![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
EVERYTHING IS POLITICAL (HUGO EDITION)
Apr. 10th, 2015 05:25 pmThe Hugo Awards nominations are out, and everyone is upset.
The short version: two groups called Sad Puppies and Rabid Puppies gamed the nomination system (albeit within the scope of the rules) to ensure that authors/publications they approve of – i.e. the ones that produce “real SF/F” – made it onto the shortlist.
In this case, “real SF/F” means “manly-man space adventure entertainment”, as opposed to Liberal Literary Affirmative Action Social Justice Warrior Bullshit (LLAASJWB) that tends to win all the Hugos these days thanks to the LAASJWB Cabal that now controls who gets nominated for Hugos and who doesn't.
I don’t follow the Hugos very closely, so the following opinion isn’t that well informed, but I’m going to assume the above accusations made by Sad/Rabid Puppies are paranoid overblown nonsense, if only because that’s usually the case when you accuse an entire group of people of conspiring against yr group of people for political reasons. (Also, the charges don't hold up very well if you do a little research, apparently.)
So here’s my opinion:
This is a thing? Are you f***ing kidding me???
Seriously, I’m flummoxed – bamboozled, even – that a whole group of fans have not only taken it upon themselves to define SF/F as a political ideology (or at least the absence of one they fervently disagree with) but also feel the need to resort to activism in order to fight an opposing cabal that arguably doesn’t really exist in any meaningful way.
Maybe I shouldn’t be surprised. After all, everything is political these days, so why not SF/F? Why not rate what qualifies as True SF/F based on narrow political affiliations? We’ve seen a similar thing with SF conventions, where some people complain about all the SJWs ruining everything with social messages (even though cited heroes like Gene Roddenberry and Robert Heinlein did pretty much just that).
The Sad/Rabid Puppies thing seems to be an extension of the overall general trend where many conservatives increasingly see liberals in general as some kind of organized threat to their way of life in which one must cancel out the other. They see liberal bias EVERYWHERE (news, Hollywood films, genre fiction, etc), and mistake criticism of their opinions as an active and organized attempt by liberals to prevent them from expressing them.
I have a hard enough time processing that POV when it’s used for general-purpose politics. It’s even harder for me to understand when it’s applied to something like defining the acceptable criteria and parameters of genre fiction. It seems pointless and dumb to me, because whatever you think those criteria/parameters should be, it’s not like anyone who exceeds them is limiting yr ability to consume and enjoy whatever type of SF/F you deem acceptable. Book publishing isn't a zero-sum game where, say, every sale that N.K Jemisin makes is a sale taken away from John C. Wright, or vice versa. As long as Baen Books is around (or as long as Tori Weisskopf is in charge of it), you’ll have someone serving the True Fandom market. So what if they don’t win Hugos? Screw the Hugos and enjoy yr hard-ass space operas. My favorite bands never win Grammys or get radio airplay, but I don’t care as long as I can still get a copy of their new album.
That said, I suspect the Sad/Rabid Puppies thing isn’t really about Real SF/F or Real Fans – not entirely. That may be part of it. But mainly it seems to be about a small group of very angry people consumed by bitter paranoid political ideology – at least some of them to the point of being racist homophobic misogynists – who are desperately trying to control their environment and justify it with tired old political-correctness conspiracy theories.
They have the right and the freedom to do that, so long as it doesn't devolve into GamerGate territory (which, as far as I know, hasn’t happened yet – not to the point of female authors getting trolled and terrorized with rape/death threats, anyway). But all the SF/F fans who disagree with their narrow viewpoint and tactics have the right to criticize them for it. And if that voice collectively has more support, then maybe the problem isn’t that SF/F is being hijacked by poseurs. Maybe the problem is that SF/F is evolving and yr not.
BONUS TRACK 1: My own criteria/parameters of SF/F can be described as follows:
1. I know it when I see it.
2. If it’s good, it’s good. If it sucks, it sucks.
3. If that means I’m not a True Fan in the eyes of some people, well, tough. My enjoyment of any book doesn’t depend on what you think of my qualifications or fanboy cred to enjoy it.
BONUS TRACK 2: I’m not familiar with some of the alleged LLAASJW authors that Sad/Rabid Puppies complain about. But you know what? They’re all on my “must check out” list next time I go to Kinokuniya.
Have spacesuit will travel,
This is dF
The short version: two groups called Sad Puppies and Rabid Puppies gamed the nomination system (albeit within the scope of the rules) to ensure that authors/publications they approve of – i.e. the ones that produce “real SF/F” – made it onto the shortlist.
In this case, “real SF/F” means “manly-man space adventure entertainment”, as opposed to Liberal Literary Affirmative Action Social Justice Warrior Bullshit (LLAASJWB) that tends to win all the Hugos these days thanks to the LAASJWB Cabal that now controls who gets nominated for Hugos and who doesn't.
I don’t follow the Hugos very closely, so the following opinion isn’t that well informed, but I’m going to assume the above accusations made by Sad/Rabid Puppies are paranoid overblown nonsense, if only because that’s usually the case when you accuse an entire group of people of conspiring against yr group of people for political reasons. (Also, the charges don't hold up very well if you do a little research, apparently.)
So here’s my opinion:
This is a thing? Are you f***ing kidding me???
Seriously, I’m flummoxed – bamboozled, even – that a whole group of fans have not only taken it upon themselves to define SF/F as a political ideology (or at least the absence of one they fervently disagree with) but also feel the need to resort to activism in order to fight an opposing cabal that arguably doesn’t really exist in any meaningful way.
Maybe I shouldn’t be surprised. After all, everything is political these days, so why not SF/F? Why not rate what qualifies as True SF/F based on narrow political affiliations? We’ve seen a similar thing with SF conventions, where some people complain about all the SJWs ruining everything with social messages (even though cited heroes like Gene Roddenberry and Robert Heinlein did pretty much just that).
The Sad/Rabid Puppies thing seems to be an extension of the overall general trend where many conservatives increasingly see liberals in general as some kind of organized threat to their way of life in which one must cancel out the other. They see liberal bias EVERYWHERE (news, Hollywood films, genre fiction, etc), and mistake criticism of their opinions as an active and organized attempt by liberals to prevent them from expressing them.
I have a hard enough time processing that POV when it’s used for general-purpose politics. It’s even harder for me to understand when it’s applied to something like defining the acceptable criteria and parameters of genre fiction. It seems pointless and dumb to me, because whatever you think those criteria/parameters should be, it’s not like anyone who exceeds them is limiting yr ability to consume and enjoy whatever type of SF/F you deem acceptable. Book publishing isn't a zero-sum game where, say, every sale that N.K Jemisin makes is a sale taken away from John C. Wright, or vice versa. As long as Baen Books is around (or as long as Tori Weisskopf is in charge of it), you’ll have someone serving the True Fandom market. So what if they don’t win Hugos? Screw the Hugos and enjoy yr hard-ass space operas. My favorite bands never win Grammys or get radio airplay, but I don’t care as long as I can still get a copy of their new album.
That said, I suspect the Sad/Rabid Puppies thing isn’t really about Real SF/F or Real Fans – not entirely. That may be part of it. But mainly it seems to be about a small group of very angry people consumed by bitter paranoid political ideology – at least some of them to the point of being racist homophobic misogynists – who are desperately trying to control their environment and justify it with tired old political-correctness conspiracy theories.
They have the right and the freedom to do that, so long as it doesn't devolve into GamerGate territory (which, as far as I know, hasn’t happened yet – not to the point of female authors getting trolled and terrorized with rape/death threats, anyway). But all the SF/F fans who disagree with their narrow viewpoint and tactics have the right to criticize them for it. And if that voice collectively has more support, then maybe the problem isn’t that SF/F is being hijacked by poseurs. Maybe the problem is that SF/F is evolving and yr not.
BONUS TRACK 1: My own criteria/parameters of SF/F can be described as follows:
1. I know it when I see it.
2. If it’s good, it’s good. If it sucks, it sucks.
3. If that means I’m not a True Fan in the eyes of some people, well, tough. My enjoyment of any book doesn’t depend on what you think of my qualifications or fanboy cred to enjoy it.
BONUS TRACK 2: I’m not familiar with some of the alleged LLAASJW authors that Sad/Rabid Puppies complain about. But you know what? They’re all on my “must check out” list next time I go to Kinokuniya.
Have spacesuit will travel,
This is dF
