While everyone else is discussing The Hugo Award finalists, I thought I’d have a brief chat about The Kitschies shortlist which was announced a couple of weeks ago.  I missed The Kitschies last year so it’s fantastic to see them back and with a new sponsor.  Unlike the Hugos, which plays it nice and safe, The Kitschies, much like The Clarke, looks further afield, considers work that wouldn’t necessarily be spoken about on your average genre blog or Twitter feed.  That’s not to say there isn’t overlap, but it’s often the case that the shortlists of both the Red and Golden Tentacles will deliver novels that you didn’t know existed, even if you think you’re clued in on all the books the cool kids are reading.  And that’s what makes The Kitschies such a valuable award.  It’s just a shame that other than its announcement no fucker seems to be talking about the nominees.  (Please feel free to provide me with links if there is discussion and I’ve missed it).

Anyway, here is the shortlist for the Red Tentacle (the prize given to best novel):

• Black Wave by Michelle Tea (& Other Stories)
• The Rift by Nina Allan (Titan)
• We See Everything by William Sutcliffe (Bloomsbury)
• Fever by Deon Meyer, translated by L. Seegers (Hodder)
• City of Circles, by Jess Richards (Hodder)

And here are the nominees for the Golden Tentacle (the best debut novel):

• How Saints Die by Carmen Marcus (Harville Secker)
• Hunger Makes the Wolf, by Alex “Acks” Wells (Angry Robot)
• Age of Assassins by RJ Barker (Orbit)
• The Black Tides of Heaven by JY Yang (Tor.com)
• Mandlebrot the Magnificent, by Liz Ziemska (Tor.com)

The first thing that struck me is that the Kitschie judges don’t give a crap about word count.  Two novellas feature on the Golden Tentacle shortlist.  Good on them.

As for the works I’ve only read two of them – Black Wave by Michelle Tea and The Rift by Nina Allan, both tremendous novels.  Just having those two books feature on the shortlist gives me the confidence that the other eight nominees – spread access the two tentacles – are of high quality.

But, if I have a complaint, it’s that The Kitschies don’t provide information on what works were submitted, other than the number (which was over a hundred).  This means for award connoisseurs like moi we don’t get to debate, pick-apart and argue about the books that should have been chosen.  When I asked The Kitschies why they didn’t publish a list of the submitted novels (ala The Clarke Award) they responded with:

The board discussed it and that’s the decision we’ve taken. Mostly to focus on the progressive, intelligent, and entertaining books that are shortlisted.

And that’s fair enough.  You want people to be talking about what made the list.  The thing is, I don’t believe publishing a longlist, or a list of submitted novels takes away from that discussion.  In my view, it enhances and provokes much-needed debate about the annual state of the genre.  Of course, not everyone cares about that sort of thing and the people who do seem to be caring less.  So, what’s left is a buzz of congratulations for 24 hours and then a whole lot of silence until the next shortlist is announced.  This is why the Sharke Six – The Clarke Award Shadow Panel – is a fantastic idea.  May it last and last.

I’ve gone off on a ramble… proving The Kitschies point about focussing on things other than the books nominated.  So to get back on track, I intend to at least read the two novellas, partly because I own them, partly because they’re short and partly because I’ve heard great things about them.  Has anyone else picked up the other six nominees?  And if so, which ones would they recommend?