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.
Thursday, 18 October 2012
The Stella Prize News
From The Stella Prize blog:
Friday, 5 October 2012
The Innocent Mage by Karen Miller: Guest review Isolde Martyn
Part of this year's challenge has been to rediscover good books by Australian women which may have been overlooked. Rita Award-winning historical fiction author Isolde Martyn has chosen to review a fantasy novel from 2005: The Innocent Mage by Karen Miller, the first in the "Kingmaker, Kingbreaker" series. Martyn writes:
It is always a delight to review a book you cannot put down, especially when it is written by a local author, too.
The central character is Asher, a young Olken fisherman who journeys to the biggest city in the land and becomes first a stable hand and then aide and advisor to Prince Gar, the King’s son. Of course, this is just not accidental, for there are other deeper forces at work.
Gradually Asher changes from a rough-spoken country lad into an accomplished administrator. The reader mentally applauds as he deals skillfully both with the snobbery that surrounds him and the distrust between the Doranen, who run the country, and the Olken, the land’s original inhabitants.
Gar, the scholarly prince, faces challenges, too. He is perceived as crippled by the Doranen because he lacks the magic skills that the rest of the royal family possess and this is an affliction for him since it is the duty of the king and his heir to use their magic to protect the boundaries of the kingdom. As evil forces conspire against the royal family and the sense of disaster begins to build and build, can the friendship between Asher and the prince survive? And so much more is at stake.
The dialogue in this novel is rich with gorgeous humour and I especially loved the male banter that underscores the growth of trust between Asher and Gar. Some authors are either afraid or inept when it comes to using humour but Karen Miller manages it so skillfully. This is a book is a ‘keeper’, one that will forever stay on my bookshelf and be read again and again.
~
Note: This post has been cross-posted to the new draft AWW website on WordPress where a group of bookbloggers will host the Australian Women Writers Challenge for 2013. The Blogger site will be closing down and the challenge will be moving before the end of the year.
Thursday, 20 September 2012
Changes to AWW - and a better way to post reviews
For some time, it has been obvious that the AWW challenge has been a victim of
its own success. Signing up and adding reviews has become so impractical that
some challenge participants have stopped adding their reviews. Even so, the challenge has generated nearly 1100 reviews.
In anticipation of continuing the AWW challenge into 2013, a group of book bloggers has been discussing how to create a better system. As a result of these discussions, the AWW challenge will shift to WordPress for 2013. A better way of signing up, linking to reviews, and indicating completion of the challenge will be implemented: instead of the awkward Mr Linky, Google forms will be adopted.
Apart from making it much easier to find and upload reviews, the new forms will
automatically enter relevant data on spreadsheets on the new AWW site. (The WordPress site is still
in draft form, but you can see what it looks like here.)
The team of bookbloggers who have agreed to help with next year's challenge will be able to sort the reviews into genres and special interest areas, and post monthly "round-ups" of reviews. Subscribers will be able to subscribe to the new blog, if they wish, via specific categories, such as "literary", "crime", "YA" etc. (If you like, you can start subscribing to the new site straightaway, as all posts here will be cross-posted there. You might just need to be patient while we bring the different components of the site together. The subscription via category will be available once the domain name is sorted.)
In 2013, the challenge will have all the features of this year's challenge, and it will also include a "read only" component. This will enable people who don't have blogs or GoodReads pages to join in the conversation. It will also encourage book groups to sign up to the challenge - pledging to have at least a few books by Australian women on their 2013 reading lists. (If you have an existing book group you want to promote, or would like to join a book group, see here.)
With the new improved site, we hope to continue with the mission to "support and promote" books by Australian women, and to contribute to the excitement surrounding writing by Australian women in the lead up to next year's inaugural Stella Prize.
If you're a regular AWW challenge participant still uploading reviews, you'll notice that the AWW Blogger Challenge page now incorporates a Google form for linking your reviews. If you're happy to start using this form straightaway to upload your review, please go ahead. It will mean one less data entry for the archive.
If you strike any problems with the new system, please let me know. Comments on the challenge page have been reopened for that purpose.
In anticipation of continuing the AWW challenge into 2013, a group of book bloggers has been discussing how to create a better system. As a result of these discussions, the AWW challenge will shift to WordPress for 2013. A better way of signing up, linking to reviews, and indicating completion of the challenge will be implemented: instead of the awkward Mr Linky, Google forms will be adopted.
 |
| New Google form for uploading links to reviews |
The team of bookbloggers who have agreed to help with next year's challenge will be able to sort the reviews into genres and special interest areas, and post monthly "round-ups" of reviews. Subscribers will be able to subscribe to the new blog, if they wish, via specific categories, such as "literary", "crime", "YA" etc. (If you like, you can start subscribing to the new site straightaway, as all posts here will be cross-posted there. You might just need to be patient while we bring the different components of the site together. The subscription via category will be available once the domain name is sorted.)
In 2013, the challenge will have all the features of this year's challenge, and it will also include a "read only" component. This will enable people who don't have blogs or GoodReads pages to join in the conversation. It will also encourage book groups to sign up to the challenge - pledging to have at least a few books by Australian women on their 2013 reading lists. (If you have an existing book group you want to promote, or would like to join a book group, see here.)
With the new improved site, we hope to continue with the mission to "support and promote" books by Australian women, and to contribute to the excitement surrounding writing by Australian women in the lead up to next year's inaugural Stella Prize.
~
If you're a regular AWW challenge participant still uploading reviews, you'll notice that the AWW Blogger Challenge page now incorporates a Google form for linking your reviews. If you're happy to start using this form straightaway to upload your review, please go ahead. It will mean one less data entry for the archive.
If you strike any problems with the new system, please let me know. Comments on the challenge page have been reopened for that purpose.
Wednesday, 19 September 2012
Is Book Reviewing Broken? Guest Post by Annabel Smith
This is the second piece on reviewing by author Annabel Smith, whose book Whisky Charlie Foxtrot will be published by Fremantle Press in November 2012.
Annabel writes:
In 2011 John Locke became the first self-published author to sell more than a million copies of his books on Amazon Kindle. He then wrote How I Sold 1 Million eBooks in 5 Months, a ‘how-to’ marketing guide for other self-published authors. However, he neglected to mention one of his key marketing strategies - paying for five-star reviews.
Few people would argue that by providing a forum for ordinary readers to publicly express their opinions about what they read, the internet is having a significant impact on the world of books. But what happens when the systems that allow ordinary readers to review books are abused? Recently there has been a spate of scandals exposing reviews which flout Amazon’s guidelines stating that reviews should not be posted by users with either a financial interest or a competing book.
In a New York Times article outing the disingenuous practice of paying for reviews, it was revealed that reviewers who work for services such as Todd Rutherford’s (now defunct) GettingBookReviews.com are so poorly paid that they don’t even read the books in question and are further discouraged from being truly critical by having their fee reduced for a less than five-star review.
Perhaps even more shameful than paying for rave reviews is the practice known as ‘sock puppeting,’ in which writers create fake online identities to praise their own books and rubbish those of competitors. British crime writer RJ Ellory recently prompted outrage in the literary world when he was caught writing ecstatic five-star reviews of his own works, and low-rated pannings of his rivals’.
Some readers and writers are calling for sites like Amazon to tighten up their reviewing systems; others believe it is a case of ‘caveat emptor’, or buyer beware. Australian blogger Bernadette calls for real consequences for authors engaging in ‘morally bankrupt’ practices, in her post on Reaction to Reading titled ‘Hit ‘em where it hurts’:
She applauds the stance of Jon Page, President of the Australian Bookseller’s Association, who has stated he will no longer stock books by authors found guilty of sock puppeting. She advocates an agreement between booksellers and bloggers not to support the works of any writer proven to have engaged in anonymously criticising their rivals’ works. Furthermore, she suggests such writers should be denied consideration for awards.
The New York Times exposé of GettingBookReviews.com quotes a data-mining expert at the University of Illinois, Chicago, who estimates that one-third of consumer reviews on the internet are fake. However, on the Guardian blog, Paul Laity suggests that due to the incredible volume of reviews on the internet ‘only a tiny fraction of them can be corrupted’. What the real figure is we may never know. But on Twitter and in the blogosphere, readers are expressing their loss of faith in the system: ‘[Reading] samples via my kindle and just being downright suspicious is my future, I guess,’ said a crime fan on Stuart Neville’s blog.)
On Twitter, @bkclb, whose mission is ‘linking independent writers and publishers to adventurous readers,’ asked ‘Is book reviewing broken? If so how do we fix it’? Certainly, readers may be more choosy about where they read their reviews in future.
Annabel writes:
In 2011 John Locke became the first self-published author to sell more than a million copies of his books on Amazon Kindle. He then wrote How I Sold 1 Million eBooks in 5 Months, a ‘how-to’ marketing guide for other self-published authors. However, he neglected to mention one of his key marketing strategies - paying for five-star reviews.
 |
| (Image in public domain) |
In a New York Times article outing the disingenuous practice of paying for reviews, it was revealed that reviewers who work for services such as Todd Rutherford’s (now defunct) GettingBookReviews.com are so poorly paid that they don’t even read the books in question and are further discouraged from being truly critical by having their fee reduced for a less than five-star review.
Perhaps even more shameful than paying for rave reviews is the practice known as ‘sock puppeting,’ in which writers create fake online identities to praise their own books and rubbish those of competitors. British crime writer RJ Ellory recently prompted outrage in the literary world when he was caught writing ecstatic five-star reviews of his own works, and low-rated pannings of his rivals’.
Some readers and writers are calling for sites like Amazon to tighten up their reviewing systems; others believe it is a case of ‘caveat emptor’, or buyer beware. Australian blogger Bernadette calls for real consequences for authors engaging in ‘morally bankrupt’ practices, in her post on Reaction to Reading titled ‘Hit ‘em where it hurts’:
…what if it wasn’t worth the risk for authors to engage in such practices? What if the cost was more than a fake apology or a few public tears? What if there were real and material consequences?
She applauds the stance of Jon Page, President of the Australian Bookseller’s Association, who has stated he will no longer stock books by authors found guilty of sock puppeting. She advocates an agreement between booksellers and bloggers not to support the works of any writer proven to have engaged in anonymously criticising their rivals’ works. Furthermore, she suggests such writers should be denied consideration for awards.
The New York Times exposé of GettingBookReviews.com quotes a data-mining expert at the University of Illinois, Chicago, who estimates that one-third of consumer reviews on the internet are fake. However, on the Guardian blog, Paul Laity suggests that due to the incredible volume of reviews on the internet ‘only a tiny fraction of them can be corrupted’. What the real figure is we may never know. But on Twitter and in the blogosphere, readers are expressing their loss of faith in the system: ‘[Reading] samples via my kindle and just being downright suspicious is my future, I guess,’ said a crime fan on Stuart Neville’s blog.)
On Twitter, @bkclb, whose mission is ‘linking independent writers and publishers to adventurous readers,’ asked ‘Is book reviewing broken? If so how do we fix it’? Certainly, readers may be more choosy about where they read their reviews in future.
Saturday, 8 September 2012
What makes a good review? Guest post by Annabel Smith
Recently, a group of volunteer bookbloggers started discussing how to build on the momentum of the AWW challenge. The result is we now have a draft website up on WordPress which we're using to iron out a few issues that have beset this year's challenge. (Not so sadly, Mr Linky will have to go.) The plan is to hold another challenge next year, and to allow people to subscribe to posts which related to specific genres and interest areas, covering as broad a range of Australian women's writing as possible. The mission will be "to support and promote" writing by Australian women throughout 2013.
One issue that cropped up in our discussion is "What makes a good review?" Some bloggers have expressed concern about the quality of their reviews. Others have said they like to write "responses", rather than critiques. One asked if AWW could do a "How to" post. As a result, author and reviewer, Annabel Smith kindly agreed to give her tips on reviewing.
Over to Annabel:
Book reviews are personal; they reflect the
reviewer as well as the book being reviewed, and for that reason there is no
right way to write them. However, bearing in mind that their purpose is to
guide other readers in their choices, there are a few guidelines to follow if
you want your reviews to be useful to others, as well as interesting to read.
Perhaps the most important thing to remember is
that a book review is an evaluation, not a summary. Essentially, it should examine
whether the author has successfully achieved what they set out to achieve. The
analysis may consider the quality and significance of the book in terms of its
literary merits and/or its ideas. For example:
- Does the novel fit its genre or does it play with the conventions of its genre in fresh and stimulating ways?
- Does it convincingly depict a certain time and place?
- Were you persuaded by the narrative point of view?
- Do the characters feel real and relatable?
- Does it stimulate you emotionally or intellectually?
- Is the plot compelling?
- How does it compare to other books in its genre, or other books which tackle the same themes/issues?
Would you recommend this book to others? Your
readers will be interested in your personal response to the book. For example:
- How did it make you feel?
- Did you relate to the characters? Why/why not?
- Were the themes or issues relevant to your own life? In what ways?
- Did any of your views change as a result of the ideas explored?
Whether your review is positive or negative, your
opinion should be supported by evidence and a balanced review will consider
both the strengths and weaknesses of a book. In a thought-provoking article
entitled ‘The Ethics of the Negative Review,’ Jan Zwicky asks us to
Look at the word itself: re-view…To look again. But to what purpose? … to further “appreciation.” The reviewer who understands their task in these terms, then, would be one who has taken the trouble to listen again, to listen with care, curiosity, and respect, in an attempt to give genuine attention to what is being said. And who can help the rest of us begin to listen attentively, too. (Read more here.)
~
Note: Scribe has offered to give away a number of books for the best AWW
reviews. Look out for details in an upcoming post. What do you think makes a great review?
~
Annabel Smith’s latest novel, Whisky Charlie Foxtrot will be published by Fremantle Press on November 1st. Her first novel, A New Map of the Universe, was shortlisted for the WA Premier’s Prize for Fiction. She has had short fiction and reviews published in Westerly and Southerly, been a writer-in-residence at Katherine Susannah Prichard Writers’ Centre and holds a PhD in writing from Edith Cowan University. Connect with her on Twitter @annabelsmithAUS and Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/AnnabelSmithAUS
~
This post will be cross-posted to the test AWW site on Wordpress.
Wednesday, 5 September 2012
Queensland Literary Award winners and Melbourne Prize finalists
Queensland Literary Award winners
Congratulations to the winners of the Queensland Literary Fiction Awards, including:- Siv Parker, Story: David Unaipon Award for Unpublished Indigenous Writer
- Janette Turner Hospital, Turbulence: Steele Rudd Award for Short Stories
- Robin de Crespiny, The People Smuggler: Nonfiction Award
- Catherine Titasey, Island of the Unexpected: QLD Emerging Author
- Sue Smith, Mabo: Television Script Award
- Angela Betzien, War Crimes: Drama Script Award
- Briony Stewart Kumiko and the Shadow Catchers: Children's Book Award
- Louise Fox, Dead Europe (adapted from the novel by Christos Tsiolkas): Film Script Award - screen writer
In other news, finalists for the Melbourne Prize have been announced. Winners will be announced November 7th. The finalists include:
Melbourne Prize for Literature 2012
- Alison Lester
- Joanna Murray-Smith
Best Writing Award 2012
- Anna Goldsworthy, Piano Lessons
- Sonya Hartnett, The Children of the King
- Favel Parrett, Past the Shallows
- Carrie Tiffany, Mateship with Birds
Has anyone reviewed the books by De Crespigny, Goldsworthy or Hartnett for the challenge?
NB: This post will be cross-posted to the AWW test website on WordPress. Plans are underway for the challenge to continue into 2013 at that site.
Update from AWW Facebook page: Emma Perry reviewed The Children of the King for the challenge on My Book Corner.
Sunday, 2 September 2012
And the winners are... 2012 Davitt Awards
Guest Blogger Bernadette announces the winners of the 2012 Davitt Awards for Australian women's crime writing. This post is a slightly edited version of one first posted at Fair Dinkum Crime.
The Davitt Awards are sponsored by Sisters in Crime Australia and are named in honour of Ellen Davitt (1812-1879) who wrote Australia’s first full length mystery novel, FORCE AND FRAUD in 1865. Awards are given annually to celebrate the best Australian crime writing by women.
This year's winners were announced at a gala dinner last night (1 September) in Melbourne. Special guest for the evening was one of Sweden's most highly respected crime writers, Åsa Larsson, who was, according to the interview carried out on the night by Sue Turnbull, inspired to take the Sisters in Crime concept home to Sweden!
The first award of the night was for Best True Crime and it went to journalist and author Liz Porter for COLD CASE FILES in which old cases from Australia, the UK and the US are re-opened in the light of new forensic techniques.
Next came the award for Best Young Fiction book which was apparently fiercely contested. Ursula Dubosarsky's THE GOLDEN DAY was highly commended by the judges but the winner of this category was Meg McKinlay for SURFACE TENSION
The next award was for Best Adult Novel. Carolyn Morwood's DEATH AND THE SPANISH LADY was highly commended by judges but the award went to Sulari Gentill for A DECLINE IN PROPHETS. It is historical crime fiction set in 1930's Australia (and beyond) and it is a delight to read, combining thoughtfully drawn characters, a wonderful sense of time and place and a ripper of a story.
The new category for this year of Best Debut Novel went to Jaye Ford for her novel BEYOND FEAR. Ford is yet another journalist-turned-crime-writer and penned a book with loads of strong female characters and snappy pace which I liked a lot.
The final award of the
night was the Reader's Choice Award. All the books
in all the other categories are eligible for this award and all members of
Sisters in Crime Australia are able to vote for it (and apparently 550 of us
did). This year the award was shared by Jaye Ford's BEYOND
FEAR and Y.A. Erskine's THE
BROTHERHOOD!. Both great books.
Congratulations to all the winners and all the writers of the eligible books. Even from my limited reading of the books in these categories I can attest to the fact that Australian women's crime writing is in great form and it is especially pleasing to see that even within the constraints of the crime genre there is such a wide variety of stories being told with many of these titles crossing over into historical, romance, speculative fiction and other genres.
(This post has also been cross-posted at the AWW draft website on WordPress)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)