|
Post by allthingshorror on Sept 20, 2009 14:04:12 GMT
Well they have been posted:
Best Novel (The August Derleth Fantasy Award)
Memoirs of a Master Forger, by William Heaney, aka Graham Joyce (Gollancz)
Best Novella The Reach of Children, by Tim Lebbon (Humdrumming) Best Short Fiction Do You See, by Sarah Pinborough, from Myth-Understandings, ed. by Ian Whates (Newcon Press) Best Collection Bull Running for Girls, by Allyson Bird (Screaming Dreams) Best Anthology The Mammoth Book of Best New Horror 19, ed. Stephen Jones (Constable & Robinson) The PS Publishing Best Small Press Award Elastic Press, run by Andrew Hook Best Non-Fiction Basil Copper: A Life in Books, by Basil Copper, ed. Stephen Jones (PS Publishing) Best Magazine/Periodical Postscripts, ed. Peter Crowther and Nick Gevers (PS Publishing) Best Artist Vincent Chong Best Comic/Graphic Novel Locke and Key, by Joe Hill and Gabriel Rodriguez (IDW Publishing) Best Televison Doctor Who, head writer Russell T. Davies (BBC Wales) Best Film The Dark Knight, directed by Christopher Nolan (Warner Brothers) The Sydney J. Bounds Award for Best Newcomer Joseph D'Lacey, for Meat (Bloody Books)
The Karl Edward Wagner Award (the Special Award) Hayao Miyazaki The results of the BFS Short Story Competition 2009 were also announced at the ceremony: Winner: Dead Astronauts, Patrick Whittaker Runner-up: In the Moment, Elana Gomel
So there you have it - and the biggest shock is Bull Running For Girls and while Allyson is a nice lass and all, her collection is a shockingly bad one and should have in no way have won. I think there may have been intensive lobbying by her and publisher to get this award. Mark Samuels, Gary McMahon, STEPHEN KING! (his greatest return to form in 15 years!) have been beaten by a woman whose stories have all the grace and subtlety of being hit over the head by a sledgehammer.
Good to see Basil's book winning best Non Fiction!
|
|
|
Post by carolinec on Sept 20, 2009 18:01:28 GMT
.. and good to see Doctor Who winning best TV (though I prefer the classic series myself). Sadly, despite having booked for it, I missed out on going to FCon yet again this year due to unforeseen circumstances, things beyond my control, and other such annoying matters. Pig sick about that.
|
|
|
Post by marksamuels on Sept 21, 2009 22:52:19 GMT
It's funny, but on the night of the BFS awards I received the following communication in my email inbox. Seriously. Some spambot out there has a sense of humour. Mark S.
|
|
|
Post by weirdmonger on Sept 22, 2009 7:25:35 GMT
Congratulations to all who won BFS awards - even if Cone Zero lost out! Among some very strong contenders (some of which I would also have liked to see win), I am very pleased that 'Bull Running For Girls' (Screaming Dreams 2008) by Allyson Bird - a book that I reviewed HERE in detail - won the Best Single-Author Collection Award from the British Fantasy Society. I am gratified that others surely must also have recognised the raw passion and sincerity underlying the fiction ... as well as valuing the fiction itself as a perceived truth truer than truth itself. Not often does this chemistry work. Books have power not necessarily by their perfection but by a strong sense of emotion that permeates through the subtle gaps left by intention and mis-intention.
|
|
|
Post by skunsworth on Sept 22, 2009 8:16:50 GMT
Erm, that's a bit out of order. I wonder if someone described one of your works as "shockingly bad", how you'd feel? By all means disagree with the judges' decisions, and state that you think they're wrong, but perhaps you might want to think about the fact that authors may also read these boards. It's strange that you say Allyson's a lovely person, and then are so brutal about Bull Running - even if you don't like it (which is fine), you might want to consider other people's feelings when you write stuff for public view. Besides, you're wrong about Bull Running. SKU
|
|
|
Post by allthingshorror on Sept 22, 2009 13:08:15 GMT
Yes, I met her the once, bought a copy of the book from her, read it and gave it away. Just because I found her nice doesn't mean to say I should pander to any ego by saying that the book is good if it isn't. I'll leave that to her friends to do. It was a rotten book, and that is my opinion and I am free to air it if I choose. If that few word remark was to hurt her feelings, then she should grow a thicker skin.
I hope her next collection is better than this one was. And I have no problems with saying this to her face, and I am sure our paths will meet at some point. But good to see that you have her back. That's all I'm going to say now. Ta Ta.
|
|
|
Post by weirdmonger on Sept 22, 2009 13:41:24 GMT
Just because I found her nice doesn't mean to say I should pander to any ego by saying that the book is good if it isn't. I'll leave that to her friends to do. I suspect you are replying to Skunsworth's post, allthingshorror, but I must say I agree with Skunsworth. I like to think I'm 'friends' with anyone with whom I come into contact in real life as well as electronically. I met Allyson Bird briefly two or three years ago, so I don't count myself as a life friend of hers. I genuinely wrote that review (I linked to) based on the text of the book. Luckily, with literature, there can be no real arguments. It's all down to taste. And I see our tastes must differ. However, importantly, to be able to say something is 'bad' in public to the serious degree you seem to be saying it, it is tempting, I would have guessed, to say why in at least some detail. Or otherwise don't say anything. In the same way that I went into detail about why I thought it 'good'. I voted for Meloy's 'Islington Crocodiles'. And I loved the Samuels, McMahon, as well as the Bird. I would have been very pleased for a winner out of these. (I haven't read the King). There were other collections I loved in 2008: 'Beneath The Surface' by Simon Strantzas and 'The Exaggerated Man' by Terry Grimwood just to name two. A strong year.
|
|
|
Post by marksamuels on Sept 22, 2009 23:36:16 GMT
I don't think it's all just down to a question of "taste", as you put it Des. One book will win out over another because of connections, networking, promotion and relentless self-publicity. Frankly, I couldn't care less about the BFS awards and this has been my position for some time. But I know folk in the BFS who are happy to play this game, and some are talented writers. What you'll notice is that they have no critical comments to make (even in private!) about the work of other writers except to chime in with the latest chorus of approval, because they're so desperate for recognition and terrified of damaging their careers as authors that they've lost all sense of objectivity. Johnny doesn't have to justify himself to anyone. He's not made any claim to a thorough-going critical analysis. What he had done is probably read a wider selection of the books nominated than had most of those who voted. And let's be honest, we're talking in the region of less than twenty votes to win a BFS award, based on past numbers. (Given the introduction of a further voting round, I'd not be surprised if it were now single figures). It would easy to target BFS members and go all out to win. All you'd need is a small press book, lots of "don't forget me at awards time" hints on the internet, make sure you hang out with the right crowd at the BFS regularly, and provide all the right noises about being one of the gang and applauding other award winners. Conversely, see how easy it is to blow your chances completely. There, I just did it (again). Mark S.
|
|
|
Post by vaughan on Sept 23, 2009 1:41:28 GMT
Do we honestly not think that is how all awards are done?
|
|
|
Post by weirdmonger on Sept 23, 2009 7:45:02 GMT
Hiya, Mark I'm not privy to the machinations of Awards as part of Human Nature. Like you, I can guess. When I won a BFS award in 1998, I took it at face value. And was happy. All I was saying (and I think Simon Kurt Unsworth said the same thing above) is that if anyone says a book is 'very very bad' in public, one must think very careful before doing so, especially without supporting context. Would you shout it out to everyone in a gathering, i.e. outside of a private conversation? That again is Human Nature. It's fair enough to say this book was 'not for me' - in any context
|
|
|
Post by marksamuels on Sept 23, 2009 8:19:19 GMT
Des On the other hand, one could say that responses like Johnny's are increasingly valuable in an environment where "congrats", "oh well done" and "oh very well deserved" simply become default positions after winning an award. Are you honestly of the opinion that Alison's collection deserved to win on merit ahead of the other contenders, and not that it won mainly for other reasons? I don't see how you can be, given that, like me, you hoped Islington Crocodiles would win. Mark S.
|
|
|
Post by weirdmonger on Sept 23, 2009 9:44:18 GMT
I was severely torn between yours, Gary's, Allyson's and Paul's, ... and the Strantzas and Grimwood if they had been shortlisted and I had read them early enough. I chose Paul's on the day for personal reasons of past association with one of the stories, the only criteria I could think of. Have you read it? Like all those books, the Allyson Bird book could easily have won on merit for the reasons I give HERE (where I said in early July at least one story should get an award.) BTW, if you're happy with someone publicly saying a book is 'very, very bad' without supporting context, then I think I'll begin to side with Joel Lane about the Internet! des
|
|
|
Post by andydecker on Sept 23, 2009 11:19:07 GMT
Ah, awards. Stuff for heated debates When I read the line-up some of the choices didn´t make a lot sense for me. I understand the Best Writer, as Joyce is a great and surely underrated writer (his Requiem sure left a lasting impression on me). I even get Televison; for all its faults Dr.Who is well done on the whole. But The Dark Knight is the best movie of the year? Don´t get me wrong, I liked it a lot, but one should think that there would be other, more original movies deserving a Fantasy Award than a comic adaption. (I just checked the list of the other nominees. A movie like The Mist shouldn´t even be on such a list, and a tv-series like Dexter doesn´t even qualify remotedly for a Fantasy Award. This seems to be a kitchen-sink approach. I guess Best Film next year will be Twilight? ) Things like best graphic novel ARE a matter of taste. I couldn´t stand the art of Locke&Key and didn´t thought it at least clever. But that´s just me. Again the nominees are somehow strange. Why should the reprint of a 20 year old Hellblazer comic (with some very bad art) merit an award? Not to mention straight Superhero comics. I sure hope that John Smith´s extraordinary Cradlegrave from 2000AD or Mill´s Defoe will be a contender next time. Those are fantasy-comics - and even british one - , not Marvel´s Avengers, for God´s sakes. Like I said, the discussion here made me curious, so I checked the work of Ms. Bird. Her story "The Caul Bearer" is made avaiable on the website of her publisher, so I read it. Well. Nice atmosphere, some original ideas, also some things I personally perceived as some serious faults which could have used another draft. (I didn´t believe for a second the love between the girl and her dead fisherman, which was just presented as a fact, not when all the other relationships were presented as loveless marriages of convenience. And what really bugged me was the timelessness of the story; when did this happen? As a tale of 1880 I can kind of believe the girl´s reaction, as of 2009 it is plain unbelievable) And the Lovecraft angle is more than tennous and suggest a connection which isn´t there. (You could easily replace the Lovecraft intro with one by Robert Howard, who did two weird tales about a cursed fishing village which more resembled the atmosphere of the village featured here than any thing Innsmouth, come to think of it.) On the whole I can´t say I was impressed. I can see why people see this as being a fresh voice, but as award material?
|
|
|
Post by weirdmonger on Sept 23, 2009 11:33:24 GMT
Andy, my view of the Bird book is at least partially based on it as a whole collection and the interactions / connections between stories (and the raw passion that gradually seems to evolve from them).
best, des
|
|
|
Post by skunsworth on Sept 23, 2009 15:48:42 GMT
Mark
If you really don't care about the BFS awards, why don't you remove your work from the long- or shortlist when it's announced? If they genuinely, mean so little to you, and you're so convinced that the winner is chosen as a result of pressure and publicity (as opposed to people enjoying it), then surely the most reasonable thing to do is simply to remove yourself from the running?
Just wondering.
S
|
|