Leave a comment

Comments 11

timill October 2 2006, 11:50:39 UTC
The Hugos were first awarded in 1953 as a one-off and restarted in 1955. Also they were initially for Novel and Short Fiction, without the split of the shorter lengths which happened in the 1960s

Not that this invalidates your points at all...

Reply

del_c October 2 2006, 12:31:09 UTC
Sorry, I think I've included eight retro-Hugos, for 1946 and 1950, in four categories. I'll amend the text of the post.

Reply

timill October 2 2006, 12:45:45 UTC
Watch out for the 1954 Retros, awarded in 2004 at Noreascon 4...

Reply


(The comment has been removed)

nwhyte October 2 2006, 12:42:28 UTC
I certainly didn't say so! The flurry of responses was largely generated by Doug Muir's comment that there are no writers under the age of 30!

Reply


nwhyte October 2 2006, 12:41:06 UTC
Quite apart from the fact that the whole basis of my calculation is to take into account the different ages at which authors have won awards, I think it's absolutely clear, even from your graph, that the 1942-51 cohort were doing better than the 1952-61 or 1962-71 cohorts in the earlier stages of their careers, and better than the 1932-41 or 1922-31 generation at the equivalent later stages.

In 2006, the 1962-71 cohort have won 10 Hugos and Nebulas, of which 1 before 1996
In 1996, the 1952-61 cohort had won 17 Hugos and Nebulas, of which 1 before 1986 (and that one was declined by the recipient)
In 1986, the 1942-51 cohort had won 62 Hugos and Nebulas, of which 11 before 1976
In 1976, the 1932-41 cohort had won 31 Hugos and Nebulas (and as you point out pre-1966 comparisons aren't really fair as the categories don't match).

I'm away from my primary database so these may be off by a handful, but I hope you see the point.

Reply


beamjockey October 2 2006, 14:07:06 UTC
Something's wrong with your chart. I don't see the orange-yellow color of 1912-21 winning many prizes. Arthur C. Clarke and Isaac Asimov are in that cohort.

Reply

del_c October 2 2006, 14:31:31 UTC
I count a total of forty five for that cohort, of which Asimov and Clarke got seven each. They're there on the chart, forty five pink squares, starting with Asimov's (retro) Hugo at 26 for The Mule and ending with Carol Emshwiller's 2005 Short Story Nebula for "I Live with You".

It's probably a trick of the eye.

Reply

beamjockey October 2 2006, 15:00:37 UTC
Pink... oh.

The little square next to "1912-1921" didn't look particularly pink to me. Kind of orange.

My mistake.

Reply


pompe October 2 2006, 14:51:21 UTC
Well, isn't the 1942-1952 cohort a big one? Around here, the 1940's people tend to dominate everything. They rebelled in '68, played golf in the 80's and worry about retirement now, and the rest of us have to live through their life stages in all sorts of culture.

Here's my Hugo question. How many Hugo's have been awarded to _translated_ SF, i.e, the author wrote it first in another language than English?

Reply

nwhyte October 2 2006, 15:11:24 UTC
Well, isn't the 1942-1952 cohort a big one?

Not as big as the omes immediately after.

How many Hugo's have been awarded to _translated_ SF, i.e, the author wrote it first in another language than English?

None at all?

Reply

pompe October 2 2006, 15:54:51 UTC
I guess it is just nationally our 1940's people are the Big Gang.

Regarding translated authors, I have no idea. Stanislaw Lem never got any?

Reply


Leave a comment

Up