Awards

YA Hugo Update

~ Cheryl ~ 8 Comments

The discussion on the proposed YA Hugo is still going strong and a couple of points are worth highlighting. Firstly, Chris Barkley has created a Facebook page for the discussion. You still have to join Facebook to use it, but you don’t have to be on Chris’s friend list. You can find it here. (And yes, the work linked for me.)

Also there was a very interesting comment by Elspeth Kovar who had gone outside the fannish community for a reaction. Here’s the salient bit:

I was chatting with the manager of my local bookstore yesterday and it occurred to me to ask if she thought if this Hugo would be a good idea. She said “Yes!” so quickly and emphatically it rocked me back on my heels. I asked for a brief explanation I could post here.

Her reasoning is that while there are hundreds of awards almost none go to the books young adults actually read. A Hugo for childrens/YA books would change that. Those readers would finally have a solid basis for choosing books. It would also make them more aware of the Hugos which would help them choose from books that aren’t shelved in age-specific areas.

All to often these debates take place in a relatively small community and people make assertions about the effects of a change without any effort to test those assertions. (I have, for example, seen people assert that a YA Hugo would do nothing for the profile of the awards.) So thanks to Elspeth for widening the discussion.

More Hugo Tinkering

~ Cheryl ~ 14 Comments

It must be silly season, because proposals for new Hugo categories are proliferating.

The latest is from Rich Lynch and can be found on his LiveJournal. I reproduce it here:

Note: strikeouts indicate proposed deletions and underlined text proposed additions.

3.3.12: Best Semiprozine. Any generally available non-professional periodical publication devoted to science fiction or fantasy which by the close of the previous calendar year has published four (4) or more issues (or the equivalent in other media), at least one (1) of which appeared in the previous calendar year, and which in the previous calendar year met at least two (2) one (1) of the following criteria:
(1) had an average press run of at least one thousand (1000) copies per issue,
(2) paid its contributors and/or staff in other than copies of the publication,
(3) (2) provided at least half the income of any one person,
(4) (3) had at least fifteen percent (15%) of its total space occupied by advertising,
(5) (4) announced itself to be a semiprozine.
Audio and video productions are excluded from this category.

3.3.13 Best Fan Audio or Video Production. Any generally available non-professional audio or video production devoted to science fiction, fantasy, or related subjects which by the close of the previous calendar year has had four (4) or more episodes or podcasts, at least one (1) of which appeared in the previous calendar year.

3.3.13 3.3.14: Best Fanzine. Any generally available non-professional periodical publication devoted to science fiction, fantasy, or related subjects which by the close of the previous calendar year has published four (4) or more issues (or the equivalent in other media), at least one (1) of which appeared in the previous calendar year, and which does not qualify as a semiprozine. Audio and video productions are excluded from this category, as are publications that pay its contributors and/or staff in other than copies of the publication.

As you’ll see, this is intended primarily to address the issue of the eligibility of podcasts and the like in the Fanzine category. Rich is not an exclusionist. What he wants to do is give audio and video fan activity its own category, just like there are separate categories for Dramatic Presentations.

Of course this means another category, and people are already complaining that there is not enough material to support the audio/video fanzine category. I’m not sure that this is true. Some countries already have such categories in their national awards, and podcasts are popping up all over the place. One of my definite nominations for Best Fanzine next year will be Jonathan Strahan and Gary K. Wolfe’s podcast. What they are doing (including their avowed production values) is very much in the fan spirit.

I also like the moving of the “no payment” clause from semiprozine to the fan categories. That makes things much clearer.

But I do have some reservations. As I recall, the phrase “or the equivalent in other media” was part of the changes to make it very clear that web sites and the like are eligible for Hugos. Removing it from the semiprozine definition will, I’m afraid, lead once again to people saying that web-based magazines such as Clarkesworld, Lightspeed and so on are not eligible. That’s not Rich’s intent — he makes that very clear — but it will happen unless some replacement wording is devised.

In addition, there are web-based magazines that include audio and video material. One example is Salon Futura. And I can absolutely guarantee that if this were to pass, and I was still in business by then, there would be people claiming that Salon Futura was not eligible for Best Semiprozine because of the audio and video content. I’m also pretty sure that by that time it would not be the only online magazine with such a mix of content. I suspect that there will be fanzines that qualify for both of Rich’s proposed categories, and people will complain about the likelihood of such a fanzine winning both.

There’s discussion on Rich’s LiveJournal (which does not require you to join anything), or feel free to comment here.

A Hugo For YA Books?

~ Cheryl ~ 60 Comments

One of the more common suggestions when people are thinking about potential new Hugo Award categories is that there should be a special award for YA books, or children’s books, or both. Mostly such suggestions some to nothing, but this year a motion will be put before the WSFS Business Meeting by Chris Barkley, who has a fine track record in guiding Hugo rules changes through the SMOFish minefield. The key elements of Chris’s proposal are as follows:

  1. That the category should be open to both YA books and those aimed at younger children;
  2. That the category should be for a “book” (presumably published in any medium) as “novels” aimed at younger readers are often below the 40,000 word minimum required for the Best Novel category;
  3. That a work may not be nominated in both the Best Novel and Best YA/Children’s Book category.

The last point is key because one of the things that really upsets the Business Meeting is the prospect of a person getting nominations in multiple categories for the same work, though I think, given the length issue, that it should actually say any of the four fiction categories, not just Best Novel.

Chris doesn’t specify how a work would be allocated to a category if it got enough votes to qualify for YA and a fiction category. However, there are at least two possibilities for resolving the issue. The author could be asked which category she wanted to accept the nomination for, or it could be based on the number of nominations received.

Some people will doubtless ask how the voters know whether a book is YA or not. That’s basically down to the voters. Administrators will place the book in the category where it gets the most nominations, and if it does get nominations in more than one they should combine them. So, for example, if a book were to get 16 nominations in Best YA and 5 in Best Novel, it would be put into Best YA, and the 5 nominations for Best Novel moved over to Best YA, provided that the people nominating in Best Novel did not also nominate it in Best YA, and that the person submitting the ballot had not used all of their 5 YA nominations on others books.

There is, of course, the argument that there are too many Hugo categories already. This is really only an issue with the length of the ceremony, which is pretty much a solved problem these days. The cost of the rockets is negligible compared to the cost of a modern Worldcon.

The real questions we should be asking are as follows:

  1. Are there enough books published each year to provide a broad choice for the voters?
  2. Is there likely to be plenty of variation in the nominees from year to year?

My own view is that the answer to both of those questions is Yes.

We might also ask whether there are any potential useful side-effects. Here are some ideas:

  1. It will shut up some of the people who complain that the lack of a YA Hugo is “not fair”;
  2. It will shut up some of the people who complain about YA books getting into the Best Novel category;
  3. It will please the people who think the Hugos should concentrate on books;
  4. It will engage directly with a growth area in publishing;
  5. It will get readers interested in the Hugos at an early age;
  6. It will add another 5 books to the fabulous Hugo Voter Packet.

The proposal is currently co-sponsored by Mr. Steve Barber of Long Beach, CA and Ms. Juli Hanslip of Lexington, SC.

Chris has asked for discussion on his Facebook page. Doubtless discussion is also taking place on a certain mailing list that I’m not supposed to mention because its very existence is supposed to be kept secret from non-SMOFish types least ordinary fans want to have a say on how WSFS is run. Those of you who are not on Facebook or on any secret mailing lists may discuss here. Kevin will be available to answer technical questions.

Translation Awards Update

~ Cheryl

I did warn you that I’d get very boring about the Translation Awards over the next few weeks, but we do have some great news.

Firstly huge thanks are due to the Science Fiction Foundation and Science Fiction Studies for pitching in with some large donations to our fund drive. It is great to see organizations will to help. In particular SF Studies has pledged annual support, which is really helpful.

In addition we have had some kind people offer more prizes for the fund raiser. Peter F. Hamilton has donated a signed copy of the limited edition hardcover of The Reality Dysfunction (Subterranean). We’ve also got offers of signed books from Kari Sperring, and a copy of an Élisabeth Vonarburg book donated by Nanopress. More details are available here.

It has been interesting watching the donations come in. Some people have been really generous. Others have just donated $1. But you know that’s OK, because if everyone who reads this blog donated $1 we’d be doing very nicely. Heck, if everyone who reads Scalzi’s blog had donated $1 we’d be set up for the next decade. Every little helps. (And you can help here.)

Translation Awards Reminder

~ Cheryl ~ 6 Comments

Hello USA. Everyone recovered from their turkey-induced stupor yet?

As you almost certainly didn’t notice last week, being preoccupied with other things, I’d like to draw your attention to the fund raiser that we are running for the SF&F Translation Awards. There are a bunch of cool prizes available for some lucky donors, and since we started the thing I have had a few kind people contact me with offers of additional prizes. We’ll announce them in due course, once we are sure we won’t be paying out more in postage than we get in from donations.

I shall probably be a bit boring about this over the next month or so, because I do want these awards to be prestigious and not just something that a bunch of nutty fans and academics care about. There are loads of fabulous authors in the non-English-speaking world, but we’ll only get translations published if we can get our own publishers away from thinking that no one will ever buy a translated novel, which sadly many of them do.

It would be great if I could tap into arts funding for this, but money for that has been horribly slashed in the UK recently. The EU has arts money available, but only for projects that are limited to EU countries. As our winners may come from Japan, or Brazil, or anywhere else outside Europe, we wouldn’t qualify. And of course it is always likely that any grant application would be turned down on the grounds that science fiction isn’t worth supporting. So it really is down to us. If you can’t afford to donate anything yourself, please at least blog about it to help spread the word.

Full details, including the current list of prizes, are available here.

Translation Awards Fund Raiser

~ Cheryl

The jury for the SF&F Translation Awards is now hard at work on its task. The first ever winners will be announced early next year. We have just about everything in place except cash prizes. And for that we need your help. I have just launched a fund raiser. As is traditional with such things, there are prizes on offer for some lucky donors. Friends of mine such as Neil Gaiman, Jeff and Ann VanderMeer, Gary K. Wolfe, Lou Anders and Nick Mamatas have offered prizes. More will be announced in the coming weeks.

Please spread the word. In particular if you are able to blog about the appeal in a language other than English, please do so. This is, after all, about promoting authors from outside of the English-speaking world.

And if you would like to donate a prize, please email me.

World Fantasy Wrap

~ Cheryl ~ 7 Comments

No, I wasn’t there, but I had a certain interest in goings on.

As it turns out, I did not win a Howie. The Special Award: UnNon-Professional category was won by Strange Horizons. This is entirely appropriate. They have been doing awesome stuff online for 10 years; Clarkesworld has only just started its 5th year. Had I been a judge, I would have given the award to them too.

I was pretty pleased with the other winners as well, though I was always going to be a bit sad over Best Novel. Fond as I am of The City and The City, I also love Finch and The Red Tree. It would have been particularly awesome for Caitlín to win.

Also, thanks to Jonathan Oliver of Solaris, I have solved a mystery. There has been some confusion over my apparently being listed as attending the convention. It wasn’t me, it was someone else with the same name.

So, for avoidance of confusion, I hereby note that I am not engaged to be married to James Maxey, though I’m sure he’s a lovely and talented guy. As to the other Cheryl, I apologize profusely if some people were unspeakably rude to you at the convention under the impression that you were me. I’m not normally a big fan of the changing your name when you get married thing, but in your case it may well be wisest thing to do.

I also note that I am not, nor ever have been, married to a professional soccer player.

Benefits of Globalization

~ Cheryl

Colin Harvey has a new post up at Suite 101 in which he catalogs all of the British Hugo winners in the written fiction categories. There are quite a few (though nowhere near as many as there would be had he included the fan categories). Towards the end he makes this observation: “The reader will notice a distinct surge in winners since 2001.”

And he’s right, there is a definite upswing in the number of British winners, especially in Best Novel where the frequency has gone up from around one a decade to every other year. What is the explanation for this? Have British writers suddenly got heaps better?

No, I don’t think so. Nor do I think that Emerald City had anything to do with it. What I think we are seeing here is the effect of the Internet, email and cheap air travel. It is now much easier for British writers to get published in the USA, and for them to travel to North America to meet their fans. In the next decade I look forward to seeing a sudden rise in winners from places other than the US, Canada and UK.

Award Ceremony Video

~ Cheryl ~ 2 Comments

Kevin is doing a good job in looking after the Hugo Awards web site now that I’m banned from updating it. He has got the video he took of the Aussiecon 4 Hugo Award Ceremony posted to the site. It is quite long — just over an hour and a half — and probably chews bandwidth like nothing else, but it is good to have it there.

In addition he has video of the Australian Awards ceremony, which we uploaded to my Vimeo account because Kevin has hit his upload limit for the week. You can watch that here.

The Cause of all the Trouble

~ Cheryl ~ 5 Comments

I’ve been trying to downplay this year’s Hugo win because, despite what SMOFdom might say, it is very little to do with me. Clarkesworld is justifiably famous because of the quality of its fiction. I hope that the non-fiction I buy is good, but on its own it would never have won any awards. I’m very much hoping that we win the World Fantasy Award as well, not because I want a Howie (though that would be nice), but because I want Neil to have the honor of collecting a trophy for his magazine.

Having said that, I am rather pleased with the new shiny toy, and this year’s dress was a big hit, so I think a photo is in order. This one is by Tom Becker and is the best I have found thus far.

Me and my Hugo, 2010 style

My Terrorist Resume Expands

~ Cheryl ~ 24 Comments

As most of you will know, I am already persona on grata in the USA, and regarded with deep suspicion in New Zealand. Now, for entirely different reasons, I have managed to upset the security services in Australia. Here’s what happened.

When I checked my bags in with Thai Airways for my trip back to London I did the usual thing of warning the check-in person that there was this big lump of metal in my suitcase that might cause alarm when the bag was scanned. I have done this before, and was not unduly worried. The check-in lady didn’t seem worried either.

Having got airside, I found somewhere to get lunch and get online because I had run out of Internet access at the hotel before I could re-synch my iPhone with the UK SIM. (For some stupid reason Apple requires you to register any new SIM via iTunes, you can’t do it direct from the phone.) I had just done that when the PA paged me, asking me to come to my gate urgently.

Yes, it was the Hugo. It had turned up on the scan of my suitcase, and a small panic was going on. The lady who had checked me in was at the gate and confirmed that I had warned her about it in advance. Also, as I was online, I was able to pull up the Hugo Awards web site, and a nice picture of me holding my trophy (thank you, Tom Becker). The gate staff were impressed and congratulated me on my good fortune. Unfortunately the airport security people were not so friendly, and insisted on having me come and see them personally. I was dispatched off in the care of one of the airport staff, and that’s when things started to get weird.

My minder, Tony, wasn’t sure where my bag was being held, and got on the radio asking which lift he should bring me down on. The baggage staff denied all knowledge of the problem. Tony explained that someone in security wanted my luggage examined. The baggage staff said they could not find my luggage. Poor Tony was getting very embarrassed. As I had my laptop open to be able to show the pictures, I was able to tweet the whole process.

After some time, and considerably wandering around from one lift shaft to another, two airport security people came and found us, and escorted us to where they said the suitcase was waiting for me. Right up to the last moment Tony was saying I’d just need to open the bag and show the Hugo to the security guys. Then he opened a door and we were greeted by five burly policemen. At that point I knew I was in trouble and stopped tweeting.

Here’s what appears to have been going on. Firstly the check-in lady did not pass my comments about the Hugo in the bag on to security (the Thai Airways staff admitted to this). Secondly, having found the Hugo (which I must say lights up magnificently on the scans – I saw a print-out), the security people did not check with the airline, they called the police. And the police, having got involved, were determined to treat the whole incident as a potential terrorist threat.

What this meant for me was two-fold. Firstly my explanation was now worthless. I was now in “guilty until proven innocent” territory, and the only thing that would satisfy the police was seeing and examining the suspect object for themselves. Secondly I got the “good cop, bad cop” treatment. One of them was very sorry for the inconvenience; another kept asking me leading questions in the hope that I’d trip up on one and give them cause to arrest me.

Thankfully, compared to the Americans, these guys were amateurs. American security people always ask you questions that they know the answer to because they have your records in front of them, but you can’t answer unless you have perfect recall for dates and places.

Looking back on it, the confusion as to where my bag was being held could have been more poor communication, but it could also have been a deliberate delaying tactic to allow the police time to get on the scene. I’ll never know about that one.

After some rigmarole — the police would not open the case themselves, but were nervous of letting me do it in case I had a weapon in there — we got the Hugo out, and removed from the bubble wrap the that nice folks at Galaxy Books had put on it. That, it appeared, was sufficient to prove that it was not going to go boom while the plane was in flight, and I was allowed to re-pack my bag and head back to the gate (via extensive re-screening of my hand luggage and person, just in case).

I should note that the airline staff were very apologetic and helpful. They were upset about the creeping security culture in their country. Also all of my previous encounters with the Aussie authorities have been very positive. Last year I arrived in Melbourne with a cold at the height on the Swine Flu panic, and later that trip I had to have my boots cleaned for fear I had picked up Elf Cooties on my visit to Rivendell. The people I had dealt with then had been very friendly. But I guess security paranoia gets to every country in the end, even Australia.

I was rather worried that my bags might not make it onto the flight (I got back to the gate with minutes to spare). I was also very concerned that I’d have to go through the same rigmarole changing planes in Bangkok. Thankfully all my fears came to naught, and the suitcase and Hugo arrived safely at baggage claim in Heathrow.

Now I only have one question remaining. Has anything been put on my immigration records in Australia about this? I guess I’ll only be able to find out by trying to go back.

Smoke Filled Rooms

~ Cheryl ~ 53 Comments

Many thanks to all of you who joined us for the live blogging of the Hugo ceremony on Sunday night. It was a blast to do. Kevin, Mur and Mary were fabulous. We all had a lot of fun. Sadly it won’t happen again, at least not in that form. I have been banned from doing it.

Surprised? I was. Kevin and I spend a lot of time talking about how open and democratic WSFS is. Anyone who goes to Worldcon can attend the Business Meeting and have their say in how the Hugos are run. But there are still little committees where acts of political skulduggery can take place.

The Hugo Awards website, where Sunday’s coverage took place, is run by a body called the Hugo Awards Marketing Committee (HAMC). It is something that Kevin helped set up several years ago. I’ve done a lot of work behind the scenes, including creating and maintaining the website.

The HAMC is managed by another WSFS committee, the Mark Protection Committee (MPC). They are the people responsible for looking after the various service marks that WSFS owns, so it makes sense that they should also oversee how the Hugos are marketed. However, some members of the MPC have always been opposed to the existence of the HAMC, and they have a long track record of trying to obstruct what it does.

In 2008 I was all ready to start work on upgrading the Worldcon and WSFS web sites as I had done for the Hugos. I wasn’t able to attend the MPC meeting, and when Kevin got back from it I was surprised to discover that I had been relieved of responsibility for the job. Someone else had been taken on to do the work. As it happens, that someone is rather better qualified to build web sites than I am, and the lack of action over the past two years is mainly due to his life going through some major changes. But even so, had I been given the job it would have been done by Montreal.

In 2009 Kevin and I managed a contest to design a logo for the Hugos. I was delighted to see the logo being used all over this year’s award ceremony, and even in newspaper articles about the awards. But at the end of the Montreal Worldcon a meeting of the MPC effectively forbade us from attempting to register the logo as a service mark. Apparently it was not necessary, and would be a waste of the MPC’s money. This year Kevin (by way of the HAMC’s report to the MPC and thus to WSFS) put a motion before the Business Meeting suggesting that we register the logo. It passed easily, and none of the MPC members who spoke so forcefully against registering it in Montreal was prepared to put that position forward in a public meeting.

This year once again I missed the MPC meeting. (I was recording an interview for Salon Futura). When I finally caught up with Kevin I discovered that the MPC had adopted a new rule forbidding any member of the HAMC from being on the Hugo ballot. Any member who wanted to remain eligible for a Hugo next year had to resign immediately.

I thought about this for all of about two seconds. I have no idea what Neil plans to do with Clarkesworld from now on, and I certainly have enough Hugos. But I would love to see Salon Futura on the ballot. What’s more, I would love to see Kevin get a nomination. He’s my business manager, fulling the same role that Kirsten Gong-Wong has for Locus. But there’s no way he was going to abandon the HAMC, so if we do get a nomination next year his name won’t be included. I, on the other hand, am staying in the Hugo race, because I have other fine staff who also deserve nominations and I want to see that happen. Accordingly I have resigned from the HAMC and won’t be allowed access to the Hugo Awards website in the future.

The official reason for the new rule is that anyone who is on the HAMC could potentially abuse their position to campaign for a Hugo for themselves. I can see how one might do that, and I have made a point of trying to avoid it. If you look at the Hugo website you won’t see much mention of me there. I certainly don’t sign any posts I write. Kevin’s name is much more prominent than mine.

The live reporting of the ceremony is a bit different. In previous years I have done that through my own websites because key staff on the current Worldcon have been actively hostile to the HAMC. This year was different, but even so we didn’t announce the coverage until we had been given express permission to do it by both Vincent Docherty, the Hugo Administrator, and Kathryn Daugherty, the ceremony director. Aussiecon 4 co-chair Perry Middlemiss came to see what we were up to during rehearsals, so he knew we were doing it too.

The thing about the live reporting is that it ought to be on the Hugo website, or that of the current Worldcon. The results should be presented to the world through official channels. It is actually of far more benefit to me to do it through my own websites, because then I get the traffic. If someone else wants to do it for the official Hugo website next year I’ll be delighted. After all, I won’t even be in Reno, so it will be hard for me. But that does mean someone else has to be prepared to do the work.

That, I suspect, is the main issue. Some of this is undoubtedly pure spite. One or two people on the MPC, having seen me win a third Hugo, will have been determined to do something to try to hurt me. But far more important than that, by removing me (and trying to remove Kevin as well), the MPC was trying to get rid of the people who actually do the work, and bring the process of marketing the Hugos to a grinding halt. They are doing this because they are strongly opposed to encouraging anyone other than Worldcon regulars from voting.

Personally I’m not too annoyed about this. I have Wizard’s Tower and Salon Futura to run. Having less WSFS work to do will be a good thing. As a WSFS member, however, I am furious. I want to see the process of marketing the Hugos go forward, not be hamstrung by a small group of selfish, elitist conservatives operating behind the scenes in little-known committees.

Kevin needs help. If you have experience in maintaining a WordPress web site and have no ambitions to win a Hugo he’d probably be delighted to hear from you. Ditto if you have experience of actual marketing. And if you can’t do any of these things, but think that what has been done here is wrong, please say so in the comments. If we want to convince people that WSFS is a fair and open organization, we have to put a stop to this sort of thing.

Kevin talks about another piece of skulduggery on his LJ.

Oops, I Did It Again

~ Cheryl ~ 15 Comments

I am utterly delighted to announce that Clarkesworld Magazine has won the 2010 Hugo Award for Best Semiprozine. Congratulations to Neil, Sean, Kate and the rest of the Clarkesworld team. It appears that I have acquired another Hugo trophy along the way.

Amazingly no one has a photo of my 2010 dress online yet. At least not that I can find.

Huge thanks to Kevin and Mur Lafferty for helping with the live coverage while I was busy being swank.

There is a party going on. I am going to it. More tomorrow when I sober up.

Hugo Ceremony Coverage

~ Cheryl ~ 3 Comments

This year’s Hugo Award ceremony live coverage will be over on the Official Hugo Awards website. I’m delighted to announced that Kevin and I will be joined in Melbourne by star podcaster, Mur Lafferty. Mur and I will cover for each other in case we have to go on stage. (She’s an acceptor for one of the Short Story nominees.) Mary Robinette Kowal may join us from Dragon*Con, if she can get online from the Hugo Awards Breakfast taking place there.

I hope as many as possible of you will watch the coverage, especially if you are a nominee. It is always a very special moment when someone learns that they have won via our coverage.

We Have The Technology

~ Cheryl ~ 3 Comments

The hotel wi-fi here at Au Contraire continues to be crappy, but we have a work-around. My pal Errol has got my laptop tethered to an iPhone (one with a local account, not my phone on data roaming) and I am using it to create this blog post from the hotel lobby. Doing the coverage of the Vogel Awards tonight should be nice and easy.

Also I’m pleased to see this technology working, because my iPhone is unlocked and I’m planning to buy an Aussie SIM for it when I get to Melbourne. That gives us a backup for the Hugos.

Graphic Novel Recommendations Wanted

~ Cheryl ~ 15 Comments

As some of you have already noticed, I am on a panel at Worldcon about science fiction and graphic novels. The contention, as Jeff Beeler put it, is that the new Hugo category is effectively for, “the best science fiction graphic novels that people who do not read graphic novels on a regular basis know about.” Paul Cornell has already waxed lyrical upon the subject. Now it is my turn. But I don’t read nearly as many comics and graphic novels as some of you. So I want your suggestions. What should we be nominating for the Best Graphic Novel Hugo next year?

Remember, the work has to either be first published in 2010 or, in the case of a serial work, the final issue has to be published in 2010.

Best Fannish Cat Nominees Announced

~ Cheryl ~ 7 Comments

As you may recall, this year’s Ditmar Awards have a special category for Best Fannish Cat. I’m still a bit peeved that the rules required Australian residency, so I wasn’t eligible, but the nominees have just been announced and I think you’ll all agree that they are very fine felines indeed. The nominees are:

  • Tabby Allen
  • Felix Blackford
  • Peri Peri Canavan
  • Flicker Gillespie
  • Pazuzu Sparks

You can find photos and biographies of all the nominees at the Dudcon III website. You have to buy a Dudcon III membership in order to vote, but it is all in the good cause of supporting the Ditmars, the other categories of which are far more sane.

The 2010 Hugo Award Showcase

~ Cheryl ~ 3 Comments

Here’s a book I have been waiting eagerly for. Last year Sean Wallace approached WSFS with a suggestion for an anthology of Hugo-nominated short fiction. The first of these books is now available, and very splendid it looks too (thanks in no small part to a fine Donato Giancola cover).

The book is edited by Mary Robinette Kowal who does a fine job of introducing each story, save perhaps for “Evil Robot Monkey” where she is reduced to a shy, embarrassed, “Um. I wrote this.”

Only 9 of the nominated pieces of short fiction are included. (I have posted the table of contents over on the official Hugo Award website.) I don’t know why the other 6 stories are missing, but I suspect a combination of cost and contractual issues. Ted Chiang, for example, is very particular about how and where his work is published, which may explains why “Exhalation” is absent.

The book is special to me for two reasons. Firstly it has the Hugo Award logo on the spine. Kevin and I are always very pleased to see it in the wild. Also the last few pages of the book list all of the nominees and winners for the 2009 Hugo Awards.

Quite what value the book has in an age where everyone who cares deeply about the Hugos gets the entire fiction slate in their voter packet is perhaps questionable, but I for one love paper books and am very pleased to have such a fine anthology on my bookshelves (well, in the piles of books on my floor). I’m also very pleased to think that kids can once again go into shops and see the words “Hugo Award” clearly displayed on a book. Here’s hoping it creates a few more fans.

If all goes well, the Hugo Award Showcase will be a regular feature of the publishing schedule for many years to come. Prime might even go back in history to cover previous years. But for that to happen you folks have to buy the book. [buy isbn=”9781607012252″].