Lee and Miller Hugo Eligible Works 2014

[rolanni]

The nice folks at SasQuan have just reminded me that Award Season has opened and that it's time for those who wish to do so to nominate works for the Hugo Awards ballot (more information here).

Below is a list of our eligible works, with links to those that are available for reading on the web, followed by some auctorial commentary.

Works are listed in this format:

TITLE, MONTH OF PUBLICATION, VENUE, WORD COUNT, CATEGORY

Everybody ready?

Here you are:

The author known as Sharon Lee and Steve Miller published three eligible works in 2014.

The Rifle's First Wife, January, Splinter Universe, 13,350, novelette   |LINK TO STORY|

Roving Gambler, April, Splinter Universe, 15,432, novelette   |LINK TO STORY|

Code of Honor, May, Splinter Universe, 10,805, novelette  |LINK TO STORY|

(PLEASE NOTE: 2014 was a year in which no new Liaden book was published.  Yes, the mass market editions of Necessity's Child and Trade Secret came out in 2014, but those editions are reprints.  When in doubt, check the copyright page of the book in question.)

The author known as Sharon Lee published three eligible works in 2014.

The Gift of Music, January, Baen.com, 5,048, short story   |LINK TO STORY|

Carousel Sun, February, Baen, 104,000, novel   |SAMPLE CHAPTERS|

The Night Don't Seem So Lonely, December, Baen.com, 8,334, novelette   |LINK TO STORY|

Auctorial Commentary

Last Award Season was. . .exceptionally acrimonious.  Somewhere within the general hootenanny and rending of garments, there stirred to life a relatively small, little scoldy thingy which was trying to become a Rule, to wit: That authors ought only to bring forward those works they had published in the previous year that were worthy.

This is bullshit, and I will tell you why.

The Hugo Awards are a readers award.  That means that the readers decide which works are "worthy."  How do they do that?  By reading the works published in the previous year and deciding which one(s) they liked best.  You may say that no one can read all the works published in the previous year.  I would say that you are right, but nonetheless, it is not the job of authors to predigest their work for you.

For one thing, authors are, historically, lousy at picking their own best works.  That's because we created the work. I can't "read" my work.  I can analyze it; I can deconstruct it; but in the end, I, the creator, am not the audience for my work.

Do I have favorites among those works we published last year?  Yes.  Yes, I do.  Steve has favorites, too.  And you know what?  They're not the same.  And the reasons that Stories X and Y are favorites?  Have nothing to do with the "worthiness" of those stories in terms of consideration for a reader's award.

I'll end with an anecdote.  Back in nineteen-aught-eighty-one, I wrote a story titled "Master of the Winds."  It was a young story, even for that early stage of my career.  It was never anything but  journeyman work.

And yet?

Fifteen years into the following century, thirty-four years after it was written, I still, once or even twice a year receive an email from a reader who will cite "Master of Winds" as one of their favorite stories ever.

If that's so -- and why would they say so, if it wasn't? -- then who on earth am I to tell them they're wrong?

Oh, one more thing.  Last year, another scoldy little thingy arose from the group discussion, and tried its damnedest to grow up into a Rule.  That one was: It is Unseemly for Women Talk About their Award Eligible Works.

That's bullshit, too.  I'll leave it to you to figure out why.

Comments

[bandicoot.livejournal.com]

The sf world seems to have gone bonkers in the last few years. Most of the fuss seems to be by people I've never heard of. I just shake my head and think, "Grow up, people!" Then I ignore the noise and go on reading really good stuff written by really good people. Sigh...

You may have already run across this, but I think it's an interesting take on the potential for more direct (if unintentional) feedback from readers to publishers: http://www.buzzfeed.com/josephbernstein/publishers-know-you-didnt-finish-the-goldfinch-heres-what-th#.ybMrvo95PB (http://www.buzzfeed.com/josephbernstein/publishers-know-you-didnt-finish-the-goldfinch-heres-what-th#.ybMrvo95PB).

[rolanni.livejournal.com]

You may have already run across this, but I think it's an interesting take on the potential for more direct (if unintentional) feedback from readers to publishers: http://www.buzzfeed.com/josephbernstein/publishers-know-you-didnt-finish-the-goldfinch-heres-what-th#.ybMrvo95PB

I hadn't seen that -- interesting link. But, you know. . .there's a reason that writers say, "Buy my book!" and not, "Read my book!" :)

The sf world seems to have gone bonkers in the last few years.

I liked the internet a whole lot more when there were only five of us, and we were all on dial-up.

[bandicoot.livejournal.com]

The internet might have been more civil then, but it was a hell of a lot less useful ;)

[charlie russel (from livejournal.com)]

I liked the internet a whole lot more when there were only five of us, and we were all on dial-up

Well, maybe not that far back, but I certainly know what you mean! As for "Buy my book" -- One can only quote the inimitable Dr. Samuel Johnson: "No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money". After all, The Cats Must Be Fed.

[rolanni.livejournal.com]

2. "Women"? Are they trying to go back to the Andre Norton era when publishers decided no one would buy sci-fi written by a woman? Where do these people come from?

It's not the publishers so much as a. . .certain segment of. . .um. . .reader who profess (1) to believe that there are no women writing SF today, and that (2) they need to shut up already about their stupid books.

I don't know where they come from, but it would all right with me if they all went home.

[attilathepbnun.livejournal.com]

Errr .... The treehouse they've been hiding in to escape catching a fatal case of girl-cooties, I'm presuming is where they came from ....

And they can't go back until they fix the leaky roof

[mbarker.livejournal.com]

Y'a know, if you apply one of those helpful transformations to that last would-be rule, you might end up with "It is unseemly for men to talk about their award eligible works," or perhaps "It is unseemly for authors to talk about their award eligible works." No matter what group you stuff into it, though, the idea seems rather preposterous. I mean, let's face it, we invite authors to cons to talk about their work, we search out their blogs or other net presence to read about their work... Are they supposed to go silent for the run-up to the awards?

[rolanni.livejournal.com]

I think it's tied into the whole "worthy" thing. The fear being that, if there are any women who are actually writing SF, and they talk about it they might obscure the fact that there is other work which is (by whatever definition the would-be rulemaker is using) worthy/ier, and so the "wrong" work might win an award.

It's really Quite Dreadful, and rather upsetting, too. I think we would all benefit from being reminded that the award is given to the work, not to the writer, so it doesn't, in a very real way, matter who wrote it, or what gender (if any) they happen to embrace.

[mbarker.livejournal.com]

IMHO: I'm afraid that the end result of many of these attempts to redefine awards to suit the rule maker is to lessen or cheapen the value of the award, rather than "purifying" it or whatever they think they are doing. Admittedly, one unanticipated result has been a broader awareness of the awards and the somewhat unstable basis that some of the awards have, but still... It feels like the attempts to define science fiction to mean only what I like and similar efforts, every time you (generic) restrict this field, you lessen it. The hope, the glory, the soul of speculative fiction, science fiction and fantasy, or whatever you want to call this stuff, is the breadth and variety, not rejection of whichever part you don't like. And now I'll get off the soapbox.

[ironore.livejournal.com]

Thank you for reminding me about "The Rifle's First Wife." I really enjoyed the novelette and accordingly so, nominated it for a Hugo. It's always hard remembering what you read that's eligible when nominating time comes around. Hope to see you two in Spokane!

[rolanni.livejournal.com]

You're very welcome. I think the lists of eligible works are enormously helpful. As little as I read, I can't remember every book I've read in a year -- that's why I keep a Books Read list.

Hope to see you two in Spokane!

Sadly, we won't be in Spokane. A combination of health, deadline, and financial challenges have more or less mandated that we stay home, excepting a small book tour in June, and work.

Gimme Hat

[catherine ives (from livejournal.com)]

Finally remembered to look up "gimme hat" because lots of people wear them in the Carousel books. Means a baseball type hat/cap (with a bill or what I might call a visor) with a logo on it which has been given away free for publicity purposes. I'm so happy. Now I know.

Re: Gimme Hat

[rolanni.livejournal.com]

And they're in particular called "gimme" hats because they're given away at trade shows, and people will come up to, say, the John Deere table, stick out their hand and say, "Gimme hat."