The Hugos - Midamericon 2 - 2016

Dave Kyle said they couldn't sit there.
See what you made them do, Dave?

So, the Hugo Award nominees have been announced, and the expected gnashing of teeth has begun.

As in previous years, there has been a great deal of comment on the various Puppy campaigns, most of which I personally believe is moot.  Here's the thing:

Yes, previous Sad Puppy campaigns have been very poorly thought out, and structured in a way that was nearly guaranteed to raise hackles among the regular Worldcon crowd. Presented as "slates", the whole thing rather smacked of the effort of L. Ron Hubbard's religious faithful to suborn the Hugos in 1987.[1] Quite apart from the reaction to a perceived attempt to game the system for personal gain, it was perhaps to be expected that the fen would come out in droves to gripe and block the effort just on principle given the appearance of being railroaded.  After all, this is the community that produced the Balcony Insurgents[2], whose main objection appears to be having been told what to do.

Enough, though: this year's effort seems to have been thought through a little more thoroughly[3], with a good effort made to produce an extensive list of options spanning the available categories. Suggestions by not only the Puppy faithful but others appear to have been honoured so long as the announced rules were followed, and the result is – to be frank – much stronger than it has been in the past.  Given the number of suggestions in most categories, it’s much harder to call this Sad Puppy list a prescribed slate – though there was some discomfort expressed in some quarters regarding how late the actual publication was (and of course there were those who felt less than honoured, shall we say, to be included in the recommendations).

Not to be out-done, however, the Rabid variety generated their own list, and in this case it was very much according to previous years: each category contained no more than the number of spaces available on the Hugo nomination form (in some cases fewer) and despite an admonition from the organizers (organizer?) that it was not to be viewed as a slate, it was inevitable that the fen would see it as such and seethe accordingly.

Given the unavoidable mental association between the Sad and Rabid varieties, the various correspondences between the 2016 Hugo finalists announced by the Midamericon 2 Hugo committee on April 26 and the Puppy list/slate have unfortunately generated…ah…sarcastic commentary.[4]

Nevertheless and regardless, there seem to be some quite viable contenders on the ballot this year, and I sincerely hope that the unfortunate idée fixe some fen have that leads them to reflexively vote No Award at the slightest sign of Puppy taint will take a break this year: quite a few of the finalists deserve to be considered on their own merits.

Under Best Novel, we find the following:

§  Ancillary Mercy by Ann Leckie (Orbit)

§  The Cinder Spires: The Aeronaut’s Windlass by Jim Butcher (Roc)

§  The Fifth Season by N.K. Jemisin (Orbit)

§  Seveneves: A Novel by Neal Stephenson (William Morrow)

§  Uprooted by Naomi Novik (Del Rey)

Ann Leckie has been a nominee in this category three years running, and took a rocket home in 2014 – it seems likely that her latest installment in the Ancillary series is a worthy contender, even if this particular style of SF isn’t to your taste. Similarly, Neal Stephenson is no stranger, having been nominated in 2009 and 2006 as well as winning the category in 1996 with his well-known novel The Diamond Age. I confess I’m more sceptical of Jim Butcher’s offering here – he’s a solid writer and I’ve enjoyed quite a bit of his work, but what I’ve read so far hasn’t really been Hugo material in its own right. But then, some authors spring upon the scene fully formed while others earn their chops over time. Perhaps this is the one that will really wow me?  I really can’t comment on the other two entries, but given their company I’d be willing to give them the benefit of the doubt.

Best Novella might be a bit more contentious, I suppose:

§  Binti by Nnedi Okorafor (Tor.com)

§  The Builders by Daniel Polansky (Tor.com)

§  Penric’s Demon by Lois McMaster Bujold (Spectrum)

§  Perfect State by Brandon Sanderson (Dragonsteel Entertainment)

§  Slow Bullets by Alastair Reynolds (Tachyon)

But here we also have some interesting suggestions. Alastair Reynolds is, in my opinion, overdue for some recognition and I’m very happy to see his story Slow Bullets made the final cut.  Nnedi Okorafor is also a very interesting writer, and although I haven’t read Binti myself yet the excerpt available at TOR’s website and what I’ve seen of Okorafor’s work makes me confident it’s a solid contender as well.  I’d be happier in this category if there were more names I knew (let alone works) but nevertheless it looks like we have two very different options to vote for – and I very much look forward to seeing how the other three measure up.

Best Novelette is another complicated category, but even there seem to be at least three strong options:

§   “And You Shall Know Her by the Trail of Dead” by Brooke Bolander (Lightspeed, Feb 2015)

§  “Flashpoint: Titan” by CHEAH Kai Wai (There Will Be War Volume X, Castalia House)

§  “Folding Beijing” by Hao Jingfang, trans. Ken Liu (Uncanny Magazine, Jan-Feb 2015)

§  “Obits” by Stephen King (The Bazaar of Bad Dreams, Scribner)

§  “What Price Humanity?” by David VanDyke (There Will Be War Volume X, Castalia House)

Brooke Bolander’s offering is one I found very interesting when I ran across it in Lightspeed last year, and although I didn’t nominate it myself  I can definitely see the appeal – I will be rereading it again through a new lens, and wonder how it will stack up. Was it just the story’s unusual narrative approach that pulled it down a bit for me (i.e. was it just a matter of taste)? Only considering it on its own merits will tell me. Stephen King is one of those authors who you might say has a list of nominations and awards of various kinds (including the Hugos, twice) as long as your arm – provided your arm is mutated to freakish proportions. I haven’t read Obits but let’s be honest: given King’s track record it would be strange if it wasn’t at least a solid story, and from there it’s as much a matter of taste as technique.  I’m not familiar with the two options taken from There Will Be War – but Folding Beijing is definitely a contender. It’s available online – check it out!

Now, I’ll confess that for me the Best Short Story category is a definite disappointment:

§   “Asymmetrical Warfare” by S. R. Algernon (Nature, Mar 2015)

§  The Commuter by Thomas A. Mays (Stealth)

§  “If You Were an Award, My Love” by Juan Tabo and S. Harris (voxday.blogspot.com, Jun 2015)

§  “Seven Kill Tiger” by Charles Shao (There Will Be War Volume X, Castalia House)

§  Space Raptor Butt Invasion by Chuck Tingle (Amazon Digital Services)

I’m very happy to see Algernon’s story “Asymmetrical Warfare” on the list of course, if only because I’ve been following Nature’s Futures feature for some time now, and have been impressed by how it’s come along.  It’s beyond time that they got the kind of recognition they’ve been working for. I don’t know The Commuter or Seven Kill Tiger so can’t really comment, but my heart sank when I saw the two “poison” entries on the list. I know why they’re there, of course, but I don’t have to like it.  Still, with confidence that Mays and Shao have produced something that can reasonably compete, it’s not a total loss. My real beef here is that short form simply doesn’t get the attention it deserves in these days of never-ending epic novel series.

As for the rest of the Works categories – well yes, there probably are some items here that maybe don’t deserve sneers but deep sighs of disappointment, but on the whole these relatively unassuming awards don’t seem to have had much to do with the kerfuffles over the last few years, and to be frank they look pretty normal to me.

Best Related Work is probably the worst offender here, with only one real contender  - the Gene Wolfe retrospective - that isn’t obviously being pushed by Puppy sympathizers.[5] Of the others, I will be excited to see Jeffro Johnson’s book once it’s actually in its final form, and the pieces by Eness and Greyland though deeply disturbing are certainly on topics that need to be discussed openly if they’re to be dealt with in any community regardless of what you think of the actual contents. As for the last: well. Battle lines were drawn years ago, so I don’t suppose this is much of a surprise to anyone.

Best Graphic Story isn’t a category I normally even consider, so it’s hard to say, though I recognise some names as worth looking more closely so presumably those who do vote here will see some strong options.

I confess that most years I’m not that impressed by any of the Dramatic Presentation options even if I know what they are, so who knows.

As for the Editor categories, particularly in the Short Form section I confess I really can’t see why anyone would be up in arms here – these are all solid choices, and I’ll personally find it very difficult to choose. I suppose in my case Mr. Pournelle will likely sink to the bottom, however, just because of the relative paucity of material on which to judge him – but then, perhaps some of those There Will Be War offerings in the Works categories will impress me sufficiently to push him back up.  Fnord knows he’s earned his spurs! Long Form will no doubt cause some gnashing of teeth considering the first name on the list, but otherwise again the choices seem solid.  The only real objection I have is that these days it’s hard to judge the editors in Long Form just because of how the industry has changed over the decades. Still, there seem to be a few names there deserving of recognition, including one who was unjustly snubbed last year because the wrong people liked her.

Semiprozine, Fanzine, and Fancast all seem like ordinary, solid categories for me – and in particular Semiprozine’s options are going to be hard to choose between for me. I’m also pleased to see Tales to Terrify on the list – I don’t often bother with the Fan categories at all, but this team definitely deserves your patronage, along with the others working on the Districts of Wonder ‘casts. If you’re not listening, you’re missing out on some great chatter – not to mention the stories!

So there you have it. Yes, the Puppies had an influence this year, but the massive influx of new voters last year seems to have reduced the impact of strange statistical anomalies that have plagued the Hugos for years (seriously, the very small voter pool combined with relatively low proportional participation contributed to some very odd effects). We still seem to be in the grip of a major fandom holy war, but “this too shall pass” as they say, and if membership and participation can be kept up - perhaps even grown! – it seems likely that the nominations and final voting will settle down into more normal patterns in a few years.

Fingers crossed in that regard, anyway.

--30-- 

---

[1] Peter Nicholls' personal account of the Conspiracy '87 fiasco can be read here - no doubt there will be similar accounts in the future by the MCs of similarly embattled Hugo ceremonies.

[2] The insurgents themselves included a number of prominent fans of the era who objected to paying $7 for the ticket to the Hugo banquet (mainly on the strength of the menu, which was apparently indifferent compared to what you could get for much less at a restaurant in New York at the time).  Nevertheless, they wanted to hear the Guest of Honor (Al Capp, the cartoonist responsible for Lil Abner) and see the awards ceremony, so they trundled up to the ballroom balcony to watch. According to Dave Kyle's account, he had merely been responding to the fire marshal's concerns in the midst of a harrowing effort to keep Nycon II on an even keel while his fiance Ruth Landis was being propositioned by the GoH. Whatever the true story, the fans were incensed, and that banquet exclusion was later denounced in their fanzines as wicked, barbarous and against ghod, if Fancyclopedia 2 can be trusted.

[3] Yes, I did have to.

[4] As of this writing, File770’s helpful cross-reference table showing the correspondences was unavailable, probably due to multiple links to it at venues such as io9 – however, for those who might be interested I should think this link will eventually function again.

[5] Even that one probably is of course, given the venue, as it’s not likely core Worldcon fandom even knew it existed, but those who did know surely consider it a worthy effort.

Going Round and Round with Revolution

Pohl (left) & possibly Wollheim (right) look on as Jack
Williamson (center) meets a crowd at Nycon I in 1939.
Photo from Howard DeVore as published by FANAC  

So. 

With the closing of nomination ballots coming up (March 31) yet another Hugo season is upon us.

For many fans, the next few months will also be a season of tension and rancor, as the ongoing battle between what might be called “core Worldcon fandom” and “Puppies Sad or Rabid” once again flares up into actual shots fired.[1]

On the one hand, we have the objections of people who consider themselves fans – certainly avid readers and followers of SFF by all accounts – that certain hugely popular authors seem to get passed over at the Hugos in favour of work that simply checks politically popular boxes.  The extreme version of this objection alleges secret cabals (perhaps in the service of shadowy masters deep in the land of Mordor a major publisher) who manipulate the outcome of the Hugos either by organized voting campaigns or perhaps even by directly tweaking the voting system in their favour.

On the other hand, we have the counter-objections of the loyal fen, who demure, claiming that the only shenanigans are on the part of the Puppies and their highly recommended lockstep voting reading lists…claims that at times seem to echo with a curious harmony in the naturally entirely neutral journalism of the mass media.

Frankly, I find the claims on both sides to be laughably extreme.  I have my own thoughts on the actions that led to Vox Day’s ejection from SFWA that I won’t air here [2], but the whole Puppies vs Fandom thing has evolved into a conflict of unprecedented animosity.

Or has it?

The the scale may be larger as a feature of modern technology, but the fact is that this kind of political wrangling is nothing new to Worldcon: way back in the mists of time, at the very first Worldcon in 1939, an eerily similar dispute led to a group of fans being barred from the event entirely.

Cast your mind back to the late 1930s, a world in transition:

The world was finally emerging from a crushing depression, Europe was in turmoil following the Great War and a series of socialist and other revolutions, Hitler’s Germany was on the rise, having successfully annexed both Austria and Czechoslovakia while the great powers dithered, fascism was gaining power not only there but seemingly everywhere in opposition to the socialist wave, and technology was progressing at a break-neck pace.  

Just two months after the grand opening of the New York World’s Fair in 1939, and on the edges of this tumultuous time, the very first Worldcon was held in New York – NyCon I as it was eventually called.

Now, it must be said that this wasn’t by any means the first “con” – that honour goes to what Dave Kyle called The First Eastern Science Fiction Convention [3] [4], which was held in Philadelphia in 1936.  It was also by no means a large affair, mind, being just a visit to the Philadelphia Science Fiction Society (PSFS) by members of the International Scientific Association (ISA), by reports of people who were there involving only a dozen people or fewer. [5] But this was a meeting of the early minds of American SF fandom:

•       John Michel - NY (who originated the idea of some outing for the NY chapter of the SFL in the first place)
•           Donald Wollheim - NY (who specifically suggested a visit to Philadelphia)
•           Milton Rothman – Phil (who hosted the meeting at his home and chaired the meeting)
•           Fred Pohl – NY (who served as secretary)
•           Dave Kyle - NY
•           William Sykora – NY
•           Herbert Goudket – NY (who was behind the camera for the apocryphal photo)
•           Robert Madle – Phil
•           Ossie Train - Phil
•           And some fellow named Hahn [6] along with, presumably, others to bring the total to about 12.

This is not a mere digression, however, since I suspect the seeds of revolution were planted on that fateful October 22 in 1936.

The key factor here is probably Sykora, who was an enormous fan from the beginning.  He wasn’t just a charter subscriber to Amazing Stories when the eponymous Hugo Gernsback launched it in 1926 but also a core member of a number of early science and SF associations, such as The Scienceers [7], the SFL (GNY branch), the International Cosmos Science Club, and the ISA.  An association of note that Sykora was most emphatically not a member of was the Futurian Society.  And so begins our real story.

 The Futurians numbered quite a few names that are well known in modern Fandom: people like Isaac Asimov, James Blish and his future wife Virginia Kidd, Damon Knight, Judith Merril – and some of the GNY-SFL members who traveled to Philadelphia: John Michel, Fred Pohl, Dave Kyle and Donald Wollheim.

Now, the New York Futurians [8] were remarkably influential, considering that they never really numbered very many, were never  and only lasted about seven years. But they /were/ intense, and differed from the more “ordinary” Gernsbackian SFandom, which insisted that fans and SF authors should ideally strive for the advancement of science – specifically, the Futurians were progressives of the time – Bohemian, anarchistic in organization, prone to free verse in poetry and decadence in literature and art.  They were sympathetic to the anarchist and communist efforts against fascist Franco in Spain (and other Fascists), and themselves defined a Futurian as one who:

“thru SF rise to vision a greater world, a greater future for the whole of mankind, and wishes to utilize his idealistic convictions for aid in a generally cooperative and diverse movement for the betterment of the world along democratic, impersonal, and unselfish lines.” [9]

Though Futurian thought was often referred to as Wollheimianism the idea really originated with John Michel in 1937:

At the 1937 Third Eastern Science Fiction Convention in Philadelphia, Donald Wollheim read a speech penned by Michel entitled “Mutation or Death!” [10] which denounced “the Gernsbackian delusion” of science alone as the way forward: Michel in this speech denounced Mussolini and other fascists, denounced what people might call today “the military industrial complex”, and declared the solidarity of SFandom with “the heroic defenders of Madrid and Shanghai.” – his declaration that SFandom was obligated to join forces to work toward a future utopian world state was taken by many to refer to communism (probably a justified assumption given the congruence between his rhetoric and that of Bolshevik revolutionaries of the era, not to mention Michel’s involvement in the Young Communist League)

This began a(nother) rather rancorous cycle of feuding in US fandom, with Michel and certain other Futurians (notably Donald Wollheim and Fred Pohl) growing increasingly political, which rubbed rather a lot of fandom the wrong way, including solid “Gernsbackian” science first fans such as Sam Moskowitz and William Sykora, the latter being a particular bugbear for the Michelian Futurists for reasons I really don’t understand – I presume simply because he was one of those who most bluntly told the kids to settle down. [11]

Things really came to a head, though, in 1939, at the time of the first official Worldcon, later dubbed Nycon by the inimitable Forrest Ackerman: this convention, being held under the auspices of the New York fandom, was chaired by Futurian nemesis Sam Moskowitz along with two others well hated by the utopians: William Sykora and James Taurasi.

These three men not only disapproved of the injection of politics into SFandom by the Futurians, but were keenly aware of the opinion of other fan organizations and more importantly the fact that the convention was likely to be fairly high profile owing to the fact that the Worlds Fair then going on in New York was themed “The World of Tomorrow” – how could the first ever major science fiction convention /not/ attract attention?  How would it look if brash, outspoken young men and women seemed to be talking (socialist) revolution?

As a result, the Triumvirate (as they were to be called) made a decision later known to fannish historians as “The Great Exclusion Act” to ban Michel, Wollheim, Pohl and others from attending, on account of rumours that they intended to issue yet another manifesto during the proceedings, whether approved or not – a concern that was based on past disruption at the smaller Newark convention in 1938[12] and the discovery of a pamphlet [13] that was written and distributed by fellow Futurian Dave Kyle and others [14].

So.

A dispute in fandom over what SF should be and what it should achieve.  A dispute over what the tone and obligations of fandom should be like.  A dispute, even, over what precisely defines rightfan and wrongfan thinking.

How does that quote go?  Ah yes:

 “History doesn’t always repeat itself.  Sometimes it just screams, 'Why don’t you listen to me?' and lets fly with a big stick.” – John W. Campbell Jr.

--30--

1. Metaphorically actual, obviously.

2. No, really.  I think there’s plenty of blame to go around, and while I don’t think I’d enjoy having a drink with the man he’s also been treated to what appears to be an unfair drubbing in the mass media.

3. But which the attendees officially dubbed the Philadelphia Science Fiction Convention in reference to the fact that both the Republican and Democratic national conventions had been held there earlier in the year.

4. And in fact, there’s even some dispute as to whether this was the first: it was a meeting, certainly, and they took the name “convention” for the business meeting, but it may be that the event held by the UK’s LeedsScience Fiction League in January 1937 was the first true “con”.

5. Though John Michel’s account in a fanzine later that year reputedly claims there were only 9 attendees (and he refers to a photo – though I haven’t been able to locate one) Dave Kyle – who was also there – says there were “barely a dozen” in his own recollection of the event .  I like to think of the attendance as being 10±2 with one of the minimal 9 – Herbert Goudket - being a kind of “Schroedinger’s Fan” as he was supposedly there, but not shown in the photo because he was behind the camera.

6. I don’t believe I’ve ever seen Hahn’s given name…er…given, and as a result every time I see or write the name I have the irrepressible image of James Tiberius Kirk expressing his outrage at being outwitted by his ancient nemesis. I feel certain the gentleman in no way resembled Ricardo Montalban, however.

7. Possibly the first SF fanclub ever!

8. Not affiliated with other groups calling themselves Futurians, though the Left Coast group in LA with the same name did apparently move en masse to the Right Coast to join up with them…just in time for the society to collapse as a result of the lawsuit filed by Wollheim in response to “The X Document” – a one shot publication that detailed an internicene conflict among the Futurians of New York.

9. Thus saith Fancyclopedia 2.

10. Full text of Michel's manifesto "Mutation or Death" is available here: 

11. It should be remembered that many of the players in this drama were younger than Michel, who at the time of Nycon 1 in 1939 was only 22 – some of them were still in their teens throughout this controversy!

12. This convention was marred by accusations of high-handed and dictatorial action by the organizers, and various sniping among political factions in fandom…sound familiar?

13. The full text of the famous Yellow Pamphlet is here. 

14. Who, strangely, despite being the nucleus of the decision to Exclude, was allowed to remain.  All reference to this seems to agree that he was allowed to stay because he was already in the hall…and yet, it appears that some others who were distributing the pamphlet, including Robert Lowndes, Cyril Kornbluth and Jack Gillespie were ejected. I’m at a loss as to what the difference was, unless it was simply that Kyle was physically inside the hall at the time the decision was made, while the others were distributing pamphlets outside.

A Hugo Mystery! Sleuths wanted!

What a find!

Flickr user Cate came across a collection of old snapshots at a thrift store, and immediately knew there was something special about them - they were from the 14th World Science Fiction Society convention, held in New York in 1956![1]

See Cate's scan of the photos here:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/slomuse/sets/72157662390340119

(Discovered by me via https://boingboing.net/2016/01/02/help-identify-the-science-fict.html - additional text there)

Amazingly, in only a few days quite a lot of names have already been pinned to these photos, with much of the heavy lifting being done by Astrid Anderson Bear and Robert Silverberg themselves!

As of this writing, we have the following identifications:

Forrest J Ackerman

Forrest J Ackerman (no period after the J please!) was a fixture of the fan community at the time, a notoriously voracious SF memorabilia collector, and literary agent for Asimov, Bradbury, Hubbard and others.  Amazingly, he missed only 2 Worldcons during his lifetime, so I suppose it's hardly surprising to find him in this random collection of photos!

Anthony Boucher

Anthony Boucher was editor of F&SF at the time of this con, and was also an author of mystery stories.

John W. Campbell

Campbell was of course editor of Astounding at this time (later to be called Analog as we all know, right?) and the magazine got the Hugo for best pro magazine that year.

Lin Carter

Lin Carter isn't as well known today as he ought to be, but until his death in 1988 he was an amazingly prolific writer with some great work on his bibliography - though in 1956 he didn't actually win any awards, being up against some pretty stiff competition.  Also, he actually hadn't published that much in the 50s - his first published novel didn't come until The Wizard of Lemuria which came out in 1965 following mentorship by L. Sprague de Camp, who went on to write collaboratively with Carter on a number of Conan stories.

Ted Carnell

   Ted Carnell - a fan and deeply involved in organization.

Jean Carroll

Jean Carroll - apparently closely involved with fandom at the time, but I'm afraid I don't know much about her and can only find brief references to her in the Journal.  Anyone with more info?

Arthur C. Clarke

Clarke was the guest of honor at NyCon II (and also won a Hugo for best short that year, for his story "The Star" published in Infinity)

Hal Clement

Hal Clement is another name you don't hear very much these days, despite the fact he was inducted as a Hall of Famer back in 1998 - in the day he wrote hard SF, and what I always noticed most was how hard he worked to make his alternative worlds scientifically plausible - no giant mono-ecologies for Hal!

L. Sprague de Camp

Does this gentleman really need introduction?  Between his Conan stories and otherwise enormous bibliography I'm sure most serious SF readers have come across him often.  The most interesting thing about him though might be that in an era when SF was very much either fantastic planetary romances or hard speculative SF adventures (rockets on the cover and all that) his interests in classical history and linguistics really come through in his world-building.

Frank Dietz

Frank Dietz is really not someone most people would know of outside of fandom, unfortunately.  His presence here is notable, however, because Dietz and George Raybin sued NyCon II chair David Kyle in 1958 in a dispute over funds, which ultimately led to the death of the World Science Fiction Society.  He also founded the famous Lunarians society in 1956, and was probably drumming up members
while not on camera! (also, responsible for the (in)famous party in room 770 which lies behind the name of online fanzine File 770 curated by Mike Glyer)

Ron Ellik

 I'm not sure what Ron Ellik was notable for in 1956, but he was certainly active in fandom and in 1958 he was one of the founders of the fanzine Fanac, which promptly won an award for best fanzine in 1959.

Pat Ellington

Once again, I'm not quite sure what Pat Ellington was noted for other than fandom at this time, but she later (1963) started a fanzine named Kim Chi.

Harlan Ellison

Here's a shot of Ellison right near the beginning of his career!  He was already establishing himself of course, but much of his career was still far ahead of him.  Later, of course, he was noted for his controversial opinions and also for editing the Dangerous Visions anthologies.  If you haven't read any of Ellison's work from the 60s and early 70s you're really missing something!

Lloyd Eschbach

Eschbach is another name rarely heard these days.  To be honest, I'm not much familiar with his work - some of which is now in the public domain - but what he's most known for might be his work on the Cosmos series, and for his comment in his autobiography that L. Ron Hubbard had commented to him about wanting to found a religion because "that's where the money is."

Nick Falasca

Nick Falasca is another mostly forgotten name.  Together with his wife of the time Noreen (who actually seems to be better remembered) he co-chaired the 1955 Worldcon in Cleveland, and later (1958) they also wrote Fandom's Burden, in which they expressed deep dissatisfaction with the WSFS (this seems to be a theme).

Ben Jason

Ben Jason aka Benedict Jablonski was one of the co-designers of the Hugo Award (the rocket itself)

David Kyle

David Kyle was the chair of NyCon II in 1956, and was emboiled in scandal over not only funds (see above for the lawsuit) but also for opposition to fans using the balcony overlooking the Hugo Award ceremony, leading to the in-group recognition signal "Dave Kyle says you can't sit here" which really sort of sums up a lot of fandom if you think about it.

Willy Ley

Willy Ley got the Hugo for best feature writer in 1956, and was a well known space flight advocate and science writer.

Bob Madle

A fan of note, but I'm not quite sure what his influence was.

Robert Silverberg

Silverberg was awarded the Hugo for "most promising new author" (now John W. Campbell Award) in 1956, and, well, obviously he was promising indeed!

Roger Sims

 Roger Sims - deeply involved in fandom.

E.E. "Doc" Smith

OK seriously, if you don't know who Doc Smith is get out there and read the Lensman series.  Smith started writing in the 20s and was a major fixture in the genre community until his death in 1965 - his work on Lensman series and other writing earn him the title "father of space opera" though perhaps that doesn't do enough to reflect his influence.

J Ben Stark

Later to be co-chair of Worldcon 26 in 1968, but I don't know much more about him.

Jams Taurasi

James Taurasi was one of the people who started it all, being a co-organizer of the FIRST Worldcon in 1939.

Wilson Tucker

Not an author I'm familiar with unfortunately, but it seems he was deeply involved in the development of the genre and particularly criticism - coining terms like Space Opera and the like.






Well, that's it - a snapshot of history as it were!  There are still many faces unaccounted for in the photos, so if you're the sort who might be able to identify people head on over and add your voice!



--30--

1. This is of course NyCon II, held August 31 – September 3