My feed
Premium

Please
or
to access all these features

Join the discussion and meet other Mumsnetters on our free online chat forum.

Chat

Booker Prize split....

27 replies

BertrandRussell · 15/10/2019 11:52

....sensible or cop out?

OP posts:
Report
justintimberlakesfishwife · 15/10/2019 11:54

Sensible (disclaimer; I haven't read either)

Report
MikeUniformMike · 15/10/2019 12:05

What do you think Bertrand?

Report
brassbrass · 15/10/2019 12:16

I'm struggling with the lack of full stops in Girl woman other so finding it hard to invest in it. Not sure why it's annoying me so much.

Report
BertrandRussell · 15/10/2019 12:23

I don’t know what I think. I suppose I think that if a competition has rules they should be stuck to. And I’m not sure the Atwood is really Booker standard. Haven’t read the other one.

OP posts:
Report
Youngatheart00 · 15/10/2019 12:25

I think The Testaments won as some form of recompense for The Handmaid’s Tale not winning back in the Eighties. I’m 3/4 of the way through The Testaments (haven’t flown though it) - it’s very good, but not outstanding IMHO.

Report
SayOohLaLa · 15/10/2019 12:29

Cop out. I've heard the abridged version of the Atwood book on Radio 4 but not read either so far. Will have to wait for paperback versions.

Interesting conversation on Radio 4 this morning about how the choice of judges makes a difference to who is likely to win. It wasn't something I'd thought about before, how the judging panel is chosen / shortlisted in itself.

Report
Cohle · 15/10/2019 13:06

Total cop out.

The rules were changed specifically to prevent this happening again. Why bother having rules if they're just going to ignore them when they fancy?

To be fair, the judges arsing on about their "revolutionary" gesture has pissed me off a bit Grin

Report
BertrandRussell · 15/10/2019 13:16

And it wasn’t just that they couldn’t agree which- it was that they decided unanimously to do it this way.

OP posts:
Report
Lamentations · 15/10/2019 13:16

I haven't read either but also felt there was something a bit disappointing about them not choosing one winner.

Report
DialANumber · 15/10/2019 19:46

I heard both authors interviewed on R4 this morning and thought they were remarkably magnanimous.

I thought it was a bit harsh to make them share the money. And I was shocked that Evaristo is the first black woman to win. Seems a bit rubbish to be the first back woman and then to only get half a prize fund...

I listened to this in conjunction with the news and discussion about racism at the England match so I think the race element struck me more and maybe it's not relevant?

I've not read either nor am I likely to given how little time I ever get to read at all!

Report
BertrandRussell · 15/10/2019 19:50

I think I’d be a bit pissed off if I was Evaristo that Atwood says she doesn’t need the money and she’s going to give it to charity!

OP posts:
Report
DialANumber · 15/10/2019 19:53

I hadn't heard that! That makes is worse!

Report
DonPablo · 15/10/2019 19:54

Oh, it's a total cop out.

MA may not have the opportunity to win again, being 80 and in a recent interview talked quite a lot about not having another her book in her at her age.

She also didn't win for the THT whichwas a mistake really. Its far more literary than TT.

And yes, I feel for the other author. I'm going to buy her book now, partly because i do want to read it, but also because it's shit that she only gets half the money and an asterisk by her win.

Report
BaBaBaBandages · 15/10/2019 19:55

I've only read The Testament but it was very disappointing. It felt like bad fanfiction and not a Booker Prize winner.

Report
Morgenrot · 15/10/2019 20:58

Cop out

Report
ThatLibraryMiss · 15/10/2019 21:13

I listened to the unabridged audiobook of The Testaments and didn't rate it at all. It was all too convenient.

Report
Bloodybridget · 16/10/2019 09:06

Did anyone hear the bit about it on R3 news this morning? Apparently lots of outrage in press re rules being flouted, and, worse, at least one commentator saying there is a risk it will be seen as "one" author being patronised, and there will be suspicions that "considerations other than literary merit" (I'm not quoting verbatim but that was the gist) were at play.
When I heard the result yesterday morning I was really pleased because I loved The Testaments and also have known Evaristo by sight for decades as she has been around on the London, feminist writing scene for a long time, and I used to be a bookseller. But I would say she is relatively unknown in the wider reading public, despite getting plenty of critical acclaim, so there won't be loads of people recognising her name and having read her previous work. And stupidly I didn't think about how the spilt award could be seen. So now I think the judges have actually done Evaristo a disservice, and I wonder what she actually thinks about it. I can't imagine Margaret Atwood minds at all, although she might also think the rules should have been adhered to.

Report
Bloodybridget · 16/10/2019 09:07

split award not spilt!

Report
Bloodybridget · 16/10/2019 09:18

By the way I'm not saying the opinions mentioned in the news item are mine! It's equally likely that the panel genuinely considered there was nothing to choose between the two novels.

Report
brassbrass · 16/10/2019 12:43

Pants I hadn't even considered the award being split. What a mess, it detracts from both authors and neither book appears to be all that judging by the comments.

Report
youngestisapsycho · 16/10/2019 12:47

If Atwood doesnt need the money she could have let Evaristo have it all!?

Report
BertrandRussell · 16/10/2019 12:49

I was just about to say that. Atwood could have shared the prestige if she wanted but not the money!

OP posts:
Report

Don’t want to miss threads like this?

Weekly

Sign up to our weekly round up and get all the best threads sent straight to your inbox!

Log in to update your newsletter preferences.

You've subscribed!

Rumboogie · 16/10/2019 12:57

there will be suspicions that "considerations other than literary merit" (I'm not quoting verbatim but that was the gist) were at play.

There was an article in the Times that said just this, and I have to say that this was exactly what I immediately thought, ie. diversity agenda and Attwoods 'consolation prize', whether one or both.

As per pp comments, a disservice to both authors.

Report
Aethelthryth · 16/10/2019 13:04

I haven't read the Evaristo; but I think "The Testaments" is really pretty poor. It has none of the sense of claustrophobia and dread that was so well-portrayed in "The Handmaid's Tale" and the interior lives of her characters lack plausibility. The plot is also horribly contrived and shoehorned uncomfortably into the rationale for Gilead: there's no way even a decadent and declining Gilead would allow young fertile girls to join the Aunts, especially as they have been re-invented as an order of intellectual quasi-nuns. In the original, nuns were forced to become handmaids. The marine adventure at the end was just tedious. I really do think that this is the worst thing that Attwood (whom I admire greatly) has written. The criteria of award seem to have been twisted to allow what is effectively a "lifetime contribution" award in a "MeToo" political moment.

Report
EstebanTheMagnificent · 16/10/2019 13:05

Total cop-out. Atwood has won, with The Blind Assassin, which knocks absolute spots off The Testaments (as do pretty much all of her other nominated novels - Cat's Eye, THT, Alias Grace and Oryx and Crake).

Report
Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.