WELL,THE SHORTLIST IS OUT (SEE PREVIOUS POSTING) AND THERE ARE THE USUAL SURPRISES, BOTH IN TERMS OF INCLUSIONS AND EXCLUSIONS, BUT THAT IS THE NATURE OF BOOK AWARDS.
However the real surprise is that there are only four titles shortlisted in the fiction category whereas there have previously always been five. There is clearly a lot of interest in this decision as before 8.00am today I had received seven e-mails and two phone calls commenting & querying the development.
May we have an explanation from the judges/organisers please?
This is most intriguing. Surely the judges have not decided there were only four worthy of shortlisting? What a slap in the face to the other nominees and their publishers if that is the case. Can The Bookman find out the names of all those fiction titles nominated? Then we can all judge for ourselves.
ReplyDeleteI am a publisher so would rather not disclose my name in case my comment is seen as sour grapes but I hope the suggestion that there are only four shortlisted fiction titles means the judges only saw four as being of sufficient quality is not correct. What a condemnation this would be on the standard of fiction publishing in NZ.
ReplyDeleteThere must be some other explanation and the judges should explain the situation urgently.
I am a regular reader of NZ fiction, mainly borrowed from the public library, and could happily nominate at least another four or five NZ fiction titles that I read last year that would be worthy to occupy the fifth spot on that list.
ReplyDeleteIt's times like these that the weird secrecy that surrounds the Montana process compares most unfavourably with the lively discussion around the Man Booker Prize.
ReplyDelete