second verse, same as the first

[kate_nepveu]

I'm just gonna quote myself from last year:

There are lots of reasons why people don't read things based on their opinions of the authors. Me, if I know that someone holds views I find morally repugnant, or if I personally dislike them, etc., then I can't keep myself from looking for evidence of those disliked traits in the work, which is unfair to the work, and so I don't even bother. Other people refuse to lend support to live authors, but are okay with dead ones. Other people think the author is dead in the interpretive sense to the extent that they don't care. All of these are valid decisions, because the way people read is so personal and because people make different moral and ethical discussions.

[ . . . ]

All that said, I promised agnosticism, which is this: I genuinely cannot find it in me to care whether the Hugos devolve into, as James Nicoll points out with characteristic brevity and asperity, political parties, or whether prior community norms about politicking prevail, or Vox Day et al. get bored, or whatever. Worst comes to worst, a few years of concerted effort results in actual winners instead of mere nominations for hateful trolls, and a few year after that, booksellers and the like catch up and realize that the Hugo is no longer prestigious, and, well, SFF fandom is big, even the bits of it that self-identify as fandom, and WorldCon and the Hugos are only a small part of that. Maybe Locus stops overweighting subscriber votes and becomes the popular award of record. Maybe the Nebulas experience a surge in prestige. Maybe I hit the lottery and endow a juried award in my honor. Who knows? But the Hugos aren't that big a teapot, at the end of the day, and if people want to self-identify with them and participate in the community that votes on them, great, they should do that, and if people don't, great, they should do that too.

(Reference: this year's "Sad Puppies" Hugo slate—hilariously, not even that contained Vox Day; the just-announced Hugo finalists. (ETA: apparently Vox Day also had a slate, but I am not going to his site on principle (see last year's post, linked above, for context.))

Comments

[sovay]

(Reference: this year's "Sad Puppies" Hugo slate—hilariously, not even that contained Vox Day; the just-announced Hugo finalists.)

Oh, good grief.

[phi]

I find nothing to disagree with in your quote of yourself. I also find that I can't bring myself to care enough, this year, to even click the Sad Puppies link.

[likeadeuce]

Heh, and I'm certainly not going to bother buying a supporting membership with the intention of sorting through this mess.

[kate_nepveu]

I don't normally buy supporting memberships in years I don't go, and I'm debating now whether to bother just because it actually *is* so simple this year, and because I can easily afford it, so it doesn't require very much caring at all.

Also, it would make me laugh a lot to see _Ms. Marvel_ (which is fucking adorable, really must write it up), of all things, win a Hugo this year.

[coalescent]

If you do buy a supporting membership this year, you can also vote for Helsinki in site selection ... :-)

[kate_nepveu]

Heh. 2017 is a really competitive year for site selection, it seems like! But I support having more WorldCons out of the US and Helsinki has been working really hard on its bid.

[rosefox]

I have heard rumors to the effect that after Helsinki announced for 2017, at least one U.S. bid did the same purely in hopes of keeping Worldcon in the U.S.

[kjn]

As far as I can tell, there is no validity in that rumour.

My take on it (from second-and third-hand info, mind) is that the DC bid got a really good deal for the venue for 2017, and that they had misunderstood Helskinki's intention about 2017 (or that Helsinki was ambigious about those intentions).

[rosefox]

I'm a little puzzled by the second bit, as I am by no means very tapped into Worldcon smoffing and I was well aware of Helsinki's 2017 bid being confirmed and serious by the time DC's bid was placed. (This post from when the DC bid was announced is also pretty clear on that.) No idea re the venue, though that is perfectly plausible.

[kjn]

A bid can be very well past the point of no return when the announcement of the bid is made, eg if they have made contracts with the chosen venue.

[readinggeek451]

That's what I heard from someone involved in the bid. According to her, they specifically asked Helsinki if they were bidding for 2017 and were told that they were not.

(edited to fix typo)

[likeadeuce]

Yeah, I get that thought process too, I just feel like I could put my $40 to better use buying books by people I support rather than investing in this whole mess at all (as someone who's never been to a WorldCon).

[kate_nepveu]

Totally understandable.

[feuervogel]

Getting a supporting membership and voting "no award" is a valid way of sorting through this mess. (I have one already because I voted in 2013 site selection, and I intend to rank all Puppy nominees below no award [ie vote no award and leave their works off completely.])

[likeadeuce]

Sure it is, but I also think finding other uses for my $40 is valid.

I signed up for a supporting membership last year - for a con I will almost certainly never be able to afford to attend - read everything, voted thoughtfully & nominated thoughtfully this year.At some point I don't see the point of paying into a system that rewards Sad Puppy behavior.

[lavendertook]

They're little energizer bunnies on a regression track, raging at their irrelevance. But still so annoying. There's a pizza place in Indiana where they can have a reserved table.

[silveraspen]

Ugh. So much ugh.