The editor of Australian Book Review, one of the country’s leading literary magazines, has launched a blistering attack on the integrity of the Prime Minister’s Literary Awards, accusing it of being Sydney-centric, badly organised and in thrall to Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp.
Peter Rose, who has previously judged the awards, and whose Crimson Crop was shortlisted for the poetry prize in 2013, blasted the awards in his editorial for the magazine’s December edition. He noted that eight of the 10 judges on the fiction/poetry and non-fiction/Australian history panels were based in NSW, including all five of the latter panel.
Peter Rose says it is unfathomable that a single media organisation has such dominance on a judging panel.Credit:Justin McManus
“Remarkably,” he wrote, “six of those 10 judges have close associations with The Australian.” There are three current or former The Australian literary editors: Caroline Overington, Stephen Romei and Deborah Hope, former editor-in-chief, Chris Mitchell, senior writer Troy Bramston, and regular columnist Peter Craven involved in the judging. Craven is also an occasional contributor to this masthead.
“Some people will have a view of shortlists, omissions and inclusions, but that is the case with awards, they are always subjective,” Rose told this masthead. “[This is not] a criticism of those News Corp people. It just strikes me as being unfathomable that a single media organisation has such dominance.
“It’s impossible to think of a major international prize where this kind of dominance from a single media organisation of whatever colour would be allowed. Imagine the Booker or Pulitzer … they would be laughed to scorn. By this decision, they have certainly undermined the integrity and authority of this year’s awards. I think that’s undeniable.”
The awards have six categories – fiction, poetry, non-fiction, Australian history, young-adult literature and children’s literature. The winners each receive $80,000 tax-free, with shortlisted authors getting $5000 each. This year’s awards will be presented in Launceston on December 13.
Rose acknowledged that the judges had been appointed by the previous federal government, but the fact there had been little public comment until now was “a sign of how inured we are to the Morrison government’s cosy relationship with News Corp”.
“Did they not think that this would be questioned? The sad reality is that we are so accustomed to the former government’s policy of favouritism that we accept it as normal,” he said.
Susan Wyndham, a former literary editor of The Sydney Morning Herald, who was a judge for three years, said the awards had to be run with scrupulous awareness of avoiding any appearance of bias.
“Our panel of five had judges from three states, and I was the only (former) literary editor or journalist,” she added. “While each of the current judges is highly competent … concentration of judges in one state and one media company is at least unimaginative.”
Turning to the dominance of judges based in NSW, Rose said he found it ironic that arts organisations funded by the federal government – including Australian Book Review – were expected to be diverse in numerous ways.
“This seems to flout that, and I think if there was to be such concentration from one state it would rightly be questioned, but here it was deemed to be appropriate.”
In his editorial Rose cites the criticism of Readings managing director Mark Rubbo, who lamented the lateness of the awards, being held in the lead-up to Christmas. “If one of the country’s most astute and successful booksellers thinks the awards are the worst-run prizes in Australia then the [awards] have a real problem,” Rose said.
Readings boss Mark Rubbo has lamented the lateness of the Prime Minister’s Literary Awards.Credit:Louis Trerise
“Anything that advances the cause of Australian literature and remunerates writers who are doing it tough has got to be welcomed. Many of us feel that these prizes should be the preeminent fixtures on the literary calendar, predictable and well promoted and giving booksellers and publishers due time to sell the books.”
Wyndham said when she was judging, the panels made their decisions by mid-year. “Every year we urged the sprawl of organisers to bring the announcement of shortlists and winners forward. December is far too late for everyone. The argument that they work around the prime minister’s schedule is invalid because most years the PM is unable to attend at the last moment.”
A spokesperson for the awards confirmed that appointments to the judging panel were made by the previous government earlier this year.
“Each year the judges and the composition of the panels are reviewed. Diversity, in all ways including across geographic location, gender, expertise and differing backgrounds, will be considered by the current Government for the appointment of the 2023 Awards’ judges.
“Considerations made when selecting the awards date include parliamentary sitting requirements and the availability of the Prime Minister in considering the Award recommendations. Planning for future dates is under careful consideration,” the spokesperson said.
In case you missed it: the culture stories that start conversations
For decades depictions of sex in Hollywood have studiously avoided focussing on a woman’s actual sexual desires and pleasure. That is, until two female directors changed that this year.
Mildura, six hours drive north-west from Melbourne, is used to being overlooked. So, why did US band Kings of Leon choose this town – better known for its production of citrus fruits – to be the kick-off of their Australian tour? And how long did it take locals to realise this was not a practical joke?
Sunkissed, behind aviator shades, on a yacht with the Italian coastline behind, is Dominic West too handsome to play Prince Charles in the fifth season of The Crown? Fans definitely think so.
The Booklist is a weekly newsletter for book lovers from books editor Jason Steger. Get it delivered every Friday.
Most Viewed in Culture
From our partners
Source: Read Full Article
