Thoughts: Not Very Rewarding? Is the Gemmell Award Bad for the Genre?

[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Next Read, Jason Baki. Jason Baki said: RT @nextread: New NR post: Thoughts: Not Very Rewarding? Is the Gemmell Award Bad for the Genre? http://bit.ly/d6X7Hc [...]

I’m reading The Cardinal’s Blades now and I’m enjoying it. It has some niggly problems but it’s fun, and Paris is really well-rendered. Not a book for people who are big on character-led pieces, nor am I sold on it being a great fantasy work seeing as most of the fantastical elements are incidental (though I bet in the subsequent books there’s more, there’s that feeling about it) but it’s a historical fantasy with heroes and villains and great fight scenes. It’s easy to imagine it being a film.

Best Served Cold was a better book, in my opinion.

Thanks, I’d glad that The Cardinal’s Blades has merit and you’re enjoying it and interesting that it’s less fantastical fantasy.

I’m an Abercrombie virgin. I have a feeling that his grittiness isnt’ going to be something I’d like. I bought The Blade Itself against my normal preferences and I’ve still got in the shelf.

I need mystery and magic and fable.

I wonder who will win.

I'm reading The Cardinal's Blades now and I'm enjoying it. It has some niggly problems but it's fun, and Paris is really well-rendered. Not a book for people who are big on character-led pieces, nor am I sold on it being a great fantasy work seeing as most of the fantastical elements are incidental (though I bet in the subsequent books there's more, there's that feeling about it) but it's a historical fantasy with heroes and villains and great fight scenes. It's easy to imagine it being a film.

Best Served Cold was a better book, in my opinion.

Thanks, I'd glad that The Cardinal's Blades has merit and you're enjoying it and interesting that it's less fantastical fantasy.

I'm an Abercrombie virgin. I have a feeling that his grittiness isnt' going to be something I'd like. I bought The Blade Itself against my normal preferences and I've still got in the shelf.

I need mystery and magic and fable.

I wonder who will win.

Comparing things to Amazon sales ranks isn’t cruel, it’s a bad idea – Amazon is just one retailer, and for the truly mass market books it’s more about the frontline meatspace stores, Waterstone’s, Smiths etc, who dominate the market. Amazon sales ranks a especially unreflective given it’s months after the books have gone on release.

It’s a snapshot And for some of the titles on the shortlist which
are imports Amazon would be the first choice. And are the awards
selected by Internet savvy voters that must have used Amazon at some
point? It was to show that popularity is fickle – much like voters.

James really is mixing his issues with how books are sold with and
projecting them onto the Gemmells.

I don’t think that’s the case. I think he’s accurately summed up the link between bestseller-manufacturing and how that affects popularity and how that influences this vote. Showering attention on totems of effective business models is not good for art, darhlings.

Oh art! Right see what you mean. So we need to get more people
watching BBC4 as well!

So if you have issues with the Legend what about the Morningstar?

Which one’s that, for noobs or for artwork? Either way, it’s still influenced by publisher spend. Whatever promos that first book were in, whatever sales level the cover helped it achieve. It costs thousands of pounds for one Amazon promo, let alone the table displays and £-off stickers. Anyway, the French chap will win because he’s already a strong seller in Europe. It’s merely rewarding some other publisher’s business model.

Art, indeed. Whatever happened to discussion of that? The lack of such rigorous debate is, I suspect, one reason the genre is laughed at from the outside. That’s why the Clarke is good for the SF genre.

Three thoughts:

1) Out of all the shortlisted books I’ve only read Best Served Cold which I thought was very fine indeed (and had a great covert to boot).

2) The Sad Tale of the Brothers Grossbart seems very much like the odd one out in this company. “Traditional, Heroic, Epic, or High Fantasy and/or in the spirit of David Gemmell’s own work”?

3) As Mark implies, an Arthur C Clarke Award – presumably the JRRTA – would be very welcome and much more preferable to this pointless award.

I’ve read the Cardinal’s Blades – it really does falter midway towards the end, becoming very dull. It’s very similar in some instances to Alexander Dumas but it doesn’t have the rich language. Or, to be honest, it could be that it didn’t translate well.

I have to disagree about these being the ones publishers spent money on – I don’t recall seeing money thrown about for Cardinal’s Blades, I don’t recall seeing money splashed about for The Drowning City or even for Adamantine Palace. Publishers don’t have money to spend on marketing the way they used to – all these titles nominated for the awards are what pubs sent into Gemmell HQ, they were longlisted – I got sent through some of the longlisted titles to read and review and some were not very good at all, but publishers felt that they should be given the chance, at the very least, hence their nomination.

I actually do wonder if our perception as readers of genre fiction is skewed BECAUSE we know these books and authors so well and anticipate their next one and their next one. And bearing in mind, we contribute to the marketing buzz about these books because we are constantly talking about them, back and forth, wondering, analysing etc. and crowing about receiving copies to read or even if we get them faster via Amazon. And the last time I checked, NO ONE has thrown any money at me to be excited about anything.

It would be fascinating to be able to do a research model on the books we (as reviewers and readers) perceive as being popular / marketed everywhere and seeing the final tallies that Nielsen Book Scan comes up with.

Sadly, I don’t have the cash to spend to sign up to Neilsen’s Book Scan because it would make for very interesting reading, probably scuppering the whole “it’s a popularity contest” idea.

Also – what’s wrong with being popular and commercial? Maybe that’s what genre fiction needs? More books that span the market, crossing boundaries, making people realise that genre fiction isn’t just for geeks and nerds with a sword and cloak fetish that run around Chistlehurst Caves LARPING and murdering the Ingerlish language by going “I seeith that thoust hast a sword, villain! ”

The lists above are pretty good representations of the genre and to be honest, I feel that more effort should be made to concentrate on the longlist. Just to be different. For a change.

In the case of CB, I’m guessing this is the case of foreign publishers over the years supporting it. Bestsellers require effort and vast support (or a movie deal). Big print runs, deep discounting, advertisements in magazines, ARCs (yes, they cost publishers a lot of money).

And, oh my, yes they do spend a lot of money on these books. It’s spent on the stuff the customer isn’t meant to see as spending money. Table promotions cost a bomb. Amazon promotions, you might as well re-mortgage your house. Borders, Waterstone’s – a LOT of money is spent on this. It’s in their interest to spend money. They want a return on their investment. It’s a hugely competitive business, merely to get their books in front of people. And those that receive this cash investment are likely to perform much better than those who aren’t because the casual reader never even sees them in a bookstore.

What’s wrong with popular and commercial? That’s not the argument, I suspect. As I said to Gav above, “Showering attention on totems of effective business models is not good for art, darhlings.”

PS. They have thrown money at you – free books. They cost someone money, and ARCs (due to their short print runs) are often more expensive per unit than final copies.

Comparing things to Amazon sales ranks isn't cruel, it's a bad idea – Amazon is just one retailer, and for the truly mass market books it's more about the frontline meatspace stores, Waterstone's, Smiths etc, who dominate the market. Amazon sales ranks a especially unreflective given it's months after the books have gone on release.

It's a snapshot And for some of the titles on the shortlist which
are imports Amazon would be the first choice. And are the awards
selected by Internet savvy voters that must have used Amazon at some
point? It was to show that popularity is fickle – much like voters.

James really is mixing his issues with how books are sold with and
projecting them onto the Gemmells.

I don't think that's the case. I think he's accurately summed up the link between bestseller-manufacturing and how that affects popularity and how that influences this vote. Showering attention on totems of effective business models is not good for art, darhlings.

Oh art! Right see what you mean. So we need to get more people
watching BBC4 as well!

So if you have issues with the Legend what about the Morningstar?

Which one's that, for noobs or for artwork? Either way, it's still influenced by publisher spend. Whatever promos that first book were in, whatever sales level the cover helped it achieve. It costs thousands of pounds for one Amazon promo, let alone the table displays and £-off stickers. Anyway, the French chap will win because he's already a strong seller in Europe. It's merely rewarding some other publisher's business model.

Art, indeed. Whatever happened to discussion of that? The lack of such rigorous debate is, I suspect, one reason the genre is laughed at from the outside. That's why the Clarke is good for the SF genre.

Three thoughts:

1) Out of all the shortlisted books I've only read Best Served Cold which I thought was very fine indeed (and had a great covert to boot).

2) The Sad Tale of the Brothers Grossbart seems very much like the odd one out in this company. “Traditional, Heroic, Epic, or High Fantasy and/or in the spirit of David Gemmell’s own work”?

3) As Mark implies, an Arthur C Clarke Award – presumably the JRRTA – would be very welcome and much more preferable to this pointless award.

I've read the Cardinal's Blades – it really does falter midway towards the end, becoming very dull. It's very similar in some instances to Alexander Dumas but it doesn't have the rich language. Or, to be honest, it could be that it didn't translate well.

I have to disagree about these being the ones publishers spent money on – I don't recall seeing money thrown about for Cardinal's Blades, I don't recall seeing money splashed about for The Drowning City or even for Adamantine Palace. Publishers don't have money to spend on marketing the way they used to – all these titles nominated for the awards are what pubs sent into Gemmell HQ, they were longlisted – I got sent through some of the longlisted titles to read and review and some were not very good at all, but publishers felt that they should be given the chance, at the very least, hence their nomination.

I actually do wonder if our perception as readers of genre fiction is skewed BECAUSE we know these books and authors so well and anticipate their next one and their next one. And bearing in mind, we contribute to the marketing buzz about these books because we are constantly talking about them, back and forth, wondering, analysing etc. and crowing about receiving copies to read or even if we get them faster via Amazon. And the last time I checked, NO ONE has thrown any money at me to be excited about anything.

It would be fascinating to be able to do a research model on the books we (as reviewers and readers) perceive as being popular / marketed everywhere and seeing the final tallies that Nielsen Book Scan comes up with.

Sadly, I don't have the cash to spend to sign up to Neilsen's Book Scan because it would make for very interesting reading, probably scuppering the whole “it's a popularity contest” idea.

Also – what's wrong with being popular and commercial? Maybe that's what genre fiction needs? More books that span the market, crossing boundaries, making people realise that genre fiction isn't just for geeks and nerds with a sword and cloak fetish that run around Chistlehurst Caves LARPING and murdering the Ingerlish language by going “I seeith that thoust hast a sword, villain! ”

The lists above are pretty good representations of the genre and to be honest, I feel that more effort should be made to concentrate on the longlist. Just to be different. For a change.

In the case of CB, I'm guessing this is the case of foreign publishers over the years supporting it. Bestsellers require effort and vast support (or a movie deal). Big print runs, deep discounting, advertisements in magazines, ARCs (yes, they cost publishers a lot of money).

And, oh my, yes they do spend a lot of money on these books. It's spent on the stuff the customer isn't meant to see as spending money. Table promotions cost a bomb. Amazon promotions, you might as well re-mortgage your house. Borders, Waterstone's – a LOT of money is spent on this. It's in their interest to spend money. They want a return on their investment. It's a hugely competitive business, merely to get their books in front of people. And those that receive this cash investment are likely to perform much better than those who aren't because the casual reader never even sees them in a bookstore.

What's wrong with popular and commercial? That's not the argument, I suspect. As I said to Gav above, “Showering attention on totems of effective business models is not good for art, darhlings.”

PS. They have thrown money at you – free books. They cost someone money, and ARCs (due to their short print runs) are often more expensive per unit than final copies.

I like the DGLA and of course I will vote!

Morningstar
I read
The Drowning City – Amanda Downum (Orbit) (144,503 )
Lamentation – Ken Scholes (185,233)
Don’t want to read the other three books.
I voted for: LAMENTATION by Ken Scholes

Legend
I read
Best Served Cold – Joe Abercrombie (Gollancz & Orbit US) (14,538)
I will definitely read WARBREAKER by Brandon Sanderson
I voted for BEST SERVED COLD by Joe Abercrombie

And who will win? Based on the experience from last year I assume Pierre Pevel will win.

I like the DGLA and of course I will vote!

Morningstar
I read
The Drowning City – Amanda Downum (Orbit) (144,503 )
Lamentation – Ken Scholes (185,233)
Don't want to read the other three books.
I voted for: LAMENTATION by Ken Scholes

Legend
I read
Best Served Cold – Joe Abercrombie (Gollancz & Orbit US) (14,538)
I will definitely read WARBREAKER by Brandon Sanderson
I voted for BEST SERVED COLD by Joe Abercrombie

And who will win? Based on the experience from last year I assume Pierre Pevel will win.

I’ve not actually read any of the nominated novels – for any award.

But, as to James’s comment “Gemmell award shortlist will be dominated by books that have had a lot of financial support”" Graham MacNeil’s ‘Empire’ benefits from promotion in White Dwarf, probably, but where else has anyone seen it advertised?

Amazon’s not a bad indicator – especially when you consider that only Abercrombie’s and MacNeill’s books are available in my local bookstores (invariably tucked away in the back of the store), none of the others.

I've not actually read any of the nominated novels – for any award.

But, as to James's comment “Gemmell award shortlist will be dominated by books that have had a lot of financial support”" Graham MacNeil's 'Empire' benefits from promotion in White Dwarf, probably, but where else has anyone seen it advertised?

Amazon's not a bad indicator – especially when you consider that only Abercrombie's and MacNeill's books are available in my local bookstores (invariably tucked away in the back of the store), none of the others.

Just a stupid thing to say that its popularist award.How many books do all the writers in longlist sell? how many votes wins the final award.Can you prove that majority of the votes online are from people whoDONT read the books but just want to cast a vote.To say its popularist is lazy blogging and inacurate.Those fans of lets say more established authors than the one you mention in Pierre Pevel..those more established authors fans have got to vote then havent they ? or are they not as dedictaed a reader and fan of the author.You cannot prove that the voters dont read the books to then choose to vote.After all the amount of votes it takes to win the award is less than what majority of the authors sell per book so you have to think more clearly before you put up such inacurate posts Gav.

It seems the only one trying to be popular* not ist is James from Specualtive Horizons.Lazy blogging to get more people to comment on his site.

No I’m right. – it doesn’t matter about the comparative critical merit of the novels. It matters who is going to actually vote for them. This is a popularity contest unless everyone that votes is going to buy and read the shortlist before casting their vote. And that isn’t going to happen. You vote for the books you like or you’ve read. Some voters might put in more consideration but their vote has the same worth as someone that has read one book and voted for it.

He’s taken 2+2 = 5. I can’t equate that to ‘lazy’ blogging. He’s made his point and people make theirs. Ignore it if it upsets you that much.

I take your point that you say its not a vote that everyone has read all the books on award but what about the panel judging? they may be more influenced on reading the last book they had to read on shortlist. does the jury read all the series of books from the author or are they just judging it on its style? they cant possibly know unless thje book was a single non trilogy book..most books arent though.The jury system can only be judged on a stand alone novel thats why in fantasy or scifi the judged panel voting system is flawed. but your saying Pierre Pevel is more popular than Steven Erickson,Salvatore,etc etc that were on long list.But I still say the more democratic vote is forr the masses.But you keep on talking about the fan votes for the european authors..what complete nonsnse.Surely if it was a popularity vote then the more famous authors would win hands dfown so where is the logic there? and its not as if hundreds of thousands of people vote its a few thousand spread over the few authors.Your saying steven errickson doesnt have a few thousand fans?? please explain.

last point .And just to say Gav im surprised you have gone with this on your blog.I like your analysis of books I am certainly not a fan of the sorry to say juvenile approach that James from Specualtive Horizons and Aidan from A dribble of ink has on this subject.I bet they will be all too happy to rush at the chance of appearing at these functions if they had an invite though ,But the use of the word Popularity is the wrong word to be using.I can understand the argument for not knwoing that everyone voted has read all books on list but its nothing to do with a popularity award.Steven erickson is more popular than pierre pevel so your undermining your point by keep using the word popularity- its an easy flippant heading to get a response

This is the problem with you people.If I disagree with your point then im being upset? or his point.Let me tell you id rather not comment on your site as I could be errrm sitting in the other room staring at a wall.But I dont like inacuracies and please be adult enough not to respond with the word upset.Im picking your point apart Gav and you come back with saying if it makes me upset? Do you do this at home if someone disagrees with you.Well makes me think that all your on here for is to say your piece and if anyone disagrees and slam dunks your argument then you cry .Take it like a man )..so to speak.Now I know the sort of character you are when it comes to someone responding against you ill stay away from this site.Id suggest you take the chip of your shoulder and have it for dinner tonight.You may get indigestion on it though.

Meaning of the word upset in my eyes.= Watching tv and seeing something very sad that UPSETS ME. Rather than being UPSET because some punk arse blogger who has about as much brain matter between there ears as a tattooed fukwit comes online and puts generalisations on his site about an awards system.I try not to get sad and upset over that Gav,get my drift? I mean I could sit here balling my eyes out over someones views online but I try to rule that out of my life.Bored anoyed and apathetic yes..Upset nahhh )..but im sure youll respond to this comment with something along the lines of ..** ( Oooo didn’t someone get out of bed the wrong side..or Oooo get you ..or ooooo looks like ive UPSET someone.) while you twitter with your legions of a followers( good grief) Get over yaselves please.

In all my time blogging I’ve never deleted a comment that wasn’t spam – well I have.

I’ve left up ‘James”s initial comment, my response, and his reply.

But I’ve removed four further comments. I’ve let him make is point.

The tone of further comments went beyond meaningful discussion.

Back to books.

Just a stupid thing to say that its popularist award.How many books do all the writers in longlist sell? how many votes wins the final award.Can you prove that majority of the votes online are from people whoDONT read the books but just want to cast a vote.To say its popularist is lazy blogging and inacurate.Those fans of lets say more established authors than the one you mention in Pierre Pevel..those more established authors fans have got to vote then havent they ? or are they not as dedictaed a reader and fan of the author.You cannot prove that the voters dont read the books to then choose to vote.After all the amount of votes it takes to win the award is less than what majority of the authors sell per book so you have to think more clearly before you put up such inacurate posts Gav.

It seems the only one trying to be popular* not ist is James from Specualtive Horizons.Lazy blogging to get more people to comment on his site.

No I'm right. – it doesn't matter about the comparative critical merit of the novels. It matters who is going to actually vote for them. This is a popularity contest unless everyone that votes is going to buy and read the shortlist before casting their vote. And that isn't going to happen. You vote for the books you like or you've read. Some voters might put in more consideration but their vote has the same worth as someone that has read one book and voted for it.

He's taken 2+2 = 5. I can't equate that to 'lazy' blogging. He's made his point and people make theirs. Ignore it if it upsets you that much.

I take your point that you say its not a vote that everyone has read all the books on award but what about the panel judging? they may be more influenced on reading the last book they had to read on shortlist. does the jury read all the series of books from the author or are they just judging it on its style? they cant possibly know unless thje book was a single non trilogy book..most books arent though.The jury system can only be judged on a stand alone novel thats why in fantasy or scifi the judged panel voting system is flawed. but your saying Pierre Pevel is more popular than Steven Erickson,Salvatore,etc etc that were on long list.But I still say the more democratic vote is forr the masses.But you keep on talking about the fan votes for the european authors..what complete nonsnse.Surely if it was a popularity vote then the more famous authors would win hands dfown so where is the logic there? and its not as if hundreds of thousands of people vote its a few thousand spread over the few authors.Your saying steven errickson doesnt have a few thousand fans?? please explain.

last point .And just to say Gav im surprised you have gone with this on your blog.I like your analysis of books I am certainly not a fan of the sorry to say juvenile approach that James from Specualtive Horizons and Aidan from A dribble of ink has on this subject.I bet they will be all too happy to rush at the chance of appearing at these functions if they had an invite though ,But the use of the word Popularity is the wrong word to be using.I can understand the argument for not knwoing that everyone voted has read all books on list but its nothing to do with a popularity award.Steven erickson is more popular than pierre pevel so your undermining your point by keep using the word popularity- its an easy flippant heading to get a response

This is the problem with you people.If I disagree with your point then im being upset? or his point.Let me tell you id rather not comment on your site as I could be errrm sitting in the other room staring at a wall.But I dont like inacuracies and please be adult enough not to respond with the word upset.Im picking your point apart Gav and you come back with saying if it makes me upset? Do you do this at home if someone disagrees with you.Well makes me think that all your on here for is to say your piece and if anyone disagrees and slam dunks your argument then you cry .Take it like a man )..so to speak.Now I know the sort of character you are when it comes to someone responding against you ill stay away from this site.Id suggest you take the chip of your shoulder and have it for dinner tonight.You may get indigestion on it though.

Meaning of the word upset in my eyes.= Watching tv and seeing something very sad that UPSETS ME. Rather than being UPSET because some punk arse blogger who has about as much brain matter between there ears as a tattooed fukwit comes online and puts generalisations on his site about an awards system.I try not to get sad and upset over that Gav,get my drift? I mean I could sit here balling my eyes out over someones views online but I try to rule that out of my life.Bored anoyed and apathetic yes..Upset nahhh )..but im sure youll respond to this comment with something along the lines of ..** ( Oooo didn't someone get out of bed the wrong side..or Oooo get you ..or ooooo looks like ive UPSET someone.) while you twitter with your legions of a followers( good grief) Get over yaselves please.

In all my time blogging I've never deleted a comment that wasn't spam – well I have.

I've left up 'James''s initial comment, my response, and his reply.

But I've removed four further comments. I've let him make is point.

The tone of further comments went beyond meaningful discussion.

Back to books.