The day before Christmas George R.R. Martin posted on his blog (entitled "Not a Blog") this observation about this past year's recent unpleasantness.
---
Puppies at Christmas
Dec. 24th, 2015 at 6:11 PM
It's Christmas Eve. Time for my ritual screening of my favorite adaptations of A CHRISTMAS CAROL... the Reginald Owen version, the Alastair Sim version, the George C. Scott version, and... best of all... BLACKADDER'S CHRISTMAS CAROL, with Rowan Atkinson. Time for eggnog. Time for wrapping prezzies. Time for peace on earth, and good will toward men... and women... and aliens... and elves... and even puppies. So in the spirit of the season, I am going to say something nice about the Sad Puppies.
Last year's Puppygate was an ugly affair. I am not going to rehash it here. My views are all on record, my original blog posts still up for anyone who wants to go back and read them. The last thing I want... the last thing anyone who truly loves science fiction, fantasy, and fandom would want... would be to have to go through the whole thing again in 2016. Whatever your view of how the Hugo Awards turned out at Sasquan, I think we can all agree that we would like MidAmericon II's awards to be more joyful, less rancorous, less controversial.
And maybe... just maybe... we'll get our wish. Call me naive. Call me an innocent. Call me too trusting by half, too nice a guy to see how things really are... but, really, I am starting to have some hope. All over the internet, people are already talking about the Hugo Awards, making recommendations, discussing the work... the WORK, the things we love, the stuff that unites us instead of the stuff that divides us. I've been trying to do my part, here on my Not A Blog, and will continue to do so. Over at FILE 770, similar discussions are taking place. And on many other websites, blogs, and bulletin boards as well... including Sad Puppies 4.
Yes, the Sad Puppies are doing it again. ((No big secret, that was announced even before worldcon)). Discussions of possible nominations in all Hugo categories can be found on their SP4 site here: http://sadpuppies4.org/sp4-recommendations-pages-and-faq/ Go check it out. You can even join in. So far as I can tell, you don't need to be a Puppy to recommend.
As of a few minutes ago, there were 159 'thoughts' in the Best Novel section, which suggests a healthy level of participation. And, I am pleased to say, almost all of what follows seems to be honest and enthusiastic discussion of the work. I am seeing very little name-calling compared to what we saw in Sad Puppies 3, a dearth of references to CHORFS and ASPs and Puppy-kickers and that perennial favorite, SJWs. I am not seeing any "nominate this, it will make their heads explode" posts that we saw so often last year.
Instead, people are recommending books. A very wide range of books. Sure, new works by familiar Puppy favorites like Larry Correia, Mike Williamson, and John C. Wright are being recommended (no surprise there)... but so are works by Neal Stephenson, James S.A. Corey, Naomi Novik, Victor Milan, Terry Pratchett, S.M. Stirling, Ian Tregillis, Ernie Cline, Elizabeth Bear, Gene Wolfe, Michael Moorcock, Orson Scott Card, Greg Bear, Kate Elliott, and many others... including the latest Marko Kloos, and... wonder of wonder... novels from N.K. Jemisin and Anne Leckie!
There are some really good names on that list. Some really good books. (And many I have not read yet, but will look up now). And there's an amazing range of literary styles, subgenres, and... yes... political and religious views. And all this is to the good.
(Similar discussions are taking place on Sad Puppies 4 for the other categories, though Best Novel has the most participation).
For decades now, LOCUS and NESFA and other fan groups have produced reading lists at year's end, long lists generated by recommendations from their editors/ members/ etc. If at the end of this process, Sad Puppies 4 puts forth a similar list, one that has room for BOTH Larry Correia and Anne Leckie, I don't think anyone could possibly object. I won't, certainly. A list like that would not be a slate, and the whole "slate voting" thing will become moot.
And that would be great. That would mean no Puppygate II. That would mean a spirited literary debate about writers and books without the acrimony and the name-calling. From that debate a truly democratic and diverse ballot could emerge, one that represents all tastes. That would mean no 'No Awards' at Big MAC II, and the Hugo ceremony could once again become a joyous celebration of the best and brightest in our field.
In my post-worldcon blog post last August 31 (( http://grrm.livejournal.com/440444.html )) I expressed the hope that the ugliness of 2015 could be left behind, that Fandom and Puppydom could coexist in peace. That's still my hope. And right now I am feeling a little more hopeful than I was in August. People are talking books, not trading epithets...
Merry Christmas to all, and to all a good read.
---
You can follow this link here to read the original post on his page plus follow-up comments.
---
The day after Christmas, Steve Davidson - one the biggest, if not the biggest, hate-mongers against this year's Hugo nominees, put forth this diatribe.
---
Puppies Won’t Change Their Stripes Even If GRRM Wants Them To
Steve Davidson December 26, 2015
The day before yesterday, George R.R. Martin offered conciliation to the puppies.
Puppies rejected it.
Elsewhere, many fans who bothered to comment remarked on GRRM’s good will, class and obvious heart-in-the-right-place spirit.
Unfortunately, this exercise is nothing more than more of the same even if it is dressed up with a bit of hopeful holiday cheer.
I don’t really like to criticize (or even disagree) with Mr. Martin (he was adamantly opposed to my No Award strategy last year and that was no fun). Not only do I run the risk of pissing off his legions of fans, but I also run the risk of giving puppies fodder for their wood chipper; ‘oh look, the SJWs are fighting amongst themselves; take heart, puppies, we’re winning’ and that’s most definitely not fun.
But when it comes to the Hugo Awards, Worldcon and Fandom, I’ve got feelings.
Those feelings tell me that Mr. Martin’s good will is misplaced. I can say this with a fair degree of confidence because they’ve already been rejected by the people who were the intended recipients. GRRM wasn’t talking to anyone other than puppies. It is a given that Fans already share his sentiments. We would all be more than happy to put this sad affair behind us and move on to find something less visceral to argue about among ourselves, like whether Star Trek or Star Wars is the greatest SF property of all time (apologies to Firefly, Stargate, Babylon 5, Battlestar and fans of other epics, and a side nod to those Trekkies who will always ask “TOS or Nextgen?”).
grinch_3Unfortunately, I don’t think that Mr. Martin understands how this whole thing works. Puppies RELY on fan’s desire to get along, to reconcile, to let bygones be bygones or to agree to drop a subject that is too toxic for fannish conversation in order to help spread their own toxicity. They view attempts to reconcile as WEAKNESS – because, as I have said before, they DO NOT UNDERSTAND FANDOM (or in some cases vehemently reject what they think they understand about it).
GRRM is obviously hoping that his words will touch some wellspring of fannishness inside the puppies, that they’ll finally come to understand that their past actions were not in keeping with the finest traditions of fandom and that now that the error of their ways has been amply demonstrated (No Award sweep of puppy categories and Wooden Asterisks, not to mention stifled applause and hundreds of thousands of words on the net) they’ll change their ways if only someone offered them a path to redemption.
Reconciliation is a fine and time-honored fannish tradition. (Even if a new feud starts up within five minutes of the handshake.) What GRRM misses is – the puppies do not want to reconcile and they are not seeking redemption. They are looking to WIN. What GRRM’s post offered was the equivalent of assuming that you are safe in the tiger’s lair because the tiger just ate your friend and is no longer hungry.
One set of puppies wants to win in order to be able to say to the rest of us that we have been wrong and they have been right all along. Not about the awards themselves, but about fandom’s moves towards diversity and putting action behind its historical commitment to openness and acceptance.
The other set of puppies wants to see nothing less than the destruction of the entirety of the science fiction community.
Fans – of which GRRM is a shining example – will always try to reconcile. It’s a fundamental component of their nature. Without it they wouldn’t be fans. It is not weakness, but is instead a very fannish thing. At this point, the fact that puppies do not seem to share this fundamental aspect of fannish nature need not be pointed out (even though I just did point it out).
Despite holiday wishes, nothing has changed. We have one more year before we can put this puppy-foolishness behind us (at least in regards to the Hugo Awards).
Trufans – like GRRM – will continue to seek ways to find common ground with puppies. Puppies, not sharing these sentiments, will continue to reject them, belittle them and weaponize them. GRRM will rightfully claim the honor of having tried (for which he should be thanked). And then we’ll all march on to the inevitable final confrontation at Big Mac 2, where I hope that those who were not fooled last year will continue to do the right thing by roundly rejecting slates, slates that are not slates, curated voting lists that are slates in all but name and every other slimy, underhanded, vile and disgusting manipulation of the vote that is attempted. (Hint to George: lay in some more hood ornaments, there may very well be a need for Besties 2.)
You can read George’s missive here. You can read reactions to it here at #10, in the comments and here also at #10 and in the comments. For extra credit, you can take a gander at this roundup of puppythink previously published here just two weeks ago. Potential nominees – please do not put voters in a quandry this year. Recuse yourself from puppy lists so that we can all have an honest, straight-forward vote, unencumbered by puppy idiocy. “Once more unto the breech dear friends, once more”. And then we can put this sad affair to rest.
No comments:
Post a Comment