The Hugo Awards, Sad Puppies, and When Politics Gets in the Way

bookgroupbuzziconThe Hugo Award nominees were announced earlier this month, and when the ballot was revealed it became clear to many that the Sad Puppies voting bloc had prevailed. The Sad Puppies, one of the worst self-chosen monikers in literary history, are a collection of authors that want to keep science fiction and fantasy old school. Sadly, what that means to them is to keep it dominated by white, racist men who decry literary conventions in the genre. The Sad Puppies want to push a right-wing agenda and want to make sure their authors and their voters skew the ballot.

hugo_smMany have weighed in on this quandary within the SFF community. Salon posted an article with the title “Sci-fi’s right-wing backlash: Never doubt that a small group of deranged trolls can ruin anything (even the Hugo Awards).” Many authors have weighed in, from John Scalzi encouraging a no vote on the less qualified nominees to George R. R. Martin saying the right-wing have “broken” the Hugo Awards.

My book group has read the Hugo Award short-story nominees for the past three years, but with these divisive, retrograde politics overshadowing the awards list, we have decided to bow out. We will be reading the Nebula Award nominated short stories instead, which look to be a more interesting crop of stories and authors anyway.

Update: Logo was corrected at the request of the Hugo Awards Marketing Committee; we inadvertently displayed a rejected design and regret the error.





About the Author:

Misha Stone is a readers' advisory librarian with The Seattle Public Library. Follow her on Twitter at @ahsimlibrarian.

Post a Comment