I’m feeling the need to explore the staleness of the “traditional SF” among the Hugo nominees a bit further. Since I’m a late-comer to the squabble, I don’t know how the works were chosen by the Puppies’ nominating committee. The writers might be friends of different Puppies who benefited from the round-up of stories. The stories might be the nominators’ estimation of the best of “traditional” SF&F culled from magazines with this leaning. Or maybe the nominators are well-read enough in the sub-genre to just know which are the most popular and deserving writers without really looking at their material. Whatever the method, the results are definitely less polished than the type work that normally gets award nominations. Those MFA graduates do know how to put together a good story.
I mostly quit reading hard SF years ago without really considering why. It was just that I didn’t enjoy the stories that much anymore. Looking at this collection now and comparing it to The Three Body Problem, for example, really points out the difficulty at hand. As mainstream SF has gone sentimental, traditional SF has lost its edge in a different way. In an interesting time warp, Cixin Liu thinks the Golden Age of SF is still here. Those old SF writers were addressing a science-literate audience, and like Cixin Liu, they pulled out all the stops, dropping in technical concepts and scientific discussion without concerns their audience wouldn’t like it. Somewhere along the line, that has disappeared for SF published in English.
I’ve been a big promoter of more literary science fiction over the years, but now that hard SF seems to be in trouble, I’m concerned the community is losing an important part of its heritage. The Puppies may have exposed a real problem here. It looks like hard SF writers are in danger of extinction. So, could WorldCon maybe establish an award specifically for hard SF? That might attract a few more accomplished writers to the sub-genre and improve the offering.
Lela E. Buis 
Aug 16, 2015 @ 05:04:54
I do wish there were more hard SF, I have to say.
But I don’t see the puppy connection with hard SF (or their particularly pointing out a lack of it). I read most of their works that were on the ballot this year, and there was very little leaning in the direction of hard SF. Christian-messaged SF? Yes, and that’s great. Hard SF? No. In the descriptions of the kinds of rip-roaring space adventures they’ve said they want, I don’t hear “hard SF” either, I hear more pulp. Three Body Problem wasn’t on their slate, and wouldn’t have made the ballot if multiple people from their slate hadn’t withdrawn.
Hard SF isn’t gone, by any means. Off the top of my head, Robinson and Stross from last year’s ballot got pretty science-y.
Anybody know of any good hard SF out this year? I’m almost finished with the newest Robinson and want to read a bunch more before nominations open in January!
LikeLike
Aug 16, 2015 @ 05:08:41
The lack of hard SF in their nominations is the problem. It’s definitely a form of “traditional” SF. It looks like they combed through Analog. Couldn’t they find any?
LikeLike
Aug 16, 2015 @ 15:32:12
Hard SF and Christian-based SF are somewhat antithetical. There’s also the issue of diversity. Old style SF – the Clarke, Asimov and Bradbury type – opened up new ideas. All of them actually predicted some real scientific breakthroughs. The new stuff just seems to be going backward.
LikeLike
Aug 16, 2015 @ 17:57:23
Thanks. That’s sort of my point. Nothing the Puppies have put forth rates as either profound or forward thinking. Even space opera can put forth new ideas that will inspire breakthroughs. Either the nominators were self-serving within their own circle, or else the work isn’t out there like it used to be.
LikeLike
Aug 17, 2015 @ 12:00:34
Reblogged this on Jonah Bergan.
LikeLike
The Two Cultures of Hugo short stories | Futures Less Travelled
Oct 04, 2015 @ 17:30:49
Pixel Scroll 12/1 Beyond The Wails of Creeps | File 770
Dec 02, 2015 @ 05:22:47