2011 Recommended Anthropomorphics List: August update
Posted by Fred Patten on Sun 7 Aug 2011 - 16:12 — Edited by GreenReaper as of 16:27
The Anthropomorphic Literature and Arts Association, which administers the annual Ursa Major Awards, has updated the 2011 Anthropomorphic Reading List to include all of the titles recommended by furry fans through the beginning of August. This list is often used by fans to nominate in the next year's Awards.
All fans are invited to recommend worthwhile anthropomorphic works in ten categories (motion pictures, dramatic short films or broadcasts, novels, short fiction, other literary works, graphic stories, comic strips, magazines, published illustrations, and games) first published during 2011, if they are not already on the list.
About the author
Fred Patten — read stories — contact (login required)a retired former librarian from North Hollywood, California, interested in general anthropomorphics
Comments
So here's a question . . .
There is currently no recommended magazine, and only one other literary work. Would Flayrah be eligible for either category? It's an edited work, published online like Anthro, and contains a variety of furry news, reviews and opinion.
Web publications have been classified as "miscellany", yet this does not apply to comic, graphic stories or dramatic works.
That's an intriguing question. I would say that if Flayrah qualifies as either, it would be as a magazine. Literary magazines traditionally contain fiction, which I have not seen on Flayrah; but is this due to policy or just because nobody submits any?
I will submit your query to the ALAA Committee and see what they think.
Fred Patten
No fiction has been submitted to Flayrah, though it was the second-most popular request on a poll asking what people wanted to see. I would be willing to post high-quality material on a trial basis, if such works were submitted.
(I would also welcome the submission of editorial cartoons, though they would need to be of publishable quality.)
Edit: Meanwhile, let's see if I can't get an ISSN for this little publication . . . they have special rules for websites.
*Thinks to self: Hmm... I might just have to take up a new hobby that I've been wanting to do since I made that political cartoon of Obama a few years back.*
Avatar was selected over FMF.
I will never forgive Ursa that one.
Personally, I agree with you. (And I feel that "Avatar" was basically ripped off from Poul Anderson's 1955 s-f story "Call Me Joe".) But the award is a popular vote award, and that's how the majority of the fans voted.
Fred Patten
Then more fans should vote!
Speaking of "Fantastic Mr. Fox" (the movie), has anybody been keeping up with news of "Fantastic Mr. Fox" (the opera, composed by Tobias Picker)? I didn't like it. I see that it most recently had a production that toured England from 28 February to 26 May of this year. Have there been any other productions since its 1998 premiere?
http://www.tobiaspicker.com/fox.html
http://anthrozine.com/site/lbry/yarf.reviews.u.html
Fred Patten
I like FMF for the same reason I like Rumble Fish; it is weird and awesome at the same time.
Back on this horse again?
I am not beating a dead horse; it is very much alive (still).
The one who wishes to keep beating the horse will never concede that it is dead.
I see what you did there.
YOU SHUT YOUR MOUTH!
... or people'll suspect you of being my sockpuppet
But, look at this way, people are still mad at the Best Picture Oscar not going to Citizen Kane in 1941. Fred barely even remembers that one.
I mean, Avatar over Fantastict Mr. Fox was our first major snub. It's a big moment!
It's the other way around, akshully.
It is I, who controls you, subconsciously.
They still offer no guidelines on what they consider anthropomorphic content. That's not good.
"If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."
~John Stuart Mill~
The blurb at the bottom of their front page seems fairly clear to me. According to that, works:
That's still very unclear. I was looking for a guide in the side menu, that's why I didn't see that paragraph. It doesn't offer much on differentiating between what's natural and what's an added character, specifically for fantasy creatures. (like pokemon which is in the game section. Are they being given human attributes or are those attributes they had in the first place?)
"If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."
~John Stuart Mill~
Maybe they are being vague on purpose, and specifically went out of their way to not offer more specific or detailed guidelines. If they are trying to model themselves after the Hugo awards, it fits right in where the Hugo awards tries to be very vague about what counts as science fiction so that it is left up to the community via voting if it is appropriate or not. It has resulted in an occasional win that some fans think belong more in other genres than science fiction, but that is considered the price of letting the community be able to define it instead of some small committee.
Right. The ALAA set up the Ursa Major Awards to include anthropomorphic content in ten categories, and leaves it to the voting fans to decide if a work is anthropomorphic enough and what category it falls in.
Fred Patten
I thought Flayrah would be more like a newsletter, or even a news channel, than a magazine.... but that's just my opinion.
~ The Legendary RingtailedFox
Your opinion is correct.
A news website is most definitely NOT a magazine.
Yet we are far from just a news website. I see three reviews on the front page. We have features (like this), opinion pieces, and more. Flayrah is hardly TIME, but I think it does approach to the definition of a news magazine.
Of course, ALAA can define its categories as it likes. The question is really whether our work falls within the material they seek to encourage. I find it hard to believe it would not, merely because it is non-fiction, or published online.
Seeings as the person who runs it is an individual who works closely with Anthrocon and they probably still probably hold a grudge from that article printed a year and a half ago, something tells me they wouldn't want to be encouraging in the slightest. Especially since they hardly contribute to the this community as much as they used to, that in and of itself is pretty telling.
ALAA is run by a committee, not an individual. I believe many of its members think positively of Flayrah, and I'd hope even those who might have reason not to would make a fair decision based on all our content.
I'm more concerned that they might not want to appear biased by including us; after all, their founder is a leading contributor. (Still, this hasn't stopped prior works being included, nominated and winning the Award.)
Post new comment