In preparation for the release of the Man Booker long list this year, I’ve been spending a bit of time on the Man Booker Prize website and around bookish chat rooms, just to see what some of the predictions were for the long list. What caught my attention more than the books themselves, however, was the constant mention of the “Booker Controversy”, something that seems to crop up nearly every year, whether it’s who gets on the long list, the short list, what the judges say, what the authors say; there always seems to be something. I wasn’t surprised, then, to come across this quote, from Publishing News:

“Each year’s controversy raises the odds. Just how shocking can Booker get? Topless judges? A page 3 committee?”

What did surprise me, a little bit, was the fact that this quote appeared on the Man Booker website itself.

I actually studied the Booker Prize’s beginnings earlier this year, as part of a course on 20th Century Literature. What I never knew was that the Booker Prize very nearly didn’t make it past the early 70s, as they just weren’t getting enough publicity, and so, in a way, I can understand why they make such a big deal of the controversies that have basically kept the prize going. Of course, the extra publicity also means that even the books that are longlisted get a sales boost, which must be nice for writers that are working in the “genre” of literary fiction, which isn’t really known for its fiscal rewards.

Added to this, it means that publishing houses continue to invest in at least a few literary fiction titles, meaning that we are given some respite from endless lists of Dan Brown-alikes, and the kind of shock-memoir and celebrity “confessions” that routinely fill supermarket shelves. Still, despite the positives, I can’t help feeling that there is something, well, a little bit icky in the amount of pride the Prize administrator’s seem to take in their “bad” publicity, as if they were naughty children. It’s just a little bit sick-making that a prize that claims to be looking for ‘the best book of the year’ doesn’t actually seem willing to let the books speak for themselves.