My dad taught history so, yes, it's important to understand the history of Worldcon & the Hugos. It matters to see what won in the past but also WHAT DIDN'T WIN & why, & that's the part that gets left out in these long winded diatribes which are about status & power, not history.

It matters to see what works and writers didn't get into the conversation presided over by the self appointed insiders and old guard. The ones not deemed "notable" enough. Because that pattern of erasing & ignoring influences how we see the modern sff landscape too.

It creates patterns of inclusion versus exclusion and who gets to decide which are exactly the things people are struggling with, talking about, getting hit by, all of that and more in the modern sff world. And the current awards have to be about THIS YEAR not 50 years ago.

I have my issues with the award process in general, but if we are going to go there then what a strong award process does is
1) talk directly to the present day, this, NOW
2) acknowledge the past that brought us here
3) welcome the future

But I'm telling you, when folks go all in hyping up Campbell as the great man whatever, you tell me how many writers & editors still alive (or now dead) who have been in sff for 40/50 years & never been given the courtesy or respect of being acknowledged on the Hugo or WC stage.

So again, this is not history. History should be expansive and inclusive, would explore and criticize and recover what is lost and ask what was elided or scorned that we might look at differently now, and how that line leads directly to how we struggle with the field TODAY.

By the way, here are links to the two big awards presentations at WC this year.

The 2020 Hugo Awards (and Astounding & Lodestar):

https://www.tor.com/2020/07/31/announcing-the-2020-hugo-award-winners/

And the local New Zealand spec fic awards, the Sir Julius Vogel Awards:

https://sffanz.wordpress.com/2020/07/30/sir-julius-vogel-awards-2020-result-announcement/