Well, I got four off-line letters today about the Publisher's Weekly Top Ten post of late night. So to make myself perfectly clear:
1) I don't think there was any kind of conspiracy in voting the list. The jury (and there may well have been a woman or women on it) voted their honest beliefs. I doubt sexism had anything to do with it.
2) As I said, choose another jury at random and you'd have a different list, maybe a very different list. We're talking random variables here. This is a completely subjective process.
3) I love getting awards. And it's nice to see friends get them. They are definitely legitimate signs of recognition as long as you admit that there are plenty of other deserving books that got lost in the shuffle.
4) When I see winners at the Academy Awards say that every one on the list was equally as good, I believe them. I mentioned losing by one vote. Well, when I read the winning book I looked at it this way: I felt mine was better written and was more realistic but I had to given the other book its freshness and swagger. If I'd been on the jury I'd probably have voted for the other book.
5) I'm not going to name a genre here but there's one that's absolutely obsessed with awards. I quit because of it. I think the mystery field treats the subject just about right--serious interest but no obsession.
This afternoon I bought and read the Max comic book issue of the The Punisher to check out two of my friends who had stories in it. Tom Picciirilli and Duane Swiercyznski had, for my taste, the best of the issue. Tom's got bit of theater business in the pay-off that is stunning.
Charlie Huston, Greg Hurwitz and Spike Milligan are also in the issue with good stories.
And stunning illustrations throughout.