SPSFC

Tar Vol On’s SPSFC4 First-Round Eliminations, Batch Four

Artwork by Tithi Luadthong

If you read any of the first three batches, the preamble is the same, so feel free to skip three paragraphs. My judging team for the fourth annual Self-Published Science Fiction Competition (SPSFC4) has been hard at work reading the 32 books initially assigned to us. By the end of March, we need to pick just two from that 32-book allocation to put forward as semifinalists. But before we cut all the way from 32 to 2, we’re starting with an intermediate stage in which we select a handful of quarterfinalists to be read and evaluated by the entire team.

As volunteer judges with plenty of other responsibilities, we will not all be reading all 32 books in full. Instead, we split them up among the team, assigning each book to a minimum of two judges, with a third judge being assigned in instances where the first two disagree. Those books that come back with strong or majority recommendations will advance to be read by the full team. Those that do not will be eliminated from the competition.

This is the most aggressive series of cuts we will make in the entire competition, as we’re seeking to eliminate 80-85% of our allocation at this first stage in order to give ourselves a manageable group of quarterfinalists. And an elimination at this stage does not mean that a book is bad. Everyone on my team has their own idiosyncratic perspective, with their own preferences and their own pet peeves. I will provide a brief explanation based on the reports given from the judges in question, but remember that one person’s “no room to breathe, not enough character depth” may be another’s gripping thriller, and one person’s “weird structure, feels too much like fantasy” may be another’s daring masterpiece. We’ve put a lot of thought into these decisions, but we will advance books that someone else will hate, and we will cut books that someone else will love. It’s inevitable.

So let’s take a moment to say goodbye to our final round of scouting phase eliminations. As always, if the blurbs grab you and our critiques don’t bother you, we heartily encourage you to try them yourselves.

Time’s Ellipse by Frasier Armitage

Status: CUT.

Consensus: Our readers were fascinated by the twist on Weird Time Stuff promised in the blurb, and were intrigued by the structural choice to tell each chapter from the perspective of a different character. But some of those differing perspectives began to get repetitive, there were a few too many editing errors, and ultimately, we weren’t sufficiently invested in the slice-of-life elements that constituted the whole.

Norylska Groans by Michael R. Fletcher and Clayton W. Snyder

Status: CUT.

Consensus: This is absolutely not a quality problem. Our readers were gripped by the bleak atmosphere and intrigued by the characters and the speculative concept. But the speculative concept involved magic stones that store and alter memory. Such a conceit certainly can be taken in a sci-fi direction, but this one felt purely fantasy and as such is not a good fit for the competition. Put it this way: if we were pitched this as a science fantasy, we may enjoy it (if we had a taste for especially grim narratives, at least), but we’d be asking where the science was.

Fieres by Jendra Berri

Status: CUT.

Consensus: Our judges praised the alienness of the aliens, but the majority struggled to get past a very slow start, in which myriad perspective characters were introduced in succession, all with backstory summaries that may have been in fashion decades ago but felt out of step with contemporary reader expectations.

New Eyes by Tobias Cabral

Status: CUT.

Consensus: Our readers were familiar with Cabral’s penchant for the hard sci-fi nitty-gritty from a past competition, but in this case, a confusing prologue put us on the wrong foot, and dialogue full of pop culture references never really settled into a flow to allow us to immerse.

Twilight Divide by Melanie Bokstad Horev

Status: CUT.

Consensus: Featuring various evolved races in a post-apocalyptic environment, this one felt like a fantasy novel resting on a sci-fi premise. Our judges didn’t have many serious complaints with the story progression, but neither was there enough of a hook to help in stand out in a crowded field.

Deceit by Sean Allen

Status: CUT.

Consensus: Our readers praised the pacing, writing quality, and expansive universe bound to appeal to fans of action-packed, large-scale space operas. But they wanted a bit more character depth to help generate emotional investment in the myriad dangers and plots.

The Anubis War by David R. Packer

Status: CUT.

Consensus: Another book with tons of worldbuilding depth and relatively shallow characterization, this one divided our readers based on how much they valued a compelling world compared to compelling characters.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *