Showing posts with label The Stella Prize. Show all posts
Showing posts with label The Stella Prize. Show all posts

Thursday, 18 October 2012

The Stella Prize News

From The Stella Prize blog:
We are delighted to announce that The Stella Prize, Australia’s first major literary prize for women’s writing, will be awarded for the first time in April 2013. The $50,000 Prize will be presented for the best work of literature published in 2012 by an Australian woman. Entries are open from now until Thursday 15 November.
Read more here.
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: ,

Friday, 17 August 2012

'Stella!!' - AWW tops 1000 reviews

This week the Australian Women Writers Challenge reached a milestone: over 1000 reviews have been linked to the site.

We should be celebrating, right?

Or should we?

Over at Meanjin last week, while discussing the progress of funding for The Stella Prize, Chris Flynn wrote: "Is it too late to predict contenders for the inaugural Stella Prize? Too late, I'm doing it."

Flynn proceeded to list 10 books of fiction released in 2012.

So far, six of these have been reviewed for AWW :
      Four of the ten have not.

      It made me wonder to what extent the challenge has achieved what it set out to achieve: to help redress the gender imbalance of reviews in literary pages. Would these participants have read and reviewed the above books anyway?

      What about the other books on Flynn's list? Any plans to read and review?





      Posted by at 13 comments:
      Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

      Wednesday, 18 July 2012

      Crime 2012 releases: What's being reviewed?

      Last weekend the tally of reviews for newly released literary works was posted on this blog, and the question was posed whether "genre" books should have been included. The response from speculative fiction authors on Twitter was a resounding, "Yes!" Of course "genre" books should be included.
      But which genres? And what do we mean by "literary" anyway?

      The question is timely because, as author P.A. O'Reilly tweeted yesterday, new prizes - including  The Stella Prize - are more open to "judging the work, not the 'genre'." So how do we identify the literary?
       
      According to O'Reilly, literary books "reward a second reading with another layer of meaning". Author Claire Corbett goes further: "A literary book doesn't give you what you demand but what you never knew you wanted." Quality writing has subtext, according to Corbett, including non-fiction; too much writing has no subtext, she says, because such craft takes time.

      Is it all a matter of craft and layers of meaning? Or are some genres more likely to be considered literary than others?

      Clearly some Speculative Fiction titles have no trouble attracting the attention of major literary awards - Corbett's 2011 release, When We Have Wings, for one, was shortlisted for the Barbara Jefferis award, while Meg Mundell's Black Glass was Highly Commended by the judges of the same award.

      But what of other genres, such as crime?

      When crime writer Peter Temple won the 2010 Miles Franklin Award for his crime novel Truth, an expectation was set up that well-crafted crime novels would attract the attention of literary judges. Last year's inclusion of Kirsten Tranter's psychological suspense novel, The Legacy, and this year's inclusion of Virginia Duigan's The Precipice on the Miles Franklin longlists appear to support this view. Yet PM Newton's 2010 - in my opinion, equally brilliant - The Old School, didn't make the grade. Was it perhaps - being a detective novel - considered too generic?

      Which crime novels released in 2012 - including detective, paranormal, YA, historical fiction, crime-romance and nonfiction titles - deserve to be considered "literary" in your view? 

      Crime: 2012 releases

      The following books released in 2012* and reviewed for the AWW challenge between January and June this year have been divided into subgenres:
      • general/thriller/psychological suspense
      • historical fiction 
      • crime/romance (sometimes referred to as "romantic suspense")
      • crime/paranormal
      • YA/Children's and 
      • True Crime.
      *Disclaimer: The release dates on publishers' website don't always accurately reflect the year when the book was first published. If there are any errors, please let me know. EL


      Tally: 18 books, 25 reviewers, 43 reviews, 10 publishers.

      Publishers: Penguin: 4 books, 10 reviews; Random House: 3 book 7 reviews; ClanDestine Press: 3 books, 3 reviews; HarperCollins: 2 books, 5 reviews; Hachette: 1 book 6 reviews; Pan MacMillan: 1 book, 4 reviews; Pantera Press: 1 book, 3 reviews; Black Opal: 1 book, 1 review; EgmontUSA: 1 book, 1 review; Walker Books: 1 book, 1 review.

      General/Thriller/Psychological Suspense

      Historical Fiction
      Romance
      Paranormal
      YA/Children's

      True Crime

      Short Stories
      ~ ~ ~

      Guest author reviews

      Of the above authors, Jaye Ford, Katherine Howell, YA Erskine and Helene Young have all reviewed for the challenge (that's why the covers of their recent releases are featured here).

      Helene has written multiple reviews, including:
      Do you think any of the above books deserves to be regarded as "literary"? Do you know of any other crime books released this year that haven't been reviewed for the challenge so far?

      Other crime titles (some not reviewed during January-June period of tally):
      Posted by at 5 comments:
      Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

      Tuesday, 6 March 2012

      PD James is a guy, right? (I: Do men and women write differently?)

      This Thursday is International Women's Day. To raise awareness of The Stella Prize writers, readers and booksellers all around the country will be discussing the proposition: "Do women and men write differently?" This question was, in part, inspired by the widely-reported comments of VS Naipaul last June; Naipaul maintained that no female writer was his equal - not even Jane Austen - and he could tell within a paragraph or two the gender of the writer.

      Recent statistics from VIDA, a women in the arts lobby group, show that gender bias in the representation of women in major literary magazines continued throughout 2011. Closer to home, over a year ago now, Sarah L'Estrange interviewed Susan Wyndham from the Sydney Morning Herald about its representation of women writers. Wyndham examined the previous six issues of the SMH literary pages and was horrified to discover the bias towards men (via publisher Sophia Whitfield's blog).

      So what, if anything, has changed?

      Not much, according to James Tierney, AWW participant and blogger, who conducted a two-month audit of substantial reviews in The Australian and The Sydney Morning Herald from October 8 to December 3, 2011

      Tierney writes: "More than a year after it became a matter for fresh controversy, less than a third (29%) of the books reviewed in the literary pages of The Sydney Morning Herald and The Australian each Saturday are written by women*. The gates were opened a little wider for XX reviewers, but not by a great deal (35%)."

      Tierney goes on to ask: 

      Why is this a problem? Surely the only thing that matters here is the literary quality of the works under review and, in the best judgement of the responsible editors, this is where the best work lay. 

      Well, no. To accept that, I’d have to accept that the best work is generally done by men and that simply does not reflect my reading experience. 

      Tierney makes the point that, if women are being overlooked for reviews based on something other than literary merit, the consequences are far-reaching.

      I don’t know this for sure but I suspect that the literary review pages of our major newspapers determine -at least in part- the bookish agenda. This leads me to a truth so obvious that it almost doesn’t bare saying but let’s give it a go nonetheless: books that are reviewed well are more likely to be considered by literary judges for inclusion on prize lists, long & short.

      If less than a third of books reviewed are by women, is it any wonder that our main literary prize, The Miles Franklin, has been awarded to women only twice since 2001? (Read Tierney's complete article here.)

      So why are women under-represented in the pages of our literary journals and major media outlets? Is there something intrinsic to women's writing that makes it less worthy of critical attention?

      A few weeks ago, I began canvassing opinions on The Stella Prize question in order to share those opinions on Thursday night when Kirsten Tranter hosts a panel at the Carrington Hotel in Katoomba with fellow authors Tara Moss and Claire Corbett. I approached several eminent bookbloggers wondering whether they would be willing to write on the topic. Only one, Kim from Reading Matters, got back to me, saying she wasn't willing to go near that "hot potato".

      A number of women I contacted agreed that men and women writing differently. One, an aspiring local travel/memoir writer, commented via Twitter that she almost never read books by women; her perception was that in her preferred genres (nonfiction and travel-memoir) women didn't publish much. When directed to The Guardian's quiz to see whether she could accurately determine if something was written by a woman, she reported 7/10 accuracy. She claimed women's writing tended to be "soft" and stood out. 

      Could VS Naipaul right? Can we tell if something is written by a woman within a few paragraphs? Are being "soft" and/or "sentimental" common to female writers, characteristics anathema to our traditional aesthetic of what constitutes "quality"?

      While posting flyers for the Stella event, I sought the opinion of a number of men, including a bookseller and an artist, both of whom answered, "Of course, men and women write differently," but that didn't mean they deserved less attention, they said. The artist went on to say that the situation with Fine Arts isn't so different: there are many examples of female artists, in his opinion, famous in their day, who are nevertheless now virtually forgotten except in relation to their more famous husbands or brothers. 

      Peter Karsten from Katoomba Book Exchange had even more to say. He agreed to put down some rough thoughts on the topic for the AWW blog and have them published here (unedited).

      Karsten writes: 
      As I see it, women’s writing would be different from their male counterparts, insomuch as depending on the genre. That having been said, the genre would determine the difference and or the same writing style, influence, method and manner of the female author in question; as a woman could write with male and or female authority.


      Thus it would be a skill needed in today’s society that will determine success or failure in reaching a targeted audience-whether it be male or female. The woman could use a male pseudonym to attract attention to her works, and gain a certain male following by subconscious suggestion that she is a male writer and or not use her full name.

      As an example: J. K. Rowling of Harry Potter fame, does not use her first name-Why? It is a subconscious effort to attract the male reader, (now as she is well known-her readership is male and female) but also a marketing ploy to some degree. Also of note are male writers, like P. D. James, who also don’t use their first name either. With these examples, there are many male and female writers who use their initials.

      But is this deception necessary in today’s society - if it is a deception by the male and more importantly by the female author?

      The answer is simply – NO – Why? The woman of today needs self-recognition of her efforts, and as her writing skills improve and her ability to deliver strong and authoritative word in written form expands, so to will she gain more recognition through efforts in her chosen genre.

      For my own part and reading influence mainly in Science Fiction and Fantasy, I have actually found no difference in writing style, but there is a difference as the main character/s are female, not male, with male characters playing secondary roles. It’s as though there is a merging of styles in these genres; could it be that female writers are in their own way are developing a male form of writing in this so-called male dominated world, in order to compete for the slice of the financial pie?

      As an example, male cooks bringing out cookery books, which in the past has been female dominated, we see this merging as this genre has both male and female authors, and there is no difference in presentation and or writing style.

      So where does this leave the female writer in general? Is there a difference in the written word by female authors?

      I said in the beginning, 'woman’s writing would be different', the word ‘would’ is the key; because it is up to the woman to determine the difference in writing style as apposed to a man’s.

      All in all I personally am not worried about the so-called difference; communication is the key to understanding, and the written word has a power all on its own, whether written by a man or a woman, as long as we understand what is being written and or read….the word has no sex discrimination label.

      The power of the pen is only as strong as the author wishes, and the success of that author is determined by public acceptance.

      If there is a difference between male and female writing styles and skills…it is perspective, as this world needs perspective of both sexes, in order to relate and understand the world as we make it and perceive it though different eyes.

      So the answer is simple… Perspective is the key…and through this viewpoint does the female writer achieve a perception that differs from their male counterparts.

      AWW notes:
      Before publishing, I contacted Peter Karsten about his mistaking PD James for a man. Karsten - being the very good sport he is - agreed to have his mistake stand uncorrected as it so well demonstrates his argument: that a woman may choose to write differently from men, but the way she writes isn't biologically determined; when she chooses to write using a unisex name in a genre dominated by men or which attracts male readers (such as crime), her gender is not immediately - or even over an entire oeuvre - obvious to the reader.

      Female Australian writers who have chosen to publish under unisex gender neutral names recently include PA O'Reilly, PM Newton and Favel Parrett. (O'Reilly, whose book The Fine Colour of Rust has just been released, wrote a guest post for AWW yesterday.) In the reviews posted by booksellers throughout 2010-11, Newton and Parrett featured highly. In Parrett's case, her novel, Past The Shallows, also featured male protagonists and depicted settings associated with male-dominated activities such as fishing and surfing.

      What do you think? 

       
      Posted by at 8 comments:
      Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

      Friday, 2 March 2012

      Kirsten Tranter's A Common Loss: Two reviews

      Next Thursday is International Women's day and author Kirsten Tranter, a supporter of The Stella Prize, will be speaking at numerous venues around Sydney, including on a panel at Katoomba with authors Tara Moss and Claire Corbett. The topic for the day, inspired by VS Naipaul's famous dismissal of women's writing as instantly recognisable and inferior to his own, is: "Do women write differently from men?" Details of the various Stella events scheduled around the country can be found on the Stella events webpage; details for the Katoomba event here.

      Tranter's second novel, A Common Loss, has been received to wide acclaim. Two guest authors have chosen to review Tranter's book for the AWW challenge, poet Phillip A Ellis and novelist Lisa Walker.  Lisa today posted the full review on her website and provided AWW with the following extract. Lisa writes:

      A Common Loss is Australian author Kirsten Tranter’s second novel. Her first, The Legacy, was an assured, fresh retelling of Henry James’s Portrait of a Lady.

      A Common Loss tells the story of five friends who meet at university and keep in touch over the next ten years. Following the death of one of their number, Dylan, the friends re-group for their annual visit to Las Vegas.

      The story starts with the narrator, Elliot, remembering a car accident the five had together. The driver, Cameron, swerves to avoid a deer and they crash. Cameron has been drinking, so Dylan claims to be the driver. As the years go by, whenever Elliot remembers the crash, it is Dylan who he sees at the wheel. This trick of the memory becomes a motif for the story.

      Elliot, a professor of literature, sees himself as a bit of an outsider in the group. With Dylan, who Elliot idealised, removed, tensions rise and relationships buckle under strain. Elliot discovers that not all of his friends viewed Dylan the same way he did. Dylan’s death sets events in train where each friend is forced to reveal long-hidden secrets...
      The full review appears on Lisa's blog here.





      Lisa describes her own novel, Liar Bird, as "possibly the first romantic comedy about feral pigs". Her next novel, about a timid erotic writer, comes out in January 2013. She writes, works and surfs on the far north coast of New South Wales and is studying towards a Masters in Creative Writing at the University of Queensland."



      The second review is by poet Phillip A Ellis. Phillip writes:

      It is true that I do not read as much women's writing as I should, with a tiny amount of that being by Australians. Hence my involvement in the Australian Women Writers Reading and Reviewing Challenge of2012. Because I want to remedy that lack, and because I want to demonstrate my support for my fellow writers, and because I especially want to support writers whose work I appreciate and love, it is with delight that I have been given the chance to review A Common Loss by Kirsten Tranter; her two novels have become favourites of mine for a number of reasons that I will be discussing in this review. This chance, the chance to support a writer whose work I admire, fits in with the challenge, and it fits in with my love of good writing.

      Five friends--Elliott, Brian, Tallis, Cameron and Dylan--have been friends since college, and since college have held annual vacations in Las Vegas. This year, things are different: Dylan the peacemaker, the glue that keeps the friends together, has died in an accident, and the remaining four are left facing the secrets that bound them to him. Secrets which threaten them in turn, seeming to promise the dissolution, not only of the friendships, but of their careers and reputations. A Common Loss deals with these, being set in Las Vegas, a place where artifice and reality intermingle, and where moral certainties can be set adrift, and it deals with the relationships between friendship and secrets, grief and betrayal, all while the spectre of Tennyson's In Memoriam weaves through the narrative as a form of parallel text.

      There are a number of ways that two texts may parallel each other. For example, two narratives may directly parallel each other, incident for incident, or they may counterpoint each other. There may be a shared language, a shared worldview or shared mood or voice. And there may also be a shared setting or set of characters. While it may be common to expect the texts to be narratives, such as two novels or other forms of fiction, it is rarer for the texts to differ in the way that they do here. In Memoriam is a lyric elegy, whereas A Common Loss is less of an elegy and more a narrative whose inciting act is the death of Dylan, and the losses that arise out of his death. There are, however, many ways in which the two texts parallel each other.

      Given that In Memoriam encodes the obsessive nature of grief and mourning, so that the text itself returns repeatedly to the image of the dead man mourned, so to is A Common Loss haunted by Dylan. As a way of understanding this, if we consider that Julius CaesarIn Memoriam also serves as a thematic thread in the narrative. I won't say exactly how, save that it has relevance for the narrator, Elliott, and his relationship with Dylan.

      And it is the relationships that define the narrative and the ethos of the book. As a result, while A Common Loss is literary, it does not smell of lamp oil, precisely as a result of its narrative emphasis on the shifting relationships. There is the relationship between Brian and Cynthia, and between Cynthia and Elliott, as well as Elliott and Natasha; while each does not dominate the narrative, they form part of the shifting play of attraction and allegiances, the attraction between the men and women, and the allegiances between the friends, so that the novel is dominated by their fluid interweavings and interactions. There is a skill to this writing, and this skill is evident in the way the characters shift and react towards and against each other.

      This skill also extends to the writing. It is literate, eschewing the easy attraction of generic simplicity for ambiguous complexity, and the characters details are deftly handled in such a manner as to sustain narrative tension and believability. It is also, as a result, compassionate. The onstensible antagonist is revealed as equally believable as the others, all of whom are united by an emphasis on their relationships with each other and the absent Dylan. Furthermore, the characters are believable: there is a sense that these are people who could exist, who could live and breathe, and meet our understanding of what a real person is.

      And the compassion of the writing extends to the characters themselves. There are, that is, no black-and-white characters, no heroes or villains, only the protagonists, their primary antagonist, and the more shadowy, elusive figures that mainly appear for a moment then fade. By concentrating so centrally on the friends and Cynthia, A Common Loss reinforces its focus on their relationships with Dylan. So that, while there is scope for a much wider cast of characters, the focus on the central group is integral to the novel and its concerns. This focus works with the characters' believability, so that their roundedness works with us to create a sense of engagement. We believe in them, that is, and we are concerned with the outcome of their shared dilemma.  

      A Common Loss is only Kirsten Tranter's second published novel. Yet it is a skilled novel, one that uses In Memoriam both as a parallel text and thematic concern. It is also literate; and it does not smell of lamp oil. Its writing is compassionate, its characters also believable and treated in a compassionate manner, and, as a result of these, I can only admit that A Common Loss is a major contribution to contemporary Australian literary fiction. While it is a quibble to consider the use of the American characters and setting as somehow unAustralian, it is a false quibble. A Common Loss is Australian precisely because it is develops an Australian sensibility, an Australian worldview, even as it deals with the wider world. And it is these two that really make Australian writing, and Australian women's writing, as distinctive and worthy of serious consideration as it is, despite our cultures' wider neglect.


      Phillip A. Ellis is a freelance critic, poet and scholar, and his poetry collection, The Flayed Man, has been published by Gothic Press; Gothic Press will also edit a collection of essays on Ramsey Campbell, that he is editing with Gary William Crawford. He is working on another collection, to appear through Diminuendo Press. Another collection has been accepted by Hippocampus Press, which has also published his concordance to the poetry of Donald Wandrei. He is the editor of Melaleuca. He has recently had Symptoms Positive and Negative, a chapbook of poetry about his experiences with schizophrenia, published by Picaro Press.


      A Common Loss / Kirsten Tranter (Sydney : Fourth Estate, 2012) ISBN: 978-0-7322-9082-5

      Available from participating AWW booksellers:
      Print copy:
      Abbeys Bookshop, Sydney
      Shearers Bookshop, Leichhardt, NSW
      Better Read Than Dead, Newtown, NSW

      Ebook:
      PNP Booksellers Mosman, NSW
      Avid Reader, Brisbane
      The Book Shuttle
      Readings

      Australian Online Bookshop

      Have you read or reviewed either of Kirsten Tranter's books? What did you think? Feel free to add your link.
      Posted by at 1 comment:
      Labels: , , , , , , , , ,
      Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)