Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Android | Email | TuneIn | Deezer | RSS
Award “controversy,” fiascos, and discussions, oh my! In this special episode of SandF, we invited Stina Leicht and Liz Bourke to talk about the Hugo and Clarke Award shortlists. We cover the controversies surrounding this year’s finalists, our own thoughts about the lists, and the rhetoric that has kept the fires burning (and more, of course).
We hope you enjoy the episode!
Note: Some of the audio is not as clean as normal. I did my best to fix the problem. I hope it does not annoy too much.
Note: If you have iTunes and like this show, please give us a review on our iTunes page, or feel free to email us with your thoughts about the show!
Here’s the episode (show notes are below):
Intro and Discussion (0:00 – 1:48:06)
- Liz Bourke’s Website
- Clarke Award Shortlist
- Hugo Award Finalists
- “Can we stop talking about the Hugos now?” by Staffer’s Book Review
You can also support this podcast by signing up for a one month free trial at Audible. Doing so helps us, gives you a change to try out Audible’s service, and brings joy to everyone.
Our new intro music is “Time Flux” by Revolution Void (CC BY 3.0).
That’s all, folks! Thanks for listening. See you next week.
0 Responses
The Hugo Voter Packet is akin to screeners sent out to Academy members before the Oscars deadline. If the authors and publishers believe the award is important, it’s beneficial to them to get their work in front of the voters. Scalzi was instrumental in assembling the first two voter packets, convincing others it was worth taking the risk.
I know I vote a much more complete ballot having received and read all the nominated works.
Agreed. It’s an awesome thing they do.
Can we get links to the podcasts that were discussed as should have been nominated for the Hugos?
I’ll get on that this weekend.