My feelings are so jumbled. Last night and this morning, tracking down the award announcements for the many awards given at Bouchercon I felt great, then dismayed, then pleased, then disappointed, then heartened then, disheaertened, then...oh halp!

At times, I feel like I don't get the mystery reading world at all - when I see peopledoing cartwheels over books that I found to be unreadable, or boring or rendy or just like a better book that was written years ago, or atrociously unfunny or atrociously sadistic or....

But the Barry awards, the Anthony awards annd the Macavity awards are all given by readers, so i tend to have more, what, faith? in them than in those given by juries, even juries of writers. i have wrotten about that in the past - how i smply don't GET the Edgars a lot of times, mostly when they complletely ignore somehting I thought was ground-shakingly good. (And yeah, I know you gotta submit your book for it to be considered, but let's assume those abou which I've ranted have gotten to the juries.) I have written how much i respect the jurors - can you IMAGINE reading, or at least TRYING to read like 130 books in a month or two? Trying to be fair and read enough to get a sense of the book? Exhausting.

Readers of ths blog will not be hugely surprised when i say my major huge hope, if not expectation, was for Cornelia Read's A FIELD OF DARKNESS to get at least one award. It was nominated for more than one award, after all. It was, as I've probably mentioned more than oh a dozen times, not a book every one would love but it was a book that knocked so many peoples' socks off, dear gods. I LOVED this book and would have loved it even if I'd never met Cornelia. I do refer to Cornelia as my best friend - and I know at times that sounds very um, junior high school, but it's also true. Still, I don't necessarily assume that my friends are all brilliant writers. (ok, well they mostly ARE.) i am able to differentiate. Still, AFOD was a brilliant book and I wanted it to win something. It didn't. In large part, I believe that is because it was part of a bunch of "first novels" that really stood out this year and were, in many ways, hugely different. It was nominated for a Barry, an Edgar, a Gumshoe, a Macavity and at least 2 other awards. It is an amazing book by an amazing writer.

The thing is though, that the other book that I nominated this year, that I thought worthy of the honor was Louise Penny's STILL LIFE. I can't be unhappy, or too whiny because for once (it's really rare) a book I thought worthy of nomination won. Louise won he Anthony AND the Barry for best first.

And so it goes. Nancy Pickard's VIRGIN OF SMALL PLAINS, which I nominated DID pick up an award. Laura Lippman, someone whose work i've championed over the years did win an award. Ken Bruen, whose work I really cannot get into (but NOT because it is BAD, please NOTE!) is one of the finest people I've had the luck to "meet" (even if only by email) and so when he wins, I rejoice.

HUGE aside - Please, when I say I don't get into someone's work, it is NOT the same as saying "I hate it" or "it's no good". I've had to say this repeatedly and it BUGS THE HELL OUT OF ME, that anyone would say "but you hate my work/his work" because it is SO NOT TRUE. We readers can say "it doesn't work for me" while still admiring the talent, nd the style of an author. i'm really ticked off because there is someone out there who has in the past insisted that I've said I hate one writers work, when I never have said that and never meant it. I think in this particular instance the author is VERY talented. I just have an issue with the character, okay? I'm capable of seeing great talent in someone even if the work doesn't appeal to me. Why is that so hard to get?

So anyway, Louise won the Anthony and the Barry. Ken got a couple awards. Laura got an Anthony to add to the shelf. Nancy got acknowledged for a knock-out of a book. Jim Huang and his co-editor walked off with a couple well-deserved awards. (and i know little about a lot of other categories so can't ocmment.)

The hardest one though, to sit through, was the Anthony given for "special services to the field" because I know EVERY SINGLE NOMINEE and think every single one of them has served the field well. There was one person missing from that list and had she been on it, it would have been 10 times harder to choose but I have met and talked with (f2f or at least email more than once) all these people and I've read their pbulications, seen their work, read their posts and know what we owe them. I've written for a couple of them, which did not affect me (much) (heh heh) but holy MOLY, any of those folks deserved the honor for what they have done for the mystery world. Jim Huang hugely deserved the honor; he's done SO much. But but but.....