Art Is Not A Competitive Sport

https://www.pngkit.com/view/u2q8e6i1i1e6y3e6_award-transparent-best-seller-clipart-free-library-best/.

This is another conversation with the clouds.

Art is not a competitive sport. And yet people turn all sorts of art forms into one. Why? I guess for the thrill of a horse race or a dog fight. There are activities that are inherently competitive – business, for example. But there is nothing intrinsically competitive about the act of creation, of bringing something new into the world. And what is equally important, all art is subjective. It is personal. It is yours to judge. So how can it even be a competitive activity?

Before I proceed further, perhaps I should issue this disclaimer. I think I was in eighth grade when I entered a piece of art in some sort of student art show. It was of a graphic design version of a rocket ship in black and white. It didn’t win anything. That has left me a bitter man for the last sixty years. This bitterness may color my attitude towards awards for art in general, and in this post, the various awards for speculative fiction and fantasy. Just say’n.

So, back to my premise. Art, the creation of something new in the world is not a competitive activity. And that the appreciation of art is entirely subjective. There are no objective measurements for the intrinsic value of art. It is all in the eye of the beholder. If one cares to, one can make a comparison between pieces of art, but that is still subjective. This fact, however, has never stopped people from making a dog fight out of all forms of art. Art, music, books, movies, fashion, design, architecture, indeed, almost any creative endeavor will have contests and awards. Some are determined by juries, other by popularity, but they’re all still subjective judgments. And as artistic judgments they are meaningless. What works for one doesn’t have to work for another. And what works for a million doesn’t mean it has to work for you. Everyone has the right to make their own judgment.

However, let’s be honest, these contests and awards aren’t meant to judge art. They’re meant to serve publicity and commerce. An award means recognition, which can then be parlayed into money. But money, well, isn’t mentioned in polite society, so it is better to pretend all these award are “honoring” the art, rather than generating publicity, and hopefully, sales to follow.

To go from the general, to the specific, let’s talk about awards in speculative fiction.

In the speculative fiction and fantasy field, there are many contests and awards. I’ll just mention just three; The Hugo Award Contest run by the World Science Fiction Society, the Nebula Award Contest run by Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America, and the Locus Contest and Award sponsored by Locas Magazine. Each year they hand out awards in various categories from novels to fans magazines. The winners are determined by popularity. Between six and eight thousand speculative fiction fans pay the WSFS money to be able to vote for their favorites in various categories. Some 2,000 professional speculative fiction and fantasy writers choose the winner of the Nebula award, and less than a 1,000 fans pick the Locus winners.

Over the last 40 years, this process has produced only 5 unanimous winners. If art was a competitive activity, and the criteria objective, one would think that there would be a clear winner each year. And when you consider that many of the people making these selections are a small group, most of whom have some connection to the publishing industry, they should be aware of any objective criteria that can be applied to speculative fiction book. Thus, if books could be judged objectively, there should be a universal winner most years.

But of course, there is no objective criteria to judge the artistic merit of a work. So now we are looking at the subjective – and perhaps business loyalty – of these judges. Is their judgment worth anything?

The fact is that more than 50 million SF & F books are sold each year, to likely over a million SF & F readers. This means that less than 1% of those readers decide what is best. And in at least one award, the Nebula Award, the voters are hardly impartial, being peers, friends, and/or rivals of the writers whose work is under consideration. One has to believe that many WSFS members are not casual readers, but people who have connections to specific publishing business that may compromise any impartiality in their choices. Thus, it is hard to believe that apparent popularity is a valid yardstick of worth in these very industry insider awards.

Which brings up the question of what is actually eligible to be judged. Half of the SF & F books sold are indie-published, and for all practical considerations, invisible in this selection process, since this is an exercise of traditional publishing, to promote traditionally published works.

In short, any way you care to look at these awards, winning has no real meaning regarding the craft and creativity of the works nominated and awarded. It is, simply, a yearly exercise in marketing.The best that can said is that awards represent a triumph of the marketing department. I’m certain that this conclusion comes as no shock to anyone. The primary purpose of these awards, and all other such awards for creative work, is to generate recognition that can be turned into money. Winning an award, and indeed, even being nominated for an award, allows a publisher and author to add a “Winner of...” or “... nominee” badge to their books, bios, and websites in the hope that this badge will lend increased credibility for the quality of the book, author, or what have you, which will then lead to increased sales. I assume it works. Heck, if you can buy a jar of orange marmalade that is served to the Queen of England, it has to be good, doesn’t it?

Of course, there is the element of “honoring” works, companies, and people, for their contributions to the industry. While there may be an authentic desire to do so, these organizations can not just settle for just “honoring” people. This too, must be turned into a winner take all contest. Oh, one can say, “I’m honored to have been nominated.” But that’s what the losers always say. And competition always creates far more losers than winners. Really, how is that honoring people? Why not just put the nominated honorees in a cage and have them fight it out like chickens or dogs? Wouldn’t that be a spectacle? I truly think it’s a shame that it seems that we can’t just acknowledge accomplishments, without making it a spectacle of it.

As I said at the beginning, art is not a competitive sport. But business is. And publishing is a business. Authors write books to make money. Books and stories, are written and published in one form or another to make money. And there is an objective criteria for judging the “best” in business. And that is, what earns the most profit. Period.

So, if it is important to determine the “best,” why not look, not at the subjective art, but at the objective reality of commerce. The best book, story, magazine, or any other contributor in the field is “how much money did they bring in?’’ Crass, yes, but objective, and can easily be justified – money, is after all, what the publishing business is about. One can write and publish for noble reasons, but at the end of the day, sales pays everyone’s wages.

So what I say, is let’s see your books – the ones with all those columns of  numbers – for each entry, so we can see what one made the most money. Then we'd known what one which really is the BEST. I can get behind that awards program. But until then, I will continue to look on these silly awards contests as the elaborate commercials they are.

It's the award season, let the dogs loose.