Some people are not pleased with the Hugo nominees

[james_davis_nicoll]

one example.

Comments

[jwgh]

This was my first thought as well, but typos happen, and it's not like most blogs have an editor to catch that sort of thing.

[james-nicoll.livejournal.com]

I am always a bit unhappy when I spot a bit of text that made perfect sense in my brain but on passing through my fingers turned into a word salad suggesting that someone had jammed an ice pick into my head and stirred while I was typing.

[jwgh]

My job is tech support, and it's always a little dismaying when a customer responds to an email to ask me what exactly I was talking about and I realize I'm not sure either. Fortunately this does not happen too often.

[martianmooncrab.livejournal.com]

I got to thinking, now, what if a woman had written this piece? Would she have gotten snarky comments, or profanity fueled death threats promoting violence against her person and property? Name calling and really graphically inappropriate physical retaliation?

I can pretty much figure that one out for myself.

[agent-mimi.livejournal.com]

It's not merely typos, however. The entire piece is full of incoherent phrasing, repetitive in a way that smacks of filling out word count and "sounding smarter." There are invented words, incorrect facts, logical potholes and a shocking display of hyphen abuse.

I find it impossible to take someone seriously who complains that the Hugos do not examine sf/f critically, then rails against a "recognizable style" of writing favored by Hugo voters which he then fully admits he cannot recognize because it is "difficult to pin down." That betrays a complete and determined inability to understand both critical examination of a text and the definition of the word "recognizable."

[jwgh]

That's fair. I just wouldn't want the piece's superficial flaws to mask its more fundamental problems.