Here are the results of the latest SF Signal poll.
Science fiction awards season is upon us. Do you think award wins are a good indicator of quality?
|(70 total votes)|
Comments this week.
“Quality is entirely subjective, and awards tend to be given, and voted for, by people who are rather too fond of their own voices. Awards are a good measure of what other people think, and little else. They are absolutely no substitute for first-person experience.” – Paul Harper
“I voted ‘usually’ because rarely seems too harsh. Sometime, though, for current awards I do have to wonder about what the voters were thinking. For the books that won awards a long [time ago] that I didn’t enjoy, I sometimes think that they’ve aged badly or maybe I just don’t get it.” – SF Fangirl
“I usually enjoy the PKD award winners the most (who can argue with Tim Powers!) for long fiction, and let the Hugs and Nebs find me some short stuff I haven’t already read.” – platyjoe
“I try to read all nominated short fiction they’re usually very good. But sometimes I come across others that I feel wasn’t worth the time I spent to read it.” – Tony Geer
“Personally I tend to have more interest in the annual Locus and SFSite polls than either the Hugo or Nebula winners. The Hugo and Nebula finalists are usually a pretty good bunch and I usually read a few of those novels. Some great books totally miss all the awards every year as well.” – David
“You can argue this till your face turns blue. There is a lot of politics, a lot of back scratching, a lot of favoritism, nepotism and so on. But at the end of the day, the one who is holding the rocket will go down in history and there is a reason for that. Every book I read that had those words on it I put down satisfied.” – General X