Reading George R.R. Martin’s responses to the Sad Puppies situation at the Hugo’s has been incredibly disappointing, for a number of reasons. I’m glad to see I’m not the only one:
He’s just being dishonest with some of his posts, and I don’t think he quite **gets** the point. He is in fact engaging in “othering” and downplaying the right of certain people to be on the nominations list in the very comments at the very time he is trying to argue it isn’t happening at all. For instance he said that Vox Day “doesn’t deserve” to be on the ballot, not based on the quality of his work, but based on his political opinions and what he might have said at some point in the past.
The issues with the Hugos and Nebulas and preferred treatment of certain people or cliques and bias date back a lot longer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFR9TYxAVZQ but one needn’t look for “SJW influence” much past 2005-2007, because that is about the timeline they first metastasized in their current radicalized form.
We have writers openly petitioning and writing about excluding others based on their birth race and sex and being embraced by other known authors in what a great idea it is and many in the media at large:
We also had Requires Hate outed last year, a dispenser of “social justice” in the context that “SJW” is being used and stand-in for their ideology unlike any other, that was propped up by Tor and certain people for nominations despite all the past actions mainly due to the writers “diversity”:
And we have a press, like Entertainment Weekly and The Telegraph that blatantly spreads lies without doing any sort of fact checking in favour of ideology with titles like “Hugo Award nominations fall victim to misogynistic, racist voting campaign”: https://archive.today/L5Jw3 and where have they gotten these “facts” and words to throw around at people without any basis in reality handed down from? They are being used very often nowadays to make someone a “non-person” not even worth talking to or considering their opinions.
We even have a writer of a certain article for Salon titled “Sci-fi’s right-wing backlash”: https://archive.today/2qMw8 openly attacking the family of a writer involved with the Sad Puppies campaign: https://twitter.com/arthur_affect/status/585635584070262784
But yet these actions and people apparently don’t exist according to GRRM? They are made up? His own bias seems to be somewhat clouding his judgment in this regard. If someone doesn’t want to see it, even if it is there in front of them as clear as day, I don’t think people will be able to make them see. And if people engage in their “No Awards” block voting openly, this just further proves the bias against the Sad Puppies and enshrines their arguments.
Here’s the “dinosaur story” that GRRM keeps mentioning by the way. It’s not very long and you can read it quickly and judge yourself: http://www.apex-magazine.com/if-you-were-a-dinosaur-my-love/
It won the Nebula Award for Best Short Story and was nominated for Best Short Story in the Hugos.
The one that also ultimately won the Hugo for Best Short Story was “The Water That Falls on You from Nowhere”, both were related to Tor: http://www.tor.com/stories/2013/02/the-water-that-falls-on-you-from-nowhere
Said story doesn’t even have much to do with SciFi and the “hook” that supposedly makes it such isn’t really all that important, it looks more like it was put in to qualify. But it is a short story about a gay man coming out to his traditional Chinese family or “jury bait”.
I know GRRM doesn’t want to believe that these things are being voted on and win because of the ideology or the political opinions of their writers, but for many people it couldn’t be any clearer and shows great similarities to how “Gone Home” for instance won Game of the Year everywhere based on a similar issue it tried to thematize rather than any inherent quality or merit.
More than anything, though, GRRM seemed to miss the point and instead created a series of straw men to argue against. Sad Puppies hasn’t been about protecting white men & rightwing fiction – their slate is actually much more diverse (in gender, sexual orientation & politics) than the previous offerings. Sarah Hoyt addresses that in her blog post “Of Science Fiction and Bed Making:”
This is not political. It would be really funny if it were. I have no clue what Larry’s politics are, except I don’t argue with him about much, and from the little I’ve heard, we pretty much agree. I suspect I’m nuttier “don’t tread on me” than he is, but he’s better armed, so…
Brad I’d qualify as soft social-democrat, which only falls under “right wing” in Portugal where “to the right of Lenin” is right wing. Oh, wait, it’s the same in SF/F, isn’t it? Never mind.
The people nominated range from anarchist to socialist and a good number of them honestly are “I have no clue.” This includes two of my personal friends, Kevin J. Anderson and Cedar Sanderson. Heck, even Amanda Green who is arguably one of my closest friends and I have never done a politics comparison. I suspect she’s more statist than I am (she’s more trusting that way) but for the rest, who knows?
That the other side thinks this is a political attack tells you that THEY have been applying a political filter to nominations and votes. Because only someone blinded by a beam in their eye can see the spec in ours.