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.
