Hmmm. This is strange.
In 1974, two books — Stanley Middleton’s Holiday and Nadine Gordimer’s The Conservationist — won the Booker Prize. This happened again in 1992, when both Michael Ondaatje’s The English Patient and Barry Unsworth’s Sacred Hunger won. After that, the prize put in the rule that there could be only one winner. That rule has never been revoked. That rule meant nothing this year!
Put 2019 as the third year when the judges of The Booker Prize couldn’t come together and name one deserving winner but instead split the prize. The two winners?
-Margaret Atwood’s The Testaments
-Bernardine Evaristo’s Girl, Woman, Other
I’m not sure how I will feel over time, but I’m against this on principle, and I’m not sure how it happens in actuality, there being five judges. There is a narrative going around that the judges just loved both of them so much they couldn’t choose, despite getting pushed back by the prize directors. I am skeptical. Maybe some day we’ll get to hear more of what went on behind closed doors.
I’m judging without much to stand on, though, as I have not read either book. Folks over in the Goodreads room have, though, and it’s been a fun conversation to follow.
I’m with you,Trevor. Sure, there are a lot of wonderful books being published and some people will feel strongly that one is worthiest of the Booker and others will feel just as strongly that another book is as worthy or more worthy. The job of the Booker committee is take on the difficult taskof settling on ONE of the top five chosen for the short list. Not everyone will agree on the choice, even among those on the committee, but their job is to discuss, argue and maybe even wrangle about the top choice and finally settle on the best book among the five. It can’t be that difficult, as it’s been done over and over again year after year. I mean, if they’re not able to do that and feel it necessary to split the prize among two, who’s to say they can’t split it three ways? Or four? This committee has not fulfilled its mandated task and as well has probably caused some needless disgruntlement and hurt feelings among the three other writers.