Literary awards are a recognition and honor of the creativity within writers. They provide encouragement, motivation, and energy for them to grow further. Some people, who neither wish others to grow nor are capable of encouraging them, tend to criticize these awards.

Recently, a senior writer, who has received many awards over decades, criticized the awards received by the younger generation, saying, “What kind of awards are these? Just a shawl, a memonto , and they call it a national award.” But when we were young, even receiving a pencil as a prize brought immense joy. That encouragement became the foundation for our gradual growth.

The Distinction of the Central Sahitya Akademi Award

However, because of its wide recognition, the Central Sahitya Akademi Award is often considered a certificate of lifetime achievement, which leads to many criticisms. Some argue that these awards are not measures of talent at all, but measures of influence, lobbying, and personal connections between selectors and awardees.

At the same time, we should not forget that they also stand as a recognition of continuous literary service. The award given to Nandini Sidda Reddy in Telugu for his poetry “ Animesha” is a recognition of his sustained literary contribution and social awareness. Heartfelt congratulations to him.

Broad-Based Efforts of the Sahitya Akademi

On this occasion, a shortlist of ten writers was also announced, along with the names of the jury members. This method is very beneficial. By announcing awards and shortlists in 24 languages, we get to know at least to some extent what kind of literature is being produced in different languages in Indian languages.
 
If the jury also explains the criteria behind their selections, it would help build a better understanding of literature across languages in the country.

Multiple Perspectives on Shortlisted Works

As usual, discussions began on Facebook regarding the Telugu shortlist. Through such discussions, many new perspectives emerge.

Some pointed out that there were no works from Rayalaseema in the shortlist. Others argued whether awards always favor certain groups. Some noted that not even a single woman’s book was included. Others observed the absence of Dalit writers. Some questioned whether short stories and novels are always undervalued.

One writer mentioned that his novel had been shortlisted for three consecutive years and felt that should have been considered more seriously.

The Perspective of Award Selection

All these viewpoints show how many angles must be considered in selecting awards. As early as in 1998, while selecting stories for a Karimnagar district anthology, we experienced  these issues. If there was no Dalit writer, we included stories depicting Dalit lives to maintain balance.

On Jury Selection and Bias

As one participant in a discussion remarked: “We gave awards impartially. If proven otherwise, we are ready to cancel them.”

But the question is not cancellation. The choice of jury itself reflects preferences and inclinations. The selection naturally follows those preferences. For instance, I was never invited to serve as a jury member for certain awards. That itself indicates that there was no intention to include my preferences or choices.

The Distinctiveness of Vishala Sahiti Awards

In contrast, I gave Vishala Sahiti Awards independently to those whom I personally appreciated, without depending on others. Since 1998, I have given awards to hundreds of writers, without limiting the number. Setting a limit would mean undervaluing other writers of the same period. Many awardees have gone on to achieve national recognition and receive prestigious awards.

Can Jury Members Be Truly Impartial?

It is well known that jury members often use such opportunities to promote those they prefer. Therefore, even when I take suggestions, I make the final decision myself. Even in the Central Sahitya Akademi, the selection of jury members reflects underlying preferences. About 25 years ago, I was invited twice as a jury member. After seeing the shortlist, I could understand whom they intended to award.

Limitations of Awards vs. Merit

A lack of award does not mean lack of merit. For example, Dasarathi Rangacharya did not receive the Sahitya Akademi Award. Can we say he was not a great writer?
If IAS selections are made up to rank 1000, can we say rank 1001 is unworthy? If the cutoff were extended, that candidate would also qualify. Similarly, awards are limited by numbers, not by merit.

Need for Broader Recognition

If, like Telugu University, awards are given in multiple categories and genres every year, such narrow competition can be avoided. The central institutions have the resources to do so. Instead of conflicts and criticism, efforts should be directed toward expanding recognition.

On Specific Works

Among novels, Appala Naidu’s “Bahula” deserves recognition at the level of Jnanpith or Saraswati Samman. In literary criticism, Adepu Lakshmipathi’s “Dik Chakra” is highly deserving and has already received several private awards. However, many works escape our notice. Even my own 2023 story collection “Kotha Korikalu” may not have reached many readers. If it had, it might also have been shortlisted. Every writer feels this way.

Need for Wider Participation

Therefore, to ensure greater literary and social justice, selection processes should be more like the Oscars, Nobel Prize, or Booker Prize, involving broader participation and voting from readers, critics, and scholars.     Without active participation, meaningful discussions cannot take place.

Recognition for Shortlisted Works

Shortlisted works should also receive wide publicity and recognition. In many countries, shortlisted books gain popularity equal to award-winning ones. Jury members should publicly explain their views on shortlisted works. This will encourage discussion, ensure accountability, increase transparency, and lead to more careful selections.