Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Sci-Fi Books Media

2004 Hugo Awards Presented at Noreascon 182

Posted by michael from the just-slightly-ahead-of-our-time dept.
DragonMagic writes "The Hugo Awards for 2003 have been handed out at the WorldCon at Noreascon in Boston." The winners are below.

Best Novel: Paladin of Souls, Lois McMaster Bujold
Novella: The Cookie Monster, Vernor Vinge
Novellette: Legions in Time, Michael Swanwick
Short Story: A Study in Emerald, Neil Gaiman
Related Book: The Chesley Awards for Science
Fiction and Fantasy Art: A Retrospective, John Grant, Elizabeth L. Humphrey, and Pamela D. Scoville
Professional Editor: Gardner Dozois
Professional Artist: Bob Eggleton and Pamela D. Scoville
Dramatic Presentation, Long Form: Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King
Dramatic Presentation, Short Form: Gollum's Acceptance Speech at the 2003 MTV Movie Awards
Semiprozine: Locus
Fanzine: Emerald City
Fan Writer: Dave Langford
Fan Artist: Frank Wu
Campbell Award: Jay Lake
Special Noreascon Four Committee Award: Erwin Strauss, aka Filthy Pierre
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

2004 Hugo Awards Presented at Noreascon More

2004 Hugo Awards Presented at Noreascon

Comments Filter:

  • Question (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Raul654 ( 453029 ) on Sunday September 05, 2004 @01:52PM (#10163579) Homepage
    Who won the 1953 retroactive award? The nominees included The Caves of Steel, Fahrenheit 451, and Childhood's End. Yeesh - what a hard call.

    • Re:Question (Score:5, Informative)

      by mediabunny ( 25035 ) on Sunday September 05, 2004 @01:56PM (#10163611)
      The 1953 Retrospective Hugo Award Winners
      Best Novel - Farenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury
      Best Novella - "A Case of Conscience" by James Blish
      Best Novelette - "Earthman, Come Home" by James Blish
      Best Short Story - "The Nine Billion Names of God" by Arthur C. Clarke
      Best Related Book - Conquest of the Moon by Wernher von Braun, Fred L. Whipple & Willy Ley
      Best Professional Editor - John W. Campbell, Jr.
      Best Professional Artist - Chesley Bonestell
      Best Dramatic Presentation, Short Form - The War of the Worlds
      Best Fanzine - Slant, Walter Willis, ed.; James White, art editor
      Best Fan Writer - Bob Tucker
      • Jesus. Now I realize why I haven't read SF in so long. The names for 1953 are all giants. Does anyone believe that today's winners will be viewed similarly in 50 years?

        I know this could be interpreted as a flame. But if anyone can convince me I'm missing a lot by not having read any of this year's winners, please proceed!

        • Re:Question (Score:3, Interesting)

          by Txiasaeia ( 581598 )
          Although I'm not usually a fanboy, Neil Gaiman's work has typically been stellar - do yourself a favour and pick up Coraline, last year's winner (novella? novelette? not sure which), an absolutely fantastic story about a young girl who visits the "flip side" of existence. There's no way that I can explain it without it sounding cheezy. Anyway, if you would just read that one story, you'd see that the current state of SF is pretty good.

          Although not quite as current, other works by British SF writers such

          • I don't think of Ballard as being of the current crop; Priest I haven't read, but hasn't he been around quite a long while as well?

            I've avoided Gaiman since I found his early comic work cloying; his characters seemed self-involved brats, designed to appeal to narcisistic youth obsessed by the tragedy of their own inevitable demise.

            I don't know if this would apply to subsequent works, but my distaste for Gaiman was strong enough to prevent further exploration.

            • Priest is fairly recent, 90s and onwards, as far as I know. Gaiman's recent novels are *much* better IMHO than Sandman.
              • Priest is fairly recent, 90s and onwards, as far as I know.

                He was writng in New Worlds in the 60s. His first novel was Indoctrinaire, 1970.

              • Ah...couldn't remember the title, but Sandman was it, pressed to my hand by a friend. Since you were able to single it out, perhaps his other works are worth a look...

        • Well, Vinge does quite a bit of intelligent writing, and Gaiman is decent too, although personally I don't think his novels have the depth of his comics (Sandman...the only comic I know of to have won a literary prize meant for books :)), even though his novels have some very intersting ideas in them.

        • Re:Question (Score:3, Informative)

          by imsabbel ( 611519 )
          Well. I guess Venor Vinge would be a giant if he wrote JUST a LITTLE more novels.
          Orson scott card will be remembered.
          I guess Dan Simmons, too.
          And Niven. A bit older, but still after 53...

          The problem is that all those people regarded as "giants" have written their books over a very long time. You cant just say that there arent really great rookies around the last few years because they may need another 20 years to build their place in the world of SF

        • Re:Question (Score:2, Informative)

          by dsheeks ( 65644 )
          Connie Willis is a very tallented writer, having written excellent novels as well as some incredible short stories.

          Of course by the time the 2053 Hugo awards come out we'll know exactly who the "giants" were in 2003. It seems a bit silly to think that there aren't writers as good today as there were 50 years ago. We might not see a Shakespeare every generation but there are plenty of good stories and authors to write them.
        • Since most of the shorter length stories are online, you might want to try reading the winners. I can't say enough good things about Vinge's The Cookie Monster. It's the most imaginative thing he's written in nearly two decades.
        • Jesus. Now I realize why I haven't read SF in so long. The names for 1953 are all giants. Does anyone believe that today's winners will be viewed similarly in 50 years?

          Well, these are being awarded 50 years afer the event, so naturally those today considered "giants" probably score higher than a contemporary award might have.

        • Lois McMaster Bujold and C.J. Cherryh's stuff is almost *always* worth reading.

          Bujold's best stuff is in the Vorkosigan universe (something like 10+ books). The high point of the series is probably Civil Campaign, which won't make sense unless you've read at least a few of the prior ones and understand the underpinnings.

          Cherryh is very prolific. Best are the Faded Sun trilogy, and the 4 or 5 books in the Chanur universe. Or the Foreigner series (6 books now) which is a great book dealing with how hum

  • Maybe . . . (Score:1, Redundant)

    by ir0b0t ( 727703 ) *
    Farenheit 451 should have been renominated this year. Half a century later, and it still resonates --- maybe moreso except that I was not alive in 1953 to compare.

    • Re:Maybe . . . (Score:3, Informative)

      by gl4ss ( 559668 )
      mods.. maybe you should read? couple of comments up

      ***********
      The 1953 Retrospective Hugo Award Winners
      *
      Best Novel - Farenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury
      Best Novella - "A Case of Conscience" by James Blish
      Best Novelette - "Earthman, Come Home" by James Blish
      *

      oh and to add something new.. the nominees for best novel:**Best Novel of 1953 (113 ballots)

      * The Caves of Steel -- Isaac Asimov (Galaxy, Oct.-Dec. 1953)
      * Fahrenheit 451 -- Ray Bradbury (Ballantine)
      * Childhood's End -- Arthur C. Clarke (Balla
    • What I found amazing in Fahrenheit451 was the prediction of soap operas. Remember those talking walls that shared stories and emotions, and that everyone became addicted to?
    • Farenheit 451 should have been renominated this year. Half a century later, and it still resonates

      Don't you mean 50 years and 460 degrees later?

  • My first WorldCon was San Jose in 2002. I was lucky enough to have a friend there who could show me the ropes - Cheryl Morgan, editor of Emerald City. If you're not familiar with her work, check out www.emcit.com. Her reviews are honest (often brutally so) and entertaining.
  • I liked Singularity Sky (on the Best Novel list). Just good scifi reading. The endless descriptions of military procedure and protocol did get a bit tiring.

    I'm looking forward to Iron Sunrise but not enough to buy it in hardcover.
  • Shouldn't the link read "for 2004"?
  • Gardner rules the Hugo Awards! How many does this make for him now? 15? 16? I wonder if his success encourages or discourages others in his field.

  • Last Night.... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Dr Reducto ( 665121 ) on Sunday September 05, 2004 @02:09PM (#10163678) Journal
    Last night some kid at the LAN party I was at came in at around 11 and was like: My dad won a Hugo!! And I asked him about it, and apparently his dad wrote Legions in Time, which is apparently about a man and woman who travel through the galaxy or alternate worlds or something. I guess good luck to that kids dad, and good luck to all those considered and those who won.

  • 2003 or 2004 (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Gerr ( 10139 )

    The first sentence in the post mentions 2003, but the link leads to the 2004 awards (the title of the article says 2004, too). Could an editor fix the mistake?

  • Just found link for vernors story: (Score:5, Informative)

    by imsabbel ( 611519 ) on Sunday September 05, 2004 @02:23PM (#10163733)
    http://www.analogsf.com/0406/cookiemonster.shtml [analogsf.com]

    Yeah. Finally a topic where my sig fits :)
  • Ilium should have won. :(

    Easily the best book of the year in IMHO. Fantasy books need their own award, I'm a tad tired of them showing up in the Hugo awards.

    • Illium was good but I didn't think it was anywhere near as good as Hyperion. The up coming Olympus might change my mind. My problem with Illium is that you just can't see exactly where it's going.

      • Re:Ilium. (Score:3, Funny)

        by Hobbex ( 41473 )
        My problem with Illium is that you just can't see exactly where it's going.

        Yeah, I always hate that in a book!
        • A book needs direction. Surprise is great but when you have no character development to speak of, are off on another planet and in an incredibly different atmosphere a reader needs something to keep them interested. Illium contains no direction, no direction = no anticipation.
          • Illium is one of those books that tosses off ideas in a few pages that most authors would write entire books about. I, too, would like to have some idea where it is going, but I enjoyed more than just about anything I've read in a while.

            Hyperion is one of my favorite books, despite the fact that I didn't really care for the series as a whole. Strangely enough, I think I would like Hyperion just fine by itself without the rest of the series, even though it doesn't "end".
            • Hyperion is one of my favorites also. I didn't like the rest of the series even though you don't find out what happens until the end of Fall of Hyperion.

              Hyperion was amazing in that it's 8 stories in one. The seven pilgrims plus the main plot. I was just astounded by the priests story, took me by total surprise. The others were almost as good.
    • I'm tired of fantasy showing up in SF bookshops, In fact I'm tired of backward looking costume drama altogether - unless its well researched biography.

      I am wondering though, is this fascinaton for "fantasy" all because of generation X or what? Science fiction used to be about possible futures, but in its most popular current form - fantasy - its all about rehashing bad relationships first recorded in Greek plays, mediated through a miasma of fondly remembered mediaeval feudal society. Admittidly I can cope
      • Good fantasy novels and good sci-fi novels are actually very similar. They both take society, change part of it, explore the world that they've created, and in doing so illuminating aspects of human nature. The only real difference is the exact way they go about doing it. Sci-fi usually starts with our society as the basis and extrapolates into the future. Fantasy starts from scratch.

        It's unfortunate that much of the fantasy genre tends to be a rehash of the lord of the rings, or "fondly remembered med

  • Sci-Fi or Fantasy? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ta_relax ( 578894 ) on Sunday September 05, 2004 @02:33PM (#10163796)
    From FAQ of Hugo awards:
    "Aren't Hugos just for Science Fiction?
    Have you ever tried to define science fiction? ..."It's all fantasy," he proclaimed. "Science fiction is fantasy you can convince yourself might happen. ...."

    I like, for example, LoTR as much as anyone else and find it one of the best trilogies ever (as novels). But, what has magic, dragons, castles etc. to do with science? If science or scientific methodology is not part of the story then why should it be eligible for this award? What happened to the heritage of Asimov, Lem, Dick, Heinlein, Clarke, and others?
    Has popular themes of Star Wars and Star Trek reduced Sci-Fi to mere fantasy now?

    As a scientist myself, I still believe that Sci-Fi is more than simple fantasy. It is -to me- exploration of possibilities for humanity's future (and past), scientific developments, and their effects. Believe me, in today's incredible speed of scientific progress we need Sci-Fi in this sense more than ever.

    I am sure the winner is a wonderful novel but...
    • Its scifi OR fantasy according to this link:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_award

      So obviously LotR qualifies. What bothers me is the best selling books on Earth right now (HP series) aren't on the list.

    • Re:Sci-Fi or Fantasy? (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Artifakt ( 700173 )
      Part of this is a pragmatic attitude on the part of fandom, that has developed into a tradition, particulary with the film Hugos.
      For many given years, particularly pre Starwars era, Hollywood didn't release any SF movies, not just any GOOD Sf, but any, period. So it quickly became a case of either giving the award to a fantasy film or nobody, or of picking between a good fantasy film and a lousy SF film. The earlier era was mostly "It's Fantasy or Nothing this year", while the post Starwars era was t
    • best term for explaining 'hard' scifi I've ran into is "speculative fiction".

      (of course, this drops most of the really popular scifi right out of it..)
    • I'm peeved at the blending that sci-fi and fantasy get too, but, they are linked, for good or ill.

      I like, for example, LoTR as much as anyone else and find it one of the best trilogies ever (as novels). But, what has magic, dragons, castles etc. to do with science?

      Magic: Any technology, sufficiently advanced, yadiyadiyada.

      Castles: Engineering is fun!

      Dragons: When I read LOTR, the descriptions of the Dark Rider's flying mount was, to me, clearly the description of a mutated pterodactyl. The movie's ima

    • Re:Sci-Fi or Fantasy? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Stinking Pig ( 45860 ) on Sunday September 05, 2004 @03:55PM (#10164213) Homepage
      I love SciFi, but honestly, heritage? Asimov, Dick, Heinlein & Clarke were all hobbled by their inability to write as well as they thought. I haven't read Lem. The four I have read wrote some really interesting stories and have some very good ideas, but characterization and plotting are weak and their novels generally limp along. Fantasy on the other hand typically focuses more on the writing and less on the magic.

      So what should the Hugo judge, science or fiction? I think a blend of both. Take Robert Forward for instance, he writes technically solid hard science books that absolutely stink, with characters that might as well be Barbie and Ken dolls (and plenty of Heinlein/Clarke style gratuitous sex). They sure do explore our scientific options, as do Clarke's, but they're painful to read. Flipside, Roger Zelazny's _Lord of Light_ is mostly characterization and plot, with the science barely considered at all. Which one is more fun and more inspiring to read? And is _Lord of Light_ even a scifi book, or more of a fantasy book? It certainly blurs the line.

      Vernor Vinge wins a Hugo practically every time he turns around, because he can write well and think scientifically. I greatly prefer reading him and have reread most of his books because they're so damned good.

      Just some thoughts, really. I don't think LoTR really deserves a Hugo either, as much as I like it, but it looks to me like it's WETA and Peter Jackson getting the awards here, not Tolkein.
      • Take Robert Forward for instance, he writes...

        That should be "he wrote". He died Sept 21, 2002.

      • So what should the Hugo judge, science or fiction?

        And as numerous Hollywood "fizzles" have shown... all the special effects (or hard science in Sci-Fi) is useless if you don't have a good story (or tell it badly).

        The best Sci-Fi in my book is stuff that puts the people ahead of the Sci-Fi. Where the science is merely a hook to draw you in and the futuristic universe is just a backdrop against which the tale plays out against.


    • > But, what has magic, dragons, castles etc. to do with science?

      What do FTL travel and most of the other familiar trappings of SF have to do with science?

      I suspect the biggest difference between SF and Fantasy is the window dressing. It's no accident that there's so much overlap in their respective sets of readers.

    • If science or scientific methodology is not part of the story then why should it be eligible for this award? What happened to the heritage of Asimov, Lem, Dick, Heinlein, Clarke, and others?

      I guess we're approaching the singularity [caltech.edu] and are finally becoming aware that it exists, and therefore no longer assume the future will look like the present, only with higher tech, and so put much higher believability requirements on pure sci-fi.
    • But, what has magic, dragons, castles etc. to do with science?

      Beyond Arthur C. Clarks famous quote [brainyquote.com]? Not much.

      I love SciFi because it's a technological/societal projection of what MIGHT happen in the future within the confines of our laws of physics. All of it ultimately leading up to our nearing Singularity [sysopmind.com].

      In order for me to suspend my disbelief of the "wizards, ogres, and elves, oh my!" in Fantasy, I have to tell myself that this too is possible ... albeit within a very good matrix-like VR simulatio

    • Ok, give us a definition that always works! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Xtifr ( 1323 ) on Sunday September 05, 2004 @05:02PM (#10164550) Homepage
      It's easy to show that fantasy and SF are distinct if you cherry-pick your examples (LoTR), but can you give us a definition of one genre or the other that can be applied to any arbitrary work to decide whether it fits into one or the other categories? I contend you can't.

      My standard example is two Zelazny novels: _Lord of Light_ and _Creatures of Light and Darkness_. Both are tales of wars between gods of ancient pantheons (Hindu in the former, Egyptian in the latter). However, in the first, the "gods" are explained as being psychically gifted humans who have managed to take over a lost colony, and who vigorously suppress all use of technology among the colonists, and reserve it for themselves, so they can appear more godlike to their subjects. Their technology is not particularly advanced (airplanes, lasers, telephones) except for the mind-transfer machine that they use to provide "reincarnation" for themselves and the more favored of their subjects. By contrast, in the latter novel, no attempt is made at all to explain these "gods", but the story is full of standard SF elements - spaceships and interstellar travel, computers, cyborgs, etc. I've seen people argue for hours about whether and how either of these books should be categorized.

      Magic, Dragons and Castles? How about Psionics, Dragons and Castles? How about Anne McAffrey's Pern series, where the dragons are actually alien creatures native to the planet, and the humans live in castles because they've lost the technology they used to come to the planet? Scientific Methodology? How about Randall Garrett's stories of Lord D'Arcy, whose research magicians are bound by laws as rigorous and scientific as anything propounded by Newton or Einstein, even though they don't happen to apply in our universe.

      Asimov, Lem, Dick, Heinlein, Clarke? Aside from Lem (who I'm not too familiar with) and perhaps Dick (whose stuff was considered so outrageous that some people questioned whether any of it could be called SF), there isn't a writer there who hasn't written both SF and Fantasy, and occasionally, the hard-to-classify story on the boundaries between the genres (e.g. Clarke's The Nine Billion Names of God).

      By the 1950s, it was clear that the writers were going to treat any attempt to define the boundaries between SF and Fantasy as a challenge. You're fighting a battle that was lost half a century ago, and citing as authorities the very people who carried the other side to victory. "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistiguishable from magic" -- A. Clarke.

      Myself, like you, I generally prefer SF, insofar as I can distinguish it, but beyond that, I also prefer the rigorous logic and internal consistency of a Lord D'Arcy fantasy over the psuedo-scientific babble of most Hollywood SF. Anyway, Bujold is primarily a science fiction writer, so I find it hard to complain too much when her fantasy novel wins the Hugo. :)
    • The Hugos are voted on by the attendees of that year's World Science Fiction Convention. So, if you don't like the nominees or winners, you can get in on changing the outcome by signing up for this year's Worldcon ("this year" in Worldcon terms being defined as "roughly from Labor Day to Labor Day"). Here is the link for more information. [worldcon.org.uk]

      Next year's Worldcon is being held in Glasgow. Joining costs £30 if you just want to vote, or £95 if you want to attend. Those prices are likely to go up as n
    • > what has magic, dragons, castles etc. to do with science?

      I don't disagree with your point about classifying science-fiction, but here's an interesting thought:

      Keep in mind that throughout history (especially recent history) we continually strive to INVENT those ideas that strike us as particularly interesting. For example, the Submarine (Jules Verne), Satellites, etc. I have no doubt that in the future we will continue to work to make our future resemble our fiction. Imagine now a distant future wher

    • I like, for example, LoTR as much as anyone else and find it one of the best trilogies ever (as novels). But, what has magic, dragons, castles etc. to do with science?

      I'm prepared to accept fantasy under the SF umbrella if only to keep the peace but I have to ask what "Gollum's accaptance speech" has got to do with SF or Fantasy. Technically impressive I suppose but as far as I can remember it was just a foul-mouthed tirade intended to amuse the MTV audience. No new ideas or anything worth discussing, I'

  • Harry Potter OotP (Score:1, Troll)

    by geek ( 5680 )
    I know people will bash this but why wasn't OotP on the list? It was a great book, much better than the ones that won and it out sold them by like an order of magnittude.
    • Not commenting on whether the latest Harry Potter book should have been on the list or not, I cannot see that sales figures should be a reason for giving a book an award.
      High sales figures != quality
    • I know people will bash this but why wasn't OotP on the list?

      Ummm... because the other books got more nominations? I'd also ask in what sense you think that "Order of the Phoenix" was "better". In sales? Largely irrelevant to whether or not the book is crap, as Ludlum has demonstrated for years. In particular, the character development of Paladin of Souls make it a much more interesting read for the adolescent-or-older audience, although it certainly wouldn't appeal to the youngest edge of Harry Potter's

      • " I'd also ask in what sense you think that "Order of the Phoenix" was "better". In sales?"

        It's popular for a reason. People don't generally buy crap, especially when the books sold for almost 30$ when released. Sales reflect quality in books, perhaps not in movies or computer operating systems, but in books, people buy what they like. Obviously when the sales don't reflect the nominations, the ones doing the nominating have a bias.

        "Have you actually read all of the nominees?"

        Most yes. I found them dull,
    • I know people will bash this but why wasn't OotP on the list? It was a great book, much better than the ones that won and it out sold them by like an order of magnittude.

      Mmmm, I *like* the HP series, but OotP wasn't really that great of a story (book #4 was much better). It was rather stilted in places and pacing. Book #4 starts with the World Cup and builds up to a big climax at the end in the Cemetary. Just about *anything* would be tough to follow that and book #5 is more of a "putting the pieces i
  • For the lazy, here is a link to the video.

    http://www.theonering.net/staticnews/1054890864.ht ml [theonering.net]

  • Bujold wasting her time on fantasy (Score:4, Informative)

    by Animats ( 122034 ) on Sunday September 05, 2004 @02:40PM (#10163835) Homepage
    Lois Bujold's best work is the Lord Vorkosigan series. She won a Hugo for one of those in 1992. But she has to pay the rent, so she cranks out those fantasy novels. The Vorkosigan series is too complex and unsettling for many readers.
    • I really doubt it is to "pay the rent". I think she just got tired of of the Vorkosigan universe and decided to try something else and it's been sucessful too. I happen to like the Chalion novels - I can't see how she could have a characters like Ista or Caz in the Vorkosigan novels...
    • Lois Bujold's best work is the Lord Vorkosigan series. She won a Hugo for one of those in 1992.

      The Vor Game, published 1991. Also, Barrayar, 1992; and Mirror Dance, 1995.

      But she has to pay the rent, so she cranks out those fantasy novels.

      Err... actually, it may also be a function of her having a nifty idea that just won't fit into the Vorkosigan series, such as the marriage ride from "Curse of Challion", inspired by an actual event in Spanish history. Her latest Vorkosigan book was also relatively w

      • The Vor Game, published 1991. Also, Barrayar, 1992; and Mirror Dance, 1995.

        You forgot her Hugo and Nebula for the Mountains of Mourning.
        • You forgot her Hugo and Nebula for the Mountains of Mourning.

          "I remember everything." -- Adept Havelock, from "The Mirror of Her Dreams", by Donaldson.

          "Mountains of Mourning" was a novella, not a novel, and the Nebulas are a separate honor from the Hugos. (Hugos are given by amateurs; Nebulas are given by other SF professionals.) It was not forgotten, it was ignored.

    • Hardly wasting her time. As much as I like the Vorkosigan series, the series is getting a bit long in the tooth. I think that part of the reason that she is writing the fantasy novels is to avoid having to kill of Aral (which will happen one of these days).

      In any case, she writes when someone contracts her to write a novel *or* she has enough saved up to take a chance (which is what happened with the first of the Chalion series).

      I'm glad that she is writing in different worlds and bringing her gift

    • Re:Bujold wasting her time on fantasy (Score:4, Informative)

      by RickHunter ( 103108 ) on Sunday September 05, 2004 @05:15PM (#10164601)

      Actually, from what she's said on her official mailing list, she can get more money from doing another Vorkosigan book. Yes, folks, not all fantasy writers are shills in it for the money. However, she can't see any direction to take it in that she wants to write, Miles and kids novels being very much out. She thinks Miles' story came to a natural end in Diplomatic Immunity, with the birth of his children, which is good. Then she got some ideas for the Five Gods universe and it wound up capturing her interest more.

    • I don't know if you read the Paladin of Souls but I'd claim her two novels in that fantasy world are better than all but the best of the Vor stuff (of which I am a huge fan).
    • I submit to you that if her fantasy novels pay the rent, they aren't exactly wasting her time, especially if they give her the time and freedom to create the Vorkosigan series (one of my wife's favorites, by the way).

      As an aside, we once met Bujold at a Worldcon. Very nice lady, as I recall.
    • I'll agree with that. Civil Campaign was a great mix of comedy and drama, probably the best in the series. However, the book that follows, Diplomatic Immunity was a bit of a let down, so maybe she needs to take break from that series.

      (I can't put my finger on anything specific with DI, but the CC novel was just oodles of fun to read.)
      • I have to agree, A Civil Campaign is probably her best book. I feel like it showed a level of cohesiveness and pacing a head above the rest of her work. As much as I like the 'earlier' books, some of the later ones (CC and Memory) are just more solid. Diplomatic Immunity did leave the taste of being a book written to appease Vorkosigan fans (such as myself).

        I think she has built such a lush world in the Vorkosigan universe. I absolutely love the combination of politics and intrigue, and that's what mak

  • Retro Hugos for 1953 (Score:1, Redundant)

    by dokhebi ( 89124 )
    The Retro Hugos for 1953 are:

    Best Novel: Farenheight 451 by Ray Bradbury
    Best Novella: "A Case of Consience" by James Blish
    Best Novellette: "Earthman, Come Home" by James Blish
    Best Short Story : "The Nine Billion Names of God" by Arthur C. Clarke
    Best Related Book: Conquest of the Moon by Wernher von Braun, Fred L. Whipple & Willy Ley
    Best Professional Editor: John W. Campbell, Jr.
    Best Profession Artist: Chesley Bonestell
    Best Dramatic Presentation, Short Form: The War of the Worlds
    Best Fanzine: Slant, Wa
  • If I look up Novelette in Merriam Webster [merriam-webster.com] it links to the definition of Novella. Is this some way of the Hugo staff giving 2 awards for short stories or is it a sideways proof that Sci-Fi as a genre is more suited to 20-30 pages of prose and that when it hits the 300-400 page region it is less saleable to the general public?
    • myc_lykaon wrote: If I look up Novelette it links to the definition of Novella. Is this some way of the Hugo staff giving 2 awards for short stories?

      Nope. I can't find an exact cite here, but in terms of length, short story < novelette < novella < novel.

      or is it a sideways proof that Sci-Fi as a genre is more suited to 20-30 pages of prose and that when it hits the 300-400 page region it is less saleable to the general public?

      Er, what? You're reaching, and reaching really hard. Novellas

    • Hugo rules [sflovers.org] have varied over the years; currently they use the same criteria for as do the Nebula Awards. According to the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America [sfwa.org], a short story is anything under 7500 words, a novelette is 7500 to 15000 words, a novella is 15000 to 40000 words, and a novel is anything longer than that.

      Is there really a measurable difference in artistic impact between a 7499-word short story and a 7501-word novella? Not really. Authors and publishers like those multiple categories,
    • Is this some way of the Hugo staff giving 2 awards for short stories or is it a sideways proof that Sci-Fi as a genre is more suited to 20-30 pages of prose and that when it hits the 300-400 page region it is less saleable to the general public?

      No, you're reaching.

      The only 20-30 page short stories that I've ever read have either been in a monthly rag or in a book of short stories.

      And they're not my preference by far. I much prefer trilogies / quads / decs... most of my bookshelf is filled with serie

  • A Study in Emerald (Score:5, Informative)

    by Bagels ( 676159 ) on Sunday September 05, 2004 @03:11PM (#10163975)
    Neil Gaiman's winning short story is up on his site [neilgaiman.com], if anyone cares to read it. It's quite good, particularly if you're a fan of Sherlock Holmes, Cthulu mythology, or both.

  • Some thoughts on 3 of the awards... (Score:4, Informative)

    by CJ Hooknose ( 51258 ) on Sunday September 05, 2004 @03:20PM (#10164017) Homepage
    3 of the stories mentioned were in a book called "The Best of Science Fiction 2003". I read that, so here are my tiny capsule reviews:

    The Cookie Monster, Vernor Vinge: This is an interesting and technically complex story. It's plausible and well-told, but it really lacks character development IMHO. Guess the competition was thin in the "novella" category or the tech talk swayed the fans.

    "Legions in Time", Michael Swanwick: This one rocked. The main characters were believable, the time travel was done well, the bad guys were really evil, and the resolution was... interesting. Only real faults are that the ending feels a bit too much like a Deus Ex Machina, and Nadine was never really explained. Read this one if you can.

    "A Study in Emerald", Neil Gaiman: Hmm. Gaiman's a good storyteller, but he bit off more than he could chew here. It's difficult to write a good Sherlock Holmes pastiche, it's difficult to write a good H.P. Lovecraft pastiche, and it's even more difficult to write a story that combines elements of both. Plus, if you haven't read much Sir Arthur Conan Doyle or H.P. Lovecraft, you won't get all the references. Gaiman almost made it work.

    • "The main characters were believable"

      Maybe you are gullible?

      "the time travel was done well,"

      You must be Dr Who I suppose.

      "the bad guys were really evil"

      No suprises there, as with most SF writing the characters are unidimensional.

  • Cookie Monster (Score:5, Funny)

    by Zorilla ( 791636 ) on Sunday September 05, 2004 @03:51PM (#10164194)
    The Cookie Monster, Vernor Vinge: This is an interesting and technically complex story. It's plausible and well-told, but it really lacks character development IMHO. Guess the competition was thin in the "novella" category or the tech talk swayed the fans.

    Yeah, the main character would have been more deeply depicted had he not been busy saying, "COOOOOKIIEE!! MMNOMMNOMMMMNOMMN!" This is even more justification for Nabisco to host his next intervention.

  • I found the link to 'The Cookie Monster' and read it just now.

    Prof. Vinge is my favorite author, and here he delivers the goods again. Bravo! Good show!

    I'm used to the idea that a good author (or band, or other artist) usually has just X number of good ideas, and sooner or later, they all run their course. In my experience, 'X' is about 2 novels, or 2 albums, YMMV.

    Prof. Vinge, however, has yet to disappoint me. Perhaps that is because his output is relatively low compared to his SF peers. It

    • Yes, Vinge is great! Two required novels (read them in order) are Deepness in the Sky, and A Fire upon the Deep. He is also one of the original cyberpunks, with "True Names." All three are SciFi 101, good for anyone looking for the best of the best.

      And I'm not just saying this because he makes liberal use of references to "newbys" in the first book (that was way back when I first heard the term "network newby." Read my username if you don't know what I'm talking about. Yes, that's my name.)

  • What? No Firefly? (Score:4, Funny)

    by Udo Schmitz ( 738216 ) on Sunday September 05, 2004 @06:51PM (#10165017) Journal
    I call conspiracy.

Slashdot Top Deals

If all else fails, lower your standards.

Close