Monday, September 10, 2007

Bosum Buddies

The good folks over at SF Signal have pointed me to results of a post-Hugo poll on their site, suggesting that a strong majority of their 72 respondents seem to think I was robbed. (This is especially gracious of them since they themselves didn't like Blindsight all that much.) What's really interesting about this poll, however, is not so much Blindsight's straw-first-place-finish, but the fact that "No Award" came in second, with twice as many votes as third place got. To me, this casts the poll itself into question: a quarter of skiffydom thinks there were no award-worthy titles on the whole slate? I'm doubtful.

On the other hand, one element does remain consistent between this wouldashouldacoulda poll and the actual vote at Worldcon: in both, "No Award" and Blindsight hung out side by side. Granted, they were at the bottom of the list for the Hugos and at the top over on SFSignal — but wherever they show up, they show up together.

Me and "No Award", we're just like that.

Labels:

8 Comments:

Anonymous Subspace said...

I am pretty interested in this system of including "No Award" as an option. It seems to me to be a pretty fundamental disservice to even have it. I mean, certainly it's a possibility that of the chosen 5 finalists none would be your choice, but how does not choosing any signal to the board (or to fans) who should have won?

I'm not making any sense. I'll try harder.

Okay, let's say that "No Award" won, or rather, that no one won the Hugo Award in 2007. The only solid determination from this is that we can be 100% sure that someone was robbed. Is there a write-in ballot that I don't know about? Isn't there a preliminary voting round where the finalists are voted for, or is that a different award I'm thinking of? And if there was a preliminary round, how can the results of which be a 25% lack of confidence?


On the other hand, if there were a "No Award" option for presidency, we would have been running headless for quite some time now.

September 10, 2007 at 11:40 PM  
Blogger Scott C. said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

September 11, 2007 at 5:28 AM  
Blogger LoopdiLou said...

Gratz on not getting an award?

Regardless, I find it fascinating that their "review" thinks that the "grim setting" of Blindsight is a con, without really giving a reason WHY "grim setting[s]" are a con. Has the reviewer never read any other scifi? Perhaps you should set your next novel in Disneyland.

Please excuse my previous deletion. I found, on review, that I congratulated you on not getting a "reward". But it's 7am and I haven't woken up yet.

September 11, 2007 at 10:03 AM  
Blogger DJK said...

I wonder if some people vote no award because they haven't read any of the books.

September 11, 2007 at 11:10 PM  
Blogger Neal Asher said...

There's only one award worth paying any attention to. It comes from your publisher and it's called 'royalties'. The rest are usually a subjective judgment, or final judgment, by a few self-appointed arbiters of taste in the SF world.

September 12, 2007 at 8:50 AM  
Blogger Peter Watts said...

Scott C. said...

Why torture yourself like this?

I'm not. I'm torturing you.

September 13, 2007 at 12:19 PM  
Blogger Peter Watts said...

DJK said...

I wonder if some people vote no award because they haven't read any of the books.

In that case, you think the better choice would be to refrain from voting entirely...


Neal said...

There's only one award worth paying any attention to. It comes from your publisher and it's called 'royalties'.

So far I'm crapping out on those too...

September 13, 2007 at 12:21 PM  
Blogger Denni said...

'No Award' is useful if you'd rather have no-one wins the Hugo than a particular entry you happen to not like. I don't think people vote 'No Award' as first preference (that would be kinda nonsensical) but I've been known to vote for it as fourth choice, ahead of one of the entrants.

'Blindsight'--I hasten to add--was my number one choice! And yes, you was robbed :(

Holding the con in Japan has probably less to do with it than the fact that people prefer fluffy fairytales over gritty hard SF that asks some serious questions. Blindsight isn't a comfortable read.

My commiserations.

September 17, 2007 at 9:44 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home