Quote:
Originally Posted by Rizla
I return to the point that the Hugo ignored The Hunger Games. This was clearly a very readable book. The sales prove it. The biggest SF award totally missed the biggest selling SF book of the decade. That says something. And Hugo should be embarrassed and taking a good look at itself.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rizla
And what about The Martian and Ready Player One, both great books. Have they been recognized by the Hugo? If not, bin the Hugo as irrelevant.
But these two works and others I have mentioned do show that great works of SF do still appear and that the genre is far from dying. But for conventional SF as headed by the Hugo and other traditional deciders of what is good, the future is not so good.
|
Again -- you have yet to provide compelling evidence that anyone who doesn't appreciate/recognize your master list of awesomeness is inherently flawed.
if the Hugos were nothing but a popularity test based on sales, then they really would be irrelevant -- as in, redundant and duplicative and unnecessary.
Apparently, people have different tastes than you. That doesn't come as a fundamental shock to me.
I am open to the theoretical possibility that the Hugos are indeed flawed, and the phenomena you name are a
symptom. But I know darn well they aren't
the cause.