Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
OtherRealms Issue 21 Part 12
Electronic OtherRealms #21
Summer, 1988
Part 12
Hugos & Other Forms
[This is a bit of a change in the LetterCol. I was unhappy with
the definition of the Other Forms Hugo category, and wrote a
quick essay about it on USENET to generate a discussion and
(hopefully) find ways to improve the category and clean up some
problems I see with some of the other Hugo Awards. An edited
(greatly shortened, for space) transcript of the discussions
follow, with my suggestions for changes and improvements to the
Hugos at the end.
I don't believe my suggestions are perfect. Far from it.
Complex situations don't boil down to simplistic answers. I
make this material available here, not as the final resolution,
but as another step in discussing the situation and finding
ways to improve it.
-- chuq]
For those that don't know, the Nolacon people decided to create
a special category to handle material that wasn't able to be
cleanly dealt with in the existing Hugo categories. The result
was the "Other Forms" award.
The definition of "Other Forms" is any Science Fiction or
Fantasy related item that doesn't fit into any other category.
The specific things they're trying to deal with are books like
the Hugo winning Science Made Stupid which won a Hugo as an art
book in the non-fiction category; Dark Knight which lost as an
art book in the non-fiction category and the likelihood of both
Watchmen (another graphic novel) and Harlan Ellison's I, Robot
script both needing a home in the upcoming Hugo elections.
Unfortunately, I think the Nolacon people blew it. The wording
is poor and ambiguous. Worse, "Other Forms" has the potential
for of abuse. It's going to be a lightly nominated category --
I expect that we'll see a large number of votes for I, Robot,
Watchmen and then there will be three things that happen to
have gotten more votes than all the other things.
What kind of random things qualify? I nominated two entries in
"Other Forms" -- A.J. Budrys for his book review column in
F&SF and Thomas Easton for his book review column in Analog.
Both write genre related columns, and the columns don't qualify
for any other category. After mailing off my ballot, though, I
started thinking about the implications of "Other Forms". It's
such a wide open category that it cries for abuse.
Like Isaac Asimov's Science Fiction Magazine? You can nominate
Dozois for Best Professional Editor, but not the magazine. So
nominate it for "Other Forms" as best genre fiction magazine.
How about nominating Clarion as the best genre related writing
conference? Or Writer's of the Future for best writing contest?
They all qualify based on the wording of the award.
I could go on, but I think you get the point.
One discussion I'd like to start up is what to do with the
Hugo's that might improve this situation. Should Graphic Novels
be specifically added to the Best Novel category, irregardless
of words? Should they have their own category? Nothing at all?
Are there any other categories that need adjusting?
Tom Galloway
(galloway%elma.epfl.ch@CLSEPF51.Bitnet)
Should Graphic Novels be specifically added to the Best Novel
category, irregardless of words? Should they have their own
category? Nothing at all?
Heck, this opens up almost as large a can of worms as the Other Forms
category. Namely, how do you define a graphic novel? The first pass
would probably be something like "A work of fiction in which the
narrative is substantially conveyed by either illustrations or a
combination of narrative and illustrations such that removal of the
illustrations would substantially effect the narrative itself" The
somewhat convoluted wording is necessary to rule out the novel which
merely has text illustrated.
But the big question is how one further defines this. Should there be a
difference between the Far Side and Bloom County comic strips and an
issue of, say, X-Men? What about something like Cerebus, which has been
announced to be a 300 issue "novel", but which is made up of a number
of self-contained stories which are further divided into individual
issues. Like other serialized works, is it not eligible until the year
in which issue 300 is printed is considered? Or are the trade paperback
partial compilations eligible for the year they're published? Are
individual issues eligible?
Is the Worldcon ready yet for a graphic story Hugo? To be honest, it's
only in the last few years that there's been material out that I'd
consider worth giving a Hugo for the most part. Does this track record
justify making this a permanent category yet?There is certain to be
argument against this based on awarding comic books rather than "real"
fiction. Comic book fandom has pretty much split off from sf fandom in
the last 20 or so years. It's unclear whether the idea of a graphic
story Hugo is politically feasible.
Delete the Best Semi-Pro magazine category
To be honest, while I don't have a copy of the regulations under which
a semi-pro magazine is defined, I suspect that the only reason Locus is
in this category is due to its circulation being just under the 10,000
which SFWA (yes, I know SFWA has nothing to do with Hugos) defines as a
pro fiction magazine. It's clear to me that Locus is a professional
magazine with no semi- about it; the thing provides the sole or vast
majority of livelihood for several people. It pays contributors. To me,
that means it's a fully pro magazine, not a semi-pro. There were good
reasons for breaking the semi-pro out from fan, but I don't think
either Locus or SF Chronicle belong here.
I decided to get really strange on the Other Forms nomination. I ended
up nominating Budrys and Harlan's columns in F&SF, the Hour 25 SF radio
show in LA, Harlan's other unpublished script [Flintlock], and
something I wish I'd thought of several weeks ago, SF- Lovers.
Wilson Heydt (whh@pbhya.PacBell.COM)
"Other Forms" also includes filk, and as Chuq noted, the rules are fuzzy
in the extreme. The folks at Off Centaur have compiled a partial list
of eligible filk for this year. There are some of us that are nominating
"Dawson's Christian" (by Duane Elms) for the "Other Forms" Hugo.
Jim Freund (jfreund@dasys1.UUCP)
First of all, I firmly believe that a form of the Other Form category
should most definitely exist. My personal love has always been for sf&f
audio drama and well-done dramatic readings. I remember the Hugo
nominations for two Firesign Theatre LP's coming in last place each
time. And we all know how much Harlan would love one for spoken word.
The late Mike Hodel should have enjoyed some recognition for his fine
sf radio program on KPFK (Hour 25). (Modesty forbids my mentioning my
weekly 2 hour sf radio program on WBAI for over 17 years, Hour of the
Wolf)I have produced radio dramas over the years that I might have
liked to have considered, and at WBAI alone, other sf radio drama
producers over the years worthy of consideration have included Samuel
R. Delany, John Lithgow, Baird Searles, and more. Moving outside the
US we must take note of the BBC, with such productions as The
Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, Nicol Williamson's reading of The
Hobbit, etc.
Not one of the above can even begin to compete in popularity (the Hugo
is a popularity poll) with even a Grade-Z movie or an episode of V in
the Special Dramatic Presentation category. Yet to make a specific
Aural Hugo would be sill. So I welcome the premise of this new award.
Yet I recognize the validity of your argument. I find the Hugo voting
to be too dispersed in taste for serious nominations (due to the vague
wording) to come forth. I think SFWA could handle such a category better...
o Best Professional Artist. Shift this from a nomination of an
artist to nominations of specific works. This would reduce the
tendency of a well-known artist get votes on name value even in
a year when their output is small or not up to snuff.
This seems it could become a double-edged sword. I feel that the Hugo's
cite name value popularity so much above all else that they often have
not familiarized themselves with a given category. I fear that the
people who would vote (and nominate) conscientiously on such an award
would be few and far between. A good but not stand-out piece of artwork
might win partly on the basis of the work it is depicting. On the other
hand, your plan might encourage publishers to use better cover art as
an incentive to featuring a potential winner.
In fact, all of these specific proposals are close calls, worthy of
debate and much fannish quibbling.
Mark Waks (justin@inmet.UUCP)
Wow. What a can of worms. I've been sitting here for about five
minutes, thinking about this, and I can already see some of the
problems that are going to be encountered if Graphic Novels (GNs) are
given their own award.
First, there's the old "what do you call Science Fiction" problem. Do
superheros qualify? I mean, I do think that Watchmen is pretty decent
SF, but how much of the rest is? The big problem, I guess, with giving
GNs their own category in the Hugos is that they would then get an
award every year. This is purely subjective, but I have no faith in the
ability of the comic book industry to put out even one Hugo-level GN
each year. Just because we've done it for the past two years means
nothing. I wouldn't want this to degenerate into a simple "best comic"
award; I hold the Hugos to a higher standard than that.
On the other hand, there really should be some way for a really
exceptional GN to be nominated, regardless of length.
What if Watchmen had never been collected? For example, I would
consider Moonshadow to be high enough quality. If the category were
created, it would need to be broad enough that a run of a comic could
be included. Otherwise, we're shorting a part of the comic industry.
As far as voting for particular works of an artist, rather than the
artists themselves: Hear, hear! I think that this is a marvelous idea,
and likely to result in far more considered voting. I would seriously
suggest this to the Hugo committee.
Kathryn L.Smith (kathy@XN.LL.MIT.EDU)
You're probably right about there not being a Hugo-quality GN every
year, but "No Award" appears on the ballot every year too. If you don't
think any of the nominees are of that quality, you can always vote that
as your first choice. And yes, there have been several cases of a given
category not being awarded every year. The question is basically how
much faith do you have in the voting members of the WorldCon.
Dan'l Danehy-Oakes (djo@pbhyc.PacBell.COM)
Do we need two media awards? Best movie and best other media?
Is there enough material out there to justify it?
The real problem is that in any given year, there may be a radio show,
or a TV show (should TV shows be counted in with movies under "Drama"?
How about stage plays? Slide shows (remember "The Capture")?
Perhaps "Other Forms" should be used as a Nominating category -- and
then categories set up based on what gets nominated in a given year. If
two or three art books get nominated, set up an "art book" category for
that year. Two or three graphic novels, set up a "graphic novel" category.
You'd have to have some threshold -- say, some minimum number of
nominations -- for something to make the ballot. For example, suppose
Watchmen and Elektra each got 150 nominations this year, and Hairballs
got forty. Then I'd say that there should only be two graphic novels on
the ballot.
Setting the threshold could be a problem, of course; and what do you do
when only one item in a given category makes the threshold? Put it and
"No Award" on the ballot together, or just award a de facto Hugo?
Best Professional Artist
I've thought for a long time that people should vote for individual
works instead of the Artist's output over a year. I suspect that (for
example) Kelly Freas might not have won quite so many Hugos under that
rule -- does anybody really go back and look at what this year's Freas,
Whelan, Sweet, etc. covers were, or do they vote for their general
impression of an artist accumulated over years?
Kevin Anderson (kanders@ncis.llnl.gov)
Every year I contemplate writing a letter to Charlie Brown, beseeching
him to drop his name from the list. Come on, guys -- Locus is in a class
by itself and will always win, unless SF Chronicle converts people. But
even still, people will perceive it as a two-man race. And that's not
true at all.
I'm a small press advocate, and I don't agree with Chuq that there are
no other alternatives. If Locus and SF Chronicle withdrew from the
running, then maybe people could pay attention to marvelous efforts
like Weirdbook, Whispers, Shayol, or Eric Vinicoff's Rigel. And ain't
it too bad that Fantasy Book didn't win any best semi-pro magazine
awards when it was around? Space & Time isn't quite in the same league,
but it has been published continuously for 20 years and it's quite well
done. These things are not fanzines, and they should be recognized for
what they are -- one of my complaints about Locus is that they usually
make snide comments about small press magazines because they seem to
think that a publication produced by one person out of his or her own
savings account should be comparable in quality to Omni.
Michael C. Berch (mcb@ati.tis.llnl.gov)
Somehow the idea of Locus "stepping aside" to let others cop the
Semi-Pro Hugo leaves sort of a bad taste in my mouth; the idea of a
award where everybody's not competing equally lessens the meaning of
the award, like playing a kid at chess and letting him win.
The trick here is to avoid loss of face, and it can be done by
realigning the categories into something where Locus no longer gets a
lock on a category, but can still compete if it chooses. Something like:
The editor awards have always puzzled me, as in trying to find a way to
vote for both a favorite book editor (Terry Carr, sigh) and a favorite
magazine editor (depends what mood I was in). Don't quite know what to
do about that.
Jim Brunet (jimb@ism780c.isc.com)
Anyway, as to Other Forms. After mulling it over, I don't think that
Watchmen or any other graphic novel should be nominated in the novel
category, regardless of word count. The forms are completely
different, fish and fowl, maybe even fish and conifer. I agree that
there needs to be a niche for things as diverse as Watchmen, Science
Made Stupid, etc. However, I'm also uneasy as to where it will end.
Best SF poem? Best SF make-up job? Best SF album? Very little in jest.
On the other hand, I vigorously approve of your suggestion for best SF
art, instead of artist. I don't know SF art that well, but when I did
nominate and vote on such, I made an effort to look at magazine covers,
book covers, etc., from the previous year in order to vote on that
year's work instead of general reputation. Even then, I had the feeling
that I was in the distinct minority.
Brandon Allbery (allbery@ncoast.UUCP)
I thought about Chuq's posting and then combined it with various other
ideas. I think I've an idea.The basic idea would be to keep Other Forms
in a modified form. It is obvious, from the existence of Watchmen/Dark
Knight, that new forms of fiction can spring up and that existing forms
which are not normally Hugo-quality may be used in Hugo-quality ways.
Thus, "Other Forms" can potentially be useful in insuring that deserving
works not fitting into other categories earn their just rewards.
Also rather obvious, however, is that an anarchic category just won't
do. As Chuq said, there are altogether too many possibilities for abuse
of the category.
My suggestion for the "Other Forms" category is that it be a two-step
category. The first step is to select categories; last year and this
year, for example, "Best Graphic Novel" would be a good category. This
would be voted on the same way that specific works/authors/artists,
etc. are voted on for the Hugo ballot.
Voting on categories would be done fairly early in the Hugo nomination
process. This would be so the winning categories could be selected and
made public in time for works to be nominated for these categories at
the same time as other works are nominated into "standard" categories.
From that point, works in "Special Forms" categories may be handled in
the same way as for normal categories.
This would deal with the changing SF scene with minimal effect on the
existing Hugo nomination process; it is flexible while it helps to
insure that oddball write-in nominees do not swamp the nominations or
final balloting.
[And finally, my thoughts on what should be done with the Hugo.
First, I'd like to see Other Forms converted to a new type of
award, an advisory Hugo. Voters would nominate Other Forms
Hugos in the first round, as they currently do. Instead of a
final ballot, however, the committee would use the nominations
to choose whether there is enough interest to warrant a special
Hugo. They could, based on the number of nominations made,
award zero or more special Hugos in a given year.
To qualify for a special Hugo, certain restrictions need to be
made to minimize special interest groups and people with
strange senses of humors. First, it has to be genre related.
It has to be originally published (or otherwise made public) in
the appropriate year for qualification. And there has to be a
significant interest in the item in the nominations -- for
instance, at least 50% of the ballots that nominate Other Forms
nominate the work.
If the committee feels a work is inappropriate, it can be
disqualified, at the risk of enduring all the screams and yells
of those that disagree.
This isn't perfect. But I think it keeps the intent of Other
Forms while keeping it under control, and trying to guarantee
it only is awarded in years when there is a deserving
candidate. I don't believe there is enough quality material to
guarantee that Other Forms would be awarded every year without
cheapening it, and that is one reason why I don't want it to be
a normal, nomination/vote award.
There are three other areas I'd like to see the Hugo's changed
or realigned. First, change "Best Artist" to "Best Artwork" --
a piece of art qualifying if first displayed or published in
the nominating year. This does mean that it's possible that
Michael Whelan will take all five slots, but if he does, he'd
deserve it -- and it strongly removes the name recognition
factor from nominating process.
The second change would be modification of the "Best
Professional Editor" category into two categories: "Best
Magazine Editor" and "Best Publishing House" -- the latter
instead of "Best Book Editor" because it is very difficult to
see who edits which books. Book editing is much more a team
effort, and it makes sense to honor the house and the team
rather than single out an individual.
Finally, the magazine categories need realignment. The primary
problem is not the "Annual Locus Award" in the semi-pro
category, but that the categories attempt to define contenders
by both size and intent. It's almost impossible for a casual
reader to understand intent -- OtherRealms, for example, was
nominated in both Semi-Pro and Fanzine categories. I would
convert the categories into the following three awards:
o Best Professional Magazine: for magazines with readership over
7,500.
o Best Small Press Magazine: for magazines with readership between
1,000 and 7,499.
o Best Amateur Magazine: for magazines and fanzines under 1,000.
Magazines of similar size should have, in general, similar
resources and generally the same quality level. By decoupling
the size of the magazine (the primary limitation on quality,
material, etc) from the question of what the magazine does (is
it a hobby, a semi- hobby, or are they serious?) you make it
easier for a good magazine to compete against it's peers.
My big complaint with the current system is that the question
of intent skews the voting to heavily. The semi-pro category
tries to define what the magazine is -- a definition that is
aimed specifically at Locus, but which blurs in too many cases
(including today's Locus, and fanzines with delusions of
grandeur such as OtherRealms).
The numbers I've chosen are somewhat arbitrary. They were
chosen to make sure Locus and SF Chron compete as Professional
Magazines, which was done to open up the small press category
to the many under-appreciated mid-sized magazines in the field.
The Amateur cut-off could just as easily be 750, or maybe as
small as 500 (although that would convert Lan's Lantern, and
almost convert File 770, both of which are definitely
fanzines). Somewhere between 500 and 1000 the cost of Xerox or
Mimeo starts to outstrip the cost of offset printing, and
that's generally the place where I define the difference
between an amateur press and a small press.
As I've said, these are my best guesses on how to "fix" things.
they aren't perfect. Locus can compete fairly as a professional
magazine, but I don't believe that SF Chron can, which means
that Andy Porter would have to get used to losing in another
category. OtherRealms would end up in the Small Press category
instead of the Amateur category, which I think would make it
harder for me to compete and win against the likes of Grue or
Fantasy Book. But these publications are all, in many ways,
special cases. I think for the magazine field the categories
would be more representative and fair.
And I'm always interested in more ideas and suggestions on this
stuff. One of the things you realize, getting into this, is
that there are no easy answers. -- chuq]
Book ratings
in OtherRealms
All books are rated with the
following guidelines. Most books
should fall into the range [***-] to
[**+]. Ratings are modified with - or +
to show a half step, with [***-]
subjectively better than [**+].
[*****] Ones of the best books of the year
[****] An above average book
[***] A good book. Recommended
[**] Flawed, but has its moments
[*] Not Recommended
[] To Be Avoided
Subscriptions
An individual copy of OtherRealms costs $2.85. A one year (4 issue)
subscription is available for $11. Please note the new rates, courtesy
of our Postal Service. Contributors of published material -- artwork,
articles, letters or whatever -- will also receive copies of the issue
they are published in.
Complimentary subscriptions to members of the publishing industry are
available. OtherRealms is available on a returnable basis to specialty
shops and bookstores. Please contact me for details.
OtherRealms is also available for arranged trades with your fanzine or
at the whim of the editor. It is also available at Future Fantasy
Books, Palo Alto CA.
Is this your last issue?
The number on your mailing list is the issue your OtherRealms
subscription dies. Negative numbers indicate complimentary
subscriptions. If it is zero, this is a one-time mailing, so if you
want to see it again, you should Do Something about it.
Electronic OtherRealms
An electronic, text-only version of OtherRealms is available on many
different computer networks and bulletin boards.
On the Internet, BITnet, CSNet and UUCP networks, send E-mail to
chuq@sun.COM for information. On USENET, it is distributed in the
newsgroup rec.mag.otherrealms. It is also available on the Delphi
timesharing service.
Those funny runes
The E-mail addresses attached to some contributor names are like Postal
Addresses, only translated into computerese. Computers can use them to
find other computers and actually deliver messages to people. Most of
the time, anyway. If you don't understand them, don't worry -- neither
do many computers.
Submissions
OtherRealms publishes articles about book length Science Fiction,
Fantasy and Horror. The primary focus is reviews of books, especially
newer and lesser known authors. Other material about books and the
people that write them are welcome, including interviews,
bibliographies and biographies.
Authors are invited to write articles for the Behind the Scene series.
These allow you to go into the background and research that went into a
book -- the things that make the book special and interesting that don't
necessarily show up in the finished product.
Please query on all non-review material, due to the limited space I
have for these items. OtherRealms does not publishe poetry, fiction or
anything about media, fannish or short-fiction works.
Submissions can be made on either Macintosh or MS-DOS disk, via E-mail
on the networks listed above, or the old-fashioned ink-on-paper
format.
On the Mac, I can read MacWrite, Word or Fullwrite format files. On
MS-DOS, please try to submit an ascii readable file. If you aren't sure
about any of this, contact me first.
Please include envelope and return postage if you want to see your
submission again. Anything submitted without return postage will be
discarded.
OtherRealms does not prohibit multiple submissions, but please note
them as such. I take first serial rights unless other arrangements are
made. On artwork, I take non- exclusive one time rights.
Art
I'm always looking for good genre related artwork, from small clip-art
pieces to covers. Originals will be returned after use. I can now
handle electronically generated art in EPS format as well.
Publishing news
OtherRealms is interested in publishing news about the happenings in
the field -- contracts, promotions, deals, sales, market needs. If
something has happened you want the world to know about, I want to
know.
The details
OtherRealms is published on a Macintosh and a LaserWriter Plus.
Software used to generate it include Microsoft Word, FullWrite
Professional, SuperPaint, Aldus Freehand, Ready, Set Go! 4.0 and a host
of others.
The body typeface is Palatino. The Headlines use Univers in various
weights and sizes. The cover logo uses Canaith, heavily modified in
Aldus Freehand.
OtherRealms
Science Fiction and Fantasy
In Review
Editor
Chuq Von Rospach
Science Editor
Laurie Sefton
Contributing Editors
Dan'l Danehy-Oakes
Charles de Lint
Rick Kleffel
Alan Wexelblat
OtherRealms #21
Summer, 1988
Copyright 1988
by Chuq Von Rospach
All Rights Reserved
One time rights have been acquired from the contributors. All rights
are hereby assigned to the contributors.
OtherRealms may not be reproduced in any form without written
permission from Chuq Von Rospach. The electronic edition may be
distributed or reproduced in its entirety as long as all copyrights,
author and publication information remain intact.
No article may be reprinted, reproduced or republished in any way
without the express permission of the author.
OtherRealms is published
in March, June, September and
December by:
Chuq Von Rospach
35111-F Newark Blvd.
Suite 255
Newark, CA 94560
USENET: chuq@sun.com
Delphi: CHUQ
CIS: 73317, 635
GENie: C.VONROSPAC
