The Hugo Awards Discussion Group discussion
2010 Hugo Awards
>
Current Hugo Nominee Favorite?
date
newest »
newest »
I read Boneshaker and enjoyed it, but it is the only one I have gotten to so far. I would like to think I'll get to at least 4 out of the 6 by the time the winners are announced in August, we'll see. The Windup Girl is the one I'm going to read next.
As far as I can tell, Westerners (or perhaps I should say, non-SEAsians) like the Windup Girl and SEAsians hate it. A friend of mine is writing a review of the book and apparently loves it, but she is Jewish New Yorker.
What about it makes it less appealing to non-SEAsians? Does the writer paint the locale in a negative light or stereotype?
"What about it makes it less appealing to non-SEAsians? Does the writer paint the locale in a negative light or stereotype?"OH YES. http://beyondvictoriana.com/2010/02/1...
I read the review, and I have to say, I think some of it is kind of ridiculous. The reviewer has a problem with the fact that an alternate universe, dystopian, fictional Thailand is painted in a negative light. We get that this is a work of fiction, right? We're doing world creating here. This isn't a journalist going to Thailand, writing a travel book, and saying Thailand is a country full of serial rapists and druggies. This is fiction.
Another thing, why is it the writer's fault that no one writes stories set there? It's not HIS responsibility, and the idea that "well no one has written about this area, so therefore you have to write something that makes it out to be a perfect utopia" is obscene. No writer can be held accountable for everyone else. Why is it okay to write something painting a fictionalized American or England in a bad light, just because there is so much positive stuff written about them. It's NOT meant to be historically accurate, and it's not even TRYING to be close to real life. If it was the exact same story set in Chicago, would the reviewer care if it reflected poorly? We have a history of gang violence. So if a novel writes a story that involves gang violence, that's a no-no? I just don't get it.
Oh, and reading a book just so you can nitpick about problems with the setting is about as ridiculous as me, being a history major, going to a movie set in an era I'm familiar with and bitching about something like "Oh, this uniform is MAROON but its supposed to be MAGENTA." Read a book for the story, and the writing, and the general narrative. If you go into a book for the sake of nitpicking, YOU WILL NOT LIKE IT. Just the way it is.
Another thing, why is it the writer's fault that no one writes stories set there? It's not HIS responsibility, and the idea that "well no one has written about this area, so therefore you have to write something that makes it out to be a perfect utopia" is obscene. No writer can be held accountable for everyone else. Why is it okay to write something painting a fictionalized American or England in a bad light, just because there is so much positive stuff written about them. It's NOT meant to be historically accurate, and it's not even TRYING to be close to real life. If it was the exact same story set in Chicago, would the reviewer care if it reflected poorly? We have a history of gang violence. So if a novel writes a story that involves gang violence, that's a no-no? I just don't get it.
Oh, and reading a book just so you can nitpick about problems with the setting is about as ridiculous as me, being a history major, going to a movie set in an era I'm familiar with and bitching about something like "Oh, this uniform is MAROON but its supposed to be MAGENTA." Read a book for the story, and the writing, and the general narrative. If you go into a book for the sake of nitpicking, YOU WILL NOT LIKE IT. Just the way it is.
I don't know the reviewer or the author, and I haven't read the book, so I can't speak for the Windup Girl. I will say, though, that for some people, nitpicking (some call it "fact checking") is just what goes on in their heads sometimes. I watched Buffy the Vampire Slayer at the behest of my fiance. While I loved the story, I just couldn't get over how bad the quality control on the set was. At one point Buffy was sitting in front of a computer (I think it was the principal's) and typing away on it... and I grabbed the remote, paused it, turned, pointed to the screen and said to my fiance, "How can she be using it? The computer's not plugged in!"My fiance backed the DVD up, looked, and then blinked at me. "I've see this four times and I never noticed."
Granted, I am also the sort of person to complain about William Gibson's "Pattern Recognition" because when checking into the Hilton in Tokyo the book had them using a card imprinter instead of those electronic terminals that are EVERYWHERE. And also that when he wrote about people staring at Cayce (or whatever her name was) I went, "ARGH. No, people do NOT stare in Tokyo!"
Matt wrote: "I read the review, and I have to say, I think some of it is kind of ridiculous. The reviewer has a problem with the fact that an alternate universe, dystopian, fictional Thailand is painted in a ne..."I tried, on the strength of the book's reputation, to like the book. After all, I cannot say I don't like something if I don't try it.
But DAMMIT. The book makes me so ANGRY! Summary: he may have done his homework when it comes to Thailand (I wouldn't know, never been there) but his fails on Malaysian research. Considering one of his main characters is supposedly Malaysian Chinese, this just does not sit well with me at all. Furthermore, he makes the mistake in a way that REALLY REALLY REALLY makes me angry--we are NOT a colonial territory and no one would continue to use the colonial name if they had any pride. Voting No Award over this.
It's fictional future. Maybe in the fictional future he is depicting, Malaysia has become a colonial territory? It seems a bit unfair to disparage a book over things like that. Novels are about telling a story, hopefully with some kind real-world message, significance... It is about good writing, I don't see why you can't enjoy a book that makes mistakes as simple as writing about someone in Japan being stared at. Does the book have to actually be good, or just historically and sociologically accurate?
Okay, too many different comments to reply to, consolidating on the review post.
Back to the topic at hand, right now I would go with The Windup Girl, having read that, Boneshaker, and The City & The City. I'm not a voting member this year but plan to be for next year. Still gotta read the other 3, though.
Considering the rave reviews Boneshaker and Windup Girl get from other places, I'm pretty sure I'm a minority reader, which is too bad. Next year should be fun--enjoy Vegas!
Oh I won't be attending, ha! I wish I could afford that, I mean being a non-attending member that still gets to vote. Maybe someday I can attend one of the conventions but thats years off for my bank roll.
I'm a hugo reader and my vote is with Windup Girl.
(I've already tried Boneshaker--didn't like it. Haven't tried Wind-up Girl yet but I don't know if I'll like it, as I don't hear good things about it in my SEAsian circles.)