Some people are not pleased with the Hugo nominees

[james_davis_nicoll]

one example.

Comments

[comrade-cat.livejournal.com]

I think Bujold is better than Heinlein. (Also, Gangnam Style is awesome.)

I don't mind him being annoyed at the Hugos, but what gets me is that he calls for throwing out the entirety of the Hugo procedure 6 sentences before the end of the essay, describes what he wants out of the replacement procedure in one sentence ('This award should recognize all the various forms of contributions in all the ways the tired mechanisms of the Hugo fail to.') and doesn't suggest anything new or specific.

I think his essay needs more examples and specificity in general.

[agharta75.livejournal.com]

As soon as I saw that Heinlein comparison, my alarms went off too.

I agree this is a weak year (McGuire and Scalzi will get Best Novel eventually, but not for those books; Bujold has been better; I shall not insult our host by mentioning whatshisname; haven't read the Ahmed) but, like, a get off my lawn rant? Really. Even though he's quoting Pogo by using "inferiority complexacle."

[comrade-cat.livejournal.com]

Oh, is that what that was? I was wondering what the heck was up with his grammar/spellcheck.

At the risk of insulting our host (which I do not want), I'm going to assume whatsisname is Robinson? I thought his Kathmandu/yeti stories were hilarious and keep trying to sell them to disinterested people, but I've never gotten into any of his other works.

[nathan helfinstine (from livejournal.com)]

Someone calls him out on it in the comments, too. Paraphrasing, "So, when can we expect your proposed changes at the Worldcon rules meeting?"

[viktor-haag.livejournal.com]

--rage-- "I can think of hundreds of books more worthy than this one!"

Really? Name a couple.

--crickets--

[comrade-cat.livejournal.com]

Confused. Where is that a quote from? I couldn't find it in the Staffer's post.

[nathan helfinstine (from livejournal.com)]

I would think it an exaggeration for effect of "Sadly, I can identify twenty better novels from any year in which one of them has appeared even among the novels of interest to Hugo voters." In the prior paragraph he complains that one of the people referenced has been nominated for ten prior novels.

Notably, he fails to suggest twenty better novels from any of the years involved, including this one.

And later, he writes "Can anyone make a reasonable case that a reader fifty years from now looking back to see what was important about 2012 should consider Blackout and Captain Vorpatril’s Alliance and Redshirts and Throne of the Crescent Moon the canonical tales?" Sure, I can make that case. People are talking about those novels this year. They are nominated those novels for awards. Some of those people will still be alive in fifty years, and furthermore the critical reviews of those works will still be available then.

Also, I would note that once again he fails to suggest which novels he thinks will be looked back upon as the greatest of the year, some five decades hence. Or why he thinks that predicting the future in that way is a reasonable thing to do.

[viktor-haag.livejournal.com]

QFT