Since I’ve finally gotten the reviews up, I’ll do the usual and look at the character of the nominations. The Dragon Awards are somewhat unique as SFF literary awards go, as they seem to be actual popular awards, i.e. what different categories of fans are actually reading. That means it’s an interesting comparison against literary awards that are partially or totally juried, where a committee chooses the winners they think are most deserving. It’s also an interesting contrast to the Goodreads Awards, which demographics suggest is dominated by women readers. Many of these novels look to be bestsellers, and I expect one “author” is actually a franchise that cranks out YA content rather than just a single author. Since it’s been a while since the awards, you can see the list of finalists here.
First, the diversity count. Here’s what I get, and as usual, I’m sorry if I miss anybody. This is pretty much based on self-disclosure online. Some authors fall into more than one category, and by “international” I mean non-US based.
Best SF Novel: 3 men (37.5%), 5 women (62.5%), 1 black (12.5%), 7 white (87.5%), 2 LGBTQ (25%), 3 international (37.5%)
Best Fantasy Novel: 2 men (33%), 4 women (67%), 1 Jewish (17%), 1 Asian (17%), 2 Hispanic (33%), 3 white (50%), 3 international (50%)
Best YA Novel: 2 men (33%), 4 women (67%), 2 Jewish (33%), 1 Asian (17%), 1 Hispanic (17%), 4 white (67%), 2 international (33%)
Best Military SFF: 7 men (100%), 0 women, 1 Jewish (14%), 7 white (100%), 1 international (14%)
Best Alternate History: 6 men (100%), 0 women, 1 Jewish (17%), 6 white (100%)
Best Horror: 2 men (40%), 3 women (60%), 1 Jewish (20%), 5 white (100%), 1 international (20%)
Totals: 22 men (58%), 16 women (42%), 1 black (3%), 6 Jewish (16%), 2 Asian (5%), 3 Hispanic (8%), 32 white (84%), 2 LGBTQ (5%), 8 international (21%)
As I understand it, the Dragons is basically a survey of reader favorites collected through the firm Survey Monkey, and (regardless of accusations) there seems to be no visible attempt by the administration to balance or distort the results. That said, there are some interesting things that stand out in this lineup. First is the difference a diversity of categories makes. While most major SFF literary awards are dominated by women these days, the Dragons has almost 60% male winners, and in two categories women are totally shut out.
Another important issue is lack of black and Hispanic popular finalists. This is hard to see in other major awards, and one could get the idea that racial barriers have suddenly been erased, but the issue shows up here. Possible problem may be a lack of participation of black and Hispanic fans in the voting, and/or failure of these writers to match the popular tastes. Although black writers, for example, have done well with angry message fiction in the major awards, this does not seem to match the popular SFF taste. On the other hand, Jewish, Asian and LGBTQ writers rated at or above their US demographic in these results. One other thought here, the timeline between announcement of the ballot and deadline for voting on the Dragons is too short to read all the finalists. This means fans may be voting for their favorite author(s) rather than for the particular works. The same problem may also affect other awards systems.
Having a look at the publishers, 5/37 (14%) were from Tor, 4/37 (11%) were from Orbit, 2/37 (5%) were from Del Rey and 2/37 (5%) were from Titan. The rest scattered out over a diverse array of publishers, including several that appear to have been established by the authors to market their own content. This shows another departure from the major awards, where the winners are typically promoted heavily through reading lists and chosen at a convention where members gather and publishers can more easily influence results.
Next, a look at characters in the novels: I only read the winning novels in six Dragon categories for this set of reviews, so I don’t have a full knowledge of the category content. Keeping that in mind, 3/6 (50%) of the winners had female main protagonists and all had prominent female characters, 3/6 (50%) had LGBTQ characters and a couple had transhuman main characters. I don’t recall that any of the winners mentioned race, which is supposed to mean the characters are white. I’d be interested in input on this one from readers. Some writers limit description of their characters under the theory that more people can identify. Is that right? Or do black readers assume that any character not specifically described as black is actually white?
As far as content goes, this varied by the category. The style and content of the finalists looks to be varied. Although I didn’t read any but the winners for these reviews, I have reviewed a few of the finalists for other awards. Again, as you would expect from the survey method of voting, this looks like popular content and suggests what fans in the different categories want to read. Best SF Novel was very traditional space opera, salty and strongly plotted. Best Fantasy Novel was surrealistic and made little sense. Best YA Novel was full of teen angst, adventures and world saving. Best Military SFF was full of angst, action and heroism. Best Alternate History was a tossed salad of US history with plot built on mystical elements and intrigue. Best Horror was a creepy but warmhearted and nonviolent tale of narrow escape. There you go. What fans really want to read.
Recent Comments