went in.)
I did not bother to ask him if he knew what, precisely, Galileo had discovered, or what proofs he gave to support his various theories.
I did not ask him to tell me what the Galilean satellites were, much less name them (off the top of my head: Io, Europa, Callisto, Ganymede. If I am wrong, and Amalthea is one of them, shame on me. If got them in order, more to my glory.)
Calibrating my questions to the level of someone without a Saint John’s College level of education, I asked him if he knew who Abertus Magnus, William of Ockham, Roger Bacon, Nicholas Steno were. He said no.
I asked him who invented the mechanical escapement used in clockwork. Or when. He did not know what mechanical escapement was. (Villard de Honnecourt circa 1237, in case you are wondering.)
Recalibrating my question to the high school level, I asked him if he knew who Pascal was, Copernicus, Descartes. He said no. Mendel. No. Still no.
He then told me that all the European inventions in mathematics and medicine came from the Muslim world. I asked him if he knew where Andalusia was, or when the Reconquista happened. Did not recognize those terms. I asked him what religion the people were in the lands conquered by the Muslims in the Seven, Eighth, and Ninth Centuries, et cetera? He guessed that they were some sort of pagans.
I did not bother to ask him if he knew who Abu Hamid al-Ghazali was.
He did not even know enough to raise and throw intro my false the old, tired, and oft- efuted slander about Hypatia the neoplatonic philosopher (always described as a female scientist) being flayed to death by a Christian mob wielding sharpened clamshells.
In other words, I could have argued in favor of the War between Science and the Church better than he. He had not even memorized his side’s own talking points.
He was a disgrace to the forces of evil.
Another ignoramus, far less ignorant (but still woefully uniformed), told me that it was fortunate that Newton lived in a Protestant nation, or otherwise his work would have been suppressed by the Church.
Yes, the same Church that invented, maintained and supported the university system, invented and defended the idea of Academic Freedom, founded every major university in the Old World, and funded, supported, published and spread every major scientific accomplishment of the Continent, not to mention all the progress, scientific, social, or otherwise from the Fifth Century to the Fifteenth. That is the Church this ignorant man was breathing a sigh of relief Newton had escaped.
It is appalling to me that in the modern age, when anyone with the touch of a button can read any book in the public domain back to the Epic of Gilgamesh could not bother to inform themselves about the basic facts of the world in which they live.
It is not merely the ignorance that bothers me. It is the ingratitude. It is like a sullen and empty-eyed princeling spitting in the face of a king on his deathbed, the the wars he fought and the kingdom he won to give to his son, the ungrateful brat does not even know where any of it came from.
As a public service, I would like to list other people who, if only I could, I would call to the witness stand to give their opinion about the war between Science and the Church.
I would even call Giordano Bruno to the stand, if he would tell us the reason why he was burned as a heretic. It was not for his scientific work.
Let us rank them in alphabetical order, with links, shall we?
This list is taken unchanged from wikipedia, so that it cannot be accused of coming from a source hostile to the Left —
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Roman_Catholic_cleric-scientists
Originally published at John C. Wright's Journal. Please leave any comments there.
February 20, 2015
Unofficial Statement of Sad Puppies 3 on St Wulfric’s Day
Here follows an entirely unofficial, very special, and personal statement of purpose from the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Malignant and Universal Inquisition of the Doctrine of the Faith, as written by my hand, John C Wright, esq, Grand Inquisitor, Archdeacon of Darkness, Solicitor General and Attorney-at-Large of the Evil Legion of Evil Authors concerning Sad Puppies 3.
[image error]
There being much confusion and conundrum, contortion and caviling, falsehood and fiddling, noseblowing and bloviating about the purpose and animating spirit of Sad Puppies 3, be it resolved that to declare our true intent, be the following known by these presence to all men, gentlehobbits, flying ponies, munchkins, marshwiggles, underpeople, vampiresses, umberhulks, homunculi, zoanthropes, artilects, moravecs, ghouls, ghasts, Gugs, Fungi from Yuggoth, and the Squire of Gothos:
* * *
We are the storytellers of science fiction and fantasy. We promote, praise and endorse of the Sad Puppies slate of Hugo nominations for this year.
We denounce and abjure and anathematize anyone who pretends to be a storyteller, but who, when asked to tell a tale of science fictional wonder, instead delivers a nagging lecture or dull piece of partisan political propaganda.
Originally published at John C. Wright's Journal. Please leave any comments there.
February 19, 2015
Who is the Muggle and who is the Slan?
UPDATE NOTICE: http://monsterhunternation.com/2015/02/18/book-bomb-novellas-from-the-sad-puppies-slate/
One of the Happy Kittens (as I hereby officially christen the self-declared foes of Sad Puppies) has decreed, speaking ex-cathedra from his bung hole, that we Evil Legionnaires of Evil who support the Sad Puppies ballot are not true, real, authentic fans of science fiction.
The esteemed Patrick Richardson expresses an opinion to the contrary, which is to say, the truth of the matter (https://otherwheregazette.wordpress.com/2015/02/15/not-a-real-fan/):
Not a real fan
Posted by Patrick RichardsonI started loving science fiction when I was all of three or four, watching the Apollo/Soyuz link-up with my parents on TV. It’s one of my earliest memories. I remember playing in the semi-finished basement of our home in Colby, Kansas, listening to Walter Cronkite as little lights showed the orbits converging.
I was hooked.
For forty years I’ve read or watched every scrap of SFF I could get my hands on.
But, according to the Anti Sad Puppy crowd, I’m not a real fan.
I read the Hobbit for the first time in Kindergarten.
So I’m not a Real Fan.
I chased the Delikon off Earth in fourth grade and followed Alice down the rabbit hole.
But I’m not a real fan.
I devoured the Chronicles of Prydain and watched the Dark rise in 5th grade.
So I’m not a Real Fan.
By sixth grade I was on my fifth run through of the Lord of the Rings.
So I’m not a Real Fan.
I discovered Col. Falkenberg and met the Moties in 7th grade.
So I’m not a Real Fan.
In the last 40 years I have read hundreds of SFF books, watched hundreds of movies, dreamed of flying on Serenity and riding Sue with Harry Dresden.
So I’m not a Real Fan.
You see, according to the Anti crowd I can’t be a real fan because I don’t go to cons. I’ve only been to one you see, not out of lack of desire, but lack of funds.
So I’m not a Real Fan.
See, to be a Real Fan, you have to agree with the liberal orthodoxy. You have to believe that SF is all about teaching us lessons, not about having fun. You also, apparently, have to go to cons and beat your breast about “privilege” and “diversity” and apparently apologize for having testicles.
The problem I see with this point of view is simple.
It’s bullshit.
Bravo, and Read the whole thing.
* * *
Keith Glass of the Otherwhere Gazette chimes in likewise:
https://otherwheregazette.wordpress.com/2015/02/17/check-your-fandom-privilege/
…Our Betters have declared, that there IS a class structure in Fandom. Ask Mike Glyer or Kevin Standlee. Apparently we need to read fanzines, be a member of a formal club, be a collector, filk, and do cosplay.
And that you are a fan “in proportion to the effort you make to attach yourself to fandom”
Well, thank you very much for laying out the requirements, that was mighty Privileged of you to do so.
And so I say in return: Check your everlovin’ Fandom Privilege. You’re a Fan if you say you’re a fan. Period. Full Stop. No check off the boxes, no “attaching yourself to fandom”. No Secret handshakes. Not even any Propeller Beanies. . .
My comment: Who dares to tell me who is and is not a fan? By what standards? By what logic?
Is this groundworm who does not know the difference between rishathra and grokking frelling telling ME that I am am not a fan?
Has he even read one story by AE van Vogt, while I wrote a NOVEL by him? Can he name, in order, the Eighteen races of Man from Olaf Stapledon? Does he know who Arthur C Clarke is, or the real name of Cordwainer Smith? Ye gods!
May the great white apes of Barsoom bugger him and the thoat he rode in on.
(Answers below)
* * *
For those of you who came in late, the Hugo Awards since roughly the mid-90s have been dominated by Leftwingery, literary twitterings, and dreck instead of stories containing science fiction elements.
To use the example most ready to hand, the winning short story was a prose poem about the wife of a paleontologist indulging an a daydream of revenge against oddly gin-drinking bar patrons who beat her bridegroom into a coma: the vignette takes place apparently in the present day, and contains nothing science fictional at all. It is not a bad piece, but neither is it the best science fiction short story of the year by any measure. It is amateurish, even lazy. For example, the authoress, instead of inventing real invectives that might erupt in a real bar fight, merely selected a grab-bag of what Leftist know-nothings dimly and risibly imagine the Rightwing boogieman hate, with the unintended consequence that the author has made the victim of the beating into a transgendered homosexual Mohammedan Mexican sissy.
Lest anyone accuse me of criticizing where I cannot do better, in one afternoon, I penned a tale using the same theme, but added a science fictional element.
If you were a Dinosaur, My Love by Rachel Swirsky
Queen of the Tyrant Lizards, by John C Wright
Miss Swirsky’s tale, whatever its other merits, is a simplistic revenge fantasy against a Leftwing caricature of Rightwingers, here portrayed as violent and drunken bigots. This is one example of a dozen works selected for their political orientation but not for their merit.
Likewise, ANCILLARY JUSTICE by Ann Leckie — as best I can tell — won the award not for the merit of the work but for the use by one character of a female pronoun as the default pronoun. I say “as best I can tell” on the evidence that three times I have challenged fans of this book to name one thing inventive or entertaining about it, aside from the book’s loyalty to feminist piety.
In each of the three cases, the response from three different fans of the book was the same: first, the fan hotly denied that the books only merit was its loyalty to feminist piety; second, the fan mentioned one or two ideas I had already handled in more depth in my own book THE GOLDEN AGE, not to mention the works other authors back to Sterling and Gibson who wrote in the 1980s; third, the fan praised the book’s loyalty to feminist piety.
One fan not only fulsomely praised the book’s loyalty to feminist piety, but then went into a frothing spasm of outrage, telling me that I must and should like and love the book, because to fail to do so would be to display my lack of loyalty to feminist piety. In other words, the reader is not the judge the book on its entertainment value, but instead bow as if to the holy book of some dark idol, and praise the book unread, lest he be found guilty of disloyalty to the idol. This fan owes an apology to Miss Leckie, because there is no insult more cutting to an author than to say the readers must force themselves to like it out of a sense of duty.
Let me be not misunderstood: I level no criticism of this novel, which I have not read and about which I form no opinion. I level a criticism at the voters who elevated this novel to the status of an award winner falsely, and under false pretenses. Whether or not Miss Leckie is a leftwing nubag or not, the sad fact is that leftwing nutbags heaped false praises on her novel not because it was praiseworthy, but only because they wanted to exploit her novel as a billboard for their pet political agenda.
Likewise again, works by women and minorities are nominated because of the skin color of the author, or sex, or victimhood status, not the merit of the work.
Like all affirmative action schemes, the attempt is counterproductive. Instead of elevating the minority, by showing the minority can compete equally on a level playing field with the majority and win on his own merit, affirmative action tilts the playing field in favor of the minority, robbing any win of any meaning, and merely demeans the merit of the award. Any minority who does win on merit now is lost in a crowd of poseurs who won not on merit but on some trivial surface feature of the author of concern only to Leftists.
I am not the only one disheartened and disgusted by the Leftification of the Science Fiction field, and its hostile take-over by literati.
The honorable Larry Correia, wishing to re-introduce the Hugo Award to the fans who read real science fiction, half in jest, proposed a slate of popular works a year or two back, and, as a jest, said that science fiction awards going to undeserving authors was the leading cause of sadness in puppies. To fight against sadness in puppies, readers were urged to join WorldCon, and vote for stories based on the merit of the story, not the political leanings of the author.
For his rather mild and common sense observation that science fiction awards should go to, you know, science fiction stories only when they are stories and contain science fiction, Mr Correia’s character was slandered, mocked, derided, impugned, insulted, slurred, slimed, and villified. He was denounced as a transgendered homosexual Mohammedan Mexican sissy. So uncouth and over-the-top were the insane rantings of the Left, that he took upon himself the title and dignity of the International Lord of Hate.
Myself, using my dread and dreaded authority which derives from the King in Yellow, the Voorish Sign and the Living Fungi of Yuggoth, I decreed into existence the Evil Legion of Evil, the literary version of the World Crime League, and published our official manifesto (http://www.scifiwright.com/2014/06/united-underworld-literary-movement-manifesto/) to which Vox Day and Sarah Hoyt added their pens mightier than swords, and to which since has rallied a dozen other names, including Brad R. Torgersen and Lieutenant Colonel Tom Kratman.
* * *
Here is the updated sample ballot, with links:
Remember: only YOU can fight puppy sadness!
Best Novel
The Dark Between the Stars – Kevin J. Anderson – TOR
Trial by Fire – Charles E. Gannon – BAEN
Skin Game – Jim Butcher – ROC
Monster Hunter Nemesis – Larry Correia – BAEN
Lines of Departure – Marko Kloos – 47 North (Amazon)
Best Novella
“Flow” – Arlan Andrews Sr. – Analog magazine November 2014
One Bright Star to Guide Them – John C. Wright – Castalia House
Big Boys Don’t Cry – Tom Kratman – Castalia House
Best Novelette
“The Journeyman: In the Stone House” – Michael F. Flynn – Analog magazine June 2014
“The Triple Sun: A Golden Age Tale” – Rajnar Vajra – Analog magazine July/Aug 2014
“Championship B’tok” – Edward M. Lerner – Analog magazine Sept 2014
“Ashes to Ashes, Dust to Dust, Earth to Alluvium” – Gray Rinehart – Orson Scott Card’s InterGalactic Medicine Show
Best Short Story
“Goodnight Stars” – Annie Bellet – The Apocalypse Triptych
“Tuesdays With Molakesh the Destroyer” – Megan Grey – Fireside Fiction
“Totaled” – Kary English – Galaxy’s Edge magazine, July 2014
“On A Spiritual Plain” – Lou Antonelli – Sci Phi Journal #2
“A Single Samurai” – Steve Diamond – Baen Big Book of Monsters
Best Related Work
Letters from Gardner – Lou Antonelli – Merry Blacksmith Press
Transhuman and Subhuman: Essays on Science Fiction and Awful Truth – John C. Wright – Castalia House
“THE HOT EQUATIONS: THERMODYNAMICS AND MILITARY SF” – Ken Burnside – Riding the Red Horse
Wisdom From My Internet – Michael Z. Williamson
“Why Science is Never Settled” Part 1, Part 2 – Tedd Roberts – BAEN
Best Graphic Story
Reduce Reuse Reanimate (Zombie Nation book #2) – Carter Reid – (independent)
Best Dramatic Presentation (Long Form)
“The Lego Movie” – Phil Lord, Christopher Miller
“Guardians of the Galaxy” – James Gunn
“Interstellar” – Christopher Nolan
“The Maze Runner” – Wes Ball
Best Dramatic Presentation (Short Form)
Grimm – ” Once We Were Gods” – NBC
The Flash – “The Flash (pilot)” – The CW
Adventure Time – “The Prince Who Wanted Everything” – Cartoon Network
Regular Show – “Saving Time” – Cartoon Network
Best Editor (Long Form)
Toni Weisskopf – BAEN
Jim Minz – BAEN
Anne Sowards – ACE/ROC
Sheila Gilbert – DAW
Best Editor (Short Form)
Mike Resnick – Galaxy’s Edge magazine
Edmund R. Schubert – Orson Scott Card’s InterGalactic Medicine Show
Jennifer Brozek (for Shattered Shields)
Bryan Thomas Schmidt (for Shattered Shields)
Best Professional Artist
Carter Reid
Jon Eno
Alan Pollack
Nick Greenwood
Best Semiprozine
Orson Scott Card’s InterGalactic Medicine Show
Abyss & Apex
Andromeda Spaceways In-Flight Magazine
Best Fanzine
Tangent SF On-line – Dave Truesdale
Elitist Book Reviews – Steve Diamond
The Revenge of Hump Day – Tim Bolgeo
Best Fancast
“The Sci Phi Show” – Jason Rennie
Dungeon Crawlers Radio
Adventures in SF Publishing
Best Fan Writer
Matthew David Surridge (Black Gate)
Jeffro Johnson
Amanda Green
Cedar Sanderson
Dave Freer
The John W. Campbell Award
Jason Cordova
Kary English
Eric S. Raymond
* * *
Answers: Cordwainer Smith’s real name is Paul Anthony Linebarger. It is abnormally easy to name all the races of man in Olaf Stapledon, since they are numbered: The First Men, the Second Men, the Third Men, and so on.
* * *
UPDATE NOTICE: http://monsterhunternation.com/2015/02/18/book-bomb-novellas-from-the-sad-puppies-slate/ :Larry Correia is holding an official BOOK BOMB to show the naysayers what’s what. Click through, and buy like crazy. Spend the rent money. Be unthrifty — because science fictional goodness like this is sadly hard to come by these days.
If you’ve already bought the book, post a review.
The International Lord of Hate says:
How a Book Bomb works is that we try to get as many people to buy them off of Amazon in the same day. Because they have a rolling average best seller list that updates hourly, this causes the book to move up the list. The higher it gets, the more people outside the Book Bomb see it, and check it out too. Success breeds success, and best of all, the author GETS PAID.
And all authors should have GET PAID on their mission statement.
Please tell your friends. Repost, reblog, tweet, whatever it is you are into. The key to Book Bombs is spreading the word. Thank you
Originally published at John C. Wright's Journal. Please leave any comments there.
Heinlein and the Radicals
I did an interview for an online magazine where I said Heinlein would not win an award from the modern World Con, because World Con had been taken over by social justice warriors who disdained Heinlein’s unique brand of ‘rational anarchism’ (which looks remarkably like what we would call libertarianism), and his attitude toward the war between the sexes — and I was astonished to read social justice warriors stoutly defending their loyalty to Heinlein, and belittling my remark.
This was not one man saying he himself was a fan of Heinlein, he merely denied that there have been loud and repeated public statements by his faction denouncing Heinlein for thoughtcrime.
Heinlein was a stinging gadfly. He wanted to startle the reader out of any complacent laziness of thought, and to question any fundamental assumptions that had not yet been questioned.
This is the mere antithesis of a social justice warrior approach. They hate questions.
Originally published at John C. Wright's Journal. Please leave any comments there.
Superversive–Interview with Wendy Delmatar
An interview with the editrix of Abyss & Apex magazine:
Wendy was superversive before the rest of us ever heard of it. She is friends with Tom Simon, the gentleman who uses Superversive as an online name and who wrote our opening post. She brings her superversiveness to bear upon her work as the editor of Abyss & Apex Magazine, a long running semi-pro magazine of speculative fiction. A&A has been in print since 2003. The magazine’s name comes from quote by Friedrich Nietzsche: “And if you gaze long into the abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.”
Wendy says of the stories she publishes: “We look for the unique: stories that stand out in a genre that pushes the envelope of unusual. We take special delight in detailed world-building: we like slipstream, YA, hypertext fiction, dark fantasy, science fiction puzzle stories, magical realism, hard science fiction, soft science fiction, science fantasy, urban fantasy, military science fiction, ghost stories, space opera, cyberpunk, steampunk… there is very little we will not look at, although we have a severe allergy to zombies, elves, retold fairy tales, sports, westerns, vampires, and gratuitous sex and violence. We have no subject/topic preference, beyond a requirement that the work have a speculative element. We are happy to read stories that don’t quite seem to fit elsewhere.”
She also points out: The Urban Dictionary gives the following definition of superversive: Nurturing; supportive, building up — opposite of subversive.
Below is our interview with this perceptive and crusading editrix.
Originally published at John C. Wright's Journal. Please leave any comments there.
John C. Wright's Blog
- John C. Wright's profile
- 449 followers
![[image error]](http://www.scifiwright.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/sad_puppies_3_patch.jpg){kind=link}