In the Sept. 12 edition of the Financial Times, British critic and novelist Victoria Glendinning, who sits on this year’s Scotiabank Giller Prize jury (which announced its longlist yesterday), generously shared her thoughts on Canadian literature.
Following the claim that reading 100 works of Canadian literature was a “life enhancing experience,” Glendinning dives into a scathing critique of Canadian culture, publishing, and literature.
Some highlights from the article, via the Globe Books Blog:
The Canadian for gutter is “eavestrough” which is picturesque. Everyone is wearing a “tuque” or “toque” which in English-English suggests the lofty headgear worn by Queen Mary but is actually a little woolly hat. And in the holiday cottages among Ontario’s northern lakes and forests–evidently, the prime setting for emotional turmoil–they sit, brooding, on Muskoka chairs. (Look those up on the net.)
…
Apart from brilliant Giller contestants, there are … “unbelievably dreadful” ones. It seems in Canada that you only have to write a novel to get grants from the Canada Council for the Arts and from your provincial Arts Council, who are also thanked. Complaints were once voiced that most shortlisted Giller novels emanated from just three big-name publishers, all owned by Bertelsmann, and that virtually every winner lived in the Toronto area. Now, many of the submitted authors, and their rugged subject matter, hail from Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland. That’s maybe because small publishers too are now subsidised, and they proliferate. If you want to get your novel published, be Canadian.
Now, tell us what you really think, Glendinning!
I’m tired of these caricatures and generalizations, however accurate they may be. Glendinning should either be specific and name names or just shut up. Yes, I’m sure lots of the books that were submitted were “unbelievably dreadful.” But which ones?
Strange. I had to go to the US to get my “rugged Canadian” novel published. Anyway, who really cares Glenwhatshername thinks. Sitting on a jury doesn’t make her an expert on Canadian literature.
Being Canadian will get you published in Canada?
Not if you write mass market genre fiction. That stuff’s beneath our dignity up here it would seem …
Genre is seldom represented in Gillerland, therefore any criticism of Canada’s seeming plenitude of memory/identity novels is only relevant as far as it goes.
If there are “unbelievably dreadful” novels that can on some remote level pass as literature, then it must follow that there are genre novels that are decidedly better than the average.
But Alex is right, unless Glendinning names names we’ve heard it all before.
I don’t think mass market genre fiction is beneath our dignity, it’s just not a major part of the Canadian publisher skill set. Literary fiction, yes and they do a great job of that. Genre, not so much and that’s why Canadian publishers don’t publish a lot of it. That not a bad thing, it’s just the way it is. And you don’t see a lot of genre fiction in the other major literary awards such as Man Booker or the Pulitzer. Jury members for these awards are usually literary writers so it makes sense that they would choose literary fiction. And that again is not bad, it’s just the way it is.
What a sticky wicket! The argument–but that’s the way it is–is no longer relevant because it’s constricting nonsense that stifles freedom. Just because that’s the way it is doesn’t mean that’s the way it should be or that’s the way it will be. Wake up and smell the coffee. If publishers want to be relevant, they must produce truthful fiction the public wants to read. Genre fiction is an obvious choice. And good solid stuff too, not lyrical nonsense that ends up in the remainder bin. Let’s try for good fiction and forget the world of prize $$$$. It’s a bold new world out there and one the Canadian publishers must respond to. It’s not too late; better late than never to get real.
“Being Canadian will get you published in Canada?”
But this statement (even phrased rhetorically) simply isn’t true. Questioning Glendinning on her premises might be a good start; I smell bigotry and sneer, not analysis.
Finn nails it. Setting aside the propriety of a juror commenting on the Giller submissions before the prize is announced, the issue here isn’t so much that she’s criticizing Canlit as that some of her remarks are simply ignorant. It’s the assertion that any dolt can be published in Canada that rankles.
[...] [...]
I don’t know what those chairs are called in Britain, but Canada just wouldn’t be Canada without ‘em. Ditto the perpetual literary mojo of Canadian writers! I love my country … and I love our writers!
I don’t know anyone, BTW, who “broods” on a Muskoka chair. Everyone I know is sunbathing, telling or hearing a story, laughing, singing, stargazing, contemplating a swim, quaffing a beer, reading a fabulous Canadian novel, cheering someone on, or being lulled by the loons …
I read the rant Ms. “BeenDiningAloneAgain” spewed against Canadian writers and have a few questions:
Has anyone ever heard of an arts jury member being so unprofessional?
Did she get paid, and if so, shouldn’t the Giller folks demand their money back?
How did such a malicious Brit become a Canadian Giller Prize Jury Member?
Can we petition to have Victoria Glendinning’s name added to the No-Fly List (like that freak who tried to light his shoes on fire)?
No Way Wayne: Just fyi, two of the longlisted books are genre novels: THE YEAR OF THE FLOOD, science (or speculative) fiction; and FACTORY GIRL, a mystery.
Well done Ms. Glendinning-finally, someone has come out in public to state that the emperor is naked. If a novel has literary merit, it will stand on its own among other works of literature in the world not because it has been subsidised, but because it is well-crafted,engaging and worth reading.I refuse to segregate (and that’s exactly what it is-segregation) Canadian novels in my bookstore..they stand or fall on their own merits alongside British, South African,American,Australian and Asian novels.
FYI MS: Well perhaps Year of and Factory Girl are positioned in the genre categories but I’m sure not going to read the books to find if they hit the mark because life is too short!
To No Way Wayne. Heck I agree with you that Canadian publishers should publish more genre fiction, besides those written by major authors like Atwood. But you got to realize that at the moment they don’t. And if you’re a genre writer looking to get a book published by a Canadian publisher, don’t count on it. Accept it and look elsewhere. I was rejected by over 15 Canadian publishers/agents for my “mystery” but as soon as I turned to the US, I got attention. In three months I got an agent and then the first American publisher she sent it too, offered me a two book deal.
The publishers need a no-return policy with bookstores; then they will have to live with their dud choices. Now bookstores clutter up their shelves and aisles with books no one buys, hoping, no doubt, that the unwary book buyers will purchase the stuff out of frustration. This is a bad business plan because boring and silly lit supplants good solid works and turns readers off on reading.
Hey IS — Thanks for injecting some good sense into this discussion. Unless the Canadian government decides to massively increase its grants to Canadian publishers (unlikely), and offer emergency funding when the next distributor goes broke, there will be precious little left of our book industry (publishers and indie booksellers) in a few years. That is… unless the broken business model is fixed. End returns, or sadly there will be very little new Canadian content to judge in these book prizes.
See http://www.BookIndustryBailout.ca for the analysis. Thank you!
[...] Victoria Glendinning, one of this year’s Giller judges, weighed in on what she saw as some of the limitations of Canadian literature (too many grants, too many cottage settings, too [...]
Despite the well-intentioned origins of the Giller to promote CanLit, any competition or prize-giving for a literary endeavor seems ludicrous. I don’t know why everybody is so surprised by Glendinning’s comments about quality. Or by Michael Prodger in UK about the Booker list. The nature of the prizes themselves guarantee that the chances of any really challenging or innovative work being chosen are slight. Let’s face it, these days literary prizes are more a marketing opportunity by corporations such as Scotia or Man, and promotional vehicles for publishers, than any real reflection of new and ingenious writing. They can’t be anything else.
Ha…someone speaks frankly and the knitting circle attacks. That’s so – well, if I were British I’d call it provincial, but a more Canadian adjective would be quaint.
Hey who was that British travel writer who decribed Canada as ‘… a few acres of snow’?