The Mookse and the Gripes discussion

Any thoughts about Sarah Jessica Parker being a judge for the 2025 Booker? I have several thoughts, none of them particularly positive. Perhaps it’s too snarky to say, “Stay in your lane,” but, really? REALLY? The Booker? To me, she is not serious enough for the Booker. Maybe for one of the more mainstream or middlebrow prizes. I’m eager to hear what others think.

I disagree. The Booker has always included people from various artistic fields, including actors and actresses. She is even more involved in the literary world than judges of the past. A lot of people seem to reduce her to the role she has played and I don't think that's fair.

If you read back through the 2025 Booker Discussion thread to when the judges were announced, you can see some people's reactions. If I recall correctly, the consensus was that it is a strong panel of judges, including SJP.

As mentioned has been discussed on the Booker thread so may be better to take over there - and SJP done have a strong literary foundation and seems a good pick to me.

Although the Booker is a mainstream middlebrow prize isn’t it?- if anything I wonder if SJP is a bit too sophisticated for it!

:-)

I must admit to not really knowing who she is - but from her Instagram site at least she reads and even publishes fiction - the judges I do not like are the ones who say things like “I normally only read non fiction” or “I mainly read classics”. We have had chairs like that in recent years.

If judges are not (as would be my preference) restricted to reviewers, writers, bloggers but to wider fields - she seems a more suitable choice than most recent judges.

I've seen a couple of interviews with SJP where she talks very modestly about her involvement in publishing and I find her genuine. The NY Times has an interview with her about being a judge. It's probably behind a paywall, but they (used to?) offer a few free articles a month. Here's a couple of answers from it:

Why do you say you’re unqualified? You’re a publisher of Booker-style fiction.

I think of judges as academics, learned, experienced in ways I’m just not. I didn’t pursue higher education. I don’t have any degrees. I separate my devotion to reading from those who can talk about it, criticize it, make judgments, have feelings that are worthy of public discourse. All those ideas seem anathema to my relationship to books. Even when I went into publishing, I felt very nervous about people taking me seriously. I felt like an interloper, and that I was constantly in a position of having to prove myself.

So to be a judge on the Booker, which is the greatest literary award bestowed — it felt very daunting.

How will you get over that feeling?

I’m just going to listen a lot. That’s the way I’ve probably created a career outside of acting: just being surrounded by people who are expert and listening, listening, listening.

And I’m assuming that all of the judges are going to be kind and excited, and also feel the weight of these conversations. We’re talking about people’s work. I want to be really thoughtful.

By contrast one of the other judges has said they look for plot first. Which to me is almost disqualifying. The Booker I think purports to be a prize for literary fiction and if that means anything, and explains why say Richard Osman doesn’t win every year, I’d say that’s fiction where plot is subordinated to ideas, language, form and (I’ll add grudgingly) character.

Ha! Why grudgingly about character?

Well, everyone has convinced me that I’m being too hard on SJP.

We may all change our mind when we see the longlist.

Grudgingly as while character is more important than plot, it ranks well behind literary form for me in what I look for in a book. To the plot or character question, my answer is ideally neither.