Hugo & Nebula Awards: Best Novels discussion
Random Chatter
>
Saving Retro Hugos
The question has several sub-parts: 1) Do Lovecraft and Campbell deserve the awards?
2) What should be the general criterion for awarding Hugos? and
3) Can we count on the objectivity of the awards in the future?
1) Lovecraft and Campbell do NOT deserve the awards, either as persons, and most certainly not as great humanitarians. However, I think their work does. They were the best in their fields at that time. I haven't seen anyone be able to contest that.
2) I think the criterion for both current and retro Hugos should be merit - which many people seem to be losing sight of. With the ever increasing influence of Social Justice activism (and by extension, of Critical Theories/Postmodernism), the focus is shifting from merit to awarding stories about oppression / authors judged to belong to an oppressed group, and, most preferably, an intersection of two or more oppressed identities.
Activists think that by replacing the narrative of a group they consider to be an oppressor with that of an oppressed group, they correct power imbalances in society. Consequently, awarding white males (and, by extension, generating an interest in their work) generally perpetuates discourses of oppression, and awarding racist white males... well, you get the drift.
This is why it is so easy for them to get rid with the awards - after all, almost no one else but white males wrote in the 1940s. And so we come to third question, and my take on it is:
3) No. Neither for retro, nor for current awards.
So as much as I like anyone making a stand against a totalitarian ideology, I think the retro Hugos should be put to sleep, at least for the time being, everything is becoming too political.
Mod
1) Lovecraft and Campbell do NOT deserve the awards, ... their work does.
Campbell got I guess like 10+ Hugos including Retro as a editor, is giving him another one says that in 1944 there were no comparable editors? On one hand, true, the majority of 1944 nominated fiction was from the Astounding, but is it because he was a great editor or because his magazine payed the highest per word, so the established authors first supplied to him. As Cor correctly mentions, yes, the best authors were there, but the share of dross was actually higher than in competition, and this suggest he is more a 'recognizable name' than really the best editor.
re Lovecraft it is harder because the award was for a mythos, perfected and streamlined after his death, therefore it states
'The Cthulhu Mythos, by H. P. Lovecraft, August Derleth, and others'
message 4:
by
Kateblue, 2nd star to the right and straight on til morning
(new)
Mod
Mod
If you Google sci-fi 1944, Wikipedia will direct you to this page: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categ...
According to this page there were five sci-fi books published in 1944. Sounds totally legit.
Mod
I read nearly all of Lovecraft's works in college, and never knew he was a racist. I didn't pick it up from the literature (which could be my own failing), but the style and influence is unmistakable. But I think awarding the Cthulhu Mythos is silly, as his influence is not limited to that. What did Lovecraft intend when creating the writing stories? Did he plot out or plan a mythology, or was it just sort of accidental, a convenient vehicle for creepy horror?
The farther back in time you go, the more difficult the question of honoring people who would be filth today. There are so many aspects of that - why is Ty Cobb, a belligerent, nasty racist person, in the Baseball Hall of Fame? He's there because of merit, in the same vein as we should judge literary works. So I agree with Plamen in that; and if we supply information about the person's flaws, so much more the education. It's like the idea of leaving Confederate statues in place or in museums, but providing plaques or other information on what they represented and why - anti-monuments if you will. You can't erase the history, but you can present it from a different viewpoint (although that could be scary in itself).
Oleksandr wrote: "... Here is a very nice article by Cora Buhlert Why the Retro Hugos Have Value, ..."I enjoyed that article. But I do take exception to one comment: "...pretty much everybody who is interested in older SFF has experienced hostility about this interest...."
I'm interested in older SFF and nobody has been hostile to me about that interest. (Then again, hardly anybody notices that I exist, which is fine.)
I like the retro Hugos because it helps me find things I might not otherwise find. Putting a focus on one particular year allows me a chance to narrow-down the list of 1000s of stories that exist down to a more manageable number to look through. I don't much care who wins the award, but I like finding interesting stuff.
I do agree with the author of the blog that when reading old SFF you can discover that what you thought it would be like may be completely wrong. It isn't all straight white men writing about straight white men (and aliens).
Mod
Should we rewire the history of science too? Were first midwives monsters because they used sage-infused water to disinfect before delivering babies? Would a doctor be jailed for negligence and taken their licence away had they done the same today?
History made us who we are today, if you are so quick to pat yourself on the back, acknowledge everyone else who got you here in the first place.
And yes, what Ed says makes perfect sense. You learn a lot from reading older literature of any kind and a lot of it is far from negative too.
Mod
Mod
Most novels and esp. shorter works were published in magazines lie Astounding, not as books
Ed wrote: "I'm interested in older SFF and nobody has been hostile to me about that interest. (Then again, hardly anybody notices that I exist, which is fine.)"
And Core was called Nazi for her volunteer work of collecting data about 1944 works to ease others their choice. Bearing in mind that she is in Germany it was doubly offensive I guess
Mod
I'd say to show modern readers (those interested) the history and development of the genre, maybe point at authors forgotten now (by a majority of readers), just to highlight old good books - for example I doubt I'd have read Kallocain or The Glass Bead Game if they weren't nominated. The same goes for a lot of shorter fiction
Allan wrote: "Also, if you want to honor past sci-fi, it seems arbitrary to start with 1939. Why not Verne or even Shelley? "
I agree, it was completely arbitrary, the first Retro was given in 1996. They are awards optionally given by a Worldcon for works eligible in a year 50, 75, or 100 years earlier when there was a Worldcon but no Hugo Award. A 2017 rule change expanded the criteria to works which would have been eligible in any year after 1939 in which no Hugos were awarded, whether or not there was a Worldcon that year. According to the current rule, awards can be given for 1939-1952 and 1954. Of the fifteen years eligible, awards have been given for eight.
I guess going before 1939 the selection will be too small and the quality of 'pulp era' often quite low
Allan wrote: "the more difficult the question of honoring people who would be filth today."
For me the true question is would these people express the same opinions today? Education changed, attitudes changed, now a minor Twitter repost can rise a storm greater than openly racist statement 50 years ago I guess. It is interesting that people are mostly fine with Greek philosophers, who were often ok with their slave-holding society that could say that barbarians are less than human and where role of women was extremely low.
About Campbell, I heard an idea that his statements were just to start a discussion, so he played a devil's advocate saying e.g. women cannot write SF, prove me wrong - actually to stimulate such writings
Mod
Yes you can, but for a fandom group activities, not individual ones are paramount - to read AND discuss
Mod
Mod
If so, maybe some categories like best editor should be just cancelled for Retros, leaving only actual works - both written and films. For I doubt a lot of readers choose what to read next based on who edited that work (even despite edits are sometimes very important)
message 15:
by
Kateblue, 2nd star to the right and straight on til morning
(new)
Mod
I think some categories such as best editor are irrelevant to most readers even today. It's the industry creating those categories so the writers don't get all the awards. Not that I don't think editing is maximally important. I just don't think the average fan particularly cares.
Most people probably don't think much about editors, but they have huge influence anyway. Some people will buy every issue of a particular magazine, or every issue in a "Best of 19xx" series, so the choices made by those editors make a big difference even if people don't notice who the editor is. When the editor is a big name, like in all those story collections with the name Asimov on the cover, it makes an even bigger difference.
Mod
True, but it is hard to split where in a good book work of an author and where of an editor. As I've said before, comparing edited and full versions of Stranger in a Strange Land led me to believe that RAH's works benefited from editing (mainly cutting)
With current online (and other) SFF magazines it is even harder - say Uncanny has more short work nominations than Clarkesworld - is it because of a better editors or that Uncanny made several #ownvoices issues that are supported by the fandom?
Or a purely hypothetical example - you get 2 anthologies of "best SSF of the year" with 10 stories each. in one you rate 1 story 5*, 4 - 4* and the rest 3*. In the second - 4 story 5*, 1 - 4* and the rest 2* - which had a better editor (chooser)? Do you just use average or the share of 5* works?
message 18:
by
Kateblue, 2nd star to the right and straight on til morning
(last edited Sep 01, 2020 10:21AM)
(new)
Mod
Definitely agree. I just don't think the oblivious reader realizes this
Oleksandr wrote: "True, but it is hard to split where in a good book work of an author and where of an editor. As I've said before, comparing edited and full versions of Stranger in a Strange Land led me to believe that RAH's works benefited from editing (mainly cutting)"
SO true. Editing is what his later books REALLY needed.
Oleksandr wrote: "... which had a better editor ..."A hard problem. But no harder or less arbitrary than picking which one book was the best among many very different books.
By the way, another thing the editor can do is pick the cover image, and in some cases the title. I think Cordwainer Smith's stories often had really clever titles. Just found out today that many of those titles were created by Fredrick Pohl.
@Alan: Considering that the Golden Age of Science Fiction begins in 1938, which is the year of eligibility for the first Retro Hugos (1939), I would bet my Grandma's silver that fans wanted to honour the work of the classic writers, some of whom (I'd immediately say Bradbury) have no awards whatsoever because the Hugos started in the 50s and the Nebulas even later.Before that, it was the pulp age, of which I know practically nothing.
Lovecraft's racism is impossible to pick up on unless you are specifically looking for it. Once I knew, I was able to connect a lot of dots, like miscegenation -> The Shadow over Innsmouth and a lot of Chtulhu, but before, nah.
Mod
Usually it is started in 1928 from publishing of both The Skylark of Space & Skylark Three: 2 Sci-Fi Books in One Edition and Buck Rogers story BUCK ROGERS IN THE 25TH CENTURY (Armageddon 2419 Ad; The Airlords Of Han) & THE PRINCE OF MARS RETURN in Amazing Stories. This idea is backed among others by The Rise and Fall of American Science Fiction, from the 1920s to the 1960s
Of course, just like a question of SFF canon, there are no clear starting date, so you are correct as well
Oleksandr wrote: "For me the true question is would these people express the same opinions today? Education changed, attitudes changed, now a minor Twitter repost can rise a storm greater than openly racist statement 50 years ago I guess."No, attitudes to so many things have changed drastically. I have lived in the old regime for 11-12 years, I still remember the enormous difference in mentality, and that was only 30 years ago.
And before, when my Grandma gave birth to twins in 1956, she wanted to throw herself off the window, because they had only one pair of everything and no money.
100 years, 200 years ago, as Art says, we can barely imagine: no antibiotics, poor sanitation, no social media (most importantly I guess), war lurking on the horizon all the time, almost complete dependence on your community and your family. Social conservatism was not a choice. People now are pampered - and the people on Twitter are pampered the most.
Fyi, I don't think anyone but Campbell can receive the award at least until the late 40s and the appearance of Galaxy and the other magazines. I have not read a single article that doesn't say he was instrumental for the Golden Age (https://www.amazon.com/Astounding-Cam..., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_...)
Mod
That's was my point as well. Or your "No" means "Yes" and you agree that most likely the behavior of Campbell and Lovecraft would have been different if they lived today, for that's what I said :)
Fyi, I don't think anyone but Campbell can receive the award at least until the late 40s
I guess we don't argue whether Campbell was important for the way the genre developed. Yes, he was, Astounding was the magazine with the largest readership, the majority of classic SF authors started there.
This is the fact, no one argues it.
What is argued is that there were other, less successful editors and authors, not because they were worse or less talented, but because they came later to the game, or lacked perseverance after several tries. And these people are mostly unknown and Retro Hugo was made to bring them to the light as well.
Campbell would win every year in the 1940s if the award were only for SF in America. But the Hugo's also consider fantasy, horror, and weird, and not just in America. So other winners are possible. But Campbell will probably still win most of them. (The category "professional magazine", or whatever they call it, probably leaves out comic books and anthology books.)
In general, the editor award isn't very interesting to me.
Mod
It should be a publication in English, so this almost limits to the USA, for the UK had other problems in the first half of the 1940.
However, there were several US magazines beyond Astounding;
Weird Tales
Planetary
Dynamic
And sometimes they published some good pieces and in a particular year their editors likely worked more than Campbell, who had established himself for years, so in a particular year they may be more worthy. Heck, even Campbell's deputy actually made actual editing in some years, but do you aware of his name?
Ed wrote: "Campbell would win every year in the 1940s if the award were only for SF in America. But the Hugo's also consider fantasy, horror, and weird, and not just in America. So other winners are possible...."Exactly what I was thinking.
Oleksandr wrote: "Usually it is started in 1928 from publishing of both [book:The Skylark of Space & Skylark Three: 2 Sci-F..."Can you recommend any article/website where I can read more about this?
That's was my point as well. Or your "No" means "Yes" and you agree that most likely the behavior of Campbell and Lovecra..."
I am getting a bit lost honestly. I mean they would not be racist nowadays. Racism is hardly a fixed personality trait. It is a belief that is shaped by your surroundings and the ideas you are exposed to. P.S.: I thought this is what you meant as well?
Oleksandr wrote: "I guess we don't argue whether Campbell was important"
I understand your point, but this kind of turns things from looking for a button for your coat to looking for a coat for your button, loll:)
By the way, why is everyone trying to find a compromise solution and accommodate and reason with people who are anything but reasonable? They live to condemn and denounce, this is a feature, not a bug of the ideology.
Does anyone actually believe, based on what is generally happening, that this stops with Lovecraft and Campbell and we live happily everafter? They are the easy targets, who were actually guilty of what they are being blamed of. But this is not the sum of their lives.
Ed wrote: "Campbell would win every year in the 1940s if the award were only for SF in America. ...."Actually maybe he wouldn't. One could make a case for Sam Merwin Jr. who took over "Startling Stories" in 1945 and is said to have greatly improved the quality. There are likely other worthy candidates that I don't know about.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Startli...
It should be a publication in English, so this almost limits to the USA, for the UK had other problems in the first half of the 1940.
The Hugos allow non-English winners, though it isn't common.
The USA also had problems in 1940s. Paper was rationed and some authors were stationed in the military. Australia banned the import of US pulp SF magazines from 1939 to 1958, so they created their own Thrills, Incorporated in 1950.
I just learned about several of these things this morning. And I find it interesting. Perhaps that shows the utility of things like the Retro Hugos.
Plamen wrote: "... they would not be racist nowadays. ... "I'm not sure how you come to that conclusion.
Racism is alive and well all over the world and will probably continue for a long time. If those people were reborn today, I can't predict what they would be like. I unfortunately know people of my own age and background who are openly and unashamedly racist.
(And to avoid confusion, I'll state I am not one of the people opposed to giving Campbell awards. Like all people, he had good and bad aspects. If I were to hate him, and I don't, it would be because of his help in creating and promoting Scientology.)
Mod
I cannot say about exact sites, I've read it this year in The Rise and Fall of American Science Fiction, from the 1920s to the 1960s and earlier when Hugo Gernsback (after whom Hugo awards are named) initial start with Amazing
re the confusion - yes we meant the same.
re: @Ed's "why not?" I guess more precisely I'll be hard to portrait them as racist. If Campbell were not in publishing business I doubt he'd talk about positives slavery in his editorials irrespective of his views. And if Lovecraft's racism is known mainly from his private letters, I doubt they would be public if he lived
Oleksandr wrote: "... re: @Ed's "why not?" ..."I can't find anyplace where I said "why not?", so I don't understand.
Mod
That's pretty interesting, thanks for researching and posting all the info.
You could totally run a group on the history of sci-fi or something! ^_^
Art wrote: "Ed wrote: "... thanks for researching and posting all the info. ..."Oh, I'll do anything if it helps me procrastinate!
I already knew about the paper rationing because I read the book "Astounding" about Campbell and his friends. And also because I found a discarded book from the 1940's where the whole back of the cover explained that they had to reduce the size of the margins to fit the text into fewer pages. I think that after the war, margins never did go back to the older, larger sizes.
"You could totally run a group on the history of sci-fi or something!"
Neither Jim nor me claims to be an expert on the subject. We enjoy discovering.
Mod
Hope my post didn't come across as sarcastic. I've got your group bookmarked for the time when I'll have enough time to follow the discussions and do an extra monthly read.
Discovering is the best part, that's where having great members comes in.
Art wrote: "Ed wrote: "Hope my post didn't come across as sarcastic...."It didn't.
Mod
I can't find anyplace where I said "why not?", so I don't understand."
Sorry, once again I rushed up, trying to save time while answering. I haven't quoted you, giving "why not?" I just meant that yours 'I'm not sure how you come to that conclusion.' to Plamen's 'they would not be racist nowadays' can be shortened to 'Why wouldn't they be racists?' which even shorter was 'why not?'
Sorry for misunderstanding
Oleksandr wrote: "Sorry, once again I rushed up, ..."No worries. I was confused, not upset.
If Campbell were not in publishing business I doubt he'd talk about positives slavery in his editorials irrespective of his views. And if Lovecraft's racism is known mainly from his private letters, I doubt they would be public if he lived
Who knows? Maybe Lovecraft would be tweeting or e-mailing and his private opinions would come out. Maybe Campbell would be interviewed on Howard Stern and his views would come out. Maybe Asimov would be a contestant on Dancing with the Stars and would be accused of groping. Maybe L. Ron Hubbard would run for president and pay hush money to prostitutes.
Or maybe they'd all be absolutely lovely people except when drunk backstage after performing on Ru Paul's Drag Race.
Back to the main point..... I used to avoid the older SF because I figured it would be mostly boring and sometimes offensive. Both things are sometimes true. But there is a whole lot of old stuff that is surprisingly fresh and interesting and non-offensive. Or is offensive in the right way. Things like "Retro Hugos" and discussion groups on goodreads help me find the good stuff.
I have no problem reading the authors listed above with the exception of L. Ron Hubbard. I won't go near his stuff.
Mod
Now that's too farfetched, the country would not tolerate such behavior.
Jokes aside, as for older literature, I believe that some older books sometimes have unexpectedly fresh ideas and characters. A more recent example would be reading books published around the moon walk and space race. Everyone was so sure that Mars would be the next to be conquered and colonized.
Mod
Yes, Retrofutures (futures as envisioned in the past) can be very interesting, compared with the present. I had a futurologistic date list from early 1970s from one of Soviet analogs of Popular Mechanics, which had people on Mars in the 80s and finished with the first human flight beyond the solar system in year 2000
as to reading old SF - as I noted elsewhere, I grew up mainly on pre-1972 SF, mainly 50s-60s, so I started with it, therefore, like a first love it is in my heart forever
Oleksandr wrote: "Plamen wrote: "Can you recommend any article/website where I can read more about this?"I cannot say about exact sites, I've read it this year in [book:The Rise and Fall of American Science Fictio..."
Thanks, Oleksandr, I'll check it out. There seems to be a lot of confusion about that, many sources seem to agree on the late 30s (1937 or 1938), but I have seen some go down to 1934, and no doubt some go as far back as the 20s. I'm personally not sure if I have read any sci fi other than Jules Vernes and Herbert Wells.
Ed wrote: "Oleksandr wrote: "Sorry, once again I rushed up, ..."No worries. I was confused, not upset.
If Campbell were not in publishing business I doubt he'd talk about positives slavery in his editorial..."
Well, things are getting too speculative - but just compare how a 20-year-old German would think at the beginning of the 1940s and how the same German would think in 2010.
Ed wrote: I'm not sure how you come to that conclusion.Racism is alive and well all over the world and will probably continue for a long time. I..."
I don't share your opinion, not at all. There has never been another time when people have been less racist (or sexist, homophobic, etc. etc. etc.) as now. It is a privilege and a luxury to endlessly deconstruct someone's tweets for a remark that is off-colour or to comb their personal history for that picture from the 90s where they have a blackface.
I don't see how the current obsession about this, and especially the outrage culture that has developed around it, will help anyone or anything, but I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on it.
The only places where I think racism is actually very much alive are East Asia and Central Africa. To some extent this is valid for my region, but I am not sure if it is not simply general hostility towards strangers. My ex is Brazilian, and I have plenty of other Brazilian friends here, the moment people see they don't bite, they are accepted very quickly.
I don't care about Campbell, I simply don't want to empower bullies. I have never seen anyone do more harm than self-righteous people.
Mod
Plamen, you strike me like a person who values reason, so please allow me to say that you may be missing some of the pieces and that lack of information makes you draw some incorrect conclusions.
Mod
Mod
Mod
Yes, Gini index is up, but does it mean the middle class is destroyed? I guess it depends on definition. Here in Ukraine, every family with a house and a car is definitely belongs to the middle class. Here is data for the US https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/RH...
Unless you say that upswing in the 90s is of "crazy rich" and not middle class then you point about its disappearance is questionable
Mod
https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...
Art wrote: "Plamen wrote: "There has never been another time when people have been less racist (or sexist, homophobic, etc. etc. etc.) .."Plamen, you strike me like a person who values reason, so please allo..."
Art, I think the same about you. Which is also why you would not lie or overexaggerate. So tell me, where in American society (as I assume you speak your country) there is deep, ingrained racism that affects people's lives? Maybe I indeed cannot see it from over here?
Btw, America's biggest problem, in my opinion, is income inequality, and all the other concomitant trouble it creates (unequal access to healthcare, etc.). Ameliorating this should solve most of the country's other problems, including racism, to the extent it exists, and it will even weaken Black nationalism.
P.S. I feel we all may be misunderstand each other a bit: I do not mean racism is gone - this is preposterous. I mean it certainly exists, especially in certain places, groups and regions, but is hardly as pervasive and "systemic" as is currently claimed. And I think there has been dramatic improvement .
Oleksandr wrote: "Allan wrote: "The gigantic shift of wealth toward the rich that’s taken place since 1980 (largely at the hands of Republicans, though the Democrats’ ineptitude at reversing it has contributed) has ..."It is not destroyed, I think Allan was just hyperbolising, but the situation is grave indeed, the middle class has shrunk significantly. I have to largely rely on memories now - but I think all growth in the last 20 years has gone to the seaboards and the richest top 1-5% of the people, leaving Middle America devastated.
Plus the structure of the job market has changed, with permanent positions with health etc. benefits being replaced with random gig jobs. Plus there is record unemployment now, which causes a lot of despair as health benefits go with the job, which doesn't exist any more - against the backdrop of a global pandemic.
Allan wrote: "Just because it’s less does not mean it’s gone. Racist behavior still happens all the time in the U.S. at a personal level as well as being ingrained into systems. The gigantic shift of wealth towa..."I accept - and agree with most of - what you are saying. However,
do you think that the solution to combating racism is to talk non-stop about it and blame everything and everyone of racism, even when it is clearly not the case.
The approach before was to encourage contact and personal relations and show that no, the others are definitely not eating children for breakfast. I think it has generally worked quite well. The disaster in the inner cities for me is an entirely different thing and has comparatively little to do with racism.
Hugo & Nebula Awards: Best Novels
Books mentioned in this topic
Ubik (other topics)Science Fiction: The Illustrated Encyclopedia (other topics)
Life During Wartime (other topics)
King and Joker (other topics)
This Perfect Day (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Ray Bradbury (other topics)Hugo Gernsback (other topics)
John W. Campbell Jr. (other topics)
H.P. Lovecraft (other topics)
For many posters, the easiest solution is to abandon Retro Hugos altogether.
Here is a very nice article by Cora Buhlert Why the Retro Hugos Have Value, which has links to several other posts of the discussion's participants. She is a creator of Retro Science Fiction Reviews, where she did a great job of collecting info about the eligible 1944 works.
This is partially intertwined with the question of If there is a SFF canon for which a separate thread is started
What do you think about Retro Hugos?