If you like my work, buy me a virtual cup of coffee at Ko-Fi.

I didn’t think I’d ever write about the Hugo Awards, Worldcon and SFWA again. I entered the game too late for the 2015 Sad Puppies drama and trauma (and I’m glad I did).

However, that event and the chatter in subsequent years led me to take a hard look at Worldcon and the Hugos. When I was a much younger science fiction reader, I thought winning a Hugo, a Saturn, or some other big name SF/F award meant it passed a rigorous and objective test of quality.

Boy, was I an idiot.

I found out that, in the modern era, science fiction works pass a rigorous test of political and social alignment with the (far) left by several hundred voters max, and that’s what wins an award.

What a disappointment. I can (sort of) see why the people behind the “puppies” did what they did in the misguided belief that they could balance the scales and make these awards more egalitarian. However, breaking into someone else’s party just to spike the punch, so to speak, is bad form, too.

I figured Worldcon et al., had finally purged all traces of conservativism and offensiveness from their ranks, the last trauma of such being the George R.R. Martin 2020 Hugo Controversy (which fortunately didn’t affect the popularity of Martin’s books).

So, I was surprised when I found out that currently there is Panic at the Hugos. What happened now? Can’t they ever create a perfect echo chamber for themselves?

“The Hugo Awards nominating stats were finally released,” wrote Jason Sanford on Bluesky. “WTF do you mean that the amazing novel Babel by R.F. Kuang, which won the Nebula Award, didn’t make the finalists list b/c it was ruled ‘not eligible.'”

Screenshot from the “File 770” website.

R.F. Kuang’s Babel was a mainstay on SFF awards lists last year, so its omission at the Hugos was noted by many fans, leading to speculation she’d withdrawn the book from contention for one reason or another. However, despite receiving 810 nominations (just five fewer than eventual winner Nettle & Bone by T. Kingfisher, and 10 fewer than the top nominee, Travis Baldree’s Legends & Lattes), Babel was left off the list without explanation, unlike several of the other nominees removed for various reasons (“declined nomination,” “one of the authors was on the Hugo subcommitee”).

Just for the record, Jason Sanford is on my “he’s a jerk” list for previously canceling Toni Weisskopf and Baen Books for basically allowing conservative authors to be published under their brand. Oh, the horror.

The Astrolabe article also prominently mentioned Camestros Felapton (fake name) who I once reached out to in good faith and who, in return, threw me to the proverbial wolves on his blog (I’ll never make that mistake again). Also Paul Weimer, who defended Sanford’s actions.

Weimer is one of those whose works have been considered ineligible for nomination. Here’s more:

Fan Writer Paul Weimer, who’s been nominated in several past years, confirmed in a Patreon post that seeing the nomination statistics was the first time he learned he was “not eligible.” He received no communications from the awards ahead of time. “I have absolutely no idea why I was ineligible and I believe I am entitled to know why I was made ineligible,” he wrote. “Chengdu, I want some answers. Dave McCarty, I want an explanation. I am owed one.”

Screenshot via Paul Weimer. Found at astrolabe.aidanmoher.com.

Weimer received 89 nominations, one fewer eventual winner Chris M. Barkley and 11 fewer than top-nominee Sanford.

Since the “ineligible” are all “DEI members” in good standing (both their works and their personal belief systems), why are they being shut out?

Naturally, the Sad Puppies was mentioned yet again (they still haven’t gotten over it), but they aren’t involved. Most likely, the Hugos have been hoist by their own petard: diversity and inclusion.

These nominations were made at the 2023 Worldcon last October in Chengdu, China. Yes, writers in China also produce science fiction, and yes, traditionally most of the science fiction I consumed as I was growing up and into adulthood was crafted by American and UK authors. So it makes sense to expand the scope of science fiction and science fiction awards internationally. What went wrong?

According to SciFi author John Scalzi (another not nice person), :

Absent any other compelling reason for its disqualification, there is speculation that its ineligibility (and the ineligibility of some other potential finalists) is a matter of governmental censorship on the part of China. This is, at this point, only speculation and should be regarded as such. If it were true, however — again, big if — I don’t know what the local Worldcon committee could have done to argue. People in the United States in particular take freedom of speech for granted and have a hard time wrapping our brains around the idea that it is not a universal ideal.

Wow! Talk about not wanting to admit it.

However, the Astrolabe article also mentions this, but with a different perspective:

“An overwhelming majority of the members of WSFS who voted on the site of the 2023 Worldcon (at the 2021 Worldcon in DC) selected Chengdu, China as the host of the 2023 Worldcon,” wrote [Kevin] Standlee in a post called “Elections Have Consequences.” “That meant that the members of WSFS who expressed an opinion accepted that the convention would be held under Chinese legal conditions. Furthermore, those people (including me) who suggested that there might be election irregularities were overridden, shouted down, fired from their convention positions, and told that they were evil and probably racist for even suggesting such a thing.”

You see why I’m critical of these folks? “shouted down, fired from their convention positions, and told that they were evil and probably racist for even suggesting such a thing.” All that for considering the realities in life, including Chinese censorship. Wow! The people running these organizations are incredibly hostile.

Human Rights Watch (want to criticize them, pundits?) states in part:

Political censorship is built into all layers of China’s Internet infrastructure. Known widely in the media as the “Great Firewall of China,” this aspect of Chinese official censorship primarily targets the movement of information between the global Internet and the Chinese Internet.

Internet censorship in the People’s Republic of China (PRC) is overseen technically by the Ministry of Information Industry (MII). Policy about what substantive content is to be censored is largely directed by the State Council Information Office and the Chinese Communist Party’s Propaganda Department, with input from other government and public security organs.

Under “The key content restriction provision is Article 19,” are eleven types of forbidden content. Those found ineligible for being nominated for a Hugo might want to look at the list and see which among those their works may have fallen.

Admittedly, this is just national China’s policies on the internet, but it’s reasonable to believe this form of censorship extends to all other areas of communication and entertainment in that country.

According to “Astrolabe,” this is a “developing story.”

And because they can’t help themselves…

Standlee further speculated that if the Hugo Awards were to be held in a state like Florida, US, they could, theoretically, “disqualify any work with LGBTQ+ content, any work with an LGBTQ+ author, or any LGBTQ+ individual, because the state has declared them all illegal under things like their ‘Don’t Say Gay or Trans’ laws and related legislation.”

I may have missed something because I’m not obsessed with Florida or its laws, but I thought the so-called “Don’t Say Gay” laws applied to teachers and schools including or promoting LGBTQ+ material in student curriculum. I seriously doubt any state laws would prohibit voters at a Worldcon from voting for a pro-LGBTQ+ science fiction/fantasy work. But once you “demonize” an entire state, you have to keep hammering away at them, even if they have nothing to do with your current plight.

China is (though those I mentioned above are loathe to admit it) far, far more repressive than even (evil) conservative Florida (I wonder how a Worldcon in Iran, Iraq or the currently besieged Gaza would fair for the inclusion crowd?). Am I being racist? Some will probably say so just because they can’t address reality.

My comments are hardly authoritative and my research not inclusive (I’m not going to mention the “File bleep, bleep, bleep” folks who in the name of inclusion are tremendous bundles of bullying), but I think I’ve got a case to make.

I know. I’m having way too much fun and being far too juvenile in even deciding to write this. But the above-mentioned pundits have set themselves up as the demi-gods of “the right side of history” and have spent a lot of time denigrating those who even slightly disagree with them, that I just don’t care. They wanted to establish a platform of “diversity only,” “stale, pale males not allowed,” and “anyone who disagrees with us is a racist.” They got what they wanted and it bit them on the ass.

I hope it hurts and get a rabies shot.

I was going to say that I miss science fiction when it was fun, but then, there are decades and decades of books, TV shows, movies, and so on that were produced before replacing good writing with identity politics ruined the ride.

See you in the past. Have fun with your meltdown.

Addendum – January 25, 2024: I just read the article Report: Hollywood Is Falling Big In China, With Zero American Movies Making The Top 10 For 2023. It says a few important things:

China is actively seeking to shape its cultural narrative and unite its people around CCP doctrines. They do this while simultaneously pushing their values into American studies and onto U.S. audiences, and suppressing America’s more liberal values in their own market.

And…

China’s market is closing. Under tighter control and nationalism from the Chinese Communist Party, the culture is rapidly turning against any sort of cross-pollination with Western values and storytelling.

And…

Warner Bros. notably removed dialogue from Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore, which alluded to Dumbledore being gay. It’s not lost on American audiences that Hollywood treats their values of diversity and inclusion as a sacred imperative domestically, but happily caves to foreign pressure to extract box office revenue from the Chinese market.

But even with western writers self-censoring on topics regarding LGBTQ+, both the Chinese people culturally AND the Chinese government are moving away from any acceptance of western values. When assessing the novel “Babel” by R.F. Kuang and answering Paul Weimer’s rant about why he was made ineligible, I think we have our answer.