With thanks to Tom Hunter for the heads up: the shortlist for this year's Arthur C Clarke Award, for the best science fiction novel published in the UK during 2010, is out. And it's a really interesting one.
Alphabetically by author, the list is as follows (I would offer a drumroll, but undoubtedly a blogger who gets up earlier than I do has already beat me to this):
Zoo City – Lauren Beukes (Angry Robot)
... which I happen to be halfway through at the moment. Ex-junkie ex-journalist finds lost things, in an alternate South Africa where those who have committed crimes get followed around by an animal manifestation of their guilt. Fast, fun, thoughtful. Post to follow in a week or so.
The Dervish House – Ian McDonald (Gollancz)
...which I've read! Needless to say, it's superb. A mosaic of Istanbul lives in five days.
Monsters of Men – Patrick Ness (Walker Books)
Given that one of the judges is Martin (who has been sharing some really interesting stats based on his reading of the 54 Clarke-eligible books this year), I'd been hoping that this might make the shortlist. It's unusual, though, for the final volume of a trilogy to be shortlisted - will that affect its chances? I raced my way through the first two grim, utterly compulsive instalments (post soon), and look forward to this concluding part.
Generosity – Richard Powers (Atlantic Books)
I confess I know nothing about this book. The Clarke always has to throw up something from left field, though, right?
Declare – Tim Powers (Corvus)
Talking of left field, here's one I didn't see coming: Declare was first published ten years ago in the US, where it won the World Fantasy Award. But this is its first appearance on this side of the Atlantic, so it is eligible. It's a sort of supernatural Cold War novel, which sounds fun.
Lightborn – Tricia Sullivan (Orbit)
Huzzah, another one that I've already read (and enjoyed). I'm on a roll this year. A localised virtual reality network goes wrong, in such a way as to turn all the adults of a particular small town into self-absorbed loons. Since my review was constrained by print magazine wordcounts, see also the discussion in which I took part, here.
So there we go. Characteristically for the Clarke, it diverges from expectations, as the results of a recent contest - in which people were asked to guess the shortlist - attest. But it does so in ways that are less likely to cause online apoplexy than usual, I think; there are no obviously crazy picks. (Although some may turn out to be crazy - the proof is in the reading...)
Early prediction? I never like to second-guess the Clarke, but surely this has to be McDonald's year.
And now I should probably go to work...
~~Nic