Categories
writing

Where do all the women hide?

I’m sure none of I’m about to say comes as a surprise to anyone reading this blog. But I still think it’s important to say over and over again, as a reminder to myself and others. Because women (and people of color, and people with non-binary genders, and people who aren’t heterosexual [including the dreaded bisexuals]) are not wild animals that hide in trees every time film crews happen to be around.

There are a lot of Indie speculative films that I’m excited about, but the more I build my list, the more painfully obvious it become that women are so rare in these imagined worlds, they might as well be unicorns. I don’t know how any of these people reproduce. At best, you get small films with two male characters and a single female character caught between them (Ex MachinaZ for Zachariah). At worse, it’s an entire team of men, sometimes if you’re lucky with some racial diversity, and the Token Tough Woman. Sometimes there’s also the Token Love Interest Woman. Often, they’re the same woman.

I recently had the privilege of reading some stories by unpublished writers (though I don’t think they’ll remain unpublished for long) and partway through the pile, I couldn’t help but notice that the characters within were either all male, or with a token female. There was only one story I read that had a female main character. I don’t blame new writers for this kind of thing. When I was just starting out, most of my characters were male. The first two novels I ever did for NaNoWriMo had male main characters. I was a couple years into writing my own stuff before I ever wrote a female main character (Hob Ravani, whom you will all get to meet soon, promise) and she was completely surrounded by men.

I think for me, it was partially an outgrowth of the writing I did before I switched to my own original fiction: I wrote a shitload of fanfiction. And with a few exceptions (like Sailor Moon) here and there, my fanfiction was always about male characters, because those were the ones in the anime series or book series or movie that were interesting.

Which brings us back to my list of movies and its depressing lack of women.

I know female characters can and do have interesting stories. I write stories about them now myself. But it’s this vicious cycle where we’re surrounded by media that tells us only men have interesting stories… and the education for the production of that media sure doesn’t help. Look at the beat sheet bible that gets used and overused for film writing: Save the Cat. I don’t think Mr. Snyder is expressing more than the constant background level of societal sexism when he frames all conflicts and characters as being about male characters, and getting the girl, and so on. But it still sticks with you. And then you go and write stories about men, because women are obviously boring and don’t do anything but be the girlfriend.

I finished writing and editing a second-world fantasy novel this year. One of the basic world building concepts was that where the story takes place, the female to male birthrate is two or three to one. And I still had to have it pointed out to me by my long-suffering beta reader that while there were a lot of women as background, almost all of the characters with actual speaking roles were men. And it made no sense. On the edit I went through and changed every male character into a female character unless I had a specific reason he needed to be male. Much better.

I’m working on a screenplay now, for the classes I’ve been taking. Of the core set of characters, one is female and three are male; I can’t really help that, since those three are on a tank crew in a country where crews are all male. But as I’ve continued on, I’ve made a very conscious effort to write the side characters as female unless I have a reason to make them male. And the same principle can be very easily applied to making certain characters of color exist in writing, and characters with different sexualities/gender identities, etc.

And no, this is not “forcing” “political correctness” into my writing. This is actually acknowledging that women exist in the fucking worlds we build as more than furniture in the background. Just like we do in real life. This is challenging my unconscious mental presumption that all characters somehow must be male unless there is a defining need for them to be female. And if other people have a problem with it, it tacitly forces them to admit their sexism (racism/homophobia/transphobia) out loud and attempt justification. Sometimes, in situations like that, people finally listen to themselves talk. Sometimes, other people are listening. It’s a start.

I look forward to the day when I have to go through a story or script I’ve written and switch some of the characters to male because there’s not a realistic enough number. Maybe then I’ll have finally purged that bias from my system.

Categories
movie

[Movie] It Follows

Whoops, I thought I’d written something about this movie already. Then I realized that I was probably thinking about the extensive discussion I had with Shaun Duke and David Annandale on the Totally Pretentious podcast. If listening to podcasts is a thing you do and you don’t mind spoilers, I definitely recommend that discussion to you. I don’t really want to rehash too much of it here, so I’m just going to hit the highlights.

A thing you should realize up front is that I don’t generally watch horror movies. I’m a wimp. I lose sleep when things are creepy and I really don’t like excessive gore. So I took one look at the trailer for this movie, and

tumblr_m641p2JoAH1qbl202

Then Shaun hit on my only weakness and asked me if I’d like to be on the podcast episode about it. CURSE YOU, DUKE.

In all seriousness, I owe him a thank you for it. I might have lost a night of sleep over how damn creepy some of the movie was, but I’d also put this one in my top five films of this year.

It Follows is about nineteen-year-old Jay, who gets infected with a sort of sexually transmitted curse after deciding to sleep with her boyfriend. The curse is eerie: an invisible (but tangible) monster constantly walks in a straight line toward whoever has been most recently infected. It kills whoever it catches, and then starts pursuing the next person up on the chain.

The monster is incredibly well done, by the way. It can look like anyone or anything at a given time, an ability it always uses for maximum terror and emotional trauma. And its slow, implacable march brings to mind what made walking zombies terrifying in their own special way when Romero put them on film—though this monster is far scarier in that it’s obviously capable of thought. The go-to assumption is that the monster’s a metaphor for STDs, though I think it’s more specifically a metaphor for HIV. There’s some pointed pill popping by the infected boyfriend at certain points in the film, and the idea that if you keep running, you can stay ahead of the monster even if it will inevitably catch you some day. This runs in line with the new reality of HIV positive in modern America; it’s no longer an instant death sentence if you can afford or get the medication, but a long-term condition.

And of course, the way Jay gets the curse also points me toward reading it as the HIV metaphor. Her boyfriend knows full well that he’s infected, and deliberately gets in her good graces and has sex with her so he can pass it along. After they’ve had sex, he chloroforms her and she wakes up tied to a wheelchair in her underwear (one of the movies first multilevel incredibly creepy scenes) so that he can show her the monster and tell her how to survive it.

Something that really struck me about this movie and still stays with me is that, while you can’t necessarily call something with this concept sex positive, at no point did anyone ever shame Jay for deciding to have sex with her boyfriend. There’s no victim blaming that occurs; the censure is always squarely pointed at the lying shitbag boyfriend, where it belongs.

This movie was filmed in Detroit and brings up some strange juxtaposition between urban decay and the suburbs that Jay lives in, which seem caught in a weird sort of 1980s stasis. Also, the film’s score was very synth-heavy, which made it feel more like an 80s horror film. I was half-convinced that it was a story set in the 80s, except no one had scary enough hair, and all of the kids had modern cell phones, e-readers, and the like.

Maika Monroe does an amazing job as Jay, terrified and desperate and just trying to find a way to survive—with the help of her friends. And the scares in the movie? It’s mostly that slow, creeping dread of watching the monster take its damn time. It’s an implacable sort of fear, punctuated occasionally by jump scares that had me huddling in my hoodie.

Excellent movie. Watch it. You can get it on streaming from a lot of different places for $4.99. Watch it even if you’re a horror wimp like me.

Categories
sfwa silly

FAQ: What is SFWA in charge of?***

Things SFWA is in charge of:

  1. The Nebula Awards!
  2. Writer Beware!
  3. SFWA.org
  4. GriefCom!
  5. The SFWA Emergency Medical fund
  6. The SFWA Bulletin and other publications that say “SFWA” on it like that one awesome cookbook with the super alcoholic Irish coffee recipe in.

Things SFWA is not in charge of:

  1. Worldcon
  2. The Hugo Awards
  3. The success or failure of your book
  4. Bees! (OR ARE THEY  AREN’T THEY?  AREN’T? ENGLISH IS HARD HELP)
  5. This thing
  6. The Hugo Awards
  7. Any member’s personal website like this one oops
  8. George RR Martin’s beret
  9. People who pronounce nuclear like “nuke-YEW-ler.”
  10. The Hugo Awards
  11. The second law of thermodynamics
  12. The way Cat Rambo’s hair keeps changing color, as if there’s nothing dependable left in this world and we’ll all just go spinning off into the void at any moment
  13. The Permian extinction
  14. El chupacabra
  15. The way cilantro tastes soapy to some people and not to others
  16. The Hugo Awards
  17. Chemtrails
  18. The really shitty traffic on the local highway you have to use every day
  19. The Hugo Awards
  20. Quantum entanglement
  21. That mysterious glowing substance that you shouldn’t have licked but you did it anyway because you were a dumb teenager and in fifty years you’re probably going to die of eyeball spleen cancer
  22. March Madness
  23. The fact that we STILL do not have a Black Widow movie and yet Ant Man? Seriously?
  24. HAARP
  25. That garbage music kids these days listen to
  26. The Hugo Awards
  27. This guy
  28. The fact that chocolate is so fattening goddammit SFWA why
  29. Bacon, cats, or John Scalzi
  30. That you can never find a pen when you need one
  31. Or that you finally find a pen and IT IS ALWAYS OUT OF INK
  32. Rainbow suspenders (or “embarrassingly enthusiastic weather braces” for our British readers)
  33. That thing on Donald Trump’s head
  34. The Hugo Awards
  35. THE MOTHERFUCKING HUGO AWARDS

I hope this clears things up.

 

 

*** – I am not an officer in SFWA. I am not speaking in an official capacity for SFWA. This website is not sanctioned by SFWA. I keep trying to text SFWA and it won’t return my texts any more either, I don’t know, maybe it’s just busy? Call me, baby.

Categories
movie

[Movie] Hitman: Agent 47. Not as bad as you’d expect.

It says volumes about this movie that the praise I can give it is, it’s not as bad as you’d expect. Actually, I think it might edge a toe toward good territory, depending on the criteria you’re using to judge if something is good or not. Action sequences, explosions, a white dude with a decent jaw line wearing a black Italian wool coat and a red silk tie and shooting people? Okay.

Though taken another way, in the realm of video game movies it’s pretty fan-fucking-tastic, helped by the fact that it wasn’t directed by Uwe Boll.

Quick synopsis: 47 is an agent blah blah genetic engineering blah blah perfect assassin blah blah no emotions, designed by a guy named Litvenko (whom I kept misnaming “Vanko” in my notes because that’s how everyone said it, I swear) who then promptly disappeared because he realized designing perfect human killbots without emotions was probably a bad idea. Katia is Litvenko’s daughter and is very good at running away and hiding, and weirdly seems unsure if Litvenko is her dad or not through the first bit of the movie. John Smith (oh THAT’S creative), who is played by Sylar shows up to ostensibly rescue Katia from 47, but actually, he also wants Litvenko the human Cheshire cat who can disappear instantly. Sylar and 47 duke it out in a way that should launch 1000 pornographic fanfics if there’s any justice in the universe, 47 kidnaps Katia, and then the really interesting part of the movie starts. Because 47 reveals that Katia is an engineered super badass like him (43 iterations better than him as a matter of fact). So of course they join forces. Bullets fly and things blow up.

There are actually some things I really, really liked in this movie, enough that I’d actually be willing to watch a sequel as long as it still had 47 (Rupert Friend) and Katia (Hannah Ware) in it. The relationship between the two characters is excellent; even before the big reveal that was already spoiled by the second trailer, they were basically sniping at each other like siblings. It was a different direction than you normally see in “action dude saves woman” movies, and I loved it. See the following conversation:

Katia: What do they want?

47: More of me.

Katia: Why would anyone want more of you?

The older brother/younger sister dynamic just speaks to me on a spiritual level, okay?

I also generally liked the action sequences. They weren’t as flashy as you get in a lot of action movies, and that was all right. They actually did a good job of speaking to character, which often gets lost in the attempt to make things splashy and justify effects budgets. 47 always came across as efficient, no frills, clinical. John Smith always had his giant, insecurity-fueled hateboner for 47 on full display. So that? I appreciated.

And praise be, a movie that kept things short and to the point. 96 minutes, in, out, done. They didn’t have enough there to justify a longer running time, and they didn’t try. So even during the occasionally cringe-worthy expository sections, the movie still moved along at a brisk enough pace that I never found it boring.

On the bad side, there were some definite script-generated problems in there. Some of the bridge scenes between plot points, such as Sylar trying to convince Katia to trust him and help him find her dad, were just awful. Wooden, stilted, nonsensical. There were also scenes that felt weirdly like relics (related to scenes that have since been changed entirely or deleted) scattered around. For example? Katia’s topless swimming scene and the later shower scene. Maybe it was just supposed to be fanservice for the presumed male-dominated audience. But it felt like it was supposed to be setup for some kind of romantic interlude, which was plainly not going to happen thank you. The plot was a bit overcomplicated for what it needed to be (two layers of badguys?) with the “real” villain not introduced until very late, though apparently that’s an inherited video game problem.

Also, I don’t know what kind of drugs they whacked Ciarán Hinds on every time before they shoved him in front of the camera, but goddamn. I could not even understand half the words he gummed out of his mouth.

I’m sure you’ll be shocked to hear that this movie doesn’t come close to passing the Bechdel-Wallace test. (It does, however, pass the sexy lamp test! Surprise!) And if you trust the setting, apparently Singapore is inhabited by a giant population of white men in suits and five Singaporean flight attendants. Also, all the cars appear to be made of brightly-colored plastic.

Hitman: Agent 47 gets a solid Meh+ from me. It’s not a bad way to spend 96 minutes if you want to just turn off your brain while you stuff the carbohydrate of your choice into your food hole. And I’m a sucker for Italian wool.

Categories
movie

[Movie] Chappie

Found this review on my thumb drive and realized that I’d never sent it anywhere or put it on my blog. So here you go, for what it’s worth. Notably less profane than my normal review style because I originally wasn’t writing it for myself.

Note: For the purposes of this review, the character Chappie will be referred to as it in the sense of being a non-human person with no intrinsic or self-identified gender, and additionally no clearly preferred pronouns. (More on the gender question later.) For this case, I beg your indulgence in not reading it as innately dehumanizing or insulting, as is often the case when applied to human persons.

Also, spoilers. Sorry, but the ending is what makes the movie worth talking about.

Much maligned by reviewers, Chappie has perhaps been judged more harshly than it deserves. It’s an incredibly imperfect film about artificial intelligence, consciousness, humanity, and family, but quietly dares to ask much larger questions than Neill Blomkamp’s previous film, Elysium.

Chappie has been compared most often to Short Circuit, a 1986 science fiction comedy movie. The basic concept is similar: robot originally intended for more martial uses gains self awareness, grapples with questions of life and death, and fights to survive against humans that are intent upon seeing to its destruction. And Chappie is pretty funny at times, though arguably not as funny as Short Circuit. But while the bones of the plot are the same, right down to the rather hyper-masculine, military-obsessed antagonist who wants to destroy the robot, the details are in many ways significantly different.

Chappie takes place in a near-future Johannesburg, where police forces have become so overwhelmed they’ve turned to buying gun-wielding, humanoid robots from a corporation called Tetravaal. Engineer Deon (Dev Patel) has designed the police robots, while his jealous rival Vincent (Hugh Jackman) pushes his expensive and far more militarized MOOSE robot. Deon is obsessed with creating true AI, though he receives no support from Tetravaal to do so. Frustrated, he steals a robot scheduled for destruction, intent on loading his AI program onto it as a test. Before he can accomplish this however, he is kidnapped by three criminals by the names of Ninja, Yolandi, and Amerika. They owe a gangster named Hippo twenty million dollars, and in order to pay him back need to hijack and armored car, a heist they believe beyond their ability unless they can force Deon to somehow remotely switch the police robots off. Deon insists he’s incapable of doing that, and instead convinces them to let him put the robot he stole together, loads on the AI program, and then Chappie is born. Due to the nature of Deon’s program, the fledgling AI starts out like a child, learning from its surroundings. The criminal gang refuses to let Deon take Chappie with him or stay, and undertake Chappie’s education themselves with only minor moral input from its creator. Yolandi eagerly takes on the role as Chappie’s mother, while Amerika acts more as an older brother and Ninja as an abusive father figure. As another wrinkle, the reason the robot was originally scheduled for destruction was that its battery had fused to the chassis, and will provide only five more days of power, thus giving Chappie a very set life expectancy. Using Chappie’s fear of death against it, Ninja ultimately convinces Chappie to help them perform the heist and trick it into doing violence with the lie that sticking a knife in someone feels good to that person, and will just make them go to sleep.

After the heist, Chappie realizes that Ninja’s promises that money would save its life were a lie, and hatches a new plan to survive. Using a neural input helmet intended to let humans remotely pilot the MOOSE, it has found a way to back up its own consciousness digitally and save it. Vincent has all the while been attempting to convince the head of Tetravaal (Signourney Weaver) to let the MOOSE loose. He uses a virus to take all of the police robots off line and then sends the MOOSE out to track down and attempt to destroy Chappie. He succeeds in killing Amerika and Yolandi, and grievously wounding Deon before Chappie and Ninja destroy the MOOSE. Chappie takes Deon back to the Tetravaal plant, exacts a non-lethal but thoroughly violent revenge on Vincent, and uses the neural input helmet to transfer the dying Deon’s consciousness into a police robot test unit. Thus saved, Deon quickly transfers Chappie into another nearby robot and then escapes.

While the setup for the plot is very ham-handed—why doesn’t Deon just lie to the criminals? how on Earth is the CEO of Tetravaal so completely short-sighted about the possibilities of true AI? why can’t they just put Chappie’s head on a different robot body? and so on—once the pieces have all been shoved to their necessary positions on the board and Chappie created, the rest unfolds well enough. Outside of Chappie, most of the characters suffer from a paucity of development, with Deon and Vincent particularly underserved. Vincent is a caricature of an antagonist; while South African, he feels like a sketched out model of toxic American masculinity, from his Christianity to his bullying to the fact that he swaggers around with a pistol on his belt. (I do not know enough about South African culture to speak to the accuracy of this caricature in that context.) At one point he even threatens Deon with the pistol, tackling him onto his desk and pressing the barrel against his cheek, and then claims that this assault was only a “joke.” Ninja, Yolandi, and Amerika (the members of the group Die Antwoord) are as far as I can tell playing caricatures of themselves, and aren’t particularly interesting for it. But the star of the movie is Chappie, and we see its progress from infancy to rebellious teenager-hood over the course of the movie.

Chappie as a character is one that a viewer will either find exceptionally endearing or extremely annoying. Well-voiced and acted in a sort of “poor-man’s motion capture” by Sharlto Copley, Chappie speaks with distinctive vocal quirks, and displays the full range of emotions one would expect from a sentient being using tone, body language, and a set of lights that stand in for eyes. The robot is lied to constantly by the humans around it, caught in a tug-of-war between Deon’s egotistical self-righteousness and Ninja’s self-conscious, bullying swagger. Much of the character’s development is seen in painful realization after realization of the lies it has been told, the cruelty and inhumanity of others, and of its own impending death. Chappie’s own emotional core is provided mostly by the inconsistently characterized Yolandi, who on one hand authors Deon’s kidnapping and is perfectly happy threatening to kill him, and on the other reads Chappie bedtime stories and assures it that it is loved despite all emotional crises. It’s the title character’s inner journey that ultimately makes the film and its incredibly rough setup worth viewing at all.

The pay-off for Chappie comes when, wanting to survive, Chappie develops a way to save its consciousness digitally. Considering the earlier discussions that Chappie has with Yolandi about the existence of souls, this is actually a bold statement to be made by writer/director Blomkamp in a time when mind-body dualism is still a hotly debated topic. And it becomes even more pointed, considering Chappie’s greatest opponent, Vincent, despises AI as soulless. That Blomkamp supposes a world in which a sentient robot is able to record the consciousness of a dying human and copy it into a robot body as the dramatic conclusion to his film deserves far more attention than it has received, no matter how much of a hot mess the first two-thirds of the movie may be. Following the ending plot stinger, he’s offering us a fictional world in which humans stand on the precipice of functional immortality, and that is heady stuff.

Another worthwhile and largely ignored question in the film—and in this case, one the director likely wasn’t so interested in asking—has to do with the question of Chappie’s gender. Robots, if sentient, are arguably beings without latent gender, wholly asexual. The robots in the film are nominally coded as male—they’re blue because they’re police robots, they have voices that sound male. But when Chappie is awakened to sentience, there is not anything obviously in its behavior that is indicative of one gender or another—it is wholly childlike. Yet immediately, a male gender is assigned to the robot by all of humans around it, including Deon. Is Deon’s knee-jerk identification of Chappie as male due to an urge to see himself in his creation, an assumption of male as a default gender, or something else? It’s a question worth asking, and one the movie never gets around to, which seems a shame.

The identification of Chappie’s gender comes not from within the character, but is imposed from without by observers who seem in general agreement that it is male, judged by behavior that is at that time purely reactive and not at all coded in one direction or another. The infant personality in the robot is skittish and exceptionally curious, and eager to please. Later we see Chappie play with the items given to it by Deon, one of which is a Barbie-esque doll that it actually styles to look like Yolandi—and then act afraid upon being caught doing so by Ninja. Is this because Chappie believes itself to be male in some way and knows it ought not play with dolls, or far more likely because Ninja has given it ample reason to fear him in general?

In fact, all of Chappie’s more masculine-coded behaviors and ways of speaking are specifically taught to it by Ninja and Amerika in order for it to seem “tougher” and convince it to be more willing to engage in violence and intimidation. With the sole exception of Deon as the token, thoughtful nerd, masculinity in this movie is generally presented as bullying and violent. And while Chappie is willing to engage in the swaggering, arguably to convince Ninja to like it the way Yolandi and Amerika do, the only way it is compelled to actually act intimidating or violent is with lies that use its desire to please its perceived parents against it. In the same way, any apparent acceptance of assigned gender on Chappie’s part seems to come entirely from a desire to please rather than out of inherent identification. Chappie’s final, knowing acceptance of violence when it enacts its revenge upon Vincent is particularly notable on these grounds.

There is an unexpected amount of meat to be found on the bones of a movie too easily dismissed in light of a comedic predecessor. Chappie is worth watching for that reason, if you can handle wading through the repetitive antics of the human caricatures—and deal with the frustration over what could have been.

Categories
movie

What a difference a trailer makes

I’m actually contemplating seeing Hitman: Agent 47 this weekend. This is mostly my BFF Mike’s fault, because he is weak to incredibly stupid and trashy action movies. But I’m willing to actually go along with him on this one, which I think is pretty much the cinematic equivalent of sitting on a curb and eating cookie dough straight out of the package while crying, because that is all I deserve.

I’ve been aware of the Hitman games in the sense that I’ve seen them on Let’s Plays and noticed them in the video game store, and thought they looked like they’re for people who want all of the murder of Assassin’s Creed without so much plot getting in the way. Which is not a judgment on you if you really like these games, it’s more a way of saying that I don’t think I’m the target audience and that’s okay.

But I think one thing is worth noting here. What has made me willing to pay actual money to sit in front of a movie loosely based on a game series I don’t care about and stuff popcorn into my maw was the second trailer. See, here was the first trailer:

THINGS EXPLODE IN A CITY POPULATED ENTIRELY WITH WHITE PEOPLE! THERE IS SHOOTING! LADYPERSON IN BIKINI! You don’t actually matter, ladyperson, other than you are the sexy lamp that will lead us to the actual important person, who is your dad. Wow, I sure have never seen this movie a million and a half times already. (And sorry, 47, your version of “You’re locked in here with me,” is sadly lacking in comparison to Rorschach’s.) Blaaaaaaaaaaah.

Then there was the second trailer:

W-wait. Ladyperson is also a super badass assassin who is going to join in with hot tie-wearing assassin and together they will SHOOT AND BLOW UP ALL THE THINGS INCLUDING TERMINATOR SYLAR? (Trailer 3 seems to confirm this.)

Okay. Bring me some popcorn and an alcoholic beverage. I will watch your train wreck, because it is all I deserve.

Categories
worldcon

With Regards to “No Award.”

Edit at 0820 on 8/25: Due to writing this post at the end of an extremely long day, I misunderstood section 3.6 and got a few things wrong. It should be corrected now; thanks to Cheryl Morgan and Kendall for keeping me on the straight and narrow.

This post is only intended to examine the potential for “No Award” to structurally damage the Hugo Awards, because I’ve now witnessed this odd rumor in a couple different places. I have less than zero interest in debating the righteousness or wrongness of people voting No Award, or discussing my own votes, or pontificating about how it might or might not affect the reputation of the awards. But matters of fact? Let’s get those straight.

Basically, voting No Award in the Hugos has zero effect on the inner workings of the awards themselves. The end. Votes of No Award over successive years might arguably have some kind of negative effect on the voting population, but will not affect the continued existence of the categories or anything like that.

Quick summary: The Hugo categories themselves are enshrined in the WSFS constitution. The only way to add, remove, or alter them is with a constitutional amendment, which takes two years to accomplish. The amendment has to be proposed one year and passed at the business meeting, and then ratified at the next year’s business meeting. You can see this process in action with the proposal of the “Best Series” category for this year. Nothing in the results of the Hugos can actually alter the existence of the awards themselves.

If that’s good enough for you, stop there. Otherwise, I’ll go ahead and get granular.

Let’s take a quick look at the places “No Award” appears in the WSFS constitution. Please note that as of this writing, this is the 2014 WSFS constitution. I don’t think it contains anything we ratified during the business meetings this weekend. But I promise, there was nothing related to “No Award” in the amendments we did ratify.

Section 3.6: “No Award”. At the discretion of an individual Worldcon Committee, if the lack of nominations or final votes in a specific category shows a marked lack of interest in that category on the part of the voters, the Award in that category shall be canceled for that year.

Note the phrase “marked lack of interest.” Lack of interest would be indicated by lack of voting/nominating; a vote of “No Award” still counts as an actual vote.

Under 3.8: Tallying of Nominations: 

3.8.3: Any nominations for “No Award” shall be disregarded.

Pretty self explanatory; nominations for no award will be disregarded when it comes to tallying the nominations. It’s always an option on the final ballot, after all, as we’re about to see.

Under 3.10: Voting:

3.10.3: “No Award” shall be listed in each category of Hugo Award on the final ballot.

Also pretty self explanatory. “No Award” is always an option for voting.

From Section 3.11: Tallying of Votes:

3.11.1: In each category, tallying shall be as described in Section 6.4. “No Award” shall be treated as a nominee. If all remaining nominees are tied, no tie- breaking shall be done and the nominees excluding “No Award” shall be declared joint winners.

3.11.2: “No Award” shall be given whenever the total number of valid ballots cast for a specific category (excluding those cast for “No Award” in first place) is less than twenty-five percent (25%) of the total number of final Award ballots received.

3.11.3: “No Award” shall be the run-off candidate for the purposes of Section 6.5.

This determines how “No Award” is tallied from the ballots. So hey, you could technically win jointly with “No Award.” That’s… a thing. Also, this makes it so that categories that are very small and ignored relative to the total number of ballots get an automatic No Award. Note this doesn’t eliminate a category through lack of apparent interest, just makes “No Award” automatic if very few ballots are received. The categories still exist as required by the constitution.

That’s it. Those are the only places “No Award” is even mentioned in the constitution.

Fun fact: Worldcon committees are allowed (but not required) to make one and only one special Hugo category that will just exist for that year:

3.3.17: Additional Category. Not more than one special category may be created by the current Worldcon Committee with nomination and voting to be the same as for the permanent categories. The Worldcon Committee is not required to create any such category; such action by a Worldcon Committee should be under exceptional circumstances only; and the special category created by one Worldcon Committee shall not be binding on following Committees. Awards created under this paragraph shall be considered to be Hugo Awards.

I don’t believe this has happened during the time I’ve attended/paid attention to WorldCon, which has only been since 2008, but it sounds cool. (And has been used in the past to experiment, such as in 1988 when Watchmen won “Other Forms.” Wikipedia also has a list, though some of those categories were once in the WSFS constitution and then subsequently removed.) Anyway, notice with this, it’s also in line with 3.6; the concom has some discretion when it comes to administering the Hugo categories, but its choices are not in any way permanent. The categories themselves make up sections 3.3.1 through 3.3.17 of the constitution of the World Science Fiction Society. And the constitution can’t just be changed on a whim:

Section 6.6: Amendment. The WSFS Constitution may be amended by a motion passed by a simple majority at any Business Meeting but only to the extent that such motion is ratified by a simple majority at the Business Meeting of the subsequent Worldcon.

So if anything were to be changed structurally about the awards themselves, the administration, the categories, anything, the only way to do that is to get an amendment to the constitution passed by a simple majority at the business meeting, and then ratified the next year.

This would be why there was so much excitement about E Pluribus Hugo and 4 and 6 this year; both will structurally change how nominations are done and finalists are decided for the Hugos. Both got a majority vote at this year’s meeting, but will have no effect unless and until they are ratified in 2016–at which point they will change how things go in 2017.

The conclusion is, the Hugos can’t be structurally destroyed by a single messy year. Or two. Or ten. It would take a majority at two consecutive business meetings to do that. Destroyed socially? Rendered a travesty because they delivered results you personally dislike and thus the Hugos Are Over? That’s for people to argue who have a lot more patience, endurance, and time to waste than me.

Categories
worldcon

Brief(?) Summary and Commentary on Saturday and Sunday WSFS Meetings

As before, here I’m going to be free with my commentary instead of limiting myself to mostly parenthetical statements. Amendments will be referred to by name. For details and summary, please see the Sasquan agenda.

Liveblog for Saturday here.

Liveblog for Sunday here.

Playlist for all segments of the business meeting here.

Saturday Meeting

This meeting was relatively short, because the room was needed for other programming at 1300, and plus they wanted to have the WorldCon chairs photo session. Important points:

  • The meeting started off with the official site selection for 2017. Helsinki won, and presented the con heads and their website. They received a check for $23,000, passed on from the last of Millenium Phillcon’s funds.
  • The “Story by Any Other Name” amendment from LonCon 3 was passed and added to constitution. This will close the audiobook loophole, for example, allowing stories that originally appeared as audiobooks to be considered with their fellow works of fiction instead of as podcasts or related works.
  • “WSFS Membership Types and Rates” amendment from LonCon 3 passed without objection and was added to the constitution.
  • “Hugo Finalist” amendment from LonCon 3 passed without objection and was added to the constitution. This was just a word term change.
  • Starting on new business for this year–this is stuff that if passed will go on to be ratified (or not) next year in Kansas City. This is where things started getting contentious.
  • The 5% Solution passed. (Thank fuck.)
  • The Multiple Nominations amendment passed.
  • Nominee Diversity was laid on the table to be taken up on Sunday after EPH was considered.
  • Tom Monaghan (apologies, I believe I have been spelling his last name wrong this entire time in my liveblogs, mea culpa) attempted to permanently adjourn the business meeting for this year and thus kill all remaining business. I found this personally very aggravating, as it seemed to be a very transparent attempt to get rid of all potential discussion and fixes with regards to the Hugo issues. Monaghan had already made it pretty clear to anyone who could overhear him arguing that he was a “puppy” of some stripe, including complaints about people defaming puppies in debate, which were for the most part not supported by the chair. The motion was ultimately disallowed due to arcane parliamentary stuff, but I think that it would have failed anyway if put to a vote.
  • The meeting ended with a motion, unanimously approved, that when the business meeting did finally adjourn on Sunday, it would be in memory of Bobbie DuFault and Peggy Rae Sapienza.

Sunday Meeting

This is where things got really contentious.

  • E Pluribus Hugo was taken up immediately via suspension of the rules. Passed via serpentine.
    • Ramez Naam, who is a writer, made the point beautifully about why slates are pieces of shit (my words, not his) by naming a sampling of works and authors who got screwed by the slates this year.
    • The point was made again and again that it’s total bullshit that 10-15% of the electorate can entirely control who shows up on the ballot.
    • Dara Korra’ti (I hope I spelled her name right) made the point beautifully across EPH and 4/6 that in a system without parties, an organized party will prevail. And she had every right to indicate that this was political because it’s been made so explicitly political by the people who started it.
    • A lot of people complained that EPH is complicated and that will alter how people vote. Considering it is about how nominations are counted, not indicated by members, I don’t really buy this argument. Also, the current system is complex in its own right as well. If you asked me to explain preferential voting to someone, I don’t think I’d be able to do a good job of it.
    • Anyway, I’m glad EPH passed. What I’m really hoping is that once they’ve got the nomination data they requested, we’ll get a good presentation about how it would have changed things this year, and we can move forward.
    • Also a point to consider: anything we voted affirmatively on this year is not yet part of the constitution. Nothing changes unless and until these are ratified next year. So by the time we take up this business at next year’s meeting, we’ll be well aware if the Hugos are once more covered with puppy shit.
    • I still believe that if EPH stops Doctor Who from dominating short form drama, that is a feature and not a bug.
    • EPH has a built-in five year sunset clause by amendment.
  • 4 and 6 also passed on a serpentine vote. This one made me kind of crazy because we spent a ridiculous amount of time noodling about if we’d use the numbers 4 and 6 or something different, and then just used 4 and 6 anyway. Much like how 90% of the time we just use the chair’s suggested debate time after 10 minutes of arguing about allowing more or less. Hrngh.
    • So noted that supposedly, this system can work in conjunction with EPH just fine. Though in my opinion, if we were to ratify EPH next year, I’ll feel a lot less compelled to ratify this one as well unless someone makes a compelling argument as to the contrary.
    • Just another shout-out to Dara, whose points on this as far as 4 and 6 doing nothing to discourage slating, were totally on point. This method could defeat one slate if it didn’t have great discipline. But if we start getting in to slates and counter slates (very likely if things continue in this year’s melodramatic style) it’s going to be a fucking mess for anyone who doesn’t want to slate.
    • This one lacks a sunset clause. I think at this point, everyone was getting pretty tired and we just didn’t manage to get the timing right on amending it.
  • Nominee Diversity passes on a serpentine vote. Not much to say here other than I was in favor of it because I’m in favor of anything that spreads the love, so to speak.
  • Best Series, by request of its originator, was moved to a committee, to report back next year. (I think he realized that everyone was getting very tired and cranky and things were not looking that friendly for a contentious subject.)
  • Electronic Signatures returned with new language from the committee. This then became a giant clusterfuck that took 30 minutes to resolve and I still don’t know why. Eventually, this too passed. It should be noted that this allows the use of electronic signatures but the means are at the discretion of the WorldCon.
  • Meeting was then adjourned in memory of Bobbie DuFault and Peggy Rae Sapienza.

PLEASE NOTE: I am now going to start going through my previous liveblogs and try to correct some name misspellings. Please bear with me.

I also have some thoughts on the Hugos, and maybe I’ll type those up at some point. But this post is already 1K words long, and my liveblog from today was almost 3K. I’m getting pretty worded out, here.

See you in Kansas City next year, space cowboys.

Categories
worldcon

WSFS Meeting #4 (Sunday): Liveblog

1334: Freedom indeed. This is Rachael, signing off.

Categories
worldcon

WSFS Meeting #3 (Saturday): Liveblog

1153: Meeting is adjourned until 1000 tomorrow.