tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33813337.post6894768318903870810..comments2023-09-12T06:18:38.552-04:00Comments on The World in the Satin Bag: 2012 Hugo Awards Nominations: Preliminary ThoughtsAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13571452656553970472noreply@blogger.comBlogger31125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33813337.post-64582667554765916232013-05-15T15:21:00.918-04:002013-05-15T15:21:00.918-04:00Lastly, "making a living" doesn't se...Lastly, "making a living" doesn't seem to be a determining factor for the category of "pro." Plenty of "pro" writers don't really make a living as writers. And the categories themselves (semi-pro vs. fan) seems to take into account a pay scale. I'm not sure if that pay scale is an accurate reflection of the barrier between "fan," "semi-pro," and "pro," but it does exist. That same pay scale may throw a wrench in my entire argument, as it concerns, if I recall correctly, payments to contributors, which StarshipSofa does not do (or am I wrong on that point?).Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13571452656553970472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33813337.post-9852994548873692292013-05-15T15:17:36.086-04:002013-05-15T15:17:36.086-04:00Profit may be the wrong word to use, since it impl...Profit may be the wrong word to use, since it implies "profit above net cost," but since you don't deny that Tony makes money off of products sold that are specific to the podcast, your argument doesn't really hold here. The question then becomes whether a certain amount of earned income from said product constitutes a shift from "fancast" to "something else." I honestly think StarshipSofa belongs in the Best Related Work category, since it's primary function is to present audio fiction, not specifically "fan" content.<br /><br />Regardless, there is a huge difference between "selling a product" and "receiving donations. There is also a difference between selling a direct product and linking to an author's website, which may or may not lead to a sale. The former you can track; the latter you cannot, unless every person who buys a book tells you why they bought it. Unless I'm mistaken, there isn't a lot of research on this point, though I'm happy to be proven wrong (it's a notion I once subscribed to, but have recently changed because, like digital piracy, arguments about what people might do given certain information is hard to say with any accuracy).<br /><br />Ad space concerns are legitimate ones. I need to think about that one some more.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13571452656553970472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33813337.post-28738060125509495502013-05-15T12:49:56.338-04:002013-05-15T12:49:56.338-04:00Put another way, if any of us actually made a livi...Put another way, if any of us actually made a living doing this, your argument might then be considered valid. <br />But we don't. <br />So it isn't. Adam Prachthttp://cheapskatesreview.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33813337.post-17344893871086579122013-05-15T12:47:27.306-04:002013-05-15T12:47:27.306-04:00You think StarShipSofa makes a /profit/?
Ha! What...You think StarShipSofa makes a /profit/? <br />Ha! What planet are you living on? <br />Tony takes money from that and turns it back around to keeping the show afloat.<br />Does a non-profit hospital cease to be one because they have a gift shop and pay the doctors?<br />Reality is calling. Better answer it. <br /><br />Oh and for the record: <br />-Coode Street includes a complete bibliography of the hosts (which presumably earns them some money). <br />-Galactic Suburbia takes donations.<br />-SF Signal has ad space on their site. <br />-Squeecast includes links to sites of all hosts, all of whom have a store, bibliography, and/or pitches with links to purchase their work. <br /><br />This is all perfectly fine. But if you're going to deride one for having supporting income, you have to deride them /all/. <br /><br />(And, yes, I'm VOLUNTEER assistant editor for StarShipSofa, so I have skin in the game). <br /><br />-AdamAdam Prachthttp://cheapskatesreview.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33813337.post-88616137678451593922012-04-10T19:51:27.682-04:002012-04-10T19:51:27.682-04:00Kevin: You keep bringing up voting and the nation...Kevin: You keep bringing up voting and the nation as a basis for why creating definitions for the Hugos will not work, but you never consider that even in a nation of people with varying opinions, it is possible for them to find common agreement on certain items, however inconvenient to certain parties.<br /><br />The same is true of the Hugos. No perfect definition is possible, but a serviceable one is. And that means we can at least find a definition which serves to solidify categories in the award for the sake of clarity, direction, and purpose.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13571452656553970472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33813337.post-35065998481200032302012-04-10T19:37:08.859-04:002012-04-10T19:37:08.859-04:00I think you're confusing "being a fan&quo...I think you're confusing "being a fan" with "being recognized as engaging as a fan" and vice versa for "pro." There's no argument here about whether you can be both a professional and a fan. There is an argument about whether you can receive an award meant for fans if what you are doing is no longer a strictly fan endeavor. And that's what needs defining. Otherwise, the category is literally meaningless, and any categories which present themselves as opposites in some way are therefore meaningless as well.<br /><br />Either there is something which can be defined as a "fan" activity or a "pro" activity, or there isn't. Only one of those scenarios justifies the existence of 90% of the Hugo Award categories.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13571452656553970472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33813337.post-1381788349130226112012-04-10T19:36:54.591-04:002012-04-10T19:36:54.591-04:00"...is there a way we can put it into the rul..."...is there a way we can put it into the rules so it appropriately reflects the activities being presented?"<br /><br />I can think of no way of writing a single definition that is impossible to misinterpret, easy to understand, and doesn't end up excluding things that you wanted to include or vice versa. There are too many imponderables, and every member has their own opinion as to what constitutes "fan," "pro," etc.<br /><br />If laws, rules, and facts were unequivocal, courts wouldn't need juries.Kevin Standleehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02748134147055160408noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33813337.post-43399351383920243982012-04-10T19:33:12.696-04:002012-04-10T19:33:12.696-04:00"Filthy Pro" is a fine old fannish phras..."Filthy Pro" is a <a href="http://www.uleth.ca/edu/runte/ncfguide/fangloss.htm#etog" rel="nofollow">fine old fannish phrase</a>. It's meant to be used ironically and isn't an insult.<br /><br />And I reiterate that "pro" and "fan" are not opposites in the field of SF & Fantasy. They're check-boxes, not radio buttons. It is perfectly possible to be both a pro and a fan at the same time. Making your first professional sale doesn't mean you are never a fan again and must be walled off from all of fandom. It's is for this very reason that WSFS doesn't strongly define "pro" and "fan," any more than we try to define "science fiction and fantasy."<br /><br />Basically, the definition is, "What I point to when I say [X]" and we take the aggregate of the opinions of the members as a consensus instead of giving a privileged place to any one person's opinion.Kevin Standleehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02748134147055160408noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33813337.post-35646500455536390572012-04-10T19:26:45.921-04:002012-04-10T19:26:45.921-04:00Kevin: "Filthy Pro" is your choice of w...Kevin: "Filthy Pro" is your choice of words, not mine. At no point did I say that I am against professional pursuits, but there must be a distinction between commercial and fan work.<br /><br />I think we need to have a serious discussion about advertising revenue, yes. Whether making money from Amazon links constitutes a disqualification from a fan category? I suppose that depends on their use. But if you are producing a product to be sold which is part and parcel of the fan product you say you are producing, that to me is not longer a separation, but a clear link of the fan pursuit with the commercial one. If we maintain that StarShipSofa is a fancast, not a commercial entity, then we must also be open to the possibility that any publisher could go the same direction and be considered for the category.<br /><br />Professional and Fan are opposites in certain instances, but not all. If the WSFS cannot make these distinctions, then the categories are even more meaningless as before. If it cannot, for example, tell us what a "novel" is, then it also cannot reasonably hold up a "novel category" as anything but a false category. Yet they've done a fairly good job dealing with novellas, novelettes, and short stories (length = category). If the WSFS cannot then define what constitutes a "fan" an what constitutes a "professional," then it really cannot justify the existence of the semi-pro category, since "pro" is indefinable under its auspices, and it cannot justify any "fan" category, since it cannot tell us what a "fan" is.<br /><br />And while I understand the logic behind letting fans "decide" what a pro and a fan are based on their votes, that is a fairly weak method for determining what does and does not belong in a category. At the very least, the discussion needs to be had: how are we separating these things out, and is there a way we can put it into the rules so it appropriately reflects the activities being presented?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13571452656553970472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33813337.post-19787086851633252972012-04-10T19:26:45.428-04:002012-04-10T19:26:45.428-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13571452656553970472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33813337.post-4753185730570019532012-04-10T19:08:58.642-04:002012-04-10T19:08:58.642-04:00If taking any money makes you a Filthy Pro, does t...If taking <em>any</em> money makes you a Filthy Pro, does that mean that any fanzine or fan web site that has Amazon links (which typically generate a few pennies for the host) or similar things Professional and Must Be Disqualified?<br /><br />I bring this up to try and make it more obvious that there isn't a bright-line distinction involved here. The WSFS Constitution doesn't define "professional" or "fan" and they aren't actually opposites of each other. And I suspect that any attempt at a technical definition will result in many counter-examples that don't make sense. It actually requires individual human judgment calls -- in this case, by the voters, I think.<br /><br />It's generally more comforting to many people to view the rules as a computer program that produces clear and unquestioned results. Real life is much messier. (I say this as someone who makes his living programming computers, BTW.)Kevin Standleehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02748134147055160408noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33813337.post-67586957244017001892012-04-10T19:04:21.446-04:002012-04-10T19:04:21.446-04:00Andrew: Last I checked, but when you sell somethi...Andrew: Last I checked, but when you sell something in order to create a profit, no matter the size, that something is a commercial product.<br /><br />The books StarShipSofa sells are produced based on what is inside the actual podcast. These are not separate commercial products, such as, say, a t-shirt, but products which are intimately tied to the elements that make the podcast what it is. For profit. That even includes transcripts *from the show.*<br /><br />It should be noted that many of their books also contain articles written specifically for the podcast element.<br /><br />So, no, the hair/rope/whatever isn't splitting against me, here. At best, there is a clear need for a debate over what it means to be engaging in the community as a fan, and what it means to be engaging as a commercial entity.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13571452656553970472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33813337.post-19179624802594416452012-04-10T18:51:15.090-04:002012-04-10T18:51:15.090-04:00My disagreement with you about StarShipSofa is tha...<em>My disagreement with you about StarShipSofa is that it is not a non-commercial dramatic anthology podcast. It is a commercial product now. They have released anthologies specifically related to the podcast. That, for me, means they are no longer acting as simple fans, but as a publisher.</em><br /><br />Fans publish. You'll find a lot of fans publishing through Lulu.<br /><br />StarShipSofa is publishing and selling books, not a commercial audio or video production.<br /><br />The hair clearly splits against you, but it's more a rope than a hair.Andrew Trembleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01890618188823101405noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33813337.post-4905052670792866172012-04-10T18:03:11.758-04:002012-04-10T18:03:11.758-04:00Kevin: Actually, there is. The rules for the cat...Kevin: Actually, there is. The rules for the category state:<br />"Any television program or other production, with a complete running time of 90 minutes or less, in any medium of dramatized science fiction, fantasy or related subjects that has been publicly presented for the first time in its present dramatic form during the previous calendar year."<br /><br />The key words are "production" and "dramatized." The latter can be construed as non-fictional, perhaps, since to dramatize doesn't always mean to fictionalize, though certainly to exaggerate. Production, however, implies an intent to create. In this context, it means "A movie, play, or record, esp. when viewed in terms of its making or staging," with the modification of the rule to mean other forms of production.<br /><br />Production is artificial. At best, the category can reflect dramatic representations of reality, such as films based on real events (say, a short film about a day in the life of Heinlein or something), but not real life events which happen to have been recorded, but which were not originally scripted. In other words: calling Garcia's emotional response to winning a "Dramatic Presentation" under these rules is to suggest, at the very least, that he staged it -- in other words, that his response was a fiction.<br /><br />I'd accept that "production" could be construed as referring also to documentary, but it most certainly does not refer to real life instances taken as staged performances.<br /><br />As for your last comment: at no point have I made any attempt to take away the right of voters to decide for themselves. You mistake my choice to criticize the awards with a desire to see them forced into an image of my choosing.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13571452656553970472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33813337.post-28045880779033599922012-04-10T17:56:35.299-04:002012-04-10T17:56:35.299-04:00"This does leave the problem of where one dra..."This does leave the problem of where one draws the line between a single narrative and a series of individual ones."<br /><br />Is there any problem with "Where the preponderance of the voters think the work lies"? In other words, what's wrong with letting the voters decide?Kevin Standleehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02748134147055160408noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33813337.post-35172676521728162472012-04-10T17:53:38.375-04:002012-04-10T17:53:38.375-04:00Andrew: Okay, so perhaps the fact that GoT is tre...Andrew: Okay, so perhaps the fact that GoT is treated as a single work to begin with (as an adaptation of a book), and DW is not has something to do with this perspective.<br /><br />My disagreement with you about StarShipSofa is that it is not a non-commercial dramatic anthology podcast. It is a commercial product now. They have released anthologies specifically related to the podcast. That, for me, means they are no longer acting as simple fans, but as a publisher. Granted, a very small publisher, but a publisher nonetheless. See here: http://www.starshipsofa.com/captains-logs/<br /><br />I appreciate the existence of the category, though. I think we need it.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13571452656553970472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33813337.post-20411985789138689092012-04-10T17:48:35.169-04:002012-04-10T17:48:35.169-04:00Anonymous: Fair enough. A different of opinion o...Anonymous: Fair enough. A different of opinion on that front. This does leave the problem of where one draws the line between a single narrative and a series of individual ones. And perhaps the community should have that discussion, since the short form category has been DW heavy two years in a row now (that I remember).Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13571452656553970472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33813337.post-8907505852869558662012-04-10T02:13:25.085-04:002012-04-10T02:13:25.085-04:00Regarding your criticism of The Garcia Moment bein...Regarding your criticism of The Garcia Moment being nominated: There is absolutely nothing in the rules that says that nominees in Best Dramatic Presentation must be fictional. Nothing. The 1970 Hugo Award for BDP (only one category then) when to "Coverage of the Apollo XI Moon Landing." And I hope you're not going to claim that was fictional.<br /><br />"Dramatic" doesn't mean "fictional" or "pre-scripted." Therefore, the work is eligible. It may not be award-worthy, and you can criticize the electorate's taste and I'll not complain a bit, but your technical argument is wrong.<br /><br />Speaking of technical arguments: you're wrong about <em>Game of Thrones</em> as well. In fact, it's not even unprecedented: <em>Heroes</em> season 1 was also nominated as a serialized dramatic work (it didn't win). Works published in a series of parts, such as a novel serialized in multiple issues of a magazine, are eligible as a single work upon publication of the final part. In this case, a sufficient number of voters declared that they considered GoT Season 1 to be a single serialized story shown in multiple parts.<br /><br />Mini-series were in fact one of the reasons we split that category by length, not medium of publication (TV/Theater). We concluded that long-form televised works (mini-series) has approximately the same clout as theatrical motion pictures and should compete in the same weight class, just as we consider all written works of 40,000 words or more a "novel" regardless of how they're published.Kevin Standleehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02748134147055160408noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33813337.post-20654177935102767502012-04-09T21:23:31.594-04:002012-04-09T21:23:31.594-04:00FYI: Not ignoring folks. Will have responses tom...FYI: Not ignoring folks. Will have responses tomorrow. Trying to catch up on grad school nonsense. Expect responses in the future, though.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13571452656553970472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33813337.post-5530788530081143012012-04-09T20:39:29.413-04:002012-04-09T20:39:29.413-04:00Oh, and on the topic of "fancasts..."
I...Oh, and on the topic of "fancasts..."<br /><br />I drafted <a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1tC8iyeU0shKbxbCtrzso-GGFGLEhTQQGI3EwS3dfwfM/edit?authkey=CMfQp5IB" rel="nofollow">the motion to add the "Best Fancast" category</a>, and it's that language that is being used to trial the category this year in Chicago. If you want to read about intent, the commentary is all there. You can argue with me all you want about what the rule means.<br /><br />There no grounds to disqualify StarShipSofa or other non-commercial dramatic anthology podcasts and vidcasts, just as there are no grounds to disqualify fiction-centered fanzines and semiprozines.<br /><br />Again, to go way back (but not as far back as Dickens), the Best Semiprozine category wasn't created to make a space for fiction-centered 'zines. It was created to kick Locus out of the Best Fanzine category, and inadvertently became a home for great fiction 'zines.Andrew Trembleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01890618188823101405noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33813337.post-57495928076451852062012-04-09T20:16:33.334-04:002012-04-09T20:16:33.334-04:00I'm not sure how the categories don't refl...I'm not sure how the categories don't reflect that.<br /><br />There is nothing in the rules that prevents the nominators from recognizing a TV series as a long-form serialized work. If the fans of a series see it as such, it's their responsibility to do so. The fans of <i>A Game of Thrones</i> appear to see it as such, the fans of <i>Doctor Who</i> appear not to. Then again, the fans of <i>A Game of Thrones</i> see it as a dramatization of a long work by GRRM, and the fans of <i>Doctor Who</i> tend to connect strongly with individual episode writers. Perspective makes a difference.<br /><br />The categories aren't a straitjacket to protect the nominators and voters from themselves. If you don't believe that _A Game of Thrones_ belongs in the category, don't vote for it. I don't believe there are grounds to disqualify Munroe from the Best Fan Artist category, but I also don't think any of his work is non-commercial fan art, so I won't be voting for him.Andrew Trembleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01890618188823101405noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33813337.post-73759474597193365752012-04-09T19:51:23.706-04:002012-04-09T19:51:23.706-04:00The WSFS constitution leaves soe hefty discretion ...The WSFS constitution leaves soe hefty discretion to the will of the voters/nominators. For me, personally, the DW episodes were all pretty much able to stand on their own as an individual narrative (even though they did fit into an over-arching story). The GOT episodes (for me) fell apart without the others, no story was really *contained* in any one episode. As such, my judgement would be GOT as a single narrative (long form) and DW short form (individual, if connected narratives). Enough people who nominated seemed to agree on that division. It seems odd if you approach if from a "this is for films / this is for television" mentality. If you can let that go, it feels more sensible. Obviously, since it's left to your judgement, you'd be free to nominate the who DW series in it's entirety under long form and if enough people agreed, that's where you'd see it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33813337.post-71904869900776680502012-04-09T18:03:02.418-04:002012-04-09T18:03:02.418-04:00Andrew: All that sounds fine, but the categories ...Andrew: All that sounds fine, but the categories do not reflect this whatsoever. The least season of Doctor Who, of which three episodes have been nominated in the short form category, is a continuous narrative. Each episode contributes to the next in a significant way, driving towards a conclusion which only makes sense in the context of all the episodes that preceded it. In that sense, Doctor Who should very well not be included in the short form category if the justification for including Game of Thrones in the long form category is that "it is a serial." That's my point. The categories simply do not make sense given what is actually on the ballot.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13571452656553970472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33813337.post-19078170649205483302012-04-09T17:27:35.052-04:002012-04-09T17:27:35.052-04:00Right, but that means any TV series whose episodes...<i>Right, but that means any TV series whose episodes comprise a single story are eligible for that category. That sort of defeats the purpose of "long form" vs. "short form."</i><br /><br />OK, I'm going to go old-school on you here.<br /><br />Is <i>A Tale of Two Cities</i> less of a novel because it was published in serial form in <i>All the Year Round?</i><br /><br />What you describe <i>is</i> the purpose of "long form" and "short form." If the goal had been to separate movies and tv shows, it would be "Best Movie" and "Best TV Show." But much like written fiction that can be serialized (and novellas are still often serialized in magazines) dramatic fiction can be serialized too. The rule divides work by length, not by distribution method, something consistent with the other Hugo categories.Andrew Trembleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01890618188823101405noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33813337.post-73336406621250713452012-04-09T09:40:59.022-04:002012-04-09T09:40:59.022-04:00Ryan: Right, but that means any TV series whose e...Ryan: Right, but that means any TV series whose episodes comprise a single story are eligible for that category. That sort of defeats the purpose of "long form" vs. "short form."Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13571452656553970472noreply@blogger.com