SFWRITER.COM > Canadian SF > What's Wrong with the Auroras?
What's Wrong with the Aurora Awards?
by Robert J. Sawyer
First published in the June 1997 issue of Alouette: The
Newsletter of the Canadian Region of SFWA
Copyright © 1997 by
Robert J. Sawyer
All Rights Reserved
The Canadian Science Fiction and Fantasy Awards
("the Auroras") have existed in one form
or another since 1980. They have become a valuable,
internationally recognized way of raising the profile of Canadian
speculative fiction.
Personally, of course, I'm a big fan of the Auroras and not
just because I've been lucky enough to win more of them than any
other English-Canadian author. But I'm not blind to the problems
with the Auroras, either. So here's my take on what's wrong with
the them, and how they could be fixed. I hope it provides some
food for thought.
The Physical Trophy
Franklyn Johnson's design for the Aurora Award is
distinctive, standardized, attractive, and appropriate. The only
real complaint ever raised about it is that the trophies take up
physical space, which becomes a problem when one person has lots of them.
However, that awards go repeatedly to the same
people in certain categories is surely indicative of a problem
with those categories and not with the trophies themselves. I
believe the pro community should wholeheartedly endorse the
current Aurora trophy design. [Ironically, in the year after I
wrote this, a new design was used; the
old design appears below.]
The Fan Aurora Awards
Periodically, there have been suggestions from members of
the pro community that the fan Aurora Awards be abolished.
However, the Auroras are fan-administered awards, and surely it
would be inappropriate, as well as unnecessarily belligerent, to
suggest to the fans that the categories that recognize their own
valuable contributions to Canadian Science Fiction be eliminated. Indeed, I
believe that pro writers should publicly endorse the existence of
the fan awards.
However, it is also true that many publications which might
give publicity to the professional award winners will be
confused, daunted, or simply turned off by the fan awards. Every
year, the Aurora committee sends a press release to many places
listing all the winners; every year it is ignored except by
Locus. Last year, I sent a
press release on my own listing only
the pro winners; The Globe and Mail gave it prominent
coverage, and it was also mentioned in The Toronto Star
and Maclean's.
So, while the fan awards should continue, I do believe that
the pro community perhaps through the Canadian Region of
SFWA should undertake to send out its own press releases
to media outlets that specialize in books, listing only the
professional-category nominees and winners.
The "Other" Category
The "Other" category has caused a great deal of
consternation because of the inability to meaningfully compare
the disparate works in this category we've had such things as
TV shows, anthologies, critical works, book reviews, museum
displays, and more, all competing against each other. There's
also a problem with the underlying assumption that every work, no
matter how unusual or offbeat, should be eligible to compete for
an award.
For instance, while it's true that "Out of this World" was
the best exhibition ever at the National Library of Canada on the
topic of Canadian Science Fiction, it's also equally true that it was the
worst exhibition ever at the National Library of Canada on the
topic of Canadian Science Fiction. Does a unique event deserve an award? How
can it possibly compete for one, if it's the only event of its
kind?
I believe the "Other" category should be confined to works
that collect short fiction and/or poetry: chapbooks,
anthologies, single-author collections, and magazines. These
forms are all sufficiently similar to make reasonable comparison
possible.
The French Auroras
In 1996, it took just three nominations to become a finalist
for the "Best Long-Form Work in French" and "Best Short-Form Work
in French" categories, and just two perhaps the nominee and
his/her significant other to become a finalist in the "Best
Other Work in French" category. Indeed, one of the works that
made it to the ballot with only two nominations had two authors
it's entirely possible that the authors themselves, and no one
else in all of Canada, were the only ones to nominate it. These
paltry numbers cheapen the Aurora awards, and bespeak an
indifference on the part of Francophone voters to the Auroras.
An aggressive stance would be to recommend that the French
Auroras be abolished; after all, there already exists a separate
series of French-Canadian science-fiction awards, the Prix Boreal.
A more conciliatory stance might be to suggest that a
minimum number of nominators, and a minimum number of
nominations, be required for an Aurora to be presented in any
given category. I feel that an Aurora category should be declared
vacant if fewer than 20 nominating ballots (from 20 different
people) contain at least one nomination in that category.
In addition, I suggest that a minimum of ten nominations be
required to be named an Aurora finalist, and that any category
with fewer than three finalists be declared vacant for the
current year. Finally, any category that has been declared
vacant for three consecutive years should be removed permanently
from the Aurora ballot, only to be reinstated by the normal CSFFA
process for adding new categories.
To further reinforce the special significance of Aurora
nominations, only two-way ties for last place on the final ballot
should be accepted. If there's a tie for fifth place on the
final ballot between three or more works or individuals, none of
the tied works should be included on the final ballot. It should be a
real honor to be an Aurora finalist, not something that
practically everyone working in that category receives.
Terminology and Categorization
The professional Aurora Awards are currently awarded as
follows:
- Best Long-Form Work in English
- Best Short-Form in English
- Best Other Work in English
- Best Long-Form Work in French
- Best Short-Form in French
- Best Other Work in French
These arcane names are awkward and unmemorable. Never has
the "long-form work" winner been anything other than a novel; the
long-form category should be renamed "Best Novel."
Poetry should still be allowed to compete in the "short-form
work" category, but this category should be renamed to simply
"Best Short Work in English/French."
And, assuming the suggestion I made earlier is adopted, the
best "Other" category should be renamed "Best Collective Work."
New Categories
Periodically, new Aurora categories are suggested. Among
those put forth recently include best graphic novel, best TV show
or movie, best poem, and best web site many presumably with
separate French and English trophies to be presented. I believe
there already are too many Aurora Awards; adding more simply
cheapens the value of each one. However, when a new category is
proposed, I believe the proposer should be required to put forth
mock ballots listing full slates of credible nominees for the
previous three years in the suggested category: if five truly
award-caliber works cannot be found in each of the preceding
three years in a proposed award category, clearly there is
insufficient quality work being done in that area in Canada to
justify an annual competitive award for it.
The Two-Year Eligibility Rule for Novels
Currently, novels are eligible for two years. However,
there's a proposal that may be ratified this year [1997] that will
prohibit any work from making the final ballot in two different
years.
Although, at first blush, not letting works be on the ballot
twice seems reasonable, it in fact invites strategic nominating:
an author of a 1998 paperback original knowing that he might have
to compete against the 1998 paperback reprint of a 1997 hardcover
bestseller might encourage friends to nominate the competing work
in 1997 so that it gets on the ballot then, thus eliminating it
from competition the following year. There's already enough
manipulation going on as is; this proposal simply invites more.
Further, as Aurora Awards chair Dennis Mullin points out,
the proposed amendment takes the crazy position that the
sixth-best novel of 1997 should get another chance in 1998
(because only the top five novels made the 1997 ballot), but the
second-best novel of 1997 doesn't deserve another chance in 1998
(because it lost in 1997).
Although the current unrestricted two-year eligibility system has
its flaws, I believe it should be retained as is or
eliminated altogether. [Ultimately, it was eliminated altogether.]
Residency Requirements
I believe only Canadian-resident authors should be eligible
for the Aurora Awards; the idea of California's William Shatner
winning one for a Tek novel strikes me as madness, and the list
of eligible works is already long enough without padding it with
books by Joel Rosenberg or Gordon Dickson. Residency should be
defined as at least six months of living in Canada in the two
years preceding publication of the work in question. As Dave
Duncan points out, giving an Aurora to an American resident who
wrote his or her book in the States is as silly as giving Dave a
Scottish Award.
Timing of the Awards Ceremony
The Aurora Awards have been presented at various times
throughout the year. Because of the need for reasonable
nominating and voting periods, and to give works published in
December a fair chance, it seems to me that the Auroras should
never be presented earlier than April 15.
Society Awards
The Aurora Awards have achieved major national and
international recognition. This has been hard-fought, over a
period of sixteen years. No other country has two major science-fiction
awards (the assertion that the United States has both the Hugo
and the Nebula is spurious: the Hugo is an international award,
presented by the members of the annual World Science Fiction
Convention, which in this decade has been or will be held in
locales as diverse as Winnipeg, Manitoba; Glasgow, Scotland; and
Melbourne, Australia; and which in all years has broadly based
international voting).
The nascent National Science Fiction and Fantasy Society
proposes creating a second, juried English-Canadian award. This
will undermine the credibility of the Auroras and confuse the
public. I believe writers should at the very least refrain from
supporting the effort to establish a second Canadian science-fiction award,
and I would prefer to see an outright condemnation of this
well-intentioned but misguided idea. [The Society collapsed
late in 1999.]
More Good Reading
More about Canadian Science Fiction
Rob's random musings on other topics
My Very Occasional Newsletter
HOME • MENU • TOP
Copyright © 1995-2024 by Robert J. Sawyer.
|