Monday, March 31, 2025

Favorite Nebula Award-winning Novels

 After finishing reading all of the Hugo Award winners for best novel, I decided to keep up the momentum and read all of the winners of the Nebula Award for best novel. I just finished the last one yesterday and decided to write a follow-up post to my earlier one where I talked about which of the Hugo books were my favorites

In this post, I’ll discuss the Nebula winners that were not also Hugo winners, and list those double-winners that I already described in the previous post.

The Nebula Award started in 1966, so there are over 10 years of generally poor-quality books that were Hugo-eligible but that were out of contention in this quest (all of my 5 worst Hugo books were before 1962). Nevertheless, there were two that I disliked enough to put in the category of worst Nebula winners.

List of favorites

Not surprisingly, many of the really good books won both awards. So the list of favorites that won only the Nebula is rather short. It’s hard to be sure that I’m holding them to exactly the same standard as my Hugo favorites – I may be a little more generous here. But all of these favorites are solid and worth a read.

NOTE: to read my full reviews of all of the Nebula Award-winning novels see my Goodreads books.

Samuel R. Delany: Babel-17 (1967)

I’m not sure that this falls into my top books of all times, but it was one of my favorite of the Nebula winners. It was pretty weird, which often is a negative for me, but somehow this one was weird in an interesting way and also pretty good for 1967. In particular, I liked the strong female main character, which was refreshing for a book from that decade. Like Babel, the 2023 winner, it was in the “power of words and language” genre, but did not drag on for page after dull page as Babel did.

Daniel Keyes: Flowers for Algernon (1967)

It’s hard to place this book relative to the others since I haven’t read it since I first did in about 1974. But I think it made a big impression on me at the time and was a really solid story. Very different in style from the other 1967 winner that I just described.

Greg Bear: Darwin’s Radio (2001)

This was a really exciting and interesting book that I had trouble putting down. Not one of my all-time top books, and I found the biology a bit hard to swallow (as a biologist). But worth reading.

Elizabeth Moon: The Speed of Dark (2004)

This is not your typical sci-fi book: the focus was not really on the advanced technology, which was only tangential to the real story line: seeing our world from the eyes of someone with autism. I was a bit disappointed with the ending, but otherwise it was a really engaging and thought-provoking book.

Favorites that also won the Hugo

The following favorite Nebula winners were already discussed in my previous blog post on favorite Hugo winners, so I will just list them here and let you read about them in the other post.

Frank Herbert: Dune (1966)

Ursula K. Le Guin: Left Hand of Darkness (1970)

Frederik Pohl: Gateway (1978)

Orson Scott Card: Ender’s Game (1986), Speaker for the Dead (1987)

Connie Willis: Blackout/All Clear (2011), Doomsday Book (1993)

N. K. Jemisin: The Stone Sky (2018)

 

Lois McMaster Bujold: Falling Free (1996) 

I’m putting this in a special category. This book did not win the Hugo and is actually not one of my favorite Bujold books, but I am including it because of my general love of the other Vorkosigan Universe books, some of which did win the Hugo.

5 star book that didn’t make my favorite list:

NOTE: there are other Nebula 5 start books that are not listed here because they were listed on the Hugo 5 star list of my other post and are therefore not repeated here.

Vonda N. McIntyre: The Moon and the Sun (1998)

Perhaps I was generous to give this 5 stars, but I liked the story. A bit slow to start and too much detail about the French court, but I really liked the characters and how different “good” characters had different viewpoints on topics like sex and religion.

Worst Nebula books

No “best” list would be complete without a corresponding “worst” list. Here it is:

Samuel R. Delany: The Einstein Interaction (1968)

Very weird book that was probably trying to make some point about myths that was lost on me. Interesting that Delany makes both my best and worst list!

Robert Silverberg: A Time of Changes (1972)

Preachy and depressing premise, disgusting attitude towards women, poor writing.
 

Sunday, February 16, 2025

Favorite Hugo Award-winning Novels


 In May 2023, I completed a quest that was on my bucket list: reading all of the winners of the Hugo Award for best science fiction/fantasy novel. At that time, there were 71 books on the list (not counting “Retro-Hugo” winners). I’m not sure when I read my first one – the first one that I can unambiguously remember reading was Dune in about 1975 or 76. I read a number of the winners from the 70’s through 90’s soon after their publication, before having kids and going to grad school cut back on my pleasure reading time. Starting in 2021, I resolved to spend more time reading for fun and a number of the more recent winners were recommended to me by my daughter. This enticed me to take up the challenge of finishing all of them and Goodreads tells me that I read 31 of them in the 12 months preceding May 2023.

Having read them all, I am enjoying thinking back on them and pondering which were my favorites. I decided to write this post to list them.

Why a favorite?


There are several criteria that must have been met to make my “favorites” list. First and foremost, the book must be deeply engaging. To me, a great fiction book draws me into its world, and while I’m reading I’m transported to that world and barely aware that I am sitting in this world reading. Second, the story needs to be clever, creative, or explore a universe that has some really interesting and different twist. Third, the story can’t be ruined by being overtly sexist, dated, or transparently preaching about the author’s pet peeve. It is fine for the book to have a point, but that point needs to be made through the storytelling.

Another characteristic (but not a requirement) is that I found myself pondering and thinking about these stories for days or weeks after reading them, and years later thinking how I would like to re-read them.

List of my favorites

NOTE: to read my full reviews of all of the Hugo Award-winning novels, see my Goodreads books.

 

N. K. Jemisin: The Fifth Season (2016), The Obelisk Gate (2017), The Stone Sky (2018)


This trilogy was so different and interesting that I was quickly intrigued by it. The narrative style of The Fifth Season was also really cool. Some parts of The Stone Sky were a bit hard to believe, but the trilogy's overall the story was very satisfying.

Vernor Vinge: A Fire Upon the Deep (1993), A Deepness in the Sky (2000)


I was not familiar with Vernor Vinge before I started reading the Hugo books, but I now really appreciate his creativity and storytelling. Both of these books have a compelling story arc, but also have fascinating and creative alien species whose interactions with humans form an integral part of the story. One interesting character overlaps in the two books.

Frank Herbert: Dune (1966)


It is a bit difficult for me to objectively compare Dune to my other favorite Hugo books, since it was probably the first “epic” sci-fi/fantasy book that I read. But at that time, I was blown away by the complex vision that Herbert created in the book. Queen’s Night at the Opera had come out not long before I read Dune and I listened to “The Prophet’s Song” many times while reading. It has become indelibly associated with Dune in my mind. If you’ve read Dune, listen to The Prophet's Song and see if you can tell why it made such a strong connection for me.

Connie Willis: Blackout/All Clear (2011), Doomsday Book (1993)


Although both of these books involve pretty depressing topics (WW II and the plague), the story telling really immersed me in those time periods. The character’s struggle to survive and return to their own time, overlaid with their efforts to recognize the humanity and dignity of the people of those times in the most trying circumstances, made for a compelling plot.

Orson Scott Card: Ender’s Game (1986), Speaker for the Dead (1987)


Although these books might be classified as young adult books, they had really interesting and surprising plots.

Lois McMaster Bujold: The Vor Game (1991), Barrayar (1992), Mirror Dance (1995)


I include these books not because they were my particular Bujold favorites, but rather because the entire Miles Vorkosigan series were so clever, funny, and entertaining. They are certainly one of my favorite book series, with The Warrior's Apprentice (not a nominee) as the very best.

C. J. Cherryh: Downbelow Station (1982), Cyteen (1989)


I include these Cherryh books for a similar reason as the Bujold books. They weren’t necessarily my favorite Cherryh books (that would probably be the Chanur books, nominated in 1983 but did not win). But C. J. Cherryh is overall one of my favorite sci-fi authors and her Alliance/Union universe is complex and fascinating.

Ursula K. Le Guin: The Left Hand of Darkness (1970)


It would be difficult to not include Le Guin somewhere on my list. The Left Hand of Darkness is certainly one of her best books, although probably the Lathe of Heaven (nominated in 1972 but did not win) is my favorite. Le Guin is perhaps unmatched for her ability to situate interesting plots in worlds and cultures that are thought-provoking.

Frederik Pohl: Gateway (1978)


I read Gateway many years ago, so I’m not sure how I would feel about it now. But at the time, the novelty of the story premise and narrative style really appealed to me.

J. K. Rowling: Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (2001)


This is actually my least favorite Harry Potter book. But the Harry Potter saga is one of my top fantasy series, so I included it on that basis.

Runners up:


Robert Sawyer: Hominids (2003)


This book was borderline and did not quite make the cut, but I have to say that I was quite intrigued by the underlying concept of the world, and I just really liked the story and imagining how the world would be different if a different Homo species had come to dominate the earth.

Walter M. Miller Jr.: A Canticle for Leibowitz (1961)


I had first heard the NPR radio dramatization of this in the early 1980’s and was not overly impressed. I am also not a big fan of post-apocalyptic books. But when I read the book recently, I really enjoyed the story-telling and premise of the first two parts of the book. It was far superior to most other sci fi books I’ve read that were written in the 1950’s and early 1960’s. But it got booted from the favorites list because of the “no preachiness” criterion. The third part of the book was just transparently an anti-euthanasia sermon and that ruined the last part of the book for me.

Vonda N. McIntyre: Dreamsnake (1979)


When I started reading this book, I was expecting to dislike it. As I said, I don’t really like post-apocalyptic stories that well, and the beginning of the book seemed pretty hokey to me. But as the story was built out, I really found myself enjoying it. As a post-apocalyptic novel, it was pretty unusually in emphasizing kindness as a basic human characteristic. That was really refreshing to me.

John Scalzi: Redshirts (2013)


This was a short and very funny parody of Star Trek. Surprisingly, it was actually built into a somewhat clever story. Definitely work a read.

Other books I gave 5 star ratings to:

Ann Leckie: Ancillary Justice (2014)


Very interesting take on A.I.

Arkady Martine: A Memory Called Empire (2020), A Desolation Called Peace (2022)


Intriguing world told from the perspective of someone confused about another culture.

Neil Gaiman: The Graveyard Book (2009)


Did not think I would like, but did.

Mary Robinette Kowal: The Calculating Stars (2019)


Pretty interesting overall plot concept, but bordering on unbelievable.

Larry Nevin: Ringworld (1971)


Clever world-building, but too sexist for my tastes now.

Victor Vinge: Rainbows End (2007)


Enjoyable and interesting book, but not up to the level of his two books I put on my favorites.

Paolo Bacigalupi: The Windup Girl (2010)


Very interesting world, but a bit too violent and depressing for me to fully enjoy

Robert Charles Wilson: Spin (2006)


Engaging and suspenseful, but not top tier.

Roger Zelazny: Lord of Light (1968)


Really interesting presentation: not sure what was real and what was mythological. Far superior and more creative than many of the books from the 1960’s. 

William Gibson: Neuromancer (1985)

Story line not amazing, but very prescient and the storytelling was vivid. The origin of "cyberspace" and cyberpunk. 

Philip K. Dick: The Man in the High Castle (1963)

One of the rare excellent winners from the early 1960's. An early entry in the alternate universe genre and well-written.

Worst Hugo Books:


No "best" list would be complete without a corresponding "worst" list. 

It seems to me pretty clear that the quality of science fiction and fantasy writing has generally improved over time. Anyone who thinks that the 1959’s and early 1960’s was some kind of golden age for science fiction clearly has not read these terrible books. One thing I cannot figure out is why Robert Heinlein is considered a great sci-fi author. The books of his that I have read ranged from mediocre to downright awful.

Robert A. Heinlein: Starship Troopers (1960)

This was just a deplorable book. One of the few I’ve given a one-star rating. Almost no plot and transparent right-wing ax-grinding.

Robert A. Heinlein: Stranger in a Strange Land (1962)

Despite this being a “famous book”, it was really terrible. Disgusting sexism (female character says “Nine times out of ten, if a girl gets raped, it’s partly her fault.”), characters droning on about Heinlein’s pet issues, etc.

Fritz Leiber: The Big Time (1958)

No real plot, stereotypical characters, dumb premise.

James Blish: A Case of Conscience (1959)

Lack of imagination about technology, shallow and stereotypical female characters, pages of pontification by characters with no plot development, …

Mark Clifton: They’d Rather Be Right (1955)

Almost impossible to obtain, and for good reason. An implausible story with annoying political overtones, masquerading as a science fiction story. Really, really dumb portrayal of A.I.