User: ramblin_phyl Date: 2007-08-24 14:57 (UTC) Subject: (no subject) Keyword: written

Have you ever noticed that the people who deride awards the most are the ones who always win, and those of us who can't get nominated are the ones who want them the most?

User: jess_ka Date: 2007-08-24 15:10 (UTC) Subject: (no subject) Keyword: happycat

I was pretty pleased when a story of mine received a SESFA, even though I'd never heard of the award until then. (Southeastern Excellence in Science Fiction Award) Heck, I'm pleased when my stories get honorable mentions in the Best of anthos. Go on, celebrate me!

Two cautions on "awards":

(1) Particularly in publishing and film — surprisingly enough, the music industry's calendar manages to avoid this problem — there really isn't enough time after the "close" of the eligibility period for readers/viewers to reflect on things, particularly if one isn't one of the Select (that is, on publishers' lists to get advance copies or living in NY/LA and able to see films early). H'wood demonstrates this year after year; it's more subtle, and more prone to individual taste, but publishing does, too.

I don't like "best of the year" lists compiled less than three months after the close of the year. Unfortunately, that approach doesn't meet the publicity needs of the publishers/film distributors, so it gets ignored. Of course, the fact that I live in flyover country — and live close enough to Peoria to know what really does play there — means my opinion probably doesn't count anyway.

(2) And in that vein, it's been my experience that looking at what is nominated across a spectrum of awards is a better test of what is "great" than is looking solely at the winners. Again, Hollywood provides an excellent example. Consider 1979: Does anyone viewing them today really, honestly think that Kramer v. Kramer is a better film than All That Jazz, Apocalypse Now!, Breaking Away, and Norma Rae (or, for that matter, The Stunt Man)? Was Hoffman's performance any better than Jack Lemmon's, Al Pacino's, Roy Scheider's, or Peter Sellers's in their respective films (note that only Hoffman and Scheider were in "best film" nominees)?

Perhaps some of this reflects the rush-to-judgment problem in point 1; I think, though, that looking solely at "winners" reinforces the monkey business Jay notes, while looking at the slightly broader spectrum of what gets nominated* across several different nomination systems — the pure popularity contest of the Hugos, the jury of the World Fantasy Awards, the mixed popularity-contest-among-the-peers and jury of the Nebulas, and so on — gives a much better view of excellence for a given eligibility period.

* The less said about the eligibility window for the Nebula Awards the better.

— CEP (http://www.scrivenerserror.blogspot.com)

User: danjite Date: 2007-08-24 15:32 (UTC) Subject: (no subject) Keyword: Cross. Very Cross.

You have good points, but I so very rarely get to use this icon!*

The purpose of all awards, of course, is to move units- whether those units are seats in a theater or future printings of F&SF.

On a non-snide side note, I believe The Stuntman was 1980.




(*I have a Roy Scheider in ATJ icon, too.)

The Stunt Man is properly a 1979 film, because that's when it was first shown to the public in Seattle. This just goes back to that stupid "eligibility is established by NY/LA showing" BS, but the opposite direction of normal.

User: kevin_standlee Date: 2007-08-24 16:05 (UTC) Subject: (no subject) Keyword: Hugo Trophy

Thanks for the link to SF Awards Watch. Note that my LJ handle has an underscore between my first and last names, though.

User: jaylake Date: 2007-08-24 16:17 (UTC) Subject: (no subject)

Thanks! Have fixed the handle (in both entries). You think I'd know that by now...

User: tim_pratt Date: 2007-08-24 16:28 (UTC) Subject: (no subject)

Whenever my work fails to be nominated for an award, I assume the system is deeply and tragically flawed. Whenever my work *is* nominated for an award, I assume the system works in a perfect and flawless manner (unless I lose the award, which indicates a breakdown in the process in the late stages, of course).

Ahem. In all seriousness, yes, I think awards are valuable -- a lot of writers, myself included, never stop appreciating external validation. Getting an award nomination is certainly no more random or subjective than getting a really enthusiastic fan letter, and those delight me out of all proportion, too. Irrationally or not, award nominations tend to give me a short burst of confidence, and I wade into the next project with more certitude and enthusiasm. That's a good thing.

User: sboydtaylor Date: 2007-08-24 20:33 (UTC) Subject: (no subject)

Doesn't this rule apply to ALL awards, not just writing? ;)

User: cmdrsuzdal Date: 2007-08-24 16:35 (UTC) Subject: (no subject)

For a reader perspective awards are useful as a form of advertising, same with best of the year lists. It's another way of finding our what's out there, what new authors are getting attention and depending on the award, whether I should care or not :)

They also create discussion, which is useful in the same way.

User: dinogrl Date: 2007-08-24 18:11 (UTC) Subject: Yes, awards translate to cash value! Keyword: art

**Applause**
Yes we all need encouragement. Thanks for posting this. Think of awards as a coupon! (not to cheapen it, but it does translate to cash value as a vehicle to get customers in the door, as you will.) I would also like to say that awards for genre art tend to be favored on the two-dimensional side. Rarely does 3-D art get a nod, the fact of the business being that "cover art" is the bulk of the industry. That's why I love it when people like Kim Graham get a Chesley for her 'ConJose Dragon'. I would also like to aspire to win an award for my jewelry, but jewelry folks are considered a "pariah" in this community. That is one reason why I never joined ASFA, because I was told to my face years ago from the president of ASFA that "jewelry was not art". We are considered "crafters", which somehow downplays our artisanship somehow in ASFA's eyes. When they have revised that notion, then I'll join.
Also, I would love for the Hugo to give an award for best Children's book in the genre. Yes, I know of the Golden Ducks, but I think that some children's books are more far reaching in scope and deserve a wider recognition. Ah well, I'm on my soapbox today, aren't I?

User: joannemerriam Date: 2007-08-25 02:31 (UTC) Subject: (no subject)

I personally have well over 1,000 rejection letters.

You keep your rejection letters?

User: jaylake Date: 2007-08-25 19:12 (UTC) Subject: (no subject) Keyword: jay-negative

Absolutely. I have a footlocker full of the little bastards. They remind me how far I've come.

User: ninebelow Date: 2007-08-25 17:50 (UTC) Subject: (no subject)

At the same time, I think awards are legitimate and important.

What, all of them?

User: jaylake Date: 2007-08-25 19:14 (UTC) Subject: (no subject)

Well, not necessarily. But I don't enough about all of them. What I do know is that enough of them are worthwhile -- intended earnestly and administered honestly -- that I don't feel the need to undercut the process.

User: frogworth Date: 2007-08-26 03:07 (UTC) Subject: (no subject)

ninebelow thinks all awards are illegitimate and unimportant and should be abolished, just like all short fiction markets. (Perhaps not including original anthologies)
(I may be exaggerating very slightly here)

User:	chrisbillett
Date:	2007-08-26 01:05 (UTC)
Subject:	(no subject)

Sage words, Jay!

User:	gritbooks
Date:	2007-08-27 08:38 (UTC)
Subject:	(no subject)

Over on author Neil Williamson's blog I made the comment that another important factor was this: people are always complaining that not enough fans are voting in the public awards, and of course one of the reasons is simply that newly purchased books go into an ever growing reading pile... and, yes, inevitably by the time you get around to said books, a year or two later, the awards have come and gone.

I mean, seriously, how often do any of us read a book straight away when we buy it, let alone read it within the first year before the award-voting is due?

So, yeah, in that respect I agreed with Neil when I said that if any of the awards had any value then it was the ones judged by a jury. Plus, in the public awards, I wonder just how many fans, say, have actually gotten around to reading Neil Gaiman’s Fragile Things yet(up for this year's British Fantasy Award for Best Collection) but have nevertheless just voted for it anyway because they liked his previous stuff. A popularity contest indeed -

- at least with the nominations for the small presses there's a good chance people actually have read them!