CoNZealand – Day 2

First up, we had a very successful party. Huge thanks to all who attended, and to Kristen and her team running the CoNZealand parties.

A lot of yesterday was taken up with preparing for the party, but I did get some time to see programme. The Representing the Other panel was very good, and led to some very lively discussion on Discord afterwards. I also watched the Conventions in the Age of COVID-19 panel, and the The Future is Female panel.

The big event last night was the Retro Hugo and Sir Julius Vogel Awards panel. Unfortunately there were major bandwidth issues with the stream and I bailed early on so as to reduce the load. Kevin stuck with it so as to be able to tweet from the official Hugo Awards feed.

This year’s Retro Hugo Award trophy is gorgeous. You can find out more about it here.

The results of the 1945 Retros can be found here. I was very pleased with the recognition for Margaret Brundage and Leigh Brackett. There has been anger expressed about the awards going to Campbell and Lovecraft, but results like this are inevitable with the Retros because most people don’t take an interest in them. According to the official statistics, only 120 people participated at the Nominations stage, and only 521 in the final ballot. If Worldcons can’t drum up more interest in the Retros then they should stop doing them (they are optional, after all).

3 thoughts on “CoNZealand – Day 2

  1. Regarding Retro Hugos: It is hard to judge some of these categories at a 75 year remove. In the past I have tended to vote for those nominees who have stood the test of time and are still read / viewed today with pleasure. In the novella category, I would probably have voted for the Brackett and in short story not the Bradbury but tastes differ. While Lovecraft as a person had some reprehensible views it is hard to argue with the fact that the Cthulhu Mythos has been widely influential and still is today. Campbell is certainly the most widely remembered of the editors noted and it would take more time than most folks have to give an honest appraisal of the other editors. Personally, I think in many cases you have to separate the person from their work. Especially individuals of a different era. Many authors / editors / artists have been awful people but their works are still read or viewed with pleasure.

    1. It is complicated. We can’t really know how people of the time would have left about the likes of Lovercraft and Campbell, though clearly some contemporaries did disapprove. What we do know, however, is that giving those people awards now will bring the wrath of the internet down upon us. Which is one of many reasons why I think that the Retros are a bad idea.

Comments are closed.