a thoughtful web.
Good ideas and conversation. No ads, no tracking.   Login or Take a Tour!
comment by dingus
dingus  ·  3138 days ago  ·  link  ·    ·  parent  ·  post: Who Won Science Fiction’s Hugo Awards, and Why It Matters

I'm no fan of the Rabid Puppies, but the way this writer injects gender/racial politics into every paragraph is nauseating. Sci-fi is no place for that, it's a place for telling engaging stories about engaging topics.





user-inactivated  ·  3138 days ago  ·  link  ·  

    Sci-fi is no place for that

Lesson Time:

Star Trek, the de-facto Sci-Fi series, is entirely about gender and racial politics. It depicted an Earth that had settled its racial and gender politics to move beyond that and into the Final Frontier. Star Trek had women in positions of power. It houses television's first interracial kiss. Its cast was more diverse than any other I think you can find in the 1960s. In short, Sci-Fi is one of the most important places for gender/racial politics.

    It's a place for telling engaging stories about engaging topics.

I don't understand what this is supposed to mean. That race and gender politic-based stories aren't engaging? We're going to have to agree to disagree here, I think.

Side note: I had the great pleasure of meeting and talking with Nichelle Nichols about her time on Star Trek and its role in televised diversity, and how NBC was going "all-color" in its network. It was awesome. It was also at Comic-Con.

b_b  ·  3138 days ago  ·  link  ·  

I'm a novice's novice when it comes to scifi, but when I think of scifi (or scifi-ish) movies and books that I've really liked (e.g., brave new world, man in the high castle, matrix, cloud atlas, gattaca) they are pretty much all about race and class based oppression. There's a reason for that. It's because scifi stories are all essentially thought experiments, experiments in which the writer tries to envision a world where some new technology exists that radically changed the world. Then (s)he attempts to figure out how characters might behave in that world in a way that is consistent with human nature. Since human nature is to oppress, that's what the characters with power do. However, the trick is that it's easier for us, the readers, to spot the problems in the imaginary world, because the tools of oppression are decoupled from our day to day social order. I think. That is, it's easier to look at handsome, white Ethan Hawke and feel bad for him, because his genes are suboptimal, than it is to look at your local inner city and not blame the victim.

briandmyers  ·  3138 days ago  ·  link  ·  

And let's not forget Ursula LeGuin's brilliant "The Left Hand of Darkness" - she wrote about gender issues long before they were on most of America's radar. Also Theodore Sturgeon's short story "The World Well Lost", and many others, I'm sure.

dingus  ·  3138 days ago  ·  link  ·  

    Sci-Fi is one of the most important places for gender/racial politics.

I guess it's fair to say that, but I don't think sci-fi should be primarily about delivering a message, i.e. that racism is bad or whatever. I think it should be primarily about coming up with some new idea, specifically of scientific/technological nature, and trying to write a story about it. There's room in there for black lebian writers and gay latino characters and all manner of progressivism, but once the point of your story is to deliver some message, it becomes the sort of thing that the Sad Puppies are complaining about. Obviously there are exceptions to this rule, for instance 1984, but I think those should stay the exception and not the norm.

(and yes, I don't really find gender/racial politics very engaging at all, but that's personal preference)

rinx  ·  3138 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Sci-fi has always been political and "delivering a message". Back in the day it was warning people about the dangers of unchecked population growth, or rapid AI development. Recently it's been a lot of dystopian bioterror or dangerous scientific advancement. All of these issues are political. You can't imagine a future society without dealing with where you think our society is heading today, it's at the heart of the genre, it's always been "preachy" as you put it.

So when people say they don't want scifi to be political, they mean they don't want it to be political in a way that challenges them. Social issues like terrorism or government control? Totally fine. Social issues like gender politics? Not ok! It's an arbitrary bar, and it's incredibly transparent to everyone but the Sad Puppies that what they are really doing is trying to silence authors that challenge them.

If you don't like Scifi that scares you, don't read it. If you don't like the Hugos, start your own award. Don't whine because other people like things you don't like. It's bible belt book banning all over, just in a internet vigilante form.

dingus  ·  3138 days ago  ·  link  ·  

I don't think good sci-fi has ever been grounded in politics. It's always been grounded in ideas, and the politics come from those ideas. Writers imagine what the world might look like when the population skyrockets, or what might happen when we perfect AI, and then go through with the possible consequences of that setting. The message is a side-effect of that process, and in some sense it's up for debate by the reader. The very best sci-fi doesn't convey a message so much as pose a question.

Sci-fi grounded in the message, meanwhile, has a definite aim. Its aim is to tell the reader what the author thinks about something, like terrorism or government control or gender politics. In my view that really gimps the story into being an elaborate setup for the message, instead of being the consequences of its setting. Of course there are exceptions, as I've stated before.

And really I don't care much about the Hugos, or the Sad Puppies. Maybe I'll read the Three Body Problem, it looks pretty good. All I'm saying is, the Sad Puppies bring up a fair point that warrants consideration rather than dismissal.

rinx  ·  3138 days ago  ·  link  ·  

    I don't think good sci-fi has ever been grounded in politics. It's always been grounded in ideas, and the politics come from those ideas.

The same is true for the books the Puppies are attacking! Go look at the Hugo winners and nominees from the last few years. Time travel, planet terraforming, alien politics, it's all there. None of them on there are solely about pushing gender politics or racial issues. They are, however, starting to include those views in a discussion about what the future looks like. That is what the Puppies are reacting to.

    The very best sci-fi doesn't convey a message so much as pose a question.

That's not really up to you to decide. If you don't like sci-fi written a certain way, don't read it. If others do, and if they give awards based on what they like, so what?

And again, if the Puppies don't like the Hugo winners, they can start their own awards. There are other awards in science fiction, like the Nebula. But they won't, because It's not about a fair, just award system. It's about other people enjoying something they don't like, and trying to take that away from them.

    All I'm saying is, the Sad Puppies bring up a fair point that warrants consideration rather than dismissal.

Right, and I'm disagreeing with you, strongly. It's not a fair point. It's an angry point based on a selfish, intolerant worldview.

dingus  ·  3138 days ago  ·  link  ·  

    The same is true for the books the Puppies are attacking! Go look at the Hugo winners and nominees from the last few years. Time travel, planet terraforming, alien politics, it's all there. None of them on there are solely about pushing gender politics or racial issues. They are, however, starting to include those views in a discussion about what the future looks like. That is what the Puppies are reacting to.

I'll hardly judge books I haven't read. The Sad Puppies aren't in the right; however, they are bringing up a more general issue about what constitutes good sci-fi. It's not their actual positions that are important, its the more generalized version of them., that being the aceptance of political aims in SF.

    That's not really up to you to decide.

Wanting books I like to be recognized for their achievements is totally reasonable, would you agree? Then why can't the Puppies do the same?

    Right, and I'm disagreeing with you, strongly. It's not a fair point. It's an angry point based on a selfish, intolerant worldview.

Filter out the selfishness and intolerance and it's something that warrants discussion.

rinx  ·  3138 days ago  ·  link  ·  

You aren't addressing anything I'm saying. I'm going to try one last time for a real conversation here then give up.

1) If the puppies want good books to get awards, why not start their own award? The Hugos have every right to award the books they like, the same way you are saying the Puppies deserve. The Hugos aren't telling the Puppies what to do. The Puppies are telling the Hugos what to do. That's the issue with the Puppies, only one group is seeking to control the other.

2) You say Puppies are upset about sci-fi that is "an elaborate setup for the message, instead of being the consequences of its setting.". Please provide actual examples of that in recent Hugo winners.

dingus  ·  3138 days ago  ·  link  ·  

if you think that I'm addressing what you're saying I don't think it's possible to have a real conversation.

rinx  ·  3138 days ago  ·  link  ·  

You've dodged those points every reply, including that one. While I doubt we will convince eachother away from our respective corners online, I would encourage you to actually read the books you're disparaging. The Hugo have nominated some really wonderful books. Before you validate the toxic campaign the Puppies are running, you might want to give those books a chance.

dingus  ·  3138 days ago  ·  link  ·  

I'll read them if I get around to it. Like I said, it would be far from me to judge a book before reading it.

rinx  ·  3138 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Maybe hold off on commenting about things you don't understand until then ;)

dingus  ·  3138 days ago  ·  link  ·  

I'm pretty sure I understand the Puppies.

arguewithatree  ·  3138 days ago  ·  link  ·  

huh? "gender/racial politics" are at the root of the issue...

dingus  ·  3138 days ago  ·  link  ·  

not really, the root of the issue is that Hugo judging is obviously flawed.

arguewithatree  ·  3138 days ago  ·  link  ·  

right... and that was used by sexist and racist groups to skew the awards.

dingus  ·  3138 days ago  ·  link  ·  

along with people who have legitimate complaints.

arguewithatree  ·  3138 days ago  ·  link  ·  

such as?

dingus  ·  3138 days ago  ·  link  ·  

well, they're claiming that some stories aren't voted on for their quality but on the political leaning of their writers, which is an additional reason why the Hugo is flawed.

arguewithatree  ·  3138 days ago  ·  link  ·  

good edit -- social justice warrior is such a nothing term

I can understand that but I think that people want to overpoliticize representation in literature. If people write about their reality as a woman/person of color/non-straight or cis person, that's not about politics that's about lived experience.

dingus  ·  3138 days ago  ·  link  ·  

    If people write about their reality as a woman/person of color/non-straight or cis person

and it makes for a good book, but unless there's an entire other dimension to that book it's not good sci-fi.

arguewithatree  ·  3138 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Right but it doesn't sound like that was the case? Full disclosure I don't know the media that won but from what I've seen it looks well rounded and meets the requisites of sci-fi

dingus  ·  3138 days ago  ·  link  ·  

I don't think it's as big of a problem as the Sad Puppies make it out to be, but it's there. I think they provided a few examples in the article, probably more if you dig around the net a little.

arguewithatree  ·  3138 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Sure. I think an expanded audience would inherently lead to expanded pool of nominees for the awards and I think people will vote for what they identify with rather than a story that's been told before. And that's how the genre grows.