{"id":10120,"date":"2015-08-30T09:13:50","date_gmt":"2015-08-30T13:13:50","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/scienceblogs.com\/principles\/?p=10120"},"modified":"2015-08-30T09:13:50","modified_gmt":"2015-08-30T13:13:50","slug":"on-the-need-for-short-story-club","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/chadorzel.com\/principles\/2015\/08\/30\/on-the-need-for-short-story-club\/","title":{"rendered":"On the Need for &#8220;Short Story Club&#8221;"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>So, the <a href=\"http:\/\/www.thehugoawards.org\/2015\/08\/2014-hugo-award-winners-announced\/\">Hugo awards<\/a> were handed out a little while ago, with half of the prose fiction categories going to &#8220;No Award&#8221; and the other half to works I voted below &#8220;No Award.&#8221; Whee. I&#8217;m not really interested in rehashing the controversy, though I will note that <a href=\"http:\/\/wrongquestions.blogspot.com\/2015\/08\/the-2015-hugo-awards-thoughts-on-results.html\">Abigail Nussbaum&#8217;s take<\/a> is probably the one I most agree with.<\/p>\n<p>With the release of the nominating stats, a number of people released &#8220;what might&#8217;ve been&#8221; ballots, stripping out the slate nominees&#8211; <a href=\"http:\/\/www.tobiasbuckell.com\/2015\/08\/23\/what-the-alternate-hugo-ballot-would-likely-have-been\/\">Tobias Buckell&#8217;s<\/a> was the first I saw, so I&#8217;ll link that. I saw a lot of people exclaiming over how awesome that would&#8217;ve been, and found myself with some time to kill, so I went and read the short stories from that list (all of which are freely available online).<\/p>\n<p>And, you know, they&#8217;re&#8230; fine. Really, the main effect this had for me was to reconfirm that short fiction is a low-return investment for me. I wouldn&#8217;t object to any of these winning an award, but none of them jumped out at me as brilliant &#8220;Oh my God, this <em>must<\/em> win!&#8221; stuff. <\/p>\n<p>(Aside: I spent a while thinking about why it is that short fiction at least seems to have a lower rate of return for me than novels. I think it&#8217;s mostly that current tastes interact with the length limit in a way that works really badly for me. The stuff that&#8217;s getting celebrated these days tends toward the &#8220;literalized metaphor&#8221; side of things&#8211; the speculative elements tend not to be points of science, but supernatural reflections of the emotional state of the characters. The failure mode of that is &#8220;crashingly obvious,&#8221; particularly when constrained to keep it under 7,500 words, and I really hate that. My reaction tends to be &#8220;Yes, I see what you did there. You&#8217;re very clever. Here&#8217;s a shiny gold star,&#8221; and a story starting in that hole needs to be really good just to ascend to the heights of &#8220;Meh.&#8221; Novels provide a little more room to work, and it&#8217;s easier to hide the clever metaphors, so they&#8217;re less likely to bug me in that particular way.)<\/p>\n<p>This then leads to the fundamental problem I have with Hugo nominating, namely that the &#8220;just nominate what you love!&#8221; method really doesn&#8217;t work for me when three-quarters of the awards go to low-return categories. Left to my own devices, I&#8217;m just not going to read much short fiction, certainly not enough to make sensible nominations. Which means I&#8217;m going to be one of those folks who nominates a bunch of novels and maybe a couple of movies, and leaves the rest blank. Which plays into the hands of the slate voters.<\/p>\n<p>The one year recently when I actually read enough short fiction to make halfway sensible nominations was when Niall Harrison put together a &#8220;Short Story Club&#8221; of bloggers who all read a particular story and reviewed it online (you can find my reviews <a href=\"http:\/\/scienceblogs.com\/principles\/?s=%22short+story+club%22\">here<\/a>). Working from a limited selection of stories by somebody with a really good grasp of the state of the field was a big help, and the obligation to say something about them on the blog was enough to motivate me to read them. (And, no, &#8220;keep garbage off the Hugo ballot&#8221; is not by itself enough motivation, especially in the absence of quality curation.)<\/p>\n<p>Niall has since moved to a role where it wouldn&#8217;t be appropriate for him to do that kind of thing, but I&#8217;d really love to see someone else take that up: picking a set of plausibly Hugo-worthy stories, setting a schedule, and collecting links to reviews. Even if it doesn&#8217;t lead to finding stuff that I actually love and want to nominate, it would be interesting to read about what other people see in these stories.<\/p>\n<p>I don&#8217;t know that anybody reading this has the free time or standing in the SF community to do this kind of thing, but I know I would find it really valuable. So I&#8217;ll throw it out there and hope for the best.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>So, the Hugo awards were handed out a little while ago, with half of the prose fiction categories going to &#8220;No Award&#8221; and the other half to works I voted below &#8220;No Award.&#8221; Whee. I&#8217;m not really interested in rehashing the controversy, though I will note that Abigail Nussbaum&#8217;s take is probably the one I&hellip; <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"http:\/\/chadorzel.com\/principles\/2015\/08\/30\/on-the-need-for-short-story-club\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"screen-reader-text\">On the Need for &#8220;Short Story Club&#8221;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[18,37,29],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-10120","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-books","category-pop_culture","category-sf","entry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/chadorzel.com\/principles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10120","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/chadorzel.com\/principles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/chadorzel.com\/principles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/chadorzel.com\/principles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/chadorzel.com\/principles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=10120"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/chadorzel.com\/principles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10120\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/chadorzel.com\/principles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=10120"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/chadorzel.com\/principles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=10120"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/chadorzel.com\/principles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=10120"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}