Hugo awards!

Interesting selection here. I'm shamed to say that I haven't read a single word of the winning fiction. Will have to change that. But I'm pleased with the Incredibles' win.

The winners of the 2005 Hugo Awards were announced tonight at Interaction, the 2005 World Science Fiction Convention (Worldcon). Around 2000 people including many of the nominees attended this major event. Full voting figures for both the nominating and final ballots were released simultaneously and are available from Interaction's Web Site.

Best Novel: Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell by Susanna Clarke

Best Novella: "The Concrete Jungle" by Charles Stross

Best Novelette: "The Faery Handbag" by Kelly Link

Best Short Story: "Travels with My Cats" by Mike Resnick

Best Related Book: The Cambridge Companion to Science Fiction
Edited by Edward James and Farah Mendlesohn

Best Dramatic Presentation, Long Form: The Incredibles
Written & Directed by Brad Bird

Best Dramatic Presentation, Short Form: "33" - Battlestar Galactica
Written by Ronald D. Moore and Directed by Michael Rymer.

Best Professional Editor: Ellen Datlow

Best Professional Artist: Jim Burns

Best Semiprozine: Ansible
Edited by David Langford

Best Fanzine: Plokta
Edited by Alison Scott, Steve Davies and Mike Scott

Best Fan Writer: David Langford

Best Fan Artist: Sue Mason

Best Web Site: SciFiction (www.scifi.com/scifiction)
Edited by Ellen Datlow. Craig Engler, general manager

John W. Campbell Award for Best New Writer (not a Hugo Award): Elizabeth Bear

Special Interaction Committee Award (not a Hugo Award): David Pringle

Now Playing: Wilson Pickett The Best of Wilson Pickett

One step forward, two steps back

I'm both encouraged and discouraged after the announcement of NASA's new manned spaceflight strategy. I'm encouraged, because NASA appears committed to a next-generation version of the Shuttle-C heavy lifter I've discussed previously. It appears the new cargo lifter improves on the old Shuttle-C design by mounting the cargo atop the rocket, rather piggy-back style, thus eliminating many of the hazards that doomed the shuttles Columbia and Challenger. That's good. It also uses existing technology, giving us heavy-lift capabilities sooner rather than later, and keeps shuttle contractors in business, which keeps those congressional representatives and senators happy. Which is pragmatic.



So I'm happy with NASA's plans for the heavy lifter, even if production of the thing comes 20 years later than it should have come. The Crew Exploration Vehicle, on the other hand, inspires considerably less adulation.

The Crew Exploration Vehicle, which NASA hopes to field around 2011, is expected to cost another $5 billion to develop and would be designed both to service the space station and to carry astronauts to lunar orbit. A heavy-lift launcher capable of delivering 125 metric tons of cargo to low Earth orbit would be finished after the smaller crew launch vehicle, according to NASA's plan, and would also cost in the neighborhood of $5 billion to develop.

The Crew Exploration Vehicle, according to NASA's plan, will be a capsule capable of accommodating three people and a limited amount of cargo for space station missions, a crew of four for a lunar mission and up to six people to dock with an awaiting Mars-bound vehicle.

What we have here is an Apollo retread, plain and simple. Granted, the Apollo capsules were robust and focused on one goal--crew transport. This is good. But you'd think that in the 30 years that have passed since the last Apollo flew, we could come up with something a little better than Buzz Aldrin's "Pigeon" concept. Rather than ride the cutting edge of aerospace technology, NASA is instead backpedaling--they're even using the same basic engine, the J-2--that powered the moon missions. The spacecraft are disposable. Essentially, the U.S. has turned its back on everything learned from the admittedly-flawed shuttle program, and instead falling back on what the previous generation of NASA engineers accomplished. It's particularly disappointing in light of the fact that development of the true next generation CEV had already been well under way (and no, I don't mean the VentureStar boondoggle).



The X-38 project was under development by Scaled Composites (remember those guys?) using a lifting-body design for a crew return vehicle to be used with the International Space Station. The design could carry as many as seven astronauts. Not a bad trick.



The lifting body design used the shape of the fuselage itself to create lift (hence the name) and eliminate the need for significant wings. The ship landed on skids, like the X-15, and used a steerable parafoil for controlled landings. All in all, it was and incredibly elegant and simple design, that performed well in flight tests. So successful, in fact, that plans were begun for a scaled-up version capable of carrying a crew into orbit in addition to reentry. At leas, until funding for the entire project was yanked because of space station cost overruns.



But that didn't stop others from noticing the promise of the design. Lockheed Martin entered the CEV sweepstakes with a design that was--at least visually--based wholly on Scaled Composites' X-38. Like the shuttle, the lifting body design is reusable, but unlike the shuttle, this one would be launched via an in-line design, perched atop the booster to avoid the hazards of falling debris. Even Russia got into the act, announcing in February they would begin production of a next-generation spacecraft called "Kliper" to replace the aging Soyuz vehicle. What form would this new ship take? A lifting body design. That Russia probably won't have the funding available to get this ship into production by their announced 2010 launch date is beside the point. Whereas the rest of the world is leaving the '60s behind and embracing spacecraft technology and design innovations that NASA itself pioneered, NASA instead is turning conservative in its old age, shunning innovation in favor of misplaced nostalgia. The irony of this is that back in 1961, Lockheed Martin's predecessor (then known as Martin) scored the highest evaluation for the Apollo command module contract, only to lose the bid to North American Aviation. Now, 44 years later, it loses to Boeing against the same spacecraft that beat it the first time. Man, that's gotta suck.

Is this "Pigeon"-style CEV better than the current shuttle? Yeah. Is it as good as we could've had? Not by a longshot. I suppose we can take solace in the fact that since it took 25 years for the Shuttle-C heavy lifter to move into formal production (albeit in a significantly modified form) we can expect to see an X-38 descendant enter service.

Now Playing: The Rolling Stones Rewind

SF Crowsnest chimes in

Geoff Willmetts, an institution among British SF book reviewers, chimes in over at SF Crowsnest on Voices of Vision:

There aren't many interview books around these days and also this is a somewhat slim volume compared to some I've picked up in the past but, nonetheless, such books should be encouraged because they give insight into the thinking of a variety of creators, providing the right questions are asked. As we've been on this side of the fence ourselves, we're also aware the art of asking the right questions is in giving the interviewee a chance to express themselves as well. Jayme Lynn Blasche's interviews here have been in print before in various mags like Interzone, Black Gate, sfSite.com, RevolutionsSF.com, amongst others. Some of them were also edited for paper publication and for the most part they've been put back to their original length here so even if you have read these in the past 5 years, there's a little more to keep you entertained here.

OK, so whose been interviewed? Editors: Gardener Dozois, Kristine Rusch, Stanley Schmidt, Gordon Van Gelder and Scott Edelman. Considering over half of them are still active editors, insight into their thinking would be essential for any writer submitting to their publication. From fantasy/speculative fiction: Robin Hobb (aka Megan Lindholm), Patricia Anthony, Charles de Lint and Elizabeth Moon. All discussing the fiction they were writing at the time of the interview. From comics: Elliott S! Maggin, Frank Cho and Scott Kurtz, Brad Meltzer and Neil Gaiman. Blaschke shows a little favouritism towards Green Arrow but he can be forgiven for that as the interviews extend beyond the DC archer. From SF: Samuel Delany, Gene Wolfe, Harlen Ellison (even if he doesn't like being categorised) and Jack Williamson. Of interest here is Ellison's own 3 year campaign to have AE Van Vogt recognised for the Grand Master Award. It's rare to see the internal politics (it does go on, folks) of the SF community allowed to rear its head and Ellison is just the chap to hit it on the head.

Although there is nothing fundamentally new here because of them being interviewed in the past 5 years but unless you haven't read it before, there has to be someone or more in the above that has to take your fancy. So, go read, OK.

I'm gratified that I earned another mostly positive review. I'm even more gratified that my book is now penetrating the British review circles, particularly with Interaction taking place in Glasgow this weekend. I'm just kicking myself for not sending any flyers along with several folks I know who are going (too late now--they've already departed).

Of Geoff's criticisms, well, I make no apologies for my obsession with Green Arrow--the Meltzer and Maggin interviews were conducted for the Fansite after all (now reverted to the Shrine). The slimness of the volume has been a concern for me, however. I'd actually misjudged the length of the manuscript, and left probably too much space for a promised introduction that never came. If I had to do it again, I'd add at least three more interviews to make it an even 20. But hey, that just means the follow-up volume will boast 25 conversations, if and when it gets published.

Now Playing: The Cars Greatest Hits

Yeah. Sure. Whatever.

Why is it that nothing this presidential dipshit does anymore surprises me?

President Bush invigorated proponents of teaching alternatives to evolution in public schools with remarks saying that schoolchildren should be taught about "intelligent design," a view of creation that challenges established scientific thinking and promotes the idea that an unseen force is behind the development of humanity.

Cue my moral/intellectual outrage, ire and cynical/scating response yadda yadda yadda.

Now Playing: Rush Chronicles

Dust, dust, dust

Who needs a safari when you've got Africa right outside your window? That huge dust cloud that blew westward out of the Sahara Desert last week has reached Texas. Actually, it reached Texas incrementally over the past couple of days, but today the effect was unmistakable. A thick haze hung over everything, obscuring visibility on the ground, in the sky, everywhere. Distant objects--be they buildings, cars or clouds--took on an indistinct, grayish-brown hue. The effect wasn't as thick or ominous as the thick smoke clouds that obscure our skies in those odd years where wildfires rage out of control in Mexico. Mexican smoke tends to form a thick blanket overhead that is reminiscent of overcast skies, although there's no moisture there and negligible cooling effect. This dust from Africa is spreading itself evenly from the ground to the sky, a uniform, nearly intangible haze that brings to mind Martian dust storms more than anything else. It's an interesting phenomenon, but I hope it clears out sooner rather than later.

Now Playing: Bonnie Raitt Luck of the Draw

Leonardo's Hands

Call the neighbors and wake the kids! "Leonardo's Hands" by Steven Gould and Rory Harper is live at RevolutionSF!

Steve's latest novel Reflex, comes out in mass market paperback tomorrow. It's an excellent book by the way. My review of it is up at SFSite.com.

Unlike Reflex, "Leonardo's Hands" is a creepy horror piece, so those looking for a Jumper-style romp will probably not find it all that satisfying. But still, it's a groovy story. I hope you're as jazzed as I am by Steve and Rory's first new piece of short fiction in close to a decade! Discuss it here, or over at the RevSF forums. Spread the word! :-)

Now Playing: R.E.M. Green

Interzone review

Yay! A review of Voices of Vision has turned up in Interzone no. 199, which is a Good Thing, as Interzone is where many of these interviews originally appeared:

Over a five year period, Jayme Lynn Blaschke conducted interviews with numerous authors and editors. Published in a variety of locations on the web and in print magazines (including Interzone), seventeen of these interviews have been collected into the book Voices of Vision, which provides a snapshot of the state of science fiction and comic books at the turn of the millennium.

Beginning with the editors of Analog, Asimov's, Fantasy & Science Fiction and Science Fiction Age, Blaschke demonstrates that he is an insightful interviewer who is interesting in asking more than just basic, run of the mill questions. The results, in the editorial interviews as well as the auctorial interviews, means he is able to shed light on what science fiction is and can be.

Not only does he include interviews with some of the grandmasters of the field, Blaschke also interviewed a variety of up and coming authors, thereby providing a wide range of point of view as authors reflect on their careers and the fields from different perspectives. Of necessity, authors who are just starting out, like Patricia Anthony, will view the field very differently than longtime authors like Jack Williamson. Similarly, a comic book author and a science fiction author, while sharing some of the same concerns, will diverge in other areas.

The only real quibble with Voices of Vision is that Blaschke was unable to either conduct follow-up interviews closer to the time of the book's publication or provide information about how the authors' and editors' careers have changed in the years since he spoke with them.

Blaschke's interviews and their subjects are interesting and, while relatively brief in length, cover a tremendous amount of ground. Voices of Vision is essential for understanding the current state of science fiction from the point of view of those who write it and publish it.

I also hear tell that there's a positive review in the new Analog. I haven't seen it yet, but will certainly crow it from the rooftops as soon as I do!

Now Playing: R.E.M. Document