1973 was a very good year. Income inequality was at its
historical lowest in America, union density was at its highest, major victories
were happening in civil rights.
But in the world of science fiction, it was the year that one
of the worst novels ever to win the top Hugo award was honoured for all the
wrong reasons.
In 1973, this was considered fashionable. (Photo via Todd Elhers) |
Solid Nominees
Let’s take a quick look at the six books on that year’s Hugo
novel short list:
When Harlie Was One by Tribbles-creator David Gerrold is an
excellent novel about an artificial intelligence and a psychologist whose job
is to evaluate it. It’s a book that is rich with insight about what it means to
be human, has well-developed characters, and a compelling story arc. It’s
definitely Gerrold’s finest work.
Time travel aficionado Poul Anderson explored some of his
well-worn themes in There Will Be Time. But he did so in interesting ways,
weaving in ecological themes, cultural diversity, and human evolution. The
result is a fine novel that holds up well today.
Long before Raymond Kurtzweil or Vernor Vinge made the
technological singularity a literary trope in SF, Clifford D. Simak explored
the concept through the eyes of a tribe of Native Americans left behind after
the rest of the human race disappears. It’s an interestingly weird novel that
foreshadows The Peace War, Marooned In Realtime, and other singularitarian
works.
The Year Of Silverberg
Robert Silverberg became the only author to have two novels
shortlisted for the Hugo in the same year, with both The Book Of Skulls and
Dying Inside in contention. Over his career, Silverberg has racked up nine
total nominations for best novel without having ever won, but these two should
have been his best chances.
The Book Of Skulls — about four college students vying
for immortality at a high cost — is probably the weaker of the two.
Dying Inside is a sublime novel, understated yet rich. The
prose is light and effective. The protagonist
Dying Inside is more than just a genre classic. (Image via Wikipedia) |
Nostalgia Triumphs
So what did take home the prize? The mostly forgotten Isaac
Asimov novel The Gods Themselves. It’s a stitch-together of three short stories
about an interdimentional energy crisis. Hard to deny that it’s an ambitious
work, and it’s hard to deny that some of the science-fictional physics are
interesting. But it’s dull. And plodding. And ungainly. It has not aged well,
and it is not Asimov at his best.
So why did it win? Probably because Asimov had never won the
best novel Hugo at that point. And probably because it was Asimov’s first
original science fiction novel in more than a decade (his previous SF novel
being a mostly-forgettable movie adaptation of Fantastic Voyage in 1966). And
possibly the Silverberg vote was split between two worthy nominees.
Beyond just the misstep of having the worst nominee win,
there were several memorable omissions from the shortlist — the Strugatsky
brothers’ Roadside Picnic is now considered a must-read classic. John Brunner’s
The Sheep Look Up looks better every year. And Norman Spinrad’s The Iron Dream
is a hilarious takedown of right-wing misogynist SF tropes that seems relevant
to today’s Sad Puppies imbroglio.
1972/73 was a year with a lot of great science fiction novels. That year's Hugo Award Winner isn’t among those.
1972/73 was a year with a lot of great science fiction novels. That year's Hugo Award Winner isn’t among those.
A lot of discussion in the fanzines and at cons at the time concerned Asimov's bold strides in the genre in this novel, largely owing to its sexual content.
ReplyDeleteSure, there was some nostalgia going on...give Ike his novel Hugo...but as I recall, there was a lot more discussion along the lines of - Foundation...menage-a-trois...!
That's fair. It's an ambitious novel, and way outside of Asimov's comfort zone, but ambition isn't enough to make something good. It's so stilted and dull.
DeleteRead it for the first time as a child, because I was working my way through the classics of SF. As much as I loved almost everything Asimov had written, that one left me cold. Returned to it decades later as an adult, because I assumed that I'd missed something on my first read through, and was left just as cold.
I think it's aged more badly than the other books on that year's short list.
oh, and that pic of what was fashionable...its a "bit" over stated
ReplyDelete100% fair point. :)
Delete