Quote:
Originally Posted by Iphinome
No, please, let's do talk about the dinosaur in the room. http://www.apex-magazine.com/if-you-...osaur-my-love/
Now explain to me why this is so bad that the people who nominated it were only checking boxes and didn't actually _like_ it. Come on, right here we have the second biggest puppy bugaboo. The evil evil thing that no one could actually like, a symbol of all that's wrong.
Dazzle me with your proof that I'm lying when I say I like it. |
No proof, I'm not saying you didn't like it, as I mentioned, tastes vary.
I'm not using the argument that no one could like it, I just believe it's not SFF.
If she was nominated for The Portrait of Lisane da Patagnia instead, fair enough (I wasn't keen on that either TBH)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iphinome
If you don't think a nominated work is worthy of a hugo, there's a remedy for that, No Award. You'll note that like Dinosaur, it didn't win. Now show me why the people who did like it were box checking instead of actually enjoying the story. You seem to think it's good so why couldn't they?
|
I did No Award Wakulla Springs even though I liked it.
As above, not SFF, thats pretty much my sole argument against them being nominated for Hugo's.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iphinome
Should I claim that the 1995 nominators were pushing a box checking agenda when they put Apollo 13 on the ballot? It was history not SFF, right?
Or maybe I should agree that space stuff or dinosaur stuff, or a little touch of magic, monsters or aliens is close enough to most people and not throw a fit.
|
Fair enough.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iphinome
|
I don't seem to like anything John C Wright wrote, I No Awarded all his stuff, it was bloody awful.
Had to do some reading so it took awhile
Short of Hoyt, who really doesn't seem to like Mary
and this post seems to be part of a back and forth between the two of them, none of the authors seemed to be attacking anybody directly (Well at least aren't making up provably false claims).
Whereas Hoyt, Correia & Torgersen seem to have been described as 3 old racist white men everywhere.
I bet a lot of people in the comments were, there seem to be a lot of nuts on both sides.
Never heard of Lou Antonelli before.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iphinome
Yes a puppy might say that and it's so kind of you to tell us purely for information and not just because you want to pretend you're not the one making the argument.
|
You seem to be under the misapprehension that I am a puppy. I've argued both sides and keep saying there is no great conspiracy and tastes vary.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iphinome
This is supposed to be a conspiracy or affirmative action? It couldn't be consistent quality or just that the number of people who seek out her work being large and the more readers the greater the number of chances to end up on someone's award list? And there are ever so few people give awards these day after all.
|
It might be, certainly as valid a point as the diversity argument.
She seems to get good reviews on Amazon, but really, 5 years running, do you think she is that good?
It was Aldiss who said the awards were a barometer of reader popularity rather than artistic merit. I think the awards have gotten a bit political of late and moved more towards the artistic merit side of the spectrum, probably due to the low number of people voting nowadays
Hopefully this fiasco has spurred more people in general to nominate and vote going forwards.