I for one have a great dislike for the man, but have never read any of his declared fiction. Is it good? I've always seen mixed reviews on his books, from raving its amazing to despising it as trash. But, when taking into consideration his lifeworks, I feel these reviews may be biased and published by followers or haters.

Anyone hear read anything from Hubbard (eg Battlefield Earth, etc.) was it good?

I dislike some of the things that Hubbards name is associated with as much as it's possible to, I think.

But don't kid yourself. Winning WotF is a BIG deal. Some big names in fantasy and science fiction are associated with it and quite a number got their first recognition with their win there. A win can do a lot for a writer.

I mean what can you say about a contest that's judged by names like Algis Budrys, David Wolverton, Anne McCaffrey, Larry Niven, Jerry Pournelle Robert Sawyer and Oscar Scott Card? The anthology is regularly one of the top selling anthologies of the year.

Now I am made uneasy by the fact that there is a connection to Scientology. I can't deny that. But I don't think any of the judges or any of the winners have ever been associated with that relgion. So if the asssociation keeps someone from entering, I don't think anyone would fault them. But don't do it thinking that it isn't a major coup to win.

[This message has been edited by JeanneT (edited May 21, 2008).]

And as Antony said to the Romans

"The evil men do live after them, the good is oft interred with their bones."

My advice: Let dead men rest, let religion stay free, and do what you think is right.

I can't imagine anyone would ever say to you, "Woa, woa...that's the winner of the WOTF...Scientologist! You can't eat here..."

I jest in part, but I still mean what I said. Your post shows why you needn't worry.

Does OSC's association with the Latter-Day Saints keep you away from this site? Apparently not. I know that there is a huge difference between being a member of a church and establishing one, but come on. Would you seriously give up a great opportunity merely because a dead man's name is attached to it. It's not like L Ron Hubbard is synonymous with Hitler. What did L Ron do that was so bad? He invented a religion and wrote some unscientific science books.
Scientologists don't call for a new Holocaust, they don't issue fatwahs, they don't try to ram bogus science into school curriculum, and unless there is some huge conspiracy that I missed there is no plan for world domination. They deserve the same scorn as any religion.
Several bad actors have come out in support of the religion is this what brings out the extra venom? Is the fact that he invented his religion so recently what makes L Ron a target?

I am not in any way a supporter of or apologist for Scientology, I'm just intolerant of intolerance. If I were to complain that a contest was sponsored by a certain Christian sect I am sure that there would be a reaction. If I were to knock Muslims this thread would probably be closed. So why do we feel it is ok to knock scientology but not others?

Anyhow the contest was established by the writer not the church. As far as I know, the winners are not given memberships and no free copies of Dianetics are handed out at the awards.

"A very generous legacy from L. Ron Hubbard—a fine, fine fiction writer—for the writers of the future." —Anne McCaffrey, Author

As far as his fiction is concerned I did read and enjoy Battlefield Earth in 1982 so while it was a good read for a young teen I don't know what it would read like now. It is certainly big. And according to Wiki:

In 2006, Guinness World Records declared Hubbard the world's most published and most translated author, having published 1,084 fiction and non-fiction works that have been translated into 71 languages

Also, if your intolerant of intolerance...as I understand it, the higher-up Scientology stuff is intensely intolerant of pretty much all other faiths.

Several of their members, I believe, also ended up in jail for breaking into an IRS building or something similar.

That's said, I enter, not because I'm trying to tear someone else down, but rather it helps me to do better than I did before. I'm competing against myself, to advance to a personal best.

To submit a story to a pro magazines is probably every bit as competitive as WOTF. There are only so many slots to fill in a publication. And if the editor picks your story from the slush, that means somebody else has lost out. Is the answer then, not to submit anywhere at all? I don't believe it is.

WOTF is fairer because it's blind. You're not going up against a pro writer whose might get published because of being an established name. There are strong editoral biases to keep a magazine a certain flavor, and while WOTF might not be bias free(for instance, the odds are slanted against high fantasy, and toward hard SF), I believe it's more open to differing flavors.

A goal for many who enter WOTF is to:
Plan A. Win and get published.
Plan B. Improve until the stories find a home elsewhere--and thus make the writer ineligible to enter.

Leaves more room for the rest of us.

quote:

---

To submit a story to a pro magazines is probably every bit as competitive as WOTF. There are only so many slots to fill in a publication. And if the editor picks your story from the slush, that means somebody else has lost out. Is the answer then, not to submit anywhere at all? I don't believe it is.

---

Theres some differences. Contests have winners, a losers (or at least, not-winners.)

Also in the context of a contest, its implicit that the "winners" (or their work) is "better" than that of those that don't win.

Submitting to markets is a matter of need. A rejection from a market doesnt mean your story was inferior to others, necessarily. Nor does an acceptance mean it was superior. A lot of it is about fit to the market.

Contests are, by definition, totally about competition. About win/lose. Better/worse.

However, I wanted to clear this up:

quote:

---

I also tend to think its relatively unlikely to happen for a total unknown.

---

1. It is only open to relatively unknown authors.

2. It is a blind judging so being well-known is irrelevant. The judges only see the writing not the name.

Don't enter if you don't want to. No one will try to talk you into it although when I said I wouldn't enter for entirely different reasons, I was told I was being foolish. Whether I was or not, I ended up entering. LOL

I have nothing but respect for the judges and the winners. The judges aren't Scientologist and the winners aren't Scientologists. Scientology and L. Ron Hubbard are beside the point from my point of view. You, of course, are welcome to have a different point of view.

quote:

---

*shrug* I consider a rejection nothing more than a "you lose." But it's a matter of attitude.

---

Well, its a matter of perception. A rejection from a market isn't a "you loose." its a rejection. It might be because the editor didn't like your piece, or it may be because it didn't fit the market.

In a contest, value judgement is implied. The whole implicit purpose of any contest is to see who is "better."

The purpose of submitting to markets is to get published, for whatever reasons you seek that end. It is technically competition, because only some will be accepted. However, again, its not necessarily about or solely about quality or value. Its like a market in more ways than one...editors look at the plethora of offerings, and pick the ones that best suit their needs.

However, writing is one of the most competitive fields you can enter. Every time you submit a piece for consideration, you are competing with other authors for the very limited number of slots.

quote:

---

However, writing is one of the most competitive fields you can enter. Every time you submit a piece for consideration, you are competing with other authors for the very limited number of slots.

---

Yes. But there are no winners or losers. Every magazine cant publish every author. So of coourse theres "competition." But thats not quite the same as a contest.

quote:

---

WotF is a SFWA eligible market. It pays pro-market rates and includes publication in a best selling anthology.

---

quote:

---

But only for the "winners"

---

In my opinion it seems there are very little differences in submiting to WOTF or Asimovs. The statistics are about the same. The only perk at WOTF or other contest is that you might get a notice saying you made honorable mention or semifinalist. This gives you a sense of how you did. In pro markets, you get a print or a rejection letter. But the main difference, i guess, would be the prestige. WOTF is a very notable achievment to have on your resume. It has launched many successful careers.

I would never try to convince someone to submit to a market that they do not believe in or endorse. There is a nameless mag that I will never submit to, even if I were to be guaranteed a sale, but I have had only positive experience with the contest. It helps being apart of a group such as the group we have here. It is a great motivator. I have learned more from these people in my group in such a short amount of time. I also know that there is no shortness of what I can learn in the time to come.

In the last WotF volume (#23) there was a religious fantasy called The Stone Cipher.

In Volume #22 there were 2 religious stories, but they were more religious sci-fi. The titles were "At the Gate of God" and "On the Mount". I don't reckon you have any particular advantage or disadvantage with a religiously themed story.

High fantasy does make it, of course. But, given the choice between a good hard SF and a good high fantasy among 8 finalists, I think the judges would opt for hard SF. In the latest Volume, there were only 4 fantasies to 9 science fiction.

Some time ago, pre-computer, pre-online, I did submit to Writers of the Future. I don't know anything about making "semi-finalist"---if I did, I never knew about it. But I mistrusted the organization behind it.

As I recall, in those days, you were supposed to submit a printed-out manuscript with your name on a separate page. (Something of a pain---my thoughts about a lot of things like that are spread around here.) I had the suspicion they were compiling a mailing list. I decided if I started getting Scientology junk mail, I'd stop submitting.

I did. And I did stop.

I don't know if I've mentioned that this "suspicion" of mine is hardly unique to Writers of the Future and Scientology. There's the Washington Times and the nature of its relationship with the Unification Church, for example. I try to avoid that newspaper just as much as I avoid WoTF.

(Truth to tell, I'm also a little suspicious of that Hubbard quote about religion and getting rich, for that matter. It comes from a source I've learned is somewhat unreliable in other features and aspects---so why not this, too?)

We've discussed all this ad nauseam, in all its permutations, and it just resulted in a locked thread. However, as we said before, there was no causality between entering a contest and getting certain mail. Nobody else has reported this, so it seems a fluke. WOTF is not a branch of a religion, it's purely a SF&F writing contest.

As far as WOTF not being associated with Scientology, i guess that is fair enough, but keep in mind there are many organizations that people have believed to be the same and it has been proved otherwise, (Narconan, various religious watchdog org's etc.) So it is viable why a person new to the scene (such as myself) could be concerned.

Cheyene - thanks for the input. LDS is a different ball game compared to Hubbard. Would I give up a great opportunity because of a dead man's name attached to it? In a heartbeat. As in your statement, if Hitler's name was attached to it, i doubt many of you here would be entering the contest (extreme example). As far as what Hubbard has done and is responsible for, well you have the net and can find out for yourself. You must have missed the conspiracy because Scientology does aim for new world order. The target isn't WHO supports it, but the damage it has done to those that support it and their families.

If it isnt associated, well fine and said. No bashing implied (of contestants or winners or the judges), just nice to know where one gets involved. I don't support, advocate, or associate with a light heart or a blind eye.

But that doesn't mean he couldn't start a good thing. (And I don't mean Scientology) I mean the WOTF contest.

I have yet to enter it, partly because I don't want to be affiliated by anything even faintly touched by scientology, but mostly--in fact, actually--it's because I don't write short fiction.

But if you do, it's probably a good professional decision to enter. No reader will toss your fiction in the garbage because you participated, and if you win you've made the beginnings of a name for yourself. And if you lose, well, you probably gleaned something from the wholke experience anyway.

I guess it's a question of what is the alternative? Doing nothing?

As for scientology supposedly aiming for New World Order, I'm not sure if that's true. But even if it is, I've always wondered why organizing humanity together, uniting our race, is automatically accepted, universally, as a bad thing. I don't see why a world government would have to be much different from our federal government. And I don't see too many people complaining about the New National Order.

So (because it has a lot of implications and basis for stories) why, exactly, is a "new world order" always conceived as bad?

I don't believe that Scientology influences the judges or the content of the stories, nor do I believe that it sends contestants unsolicited mail.

I do believe that WOTF is a valuable marketing aid for Scientology, because through WOTF and the association with big name authors it gets to present L Ron as a respected SF writer.

I think the idea is to hope that people who come to WOTF having never heard of L Ron will read his SF, and then his Dianetics books--and Scientology's leaders know that a goodly proportion of those who read about Dianetics become Scientologists. To aid that process, the WOTF bio of L Ron at Galaxy Press's website omits any mention of Scientology.

I believe too that SF readers are a good target for recruitment because they're more open than most to new scientific and philosophical ideas. WOTF appears to me to be part of an ingenious marketing campaign which targets SF readers and writers, and relies on continual exposure of the L Ron name and making his books--all of them--easily available.

I will never enter WOTF because I perceive a connection with the marketing of Scientology. If that's pompous, so be it.

Good luck to all who enter and those who win. It is an achievement and I'm sorry it gets tainted by discussions like this. I don't understand why WOTF doesn't simply cut its association with L Ron's Galaxy Press and instead use an independent publisher. If it did, the question--and the tainting--would never again arise.

Cheers,
Pat

[This message has been edited by TaleSpinner (edited May 22, 2008).]

...and now you're telling me the Scientologists are there, too?!

They're all wrong...I'm going to take over the world. Who wants to join me?

I doubt that many people who read his fiction, go on to read his nonfiction. It seems also doubtful that a _good_ proportion of people who read his nonfiction convert. Again, there is no unbiased, documented evidence.

Non SF readers are also open to new ideas, and many SF readers read just for entertainment, not for "enlightenment". (I know I do).

In a previous thread RaymondT described himself as working for Galaxy Press and said, in part:

quote:

---

The connection with Scientology is L. Ron Hubbard who was a writer and who started out as a fiction writer in the 30's, wrote over 200 short stories, novelettes and novels before 1950. In 1950 he published Dianetics which set of a whirlwind, sold millions of copies just in the first few years and which consumed his life for the next 30 years. Right after the publication of the book, people showed up at his house in Elizabeth, New Jersey and camped out on his lawn demanding that he train them in the application of the Dianetics procedure. He started giving lectures on the subject, travelled through the country and the world giving lectures everywhere he went. This amounted to some 2000 public lectures he gave all in all.

---

It seems to me that that is a good basis for believing that Scientologists have confidence that if people can be persuaded to read "Dianetics" they are likely to convert to Scientology.

More at http://www.hatrack.com/forums/writers/forum/Forum1/HTML/004405-2.html

On the intent to help new writers: if that is truly the case, why is L Ron's name so prominent? Why don't the book covers mention Kathy Wentworth?--Or the names of the writers who won? (Most if not all anthologies include the names at least some of the authors on the cover.) Why doesn't Galaxy ever publish further works by the writers it discovers? Why not develop their talents further? (Analog, Asimovs and the rest take more pieces from the writers they introduce.) I think the answers to those questions are that such endeavours would not further L Ron's name.

On conspiracy theories: I'd be equally leery if WOTF used a publisher that was owned by, and aligned to the teachings of, any other single prophet or church.

Which returns me to my main question: why doesn't WOTF simply drop Galaxy and any perception of connection with Scientology? There's no such problem with any other market or competition.

Cheers,
Pat

I think, given the history of Hubbard and Scientology, and the widely-dispersed knowledge of their activities within the science fiction community, that these objections and caveats and suspicions will always be with us.

quote:

---

Also, on comparisons between Scientology and the Latter-Day Saints,

---

Unfortunately that comparison was made by me. Not as a direct comparison, but to point out that we shouldn't attack any religion here.
I guess that people will read what they want to read.
IB You got room for more?

If you want to enter for whatever reason,do so.

If you don't want to enter for whatever reason, don't do so.

On the subject of whether SF has an advantage over fantasy, the administrator of the WotF did some checking after I brought this subject up over there and said he didn't see an advantage one way or the other over a number of volumes. However, I must say every volume I've looked at had a strong preponderance of SF. So, the whole thing is debatable. Obviously, the better the story then the better the chance whatever the genre.

Now to go work on what MAY be my next entry (or may be sent elsewhere) if I can get it to stop being sucky.

quote:

---

KDW, would it be worth compiling a few links about WotF in the link library down there?

---

It seems to me that people who are so paranoid and Leary towards organized religion, likely have internal struggles they have yet to come to terms with. Likely they are not quite at peace with their conviction that doing absolutely nothing could possibly be the real answer.

Lets face it. What are the chances that there is nothing in existence that is greater than your own personal opinion and wisdom?

I have used Scientology in my life for over 20 years and becoming a Scientologist is the best thing I have ever done - ever.

It's helped me in so many different ways that listing it all would fill a book, but suffice it to say that I have a wonderful marriage with an incredible woman, that I have been healthy with not a single doctor's or hospital visit in over 20 years. I have a fulfilling job that helps me reach my personal goals (after all I work for Writers of the Future) and my parents, brothers and sisters are also doing extremely well in their lives with the help of Scientology principles. This has been a great life and it's going to be even better. That's to no small part thanks to L. Ron Hubbard.

If you don't understand terms like "thetan" or "auditing" you can look those up in any Scientology book. They are very clearly defined.