all the news that's unfit to print
Hi Zadie and Stephen -As the wise man said: "altruism's for schmucks!"No, it seems you can't win on the internet, but please remember there's a healthy majority of stoics out here that aren't part of a baying mob of fuming ingrates.This calm coterie (we're quiet, but we're here) respects what you're trying to do with the competition, respects the decision you've made and all the rest of it.I write this only to redress the notion of "common fury". By my count, there are as many calm reactions as sour-grape splutterings. It's tempting to assume that the loudest, or most earnest, speak for everyone, but I'd like to assure you that's not true. I also don't think all that many people insisted the cash be split - it's just the internet doing its amplification thing. But what's done is done.To those questioning the judges' integrity: look. I'm a published, multiple award-winning author and if I'm not complaining, why should you? That's the way the cookie crumbles, amigos. Submit your stories to Bridport (£6) or to the Tell Tales anthology (free). Send them to the VS Pritchett prize at the RSL, to the Iowa Review. Heck, if they're that good, send them to the New Yorker -- just please, please, enough of the moaning. We're all supposed to be writers. Last I checked, that stood for empathy and subtlety, and for the elegant expression of compassion. People are disappointed, and that's fair enough. But let's not rail against the inequities of the fragile, brittle surface of things - that's what journalists are for. Let us try and look deeper for our answers. Let us try harder. Let us write.
disposition of the prize money
Please, please let it be true, that this IS the final, final statement.
Post a Comment