Any other fans of trompe l’oeil out there?
I love the work of John Pugh, master of the art style called “narrative illusionism.”
Take a look:
I have seen the one in Winslow, Arizona in person.
Lots more examples of his work can be found on his website at:
http://artofjohnpugh.com/
Enjoy.
Hello again from Ogre Jenni!
A Virginia-based burlesque company, Blacklist Burlesque, will perform at Santa Fe’s hometown theater, the Jean Cocteau Cinema, on Monday, September 14th and Tuesday, September 15th. Blacklist Burlesque promises a hilarious and sexy parody of George R.R. Martin’s Game of Thrones series. View the specific times and purchase tickets here: http://bit.ly/1Kggk3a
Here are some silly quotes from Blacklist Burlesque:
“For the night is dark and full of rhinestones.”
“Arya gonna come see us? Aw, c’mon, you gotta have a Sansa humor!”
Blacklist Burlesque refers to themselves as the "first name and last word in Richmond, Virginia and beyond for neo-burlesque and nerd-lesque shows." They already had me at "Burlesque," but they won my tiny black heart with "nerd-lesque."
Holy fishnets, Batman! I did not know that “nerd-lesque” was even a thing until we booked Blacklist Burlesque’s Game of Thrones-themed act at the Cocteau. Apparently, in the world of nerd-lesque, there are Star Trek cabarets, super hero acts, high fantasty burlesque shows, and—quite frighteningly—Cthulhu strip-teases. There are just some things in this universe that the human mind shouldn’t be exposed to. Or maybe I should just get out of my lair every once in a while.
For those who don’t know the basic history of burlesque, it is an art form that has thumbed its nose at upper-class cultures and social conventions for hundreds of years. In the 17th and 18th centuries, the umbrella term “burlesque” covered many varieties of theatrical lampooning or “travesty.” In the 19th century, burlesque producers and performers would take specific arias and oratorios from famous operas, and rewrite the lyrics for comedic effect—just like “Weird Al” Yankovic! In other words, the middle and lower classes got to knock “serious” art off of its pedestal from time to time.
But what about the strip-tease, the feather costumes, and the pasties, you ask? Strip-tease, an important aspect of modern and neo-burlesque, became standard around the 1930s. Think of the bawdy cabaret culture of the 1930s—and then the pin-up girls of the 1940s and 1950s. Now this is just a brief overview from a humble ogre, so if any of you readers have any interesting or tantalizing tidbits to add about burlesque, please leave a comment—and see you at the show!
We have a cool week coming up at the Jean Cocteau Cinema, for all of you in Santa Fe and Albuquerque and environs, or anyone who just happens to be in the neighborhood.
On Friday and Saturday, we’ll be featuring live magic by the amazing JOEL WARD. See the post below by Jenni (who insists that she is an ogre, not a minion).
On Sunday, September 13, we’ll have the one-and-only FELICIA DAY, queen of the geek girls, here for an author event, interview, and signing. She’s on tour, promoting her new bio YOU’RE NEVER WEIRD ON THE INTERNET (almost), and of course we’ll have stacks of copies on hand.
And come Monday and Tuesday, for those two nights only, the Cocteau will be presenting BURLESQUE with a GAME OF THRONES theme.
Advance tix for all of these available at the Cocteau website: http://www.jeancocteaucinema.com/
Do move fast if you want tickets. Especially for Felicia, whose show is almost sold out.
Oh, and we still show movie too.
((More detailed announcements about Felicia’s appearance and the GAME OF THRONES burlesque will be appearing here soon, courtesy of Ogre Jenni)).
(((I will leave this open for comments, but please, STAY ON TOPIC. The post about Joel Ward just below drew a bunch of off-topic comments and questions, all of which have been deleted. No questions about my books or the Tv show here, please, and no more Puppy poop.)))
It’s Labor Day.
We ought to be at worldcon.
Labor Day weekened was the traditional date for worldcon for half a century. Not in the beginning, no. And not so often of late either. But in the middle, yes. For decades and decades. You could set your calendar by it.
It’s still the best date for a big con. Which is why Dragoncon moved there.
Dragoncon should go back to its original July dates. And worldcon should go back to Labor Day.
Yes, I know all the arguments against. Don’t want to hear them again, thank you. I say they’re spinach, and I say to hell with them.
It’s Labor Day.
We ought to be at worldcon.
So, I’ve heard rumors that some of our Sad Puppy friends, unhappy about the way the Hugo voting turned out, are talking about starting their own awards. Perhaps in conjunction with Dragoncon, the gigantic Atlanta media con, or perhaps at Libertycon, a smaller regional con held annually in Chattanooga.
For what it’s worth — probably not much, since very few of the Pups seem to care what any non-Pups think — I think this is a terrific idea. (Which is why I suggested it back in May, when the Puppy Wars began).
Look, everybody likes to get an award. An attaboy, a tip of the hat, some recognition for their effort. Scientists like to win Nobel Prizes, journalists like to win Pulitzers, and the guys who work at Pep Boys like to win Employee of the Month. If you go back to the first Puppy posts, way back when, and scrape off all the stuff about SJWs and cliques and cabals, the bottom line complaint, the thing that triggered all the rage, is very simple and very human: “hey, no one is giving US any awards.” The Pups and the writers and stories they liked were simply not being honored by the Hugos.
The thing is — and given the hundreds and thousands of words that have been written about Puppygate, it is easy to lose sight of this — the Hugo may be the oldest and most prestigious award in our genre, but it is NOT the only one, and has not been since, hmmm, the mid 60s, at least. That was when Damon Knight founded SFWA, and launched the Nebulas.
In an odd funhouse mirror sort of way, Damon Knight had the same issue with the Hugo Awards that the Puppies did. He thought they were going to the wrong stories. But Damon was coming from the other side; he wanted to make SF (not fantasy so much, he was never a fantasy fan, once said he’s never read a book with a map in it) more literary. To this end he founded Milford, founded Clarion, taught Clarion for half a century, edited ORBIT (by far the most literary of the original anthologies)… and began the Nebulas. Damon felt that the Hugos, the fan award, too often went to popular works, whereas the Nebula would recognize more ambitious, experimental, and “writerly” books and stories. (It has not always worked that way, but never mind).
The Nebula was the first important rival to the Hugo, but it is by no means the only one. These days, we have more awards than I can count… and many of them started with the express purpose of recognizing a genre, subgenre, group of writers, or point of view not sufficiently honored by the Hugos, according to their founders.
Charles Brown started the LOCUS Award, and always insisted that it was more significant than the Hugo, since it had a larger voter base (originally just LOCUS subscribers, later expanded to include anyone who wants to send in a ballot). For a time Charlie presented the LOCUS Awards at Dragoncon, in fact… but no one at Dragoncon seemed to give two shits (the turnout was always much bigger for the Bettie Page Lookalike Contest), so he finally moved the presentation to Westercon.
Lin Carter felt that epic fantasy and sword & sorcery were being ignored by the Hugo voters, and founded the Gandalf Award. His original intent was to create an entire parallel set of awards, duplicating all the Hugo categoriesfor fantasy instead of SF. He was talked into scaling that down into one Life Achievement Gandalf, but that was given at worldcon for a number of years, until his death.
SF and fantasy and horror aficionados in the film and television industry, feeling that SF and fantasy was too often ignored by the Oscars and Emmys, started the Saturn Awards, which continue to this day.
Wiscon, the feminist-oriented convention in Madison, Wisconsin, created the Tiptree Awards to recognize outstanding works of SF and fantasy that examine issues of gender.
The World Fantasy Con has the World Fantasy Awards, sometimes called the “Howards” or “Howies” for their iconic trophy, a wonderfully grotesque bust of H.P. Lovecraft by Gahan Wilson. Both fantasy and horror (not not SF) are eligible for that one.
That did not prevent the Horror Writers Association from starting their own award a few years later, partly because some of them felt that the Howard did not go to horror often enough. Their Bram Stoker Award is not, as one might think, a bust of Bram Stoker, but rather a delightful gothic ceramic statue of a haunted house.
A small Kansas convention started the Balrog Awards, for reasons that remain unclear. Among writers, it was also known as “the coveted Balrog.” The trophy was quite imposing, especially from the rear. (I won one once, in its last year, but the trophy was smashed in an auto accident before it could be mailed and never replaced, and the organizer went to Oman).
Some of the Puppies have complained the media tie-in books never win Hugos. That’s true, they don’t (and shouldn’t, in my opinion). Some of the writers of media tie-ins felt the same way, however, and instead of bitching, they created their own awards, the Scribes. Those are still going as well. Here, see: http://iamtw.org/the-scribe-awards/scribe-award-nominees/
The Scribes are presented at San Diego Comicon. So are the Inkpots, comicon’s own awards, which they’ve been giving for decades. Also the Eisners, THE premiere award for comics and graphic novels. (I have never been sure why the hell the Hugos needed a Graphic Story category, when the Eisners already existed).
The Hugos are not the only award presented at worldcon either. Libertarian fans, wanted to recognize libertarian fiction, present the Prometheus Award at worldcon annually. (And hey, I gave my Alfies at worldcon too, though I hope they don’t need to become a tradition). There are also the Hogus and Black Holes, though admittedly those are more satire than honor.
Bubonicon, our own local con in New Mexico, used to give the Green Slime Awards, a brainchild of Horrible Old Roy Tackett, for the worst SF of the year. That stopped when Roy passed.
British fans, not content with the awards that Americans were handing out, have their own British Fantasy Awards, and also the prestigious Arthur C. Clarke Award.
The Australians, Canadians, Czechs, Spanish, and Japanese all have their own SF awards as well. And there are doubtless many more I am not aware of. The artists, wanting to honor more of their own than were being recognized by the Best Professional Artist Hugo, founded ASFA and began presenting Chesleys annually at worldcon.
Additionally we have the John W. Campbell Memorial Award (not to be confused with the John W. Campbell Award), the Pilgrim, the Sturgeon, the Heinlein…
Also, hey, we have Reddit, and their VERY cool new Stabby Award, an engraved dagger:
No doubt I have left some out. The point being, there are a LOT of awards.
But there is always room for more. A great many of the awards discussed above were started precisely because the people behind them felt someone was being overlooked by the Hugos and/ or other existing awards, and wanted to give an “attaboy” to work they cherished.
There is no reason the Sad Puppies should not do the same. Give them at Dragoncon, give them at Libertycon… or, hell, give them at worldcon, if you want. Most worldcons will give you a hall for the presentation, I’m sure, just as they do for the Prometheus Awards and the Seiuns. Or you can rent your own venue off-site, as I did with the Alfies. Have a party. No booing, just cheers. Give handsome trophies to those you think deserve it. Spread joy.
That’s what awards are supposed to be about, after all. Giving some joy back to the writers and editors and artists who have given you so much joy with their work. Celebration.
Since RAH is already taken by the Heinlein Foundation for its own award, maybe you should call them the Jims, to honor Jim Baen, an editor and publisher that I know many of you admire. If you launch a Kickstarter to have a bust of him sculpted for the trophy, I’ll be glad to contribute. (It may surprise you to know that while Jim Baen and I were very far apart politically, we shared many a meal together, and he published a half dozen of my books. Liberals and conservatives CAN get along, and usually did, in fandom of yore).
Go for it, and maybe those puppies that you’re so concerned about will finally have a reason to smile.
Ogre Jenni here – yes "Ogre" is my awesome job title. Nice to meet you!
Jean Cocteau Cinema, our lovely little cinema in Santa Fe, proudly welcomes comedian and magician Joel Ward to our stage on Friday, September 11th and Saturday, September 12th. You can find out specific showtimes and purchase tickets here!
We love magic shows at the Cocteau, and we seek out a variety of magicians with unique personalities and theatrical stylings. Take some of our previous magic shows for example. The Amazing Misty Lee brought a spooky Victorian elegance to her seance-themed performances, and Francis Menotti's magic possessed intellectual, surreal, and art historical qualities. This time around, we have a stage thief named Joel Ward. Think "Vegas!" We're pretty sure that stars and beautiful ladies sparkle around his head at all times. Joel's act is flashy, funny, and incredibly polished. His "prestidigitations" (commonly known as 'sleight of hand') are simply awe-inspiring. No dumb ol' quarters will be pulled from behind people's ears—try flocks of flaming doves or sequined assistants (chopped in half or whole—we don't know.)
Okay, I can't absolutely promise flocks of flaming doves or portions of sequined assistants, but I can promise plenty of audience participation. And regular magical doves. In other words, expect nothing short of perfection. *
A little bit about Joel Ward:
Joel was a World Champion Teen Magician by age 15, and he placed 1st at the International Brotherhood of Magicians annual competition, which is the World’s Largest Magic Organization. He performs hundreds of shows per year, and he has been featured on the Bonnie Hunt Show, The Masters of Illusion, and for the Barnum & Bailey Circus show, Boom A Ring. He has also made appearances on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno and on Comedy Central's Tosh.0. In other words, he's kind of a big deal.
Watch the highlight reel below for a taste of what Joel Ward will bring to the Cocteau! See you there!
<lj-embed id=”598″/>
* No regular magical doves or sequined assistants will be harmed during Joel Ward's performances.
Loathe as I am to say any more about the Hugo Awards…
This one has nothing to do with the Puppies, be they Sad or Rabid. This is about the awards themselves, and ways they could be made better. At several points during Puppygate, I said words to the effect that, “the Hugos are not perfect, but… ” Given all that was going on, defending the awards seemed more important than reforming them.
But now that Sasquan is past, maybe this is a good time to discuss ways in which our field’s oldest and most prestigious awards could be made better.
Over on his own Live Journal, Kevin Standlee has put forward a pretty bold proposal. He proposes abolishing three of the current Hugo categories:
1) Best Semiprozine
2) Best Editor, Short Form
3) Best Editor, Long Form
In their place, he would add three new categories (one actually an old category restored):
1) Best Professional Magazine
2) Best Anthology or Collection
3) Best Publisher
I suspect that the chance of these changes being enacted are remote (every existing Hugo category has an entrenched constituency, so while adding categories is difficult, abolishing one is all but impossible) but nonetheless, I think these are eminently sensible changes and I would whole-heartedly support them. Let me tell you why.
For me, the most problematic Hugo categories are those that honor a person rather than a work. Look at Best Artist, for instant. I was just discussing that with my friend John Picacio this past weekend, as it’s a pet peeve of his. The award has been around for half a century, yet fewer than twenty people have ever won it. The same people win, year after year. Many voters have no idea what art they did the past year, if any; they just know, “oh, I like X’s art,” and they vote for him, again.
The Best Editor categories have shown every signs of working the same way. Originally the category WAS Best Magazine, which was easy to judge. Did ASTOUNDING or GALAXY have a better year? It was changed to Best Editor in the 70s, during the boom in original anthologies, sometimes called “book-a-zines”… and to allow book editors to compete. But few book editors were ever nominated, and none ever won, until the category was split in half. Problem is, and this complaint came up often during Puppygate and after, that most books do not credit their editors… and besides that, the reader has no real way to know what the editor did. Some novels are heavily edited, some much less. What is the criterion?
The proof should be in the pudding. Which pudding tastes better. Reward the WORK, not the author or editor or artist. Go back to Best Magazine, and add Anthology/ Collection (both the Locus Awards and the World Fantasy Awards have such a category, and it works well). That more than covers the Short Form Editors.
And Best Publisher covers the Long Form Editors. It is much easier to know which publisher issued the most outstanding books during the previous year, than to decide what editor did what… assuming you can even find out who edited your favorite book.
Of course, book editors may object that they don’t get a trophy. Easy answer: more trophies. A few years ago, they handed out SEVEN rockets to the seven winners of the Best Podcast category. They can do the same for Best Publisher: a rocket for the publisher, and one for every senior (i.e. not assistant) editor in the SF/ fantasy imprint(s). The publisher lists the nominees when they get the nomination, the same way that those of us in TV are asked to list the people who’ll get the rockets when we get nominated in Best Dramatic Presentation.
Oh, and getting rid of Semiprozine is long past due as well. It’s a bastard categtory, created solely to get LOCUS out of Fanzine, where it was winning far too often for the taste of all the other fanzine publishers. No other award in the world that I have ever heard of has a “semi” category. Best Semipro Artist? Best Semipro Director? Best Semiprofessional Actress in a Supporting Role?
Make it Best Magazine, the way it used to be. Once upon a time, the semipros could not compete with the professional magazines since the imbalance in circulation was too great. ANALOG sold 100,000 copies, LOCUS sold 10,000. Well, guess what? Those days are gone. I am not sure that F&SF has ANY circulation advantage over CLARKSWORLD or INTERZONE or LOCUS these days, but if they do, it’s no longer an order of magnitude. And decades of results in Best Novel show that books that sell a relatively small number of copies regularly defeat ones that sell a lot more… why shouldn’t it work that way for magazines as well?
Anyway… I think these are good ideas. Maybe even something old fans and new fans and Puppies and non-Puppies can agree on, without politics getting into it.
I am going to close comments on this post, however. Not because there is nothing to say — there is a LOT to say about these proposals — but because there’s a better place to say it, over on Kevin Standlee’s own LJ, which you will find here:
http://kevin-standlee.livejournal.com/1495246.html
There’s a vigorous (and courteous) debate already going on there. Go and join it.
These are Kevin’s proposals, not mine. But I like them.
The Hugo Awards for 2015 have been announced, the rockets handed out, the post-mortems written and published. You can read analyses all over the internet. My own thoughts on the results can be found below, so I won’t recap them here. The Great Puppy War is over.
Or is it?
That’s the question. Where do we go from here?
I know where I’d like to go: back to normalcy, as old Warren G. Harding once said.
No one who truly cares about science fiction, fantasy, or fandom could possibly want a Second Puppy War. The past half year has been deeply unpleasant for writers and readers on both sides. Next year’s worldcon is in Kansas City, and it would be great if the Hugo ceremony next August could once again be a celebration of excellence, rewarding all the writers, editors, artists, and fans who had done outstanding work in 2015.
Can that possibly happen? Can we remember that “we are all science fiction,” as some of the ribbons I saw at Sasquan proclaimed? Can we have a reconciliation?
I think there’s a chance. But a chance is not a certainty. It depends. Mostly, I think, it depends on the Sad Puppies.
We already know that VD Beale and the Rabid Puppies are going to try to do it again. They want to destroy the award, and they will no doubt do their damndest, and there will be a rabid slate. Nothing can be done about that… except to ignore the troll. Fandom — liberal and conservative, Sad Puppy and Truefan, have all been paying too much attention to Beale. Our links and denunciations have driven his page views higher and higher. And too many people empowered VD and his slate… either by voting for the work he slated (often unread) or by voting AGAINST the work he slated. We should not be giving these toxic clowns the power to sway our votes either way. Beale will do a slate, no doubt. Just ignore it. Nominate and vote as if the Rabid Puppies did not exist. That’s certainly what I intend to do.
Which brings me to the Sad Puppies. Brad Torgersen has retired from the fray, he tells us. There will be a Sad Puppies 4 campaign, but it will be run by Kate Paulk. It is my understanding that she does not intend to generate a slate, but rather a recommended reading list, similar in scope and intent to the LOCUS Recommended Reading List, or that of NESFA, or LASFS. I think that’s good. Unlike the Torgersen list, which was carefully “curated,” Paulk has said that her list will focus on the works that receive the most suggestions from those participating, that it could include “even David Gerrold” if a lot of people suggest him. I think that’s VERY good. Could it also include “even” N.K. Jemisin and Rachel Swirsky and Ken Liu and Mary Robinette Kowal? Even better. Not that I think it will… the Puppies may not be all conservative, but certainly more of them tend right than left, and their literary tastes undoubtedly run to more traditional forms and styles too. But if Paulk is honestly willing to consider all the suggestions she gets, without litmus tests, I applaud that. It should enable her to produce a recommended reading list that is far more varied, and far more interesting, than the SP3 slate.
Slating was one of this year’s big problems. It was SLATING that produced the avalanche of “No Award” voting in this year’s Hugo balloting, the widespread perception in fandom that the slated nominees were illegitimate. If there is no slating (save for the Rabid slate, which I fear is inescapable), I think fandom as a whole will be far more open to the suggestions of the Sad Puppies.
Let’s make it about the work. Let’s argue about the BOOKS. And yes, of course, it will be an argument. I may not like the stories you like. You may not like the stories I like. We can all live with that, I think. I survived the Old Wave/ New Wave debate. Hell, I enjoyed parts of it… because it was about literature, about prose style, characterization, storytelling. Some of the stuff that Jo Walton explores in her Alfie-winning Best Related Work, WHAT MAKES THIS BOOK SO GREAT? That’s the sort of debate we should be having.
The elimination of slates will be a huge step toward the end of hostilities.
But there’s a second step that’s also necessary. One I have touched on many times before. We have to put an end to the name-calling. To the stupid epithets.
I have seen some hopeful signs on that front in some of the Hugo round-ups I’ve read. Puppies and Puppy sympathizers using terms like Fan (with a capital), or trufan, or anti-Puppy, all of which I am fine with. I am not fine with CHORF, ASP, Puppy-kicker, Morlock, SJW, Social Justice Bully, and some of the other stupid, offensive labels that some Pups (please note, I said SOME) have repeatedly used for describe their opponents since this whole thing began. I am REALLY not fine with the loonies on the Puppy side who find even those insults too mild, and prefer to call us Marxists, Maoists, feminazis, Nazis, Christ-hating Sodomites, and the like. There have been some truly insane analogies coming from the kennels too — comparisons to World War II, to the Nazi death camps, to ethnic cleansing. Guy, come on, cool down. WE ARE ARGUING ABOUT A LITERARY AWARD THAT BEGAN AS AN OLDSMOBILE HOOD ORNAMENT. Even getting voted below No Award is NOT the same as being put on a train to Auschwitz, and when you type shit like that, well…
The Pups have often complained that they don’t get no respect… which has never actually been true, as the pre-Puppy awards nominations of Correia and Torgersen have proved… but never mind, the point here is that to get respect, you need to give respect.
And before any of the Puppies jump on here to say, “you did or first,” or “you did it worse,” well… I think you’re wrong, but we’ve argued it before, and there is no point in arguing it again. A lot of things were said during the past few months. Do we want to keep rehashing them endlessly, or do we want to move on?
I am very proud of what I did with the Alfies; the reactions of the winners, and the way the awards have been received by fandom, pleases me no end. Sometimes it is better to give than to receive, and I got as much joy from giving out the Alfies than I have from receiving any of my Hugo awards, Nebulas, or World Fantasy Awards.
But I don’t want to have to give them again.
I voted No Award in several Hugo categories this year, because the finalists were unworthy of the rocket, but I was not pleased to do so.
I would rather not have to do that again either. Next year, I hope, the Hugo ballot will present me with so many excellent choices that No Award will be ranked last in every category.
If there are fans of good will on the other side who share these hopes, be they liberal or conservative, left wing or right wing, great… I am holding out my hand. Let’s talk about books. We may disagree… probably WILL disagree… but that’s not the end of the world, or even the Hugos. That’s just fandom. If you have ever been to a con, you’ll know that the best panels are the ones with a little lively disagreement.
((And for those of you who would prefer to continue to call names and throw stones and talk about cabals and conspiracies and death trains… sorry, not going to engage. Hatespeech is not lively disagreement. I am too old, too smart, and too rich to waste my time with assholes.))
<lj-embed id=”596″/>
I’m back home from Bubonicon, our venerable local con, and the last one on my schedule for this year. No more cons on my schedule until the end of February, when I’ll be headed to Virginia.
Bubonicon — named after our state’s rep as “home of the flea, land of the plague” — is much bigger and livelier than it used to be, but still a very friendly, fun local con, with a strong literary flavor. This year’s incarnation featured a great lineup of guests including Cat Valente, Tamora Pierce, and Mary Robinette Kowal. I enjoyed hanging them with, and getting to know them better. Terrific guests, terrific writers, and wonderful people. Warm and witty.
A whole bunch of my Wild Cards writers and friends were also on hand, including the usual New Mexico gang, and out-of-towners like Caroline Spector and Carrie Vaughn.
The highlight of the weekend, as ever, was our evening with Pope Francis.
And so con season draws to a close… but football season is almost at hand!
Once I had decided to hand out the Alfies, as detailed on the previous post, I had to make a lot of other decisions. Again and again, I found myself returning to the original 1953 awards, and the spirit in which they were given.
The prestige of the Hugo, the history, the lineage, whatever career-boosting or financial rewards the rocket supposedly carries… there was no way for me to make up for any of that. But I could certainly give some losers an “Attaboy! You did good!” in the spirit of ’53.
In 1953, there were no losers, just winners. That appealed to me. I wanted these awards to be a celebration, a occasion of happiness. I would award some worthy people, but there would be no shortlist, no campaigning, and therefore no losers.
Of course, an “Attaboy!” is nice, but a cool trophy is even nicer. Right away I decided that plaques (boring) and “certificates suitable for framing” would not serve. We needed something much better. Something that could stand next to a Hugo, tall and proud and ready for blast off.
In 1953, legend says the Hugos were made from Oldsmobile hood ornaments. But as we now know (see previous post), they were not called the Hugos that year, and were not actually hood ornaments. That would need to wait till 1956. But what the hell, when the legend becomes truth, print the legend. I loved the legend, and I loved the way Alfie Bester talked himself into that first Hugo Losers party, so I decided that my awards would also be made from old 50s hood ornaments. I went up on ebay to look for some, and discovered… gods be good, that really was the “Space Age,” half the cars on the road had some sort of rocket or jet on their hoods (to go with those gigantic tailfins).
I decided to avoid the 1950 and 1951 Oldsmobile Rocket 88 ornaments on offer (except for one I bought for show ‘n tell). The central rocket on those is too close to the Hugo rocket of today, and the Hugo and its iconic design are the trademarked property of the World Science Fiction Convention. I did not want to infringe, nor open myself up to charges that I was handing out ‘my own Hugos.’ The Alfies needed to look dramatically different… but still cool.
Fortunately, even with the Olds taken off the table, I had a wealth of choices. Fords, Chevys, Mercurys, Willys, Lincolns… there were some amazing rocket-shaped thingamabobs out there. Nobody was selling a lot of a dozen identical ones, however, so I realized that the Alfies would have to include a number of different designs. A whole fleet of spaceships, as it were. I set to bidding, and buying. Won some, lost some, dropped out on others when the prices got too high. When they started coming in, I saw right away that some were not as suitable as they’d looked, but others were perfect. None of them were in especially great condition, to be sure. That’s why most of them came cheap. Just like that DEMOLISHED MAN rocket from 1953, they were rusted, pitted, corroded by the passage of time.
So I turned to Tyler Smith, sculptor and metal-worker par excellence, the guy who made the Beast’s head for the Jean Cocteau Cinema and is working on the dragon’s head for Dragonstone Studios. Consider him the spiritual heir to the original Hugo-maker, Jack McKnight. Tyler sanded and smoothed the hood ornaments, ground down the rough bits and filled in holes, then had them all powder-coated and rechromed. Then he set to designing bases for them. We rejected the idea of fastening them to wooden backings, like the 1956 Hugo; instead Tyler cut some dramatic metal bases with his trusty plasma-cutter, so the Alfies looked as if they were taking flight.
Here’s the fleet, as it looked when Tyler finished:
Back in 1953, Jack McKnight worked all through the convention to finish the awards in time for the presentation. Thankfully, Tyler managed to finish the Alfies the day before we were scheduled to take off for Spokane. (Even so, that last week gave me ulcers). In 1953, the concom presumably told McKnight who the winners were going to be, so he could have their names engraved on the bases. We had no such knowledge, so the Alfies had no engraving, no names. We would not find that out who won them until after the Hugo Awards ceremony, when Sasquan released the voting totals. (We do plan to have name plates for the bases engraved now, and will mail them out to the winners).
As to who those winners would be… I decided, early on, that I would not attempt to give Alfies out in every category. The Puppies had dominated the ballot as a whole, beyond a doubt, but in most categories there were a couple… or at least one… legitimate nominee. In those races, at least, the voters had a choice.
But in five categories no such choice existed: Novella, Short Story, Related Work, Long Form Editor, Short Form Editor. In those categories the only choice was between the Sad Puppies and the Rabids and the Sad/ Rabids. The slates had taken EVERY slot in those races. Unless you were a Puppy, you were not even allowed in the starting gate. Even Secretariat could not hope to win a horserace under those conditions. (I suspected that No Award would win in some of these categories, as I said in my Hugo handicapping. I was shocked that NA won in all five).
And it should be stressed: I did not pick the Alfie winners, at least not in these five races. FANDOM picked the winners. The Alfie in each of these races went to the writer or editor who had received the most nominations while not part of any slate. I had no idea who the winners would be until after the Hugo ceremony, when I got my hands on the ‘pink sheet’ with all of this year’s voting details, and was able to check the nomination numbers.
My plan had been to reveal the Alfies and announce the winners at the Hugo Losers Party, as a midnight surprise. Turned out to be closer to one, since everything ran late that night. Rather than presenting all the awards myself, I asked a few friends to help me hand them out. Ellen Datlow, Pat Cadigan, David Gerrold, and Robert Silverberg — stalwart fellows, and Hugo Losers in good standing, all — came forward to lend a hand.
BEST EDITOR, SHORT FORM was the first Alfie handed out. The winner was JOHN JOSEPH ADAMS, who had come in sixth behind the slates with 149 nominations (only 13 behind Vox Day — if only a few more fans had troubled to nominate, we might not have had No Award winning here). Adams was at the con, but unfortunately not at the party. I had never been able to track him down.
BEST EDITOR, LONG FORM was presented by Ellen Datlow, one of our field’s leading editors for close on forty years. Ellen has won Hugos and lost more, and probably has more World Fantasy Awards than any other person. Her apartment looks like Easter Island; everywhere you turn, H.P. Lovecraft is staring at you. The winner was LIZ GORINSKY of Tor, with 96 nominations. Liz is a Hugo Loser in good standing, since she has been a finalist several times, but has never won. She’s still a Hugo Loser… but now at least she is an Alfie winner, and she was there to accept, which delighted me no end.
Next was BEST RELATED WORK. Jo Walton took this one, with 105 nominations, for WHAT MAKES THIS BOOK SO GREAT. Alas, though she was said to be at the con, I never found her, so she was not at the party. (Until I saw the nomination totals, I had been thinking the second volume of William Patterson’s Heinlein bio would take this Alfie, but I was completely wrong. And the Walton book is a perfect winner, one that epitomizes the spirit of the original Hugo Awards. It is a big book of Attaboys!, a fond and affectionate look back at the books that made us SF fans). David Gerrold made the presentation.
BEST SHORT STORY. “Jackalope Wives” by Ursula Vernon. 76 nominations. Ursula was not at the con, but her friend Mur Lafferty came forward to accept on her behalf. Pat Cadigan made the presentation. Mur spent the rest of the evening having photographs taken of various editors, writers, and fans holding Ursula’s Alfie. Hope you don’t mind the fingerprints, Ursula.
BEST NOVELLA. Robert Silverberg presented the Alfie (a monster, the largest of the hood ornaments I secured, since novella has the biggest stories) to “The Slow Regard of Silent Things,” by Patrick Rothfuss, 124 nominations. Patrick was not at Sasquan, so the massive trophy was accepted on his behalf by Scott Lynch.
Those were the five Alfies determined by fan vote. I know, of course, that the story with the most nominations does not always win the Hugo in the end, so there is no certainty that John Joseph Adams, Liz Gorinsky, Jo Walton, Ursula Vernon, or Patrick Rothfuss would have won Hugos this year… but we do know, based on the nominations, that they would have been contenders. The slates deprived them of that chance. They may win Hugo Awards in the future, or they may not. This year’s rocket is gone forever. But they will always have the Alfie.
Attaboy, guys. Attaboy, girls. You did good!
But that’s not all, folks. Worldcons have the authority to give one special committee award each year, according to the WSFS constitution. I decided I would give some special committee awards as well, in the spirit of those ’53 Hugos, where none of the awards were voted on. Not being bound by the WSFS constitution, I could give out four extra awards, not just one.
These I presented myself.
One went to ERIC FLINT. Through these long months of vitriol and mud-slinging, Eric Flint’s blog remained an oasis of common sense, facts, and sanity. He kept his calm when everyone else was losing theirs, and he spoke truth, though he had no horse in this race, and no need to speak up at all. I did not always agree with everything he said about Puppygate, mind you, but that’s okay. Reasonable men should be able to disagree. His courage and calm words deserved an Alfie… and when next year comes around, I plan to nominate Flint for Best Fan Writer.
Two more Alfies went to ANNIE BELLET and MARKO KLOOS. Added to the slates without their knowledge or consent, both of these talented young writers found themselves on this year’s Hugo ballot, Bellet for her short story “Goodnight Stars” and Kloos for his novel LINES OF DEPARTURE. It was the first Hugo nomination for both of them, something that every science fiction writer dreams of, a day to be remembered and cherished forever. And yet, when they discovered the nature of the slates and the block-voting that had placed them on the ballot, both Bellet and Kloos withdrew, turning down their nominations. I cannot imagine how difficult and painful a decision that must have been. Bellet’s story actually had more nominations than any other short story on the ballot, regardless of slate, which suggests that she might well have been nominated even without the ‘help’ of the Puppies. And it was Marko Kloos’ withdrawal that opened up a space on the ballot for Cixin Liu’s THREE-BODY PROBLEM, the eventual winner. They lost their shot at a Hugo (this year, at least — I think both of them will be back), but their courage and integrity earned them both an Alfie.
The last Alfie of the night had… surprise, surprise… nothing to do with the slates, the Sads, the Puppies, or any of that madness. I wanted to give a token of recognition to one of the giants of our field, a Hugo winner, Hugo loser (if you look only at the fiction categories, he has lost more Hugos than anyone, I believe), SFWA Grand Master, former Worldcon Guest of Honor, and Big Heart Award winner… the one and only Silverbob. The coolest Alfie of all (the half-lucite one that lights up) went to ROBERT SILVERBERG, the only man among us to have attended every Hugo Awards ceremony since 1953. There has never been a Hugo given out without Silverberg watching. Just think of that!
And that was the night. The party resumed with much hooting and hollering.
A few last words. Some people are calling the Alfies an “alternative” award. I prefer to think of them as “supplementary” awards. A way to heal the hurt, spread some joy, reward good work.
I wanted them to be a surprise, so I did all I could to keep them secret. Aside from me and my team here in Santa Fe, no one knew about the Alfies ahead of time except the handful of people I asked to help me present them. None of the winners had so much as an inkling.
Some of the leading Puppies have oft said that the awards should be about the work. I agree. And looking at the Alfie winners, I could not be more proud of the quality of the work represented. Truly top-flight stuff, and no “boring message fiction” to be found (that was always an empty talking point). Any of them would have done the Hugo proud.
So let’s have a round of applause for Robert Silverberg, Marko Kloos, Annie Bellet, Eric Flint, Jo Walton, Ursula Vernon, Liz Gorinsky, John Joseph Adams, Patrick Rothfuss. Enjoy your rockets. But remember what Alfie Bester said… they’re hood ornaments, and in twenty-three years they may be so pitted and corroded that you’ll be welcome at the Losers Party.
This blog is the only place for official communication from George R.R. Martin. For press inquiries, please contact David Moench
