![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Adam Roberts does not like the nominations for this years Hugo awards (be sure to read his full blog post because he makes some good points, even if I don’t agree with him about ‘Little Brother’). After taking part in NerdsHeartYA, I’m really starting to feel that perhaps the time has come for people like Roberts to stop just posting biting blog posts about the issue of awards and try to actually sort them out.
I’m sure Renay’s been thinking about things she’s like to change about NerdsHeartYA if it runs next year (but I’m really proud to be associated with it, can’t wait to see the outcome and I think it can only get better if it happens again and again) but when she identified a problem in the world of book awards she got annoyed and tried to do something about it. She’s an influential book blogger, but Roberts is an author capable of drawing international attention to the issue. If Renay can take action, Roberts can’t exactly plead poverty of resources. If he wants to see awards where people judge books based on a certain set of criteria (experimentalism in fiction) why doesn’t he set one up?
Personally I think it is pointless to try and change how an existing award is judged, by arguing that experimentation in fiction should always be the default criteria for judging whether a book deserves a place on the shortlist. Many people don’t agree that the inclusion of successful experimentation makes a book better than a book that works successfully, but takes a more traditional form. Some people think experimentation can be sacrificed if the book contains other strong elements. Some people want to see experimentalism but don’t feel that every book needs to be experimental to be called a great book. If Roberts think differently why doesn’t he set up his own award that specifically looks for the very best experimental sci-fi?
Yes if everyone set up specific awards like this there would be tons of awards, but then we’d all have more lovely lists to debate about (I think all book lovers like a good list to rip apart). Maybe we’d all stop feeling oh so bitter about the state of book awards if it looked like someone, somewhere in the book industry was trying to address our issues with them (authors included for their body of work, instead of the novel put on the shortlist, lack of experimental fiction, playing to what the marketing department has identified as the intended audience for this award etc, etc, etc until infinity). That’s what the original break away awards, such as the Orange Prize, were all about. They tried to find a way of addressing the problems with other awards. If you don’t like how these awards are run now then by all means explain why you feel that way loudly, but you could also subvert these flawed awards by just creating your own. An award is after all just a list of books picked by a bunch of people who like books, following a set of criteria (internal or external).
I’m sure Renay’s been thinking about things she’s like to change about NerdsHeartYA if it runs next year (but I’m really proud to be associated with it, can’t wait to see the outcome and I think it can only get better if it happens again and again) but when she identified a problem in the world of book awards she got annoyed and tried to do something about it. She’s an influential book blogger, but Roberts is an author capable of drawing international attention to the issue. If Renay can take action, Roberts can’t exactly plead poverty of resources. If he wants to see awards where people judge books based on a certain set of criteria (experimentalism in fiction) why doesn’t he set one up?
Personally I think it is pointless to try and change how an existing award is judged, by arguing that experimentation in fiction should always be the default criteria for judging whether a book deserves a place on the shortlist. Many people don’t agree that the inclusion of successful experimentation makes a book better than a book that works successfully, but takes a more traditional form. Some people think experimentation can be sacrificed if the book contains other strong elements. Some people want to see experimentalism but don’t feel that every book needs to be experimental to be called a great book. If Roberts think differently why doesn’t he set up his own award that specifically looks for the very best experimental sci-fi?
Yes if everyone set up specific awards like this there would be tons of awards, but then we’d all have more lovely lists to debate about (I think all book lovers like a good list to rip apart). Maybe we’d all stop feeling oh so bitter about the state of book awards if it looked like someone, somewhere in the book industry was trying to address our issues with them (authors included for their body of work, instead of the novel put on the shortlist, lack of experimental fiction, playing to what the marketing department has identified as the intended audience for this award etc, etc, etc until infinity). That’s what the original break away awards, such as the Orange Prize, were all about. They tried to find a way of addressing the problems with other awards. If you don’t like how these awards are run now then by all means explain why you feel that way loudly, but you could also subvert these flawed awards by just creating your own. An award is after all just a list of books picked by a bunch of people who like books, following a set of criteria (internal or external).
