It's about time

Hooray! Of course, the case would be stronger if she won and refused the prize. But these affairs are crap shoots. I've won a few and I've judged a few others, and the latter experience especially made me realize how little these affairs have to do with writers. They are about the personal tastes of particular judges. It's a crap shoot. You win by getting the right material in front of the right judge at the right time. It is terrible that literary careers and reputations get judged by these affairs. Do we think a winner of the lottery is especially gifted? Of course not. S/he is LUCKY. Same with literary prizes. LUCK above all else. I speak as a prize winner and a literary contest judge: winning is a result of good fortune, the accidental meeting of the right material before the right judge. Blind luck. Call it what it is and move on.

clipped from seattlepi.nwsource.com Zadie Smith speaks out against literary prizes The Telegraph (U.K.) reports that author Zadie Smith has come out against literary prizes, saying they are not really about literature at all. The always vivacious Smith weighed in on something called the Willesden Herald Web site: "They (literary prizes) are really about brand consolidation," she wrote, "for beer companies, phone companies, coffee companies and even frozen food companies." It was quickly noted Smith has won many major literary prizes, including the Whitbred First Novel Award for "White Teeth." Ion Trewin, organizer of the Man Booker prizes, told London's Sunday Times: "Why has she been happy to accept money from these prizes and sponsors?"