More on the Retro Hugos

*Update.* I've learned more about the awards since my previous post. From what I understand, the way to change the Retros is to:

1) attend a Worldcon business meeting; 2) make a motion to abolish the Retro Hugos; 3) for those who support the proposal below, to make a motion to establish an alternative award.

Objections to changing the Retro Hugo (based on comments I've received):

• the name "Hugo" cannot be attached to a juried award
I think this is something the Worldcon should reconsider, but in this case it doesn't matter. Dead authors don't care about winning 'Hugos'. Call it something else, e.g. the 'Retro' award.
• the Retro Hugo award isn't scheduled to be given out next year anyway
Great. That gives us time to implement changes.

You know what I haven't heard? Anyone arguing that the current award should remain untouched. Rich Horton has a Facebook post that's attracting comments from the fans who make an effort to read and vote conscientiously for the Retro. They're frustrated too. 

Here's the thing: if you got those dedicated Retro fans in a room (virtual or otherwise), they would have a great conversation about 'who could have won in 1947'. But a conversation between a small group of qualified people is best supported with a panel, not with an award voted on by the general membership. Worldcon could always host a 'who might have won' discussion panel in 'Retro Hugo' years instead.

As a reminder, here was my proposal for an alternate award.

My suggestion would be to focus on the award’s goal of introducing fans to lesser-known works and teaching us something about SF history. I’d suggest the following format changes:

1) make it a juried award, with the jury consisting of academics and critics who’ve done historical recovery work; 

2) reduce the slate from 12 or so awards to 1 or 2, which would allow for more fan engagement with the work(s) in question; 

3) make its guiding question not, ‘what works might have won in a given year’ but  ‘Which lesser-known SF works from the years of eligibility most speak to the genre and the SF community in 2022?’"

The main response has been

• 1 or 2 categories is too few!

Less is more. The fewer texts there are to read / watch, the more people can participate. That's the theory behind the 'One Book, One City' reading movements you see across the U.S., and in essence, it's what I'm proposing: "One Classic, One Con." Except that  'classic' in this case would be a lesser-known work selected by a jury.

• What if the texts of 1947 don't lend themselves to discussion?

If we're re-imagining this award, we can do away with the year-focused format. Instead, a 3 person jury could solicit reading suggestions for pre-1953 works of interest in the year 2022. The jury could focus on a keyword: e.g. "pandemic," or "race", to help it whittle down the possibilities. You could also rotate the form being looked at each year, depending on the expertise of your jury members: novel, short story, television episode, or film.

• Other admin suggestions:

 1) announce the winner months before Worldcon, so that people have time to read and think about the text;
2) have the jury write up and post share its selection rationale before Worldcon;
3) have a 'Retro discussion' panel at Worldcon that includes jury members and current Hugo Finalists whose work connects to the theme. 

Note that involvement doesn't need to end there.  Ask the Hugo Fan Writers to comment on the text, the Hugo Fan Artists if they'd like to illustrate something from the story, etc. Invite participation that goes beyond just talking about the text in question. 

That would be my suggestion for an alternate award. Regardless of whether another award is established, the Retro Hugo as it stands has got to go.