I'm also one for not taking the whole "prize" thing too literally; prizes in TeeVee are a bit of a joke, you see, and though I get the prestige of the Booker, I chuckle a bit over the fooferal extended to the Giller Awards each year. It seems a lot of gewgaw for this little parish, y'know?
But I got a reminder today of just what purpose literary prizes serve with the announcement of the shortlist for the Taylor Prize, a 25K prize for a Canadian non-fiction book, named after journalist Charles Taylor.
The Boy in the Moon is writer/broadcaster Ian Brown's story of the daily life, and care, for his son, who has a genetic disorder. I remember reading Brown's columns about his son in the Globe when they first appeared and being transfixed; the book left me no less so -- but my post read behavior did. I have no idea why, but now that I think about it, I read this book, and it deeply affected me...it's well-written and searing and sad and a whole bunch of other things. But when I was finished, I put it aside and to the best of my knowledge, I've never discussed it with anybody.Which is weird. I mean, I read a book, I love a book, I tell everybody. But not Brown's simple, affecting memoir.
So the awards announcement jogged something in me, and now I have a bit of a mystery about myself to solve: why didn't I sing this book's praises? Luckily, the Taylor Prize has.
As a stubborn believer that Canadian History isn't the boring broth some would have you believe, two of the other books on the list are intriguing titles that have been on my to-read list all year: Just Watch Me, John English's 2nd volume of Trudeau biography, covering 1968-80, and Daniel Poliquin's Rene Levesque.So maybe it's time I stopped being so smug about literary prizes like the Taylor Prize.
It gives me a shot at pushing Brown's wonderful book and two others I find compelling. (Actually the whole list sounds pretty good.)
I guess I've just been too well jaded by the Gemini's.
But you know what?
The Gillers are still silly. See?
Male anti-fiction bias and all that.
I'm a bad man.

3 rumbles:
The Gillers are silly, for sure, but if we'd think of them as being like a specialty cable channel that only goes after a small niche market instead of a mainstream network, it would make more sense.
I've practiced the same silence on three or four books I've loved. One of them another title by Ian Brown (Guy can fucken write, huh?).
I think it happens when a writer pushes a personal button and somehow you know that talking up the book is going to take you even deeper into that personal place. And it's usually a place you don't want to go -- or maybe just take along some company if you do.
I also think writers get attached to the writing itself sometimes and there's something about the rythmn or the style that you want to try out yourself or emulate. We all steal, but I think there's a resistance to being open to who you're stealing from.
And sometimes I think the silence is purely monetary. You want to be the one to adapt it -- and why have a lot of competition.
I think it's a little from column A and a bit from column B, Jim, to tell you the truth.
Post a Comment