It’s an interesting selection.  Michael Enright is one of my favourite CBC radio personalities, one of the last and best of the old guard.   I was just thinking about him this morning as one of only a handful of CBC radio personalities I still regularly tune in for.  He’s a thoughtful, open, and very able reader and commentator, and I’m happy to see him on the list. (In truth, I’m fond of anyone at the CBC who still regularly wears a bow-tie.)

I’ve never read either Ali Smith or Claire Messud, or at least, I’ve not read either much.  I have two of Ali Smith’s short story collections on my shelves, and I’ve been meaning to read her for some time: as she is known, at least in the U.K., as much for her work as a short story writer, perhaps this will bode well for a few more collections seeing long list inclusions.  The only work from Claire Messud I’ve read was an excerpt from a novel included in the Penguin Book of Canadian Short Stories that likely should not have been there (it’s not a short story, and she’d very likely never describe herself as Canadian).  Regardless, she is someone I’ve been meaning to take a look at for some time, and will try and do so over the next few months.

I am quite pleased with the Giller Prize’s decision to make the prize more international.  Though some have argued that bringing in foreign writers to judge our literature is wrong, a form of pandering to foreign taste and judgment, such an argument misses the point.  Canadian literature has suffered for too long from a closed circle approach to meting out its plums, whether these be the operating funding provided by the likes of the Canada Council or other government agencies, award juries, university writer-in-residence positions, and much else: bringing in other voices, other perspectives, from other places, might be one of the only ways to ensure that our literature moves off the proverbial small pond and into the larger currents of international literature.  I, for one, am quite interested to see what this jury comes up with.

For the press release on the newly announced Giller jury and the biographies of its individual jurists, please go here.

]]> http://notesandqueries.ca/giller-prize-jury-announced/feed/ 0 http://notesandqueries.ca/you-cant-judge-a-book-by-its-scholar/ http://notesandqueries.ca/you-cant-judge-a-book-by-its-scholar/#comments Tue, 05 Jan 2010 18:02:14 +0000 Daniel Wells http://www.notesandqueries.ca/?p=668 Over at the Globe & Mail, the Tuesday essay asks why there are not more Canadian Literature professors on literary award juries.

It’s the start of a new year for Canadian literature. The hoopla surrounding last year’s Giller has quieted down. The Governor-General’s Literary Awards have been handed out. Soon Canada Reads will fill the gap and take over the public’s imagination. For most literary institutions, January is a sleepy time.

Break time is over, though, for literary prize foundations. I’m sure the Giller advisory board has already started drafting up potential jury lists for 2010, and that someone at the Canada Council has been tasked with a similar function. But I’m also certain that none of the names bandied about will be those of Canadian literature scholars.

Why? Because apparently literary critics (as opposed to reviewers) have no place in Canadian literary prize competitions.

Consider this: In the last 15 years of the Scotiabank Giller Prize, only two of out of the 36 jurists have been academics – one of whom helped create the prize.

Or have a glance at the 2009 jury members for poetry or fiction for the GG awards. Or at any point over the previous 20 years. See any scholars?

for the rest of the essay, please go here.