Too Many Hugos?

[kevin_standlee]

Over on SF Awards Watch, we have a report about Mike Resnick complaining that there are too many Hugo Award categories. Now, I understand the argument that having "too many" categories somehow cheapens the Award; however, I reject it as currently drawn. The fact that there are Academy Awards for Best Cinematography and Best Set Design doesn't devalue the Oscars for Best Actor and Best Actress. Similarly, I don't think that Hugo Awards for editing and for fan activity make the written fiction categories somehow less worthy.

Now, neither Cheryl nor I have access to the full Resnick article. We are relying on the summary and quotes from it. I freely admit that I may be missing something. But on the strength of what we know, I challenged Mike in my comment on SFAW to (a) come up with his list of Hugo Award categories that he would eliminate were he to have unilateral control over the categories and (b) to come to the WSFS Business Meeting and propose these changes himself. Nobody is stopping him. He's done it before (1994) when a WSFS decision riled him up, so he's familiar with the process.

As it happens, there will be a round-table discussion at SMOFCon this Friday discussing Hugo Award categories. I wonder if Resnick's complaint will be on the table?

Comments

[dsmoen.livejournal.com]

I guarantee you if there were a "graphic novel" nominated in the short story category, he'd feel differently.

[querldox.livejournal.com]

Well, I personally think Best Semi-Prozine's loss wouldn't cause tears anywhere but a certain office in Oakland...

The other category I think may get a serious look at in the next few years is Best Fan Writer. John Scalzi only lost by one vote this year, and there are several other professional writers with very popular blogs who could potentially start dominating the nominations as people realize they're eligible (for example, Neil Gaiman).

On the one hand, unlike a lot of "classic fanzine fans and fan writers", I do feel what these pros are doing in their blogs is fan writing. And I'd certainly not have any problem with cons that named, for example, Fred Pohl or Harry Stubbs (Hal Clement) as Fan Guest of Honor. But the (pardon the pun) fanbase of certain pro authors who blog with wide readership does have the strong potential of overwhelming the classic fan writers, and fans who are not professional writers.

[rwl.livejournal.com]

I read your and Mike's exchange, and he stated that he was not against eliminating any existing categories, just not creating any new ones. That's different from how you are characterizing it.

That said, it's probably inevitable several of the categories will be redefined. Maybe one place to start might be the "semiprozine" category -- redefining it as "best related magazine" or somesuch. That might bring some additional potential nominees into the mix.

[rwl.livejournal.com]

Oops, make that "not for eliminating any existing catefories".

[kevin-standlee.livejournal.com]

That's different from how you are characterizing it.

True, as he later clarified. Still, he seems unhappy that there are categories other than the four written fiction ones. It certainly doesn't bother me.

I was initially in favor of creating Best Web Site, but I'm willing to be persuaded that better promotion of the fact that nearly everything pushed over web sites is already eligible might work. (It appears that many people seem to think that things published on web sites somehow aren't eligible because it's not "really" publishing, i.e. ink on paper.)

I also think that we could lose Best Semiprozine without much heartache, particularly if we pointed out that while the publications themselves would no longer be eligible, their editors would be under Best Editor Short Form.