Apparently, it is Women in Horror month, so to celebrate this momentous occasion, I urge you to check out the fine work of these talented Aussie authors, editors, and fans who have been known to delve into the dark genre:

Danny Oz has written a very bloody informative history lesson about the Australian SF natcons, lit and media fandom, and spec fic awards.

As someone with a foot in pro and fan camps (the intent is mostly pro, but I’m a genuine horror lit fan, which is where the bulk of my award nominations have come from), and as someone who has already grown tired of small press politics after just six short years, I found Danny’s post to be incredibly grounding.

And you know what? I agree with him – I had no idea that media-focussed Aussie natcons existed, but now that I do, I think more should be done to balance the lit and media content for future natcons.

Also (and I’ll probably cop some flak here, especially given how I follow them each year), I think the Ditmars should be more fan oriented. Fiction writers and editors now have expanded versions of the Aurealis Awards and (for horror) the Australian Shadows Award. So let’s not forget the fans that built natcons over the last few decades.

If anyone is looking at Ditmar rules in the next few years, how about considering toning down the pro categories (removing New Talent or combining Novella and Short Story, for instance) and expanding the fan categories (eg. have fanzine, fan website, and fan production categories – and define what these really mean)? Lets give the fans more of the recognition they deserve.

Well, that last post gets a FAIL. It confirms my suspicion that so few people actually read small press short stories – at least amongst the people who stop by this blog. Most of the interest in small press stuff would appear to be my fellow writers wanting to get their own stuff published.

Anyway, onto something that’s been niggling me a bit (like that Year’s Best Honourable Mention thing a while back). With awards season now upon us, I’ve noticed there are a fair number of newer authors that claim to have ‘award nominations’ for work that was simply entered into an award. I’ve seen it happen with the Australian Shadows Award, the Aurealis Award, and the Bram Stoker Awards.

An ‘award nomination’ means that your work was shortlisted as a finalist. Having your work ‘entered’ into the award for consideration does not equal an award nomination.

I don’t blame the authors at all, though. How can they know any better when the terminology is so loose? We tightened up the language for the Australian Shadows last year for this reason.

All it requires is for awards administrators to change the wording on their entry forms to state works are ‘entered’ rather than ‘nominated’ for consideration and voila, problem solved.

On the subject of awards, the first of the Aussie SF public nomination awards – Western Australia’s Tin Duck Awards – are now open for people to recommend/nominate works.

Last year, I listed everything I thought eligible in the categories I know (the professional fiction ones). This year, I’m going to be more selfish and just post the stuff I read and enjoyed (which admittedly had a dark focus).

If you disagree with what I recommend, then go your own way. We’re in a democracy, after all, and I’m certainly not the fountain of all knowledge.

The best thing about this year’s awards is that they have a handy online entry form (similar to the Stoker Awards), which is convenient and cool. You’ll find it here.

So, I’d like to recommend the following works by West Aussies to any Swancon goers out there:

Best Professional Long Fiction
Hal Spacejock: No Free Lunch by Simon Haynes (Fremantle Press)

Best Professional Short Fiction
“Teeth” by Stephen Dedman (Clarkesworld Magazine)
“Just Us” by Pete Kempshall (Voices, ed. Mark S. Deniz & Amanda Pillar)
“A Picture of Death” by Shane Jiraiya Cummings (Voices, ed. Mark S. Deniz & Amanda Pillar)
“Bed Bugs” by Martin Livings (Voices, ed. Mark S. Deniz & Amanda Pillar)
“The Claws of Native Ghosts” by Lee Battersby (The Beast Within, ed. Matt Hults)

Best Professional Production
Black: Australian Dark Culture Magazine, edited by Angela Challis
Black Box, edited by Shane Jiraiya Cummings

Best Fan Production
HorrorScope (http://ozhorrorscope.blogspot.com/)
Eclectism, edited by Craig Bezant*
Studies in Australian Weird Fiction, edited by Benjamin Szumskyj*

Now, go forth and nominate!

* Not sure if these qualify in the Fan/Unpaid or Professional categories.

Looks like the full moon came late this month. Seems that a bit of madness has hit the internet over authors reacting to reviews. A quick scan of the blogosphere in recent days shows that a US author/editor has been hit with a death threat over writing a pretty tame review. Ticonderoga Online’s latest incarnation Ticon4 has also had some authors get uppity about their reviews, one of whom is a successful paranormal fiction author blowing one sentence out of proportion.

From my experiences as a reviewer (with HorrorScope and elsewhere), I can sympathise with the reviewers. With the arts such a magnet for temperamental people and with writing, especially, a lonely profession, the whole attack-the-reviewer thing appears to be more visible (another yay for the internet!). It may always have been this prevalent, but it’s certainly more visible these days.

There are good reviews, there are bad reviews, and there are reviews somewhere in the middle. Reviews vary, and in my opinion, most of the Australian SF reviews could be more polished and insightful, but that’s not really the point. Published writers create work for the public domain, for better or worse. Your readers will praise or criticise, and as I’ve discovered from reading negative reviews of work I’ve loved or when selecting awards shortlists and disagreeing quite wildly with fellow judges, people’s opinions just can’t be fathomed, at times. It’s what makes life interesting.

But here’s the thing, and writers take note: if you allow your personal neuroses to spill out into a hissy fit/flame war against a reviewer, then editors will not want to work with you and reviewers will no longer wish to review your work. Editors and reviewers have long memories. Writers might think, “fuck ‘em, it’s just one editor/market” but it’s more than that. Editors talk, editors remember. Editors have friends and colleagues and they all talk.

I’ve been pondering my role in speculative fiction circles and how I’m perceived by people in the spec fic community. Hence I’ve chucked the poll up above. Please feel free to stop by and add your answer. I’m curious to know!

You get bonus points (and gratitude) if you drop by this post and let me know in the comments why you see me in the role you’ve voted for. For me, when summing up how one is viewed, all information is greatly appreciated!