The voting results are here, if you're curious.

In the wake of this award, I can only conclude that Neptunian fascist invaders have seeded earth's spec fic community with recessive Moron Genes.

Oh, I'm not bitching about the fact that a Harry Potter novel won the Hugo. After all, the Hugos areessentially a popularity contest, folks. The winners are selected by the Great Unwashed at the annual Worldcon, and the bar for entry into that august body of voters is a paid membership. Nothing more. I have read all four Harry Potter novels, and I've seen the list of best novel nominees. Do I think that Goblet of Firereally stacks up against even the only other nominated novel I read, George R.R. Martin's juicy A Storm of Swords? Nah. The Potter novel is amusing, diverting, and addictive, but it's also tangled in its own length. A special kind of magic, but no moral argument or literary gravity. Still, I didn't vote, did I?

No, my gripe is with the mental bronze medallists that crawled out of the woodwork in the wake of the awards to paste gigantic neon "I AM THE LOWEST COMMON DENOMINATOR" signs on their underused craniums.

Like this one. Seems to be a fairly articulate guy with a valid opinions I somewhat share. But what the hell is he talking about, "hopping onto a commercial bandwagon?" Popular books get votes in popularity contests. It's not news.

This one's worse. So the Locus awards are the only one he's going to have any faith in from this point on, eh? Too bad that the 2000 Locus award went, as astute readers point out in later letters, to Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban.

To be fair, the Locus letters are like dispatches from Voltaire compared to some of the letters at Sci Fi Weekly.

Negative responses seem to fall into two camps:

"Sniff, sniff! Fantasy books shouldn't win the award for world science fiction achievement! I'm confused!"

News flash: The Constitution of the World Science Fiction Society describes eligibility for the Hugo awards in the following terms, in Article 3, Section 3.2.1:

"Unless otherwise specified, Hugo Awards are given for work in the field of science fiction or fantasy appearing for the first time during the previous calendar year. "

And that is that. There is no appeal to this, where the 2001 awards are concerned. That is the text.

"Everyone knows that J.K. Rowling is a populist sell-out hack and the Harry Potter books are crap!"

Kudos to those of you who actually read a HP book or two before coming to this conclusion. I disagree, but you are 100% entitled to not be crushed to death by a patrolling Harlan-Bot.

As for the rest of you sorry idiots...

Am I licking toads, or are people admitting in letters to public forums that they haven't read the work in question, but that they're sure it's "hackwork" and "kiddie crap?"

Are adults really doing that?

Look, reprobates, it's like this. "I haven't read X because it doesn't seem to be my sort of thing" is a perfectly valid statement. "I haven't read X because I can already tell that it's crap, and I have no need to read it" is what the French call shit for brains.

You cannot telepathically read a book from a distance. You cannot offer a valid opinion on the substance and text of a book you have not read.

I mean, really. Are you people house trained? Is it safe to leave you near an open flame without supervision? Ever tasted antifreeze? Quick, when a plane crashes on the U.S.A./Canada border, where do they bury the survivors?

Take three lessons home with you today, kids. Write 'em down if you must.

1. The Hugo Awards, for better and for worse, are given out by that small portion of Worldcon members who actually bother to vote each year. It is a popular vote by an uncontrolled demographic of skiffy fans, pros, miscreants, and lunatics. If you disapprove of the 2001 selections, buy a 2002 membership and rock the vote.

2. The Hugo Awards are for works of fantasy and science fiction. Says so right in the rules. Fantasy and science fiction.

3. It is never right to offer a conclusive opinion on a literary work that you have not actually read. No. Shut up. It is wrong. It is a Wrong Thing. It is dishonest, lazy, presumptuous, and ignorant. Everyone has a right to an informedopinion. No buts.

Cripes. Looking at the fallout of anti-Potter sentimentality in the past two months ("Oh Gawd! A piece of Children's Literature! A piece of Fantasy Literature! A piece of Popular Literature! It ain't Science Fiction, no sir, don't touch the filthy thing, what would Robert Heinlein think..."), I can only wonder... is this how the sci-fi community must look to those on the Outside? To the Literary Types ("Oh Gawd! A piece of Science Fiction! Plot and character driven! Heavy prose! It ain't Literary Fiction, no ma'am, don't touch the filthy thing, what wouldJohn Updike think...")?

A little perspective might just save us from becoming what we detest, if it isn't already too late.