Long time, no see; lovely to see you there–and that gown is gorgeous; I can’t imagine the amount of work finishing dresses for yourself and others on deadline must have been.
I’m going to make a point of checking in here more regularly; looking forward to the next one.
]]>Thank you, Bronwyn. I knew they had misquoted you. Have to love the press ! I know once the task force is done they intend to post the stats. Yes, there are some amazing diverse authors who write historical romance who should have entered but perhaps did not for that very reason. It will take time and proof to convince them otherwise. I will be interested to see the stats. Like you, I had a wonderfully diverse group of entries in the books I judged and they were, for the most part, wonderfully written. A couple even made it into the finals and one of my top picks won her category which pleased me and made me feel like I might have done a good job in judging my entries. It is a complex and difficult situation and I hope in time improvements can be made to make certain this never happens again. Do take care !
]]>Hi Louisa. Thanks for letting me know about the PR article misquoting me. I’ve sent in a correction. Yes, I’m hoping that the RWA review of the awards process looks at the proportion of diverse entries as well as the proportions of finalists in each category. However, there are many authors of color and diverse lives who write historicals, and given that entry was free and open to non-RWA members from the outset, my feeling in that there should have been a reasonable proportion of entries in the category – as I mention in my post, I certainly had a good percentage of diverse entries in my packets in other categories. And if they didn’t enter, then the question must be asked, why not? Did they not believe that their books would be judged fairly? It’s such a complex and difficult situation, and I’m so sorry that the controversy has marred the pleasure you should take in winning your category. Thinking of you.
]]>