The Prime Minister's Literary Award, worth a tax-free $100,000 a year each for a fiction and a nonfiction book, has divided the literati.
The Australian Society of Authors and the Australian Booksellers Association both expressed pleasure at the initiative and the extra $100,000 for promotion of the award, which will give exposure (and, they hope, sales) to shortlisted books as well as the winners. "A prize of this stature and worth is testament to the fact that books are still the bedrock of our culture," says the booksellers' president, Fiona Stager.
However, Ivor Indyk, the publisher at Giramondo, expressed the view shared by David Malouf and others: "The prizes seem driven by symbolism rather than by practical need. They ignore poetry, a strange barbarism in a country which prides itself on being civilised. We already have plenty of prizes, and if the judges of those are any good the new prizes will go to writers who have just won prizes, unless there is an idea other than money behind them."
Indyk argues: "We desperately need money for school visits by writers, touring programs, international exchanges, educational materials in Australian literature, editorial positions in magazines and the smaller literary publishers, and familiarisation courses for teachers, booksellers and reviewers. That kind of support would be far more beneficial to writers."
The Minister for the Arts, Peter Garrett, was surprisingly hard to contact about his government's generosity. Undercover asked whether the Prime Minister's History Prize, initiated by John Howard, would continue or be replaced by the literary awards. "They're totally separate - the announcement of the literary awards has no bearing whatsoever on the history award," says Garrett's spokesman, suggesting that the answer will be at Kevin Rudd's whim.