“‘The Booker Prize has abandoned Britain,’ a headline decried. Poor little Britain” (p 32).
Brits seem the most frustrated by inclusion of Americans in the prize.
The author of this article is frustrated by this because American authors are often “backed by the heavyweights of the publishing industry” in her eyes giving them an unfair advantage.
“Commonwealth” countries allowed to compete pre 2013
Real Life by Brandon Taylor compared to A Separate Peace (p 135)
I just remembered I read A Separate Peace yesterday. It was a favorite of mine in high school, so I’m excited to read a more modern type of “campus novel” from a very different perspective.
This Mournbale Body“…painstakingly elucidates the human toll of a decimated economy.”
To be honest, I’m really wishing I’d read Nervous Conditions before I started reading This Mournable Body, but that’s okay! I can read it after.
I’m excited to see how I feel about The New Wilderness because I really enjoy dystopian novels and also enjoy mother-daughter stories. Menon does not seem to like the book very much, seeing it as made for movies/TV, but I don’t necessarily think that’s a bad thing.
Perhaps this isn’t a very sophisticated opinion, but I don’t even think plot holes are that big of a deal, especially in a dystopian novel where the author has to build an entire universe. I’ve personally always enjoyed books with “gaps” that leave some questions, and provide opportunities for the reader to use their imagination.
I also question Menon claiming that The New Wilderness was not good quality writing (p 152). First of all, I think what “high quality writing” means now in 2021, is extremely different than what it’s ever meant before. The vast majority of humans are no longer using full, proper, grammatically correct sentence to communicate verbally or on through writing. Books that were once considered extremely well written, are now basically unreadable to many people. Considering this, how are academics of the future going to judge the quality of writing, and deem it “good” or “bad” quality?
“Barack Obama to take part in 2020 Booker prize ceremony” Alison Flood
12 NOV 2020
Obama attended the virtual (due to COVID) Booker Prize event.
The event itself was moved a few days to avoid happening at the same time as the release of the first volume of Obama’s novel.
I find it a little ironic that some people have issues or annoyances about Americans being involved in the prize, or able to win one, and yet they had Obama speak at their event.
“The longform patriarchs, and their accomplices” Bernardine Evaristo
1 OCT 2020
“Beyond the white male canon”
Canonrefers to a collection of rules or texts that are considered to be authoritative. Shakespeare and Chaucer are part of the canon of Western literature, so you might read their work in an English class.
“So when we talk about the novel, we also need to talk about who is writing the novel and what they are choosing to write about. This essay stands for the idea that novels need to be generate by and speak to a variety of demographics–although we are not the sum of our supposed ‘demographics’…”
I agree with Evaristo that you probably should consider who an author is when reading their novel. I personally do not see authors as separate from their work, in the same way I don’t see musicians as separate from their work. Context is important for understanding what the author is trying to convey.
“It’s not about who writes the novels or their subject matter, they proclaim–as if there is no cultural context to literature and publishing books, as if we are living in an equal society, as if arguments around inclusion and social justice are piffle, irrelevant excuses, signs of intellectual inferiority. Who cares who the writers are, they say? Great literature is divorced from such petty concerns!”
As efforts increase to make the literary world/book lists more diverse and inclusive, there is a tendency for some people to think that certain writers (non-white, female, gay/lesbian) are being favored over white, straight male writers.
Of course, the situation is more nuanced. Allowing more types of people to be included isn’t actually excluding anyone, but it can feel like that to people who have always been included, and now feel less included.
I agree with Evaristo’s point that novels should be written by a wider array of “demographics” (as she puts it) because this allows us to read, enjoy, and understand more perspectives on the world. This is extremely valuable!
I’ll add that I don’t think devaluing the straight, middle-class white male perspective is helpful. I agree that this perspective has been the only perspective in novels for too long, and that publishers should allow for authors that don’t fit that description to publish books. However, this doesn’t mean that straight, middle-class white men’s perspectives are useless to society or that books shouldn’t be written from this perspective at all.
Personally, I think the goal should be for novels to continuously include more and more perspectives, unique/niche or very common.
Final Thoughts:
I enjoyed reading this article after reading Part 1 of This Mournable Body. So far, I’ve really loved this book and the main character. The back of the book was not lying when it said this is a psychologically charged novel!
Evaristo is 100% right that novels need to be written from a wider variety of perspectives, because the more perspectives people are open to considering, the more empathetic and understanding people can be.
Evaristo’s essays made me think of a recent “controversy” or discussion in the news: Is it okay for white authors to write from the perspective of a non-white person? Is it okay for anyone to write characters of a different race, gender, or sexual orientation than their own?
