This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Interest in the Boardman Tasker (BT) Award for Mountain Literature remains as great as ever and this year's competition has resulted in 35 books being submitted, from personal journeys and adventures, poetry, biographies & autobiographies to novels.
This year's judges Graham Desroy (Chair), Terry Gifford and Helen Mort have selected the five books for this year's shortlist.
Read more
In reply to Mick Ward:
Miserable bstrds Mick! I guess dating a pole dancer - then a professional Dominatrix counts for nowt these days then. Grumble, grumble. Bstrds, no three grand for 'Punk in the Gym' then! There is even some rock climbing in it but not enough snowy mountains obviously.
Am not bitter. Honest. No, seriously, am not.
Good luck to 'The Bond', sounds like a ripper.
Cheers,
Andy Boorm ,,, err Pollitt.
> Thanks to Steve and Terry for writing this.
> Mick
Miserable bstrds Mick! I guess dating a pole dancer - then a professional Dominatrix counts for nowt these days then. Grumble, grumble. Bstrds, no three grand for 'Punk in the Gym' then! There is even some rock climbing in it but not enough snowy mountains obviously.
Am not bitter. Honest. No, seriously, am not.
Good luck to 'The Bond', sounds like a ripper.
Cheers,
Andy Boorm ,,, err Pollitt.
6
1
In reply to AP Melbourne:
I'm surprised Punks in the Gym isn't in the list, that's the book I can't wait to read.
I'm surprised Punks in the Gym isn't in the list, that's the book I can't wait to read.
1
In reply to AP Melbourne:
Pah, did Al Evans not date a Spanish hooker for a while? He didn't win any prize for that, not even a STD.
> Miserable bstrds Mick! I guess dating a pole dancer - then a professional Dominatrix counts for nowt these days then. Grumble, grumble.
Pah, did Al Evans not date a Spanish hooker for a while? He didn't win any prize for that, not even a STD.
3
In reply to AP Melbourne:
I agree, it does seem odd. I hope this isn't telling tales out of school but when Steve phoned the other day (about something unrelated to the BT) he said how impressed he was by 'Punk in the Gym'. Obviously he's not a judge and that was simply his personal opinion - but it's one to be highly valued.
I'm always uneasy about any kind of artistic awards; necessarily they're subjective (as are climbing grades). Back in the day, when I had literary aspirations, I'd follow national awards with a sense of dismay. Often they seemed so flavour of the month/politically correct/fellow member of a literary cadre as to be nonsensical in terms of merit.
But I think this applies far less (if at all) to the BT where fellow climbers agonise about getting it right. Years ago one Chair of judges whom I'd previously thought was a right plonker admitted that, even after the decision, he carried on agonising. And I thought, 'Bloody hell, good on you.'
Sometimes judges just plain don't get it right. And hey, we're all human. Ed Drummond's 'A Dream of White Horses' and Harold Drasdo's 'The Ordinary Route' not only didn't win, they didn't even make the short-list. But they're now (rightly) regarded as classics.
If it's any consolation, I suspect 'Punk in the Gym' will be regarded as the classic in its genre. It's obvious that it's resonated with many people on here.
All best wishes,
Mick
I agree, it does seem odd. I hope this isn't telling tales out of school but when Steve phoned the other day (about something unrelated to the BT) he said how impressed he was by 'Punk in the Gym'. Obviously he's not a judge and that was simply his personal opinion - but it's one to be highly valued.
I'm always uneasy about any kind of artistic awards; necessarily they're subjective (as are climbing grades). Back in the day, when I had literary aspirations, I'd follow national awards with a sense of dismay. Often they seemed so flavour of the month/politically correct/fellow member of a literary cadre as to be nonsensical in terms of merit.
But I think this applies far less (if at all) to the BT where fellow climbers agonise about getting it right. Years ago one Chair of judges whom I'd previously thought was a right plonker admitted that, even after the decision, he carried on agonising. And I thought, 'Bloody hell, good on you.'
Sometimes judges just plain don't get it right. And hey, we're all human. Ed Drummond's 'A Dream of White Horses' and Harold Drasdo's 'The Ordinary Route' not only didn't win, they didn't even make the short-list. But they're now (rightly) regarded as classics.
If it's any consolation, I suspect 'Punk in the Gym' will be regarded as the classic in its genre. It's obvious that it's resonated with many people on here.
All best wishes,
Mick
6
In reply to Michael Simpson:
If you haven't read it, why are you surprised it's not in the list?
> I'm surprised Punks in the Gym isn't in the list, that's the book I can't wait to read.
If you haven't read it, why are you surprised it's not in the list?
7
In reply to Mick Ward:
True, but then people voted for Brexit and Mrs Brown's Boys. Democracy can't always be trusted either.
> Sometimes judges just plain don't get it right.
True, but then people voted for Brexit and Mrs Brown's Boys. Democracy can't always be trusted either.
5
In reply to planetmarshall:
I've read some excerpts and I was going on gut feeling.
I've read some excerpts and I was going on gut feeling.
Post edited at 17:56
1
1
In reply to UKC/UKH News:
I thought Alone on the Wall was pretty substandard stuff, nowhere near worthy of an award; but what do I know.
I thought Alone on the Wall was pretty substandard stuff, nowhere near worthy of an award; but what do I know.
Post edited at 18:43
9
In reply to UKC/UKH News:
When reading 'Into the Silence' I was especially interested in George Finch and his poor treatment by the people in the AC & RGS. I climbed one of his routes in Corsica which he had put up years ago (1909, a landmark route in Corsican mountaineering). Apart from not going to the 'right school' he was a colonial, and so his very sound advice was ignored. Now if Mallory had been partnered with Finch instead of Irving, history could well have been very different! Looking forward to reading the book.
When reading 'Into the Silence' I was especially interested in George Finch and his poor treatment by the people in the AC & RGS. I climbed one of his routes in Corsica which he had put up years ago (1909, a landmark route in Corsican mountaineering). Apart from not going to the 'right school' he was a colonial, and so his very sound advice was ignored. Now if Mallory had been partnered with Finch instead of Irving, history could well have been very different! Looking forward to reading the book.
Post edited at 19:37
1
5
In reply to Mick Ward:
Oh Mick you're always so nice and kind - to everyone.
Thanks for that, means a lot. I seriously Was kidding around with my 'grumble' too BTW and simply hope all on the shortlist are there on Literary merit.
Interestingly (well, to me anyway) I was invited to attend on the night - from twelve thousand miles away, but declined due to various 'circumstances'. The BT rules state that the shortlisters Must be in attendance or they're disqualified so it was never going to happen was it. Perhaps a bronze in the Peoples' Choice category?
Here's a fact: I only really wrote 'Punk' coz I'd been laid off work and banished for five weeks. It was either leap off the Westgate Bridge or find something to occupy myself. I chose beer and writing, that Yarra river's cold and the suicide jumpers drown in the mud when they spear in as its very shallow. Didn't fancy that and a 'gangster' associate wouldn't sell me a gun and one bullet coz he knew who it was for. I even went to 'the chosen destination' once and just wept like a baby.
Better now though and its comforting that many are enjoying the book.
Cheers,
And. x
> I agree, it does seem odd. I hope this isn't telling tales out of school but when Steve phoned the other day (about something unrelated to the BT) he said how impressed he was by 'Punk in the Gym'. Obviously he's not a judge and that was simply his personal opinion - but it's one to be highly valued.
> All best wishes,
> Mick
> All best wishes,
> Mick
Oh Mick you're always so nice and kind - to everyone.
Thanks for that, means a lot. I seriously Was kidding around with my 'grumble' too BTW and simply hope all on the shortlist are there on Literary merit.
Interestingly (well, to me anyway) I was invited to attend on the night - from twelve thousand miles away, but declined due to various 'circumstances'. The BT rules state that the shortlisters Must be in attendance or they're disqualified so it was never going to happen was it. Perhaps a bronze in the Peoples' Choice category?
Here's a fact: I only really wrote 'Punk' coz I'd been laid off work and banished for five weeks. It was either leap off the Westgate Bridge or find something to occupy myself. I chose beer and writing, that Yarra river's cold and the suicide jumpers drown in the mud when they spear in as its very shallow. Didn't fancy that and a 'gangster' associate wouldn't sell me a gun and one bullet coz he knew who it was for. I even went to 'the chosen destination' once and just wept like a baby.
Better now though and its comforting that many are enjoying the book.
Cheers,
And. x
6
In reply to AP Melbourne:
Wow, is that true? I never realised that. If that is the case then I think not only is it unfair (given the nature of the authors, being climbers, may be far away somewhere) but it severely detracts from the prize being simply for the best book. It becomes something else, more an industry PR event than a genuine award on merit.
> The BT rules state that the shortlisters Must be in attendance or they're disqualified ...
Wow, is that true? I never realised that. If that is the case then I think not only is it unfair (given the nature of the authors, being climbers, may be far away somewhere) but it severely detracts from the prize being simply for the best book. It becomes something else, more an industry PR event than a genuine award on merit.
7
In reply to Mick Ward:
Agreed on both counts. I used to put such excuses down to sour grapes on the part of the un-nominated, but then was privy to some tales from the judging panels of a competition (not the BT) and it made me cringe. The scene can be very cliquey and you pile commercial interests on top of that, it can all get very disappointing for anyone who cares. You can't criticise as it comes off as jealous or bitter. The trick is to genuinely not care.
To be fair though, the previous couple of years of the BT, before this year, had several really good books in each Shortlist such that it would be hard to pick between them, even doing your best to be objective. Someone has to lose, but when the field is that good, all of us as readers win.
As someone who occasionally writes about climbing for part of my living, I know the (un)economics of publishing in the industry, so we honestly should be grateful that there are still publishers willing to do the work and take the risk to put such books out. Of course they're in business to make money, but they ain't getting' rich. There have been some great books in recent years, that very easily could not have ever made it to print, depriving our community of good bits of its culture.
>
> Often they seemed so flavour of the month/politically correct/fellow member of a literary cadre as to be nonsensical in terms of merit.
> Often they seemed so flavour of the month/politically correct/fellow member of a literary cadre as to be nonsensical in terms of merit.
> Sometimes judges just plain don't get it right.
Agreed on both counts. I used to put such excuses down to sour grapes on the part of the un-nominated, but then was privy to some tales from the judging panels of a competition (not the BT) and it made me cringe. The scene can be very cliquey and you pile commercial interests on top of that, it can all get very disappointing for anyone who cares. You can't criticise as it comes off as jealous or bitter. The trick is to genuinely not care.
To be fair though, the previous couple of years of the BT, before this year, had several really good books in each Shortlist such that it would be hard to pick between them, even doing your best to be objective. Someone has to lose, but when the field is that good, all of us as readers win.
As someone who occasionally writes about climbing for part of my living, I know the (un)economics of publishing in the industry, so we honestly should be grateful that there are still publishers willing to do the work and take the risk to put such books out. Of course they're in business to make money, but they ain't getting' rich. There have been some great books in recent years, that very easily could not have ever made it to print, depriving our community of good bits of its culture.
5
In reply to AP Melbourne:
Don't worry, you even looked like the young Martin Amis, perenially ignored by the Booker.
Don't worry, you even looked like the young Martin Amis, perenially ignored by the Booker.
In reply to Damo:
Sure is Damo - just google the rules.
There is however, a discretionary whereby the Committee can allow an author to submit a 20min video/interview in lieu and still count.
My Kiwi friend Charlie Creese and I have come up with a cracker which Simon Madden (of Vertical Life mag) is going to shoot soon. We've spent hours & hours and have expensive, professional studio space booked.
'Punk' missed out because it wasn't good enough, I accept that. Fair & square and wish only goodwill to the others.
Thanks mate.
Cheers,
AP.
> Wow, is that true? I never realised that. If that is the case then I think not only is it unfair (given the nature of the authors, being climbers, may be far away somewhere) but it severely detracts from the prize being simply for the best book. It becomes something else, more an industry PR event than a genuine award on merit.
Sure is Damo - just google the rules.
There is however, a discretionary whereby the Committee can allow an author to submit a 20min video/interview in lieu and still count.
My Kiwi friend Charlie Creese and I have come up with a cracker which Simon Madden (of Vertical Life mag) is going to shoot soon. We've spent hours & hours and have expensive, professional studio space booked.
'Punk' missed out because it wasn't good enough, I accept that. Fair & square and wish only goodwill to the others.
Thanks mate.
Cheers,
AP.
In reply to Mick Ward:
Absolutely agree that those two deserve to be regarded as classics. But to be fair to the panel of the time, those weren't failures of judgement. At that time, and arguably with some justification, the rules of the BT Award debarred books where chunks of the content had been previously published, often in 'Mountain' or in club journals. That was true of both those books. The BT rules have been changed now.
> Sometimes judges just plain don't get it right. And hey, we're all human. Ed Drummond's 'A Dream of White Horses' and Harold Drasdo's 'The Ordinary Route' not only didn't win, they didn't even make the short-list. But they're now (rightly) regarded as classics.
Absolutely agree that those two deserve to be regarded as classics. But to be fair to the panel of the time, those weren't failures of judgement. At that time, and arguably with some justification, the rules of the BT Award debarred books where chunks of the content had been previously published, often in 'Mountain' or in club journals. That was true of both those books. The BT rules have been changed now.
In reply to AP Melbourne:
Well, the rules regarding this for 2016 are:
'6. PUBLICITY
Shortlisted Authors will be requested to attend the Award Ceremony and participate in the Shortlisted Authors (SLA) event to talk about their books. Attendance is not mandatory but those unable to attend will be expected to co-operate in pre-recording an interview or another presentation to be shown in the SLA event. All are expected to co-operate with reasonable requests to publicise their own book and the Award Ceremony before, during and in the aftermath of the Award.'
That is more or less the same as I remember it on the 5 occasions I submitted books between 1991 and 2012. There have surely been several occasions when the winner has not been able to attend the Award Ceremony? Surely it's never been mandatory?
> Sure is Damo - just google the rules.
Well, the rules regarding this for 2016 are:
'6. PUBLICITY
Shortlisted Authors will be requested to attend the Award Ceremony and participate in the Shortlisted Authors (SLA) event to talk about their books. Attendance is not mandatory but those unable to attend will be expected to co-operate in pre-recording an interview or another presentation to be shown in the SLA event. All are expected to co-operate with reasonable requests to publicise their own book and the Award Ceremony before, during and in the aftermath of the Award.'
That is more or less the same as I remember it on the 5 occasions I submitted books between 1991 and 2012. There have surely been several occasions when the winner has not been able to attend the Award Ceremony? Surely it's never been mandatory?
5
In reply to Bob Aitken:
Then of course there is the issue that in some years the standard of entries is unusually high. This may be such a year. So far I've read most of Mark Vallance's 'Wild Country' and think it's a very strong contender.
> Absolutely agree that those two deserve to be regarded as classics. But to be fair to the panel of the time, those weren't failures of judgement. At that time, and arguably with some justification, the rules of the BT Award debarred books where chunks of the content had been previously published, often in 'Mountain' or in club journals. That was true of both those books. The BT rules have been changed now.
Then of course there is the issue that in some years the standard of entries is unusually high. This may be such a year. So far I've read most of Mark Vallance's 'Wild Country' and think it's a very strong contender.
In reply to Damo:
No, not really. From the 2016 rules:
Shortlisted Authors will be requested to attend the Award Ceremony and participate in the Shortlisted Authors (SLA) event to talk about their books. Attendance is not mandatory but those unable to attend will be expected to co-operate in pre-recording an interview or another presentation to be shown in the SLA event. All are expected to co-operate with reasonable requests to publicise their own book and the Award Ceremony before, during and in the aftermath of the Award.
Given that the BT is an event as well as a prize, I don't think it's too much to ask that the shortlisted authors either show up or cooperate in some other way.
> Wow, is that true?
No, not really. From the 2016 rules:
Shortlisted Authors will be requested to attend the Award Ceremony and participate in the Shortlisted Authors (SLA) event to talk about their books. Attendance is not mandatory but those unable to attend will be expected to co-operate in pre-recording an interview or another presentation to be shown in the SLA event. All are expected to co-operate with reasonable requests to publicise their own book and the Award Ceremony before, during and in the aftermath of the Award.
Given that the BT is an event as well as a prize, I don't think it's too much to ask that the shortlisted authors either show up or cooperate in some other way.
1
In reply to Bob Aitken:
Thank you for putting me right and my apologies to the members of both panels. If I remember correctly, both books came out before you could easily get the BT rules from a search engine. When Jim Perrin's 'Yes to Dance' was published, there seemed to be some ambiguity whether, as a collection, it would be eligible. On this basis, it wasn't.
My own feeling (for what it's worth!) is that literary collections (where, very often, much has been published before) should indeed be eligible. If an author can cherry-pick his/her best stuff over many years (or at least exclude weaker pieces), surely it's likely that the overall literary standard will be somewhere in the very good to superlative range?
Obviously a much less technically adroit writer can still come along with a brilliant story and sweep all before him/her - which is back to the subjectivity of it all!
But thanks again for putting me right - and if you were one of the panels re Drummond or Drasdo, please also accept a personal apology.
Mick
> Absolutely agree that those two deserve to be regarded as classics. But to be fair to the panel of the time, those weren't failures of judgement. At that time, and arguably with some justification, the rules of the BT Award debarred books where chunks of the content had been previously published, often in 'Mountain' or in club journals. That was true of both those books. The BT rules have been changed now.
Thank you for putting me right and my apologies to the members of both panels. If I remember correctly, both books came out before you could easily get the BT rules from a search engine. When Jim Perrin's 'Yes to Dance' was published, there seemed to be some ambiguity whether, as a collection, it would be eligible. On this basis, it wasn't.
My own feeling (for what it's worth!) is that literary collections (where, very often, much has been published before) should indeed be eligible. If an author can cherry-pick his/her best stuff over many years (or at least exclude weaker pieces), surely it's likely that the overall literary standard will be somewhere in the very good to superlative range?
Obviously a much less technically adroit writer can still come along with a brilliant story and sweep all before him/her - which is back to the subjectivity of it all!
But thanks again for putting me right - and if you were one of the panels re Drummond or Drasdo, please also accept a personal apology.
Mick
2
In reply to Mick Ward:
There was nothing personal, Mick, so no need to apologise, thank you. I've never been on a BT panel and from what I've heard of the arduous nature of the experience I'm happy to avoid any possible risk that I ever might be. Much hard reading, stiff debates with fellow panel members, and dog's abuse from one or two of the unsuccessful candidates or their publishers.
I only learned about the 'original content' issue with the BT Award from my late buddy Peter Hodgkiss of the Ernest Press, who was greatly disappointed that Harold Drasdo's 'Ordinary Route', which he published, was judged ineligible. Strictly speaking, I don't know if the rules were explicit about prior publication at that time, but the headline rubric of the BT Memorial Award used to say clearly that it was for 'an original work which has made an outstanding contribution to mountain literature', and that was apparently interpreted to mean that content should be wholly original and not previously have been published in any other format. The Award strapline no longer includes the word 'original'. It may be that the omission of obviously worthy books like Ed Drummond's, Drasdo's, and - as, you say, Jim Perrin's - may have persuaded the Trustees that they should relax the criterion. Maybe some Trustee or former panel member can tell us.
Bob
There was nothing personal, Mick, so no need to apologise, thank you. I've never been on a BT panel and from what I've heard of the arduous nature of the experience I'm happy to avoid any possible risk that I ever might be. Much hard reading, stiff debates with fellow panel members, and dog's abuse from one or two of the unsuccessful candidates or their publishers.
I only learned about the 'original content' issue with the BT Award from my late buddy Peter Hodgkiss of the Ernest Press, who was greatly disappointed that Harold Drasdo's 'Ordinary Route', which he published, was judged ineligible. Strictly speaking, I don't know if the rules were explicit about prior publication at that time, but the headline rubric of the BT Memorial Award used to say clearly that it was for 'an original work which has made an outstanding contribution to mountain literature', and that was apparently interpreted to mean that content should be wholly original and not previously have been published in any other format. The Award strapline no longer includes the word 'original'. It may be that the omission of obviously worthy books like Ed Drummond's, Drasdo's, and - as, you say, Jim Perrin's - may have persuaded the Trustees that they should relax the criterion. Maybe some Trustee or former panel member can tell us.
Bob
In reply to Gordon Stainforth:
Then I'll stand corrected Gordon with open palms up and exclaim 'guilty as charged, sorry'. Just saying what I was advised and have now consulted that nice person on Google. Notwithsating (notwithstanding even), it beggars belief that a book that's already been panned around the globe for lack of 'literary merit' gets the nod. Please, and I mean this, am not 'bagging' the famous subject here and have had the pleasure of making his aquaintance. Top bloke, legend, blah, but ,,,
Have just head-butted the keyboard. Again! Anybody direct me to me bedroom please I think I'm tipsy again.
Back in the morning then, which is now. Afternoon then.
Help!
Ladies first thanks.
xx
> Well, the rules regarding this for 2016 are:
> '6. PUBLICITY
> Shortlisted Authors will be requested to attend ,,, Surely it's never been mandatory?
Then I'll stand corrected Gordon with open palms up and exclaim 'guilty as charged, sorry'. Just saying what I was advised and have now consulted that nice person on Google. Notwithsating (notwithstanding even), it beggars belief that a book that's already been panned around the globe for lack of 'literary merit' gets the nod. Please, and I mean this, am not 'bagging' the famous subject here and have had the pleasure of making his aquaintance. Top bloke, legend, blah, but ,,,
Have just head-butted the keyboard. Again! Anybody direct me to me bedroom please I think I'm tipsy again.
Back in the morning then, which is now. Afternoon then.
Help!
Ladies first thanks.
xx
3
In reply to planetmarshall:
>
No, fair enough, thanks.
> No, not really. From the 2016 rules:
>
> Given that the BT is an event as well as a prize, I don't think it's too much to ask that the shortlisted authors either show up or cooperate in some other way.
No, fair enough, thanks.
In reply to AP Melbourne:
No doubt it's contained in the 23 messages I've not read on this thread, however absolute travesty that Punks in the gym hasn't made it into the running.
Bloody marvellous book, worthy of the win in my opinion....not that they ever hold much merit my opinions!
Listened to Grimmers podcast with Glen Robbins on my way back from font yesterday, having read the book I had images in my head of a leather clad Aussie sat next to me chatting for an hour!
Sam
No doubt it's contained in the 23 messages I've not read on this thread, however absolute travesty that Punks in the gym hasn't made it into the running.
Bloody marvellous book, worthy of the win in my opinion....not that they ever hold much merit my opinions!
Listened to Grimmers podcast with Glen Robbins on my way back from font yesterday, having read the book I had images in my head of a leather clad Aussie sat next to me chatting for an hour!
Sam
1
In reply to Sheffield Sam:
Seriously? Touching The Void? The Villain? Freedom Climbers? Have you read any of these?
> ....not that they ever hold much merit my opinions!
Seriously? Touching The Void? The Villain? Freedom Climbers? Have you read any of these?
In reply to planetmarshall:
Yep, most of them in fact, you miss the point of my post. It was the merit of my opinions not the award I was questioning.
Yep, most of them in fact, you miss the point of my post. It was the merit of my opinions not the award I was questioning.
In reply to Sheffield Sam:
Yes my apologies, although a comma might have helped
> Yep, most of them in fact, you miss the point of my post.
Yes my apologies, although a comma might have helped
In reply to Bob Aitken:
I envy you having known Peter. He seemed a delightful man. He turned me down on the basis that nobody would be interested in reading me - which was meant kindly and I bore him no rancour. Quite the opposite.
As chance would have it, around this time I had two (non-mountaineering) books published. Both had lots of highly favourable reviews. One sold in five countries, the other in about 30.
That Peter had turned me down made absolutely no difference to my resolve to publicise 'The Ordinary Route'. Harold really was a remarkable man - the most intellectual person I've encountered in the mountaineering world.
http://footlesscrow.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/no-ordinary-man.html
Mick
> I only learned about the 'original content' issue with the BT Award from my late buddy Peter Hodgkiss of the Ernest Press, who was greatly disappointed that Harold Drasdo's 'Ordinary Route', which he published, was judged ineligible.
I envy you having known Peter. He seemed a delightful man. He turned me down on the basis that nobody would be interested in reading me - which was meant kindly and I bore him no rancour. Quite the opposite.
As chance would have it, around this time I had two (non-mountaineering) books published. Both had lots of highly favourable reviews. One sold in five countries, the other in about 30.
That Peter had turned me down made absolutely no difference to my resolve to publicise 'The Ordinary Route'. Harold really was a remarkable man - the most intellectual person I've encountered in the mountaineering world.
http://footlesscrow.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/no-ordinary-man.html
Mick
2
In reply to Gordon Stainforth:
Every year I try to get through the shortlist before the awards (so impressed by the judges managing to get through the long list).
I must admit I'm finding 'Wild Country' a bit hit and miss. Vallance seems terribly concerned with impressing the reader with his knowledge of fine wines and French literature, and his prosaic descriptions of people - "The attractive girl with the dark hair" is all a bit Dan Brown. Still, I'll stick with it.
> So far I've read most of Mark Vallance's 'Wild Country' and think it's a very strong contender.
Every year I try to get through the shortlist before the awards (so impressed by the judges managing to get through the long list).
I must admit I'm finding 'Wild Country' a bit hit and miss. Vallance seems terribly concerned with impressing the reader with his knowledge of fine wines and French literature, and his prosaic descriptions of people - "The attractive girl with the dark hair" is all a bit Dan Brown. Still, I'll stick with it.
In reply to AP Melbourne:
Actually, Andy, I probably feel much like you about the BT. I've felt quite/very hurt by them on about 4 occasions. The last time was very painful. Won't mention any names.
> Then I'll stand corrected Gordon with open palms up and exclaim 'guilty as charged, sorry'. Just saying what I was advised and have now consulted that nice person on Google. Notwithsating (notwithstanding even), it beggars belief that a book that's already been panned around the globe for lack of 'literary merit' gets the nod. Please, and I mean this, am not 'bagging' the famous subject here and have had the pleasure of making his aquaintance. Top bloke, legend, blah, but ,,,
> Have just head-butted the keyboard. Again! Anybody direct me to me bedroom please I think I'm tipsy again.
> Back in the morning then, which is now. Afternoon then.
> Help!
> Ladies first thanks.
> xx
Actually, Andy, I probably feel much like you about the BT. I've felt quite/very hurt by them on about 4 occasions. The last time was very painful. Won't mention any names.
1
In reply to AP Melbourne:
Well if it's any consolation I shall make an effort to obtain a copy and read it while ignoring the rest!
Well if it's any consolation I shall make an effort to obtain a copy and read it while ignoring the rest!
1
In reply to Gordon Stainforth:
Cheers Gordon, appreciate the sentiment and am empathetic - or is that just pathetic?
Am Seriously, Honestly, Truly slightly disappointed as feel I've let Andy & Ann Boorman down. AB put in a tireless, 14 month effort into 'tidying up' my words with full backing of wife Ann. Taught me the difference between (parenthesis) and [brackets] and 'its' and 'it's' and corrected my smelling and grammer ..
As Mick (Ward) and others have commented, it's (it's, see) all subjective but the absolute deluge of emails I've received from around the globe in the past week have lifted my spirits so very, very much. Thanks to everyone who's taken the trouble.
I don't think Anyone writes a climbing book to make money really, that isn't the motivation and there are no 'sour grapes' in my house.
Best wishes to the winner. I mean that Genuinely.
Cheers,
AP.
> Actually, Andy, I probably feel much like you about the BT. I've felt quite/very hurt by them on about 4 occasions. The last time was very painful. Won't mention any names.
Cheers Gordon, appreciate the sentiment and am empathetic - or is that just pathetic?
Am Seriously, Honestly, Truly slightly disappointed as feel I've let Andy & Ann Boorman down. AB put in a tireless, 14 month effort into 'tidying up' my words with full backing of wife Ann. Taught me the difference between (parenthesis) and [brackets] and 'its' and 'it's' and corrected my smelling and grammer ..
As Mick (Ward) and others have commented, it's (it's, see) all subjective but the absolute deluge of emails I've received from around the globe in the past week have lifted my spirits so very, very much. Thanks to everyone who's taken the trouble.
I don't think Anyone writes a climbing book to make money really, that isn't the motivation and there are no 'sour grapes' in my house.
Best wishes to the winner. I mean that Genuinely.
Cheers,
AP.
3
In reply to AP Melbourne:
Having climbed a couple of times with Andy Boorman, my reading of him is that he's a very decent, altruistic guy who would have wanted to help you in any way he could. I'm sure he's disappointed not by you but for you. Literary judgements are... literary judgements. As with Gordon, I've had some 'interesting' experiences (though not thankfully with the BT).
The bottom line about writing is this: what matters most is what your writing gives to your readers. Everything else is... everything else. Your deluge of emails is true literary gold - it's saying that the pair of you did something which mattered.
Andy, if I had the choice between winning an award and writing a classic - well, it wouldn't be much of a choice!
Mick
Having climbed a couple of times with Andy Boorman, my reading of him is that he's a very decent, altruistic guy who would have wanted to help you in any way he could. I'm sure he's disappointed not by you but for you. Literary judgements are... literary judgements. As with Gordon, I've had some 'interesting' experiences (though not thankfully with the BT).
The bottom line about writing is this: what matters most is what your writing gives to your readers. Everything else is... everything else. Your deluge of emails is true literary gold - it's saying that the pair of you did something which mattered.
Andy, if I had the choice between winning an award and writing a classic - well, it wouldn't be much of a choice!
Mick
3
In reply to AP Melbourne:
Hi Andy,
There are a bunch of brilliant (auto)biographies that document the golden age of climbing in the 80s and 90s. However there are only 2 that I've re-read. One is yours because apart from being well written, for me it captures what it was like to be in and around that Sheffield-Llandudno-Llanberis nexus back then. At least one of your old climbing partners was worried about how 'honest' a depiction you were going to give pre-publication!
I've read one of the shortlisted books, and on the basis of that, for what it's worth, yours should have been up there. My guess is there's plenty of material for vol 2. My AP moment recently was a chat with an old (female) friend on Linkedin who, mid reminiscence asked if I knew what happened to the good looking skinny guy at one of the Albany Road parties. I pointed her to your book, and later got the reply that you need to put contact details in the next edition. Some things never change.
Paul
Hi Andy,
There are a bunch of brilliant (auto)biographies that document the golden age of climbing in the 80s and 90s. However there are only 2 that I've re-read. One is yours because apart from being well written, for me it captures what it was like to be in and around that Sheffield-Llandudno-Llanberis nexus back then. At least one of your old climbing partners was worried about how 'honest' a depiction you were going to give pre-publication!
I've read one of the shortlisted books, and on the basis of that, for what it's worth, yours should have been up there. My guess is there's plenty of material for vol 2. My AP moment recently was a chat with an old (female) friend on Linkedin who, mid reminiscence asked if I knew what happened to the good looking skinny guy at one of the Albany Road parties. I pointed her to your book, and later got the reply that you need to put contact details in the next edition. Some things never change.
Paul
3
In reply to paul_in_cumbria:
Ah Paul, kind words indeed, cheers mate. Those Albany Rd parties ... ha! Don't they (apropos the 60's) say if you can remember them then you weren't there? I could simply not stand at my last one there and had daftly left the van you serviced outside. So drove home. Erratically. Lights off so as not to draw attention. I remember going straight through red lights. Not happy with myself about that one and to this day have Never, ever, driven less than point zero.
Book awards: Hey, no probs here, stiff competion this year apparently so congrats to the winner.
Vol 2 has been suggested ,,, down to whether folk want more tales of Debauchery really (Not the climb on High Tor - the invite-only swingers' parties Deb ran). May even drop in a few scary first acsent tales to spice things up a bit and share some goss ,, Ha!
Paperback, affordable, ya know.
Cheers,
And. x
> Hi Andy,
> There are a bunch of brilliant (auto)biographies that document the golden age of climbing in the 80s and 90s. However there are only 2 that I've re-read. One is yours because apart from being well written, for me it captures what it was like to be in and around that Sheffield-Llandudno-Llanberis nexus back then. At least one of your old climbing partners was worried about how 'honest' a depiction you were going to give pre-publication!
> I've read one of the shortlisted books, and on the basis of that, for what it's worth, yours should have been up there. My guess is there's plenty of material for vol 2....
> Paul
> Paul
Ah Paul, kind words indeed, cheers mate. Those Albany Rd parties ... ha! Don't they (apropos the 60's) say if you can remember them then you weren't there? I could simply not stand at my last one there and had daftly left the van you serviced outside. So drove home. Erratically. Lights off so as not to draw attention. I remember going straight through red lights. Not happy with myself about that one and to this day have Never, ever, driven less than point zero.
Book awards: Hey, no probs here, stiff competion this year apparently so congrats to the winner.
Vol 2 has been suggested ,,, down to whether folk want more tales of Debauchery really (Not the climb on High Tor - the invite-only swingers' parties Deb ran). May even drop in a few scary first acsent tales to spice things up a bit and share some goss ,, Ha!
Paperback, affordable, ya know.
Cheers,
And. x
In reply to Mick Ward:
Oh stop it Michael, Please, you're making me blush.
Yes, of course its important that your readers - who pay cold, hard cash whilst their kids go without food or new school shoes (let's discount the shoplifters - I still get my one pound fifty p) to support struggling authors but 'Punk' wouldn't've happened without Andy & Ann's support, advice and love. There's One, single grammatical error and a couple of misplaced apostrohpies. Answers on the back of a fifty wins a free copy!
More poigniantly though Mick, and other caring posters, I've already won a far bigger prize: Was Literally suicidal for a while there but stuck with it and the pain subsided ,,, somewhat, so I wrote a book and had the photos to prove it.
Writing was/is cathartic, cleansing, a bit of an ego trip blah, But It Saved My Life.
Cheers & love from down here.
A. xx
> Having climbed a couple of times with Andy Boorman, my reading of him is that he's a very decent, altruistic guy who would have wanted to help you in any way he could. I'm sure he's disappointed not by you but for you. Literary judgements are... literary judgements. As with Gordon, I've had some 'interesting' experiences (though not thankfully with the BT).
> The bottom line about writing is this: what matters most is what your writing gives to your readers. Everything else is... everything else. Your deluge of emails is true literary gold - it's saying that the pair of you did something which mattered.
> Andy, if I had the choice between winning an award and writing a classic - well, it wouldn't be much of a choice!
> Mick
Oh stop it Michael, Please, you're making me blush.
Yes, of course its important that your readers - who pay cold, hard cash whilst their kids go without food or new school shoes (let's discount the shoplifters - I still get my one pound fifty p) to support struggling authors but 'Punk' wouldn't've happened without Andy & Ann's support, advice and love. There's One, single grammatical error and a couple of misplaced apostrohpies. Answers on the back of a fifty wins a free copy!
More poigniantly though Mick, and other caring posters, I've already won a far bigger prize: Was Literally suicidal for a while there but stuck with it and the pain subsided ,,, somewhat, so I wrote a book and had the photos to prove it.
Writing was/is cathartic, cleansing, a bit of an ego trip blah, But It Saved My Life.
Cheers & love from down here.
A. xx
1
In reply to AP Melbourne:
In reply to AP Melbourne:
Well, there was the one where the floor (my bedroom) collapsed, and the (many) dancers ended up in the cellar. Jon Stevenson also promised to arrange catering for one of them which turned out to be the best party of the lot. Jon had persuaded the guy with the kebab van outside The Leadmill to come over when the club shut. Genius!
The one where Joe Simpson decided to 'liven up' the bonfire (which people were taking turns to jump through on a moped via a couple of plywood ramps). Anyhow, the flames shot back towards the gallon can which Joe instinctively threw away, which set fire to the whole of the neighbours fence. This was met with delight by the neighbour who started ripping his kitchen out (4am) and passing it over for the bonfire. Around 5 or 6am a bunch of us headed out to Burbage for some bouldering. Get back to Albany Road. Nothing.
A television, and nothing. They burned my bed. No sofa. Nothing left at all. Joe's stuff was alright in the attic, but otherwise, nothing.
Those were the days.
Cheers
Paul
In reply to AP Melbourne:
> Ah Paul, kind words indeed, cheers mate. Those Albany Rd parties ... ha! Don't they (apropos the 60's) say if you can remember them then you weren't there? I could simply not stand at my last one there and had daftly left the van you serviced outside. So drove home. Erratically. Lights off so as not to draw attention. I remember going straight through red lights. Not happy with myself about that one and to this day have Never, ever, driven less than point zero.
Well, there was the one where the floor (my bedroom) collapsed, and the (many) dancers ended up in the cellar. Jon Stevenson also promised to arrange catering for one of them which turned out to be the best party of the lot. Jon had persuaded the guy with the kebab van outside The Leadmill to come over when the club shut. Genius!
The one where Joe Simpson decided to 'liven up' the bonfire (which people were taking turns to jump through on a moped via a couple of plywood ramps). Anyhow, the flames shot back towards the gallon can which Joe instinctively threw away, which set fire to the whole of the neighbours fence. This was met with delight by the neighbour who started ripping his kitchen out (4am) and passing it over for the bonfire. Around 5 or 6am a bunch of us headed out to Burbage for some bouldering. Get back to Albany Road. Nothing.
A television, and nothing. They burned my bed. No sofa. Nothing left at all. Joe's stuff was alright in the attic, but otherwise, nothing.
Those were the days.
Cheers
Paul
1
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...