Hugo Awards

In case anyone reading this hasn’t already seen one of the many, many other blogs and websites with the list, the nominees for the Hugo Awards have been announced. I’d give the list, but, you can find the list at the source, here or you can get the list plus good commentary over at John Scalzi’s blog, HERE.

I’ve read some but not a lot of what’s on these lists, but I’m sure the nominees are all worthy in the context of today’s SF market. What I find disappointing is that the writers and voters don’t seem to have picked up on the lesson of Scalzi’s Old Man’s War trilogy +1, that there’s a healthy market for well done, sweeping, character-centric, federations-of-planets style, good old fashioned space opera. Hey. we want MORE of that stuff, or at least I do.

About Rick Robinson

Enjoying life in Portland, OR
This entry was posted in Personal Opinion, science fiction. Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to Hugo Awards

  1. John Scalzi seems to be channeling Heinlein, Rick.

  2. Jeff Meyerson says:

    Well, I loved the OLD MAN’S WAR series, so yes I’d be happy to read something else along those lines, if you have any suggestions.

  3. I’m quite fond of the Old Man’s War series as well. The Android’s Dream was good also.

  4. Richard R. says:

    Point is nothing on the Hugo or Nebula lists is like that series at all. It’s all what some are calling “00” SF

  5. Todd Mason says:

    I can’t help but be put off by something every time I look at Scalzi’s blog. The novel Hugo is Not more important than the other fiction Hugoes.

  6. Carl V. says:

    I have read a bit of what made the list, but not much. I did enjoy Boneshaker quite a lot and am in the process of listening to the audio version of Meiville’s book…so far, so good.

    And I’m with you, I could certainly dig on more Scalzi-like space opera!

  7. The shift is in for more “literary” SF (and again I’ll say ‘whatever that is….’).

    Richard – I agree MORE good old fashioned SF (with modern stuff of course).

    I’ve been working on an idea which will eventually become a blog post. In a nutshell: I think it is nearly impossible for anyone who didn’t grow up listening to radio plays to enjoy/appreciate the classics. I’m re-reading Foundation right now (best series of all time, though some say that it outright sucks) and what I’m finding is this: Asimov did NOT fill in the blanks because he expected his readers too.

    I believe that this is probably the case across the board with the classics: authors were not writing ivory tower stuff, they were writing ideas and sweeping concepts and the successful ones from that era did so in a way that allowed the reader to participate by deliberately leaving things bare-bones.
    Today – just like the movies. Everyone is compelled to “show me everything” (relying on my sense of imagination might lead to lower collectible toy sales….)

  8. Richard says:

    I agree with you there, Steve, and I hadn’t thought about listening to the old radio shows in that way. Other than the sound effects it was straight dialogue. I’m not sure how much imagination younger (let’s say under 35) readers have as they have rarely been challenged to use it. I’ll take it even further back and say that play and toys don’t require imagination as they once did. When I was a kid, I could be Tarzan just by climbing a tree, to be a cowboy I used a stick as a rifle, to be an explorer I simply went into the back yard and PRETENDED, using my imagination. I’m not saying kids want to be Tarzan, cowboys or explorers these days, but you get the idea. A kid these days wouldn’t play cowboy, he get a Killer Cowboys video game and play with his thumbs…

  9. Carl V. says:

    I just read the Foundation trilogy for the the first time a few years ago and LOVED it. It ranks among my favorite series ever. I don’t quite understand the flack it gets from some people today, but to each his own.

  10. Richard says:

    My guess is it gets flack because most readers find it old-fashioned and perhaps a little boring. I didn’t – I haven’t read it in 25 years – but newer readers might. Still everyone has their own opinions. I hated William Gibson’s Neuromancer, the book that turned me off to SF in the Eighties, and decided to stick with the classics. I’ve since gotten back to some newer things, but that book is now considered seminal.

  11. Jeff S. says:

    I’m not a fan of the Hugos or these kind of award lists. Too much elitist mentality.

    Give me an “old fashioned” fun Scifi novel over most of the “nominated” fare any day.

    I also enjoyed Foundation. I didn’t love it but I liked it a lot and hope it never is tainted one day by a film adaption. Someone must sabotage Roland Emmerich’s efforts to film this trilogy.

  12. Carl V. says:

    Yes, Jeff…Amen to that!

    I personally like the awards lists, even if I do not always agree with the choices made. For one thing it has been a way for me to discover various works and authors that I might not have come across otherwise, especially classic works that one cannot find easily on the standard chain store bookshelf.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s