Among Others Wins Hugo For Best Novel

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Among Others Wins Hugo For Best Novel

Posted by Soulskill on Sunday September 2, 2012 @06:10PM from the congratulations-to-all dept.

The 2012 Hugo Award ceremony has completed at Chicon 7, and Among Others by Jo Walton has been given the award for Best Novel. The Man Who Bridged the Mist by Kij Johnson won for Best Novella, and The Paper Menagerie won for Best Short Story. Doctor Who had three nominations for Best Dramatic Presentation (Short Form), and ended up taking home the award for the episode "The Doctor's Wife," which was written by Neil Gaiman and directed by Richard Clark. Season 1 of Game of Thrones won Best Dramatic Presentation (Long Form), edging out Hugo and Captain America. Ursula Vernon was awarded the Best Graphic Story Hugo for Digger. See below for the full list of winners. Best Novel: Among Others by Jo Walton (Tor)

Best Novella: “The Man Who Bridged the Mist” by Kij Johnson (Asimov's, September/October 2011)

Best Novelette: “Six Months, Three Days” by Charlie Jane Anders (Tor.com)

Best Short Story: “The Paper Menagerie” by Ken Liu (The Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction, March/April 2011)

Best Related Work: The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction, Third Edition edited by John Clute, David Langford, Peter Nicholls, and Graham Sleight (Gollancz)

Best Graphic Story: Digger by Ursula Vernon (Sofawolf Press)

Best Dramatic Presentation (Long Form): Game of Thrones (Season 1), created by David Benioff and D. B. Weiss; written by David Benioff, D. B. Weiss, Bryan Cogman, Jane Espenson, and George R. R. Martin; directed by Brian Kirk, Daniel Minahan, Tim van Patten, and Alan Taylor (HBO)

Best Dramatic Presentation (Short Form): “The Doctor's Wife” (Doctor Who), written by Neil Gaiman; directed by Richard Clark (BBC Wales)

Best Editor (Short Form): Sheila Williams

Best Editor (Long Form): Betsy Wollheim

Best Professional Artist: John Picacio

Best Semiprozine: Locus edited by Liza Groen Trombi, Kirsten Gong-Wong, et al.

Best Fanzine: SF Signal edited by John DeNardo

Best Fan Writer: Jim C. Hines

Best Fan Artist: Maurine Starkey

Best Fancast: SF Squeecast, Lynne M. Thomas, Seanan McGuire, Paul Cornell, Elizabeth Bear, and Catherynne M. Valente

For a full breakdown of how all 1922 ballots were cast, check this PDF.

88 of 115 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

I must be getting old by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-02 18:16 · Score: 1

Season 1 of Game of Thrones won Best Dramatic Presentation (Long Form), edging out Hugo and Captain America.
While I haven't seen Hugo, Captain America had no Dramatic Presentation (or any Presentation, really) to speak of. How did it get to the top contender list??
(First post?)
1. Re:I must be getting old by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-02 20:19 · Score: 1
  
  I was confused too seeing Captain America winning anything with "Dramatic" in the name, but it was still a pretty good movie and a fine addition to the Marvel Cinematic Universe. It's a character that could be extremely generic and lame, but it was really well done.
2. Re:I must be getting old by TheRaven64 · 2012-09-02 20:27 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  It's the Hugo, not the Nebula. The Nebula award is intended to judge the artistic merit (whatever that means) of a work and is based on the opinions of a selected group of (mostly?) science fiction writers. The Hugo is based on nominations and votes from fans. It just means that a lot of people liked Captain America. Or that it didn't have much competition this year. Given that two of the other three options were 'Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2' (not as bad as Part 1, but still pretty dire, well into the Hollywood 'but my swimming pool is already filled with money' stage) and Source Code (if it's twice as good as I've heard, I'm still glad I haven't seen it), then there wasn't a great deal of choice. I thought Hugo was superb, but it also didn't get anything like the publicity of the other two, so I wouldn't be surprised if most of the voters hadn't seen it.
  
  --
  I am TheRaven on Soylent News
3. Re:I must be getting old by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-02 20:37 · Score: 1
  
  "It's pretty well done, it's just not my thing"
  That's because "well done" is subjective. If they thought it was well done, why would they dislike it? That makes no sense anyway. It's easily possible that they could feel it's the worst show on television.
4. Re:I must be getting old by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-02 20:39 · Score: 1
  
  I'm convinced that literally everyone who talks shit about GoT is just trolling or trying to be a contrarian. I say this because none of them say things like "It's pretty well done, it's just not my thing" or anything to that affect, they all feel the need to pretend it's the most aweful show on television.
  That's because you're delusional. The only bit of the second half I didn't watch in fast forward was when Joffrey goes back on his word and executes Eddard. The rest of the story is that midget shithead screwing women left right and center in whore houses. Historically inaccurate wenching set in a mythical version of medieval England is definitely not my thing. The costumes varied from good to excellent. The scenery could be quite impressive. But the storyline was shite, and if you think it was good I weep for you.
5. Re:I must be getting old by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-02 20:54 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  The only bit of the second half I didn't watch in fast forward
  Yeah, if I watched an entire show in fast forward, I'd think it was pretty bad too. Game of Thrones was pretty awesome when watched at normal speed though.
6. Re:I must be getting old by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-02 23:16 · Score: 1
  
  Didn't you get the memo? In America, we're supposed to blindly cheer and rave for stuff actually literally based on Nazi war propaganda stories and commissioned / paid for by the US military. Especially if it depicts professional mass-murderers (aka "soldiers") as "heroes", and generally has a feeling of "’MERICA, FUCK YEAH!".
  How dare you think for yourself! Off to the Gulag with you!
7. Re:I must be getting old by PopeRatzo · 2012-09-03 00:45 · Score: 1
  
  I'm not sure I understand why Hugo is in the mix. Isn't the Hugo Award for Science Fiction? While I also loved the movie, and have always been a sucker for the Melies story, I didn't see it as science fiction.
  
  --
  You are welcome on my lawn.
8. Re:I must be getting old by julesh · 2012-09-03 01:03 · Score: 1
  
  The Nebula award [...] is based on the opinions of a selected group of (mostly?) science fiction writers.
  Entirely science fiction and/or fantasy writers: judges must be members of SFWA, and previous publication of a work (or multiple short works) of appropriate genre fiction in a professional capacity is a membership requirement of the organisation.
9. Re:I must be getting old by cpu6502 · 2012-09-03 03:50 · Score: 1
  
  Lots of comic fans in the Hugo ballot. The Captain came-in third place.
  MY complaint is: Why are there two TV shows winning awards? We have the Doctor Who episode, and then Game of Thrones entire season. I would prefer that GOT be ineligible for the "long form" award so that we have one award for TV, and one award for movies. (I thought that was the original intent of splitting the Dramatic Presentation in the first place.)
  
  --
  My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
10. Re:I must be getting old by cpu6502 · 2012-09-03 03:55 · Score: 1
  
  >>>I'm convinced that literally everyone who talks shit about GoT is just trolling or trying to be a contrarian.
  I thought it was boring. I downloaded the whole season but only watched about half of it. Then I lost interest. I'd rather watch a drama about real history. Or alt. history.
  
  --
  My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
11. Re:I must be getting old by cpu6502 · 2012-09-03 04:19 · Score: 1
  
  P.S. Babylon 5 and Lost were not allowed to nominate a whole season, even though both were continuing stories just like Game of Thrones.
  
  --
  My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
12. Re:I must be getting old by sapphire+wyvern · 2012-09-03 14:57 · Score: 1
  
  What about the clockwork artist? That seems like a sf element, even if the story overall is mostly focussed on the human aspects.
13. Re:I must be getting old by jollyreaper · 2012-09-03 16:22 · Score: 1
  
  Historically inaccurate wenching set in a mythical version of medieval England is definitely not my thing.
  I don't recall dragons and zombies in my history, either! Game of Thrones is really inaccurate!
  
  --
  Kwisatz Haderach
  Sell the spice to CHOAM
  This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
14. Re:I must be getting old by tehcyder · 2012-09-03 20:22 · Score: 1
  
  I'm convinced that literally everyone who talks shit about GoT is just trolling or trying to be a contrarian.
  Right, so GoT is objectively great, and anyone who thinks otherwise must be lying or trolling? I am not a great fantasy fan in the first place, so I'm biased, but I found what I have seen of GoT to be enjoyable in the fairly camp way that Arnie in Conan the Barbarian was. It's like Dallas with swords and tits, which is fine in itself but doesn't mean it's great TV.
  
  Grow up, fanboy. You sound like the vapid, whiny Twilight fans who can't believe that anyone doesn't think they're, like, the greatest evar.
  
  --
  To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
15. Re:I must be getting old by tehcyder · 2012-09-03 20:31 · Score: 1
  
  "It's pretty well done, it's just not my thing"
  That's because "well done" is subjective. If they thought it was well done, why would they dislike it? That makes no sense anyway. It's easily possible that they could feel it's the worst show on television.
  No, it is entirely possible to appreciate that something is well done in its own terms without enjoying it in the slightest.
  
  When I am forced to see something like Downton Abbey, I can say "yes, lovely costumes, nice interior decoration, well defined characters portrayed by good actors" while disliking the whole thing completely.
  
  Everyone has whole genres of film, books or whatever that they simply don't get on with, that doesn't mean they can't appreciate the good things in them. It's just that unless you're a professional critic who needs to achieve some sort of objectivity, life is just too short to keep watching 1950s Hollywood musicals, 1930s Westerns, 1990s romcoms or whatever if they're not your thing.
  
  --
  To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
16. Re:I must be getting old by tehcyder · 2012-09-03 21:26 · Score: 1
  
  Anyone who refers to people who read books as "bookies" has automatically lost any credibility they might conceivably have had.
  
  --
  To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
17. Re:I must be getting old by tehcyder · 2012-09-03 21:32 · Score: 1
  
  I'm not sure I understand why Hugo is in the mix. Isn't the Hugo Award for Science Fiction? While I also loved the movie, and have always been a sucker for the Melies story, I didn't see it as science fiction.
  I assumed it was some sort of postmodernist joke. Because obviously something called Hugo should get a Hugo award, in the same way that it would be amusing if a film called Oscar, with a director and leading actor called Oscar, won an Oscar.
  
  --
  To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Many voters don't read all novels by blarkon · 2012-09-02 18:25 · Score: 4, Insightful

A lot of voters don't seem to read all the novels - so a substantial number vote for what they've read and they've only read what they already know they will like.
1. Re:Many voters don't read all novels by sheepe2004 · 2012-09-02 23:56 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  A lot of voters don't seem to read all the novels - so a substantial number vote for what they've read and they've only read what they already know they will like.
  I was about to mod this as insightful until I realised I hadn't read all the comments and I only have one mod point left.
  
  --
  http://compsoc.man.ac.uk/~shep/
2. Re:Many voters don't read all novels by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-03 01:22 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Nominees were announced on April 7th
  Part of the Voter packet was made available on May 18th
  (it took like a week or two more for the novels to be available, IIRC)
  Voting closed July 31st
  Voters generally don't have time to read all the content, unless they purchase and read them before the voter packet is released (and then pay twice for them) or have lots of time to read during that two month period between when the packet is made available and voting is closed.
  I usually get to all but one of the novels, with the novel I miss being one by an author I've read before, but wasn't fond of.
3. Re:Many voters don't read all novels by cpu6502 · 2012-09-03 04:53 · Score: 1
  
  >>>A lot of voters don't seem to read all the novels - so a substantial number vote for what they've read
  This used to be an accurate statement, but it is no more. Everybody who votes gets a free copy of all 5 novels (and novellas and short stories and.....). I'm sure that they, like me, read through all five free books before voting for best novel.
  I read a novel in 1-2 days. The shorts are like TV episodes..... about an hour each. Easily done. Oh and also: You can find all the shorts and novellas on the web for free. It's just a matter of searching.
  
  --
  My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
4. Re:Many voters don't read all novels by doom · 2012-09-03 05:16 · Score: 1
  
  I'm sure that they, like me, read through all five free books before voting for best novel.
  
  Have con-goers stopped drinking beer? They used to be famous for voting for whoever did con parties with free kegs of beer. But I guess if everyone does that, the advantage is lost.
5. Re:Many voters don't read all novels by blarkon · 2012-09-03 11:46 · Score: 1
  
  A lot of the members I've talked to only read the ones that they were interested in of the packet. I asked about 20 people if they'd read everything - and except for 2 cases the answer was "no". In most cases they'd read 2 or so of the books.
Jo Walton? Dr. Who? by fm6 · 2012-09-02 18:39 · Score: 2

I don't what I find stranger, that Neil Gaiman actually took the time write a Dr. Who episode (part of a lame ripoff of The Time Traveler's Wife) or that people really think it counts as SF.
I'm wondering how much I care about Jo Walton these days. I started out reading Farthing, which was very good, but turned out to be the first volume in a trilogy that was terrible. She's also written a series about Victorian Dragons, which I feel no inclination at all the read. I'll probably get this new one out of the library, but end up not finishing it.
1. Re:Jo Walton? Dr. Who? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-02 18:56 · Score: 1
  
  The Doctors Wife wasn't part of the River Song arc.
2. Re:Jo Walton? Dr. Who? by 1u3hr · 2012-09-02 19:53 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  I don't what I find stranger, that Neil Gaiman actually took the time write a Dr. Who episode (part of a lame ripoff of The Time Traveler's Wife) or that people really think it counts as SF.
  Gaiman is British, and Doctor Who is truly an icon of British SF. Just about every SF fan, and writer, was weaned on it and feels deep affection for it.I've been watching it since 1964 myself. Doctor Who is very soft core SF, but still tries to be SF.
  If you held to strict definitions of SF, you'd hardly ever give out any awards for TV or movies. Game of Thrones is pure fantasy, for instance. "Gritty" fantasy, but still has magic, zombies, dragons, etc. I'm just glad it didn't go to a comic book superhero "franchise". Leave that stuff to Comicon.
3. Re:Jo Walton? Dr. Who? by Chrisq · 2012-09-02 20:20 · Score: 2
  
  (part of a lame ripoff of The Time Traveler's Wife)
  Really? Let me remind you. "The Doctor's wife" was the Tardis, embodied in idris when the Tardis was captured by "the House". I fail to see any similarity with "The Time Traveller's wife", except for "wife" appearing in the title.
4. Re:Jo Walton? Dr. Who? by TheRaven64 · 2012-09-02 20:35 · Score: 2
  
  If you look at the nominations, three of the five were for Doctor Who episodes. Given the piss-poor writing of the last series (I feel sorry for Matt Smith; you can tell he's a competent actor, but the writers seem to be religiously opposed to giving him anything to work with), The Doctor's Wife was probably the best they could have come up with. Night Terrors was the closest to a traditional Doctor Who episode, but didn't really stand out. Closing Time was just embarrassing. The Rebel Flesh / The Almost People would probably get my vote, but none of them were really worthy of an award. We haven't had anything like The Empty Child, The Girl in the Fireplace, or Blink since Steven Moffat took over, which is quite odd given that he wrote them. It makes me think that Russell T Davis must be a very good script editor...
  
  --
  I am TheRaven on Soylent News
5. Re:Jo Walton? Dr. Who? by 1u3hr · 2012-09-02 22:02 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, but as I said, there are thin pickings for quality SF writing on screen, at the best of times. If "Doctor Who" doesn't deserve a gong, what does? "No award"?
6. Re:Jo Walton? Dr. Who? by thomst · 2012-09-03 00:29 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  1u3hr opined:
  
  Gaiman is British, and Doctor Who is truly an icon of British SF. Just about every SF fan, and writer, was weaned on it and feels deep affection for it.I've been watching it since 1964 myself. Doctor Who is very soft core SF, but still tries to be SF.
  I remember when the first Doctor Who paperback novel came out (yes, I'm that old). Even though I was only ten years old, the back cover blurb alone was enough to convince me that this was not science fiction - and any discriminating sf fan of the time would have reached the same conclusion.
  Flash forward nearly fifty years: last night, the Mrs. and I finished watching the premiere episode of season seven of the Dr. Who reboot with great satisfaction and kudos to Stephen Moffat, who continues to crank out immensely entertaining scripts at a Straczynskian pace. And we're very much looking forward to seeing what he's got up his writerly sleeve over the course of the rest of the season, too.
  The difference? Back then, I was a hard-sf purist, who disdained anything that smacked of fantasy dressed up in science fiction clothes. What changed my mind about the Dr. Who reboot (besides my tastes becoming less rigidly defined with the passage of time, I mean) was that, first and foremost, the new Dr. Who is based on good storytelling. The Gaiman-penned The Doctor's Wife episode is a good case in point, but Moffat (who writes most of the episodes, as well as being the showrunner) is a consistently excellent writer, too.
  The thing about Dr. Who both then and now is that you just have to accomodate yourself as a viewer/reader to the fact that there's essentially no actual science in this nominally-science-fictional series. Oh, they'll throw in sf buzzwords, but, as for any real science content? Don't get your hopes up. But, as long as you're content to discard any expectation you might have of ACTUAL sf in this so-called "science fiction" show, and content yourself with mere crackin' entertainment, Dr. Who - especially the latest version - can be a mightily pleasurable indulgence.
  
  If you held to strict definitions of SF, you'd hardly ever give out any awards for TV or movies. Game of Thrones is pure fantasy, for instance. "Gritty" fantasy, but still has magic, zombies, dragons, etc. I'm just glad it didn't go to a comic book superhero "franchise". Leave that stuff to Comicon.
  The Hugos are awarded based on voting by the fans that attend (or at least pay to support) the WorldCon. Some of 'em are purists, but many are not.
  Otherwise, how to account for the presence of so many of Anne McCaffrey's seemingly-endless procession of Pern novels on Hugo finalist ballots over the years?
  However, I take issue with the notion that, barring fantasy entries, "you'd hardly ever give out any awards for TV or movies." Over the years, there's been a steady, if admittedly thin, stream of "hard" sf TV series, and a thinner, but still steady stream of movies: Joss Whedon's Firefly and Dollhouse, The Sarah Connor Chronicles, Cattlecar Galaxia, Andromeda, Babylon 5, and the various incarnations of Star Trek all spring immediately to mind in the TV category, and Syfy's current Alphas certainly qualifies, as well (and it has a kickin' theme song, to boot). As for movies, there's been plenty of those, too - far too many to list here - with Bruce Willis's upcoming Loopers being the latest. And there's some really good smaller, indie movies, too (Moon and Timecrimes, for instance).
  The good stuff - the pure quill, to quote a Smithism - is out there. Certainly there's been enough of it to make an award every year (although the number of choices in any given year might well be pretty limited), even with the entrants limited to "hard" sf stories. And remember, ever since Judy Merrill coined the term back in the 60's, "sf" has stood for "speculative fiction" - and, in the long run, that's probably all to the good for the relentless expansion of the brand into the mainstream.
  Believe me when I say that's something I never expected to happen, back when I picked up Tom Swift Jr. and the Caves of Nuclear Fire at the age of six, and began my lifelong love affair with sf.
  
  --
  Check out my novel.
7. Re:Jo Walton? Dr. Who? by TheLink · 2012-09-03 00:56 · Score: 1
  
  "No award" when stuff is too crap is actually a good policy.
  
  I'm not saying that nothing is good enough- I haven't really been keeping up with stuff, so I'm not qualified to judge.
  --
  
  Too many replies beneath your current threshold
8. Re:Jo Walton? Dr. Who? by PopeRatzo · 2012-09-03 00:57 · Score: 1
  
  How do people think Among Others is a better novel than Embassytown? In an off year for new science fiction novels (except Embassytown), it seemed pretty obvious that China Melville's novel, which in my opinion was an homage to the recently-passed Ray Bradbury, deserves every sci-fi award of the year.
  2012 will be better. There's already City of Bohane which is terrific, and Paulo Bagiacalupi has a new one and already a clear favorite for Best First Novel in Caliban's War (the Expanse) if you happen to love space opera (I do not).
  Jo Walton is competent enough, and Among Others is her best work, but it still felt like I was reading above-average young adult fiction, little more.
  
  --
  You are welcome on my lawn.
9. Re:Jo Walton? Dr. Who? by Smauler · 2012-09-03 03:21 · Score: 1
  
  It's China Mieville, not Melville. I originally read it at Melville, too. Have to go pick up Embassytown soon, have read all his others.
10. Re:Jo Walton? Dr. Who? by fm6 · 2012-09-03 03:27 · Score: 1
  
  It tries to be SF. Epic fail.
  You seem to be saying that there should be Hugos for crappy SF, pseudo-SF, and non-SF, just so they they can cover all the categories. Well, if you want the awards to be meaningless, I guess that makes sense.
11. Re:Jo Walton? Dr. Who? by fm6 · 2012-09-03 03:30 · Score: 1
  
  Sorry, my mistake. The title made me think of the episode where The Doctor marries that that woman from ER.
12. Re:Jo Walton? Dr. Who? by cpu6502 · 2012-09-03 04:02 · Score: 1
  
  >>>I don't what I find stranger, that Neil Gaiman actually took the time write a Dr. Who episode or that people really think it counts as SF.
  I think you should be modded "troll". Of course Doctor Who counts as SF in the Hugo Award arena. Ditto past television winners like Babylon 5, Star Trek, and Twilight Zone. Where have you been??? (Trivia: Neil Geiman wrote an episode for not just Doctor Who, but also Babylon 5.)
  
  --
  My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
13. Re:Jo Walton? Dr. Who? by cpu6502 · 2012-09-03 04:08 · Score: 1
  
  I am surprised how many times "no award" was given. In every instance but one, there were some classic movies that should have won.
  Example: The Day the Earth Caught Fire.
  Another example: Colossus The Forbin Project
  Another: Logan's Run
  Another: Twilight Zone 1963 (either the whole thing, or a single episode). It doesn't pay to be picky because when future generations look back and see "no award" they wonder if you were stupid. In all these cases the movies/shows I listed should have won an award.
  
  --
  My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
14. Re:Jo Walton? Dr. Who? by 1u3hr · 2012-09-03 05:59 · Score: 1
  
  You seem to be saying that there should be Hugos for crappy SF, pseudo-SF, and non-SF, just so they they can cover all the categories. Well, if you want the awards to be meaningless, I guess that makes sense.
  Don't put words in my mouth. I never said that at all.
  I wasn't saying what I wanted or what "should" happen. I was explaining why the programs that won did.
15. Re:Jo Walton? Dr. Who? by Fallingcow · 2012-09-03 06:15 · Score: 1
  
  Jo Walton is competent enough, and Among Others is her best work, but it still felt like I was reading above-average young adult fiction, little more.
  Welcome to the curse of being someone who reads and enjoys science fiction, but doesn't exclusively read sci-fi (or fantasy).
16. Re:Jo Walton? Dr. Who? by fm6 · 2012-09-03 06:30 · Score: 1
  
  I'm not putting words in your mouth, I'm trying to understand what you're saying. If you don't want to be misinterpreted, write more clearly.
17. Re:Jo Walton? Dr. Who? by fm6 · 2012-09-03 07:39 · Score: 1
  
  Sorry, I confused the episode called TDW with the episode featuring TDW.
18. Re:Jo Walton? Dr. Who? by Kittenman · 2012-09-03 08:39 · Score: 1
  
  (part of a lame ripoff of The Time Traveler's Wife)
  Really? Let me remind you. "The Doctor's wife" was the Tardis, embodied in idris when the Tardis was captured by "the House". I fail to see any similarity with "The Time Traveller's wife", except for "wife" appearing in the title.
  And "The".
  
  --
  "The greatest lesson in life is to know that even fools are right sometimes" - Winston Churchill
19. Re:Jo Walton? Dr. Who? by Chrisq · 2012-09-03 09:13 · Score: 1
  
  Sorry, my mistake. The title made me think of the episode where The Doctor marries that that woman from ER.
  Even that did not have much in common ... no more than either have in common with Slaughterhouse-Five or Time and Time Again.
20. Re:Jo Walton? Dr. Who? by fm6 · 2012-09-03 09:40 · Score: 1
  
  You see a story where two characters fall in love and experience the same events in reverse order, and you don't see any similarity with The Time Traveler's Wife?
21. Re:Jo Walton? Dr. Who? by Chrisq · 2012-09-03 18:19 · Score: 1
  
  read what I said again ... no more so than other stories where people fall in love and live in reverse order.
22. Re:Jo Walton? Dr. Who? by fm6 · 2012-09-03 19:30 · Score: 1
  
  Slaughterhouse 5 was a love story? I must have read it wrong.
  Anyway, Moffatt said that he "borrowed ideas" from TTTW.
23. Re:Jo Walton? Dr. Who? by 1u3hr · 2012-09-03 21:00 · Score: 1
  
  The problem is at your end. You either deliberately or carelessly misinterpreted what I wrote to prop up your soapbox.
24. Re:Jo Walton? Dr. Who? by tehcyder · 2012-09-03 21:37 · Score: 1
  
  a Dr. Who episode (part of a lame ripoff of The Time Traveler's Wife)
  I think TTTW was the lame ripoff of Science fiction.
  
  --
  To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
25. Re:Jo Walton? Dr. Who? by tehcyder · 2012-09-03 21:58 · Score: 1
  
  The thing about Dr. Who both then and now is that you just have to accomodate yourself as a viewer/reader to the fact that there's essentially no actual science in this nominally-science-fictional series. Oh, they'll throw in sf buzzwords, but, as for any real science content? Don't get your hopes up.
  Discussions like this always end up becoming a "no true Scotsman" fallacy. There is absolutely nothing to say that you need to have hard science to make something science fiction. A lot of work by Philip K Dick for instance has about the same scientific depth as the Hobbit, but who cares?
  
  Anyway, half the "science" in science fiction is bollicks. Just because you handwave away faster than light travel in a Space Opera by calling it inter-dimensional hyperspatial shifting or casually let people have anti-gravity suits doesn't make it science-y.
  
  The sort of hard science SF novels that go into great detail about building space rockets or whatever are often instructive rather than entertaining. The key word in "science fiction" is the second one. It has been said many times that "speculative fiction" would be a better general description of the genre anyway.
  
  --
  To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
26. Re:Jo Walton? Dr. Who? by tehcyder · 2012-09-03 22:04 · Score: 1
  
  You seem convinced that The Time Traveller's Wife is somehow the first and best time travel story. It is neither.
  
  --
  To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
27. Re:Jo Walton? Dr. Who? by fm6 · 2012-09-04 04:30 · Score: 1
  
  What, because a bad TV show ripped it off, it's a great book? Yeah, that's logical.
28. Re:Jo Walton? Dr. Who? by fm6 · 2012-09-04 05:32 · Score: 1
  
  Agreed. I'm trashing Dr. Who, not defending the writer they ripped off.
29. Re:Jo Walton? Dr. Who? by fm6 · 2012-09-04 05:35 · Score: 1
  
  Ah, conspiracy theories, the last refuge of the stupid.
No ePub direct from Tor? by trawg · 2012-09-02 18:50 · Score: 5, Interesting

I can't figure out the world of e-book publishing. I'm generally happy to buy the Hugo Award winners (and even nominees) figuring that half the work in finding at least some good SF has been done for me, but I can't just go to the publisher's website and buy the fucking book directly from them in an ePub version.
I find this especially weird for Tor given that they seem to understand DRM sucks and they made a big noise about all their ebooks going DRM free.
But on their buy page (which I found from this article in the Tor blog after doing a Google search for the name) only lets me pick from a bunch of ebook retailers like Amazon, B&N, Google Books... and I know at least some of those won't be available as options for me because I'm here in Australia and not in the USA (Google Books for example is not available to us here).
Further, most of the other options are for specific devices - I happen to have a Kobo, but when I follow the link for that, it takes me to the Kobo search page - either the book is not available there at all, or it's not available for my region. I've tried buying "DRM free" ebooks from Amazon and could not figure out how to do it easily without a Kindle (you don't seem to ever got prompted to download a file; I assume it is all back-end device specific magic tied to your account...?)
In short - I just want to download an ePub file. I know many many users don't want to have to do this, but it is seriously the absolute simplest form of distribution you could come up with - just let me download a .epub file directly in my browser so I can do whatever the hell I want with it!
1. Re:No ePub direct from Tor? by julesh · 2012-09-02 19:44 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  But on their buy page [macmillan.com] (which I found from this article [tor.com] in the Tor blog after doing a Google search for the name) only lets me pick from a bunch of ebook retailers like Amazon, B&N, Google Books... and I know at least some of those won't be available as options for me because I'm here in Australia and not in the USA (Google Books for example is not available to us here).
  The problem here goes deeper than you think -- Tor don't have the required license to sell Walton's book to you, as they only have the north american and UK distribution rights, AIUI. For you to be able to buy the book, an australian publisher will need to enter into a contract with Walton.
2. Re:No ePub direct from Tor? by Rogerborg · 2012-09-02 22:22 · Score: 2
  
  Informative; also bullshit. The idea of regional "distribution" and "publishers" for eBooks, I mean.
  
  --
  If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
3. Re:No ePub direct from Tor? by RabidReindeer · 2012-09-02 23:11 · Score: 2
  
  Sadly, the only way of getting without pains a DRM-free epub of many books is to download them from one of the many simple channels that offers them "illegaly". While Amazon and others do a reasonable job of simplifying the process of getting an e-book, it's still DRM'd.
  In any case, "Among Others" is NOT SF, but fantasy, and quite good at that.
  Buying a book from an ebbok bookseller doesn't have to mean DRM. While Amazon might force it, their competition does not.
  A recent TOR ePub in the Barnes & Noble Nook shop carried a very explicit notice that due to the insistence of the publisher, that book did not carry DRM.
4. Re:No ePub direct from Tor? by EzInKy · 2012-09-03 01:24 · Score: 1
  
  So authors are still content to rely on this outmodded must have a middleman "sucking me dry" concept, are they? If someone wants to read you, what difference does it make where they live? Seriously, is anybody really buying into this "can't drive a horseless carraige without a buggy whip" type of thinking anymore?
  
  --
  Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
5. Re:No ePub direct from Tor? by dargaud · 2012-09-03 01:25 · Score: 1
  
  I've been wanting to buy an ereader for a long time but was wondering about all the things you just wrote. Kindle doesn't read pdf/ebook and other formats for free files (from Project Gutemberg for instance). Other e-readers can't purchase books that are licenced for the Kindle only. I don't want to read on my phone or a bright tablet with the kindle software. What is the solution ? It shouldn't be that hard !
  
  --
  Non-Linux Penguins ?
6. Re:No ePub direct from Tor? by Builder · 2012-09-03 02:04 · Score: 1
  
  And yet in this case, Tor do not have the book available for sale to the OP.
  If publishers don't realise that they are pissing people off by refusing to take their money, they're going to have to face the same challenge that the music industry did, instead of learning from their mistakes and offering a solution.
7. Re:No ePub direct from Tor? by CrimsonAvenger · 2012-09-03 02:50 · Score: 1
  
  The keyword you're looking for is "Calibre". It's for ebook library management on your PC, but it can also convert from one ebook format to another...
  
  --
  
  "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
8. Re:No ePub direct from Tor? by safetyinnumbers · 2012-09-03 03:52 · Score: 1
  
  Buying a book from an ebbok bookseller doesn't have to mean DRM. While Amazon might force it, their competition does not.
  That was the point - Amazon doesn't enforce it, it displays "this book is DRM-free at the request of the publisher" for some books now. But the poster was complaining that you still can't actually get that book without downloading it to a kindle.
9. Re:No ePub direct from Tor? by cpu6502 · 2012-09-03 04:14 · Score: 1
  
  >>>So authors are still content to rely on this outmodded must have a middleman "sucking me dry" concept, are they?
  As if a book exists by itself. The authors need the following people:
  - an editor to turn their overlong tome into something people will be willing to read
  - an artist to create the cover (it's what sells books)
  - a publisher to contact the bookstores & stick the book onto shelves.
  The alternative is to be like all those self-published authors on amazon.com that have poorly-written stories (needs an editor) filled with numerous typos, generic art covers (often look like porno mags) that only get around ten downloads (no publisher to push the book into B&N or Borders for the big sales).
  
  --
  My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
10. Re:No ePub direct from Tor? by RDW · 2012-09-03 04:26 · Score: 2
  
  I've tried buying "DRM free" ebooks from Amazon and could not figure out how to do it easily without a Kindle (you don't seem to ever got prompted to download a file; I assume it is all back-end device specific magic tied to your account...?)
  There are desktop applications for Windows and Mac, e.g.:
  http://www.amazon.com/gp/kindle/pc/download
  Once this is installed and registered to your Amazon account, any purchased ebook files are automatically downloaded to a directory on your computer when the application is started, or you request a sync. From there (if DRM free) you can convert the files to some other format like epub, using a tool like Calibre:
  http://calibre-ebook.com/
  Even if the files do have DRM, there are unofficial Calibre plugins to disinfect them seamlessly, as this l33t h4x0r site describes:
  http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2011/01/how-to-strip-drm-from-kindle-e-books-and-others/
11. Re:No ePub direct from Tor? by trawg · 2012-09-03 09:51 · Score: 1
  
  As someone else points out, Calibre, solves a lot of those problems for you. I use it to convert to ePub from various other formats - it is a great piece of open source software!
  I actually do most of my reading on my phone. Some people seem to really struggle long-term reading but me (and my girlfriend) do it for hours with no problems. I can't explain why, but the one tip I would say is when reading at night or in dark environments, make sure you change colours - many book readers (I use FBReader on Android) have a 'night mode', but it is often white text on black background. Change to red text on black background and it is MASSIVELY less stressful on the eyes.
12. Re:No ePub direct from Tor? by dargaud · 2012-09-03 17:51 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, I've used Calibre in the past for other things. But if you can't download Amazon books, then what use is it ? And can it put a pdf/ePub onto a Kindle ? How ? Not having a Kindle, I'm curious.
  
  --
  Non-Linux Penguins ?
13. Re:No ePub direct from Tor? by tehcyder · 2012-09-03 22:09 · Score: 1
  
  In any case, "Among Others" is NOT SF, but fantasy, and quite good at that.
  "SF" is just a label to help bookshops file their product and comfort stupid people. A book is either well written or not, nothing else matters.
  
  --
  To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
14. Re:No ePub direct from Tor? by neminem · 2012-09-04 03:33 · Score: 1
  
  You don't need a publisher in order to get a good editor (or several). You don't need a publisher to get a good artist. You -shouldn't- need a publisher to get your books onto shelves, though my guess is that these days you probably still do (and anyway, it would probably continue to be easier... though one could imagine a do-it-yourself type publishing company that you could pay to deal only with the legal aspects of getting books onto shelves for you, but had you do everything else? I'm sure people would go for that.)
15. Re:No ePub direct from Tor? by RabidReindeer · 2012-09-04 03:44 · Score: 1
  
  I think we have some confusion here.
  The original complaint was
  
  While Amazon and others do a reasonable job of simplifying the process of getting an e-book, it's still DRM'd.
  And Barnes and Noble (also reportedly Amazon) DO allow getting the book DRM-free, via their respective stores. So that addresses that complaint.
  However, an off-the-shelf Nook will then download the book into its hidden memory, and *I* have a complaint with that.
  As far as buying direct from TOR goes, while that would be nice, there is a difference between publisher and bookseller. TOR has done the work of acquiring the author, proofreading and typesetting, making editorial suggestions, and so forth in order to produce a product. However, it is their option to outsource actual distribution of the product.
  Yes, it introduces a middleman, but there's still value there. TOR can keep their costs (and thus the product costs) down by not having to hire people and acquire assets needed to handle the retail sales transactions and distributions. And even over the Internet, that's a lot of work. Amazon, B&N, and their ilk provide the "one-stop shopping" experience so that you don't have to keep accounts with every single publisher whose authors you like and handle the merchant accounts, taxes, download servers & suport personnel, etc. etc.
  It's actually not that bad a deal as long as you keep the hidden storage, "virtual ownership" and DRM out of the mix.
16. Re:No ePub direct from Tor? by Man+Eating+Duck · 2012-09-04 15:07 · Score: 1
  
  I'm seconding this. I've bought many books from the Kindle store, automatically stripped DRM with Calibre and converted them to the superior epub format. Works fine with my Sony reader.
  
  --
  Are you a grammar Nazi? I'm trying to improve my English; please correct my errors! :)
17. Re:No ePub direct from Tor? by julesh · 2012-09-17 08:08 · Score: 1
  
  You don't need a publisher in order to get a good editor (or several).
  OK... so how do you find a good editor without a publisher? How do you decide whether they are right for your book or not? How much is it going to cost you out of pocket? When you realise that around 75% of published fiction makes a loss, are you going to chance it?
  
  You -shouldn't- need a publisher to get your books onto shelves, though my guess is that these days you probably still do (and anyway, it would probably continue to be easier... though one could imagine a do-it-yourself type publishing company that you could pay to deal only with the legal aspects of getting books onto shelves for you, but had you do everything else? I'm sure people would go for that.)
  The problem with this is that bookshops rely on publishers as a filter to whether it's worth considering stocking a book. They don't as a rule stock self-published books simply because they don't have the resources to decide whether they should or not, because there are so many of them. Consider, for example, self-publishing company PublishAmerica (or vanity press, if you ask the right people), which put out more titles last year than all the proper English-language publishers put together. And they have several competitors nearly as big.
18. Re:No ePub direct from Tor? by neminem · 2012-09-17 08:34 · Score: 1
  
  I do see the issue with the second point (there's a lot of crap out there being vanity-published, most of it really awful, that would have no business being on shelves of bookstores. There's a decent amount of crap being published by legit publishers with no business being on shelves, too, but I would be willing to bet the ratio of mindnumbingly terrible to not, would be much better in the latter case. That is a real issue, given that obviously any company you paid to help you put your books on shelves would claim it was the next coming of Christ to the book world.
  The first one is less of an issue, though - if you write well, you probably have friends and/or random internet people who'd be happy to read your betas. Some of them are probably literate and would be happy to help you edit. I know many mainstream authors do that sort of thing as a first-round anyway. That's mostly what I was referring to. Plus that way you don't get "editors" who think part of their job is forcing you to write something more marketable and make you change things you don't want to if you want them to go ahead with the publishing. (I'm not a writer, I've never been a writer, but I've heard things.)
Congratulations to Ursula Vernon by sapphire+wyvern · 2012-09-02 19:00 · Score: 3, Insightful

Ursula Vernon well deserves the recognition for Digger.
That reminds me that I should go and buy the print collections. I enjoyed it very much as a free webcomic, and she deserves some money for her efforts.
I'm sure I will enjoy re-reading Digger...
1. Re:Congratulations to Ursula Vernon by Hartree · 2012-09-02 20:20 · Score: 1
  
  Remember tunnel 17!
2. Re:Congratulations to Ursula Vernon by tobiah · 2012-09-03 04:45 · Score: 1
  
  Digger wasn't that well-known, so that's a bit surprising. But it's very well-written and depicted, and a complete story.
  
  --
  "The ability to delude yourself may be an important survival tool" - Jane Wagner -
3. Re:Congratulations to Ursula Vernon by greenreaper · 2012-09-04 08:04 · Score: 1
  
  They included the entire series as a PDF in the voter packet, so I imagine attendees had the chance to read it on the plane.
Amar Tottho 71 by rubeldonarmanseo · 2012-09-02 20:41 · Score: 1

I can't understand . amartottho71
Kij Johnson read full online by mattr · 2012-09-03 00:16 · Score: 2

Among Others was a good book indeed!
I always have so much trouble finding half the books that win these awards.
Here is a copy of Kij Johnson's novella on her website and it is awesome that she is posting it, especially since Asimov's requires you buy their bag to read the conclusion! Congratulations to all.
Full story in .doc format
Kij Johnson
Full voting/nomination stats available by AMK · 2012-09-03 00:53 · Score: 1

The convention published the complete voting and nomination data (PDF), so you can find out who would have come in second and what things were nominated but didn't make it onto the ballot.
Curious! by EzInKy · 2012-09-03 01:12 · Score: 1

You aren't suggesting that people should vote for novels that they haven't read are you? In addition, it seems sort of silly to expect someone to vote something they might not like as their favorite does it not? Am I missing something here?

--
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
tor link by mattr · 2012-09-03 02:41 · Score: 1

Check out the Tor page - more useful.
And the loser is... by Chelloveck · 2012-09-03 03:34 · Score: 1

And the loser is ustream.tv, which was streaming the Hugo ceremonies live last night, right up until the best short-form dramatic presentation category. They cut the stream in the middle of Neil Gaiman's acceptance speech because of "violations of terms of service". I'm pretty sure they have a content-scanning bot which threw a hissy fit over the clips of the nominated shows.
At least, I hope it was a bot. I'd much rather imagine a mistake by an automated system than a conscious decision by a human that this particular use of the material was verboten.

--
Chelloveck
I give up on debugging. From now on, SIGSEGV is a feature.
Re:I thought the Hugo is a Sci-Fi award. by 91degrees · 2012-09-03 09:06 · Score: 1

It's for speculative fiction. This makes the criteria pretty loose.

The City and the City won on year and you could argue that that's neither.
Best compilation of science fiction I've found by robateastridge · 2012-09-03 09:14 · Score: 1

If you like sci-fi and have trouble finding material to read, look for Gardner Dozois' collections on Amazon. He's been doing them for years and I've bought all that I can find. I just finished reading “The Man Who Bridged the Mist” and I'm glad it won; great story.
1. Re:Best compilation of science fiction I've found by Man+Eating+Duck · 2012-09-04 15:19 · Score: 1
  
  It looks like those are all short stories. Can anyone recommend some good novel length hard sci-fi from the past 10 years? books or authors....
  Peter Hamilton, which AC recommends, is good. Check also out the Manifold series by Stephen Baxter. Speculative, hard SF which has not aged badly even if the books are somewhat more than ten years old. The same goes for the SF of Iain M. Banks, I can't really recommend his regular fiction.
  
  --
  Are you a grammar Nazi? I'm trying to improve my English; please correct my errors! :)
Re:I thought the Hugo is a Sci-Fi award. by 91degrees · 2012-09-03 10:11 · Score: 1

You know, I don't think there is. At least not one that anyone considers important.
Re:I thought the Hugo is a Sci-Fi award. by tehcyder · 2012-09-03 23:03 · Score: 1

Meh. Fantasy bores me. Is there an award for hard sci-fi? Ie, guys like Stephen Baxter that actually know some science and care about the details? That would be a good filter for me.... it appears that the Hugo is kind of useless for my purposes.
Go and read a few car maintenance manuals, they're about as much fun, plus the plots are more exciting.

--
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it