2003 Nebula Award Winners

[emohawk]

For those that haven't heard, the winners of the 2003 Nebula Awards were announced at a banquet Saturday evening, April 17, in Seattle, Washington.

Novel
The Speed of Dark, Elizabeth Moon (Ballantine)

Novella
Coraline, Neil Gaiman (HarperCollins)

Novellette
"The Empire of Ice Cream", Jeffrey Ford (Sci Fiction, 26 Feb 2003)

Short Story
"What I Didn't See", Karen Joy Fowler (Sci Fiction 10 Jul 2002)

Script
The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers, Fran Walsh, Philippa Boyens, Stephen Sinclair & Peter Jackson (New Line Cinema; based on the novel by J. R. R. Tolkien)

Other awards, as previously announced, were presented: the Damon Knight Memorial Grand Master Award was given to Robert Silverberg, and the Service to SFWA Awards were presented to Ann Crispin and Michael Capobianco.

I was very excited a month or two ago when I heard Robert Silverberg was being honoured with a Grand Master Award. If I was pressured to nominate my overall favourite SF author he would be it, so my heartfelt congratulations to a well deserved honour, he truely is one of the greats. Congratulations to all the winners (though I doubt any would read this post!); Coraline being the only one I've read though (but loved). Maybe The Speed of Dark should be a Book Club nomination as I don't recall too many people having read it.

[Kamakhya]

Short Story
"What I Didn't See", Karen Joy Fowler (Sci Fiction 10 Jul 2002)

My sf writer friend asked me to pose a question here with respect to this story. She is curious if anyone has an opinion on whether or not this story is SF and if so, in what way.

Having just read the story myself, I can see her issue with it. While it is a fine story, I, myself, am hard pressed to see how it relates even to the broader category of Spec Fic, much less SF. Perhaps it is just a way to give an honor to a SF writer, despite it not being a SF story.

You can read the story here:
Story

[Thekherham]

I love Robert Silverberg. He was the first s.f. author I read and I still think he's great.
I'm really glad he was honored wityh the Grand Master Award.

[Archren]

Two things:

Whoohoo! "Speed of Dark" was an awesome book and Elizabeth Moon is one of my favorite authors and I'm really glad to see her get recognition. Yay!

Second:

My sf writer friend asked me to pose a question here with respect to this story. She is curious if anyone has an opinion on whether or not this story is SF and if so, in what way.

I see you friend's point. If I read this story without any context, I'm sure I'd treat it as a mainstream story. However, I can justify it's inclusion in one way: it is written about a time when the jungles (particularly African jungles) were so remote and unexplored that expeditions there were like space travel is now: exploring the unknown. That is why Edgar Rice Burroughs "Tarzan" stories are allowed into spec fic. He was actually writing at that time, whereas Fowler just set her story there, so that's different, but I think it's enough to allow it in. It was certainly well done.

[emohawk]

Originally posted by Kamakhya
My sf writer friend asked me to pose a question here with respect to this story. She is curious if anyone has an opinion on whether or not this story is SF and if so, in what way.

Apart from the fact that it's about a scientific expedition into the unknown/barely known, the only other connection I can see is that it was published in a Sci Fi magazine. Maybe what she didn't see was aliens abducting Beverly.

[emohawk]

Originally posted by Kamakhya
You can read the story here:
Story

For those that don't know, you can also read Jeffery Ford's "The Empire of Ice Cream" at the same site. It's a pretty decent story and can be found here.

[Hobbit]

Thanks for this, emo. I think I'm right in saying that Silverberg is the SF author (still living) with the most awards... but I'm sure one more won't go amiss. And he is one of my faves.

As for Elizabeth Moon's book, that's an interesting one. It is less sf/Fantasy than her usual output, and indeed may be another book that may/may not be 'speculative fiction', being in part based on her own experiences with her own son, I believe.

Thinking outside the box for a second, does this mean that we are now seeing the idea of books that are not 'genre related' as 'more eligible' for the spec fic awards? Is it a case of the awards being more receptive to a broader range of writing, or conversely, is it an attempt by the awards to become more mainstream, or even simply a good book that deserves recognition, regardless of labelling/pigeonholing? It was considered in the BSFA Awards last year (or was it the Arthur C Clarke?)

It does tie in a little with this idea prevalent at the moment of books being promoted as anything but spec fic but clearly have spec fic elements (stand up Margaret Atwood, et al )

Or does it? (The Nebulas are voted for by the writers, rather than the general masses, don't forget).

Not trying to demean the award by any means but it is something that I'm noticing around and about at the moment.

(Oh, and yes, it has come up a couple of times in the SF Book Club as one for consideration - might be worth putting back in the pot? )

Hobbit

[lemming]

Hobbit, The Speed of Dark is comfortably within the boundaries of speculative fiction. From the outset it includes speculative autism treatments that haven't been invented yet, not to mention other advances in biotechnology that we're nowhere close to (LifeTime the life extension treatment). The idea of treating autism in an autistic adult is something we're decades away from achieving.

All the science in which advances are projected are medical/biotech, but the book is VERY DEFINITELY science fiction. It is not being marketed as such (as indeed many medical thrillers also are not), but that doesn't change the facts.

(I assume you haven't read it... but now you have been informed )

[Hobbit]

Yes, thanks lemming.

I've read extracts but not the whole thing. The parts that I read were not particularly any time or place, and from what I remember could easily have been extracted from other non-genre books, such as Mark Haddon's The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time. Hence the musing aloud. It wasn't a question particularly aimed at Elizabeth Moon's book, but a wider thought.

From what you've said, it sounds rather like Daniel Keyes's Flowers for Algernon, Greg Bear's Darwin's Radio/Children, or (pushing it a little!) a Michael Crichton style techno-thriller.

We're in the realm of genre classification, aren't we?

OK - enlighten me further - in your opinion (or anyone elses!), is it better/worse than her other work? Is it worthy of a Nebula?

Hobbit

[lemming]

As for the story and novellette--thanks, Kamakhya and emohawk for the links!

Frankly, I have no idea why What I Didn't See was accepted as a science fiction story at all. It involved questing into the unknown, but there was little to no speculation about, well, anything. Certainly all fields of science were left alone--unless perhaps some of those spider categories were made up, and they had nothing to do with the plot. I'm baffled.

The Emperor of Ice Cream, on the other hand, was great, and deserved the win. I'm glad to have read it.

[lemming]

OK - enlighten me further - in your opinion (or anyone elses!), is it better/worse than her other work? Is it worthy of a Nebula?

I've raved about the book in a few other threads... I really loved it. Apparently, and I'm basing this on book reviews, it's a breakthrough work for this author and all her other work is well below the level of this one. I haven't read anything else by her, so I can't say, but would encourage people to not be put off by having read her other work, as this would seem to be a different style entirely.

The strength of the book is definitely the characterization of the main character rather than either the plot or the scientific advances necessary for the plot to occur, but to me that's not a weakness--more just that the characterization is stunning and no other aspect of the book happened to be able to outshine it.

Its weakness, in my mind, is the shallow characterization of the bad guy, Mr. Crenshaw. His anger and meanness are a little too unrealistic and his motivations are never given. It's strange, because everyone else in the book--disabled or normal--is so incredibly human. However, aside from Mr. Crenshaw, it's a near-perfect piece of work in my opinion. Really leaves you thinking about what it is to be human, and "normal", and how your mind works. (A good comparison can indeed be made with Flowers for Algernon.)

It very much deserved the Nebula, IMO.

[Hobbit]

it's a breakthrough work for this author and all her other work is well below the level of this one. I haven't read anything else by her, so I can't say, but would encourage people to not be put off by having read her other work, as this would seem to be a different style entirely.

I have read a bit of her other work and whilst it is competent and entertaining, I've not been that impressed with it. Her writing links with Anne McCaffrey are obvious, as her work IMO has been very much in the 'McCaffrey style' (For example, Moon's SF has been Space Opera and horses, whilst her Fantasy writing has been Quest Fantasy and...... horses )

The subject of autism is a little too close to home for me for me to want to read it as entertainment (my eldest son has Aspberger's Syndrome, so I do have an idea of the autistic spectrum) but I have heard lots of good things about Moon's book, and had it recommended a few times (probably from you too through the forum, lemming, now I think about it ) so it might just happen...


Lastly, found a short Silverberg interview here which is linked to this event.

Hobbit

[Kamakhya]

Thank you everyone for your thoughtful responses to my request. My friend is relieved. As a past president of the SFWA, she was concerned that the genre was changing in ways she was not aware of. The fact that a group of well read sf addicts agree that it's inclusion was baffling, at least assured her that she was not losing her mind.

[fortytwo]

Interesting to read other views on “What I Didn't See".
I agree with those who say it’s not science fiction. It’s quite well written, but not particularly outstanding. Just the sort of thing you might read in Reader’s Digest while waiting in the doctor’s surgery.
I would find it depressing if this was a sign of things to come *

Regarding Moon’s Speed of Darkness, after reading half of the Serrano Legacy and at the risk of flogging a dead horse* I have to repeat myself and say that It would be impossible for me to ever read any of her work again. Once bitten twice shy.

Count me in as another who is pleased to see Silverberg getting his award. I invariably enjoy his stories and Dying Inside is one of my favourite books.

*sorry about those –I couldn’t stop myself.

42

[ArthurFrayn]

I agree it's great to see Robert Silverberg recieve a Grand Master Award.
He's probably the science fiction writer that means the most to me.
Thanks for article link, Hobbit!