Discussion:
What's so great about "Ancillary Justice"?
(too old to reply)
Juho Julkunen
2020-02-03 21:29:34 UTC
Permalink
I am reading _Ancillary Justice_ by Ann Leckie. The book seems perfectly normal to me. It does not appear outstanding in any way whatsoever. Nothing wrong with it, but is seems to lack any outstanding feature whatsoever. Not characters, story, writing, concepts. Nothing.
Why did it win both the Nebula and Hugo awards?
Regards
It was weird, no male pronouns IIRC.
There's nothing weird about no male pronouns.

I've read hundreds of books without them.
--
Juho Julkunen
Amicus Brevis
2020-02-03 21:54:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Juho Julkunen
I am reading _Ancillary Justice_ by Ann Leckie. The book seems perfectly normal to me. It does not appear outstanding in any way whatsoever. Nothing wrong with it, but is seems to lack any outstanding feature whatsoever. Not characters, story, writing, concepts. Nothing.
Why did it win both the Nebula and Hugo awards?
Regards
It was weird, no male pronouns IIRC.
There's nothing weird about no male pronouns.
I've read hundreds of books without them.
--
Juho Julkunen
==
I agree that there is nothing weird about it. Many books I have read simply have references distinguishing between citizens and non-citizens with no finer distinction. But I have not read one before where there is a reference to it every five paragraphs.


Regards
Chris Buckley
2020-02-03 21:58:26 UTC
Permalink
I am reading _Ancillary Justice_ by Ann Leckie. The book seems perfectly normal to me. It does not appear outstanding in any way whatsoever. Nothing wrong with it, but is seems to lack any outstanding feature whatsoever. Not characters, story, writing, concepts. Nothing.
Why did it win both the Nebula and Hugo awards?
Regards
It was weird, no male pronouns IIRC.
Lynn
Is that why it won? Because it seemed to be saying something about transgender rights by depicting a society without gendered interpersonal references?
No, it won because many people thought it had excellent characters,
story, writing and concepts, all of which I agree with. It was a rare book
that was outstanding in both hard science fiction aspects and more societal
science fiction aspects.

Chris
Amicus Brevis
2020-02-03 22:08:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chris Buckley
I am reading _Ancillary Justice_ by Ann Leckie. The book seems perfectly normal to me. It does not appear outstanding in any way whatsoever. Nothing wrong with it, but is seems to lack any outstanding feature whatsoever. Not characters, story, writing, concepts. Nothing.
Why did it win both the Nebula and Hugo awards?
Regards
It was weird, no male pronouns IIRC.
Lynn
Is that why it won? Because it seemed to be saying something about transgender rights by depicting a society without gendered interpersonal references?
No, it won because many people thought it had excellent characters,
story, writing and concepts, all of which I agree with. It was a rare book
that was outstanding in both hard science fiction aspects and more societal
science fiction aspects.
Chris
The only thing rare about it was the unusual number of references to the fact that the Radch made no gender references. I would not debate whether it is was good in other aspects. I only know what I like. I am no literature critic. But I know that it is not _rare_ in those other aspects. There is nothing outstanding in its hard science. In fact, there is little with respect to hard science in it. And as I said I won't debate the writing and characters. If a large number of people thought those aspects were great I am willing to defer to them.

I was mostly curious to find out if there was any controversy about it winning those awards. I suppose I will find out, depending on who else choose to comment.


Regards
h***@gmail.com
2020-02-04 01:10:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Amicus Brevis
Post by Chris Buckley
I am reading _Ancillary Justice_ by Ann Leckie. The book seems perfectly normal to me. It does not appear outstanding in any way whatsoever. Nothing wrong with it, but is seems to lack any outstanding feature whatsoever. Not characters, story, writing, concepts. Nothing.
Why did it win both the Nebula and Hugo awards?
Regards
It was weird, no male pronouns IIRC.
Lynn
Is that why it won? Because it seemed to be saying something about transgender rights by depicting a society without gendered interpersonal references?
No, it won because many people thought it had excellent characters,
story, writing and concepts, all of which I agree with. It was a rare book
that was outstanding in both hard science fiction aspects and more societal
science fiction aspects.
Chris
The only thing rare about it was the unusual number of references to the fact that the Radch made no gender references. I would not debate whether it is was good in other aspects. I only know what I like. I am no literature critic. But I know that it is not _rare_ in those other aspects. There is nothing outstanding in its hard science. In fact, there is little with respect to hard science in it. And as I said I won't debate the writing and characters. If a large number of people thought those aspects were great I am willing to defer to them.
I was mostly curious to find out if there was any controversy about it winning those awards. I suppose I will find out, depending on who else choose to comment.
Of course there was controversy about it winning.
It wasn't written by a white male about a white male.in a world full of white males doing everything important
James Nicoll
2020-02-04 03:00:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Amicus Brevis
I was mostly curious to find out if there was any controversy about it
winning those awards.
Interminable bitching from the Sadly Rabid Puppies, as I recall.
Ancillary Justice had its win the year before the Puppies slated their
way onto the ballot and part of their schtick was that they needed to
Save the Hugoes, which in turn meant they had to denounce the last
(variable number of years) worth of winners. I remember someone was
more angry about the tavern than the pronouns because ... I guess
science fiction doesn't have taverns or something?

Huh. I only just now looked at the long list so I'd never noticed
before that if Ann Leckie had not been a finalist that year, Sarah
Hoyt would have been on the ballot. The same is true of any other
finalist that year but Leckie was the winner and not esp well known
--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My tor pieces at https://www.tor.com/author/james-davis-nicoll/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll
James Nicoll
2020-02-04 03:04:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by James Nicoll
Post by Amicus Brevis
I was mostly curious to find out if there was any controversy about it
winning those awards.
Interminable bitching from the Sadly Rabid Puppies, as I recall.
Ancillary Justice had its win the year before the Puppies slated their
way onto the ballot and part of their schtick was that they needed to
Save the Hugoes, which in turn meant they had to denounce the last
(variable number of years) worth of winners. I remember someone was
more angry about the tavern than the pronouns because ... I guess
science fiction doesn't have taverns or something?
Huh. I only just now looked at the long list so I'd never noticed
before that if Ann Leckie had not been a finalist that year, Sarah
Hoyt would have been on the ballot. The same is true of any other
finalist that year but Leckie was the winner and not esp well known
before her novel came out, I meant to say.
--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My tor pieces at https://www.tor.com/author/james-davis-nicoll/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll
Carl Fink
2020-02-04 14:39:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chris Buckley
No, it won because many people thought it had excellent characters,
story, writing and concepts, all of which I agree with. It was a rare book
that was outstanding in both hard science fiction aspects and more societal
science fiction aspects.
There were literally no hard SF aspects. It was extremely soft SF, nearly
space opera level.
--
Carl Fink ***@finknetwork.com
https://reasonablyliterate.com https://nitpicking.com
If you want to make a point, somebody will take the point and stab you with it.
-Kenne Estes
Magewolf
2020-02-04 18:12:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chris Buckley
I am reading _Ancillary Justice_ by Ann Leckie. The book seems perfectly normal to me. It does not appear outstanding in any way whatsoever. Nothing wrong with it, but is seems to lack any outstanding feature whatsoever. Not characters, story, writing, concepts. Nothing.
Why did it win both the Nebula and Hugo awards?
Regards
It was weird, no male pronouns IIRC.
Lynn
Is that why it won? Because it seemed to be saying something about transgender rights by depicting a society without gendered interpersonal references?
No, it won because many people thought it had excellent characters,
story, writing and concepts, all of which I agree with. It was a rare book
that was outstanding in both hard science fiction aspects and more societal
science fiction aspects.
Chris
A. There is no hard science fiction in the book.
B. It's not rare, even in the year it won.
C. It won a Hugo because of the pronoun gimmick.

To expand on C the same first novel without the pronoun thing would not
have gotten the same publicity boost especially with Hugo voters and
would have not benefited from the stick it to the puppies vote.

Does that mean I think it is a bad book? No,I rather like all three of
them. Do I think it was the best book of the year? No,not even close.
Juho Julkunen
2020-02-04 20:15:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Magewolf
C. It won a Hugo because of the pronoun gimmick.
To expand on C the same first novel without the pronoun thing would not
have gotten the same publicity boost especially with Hugo voters and
would have not benefited from the stick it to the puppies vote.
See, this is the kind of privileged information I don't have access to.
--
Juho Julkunen
Kevrob
2020-02-04 20:39:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Juho Julkunen
Post by Magewolf
C. It won a Hugo because of the pronoun gimmick.
To expand on C the same first novel without the pronoun thing would not
have gotten the same publicity boost especially with Hugo voters and
would have not benefited from the stick it to the puppies vote.
See, this is the kind of privileged information I don't have access to.
Surely, some other author pulled off the no-personal-
pronouns trick in some other novel, previously?
It sounds like an "experimental fiction" stunt that
would have been tried in the non-genre "avant garde,"
sometime in the 20th century. That might not have been
much of a story, though.

--
Kevin R
a.a #2310
Amicus Brevis
2020-02-04 21:23:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kevrob
Post by Juho Julkunen
Post by Magewolf
C. It won a Hugo because of the pronoun gimmick.
To expand on C the same first novel without the pronoun thing would not
have gotten the same publicity boost especially with Hugo voters and
would have not benefited from the stick it to the puppies vote.
See, this is the kind of privileged information I don't have access to.
Surely, some other author pulled off the no-personal-
pronouns trick in some other novel, previously?
There are pronouns in Ancillary. The whole "it only won because of pronouns"
nonsense is a 2015 thing.
That said, I am pretty sure Delany played with different rules for pronouns in
Stars in My Pocket Like Grains of Sand.
--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My tor pieces at https://www.tor.com/author/james-davis-nicoll/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll
This post is highly misleading. Only people who have not read the book would say that there are no gendered pronouns in the book. Yet some people who read it may agree that it won because its treatment of pronouns. There is no contradiction between the two claims as this post seems to suggest.

The Radch to do not use pronouns when referring to each other when speaking to each other. But they do use pronouns when speaking to others outside their civilization. The author makes frequent reference to this fact by noting that they make mistakes when trying to use gendered references when speaking to others outside their society. They often make errors and these errors of the discussions surrounding them serve as the vehicle the author bring this up every few pages. Itis plastered all over _Ancillary Justice_.

I will not say that the book won because of its treatment of pronouns. But I will say that book is good but not exceptionally good. I will also say that the author makes the treatment of gender a - not "the" - central feature of the book, but not the story.
Robert Woodward
2020-02-05 06:05:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kevrob
Post by Juho Julkunen
Post by Magewolf
C. It won a Hugo because of the pronoun gimmick.
To expand on C the same first novel without the pronoun thing would not
have gotten the same publicity boost especially with Hugo voters and
would have not benefited from the stick it to the puppies vote.
See, this is the kind of privileged information I don't have access to.
Surely, some other author pulled off the no-personal-
pronouns trick in some other novel, previously?
It sounds like an "experimental fiction" stunt that
would have been tried in the non-genre "avant garde,"
sometime in the 20th century.
IIRC, the viewpoint character in Melissa Scott's _The Kindly Ones_ is
never referred to with a 3rd person pronoun (the book is written in
first person), nor in any other way that would suggest gender. Everybody
else, IIRC, are referred to as either "he" or "her".

David Weber in the Honorverse has female characters referring to an
unidentified individual (i.e., the commander of an enemy warship) as
"her", while the male characters refer to such an individual as "he"
(even in the same conversation with a female colleague).
--
"We have advanced to new and surprising levels of bafflement."
Imperial Auditor Miles Vorkosigan describes progress in _Komarr_.
—-----------------------------------------------------
Robert Woodward ***@drizzle.com
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
2020-02-05 06:37:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by Kevrob
Post by Juho Julkunen
Post by Magewolf
C. It won a Hugo because of the pronoun gimmick.
To expand on C the same first novel without the pronoun thing would not
have gotten the same publicity boost especially with Hugo voters and
would have not benefited from the stick it to the puppies vote.
See, this is the kind of privileged information I don't have access to.
Surely, some other author pulled off the no-personal-
pronouns trick in some other novel, previously?
It sounds like an "experimental fiction" stunt that
would have been tried in the non-genre "avant garde,"
sometime in the 20th century.
IIRC, the viewpoint character in Melissa Scott's _The Kindly Ones_ is
never referred to with a 3rd person pronoun (the book is written in
first person), nor in any other way that would suggest gender. Everybody
else, IIRC, are referred to as either "he" or "her".
David Weber in the Honorverse has female characters referring to an
unidentified individual (i.e., the commander of an enemy warship) as
"her", while the male characters refer to such an individual as "he"
(even in the same conversation with a female colleague).
Lin Carter (!) did it years ago in _Found Wanting_.
--
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..
Jaimie Vandenbergh
2020-02-06 01:42:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kevrob
Surely, some other author pulled off the no-personal-
pronouns trick in some other novel, previously?
Didn't Melissa Scott do it in /The Kindly Ones/? Though I believe it
was only a single character about whom she went out of he way to give no
gender clues.
There's a mystery series whose title and author I have conveniently forgotten (four books,
and the author is now dead) in which the gender of the lead character is never revealed.
Presumably, careful pronoun choice was involved.
L Frank Baum of Oz fame wrote a book entitled _John Dough and the Cherub_,
wherein the titular cherub (a seven year old child or thereabouts) was never
gendered. It wasn't called out until the end pages, and there's a note in the
back from Baum enthusiastically enlisting his child readers to write to him
about which gender the cherub is and why. Published 1906, this is hardly a new
and exciting phenomenon.

Cheers - Jaimie
--
Anyone who considers arithmetical methods of producing random
digits is, of course, in a state of sin. -- John von Neumann
Kevrob
2020-02-06 02:09:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jaimie Vandenbergh
Post by Kevrob
Surely, some other author pulled off the no-personal-
pronouns trick in some other novel, previously?
Didn't Melissa Scott do it in /The Kindly Ones/? Though I believe it
was only a single character about whom she went out of he way to give no
gender clues.
There's a mystery series whose title and author I have conveniently forgotten (four books,
and the author is now dead) in which the gender of the lead character is never revealed.
Presumably, careful pronoun choice was involved.
L Frank Baum of Oz fame wrote a book entitled _John Dough and the Cherub_,
wherein the titular cherub (a seven year old child or thereabouts) was never
gendered. It wasn't called out until the end pages, and there's a note in the
back from Baum enthusiastically enlisting his child readers to write to him
about which gender the cherub is and why. Published 1906, this is hardly a new
and exciting phenomenon.
Cheers - Jaimie
Don't forget the relationship between Tip and Ozma!
Baum played with "boy or girl?" a bit.

Kevin R
r***@gmail.com
2020-02-11 21:06:04 UTC
Permalink
That said, I am pretty sure Delany played with different rules for pronouns in
Stars in My Pocket Like Grains of Sand.
Indeed. https://www.tor.com/2014/01/23/what-makes-this-book-so-great-samuel-r-delany-stars-in-my-pocket-like-grains-of-sand/
Gender is constructed very differently. “She” is the standard pronoun for
any sentient being, and “woman” is the standard term for a person. “He” is
the pronoun for someone you desire. “Man” is an obsolete poetic word.
“Mother” is a role anyone can choose if they are parenting.
r***@gmail.com
2020-02-11 21:52:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kevrob
Surely, some other author pulled off the no-personal-
pronouns trick in some other novel, previously?
Didn't Melissa Scott do it in /The Kindly Ones/? Though I believe it
was only a single character about whom she went out of he way to give no
gender clues.
There's a mystery series whose title and author I have conveniently forgotten (four books,
and the author is now dead) in which the gender of the lead character is never revealed.
Presumably, careful pronoun choice was involved.
Possibly this? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Caudwell#Hilary_Tamar_series
James Nicoll
2020-02-04 20:47:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Juho Julkunen
Post by Magewolf
C. It won a Hugo because of the pronoun gimmick.
To expand on C the same first novel without the pronoun thing would not
have gotten the same publicity boost especially with Hugo voters and
would have not benefited from the stick it to the puppies vote.
See, this is the kind of privileged information I don't have access to.
Leckie won in 2014. The Puppies didn't really inspire the anti-puppy vote
until 2015, where the diligence of their efforts at slating whatever shit
their buddies crapped out onto the ballot was such that as many no awards
were handed out as in all the previous years. So much winning.

There was a funny to me side effect of the Puppies, which is that
due to the overall surge in voters for the Hugos in 2015 (who
could then nominate the next year), I got more than twice as
many nominations for the Hugo in 2015 as in 2014 without it
affecting my ranking that much. I might have done slightly worse.

The rough timeline of the Puppies was
2013: Failed to get Monster Hunter onto the ballot
2014: Seven of twelve Puppy nominees get onto the ballot. Vox Doy manages to
place below last place, go him.
2015: The Puppies get 58 of 67 candidates on the ballot. Hilarity ensues. All of
their nominees place below No Award.
2016: The Puppies get 64 of their 81 nominees on the ballot, the most notable of which
was Chuck Tingle, surrealist pornographer. I think the idea was to humiliate the Hugos
with an absurd candidate but since it turned out Tingle was a very funny guy who didn't
care to be weaponized by the Puppies, this gambit did not play out as Day expected.
2017: Puppies are effectively dead as a voting power.
2018: Still dead
2019: Still dead
--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My tor pieces at https://www.tor.com/author/james-davis-nicoll/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll
Michael Ikeda
2020-02-04 23:52:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by James Nicoll
says...
Post by Magewolf
C. It won a Hugo because of the pronoun gimmick.
To expand on C the same first novel without the pronoun thing
would not have gotten the same publicity boost especially with
Hugo voters and would have not benefited from the stick it to
the puppies vote.
See, this is the kind of privileged information I don't have
access to.
Leckie won in 2014. The Puppies didn't really inspire the
anti-puppy vote until 2015, where the diligence of their efforts
at slating whatever shit their buddies crapped out onto the
ballot was such that as many no awards were handed out as in all
the previous years. So much winning.
There was a funny to me side effect of the Puppies, which is
that due to the overall surge in voters for the Hugos in 2015
(who could then nominate the next year), I got more than twice
as many nominations for the Hugo in 2015 as in 2014 without it
affecting my ranking that much. I might have done slightly
worse.
The rough timeline of the Puppies was
2013: Failed to get Monster Hunter onto the ballot
2014: Seven of twelve Puppy nominees get onto the ballot. Vox
Doy manages to place below last place, go him.
2015: The Puppies get 58 of 67 candidates on the ballot.
Hilarity ensues. All of their nominees place below No Award.
Minor qualification here. The Puppies' nominees for the two
subcategories of Best Dramatic Presentation did not place below No
Award. For whatever reason, the Puppies actually nominated fairly
mainstream works in these categories.
Post by James Nicoll
2016: The Puppies get 64 of their 81 nominees on the ballot, the
most notable of which was Chuck Tingle, surrealist pornographer.
I think the idea was to humiliate the Hugos with an absurd
candidate but since it turned out Tingle was a very funny guy
who didn't care to be weaponized by the Puppies, this gambit did
not play out as Day expected. 2017: Puppies are effectively dead
as a voting power. 2018: Still dead
2019: Still dead
Amicus Brevis
2020-02-04 23:17:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Magewolf
Post by Chris Buckley
I am reading _Ancillary Justice_ by Ann Leckie. The book seems perfectly normal to me. It does not appear outstanding in any way whatsoever. Nothing wrong with it, but is seems to lack any outstanding feature whatsoever. Not characters, story, writing, concepts. Nothing.
Why did it win both the Nebula and Hugo awards?
Regards
It was weird, no male pronouns IIRC.
Lynn
Is that why it won? Because it seemed to be saying something about transgender rights by depicting a society without gendered interpersonal references?
No, it won because many people thought it had excellent characters,
story, writing and concepts, all of which I agree with. It was a rare book
that was outstanding in both hard science fiction aspects and more societal
science fiction aspects.
Chris
A. There is no hard science fiction in the book.
B. It's not rare, even in the year it won.
C. It won a Hugo because of the pronoun gimmick.
To expand on C the same first novel without the pronoun thing would not
have gotten the same publicity boost especially with Hugo voters and
would have not benefited from the stick it to the puppies vote.
Does that mean I think it is a bad book? No,I rather like all three of
them. Do I think it was the best book of the year? No,not even close.
Upon reflection, and then a quick re-read, I agree that "hard science
fiction" is not a good description for _Ancillary Justice_ . The world
building is good but not enough to take it into the hard science fiction
category, even using my definitions.
However, it was original and good; I thought of the nominees it was
the clear winner (_Wheel of Time_???, Neptune's Brood_??? (minor
Stross), _Warbound_???). And _Parasite_ was much more of a
thriller than a Hugo award winner but if your tastes run that way, I
wouldn't argue too much. Which of those books would be a much better
winner?
Chris
Does that list cover both the Hugo and the Nebula? Even if it is not, you address one of the reasons I not jump to the conclusion that it won because of its politics. I have not read the other books it was up against.


Regards
James Nicoll
2020-02-05 00:43:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Magewolf
Post by Chris Buckley
I am reading _Ancillary Justice_ by Ann Leckie. The book seems perfectly normal to me.
It does not appear outstanding in any way whatsoever. Nothing wrong with it, but is seems to
lack any outstanding feature whatsoever. Not characters, story, writing, concepts. Nothing.
Post by Magewolf
Post by Chris Buckley
Why did it win both the Nebula and Hugo awards?
Regards
It was weird, no male pronouns IIRC.
Lynn
Is that why it won? Because it seemed to be saying something about transgender rights by
depicting a society without gendered interpersonal references?
Post by Magewolf
Post by Chris Buckley
No, it won because many people thought it had excellent characters,
story, writing and concepts, all of which I agree with. It was a rare book
that was outstanding in both hard science fiction aspects and more societal
science fiction aspects.
Chris
A. There is no hard science fiction in the book.
B. It's not rare, even in the year it won.
C. It won a Hugo because of the pronoun gimmick.
To expand on C the same first novel without the pronoun thing would not
have gotten the same publicity boost especially with Hugo voters and
would have not benefited from the stick it to the puppies vote.
Does that mean I think it is a bad book? No,I rather like all three of
them. Do I think it was the best book of the year? No,not even close.
Upon reflection, and then a quick re-read, I agree that "hard science
fiction" is not a good description for _Ancillary Justice_ . The world
building is good but not enough to take it into the hard science fiction
category, even using my definitions.
However, it was original and good; I thought of the nominees it was
the clear winner (_Wheel of Time_???, Neptune's Brood_??? (minor
Stross), _Warbound_???). And _Parasite_ was much more of a
thriller than a Hugo award winner but if your tastes run that way, I
wouldn't argue too much. Which of those books would be a much better
winner?
Chris
Does that list cover both the Hugo and the Nebula? Even if it is not, you address one of the
reasons I not jump to the conclusion that it won because of its politics. I have not read the
other books it was up against.
The Nebula finalists were as follows

Ann Leckie Ancillary Justice
Karen Joy Fowler We Are All Completely Beside Ourselves
Neil Gaiman The Ocean at the End of the Lane
Charles E. Gannon Fire with Fire
Nicola Griffith Hild
Linda Nagata The Red: First Light
Sofia Samatar A Stranger in Olondria
Helene Wecker The Golem and the Jinni

(of which I have read four)
--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My tor pieces at https://www.tor.com/author/james-davis-nicoll/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll
Joe Bernstein
2020-02-05 04:39:28 UTC
Permalink
***@panix.com (James Nicoll) wrote in news:r1d33v$a8k$***@reader2.panix.com:

[<Ancillary Justice> and its competition for awards]
Post by James Nicoll
The Nebula finalists were as follows
Ann Leckie Ancillary Justice
Karen Joy Fowler We Are All Completely Beside Ourselves
Neil Gaiman The Ocean at the End of the Lane
Charles E. Gannon Fire with Fire
Nicola Griffith Hild
Linda Nagata The Red: First Light
Sofia Samatar A Stranger in Olondria
Helene Wecker The Golem and the Jinni
(of which I have read four)
I've read two, and after I looked this list over, it dawned on me
that the authors of those two might be the oldest named. So I just
checked at the ISFDB, and there's something weird going on with this
list: Gaiman, Gannon, Griffith and Nagata were all born in 1960. Of
those, Gaiman is by a few days the youngest, which means that, having
read <The Ocean at the End of the Lane> and <We Are All Completely
Beside Ourselves> but none of the others, I have *not* read the books
by the two oldest authors on the list, but only by a matter of months.
(At least, unless Wecker is quite old for a first novelist, which of
course is possible.)

The others: Fowler, 1950. Leckie, 1966. Samatar, 1971. Wecker ?

And yes, of course I've been working on the gerontocracy stuff re the
Senate today; I just finished Benjamin Harrison's legacy to the
nation, six of the states in its northwest quarter. But I think my
curiosity was triggered more by my hopeless outdatedness as revealed
by the latest Hugo list some months ago.

<Ocean> is extremely good, but since this is the Nebulas we also have
to take Art into account, and I suspect Fowler's book is better in
that regard than my not enjoying it very much says. (On the other
hand, I don't remember that it's speculative fiction, unless at a
fairly trivial level of alternate history. [1])

Joe Bernstein

[1] Unfortunately Fowler's book isn't in the surviving part of my
book log, which means, a - I have to re-read it, and b - I can't see
where I put it when I read it, which would be more reliable than my
memory. Gaiman's book *also* isn't in what survives, but re-reading
*that* doesn't trouble me.
Well, except that I have a copy with me which I picked because it
would be a new-to-me Gaiman book, only to find gradually that I'd
read it before. That *was* troubling, especially in the way this
experience resembles the book's ending.
--
Joe Bernstein <***@gmail.com>
Jack Bohn
2020-02-05 14:45:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joe Bernstein
Gaiman's book *also* isn't in what survives, but re-reading
*that* doesn't trouble me.
Well, except that I have a copy with me which I picked because it
would be a new-to-me Gaiman book, only to find gradually that I'd
read it before. That *was* troubling, especially in the way this
experience resembles the book's ending.
You have my sympathy. Around this time of year, many years ago, I read a story (folks can YASID with the title, it would be fairly easy to dig through the 1980s ANALOGs to find it): At a regular interdisciplinary bull session one professor said he'd gotten tired of physicist's "Schrodinger's cat" debate and decided to put humanity's money where its mouth was. He set up a decay and detector, rigged to break a vial of a deadly airborne disease, waited the requisite time, then cremated the setup. Already done, now their group could wait around to see what "the observer effect" would do. That day I started showing symptoms... of the flu.
--
-Jack
a***@msn.com
2020-02-06 01:15:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jack Bohn
Post by Joe Bernstein
Gaiman's book *also* isn't in what survives, but re-reading
*that* doesn't trouble me.
Well, except that I have a copy with me which I picked because it
would be a new-to-me Gaiman book, only to find gradually that I'd
read it before. That *was* troubling, especially in the way this
experience resembles the book's ending.
You have my sympathy. Around this time of year, many years ago, I read a story (folks can YASID with the title, it would be fairly easy to dig through the 1980s ANALOGs to find it): At a regular interdisciplinary bull session one professor said he'd gotten tired of physicist's "Schrodinger's cat" debate and decided to put humanity's money where its mouth was. He set up a decay and detector, rigged to break a vial of a deadly airborne disease, waited the requisite time, then cremated the setup. Already done, now their group could wait around to see what "the observer effect" would do. That day I started showing symptoms... of the flu.
Greg Bear's Schroedinger's Plague https://www.blackgate.com/2018/08/20/birthday-reviews-greg-bears-schrodingers-plague/
Richard Hershberger
2020-02-06 15:17:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joe Bernstein
[<Ancillary Justice> and its competition for awards]
Post by James Nicoll
The Nebula finalists were as follows
Ann Leckie Ancillary Justice
Karen Joy Fowler We Are All Completely Beside Ourselves
Neil Gaiman The Ocean at the End of the Lane
Charles E. Gannon Fire with Fire
Nicola Griffith Hild
Linda Nagata The Red: First Light
Sofia Samatar A Stranger in Olondria
Helene Wecker The Golem and the Jinni
(of which I have read four)
I've read two, and after I looked this list over, it dawned on me
that the authors of those two might be the oldest named. So I just
checked at the ISFDB, and there's something weird going on with this
list: Gaiman, Gannon, Griffith and Nagata were all born in 1960. Of
those, Gaiman is by a few days the youngest, which means that, having
read <The Ocean at the End of the Lane> and <We Are All Completely
Beside Ourselves> but none of the others, I have *not* read the books
by the two oldest authors on the list, but only by a matter of months.
(At least, unless Wecker is quite old for a first novelist, which of
course is possible.)
The others: Fowler, 1950. Leckie, 1966. Samatar, 1971. Wecker ?
And yes, of course I've been working on the gerontocracy stuff re the
Senate today; I just finished Benjamin Harrison's legacy to the
nation, six of the states in its northwest quarter. But I think my
curiosity was triggered more by my hopeless outdatedness as revealed
by the latest Hugo list some months ago.
<Ocean> is extremely good, but since this is the Nebulas we also have
to take Art into account, and I suspect Fowler's book is better in
that regard than my not enjoying it very much says. (On the other
hand, I don't remember that it's speculative fiction, unless at a
fairly trivial level of alternate history. [1])
Joe Bernstein
[1] Unfortunately Fowler's book isn't in the surviving part of my
book log, which means, a - I have to re-read it, and b - I can't see
where I put it when I read it, which would be more reliable than my
memory. Gaiman's book *also* isn't in what survives, but re-reading
*that* doesn't trouble me.
Well, except that I have a copy with me which I picked because it
would be a new-to-me Gaiman book, only to find gradually that I'd
read it before. That *was* troubling, especially in the way this
experience resembles the book's ending.
--
The Fowler isn't even marketed as SF. I tend to favor the "SF is that which is marketed as SF" definition of the genre, so there you go. Look at the Amazon page and it brags about winning the PEN/Faulkner price, being shortlisted for the Booker prize, and being cited by the NY Times and the Christian Science Monitor in "top works" lists. There is no mention of its being a finalist for the Nebula.

Richard R. Hershberger
Magewolf
2020-02-05 18:55:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Magewolf
Post by Chris Buckley
I am reading _Ancillary Justice_ by Ann Leckie. The book seems perfectly normal to me. It does not appear outstanding in any way whatsoever. Nothing wrong with it, but is seems to lack any outstanding feature whatsoever. Not characters, story, writing, concepts. Nothing.
Why did it win both the Nebula and Hugo awards?
Regards
It was weird, no male pronouns IIRC.
Lynn
Is that why it won? Because it seemed to be saying something about transgender rights by depicting a society without gendered interpersonal references?
No, it won because many people thought it had excellent characters,
story, writing and concepts, all of which I agree with. It was a rare book
that was outstanding in both hard science fiction aspects and more societal
science fiction aspects.
Chris
A. There is no hard science fiction in the book.
B. It's not rare, even in the year it won.
C. It won a Hugo because of the pronoun gimmick.
To expand on C the same first novel without the pronoun thing would not
have gotten the same publicity boost especially with Hugo voters and
would have not benefited from the stick it to the puppies vote.
Does that mean I think it is a bad book? No,I rather like all three of
them. Do I think it was the best book of the year? No,not even close.
Upon reflection, and then a quick re-read, I agree that "hard science
fiction" is not a good description for _Ancillary Justice_ . The world
building is good but not enough to take it into the hard science fiction
category, even using my definitions.
However, it was original and good; I thought of the nominees it was
the clear winner (_Wheel of Time_???, Neptune's Brood_??? (minor
Stross), _Warbound_???). And _Parasite_ was much more of a
thriller than a Hugo award winner but if your tastes run that way, I
wouldn't argue too much. Which of those books would be a much better
winner?
Chris
I thought I had my 2014 nominations saved somewhere but could not find
them. But I do remember none of them made the final list that year. I
did find my vote which was Ancillary Justice,Neptune's Brood,no
award,Parasite,Wheel of Time,Warbound. Honestly I should have put no
award first but I hate doing that. It was a very weak list of finalists.
Chris Buckley
2020-02-05 19:43:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Magewolf
Post by Magewolf
Post by Chris Buckley
I am reading _Ancillary Justice_ by Ann Leckie. The book seems perfectly normal to me. It does not appear outstanding in any way whatsoever. Nothing wrong with it, but is seems to lack any outstanding feature whatsoever. Not characters, story, writing, concepts. Nothing.
Why did it win both the Nebula and Hugo awards?
Regards
It was weird, no male pronouns IIRC.
Lynn
Is that why it won? Because it seemed to be saying something about transgender rights by depicting a society without gendered interpersonal references?
No, it won because many people thought it had excellent characters,
story, writing and concepts, all of which I agree with. It was a rare book
that was outstanding in both hard science fiction aspects and more societal
science fiction aspects.
Chris
A. There is no hard science fiction in the book.
B. It's not rare, even in the year it won.
C. It won a Hugo because of the pronoun gimmick.
To expand on C the same first novel without the pronoun thing would not
have gotten the same publicity boost especially with Hugo voters and
would have not benefited from the stick it to the puppies vote.
Does that mean I think it is a bad book? No,I rather like all three of
them. Do I think it was the best book of the year? No,not even close.
Upon reflection, and then a quick re-read, I agree that "hard science
fiction" is not a good description for _Ancillary Justice_ . The world
building is good but not enough to take it into the hard science fiction
category, even using my definitions.
However, it was original and good; I thought of the nominees it was
the clear winner (_Wheel of Time_???, Neptune's Brood_??? (minor
Stross), _Warbound_???). And _Parasite_ was much more of a
thriller than a Hugo award winner but if your tastes run that way, I
wouldn't argue too much. Which of those books would be a much better
winner?
Chris
I thought I had my 2014 nominations saved somewhere but could not find
them. But I do remember none of them made the final list that year. I
did find my vote which was Ancillary Justice,Neptune's Brood,no
award,Parasite,Wheel of Time,Warbound. Honestly I should have put no
award first but I hate doing that. It was a very weak list of finalists.
Yes, with the exception of _Ancillary Justice_ (IMO) it was just a
weak year altogether. The Nebula Award nominees and the top Locus
Awards rankings (which I generally respect more than Nebula) weren't
any better.

_Ancillary Justice_ not only won the Hugo, it completely dominated the
voting. It had more than twice as many first place votes compared to
the _Wheel of Time_, 3 times as many compared to _Neptune's Brood_, 4 times
as many compared to _Warbound_, and almost 5 times as many compared to
_Parasite_.

In the more than a dozen other years that I could find vote totals for, (in
http://thehugoawards.org/content/pdf , anybody have a source for more years?)
no other book dominated nearly as much as _Ancillary Justice_ (one of the
Harry Potter novels came close).

Chris
Amicus Brevis
2020-02-05 19:56:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chris Buckley
Post by Magewolf
Post by Magewolf
Post by Chris Buckley
I am reading _Ancillary Justice_ by Ann Leckie. The book seems perfectly normal to me. It does not appear outstanding in any way whatsoever. Nothing wrong with it, but is seems to lack any outstanding feature whatsoever. Not characters, story, writing, concepts. Nothing.
Why did it win both the Nebula and Hugo awards?
Regards
It was weird, no male pronouns IIRC.
Lynn
Is that why it won? Because it seemed to be saying something about transgender rights by depicting a society without gendered interpersonal references?
No, it won because many people thought it had excellent characters,
story, writing and concepts, all of which I agree with. It was a rare book
that was outstanding in both hard science fiction aspects and more societal
science fiction aspects.
Chris
A. There is no hard science fiction in the book.
B. It's not rare, even in the year it won.
C. It won a Hugo because of the pronoun gimmick.
To expand on C the same first novel without the pronoun thing would not
have gotten the same publicity boost especially with Hugo voters and
would have not benefited from the stick it to the puppies vote.
Does that mean I think it is a bad book? No,I rather like all three of
them. Do I think it was the best book of the year? No,not even close.
Upon reflection, and then a quick re-read, I agree that "hard science
fiction" is not a good description for _Ancillary Justice_ . The world
building is good but not enough to take it into the hard science fiction
category, even using my definitions.
However, it was original and good; I thought of the nominees it was
the clear winner (_Wheel of Time_???, Neptune's Brood_??? (minor
Stross), _Warbound_???). And _Parasite_ was much more of a
thriller than a Hugo award winner but if your tastes run that way, I
wouldn't argue too much. Which of those books would be a much better
winner?
Chris
I thought I had my 2014 nominations saved somewhere but could not find
them. But I do remember none of them made the final list that year. I
did find my vote which was Ancillary Justice,Neptune's Brood,no
award,Parasite,Wheel of Time,Warbound. Honestly I should have put no
award first but I hate doing that. It was a very weak list of finalists.
Yes, with the exception of _Ancillary Justice_ (IMO) it was just a
weak year altogether. The Nebula Award nominees and the top Locus
Awards rankings (which I generally respect more than Nebula) weren't
any better.
_Ancillary Justice_ not only won the Hugo, it completely dominated the
voting. It had more than twice as many first place votes compared to
the _Wheel of Time_, 3 times as many compared to _Neptune's Brood_, 4 times
as many compared to _Warbound_, and almost 5 times as many compared to
_Parasite_.
In the more than a dozen other years that I could find vote totals for, (in
http://thehugoawards.org/content/pdf , anybody have a source for more years?)
no other book dominated nearly as much as _Ancillary Justice_ (one of the
Harry Potter novels came close).
Chris
I am always suspicious of popular opinion which accuses judges of ignoring their duties. That is my bias. But I was a afraid that I may have to concede in this case. I am glad to learn that it was a bad year. (And for those who were inclined to read that incorrectly, note the word "learn". That is what I am glad about. Not the fact itself.)



Regards
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-02-03 21:07:54 UTC
Permalink
On Monday, February 3, 2020 at 4:26:02 PM UTC-5, Lynn McGuire
I am reading _Ancillary Justice_ by Ann Leckie. The book
seems perfect
ly normal to me. It does not appear outstanding in any way
whatsoever. Nothing wrong with it, but is seems to lack any
outstanding feature whatsoever. Not characters, story, writing,
concepts. Nothing.
Why did it win both the Nebula and Hugo awards?
Regards
It was weird, no male pronouns IIRC.
Lynn
Is that why it won? Because it seemed to be saying something
about transgender rights by depicting a society without gendered
interpersonal references?
That does seem to be the primary, if not only, criteria for both
awards these days. That, and an author that isn't a white male
heterosexual.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Amicus Brevis
2020-02-03 22:29:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Monday, February 3, 2020 at 4:26:02 PM UTC-5, Lynn McGuire
I am reading _Ancillary Justice_ by Ann Leckie. The book
seems perfect
ly normal to me. It does not appear outstanding in any way
whatsoever. Nothing wrong with it, but is seems to lack any
outstanding feature whatsoever. Not characters, story, writing,
concepts. Nothing.
Why did it win both the Nebula and Hugo awards?
Regards
It was weird, no male pronouns IIRC.
Lynn
Is that why it won? Because it seemed to be saying something
about transgender rights by depicting a society without gendered
interpersonal references?
That does seem to be the primary, if not only, criteria for both
awards these days. That, and an author that isn't a white male
heterosexual.
--
Terry Austin
Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
==
I have no problem with the book itself. I just saw a reference to it as a winner of both awards and got it, expecting something exceptional. I just could not see where it rose above being ordinarily good. I am enjoying the story. I am not sorry I bought it. It is a good book, especially for a first effort. It just does not live up to what I expected of a double winner.



Regards
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-02-03 22:52:49 UTC
Permalink
On Monday, February 3, 2020 at 5:07:57 PM UTC-5, Jibini Kula
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Monday, February 3, 2020 at 4:26:02 PM UTC-5, Lynn McGuire
I am reading _Ancillary Justice_ by Ann Leckie. The book
seems perfect
ly normal to me. It does not appear outstanding in any way
whatsoever. Nothing wrong with it, but is seems to lack any
outstanding feature whatsoever. Not characters, story,
writing, concepts. Nothing.
Why did it win both the Nebula and Hugo awards?
Regards
It was weird, no male pronouns IIRC.
Lynn
Is that why it won? Because it seemed to be saying something
about transgender rights by depicting a society without
gendered interpersonal references?
That does seem to be the primary, if not only, criteria for
both awards these days. That, and an author that isn't a white
male heterosexual.
--
Terry Austin
Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United
States illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest
border.)
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
=I have no problem with the book itself. I just saw a reference
to it as a winner of both awards and got it, expecting something
exceptional. I just could not see where it rose above being
ordinarily good. I am enjoying the story. I am not sorry I
bought it. It is a good book, especially for a first effort. It
just does not live up to what I expected of a double winner.
That is because you have the mistaken belief that either or both
awards are given out based on the quality of writ*ing*, and not the
wri*er*.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Amicus Brevis
2020-02-04 00:13:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Monday, February 3, 2020 at 5:07:57 PM UTC-5, Jibini Kula
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Monday, February 3, 2020 at 4:26:02 PM UTC-5, Lynn McGuire
I am reading _Ancillary Justice_ by Ann Leckie. The book
seems perfect
ly normal to me. It does not appear outstanding in any way
whatsoever. Nothing wrong with it, but is seems to lack any
outstanding feature whatsoever. Not characters, story,
writing, concepts. Nothing.
Why did it win both the Nebula and Hugo awards?
Regards
It was weird, no male pronouns IIRC.
Lynn
Is that why it won? Because it seemed to be saying something
about transgender rights by depicting a society without
gendered interpersonal references?
That does seem to be the primary, if not only, criteria for
both awards these days. That, and an author that isn't a white
male heterosexual.
--
Terry Austin
Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United
States illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest
border.)
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
=I have no problem with the book itself. I just saw a reference
to it as a winner of both awards and got it, expecting something
exceptional. I just could not see where it rose above being
ordinarily good. I am enjoying the story. I am not sorry I
bought it. It is a good book, especially for a first effort. It
just does not live up to what I expected of a double winner.
That is because you have the mistaken belief that either or both
awards are given out based on the quality of writ*ing*, and not the
wri*er*.
--
Terry Austin
Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Do you recall if there were criticisms of the awards when they were given? If so, were they widespread? Specifically, did people say that the award was given because of the way gender was treated in the book?




Regards
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-02-03 23:43:36 UTC
Permalink
On Monday, February 3, 2020 at 6:52:53 PM UTC-5, Jibini Kula
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Monday, February 3, 2020 at 5:07:57 PM UTC-5, Jibini Kula
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Monday, February 3, 2020 at 4:26:02 PM UTC-5, Lynn
I am reading _Ancillary Justice_ by Ann Leckie. The
book seems perfect
ly normal to me. It does not appear outstanding in any way
whatsoever. Nothing wrong with it, but is seems to lack
any outstanding feature whatsoever. Not characters, story,
writing, concepts. Nothing.
Why did it win both the Nebula and Hugo awards?
Regards
It was weird, no male pronouns IIRC.
Lynn
Is that why it won? Because it seemed to be saying
something about transgender rights by depicting a society
without gendered interpersonal references?
That does seem to be the primary, if not only, criteria for
both awards these days. That, and an author that isn't a
white male heterosexual.
--
Terry Austin
Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United
States illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest
border.)
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
=I have no problem with the book itself. I just saw a
reference to it as a winner of both awards and got it,
expecting something exceptional. I just could not see where
it rose above being ordinarily good. I am enjoying the story.
I am not sorry I bought it. It is a good book, especially
for a first effort. It just does not live up to what I
expected of a double winner.
That is because you have the mistaken belief that either or
both awards are given out based on the quality of writ*ing*,
and not the wri*er*.
--
Terry Austin
Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United
States illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest
border.)
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Do you recall if there were criticisms of the awards when they
were given? If so, were they widespread? Specifically, did
people say that the award was given because of the way gender
was treated in the book?
If you go to your favorite search engine and do a search for either
award name and the word "controversy," you will get millions of
hits.

It's odd that anyone could be unaware of the ongoing controversy
with the Hugos in recent without being completely unaware of the
very existence of the Hugos.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
J. Clarke
2020-02-04 01:51:12 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 3 Feb 2020 16:13:08 -0800 (PST), Amicus Brevis
Post by Amicus Brevis
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Monday, February 3, 2020 at 5:07:57 PM UTC-5, Jibini Kula
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Monday, February 3, 2020 at 4:26:02 PM UTC-5, Lynn McGuire
I am reading _Ancillary Justice_ by Ann Leckie. The book
seems perfect
ly normal to me. It does not appear outstanding in any way
whatsoever. Nothing wrong with it, but is seems to lack any
outstanding feature whatsoever. Not characters, story,
writing, concepts. Nothing.
Why did it win both the Nebula and Hugo awards?
Regards
It was weird, no male pronouns IIRC.
Lynn
Is that why it won? Because it seemed to be saying something
about transgender rights by depicting a society without
gendered interpersonal references?
That does seem to be the primary, if not only, criteria for
both awards these days. That, and an author that isn't a white
male heterosexual.
--
Terry Austin
Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United
States illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest
border.)
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
=I have no problem with the book itself. I just saw a reference
to it as a winner of both awards and got it, expecting something
exceptional. I just could not see where it rose above being
ordinarily good. I am enjoying the story. I am not sorry I
bought it. It is a good book, especially for a first effort. It
just does not live up to what I expected of a double winner.
That is because you have the mistaken belief that either or both
awards are given out based on the quality of writ*ing*, and not the
wri*er*.
--
Terry Austin
Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Do you recall if there were criticisms of the awards when they were given? If so, were they widespread? Specifically, did people say that the award was given because of the way gender was treated in the book?
That was the second year of Sad Puppies so it's rather difficult to
separate signal from noise.
Chrysi Cat
2020-02-07 09:44:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Amicus Brevis
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Monday, February 3, 2020 at 5:07:57 PM UTC-5, Jibini Kula
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Monday, February 3, 2020 at 4:26:02 PM UTC-5, Lynn McGuire
I am reading _Ancillary Justice_ by Ann Leckie. The book
seems perfect
ly normal to me. It does not appear outstanding in any way
whatsoever. Nothing wrong with it, but is seems to lack any
outstanding feature whatsoever. Not characters, story,
writing, concepts. Nothing.
Why did it win both the Nebula and Hugo awards?
Regards
It was weird, no male pronouns IIRC.
Lynn
Is that why it won? Because it seemed to be saying something
about transgender rights by depicting a society without
gendered interpersonal references?
That does seem to be the primary, if not only, criteria for
both awards these days. That, and an author that isn't a white
male heterosexual.
--
Terry Austin
Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United
States illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest
border.)
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
=I have no problem with the book itself. I just saw a reference
to it as a winner of both awards and got it, expecting something
exceptional. I just could not see where it rose above being
ordinarily good. I am enjoying the story. I am not sorry I
bought it. It is a good book, especially for a first effort. It
just does not live up to what I expected of a double winner.
That is because you have the mistaken belief that either or both
awards are given out based on the quality of writ*ing*, and not the
wri*er*.
--
Terry Austin
Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Do you recall if there were criticisms of the awards when they were given? If so, were they widespread? Specifically, did people say that the award was given because of the way gender was treated in the book?
Regards
Well, I think there's a good argument that it's the book that finally
stirred up the Puppy movements, so...umm...yes?

That said, I consider that a perfectly good reason to award it. Terry
doesn't because he's a Log Cabin Republican.
--
Chrysi Cat
1/2 anthrocat, nearly 1/2 anthrofox, all magical
Transgoddess, quick to anger.
Call me Chrysi or call me Kat, I'll respond to either!
Amicus Brevis
2020-02-07 10:02:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by Amicus Brevis
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Monday, February 3, 2020 at 5:07:57 PM UTC-5, Jibini Kula
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Monday, February 3, 2020 at 4:26:02 PM UTC-5, Lynn McGuire
I am reading _Ancillary Justice_ by Ann Leckie. The book
seems perfect
ly normal to me. It does not appear outstanding in any way
whatsoever. Nothing wrong with it, but is seems to lack any
outstanding feature whatsoever. Not characters, story,
writing, concepts. Nothing.
Why did it win both the Nebula and Hugo awards?
Regards
It was weird, no male pronouns IIRC.
Lynn
Is that why it won? Because it seemed to be saying something
about transgender rights by depicting a society without
gendered interpersonal references?
That does seem to be the primary, if not only, criteria for
both awards these days. That, and an author that isn't a white
male heterosexual.
--
Terry Austin
Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United
States illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest
border.)
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
=I have no problem with the book itself. I just saw a reference
to it as a winner of both awards and got it, expecting something
exceptional. I just could not see where it rose above being
ordinarily good. I am enjoying the story. I am not sorry I
bought it. It is a good book, especially for a first effort. It
just does not live up to what I expected of a double winner.
That is because you have the mistaken belief that either or both
awards are given out based on the quality of writ*ing*, and not the
wri*er*.
--
Terry Austin
Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Do you recall if there were criticisms of the awards when they were given? If so, were they widespread? Specifically, did people say that the award was given because of the way gender was treated in the book?
Regards
Well, I think there's a good argument that it's the book that finally
stirred up the Puppy movements, so...umm...yes?
That said, I consider that a perfectly good reason to award it. Terry
doesn't because he's a Log Cabin Republican.
--
Chrysi Cat
1/2 anthrocat, nearly 1/2 anthrofox, all magical
Transgoddess, quick to anger.
Call me Chrysi or call me Kat, I'll respond to either!
I am none of Republican or Log Cabin. Not even Republican leaning or sympathizing, and I don't think that is nearly enough. As I said, other than the fact that the writer drew attention it very often in the first half of the book and intermittently in the second half, the treatment wasn't all that exceptional. It was just unusual. It is a good book even without that, but I think the suggestion that it was up
against a weak field is more convincing.



Regards
Chrysi Cat
2020-02-07 10:17:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Amicus Brevis
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by Amicus Brevis
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Monday, February 3, 2020 at 5:07:57 PM UTC-5, Jibini Kula
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Monday, February 3, 2020 at 4:26:02 PM UTC-5, Lynn McGuire
I am reading _Ancillary Justice_ by Ann Leckie. The book
seems perfect
ly normal to me. It does not appear outstanding in any way
whatsoever. Nothing wrong with it, but is seems to lack any
outstanding feature whatsoever. Not characters, story,
writing, concepts. Nothing.
Why did it win both the Nebula and Hugo awards?
Regards
It was weird, no male pronouns IIRC.
Lynn
Is that why it won? Because it seemed to be saying something
about transgender rights by depicting a society without
gendered interpersonal references?
That does seem to be the primary, if not only, criteria for
both awards these days. That, and an author that isn't a white
male heterosexual.
--
Terry Austin
Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United
States illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest
border.)
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
=I have no problem with the book itself. I just saw a reference
to it as a winner of both awards and got it, expecting something
exceptional. I just could not see where it rose above being
ordinarily good. I am enjoying the story. I am not sorry I
bought it. It is a good book, especially for a first effort. It
just does not live up to what I expected of a double winner.
That is because you have the mistaken belief that either or both
awards are given out based on the quality of writ*ing*, and not the
wri*er*.
--
Terry Austin
Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Do you recall if there were criticisms of the awards when they were given? If so, were they widespread? Specifically, did people say that the award was given because of the way gender was treated in the book?
Regards
Well, I think there's a good argument that it's the book that finally
stirred up the Puppy movements, so...umm...yes?
That said, I consider that a perfectly good reason to award it. Terry
doesn't because he's a Log Cabin Republican.
--
Chrysi Cat
1/2 anthrocat, nearly 1/2 anthrofox, all magical
Transgoddess, quick to anger.
Call me Chrysi or call me Kat, I'll respond to either!
I am none of Republican or Log Cabin. Not even Republican leaning or sympathizing, and I don't think that is nearly enough. As I said, other than the fact that the writer drew attention it very often in the first half of the book and intermittently in the second half, the treatment wasn't all that exceptional. It was just unusual. It is a good book even without that, but I think the suggestion that it was up
against a weak field is more convincing.
Regards
I don't recall taking a shot at YOU. I said Terry--the guy who came back
just the beginning of this week and already has more posts to the group
since then than prolly any other two combined--is Log Cabin. And the way
he was claiming this was only even nominated because of _who_ wrote it
suggests "Puppy sympathiser" to boot.

Sorry for the misunderstanding.
--
Chrysi Cat
1/2 anthrocat, nearly 1/2 anthrofox, all magical
Transgoddess, quick to anger.
Call me Chrysi or call me Kat, I'll respond to either!
Amicus Brevis
2020-02-07 10:26:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by Amicus Brevis
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by Amicus Brevis
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Monday, February 3, 2020 at 5:07:57 PM UTC-5, Jibini Kula
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Monday, February 3, 2020 at 4:26:02 PM UTC-5, Lynn McGuire
I am reading _Ancillary Justice_ by Ann Leckie. The book
seems perfect
ly normal to me. It does not appear outstanding in any way
whatsoever. Nothing wrong with it, but is seems to lack any
outstanding feature whatsoever. Not characters, story,
writing, concepts. Nothing.
Why did it win both the Nebula and Hugo awards?
Regards
It was weird, no male pronouns IIRC.
Lynn
Is that why it won? Because it seemed to be saying something
about transgender rights by depicting a society without
gendered interpersonal references?
That does seem to be the primary, if not only, criteria for
both awards these days. That, and an author that isn't a white
male heterosexual.
--
Terry Austin
Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United
States illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest
border.)
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
=I have no problem with the book itself. I just saw a reference
to it as a winner of both awards and got it, expecting something
exceptional. I just could not see where it rose above being
ordinarily good. I am enjoying the story. I am not sorry I
bought it. It is a good book, especially for a first effort. It
just does not live up to what I expected of a double winner.
That is because you have the mistaken belief that either or both
awards are given out based on the quality of writ*ing*, and not the
wri*er*.
--
Terry Austin
Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Do you recall if there were criticisms of the awards when they were given? If so, were they widespread? Specifically, did people say that the award was given because of the way gender was treated in the book?
Regards
Well, I think there's a good argument that it's the book that finally
stirred up the Puppy movements, so...umm...yes?
That said, I consider that a perfectly good reason to award it. Terry
doesn't because he's a Log Cabin Republican.
--
Chrysi Cat
1/2 anthrocat, nearly 1/2 anthrofox, all magical
Transgoddess, quick to anger.
Call me Chrysi or call me Kat, I'll respond to either!
I am none of Republican or Log Cabin. Not even Republican leaning or sympathizing, and I don't think that is nearly enough. As I said, other than the fact that the writer drew attention it very often in the first half of the book and intermittently in the second half, the treatment wasn't all that exceptional. It was just unusual. It is a good book even without that, but I think the suggestion that it was up
against a weak field is more convincing.
Regards
I don't recall taking a shot at YOU. I said Terry--the guy who came back
just the beginning of this week and already has more posts to the group
since then than prolly any other two combined--is Log Cabin. And the way
he was claiming this was only even nominated because of _who_ wrote it
suggests "Puppy sympathiser" to boot.
Sorry for the misunderstanding.
--
Chrysi Cat
1/2 anthrocat, nearly 1/2 anthrofox, all magical
Transgoddess, quick to anger.
Call me Chrysi or call me Kat, I'll respond to either!
'My apologies too. I did not intend to get between you and Terry. I am only now recalling some of the dynamics with Terry. I was just separately arguing that I don't think the treatment of gender in the book is a sufficient justification for the awards, since you seemed to suggest that you think it is. If you were just poking Terry in the eye, please accept my apologies for getting in the midst of that.

I am well aware that you took no shot at me, and wish you to understand that I am not taking one at you. I have no problem with you at all. I was only disagreeing with that specific opinion.



Regards
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-02-07 20:25:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chrysi Cat
On Friday, February 7, 2020 at 4:44:25 AM UTC-5, Chrysi Cat
Post by Chrysi Cat
On Monday, February 3, 2020 at 6:52:53 PM UTC-5, Jibini Kula
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Monday, February 3, 2020 at 5:07:57 PM UTC-5, Jibini
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Monday, February 3, 2020 at 4:26:02 PM UTC-5, Lynn
I am reading _Ancillary Justice_ by Ann Leckie. The
book seems perfect
ly normal to me. It does not appear outstanding in any
way whatsoever. Nothing wrong with it, but is seems to
lack any outstanding feature whatsoever. Not characters,
story, writing, concepts. Nothing.
Why did it win both the Nebula and Hugo awards?
Regards
It was weird, no male pronouns IIRC.
Lynn
Is that why it won? Because it seemed to be saying
something about transgender rights by depicting a society
without gendered interpersonal references?
That does seem to be the primary, if not only, criteria
for both awards these days. That, and an author that isn't
a white male heterosexual.
--
Terry Austin
Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the
United States illegally is over 132,000 for just the
southwest border.)
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
=I have no problem with the book itself. I just saw a
reference to it as a winner of both awards and got it,
expecting something exceptional. I just could not see where
it rose above being ordinarily good. I am enjoying the
story. I am not sorry I bought it. It is a good book,
especially for a first effort. It just does not live up to
what I expected of a double winner.
That is because you have the mistaken belief that either or
both awards are given out based on the quality of writ*ing*,
and not the wri*er*.
--
Terry Austin
Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United
States illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest
border.)
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Do you recall if there were criticisms of the awards when
they were given? If so, were they widespread? Specifically,
did people say that the award was given because of the way
gender was treated in the book?
Regards
Well, I think there's a good argument that it's the book that
finally stirred up the Puppy movements, so...umm...yes?
That said, I consider that a perfectly good reason to award
it. Terry doesn't because he's a Log Cabin Republican.
--
Chrysi Cat
1/2 anthrocat, nearly 1/2 anthrofox, all magical
Transgoddess, quick to anger.
Call me Chrysi or call me Kat, I'll respond to either!
I am none of Republican or Log Cabin. Not even Republican
leaning or sympathizing, and I don't think that is nearly
enough. As I said, other than the fact that the writer drew
attention it very often in the first half of the book and
intermittently in the second half, the treatment wasn't all
that exceptional. It was just unusual. It is a good book even
without that, but I think the suggestion that it was up against
a weak field is more convincing.
Regards
I don't recall taking a shot at YOU. I said Terry--the guy who
came back just the beginning of this week and already has more
posts to the group since then than prolly any other two
combined--is Log Cabin. And the way he was claiming this was
only even nominated because of _who_ wrote it suggests "Puppy
sympathiser" to boot.
Sorry for the misunderstanding.
Perhaps if you took your meds, the voices would go away.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
James Nicoll
2020-02-07 15:50:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chrysi Cat
Well, I think there's a good argument that it's the book that finally
stirred up the Puppy movements, so...umm...yes?
I remember a lot more screaming about "If You Were a Dinosaur, My Love" despite the fact it
didn't actually win a Hugo. But really, what stirred up the Puppies was LC was butt-hurt
because he was ranked only the fifth most promising new writer of the year out of thousands
and thousands and he wanted a Hugo Award.
--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My tor pieces at https://www.tor.com/author/james-davis-nicoll/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll
Chrysi Cat
2020-02-07 09:38:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Monday, February 3, 2020 at 4:26:02 PM UTC-5, Lynn McGuire
I am reading _Ancillary Justice_ by Ann Leckie. The book
seems perfect
ly normal to me. It does not appear outstanding in any way
whatsoever. Nothing wrong with it, but is seems to lack any
outstanding feature whatsoever. Not characters, story, writing,
concepts. Nothing.
Why did it win both the Nebula and Hugo awards?
Regards
It was weird, no male pronouns IIRC.
Lynn
Is that why it won? Because it seemed to be saying something
about transgender rights by depicting a society without gendered
interpersonal references?
That does seem to be the primary, if not only, criteria for both
awards these days. That, and an author that isn't a white male
heterosexual.
Oh, lawdy. Why not just come straight [ironically] out and say
unequivocally that the Puppies were always right, if that's the way you
feel?
--
Chrysi Cat
1/2 anthrocat, nearly 1/2 anthrofox, all magical
Transgoddess, quick to anger.
Call me Chrysi or call me Kat, I'll respond to either!
h***@gmail.com
2020-02-07 10:09:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
Is that why it won? Because it seemed to be saying something
about transgender rights by depicting a society without gendered
interpersonal references?
That does seem to be the primary, if not only, criteria for both
awards these days. That, and an author that isn't a white male
heterosexual.
Oh, lawdy. Why not just come straight [ironically] out and say
unequivocally that the Puppies were always right, if that's the way you
feel?
It's Terry in full troll mode.
Just ignore him and be done with it.
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-02-07 20:24:16 UTC
Permalink
On Friday, February 7, 2020 at 8:38:54 PM UTC+11, Chrysi Cat
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
Is that why it won? Because it seemed to be saying
something about transgender rights by depicting a society
without gendered interpersonal references?
That does seem to be the primary, if not only, criteria for
both awards these days. That, and an author that isn't a
white male heterosexual.
Oh, lawdy. Why not just come straight [ironically] out and say
unequivocally that the Puppies were always right, if that's the
way you feel?
It's Terry in full troll mode.
Just ignore him and be done with it.
It isn't capable of doing so.

Neither are you.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2020-02-07 20:23:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
On Monday, February 3, 2020 at 4:26:02 PM UTC-5, Lynn McGuire
I am reading _Ancillary Justice_ by Ann Leckie. The book
seems perfect
ly normal to me. It does not appear outstanding in any way
whatsoever. Nothing wrong with it, but is seems to lack any
outstanding feature whatsoever. Not characters, story,
writing, concepts. Nothing.
Why did it win both the Nebula and Hugo awards?
Regards
It was weird, no male pronouns IIRC.
Lynn
Is that why it won? Because it seemed to be saying something
about transgender rights by depicting a society without
gendered interpersonal references?
That does seem to be the primary, if not only, criteria for
both awards these days. That, and an author that isn't a white
male heterosexual.
Oh, lawdy. Why not just come straight [ironically] out and say
unequivocally that the Puppies were always right, if that's the
way you feel?
You're still mentally ill, I see.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
Lynn McGuire
2020-02-03 23:38:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Juho Julkunen
I am reading _Ancillary Justice_ by Ann Leckie. The book seems perfectly normal to me. It does not appear outstanding in any way whatsoever. Nothing wrong with it, but is seems to lack any outstanding feature whatsoever. Not characters, story, writing, concepts. Nothing.
Why did it win both the Nebula and Hugo awards?
Regards
It was weird, no male pronouns IIRC.
There's nothing weird about no male pronouns.
I've read hundreds of books without them.
Such as ?

Lynn
Juho Julkunen
2020-02-04 00:50:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Juho Julkunen
I am reading _Ancillary Justice_ by Ann Leckie. The book seems perfectly normal to me. It does not appear outstanding in any way whatsoever. Nothing wrong with it, but is seems to lack any outstanding feature whatsoever. Not characters, story, writing, concepts. Nothing.
Why did it win both the Nebula and Hugo awards?
Regards
It was weird, no male pronouns IIRC.
There's nothing weird about no male pronouns.
I've read hundreds of books without them.
Such as ?
Every single one I read up to the age of fourteen or fifteen, and quite
a few since. (That was when I first read a complete novel in English.
Finnish doesn't have gendered pronouns. I find them a little weird.)

The Radch not making any distinction based on gender is the unusual part
in the _Ancillary_ series, not the lack of pronouns per se.
--
Juho Julkunen
It was Jurassic Park.
Lynn McGuire
2020-02-04 01:55:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Juho Julkunen
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Juho Julkunen
I am reading _Ancillary Justice_ by Ann Leckie. The book seems perfectly normal to me. It does not appear outstanding in any way whatsoever. Nothing wrong with it, but is seems to lack any outstanding feature whatsoever. Not characters, story, writing, concepts. Nothing.
Why did it win both the Nebula and Hugo awards?
Regards
It was weird, no male pronouns IIRC.
There's nothing weird about no male pronouns.
I've read hundreds of books without them.
Such as ?
Every single one I read up to the age of fourteen or fifteen, and quite
a few since. (That was when I first read a complete novel in English.
Finnish doesn't have gendered pronouns. I find them a little weird.)
The Radch not making any distinction based on gender is the unusual part
in the _Ancillary_ series, not the lack of pronouns per se.
Ah, I did not think about another language. I know a little bit of
German which is very gendered. Die, Der, und Das.

Lynn
Titus G
2020-02-04 03:10:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Juho Julkunen
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Juho Julkunen
I am reading _Ancillary Justice_ by Ann Leckie. The book seems perfectly normal to me. It does not appear outstanding in any way whatsoever. Nothing wrong with it, but is seems to lack any outstanding feature whatsoever. Not characters, story, writing, concepts. Nothing.
Why did it win both the Nebula and Hugo awards?
Regards
It was weird, no male pronouns IIRC.
There's nothing weird about no male pronouns.
I've read hundreds of books without them.
Such as ?
Every single one I read up to the age of fourteen or fifteen, and quite
a few since. (That was when I first read a complete novel in English.
Finnish doesn't have gendered pronouns. I find them a little weird.)
The Radch not making any distinction based on gender is the unusual part
in the _Ancillary_ series, not the lack of pronouns per se.
In the Praxis books by Walter Jon Williams, I have sometimes tripped
over pronouns because military characters are often referred to by their
last names and I forget their gender because it is seldom relevant.
Titus G
2020-02-04 03:11:01 UTC
Permalink
I am reading _Ancillary Justice_ by Ann Leckie. The book seems perfectly normal to me. It does not appear outstanding in any way whatsoever. Nothing wrong with it, but is seems to lack any outstanding feature whatsoever. Not characters, story, writing, concepts. Nothing.
Ancillary Justice and Ancillary Sword were five star reads for me and
Ancillary Mercy was close. I read Justice in 2014 and it was just as
good again in 2016.
The writing was clearly above average, the characters and story were
just fascinating and perhaps you have not yet experienced much of the
ship mind which was outstanding for me. But I am mainly thinking of the
whole trilogy rather than just Justice and I recommend that you
persevere. The scope is vast and levels of deviousness almost endless.
Why did it win both the Nebula and Hugo awards?
Amicus Brevis
2020-02-04 03:15:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Titus G
I am reading _Ancillary Justice_ by Ann Leckie. The book seems perfectly normal to me. It does not appear outstanding in any way whatsoever. Nothing wrong with it, but is seems to lack any outstanding feature whatsoever. Not characters, story, writing, concepts. Nothing.
Ancillary Justice and Ancillary Sword were five star reads for me and
Ancillary Mercy was close. I read Justice in 2014 and it was just as
good again in 2016.
The writing was clearly above average, the characters and story were
just fascinating and perhaps you have not yet experienced much of the
ship mind which was outstanding for me. But I am mainly thinking of the
whole trilogy rather than just Justice and I recommend that you
persevere. The scope is vast and levels of deviousness almost endless.
Why did it win both the Nebula and Hugo awards?
Thanks. I suspect that something which has happened to me before is happening. I am "reading" the audio book. It has happened to me more than once that I did not like a book I listened to, but loved it when I actually read it. I think I am going to restart with Kindle. I am eligible for a few free books.

Again, thanks.
Lynn McGuire
2020-02-03 23:39:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Juho Julkunen
I am reading _Ancillary Justice_ by Ann Leckie. The book seems perfectly normal to me. It does not appear outstanding in any way whatsoever. Nothing wrong with it, but is seems to lack any outstanding feature whatsoever. Not characters, story, writing, concepts. Nothing.
Why did it win both the Nebula and Hugo awards?
Regards
It was weird, no male pronouns IIRC.
There's nothing weird about no male pronouns.
I've read hundreds of books without them.
And I did not say it was bad, in fact it was quite good.

Lynn
Juho Julkunen
2020-02-04 01:02:33 UTC
Permalink
says...
I am reading _Ancillary Justice_ by Ann Leckie. The book seems perfectly normal to me. It does not appear outstanding in any way whatsoever. Nothing wrong with it, but is seems to lack any outstanding feature whatsoever. Not characters, story, writing, concepts. Nothing.
Why did it win both the Nebula and Hugo awards?
It's a really good book?
--
Did you find it so? I have read books before that won the Hugo or Nebula that I did not enjoy. But never one that I could not understand why it won both awards. This just does not seem to have any of the indicators that would normally make a book a contender.
I don't pretend to be an expert on what makes a book a contender for a
Hugo or Nebula. I found the book excellent, in some ways old-fashioned
SF with modern sensibilites, with good writing and great
characterization. I don't think I was at any point floored with
sensawunda, but that has been getting rarer as I get further from the
Golden Age, anyway.
--
Juho Julkunen
Loading...