1998 Winners and 1999 Spookys
RedThunder
First of all, I just want to send out another plea for volunteers. The
work won't me much, but I'll need help listing the eligible stories and
finding links. Thanks:)
The 1998 Spookys...
The winners can be found at
http://www.geocities.com/BourbonStreet/Delta/6504/archives/winners.html
for those who missed it on the NG. There aren't any links, but from
there you can get to the original nomination listings, which do have the
links.
As for the archives, they are up at
http://www.geocities.com/BourbonStreet/Delta/6504/archives/index.html
for those interested. AUTHORS: please check this list to see where we
linked to your story. All links to Gossamer will be removed by the end
of the week, so if your story is linked to Gossamer, please provide us
with an alternative addy. Thanks:)
On to the 1999 Spookys...
There have been a few protests over the massive reduction in categories,
namely that I cut them too much, and I have been flooded with requests
to add Outstanding Slash story to the list. After some more thinking
(wonderful thing, that:) I came up with an alternative list that has 16
categories as well as 4 empty slots. That gives a total of twenty
categories, which will hopefully cover all of the stories more fully.
Does that sound better?
Also, I'll try to have the site up in a couple of weeks. It'll look
remarkably similar to this year's site with different colors:)
Characterization:
-Scully Characterization
-Mulder Characterization
-Recurring TV Character
-Original Character
Genres (each story may only be nominated in *one* of these)
-Action/Adventure
-Crossover
-X-File
-Other Story
Romance
-NC-17 MSR
-Non NC-17 MSR
-Slash story
-Other Romance
Other
Author
New Author
Series/Long story/Novel (yep, that's all one category)
Short Stories (which would include vignettes)
RedThunder
Alli
>
> In article <36CF51A0...@paonline.com>,
> RedThunder <redth...@paonline.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >Characterization:
> >-Scully Characterization
> >-Mulder Characterization
> >-Recurring TV Character
> >-Original Character
> >
> >Genres (each story may only be nominated in *one* of these)
> >-Action/Adventure
> >-Crossover
> >-X-File
> >-Other Story
> >
> >Romance
> >-NC-17 MSR
> >-Non NC-17 MSR
> >-Slash story
> >-Other Romance
> >
> >Other
> >Author
> >New Author
> >Series/Long story/Novel (yep, that's all one category)
> >Short Stories (which would include vignettes)
> >
> >RedThunder
> >
>
> I still have problems lumping series, novel and long stories in one big
> category. Is short to be 50k and under and long everything else? Yikes!
> You've got to admit there's big difference between one 100k story and a
> series of four 300K stories!
I have to agree here, as someone who ends up writing LONG stories most
of the time. I think "Outstanding Series" should stand as its own
catagory. Writing a series is so much more difficult than simply
writing a long-ish story.
As someone else stated, action/adventure and X
> file can often be interpreted as the same thing. They appeared to be in
> many cases this time around. So why not just drop "X-File?" After all, they
> are all "The X-files."<G>
I disagree a little here. All stories AREN'T X-Files. I mean, they
aren't cases. I admit, I haven't read all the winning stories, but it
was my impression that "X-Files" were stories centered on cases, and
"Action/Adventure" starred the characters in an Adventure story not
relating to work ("The Forgotten Ones" comes to mind). But yes, they
ARE similar.
Where's Humor? I think Humor is a much more
> popular and widespead genre than Crossover. I'd rather have a Humor
> category than a Crossover category if I had to choose. That's me. What does
> everyone else think?
Humor IS very widespread and I DO enjoy it more than Crossovers.
However, Crossovers are fun and sometimes irresistable. Nothing gets
a an emotional response out of me quicker than smacking two shows
together and yelling "Play Nice!" Especially when the Xover is
plausable.
> I'm still suggesting dropping MSR categories altogether <gasp>! Really,
> stories with some degree of an MSR have become so popular and widespread,
> I'd argue that there's no need for a specialty category for MSRs.
>
Not sure about THAT one, but that's just cuz of my shipper
tendencies. Yes, most stories have aspects of MSR or UST... I don't
know.
I'm pretty much against narrowing down the categories. Ideally, there
should be more. But I know that RedThunder and her helpers put a lot
of time into this (I know; I was one) and MORE work is just
mind-boggeling. Basically, I think that all categories used this year
should be kept. The less categories, the more genre's are tossed out
or lumped together, the less great stories that will be recognized as
winners. Of course, they're all winners. :)
--
Alli
"WHAT WE DON"T KNOW: Mulder peeked at Scully's naked body while they
were in the shower. Did his ogling offend Scully, who seemed to turn
away once she saw him looking? How much did Scully see of Mulder?
Did Mulder take another, much colder shower after checking out
Scully?"
- Michael Liedtke and George Avalos "X-CURSIONS"
Visit this great weekly X-Files column at
http://www.hotcoco.com/juke/index.htm
And I now have my own pathetic little site at
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Keep/6963
Humor me and check it out, why don't you?
Brandon Ray
Alli wrote:
> Teddi Litman wrote:
>
> > I'm still suggesting dropping MSR categories altogether <gasp>! Really,
> > stories with some degree of an MSR have become so popular and widespread,
> > I'd argue that there's no need for a specialty category for MSRs.
> >
> Not sure about THAT one, but that's just cuz of my shipper
> tendencies. Yes, most stories have aspects of MSR or UST... I don't
> know.
>
I think the MSR categories should stay. Dropping them because the theme is
prevalent seems odd...that would seem to me to be a factor which says there
SHOULD be these categories.
--
I was bonding with Frohike and it scared me. -- Special Agent Dana Scully,
"Night of the Gunmen", by MoJoBer
===================================
Visit my fanfic; it gets lonely: http://www.avalon.net/~publius/MyStories.html
R. Scott Carr
> Short Stories (which would include vignettes)
From a literary standpoint, short stories and vignettes are two very
different things. I would again urge that vignettes be a separate category,
because they are a unique format and there are just so many of them. Please
don't let short stories be drowned among them.
--
Scott Carr
R. Scott Carr
> As someone else stated, action/adventure and X
> file can often be interpreted as the same thing. They appeared to be in
> many cases this time around. So why not just drop "X-File?"
I would tend to disagree with this. Action/Adventure is a good place for
stories such as "Tempest," by Missy Pennington, or "Umbra," by Dawson Rambo.
Both stories take Mulder and Scully well outside the sort of investigations that
we see on the series. "Tempest" is sort of a survival story cum romance, while
Umbra is rather...Clancyesque.
On the other hand, stories like the ongoing "Sovereignty" trilogy by Vehemently,
Khyber's (unfinished) "Sokol," many of Nascent's offerings, etc, belong in the
X-File category, because they put M&S in more XF-like situations.
> After all, they
> are all "The X-files."<G>
Yes, but the meaning of XF here is more specific than just the fact that these
are XF fanfics.
> I'd rather have a Humor
> category than a Crossover category if I had to choose.
Agreed. Humor seems much more popular.
> Also, now for my most radical suggestion,
> I'm still suggesting dropping MSR categories altogether <gasp>! Really,
> stories with some degree of an MSR have become so popular and widespread,
> I'd argue that there's no need for a specialty category for MSRs.
This is not a good approach, in my view. Either have one category -- best
romance, which will most likely go to an MSR, I think -- or create specific
categories (MSR, Slash, "Alternate Pairing" (hetero), ?/Other -- any more
needed?) I don't think we should have an "open" romance category and extra
categories reserved for non-MSR, even though I suspect MSR would win the open.
It's the principle of it.
On the novels issue: There really aren't very many "ELS" or "Oklahoma"-length
stories each year, so maybe we don't need to separate the novels and the
novellas. On the other hand, perhaps the bar for what constitutes a "novel"
should be raised from the current 200kb endorsed by the Annex.
--
Scott Carr
Teddi Litman
>
>
>Characterization:
>-Scully Characterization
>-Mulder Characterization
>-Recurring TV Character
>-Original Character
>
>Genres (each story may only be nominated in *one* of these)
>-Action/Adventure
>-Crossover
>-X-File
>-Other Story
>
>Romance
>-NC-17 MSR
>-Non NC-17 MSR
>-Slash story
>-Other Romance
>
>Other
>Author
>New Author
>Series/Long story/Novel (yep, that's all one category)
>Short Stories (which would include vignettes)
>
>RedThunder
>
This is a little better. (Of course, I'm stuck on my list, I admit it.<G>)
I still have problems lumping series, novel and long stories in one big
category. Is short to be 50k and under and long everything else? Yikes!
You've got to admit there's big difference between one 100k story and a
series of four 300K stories! As someone else stated, action/adventure and X
file can often be interpreted as the same thing. They appeared to be in
many cases this time around. So why not just drop "X-File?" After all, they
are all "The X-files."<G> Where's Humor? I think Humor is a much more
popular and widespead genre than Crossover. I'd rather have a Humor
category than a Crossover category if I had to choose. That's me. What does
everyone else think? I don't see the real need for the "Other story
category" at all. The main,general categories (Yes, I would still group
them by size...boooorinng I know; but I'd still argue that's more fair.)
would encompass stories that don't fit specific genres. As I see it, the
genre and specialty categories are for stories that might not compete well
in the broader general categories. (i.e Humor, slash, stories which focus on
characters other than Mulder and Scully, character studies which may not
involve tight, intense plotting) Also, now for my most radical suggestion,
I'm still suggesting dropping MSR categories altogether <gasp>! Really,
stories with some degree of an MSR have become so popular and widespread,
I'd argue that there's no need for a specialty category for MSRs.
Teddi
raven
<redth...@paonline.com> wrote:
>
>On to the 1999 Spookys...
>There have been a few protests over the massive reduction in categories,
>namely that I cut them too much, and I have been flooded with requests
>to add Outstanding Slash story to the list. After some more thinking
>(wonderful thing, that:) I came up with an alternative list that has 16
>categories as well as 4 empty slots. That gives a total of twenty
>categories, which will hopefully cover all of the stories more fully.
>Does that sound better?
>
>Also, I'll try to have the site up in a couple of weeks. It'll look
>remarkably similar to this year's site with different colors:)
>
>Characterization:
>-Scully Characterization
>-Mulder Characterization
>-Recurring TV Character
>-Original Character
>
>Genres (each story may only be nominated in *one* of these)
>-Action/Adventure
>-Crossover
>-X-File
>-Other Story
This is good. X-File and Action/Adventure and Story should definitely
remain split, as they are quite different, judging by the explanations
on Gossamer.
>
>Romance
>-NC-17 MSR
>-Non NC-17 MSR
>-Slash story
>-Other Romance
This area should be changed a little to encompass a far broader range
of possible relationships. To me the interaction between the
characters is a very important aspect of any fic, and one which isn't
covered by any of the other categories. Having two categories for MSR
seems to exclude all other forms of relationship. I would suggest
something like:
Relationship
-MSR
-M/S UST or Platonic
-Slash story
-Other romance
>
>Other
>Author
>New Author
Should New Authors also be eligible for the Outstanding Author
category?
>Series/Long story/Novel (yep, that's all one category)
This one could be split into two categories; Series and Long
Story/Novel. They are two very different things.
>Short Stories (which would include vignettes)
~raven~
RedThunder
Well, after a good nights sleep (and quite a bit of relief that no one is
hunting my head:) I'm ready to hop into the foray again.
But first, we are still looking for volunteers...if you'd like to help with the
awards, even for just a short period of time, please let me know.
> I think, from the start, we were faced with a rushed the awards
> process. There were many issues not hammered out at the beginning
> and then several issues that cropped up along the way that were
> never resolved. I think in some instances, answers to questions
> changed part-way through the process, which added to the confusion.
This is probably true. We tried to save all of the suggestions to use them for
next year, and we are definitally going to take things a bit slower:)
> An example of this was how when the final nominees came out, RedThunder's
> message said the number of votes allowed in a category varied according
> to how many stories were left in a category. However, by the final days
> of voting, I could only find documents that said three votes per category.
> If there was notice of this on the newsgroup, I missed it somehow.
> I was confused, but stuck with three votes per category so my votes would
> not be invalidated. But now I'm left still wondering about that.
Well, the number of votes was the same for each category, no matter how many
nominated stories there were. The number of places did depend on the number of
stories in that category (if there were eight or more stories, a third place
was added.)
> Late in the nominations process, there was talk of a poetry award, and
> at the last minute, RT solicited nominations for best disclaimer that never
> seemed to come together (or, am I mistaken and these ideas are running
> later than the main awards?). Deadlines kept changing, as did eligible
> stories, and the whole process felt like a race through mud.
The poetry category was brought up when a few people expressed a concern that
poetry was being excluded for no reason. However, the official poetry awards
were announced soon after, so that kind of faded out.
The disclaimers were just to be used for the site (actually, I was planning on
mixing them in when I announced the winners, but after asking a few people,
that was deemed to be a bad idea.) I still have them, and I'll start putting
them around the archives soon.
> RT asked in an earlier thread for comments on the awards process.
> I hope you will see I am noting facts *as I perceived them.*
Comments are welcome and encouraged. Otherwise, how can we fix the problems or
know what we are doing right?
> I think a release of statistics would be very interesting to a
> lot of us. I am about *general* statistics of total voter turnout
> and total number of votes in a given category. These numbers will
> not hurt any authors, but will give us clues as to the validity of
> categories (which we are trying to figure out now) or perhaps
> voters we need to encourage (I can just picture a low slash category
> vote, even though I know we have a thriving slash community) if
> we want to encourage them.
Stats are available, for both rounds, if you contact me. Basically it's just
the raw numbers, and there's an awful lot of them, which is why they aren't
posted here. Just let me know if you want to see them.
Just as a side note thoough, slash received far more votes than Mulder/Other or
Scully/Other, though far less than any of the characterization categories.
> *Numbers* do not say anything about trust and should be easy to
> give. Feed us statistic geeks! :)
They're here. The numbers for the final round are about 12K. I haven't even
figured out how much the first round would be, but it's probably near 50K.
> Also current is that the awards have happened, *most* everyone seems
> happy about this (or else they ain't talkin'), and we all seem up
> for another round in November. Thank you, RedThunder and friends!
Thank you:) And a special thank you to everyone who helped out this year. These
awards would not have been possible without them.
> In addition, RedThunder has already begun working at smoothing out
> the process for the next awards and soliciting suggestions, which is
> commendable and an amazing show of stamina. ;)
Again, thanks:)
> Maybe it's me, but I feel like we are trying to settle too much too
> quickly. The open discussion currently going on about categories
> is a good idea. The tone of it is saying to me that people are
> actually for a large number of categories, not less. Setting a
> limit right away seems short-sighted.
If there is a strong push towards making more categories, I will be more than
happy to listen to it (and I am listening now.) I'll give it at least a month
before anything even resembling a rule about categories will be up on the site,
and alot can happen between then and now. We could end up with seventy
categories (though I for one certainly hope not.)
> Rules and a schedule should be in place a month before *nominations*
> are to begin. Advertising for the awards and the rules should start
> then so we get as many informed voters as possible. It might help
> cut down on ineligible nominations and headaches for the organizers.
They'll be up long before then. Hopefully I'll have everything up and finalized
by the end of August. We are also trying to make up an eligibility story list
so people can verify that the stories that they are nominating are eligible.
> Spread the word far and wide next year. ATXC is open to all, but a
> lot of people do not visit it every day. Messages scroll at a
> different rate for a lot of newsreaders. One post, with permission,
> to several key mailing lists should do the trick. Or encourage
> people to let others know on their lists, if such news is on-topic.
Actually, here's something that I don't exactly agree with. This year I know of
at least one author who asked people from her mailing list (people who don't
even come to atxc) to vote for her, and that gave her a tremendous advantage. I
have a feeling that there will be announcements posted at atxc on a pretty
regular basis, if nothing else, just to let everyone know when the site has
been updated, so the voters should be well-informed.
> Also, the cut-off deadline should should be announced several times
> over the month before it, so authors who want to make their work
> eligible can get it posted.
I can announce that one now. The eligibility dates for the 1999 Spookys are Oct
2, 1998 to Oct 1, 1999.
> Pointers to WIP should count.
That's what I've been hearing, so that's what will probably happen:)
> The web pages for each category should have the definition of the
> category *on the page.*
That sounds like a good idea to me.
> It should be determined if a non-web-page ballot is needed for
> next year. Is there a significant number of voters without web
> access to justify posted ballots?
The voting process is done the way it was done because it makes stuffing a
ballot more difficult and easier to spot. Notice we didn't have a problem with
it, but the Whammys (which are automated) did. I know it's hard to vote this
way (another reason for fewer categories) but there are benefits that I would
be loathe to give up.
> \*Blatantly* off-subject stories should not make it out of nominations
> for a category. "Red Valerian" in Scully/Skinner romance is a grey
> area. But the same story showing up in MSR and MSFriendship should
> not happen (a story title eludes me, and gee, I'm on the computer
> without the Spooky bookmark - see below). Either go by which category
> the story gets the most nominations in or go with the author's
> categorization if provided.
Personally, I had only read about 1% of the stories that were nominated this
year, so I wouldn't even begin to notice if a story was in the wrong category.
Yet another reason why categories should be cut down (in the categories that I
proposed, a story could only be nominated in one category in each major group
(except for characterization...that one probably needs some more work.) That
way, if there is conflict, the author would decide which category his/her story
fits into the most.
> Every post to the newsgroup from the Spookys organizers about the
> awards should have a link to the web page listed (I kept having
> to hunt the damn thing down as I voted from 3 different machines ;).
Okay, okay. I'll try to figure out that whole signature thing:)
> If you want my novel comments, I think I see a distinct gap between
> 200k and 300k when archiving the Annex. Most stories either barely
> make the 200k minimum or soar past 300k and beyond. So, I suggest
> a 300k minimum to make the novel cut for the voting.
I'd have to agree with Brandon here. When I think novel, I think 200K, simply
because of the Annex, and I have a feelign that most other people feel the same
way.
> I could think of more problems, suggestions and praise, but
> I'm tuckered out tonight. I especially can't come up with enough
> praise for the organizers. Despite my reservations at the
> speed of the process, it is truly an accomplishment to
> get so much done in so little time with so few problems.
>
> I think, with some preparation and organization, next year's awards
> could be bigger than ever. And, no matter what, this year's awards
> and nominees yielded a moderately comprehensive recommendations list
> for the year, which can only benefit us readers, new and old.
Thanks for your comments, they really were helpful, and will be used to shape
the next round of the Spooky Awards:)
RedThunder
(who isn't listing the site here, because she hasn't finished it yet...;)
RedThunder
as possible on the list (and yes, we still need more help with this:) Hopefully
we'll be able to get the beginnings of a list up in a month or so, and from
then on we'll be updating that list every week with the stories that were
posted that week, as well as asking authors to come and review the list to make
sure that we haven't missed anything.
RedThunder
Teddi Litman wrote:
> In article <36D15C92...@paonline.com>,
> RedThunder <redth...@paonline.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >They'll be up long before then. Hopefully I'll have everything up and
> finalized
> >by the end of August. We are also trying to make up an eligibility story
> list
> >so people can verify that the stories that they are nominating are
> eligible.
>
> That's a *great* idea! I also suggest that this eligibility list be posted
> (or at least directions to it posted several times) at least a month prior
> to the nominations process. Writers can then check the list and if their
> story/ies are not on it but they feel they are eligible, they can alert you
> to the obmission.
>
> Teddi
lore
Nobody yell "fire." ;)
Looking at what's past:
I think, from the start, we were faced with a rushed the awards
process. There were many issues not hammered out at the beginning
and then several issues that cropped up along the way that were
never resolved. I think in some instances, answers to questions
changed part-way through the process, which added to the confusion.
An example of this was how when the final nominees came out, RedThunder's
message said the number of votes allowed in a category varied according
to how many stories were left in a category. However, by the final days
of voting, I could only find documents that said three votes per category.
If there was notice of this on the newsgroup, I missed it somehow.
I was confused, but stuck with three votes per category so my votes would
not be invalidated. But now I'm left still wondering about that.
Late in the nominations process, there was talk of a poetry award, and
at the last minute, RT solicited nominations for best disclaimer that never
seemed to come together (or, am I mistaken and these ideas are running
later than the main awards?). Deadlines kept changing, as did eligible
stories, and the whole process felt like a race through mud.
RT asked in an earlier thread for comments on the awards process.
I hope you will see I am noting facts *as I perceived them.*
What's current:
I think a release of statistics would be very interesting to a
lot of us. I am about *general* statistics of total voter turnout
and total number of votes in a given category. These numbers will
not hurt any authors, but will give us clues as to the validity of
categories (which we are trying to figure out now) or perhaps
voters we need to encourage (I can just picture a low slash category
vote, even though I know we have a thriving slash community) if
we want to encourage them.
*Numbers* do not say anything about trust and should be easy to
give. Feed us statistic geeks! :)
Also current is that the awards have happened, *most* everyone seems
happy about this (or else they ain't talkin'), and we all seem up
for another round in November. Thank you, RedThunder and friends!
In addition, RedThunder has already begun working at smoothing out
the process for the next awards and soliciting suggestions, which is
commendable and an amazing show of stamina. ;)
Suggestions for the future:
Maybe it's me, but I feel like we are trying to settle too much too
quickly. The open discussion currently going on about categories
is a good idea. The tone of it is saying to me that people are
actually for a large number of categories, not less. Setting a
limit right away seems short-sighted.
Rules and a schedule should be in place a month before *nominations*
are to begin. Advertising for the awards and the rules should start
then so we get as many informed voters as possible. It might help
cut down on ineligible nominations and headaches for the organizers.
Spread the word far and wide next year. ATXC is open to all, but a
lot of people do not visit it every day. Messages scroll at a
different rate for a lot of newsreaders. One post, with permission,
to several key mailing lists should do the trick. Or encourage
people to let others know on their lists, if such news is on-topic.
Also, the cut-off deadline should should be announced several times
over the month before it, so authors who want to make their work
eligible can get it posted.
Pointers to WIP should count.
The web pages for each category should have the definition of the
category *on the page.*
It should be determined if a non-web-page ballot is needed for
next year. Is there a significant number of voters without web
access to justify posted ballots?
*Blatantly* off-subject stories should not make it out of nominations
for a category. "Red Valerian" in Scully/Skinner romance is a grey
area. But the same story showing up in MSR and MSFriendship should
not happen (a story title eludes me, and gee, I'm on the computer
without the Spooky bookmark - see below). Either go by which category
the story gets the most nominations in or go with the author's
categorization if provided.
Every post to the newsgroup from the Spookys organizers about the
awards should have a link to the web page listed (I kept having
to hunt the damn thing down as I voted from 3 different machines ;).
If you want my novel comments, I think I see a distinct gap between
200k and 300k when archiving the Annex. Most stories either barely
make the 200k minimum or soar past 300k and beyond. So, I suggest
a 300k minimum to make the novel cut for the voting.
Wrap-up:
I could think of more problems, suggestions and praise, but
I'm tuckered out tonight. I especially can't come up with enough
praise for the organizers. Despite my reservations at the
speed of the process, it is truly an accomplishment to
get so much done in so little time with so few problems.
I think, with some preparation and organization, next year's awards
could be bigger than ever. And, no matter what, this year's awards
and nominees yielded a moderately comprehensive recommendations list
for the year, which can only benefit us readers, new and old.
love, lore
--
_____________________________________________________________
You love too obsessively and you live too fiercely and you
always demand the impossible. Don't ever change babe -
that's the glory and the terror of being you. 10/31
Brandon Ray
lore wrote:
>
> An example of this was how when the final nominees came out, RedThunder's
> message said the number of votes allowed in a category varied according
> to how many stories were left in a category. However, by the final days
> of voting, I could only find documents that said three votes per category.
> If there was notice of this on the newsgroup, I missed it somehow.
> I was confused, but stuck with three votes per category so my votes would
> not be invalidated. But now I'm left still wondering about that.
The number of votes never varied, so far as I know. The number of "winners"
did. Categories with a lot of entries had 1st, 2nd and 3rd named; categories
with only a few entries got only 1st and 2nd named.
>
> Late in the nominations process, there was talk of a poetry award, and
> at the last minute, RT solicited nominations for best disclaimer that never
> seemed to come together (or, am I mistaken and these ideas are running
> later than the main awards?). Deadlines kept changing, as did eligible
> stories, and the whole process felt like a race through mud.
My impression was that the solicitation of disclaimers so she'd have something
amusing to add to the web site. I didn't think it was part of the awards
process.
>
>
> Also current is that the awards have happened, *most* everyone seems
> happy about this (or else they ain't talkin'), and we all seem up
> for another round in November. Thank you, RedThunder and friends!
amen!
>
>
> In addition, RedThunder has already begun working at smoothing out
> the process for the next awards and soliciting suggestions, which is
> commendable and an amazing show of stamina. ;)
double amen!
>
>
> Spread the word far and wide next year. ATXC is open to all, but a
> lot of people do not visit it every day. Messages scroll at a
> different rate for a lot of newsreaders. One post, with permission,
> to several key mailing lists should do the trick. Or encourage
> people to let others know on their lists, if such news is on-topic.
I disagree with this one. The awards are for ATXC, and they should not be
heavily advertised outside ATXC. If there's concern that occasion readers
might miss the announcement, then the announcement could be repeated, say,
once a week for a month. Anyone who misses that is prolly so occasional as to
not be a big concern. But I'd hate to see the voting flooded by people who do
not normally participate (or even lurk), who just happened to see an
announcement on a mailing list.
>
> The web pages for each category should have the definition of the
> category *on the page.*
Excellent idea.
>
> *Blatantly* off-subject stories should not make it out of nominations
> for a category. "Red Valerian" in Scully/Skinner romance is a grey
> area. But the same story showing up in MSR and MSFriendship should
> not happen (a story title eludes me, and gee, I'm on the computer
> without the Spooky bookmark - see below). Either go by which category
> the story gets the most nominations in or go with the author's
> categorization if provided.
This is a difficult subject. Taken to extremes, it can lead to creation of
juries, and more opportunities for hurt feelings, flame wars, etc. I don't
even want to THINK about the flame war that could erupt if someone decided
"Red Valerian" was (or was not) qualified under Scully/Skinner.
Even as it is, I hear there's been some dissent over "Jitterbug Perfume"
winning the slash category.
These are issues that will need some hashing out. I don't know the answer.
>
>
> If you want my novel comments, I think I see a distinct gap between
> 200k and 300k when archiving the Annex. Most stories either barely
> make the 200k minimum or soar past 300k and beyond. So, I suggest
> a 300k minimum to make the novel cut for the voting.
The only reason I have reservations about this is because you use the 200K
cutoff...which I suspect causes a lot of people to think of 200K to be the
cutoff for a "novel". If RT uses 200K, then we can assume anything at the
Annex that falls within the date range qualifies. *shrug*
JourneyToX
>even want to THINK about the flame war that could erupt if someone decided
>"Red Valerian" was (or was not) qualified under Scully/Skinner.
>
>Even as it is, I hear there's been some dissent over "Jitterbug Perfume"
I say this as Dasha's friend, believing that she would acknowledge this
herself, and probably will, publicly, at some point.
The Red Valerian series started as SSR, and as a whole, maybe 1/5th or 1/6th of
it was SSR. Skinner and Scully wind up with different partners at the end.
The Jitterbug series wound up as MSR too.
They're splendid stories. I wrote Dasha so much praise over RV that I was
afraid she thought I had a crush on her.
But you cannot truly say either series belonged in the category in which it was
nominated. There are stories that put Skinner and Scully together, no Mulder.
THAT is the definition of SSR. There are stories that put Scully together with
a woman. THAT is Scully slash.
No matter what you think of non-MSR stories such as true SSR, slash, etc., and
I gather your opinion isn't high, it's not fair to the writers/readers of those
stories, it's really mixing apples and oranges to say that these stories should
compete against stories where MSR doesn't get mixed in.
I hope many more people will encourage Red T, if she is to take over the
process again next year, to recognize and separate out the categories in a
better way. It may be a big job for her but that's what she asked for.
*~*~*~*~*~*
Journ...@aol.com, BYFP, not BOFQ
MORE Skinner, Save Spender, Can Kersh, Flush Fowley.
"God Bless America! Now get your asses out of here!" 1939!Skinner, Triangle
"Oh yeahhhh!" Mitch Pileggi, Season 3 Gag Reels. :-)
~*~*~*~*~
JourneyToX
That was supposed to go email.
Oh shit. Oh shit. Oh shit. Oh shit. Oh shit. Oh shit. Oh shit. Oh shit. Oh
shit. Oh shit.
Shit.
Brandon Ray
JourneyToX wrote:
>
> But you cannot truly say either series belonged in the category in which it was
> nominated. There are stories that put Skinner and Scully together, no Mulder.
> THAT is the definition of SSR. There are stories that put Scully together with
> a woman. THAT is Scully slash.
I dunno about these definitions. I understand where you're coming from though.
But it doesn't seem that cut and dried to me. *shrug*
I'm not saying that "Red Valerian" or "Jitterbug Perfume" should (or should not)
have won in their respective categories. I don't read enough slash or
Scully/Skinner to know if they were the best stories in their respective genres,
so I didn't vote those categories. I liked each of those stories well enough,
especially RV.
As to categories...I'm not sure how you can write a definition that will include
the stories you say you want but exclude the ones you don't want -- unless you're
willing to go to a jury system and, as I said, this seems to me to have great
potential for flame wars.
>
> No matter what you think of non-MSR stories such as true SSR, slash, etc., and
> I gather your opinion isn't high, it's not fair to the writers/readers of those
> stories, it's really mixing apples and oranges to say that these stories should
> compete against stories where MSR doesn't get mixed in.
My opinions....hmmm. I don't think the slash or Scully/Skinner stories are
necessarily poorly written; I haven't read enough in that genre to have a real
opinion -- other than some of Nonie's, and that only because she's my sister in
law. I assume that the writing quality averages about the same as for MSR's. But
I don't know. I'll admit that these two genres don't make sense to me, based on
what I see on the show. But others disagree, and that's fine.
As for mixing apples and oranges and issues of fairness...again, I don't know
quite what could be done to achieve the goal you want that wouldn't create greater
problems.
>
> I hope many more people will encourage Red T, if she is to take over the
> process again next year, to recognize and separate out the categories in a
> better way. It may be a big job for her but that's what she asked for.
One change which I understand we'll see in the 199 Spookys will be a rule that a
story can only be nominated in one category in each subgroup. So Dasha would have
been required to decide whether Jitterbug would be in the slash category or the
MSR category. Of course, there's an obvious problem -- an unscrupulous author
might choose to put the story in the category where it seemed more likely to win,
rather than the most appropriate one.
I am NOT saying that Dasha would do this; I'm saying that someone might. And that
would short circuit the intent of the new rule.
--
"So, are you two the Fred and Ginger of X-Files fanfic?!?" -- Bonnie, commenting
on "Alternatives 5: Afterglow"
==============================
Ease your karmic burden! Visit my fanfic today!
http://www.avalon.net/~publius/MyStories.html
ZzariarazZ
This seemes to me to be a mistake. It takes a different style and different
amounts of effort to write a series than a long story or novel, for example. If
you group all of them in the same category, then what's going to end up
happening is that either the serieses or the novels or the long stories are
going to get overlooked, depending on how much of each are written this year.
Grouping the long stories and the novels together is fine, but I wish you'd
reconsider putting the serieses in their own category.
One other point: if they are all grouped, that category will be positively
SWAMPED (not to mention poor RedThunder and all us volunteers).
Jenna C.
-()-()-()-()-()-()-()-()-()-()-()-()-()-()-()-
Check out my fanfic; it won't bite...
http://members.aol.com/zzariarazz/index.html
R. Scott Carr
> MSR: a story where Mulder and Scully are involved in a romance with each
> other, and end up together, usually happily ever after
>
> SSR: a story where Skinner and Scully are involved in a romance with each
> other, and end up together, usually happily ever after
>
> Why *shouldn't* it be that cut and dried.
Simply because these definitions won't be accepted -- many writers on this ng
strenuously resist being pigeon-holed, and definitions as narrow as these will
likely be perceived as overly restrictive. In any case, most good stories are not
cut and dried, so categorizing them in a cut-and-dried manner seems self-defeating.
Furthermore, if we expand on the logic of the examples above, then we presumably
have to create additional categories, such as MSSSR, for stories where Scully dumps
Mulder for Skinner, SSMSR, for the other way around, MKSKR, where Krycek dumps
Mulder for Scully, or even SSSMRXR, where Scully dumps Skinner for Mr. X -- utterly
unworkable, of course.
Thus, stories such as the "Red Valerian" series have to be categorized as both SSR
and MSR -- perhaps the community could present the labels in chronological order --
an X-File involving first Skinner/Scully romance and then Mulder/Scully romance
would be XR/SSR/MSR. (In fact, I think some authors already do this, usually in
this format: XR, Scully/Skinner, Mulder/Scully, or something along those lines.)
--
Scott Carr
Brandon Ray
"R. Scott Carr" wrote:
> MissElise wrote:
>
> > MSR: a story where Mulder and Scully are involved in a romance with each
> > other, and end up together, usually happily ever after
> >
> > SSR: a story where Skinner and Scully are involved in a romance with each
> > other, and end up together, usually happily ever after
> >
> > Why *shouldn't* it be that cut and dried.
>
> Simply because these definitions won't be accepted -- many writers on this ng
> strenuously resist being pigeon-holed, and definitions as narrow as these will
> likely be perceived as overly restrictive. In any case, most good stories are not
> cut and dried, so categorizing them in a cut-and-dried manner seems self-defeating.
And I just realized, on top of all that, that these definitions are in effect asking
that stories only be accepted as slash or Sc/Sk or MSR if the story has a "happy"
ending from the POV of fans of that subgenre. So if you write a story with a torrid
M/S romance, in which they ultimately break up and go their separate ways -- I guess
it doesn't qualify? That doesn't seem right to me.
Brandon Ray
MissElise wrote:
> > So if you write a story with a torrid
> >M/S romance, in which they ultimately break up and go their separate ways --
> >I guess
> >it doesn't qualify? That doesn't seem right to me.
>
> You should have read my complete post, Brandon. :)
I did, Elise. If that's not what you meant, perhaps you could explain more
clearly what you DID mean?
R. Scott Carr
> Things are
> defined in any contest you enter, and these awards should be no different.
True, to a point. However, consider the following -- no Spooky committee could
hope to read every nominated story. (I think the numbers speak for themselves.)
Thus, they could hardly be expected to ensure that all stories are appropriately
categorized. Furthermore, even if they could do so, the arguments that this would
bring about would never end. I think the most practical method of determining
"appropriateness" is to let people nominate stories in whatever category they want
and let the vote decide what belongs where. So doing would be consistent with the
underlying premise of the Spookies, which is to recognize the most popular
stories. And I doubt that grossly miscategorized stories would win, or even make
the finals.
That said, I don't think it would hurt to have carefully-written category
definitions available when the nominations begin. I just think it's important that
they not be overly narrow.
> If I'm reading a romance where Steve and Mary declare their love for one
> another by the end of the book, but she is dating another guy named Larry at
> some point, you can bet I don't think this is a Mary and Larry romance. It's a
> story about Steve and Mary's romance.
Well, maybe. A lot depends on the Mary/Larry relationship, how it's portrayed, how
serious it is from Mary's POV (and Larry's, for that matter), and so forth.
Furthermore, the fact that Steve and Mary end up together doesn't make it
Mary/Steve romance. And if Larry and Mary don't end up together, that doesn't mean
it's not Larry/Mary romance.
I'll try to give a populist example: James Clavell's _Shogun_ includes a romantic
subplot in which the involved persons do not end up together, and in which both are
involved in other sexual/quasi-romantic relationships (I'm over-generalizing, but
this is the gist of it). In any case, the real romance is the ill-fated one. And
there are plenty of stories in literature that feature ambiguous romantic
triangles, and though a choice is eventually made, they cannot be characterized as
one sort of romance or another.
Let's go back to "Red Valerian" -- is it "true" Scully/Skinner romance, or is it
somehow "adulterated" by the presence of MSR? There is no clear answer to this
question, and I suspect that there are at least two schools of thought on the issue
(both of which have vociferous proponents.)
Yet the Spooky voters taken as a whole were evidently satisfied with its SSR
credentials -- thus, almost by definition, it was correctly categorized.
> But when it comes time for nominations, you should realize that your story will
> be eligible for only one category and it should be placed in the appropriate
> category,
Frankly, I disagree with the idea that stories should only be eligible in one
category. If a story is the best MSR and the best SSR, it should be recognized as
such. If it is the best X-File and the best romance, again, it should be so
recognized.
> otherwise why not just have one category
> and throw em all in there and let the voting begin.
I think this year's Spookies demonstrated that, although stories were nominated in
multiple categories, the list of winners contained a fair variety. Were the
results ideal? No, but I don't think ideal results are a reasonable expectation.
If I really wanted a contest with ideal results, I'd just declare the opening of
the "Scotties," judged solely by me, and then hand out virtual dog statuettes of
gold, silver, and bronze. (Note for the literal-minded: this statement is simply
designed to illustrate a point. It is not meant to be taken at face value.)
--
Scott Carr
Brandon Ray
MissElise wrote:
> >I did, Elise. If that's not what you meant, perhaps you could explain more
> >clearly what you DID mean?
>
> It said: Story in which M/S are together, but it ends unhappily (them alone)
> would still be MSR.
So then why are people questioning Red Valerian and Jitterbug? They seem to me
to be parallel cases:
Red Valerian: Scully and Skinner are together but it ends unhappily (for
Scully/Skinner fans)
Jitterbug: Scully is doing slash and reasonably happy with it, but it ends
unhappily (for slash fans)
*shrug*
I guess I don't get it.
Dragan Antulov
MissElise wrote in message <19990223141103...@ng94.aol.com>...
>Though I'm sure some people do define it that way, it makes no sense to me.
No
>one here would likely define an MSR as a story in which they wind up with
>someone else (be it Krycek, Marita, Pendrell, Spender...whoever) at the
end.
>Mulder realizing he loves Krycek after being with Scully for the whole
story
>would not be called MSR by the Shippers...if it *would* be, colour me ultra
>shocked.
>
>There shouldn't be a question about how to categorize these stories.
>
>Scully ends up with Mulder--MSR
>
>Scully ends up with Skinner--SSR
>
>Scully ends up with no one, but has been involved in a romance that did not
>work out with Mulder--MSR
>
>Scully ends up with no one, but has been involved in a romance that did not
>work out with Skinner--SSR
>
>Scully ends up with no one, but has been involved in a romance that did not
>work out with Krycek--KSR
>
>Scully ends up with no one, but has been involved in a romance that did not
>work out with other--Scully/Other
>
>I don't see what is hard about that, or unfair.
>
>Does that make any sense?
How to categorise stories with Mulder, Scully and Skinner enjoying the
benefits of menage a trois?
Dragan Antulov a.k.a. Drax
Fido: 2:381/100
E-mail: dragan....@st.tel.hr
E-mail: dragan....@altbbs.fido.hr
E-mail: dr...@purger.com
Visit my XF fanfic page at http://www.purger.com/drax/draxsfan.htm
RedThunder
Just one comment that I'd like to make....
> Well, I contributed to this can of worms, so...
>
<snip - lots of good comments>
> I would also like to propose that stories *not* be limited to
> only one category. Again, let the voters decide. A movie can be
> nominated in more than one category at the Oscars; a song at the
> Grammys, a book at the Hugos, etc. If a story can only be in one
> category, but prevailing thought is that it's the best in more
> than one, doesn't that lessen the validity of the nominations
> in the other categories the story could have competed in?
Well, while it's true that movies can be nominated for more than one category,
the same movie isn't nominated for both best comedy and best drama (well, okay,
so that doesn't apply -- think of the emmys, which has a few more categories.)
Stories would only be limited to one category in each major group (though, as
of now, I don't see how that would work for the characterization group, so that
would be the exception.)
I can understand the concerns of the slash audience, as the voters for the
Spookys are probably going to be mainly shipperish (since atxc -- though not
the entire fanfic community -- appears to be mostly MSR oriented) and so many
borderline MSR/slash stories will have a better chance than straight slash
stories. That's why I'd like to see only each story being nominated in only one
romance category. That way the author can choose the *best* fitting category
(sort of like those multiple choice tests where all of the answers are right,
but you have the pick the one that is the best answer.) It'll be a tough
decision, no doubt about it, but at least the person who is most familiar with
the story will have a chance to decide where it goes.
Of course, the other option is to remove the category altogether, since slash
has its own awards, something that MSR doesn't have. But I'd hate to see that
happen.
RedThunder
Teddi Litman
>
>They'll be up long before then. Hopefully I'll have everything up and
finalized
>by the end of August. We are also trying to make up an eligibility story
list
>so people can verify that the stories that they are nominating are
eligible.
Teddi Litman
miss...@aol.com (MissElise) wrote:
>
>There shouldn't be a question about how to categorize these stories.
>
>Scully ends up with Mulder--MSR
>
>Scully ends up with Skinner--SSR
>
>Scully ends up with no one, but has been involved in a romance that did not
>work out with Mulder--MSR
>
>Scully ends up with no one, but has been involved in a romance that did not
>work out with Skinner--SSR
>
>Scully ends up with no one, but has been involved in a romance that did not
>work out with Krycek--KSR
>
>Scully ends up with no one, but has been involved in a romance that did not
>work out with other--Scully/Other
>
>I don't see what is hard about that, or unfair.
>
>Does that make any sense?
Sure it makes sense, but you do realize you are now suggesting writers
classify stories by how they end. Yikes!!! Do we *really* want to do that?
Aren't "character death" warnings bad enough?
Honestly, I *do* see where you are coming from. And I do admit, with my
'shipper tendencies I have voted for MSRish stories in "Other" categories.
(Though I *did* love a *true* other/slash story this year, though
admittedly, neither Mulder nor Scully was in the slash/other relationship
.... and Mulder/Scully are a couple, though on the backburner, in this story.
How would you classify a story that is Skinner/Krycek/other female that also
has Mulder/Scully way in the background?) Perhaps I should have just taken
Brandon's route and not voted in these categories. <shrug> I guess it just
has always been accepted. I just see no fair way to "legislate" this
problem beyond requesting authors to choose the one *most* appropriate
subcategory in which their story belongs as Brandon suggested.
Teddi
Pyrephox18
>classify stories by how they end. Yikes!!! Do we *really* want to do that?
>Aren't "character death" warnings bad enough?
I'm kind of tentitive about stepping into this, but, to me, I tend to remember
a relationship story by what it was *mostly*. For instance, if it's 4/5 Slash,
but the last part has a het paring, I still consider it a Slash story, and not
MSR/SSR/SKR?whatever.
Pyrephox- "In my world people are in chains and we ride them like ponies"-
Naughty Willow.
"For to see Mad Tom of Bedlam,
Ten thousand miles I'd travel.
Mad Maudlin goes on dirty toes,
For to save her shoes from gravel.
And still I sing bonny boys, bonny mad boys,
Bedlam boys are bonny!"
- Mad Tom of Bedlam
Teddi Litman
laliz...@aol.com (LaLizWoman) wrote:
><<<And I just realized, on top of all that, that these definitions are in
>effect asking
>that stories only be accepted as slash or Sc/Sk or MSR if the story has a
>"happy"
>ending from the POV of fans of that subgenre. So if you write a story with
a
>torrid
>M/S romance, in which they ultimately break up and go their separate ways
- I
>guess
>it doesn't qualify? That doesn't seem right to me.>.>
>
>Brandon, you might want to read the entire post that was taken from.
>
>It defines the unhappy endings as well.
>
>
How about something like: Skinner and Scully have a romance. It is a
*positive* relationship. Alas, the fates conspire against them and Scully
ends up marrying Mulder. They have a good marriage: after all they are good
friends; they trust and respect each other. However, the relationship never
has the fire and passion Scully had with Skinner; and she quietly misses him
the rest of her life. How would you classify that? See how difficult this
is? No I don't know if this story exists; but it is certainly a conceivable
scenario written by an SSR fan. (I know I've read many MSR-oriented stories
where one or both end up with someone else and that ending is neither happy
*nor* absolutely tragic.) However, by Miss Elise's "cut and dried"
definitions, it should be MSR.
Not only is it being suggested that stories be categorized by their
endings...but also whether the ending should be interpreted as "happy" or
not. It is just a bad idea.
Teddi
lore
I think the main point everyone is making on this category issue is
that some stories cannot be easily categorized. Obviously, we should
not exclude hard-to-categorize stories from competition just because
they are unique.
So, I have been swayed by all the persuasive arguments into drawing
this conclusion: let the voters decide where a story may fall. That
is the most fair way to determine if a story is MSR, slash, SSk
or whatever and everyone has their say. Maybe MSR-flavored stories
will have an advantage in non-MSR categories. But educating voters
with clear rules and category definitions will help people make the most
honest choices they can. But some choices are always going to be hard.
Our ongoing example: Dasha's stories are very deserving of being awarded,
and I believe they do fit the categories they were nominated in because I
believe some slash or some MSR or some SSk should qualify them in their
respective categories. I guess I am advocating including rather
than excluding. If a story is unique enough to cross categories,
then that's the nature of the story and it should be allowed in
all the categories it qualifies for. Let the voters decide if
a multi-romance story is the best for it's category.
I also suggest that authors who believe their story belongs in a certain
category should post to the newsgroup their thoughts and have very specific
categories in their headers. I do not think they should be put in
a position of choosing between categories. We're all voting as
readers when we vote. Let the readers decide unless the author wants
to specifically exclude their story from a category.
I would also like to propose that stories *not* be limited to
only one category. Again, let the voters decide. A movie can be
nominated in more than one category at the Oscars; a song at the
Grammys, a book at the Hugos, etc. If a story can only be in one
category, but prevailing thought is that it's the best in more
than one, doesn't that lessen the validity of the nominations
in the other categories the story could have competed in?
Ugh, I'm being obtuse. Does anyone see what I am driving at
that can say this more clearly?
R. Scott Carr
> Not if it ends happily for the *fans*--for the characters.
This is tangential to the main issue, imo. Scully/Skinner romance is a major
theme and an integral part of the "Red Valerian" series. To say that RV is
not both SSR *and* MSR is a difficult claim to defend, at a minimum, and as I
see it, stories like RV should be eligible in both the SSR and MSR
categories. I don't see what is to be gained by excluding them from either.
--
Scott
Dasha K
>unhappily (for slash fans)
>
>
I wouldn't say that Scully was resasonablly happy with it, but that's just my
reading of the story. And what do I know? I just wrote the thing. <g>
Dasha, who wants to point out that her above comment doesn't mean that Scully
couldn't be happy w/another woman, just that in that particular situation, bar
pickups were not doing it for her.
R. Scott Carr
> Scott, that's a good suggestion, but it didn't work this year or you wouldn't
> have people complaining that stories were inappropriate for the categories they
> were nominated in.
I'm not so sure about this. I think there will always be complaints, no matter
what the Spooky folks do. And while I agree that there were some miscategorized
stories, I don't think the entire process was undermined because of that. And I
guess I remain convinced that the best we can do is, as you suggest, issue
guidelines, and then just let the voting decide what belongs where.
Speaking personally, there were several stories that I liked that I did not vote
for in particular categories, simply because I thought they belonged elsewhere.
However, and fortunately, they were also listed in categories where I could, in
good conscience, vote for them.
> I think this responsibility falls directly on the writer to
> speak up and say, thank you, but my story really doesn't belong in this
> category. And yeah, I know, not everyone is going to do this, but it's only a
> suggestion.
I certainly have no objection to this idea, though you are correct that not all
authors would be inclined to disqualify their own story.
> I should hope not! <snort> Wait until you get the complaints that the breed of
> dog isn't the correct one. :P
It's a Scottie or nothing. <g>
> thoughtful critiques of why
> something won't work instead of simply saying there is no answer to the problem
> or there is no problem.
I don't mean to say that there is no problem whatsoever -- but I think in some
cases, the cure might be worse than the disease.
--
Scott Carr
JourneyToX
>benefits of menage a trois?
>
Damnit, those deserve their own Spooky category. And heaps of public praise!
And solid gold statuettes! And bouquets! And homebaked brownies!
I'm not kidding here!!!
swikstr
> <<<Well, maybe. A lot depends on the Mary/Larry relationship, how it's
> portrayed, how serious it is from Mary's POV (and Larry's, for that matter),
> and so forth.
> Furthermore, the fact that Steve and Mary end up together doesn't make it
> Mary/Steve romance. And if Larry and Mary don't end up together, that doesn't
> mean it's not Larry/Mary romance.>>>
>
> POV is very important, and once again, when it comes to a difficult story to
> categorize, you may have to go by which character has the prevalent POV, or the
> author's wishes.
This argument is central to my personal opinion that it's impossible to truly label
romance stories as "one or the other" outside of the prevailing opinion of the
authers themselves. And I realize much of this debate centers around the Sk/Sc or
slash v. MSR debate, but as a writer of a very serious Scully/Other with MSR, I
happen to have some strong opinions on this because the disagreement is essentially
the same.
Look, it's no secret that a lot of authors pair Mulder and/or Scully with a third
party (be it Skinner, Krycek, Tooms, Karen Koseff, whoever) as a means to an end.
Essentially, where I think the complaints stem from is the readers' belief that
such a pairing is really nothing more than a "straw man" leading to more
predictable MSR. But I think we all know that not all "other" pairings end up this
transparent.
So the problem is -- who's the judge?? Honestly, I'm not sure anyone besides the
original author is qualified to make that call, no matter what the prevailing
popular opinion.
> <<<Frankly, I disagree with the idea that stories should only be eligible in
> one
> category. If a story is the best MSR and the best SSR, it should be recognized
> as
> such. If it is the best X-File and the best romance, again, it should be so
> recognized.>>>
>
> I'm half and half on this issue. Some stories cross a lot of lines--size, case
> files with MSR or other romance--I don't know. That's an issue I'm undecided
> about and until I know more about the guidelines of this particular issue, I'm
> straddling the fence.
And see, this is where I struggled with Homicidal Tendencies when it came to
nominations. Ask RedThunder ;) She and I traded many an email before I could
finally decide what categories I felt the series best suited to run in.
HT in and of itself encompasses *several* varying themes that makes it quite
difficult to "categorize," including: A.) a very serious x-file with strong,
underlying social themes, B.) depiction of a very intense, personal, sexual
relationship between Scully and a third party that touches sparingly on her
feelings for Mulder, C.) depiction of a very intense, personal, evolving sexual
relationship between Scully and Mulder.
Is it Scully/Other or is is MSR? I *have* to say it's both. The term "romance" as
it applies in XF fanfic is difficult to define. The truth is, Scully has been
involved in a romance with both men in this story from the start. The "romance"
may not be the same in both instances, and it changes over time, but I'd challenge
any reader of the story to tell me that it isn't a romance in both regards.
Based on the debate I've read so far, HT (as it stands) would ultimately be forced
into the MSR category. Which is interesting because it took third place in the
Scully/Other category (a category that I still believe it belongs in). And the
irony of classifying it as MSR is that I have *no* doubt that it's been passed on
by certain readers who only do MSR just because it depicts Scully with another
person.
> What I would like is see is people discussing this issue of categories and
> MAKING suggestions of how to set up guidelines--thoughtful critiques of why
> something won't work instead of simply saying there is no answer to the problem
> or there is no problem.
Agreed. And that's why I think it's unfair for the administrators of the awards or
anyone to assert the right over the authors to deem whether a story is or is not
eligible for a certain category when it comes to issues of theme and
characterization. I think the individual author *must* retain the right to make
that call. Of course, if the author refuses to venture an opinion, then they've
given up that right.
And if people don't agree with the author's particular call and feel the
categorization is unfair, then by all means let that sentiment show in the final
vote tally.
-swik
--
"When angry, count four; when very angry, swear."
-- Mark Twain
Laura Shapiro
>How to categorise stories with Mulder, Scully and Skinner enjoying the
>benefits of menage a trois?
Hot!
Seriously, I'm about to encounter this same question myself. I rarely
categorize my own work (though some of it involves sex between Mulder and
Scully, it could hardly be considered "romance"), and I was assuming that
for our forthcoming M/Sc/Sk story, we would label it, well, M/Sc/Sk.
How about just "other romance"? Or "other NC-17"? I assume there aren't
enough threesome stories to merit a "threesomes" category.
~ Laura
--"Divine am I inside and out, and I make holy whatever I touch or am
touch'd from,
The scent of these arm-pits aroma finer than prayer,
This head more than churches, bibles, and all the creeds."
--Walt Whitman
Laura Shapiro
Laura Shapiro
and it seem like it might be workable.
What if award categories are based on genre and ability, rather than on
content?
For instance:
The Emmy's separate shows based on genre (comedy, drama, sports show, etc.),
and on performance (Best Actor, Best Director, Best Makeup, Best Costume,
etc.).
What if we tried to do the same thing?
Best X-File
Best Comedy
Best Romance
Best Erotica
Best Post-Ep
and then
Best Vignette
Best Short Story
Best Series
Best Novel
Best Poem
Best Filk
and then
Best Scully Characterization
Best Mulder Characterization
Best Skinner Characterization
Best Krycek Characterization
Best "Featured Regular" Characterization
Best Original Characterization
and then (and this is the crucial part)
Best Editing (could be for editors or beta-readers as well as authors if
they edit themselves -- think how teams of producers each get a statuette)
Best Plot (rewarding well-crafted plots with good narrative structure,
rising tension, etc.)
Best Atmosphere (rewarding well-researched and/or detailed descriptions of
settings - time or place)
Best Erotic Descriptions (rewarding squidge potential)
...and other stuff we can come up with.
Yes, it means that MSRs will compete directly with other pairings (or
threesomes, for that matter). But since that appears to be unavoidable
anyway, why not take the "pairing" question out of it all together and just
reward good writing? Isn't that what this is supposed to be about?
Brandon Ray
Emmalanna wrote:
> I think this is partly what happened in the slash and
> S/Sk categories in question: many voters had read the ones which ultimately
> had Scully and Mulder in a romantic relationship, and since they'd read and
> enjoyed those stories but hadn't read the ones more closely conforming to the
> strict "slash" and "S/Sk" definitions (as have been discussed here), they voted
> for the ones they recognized and enjoyed. End of story.
I thnk that's exactly what happened.
>
> We can't force people to read all the stories in a genre they don't generally
> enjoy, just for the sake of fairness. If so, then those people might as well
> not vote anyway.
Which is exactly what I did: The only story in the slash category I'd read was
Jitterbug; the only one in the Sc/Sk category I'd read was Red Valerian. I had no
interest in reading any of the others, so I just didn't vote those categories.
Wouldn't have been fair.
Karen Rasch
> So the problem is -- who's the judge?? Honestly, I'm not sure anyone besides the
> original author is qualified to make that call, no matter what the prevailing
> popular opinion.
> Agreed. And that's why I think it's unfair for the administrators of the awards or
> anyone to assert the right over the authors to deem whether a story is or is not
> eligible for a certain category when it comes to issues of theme and
> characterization. I think the individual author *must* retain the right to make
> that call. Of course, if the author refuses to venture an opinion, then they've
> given up that right.
>
> And if people don't agree with the author's particular call and feel the
> categorization is unfair, then by all means let that sentiment show in the final
> vote tally.
As is obvious from this thread, categorization is definitely an issue.
I know as a =reader=, I raised this issue with Red Thunder. A story
that I would have thought was best categorized as an "Outstanding
Vignette" (as, to me, it was largely a mood/character piece) or perhaps
even an "Outstanding Short Story" got its first
nomination-to-be-nominated in the "Outstanding Action/Adventure"
category. (?!) As a huge fan of this piece, I was confused as to what I
should do to try and support it. Should I leave it where it was, and
try to see the story got recognized in a category I feared it stood no
shot of winning? Or instead should I go ahead and nominate it where =I=
felt it belonged (thus potentially splitting votes and confusing the
issue entirely). Red was a bit perplexed as well. After we exchanged
emails on the subject, she opted to contact the author who, as I
recollect, pulled it from the "Action/Adventure" list.
Sadly, the point wound up being moot as it didn't make the final cut.
:-(
Regardless, it's interesting how differently stories can be viewed by
the people who enjoy them. Ultimately, however, I agree; the final
decision must reside with the author.
Karen
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Karen Rasch
kra...@earthlink.net
http://home.earthlink.net/~krasch
"When they first landed [on the moon], it was
as though I'd seen a unicorn on the television
news. . . . It was very interesting, of course.
But it certainly spoiled unicorns."
Tom Stoppard - "Jumpers"
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Teddi Litman
RedThunder <redth...@paonline.com> wrote:
>
>I can understand the concerns of the slash audience, as the voters for the
>Spookys are probably going to be mainly shipperish (since atxc -- though
not
>the entire fanfic community -- appears to be mostly MSR oriented) and so
many
>borderline MSR/slash stories will have a better chance than straight slash
>stories. That's why I'd like to see only each story being nominated in only
one
>romance category. That way the author can choose the *best* fitting
category
>(sort of like those multiple choice tests where all of the answers are
right,
>but you have the pick the one that is the best answer.) It'll be a tough
>decision, no doubt about it, but at least the person who is most familiar
with
>the story will have a chance to decide where it goes.
>
>Of course, the other option is to remove the category altogether, since
slash
>has its own awards, something that MSR doesn't have. But I'd hate to see
that
>happen.
>
>RedThunder
>
No, I don't think removing the just the slash category is the answer.
Removing *all* romance/relationship categories might be though.:O
Ok, ok I'll let that one go ... well eventually.<G> Though perhaps a MSR
awards or rather a Mulder/Scully relationship awards (As someone stated in
anouther thread, there then can be categories for every permutation and
interpretation of the relationship.), might not be a bad idea. Then maybe
people would be more willing to drop relationship categories from the
Spookys. Really, this whole categories issue is specifically about
*relationship* categories only. No one is really making an issue over
whether a story nominated as "Carteresque" really should have been "X-File"
even though those two categories were probably the *most* easily confused
and least well defined.
Teddi
Teddi Litman
laliz...@aol.com (LaLizWoman) wrote:
>You know, RT, I think the one nomination per romance category is a great
idea.
>
>I'm straddling the fence when it comes to an overall rule that says one
>nomination per story, period. Some stories cross into other categories,
but it
>should be limited to one romance category.
>
>It shouldn't be kept out of long series, novel length, comedy, case files,
>etc., because while there may be a strong romantic nature to the story,
there
>are a lot of stories out there that this is only a secondary plot.
>
>la
>
>"For my next trick, I'll need a large wooden
>cross and a couple of volunteers."
>Bobby Hill as the Amazing Jesus
>"King of the Hill"
I think that's the best answer yet really(beyond dropping the romance
categories altogther....ok, ok, I'll stop<G> And believe it or not, I tend
to *like* stories that tend to get *categorized* as "romance"); but as la
says, keep the restrictions for the romance categories *only*. Each story
is eligible for only one romance category; but *everything* else is fair
game. Just as an example: a humor story can also be an action/adventure
story.
Teddi
Teddi Litman
"Laura Shapiro" <la...@humandesign.com> wrote:
I really, really *like* this list!! And note is is only 21 categories!!!
Though I'd add "Action/Adventure" to the first group; and drop "Post-ep" if
we had to drop something. I'd also add "Long Story" to the second group
(Yeah, I'm about as stuck on length categorizations as I am on dropping
relationship/romance categories.<G>) as there's this big gap between "Short
Story" and "Novel." And of course, we need to change "best" to
"outstanding". Yes, we are being PC; but only because it is true: there can
be no consensus on "best."
Teddi
Teddi Litman
miss...@aol.com (MissElise) wrote:
>>why not take the "pairing" question out of it all together and just
>>reward good writing? Isn't that what this is supposed to be about?
>
>Good point. :)
>
Yes! Yes!! Amen! Amen!! Ok, I *won't* stop! Down with pairing/relationship
categories!!!<G>
Teddi
Aqualegia
In article <36D0C579...@ecis.com>, Alli <al...@ecis.com> writes:
>Romance
>> >-NC-17 MSR
>> >-Non NC-17 MSR
>> >-Slash story
>> >-Other Romance
IMO If you're going to have a category for MSR then I think you have to have
M/other, Sc/Sk, Sc/K
Also the slash category should be split up into :-
Scully/slash
M/K
Sk/K
M/Sk (this was the only one represented in the 1998 lists)
Other
FWIW I'm a Krycek slash reader, I don't read MSR, however, I have read, and
enjoyed Sc/K. I have no doubt there are many people who only read MSR and
don't read slash.
Lynda
[Krycekaholic]
Focussed on Nick Lea
http://members.aol.com/aqualegia/index.html
Teddi Litman
aqua...@aol.com (Aqualegia) wrote:
>
>In article <36D0C579...@ecis.com>, Alli <al...@ecis.com> writes:
>
>>Romance
>>> >-NC-17 MSR
>>> >-Non NC-17 MSR
>>> >-Slash story
>>> >-Other Romance
>
>IMO If you're going to have a category for MSR then I think you have to
have
>M/other, Sc/Sk, Sc/K
>
>Also the slash category should be split up into :-
>Scully/slash
>M/K
>Sk/K
>M/Sk (this was the only one represented in the 1998 lists)
>Other
Exactly! That's why I can't let go of the idea (I keep *trying* honest; I
*know* it's not a popular idea.) of dropping the relationship categories all
together.
Teddi
R. Scott Carr
> I can understand the concerns of the slash audience, as the voters for the
> Spookys are probably going to be mainly shipperish (since atxc -- though not
> the entire fanfic community -- appears to be mostly MSR oriented) and so many
> borderline MSR/slash stories will have a better chance than straight slash
> stories. That's why I'd like to see only each story being nominated in only one
> romance category.
I would argue against this. The fundamental premise of the Spookies is that they
reflect the popular judgment of atxc (not the entire fanfic universe, or the
Divine, or whatever) -- if atxc is "shipperish" (which is problematic, and not
really the key issue here), then the results of the Spookies probably ought to
reflect that. To try to gerrymander the categories to produce "pure" slash winners
seems pointless.
By the same token, advocates of slash ought to be in here voting -- that might be
the best way to ensure that "pure" slash gets fair treatment by the awards.
I'd like to reiterate, however, that there is no reason (in theory, at least) that
a story could not be the "best" in *all* romance categories, and I don't see any
reason to artificially exclude stories from any category. It think it is very
possible that the best MSR might also be the best Mulder/Other, or whatever.
Some of the ideas I've seen put forward that I liked:
1) Issuing guidelines regarding category definitions in advance -- if folks
understand, for example, that strongly MSR-oriented fics are not terribly
"Carteresque," for example, then they might come up with more appropriate
nominations. By the same token, if SSR or slash is a very minor element of what is
essentially an MSR story, it would be best to nominate it as an MSR, rather than
either of the other two. (And here it would help if authors would weigh in with
their views on where a story belongs -- after being nominated, of course.)
2) More discussion of the types of categories and what they mean. For example,
certain categories (vignette, short story, novella/novel) reflect the length and
structure of a story. Others, such as X-File, Action/Adventure, and so forth,
reflect the subject matter, and still others (the various romance categories)
reflect the way that the author views the characters of the XF universe and how
they relate. Thus, it seems very likely that a particularly good story might take
prizes in several categories, since these groups tend to address different aspects
of a story.
> Of course, the other option is to remove the category altogether, since slash
> has its own awards, something that MSR doesn't have. But I'd hate to see that
> happen.
I think this would be very counter-productive.
--
Scott Carr
JourneyToX
>How about something like: Skinner and Scully have a romance. It is a
>*positive* relationship. Alas, the fates conspire against them and Scully
>ends up marrying Mulder. They have a good marriage: after all they are good
>friends; they trust and respect each other. However, the relationship never
>has the fire and passion Scully had with Skinner; and she quietly misses him
>the rest of her life. How would you classify that?
I'd classify that as a fanfic idea I desperately wish I could claim as my own
and write!!!!!!
:::::::drooling::::::::
CiCi Lean2
(JourneyToX) writes:
>>How about something like: Skinner and Scully have a romance. It is a
>>*positive* relationship. Alas, the fates conspire against them and Scully
>>ends up marrying Mulder. They have a good marriage: after all they are good
>>friends; they trust and respect each other. However, the relationship never
>>has the fire and passion Scully had with Skinner; and she quietly misses him
>>the rest of her life. How would you classify that?
I'd classify this under the "I'll See This Fic On ATXC When You-Know-What
Freezes Over."
CL
(and yes, that's a direct challenge folks...)
The Circle of CiCi
http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Workshop/3293/index.html
JourneyToX
>(JourneyToX) writes:
>
>>>How about something like: Skinner and Scully have a romance. It is a
>>>*positive* relationship. Alas, the fates conspire against them and Scully
>>>ends up marrying Mulder. They have a good marriage: after all they are good
>>>friends; they trust and respect each other. However, the relationship never
>>>has the fire and passion Scully had with Skinner; and she quietly misses
>him
>>>the rest of her life. How would you classify that?
And THEN, CiCi wrote:
>
>I'd classify this under the "I'll See This Fic On ATXC When You-Know-What
>Freezes Over."
>
>CL
>(and yes, that's a direct challenge folks...)
>The Circle of CiCi
>http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Workshop/3293/index.html
>
>
I know a gauntlet on the ground when I see it, CiCi.
And I can bend over and pick it up.
Oh yeah.
Pamela T. Pon
>"Laura Shapiro" <la...@humandesign.com> wrote:
>>Best X-File
>>Best Comedy
>>Best Romance
>>Best Erotica
>>Best Post-Ep
I would restore the Crossover category (anything to encourage people to
read & write more crossovers of all kinds!). And perhaps either restore
Action/Adventure, or split the X-File category into separate MOTW and
Mytharc categories (since most Action/Adventures fall under Mytharc).
>>Best Vignette
>>Best Short Story
>>Best Series
>>Best Novel
>>Best Poem
>>Best Filk
I like the idea of separating the Poem and Filk categories.
They are two very different things.
>>Best Scully Characterization
>>Best Mulder Characterization
>>Best Skinner Characterization
>>Best Krycek Characterization
>>Best "Featured Regular" Characterization
>>Best Original Characterization
Giving Skinner & Krycek categories all their own -- *regardless* of
romantic pairings -- is a GREAT idea! Let them be defined as individuals,
not just by the identity/ies of whomever they happen to be sleeping with.
>>and then (and this is the crucial part)
>>
>>Best Editing (could be for editors or beta-readers as well as authors if
>>they edit themselves -- think how teams of producers each get a statuette)
>>Best Plot (rewarding well-crafted plots with good narrative structure,
>>rising tension, etc.)
>>Best Atmosphere (rewarding well-researched and/or detailed descriptions
>>of settings - time or place)
>>Best Erotic Descriptions (rewarding squidge potential)
>
>I really, really *like* this list!! And note is is only 21 categories!!!
I think this list is a truly refreshing proposition. At the moment,
I find it most intriguing. Eventually, I'll probably go back to wanting
a slew of various romance categories (since there are so MANY different
kinds of romance stories, and I love them ALL ;-) -- but for this brief
moment in time, I like the idea of abandoning them altogether.
>Though I'd add "Action/Adventure" to the first group; and drop "Post-ep"
>if we had to drop something. I'd also add "Long Story" to the second
>group [...] as there's this big gap between "Short Story" and "Novel."
True.
>And of course, we need to change "best" to "outstanding".
Yup.
* Tuesday on DUE SOUTH: "Perfect Strangers" * around 10 pm EST/PST on TNT *
* time depends on basketball *