Little known fact: during the late 1960ies, Asimov briefly was the lead singer of a British boy group.
8 Likes
It has a lot of pages. That’s a good thing, right?
You only mentioned one. Is the other soup-based?
8 Likes
There were 2 that were named for him, the best new writer award and a memorial award.
5 Likes
He was probably talking about the “Mission Earth” series (10 books!) or “Old Doc Methusalah”.
Believe it or not Hubbard could write very good science fiction.
And if creating a world-spanning cult doesn’t impress you then I’m not sure what will. I mean, he’s the kind of dangerous, exciting character than we write science fiction about.
A world where cults and empires are not a thing, maybe?
15 Likes
Ooh, swift work by the mods.
11 Likes
18 Likes
16 Likes
There is no reason to name awards for known assholes. And there is even less reason to defend them because of whatever they might have done for something you like, especially if they probably did wayyy more to hinder that thing. People who defend racists and fascists, like, just…what??
8 Likes
I hereby give you the “Adolf Hitler Award for Commenting.”
You’re fine with that, I’m sure.
17 Likes
12 Likes
Not really, because so many of them didn’t pass the litmus tests of their times.
16 Likes
How many excellent writers were frozen out to please an open fascist? How many solid writers were driven out because his prominence helped foster a climate where only white dudes were given a chance? And how good do I have to be in my chosen field to make sure all other considerations are thrown out to continue praising me? Because here’s the thing, any good work he did is already done, no matter what the award is called, but the chilling effects created by naming one of the most prominent awards in the field after him persists. The proposal is to change the name of the award, not to scour any of his contributions out of history. Asimov will still have been published no matter what we call the award, but maybe we make it a little easier for someone from one of the groups he loathed to get their manuscript read in the future.
21 Likes
17 Likes
The superficial excuse for Campbell’s outrageous editorials was that he was taking up contrarian viewpoints for argument’s sake to provoke controversy and debate. (Because that sells magazines.)
But looking back, it’s a lot like “just asking questions”.
14 Likes
Arguments of the form “The U.S. is really more responsible for Nazism than Germany” are obviously bullshit and will make people wonder about your motives 
8 Likes
He wasn’t Devil’s Advocating. The only way that would hold water is if he ever claimed to be, or if he made any arguments that made anyone believe he wasn’t sincerely and deeply racist.
Aside from that, in the weird scenario that someone is putting out racist screeds that person doesn’t sincerely believe, when they know they’re being received as if they are sincere, and that they’ll hurt vulnerable people in real life, well, that’s still super-racist.
12 Likes
Yep. The Jobs-emulating manager I had at Apple was the reason I quit after six weeks with no prospect in sight. If emotional abuse of your employees is your management tool, I won’t work for you.
9 Likes
He wasn’t that much of a genius. That’s part of what we’re arguing about.
People would be willing to hold their noses about his many awful qualities and remember him for something else if what he created was really that great.
11 Likes
I don’t know why people are even mad.
It’s just not in John W Campbell’s nature to have a prize named after him.
You can tell this most scientifically by the fact that he doesn’t have a prize named after him.
9 Likes
