Congratulations, ChiZine

One of the pleasant surprises of World Fantasy was getting to meet Brett Savory and Sandra Kasturi, the people behind ChiZine. This Canadian small press has been consistently surprising me with the quality of their output, and I was delighted to see I’m not alone in my opinion. ChiZine won three categories in the British Fantasy Awards. Most notably they won Best Small Press, and books that they published won Best Collection and Best Newcomer.

ChiZine are most noted for their horror output, and their two winning titles — Remember Why You Fear Me by Rob Shearman and Hair Side, Flesh Side by Helen Marshall — are both superb examples of that genre.

While I’m promoting the company, however, I’d like to point you at a couple of their other titles: Gemma Files Hexslinger Trilogy (I reviewed part one here), and Napier’s Bones by Derryl Murphy, which so impressed Ms. Lord and Ms. Burnham.

Home At Last

Kevin is a couple of hours short of touchdown in San Francisco and I’m back in The Cottage. Eventually I’ll get caught up on stuff. Right now, however, I’m preparing for tomorrow’s show on Ujima where I will be interviewing Jonathan L. Howard about his career in video game design, his Johanes Cabal books, his new series from Strange Chemistry and doubtless a few other things as well. We may even chat about World Fantasy.

One thing I did get done while I was away (because I had a deadline) was a brief report on the World Fantasy Awards for the For Books’ Sake website. You can find that here.

Meanwhile, it is back to reading Katya’s World, which I’m enjoying a lot, and then sleep, of which I seem to need rather a lot.

Awards Confusion

Kevin and I are still in London, and I probably won’t be able to get caught up with blogging until the weekend, but I do want to mention one thing.

As soon as I heard the announcement that the World Fantasy Awards and British Fantasy Awards were to be presented, not just at the same ceremony, but interleaved, I knew that confusion would result. I was right. I have already seen two very high profile authors tweeting the wrong information. Here is what actually happened.

The World Fantasy Award for Best Novel went to G. Willow Wilson for Alif the Unseen.

The British Fantasy Award for Best Fantasy Novel went to Graham Joyce for Some Kind of Fairy Tale.

The British Fantasy Award for Best Horror Novel went to Last Days by Adam Nevill.

It didn’t help that Graham’s book was up for all three awards. It really was very foolish to present them all at once.

The Bisexual Book Awards

Yes, there are such things. They have an SF/F/H category too, and a separate one for YA. You don’t have to identify as bisexual, just have suitable content in your book. Entry is free, so if you happen to have a book out this year with bisexual content then you should get on and submit it. Because you never know. Also I want to see plenty of support for the awards from our little corner of the world (in fact they only do the SF/F/H category if there are sufficient entries, otherwise we get lumped into mainstream). Further details here.

Women Win Literary Prizes

I gather that the Canadian writer, Alice Munro, has won the Nobel Prize for Literature. I’m not very familiar with her work, but several of the people I follow on Twitter are very excited about this, and she is only the 13th woman to win the prize in the 114 years of its existence. So, yay Alice, and well done people in Stockholm.

Meanwhile, across the water in Helsinki, the Finnish Literature Society has awarded their annual Aleksis Kivi Fund to Leena Krohn. This is only worth around £12,500, as compared to the £770,000 that Munro is apparently getting from the Nobel folks, but it certainly isn’t to be sniffed at, especially as the award is going to someone who very obviously writes “that weird stuff”.

Krohn’s work is something that I am familiar with. What’s more, I actually have her latest translated work in the bookstore. Datura: award-winning literature, and SF. Check it out.

YA in the Booker

Adam Roberts’ post calling for more attention to be paid to YA by the Booker Prize has been gaining a fair amount of attention. I was going to comment on it but then, like Matt Cheney, found that I had far more to say than is reasonable, or even polite, to put into a blog comment. So I’m writing something here instead.

Adam’s basic point appears to be that YA is a burgeoning field of literature and that the Booker, as a prize for all literature, should look at it, and reward it if it is good enough, rather than assuming that it is of lesser quality simply because it is “for kids”.

(I note in passing that this is a somewhat different point to the argument for a YA Hugo. The Hugos can and do consider YA, and have voted YA books the Best Novel prize in the past. What we are debating now is whether there should be a Hugo specifically for YA.)

I am certainly reading a lot more YA these days. I do so for a whole range of reasons, one of which is simply that YA books tend to be shorter and more fast-paced than non-YA, and sometimes this is what I want out of a book. Here are some more complex arguments.

1. Because publishers still tend to assume that SF&F is “for kids” it is often easier to get a translation deal for a YA SF&F novel than it is for an adult one. So if I want to read translated SF&F, YA is a good place to look.

2. Equally publishers still tend to assume that YA is less serious than adult fiction, and therefore an appropriate venue for women writers. If I want to look for good new women writers, again YA is one of the places to go.

3. Finally it appears to be easier to address issues of gender and sexuality in YA than it is in adult fiction. I suspect that this is because publishers code YA as being for teenage girls. Adult SF&F they assume is for adult males, whom they think may be offended by QUILTBAG themes, and if they had YA fiction aimed at boys they’d probably worry that the audience would be harmed by such material.

Yes, I know I am making sweeping generalizations here. Not all publishers think in these stereotypical ways, and in part their thinking is constrained by what bookstore chains are prepared to stock. But these marketing considerations do still seem to be important in the industry, and consequently I find YA a good place to go for many of the things I want in a book.

The other interesting thing about YA is how it is defined. Most genre categories are defined by things like plot, setting and tropes. It certainly can be argued that a YA book must contain standard elements about growing up: about coming to terms with sexuality, and with becoming an independent adult rather than someone under parental control. However, YA does also seem to be defined by its audience. It is intended to be read by teenagers.

Consequently, my concern about YA in the Booker is very similar to my concern about YA in the Hugos. If the Booker is to reward YA, it needs to judge it from a teenage perspective, which means having teenage jurors. If it doesn’t have that, then it is just a bunch of adults telling kids what they should be reading. That, of course, has value in its own way, but doesn’t connect properly with the readership of the books, and may end up rewarding books that are poorly written YA, in that they appeal more to adults rather than to the target audience.

Clarkesworld #84

In all of the post-Worldcon confusion Neil forgot to send me the files for Clarkesworld #84, and I forgot to nag him. It has taken me a while to get the issue in store, but finally it is available.

Of course this does give me an opportunity to congratulate the team once again on another (IMHO) very deserved Hugo. I understand that the full video of the ceremony is now available on UStream. I much watch that as the feed cut off in the middle of the Clarkesworld acceptance speeches.

In issue #84 there is new fiction from Greg Mellor (“Mar Pacifico”), James Patrick Kelly (“The Promise of Space”) and Mark Bourne & Elizabeth Bourne (“One Flesh”). That final story is somewhat poignant because we learn from the author bios that Mark Bourne died before the story could be published. I don’t know if Gardner did this deliberately, but in the classic fiction section we have stories by Nancy Kress (“First Principle”) and her late husband, Charles Sheffield (“Out of Copyright”).

The audio versions of “Mar Pacifico” and “The Promise of Space” are already available.

In non-fiction an old friend of the magazine, Mark Cole, talks about science fiction on American radio. Jeremy’s interview is with the brilliant Ken Liu. And there is an Another Word column from Alethea Kontis about love at first sight. I believe, Princess, I truly do.

Neil’s editorial takes a sideways look at the state of digital publishing by imaging a TV series about a group of digital kids struggling to survive in the post-apocalyptic publishing world. Given that I’m now supposed to be one of the leaders of the old-time paper fanzine crowd, I’m disappointed not to be cast in the role of the evil boss of Paper Empire.

This issue’s cover is “Silent Oracle” by British artist, Matt Dixon. I sure hope he’s going to be exhibiting at Loncon 3.

The Audio Book Mess

Monday was one of the most unpleasant days I can remember in all my involvement with Worldcon. Just as I was about to set out for an evening appointment (opening the Out Stories Bristol exhibition on another stage of its road trip around the South West), a tweet came in linking to a blog post that accused this year’s Hugos of fraudulently denying a work a place on the ballot, in direct contravention of the rules of the Awards, the explanation for this travesty being rampant misogyny on behalf of the Hugo Administrators. I had to go and catch a train, and Kevin was in the middle of a long drive across Nevada, so neither of us could do much to address this. I did have some Twitter access on the train, and I spent the journey watching in despair as one after another high profile figure in the publishing industry re-tweeted this allegation uncritically. It was, not to put too fine a point on it, an absolute fucking disaster.

Where did this all come from? Well, back in 2008 John Scalzi edited an anthology called METAtropolis. It had a bunch of really good people in it: Elizabeth Bear, Jay Lake, Tobias Buckell and Karl Schroeder. As an anthology, of course, it wasn’t eligible for a Hugo, though the individual stories should each have been eligible. The interesting thing about METAtropolis, however, was that it was published as an audio book only (initially, a print version followed the next year). So someone came up with the wizard wheeze of getting it nominated in Best Dramatic Presentation: Long Form. After all, an audio book is a dramatic performance, right, not text?

At this time we were still fighting the whole “form v content” battle. There were still people who insisted that an ebook and a paper book were different things, and should have different Hugo categories (and, of course, that fanzines published electronically were not real fanzines and should not be eligible for Hugos). Audio was a whole different kettle of fish. Where did audio books belong? No one knew.

There was a great deal of online chat about the issue, with many people championing the cause of METAtropolis. As a result the Hugo Administrators had little choice but to accept the nomination. I was OK about this, if the argument was that the audio book was indeed some sort of dramatic production with performers and a producer, but the way the work appeared on the ballot, listing authors and an editor, and ignoring the producer, made it clear that a decision had been made that an audio book, of any form, was a Dramatic Presentation.

By the way, in researching this I noticed that Mark Kelly’s otherwise excellent Science Fiction Awards Database does not include any nominations for Dramatic Presentations. That’s not just METAtropolis. Paul Cornell’s nominations for Doctor Who are missing too. I’m not sure why this is, and it is not necessarily Mark’s fault, but it does seem odd to me.

Fast forward now to 2013, and another audio-only production appears in the nominations. It is “Lady Astronaut of Mars” by Mary Robinette Kowal. This time the voters put it in the Novelette category. The administrators looked at it, looked at the precedent set by METAtropolis, and decided that it really ought to belong in the Best Dramatic Presentation: Short Form category instead where, sadly, it didn’t have enough votes to make the ballot.

Correspondence between Mary and this year’s head Hugo Administrator, Todd Dashoff, is available at Mary’s website.

What Todd and his colleagues decided doesn’t surprise me, especially when I saw that Mary’s initial blog post about the story included directions for performing the characters. If anyone’s audio book story was going to be theatrical, I would guess it would be Mary’s. But there are still clearly grey areas in the rules.

What did surprise me is that John Scalzi was apparently told, by the 2009 Administrator, that the individual stories in METAtropolis were also eligible in the various short fiction categories, in their audio form. In retrospect that seems very odd to me, and John did write about it, but I suspect that piece of information didn’t get passed down through the years. In any case, none of the stories was nominated, so no actual precedent was set.

So we have a complex issue here whereby a work has been ruled a Dramatic Presentation, based on precedent, and moved to that category, where it failed to get enough nominations to make the ballot. There are a lot of issues around exactly how and why an audio book might or might not be considered in a fiction category. I don’t want to go into those now, because there is a more important issue at hand.

What happened on Monday was this post, which picks up the story. It follows up some of the complications of audio book eligibility, but despite this it concludes that Mary’s exclusion from the ballot was a case of outright fraud on the part of the Hugo Administrators, and says so, very loudly.

Why? Because everyone knows that those Worldcon people are a bunch of misogynist, racist, ageist, ableist, homophobic, transphobic shitbags, of course. What else do you expect them to do?

Also, just in case any of the guilty parties happen to have some sort of excuse handy for what they have done, the author of the post explained that what they were guilty of was subconscious misogyny. That is, they may not be aware of what they are doing, but being misogynist, racist, ageist, ableist, homophobic, transphobic shitbags they were guilty anyway. It is a sort of Original Sin. You can’t escape.

Quite apart from the accusations leveled at the Hugos, this sort of thing upsets me a lot. That’s because I have spent quite a lot of my life being told that I do not know my own mind, and that I have all sorts of subconscious neuroses and perversions that lead me to think that I am a woman, whereas ‘really’ I’m not, because other people say so. I cannot begin to tell you how annoying that is.

Also, the assumption that everyone involved with the Hugos is some sort of balding, bearded, beer-bellied old man (probably a Christian Fundamentalist Libertarian with a collection of guns even bigger than his collection of Heinlein novels) gets old very quickly. Sadly I know what happens if I’m getting yelled at by some feminist online. If I stick my hand up and say, “excuse me, female here”, someone will tell me, “but you are ‘really’ a man”. I can’t fight this sort of thing, I just end up getting insulted and dismissed.

Back to the issue in hand, however, and there is one thing that Todd & co. did not do well. Given that they found it necessary to move Mary’s story between categories, they should have had the decency to explain it all to her on the night, in person, not force her to exchange emails with them after the convention. In the absence of any other information, that seems plain rude to me.

What they should not have done, despite all of the yelling, is tell anyone before the vote what they were doing. Why? Well, what would happen if that sort of thing were standard practice? Let us suppose, for a moment, that the person in question was not Mary, who is a calm and reasonable sort, but John Ringo, who has recently been claiming that he too has been unfairly denied nominations.

Suppose, then, that a Hugo Administrator wrote to Mr. Ringo explaining that his story could not be considered as a novelette but would instead be in the BDP: Short category. Is it possible, do you think, that Mr. Ringo might kick up a big stink and demand that the decision be reversed? And that there would be a massive online flame war as a result? And that the whole of that year’s ballot would be tainted by accusations of cheating? I think it might be. Which is why Hugo Administrators are very reluctant to deal with this sort of issue beforehand.

Remember also that these days the vast majority of votes come in electronically in the day or two before balloting closes. Even if the Administrators had wanted to warn Mary of the problem, there would have been only a couple of days between them finding out that there was an issue to be dealt with and the end of voting.

This brings us to what I think is a better gender analysis of the whole issue. When John came out with METAtropolis he knew that there were questions of eligibility, so he talked about them openly. Some of the authors did too. The net result was that they proactively created a climate of opinion in which the Hugo Administrators had little choice but to allow the nomination in BDP: Long. It was a very boy thing to do.

Mary, on the other hand, appears to have been fairly quiet about the whole thing. I don’t recall her pushing hard for a nomination, and certainly not doing so specifically in Novelette. She appears to have politely sat back and let the process take its course. Also, even if she had done so, she would have got fair less exposure for her campaign simply because people pay less attention to what women say.

Now, of course, it is a different matter. The story was made available in print this year and should be eligible for Novelette next year as normal. Everyone now knows about Mary not getting a nomination this year, and I am pretty sure that she’ll remind the voters when the time comes. For the reasons explained above, I doubt that Loncon 3’s Hugo Administrators will say publicly what they intend to do, but they would be very foolish not to allow the nomination.

Well, I say that. Others appear to disagree, and think it is inevitable that the story will once again be unfairly excluded, this time by Loncon 3, directly reversing the decision made by Lone Star Con 3. Why? Because misogynist, racist, ageist, ableist, homophobic, transphobic shitbags, of course. It is only natural that they will do the most Evil thing possible.

By the way, if you suspect that the above means that we are slowly drifting into a situation whereby borderline issues of eligibility for the Hugos are not determined by the WSFS Constitution, or by the Hugo Administrators, but by whether or not the authors concerned can mount an effective enough advance online campaign to force the Administrators’ hands, well, I suspect you are right. And I’m not sure it is very healthy either.

Other aspects of the story are of some interest. The post contains some creative interpretations of the WSFS Constitution that will help frame correcting amendments, and which the Nit-Picking and Fly-Specking Committee (yes, there is such a thing) will want to take a look at to prevent any further misunderstanding. The post also quotes the Hugo Awards website as saying, “There is no requirement that a work be published on paper.” I do believe that I wrote that, and of course I was talking about digital books at the time. Kevin and I need to go through the site with a fine toothed comb looking for other potential issues like that.

Of course it would have been nice if the author of that post had come to us with questions. The Hugo website does have an email address, and we are happy to answer enquiries. But I guess there was no point in her bothering. After all, we are misogynist, racist, ageist, ableist, homophobic, transphobic shitbags and we would only have lied to her, if only subconsciously.

Meanwhile the upshot of this is that it appears that all audio books are doubly eligible, as both stories and dramatic presentations, provided that the text is published as text somewhere. The net result of the ruling is that lots of people are suddenly eligible for more Hugos, and a whole lot more works are going to go into the BDP categories. Odd, then, that the whole thing is being spun as a means of denying people eligibility.

Then again, fandom is ever creative. One of the responses to Monday’s debacle was that we should add a Best Audio Book category. Or perhaps several of them, dependent on length. Because, of course, if you have a great deal of confusion as to which of two categories a work is eligible for, the right thing to do is apparently to add a third category it might be eligible for.

*sigh*

It always upsets me when we have this sort of confusion affecting eligibility. I wish we could have nice, clean, simple rules, but the real world doesn’t work like that. Nor does fandom. I did once think that we could get audio accepted as just another format, but then we had the Best Fancast Hugo, which put format ahead of content, so the whole thing is up in the air again.

It upsets me far more, however, to see the Hugos dragged through the mud like this. Individual rants are fine, but having those rants re-tweeted uncritically by people with vast numbers of followers does untold damage. Only a small fraction of the people who saw those tweets will read the offending post. Only a fraction of those will ever read Mary’s post with the explanation, or this one of mine. Most people will say, ”too long, didn’t read”. The one thing that almost everyone will have taken away from this debacle is, “the Hugos are corrupt and misogynist”.

The bottom line here is that if you run awards, any awards, it is important that the public have respect for the people involved in making important decisions. That’s the same whether you have a jury, or a group of Administrators who interpret the rules and count the votes. If you have a situation where, any time you have a disputed decision, the immediate reaction is not to treat that decision as viable but contentious, not even as a lapse in judgment, but as evidence of a deep moral failing on the part of those responsible, well then your awards are worthless. And that, dear readers, is pretty much where the Hugos ended up on Monday.

Why is this my problem? Well, Kevin and I are both on the Hugo Awards Marketing Committee. While we have no say in what Hugo Administrators do (and some of them have been quite hostile to our work), it is our job to ensure that the public has confidence in what they do. We need to be able to explain the rules clearly, and give people confidence that those rules are being applied fairly. In that task, we have failed utterly. If we were working for a proper corporation we’d be finding our belongings in a cardboard box on the sidewalk outside the office around now.

I don’t think that the speed of the Internet is an issue here. The willingness of people to believe anything bad about the Hugos, regardless of how absurd or fantastical the accusation might be, is clear evidence of a much deeper problem that we’ve failed to deal with effectively.

I really don’t know what to do about it. I don’t have the sort of platform that can counter such allegations. Neither does Kevin, or anyone else involved with Worldcon. Besides, as a misogynist, racist, ageist, ableist, homophobic, transphobic shitbag, and an old white man to boot, I am not to be believed. The whole, “guilty until proved innocent, and actually guilty anyway because I am the sort of person who is guilty simply because of who I am,” is incredibly wearing.

I guess I’ll do what I can. I will certainly help Mary frame some motions for next year’s Business Meeting. But I doubt that will help much with the larger issue. I don’t think anything can. I’ll have more to say about this tomorrow.

Missing Hugo Post

Yesterday on Twitter I promised I would post about the audio book Hugo debacle that has blown up. Well I have written the post, but I wanted to run it past Kevin first to make sure I haven’t said anything wrong. He’s been driving back from Worldcon, and has only just got home in the last half hour so so. He’ll be exhausted, and I need to get to bed because I have a very busy day in the Ujima studios tomorrow and I need to be rested (I didn’t sleep much at all last night, I was too upset).

So probably the post will go up tomorrow when I get back from Bristol.

Also there will be a link to what I expect to be a really amazing, if heart-rending interview.

See you then. Meanwhile I’m watching England play football in the expectation that it will send me to sleep.

More Worldcon and Hugo Feedback

Stina Leicht has a Worldcon post up, from which I learned a lot about the origin and meaning of the song, “Yellow Rose of Texas”. That came as part of a discussion of a “women writers” panel, much like the WFC one that Kameron Hurley was complaining about. However, despite the fact that the panel premise is annoying, Stina says that the panelists made something good out of it, and most of the audience went along with that rather than trying to shout them down, mansplain or walk out. That’s good to know, and hopefully Stina is less likely to accused of having imagined it, or been got at by Evil SMOFs, than the reporter from the Austin Chronicle.

I woke up around 4:45 this morning, presumably because Kevin was just tweeting that he’d got to his overnight stop so I could stop worrying about his being on the road after a long, tiring convention. Because I did so, I saw a tweet from John Scalzi linking to a Facebook post by John Ringo. Mr. Ringo is upset about Redshirts winning Best Novel, and he explains that this outrage is because Scalzi is, “beloved by all the hasbeen liberal neurotics who control the Hugo voting and balloting.”

Well, yes, I guess that would be Kevin and myself. As everyone knows, we secretly control the results of the Hugos, which is how I have managed to cheat my way to four of the things. This year John offered me a substantial sum of money (I gather the profits he has made from his successful blog and modeling career) to get him Best Novel, and on the proceeds of that I shall be retiring to a secret base on a Pacific Island from which I shall continue to control all of fandom at my leisure.

I note in passing that Mr. Ringo is actually accusing Hugo Administrators of deliberate ballot fraud over a number of years. He makes that very clear in follow-up comments.

I shall leave the last word to Saladin Ahmed.

https://twitter.com/saladinahmed/status/375060005231140864

WorldCon and Hugo Reportage

Two of the things I was doing yesterday are now online.

First up there’s David Barnett’s column on the Hugos in The Guardian. I sent him several sound bites, but they only used the ones that were factual.

And secondly I have an article about some of the female winners available at For Books’ Sake.

I’d also like to draw your attention to this article from the Austin Chronicle. It is by a female reporter who has never been to a convention before, and it opens with her talking about how friendly and respectful she found the fans there. Obviously we still have a way to go, but it sounds like LoneStarCon 3 put some effort into making women feel safe and welcome, and it paid off.

Some Hugo Thoughts

2013 Hugo trophyWell, in between trying to wake up, and dashing to Tesco because I needed food, I have been answering questions on the Hugos today. Hopefully material will appear in The Guardian, at For Books Sake, and in Apple’s iBooks store in due course. Now I get to do my own bit.

I’ll start with further congratulations for my pal, Mur. I’ve replayed the section of the ceremony to get a better look at her dress, and it is indeed gorgeous. She has the best tattoos as well. Also, in the New York Times, Mur. How cool is that? 🙂

Talking of friends, Farah and Edward must be devastated to lose by only 3 votes. I’m so glad they already have Hugos. For an academic work to come so close to beating a podcast featuring some hugely popular writers is an amazing achievement.

And of course my friends at Clarkesworld won again. That’s great for a number of reasons, starting with the fact that Neil is alive to see it happen, which is a minor miracle after his heart problems. I’m no longer on the team, so I don’t get a share in the glory, which is fine by me. There are many reasons why I stepped down from my post there, not the least of which is that I needed to get out of any positions that might look like I was working illegally in the USA. But the Hugos were also a factor.

The two Hugos I won with Clarkesworld came at the time when I got kicked off the Hugo Award Marketing Committee on the grounds that my involvement there was a conflict of interest. The implication was that I had cheated my way to Hugo wins through my involvement with the HAMC. I was pretty sure that Clarkesworld would win just as easily without me, and that has now been proved.

Talking of Clarkesworld, I’m also delighted to see that they won another Chesley for Best Magazine Cover, with this art by Ken Barthelmey.

Meanwhile, on to the rest of the categories. Nicholas Whyte has a good post digging into the details of the voting figures, which means I don’t have to engage my brain too much. One of the key points here is the Short Story nominations. As Whyte notes, had the cut-off for the ballot been 4% rather than 5%, we would have seen a 4-way tie for 5th place and eight nominees rather than the three we got. I suspect that would have resulted in just as much wailing and gnashing of teeth.

Something else that is worth noting is the table of nominating statistics at the end of the data. People tend to assume that the fan categories are very much a minority interest, but Fan Writer got mentioned on 485 nominating ballots: More than Graphic Story, Semiprozine or the Campbell. You needed more nominations to get on the ballot for Fan Writer than you did for Graphic Story, Related Work, Short Story or Novelette.

By the way, I see that 30 people nominated me for Fan Writer. That’s very kind. I’ve been keeping quiet about such things of late, but I am thinking a bit about next year, given that I’ll actually be able to get to the ceremony.

As is usual, most of the things I nominated didn’t get on the ballot, let alone win. I was distraught to see that The Writer & The Critic missed a nomination by just one vote. It is awesome, people. I was also pleased to see good showings for The Drowning Girl, Cloud Atlas, and Iron Sky, though none was close to making the ballot. I was absolutely delighted to see World SF in Translation by Jari Koponen on the long list.

One interesting thing about the nominating stats is that GRRM appears to have declined a nomination for the season in Long From in order to challenge Doctor Who in Short Form. If I have interpreted that correctly, I think it is an excellent move on his part. The Short Form category needs competition.

Mike Carey’s brilliant The Unwritten appears to have fallen foul of the interpretation of voter’s wishes problems that have plagued the Graphic Story category. Both Vol #5 and Vol #6 were eligible, and both got votes. There were also 15 votes that did not specify which volume. Vol #6 missed a place on the ballot by 5 votes. I think something needs to be done about this, but I’m not sure what.

Moving on to the winners, I’m pleased to see another new name win Fan Artist, and John Picacio win at his home convention. John and Ken Liu give us some welcome non-white winners.

I am utterly delighted for Tansy, who is the first Australian woman ever to win a Hugo. Given that she was the last nominee to get in, her work clearly must have impressed the voters.

I’m also very pleased for Saga. Had you suggested that an anti-war comic with strong feminist themes that features breast-feeding on the cover would win a Hugo I think I might have laughed. I love it.

And I am perhaps most delighted for Pat Cadigan. Just a few weeks ago she was in hospital having a suspected cancerous growth removed, but she made it to Texas. She has had several prior nominations but has never won. “Girl Thing” is an amazing story, clearly part-rooted in trans issues. I can’t wait to read the novel that she is working on, based on the story.

I gather that the Angry Young Men brigade thinks that Scalzi winning Best Novel is a sign of the death of civilization. Well it wouldn’t have been my choice either. (Any winner other than The Drowning Girl is a travesty, though I would have settled for Empty Space.) However, John is a friend, is enormously popular, and was clearly deeply touched by the win. When all is said and done, it is just a beauty contest (as Charlie Stross said on Twitter today).

You win some and you lose some. I’m very pleased with almost half of the winners, which I think makes for a pretty good year.

A quick nod to the SF Squeecast and SF Signal who have elected to withdraw from competition to give others a chance. It is sad that this has to happen, but in categories where this year’s version of last year’s winning work is eligible a trend toward domination is inevitable. Thanks to both groups for their graciousness.

Of course the results won’t please everyone. The haters are, as ever, out in force. It amuses me to see how the Hugos can be slammed as both a corrupt force dominating fandom and totally irrelevant in the same tweet.

Hugo’s Midnight Party

I spent three hours in the middle of the night helping Kevin and Mur Lafferty host the text-based Hugo Award ceremony coverage. I got no sleep beforehand, and only about three hours afterwards, so I am barely functional today. I am running my end of month backups, as that’s about the only work I am good for.

The live video feed was very temperamental, going down frequently through the webcast. LoneStarCon 3 is insisting that this was the fault of their tech team, and nothing to do with UStream who provided the web services. As a result, we once again had a huge audience, peaking at 822. That’s a far cry from the 100 or so I used to get when I first started doing this.

The video appears to be available for replay in bits. UStream appears to be counting each time it went down and back up again as starting a separate broadcast. Hopefully LSC3 will be able to get a copy of the whole thing to them at some point. I’ll try to watch the whole thing before announcing the Best Dressed Award, but on the basis of what I’ve seen thus far I think Deborah Stanish is a very hot tip. Elizabeth Bear also looked very classy. Sadly John Scalzi’s attempt at a ballgown wasn’t up to much. It looked just like a suit to me.

With far more people I have had to be far more ruthless about comment moderation. That’s partly because having to watch loads of people congratulate each winner does not make for a good show, because everything scrolls through too fast. I just had to delete those comments and post a general “lots of people very happy” comment. Equally there’s no point in posting endless versions of “the video is down again” and “the video is back up”.

With regard to the tech failures, there was an interesting balancing act to be made between providing answers to genuine tech questions and letting through a flood of snark and uninformed opinion. I don’t think I always got that right.

What was noticeable is that as viewer numbers have gone up the level of spite and mean-spiritedness in the comments has gone up too. I screened out all of the vitriol about who had won, what the winners were wearing, Paul Cornell’s jokes and so on. I also ended up screening out almost all of the positive comments because that lead to complaints about my allowing them through.

Overall, however, I think the evening went well. I hope that Loncon 3 allows us to do it again next year (and I’m really looking forward to doing color commentary again rather than just comment moderation, as I’ll be able to be in the audience). If possible I recommend that they set up an audio-only feed as well as a video one, because video appears to still be very hard to get right.

The good news is that, as Kevin survived a sneak attack on his chairmanship of the Mark Protection Committee yesterday, we are still able to do these things officially on the Hugo Awards website.

I’ll do a separate post on the Hugo results later, but here I want to give huge hugs to my co-commentator, Mur Lafferty for her Campbell win, and for managing to get up the steps without tripping like certain other members of the team I could mention.

Hugos Live Tonight

It's Hugo Time!

Yes, it is that time of year again. I hope that some of you will join Kevin, Mur Lafferty and myself for live coverage of this year’s Hugo Award ceremony. The show will also be webcast live over UStream, hopefully without bot interference this year. I’ll probably have that up too, just in case Paul Cornell ends up cosplaying Amy Pond for his toastmaster stint.

Translation Awards Press Coverage

It was good to see the winners of the Translation Awards getting recognized in various community news outlets. My thanks to Locus, Tor.com, and Amazing Stories. What really pleases me, however, is when I see the story being picked up outside of the community. Here are a couple.

The Jewish Book Review featured the honorable mention for Kaytek the Wizard.

A national newspaper in Croatia, Novi List, featured the honorable mention for Zoran Vlahović, including an interview with me. That one is in the print edition as well, and the previous day there was a huge article about Jacqueline Carey. Many thanks to Davor Žic for his fine coverage of Liburnicon.

If anyone knows of any additional coverage, please let me know.

WSFS Business – The Main Event

Today’s WSFS Business Meeting ended up being a fairly quiet event, as far as I can see from Twitter and from Rachel Acks’ live blog. That’s because a lot of the controversial business was dealt with yesterday. Here are some highlights.

The motion to make electronic publications opt-out rather than opt-in and will go to London for ratification. This is good, because it will help keep the price of Supporting Memberships down.

The various motions about whether you can have one set of WSFS voting rights without another were debated, but were eventually referred to a committee to try to sort out some sensible language. That should be interesting, because the people who are strongly against splitting up rights tend to also be the people who are strongly against the concept of WSFS membership (as opposed to membership of individual Worldcons). I may have to write about that in more detail later. Anyway, the good thing is, as Tero noted on Twitter, that the knee-jerk idea that we must take action in a hurry just in case something bad happens has been voted down.

The WSFS Accountability Act, which seeks to improve accountability for Worldcon surpluses, has been passed with much simplified language and goes to London for ratification.

The Fan Artist motion was passed, but that’s misleading because it was amended so heavily in the process that it does none of the things that the original proposers really wanted. As I suspected, people complained about having to compare apples to oranges. There were also suggestions that some of the activities that were to be included are already covered by other categories. All that we have left are clarifications that art displayed at conventions does qualify (even though that’s not really “public”), and that the art must be non-professional (whatever that means). I suspect this may end up being known as the anti-Randall Munroe amendment.

The amendments to change the voting requirements for eligibility extensions from a 3/4 majority to a 2/3 majority passed fairly easily, mainly because every other requirement for a super-majority is the Constitution is set at 2/3. Vincent Docherty’s suggestion to make the main Eligibility Extension for non-US publications permanent was much more hotly debated. As I said yesterday, I would be happy to keep making the case for it each year but, despite opposition from many of the big guns in US SMOFdom, Vincent won the debate by 49-32, so that also goes forward to London for ratification.

At the end of the meeting a new piece of business was introduced. This would remove the regional restrictions on membership of the Mark Protection Committee. I am somewhat suspicious about this. The MPC is the only permanent committee that WSFS has that has any power. It was, if you remember, the committee that had me flung off the Hugo Award Marketing Committee (the HAMC is subservient to the MPC). I have a sneaking suspicion that certain people are trying to change the rules of elections to the MPC so that it will be easier to take it over. Of course I could be wrong. I shall see what Kevin has to say. In any case, it too will be up for ratification in London, so if it is a problem it can be dealt with then.

All in all it was a pretty good day. Well done fandom.

YA Hugo Follow-Up

Kevin has posted his own thoughts about the Preliminary Business meeting here.

He has also posted video of the whole of the meeting here. Most of the debate on the YA Hugo is in Part I. I’m interested to see who the five people who vociferously opposed the Eligibility Extension were.

I also suggest that you read this post by the person responsible for moving the YA Hugo motion. You’ll probably see lots of posts over the next few days complaining about how Evil SMOFs used trickery and cheating to kill off the YA Hugo. Given the way things have gone this year, it would not surprise me to see Kevin fingered as the ringleader of those Evil SMOFs.

Obviously I wasn’t there, so I have to rely mainly on other people’s reports of what went on, but I do know Don Eastlake fairly well. He’s by no means a boring conservative. Indeed, as far as I know he is the only person ever to have chaired the Business Meeting and won Best In Show at the Worldcon Masquerade. But, as Kevin notes, he does tend to run the meeting more quickly, with less explanation, than Kevin does. That makes him popular with the regulars, who tend to think that Kevin wastes their time, but it makes things harder for newbies.

What effectively happened here was a primitive form of representative democracy. Kevin, as someone who is well versed in how the BM works, acted on behalf of Aiglet and others to help them get what they wanted out of the meeting.

WSFS is very proud of being a participatory democracy rather than a representative democracy, and given the way that modern national politics work I can see why people have little trust in their elected representatives. But equally, the larger a community becomes, and the more sophisticated its governing processes, the harder it becomes for ordinary people to play a full part in the decision-making process. Consequently, other forms of democracy become necessary.

There is no right answer to how WSFS should be governed. Democracy is a messy business, and no system will suit everyone. However, I do think we need to think carefully about how best to involve more people in decision-making. In the meantime we’ll be reliant on people like Kevin voluntarily helping newcomers through the process.

WSFS Business – The Preliminary Meeting

Today at Worldcon the Preliminary Business Meeting took place. This is the one that sorts out the agenda for the main meeting tomorrow. It is important because of a procedure called Objection to Consideration (OTC) through which motions deemed frivolous or a waste of time can be removed from the agenda entirely. Some resolutions, including the Hugo Award Eligibility Extension, can also be discussed as they do not involve actual amendments to the WSFS Constitution.

Kevin kept up a tweet stream throughout, but that’s hard to follow so I recommend this live blog of the meeting by Rachel Acks. She’s clearly partial, but she has most of the salient issues covered very clearly. Here are the highlights.

The motion to remove some of the fan categories had a 16 ton OTC dropped upon it, as I rather suspected it would. It was silly and a bit spiteful.

The same fate befell the “Very Short Form Dramatic Presentation” proposal. I suspect this is mainly because people expected it to become dominated by trailers for the same films that end up in Long Form.

A new motion, that I hadn’t seem come in, to expand Fan Artist to cover more types of art, will get debate time. My initial impression is that anything that can improve interest in this category is good, though I’m sure people will complain about having to compare apples to oranges.

The Hugo Award Eligibility Extension was passed almost unanimously. I’m very pleased about this because it means that WSFS has finally accepted that the Extension is about works from all over the world, not a special sop to UK-published works. It also acknowledges that, thanks to population sizes, the majority of voters will probably be US-based every year for a while yet.

There was a daft proposal to add an Eligibility Extension to the Retro Hugos. London is running 1939 Retros, so an extension would have included works published outside of the US prior to 1939 1938, and published in the US in 1939 1938. Given that the purpose of the extension to is allow US voters time to read the works, and that they will have had 75 years to do so, I fail to understand what different more time would make.

Then again, the intention became obvious with the next motion. You see, The Hobbit was published in the UK in 1938 1937. An extension would have allowed it to be included in the 1939 Retro Hugos. A special plea to have it included anyway was also rejected. If we are going to have Retro Hugos (which I am increasingly thinking was a Very Bad Idea) then can we at least keep to the works published in the year in question and not add works from other years just because they are very popular?

There were also a whole bunch of suggestions for making eligibility extensions easier, including one that would make the main one a permanent feature rather than having to be voted on every year. Given that is passes almost unanimously every year, I can see people not wanting to waste time on it, but equally I’m happy to argue for it every year if necessary.

And now for the one contentious part of the meeting: the YA Hugo.

At the start of the meeting the proposer of that motion asked to withdraw it. I think that was a sensible move, because the motion as it stood would have failed, and would have further soured people on the whole idea of a YA Hugo. Unfortunately you can’t withdraw a motion once it has been submitted without unanimous consent, and someone insisted on having a debate. I don’t know whether that was an overly enthusiastic supporter, or someone trying to stir up trouble, but the effect was trouble all the same.

Because the motion had to be debated, and because the mover wanted it removed, the only thing to do was to raise an OTC. Given that the maker of the motion didn’t want it debated, and it was unpopular anyway, it didn’t surprise me that the OTC passed. But of course Twitter was then full of people complaining about how the Evil SMOFs had stomped on the YA Hugo yet again, and ignoring the context of what had gone on in the meeting.

Towards the end of the meeting, as Rachel explains, Kevin moved to create a committee to study the issue of the YA Hugo and report back next year. This is a very promising development, because it provides a venue for the supporters of the motion and sympathetic BM regulars to get together and thrash out something that has a chance of getting passed. Kevin and I have both volunteered to be on the committee. It will need some work, and compromise on both sides, but I’m hopeful that we can come up with something that is going to get young people involved in the Hugos.

If you are interested in being involved in the YA Hugo Committee, let me know and I will pass your name on to the appropriate people. Ideally you need to do so tomorrow, though I suspect that there will be means of adding people later.

Those were the main highlights from today. The video of the meeting should be online in a day or so. I was also pleased to hear Kevin note that there was a very big turnout. The more people get involved, the better the BM will be able to reflect the wishes of fandom at large, rather than just the few people willing to go to meetings.

Liburnicon – Day 2

Yesterday we went to the beach. Personally I did not end up on the con beach. Mihaela and Bernard turned up, and we took Iggy to a beach a few km along the coast. There are lots of such places. Tiny villages clinging to the edge of precipitous mountains with a small cove that allows access to the sea. To a girl brought up on the beaches of Devon, Cornwall and the Gower, the beaches round here don’t really amount to much, and the sea is almost as cold as it is in the UK, but the scenery… Oh my goodness! Also it was warm and sunny and we were enjoying the vacation.

Somewhat later, back at the convention, we did a fan fund auction for GUFF, and then Jacqueline Carey and I did a panel on Urban Fantasy. I need to write up some notes about that, because inevitably it turned into a list panel, but I did also get to talk theory and explained the basic ideas from Rhetorics of Fantasy to the audience.

Also we announced the results of the SF&F Translation Awards, which you can find here. I was very pleased to once again be able to make the announcement in non-English-speaking country. Next year I think we might do Dublin, though, because there will be a Eurocon there and it is conveniently timed. Would that be OK, Gareth?

The Liburnicon people have been fabulous throughout. It’s more of a popular culture con than a literary one, but I’m loving seeing how many young people they have there. Yesterday it was full of kids doing a pirate treasure hunt.

Sadly today’s pirate cruise has been cancelled due to Zeus throwing a strop, but that should mean I get to see a bit of the town instead.

Liburnicon Underway

Mirko and I drove to Opatija yesterday, through some really spectacular mountain scenery. The town is perched on the edge of the mountains, dropping precipitously towards the sea. There’s so little room to build, that everything stretches out along the sea front. It was almost dark when I got here, but the town was still hopping late into the evening when I finally got to my hotel.

The convention is held in a local school — the kids being on vacation — and when I got there it looked like many of the attendees had only recently graduated. There were lots of people in pirate costumes, and the place was set up for a party.

Jacqueline Carey got a 2-hour GoH slot to open the main programming, which turned out to be a bit too long but was excellent while we had had things to discuss. She was interviewed by her publisher and editor from Algroithm, the leading SF&F publisher around here. I must say that they have done a superb job with the two Kushiel books that they currently have in translation. Volume 2 arrived last night, hot off the presses.

While Jacqueline signed books, I got interviewed by a local journalist. He was quite young, and wearing a Star Trek red shirt. I don’t think this was an ironic comment on being asked to cover the convention.

After that there was food, beer and music. As I hadn’t yet checked into my hotel I bailed before the band came on because I was a bit worried about them thinking I wasn’t turning up. I hope to catch tonight’s band, but I do have to get back and send out the results of the Translation Awards.