2003 Hugo Award Winners Announced

securitas writes "For those that follow these sorts of things, the 2003 Hugo Award Winners list has been released (PDF). Robert Sawyer's 'Homonids' won Best Novel, fan favorite Neil Gaiman won Best Novella for 'Coraline', Geoffery A. Landis won Best Short Story for 'Falling Onto Mars', Buffy the Vampire Slayer's 'Conversations with Dead People' won Best Short Form Dramatic Presentation and predictably 'The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers' won Best Long Form Dramatic Presentation. You can get all the details at the Torcon 2003 Hugo Awards section."

Comments

not first post

[Anonymous Coward]

bitches

Good for Buffy

[Anonymous Coward]

A lot of awards have overlooked the series in the past when they've been deserving.

Re:Good for Buffy

[Scrameustache]

Yeah...'cause "conversations with dead people" was chuck full of science-fiction huh?

Re:Good for Buffy

[Dark Lord Seth]

Really?

Just because YOU think the series is the next best thing in the world, it might not be all that great after all. Personally, I think Buffy the series is beyond crap, at best. It's like watching Matrix Reloaded. I just don't fcking GET IT! That, and there's always a small legion of bozos around who claim that I'm the idiot for "not getting it" and that I should see all the previous episodes to understand and appreciate it.

True art is something which will always be remembered for the amount of creativity, effort and passion that was poured into something. Elvis Presley's music is art; I can't stand hearing it but it's art. In one hundred years people will still know about Elvis Presley, same thing for the Rolling Stones and Queen. Stanley Kubrick (sp?) is an artist too, even though I can't stand his movies either. You don't have to like something for it to be deserving of anything, and the reverse is true as well; as soon as YOU like something doesn't mean it automatically is the next best thing since sliced bread.

Re:Good for Buffy

[Anonymous Coward]

Just because YOU think the series is the next best thing in the world,

Where did I say anything of the sort, exactly? They've had some really strong episodes, and some bad ones. Was the one that won the award the strongest? No, there were better, but it was still good. It wasn't even your typical episode, as there wasn't that much action or comedy in it. It dealt with the characters and their own self assessment.

Re:Good for Buffy

[Bendy Chief]

Well, I'm certainly not going to disagree with you when I say that Matrix Reloaded tends to polarize people's opinions. However, it really is "hard to get" for a large number of people, especially the explanation of the Systemic Anomaly and how that ties into the existing control structure of the Matrix. It's mostly that concept, along with the emergence of Smith as a vastly important character, that makes me like the movie.

Buffy is different. There's nothing to "get". What you don't "get" is how people can enjoy it, and I'm in the same boat as you. That show always struck me as monstrously overrated and stupid. Poor acting, terrible fighting, and so forth.

Buffy fans in the audience forgive me, but I think the majority of that show's fanbase is composed of A) teen girls who think "Girl Power" is a blonde throwing fake punches, and B) Harry Knowles' demonic brood of fanboys.

Re:Good for Buffy

[Anonymous Coward]

It's quite clear it covers Sci-Fi and Fantasy, or did I miss all the sci-fi in LOTR?

Re:Good for Buffy

[Anonymous Coward]

The show is perfectly aimed at much of the Slashdot crowd if they gave it a chance. Willow is a computer nerd, Xander is the sci-fi geek, and Buffy is cute. Spike once held one of the villains Boba Fett models as a hostage, and one of Xander's prize possessions is his Babylon 5 plate collection. Xander also spent a good amount of time discussing T'Pol's breasts... just like Slashdot!

Re:Good for Buffy

[110010001000]

"the explanation of the Systemic Anomaly and how that ties into the existing control structure of the Matrix"

*snicker*

Re:Good for Buffy

[cherokee158]

Granted, Buffy does not fit what a lot of people would consider the usual definition of science fiction (science being conspicously absent), but it is a well-written show. I really could not understand what people saw in this show for the longest time, but boredom and a Buffy Viewer's Choice marathon changed my mind almost overnight. Suspension of disbelief was a battle for me with this one, but once I grudgingly accepted the premise, I grew to love the characters and relish every chapter of a story that was sometimes funny, sometimes scary, and always suprising. Like most good writing, the story does not immediately make itself appreciated, but once you have seen enough to become aware of the characters and appreciate the story arcs, it gets into your pores and stays there. In less than one year, I went from Buffy-hater to owning the entire series on DVD. Don't let the obvious bullseye this series paints on the teen target market lull you into thinking this show is just fluff. It makes some very sly jabs at just about every genre cliche there is, and, if you let it, can move you to screams, tears or fits of laughter all in a single episode. That being said, go ahead and hate it if you want. More DVD's for me :-)

Re:Good for Buffy

[Abcd1234]

Buffy fans in the audience forgive me, but I think the majority of that show's fanbase is composed of...

And I think all people who are interested in computers are geeky, socially inept freaks. Oh, wait, that's wrong too... this is what happens when you try to stereotype a group of people who are interested in something you're not. After all, just because you don't "get it" doesn't mean that there isn't a diverse group of people out there who disagree with you.

Re:Good for Buffy

[Anonymous Coward]

Translation: I don't have a girlfriend and my poor social skills mean that I'll probably never have one. My Internet connection is already saturated downloading pr0n, and while I'm waiting for "Cheerleader Gangbangs #52" to download I can get my rocks off watching Sarah Michelle Gellar on TV.

Re:Good for Buffy

[Dark Lord Seth]

Whatever the hell the Buffy fanbase consists off, it sure has got something I do not: mod points. I wasn't even flaming! Though that would have been fun and pissing of all the Buffy fans would have beeen immensely hilarious...

Re:Good for Buffy

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah...'cause "conversations with dead people" was chuck full of science-fiction huh?

Hear, hear. Garbage TV does not deserve a Hugo.

Re:Good for Buffy

[Jake96]

I doubt if the average person could name everything that deserves to be remembered as true art. I would wager there is 'forgotten' true art that is today largely ignored even by critics and historians.

Should you see all the episodes of Buffy to 'get' it? Would you look at three square centimeters of a statue before dismissing it as crap? I appreciate that you may not find Buffy accessible at first viewing and not be motivated to continue. However, just because YOU don't like something doesn't automatically mean there is no argument for its status as something more than television filler material.

In other words, I think you've contradicted your own point that personal taste shouldn't enter much into the 'art or not' debate. Your only argument that Buffy isn't art is that you find it beyond crap. What objective reasons can you give that Buffy is not art?

Re:Good for Buffy

[lrucker]

A lot of awards have overlooked the series in the past when they've been deserving.

That's no reason to vote for it this year, when it hasn't been deserving.

Re:Good for Buffy

[Lodragandraoidh]

Art is esthetic. Therefore, there is no right or wrong answer to the question of what is the best. Its like saying vanilla is better than chocolate.

All we can do is come to some consensus about it in order to 'pick' one over another. By its nature consensus (or voting for that matter) is just a compromise since there will always be those that will not change their view, and those that will change an original opinion based on argument, politics, or some other criteria (magic 8-ball?).

I can't see getting all worked up over it.

Re:Good for Buffy

[Sgt_Jake]

And I think all people who are interested in computers are geeky, socially inept freaks. Oh, wait, that's wrong too...

it is?

gnaa!

[Anonymous Coward]

GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the first organization which
gathers GAY NIGGERS from all over America and abroad for one common goal - being GAY NIGGERS.

Are you GAY ?
Are you a NIGGER ?
Are you a GAY NIGGER ?

If you answered "Yes" to any of the above questions, then GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) might be exactly what you've been looking for!
Join GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) today, and enjoy all the benefits of being a full-time GNAA member.
GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the fastest-growing GAY NIGGER community with THOUSANDS of members all over United States of America. You, too, can be a part of GNAA if you join today!

Why not? It's quick and easy - only 3 simple steps!

First, you have to obtain a copy of GAY NIGGERS FROM OUTER SPACE THE MOVIE and watch it.

Second, you need to succeed in posting a GNAA "first post" on slashdot.org, a popular "news for trolls" website

Third, you need to join the official GNAA irc channel #GNAA on EFNet, and apply for membership.
Talk to one of the ops or any of the other members in the channel to sign up today!

If you are having trouble locating #GNAA, the official GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA irc channel, you might be on a wrong irc network. The correct network is EFNet, and you can connect to irc.secsup.org or irc.isprime.com as one of the EFNet servers.
If you do not have an IRC client handy, you are free to use the GNAA Java IRC client by clicking here.

If you have mod points and would like to support GNAA, please moderate this post up.

This post brought to you by Penisbird , a proud member of the GNAA

G_____________________________________naann_______ ________G
N_____________________________nnnaa__nanaaa_______ ________A
A____________________aanana__nannaa_nna_an________ ________Y
A_____________annna_nnnnnan_aan_aa__na__aa________ ________*
G____________nnaana_nnn__nn_aa__nn__na_anaann_MERI CA______N
N___________ana__nn_an___an_aa_anaaannnanaa_______ ________I
A___________aa__ana_nn___nn_nnnnaa___ana__________ ________G
A__________nna__an__na___nn__nnn___SSOCIATION_of__ ________G
G__________ana_naa__an___nnn______________________ ________E
N__________ananan___nn___aan_IGGER________________ ________R
A__________nnna____naa____________________________ ________S
A________nnaa_____anan____________________________ ________*
G________anaannana________________________________ ________A
N________ananaannn_AY_____________________________ ________S
A________ana____nn_________IRC-EFNET-#GNAA________ ________S
A_______nn_____na_________________________________ ________O
*_______aaaan_____________________________________ ________C
um, dolor. Nunc nec nisl. Phasellus blandit tempor augue. Donec arcu orci, adipiscing ac, interdum a, tempus nec, enim. Phasellus placerat iaculis orci. Crasa sit amet quam. Sed enim quam, porta quis, aliquet quis, hendrerit ut, sem. Etiam felis tellus, suscipit et, consequat quis, pharetra sit amet, nisl. Aenean arcu massa, lacinia in, dictum eu, pulvinar a

Is scifi just to placify geeks?

[Thinkit3]

Why not do something to advance science rather than just read and wish you were born years later? Seems like they have a section in the bookstore to keep geeks happy and not taking over the world as they are destined to.

Re:Is scifi just to placify geeks?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sci-Fi does advance science; where do you think scientists get ideas, most modern tech was first thought up in science fiction. My PDA looks a lot like a star trek PADD, my cell phone looks like a communicator.

That's not even taking into account all the kids who grow up reading sci-fi and grow up to be scientists because of it.

You're an idiot.

Re:Is scifi just to placify geeks?

[efuseekay]

Not everybody wants to be a scientist, especially when you get low pay, poor advancement and lousy job opportunities. And that's after you have spent 5-7 years slogging away as a slave in grad school....

On the other hand, doing science is the most rewarding experience I've ever had*.

Btw, Geoffery Landis is himself a scientist...

* Other than hot, steamy sex.

Re:Is scifi just to placify geeks?

[theoddball]

Sci-Fi does advance science; where do you think scientists get ideas, most modern tech was first thought up in science fiction. No. In general, SF derives from existing scientfic concepts. It's not as if authors are sitting around and think "Hey, you know what'd be cool? Some kinda energy source from little tiny particles called atoms smashing into each other!" Enrico Fermi didn't learn how fission works from reading SF. Even pulling ideas from existing science, the genre has gotten it wrong plenty of times. It was Gibson (I think) that wrote a story where characters see all these bizarre rocketships and flying things in the sky, and strange vehicles on the ground...in the end, these crazy vehicles turn out to be all the pictures of silver ships and flying cars and nuclear thingamajigs from the 1950s pulp mags. Kim Stanley Robinson has written about a lot of prospective, uninvented things in his Mars series, but he didn't start from nothing--a lot of the ideas in those books was first proposed by NASA researchers and guys like Robert Zubrin. Hell, he even takes stuff from the 100 Day Plan. SF and science feed off each other, true...but SF != source of science.

Re:Is scifi just to placify geeks?

[Anonymous Coward]

I wrote an essay in HS english that basically said Science drives Sci-Fi forward and in turn Sci-Fi drive Science forware. Sci-Fi authors go a long way towards taking abstract concepts from the Scientists and proposing workable applications which the scientists then work out.

Re:Is scifi just to placify geeks?

[LauraW]

It was indeed Gibson. The story was "The Gernsback Continuum". It was in his collection Burning Chrome and probably other places.

Re:Is scifi just to placify geeks?

[Snowspinner]

There is plenty of important value to be placed on science fiction without resorting to making things up. Science fiction does not drive science - one would be hard pressed to come up with an important scientific advance that would not have happened without science fiction.

No. If you want to justify science fiction, look at the ways in which the ability to create future worlds, or alien civilizations allows new ways to talk about problems that humans face today. Look at the metaphorical capabilities of it. Look at the simple fact that it entertains people - both geeks and "normal" people.

But don't delude yourself into thinking that science fiction is somehow necessary to science. If nothing else, the Greeks, the Renaissance, and the Enlightenment clearly did pretty well at science without science fiction.

Re:Is scifi just to placify geeks?

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow. Tinfoil-hat, black-helicopter grade paranoia and delusions of grandeur all in one post! That's gotta be some kind of new Slashdot record. If not in the absolute sense, at least in the disfunctionalities-per-word metric.

Re:Is scifi just to placify geeks?

[Anonymous Coward]

In general, SF derives from existing scientfic concepts. It's not as if authors are sitting around and think "Hey, you know what'd be cool? Some kinda energy source from little tiny particles called atoms smashing into each other!"

Nope. Instead they're sitting around thinking things like, "Hey, you know what'd be cool? Satellites that orbit the earth at such an altitude that they make one complete rotation per day. You could probably put a radio or TV transmitter on one of those and broadcast to half the globe!"

And voila, shortly thereafter we had communications satellites.

(The concept of the geosynchronous communications satellite was first invented by Arthur C. Clarke, famous science fiction author.)

Re:Is scifi just to placify geeks?

[reallocate]

Didn't you know? Everything that happens on Earth is planned and controlled by the Evil Minions of Emporer Ming.

I'm guessing your parents kept asking you "Is that really necessary?"

Re:Is scifi just to placify geeks?

[dspeyer]

Science fiction occasionally advances science, the communications satellite being the famous example, but the real idea is to advance society around science. As science overtakes science fiction (usually co-incidentally) society struggles to adapt. It's good that there are at least a few people who have already thought about how to respond to changes like those which happen!

Re:Is scifi just to placify geeks?

[Anonymous Coward]

I assume you mean Prince Xenu. Even a modern operating system controversy was engineered in advance, eons ago. Don't believe me? Turn the letters in "Unix" around. See?

You have the capacity, but not yet the ability, to see past deceptions even more mind-bogglingly devious and obscure than that. And for a small fee, that potential can be unlocked. And it all starts with a simple (free!) personality test.

Re:Is scifi just to placify geeks?

[DrLudicrous]

You are correct about Landis. I met him back in 1995 when I was a summer intern at NASA. He works in the Photovoltaic Branch in Cleveland's Glenn Research Center.

Re:Is scifi just to placify geeks?

[kubrick]

On the other hand, doing science is the most rewarding experience I've ever had*.

* Other than hot, steamy sex.

So, would you recommend work as a porn star instead? :)

Re:Is scifi just to placify geeks?

[1000StonedMonkeys]

Just wait until they build a space elevator.

Re:Is scifi just to placify geeks?

[BlightThePower]

Sci-fi doesn't drive science in my opinion; scientists and engineers are quite capable of having ideas themselves now and then(!). As with anything, apart from a few wildly insightful and original thoughts that have changed the world, the rest is alas two-a-penny. The real trick is having the skill and the tenacity to develop things to a state where they can be used/brought to the market.

I have a strange feeling of deja vu here because I've just remembered I've posted almost the same comment before. Heh, heres another point I made then; be careful how you interpret the evidence for sci-fi's contribution. Thousands of writers, thousands of books, hundreds of thousands of speculations (some major = we will live on the moon, some minor = we will have portable computers). Each one of these writers is striving for some degree of originality or novelty (very much the raison d'etre of SF since pulp-sci fi bit the bullet). Would it not be incredibly strange if a handful of these hundreds of thousands of speculations didn't to some extent come true?

Re:Is scifi just to placify geeks?

[multimed]

Disclaimer: Generalities are just that

While scientists and engineers typically push the world forward by scientific achievement, often they're not the best at either applying or marketing their work. And often the type of abilities that make one good at scientific type thinking are contrary to the creative outside the box thinking that science fiction and ultimately even tomorrow's reality. The big things most often come from some one asking "Why not?" rather than "Why?" Scientists and engineers are bound by (current) science. Writers have no boundaries and are free to come whatever they can imagine.

Ultimately I guess it's a matter of being a 'dreamer.' Certainly scientists can be dreamers but basically it's a major part of the job description for ficiton writers.

Re:Is scifi just to placify geeks?

[Snaller]

On the other hand, doing science is the most rewarding experience I've ever had*.

* Other than hot, steamy sex.

You've had sex? What kind of a scientist are you!

DON'T spell his name with two 'L's:

[Anonymous Coward]

Philip K. Dick's last winner:

http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/you.html

Dangit....

[JoeLinux]

And yet another year passes in which they fail to acknowledge the wonderous story that is Battlefield:Earth.

Re:Dangit....

[el-spectre]

The book wasn't bad... not incredibly believable, but entertaining. The movie... eh... I feel bad for the trees that died to make the cellulose for the film...

Re:Dangit....

[Anonymous Coward]

ah yes, L. Ron "Rob us all of our Hollywood Money" Hubbard. Bad bloated book. Bad movie with a very fat John Travolta.

At least sci-fi fans had some taste when they stayed away from theatres when it came out.

Re:Dangit....

[Morosoph]

And yet another year passes in which they fail to acknowledge the wonderous story that is Battlefield:Earth.

Shurley the award only applies to non-fiction!

Re:Dangit....

[Morosoph]

Ooops, non-fiction (above) should read fiction, sorry!

Re:Dangit....

[belroth]

ObNitPick:
Cellulose hasn't been used for film stock for many years. It was far too flammable.

Not arguing with the sentiment though...

Re:Dangit....

[rossifer]

The book was so enormously implausible that I couldn't even find it slightly entertaining. Luckily, when I was that age, I didn't have anything to do with my life so it's not like the time was relaly wasted.

They blew the fuses on the control boards of the teleport devices during fabrication (to make it look like any tampering lets the smoke out) and the other galactic races never figured out that 1) the power wasn't flowing through the obvious "blown" circuits and 2) the "blowing" of the circuits didn't happen when they opened it. At least the lack of smell might hint to the 10,000 year advanced technologist that the cold melted wire might be a ruse...

And that's one of the least egregious problems in the story. L Ron Hubbard is quite simply one of the worst authors ever published.

Regards,
Ross

Re:Dangit....

[MrBlint]

Mod Parent Down. -1 Defamatory to Scient0l0gy

Re:Dangit....

[el-spectre]

I thought that might be the case, but I ignored it for the joke :)

Modern Sci-Fi

[Anonymous Coward]

I find modern sci-fi to be incredibly boring. Even the second foundation trilogy reads like second rate cyberpunk. Most modern stuff is written like trash romance novels set with Sims and assorted other sci-fi elements.

Re:Modern Sci-Fi

[Sphere1952]

There are exceptions, such as Brin.

Re:Modern Sci-Fi

[Anonymous Coward]

Brin wrote the 3rd book in the 2nd foundation trilogy. I've only read the first 2. The first by Benford, was one of worst pieces of trash I've ever seen. He seemed more interested in tearing apart all the featuers of Asimov's universe than it writing a good novel. Seldon is supposed to be a scientist, but his moves in Foundation's Fear would put James Bond to shame. What was that crap with the sims? It was so boring I ended up skipping all those passages. I'd see Foundation's Fear is the second worst book ever written (Scarlet is first), and as a huge Asimov fan, I think Benford should be shot.

The 2nd book in the series was a lot better and Bear tried to resolve Benson's crap with Asimov's universe, but he also added his own garbage. Even the Calvinist robots didn't act even remotely like asimov's robots...and of course he followed up on the sim garbage. I don't think I will read the 3rd book. The first 2 are just mutilations of Asimov's work.

Re:Modern Sci-Fi

[LauraW]

>Even the second foundation trilogy reads like second rate cyberpunk.

That's because the second foundation trilogy sucked.

Well, maybe it wasn't that bad, but it was totally derivative, had a fairly lame "cyberpunk-lite" plot, and was written by three different people. IMO, Asimov ruined both the Foundation and Robots series when he merged them in his later years. Not quite as badly as Heinlein messed up his own series with dreck like Number of the Beast, but still pretty bad.

There are still some good SF authors out there, though: Kim Stanley Robinson, CJ Cherryh, Ursula LeGuin, Connie Willis, Neal Stephenson, William Gibson, ....

Re:Modern Sci-Fi

[Sphere1952]

I must admit that I couldn't finish the first. Someday I'll read what Brin did to the third, but I was thinking more of his Uplift series, The Postman, and The Practice Effect.

I've always found Benford and Bear a bit on the edge -- usually, but not always, a good read.

I think they just randomly chose three B's to follow Azimov.

Re:Modern Sci-Fi

[Sphere1952]

I just re-read The Diamond Age. Maybe I'll go for a third reading.

Re:Modern Sci-Fi

[MagPulse]

How about Ender's Game, written in 1991? That's the most action-packed book I've ever read.

Re:Modern Sci-Fi

[JCoplen]

WHAT!? He's an exception to modern SF being boring. Please.

Re:Modern Sci-Fi

[miu]

Not quite as badly as Heinlein messed up his own series with dreck like Number of the Beast

I think RAH must have pissed of all the good editors by the time he wrote that stinker. But maybe I'm a poor judge, "the cat that walks though walls" and "the moon is a harsh mistress" are his only books I liked after the age of 14.

Re:Modern Sci-Fi

[LauraW]

> But maybe I'm a poor judge, "the cat that walks though walls" and "the moon is a harsh mistress" are his only books I liked after the age of 14.

I thought The Cat Who Walks Through Walls was decent but not great. On the other hand, The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress is a great book, and certainly one of Heinlein's best. It's probably my favorite "classic" SF. Another of Heinlein's early works I really like is The Past Through Tomorrow, a collection of short stories from his "future history" universe (the one Lazarus Long was in). It includes some real classics like "Methusela's Children" and "If This Goes On". Friday is probably my favorite of his later stuff.

Re:Modern Sci-Fi

[miu]

Another of Heinlein's early works I really like is The Past Through Tomorrow

Yeah, I forgot about that one - it had some great stories in it. Apparently Number of the Beast and To Sail Beyond the Sunset were so bad they destroyed the happy memories of the Future History stuff I had liked earlier.

Re:Modern Sci-Fi

[Ompaloskeptic]

A great book based on the foundation books is Psycohistorical crisis by Donald Kingsbury. Very much recommended. It's the foundation extremely far into the future (16 centuries after founding of second foundation).

Re:Modern Sci-Fi

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't forget "The Door into Summer".

Awards..

[grub]

Hugo?

The 2003 Huge-O Award goes to..
GOATSE.CX GUY

Congratulations, come up and take a bow.

Ironic about Buffy....

[GrnArmadillo]

Winning an award after the show bows for an episode about ghosts of the past. :) Also note how Buffy creator Joss Whedon has three of the nominated episodes (for his other two shows, "Angel" and the late "Firefly") while the other two noms belong to "Enterprize". It's a small world these days.....

Re:Ironic about Buffy....

[quacking duck]

I was rooting for Firefly's "Serenity", but this Buffy ep was about as deserving. Far more so than the two nominated "Enterprise" eps.

Re:Ironic about Buffy....

[Anonymous Coward]

Nominating Buffy/Firefly/Angel eps alongside Enterprise seems like a weird attempt to please all of the people. They're basically dipoles; does anyone out there like both Buffy and Enterprise (or any other new Star Trek franchise)? I and most people I know who enjoy Buffy & Co loathe Enterprise, whereas it seems the majority of SF-watching TV viewers falls entirely the opposite way.

I'd nominate Our Mrs. Reynolds or Objects in Space over Serenity. The Message was also good, but I imagine they have to be aired to be eligible. I'd also put Lies My Parents Told Me above CwDP.

OMG

[Anonymous Coward]

OMFG have you seen the Halo 2 trailer it's like slow and it's telling you all the stuff you did in the first one then the music kicks in and and the chief comes out and gets a gun the earf is on fire and chief is like fuck this im jumping and HE JUMPS PUT OF TEH SPACESHIP with angels singing and he lands on the bad guys and that annoying ai lady is like GO GET EM TIGER! WILDCAT IS ON TEH SPOKE!!!~`1 and theres less polys but rawkin bumb mappings you can view this on a special MICROSOFT xbox disk that comes with EB games store.

Yay Canada!

[optikSmoke]

I've read a bunch of Sawyer's books (his present-day/near-present-day sci-fi) and they do not dissapoint. I found it funny that I spotted Hominids in the store the other day and picked it up, and now I hear it won the Hugo :)

Heh... he's also Canadian! Yay Canada!

Re:Yay Canada!

[Anonymous Coward]

As a canadian, I am happy for Sawyer too. But, I don't think this book deserved a Hugo; it's just your average run of the mill parallel-universe sci-fi book. The plot was so mushy and most of the side-stories were just that without any contribution to the general progress of the story.
David Brin's 'Kiln People' should have gotten this years Hugo; all the stories of the different 'people' in this novel add to one consistent although unusual ending. I liked the way the story was told from the perspective of different characters who are just the image of a single character. Okay, the last 1/5 of this story was unnnessarily long, but the rest of the book redeemed it for me.
Anyways, this is a slight improvement from giving out Hugo award to the Harry Potter novel.

Re:Yay Canada!

[allrong]

I find it a bit sad that Sawyer's books have big blurb's trumpeting how he is Canada's answer to xxx. UK SF also seems to have had an inferiority complex up until recently with cover quotes of how author Y has revitilised UK SF.

I am very surprised that Australian SF book covers have not done the same over the past decade. We are usually quite noisy about promoting Aussieness, to our eternal detriment.

I enjoyed reading Sawyer's Calculating God, but after seeing his website sfwriter.com I'm quite put off by this guy's self-promotion.

Re:Yay Canada!

[Anonymous Coward]

Interestingly, Sawyer didn't win an Aurora award (Canada's SF award) with this book. Permanence, by Karl Schroeder, picked that up. I read Homonids, and enjoyed it, but I've read alot better.

Hugos these days...

[theoddball]

Nice to see the literary Hugos are going to actual SF again...two years of solid selections. I think it was 2001 when Harry Potter won best novel, and I just shook my head... I have nothing against HP, but it doesn't deserve a Hugo. It's not adult fiction, and it's not even science fiction (which is, of course, the focus of the Hugo... I disagree with the folks who keep saying SF is "incredibly boring" these days, though--it's just on a different tack.

Re:Hugos these days...

[Anonymous Coward]

According to what I read on the site, Hugos are given to both science fiction and fantasy. It's just that apparently lots of previous noms were mostly sci-fi, which is completely not their problem if the pendulum decides to swing the other way for a while.

I don't even follow the details behind the Hugo awards, but 2 minutes of reading unearths Section 3.2.1: "Unless otherwise specified, Hugo Awards are given for work in the field of science fiction or fantasy..."

Re:Hugos these days...

[Anonymous Coward]

I have nothing against HP, but it doesn't deserve a Hugo. It's not adult fiction, and it's not even science fiction

Well, narrowing down the Hugo awards to science fiction only isn't exactly correct. But setting that aside, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire most certainly is adult fiction. It's written in such a way that it's suitable entertainment for kids, but the themes are definitely adult. Murder, death, destiny, revenge, and the constant, underlying idea that you can't, so to speak, judge a book by its cover.

Don't assume that a book that's beloved by kids isn't for adults.

Re:Hugos these days...

[sparrow_hawk]

Err... umm...
Nice to see the literary Hugos are going to actual SF again..
I have nothing against HP, but it doesn't deserve a Hugo. It's not adult fiction, and it's not even science fiction

So... have you read Coraline? As with much great fantasy (yes, fantasy -- not science fiction), it operates on two levels. For children, it's an adventure story; for adults, a horror story. It is undeniably written for children, however, yet it's definately a great read however old you are. :) It just goes to show that good "children's literature" is good literature, period.

Re:Hugos these days...

[Anonymous Coward]

American Gods was not sci-fi. It started out seeming like it could be sci-fi, but in the end it was just a fantasy novel set in modern times with the same cliched fantasy plots.

Re:Hugos these days...

[Hast]

Yeah but as adult fiction it is really poor. After reading the HP books I do think that the fourth book is the best. (It's better than the fifth as well.) But compared to other literature, even fantasy literature which contains an alarmingly high portion of pulp it comes up short IMHO.

And while it has all of the above it doesn't have enough drama for me to care about the characters. And the longer you get the more obvious the severe lackings of the adult characters become. You get a feeling that Harry is running around in a world of at most 2D characters. There's no depth to any on them. And it's only the special characters that are actually 2D, most of them are at most 1D.

Generally I just get annoyed that all the characters are walking around being so stupid all the time. Although it's not nearly as bad as in Robert Jordan's stories. If you want new and good fantasy try Robin Hobbs, she should have gotten awards instead.

Re:Hugos these days...

[Gilmoure]

I have nothing against HP, but it doesn't deserve a Hugo. It's not adult fiction...

Especially when there's work by LeGuin and Pullman. There's some great children's literature that is enjoyable as an adult.

Re:Hugos these days...

[antin]

The Hobbit - enough said. Definately written for children, it even assures the read at multiple points that everything turns out alright in the end. However I know more adults that have read it than children. In fact I know many adults who have read it to their children because of how much they, the adult, enjoy it.

Science fiction?

[Scrameustache]

Why are fantasy and horror works winning sci-fi awards?

The award will stop to have any meaning if they don't stick to its niche.

Re:Science fiction?

[fishexe]

bah, sci-fi doesn't even mean anything anymore anyways. Haven't you seen how many books about wizards and dragons are in the sci fi section of the bookstore?

Re:Science fiction?

[Scrameustache]

Haven't you seen how many books about wizards and dragons are in the sci fi section of the bookstore?

Bookstore managers and their inability to classify their wares adequatly should not be a trend setter for people handing out awards. THEY should know better.

Re:Science fiction?

[reallocate]

>> Haven't you seen how many books about wizards and dragons are in the sci fi section of the bookstore?

Yeah. I wish shops would put the fantasy books on their own shelves, so I can ignore them.

Re:Science fiction?

[Badge 17]

Hm... maybe because the Hugo is not just a science fiction award. You may recall that the Lord of the Rings "trilogy" was nominated for a best series award or something of that nature (incidentally, it was beaten by Asimov's Foundation series).

I'll copy a link given above that's useful in clarifying the award... http://www.torcon3.org/ballots/hugoWSFS.html

The lines between SciFi and Fantasy are not always clear, and if LoTR is valid for a Hugo, then it isn't going to dilute the meaning of the Hugo any more if we nominate fantasy. There's always been a division between hard and soft science fiction (or between Science Fiction and SciFi, according to some people).

Just look at the difference between Harlan Ellison and Isaac Asimov. Oh, and guess which one has won more Hugos.

Re:Science fiction?

[bluGill]

Anymore? Historicly Sci-fi did include fantasy, just look at all the old Andre Norton works that were more fantasy than sci-fi. For that matter anything fantasy was sci-fi.

Good authors write, bad authors worry about what catagory their books will be clasified in before they start. Start with an idea, and make it work. If it is hard science fiction, good, if it isn't, good. It might appeal more to someone if it fits a catagory, but only after a good book is written do you decide if you like it.

Re:Science fiction?

[Jeff DeMaagd]

True. Pleasantville, The Truman Show and Harry Potter also got nominations in the past, despite not being science fiction.

If they don't make some adjustments, it will be the "Latest Hip Subculture Genre Awards".

I think a lot of this stuff may be winning on name recognition alone rather than on whether or not it meets basic criteria of deserving an award.

Re:Science fiction?

[Pikathulhu]

Hugo-nominated fantasy novels include but are not limited to ...

Day of the Minotaur (1967)
Too Many Magicians (1967)
Goblin Reservation (1969)
Harpist in the Wind (1980)
Little, Big (1982)
Tea With the Black Dragon (1984)
Seventh Son (1988)
Red Prophet (1989)
Prentice Alvin (1990)
Towing Jehovah (1995)

By the way, Hominids is a dreadful book, and there's a coincidence in its win that Slashdot readers may not know about: the author couldn't possibly be more active in promoting himself as Canada's big-time SF writer, and all the Hugo voters this year were necessarily paid members of a convention taking place in Canada--in fact, Toronto where the winning author lives. Are Canadian SF fans really such parochial nationalist boosters that they would vote for a bad book just because it's Canadian? I wouldn't have thought so before yesterday.

You should read Hominids, The Scar, Bones of the Earth, Kiln People, and The Years of Rice and Salt if you'd like to judge for yourself. I'd have voted for any of them and even "no award" before I would have voted for Hominids.

Re:Science fiction?

[gl4ss]

dunno, because there's not awful of new science fiction coming nowadays that is 'traditional' science fiction? especially not too much of good stuff that really have something to say about the world today and fit into that.

i still manage to find stuff to read though.. but i've rarely put much merit on awards anyways and since i haven't been around to read most of the stuff as fresh i can read decades old stuff as new(and why shouldn't everyone?).

besides they're more like of an obviously fiction awards than scifi awards.. to me scifi is speculative fiction at it's best, so i rank wide amounts of green little men from mars stuff out of it too(that doesn't mean i don't read them or like them when they're good)

more than that i'd much more like to see awards for books i shouldn't read(along with reasons, by people who have read the book completely and are not retards), of such books i've lately read jeff longs 'year zero'. it suck. heavily. it was _BAD_, i did give it the chance though and read it till the end but the book is nothing but pure populistic disease fear shit mixed with cloning(of _jesus_ none the less) and end of the civilised world scenario mixed with petty rivalry and broken family and resurrection-cloning nonsense. the kinda shit book why people fear cloning and the cloning being in it mostly for no reason at all than because cloning is hip,any other explanation for the multiple retarded jesuses would have done just as well, if not better. but wait! the jesuses itself had barely any function for the story at all anyways, heck, the cloning wasn't even used for a cause of the disease sweeping everyone away so there was totally zero reasons to use it all. the book could have been much much better with much of the stuff left out, so instead of 500 pages it could have been a great book at 300 pages.. one reason why i tend to stay away from books with 500+ pages, they generally are big just because they're bloated or the wording is bad, exceptions happen of course. the new harry potter for example is so thick just because it has outrageously big font and the lines are way too much away from each other too but i guess having '700pages' was a selling point too in it's weird way, perhaps a way to justify greater price too(more like 300 pages if it was printed like a normal book, scifi it certainly was not, childrens book is the most fitting description, while it's not that bad it's not _great_ either).

yes this turned into a slash-rant that begins vagely following the subject at hand and then runs away.

Re:Science fiction?

[hcduvall]

Maybe bookstore owners classify it by customer taste- or their expected taste. Admittedly it might turn into a circle of expectation and execution, someone who reads sci-fi might read fantasy might play role-playing games might read comics.

Chris Ware, "graphic novelist" du juor of the nytimes and the other non-comic press has a blurb on one of his comics to the vendor:

Do not sell to minors, critics, estranged parents, or gym teachers; Do not display in respectable bookstore anywhere near fiction, art, or literature. File only under: Science Fiction and Role Playing Games.

Its just the way things are marketed- genre is a ghetto.

Re: Science fiction?

[gidds]

...The Truman Show... also got nominations in the past, despite not being science fiction.

Why doesn't The Truman Show count as science fiction?

The absence of space travel, laser guns and robots doesn't stop something being science fiction, just as their presence doesn't guarantee it is. Good science fiction has always been about ideas -- about ideas that change society or our relationship with the universe.

For example, I've always considered most 'space opera' such as Star Wars to be simply adventure stories that happen to be set in space - not science fiction at all. Conversely, stories like The Truman Show which are about ideas, about the nature of the world, and which invoke a sense of wonder, strike me as being much closer to the heart of science fiction. (Though there's actually quite a bit of technology involved in the backstory to TTS too.) And of course there are stories with both, like Bladerunner, which not only has a future setting with all the trappings, but a plot which directly involves the nature of that setting, and asks deep questions about personal identity.

Re:Science fiction?

[nathanh]

True. Pleasantville, The Truman Show and Harry Potter also got nominations in the past, despite not being science fiction.

The Truman Show is definitely sci-fi. Existing scientific knowledge was used a plot device to explore Truman's connection between perception and reality. Without the scientific underpinnings such as 24x7 hidden cameras and an artifical world for Truman, the story would have made no sense. This is what separates true sci-fi from "fantasies in space" like Star Wars.

Other sci-fi stories that aren't immediately obvious are Make Room, Make Room and 1984. In the first story the plot device is world famine due to a population explosion. In the second story the plot device is governmental monitoring and control of media, used to oppress the people. Neither of those stories requires any "fantasy" science like hyperengines or warpblasters, yet they're still sci-fi.

Re:Science fiction?

[Jeff DeMaagd]

You are probably right, I haven't thought of it that way. I always just figured it to be in a psychological something else of a genre if I had to classify it, but there are scientific principles used in studying psychology.

Re:Science fiction?

[MegaFur]

Apparently they're redefining the phrase "science fiction" al la "the sci-fi channel". That channel seems to show many things that barely even count as entertainment much less science fiction.

Oh well, at least BtVS won something.

Re:Science fiction?

[MegaFur]

Anymore? Historicly Sci-fi did include fantasy, just look at all the old Andre Norton works that were more fantasy than sci-fi. For that matter anything fantasy was sci-fi.

According to my high school teacher, it was the other way around; i.e. fantansy included science fiction. This makes sense because the simple English word fantasy is more general than science fiction. Fantasy was supposed to refer to any story with a fantastical premise or situation--in fact it didn't even specifically have to involve science or guys with swords and wizards. Many Twilight Zone episodes fall into this category. By contrast, in a science fiction story, some sort of made-up science was always supposed to play a major role.

Re: Science fiction?

[MegaFur]

Not that anyone else in the world cares, but by my own personal categorizations:

The Truman Show: definitely fantasy*, also probably gets to be science fiction since, to my knowlege, no one has ever built a huge hemispherical dome on the Earth and put someone inside it like a sort of goldfish. Although we can easily conceive of the idea of doing this, actually doing it would pose all sorts of technical challenges. So, it's gotta be at least "technology fiction" :-) and maybe science fiction as well.
Oh, and btw, seperate from that, I definitely agree: Truman Show was an awesome movie that raises many important questions about ourselves, the Universe, and all that. And, I also agree that sci-fi is at its best when it's doing that.

The Star Wars trilogy: I'd classify these as fantasy*/sci-fi, but with a qualifier (the same qualifier that should get prepended to most sci-fi). That qualifier is "soft". Whenever the make-believe science isn't the central focus (it almost never is), then this is soft sci-fi.
(Note: a story that has a lame-ass sounding "scientist" go on about how sub-meson quarks infiltrated the ape's brain to turn it into Pee Wee Herman does not count as hard sci-fi--to count as hard sci-fi, the explanations have to not suck.)

Bladerunner: Well, it's definitely fantasy*/sci-fi, but the category it seems to fit best, at least superficially would be "detective story" / "film noir".

* I'm using the literary definition of fantasy I was given in high school. This definition went something like: a story with a fantastical or make-believe setting. You can see that this is rather more broad than simply "sword and sorcery" or "sci-fi" and encompasses all those settings and more (e.g. there are many good short stories where we're not sure of the exact location or the technology they have because it's not relevant).

Okay, okay, I know this whole thing has been pointless--it was just a way for me to exercise my typing skills. :-) It is, of course, almost always the case that the really good stories defy categorization. It is also that case that, regardless of that, categories tend to be rather superficial as I wrote there about Bladerunner.

Re:Science fiction?

[Jardine]

By the way, Hominids is a dreadful book

You're entitled to your opinion of course, but I loved Hominids, its sequel Humans, and am waiting to pick up a copy of Hybrids. There's something about Robert J. Sawyer's writing style that, to me, makes his books hard to put down. What was it that you didn't like about the story? Was it something in the plot, something to do with the writing style, a hatred of all things Canadian?

Re:Science fiction?

[Bullet-Dodger]

I've read Hominids, and I remember liking it. Why is it that you dislike it so much, exactly?

Re:Science fiction?

[scowling]

I've generally enjoyed Sawyer's work, but the two novels before Hominids, that is, Calculating God and Humans, were subpar SF. Luckily, his short story collection, Iterations, was excellent.

That said, my disappointment with Humans (and, granted, some of my disappointment stemmed from my inability to suspend disbelief about the anti-privacy worldview) helped me to decide not to pick up Hominids in hardcover. I'll read it in paperback, but in a year where Kiln People was eligible, Sawyer should not have won.

And, yeah, I'm Canadian.

Re:Science fiction?

[merchant_x]

If you want "hard" science fiction get yourself a subscription to Analog magazine. The stories they publish and generaly true science fiction. They are mostly short stories but they do serial novels. Hominids was serialized in Analog.

Re:Science fiction?

[scowling]

I used to be a quasi-management drone at the Victoria outlet of Chapters (the big book chain in Canada). For a while, I ran the fiction section, and wanted to divide up the SF/Fantasy section, separating the two genres. I was flatly refused at all levels, all the way to the top, even though the other big bookstores in town sectioned their SF and fantasy books separately.

In the years since I worked there, they've made the switch (the management change after the buyout by Indigo may have led to this).

Now I can ignore the fantasy books again at Chapters. Or I would, if I didn't get physically ill (Clockwork Orange-style) when I think about spending money at Chapters.

Re:Science fiction?

[scowling]

Screwed that up. Substitute Hominids for Humans and vice-versa, above.

Re:Science fiction?

[Pikathulhu]

Well, in addition to Hominids, I've read Starplex, The Terminal Experiment, and Illegal Alien. If I'm biased against Canadians in general or Sawyer in particular, I certainly keep giving them a try.

Robert Sawyer is very much comparable to Michael Crichton. He cranks out a lot of books. They are fast reads. And they are bad for a lot of the same reasons. They feel shallow, like a mediocre SF movie or TV show. They are full of goofiness and cliches.

Have you actually read the competition? Can you honestly say that Hominids adds more to the world's literary imagination than The Scar or Kiln People? Can you honestly say that Hominids has better writing or characterization than Bones of the Earth? I suppose it's possible, but you don't say.

Re:Science fiction?

[Aussie]

If you want "hard" science fiction get yourself a subscription to Analog magazine.

Seconded, that's where I get my regular hit. Some really good writers contribute to Analog.

Re:Science fiction?

[gl4ss]

gotta check it out.

it take that it is http://www.analogsf.com/ ? seems like at least, gotta do some reading when i have time, or maybe subscribe to the ebooks(yeah i need distractions for lectures)..

Re: Science fiction?

[ncstockguy]

Yes, the Truman Show is probably the best true Science Fiction movie to come out in the last several years. Precisely because it does NOT feature futuristic robots, interstellar light drives and Wookies.
It is much more plausible Science Fiction and very entertaining as well. Anyone noticing how--ahem-- real television is rapidly following Truman's example now?

Re:Science fiction?

[bluGill]

Well yeah, except that publishers called is science fiction.

Re:Science fiction?

[Ompaloskeptic]

Yes. The scifi channel has mostly crap shows. They need to bring back farscape and make more shows like that. And stargate. That's good.

Re:Science fiction?

[Snaller]

Why are fantasy and horror works winning sci-fi awards?

Because americans can't tell the difference.

Re:Science fiction?

[LittleGuy]

Continuing the bitchfest....

True. Pleasantville, The Truman Show and Harry Potter also got nominations in the past, despite not being science fiction.

And "Who Framed Roger Rabbit?" won in 1989. Definitely not SF ('Adventures of Baron Munchusen' would have been closer to the genre).

So, who finally determines what should be included and not? Right now, it's the voters of the WorldCon. Unless I'm mistaken, there's nothing in the regs to prohibit a group (admittedly deranged and dangerous) to buy meberships just to award "From Justin to Kelly" a Hugo.

Top Ten Differences Between Democrats and Republic

[Anonymous Coward]

Top Ten Differences Between Democrats and Republicans (from the perspective of a Democrat):

10. Democrats take your money and give it to social programs. Republicans take your money and give it to their friends.

9. Democrats lie about sex. Republicans sex up their lies.

8. Democrats think international cooperation means working with the United Nations. Republicans think international cooperation means working with Exxon/Mobil.

7. Democrats try to save the planet. Republicans try to pave the planet.

6. Democrats are elected. Republicans are selected.

5. Democrats make treaties. Republicans break them.

4. Democrats support a social welfare system. Republicans support a corporate welfare system.

3. Democrats defend the rights of white supremacists. Republicans are the white supremacists.

2. Democrats govern. Republicans rule.

1. Democrats call people who don't believe in the separation of church and state a threat to civil liberties. Republicans call them judicial appointees.

You completely inhale the pastes in crust

[Anonymous Coward]

It has come to my attention that you completely inhale the pastes in crust. Read on for more about this fascinating topic.

The world went into shock a few weeks ago when goatse.info [goatse.info] reported the results of a study which concluded that inhaling paste is a very dangerous pastime, one that no one is advised to take up. Eventually, everyone adapted to the new state of affairs and began inhaling other things. Almost everyone, that is. But not you! According to my records, you still inhale paste!

Why?! What the fuck is wrong with you?!

You moron, you idiot, you imbecile, you gay nigger! Arg! You make me so fucking sick! FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU.

Dubious value award.

[sakusha]

I bet Neil Gaiman felt really great when he won the award that Harry Potter won last year.
I looked through the past Hugo lists, it's all the same people giving themselves the same awards. Are these awards really important to anyone outside the authors' circles?

Re:Dubious value award.

[soundofthemoon]

I don't think it's the same people giving themselves awards. The Hugos are awarded by the membership of the World Science-Fiction Convetion (http://www.worldcon.org/). Yes, many authors are members, but the bulk are just fen. So the awards are given by a few thousand people active in the SF fan community.

That said, yes, it's not particularly scientific or democratic. But that's what the award means - WorldCon thinks this book is the best. If you aren't happy with the selections, you can do what I did this year. I purchased a relatively inexpensive associate (non-attending) membership which allowed me to vote for the Hugos, and I'll be able to nominate for next year's awards too.

Of course none of the entries I voted for won. Too bad, because Kiln People rocked.

Since when are Buffy and Coraline Sci-Fi?

[Snowspinner]

This is not a knock against either Buffy or Coraline - I have Buffy seasons 1-7 on my bookshelf, and my Neil Gaiman collection is probably worth about $1000. But neither of them are science fiction. Coraline is a children's horror novel. A wonderful children's horror novel, but a children's horror novel all the same.

Maybe a case can be made for Buffy, since it's at least had sci-fi moments in its series, but Conversations With Dead People was not one of them.

I mean, yeah, a case can be made that the Hugos need to start acknowledging things beyond straight sci-fi if they're going to survive as a relevent and interesting award. But if they're going to do that, they should stop calling themselves a science fiction award. And they should also pause to ask whether, with the World Fantasy and Bram Stoker awards around, such a move is really necessary.

Oh well. Grats to Gaiman and Whedon anyway. =)

Re:Since when are Buffy and Coraline Sci-Fi?

[Anonymous Coward]

I have Buffy seasons 1-7 on my bookshelf...

Pretty impressive considering that season four was only released a couple of months ago...

Re:Since when are Buffy and Coraline Sci-Fi?

[soundofthemoon]

I haven't read Coraline yet (it's on my list, which is kind of long right now), but there's a strong case to be made that Buffy is science fiction, not fantasy. I'd say The Two Towers, and all of LOTR, is definitely fantasy. But you don't need gadgets and flying cars to be science fiction.

I've had this conversation with some other SF authors (yeah, I have pretentions), and it seems the big distinction between SF and fantasy isn't the way the world differs from our own (high-tech vs. magic), but how the characters relate to it. In SF, technology is external and understandable. In fantasy, magic is beyond understanding, and it's a mostly internal thing. Being able to do spells and make potions is just a different flavor of technology. But the One Ring isn't technology, it's a force of nature, and thus magic.

The supernatural in Buffy is very much magical technology. Anyone, even Xander, can pick up a stake and nail a vamp. Even the Slayer is technology - the Shadow Men just bound the essence of a demon to the slayer line and presto!, superchicks to fight vampires.

Re:Since when are Buffy and Coraline Sci-Fi?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, he must have TAPED IT or something. That high-tech thingy called a VCR? Look it up before you make a complete shitstain of yourself...

Re:Since when are Buffy and Coraline Sci-Fi?

[Snowspinner]

Buffy 1-6
7.

Pardon my slight exaggeration - the second half of season 7 is only on pre-order.

Re:Since when are Buffy and Coraline Sci-Fi?

[Snowspinner]

We're just going to pretend that I can close my HTML tags the first time, OK?

Buffy 1-6

Buffy 7.

Pardon my slight exaggeration - the second half of season 7 is only on pre-order.

Re:Since when are Buffy and Coraline Sci-Fi?

[Justinian II]

Does no-one bother to educate themselves before they post? This comes up every year. The Hugo is not just a "science fiction" award. The most cursory checking would have revealed this fact. From the WSFS constitution:

"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."

Got that? "Work in the field of science fiction or fantasy". Can we please stop with the "but that isn't science fiction!" stuff now?

That said, _Hominids_ is a truly awful book and as a winner is an embarrassment to all involved in the Hugo process.

Re:Since when are Buffy and Coraline Sci-Fi?

[Anonymous Coward]

My impression was that the slayer line existed and had power before the shadow guys did that - for them it was about instilling a power they could control, and thus controlling the preexisting power manifested in the slayer. I always figured the slayer's original power stemmed out of anger and pain at having lost people to vampires (this is vaguely communicated by the first slayer in Restless, I think). But let's face it, that was a bit difficult to follow (kind of like the "Summers' blood" thing in The Gift). ;)

Buffy and particularly Angel are often about alternate universes, parallel dimensions and so on, which is very much a staple of ("soft") scifi. Angel also has an X-men style superhero now, assuming she's not permanently written out.

It occurs to me that this might be why Buffy fans get so militant about perceived or actual discrepancies where the writers fail to follow the rules; Angel enters an apartment without an invitation or the like. It's perceived as an alternate universe with a set of hard and fast physical laws that differ from our own (or, it's this universe and we're all to blind to see). I can't see a way to differentiate that from scifi, even much of the "hard" stuff (much of which has FTL travel or the like).

Re:Since when are Buffy and Coraline Sci-Fi?

[Anonymous Coward]

That said, _Hominids_ is a truly awful book and as a winner is an embarrassment to all involved in the Hugo process.

It's based on Sliders, I mean, WTF? How did even get nominated?

Re:Since when are Buffy and Coraline Sci-Fi?

[Snaller]

But the One Ring isn't technology, it's a force of nature, and thus magic

Its also vastly overrated. What can it do except make you invisible and go nuts? If it was technology you could at least return it to the shop and get a Playstation instead!

Re:Since when are Buffy and Coraline Sci-Fi?

[Snaller]

The Hugo is not just a "science fiction" award.

But it should be! They made a mistake! Fantasy is for children!

Can someone explain to me

[Anonymous Coward]

the appeal of Sawyer's work? Now, if you want good Canadian scifi, read some James Alan Gardner.

Re:Can someone explain to me

[Anonymous Coward]

JAG is truly a helluva writer and I've thought well of him on the panels I've been on him with.

Ditto for Geoffrey Landis.

In that case

[Raul654]

Yeah...'cause "conversations with dead people" was chuck full of science-fiction

In that case, I hearby nominate Jonathan Edwards for the 2004 Dramatic Presentation Hugo Award

Yay Sawyer, Too!

[reallocate]

Sawyer deserves this. Nice to see recognition going to a writer who can build real stories around real characters.

Just how many times has locus won best semipro ?

[Crashmarik]

Is it just the fact that locus is about the only quality entry in the category ? They seem to win every year.

Hey now. What about...

[militantbob]

Orson Scott Card? I don't read a lot of scifi but i randomly picked up enders game a few months ago and am now finishing the last book (so far) in the series. ender series is still definitely scifi, but in a more vague sense, like rand's 'atlas shrugged' was scifi. but it's still an excellent series, which will given a movie treatment (enders game and enders shadow combined in one film) and which won the hugo and nebula awards back in the mid 80's....

anyone still reading card?

New entertainment industry

[asr_man]

People will eventually get bored not doing anything, so they'll pay to enter a theme park where they can have "immersive retro experiences" where the robots will let them join in flipping burgers or whatever, "just like they used to in the old days". The great grandparents (that's *you*) will think they're nuts.

Arthur C Clarke invented sattelite communication

[bstadil]

In general, SF derives from existing scientfic concepts

Look here for a counter argument.

Hello this is the Internet, HTML is what we use

[Anonymous Coward]

TORCON 3 The 61st World Science Fiction Convention August 28 to September 1, 2003 Metro Toronto Convention Centre
The 2003 Hugo Award Winners

PO Box 3, Station A, Toronto, Ontario, M5W 1A2, Canada info@ torcon3. on. ca www. torcon3. on. ca
Best Novel Hominids by Robert J. Sawyer (Analog 1-4/ 02; Tor)
Best Novella Coraline by Neil Gaiman (HarperCollins)
Best Novelette "Slow Life" by Michael Swanwick (Analog 12/ 02)

Best Short Story "Falling Onto Mars" by Geoffrey A. Landis (Analog 7-8/ 02)
Best Related Book Better to Have Loved: The Life of Judith Merril
Judith Merril and Emily Pohl-Weary (Between the Lines)
Best Short Form Dramatic Presentation Buffy the Vampire Slayer, "Conversations With Dead People"

(20th Century Fox Television/ Mutant Enemy Inc.) Directed by Nick Marck; Teleplay by Jane Espenson & Drew Goddard

Best Long Form Dramatic Presentation The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers
(New Line Cinema) Directed by Peter Jackson; Screenplay by Fran Walsh, Phillippa Boyens,
Stephen Sinclair & Peter Jackson; based on the novel by J. R. R. Tolkien
Best Professional Editor Gardner Dozois

Best Professional Artist Bob Eggleton
Best Semiprozine Locus
Charles N. Brown, Jennifer A. Hall, and Kirsten Gong-Wong, eds.
Best Fanzine Mimosa

Rich and Nicki Lynch, eds.
Best Fan Writer Dave Langford

Best Fan Artist Sue Mason
John W. Campbell Award for Best New Writer (sponsored by Dell Magazines)
Wen Spencer 1

From the FAQ

[Anonymous Coward]

People may nominate works of science fiction or fantasy. Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets is on the Hugo Awards ballot because enough people felt it deserves a Best Long Form Dramatic Presentation Hugo Award. The key word is "best" - we want the Hugo Awards to be given to the best works of the year. The Hugo Awards existed long before the World Fantasy Awards. Why should we limit ourselves to just science fiction?

Buffy is fantasy.

Bzzzzt!

[Anonymous Coward]

I think you mean "This is the web" or "This is the world wide web." The internet was around long before HTML.

Sawyer's Work Disappoints Plenty

[Nova Express]

>they do not dissapoint

That is, if you're not bothered by details like scientific plausability, plot, characterization, etc.

I have not read Hominids (although the reviews of it I have seen have not been promising), but I did read Starplex, which was a Hugo and Nebula finalist, and that was such a singularly wretched novel that I haven't read another Sawyer novel since.

This is clearly a case of "home cooking," since Worldcon was held in Sawyer's back yard. It's very sad that Sawyer won a Hugo before (and here's just a partial list) Gene Wolfe, Howard Waldrop, Pat Cadigan, China Mieville, Paul Di Filippo, Rudy Rucker, John Kessel, Iain Banks, Michaael Bishop...

Well, the list of science fiction writers better than Robert J. Sayer who haven't won a Hugo just goes on and on, doesn't it?

Re:Sawyer's Work Disappoints Plenty

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm also sure now that Sawyer has won he again will not shut up about how great a writer he is, and he will have to do at least a dozen interviews and a long-form documentary of how great he is in 2003. Don't believe me? Look up what his "personal website" domain is (exercise left to the google user).

Re:Sawyer's Work Disappoints Plenty

[Anonymous Coward]

"It's very sad that Sawyer won a Hugo before (and here's just a partial list) Gene Wolfe, Howard Waldrop, Pat Cadigan, China Mieville, Paul Di Filippo, Rudy Rucker, John Kessel, Iain Banks, Michaael Bishop... Well, the list of science fiction writers better than Robert J. Sayer who haven't won a Hugo just goes on and on, doesn't it?" Yeah, try a phone book!

Re:Sawyer's Work Disappoints Plenty

[Anonymous Coward]

Sawyer is a good SF writer. But Hominids is not his best book; Calculating God or Flasforward were better books.
And in the nominated list there was at least a better book (IMHO), The Scar by China Mieville.
But the convention happened in Sawyer's city, Toronto, and this probably skewed the votes.
A+,

Re:Sawyer's Work Disappoints Plenty

[schnitzi]

I hate "Me, too!" style posts, but let me just say, "Hear, hear!". I read his "The Terminal Experiment", and it was excrutiating...

Re:Sawyer's Work Disappoints Plenty

[cephyn]

I guess I'm in the minority -- I actually like Sawyer's stuff. Admittedly its pulp and cheap fun. All his books are pretty much the same. I read the first chapter of Hominids and was not impressed, and the plot didn't really make me want to buy the book -- now that it won an award I figured I'd have to read it now, but after the bad reviews from /. I'm all confused.

Re:Sawyer's Work Disappoints Plenty

[Anonymous Coward]

Particularly Mieville, in my opinion. His _The Scar_ was actually one of the nominees, and I figured it was a shoe-in to win the award. I read Brin's _Kiln People_ and was impressed, but _The Scar_ is remarkable fiction. If he didn't win for _Perdido Street Station_ and he didn't win for _The Scar_, I don't know if he's ever going to win a Hugo... Though keep your fingers crossed that he'll keep up the quality.

I'm sorry, but Sawyer is not in the same class as Mieville, Brin, or even Kim Stanley Robinson, whose book that was nominated this year was abysmal by Robinson's usual standards.

Sci-Fi vs. Fantasy

[FroBugg]

A lot of people seem to think that the Hugos are being lessened by being granted to works that aren't strictly sci-fi.

But these days there's very little sci-fi that's actually science fiction. Most of it is fantasy with computers.

China Mieville (one of the Hugo-nominated authors this year) has an excellent essay on the subject of what he calls "weird fiction" at his website, http://www.panmacmillan.com/features/china/debate. htm

Re:Sci-Fi vs. Fantasy

[nagora]

A lot of people seem to think that the Hugos are being lessened by being granted to works that aren't strictly sci-fi.

Personally, I think they're being lessened by being awarded to third-rate crap like the Two Towers.

TWW

Re:Hey now. What about...

[Anonymous Coward]

Orson Scott Card hasn't written any 'true' SF in a while. Unlike some, I enjoy all his stuff (not just the sci-fi, which is really just Ender's {Game | Shadow} and maybe Pastwatch), but he's mostly shifted into other genres.

_Hominids_ is book one of a trilogy

[DragonMagic]

_Hominids_ is the first book of a Neanderthal trilogy, where Neanderthals on an alternate earth, where Homo sapiens died out instead, use a quantum computer which opens a portal to our world.

The other two books, _Humans_ and _Hybrids_, are now both available. _Humans_ and _Hominids_ are paperbacks and _Hybrids_ *just* came out in hardcover.

If you enjoy good science fiction, read all three. And hopefully _Humans_ or _Hybrids_ makes the ballot again next year (both published first in 2003).

Re:_Hominids_ is book one of a trilogy

[Curunir_wolf]

So he stole the plot from Sliders? Oh, no, wait. Those were "kromags". Never mind.

Re:_Hominids_ is book one of a trilogy

[Stalyn]

where Neanderthals on an alternate earth, where Homo sapiens died out instead, use a quantum computer which opens a portal to our world.

and this won a Hugo? Is SciFi that bad nowadays?

Re:_Hominids_ is book one of a trilogy

[Anonymous Coward]

Geez, and one of the other winners: A short guy, with big harry feet, has to destroy a magical piece of jewelry, and takes 3 whole books to do it! Crap!

Re:_Hominids_ is book one of a trilogy

[vidarh]

And you really fail to see how this could lead to a thought provoking book, and decide to judge it on a few short sentences instead?

I haven't read this book, but sci fi is full of great books that resulted from the setting of "what if these two people or these two groups of people got a chance to meet under other circumstances".

Ah, it's a TV novelization!

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm glad someone is finally making novels based on the Sliders TV show.

And winning awards for them, no less.

Re:Hey now. What about...

[Anonymous Coward]

Just finished "Sarah" and "Rebekah". Neither are SF, of course.

Oddly, he preaches less while writing about the Women of Genesis than he does in the Ender series :)

magic in Tolkein

[MenTaLguY]

But the One Ring isn't technology, it's a force of nature, and thus magic.

Tolkein's thesis (insofar as he even had one) was that the One Ring was a sort of technology, inasmuch as it was most definitely not a force of nature -- it was specifically a work of Sauron's artifice.

This is well-supported in his writings; I also ran across an essay on the subject recently.

Re:magic in Tolkein

[soundofthemoon]

Of course the One Ring was the creation of Sauron. But Sauron himself was sort of a force of nature. He is never quite personified in the stories, existing mostly as a lurking presence off-stage. The Ring is still beyond the understanding and control of even the greatest of the Wise, and so even while created as an act of art, exists more as a force of nature for the characters in the story.

Re:magic in Tolkein

[Anonymous Coward]

This fits into a central science-fictional trope, I'd say; Faust via Frankenstein, absolute power corrupting absolutely.

Re:magic in Tolkein

[b-baggins]

The one ring was the embodiment of evil. It could no more be controlled by any individual than evil can be controlled. Those who were fools enough to try were consumed by it and became its slave.

It's a pretty simple theme, but probably quite beyond the comprehension of the relativism that makes up modern-day morality.

Re:magic in Tolkein

[MenTaLguY]

For what it's worth, I didn't feel necessary to make that tie-in myself since it's already done in the article.

Re:magic in Tolkein

[vidarh]

It's pretty well accepted by now, though, that Sauron and the ring represented the coming of machines to Middle Earth. Tolkien had a strong dislike for machines and technology, and made it pretty clear that that was where he had drawn his inspiration. So while it's not explicit in the books, it would seem quite valid to take it one step further and treat the ring as technology. Not being understood is not the same as not being understandable.

I would call Lord of the Rings a fantasy work, not sci fi, but the underlying theme of mans fear of the machines and what changes they brought is a typical sci fi theme.

Re:Hey now. What about...

[Anonymous Coward]

If you enjoy SF written by cultish wackjobs, you may enjoy Battlefield Earth (though arguably Hubbard was merely a calculating sociopath at the time he wrote it and not yet a cultish wackjob with a true-believer agenda to sell, unlike Card and Rand - any others I've missed in this "subgenre"? I'm seriously interested).

Re:Just how many times has locus won best semipro

[andyhat]

Interzone is excellent, and would get my vote if I were voting. NYRSF and Ansible are both excellent, as well, and I've heard good things about Speculations. Locus is excellent, too, of course, but at this point I think its wins are as much about the name recognition and momentum as because there aren't other great semiprozines.

Robert Sawyer's 'Homonids' won Best Novel

[Anonymous Coward]

'Homonids' - An epic story of the struggle for acceptance amongst ancient Neanderthal interior decorators.

Re:Hey now. What about...

[erikharrison]

Well, the cultish whackjob really crosses genres . . . .

Thing is Orson Scott Card may be a touch cultish - though frankly, the Christians have numbers over the Scientologists - but he ain't a whackjob. He doesn't live far from here, and comes up to read at the local bookstore everytime he publishes. He's really a nice guy, and unlike Hubbard, Orson Scott has written things worth reading. Ender's Game is one of the great SciFi novels, period in my opinion.

Ayn Rand is a whackjob with diareaha of the typewriter.

LoTR != Sci-Fi

[Down8]

Since when does a story like The Lord of the Ring fall intot the science fiction category? Magic doesn't cound as science people.

-bZj

Homonids

[incom]

I have to admit, homonids was a good book. I think this is the first time I've read a sci-fi book before it won a major award.

Re:Hey now. What about...

[militantbob]

Amusing that you would put Card alongside Rand like that. Rand has always been one of my favorite writers... Hubbard? *shudder*.

And what's cultish about Card? I don't know anything about him except that he's a 'Mormon' who doesn't seem very Mormon-ish and likes to use Catholicism as a tool to enable him to blather a bit every couple dozen pages in every book of his I've read. hehehe. *shrug*

Re:Yay Canada! Our own SF awards

[farrellj]

Also at Torcon 3, we gave out the Prix Aurora Awards, where we acknowledge the contributions to the fields of SF and Fantasy by Canadians...and here are the winners:

Best Long-Form Work in English
Meilleur livre en anglais

* -- Permanence, Karl Schroeder (Tor) --

Meilleur livre en francais
Best Long-Form Work in French

* -- Le Revenant de Fomalhaut, Jean-Louis Trudel (Mediaspaul) --

Best Short-Form Work in English
Meilleure nouvelle en anglais

* -- "Ineluctable", Robert J. Sawyer (Analog Nov/2002) --

Meilleure nouvelle en francais
Best Short-Form Work in French

* -- La Guerre sans temps, Sylvie Berard (Solaris 143) --

Best Work in English (Other)
Meilleur ouvrage en anglais (Autre)

* -- Edo van Belkom, editing Be VERY Afraid! (Tundra Books) --

Artistic Achievement / Accomplissement artistique

* -- Mel Vavaroutsos --

Fan Achievement (Publication)
Accomplissement fanique (publication)

* -- Made in Canada Newsletter, Don Bassie, ed. [webzine] --

Fan Achievement (Organizational)
Accomplissement fanique (Organisation)

* -- Georgina Miles --

Fan Achievement (Other)
Accomplissement fanique (autre)

* -- Jason Taniguchi, one-man SF parody shows / presentations
individuelles de parodies SF --

Uh huh

[autopr0n]

Except the scientists would probably have figured that out from his PATENT, not from reading his books. Anyway, one example does not mean much of anything. There may be some instances, but that doesn't mean that science would be nowhere without Sci-fi. I'd be willing to bet that the vast majority of scientific advances are not based on things in sci fi

Re:Uh huh

[Anonymous Coward]

Yea. What SF drives isn't the discovery and invention of new devices, but the consumer demand for products discussed in books and seen on film.

Re:Uh huh

[Anonymous Coward]

some instances

off the top of my head, a few more things "invented" by science fiction before science got to it: moon missions (Verne), robots (Lem, for the word, the concept being ancient), waldoes (Bradbury?), cyberspace (Gibson), television, telephone, cloning, etc. etc.

That is not to say the writers had worked out *how* to make these things reality - that's the job of scientists and engineers. But the writers had *thought* of it first.

At their best, science fiction and science inspire and enrich each other. It's a mutualism, much like the relationship between general fiction and life in general.

I'd be willing to bet that the vast majority of scientific advances are not based on things in sci fi

I wouldn't say "based on", but the vast majority of scientific advances have previously been described speculatively by science fiction writers.

- nic

Then you havent read

[Hecatonchires]

Snowcrash by Neal Stephenson
or
Ice Station by Matthew Reilly [not strictly scifi, but as action goes, wow]

I love enders game, but there is more out there.

Re:Then you havent read

[Hast]

I though Snowcrash was pretty bad from a literary standpoint. I much prefered Cryptonomicon to it. IMHO it just felt like too much of a rip off of standard cyberpunk. But there certainly are some good ideas in there, the suburbs and stuff like that and it's worth readin. And "I bet they will listen to Reason (tm)" is one good line. :-)

Totally agree

[tcdk]

I've had similar experiences with Sayer.

I started of with Frameshift (hugo finalist). Which was rather confusing and pointless (or rather it had to may points for any of them to mean anything). Thinking that I might be missing something (with Sayer getting all those awards), I tried The Terminal Experiment (Nebula winner), which was even worse.

Both books suffer badly from Sayer inablility to stick with the topic or hold a logical plot together. His characters are annoying sons-of-hippies, who thinks unlike any real people. They mostly act like politically correct robots.

I'm never going to read another Sayer novel, no matter how may awards it gets.

I'm not sure about it and frankly I'm not going to spend the time checking on it, but I've this idea that all these awards corolate with him having been
President of the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America, Inc..

I'm not saying that there's a direct connecting, but he must have a lot of friends and be well connected. Probably a good guy to know and brown-nose, if you what a good quote on the back of your next novel...

Re:Totally agree

[tcdk]

I'm not sure where all the w's went...

Sorry about that.

Re:Hey now. What about...

[nojayuk]

If you enjoy SF written by cultish wackjobs...any others I've missed in this "subgenre"? I'm seriously interested.

James P. Hogan is a Veliskovskian True Believer and this is showing through more and more in his newer writings. There are also quite a few believers in the Singularity (aka Rapture of the Nerds) who are writing SF and furthermore getting it published although since its the sort of thing Slashdot readers dream about it's probably not a cult but a "common interest".

Novel reviews

[mr breakfast]

For a bit of background there is a comparative review here of all the nominees for best novel.

Brother Grimm's Tales

[Moritz Moeller - Her]

would also be adult fiction for you right? Let's check with snow white as an example. It has murder (the witch trying to poison snow white), death (everyone thinks she is dead), destiny (Prince coming), revenge (the witch gets it in the end).

In fact children do like the same topics as adults, they just understand less, which is why HP and Grimm's fairy tales have simplistic plots and characters.

Canadians as Parochial Nationalists?

[LordZardoz]

I will admit that Hominids takes it a bit too far in making it clear that the story is taking place in some small towns in Ontario .

But before you come down on Canada for being parochial Nationalists, consider that every morning in schools that the first thing school children do is recite the Pledge of Allegiance and salute a flag. From where I stand, that seems damn near cultish.

If the only reason that you cannot stand the book is because it is blatently pro Canadian, then perhaps you were paying too much attention to the wrong bits. I liked Hominids a fair bit. The reason I liked it is because it is a story that takes a path much different then typical Sci-Fi. Not many Sci-Fi books manage to examine things like Religion and Violence in a primarily modern context.

END COMMUNICATION

SF in the classical sense

[ppanon]

Catherine Asaro, David Brin, Michael Flynn, Kathleen Ann Goonan, Wil McCarthy, Larry Niven, Neil Stephenson, John Varley, and Vernor Vinge all write hard SF. Two authors that I read regularly died last year: Robert L. Forward and Charles Sheffield, but there are still many good SF writers.

George R.R. Martin in his GoH speech said that this the new golden age of science fiction. I don't know if I would go that far but, while there is a lot of Star Trek, Babylon Five, and similar media-based material being pumped out, there is also a lot of good science fiction if you know where to look.

One of the winning stories online

[xanderwilson]

If anyone's interested, Geoffrey's story is still up on the Analog website: Falling Onto Mars.

Alex.