This will probably sound like sour grapes, but what the hell. I think the omission of Dreamhunter is unbelievable. Do the judges think it's too complicated for YA readers? Do they think it displays too little national pride?

I gave a copy of Dreamhunters to several children and they absolutely loved it. I myself couldn't bear to put it down, to leave Elizabeth's delicously built world for a second. I publicly toast the book and remind myself that Book Awards are notoriously and subjectively fickle.

I agree! I think the book is superbly written and I have given it to YA readers who have without exception loved it and are waiting for more.

Book awards are 'notoriously and subjectively fickle' but let that fact not detract in the least from Margaret Mahy's double here: both her books deserve to take their categories-

Quite possibly she does, Keri, and sidelining Dreamhunter and Quest for the Sun certainly helps clear the way.

It's the judges, not the awards, that are fickle. In this case, perhaps we have a timid and rather earnest panel who have bowed to traditional pieities (Margaret Mahy, ouvert NZ subject matter etc) and, quite simply, overlooked suberb new quality. It wouldn't be the first time it's happened. A bit alarmed too the see Graham Lay in yet another reincarnation as literary judge/convenor. He seems one of those endlessly recycled literary personages. Perhaps more imagination and a wider field is needed for the choice of judges, too.

I’m a fan of awards in general and especially of awards that draw attention to New Zealand Books. As a long time member of the bookselling industry I’m convinced they’re are vital to its continued health. The people that make them happen, not to mention the fantastic support from NZ Post in this case, deserve praise.
I certainly don’t agree with judge’s decisions all the time and, Margaret Mahy’s worthiness aside, don’t agree with everything they’ve picked in this case. Which is fine really, that’s what awards are about. But what really bothers me about the omission of both Dreamhunter and Quest for the Sun, is the apparent dismissal of great storytelling in favour of subject matter that is “worthy” or “relevant” or about “issues”. I’m not convinced this is what our young readers or any of our readers for that matter, want to read. It’s fine to address subject matter that covers matters related to our lives, in fact it’s essential, but the creation of a convincing, consistent and resonant fictional world is surely more important.

Well, we chased up NZ Post to give them an opportunity to comment, but unsurprisingly, the only comment is 'no comment'. Fair enough really, can't set a precedent there, or all hell would break loose. But we have to agree: it's hard to imagine why such an extraordinary work as Dreamhunter would not have made the cut. Sigh.

It's astonishing that Elizabeth Knox, Kate de Goldi (Uncle Jack), Jack Lasenby (Mr Bluenose), and Penelope Todd (Box) were all omitted from the awards (and from the latest Notable Books List)! Are these awards for fine writing or for something else?

The non-selection of Knox’s Dreamhunter has thrown you all into a bit of a spin. Some of the comments raised are, quite frankly, reminiscent of those bandied about on Radio Sport when the caller’s favourite player doesn’t make the cut. Come on people, get a grip – perhaps it just wasn’t good enough.

Has Steve read the book? It was published by Harpercollins Australia, Faber in England, and is about to come out in the US with FSG, Penguin in Canada, and later in Japan.

Yes, I have read all of her books and reviewed several of them. But it is not the book I am concerned about, here, it is the ranting about the judges’ selection that worries me. Other books, on this occasion, were deemed to be more fitting of selection. Let’s congratulate these authors and stop acting like spoilt children.

hmmm “ranting”? wow I've never been accused of that before, I'm impressed…..it's not the selection so much that I find a little disturbing and certainly congratulations to the short-listed authors; it's the tone of the press releases that accompanied the release of the short list and the reasons for selection championed there. The only “spoilt children” here might be the unfortuante readers not pointed in the direction of some darn good books…

I think that NZ Post has stumped up with an award and they have the right to choose who they like. Perhaps leafsalon could have their own gong (the “Kathys”?)?

The great thing about awards is the controversy they often generate. So I'm afraid folks are not always inclined to sit back and dutifully accept judges' recommendations. In fact, if NZ Post are going to put their stake in the sand and make literary judgments, they should also be prepared to cop any flak that comes their way. It's part of the territory.

PS to Steve: we haven't had the pleasure of reading your reviews, are they posted online?

I think that the NZ Post awards should be based on the readers votes (e.g. The Smarties Book Award system in the UK). Children/young adults are very savvy readers and best positioned to make the right choice.

It's good to see an extended debate on sych an important subject. James F. English in his fascinating book “The Economy of Prestige: Prizes, Awards and the Circulation of Cultural Value” (Harvard, 2005), argues that prizes are by far the most widespread and powerful instruments for the creation of cultural capital, and cites children's literature as one on the few fields of cultural consumption in which prizes have a more direct and powerful effect on sales than video porn. In the Montanas, the very complex system of categories and specialist advisers essentially exists to give credibility to a process that delivers its commercial benefit almost exclusively to one or two winners. But the NZ Post shifts significant quantities of all the shortlisted books, which is why it matters, and why it is a mistake to regard it cynically as just a lottery.

This just in from Elizabeth Knox's US publisher: Dreamhunter has just come out in the States, here is part of what Kirkus Reviews will be saying about it in their March issue: 'A lyrical, intricate and ferociously intelligent fantasy … Knox starts off slowly, gradually piling on the details of two utterly convincing worlds … The characters display equal complexity, with hidden depths and tragic flaws. Once the plot gathers momentum, it builds inexorably to a nightmare climax that satisfies fully while pointing to the promised sequel. Provocative and compelling.' Here's to some whopping 'commercial benefit' for the book over there.

I’m reading Ben Okri’s A Way of Being Free. What a tonic he is for the writer feeling twitchy about competitions and the way good work can be judged and apparently dismissed. He reminds us of what matters: the vivifying affect of the writing on the writer, and on its receptive readers — be they many or few. So, courage, fellow sideswiped ones. Don’t give in to ‘the demons of rivalry, the degrading competition which leads the best practitioners, if they submit, away from their beautiful journey.’ (Okri) It is a tricky but a beautiful journey.