3 Quarks Daily Arts and Literature Blogging Prize

The fine site 3 Quarks Daily is once again running its Arts and Literature blogging contest, to be judged this year by blogger, essayist, novelist, and teacher Laila Lalami. I think these contests are a great way to draw attention to the engaged, passionate, articulate writing to be found in blogs: contrary to the whingeing of the nattering naysayers, I think there’s far more to celebrate than to lament in the wonderfully open, curious, diverse and generous conversation about books that the internet has enabled. I was truly honored to be among the finalists in last year’s competition, judged by Robert Pinsky, for my review of Daniel Mendelsohn’s remarkable book The Lost (yes, there’s some irony there, as he seems to be the Naysayer-in-Chief). I encourage everyone to think about posts they think represent the best of arts and literature blogging (whether their own or someone else’s), to post a nomination at 3QD, and then to spend some time browsing through the other nominations, which I’m sure will be full of treasures.

7 Comments to 3 Quarks Daily Arts and Literature Blogging Prize

  1. February 23, 2011 at 6:03 pm | Permalink

    All right, done. Thanks for the notice.

  2. February 23, 2011 at 11:30 pm | Permalink

    I have one post on Bookphilia I’m entirely proud of (Book 2, Romola) and I posted it one year and one week ago, and so it’s not eligible. Ah, well! If I ever read a book that interests me that intensely again, perhaps I’ll write something as good. :)

    Rohan: You’ve posted so many I would nominate that I can’t decide but I will keep looking. Because your blog deserves the recognition.

  3. February 24, 2011 at 6:13 am | Permalink

    I knew nothing about this, so thanks for pointing me in the right direction. What a wonderful way to meet new bloggers.

  4. February 24, 2011 at 6:21 am | Permalink

    Thanks for all your generous words, Rohan, and for sending quality nominations our way!

    Best wishes,

    Abbas

  5. Rohan's Gravatar Rohan
    February 24, 2011 at 9:02 am | Permalink

    Colleen: Too bad! A near miss on such a smart post, and one that represents a book hardly likely to be reviewed by any other nominee. Thanks for your encouragement! I had resolved to nominate litlove’s excellent post on Camus (from yesterday, just in time!) but I see she has beat me to it. So I think I’ll stop feeling awkward about a self-nomination and put forward one of my own posts. But which one? I am partial to my review of Lynne Sharon Schwartz’s Leaving Brooklyn, because I though the book was so remarkable and really deserves continuing attention. But I was quite happy with my reviews of Hilary Mantel’s A Place of Greater Safety and Byatt’s The Children’s Book too. I think I’ll go with Leaving Brooklyn, since that review is also pretty characteristic of what I do here–but if there’s another one you think is better, I’d be proud if you put it forward.

    Annie: Yes, already there are several impressive pieces highlighted that I would not otherwise have discovered.

    Abbas: Looks like you’ll have a good competition on your hands! Laila Lalami is a great choice for judge, too. I have long read her blog and essays, and really appreciated Hope and Other Dangerous Pursuits when I read it last summer.

  6. February 24, 2011 at 10:58 am | Permalink

    I am particularly fond of your post on Byatt’s The Children’s Book but I’d trust your own judgment on this one. :)

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Subscribe

Blog Archive

Categories

Currently Reading


goodreads.com

Comments Policy

Comments that contribute civilly and constructively to discussion of the topics raised on this blog, from any point of view, are welcome. Comments that are not civil or constructive will be deleted.

All entries copyright Rohan Maitzen. If you use material from this blog, please give proper credit to the author.