Wherein John Scalzi, the Pauly Shore of Tor Books, demonstrates his practiced innumeracy regarding the Tor Awards Hugo Awards.
h/t to @FuturistDog
Gee, I wonder whose book the Tor finalist happens to be.
Oh.
Scalzi is correct in one regard. Tor’s fortunes have objectively declined since their pre-Puppies heyday. Between 1986 and 2016, Tor won more than twice as many Best Novel Hugos as the next most-awarded publisher. That’s leaving aside the Best Editor – Long Form Award they had created just for Patrick Nielsen Hayden.
The Best Novel Hugo was the Tor Award. Now Scalzi’s underperforming Asimov ripoff is offered up as the sacrificial lamb designated to lose to Jemisin.
“But wait,” I hear you asking. “Are the CHORFs really so unimaginative as to give a purse puppy slinging writers’ workshop prose a Best Novel threepeat?”
If the Oppression Olympics now underway before World Con even convenes are any indication, yes. Yes, they are.
In the meantime, don’t forget to vote in the Dragon Awards, the readers’ choice award that recognizes normal fandom’s favorite works of science fiction and fantasy.
Also, don’t forget to check out my Dragon Award-nominated and winning Soul Cycle books.
Finally, if you’d like to avoid clunky constructions like “…it’s doing a poor job of being so,” in your books, I now have a limited window of availability to consider new editing projects.
Brian,
To quote a movie line we're just not that into you Tor.
We've forked and replaced you and not looking back
xavier
You omit to mention that in 2015 the Sad Puppies *NOMINATED* and campaigned for a Tor published book, while the Rabid Puppies *voted for* a Tor published book.
And this nullifies Brian's main thesis….how?
Tor is now irrelevant for readers that's the gist.
xavier
Glad we agree that Scalzi is wrong.
Brian,
You explained cogently the situation;it was helpful. I have a better grasp of why Tor no longer appeals to readers.
xavier