|Vader Reads Correia|
For those not following the Hugo controversy, here is my boiled down version:
- The Hugos are genre awards for literature and other media (generally sci fi/fantasy) given out at Worldcon. They are known as the most prestigious awards in the world for sci fi/fantasy literature.
- Liberal/progressive themes have been nominated and won the lion’s share of awards for years, with literature of any other political—or neutral—persuasion excluded.
- Some authors, tired of the lopsided and overly political atmosphere of the most prestigious awards in the world, decided to urge readers to look at a larger slate of novels to nominate, free of any political prejudice. This was mostly spearheaded by ace writer Larry Correia, in a campaign hilariously named “Sad Puppies.”
- This worked, and many novels with not-necessarily-progressive themes were nominated this year. Mr. Correia himself won a nomination, but recused himself due to the campaign. Now many liberal Worldcon members and voters are angry (I mean going off the rails angry) with Mr. Correia and his friends who worked to make sure the Hugo nomination process was more diverse.
Here Game of Thrones writer George R.R. Martin writes a non-hateful essay about why he does not like this.
I absolutely, unequivocally love both of these writers. And unlike most of the general debate, Martin’s and Correia’s comments are (mostly) polite and well reasoned. For the record, Correia is right and, with all due respect, Martin is wrong. Not in his personal opinions, but that this is a bad thing.