WLF Prize in Literature 2023

How many writers should our shortlist consist of?

  • Total voters
    33
  • Poll closed .
Bartleby

Bartleby

Moderator
As has been demanded, here is the 2023 thread for the Wolfie!

Just refreshing our minds of the rules we were operating under last year:

1. We should nominate only living authors who haven't won the Nobel Prize in Literature.
2. Our nominations should consist of three writers, ranked.
3. The shortlist will consist of three writers.
4. Members should have read at least one book by each shortlisted author before casting a final vote on who's the winner.
5. In order to be nominated at least one book by the writer should be readily available in English
6. Writers shortlisted on the previous year shouldn't be nominated again.

The nominations from the 2022 prize can be seen here.

As we've seen with the case of Javier Marías' passing, we have to decide on what to do in case one or more of our shortlisted writers die in the process. Do we keep them even if they go the good place, as it were, right after they've entered the shortlist? Do we only consider those who are still alive and kicking when we've reached a decision? Somewhere in between? Please share your thoughts so we can proceed with our nominations :) !

I guess this covers all the basics; if anyone has any complaints/suggestions, please let us know. Otherwise we should start nominating (I think the 2021 method, using google forms, proved to be a good way to do this, since we couldn't be influenced by each others' nominations) :)
 
Stevie B

Stevie B

Current Member
Bartleby said:
As we've seen with the case of Javier Marías' passing, we have to decide on what to do in case one or more of our shortlisted writers die in the process. Do we keep them even if they go the good place, as it were, right after they've entered the shortlist? Do we only consider those who are still alive and kicking when we've reached a decision? Somewhere in between? Please share your thoughts so we can proceed with our nominations :) !
Click to expand...
What about having our #4 candidate serve as an alternate in case one of our finalists passes away? That way, we wouldn't have to go through the nominating process all over again.
 
Last edited:
Liam

Liam

Administrator
If, god forbid, one (or more) of the three shortlisted writers dies early on in the process, it would be helpful to keep a list of "runners up" as it were, like the fourth, fifth and sixth places, respectively. Should a writer die too late in the year, i.e. just as we're about to conclude our "deliberations," I'd say, keep them on the shortlist but also give members the option of either voting or not voting for that writer, seeing as opinions were pretty split this year re: Marias.
 
Stevie B

Stevie B

Current Member
Liam said:
If, god forbid, one (or more) of the three shortlisted writers dies early on in the process, it would be helpful to keep a list of "runners up" as it were, like the fourth, fifth and sixth places, respectively. Should a writer die too late in the year, i.e. just as we're about to conclude our "deliberations," I'd say, keep them on the shortlist but also give members the option of either voting or not voting for that writer, seeing as opinions were pretty split this year re: Marias.
Click to expand...
I agree with that, but would there be a specific timeline where we'd automatically drop a finalist from consideration - for example, if s(he) passes away more than five or six months before decision time?
 
Liam

Liam

Administrator
^Yeah, we should come up with a timeline, I'd say the 4 (or even 3) month mark would give members plenty of time to read at least ONE book by the replacement candidate (those that still intend to vote for the dead writer are obviously excused from this extracurricular activity, LOL)--
 
redhead

redhead

Blahblahblah
I've been wondering, what if we upped the number of authors to four? We did that the first year and it didn't cause any problems. I actually kinda liked having another writer to rank and compare. And if, god forbid, someone died, we'd still have one more author in the mix than normal, which would make things easier than a replacement system--as I foresee that getting complicated fast.
 
Leseratte

Leseratte

Well-known member
redhead said:
I've been wondering, what if we upped the number of authors to four? We did that the first year and it didn't cause any problems. I actually kinda liked having another writer to rank and compare. And if, god forbid, someone died, we'd still have one more author in the mix than normal, which would make things easier than a replacement system--as I foresee that getting complicated fast.
Click to expand...
I agree, it would be more practical, @redhead. How about including poetry?
 
Liam

Liam

Administrator
Start posting your lists of candidates, people, so that I can look at them... and JUDGE you, ?
 
Liam

Liam

Administrator
Actually, none of those I plan to nominate are Welsh. Though if we do go with "one nominated POET is mandatory" I'll probably go with Paul Muldoon, whom I consider the greatest living poet in the English language.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top