Re: Are the Hugo Award Winners Boring Examples of SF?
- From: wdstarr@xxxxxxxxx (William December Starr)
- Date: 2 Aug 2009 12:33:11 -0400
In article <h5402q$35l$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Jack Tingle <wjtingle@xxxxxxxxxxx> said:
William December Starr wrote:
I'd say that the Hugos are a strong *suggestion* of quality. Not
a guarantee, but a flag that says "The probability that you will
find quality within this piece of speculative fiction, while
definitely not 1.0, is significantly higher than the
corresponding probability would be in a randomly selected piece
of speculative fiction."
I view it as sort of the converse: "This sucks less than most
heavily-promoted sf from last year." The difference is primarily
one of emphasis.
Does that mean that you believe that in the sf field promotion and
quality exist in inverse proportion, or just that if a work isn't
heavily-promoted then not enough Hugo nominators will even know that
it exists and therefore it by definition _can't_ be a Hugo-winner?
-- wds
.
- References:
- Re: Are the Hugo Award Winners Boring Examples of SF?
- From: Eric Walker
- Re: Are the Hugo Award Winners Boring Examples of SF?
- From: William December Starr
- Re: Are the Hugo Award Winners Boring Examples of SF?
- From: Jack Tingle
- Re: Are the Hugo Award Winners Boring Examples of SF?
- Prev by Date: Re: Why manned exploration of space?
- Next by Date: Re: Why manned exploration of space?
- Previous by thread: Re: Are the Hugo Award Winners Boring Examples of SF?
- Next by thread: Re: Are the Hugo Award Winners Boring Examples of SF?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading