I sure hope Doctor Who or Battlestar Galactica wins Best Dramatic Presentation.

Ah, er, I mean, uh.

If Downloaded doesn't win, I hope Girl in the Fireplace does. And I hope Army of Ghosts doesn't.

Sadly, I know little about the other categories and candidates, except that I liked His Majesty's Dragon.

Congratulations, Patrick. Though I have to say that I nominated both you & Teresa for fan writer and am kind of bummed your names aren't on that list too.

An interesting list. I'll have to start reading.

Congrats Patrick, and thanks for doing what Nippon apparently didn't bother to do...grrr....

You missed Stargate SG-1 - 200. Actually the Stargate episode is also pretty good; there was quite a lot of good SF on TV last year.

And wouldn't Lou Anders be up for short fiction editor??

One of the main "fans have no taste" categories, though, was the Best Dramatic Presentation category. Amazing that Pan's Labyrinth missed the cut, but that POTC, a completely dreadful movie, is on the ballot.

Jim was especially happy to see Eifelheim on the ballot.

(Is there a single Japanese nominee on this list?)

I'm still not sure I like the fan writer category being open to professionals, although I've heard the arguments a dozen times. It just strikes my "odd" notion.

Also am very down with the Naomi Novik nominations. That was a really good book.

I want to state my objection to any film set in a universe in which Port Royal has cliffs. That is just wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

Congratulations, Patrick!

As traditional at this time of year, I now feel insanely disconnected from the genre, as I haven't even heard of two of the novel nominees (never mind the short fiction).

Blindsight and Eifelheim -- worth reading, or inexplicably popular?

"And wouldn't Lou Anders be up for short fiction editor?"

Not sure what you're asking. I think he's eligible in Editor, Short Form by virtue of anthologies edited--I haven't actually gone and counted--but he's definitely eligible in Editor, Long Form and that's where he got enough nominations.

#8: Neither of them are my book. Both are very much worth reading. Blindsight in particular is one hell of a ride.

Eifelheim is reported to be a great book (by folks who read a lot, like my husband) - Jim's review.

Blindsight, I have no idea.

A bit sad there is only one woman nominee among all the fiction nominees...

Liked all the novels except haven't read Blindsight. Novik's book is more fantasy than sf but really good -- great imagination. Eifelheim would be my vote if I were voting.

#3 Laurie -- My understanding is that Patrick posted correctly, that Lou Anders was nominated in the Best Professional Editor - Long Form editor category. I haven't seen the ballot, but I called into the NESFA clubhouse and asked that it be read to me just as the collation started. Then I was out for the evening and missed all of the fun that followed there tonight.

I look forward to seeing a formal announcement from Nippon and hope it comes soon. They asked nominees for URLs where available, so I expect they'll put up links, too.

Congratulations, Patrick! And congratulations, Tor!

Congratulations Patrick!-I'm really glad about Blindsight which I love..

#5: "I'm still not sure I like the fan writer category being open to professionals, although I've heard the arguments a dozen times. It just strikes my 'odd' notion."

Well, if you've actually heard all the arguments, I guess there's no point in trying to have a conversation about it, is there? Which leaves me wondering why you bothered to say anything at all.

For the benefit of other readers of this conversation, the Best Fan Writer Hugo has been awarded 40 times, 23 of those times to a working professional writer. In 2001, the award went to the same person who won Best Short Story. By and large, the SF world, pro and fan, doesn't find this extraordinary, because most of us are clear on the idea that "fan" and "pro" are terms for things we do, not for things we are.

Also: the fan Hugo categories are not junior-varsity versions of the pro categories, and "fan" is not the larval stage of "pro".

If these points don't make any difference, then we're talking across irreconcilable value systems. Or, alternately, you simply can't get past the idea that "fan" has to mean "spectator" or "aspirant" or "drooling wannabe." The best thing about the SF subculture is that, frequently, we do better than that.

Laurie, #11: "A bit sad there is only one woman nominee among all the fiction nominees..."

Holy crap, you're right. That's really remarkable.

And remarkably stupid, considering how much good SF is written by women these days.

I didn't notice it until you pointed it out. The essence of sexism is that "male" is the unremarkable "default state."

Congrats to you, too Geri!

Yay, Geri!

I just want to say that I've always considered myself a fanwriter, and that I have no problem whatsoever with Hugo voters taking the same view of the matter.

I mean, hey. Terry Carr.

Thank you, Teresa and Laurie! Yep, Randy Byers and I are thrilled that Science-Fiction Five-Yearly was nominated. It's also bittersweet; LeeH would have been utterly croggled by the nomination, and very, very pleased.

Congratulations, Patrick and anyone else on that list who might be reading!

I'll be severely unhappy if Children of Men doesn't win. For whatever record anyone might be keeping.

I liked Blindsight even though I totally disagreed with Peter Watts' conclusions. It's chock full (chockful?) of mind-blowing ideas, as good sf ought to be. It's worth reading for the vampires alone, really.

If you want, you can read the whole thing online, here.

Good to see Watts' Blindsight on that list, because if it wasn't there, I'd be worried about fandom.**

It's been over two months since I've read it*, but the sheer sharp beauty of it makes it feel like I just read it yesterday.

Even though it's available online (and for free), I highly recommend buying the book. If you read it online, you'll be tempted to read it at night. Bad idea.

This book should only be read in direct sunlight, preferably outdoors. You'll understand when you're done. Trees and tomato cages and happy unenhanced humans walking by, children laughing: these reminders that it's only 2007 will help keep the book's spiky memeseeds from sprouting too deep.

*My first reaction: "If a good novel is like a fine-crafted bottle of beer or wine, then Blindsight is a partially vacuum distilled eau de vie from the fruit of the tree of knowledge."

** And this year had strong contenders (I see 3/5 of my novel votes made it), but, wow, Blindsight. It now tops my list of novels that can singletentacledly represent exactly what SF is and does and should be. Sensawunda. Multiple Algenon moments. Big reference section. [also the ability to make me want to question / repudiate my major life's work and instead go hiding on the last EU feudal island, and, say, make organic bread for Sark tourists.] Anyways, deserves a Hugo.

Kathryn, #22: I find Blindsight to be excellent before-bed reading, though last night I had the idea for a t-shirt along the lines of those "Joss Whedon is My Master Now", with "Jukka Sarasti is My Master Now"...

I also realised I have read 80% of the novel finalists, and not a single other one of the written ones.

Regarding Pan's Labyrinth... yeah, I'm kind of surprised to not see it listed, either. It'd be interesting to find out whether it simply didn't get the votes, or if it was held back for next year, since while it was technically released in 2006, it didn't receive a non-limited US release until January.

Or maybe I'm just being hopeful because I think it totally deserves the nod.

Congrats to all of you nominated!

Kathryn: Sark, like the other Channel Islands, is not in the EU.

And in the Department of 'Gah!', received my nominating ballot for the 2007 Hugo Awards... yesterday! Too little postage on the envelope by five pence, cost me a pound and five pence to collapse the wave and find out what someone was trying to send me.

Shouldn't it be “A Billion Eves” by Robert Reed?

Like all others surely, I'm delighted to see that Science Fiction Five Yearly has finally got a nod, after only, what, fifty years of publishing or so?

The fan writer category is beginning to improve markedly; I remember years when Langford was accompanied by other nominees whose writing was of such low standard that it was all I could do to struggle through sample articles. If part of what has enabled that improvement is the fannish blogs of professional authors, I'm all for it.

Also, is 'His Majesty's Dragon' the same book as 'Temeraire'? Shouldn't the ballot list both titles? (Especially as Temeraire is such a much better title that actually credits the reader with a little intelligence, harrumph humph)

Kathryn: "Algenon moments"? Is this a phrase I ought to know?

Congratulations to nominees. I haven't read as many of the nominees as I'd like - actually there are more than a few I hadn't heard of - but all of the nominees I have read deserve to be there.

Temeraire. Now why, when I first saw that, did my fingers itch to ROT-13 it?

Now there's a fun idea. Write a fantasy novel all of whose characters all have amusingly ROT-13able names. Gur Ureb, the hero. Irelir Elnatel, the brooding warrior with a dark and mysterious past. Nybar, the distant and nomadic abjurer. Rys, the token elf. Join them as they fight Ungua B'shel, the vengeful she-witch! But will they anticipate their betrayal at the hands of Cherrivy, their deceptively adorable catgirl side-kick? Stay tuned!

Heresiarch @30

Algernon moments. I once could spell it.

That's my term for that Sensasmarta you get during a book, where for a few glorious pages you understand the science, because the author makes you feel it*. Not like a mystery, where you outsmart the author... the book makes you smarter. Until the temporary neural scaffolding built by and for reading the book starts to fade.

Greg Egan does good Sensasmarta: within his novels he makes exploring mathematical proofs of Riemann flat space manifolds fun and essential and seemingly doable, by you, the reader. And immediately after you finish the book you think you can. But then by the next day, when you wander over to the net thinking "today's the day I'm going to do some righteous proofs," you can't wrap your mind around it anymore. The only thing about Riemannian geometry that makes sense is that there is a Soul Theorem**. (And I have to love any article that ends with "See also Shape of the Universe.") i.e. to "build some geometric intuition [it'll be] usually by doing enormous amounts of calculations," but Egan can give you the temporary memory of having done just that.

* I also use the term to mean "I remember I once could do this."

** The soul is not uniquely determined, but any two souls are isometric

I personally prefer "His Majesty's Dragon" to "Temeraire". My ideal is titles like "'Repent, Harlequin!' Said the Tick-tock-man" and "Time Considered As a Helix of Semi-Precious Stones". Something with a bit of imagination.

I can cope with quotes from Shakespeare if they're particularly a propos: something that speaks both to plot and theme, for example. "His Majesty's Dragon" does that at least somewhat: yes, it's referring to a dragon who serves the king; but it also has notes, not quite as directly, of duty and honour and all that stuff which runs through the book(s).

Noun phrases, yeah, okay. And I'm resigned to those one-word titles like "Memory" or "[First] Contact" or any of those which have been used a hundred times before and will be used a hundred times after. I don't know why people think they're a good idea, honestly -- sure, it's easier to remember than "Time Considered [etc]" but then you've also got to remember the author's name to distinguish it from the rest of them.

But "Temeraire"? It tells you nothing about the book. It's just a name. It's just... "I couldn't come up with a good title so I named it after the dragon." Meh.

When I went to buy a copy of the book, the bookstore had both editions. I didn't hesitate: I went for "His Majesty's Dragon".

Ethan, #20: Congratulations, Patrick and anyone else on that list who might be reading!

Thanks!

And congratulations, Patrick!

There's a small error in the novelette category. "The Djinn's Wife" was published in Asimov's, unless I'm mistaken.

Congrats, Patrick.

Laurie @ 3... Amazing that Pan's Labyrinth missed the cut, but that POTC, a completely dreadful movie, is on the ballot.

I'm with you. And I'm surprised that The Fountain, flawed as it was, didn't make it either. Maybe fans of Hugh Jackman were upset that he didn't take his shirt off in that movie. (Yes, I mean you, TexAnne.) On the other hand, he didn't do that in the unpleasant Prestige. It's true that the latter had David Bowie as Tesla and you can't go wrong if you have Bowie in your film.

The Prestige managed to keep me interested despite the nastiness of all the characters bar Michael Caine's. I'm not sure if I was supposed to see each twist coming so easily, but they certainly put in enough hints.

Congratulations, Patrick.

I personally prefer "His Majesty's Dragon" to "Temeraire". My ideal is titles like "'Repent, Harlequin!' Said the Tick-tock-man" and "Time Considered As a Helix of Semi-Precious Stones". Something with a bit of imagination.

This anticipates my plan to retitle Ansible as The Zine That Shouted Factoids At The Heart Of The Web With Fear And Loathing In Its Gucci Luggage.

Congratulations all round, especially to the new influx of fanwriter nominees whom I encourage -- nay, urge -- to crush me like a bug!

I wonder how long it'll be before we get our official notifications from Nippon 2007?

Zeborah: "Temeraire" is not just a name, it's the name of the "Fighting Temeraire", which was second in line in the Battle of Trafalgar, and was also the subject of one of Turner's most famous paintings, "The Fighting Temeraire tugged to her last Berth to be broken up". All of which tells you a lot more about the atmosphere and mood that Novik is presumably trying to evoke than "His Majesty's Dragon".

Kathryn: Oh, those moments. "Algernon moments," huh? Good word. Yes, Blindsight does have a lot of those, doesn't it?

#34 Zeborah: Agreed. I'm tired of titles that consist mainly of fictional character and place names: The Sword of This, The Redemption of That. Meh. Made-up words (because they're made up) just aren't very evocative. I like titles that have a lot of mythic resonance, and it's awful hard to pull that off with a made-up word.

Dr. Schoen is a new writer??

Mike Scott made my point about what Temeraire* made me think of as a title**, so I'll say there was one moment near the start of Temeraire that made me stop and ask if Novik had done her research properly. Other than that brilliant (also, Naomi Novik is a great name that also ought to rot13).

Anyway, my minor quibble: Grzrenver pbzrf bhg bs ure furyy naq vagebqhprf urefrys ol fnlvat "uryyb". V gura fcrag gur erfg bs gur obbx ybbxvat sbe zber nanpuebavfzf, ohg gur bayl bar'f V erzrzore jrer qentba eryngrq.

And congratulations.

* Of course in the book, Captain Laurence comes up with a name for the dragon by naming it after a ship.
**Plus it had a dragon AND a ship on the cover. How could it be bad?

Had I read the list before going to bed, Patrick, I would have beaten Laurie to the draw on noticing there was only one woman print nominee. I don't usually count that way but this leaped out at me.

And no nomination for "Lost"?" Feh!

However, congrats to Our Genial Host and Geri both. Oh and Dave L, though that is such an annual event.

JaneY

About errors in the list...

Nippon2007 has yet to formally release a digital list to the Web, though the printed ballot is going out shortly. Someone listed all nominees on a mailing list - strictly alphabetically without the publication information. Patrick took that list and made the standard category list. I took the category list, found a few minor errors in titles, and added publication info for AwardWeb.

I made at least two mistakes (Billion Eyes instead of Billion Eves, because Billion Eyes showed up erroneously at a Web site or two, and put Ian Mcdonald's story in Analog rather than Asimov's--sorry, I was up way past my bedtime last night). I will continue to fix the list on AwardWeb.

Who knows, maybe Nippon 2007 will post a real digital list some day...

Ken H: I wondered about that, too, but Lawrence's best-known work is a "translation."

According to ISFIC, here's his short fiction publication history:

* Buffalo Dogs (2001) [[DNA]]
* Quantum Pen (2003) [[Artemis/LRC]]
* The Sky’s the Limit (2004) [[Wheatland Press]]
* Take Me to Your Liederkranz (2005) [[Analog]]

Maybe the first three stories were considered to be in "small" publications, but...

Jane, Lost pretty much jumped the shark - I know I didn't nominate anything from it.

This is the first listing I've seen of the complete list -- hail all! Special congrats to Chris (for scoring twice) and to Geri Sullivan -- very well deserved. I see Challenger is doomed again.

Glad this list shows on payday. Got some novels to buy.

Whoever endorsed CHILDREN OF MEN, I'm with you. Probably the best-directed movie of 2006, and the best Michael Caine performance I've seen since MONA LISA.

To add a bit of detail to what Laurie reports: Nominees were asked to embargo the information until last Friday, the 23rd. On the "Smofs" list--a discussion group for people interested in the minutiae of running science fiction conventions--it was announced that there would be a work party at NESFA's headquarters at 6 PM on Wednesday the 28th, to collate and mail the club newsletter plus copies of the Hugo and site-selection ballots. The 23rd came and went. At Tor, we knew about Michael Flynn's and Vernor Vinge's novels being on the ballot, but while we thought Blindsight was a good bet, we didn't know, we hadn't heard from the author, and David Hartwell and I were increasingly curious. When the 28th dawned with still no word from the Hugo committee, I asked on the Smofs list if printed ballots were still expected at this party, and was told, firmly, yes.

A few minutes after 6, I posted to Smofs suggesting that if the party's attendees were in possession of the ballot, they were now in a position to scoop Locus, which generally gets the drop on every other SF newszine and web site because that they help Hugo subcommittees verify eligibility and nail down the bibliographic details. The fact that several party attendees were clearly checking their email should come as no surprise, nor should the playfulness of the responses ("Can't answer, too busy collating"; "Sorry, I'd post the ballot, but it's all in Japanese"). Finally, in a magnificent piece of fannish improvisation, party attendee Sharon Sbarsky posted a single list of all the nominees--in alphabetical order, stripped of their category headers. After resorting everything into its proper categories, I posted the list to Making Light.

I agree that everyone in The Prestige except Caine and the little girl was horrid. But the damn movie would not, and will not, leave me alone. If a genie would grant me three writing wishes, the ability to write plots that won't leave you alone would be #2. (Good editor, #1; Brust's ability to make reader sympathize with unsympathetic character, #3.)

As it happens, even though I published the US softcover of The Prestige, Teresa and I only got round to watching the movie the night before last. We loved it. I want to re-read the book and then see the movie again.

Yes, neither of the magicians is a warm-and-fuzzy character you'd want to take home with you, but what a headlong piece of storytelling.

Googling around to read various things I'd avoided reading before seeing the movie (yes, I'd read the book, but I was also aware that the movie changed the ending), I was delighted to find an interview with author Christopher Priest in which he said that, in fact, he completely made up that bit about the pledge, the turn, and the prestige. Took me in completely! Reality is full of commonplace words that have some slightly off-kilter secondary meaning in some field's technical jargon, and using the word "prestige" that way had exactly the right weight and feel. In fact, Priest says, following his novel The Glamour he had the persistent idle thought that it would be nifty to call a novel The Prestige, and he also had a notion to write a novel about stage magicians. When he noticed that "prestige" and "prestidigitation" share a bunch of letters, the two ideas came together.

Patrick (to whom, also, congratulations) writes: Nominees were asked to embargo the information until last Friday, the 23rd.

Not this nominee. In my official email from Hugo Admin, 23 March is not an end-of-embargo date but the deadline for refusing nominations: "if I don't hear from you before March 23, 2007 I will assume that you have accepted your nomination." Nominees were asked to keep quiet "until the official announcement of the entire ballot."

It is a sign of how little time I've spent in bookstores lately *stupid lack of money* that I missed the existence of a new Vernor Vinge novel. I must see if the library has it. I probably ought to see if the library has all of the nominees for best novel, actually -- a Hugo nomination is not a guarantee I'll like it, but it's sure an indication that there's a good chance I will. (Also should check if they carry back issues of Asimov's.)

Congratulations Patrick, and Kathryn, and Geri, and John Scalzi... and anyone else on that list who reads here that I missed, which I likely did. Also, woo, three Tor novels.

#23: Jukka Sarasti your master? Nah, predators don't do that master/servant thing very well. `I am but prey of Jukka Sarasti', perhaps?

#22: I think Blindsight is a nice happy book: the idea density sort of cancels out the downer parts. (Mind you everyone else thinks that opinion is cracked, including the author). If you want depressing, pick on another Hugo nominee and read Flynn's _The Wreck of The River of Stars_.

(The fact that I have long agreed with the author's thesis in Blindsight is of course *entirely unconnected* with my thinking it's not depressing to read. Naturally.)

Reading it in sunlight won't help, though: Wattsian vampires are unaffected by sunlight (and garlic). As far as I can tell a guaranteed defence against Wattsian vampires is to be female (since they're feeding on people to get access to a protein coded for by a gene on the Y chromosome, eating women is a waste of time).

(The more nifty the ideas in a book, the more I'm driven to pick holes in them...)

w00t! Go, all you!

Heresiarch @ 42... I'm tired of titles that consist mainly of fictional character and place names

Like The Sword of Sha-nah-nah, or is that Shannara ?

In the dept of movies about magicians, I much preferred The Illusionist.

Serge, I'm with you (thought The Illusionist is completely non-speculative).

The Prestige is an interesting movie with pretty good casting, but the whole premise, at its end, is so unpleasant that I simply didn't like it. Jim has also read the book and says the book is better.

Should I read The Prestige first, or watch the movie first?

I give Terry Brooks a pass because of his stirring and heartfelt treatment of the perils of substance abuse--especially alcohol.

As to why the official online ballot didn't go up before printed ballots started to mail: evidently the person responsible had a family medical emergency. The Worldcon is, after all, entirely run by volunteers...

Nix #54: But as a Y chromosome is a truncated X, surely any gene that exists on a Y will also exist on an X somewhere? Disclaimer: It's been a long time since I looked at any biology...

Congratulations on your nomination, Patrick!

Do you suppose they will add a "comics" category anytime soon?

I ask because it seems likely that some really good English-language SF is likely to* (or has been**) produced in graphic novel format. Obviously, the Seiun Awards do comics - manga is a huge industry that has focused heavily on SF themes for the past fifty years.

*you do know that season eight of Buffy is coming out as a periodical, right?
**do translated works count?

#34 Zeborah: A perfect encapsulation of why 'Temeraire' wouldn't work as a title for a US audience. For me of course (and presumably others), I knew I would have to read the book as soon as I heard that the dragon was called Temeraire.

Prior to that, my impression of the book had been, roughly "Aerial dragons fighting with British ships in the Napoleonic Wars! My goodness that woman is sitting on a limitless heap of gold which she can shovel out just as fast as she can write!" It may be the single best idea anyone has ever had for a series of commercially successful books (and no doubt movies).

I think there'd be a lot of resistance to adding a comics category. Not because Worldcon people dis comics (we don't; many of us love comics), but because we don't feel our subculture is knowledgeable enough on the subject. And the comics world has a bunch of perfectly good awards anyway.

As various people have pointed out over the years, it's not the mission of the Hugo Awards to cover every imaginable manifestation of SF storytelling or fannish activity.

Alison, #65: "[M]y impression of the book had been, roughly "Aerial dragons fighting with British ships in the Napoleonic Wars! My goodness that woman is sitting on a limitless heap of gold which she can shovel out just as fast as she can write!"

That was pretty much my take as well. Some ideas are just so good and so commercial that the only possible response is gobsmacked awe.

Kimiko @ #64:
I ask because it seems likely that some really good English-language SF is likely to* (or has been**) produced in graphic novel format.

I nominated Pride of Baghdad this year for Best Related Book, but it didn't make the ballot. (My more unusual nominees never do - I was 0 for 4 on the more obscure stuff this year.)

Thank you Patrick, that's an excellent explanation*.

...but I'll ask the question again in another ten years ;)

*and deuced fast too! I really didn't think it would rate a response! Whee!

And a hearty, "Whoo-hooo! Rock wit' it, lean wit' it!" to all of the nominees.

Of course, rock wit' it, lean wit' it however you will. This is not an injunction, just a suggestion.

Jakob @54: Sort of: the X and Y diverged a *long* time ago, and several unique genes exist on the Y alone (the most important being SRY of course: not that the Y has many working genes left).
There is a paralog of the gene which I think Watts is referring to (PCDH11Y) on the X chromosome, but there are differences in gene regulation and sequence between the two (PCDH11Y is expressed in the male foetal brain and in the prostate; perhaps male vampires would need to eat specific bits of men to keep their fertility up :) anyway they'd be neurovores, not blood drinkers. I suppose obligate baby-eating is even *more* icky...)

To add a bit of detail to what Laurie reports: Nominees were asked to embargo the information until last Friday, the 23rd.

NOTE TO SMOFS: One again, though I am a nominee, I didn't get the memo on embargoing the info. But I was NICE, so even though I knew plenty, I didn't spill any beans.

HOWEVER, in future, if the Hugo committee chooses to notify according to the Napoleonic code -- notifying only my husband and not me -- I will happily blog everything I know, embargo or no.

Sending notifications only to my eminent & much-nominated spouse is not good enough.

Those who don't mind reading an occasional comic and like the idea behind Temeraire/His Majesty's Dragon might be interested in Arrowsmith -- not so much the Sinclair Lewis version, but the one by Kurt Busiek and Carlos Pacheco, called in its trade pb version So Smart in Their Fine Uniforms. Alternate history World War I, farmboy goes to war, joins a unit that fights alongside small dragons (each soldier gets his own personal one). Well-done version of a standard story inside a nice piece of world-building. (Making Light connection: Lawrence Watt-Evans helped out on that aspect.)

Serge, 37: *grins unrepentantly*

Neil, 44: Temeraire is a boy dragon.

Someday I'll read The Prestige. Then I'll see the movie. I'll also read Blindsight and everything Vinge has ever written.

*sigh* Stupid grad school, making me fafiate like that. I don't think I'm ever going to catch up, am I?

Congratulations, Patrick! And how cool to see Viable Paradise alum Paul Melko nominated as well!

TexAnne @ 74... *grins unrepentantly*

Why am I not surprised?

Jeffrey @ 73... I was wondering if someone else had come across Arrowsmith. I haven't heard when Kurt Busiek is planning to publish the rest of the story. Have you?

Congratulations, Patrick!

TexAnne #74: Grad school does evil things to us all.

Why on earth is David Lloyd being credited for the screenplay of V For Vendetta? The Wachowskis wrote that screenplay, and I don't think Lloyd had any input besides having been part of the team that did the graphic novel it was 'based on'.

Well, Sacha Baron Cohen was nominated for an Oscar for "Best Adapted Screenplay" when there was no original at all.

"Congratulations!" to all those winners who might happen to read this (especially and including Patrick, who is the most likely one to read this but I realize there are quite possibly others).

Algernon Moments is a good way to describe that phenomenon. I've often had the same sort of thing with regard to science or technology; I understood Van Eck phreaking, for example, while reading Neal Stephenson's Cryptonomicon. I can only hope that when I get finished with what I'm working on people can similarly understand lock bumping and smart card eavesdropping.

Many of the people here know this already, but for the benefit of others who do not: Every year's Hugo Awards is run by a different committee. Some semblance of consistency may have appeared from time to time when the Worldcon committee has selected the same person to do the job who has done it before; however, this can't be counted upon. And despite attempts to get people to coordinate their efforts, there's inconsistency from year to year. This is unfortunate, but as long as Worldcon is run the way it is -- something I don't see changing any time soon -- oddities in administration from year to year are likely to keep happening.

I also understand that in past years -- before the internet became such a way of life, I think -- a Worldcon committee that issued a Hugo Nominations announcement before sending out the ballots to its members (that was back when the only way to vote was to write things on a piece of paper, odd as this probably seems to some folks now) was raked over the coals for doing so.

I'm somewhat sympathetic to Worldcon committees, who are in a no-win situation here: someone will always be unhappy with them no matter what they decide to do.

Congratulations to all! And...boy, does Asimov's ever do well on the short forms. Just LOOK at all those noms!

Kathryn 72: Did they really notify your husband (and him alone) of your nomination? The word 'offensive' doesn't even begin to cover that. What possible excuse could they have for that? It fairly boggles the mind.

TexAnne @74 - Sorry, dozy, also just read Eragon.

Which is no excuse for being unable to correctly sex dragons*.

* "How do you sex a dragon?"
"VERY Carefully."

Look what the official Nippon 2007 Web site has posted:

http://www.nippon2007.us/hugo_nominees.php

Someone must be joking around. The real list they have yet to post.

Hi Patrick,

Congratulations on your nomination! Here's a minor correction for your list. Mike Flynn's story “Dawn, and Sunset, and the Colours of the Earth” appeared in the October/November 2006 issue of Asimov's.

I don't much care to argue that pros aren't eligible in the fan categories, but is there any evidence that John Scalzi actually is a fan, i.e. someone who participates in fandom? Does he participate in any fannish forum that doesn't happen to involve networking with other pros? Did he go to any conventions before turning pro? Does he ever engage in any fanac that is neither about John Scalzi nor his professional interest in science fiction?

Sheesh, am I the only one who thinks putting Gur Cerfgvtr on this list is a major spoiler?

Jura V jngpurq Gur Cerfgvtr, vg qvqa'g bpphe gb zr gung vg jbhyq unir nal fpv-sv ryrzragf. Fb V jnf pregnva gung gur ungf ba gur uvyyfvqr jnf whfg n gevpx ol Grfyn gb fjvaqyr Wnpxzna'f punenpgre. Naq gung Wnpxzna unq ernyvmrq gur znpuvar qvqa'g jbex ohg pnzr hc jvgu n fbzr gevpx gb qb vg naljnl.

Va ergebfcrpg, V gubhtug gur fhqqra vapyhfvba bs fpv-sv jnf cerggl snve. Chyyvat n gevpx yvxr gung jbhyq or bhg bs punenpgre sbe Grfyn, naq ur jnf shyy bs cbegragvbhf jneavatf gung gur znpuvar jnf trahvaryl fbzrguvat Zna Jnf Abg Zrnag Gb Xabj. Gur zbivr bcrarq jvgu n fubg bs gur ungf, rzcunfvmvat gung urer jnf fbzrguvat rkgenbeqvanel. Naq Pnvar'f punenpgre gbyq hf gung gurer jnf ab jnl gb qb n gevpx yvxr gung jvgubhg n qbhoyr (juvpu jnf gehr sbe obgu zntvpvnaf).

V ybir jura n fgbel gevpxf zr ol gryyvat zr gur gehgu naq fbzrubj trggvat zr abg gb oryvrir vg (lrf, V ybir Trar Jbysr). Guvf zbivr jnf shyy bs gung. Gur tvey fcl gbyq Wnpxzna'f punenpgre gung fur'q frra gur bgure zntvpvna hfvat znxr-hc, ohg V gubhtug fur jnf ylvat gb uvz orpnhfr fur ungrq uvz.

Ohg naljnl, vs V'q xabja tbvat va gung guvf jnf n traer fgbel, vg jbhyq unir orra yrff sha. Fb cooyyygu! gb gur abzvangvat pbzzvggrr sbe gur fcbvyref.

Ulrika O'Brien @87: Does he ever engage in any fanac that is neither about John Scalzi nor his professional interest in science fiction?

He's a fan of Pluto (and AFAIK, it's not a professional interest).

Straight-

Maybe everyone else here knew who wrote the book and what genre it was published in? Also, the Tesla element of the story goes sciencefictional the minute you've got Tesla working on a matter transporter.

Rob-

In what way does that make him a fan?

Maybe everyone else here knew who wrote the book and what genre it was published in?

Fair enough. I didn't know it was based on a story by Priest until I got to the end credits.

Also, the Tesla element of the story goes sciencefictional the minute you've got Tesla working on a matter transporter.

It's only sciencefictional if he's really trying to make one (instead of pulling a swindle to get funding for his actual research) and if it works. (Or maybe if, unlike me, you know enough about Tesla to know he never tried to make transporter. Or pretended to try.)

Well, Ulrika, according to a gafiated small-name-fan, when I read scalzi.com, it reads fannish. Maybe not corflu-twill fannish, but there's definitely sensawunda in there.

And he's passed the first test, which is getting nominated by fans. We'll have to see how the second test goes, won't we?

#77 Serge:

Busiek has said they definitely intend to continue the story, but not in the near future. He has four other books he's working on at the moment.

That's what I thought, Jeffrey. He's got AstroCity and Superman he's working on.

TexAnne @74 Temeraire is a boy dragon.

Nf nalbar jub erzrzoref gur fprar va bar bs gur yngre obbxf nobhg jul ur yvxrf jngre fbheprf jvgu ovt, ebhaqrq fgbarf jvyy erpnyy....

Kathryn Cramer @ 72: That's...outrageous. I don't have words.

Lloyd has, according to IMDB.com, a credit under writing for the V for Vendetta film, but it is an odd-looking one. It only takes a very little digging to find that he was co-creator, with Alan Moore, of the original comic. Alan Moore refused any credit for the film, and seems to be thoroughly fed up with what the film industry does with his work

I probably over-simplify.

But if Alan Moore doesn't want a credit for the film, what can we do?

Dan-

Sensawunda is swell, but that doesn't make a person a *participant* in *fandom*. I'm not aware of Scalzi participating (as opposed to broadcasting) and that seems like a big road block to calling him a fan.

My first thought at the idea of dragons in the Napoleonic Wars is to wince at the potential intersection of dragon and chain-shot, grape or canister, but maybe I've just been reading too much O'Brien.

There is a part of my brain that wants to read it to see how the author deals with it, which I guess proves the point, as long as it isn't brushed off somehow.

Ulrika@87: I'm pretty sure I'd quantify anyone who blogs sometimes about (other peoples') fantasy or SF books a fan, and I rather don't think he only mentioned Boskone as being a cool convention because he was on panels there.

I think, personally, that defining fan rigidly does a disservice to a lot of people. I mean, my fiancé has never attended a convention in his life, let alone worked at one or put out an APA or anything of the like. But his book collection (and his interest in my book collection) makes him a fan as far as I'm concerned.

The miscrediting of the V for Vendetta screenplay has been corrected.

Tina-

I disagree that it's a disservice to make distinctions. As far as I can see, somebody who reads a lot of SF and never has any contact with other people of the community of fandom is a reader of SF, not a fan. Fandom is a culture.

I just read Scalzi's thoughts on the fanwriter nomination. It reads like a movie star collecting an Oscar -- all about how "What I do here" impacts "You guys, over there." This is not a man who considers himself part of something.

I think "Girl in the Fireplace" is the strongest of the three Doctor Who nominations. "Army of Ghosts"/"Doomsday" and "School Reunion" both have features that appeal to the long-term enthusiasts.

I wonder a little if US TV is now having to compete on a wider stage because of the P2P technologies used to pass around illicit copies of such programs. And how much are the highlights of non-US shows emphasised--would you bother with downloading every show, or just follow the buzz about the highlights?

#59: "Should I read The Prestige first, or watch the movie first?"

Play the video game! The sequence where Tesla gives you a broadcast power energized fighting suit is great.

Dragons? Hmm.

Alpha-Shade: Dragon-ish things vs. biplanes, in an alternate universe with WWI typical tech. (Aside from the airborne battleships.)

Coming soon to a theater near you... Tesla's Transformers...

Ulrike: I disagree the Hugo category requires one to be "a member of fandom", even if I were to agree fully with you about the distinction of who belongs to it.

Starting with, my sweetie does have contact with members of fandom. For instance, me, assuming I still qualify what with having not attended a convention in 4 or 5 years. Also contact with other mutual friends of ours, some of whom are more active than others. And yes, we discuss books, and their writing, and movies, and basically all the other sorts of conversations I have with people "in fandom", including topics that are the focus of panels.

I'm pretty sure that ought to qualify as 'fandom'.

Moreover, I insist it is a disservice to be so rigid. Anytime any group -- particularly one for whom inclusiveness is supposed to be a practice or virtue -- starts labelling people as "outsiders" because they don't meet some precise definition of what qualifies, both those labelled and the group lose by it.

And, frankly, I don't want to be a part of the group that does it.

Nonetheless, I consider that all besides the point, as I read the category as being for a person who writes about sff in some capacity (including but not limited to: about books, about authors, about movies, about conventions) while not getting paid for that writing. Regardless of whether or not that is not true 100% of the time. The award does not read 'best amateur writer in fandom', and I don't think it should or should be taken that way.

As I see it, a community defines itself typically by:

a. Inclusion: This person does things that we do and/or looks like us in some fashion, and is therefore one of us
b. Exclusion: This person does things that we don't do and/or does not look like us in some fashion, and is therefore not one of us

The mix of which techniques are used depend on the community in question, but will normally contain a mix of both inclusion and exclusion. Different factions in a community may have different standards. Arbitrariness also applies.

Things that Scalzi does that fit an inclusive model of fandom community membership:

1. Attends conventions, and talks to people at them
2. Writes stuff about Star Wars, and fanfic controversies, and books by SF writers (not himself), and participates in discussions about them

Things that Scalzi does that might fall foul of an exclusive model of fandom community membership:

1. Writes books as a pro, and writes about writing books as a pro, and does some self-publicity as a pro.
2. Got into fandom as a professional first, then as a fan, and thus in some way didn't pay his dues.
3. Erm, I don't know, did he once say "Sci Fi" instead of "SF"?

Okay, that got a little sarcastic and possibly more than a little unfair.

However, writing as somebody not a member of fandom, I would think (based on a purely personal opinion that stronger communities tend to be based more on inclusive factors rather than exclusive ones) that the inclusive factors should outweigh the exclusive ones. Indeed, the nomination indicates that a lot of people who think of themselves as fans also think so.

Woooh! Congrats Patrick!

Dave Bell@98: Oh, I never meant to suggest crediting *Alan* for the screenplay! Good god, that would be a gaffe of monumental proportions. Your description of the situation with him, while indeed over-simplified, is not inaccurate.

Generally speaking, IMDB is not a reliable source, just a good first approximation. The Warner Bros Site for the film shows the film credits as including "Screenplay by THE WACHOWSKI BROTHERS [some other credits] Based on the Graphic Novel Illustrated by David Lloyd".

I'm particularly pleased to see "Blindsight" in that list. (Despite having a dog in that race myself, and the presence of such a strong rival reducing my own chances.) It's probably one of the biggest sensa-wunda hard SF fixes I've had since, oh, "Diaspora"; it redefines one corner of the envelope that sadly doesn't get enough attention these days. Books like that don't come along anything like often enough, in my opinion.

Dave Bell@98 & Alexx Kay@111:

The end credits for the "V for Vendetta" movie states that it was based on the graphic novel *illustrated* by David Lloyd. No mention of Alan Moore. I am enough of a fanboy to have paid attention. It's a pretty concrete example of the screwy nature of the movie industry.

Given how much of the cinematography of "V for Vendetta" was influenced, panel by panel, by Lloyd's art, a nod seems entirely appropriate.

#109: And, of course, of your list of "things that Scalzi does that might fall foul of an exclusive model of fandom community membership", #3 is a joke, and neither #1 nor #2 have ever been widely held to disqualify anyone from being considered a "fan".

Most notably, the idea encapsulated in #2--that if you get into the SF subculture as a pro rather than as a fan you therefore haven't "paid your dues"--only makes sense if you really, truly believe that fandom is aspirational prodom and that "fan" is the larval form of "pro." In fact, of course, being a fan isn't about "paying dues" toward being a pro.

I'm having a hard time with Ulrika's #87 because:

(1) I like Ulrika, and I'm conscious that we've gotten one another very annoyed in online discussions in the past. I don't want to do that again.

(2) The tendentious way she's chosen to frame some of this--for instance, "Does he participate in any fannish forum that doesn't happen to involve networking with other pros?"--makes me very unhappy indeed. In fact 95% of what John or any other pro does at an SF con is exactly the same thing fans do--we hang out, we reconnect with friends and maybe meet new people, and we hope to have some interesting coversations. John does all of these things particularly well; he doesn't put on airs and he seems to be happy to chat with all kinds of people. Suggesting that his convention behavior amounts to nothing more than "networking" seems like a sneaky way to insinuate that something good is, in some hidden way, actually bad.

(3) Likewise, to ask "does he ever engage in any fanac that is neither about John Scalzi nor his professional interest in science fiction?" is to present a test that a lot of old-time dyed-in-the-stencil fans couldn't pass. I have whole twiltone fanzines that are about nothing more than their writers' own lives plus periodic digressions into discussions of SF and the SF industry. Those fanzines seemed pretty fannish to me at the time. Indeed, that kind of thing is practically a genre of fanwriting. That said, anyone who browses The Whatever can easily see that John writes about plenty of stuff that's neither directly self-centered nor focussed on professional SF. Indeed, before he started selling SF novels, there was even more such material, but it's hardly surprising that, having set forth on a career in a new field and enjoyed some early success, he finds it interesting to write about. This is different from the fanwriting careers of 5,271,009 other fannish pros exactly how? Answer: it's not different.

Basically, Ulrika's questions bother me because they seem to amount to a bunch of purity-of-essence tests for fannishness that a lot of fans, Teresa and me included, couldn't pass. Scalzi can take care of himself, but it makes me unhappy to see Ulrika, someone I respect, putting forth such a crabby and narrow definition of what "fan" means in the context of the SF subculture.

I thought a fan was someone who loves science-fiction.

Let us purify fandom! Anyone who doesn't have mimeo ink on their fingers and a Gestetner manual in their back pocket, not to mention a propeller beanie on their head, will be ceremonially banned from ever again attending a convention and using the club treehouse.

That'll show 'em.

Does photocopier fluid count, Charlie?

A belated congratulations to Patrick for your nomination!

Serge: photocopiers are far too similar to laser printers for the comfort of 1930s Wahabi Fandom. Laser printers may be connected to computers with internet thingies, and used for printing out those heretical "blogs". Thus, anathema is pronounced upon you. Out, foul revisionist!

Also, I'd missed that Geoff Ryman novelette. Time to correct the matter.

'Purify fandom'. Oxymoron or contradiction in terms? You be the judge.

Xopher, you have clearly succumbed to degeneracy because your words do not exhibit Correct Thought.

In penance, if you wish to be readmitted to right-thinking fandom, you must re-read "The Weapon Makers" by A. E. Van Vogt three times while reciting "Fans are Slans" repeatedly, then pub your ish in an edition of not fewer than 100 copies using an Underwood typewriter and a jello duplicator.

Only then may you be certified as a right-thinking fan.

Signed,

"Who elected him Pope?"

Charlie... Out, foul revisionist!

You old keeper of the bourgeois order.