Hugo Awards controversy

[overgeeked]

The committee took it upon themselves, apparently without pressure from the Chinese government, to self-censor which books would be eligible for the Hugo Awards based on what they assumed would upset the CCP. Several books which were very well regarded and won other awards, that were also shoe-ins for the Hugo, were preemptively removed from the ballot. Just in case. The committee targets books that mentioned China, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Tibet, and also targeted LGBTQ+ authors or books that features LGBTQ+ characters or themes.

Daniel Greene has covered this a lot. Here's his latest with the actual leaked emails.

 

[Morrus]

although the real reason is kind of obvious: they were pre-emptively removing things on the chance that it may rile up someone in China

That's just a restatement of the OP... what sort of things, which might rile people how?

(I mean I can guess, but I just want to make sure I'm not just stereotyping)

 

[overgeeked]

I'm not sure what you're confused about.

The committee did a bigotry. Specifically against LGBTQ+ authors, and authors who dared to include LGBTQ+ characters, or anyone who's work talked about China in even a potentially negative light.

The committee also did a bootlick. Bending over backwards to kowtow to authoritarianism without even being asked to.

That's why people are mad.

 

[Deset Gled]

That's just a restatement of the OP... what sort of things, which might rile people how?

(I mean I can guess, but I just want to make sure I'm not just stereotyping)

I'm having trouble finding a full list of what was removed. Some of the most prominent authors banned were Neil Gaiman, R. F. Kuang, Xiran Jay Zhao, and Paul Weimer.

Here's an article from the Guardian that covers the incident: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2024/feb/15/authors-excluded-from-hugo-awards-over-china-concerns

And here's a TikTok'er that gives what I have found to be a very good summary from a couple weeks ago: https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZT8wQcLoh/

 

[Morrus]

I'm not sure what you're confused about.

The committee did a bigotry. Specifically against LGBTQ+ authors, and authors who dared to include LGBTQ+ characters, or anyone who's work talked about China in even a potentially negative light.

The committee also did a bootlick. Bending over backwards to kowtow to authoritarianism without even being asked to.

That's why people are mad.

OK, that information wasn't present in this thread prior to my post (or if it was, it's buried somewhere in the thread). I wasn't 'confused', I was just asking what we were discussing, as the thread seemed to assume familiarity with the subject matter. Thank you for providing the information. Not so much for the snark.

(Though I see the OP has been edited a couple of times since I first saw it)

 

[Eyes of Nine]

(Though I see the OP has been edited a couple of times since I first saw it)

I don't think so, I posted last night (California time), and just got back online now (20:52 California time). but maybe you mean something else when you say OP? Edited to add: Or maybe as site owner, you can see time stamps of pre-post edits?

 

[Autumnal]

The actual first step on resisting authoritarianism in this case would have been to make a big deal about and campaign against having Worldcon in China, citing its authoritarian abuses as the reason. I'm guessing the concom didn't do that. So, resistance wasn't their primary goal.

It’s worth noting there was substantial opposition to the bid, some of which was quite racist in a “heathen Chinee can’t out on a proper con” kind of way. Which led to all opposition being criticized as racist, including that from people familiar with doing business under totalitarian regimes.

 

[Zardnaar]

Moral of the story don't have your con in China. If you do kow tow to Winnie Ze Poo.

Next year Eritrea, North Korea, Saudi Arabia let's go!!!!!

 

[trappedslider]

It's now hit the mainstream

Science fiction authors were excluded from awards for fear of offending China

Leaked emails show organizers of the prestigious Hugo Awards vetted writers’ work and comments with regard to China, where last year’s awards were held.

www.nbcnews.com

 

[GothmogIV]

The actual first step on resisting authoritarianism in this case would have been to make a big deal about and campaign against having Worldcon in China, citing its authoritarian abuses as the reason. I'm guessing the concom didn't do that. So, resistance wasn't their primary goal.

Once you are holding an convention in China, some acceptance of the authoritarianism is required, or your con doesn't run.

Correct, sir: to avoid the censure of an authoritarian government, don't chose to give that government the opportunity to censure you. Dumb move, Hugos.