The awards went to those books because people voted for them. They may or may not have voted based on the books' quality, and they may evaluate quality differently to you. But that is how voting works.

To put it another way, yes, the Hugos often recognise shit work, and have done for decades, but they do so fairly.

IMO The Broken Earth trilogy winning the Hugos is the best argument against the claim that Hugos are politicized. The books are a SFF must read.

They're good books, but IIRC there was heavy discussion on how her... Dragon Age fanfic winning was political, especially with the Hugo hattrick. I enjoyed the books, but her wins were definitely... contentious along the expected culture war drama.

The Dark Forest, IMO, is one of the best sci-fi ever written

The Dark Forest, IMO, is one of the best sci-fi ever written

In case anyone else is thinking about picking up the Broken Earth trilogy, I'll offer another opinion. The Fifth Season still stands out to me as one of the best sff novels I've read in many years and I recommend it wholeheartedly. I remember feeling sorry for authors who had novels published the same year, because The Fifth Season was so obviously going to sweep the awards (on merit). Had a similar reaction to R F Kuang's Babel, but different outcome there, obviously.

Ok fine... these replies are making me feel like I should read some more NK Jimison. Broken Earth did not land for me at all, but I hear all the enthusiasm and I'll keep an open mind.

What. They were so good! What did you not like about them?

I've read them a few times, I like them, but I have a really hard time recommending them because child abuse is a inescapable theme of the story.

I loved all three and one is a second person novel that manages to make it the whole way without it getting weird.

I'm sorry that the gender and ethnicity of the author appears to be an issue for you. I think that amongst the finalists, in 2016, 2017 and 2018 all three are easy winners. I feel for Uprooted and Too Like the lightning lovers but sometimes you the bear eats you etc.

> I'm sorry that the gender and ethnicity of the author appears to be an issue for you.

Parent didn't say that it was an issue. He called it 'woke'.

Yes, and that was the only evidence supplied to why they were 'awful'. The post should have been ignored on that basis alone, but because it wasn't its easy to see why GP might have extrapolated their response.

I read all three and had enough hope at the beginning to push through. I really hated the second person, the stream of consciousness prose, the random all-caps, and the relentlessly bleak tone. I think NK Jimison may be a talented writer but the style drove me nuts and the story went nowhere.

Reading the replies is making me rethink my initial comment. There a lot of people rushing to defend the books, so maybe it's just not for me. Perhaps I overestimated the impact of the social context on the outcome.

The Stone Sky, the third book, is a joint Hugo and Nebula winner.

Mileage varies a LOT. I don't always love the Hugo (or Nebula) winner, because I think people who only read SF tend to value SF concepts over prose and narrative and that's sometimes reflected in the winners, but holy hell I loved both Broken Earth and Inheritance. The Great Cities twofer is mighty fine, too.

Not for nothing, but Jemisin is also a MacArthur fellow.