On Author Domination of the Hugos
Apr. 22nd, 2015 10:24 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
jsburbidgeOne of the complaints which pre-dates the Sad Puppies regarding the Hugos is that a subset of authors dominate the awards. The SP's have picked up on this and given it a twist, but even before them it was not uncommon to see suggestions regarding rules for disqualifying authors for years immediately subsequent to wins.
This is a poor idea. Although there certainly are authors whose repeated nominations in the Best Novel category must be chalked up in part to the effects of self-publicity at the personal level (Scalzi, McGuire, and Sawyer, in varying ways and degrees) and some who are acknowledged masters who also have been nominated (and sometimes won) for inferior work (Asimov, Willis, Bujold), it's also true that a great author at the top of his/her form can produce a cluster of great novels tightly spaced, which are legitimately the best, or arguably the best, of the year.
Ann Leckie is a fair example. Ancillary Sword is not, in my opinion, the very best novel of 2014, but it's certainly arguably one of the best five, and I can see some readers legitimately considering it the best.
As for the authors of whom it could legitimately be said that they gain votes as the result of self-publicity: the self-publicity is real enough, but it's not about rewards: it's about sales. Scalzi, Stross, McGuire et al. maintain strong online presences with lots of readers not because they're in a permanent Hugo campaign, but because they want to sell more books. The Hugo posts are a minor offshoot of the general ongoing self-promotion. (Note that selling yourself on social media is standard advice to authors of all stripes these days; these are merely at the high (power-law) end of the scale as far as success goes.)
As a result of economic changes in publishing, social media self-promotion by authors is not going to go away. Some authors avoid doing this for awards, and are quite emphatic about it (e.g. Jo Walton), but it's a little unrealistic not to expect an author not noting when his or her book has come out, or what it's about.
It's worth remembering that the Hugos not infrequently are won by works by authors who have never been nominated before - Clarke, Leckie, Chabon, Bacigalupi, Walton.
Trying to correct for the impact of social media by setting up rules on the awards is the wrong approach. Generalized signal boosting for other authors' works - throughout the year, not tied directly to awards - is probably a better idea.
This is a poor idea. Although there certainly are authors whose repeated nominations in the Best Novel category must be chalked up in part to the effects of self-publicity at the personal level (Scalzi, McGuire, and Sawyer, in varying ways and degrees) and some who are acknowledged masters who also have been nominated (and sometimes won) for inferior work (Asimov, Willis, Bujold), it's also true that a great author at the top of his/her form can produce a cluster of great novels tightly spaced, which are legitimately the best, or arguably the best, of the year.
Ann Leckie is a fair example. Ancillary Sword is not, in my opinion, the very best novel of 2014, but it's certainly arguably one of the best five, and I can see some readers legitimately considering it the best.
As for the authors of whom it could legitimately be said that they gain votes as the result of self-publicity: the self-publicity is real enough, but it's not about rewards: it's about sales. Scalzi, Stross, McGuire et al. maintain strong online presences with lots of readers not because they're in a permanent Hugo campaign, but because they want to sell more books. The Hugo posts are a minor offshoot of the general ongoing self-promotion. (Note that selling yourself on social media is standard advice to authors of all stripes these days; these are merely at the high (power-law) end of the scale as far as success goes.)
As a result of economic changes in publishing, social media self-promotion by authors is not going to go away. Some authors avoid doing this for awards, and are quite emphatic about it (e.g. Jo Walton), but it's a little unrealistic not to expect an author not noting when his or her book has come out, or what it's about.
It's worth remembering that the Hugos not infrequently are won by works by authors who have never been nominated before - Clarke, Leckie, Chabon, Bacigalupi, Walton.
Trying to correct for the impact of social media by setting up rules on the awards is the wrong approach. Generalized signal boosting for other authors' works - throughout the year, not tied directly to awards - is probably a better idea.
