The U.S.’s political and economic influence may be on the wane but there is little doubt that it remains a formidable literary powerhouse even if the Europe-centric Swedish Academy — the arbiter and dispenser of the Nobel Prize for Literature — turns up its nose at American literature.
The taste of the pudding lies in the eating and the Man Booker Prize judges liked what they tasted so much that they have given over one-third of this year’s longlist to writers from across the pond inevitably raising a few eyebrows. The Independent on Sunday ’s literary editor, Katy Guest, noted there are “more Americans on the list than women”.
This is the first time that the £50,000 prize — arguably the English-speaking world’s most coveted literary honour — has been opened up to the Americans.
Until now, only writers from Britain, Ireland and the Commonwealth countries were eligible. The result: a carnage of the literary Commonwealth. There is not a single South Asian or African contender. The only Asian Commonwealth writer on the list is Australia’s Richard Flanagan; and the only Indian-origin writer Neel Mukherjee — long listed for his novel The Lives of Others — is British. Where are the likes of Kamila Shamsie whose new novel, A God in Every Stone , is one of the most talked-about books this summer?
“It’s the time of year when young writers wait eagerly to discover exciting new voices from all over the world… Such a pity that this year’s list has cast such a cloud,” wrote Nigerian-born writer Irenosen Okojie in The Observer.
Booker’s literary director, Ion Trewin, admitted, “I just don’t think it is necessarily one of the great years for the Commonwealth.” But he suggested that it had more to do with the quality of entries from the region than the decision to include Americans.
Booker sponsors were warned of the risks of letting in the Americans: they would hijack the show. But the counter-argument was that keeping them out of a major English language prize was unfair and discriminatory. Some even thought it was akin to a form of ‘literary apartheid’, besides admitting that the best of British, Asian and African writers were simply not good enough to compete with their American peers. Then why not go truly international and throw the doors open to everyone? Europeans, Latin Americans, Chinese, Francophone Africans, Arabs, Turks, Iranians — anyone whose work may be available in English translation. (Yes, there is already a Man Booker International prize but it is given for a writer’s lifetime achievement and not their latest work.) Unfortunately, the debate has taken on a slightly anti-American tone, and descended into an ‘American Vs the Rest’ row. The real issue, though, is quite different: what is the Booker for? What does it see as its purpose? Who or who should not be allowed to compete must be determined by what Booker is meant to achieve.
All major prizes have an identity. And the Booker’s identity had, so far, been defined by its founding objective: to recognise good innovative writing from former British colonies.
The idea was to discover new voices from the English-speaking regions of the Third World and introduce them to the First. Although judges sometimes went too far in their search for innovation and ended up with bogus stuff dressed up as literary experiment (does anyone remember Keri Hulme’s unreadable The Bone People ?), by and large the arrangement worked well.
Some of the biggest names in Commonwealth writing owe their fame, in some measure, to the Booker. I’m not sure if Salman Rushdie, Arundhati Roy or Aravind Adiga would have become the household names they are were it not for the Booker. And that happened because Booker’s priorities were different. It actively focused on rewarding good fiction from these particular regions. That was its raison d’être.
It might still insist that it remains committed to promoting the best irrespective of where it comes from, but only the very naive will believe that with Americans inside the tent, things have not radically changed. Given the sheer range and quality of the best American writing, the competition has become a lot tougher, to put it mildly. It is by no means my intention to downplay Indian literary talent but, when pitted against Americans, Indians will find it harder to lay their hands on that £50,000 cheque; or indeed even get on the shortlist in the first place. I don’t know the reaction in India but certainly the British literary establishment is in a panic over the prospect of having to compete with the “Great American” novel. It is being portrayed as a David vs. Goliath contest. The Americanisation of the Booker comes at a time when there is genuine anxiety about the state of contemporary British fiction. A leading British writer recently said that it was offering nothing new anymore; and all the action was in America.
Philosopher A.C. Grayling insisted that the books were chosen for their quality alone, and no other criterion was applied. What he didn’t say was that the very presence of all-mighty Americans tilted the balance in their favour.
For some years, the Booker has suffered from an acute identity crisis; not quite able to decide what sort of writing it wants to promote. The result is that, depending on the quirks of the judging panel, it has lurched from highbrow choices (often so highbrow as to be inaccessible to ordinary readers) to mid-brow and downright popular. The decision to embrace Americans may have been intended to give it a clearer identity as an English language prize. But my own view is that it is likely to compound the confusion, and the prize will end up as neither fish nor fowl, losing its Commonwealth/Third World identity without fully acquiring a credible new one.
The Longlist
Joshua Ferris (US) – To Rise Again at a Decent Hour
Richard Flanagan (Australia) – The Narrow Road to the Deep North
Karen Joy Fowler (US) – We Are All Completely Beside Ourselves
Siri Hustvedt (US) – The Blazing World
Howard Jacobson (Britain) – J
Paul Kingsnorth (Britain) – The Wake
David Mitchell (Britain) – The Bone Clocks
Neel Mukherjee (Britain) – The Lives of Others
David Nicholls (Britain) – Us
Joseph O'Neill (Ireland) – The Dog
Richard Powers (US) – Orfeo
Ali Smith (Britain) – How to Be Both
Niall Williams (Ireland) – History of the Rain
The shortlist will be announced on September 9 and the winner on October 14.
