Vote vote vote--and rec rec rec rec

[ellen_datlow]

Ok. Here's my impassioned plea/push/nag for anyone who reads this blog and is eligible to recommend stories and or novels for the various peer group science fiction, fantasy, and horror awards.
I know that some people feel that awards themselves are a bad thing and that they should all be abolished. I'm not talking to you. I don't believe that and I know I'm not going to change your minds.

Awards are NOT going to go away but they could become less visible (which I think is a bad thing). As an editor I really appreciate it when the stories/books I edit make final award ballots and win awards. And I think most writers are even more appreciative of this. It gives a sense of validation for what you're doing by your peers (for the Nebula and Stoker).

Right now is "award rec season" and there are discussions on both the SFWA Bulletin Board and the HWA Bulletin Board about how their respective awards are dying --not enough members are recommending works to even make a preliminary ballot.

Now some people think that this might be because no one likes the work being published.
Others that no one is reading enough short fiction to be interested in recommending works in those categories.
I have a really difficult time believing the first reason. I've been reading sf/f/h short fiction for twenty five years and have found no drop off in quality in any of those fields.

I can't answer for the second but I hope it's not true because if so my profession will die and I love editing short fiction.

If you care at ALL for the genre short story then I urge you to recommend the stories that you think are worth bringing to the attention of your peers.

This is totally off the cuff and I know if I thought about it more I'd have more to write--but I'd also probably just delete the whole post...

Comments welcome!

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

I do think good stuff is being published. I don't think enough great stuff is being published. "Publishable" stuff is being published, which is mildly depressing. More importantly, though, is if people aren't voting for things that fact might be symptomatic of something else. While it's admirable to suggest people vote, the fact that they aren't would mean to me, possibly, that they're not that enthused--at least, not enough to vote.

JeffV

[ellen-datlow.livejournal.com]

I personally feel that they're perhaps just not reading widely enough.

[david-de-beer.livejournal.com]

a culture of increasing apathy?

>I do think good stuff is being published. I don't think enough great stuff is being published

not sure this has ever been different, really. Insofar as publishable stuff - well, true, but this is probably a lot to do with an overabundance of markets (can't believe I'm complaining about this, am not hitting ten sales a year or whatever, but still, there's too many), more markets may create more opportunity for publication but a healthier model might be less regular markets, with occasional one-time markets (anthos, for example), forcing the current volume of submissions to the same places. Theoretically, that should boost competition and quality levels. Theoretically.
What it would do, is cut down some of the options on reading. That's not always a bad thing. I still say Urban Fantasy has a shock coming, they're digging their own graves, high as they are flying at the moment.
Also, a problem with regular markets is that they have space that needs filling. No matter who the "name", filler is filler, and I'm just not fan-geeky enough about any specific writer to handle watered down drivel from them.