Slashdot Mirror
Gaiman's American Gods Wins Hugo
H.I. McDonnough writes "Neil Gaiman won this year's Hugo for his novel American Gods.
A much better choice than last year. " If you are a curious, check out the review I did on it.
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
A much better choice than last year.
Would you like some cheese with your whine?
It amazes me how narrow-minded scifis are about what is pure and what is not.
I recommend everyone read this, it's a great book.
I remember Hugo, grew up reading his pulp magazines. Here's an article about him. One of my favorite magazines was Hugo's magazine Radio Electronics. Not only was Hugo a brilliant science fiction promoter, but he was also a brilliant electrical engineer involved in the development of many of the gizmos which we now take for granted.
But it says squat...
Any of the Culture books by Banks are ripe for this award. I think Potter's a bathtub read not a Hugo but that's OK. I heard a NPR bit which ripped the Author a new waste disposal unit, he pointed out that she used teh term "stretched thier legs" like 5 times and that it was just poor quality writing.
I have to say the Vernor Vinge books are wonderful and if you haven'r read them you are in for a treat.
F34nor
What surprised me was how much the book felt like Gaiman's comic books, Sandman in particular. I certainly enjoyed reading it and would reccomend it, but, and this is a big but, was it worthy of the Hugo ? Well I'm kind of surprised to discover that apparently it was. Yes it was good, entertaining even thought provoking in a minor way and nice twist at the end. But then I suppose that's more than you can say for most sci-fi which is lucky to achieve one of those. Anyway, if you haven't already read it, you should.
Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
I must say that Gaiman's book was fun to read, although I wouldn't call it Sci Fi. In that catagory
I would have picked the Chronoliths, just ahead of Cosmonaut's Keep.
***Quis custodiet ipsos custodes***
Easy! Because
Slashot: Rumors for Nerds, Stuff that Only Matters in our Little Social Circle.
What is music when you despise all sound?
There are two things I really appreciated about American Gods.
- The old god's interaction with the current world
- The mythos of the new "gods" of America
I also find it interesting that some of the elder gods fall victim to the allure of "The American Dream(tm)". The promise of prosperity didn't apply to them when their followers came over here and now they are bitter. The want a piece of the pie too.
Whether you thought American Gods was better than Goblet of Fire is irrelevant. They are are both fine books in their own right. But the important thing to remember is that they are written in very different styles and have much different target audiences.
CDE open sourced! https://sourceforge.net/projects/cdesktopenv/
If you're not familiar with this book, I will make a suggestion: Make sure you get at least half way through before you decide to quit. You won't regret it.
You can pick this up on Amazon, from your local library, or from your local audiobook store if you have one.
Remove the caps and hold to a mirror.
I liked "American Gods" so much that as soon as I finished it I told several friends to read it. All of them liked it as much as I did. It deserved a Hugo IMO even though it is *not* SF in the classical sense.
- Robin
with a title like that I almost want to give up science fiction. yechh...
I enjoyed "American Gods" well enough, but I thought it was not up to the par with his earlier work, "Neverwhere."
With the Norse pantheon and American tourist attraction motifs of "American Gods," I kept feeling like it was trying to be too serious for its airy fantasy blend of Douglas Adams' Long Dark Tea-Time of the Soul (the second Dirk Gently book), and LucasArt's Sam and Max Hit the Road graphical adventure game. The narrative is just disjoint enough that reading this book aloud would just lose some of the punch, I think.
Conversely, "Neverwhere" seemed to have fanciful influences from Lewis Carroll's Alice in Wonderland and Mary Poppins, where the delusional whimsy was a cover for the sinister trappings of a far more grave underworld that is best kept out of view. The bounds of the action are easily tracked and scenes segue smoothly, making Neverwhere a great story to read aloud to an older child or a spouse.
But that's just my opinion, and surely, both are quite palatable, and congrats to Neil Gaiman on his well-deserved accolades.
[
voting must have been done by a bunch of philistine marketroids.
Mieville's Perdidot Street Station was a brilliantly creative and original book. sooo well written and intelligent. dark humanist tale of adventure and science in an authoritarian world.
gaiman's book was a poorly written & unoriginal reworking of Sandman.
One of few books that was translated and hit retail market before it was awarded with some of the prices. So we poor eastern europeans have the opportunity to know what is all about.
Cocteau
www.universal-tao.com/dark_room/DarkRoom.pdf
m an tak
The guy who runs this site is a western MD and the only student of "White Cloud" the last Taoist internal Alchemest Monk to escpae communist China. He took Chia as his only student. Cool shit. White Cloud was supposed to me a serious badass, came from the same school that they are talking about in Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon. Mystical Taoist Kung Fu.
http://www.globalserve.net/~sarlo/RatingsM.htm#
Doesn't get that good a rating though...
No. No kicks here. Just this is a site that actually wants people to subscribe to it but can't even run a semi-professional operation. It severely irks me. Yep, I saw the post on the Two Towers. Maybe i keep posting to think one day the system will actually work. Naive, I guess. But you're right. I'm about done here. I'm tired of reading about buffy, the Dance Dance Revolution and 2 year old rants on U571 as well as the massive biased against anything not open source. The site it busted and ran by ametures. But thanks for asking.
You need a FREE iPod Nano
And as such are voted on by attendees of Worldcon who are bothered enough to vote. There's between 500 - 1000 votes cast (I can't find accurate figures), but the nominating ballot counts are online. This year, there was a total of 381 nominating ballots for best novel.
We're not talking about a serious statistical sample here, folks.
As a side note, were the Hogu and Black Hole awards presented this year?
www.lucernesys.comHorizon: Calendar-based personal finance
Now, ignoring the Usenet bit, tell me the poster wasn't trolling with this:
(Referring to Harry Potter).
Slashdot editors and story submitters really need to start restraining themselves from editorialising in the story itself. That's what the comment section is for. That's what would be professional.
This isn't intended to be a troll. Now mod me into oblivion.
- SMJ - (It's not just a name: it's a bad aftertaste.)
I've been a fan of Gaiman for a few years, and can remember being excited at finding Neverwhere ("a whole novel!") a few years back. But it just wasn't that good. The whole thing felt a little flat, and while it did seem to want to be a bit like Alice in Wonderland, it just didn't come close. See Coraline for a better attempt.
American Gods, on the other hand, was a fabulous book. Lots of Gaimanesque details and twists, but felt like it hung together much better. Anyhow, differences of opinion I suppose.
Congrats to Gaiman. It is well deserved.
While I am basically fond of American Gods, I did have a few quarrels with it. For those of you who haven't read the book, it's in the vein of the Odyssey in that you have a protagonist who is sent from one locale to another, dealing with gods and operating at their whim. The particular gods square off in two different camps - the modern gods and the old gods. The old gods are the standard mythological gods that we all know and love. The modern gods are the modern items we all need in our lives - television, the Internet, beauty, etc. My problem with it was that Gaimain seemed, at some points, to be making up rules for his world, not because they seemed like the way things would be in such a world, but because they were useful rules for him to have in order to advance the plot. In a word, some sections felt contrived. That being said, I thought the writing was superb and that not only was it an entertaining read, it also had very comedic moments. I also really enjoyed the ending [which I will not give away] but let me just say that it was a fun little twist that really wrapped things up nicely. And while I did enjoy the ending, that may have been partially responsible for my feeling that the book was a bit contrived. Oh, also look out for the inclusion of a dead woman walking the Earth. Clive Barker had a similar character in The Damnation Game and both texts do a nice job of showing just what problems someone who is dead runs into when they're not allowed to lie in the ground. All in all, it was one of the better books I've read in the previous year and would suggest you pick it up. After all, it's in paperback now and that's nearly free!
I don't want to start a war here, but come on, this book was horrendous! Wait, wait, put down the flame throwers, I am a huge fan of Gaiman's. Yes, I actually read Sandman when it was first hitting the streets way back when... (as a matter of fact, I do still have most of the first year and half of the comic in a long-box somewhere...) I have read and loved Smoke and Mirrors (great short stories) as well as Good Omens ( I always keep an extra copy on hand to loan out). But American Gods is drivel compared to these other works. I bought the hardback as soon as it came out, read it in a couple of days and was thoroughly dissapointed.
What bothered me most about this novel was that Gaimen started with an amazing concept, spent three chapters reeling me in, and then it just fell flat. I was under the impression that he was more in the mood to take a road trip across america and wanted his publisher to foot the bill. He meanders for nearly three fourths of the book, only truly returning to his style for the last two or three chapters, as if he has realized "Oh shit, I need an ending"
I will continue to buy and read just about anything he puts out. He is by far and away one of the better literary craftsmen of our times. I am completely blown away with his lyrical command of the language! But to give this book the Hugo? Surely there were others in the genre that actually fleshed out an entire plot from start to finish???
Ok, I'm done. You can ignite the flame throwers now.
I finally got through it a few weeks ago and I didn't have any particulrly strong feelings for or against it but I did feel like I wanted my time back.
I did like the story of the Norsemen interacting with the Indians (the woo woo kind, not the one's with the Bomb)
This
Magic Realism is a sub-genre of both Fantasy and Science Fiction (though its roots are more firmly in Fantasy than Science Fiction) that was fist recognized in South America, but has spread across the globe. I consider much of Gaiman's work to be in this catagory, though others might argue. Certainly American Gods is part Magic Realism, though also part traditional Fantasy.
It's nice to see Fantasy moving forward beyond the niches in which it had languished for so long. Not that there weren't brilliant Fantasy authors or stories that broke out of the standard molds of the genre, but let's face it: science fiction has roamed far and wide from hard science speculation to space opera to the new wave SF of the 60s to the alternate histories of the 90s. Fantasy has maintained a fairly narrow range during that time, focusing mostly on European mythology in various forms (here I include purists such as Tolkein and origial mythologies such as Moorecock's) and the Horror Fantasy that was pioneered in the late 1800s and early 1900s by Poe and Lovecraft among others.
Fantasy is now re-discovering its vast potential, and I could not be more thrilled. Authors like Ian Banks, Jonathan Lethem and others of the genre are well worth checking out. Hopefully this is only the beginning, and we'll have another three or four sub-genres of Fantasy sprouting in the coming decades!
The old gods' interaction with the current world
I've always thought that the fundamental conceit in American Gods, as you state above, was one that was appropriated from Douglas Adams in The Long Dark Teatime of the Soul. I don't have the exact quote to hand, but it was something like 'The Gods still continued to exist long after the people stopped believing in them'.
I think that Gaiman took this good idea, half-developed it in Good Omens, and then fully fleshed it in the current Hugo winner.
Does American Gods deserve to be a Hugo winner? Did Harry Potter? They deserved it as much as Cryponomicon deserved to be nominated in 2000.
Is it just me or is the Amazon link a referral?
:P
Whore indeed
I am very happy with American gods as their choice. I think Gaiman's writing is lush and well-crafted. While American Gods may thematically reflect the flavor of the Sandman comics/graphic novels as a book it gave Gaiman the space to explore the themes with a lot more depth. Despite having a signature darkness his writing has shown a great range from Stardust to Neverwhere to Smoke and Mirrors and even his children's books. I am glad that he is receving some of the critical acclaim that is his due.
A much better choice than last year [Harry Potter].
Yes, because we know that anything that is popular is automatically bad. And of course we know that anything obscure and unread by the masses is automatically better.
I will never, ever, understand why certain people must hate anything that a lot of other people happen to like (see also: movies, Titanic).
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
Sheesh. The one Gaiman book I don't fly through right away turns out to be one of the best.
I've come to like the collective term "speculative fiction". It nicely describes the whole range.
Some people take their fun way too seriously. The hugos are a classic example of this. It's just a vote by a group of geeks attenting a yearly international party. Your local mayor probably gets more voter turnout in the local election.
See you at Torcon.
No Zen is good zen
The good news is that an amazing book won the award, the bad news is that it beat out another amazing book: China Mieville's Perdido Street Station.
This is the first time in years where some books I have read have showed up as nominations ( I read Chronoliths as well, but it was so-so). American Gods and Perdido St. represent (to me) the best things to come out of the SCI-Fi genre in a long, long time.
My love for these books aside, I think the arguements over whether these books are actually Canonical Science Fiction are ridiculous. The genre will stagnate (if it hasn't already) if authors are limited to space operas or extrapolating the latest sci-tech flavor (hmmm, I got it, nanopunk! or how about genomepunk?). Neal Stephenson has moved beyond the genre for the most part, and his books keep getting better. Gaiman and Mieville's work are obviously pushing the boundaries of what is or is not science fiction and this is something to be embraced.
As a bonus, both of these books have covers that are actually interesting (Perdido more so that AG). It's nice to be able to read a book in public which doesn't have a cover that looked like someone moonlighting from Harlequin Romances designed it.
I read American Gods on the advice of a friend and I was kind of disappointed.
Personally, I thought the story was great and interesting, but that the writing was horrible. It's been a while since I've read it, unfortunately, but I recall thinking several times that it felt like it was written by a sixth-grader. I thought it distracted quite a bit from the actual story.
Apart from that qualm, though, it was an interesting read. Unfortunately, it hasn't convinced me to read anything else he's written and I can't see myself being compelled to in the future.
The best way to characterize the genre is from the intention of the writer. If the writer is trying to write science fiction, it's SF (admittedly sometimes bad and illogical). It's not a precise rule; you can't just count up the how many times the author uses (telepathy | time travel | FTL travel | mythical creatures | inherited memory | returning from the dead | ... ) and when it hits a magic number throw up your hands and say "That's it! This is fantasy!".
Should we be snobs and disdain fantasy? Of course not. I would consider "Perdido Street Station" the most intellectual of the nominees, and it's clearly not SF (Mieville calls it "weird fiction"). But it's a useful distinction even if it can be difficult to make. Should we throw away the specualtive-fiction super-genre entirely simply becuase Vonnegut and Crighton are difficult to place? (by my rule, of course, neither are SF)
As for the Asimov quote, he's haldly pure. The premise of humans originating from aliens (the Pak, in his Known Space books) is about as "illogical" as can be. But he's trying to write SF, and so that's what it is.
In horror: Bram Stoker Award (winner)
In fantasy: World Fantasy Award (nominated, the winner has not been decided yet)
In sci-fi: Hugo Award (winner)
Look at the tons of other awards in Neil Gaiman's collection.
I'm glad Mr Gaiman is finally getting the plaudits he deserves. This book wasn't even his best work (although its far better than most other writers have managed recently). Here's hoing that Coraline gets some sort of recognition. It's by far the best children's book since way before Harry Potter was plagiarised from The Worst Witch and others.
Fantasy and Sci-Fi are too intrinsically tied together to make meaningless catagorical distinctions for awards. Hence the label "Speculative Fiction" is now preferred.
From the
constitution of the WSFS:
3.2.1: Unless otherwise specified, Hugo Awards are given for work in the field of science fiction or fantasy appearing for the first time during the previous calendar year.
Admittedly, prior to Harry Potter the winning novel has never been fantasy (Lord of Light and To Your Scattered Bodies Go are probably the closest, and few people would characterize those as anything other than SF). But fantasy often wins in the short fiction catagories.
From Neil's weblog today:
Fortunately, we mere mortals aren't plauged by such concerns.
Lot's of times this happens...I really think the award was giving out of respect for the Sandman series.
Nobody says it of course, but I'm sure that everyone in that panel had thier respect for Gaiman won be reading Sandman.
Lots of people are very gaurded about the chategorization of thier genre fiction...comic books, graphic novel, sci fi, fantasy...like most geniuses Gaiman took one genre and blended it with a few others.
It's hard to characterize(I.E. pigeonhole) work like that....so they sneak him in edgewise by giving him an award about a book he wrote.
They are paying him respect as an artist. Respect he amply deserves.
The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky
I've always thought that the fundamental conceit in American Gods, as you state above, was one that was appropriated from Douglas Adams...
It's a pretty well-worn conceit -- I recall reading similar things as long ago as the '60s -- and I doubt that those were "original" either.
I though Gaiman handled it very well -- I thoroughly enjoyed the book.
The distinction between science fiction and not-science-fiction doesn't worry me as much as it once did. It seems that the Hugo voters agree.
If you suffer from a long commute, this book is also available from Recorded Books, unabridged, http://www.recordedbooks.com
I bought this book with a giftcard, not knowing anything about Gaiman's work and just wanting something a little out of the ordinary... I thought it was a great book, but I read a lot of fantastic "pure" sci-fi last year.
*shrug*
~D:
It was as bad as a Russian novel, but the Russian novels at least usually have a point! This just seemed to be a roll in a kind of a trendy post-modern muckiness for its own sake. It made me tired.
"He who would learn astronomy, and other recondite arts, let him go elsewhere. " -- John Calvin, commenting on Genesis 1
Optimist: The glass is half full.
Pessimist: The glass is half empty.
Engineer: The glass is too big for the volume of liquid being sampled.
I read this - it wasn't a great book. In fact, it was only barely readable.
Trite premise. Oh boy, Gods are created by how much their subjects worship them. How, umm, original. I like it better the first time when Captain Kirk was involved. At least then it had better dialog.
The melding of fantasy and reality didn't work. Some books are fantastic and yet seem "realistic" within the rules they lay down. This book just seemed cheesy.
Neverwhere was better. I read that first and thought maybe he was good - then American Gods came along and Peeeeeuw! Somethin' stinks in here!
There is definitely a movie at some stage of production, but the last information I know of was from a little over two years ago, when Richard Loncraine had been signed as the director (although there were later rumors that he might not be directing due to a schedule conflict).
Jim Henson's production company and Dimension Films are the companies involved.
Aparrently the filming was supposed to be starting the spring/summer of 2001, but I have heard nothing on it since then, so the current status is unknown (at least to me).
--The Rizz
"Grandpa died and was resurrected after three days, but no one called him the Son of God; they just said, 'Hey, that's Gramps!'" --Steve Martin
Given the fact that the Hugos honor both science fiction AND fantasy novels, let's consider this interesting what if: J.R.R. Tolkien's Lord of the Rings was published in 2001 instead of 1953-1955.
Given how amazingly well put together LoTR is, I'm sure LoTR (had it been published in 2001) would likely have garnered both Hugo and Nebula nominations--and probably would have won both awards for Best Novel this year.
Sandman was and is great. It set a standard that will last forever. But his novels are...mediocre at best. He's a cool guy, he's a good writer, but he basically shot his entire wad on Sandman. Which is okay. It was a cool wad. Reminds me of William Gibson. There was Burning Chrome, then Neuromancer, then....everything else. Everyone still respects him as an author, but it's really just because of Neuromancer.
And yet, if you read the actual rules for the Hugo Awards, it clearly states that "Hugo Awards are given for work in the field of science fiction or fantasy"
...who would have thought that so much posting and controversy would be stirred up by this! For the record:
1) I liked American Gods very much when I read it and even felt it was a sort of commentary about current american values. 'Course, I love everything Gaiman has ever written including Sandman, Neverwhere, Good Omens, and so forth.
2) I thoroughly enjoyed Goblet of Fire and all of the other Harry Potter books. They are mere mind candy (not difficult reading) and enjoyable for what they are.
3) Should a Harry Potter book have recieved the Hugo? Well it is good writing for what it is. But in the rampant discussion concerning what is fantasy and what is sci-fi, there are many grey lines. That being said, I believe that Harry Potter is purely fantasy. And if the Hugo is a sci-fi award, then it shouldn't have been awarded to Goblet of Fire. Gaiman's works tend to fall in the grey area and are even similar to the "urban fantasy" works of Charles DeLint. I don't think that I would give DeLint an award in the sci-fi category (even though I really love his stuff and recommend it to everyone) but surely in the fantasy realm. Maybe American Gods should be in that realm too. Then again, I really like Gaiman's work, and since it is in that grey area (an area that theoretical physics is in as well) I'd just as soon not argue at length as to whether it deserves the Hugo or not. Let's just say that I'm glad it got an award.
4) Finally, there are way too many posts under the "Narrow Minded Bigot" subject that are just way off-topic but have been modded up for being "insightful" or similar. People debating what is christian/pagan etc. (though very politely in general, thank-you) is not on the topic of this years and last years Hugo award winner.
Optimist: The glass is half full
Pessimist: The glass is half empty
Doofus: The glass is half full, no, wait, empty, ummm what was the question?
Realist: Hey, I ordered a cheeseburger!
:::Horrendous Experiences Make Amusing Anecdotes:::
Xavier
Do I make sense? Please report if not.
read it? we're translating it into dutch for a thesis :D
The Awful Truth
A troll, surely, if you post a message saying "Bill Gates sucks"... /.ers are going to jump on that.
...wonderful...and not comic-like at all).
I see your point, but while I do think Gaiman's books are more in touch with popular culture, and therefore a better choice than Harry Potter (I liked the book, didn't think it was worth a prize), I personally think his work in the art+literature (I'd say graphic novel, but the last one was
Not even Gaiman-like. Not what I'd expected, anyway. But a lovely portrayal of Japanese folk-lore.
_I_ think Neil Gaiman's contribution to the world of sci-fi, fantasy, mythology, whatever you want to call it, has been exceptional, and best expressed in <opinion>the story telling realm of graphic novels.</opinion>
<-- echo $newOpinion -->
Troll 1. v.,n. [From the Usenet group alt.folklore.urban] To utter a posting on Usenet designed to attract predictable responses or flames
Lotsa people have read or seen his work - I'm guessing there's as many opinions here as there are people, about whether he deserves it or not, or what his best work is.
Predictable responses? Good luck. I reckon there are as many responses here as there are people.
Warning: May contain nuts
I almost ate the flame bait myself. Even if I didn't like Harry Potter, the comment is clearly antagonistic, and adds nothing to the news item itself.
Saber Marionette J? Singapore Medical Journal? Scientiae Mathematicae Japonicae? Special Ministry to Japanese? What in God's name does your sig stand for?
Bravo to Mr. Gaiman, bravo to American Gods, and brvo to those who leave their Harry Potter squables out of the disscussion. (I have personally read a few of the books and didn't see why everyone thinks they are so brilliant) But anyway, American Gods definately earned this award.
The book has that singular uniqueness that all good books have. It's engrossing, its fascinating, its a scifi, its a mystery, is everything rolled into one. I couldn't put it down until I finished it. For me, the best part was definately the end. I definately didn't see that plot twist coming (did anyone?). And, that is very refreshing in a time of many books, movies, and whatnot that are so very predictable.
Oh, forget those who try to define what "scifi" is. Whatever scifi is and whatever American Gods is, it still deserves that award!
Hard work usually pays off over time, but procrastination pays off now.
It's my initials.
- SMJ - (It's not just a name: it's a bad aftertaste.)
Sigh... Incarnations of Immortality is a series by Piers Anthony, not Roger Zelazny. Zelazney is best known for the Amber series, which would actually form a better example for your first category, since the Amber multiverse is a superset which contains our mundane little universe within it.
Thus, although the stories are full of magic, this isn't contradicted by the lack of overt magic in our particular piece of Shadow; you could therefore make the case that it is science fiction, just barely. In Incarnations magic is an integral part of the world, which puts it firmly in the fantasy camp; it does not follow the known structure of our universe.
This is special that it goes beyond the myriads of children's book awards that she had already one and why she also wins in adult categories.
I thought that was the World Fantasy Award.
Thought this was funny! From his journal:
Several hundred congratulatory e-mails came in today. My favourite so far, from my son Mike, just said Well, it is always weird to wake up and read your family news at the top of slashdot, but I suppose I'll get used to it at some point. Congratulations Dad!
Most people would die sooner than think; in fact, they do.