Hugos Live

It is not long now before the 2013 Hugo Award ceremony. The official press releases about coverage have gone out. We’ll be getting ad-free (and hopefully bot-free) service from UStream, and as usual there will also be text-only coverage for the benefit of those of you with limited bandwidth. The full details are available here.

As Kevin notes here, I’ll be along for the ride. I can’t be at the event, but I can be up in the middle of the night to help out. My name isn’t in the official announcement because, Menace to Fandom and all that.

World Fantasy Ballot

The short lists for this year’s World Fantasy Awards were released last night. Locus has the lists. There’s nothing from Clarkesworld on the ballot, but I’m still very pleased with the choices.

In Best Novel I am, of course, keeping my fingers crossed for Caitlín R. Kiernan and The Drowning Girl, but it is a great ballot. I’m particularly keen to read Anna Tambour’s book, as I have very much enjoyed her previous work.

I’m not hugely familiar with the Novella list, but I note that Kaaron Warren’s “Sky” has been winning awards hand over fist this year. Also it makes up the bulk of the collection, Through Splintered Walls, which is available in the bookstore.

The Short Story list is all new to me, but huge congratulations to Beneath Ceaseless Skies, who are clearly becoming a force to be reckoned with.

My friend Jonathan Strahan has two books in Anthology, but I confess that I’m hoping the prize goes to Three Messages and a Warning, which contains stories by Mexican fantasy writers, translated from Spanish.

Collection is perhaps the toughest category. I’m delighted to see Karin Tidbeck’s Jagannath in there, but she’s up against superb work by Rob Shearman, Kij Johnson and Ursula K. Le Guin. My sympathy to Joel Lane for getting on the ballot and then finding himself in that company.

Both Jagannath and Remember Why You Fear Me are available in the bookstore.

Lots of unfamiliar names in the Artist category, so I need to educate myself there.

I’m delighted to see Carlos Ruiz Zafón’s translator getting a nod in Special Award: Professional, but I’m hoping that one goes to Brett and Sandra because ChiZine is awesome company.

And finally Special Award: Non-Professional, which sees another nod for the fabulous Charles A. Tan, but which I think I’d most like to see go to Timmi Duchamp for Aqueduct Press.

I am so looking forward to Brighton.

Today on Ujima

Well that was a busy day. Huge thanks to Stephanie Saulter for being a fabulous guest on the show. I seem to have monopolized most of the two hours this week. Here’s what went down.

The first half hour was all about Stephanie. We talked about her trip home to Jamaica to launch Gemsigns. We talked about her experiences at the Nine Worlds convention over the weekend. And we talked about the current state of affairs in Jamaica, which ranged from the economy to Usain Bolt and Chris Gayle to the horrific transphobic murder of Dwayne Jones.

The Nine Worlds coverage include shout outs for Hal Duncan, Rochita Loenen-Ruiz, Tade Thompson and quite likely a few other people. I also got in a mention of the fabulous new @WritersofColour Twitter account, and my friend Nikesh Shukla, who has a great article on their blog today about how brown people get used in movies.

In the second half hour I talked to Hannah Lawton, a young Bristol lady who, with her friend Jessie Van Beck, will be rowing across the Atlantic for charity this December. This is part of the Talisker Whisky Atlantic Challenge. You can read more about Hannah and Jessie, and why they are undertaking this grueling challenge, here.

The first hour of the show is now available as a podcast here.

Hour two begins with the Lighter Look at Life segment, which this week was all about proverbs and grammar and, well, it rambled a bit. And I think we might have got a bit confused between Axioms and Maxims. Stephanie and I both feature.

Then after 15 minutes we have the Woman of the Week slot, in which I talk to Stephanie about her life, her amazing family, and how a girl from Jamaica with what might have been the best job in the world ended up in the UK and becoming a science fiction writer.

Finally we have 15 minutes on summer reading, including Jackie’s kids being charming about their love for Harry Potter and The Hunger Games. Between us Stephanie and I managed to recommend Nalo Hopkinson, Ian McDonald, Karen Lord, Juliet McKenna, Jon Grimwood and the whole of the World Fantasy Awards Best Novel ballot.

The second half hour is available as a podcast here.

Sense of Community

There has been a lot of debate around this year’s Business Meeting motions since I wrote about them last week. Kevin tells me that elsewhere it is being said that anyone who is against the “No Cheap Voting” motion must be in favor of free voting. They’ll probably carry on doing that no matter what I say. If you are interested, Seanan McGuire has a lot to say about why some sort of cost to participate is necessary, and she’s right.

There has also been a lot of discussion about the economics of membership, and possible changes to the WSFS Constitution that might allow us to lower the cost of a Supporting Membership. These are good discussions to have, and I hope we can get the cost down further. However, such discussions are irrelevant to the “No Cheap Voting” proposal. It doesn’t talk about what the price should be; it simply seeks to establish, as a matter of principle, that lack of wealth should be a barrier to participation. If it passes, I fully expect people to argue that, regardless of the economics, the price of a Supporting Membership can never be reduced below the roughly $40 that London is charging, because that would make it “cheap”. Then they’d start arguing that $40 is “cheap”, and begin asking bids if they will increase the cost of a Supporting Membership in line with the will of the Business Meeting.

A much more relevant issue is that is the concept of a “sense of community”. People are saying that they want Hugo voters to feel that they belong to the World Science Fiction Society, and that somehow paying a lot of money for the privilege will give them this sense of belonging. I’d like to look at that idea in more detail.

I accept the fact that there are people who think that the only “true” members of WSFS are the people who go to Worldcon every year, and actually help create the event. They have clearly invested far more than just money in the event. Some would like to restrict voting in the Hugos to that group (and indeed participation in the Business Meeting is still restricted to that group). For them, a Supporting Membership is simply a means of allowing people who would otherwise be regulars to keep up their participation in those few years when actually attending is impossible for some reason. It is a valid position to hold, but one I disagree with. Once the convention grew beyond the size that all of the people who attended could reasonably be involved in staging it, I believe that position became untenable.

The problem with the “sense of community” argument is that someone who pays $200 to attend when Worldcon is local to them, but never attends when it isn’t, is somehow deemed “part of the community” for that year and deserving of a vote, whereas someone who pays far less every year but never attends is somehow “not part of the community”. I think that this is thoroughly muddle-headed.

Someone who only ever interacts with Worldcon as a paying member when it is local to them, and who never takes part as other than an audience member, does not generally feel part of WSFS. Many of them don’t even bother to vote in the Hugos. They see Worldcon as a foreign event that costs a stupid amount to attend, but which they go to because of the big names they’ll get to see. Once the con is over, they have no interest in it until next time it is local.

The people who really feel part of Worldcon, and of WSFS, are the people who will go to Worldcon when it is local, and will buy a Supporting Membership in years when it isn’t so that they can carry on being part of the excitement. That’s the sort of community I want to foster. It may well be that someone who lives in, say, Japan or Australia can only afford to attend Worldcon one year in ten when the convention comes to their part of the world. That’s inevitable with an international event.

Colin Harris said yesterday in a comment that there is a feeling amongst Worldcon regulars that the Hugos are becoming dominated by people who are only interested in the Hugos, and have no interest in Worldcon. Presumably that’s because the proportion of voters who have supporting memberships rather than attending memberships is going up. Maybe some of those people genuinely don’t care about Worldcon, but it is my contention that most of them do. Most of them would love to attend regularly, they just can’t afford to. They are amongst that group of people who will attend on that one year in ten when Worldcon is local to them, but will buy Supporting Memberships the rest of the time.

Furthermore, I maintain that if those people are buying Supporting Memberships whenever Worldcon isn’t local, then they are far more likely to volunteer to help stage it when it does come back. And indeed they are more likely to become part of a bid to bring it back. That’s what community building is all about.

So how can we foster this sense of belonging? How can we encourage people to become part of WSFS every year? Well, a cheap Voting Membership is a possible tactic. It has been suggested, but hasn’t been tried. Personally I would prefer to have Worldcon find other things that it can offer to Supporting Members that would encourage more people to think that $40 was a reasonable price, but I appreciate that can be difficult to achieve.

What certainly won’t foster a sense of community, except amongst some of those who are already members, is passing motions that appear to be specifically designed to make that community seem elitist. The question is, what sort of community do you want: one where you dig in, protect what is yours, and don’t let anyone else join; or one that is open and welcoming to as many like-minded people as possible?

If Worldcon is to be a truly international event, and especially in a time when international travel is becoming more difficult rather than less so, I think it is inevitable that people who want to support Worldcon will outnumber those who can actually attend. Let’s welcome those people, find more ways to get them involved, and build a bigger sense of community.

WSFS: The Old Pharts Fight Back

The agenda for this year’s WSFS Business Meeting has been published, and with it the usual collection of new business for consideration.

There has been quite a lot of discussion elsewhere already about the proposal to scrap three (but oddly not all) of the fan categories in the Hugos. I don’t think I need to add to that. You only have to read the commentary on the motion to see that it is the work of someone with a bee in his bonnet. The logic of it has been thoroughly dissected elsewhere. I guess it would be amusing to see it actually get debated, because some people would end up saying some very weird things on the record, but I’m expecting this to suffer Objection To Consideration at the Friday meeting. It you can spare the time to drop by on Friday to make sure it doesn’t get any further, please do so.

A rather more serious piece of business is the one called “No Cheap Voting”. Here is the text, to save you clicking through to read it.

4.1.1 Short Title: No Cheap Voting

Moved, to add a new subsection following existing section 1.5.7:

Section 1.5.X: No membership that includes any WSFS voting right may be sold by a Worldcon for less than that Worldcon’s supporting membership rate when it was initially selected.

Commentary: These voting rights are a perquisite of Worldcon membership. Anything including the same for less is distorted by definition.

The title of the motion, and the use of the word “distorted” should be enough to tell you that this too is the work of people who are angry about the way the world is going, and want to roll things back. But what is it all about?

Well, for a long time people have been complaining that voting in the Hugo Awards is too expensive. I agreed with them, and so did many other people. As a result, some steps have been taking to reduce the cost.

The main issue here is that voting in the Hugos is a right that one obtains by becoming a member of Worldcon. For a long time conservatives have tried to claim that being a “member” means actually attending the convention, but voting at the convention hasn’t been required for ages. Worldcons have long sold “supporting memberships” that allow people who can’t afford to attend to still participate in the event.

However, supporting memberships are still fairly expensive. For the current Worldcon in San Antonio they cost $60. London, to my horror, is not currently advertising a rate for supporting memberships. I very much hope that this is an error in their website, and not policy.

There are various reasons for the high price. Partly you get things other than the voting rights for a supporting membership, such as the program book and progress reports, which cost money to produce. And partly supporting memberships are tied into the site selection process. You have to buy at least a supporting membership to vote in site selection, and Worldcons have become dependent on the revenue from site selection to provide the initial cash flow that they need on becoming seated. Some progress was made last year, but supporting memberships can’t get too much cheaper without causing financial hardship to Worldcons, unless some other means of obtaining an initial cash injection is found.

Without cheaper supporting memberships, it might seem that Hugo voting cannot get any cheaper, but that’s not the case. There is nothing in the WSFS Constitution that would prevent a Worldcon from adopting a new class of membership: a Voting Membership. It would carry with it no rights other than voting in the Hugos, and would therefore be pure profit for the Worldcon. If it was priced suitably, it could result in a significant additional source of income, as well as increasing participation in Hugo voting.

The purpose of this new motion is to prevent Worldcons from ever creating this sort of membership.

That is, its purpose is to prevent the “Wrong Sort of Fan” from participating in the Hugos: young people, poor people, people from countries where $60 is a huge amount of money, and so on.

The commentary on the motion is a piece of ridiculous sophistry. A membership is a membership. There is no reason why creating a new type of membership would be a “distortion”, unless you have the sort of mindset that holds that allowing people who are poorer than you to vote is a “distortion”.

This motion is an attempt by people who already have voting privileges to prevent those privileges from being extended to others. It also cuts Worldcons off from a potentially very lucrative source of income. I want to see it voted down.

Polari Prize Long List – Congratulations Jack

The Polari Prize is a British literary award for a “first book which explores the LGBT experience”. It is open to fiction, poetry and non-fiction, which must make it very hard to judge. I’m delighted to see that my friend Jack Wolf has made it onto the Long List with his very fine novel, The Tale of Raw Head & Bloody Bones, which I reviewed here. Good luck, Jack!

I know very little about the rest of the long list. However, Realisations by Andie Davidson is a book of trans-themed poetry. I believe that Andie will be at the literature tent of the main Brighton Pride this weekend.

Hello Croatia

So, it looks like I shall be off traveling again in August. I really enjoyed my time in Zagreb last year, and wanted to go back. I’m pleased to report that I will be doing so. I’m going to Liburnicon.

I hasten to add that this is not a result of my supposed vast wealth. I am able to go because I still have a reasonable collection of United frequent flier points, and though the extreme generosity of the Croatian fans who are providing me with transport and places to stay when I am in their country. I am enormously grateful to them.

Liburnicon is held in Opatija, a seaside town just to the east of Istria. It was apparently a favorite holiday destination of the Austrian Emperor, Franz Joseph I. Guy Gavriel Kay has been there as a guest, and warmly recommended the convention to me when I met him in Toronto in June. Oh, and the convention has a pirate theme this year, complete with a “pirate boat party” to one of the offshore islands. How cool is that?

While I am there, I expect to be announcing the winners of the Science Fiction & Fantasy Translation Awards. That, of course, is dependent on the jury, and I apologize if I have just dropped them in it, but I was told that this would be feasible.

I shall, of course, take lots of photos while I am there. I’ll also try to blog as much as I can about the event. I want to do my best to repay the generosity of the Croatian fans. I am so very lucky.

Finncon – The Awards

I missed all of the award ceremonies at Finncon (except the one I gave). However, the reliable Tero has all of the details.

There were three short story awards announced. You probably won’t recognize the winners unless you are Finnish, but given the way things go they could all be internationally famous soon. The winners and runners up are listed here.

Of more interest outside of Finland is the Tähtifantasia Award, which is for fantasy books first published in Finnish. A very competitive field included The Shadow of the Torturer by Gene Wolfe, Going Postal by Terry Pratchett and Snake Agent by Liz Williams, plus a Swedish linked collection, Svenska kulter: Skräckberättelser (Swedish Cults: Horror Stories) by Anders Fager. However, the winner was The Modern World by Steph Swainston. I’m delighted for Steph, and hope this encourages her to keep writing. Further details are available here.

Update: details of the Swedish book fixed with thanks to Johan Jönsson.

Finncon – Day 3

Yesterday morning began with a fascinating panel on writing and music. It covered a range of topics, including what music is good to write to, how you evoke the sense of listening to music in your books, whether you should include a “playlist” at the back of your novel, and novels which are of interest to people who love music. This is the sort of panel I would love to be on. Then again, I want to see it done with Liz Hand, Ian McDonald, Al Reynolds, Ellen Kushner and Jon Courtenay Grimwood.

Next up was a 2-hour meet-up of international writers, to which our Russian & Chinese friends turned up. I announced the short lists for the Translation Awards, and we got to shower congratulations on Karin Tidbeck. Various plans were hatched for how we could do things to further international cooperation at next year’s Finncon.

Then we did Hall Costume judging. I posted a picture of the winner yesterday.

Back in the hotel, I got the Translation Awards announcement online, and then it was time for the closing ceremonies. There was a dead dog party in the evening, with fabulous food. And then it was time to say goodbye to everyone, with much sadness. Another marvelous Finncon completed, and lots more authors added to the “Finncon is the best convention in the world” club.

Locus Awards 2013

This year’s Locus Awards winners were announced last night. Thanks to Liz Argall for live tweeting the event. You can see the full list of finalists and winners here.

There are lots of great winners there, and quite a few interesting pointers for the Hugos. I’m particularly pleased to see Pat Cadigan win Novelette for “The Girl Thing Who Went Out For Sushi”, and I also note that there’s a lot of correlation between being a Guest of Honor at Finncon and winning a Locus Award. Pat was a GoH in 2010, and one of this year’s GoHs is Aliette de Bodard who won Short Story with “Immersion”. That, of course, is freely available online at Clarkesworld, though if you want to help Neil keep the magazine going you could always buy the issue. Next year’s GoHs include Elizabeth Bear, who won Collection for Shoggoths in Bloom, which is also in the bookstore.

You’ll note that all of those winners are women. Indeed, with Nancy Kress carrying off Novella for “After the Fall, Before the Fall, During the Fall” all of the short fiction prizes went to women. In contrast all of the novel prizes went to men (Miéville, Ahmed, Stross, Scalzi). Editing prizes were 50:50 between Datlow and Strahan. I have no idea if this means anything, but it seemed weird.

Meanwhile, I must do more Hugo reading. After all, I’m on a panel about the awards at Finncon…

I Get Podcast

I am so behind on podcast listening. There are episodes of Coode Street, Galactic Suburbia, The Writer & The Critic, Shout Out and For Books Sake that I need to listen to. I have, however, managed to catch the latest Outer Alliance podcast. Yes, that’s ego-driven. I’m on it.

In episode #31 the fabulous Julia Rios talks to a number of Outer Alliance members on a variety of subjects. I get to pontificate about awards, recycle an old joke about the difference between Raiders and 49ers fans, and enthuse about Caitlín R. Kiernan, Gail Simone, Stephanie Saulter and other great people. The other guests have really good contributions as well, and the variety of reactions to QUILTBAG as a term is fascinating. You can listen here.

By the way, the recording was made a couple of week ago, so neither Julia nor I was able to react to the Aurealis Awards being just as much of a vagfest as the Ditmars.

Thanks as always to Julia for having me as a guest.

And Nebulas

I don’t have to give you a run-down here, because the good folks from Locus were on hand to do so. Here’s the list.

I am, of course, disappointed that The Drowning Girl didn’t win, but it is an interesting collection of winners. Also the Nebulas go 50:50 to men and women, and one of the winners is French, so we are doing quite well for diversity. (The Bradbury and Norton are Not Nebulas, of course.)

The best bit of news, however, is another win for Clarkesworld. That’s two this weekend. Thoraiya Dyer’s “The Wisdom of Ants” in the Aurealis Awards, and Aliette de Bodard’s “Immersion” in the Nebulas. Yay! 🙂

Aurealis Awards Winners

Australia’s juried awards were announced at a ceremony in Sydney today. Based on their Twitter feed, here are the winners.

  • Children’s Fiction (mainly words): Brotherband: The Hunters by John Flanagan (Random House Australia)
  • Children’s Fiction (mainly pictures): Little Elephants by Graeme Base (author and illustrator) (Viking Penguin)
  • YA Short Story: “The Wisdom of the Ants” by Thoraiya Dyer (Clarkesworld)
  • YA Novel: tie: Dead, Actually by Kaz Delaney (Allen & Unwin) and Sea Hearts by Margo Lanagan (Allen & Unwin)
  • Graphic novel: Blue by Pat Grant (author and illustrator) (Top Shelf Comix)
  • Collection: That Book Your Mad Ancestor Wrote by K. J. Bishop (self-published)
  • Anthology: The Best Science Fiction & Fantasy of the Year Volume 6 edited by Jonathan Strahan (Night Shade Books)
  • Horror Short Story: “Sky” by Kaaron Warren (Through Splintered Walls, Twelfth Planet Press)
  • Horror Novel: Perfections by Kirstyn McDermott (Xoum)
  • Fantasy Short Story: “Bajazzle” by Margo Lanagan (Cracklescape, Twelfth Planet Press)
  • Fantasy Novel: Sea Hearts by Margo Lanagan (Allen & Unwin)
  • Science Fiction Short Story: “Significant Dust” by Margo Lanagan (Cracklescape, Twelfth Planet Press)
  • Science Fiction Novel: The Rook by Daniel O’Malley (Harper Collins)
  • Peter McNamara Convenors’ Award for Excellence: Kate Eltham
  • Kris Hembury Encouragement Award: Laura Goodin

Congratulations in particular to Margo Lanagan who picked up four awards on the night. I note that, as with the Ditmars the vast majority of winners are women. Goodness only knows what Alisa’s puppy will say on the next episode of Galactic Suburbia.

I am, of course, delighted to see another award win for Clarkesworld. If you’d like to help Neil and the crew with the expenses, you can buy that issue from my bookstore. And, of course, we have several of the award winners on sale. Here they are.

Tähtivaeltaja Award

Talking of Finland, the results of the 2013 Tähtivaeltaja Award were announced on Monday. This is an award for science fiction published in Finnish. The shortlist was as follows:

  • Pintakuvio (Surface Detail) by Iain M. Banks
  • Ready Player One by Ernest Cline
  • Teemestarin kirja by Emmi Itäranta
  • Muistoissa sininen Maa (Blue Remembered Earth) by Alastair Reynolds
  • Kiduttajan varjo (The Shadow of the Torturer) by Gene Wolfe

And the winner is the Gene Wolfe book, Kiduttajan varjo, which was translated by my friend, Johanna Vainikainen-Uusitalo. You may well be thinking that a Gene Wolfe book has something of an unfair advantage, but bear in mind that most, if not all, of the jury will have read the book in the original English. If Johanna hadn’t done a great job translating it then it would not have won. I’m very happy for her.

By the way, you may have noticed that one of the books on the short list was original in Finnish. Emmi Itäranta’s book has already won a couple of mainstream literary awards in Finland (including a €16,000 prize). It will be published in English as Memory of Water next year.

Further details about the Tähtivaeltaja Award are available from the ever-reliable Tero.

Ditmar Winners

The Ditmar Award winners were announced at the Australian Natcon yesterday evening. I can’t see an official announcement yet, but based on Twitter reports the winners are as follows:

Also announced at the ceremony (but Not A Ditmar) were the following:

  • Norma K. Hemming Award: Sea Hearts, Margo Lanagan (Allen & Unwin)
  • Peter McNamara Lifetime Achievement Award: Nick Stathopoulos
  • A. Bertram Chandler Award for Outstanding Achievement: Russell B Farr

I’m delighted to see a Clarkesworld story winning the short fiction category. Also I note that Karen Warren’s double-winning collection is available in a bookstore near you.

I look forward to seeing long, angry articles from male fans complaining that the Ditmars are “broken”, and blaming it all on Alisa Krasnostein with her radical lesbian separatist politics. 😉

Update: Added the Chandler Award. See Sean the Bookonaut for a Storify record of the ceremony.

Small Blue Planet: France

C’est animé? C’est vivant? Je ne sais pas. La traduction, elle est difficile.

Especially when you are as bad at languages as I am.

Thankfully my guests on Small Blue Planet are very good at English. Many thanks to Mélanie Fazi and Lionel Davoust for their wonderful tour of French science fiction and fantasy. Also thanks as ever to our wonderful producer, Karen Burnham, and to Kevin for being the emergency holographic sound recordist.

Along the way we talk about French conventions, the best award trophy in the world, how the UK came to be a fundamentalist Mormon state, Brian Stableford’s amazing translation work, and some of the best SF&F writers working in French today.

As ever, the podcast is available via the Locus Roundtable.

The Granta List

Granta is a British literary magazine widely regarded as a pillar of the establishment. Every ten years they publish a list of “top British novelists under 40”. Previously the list has featured the likes of Martin Amis, Ian McEwan, Jeanette Winterson and Zadie Smith. This year’s list has just been published. The Guardian has a run down. They note that for the first time the list has more women on it than men. The list is also very multi-cultural, with authors who have connections to China, Nigeria, Ghana, the US, Bangladesh and Pakistan. There is, however, another aspect of diversity in the list I’d like to point to.

Helen Oyeyemi has been a nominee for the Shirley Jackson Awards. Sarah Hall and Steven Hall (no relation as far as I know) have both been Clarke nominees, and Sarah has won the Tiptree. Ned Beauman also writes science fiction (I bought The Teleportation Accident, though I confess I didn’t get on well with it). Admittedly none of them were published by specialist genre imprints, but that shouldn’t stop us making them welcome.

Like I said, Granta is a pillar of the British literary establishment. The culture war: we haz won it.

Now I look forward to a series of articles by straight, cis white men complaining about how the Granta list is “broken”. 😉

Australian Shadows Awards #WomenInGenre

Via Kirstyn McDermott I have seen the results of this year’s Australian Shadows Awards, which are juried awards for horror fiction. Kirstyn is quite rightly jumping up and down because she has won the Novel category with Perfections. However, I want to draw your attention to the Long Fiction and Collection categories. Long Fiction was won by a story called “Sky” by Kaaron Warren. That appears in a collection called Through Splintered Walls, published by Twelfth Planet Press, which happens to have won the Collection category. And you can buy it here.

Nice skull, Kirstyn. Try not to hit Mondy too hard with it.

Sir Arthur’s Fantasy Women #WomenInGenre

So the Clarke Award jury this year managed to return a short list of six books by men, despite four of the five judges being women. I think it is a pretty safe bet that if the Hugo Best novel short list had been men-only we’d have seen an outcry from UK fandom saying that this proves the Hugos are “broken”, and that Americans are appalling people whom we should all despise. What we are seeing with the Clarke is much sad tutting over the state of UK publishing, and the occasional comment about how British awards reward quality, rather than being influenced by “political correctness”.

Let me say right at the start that anyone who says that these six books were chosen because they were the six best books in the field is talking utter bollocks. I know how juries work. I’ve been on some. What these six books represent is what this year’s jury felt were the six best books in the field. Another jury might have made a very different selection. Given what I’ve read, and what other well-read people have said, I think there’s a reasonable chance that, with a different jury, Empty Space, The Fractal Prince, Jack Glass, Railsea and The Method might all have been selected. As it happens, I know a couple of the jury quite well (I publish one of them) and I’m confident that they will have done an honest job within the confines of the award rules as they understood them, and given the selection of books available to them.

However, reading Liz Williams’ defense of the short list in The Guardian leads me to wonder a bit about the situation that they found themselves in. Firstly Liz makes a very valid point about the state of publishing in the UK. The lack of opportunities for women SF authors here has been lamentable over the past few years. If people like Justina Robson, Gwyneth Jones and Tricia Sullivan can’t get novel contracts, something is badly wrong. I’d add Pat Cadigan to that list, but hopefully her recent Hugo nomination will cause publishers to sit up and take notice. I’m delighted to see Jo Fletcher Books doing their bit to redress the balance, but I note that they are publishing new people; the established names still can’t get a book out. Before you blame the publishers, however, check out what Malinda Lo had to say recently about the pressures that they are under, particularly from big book chains.

Liz also talks about the sort of books that the jury received. She mentions, “a return to both the ‘sensawunda’ and to the critical thought that so many complain is lacking from contemporary SF” and of some of the submissions being “technically fantasy”. This worries me a bit. I shall attempt to explain why.

My first thought is that an award founded by Sir Arthur has every right to focus on science fiction. If you were going to pick one SF author who actually did what people outside of the field think all SF authors try to do, i.e. predict the future, he’d probably be first on your list. Sir Arthur not only understood technology, he got his predictions right a lot more often than anyone else (by which I mean that his score was non-zero).

Also, as Farah Mendlesohn has noted on Twitter, the Clarke jury does get sent a lot of books that are obviously fantasy. She mentioned getting Terry Pratchett novels when she was a judge, and I see that Paul Cornell’s London Falling was submitted this year. With a record number of books submitted (a testament to the effectiveness of Tom Hunter’s PR machine, which makes publishers want to be selected for the Clarke) I can see that juries want to avoid having to plough through books that should not have been given to them in the first place. Farah has set herself the task of reading all of the submissions by women to find out how many of them had no chance at all, and that’s an interesting project, but it probably doesn’t tell the whole story.

The word that worries me most is “technically”, because it makes it sound like books were being rejected on a technicality. I suspect that Liz probably didn’t mean that, but it is how it came over to me. It reminds me of all those silly debates we get into in fandom where people try to define what is and isn’t “really” science fiction, and it makes me happy that the Hugos don’t try to make a distinction. I can see that if I had been allowed to submit Archangel Protocol then it could have been accused of being “technically fantasy” despite the strong cyberpunk content, because it also contains angels. There are clear and obvious cases, but there’s also a very big grey area that we need to be careful about.

The Clarke has a recent history of rewarding books that some people dismiss as “really fantasy”. Perdido Street Station won the British Fantasy Award as well as the Clarke. The City & The City won the World Fantasy Award, the Hugo and the Clarke despite many people saying it wasn’t genre at all. And Zoo City is only “not urban fantasy” in the same way that 1984 is “not science fiction”. I very much hope that there hasn’t been some sort of policy retreat from doing this sort of thing, because I think it would affect women disproportionately.

You see, it isn’t just a question of publishers not buying SF by women. I’m pretty sure that often when they do buy it they do so only if they think the book can also be marketed as fantasy. They, and the bookstores, are still wedded to the idea that SF is for boys and (non-grimdark) fantasy is for girls, so if they find a really good SF book by a woman they’ll want to be able to present it to the marketing department, the bookstore buyers and the public as fantasy.

Plus, of course, you have the added problem of the difficulty that women have getting jobs in science and technology, so the number of women qualified to write seriously hard SF is probably a lot less than the number of men. (I was trying yesterday to think of women SF writers who are actually physicists. Catherine Asaro and Vandana Singh came immediately to mind. Tricia Sullivan is doing an OU degree. Who else?)

So I think there’s a real danger that the Clarke, in focusing tightly on science fiction, will inevitably be something of a cockforest. Obviously we hope that publishers will step up to the plate and allow women writers to get their SF novels to market, but they are commercial operations and are, to a certain extent, at the mercy of public taste.

One of the things that awards are good for is leading public taste. Juried awards in particular can encourage the public to read books that they might not otherwise have tried. One of the best ways to get the Great British Public reading SF by women is to have it nominated for the Clarke. So while I understand why the Clarke needs to stick to its science fiction only remit, I’d like to be sure that it isn’t doing anything that might make it even harder than it already is for women to get short-listed.

Hmm, what’s that I hear? “Hideously diverse Britain!” “Political correctness gone mad!” *sigh*