The Theory of Related-ivity: Segment XIII

The Theory of Related-ivity:

A History and Analysis of the Best Related Work Hugo Category

by Heather Rose Jones

(This is a serialized article exploring the history of the Best Related Work Hugo category in its various names and versions. If you’ve come in at the middle, start here.)

Contents

Part 3: Historic Trends

3.3 Category

3.3.4 Less Popular Categories

3.3.4 1 Convention

3.3.4.2 Convention Publication

3.3.4.3 Graphic

3.3.4.4 Humor

3.3.4.5 Interviews

3.3.4.6 Journalism

3.3.4.7 Reviews

3.3.4.8 Science

3.3.5 Least Popular Categories

3.3.5.1 Experience

3.3.5.2 Music

3.3.5.3 Photography

3.3.5.4 Poetry

3.3.5.5 Role Playing Game

---

Part 3: Historic Trends

3.3 Category

3.3.4 Less Popular Categories

Once the frequency of a Category drops below 5% of the data set, the numbers involved become much less useful for anything but anecdotal observations. So for this and the next group, discussion will largely be confined to the basic distribution data and any interesting or noteworthy observations. Discussions of author gender will only be included if it clearly diverges from the average. No overall conclusions will be presented for the Less Popular and Least Popular Categories.

Although these categories are classed as “less popular” based on overall presence in the data set, several of them fall in what might be considered traditional Categories of material, such as Reviews and Science writing.

Works whose classification includes one of the “less popular” categories make up 113 out of the total 609 works (19%), keeping in mind that many works fall in more than one Category.

3.3.4 1 Convention

Definition: An organized, time-bound, structured multi-person experience. This may be an isolated instance but generally represents one of an ongoing series of instances.

Overall, 5 works (1% of the full data set) are classified as Convention. All occur during the Related Work era. As all Conventions fall in the Event Media format, the primary discussion of this group falls in that section. For comparison purposes, here are the standard stats.

Best Related Work

• Finalists in 2 out of 16 years (13%)
• 3% of Finalists
• No Winners
• Long list in 3 years (19%)
• 2% of Long List

Creator gender for Conventions is (perhaps unsurprisingly) dominated by mixed-gender teams, but the low numbers make this less meaningful.

All Convention nominations occurred between 2019-2022. While it’s probably too soon to draw conclusions, it’s possible that interest in nominating Conventions for Best Related was strongly driven by the specific temporal context of the Covid pandemic and will not be sustained.

3.3.4.2 Convention Publication

Definition: An informational publication put out by a specific convention and related to activities at that convention.

As all but one work in this Category fall in the Ephemera Media format, the most significant discussion of the works is given there. The remaining work is a published Book of Worldcon guest of honor speeches.[1]

Overall, 6 works (1% of the full data set) are classified as Convention Publications. In the 46 years in which Best Related has existed they appear as follows:

Best Non-Fiction Book

• Finalists in 1 out of 18 years (6%)
• 1% of Finalists
• No Winners
• (Long List data not available)

Best Related Book

• Finalists in 2 out of 12 years (17%)
• 3% of Finalists
• No Winners
• Long List in 3 years (25%)
• 2% of Long List

Best Related Work

• Finalists in 0 out of 16 years (0%)
• No Finalists
• No Winners
• Long list in 1 year (6%)
• <1% of Long List

While at least one Long List nominee occurs in each of the three eras, the majority of Convention Publications (4) were nominated during the Related Book era. With the shift of most Convention Publications from print to online formats (with the exception of the souvenir program book) it’s likely that the context for noteworthy works in this Category is gone.

Author gender for Convention Publications is less male-dominated than the whole, but the low numbers make this less meaningful.

3.3.4.3 Graphic

Definition: A work in which a narrative (fictional or non-fictional) strongly relies on sequential art.

The content of Graphic works is discussed in detail in the Overlapping Categories section under Graphic Story, therefore the following will only present the overall statistics. A couple Graphic works are also classified under Humor.

Overall, 15 works (2% of the full data set) are classified as Graphic works. In the 46 years in which Best Related has existed they appear as follows:

Best Non-Fiction Book

• Finalists in 3 out of 18 years (17%)
• 3% of Finalists
• 11% of Winners
• (Long List data not available)

Best Related Book

• Finalists in 2 out of 12 years (17%)
• 3% of Finalists
• No Winners
• Long List in 6 years (50%)
• 4% of Long List

Best Related Work

• Finalists in 0 out of 16 years (0%)
• 0% of Finalists
• No Winners
• Long list in 1 year (6%)
• <1% of Long List

As previously noted, a separate category for Best Graphic Work was created the year before the change to the Related Work era, thus is is not surprising that this type of work essentially disappears from Best Related at that point.

While Graphic works have a higher proportion of male-only authors than the full data set, the proportion aligns with the overall proportions in the Non-Fiction and Related Book eras, when these works primarily occur.

3.3.4.4 Humor

Definition: A work intended for humorous entertainment.

Works of Humor are sometimes cross-classified as Graphic works or Art, or include Humor as part of a collection of multiple categories of work.

Overall, 10 works (2% of the full data set) are classified as Humor. In the 46 years in which Best Related has existed they appear as follows:

Best Non-Fiction Book

• Finalists in 2 out of 18 years (11%)
• 3% of Finalists
• 6% of Winners
• (Long List data not available)

Best Related Book

• Finalists in 0 out of 12 years (0%)
• No Finalists
• No Winners
• Long List in 2 years (17%)
• 1% of Long List

Best Related Work

• Finalists in 0 out of 16 years (0%)
• No Finalists
• No Winners
• Long list in 3 years (19%)
• 2% of Long List

While humorous works cover a variety of subjects, the most interesting feature is that while works in the Non-Fiction and Related Book eras poke fun at themes in SFF literature, those in the Related Work era address social issues and events in fandom. Author gender is in line with the average for the whole data set.

3.3.4.5 Interviews

Definition: Similar to Biography or Memoir but elicited in the form of an interactive Interview and often being a collection of Interviews of various people.

Works classified as Interview don’t include any cross-over to other categories.

Overall, 9 works (1% of the full data set) are classified as Interviews. In the 46 years in which Best Related has existed they appear as follows:

Best Non-Fiction Book

• Finalists in 1 out of 18 years (6%)
• 1% of Finalists
• No Winners
• (Long List data not available)

Best Related Book

• Finalists in 1 out of 12 years (8%)
• 2% of Finalists
• No Winners
• Long List in 3 years (25%)
• 3% of Long List

Best Related Work

• Finalists in 2 out of 16 years (13%)
• 2% of Finalists
• No Winners
• Long list in 3 years (19%)
• 1% of Long List

Five of the works contained collections of multiple Interviews of different people while 4 were of specific individuals. All the single-Interview subjects were male, while author gender of Interview works is roughly in line with the overall average.

3.3.4.6 Journalism

Definition: Investigation, analysis, or communication about an ongoing or contemporary event or situation. This has very fuzzy boundaries with History, but is used to tag works with more immediacy, where the work may be “breaking news” as it were.

One work is cross-tagged with History as it covers both a historical review of events and investigative work.

Overall, 17 works (3% of the full data set) are classified as Journalism. All the works tagged as Journalism fall in the Related Work era. This isn’t surprising as the definition of Journalism that was used tends to highlight immediacy, which is less likely to be a feature of published Books.

Best Related Work

• Finalists in 4 out of 16 years (25%)
• 8% of Finalists
• No Winners
• Long list in 10 years (63%)
• 7% of Long List

The subjects of these works tend toward social issues. In 4 years the annual #BlackSpecFic Report (a report on racial representation in SFF literature and publishing) was nominated. Three works addressed issues around the 2023 Hugo Awards.[2] Other Topics include disability experiences, the Sad Puppies movement, and the politics of writing workshops. Seven of the works concerned issues or events related to specific People or media Properties. The specific People who were Topics of investigation were both male. Author gender of Investigation is disproportionately non-male (only 41% male-only authorship).

3.3.4.7 Reviews

Definition: A collection of discussions of specific works. There can be overlap between this Category and Criticism.

Reviews sometimes co-occur with Essays (8), with individual co-occurrences with Criticism, Fiction, and Humor.

Overall, 26 works (4% of the full data set) are classified as Reviews. In the 46 years in which Best Related has existed they appear as follows:

Best Non-Fiction Book

• Finalists in 1 out of 18 years (6%)
• 2% of Finalists
• No Winners
• (Long List data not available)

Best Related Book

• Finalists in 2 out of 12 years (17%)
• 3% of Finalists
• No Winners
• Long List in 3 years (25%)
• 2% of Long List

Best Related Work

• Finalists in 7 out of 16 years (44%)
• 9% of Finalists
• 6% of Winners
• Long list in 10 years (63%)
• 7% of Long List

Reviews increase steadily in frequency over time, with a significant increase in the Related Work era, the only era with a Winner. Frequency is roughly similar between Finalists and long lists.

Overwhelmingly (22 out of 26), works classified as Reviews are collection of Reviews of multiple works by a single reviewer. Of these, 20 review Books or a variety of media types, while 2 review movies. Two works are collections of reviews by multiple authors. The Category outliers are a Video review of a specific Property and a Social Media post promoting a specific Property. Two reviewers have more than one work in the Category: Gary K. Wolfe and John Clute, each appearing 3 times.[3]

The gender balance of Reviews is functionally identical to that of the overall data set: 17 (65%) of the works had male authors while 8 (31%) had non-male authors.

3.3.4.8 Science

Definition: A work examining or explaining some aspect of real-world or speculative Science.

Science works are rarely cross-categorized. One also appears as Art, and 3 also as Fiction (all 3 in the Series The Science of Discworld).

Overall, 28 works (5% of the full data set) are classified as Science. In the 46 years in which Best Related has existed they appear as follows:

Best Non-Fiction Book

• Finalists in 1 out of 18 years (6%)
• 1% of Finalists
• 6% of Winners
• (Long List data not available)

Best Related Book

• Finalists in 3 out of 12 years (25%)
• 5% of Finalists
• No Winners
• Long List in 8 years (67%)
• 6% of Long List

Best Related Work

• Finalists in 2 out of 16 years (13%)
• 3% of Finalists
• 6%Winners
• Long list in 6 years (46%)
• 4% of Long List

Science works are roughly consistent in frequency across all three eras and between Finalists and long lists. Within the limits of the low numbers involved, Winners are also roughly proportionate to Finalists.

Works focused on Science lean strongly towards classic SF Topics: 2 Astronomy, 3 Cosmology, 4 Futurism, 2 Planetary Science, 7 Space Travel. Four works cover assorted hard sciences or Science methodology, while only 1 work falls under life sciences (Ursula Vernon’s “Whalefall” Speech). Five works discuss scientific aspects of specific media Properties (Star Trek, X-Files, and Discworld).

Male-only authorship is over-represented in the whole group (79%), but gender follows the overall pattern with the Related Work era being more balanced.

3.3.5 Least Popular Categories

As with the previous group, these categories with extremely low numbers are of minimal analytic use and no overall conclusions are offered.

Works whose classification includes one of the “least popular” categories make up 10 out of the total 609 works (2%), keeping in mind that many works fall in more than one Category.

3.3.5.1 Experience

Definition: An event that does not rely on a specific structured interactive space but is generally time-bound in some fashion. This is a rather eclectic group of items that didn’t fit well elsewhere and the label is somewhat arbitrary.

Works classified as Experience are not cross-classified, however this is largely because “Experience” would not have been assigned as the Category if any other classification were obvious.

Overall, 3 works (<1% of the full data set) are classified as Experience. Works classified as Experience occur only in the Related Work era.

Best Related Work

• Finalists in 1 out of 16 years (6%)
• 1% of Finalists
• No Winners
• Long list in 1 year (6%)
• 1% of Long List

The items classified as Experience include the r/Fantasy Bingo Reading Challenge, NASA coverage of the solar eclipse, and the Magical Readathon. Philosophical questions around the eclipse coverage have been discussed in the Media section under Video.

3.3.5.2 Music

Definition: Musical performance.⁠

All works categorized as Music are also classified as Album under Media format and are discussed in detail there. Due to the Media definitions for the Best Related category, they appear only in the Related Work era.

Only the overall stats will be listed here, for comparison purposes.

Overall, 3 works (<1% of the full data set) are classified as Music.

Best Related Work

• Finalists in 1 out of 16 years (6%)
• 1% of Finalists
• No Winners
• Long list in 1 years (6%)
• 1% of Long List

3.3.5.3 Photography

Definition: A presentation of photographic works, where any accompanying text is less significant.

Biographical dictionary types of works are not included in this Category even if they included photos.

Overall, 2 works (<1% of the full data set) are classified as Photography. They appear only in the Non-Fiction era.

Best Non-Fiction Book

• Finalists in 2 out of 18 years (11%)
• 2% of Finalists
• No Winners
• (Long List data not available)

The works in question are 2 collections of portraits of authors, The Faces of Science Fiction and The Faces of Fantasy, both by the same author. The first is the work Lew Wolkoff must have been referring to in his 1986 complaint about “an album of photographic portraits of SFF authors” as an example of material he felt didn’t belong under Best Non-Fiction Book. Although the expanded definition of the category scope in later eras would have made such works more clearly in scope, no photo collections have been nominated in later eras.[4]

3.3.5.4 Poetry

Definition: A work of Poetry

Only one work falls in this Category, occurring in the Related Work era.[5]

Overall, 1 work (<1% of the full data set) is classified as Poetry.

Best Related Work

• Finalists in 0 out of 16 years (0%)
• No Finalists
• No Winners
• Long list in 1 years (6%)
• <1% of Long List

The work in question is the Mari Lwyd poetic twitter thread discussed in detail under the Social Media format. It’s possible that some of the nominees that collected various Essays, Reviews, critical studies, etc. by a specific author may also have included Poetry, but this was not apparent from the available information.

Despite the obvious popularity of Poetry, as evidenced by the establishment of a special Hugo category for Poetry in 2025 and 2026 and the initial passage of an amendment establishing it as a constitutional category in 2025, it’s clear that nominators did not consider Poetry to be in scope for Best Related. See the discussion under Media formats for speculation on why nominators were interested in the nominated poem.

3.3.5.5 Role Playing Game

Definition: An interactive Game in which players take on character roles.⁠

Overall, 1 work (<1% of the full data set) is classified as a Role-Playing Game. It appears during the Related Work era.

Best Related Work

• Finalists in 1 out of 16 years (6%)
• 1% of Finalists
• No Winners
• Long list in 1 years (6%)
• <1% of Long List

See the discussion of this work in Media formats under Game, as well as in the Overlapping Categories section under Game.

---

(Segment XIV will cover Part 3 Historic Trends, Section 3.3 Category, Chapters under 3.3.6 Category Supergenres.)