The Letters to the Editor department is intended to be a forum for our readers to express their own opinions and ideas. While we appreciate the many complimentary letters we receive each day, you won't find them on this page. Instead, you will find letters that go beyond or even contradict what we have written, letters that offer a different perspective and provide a different view of science fiction. If you would like to submit a letter, please use our feedback form or send a message to scifiweekly@scifi.com.
-- Craig E. Engler, Editor
The Hugos should be expanded
s a lifelong reader, book lover, avid collector and most recently, a writer, it is not easy for me to admit that the Dramatic Presentation Hugo has become (at least in my mind) more important in stature than Best Novel.
This was a long time in coming, the roots of which go back to the Star Wars films; for a generation now, they have defined what SF is, at least in the mind of the general public.
Of course we in SF fandom know better. Star Trek, Babylon 5, and the Alien franchise never would have been possible without the seminal influences of E.E. "Doc" Smith, Robert A. Heinlein, A.E. van Vogt or Isaac Asimov (among many, many others).
The dilemma is that circulation of all of the SF magazines is going down. Veteran and novice writers are having a tough time selling novels unless they happen to have a built-in audience via a media tie-in.
When the first Star Wars film hit, SF fandom was more or less taken by surprise. Now, with a new series and a new generation set to be enthralled by interstellar action and intrigue, we, as fans, writers and educators, have a unique opportunity to sing the praises of the origins of great adventure and pass on our great literary heritage of fantasy and SF to the next generation of potential watchers, readers and writers.
Which brings me back to the Hugos. They are the highest literary award we, as readers, have any say about. Yet this year, as it has been for the past several years, ballots for the Dramatic Presentation category far surpassed the tally for Best Novel, 712 to 585 votes.
Frankly, I was deeply disappointed with the quality of the five nominees, Starship Troopers, The Fifth Element, Gattaca, Men in Black and the eventual winner, Contact. There were several outstanding episodes of Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, Millennium, The X-Files, Outer Limits and Babylon 5 that were, at least in my humble opinion, better than those on the final ballot.
I sat in the audience at Bucconeer when film publicist Jeff Walker half-jokingly thanked Babylon 5 fans for spreading their nominations among five episodes (which finished 6-9 and 11th on the nomination ballot) and accepted the Hugo for Contact. He then lamented the fact that the Dramatic Presentation Hugo could go to only one particular show or movie. He suggested that in the future, some consideration be given to splitting the award into several categories.
When I returned home, I found a new edition of Howard DeVore's The History of the Hugo, Nebula and World Fantasy Awards (Advent Publishers, $14) waiting for me. There I found several of the past nominees were not all from the visual medium. In 1971, Jefferson Airplane's Blows Against the Empire album competed against The Firesign Theater's Don't Crush That Dwarf, Hand Me the Pliers. The very next year, Firesign Theater was back on the final ballot with I Think We're All Bozos on This Bus. Phil Foglio's cartoon slide show, The Capture, was nominated in 1976. Blood: The Life And Times of Jack The Ripper, a spoken-word album by Robert Bloch and Harlan Ellison, finished third to Star Wars in 1977 and in 1979, Douglas Adams' The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy finished second to Superman.
Nearly 20 years have past since the last time something other than a movie or television show has been nominated for Best Dramatic presentation.
I have been thinking about what Jeff Walker said since the end of Bucconeer. After some careful consideration, I propose the Dramatic Presentation Award be divided in the following manner:
- Best Film (or Motion Picture).
- Best Television Episode(s): As stated in the current rules, a single episode or a related arc of episodes, not an entire season of shows.
- Best Musical Recording or Performance: Covering music albums (filk and otherwise), live theater musical or opera.
- Best Spoken-Word Recording/Performance: Covering spoken-word books or short works on tape or CD, a single or related arc of radio shows or theater performance.
- Best Other Related Form: Covering documentaries, art exhibits, ballet or other live performance art.
If there were a lack of interest or less than three viable nominees in any particular category, it would be dropped for that voting year.
Now some may see this expansion as a bit excessive; that by doing this, we are essentially conceding the Science Fiction Achievement Awards to media fans. I reply in turn that we must change with the times if we are to ensure SF fandom's survival in the next century. Media fans are not enemies, they're SF fans too, and they do buy and read books. As an example: Even though it was, in my humble opinion, a dreadful adaptation, Starship Troopers has had one big benefit; some those fans who either liked or disliked it have sought out (at my urging in some cases) and read the source material. Result: The possibility of a new generation of Robert A. Heinlein readers.
I have noticed over the past few years, a growing division among anime, filking, media and book reading fans. By raising the profile of the Hugo, we will raise the awareness of the SF community as a whole in other artistic communities and the general public. And in doing so, we will have more people becoming aware of and voting on the Hugos. I find the prospect of nominating Midnight Oil, Peter Gabriel or the Kronos Quartet for a Hugo incredibly exciting.
Chris M. Barkley
cmbarkley@yahoo.com
Editor: Readers interested in learning more about the Hugo Awards should visit the Web site of the World Science Fiction Society.
Nothing good to say about Armageddon
irst, I, too, don't know what Jerry Bruckheimer was doing when he said Armageddon was so accurate. The official NASA NEAR Web page had a review of five different movies and miniseries, covering everything from Sean Connery's Meteor forward. In terms of scientific accuracy, they put Deep Impact at the top of the list and Armageddon at the bottom.
Second, after seeing Armageddon, my teenaged kids thought that it was the greatest thing ever. So, last weekend I took two of them to see Deep Impact, which is still showing at the "dollar shows" where I live. They left the theater stunned by how different the two movies were, and decided to never again say anything good about Armageddon.
The reason for their drastic change of opinion is that, unlike Armageddon, Deep Impact is about how real people would act in the face of the ultimate disaster. Every character in the movie rang true. In particular, Tea Leoni's character evolved during the show. Initially, she is a self-centered reporter who will do anything to get ahead, but she becomes heroic when she decides to give up her ticket to safety to a mother and child.
In the end, it boils down to personal taste. If you want to see big explosions and a special-effects extravaganza, go see Armageddon. But if, on the other hand, you enjoyed Apollo 13, Deep Impact is the one that shouldn't be missed.
Sam Denton
sam.denton@maryville.com
Armageddon was fun, Deep Impact was dull
rmageddon was enjoyable, much more than Deep Impact. The science was pretty wide of the mark in both films, but Armageddon was fun where most of Deep Impact was dull. Jerry Bruckheimer was at least aware of what the public wanted...graphic asteroid impact special effects. Deep Impact was ruined because, from the previews, we knew the asteroid (at least a fragment) would hit. As for NASA's eight of 10 rating, I doubt they were gauging the accuracy as much as the NASA friendliness of the movie. NASA loved having the public told they could prepare two top-secret shuttles in less than 18 days. That is the worst gaffe of all, efficiency from a government agency!
Claude Watrous
rustyinaz@aol.com
Regular people working in space
irst of all, Armageddon was meant to be slam-bam entertainment. In spite of two corny situations (defusing the nuke with a second to spare and waiting for the final second to detonate), the movie portrayed regular people doing their work in space. When we have the "belters" in the future who will be mining the asteroids, I imagine they will be a bunch of roughnecks much like those in the movie. Shakespeare it wasn't, but as a sci-fi action flick, it was better than most.
Hanno
Hannibal@Hotmail.com
Who cares about accuracy?
aving read many of the letters regarding Armageddon, and finally being able to see the movie, I offer this thought. What are we really expecting from science fiction (heavy on the fiction) movies, books and TV shows? My point: Armageddon was a great movie, rather predictable in some areas especially if you read a lot of sci-fi, but the action was great, the special effects wonderful, I cared about the characters and was moved in the end. It made me think about how I would act in the event that I was told the world would end in 18 days. Isn't that was sci-fi is all about, proposing the possibilities?
Who cares how scientifically accurate it is, if I want science fact, I'll pick up a textbook. By asking for accurate science fact we are taking the magic of storytelling away. Even the first Star Trek series, although trying to keep to facts, was more concerned with the story than the actual fact. Remember there are no audible explosions in space and the stars really wouldn't show up on the viewing screen, but wasn't it fun to see that and wonder what it would be like to be on the Enterprise and see the star go by? Allow science fiction to be science fiction and enjoy the story.
Mary Puls
menoly@email.msn.com
