Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew H.
I disagree. It's not about courtesy, it's about choosing to not be cowardly. Priest has shown that he has standards, and that he is not afraid to speak up when he feels those standards are being violated. This is a good thing, and it's something we need more of, not less of.
These are all successful, well-known authors. They can deal with the criticism, and if they can't, they should be in another field. (And Stross is taking the Internet puppy title and running with it, so he's clearly able to take it).
No one is well served if people withhold criticism on an important matter because they don't want to look like an ass. If Priest believes that the Clarke prize is going in the wrong direction, he has a *duty* to speak up, which, happily, he has.
|
Well, we just differ on this. The only novel that Priest gives a valid work-over of is Mieville's Embassytown. The rest of the picks get a paragraph at most and just come across as dismissive.
Quote:
|
Sheri S. Tepper’s The Waters Rising (Gollancz) – how can one describe it? For f*ck’s sake, it is a quest saga and it has a talking horse. There are puns on the word ‘neigh’.
|
Is that well-reasoned, thoughtful criticism? Does it come across as anything else but petty?
Firing the judges, cancelling the competition, etc...Really?
Maybe I'm being too categorical by saying that all criticism should be private, I'll concede that. Speaking out has its place. But not like this.