As judges of the Gratiaen prize, we were faced, as it were, with a bountiful fruit-bearing tree, which, having fed of the fertile soil of the land, having drunk daily the opulent ocean breeze, bore not one, but an astounding variety of fruit. How, of these 56 succulent fruit, no two of which resembled each other, could we choose five?

We had the full range of offerings before us, as our Chairperson has explained: prose and poetry, theatre, memoirs and autobiographies. As my colleague Dr. Wickremasinghe has elaborated, we made our way thoughtfully through the submissions, establishing certain criteria while also allowing ourselves the space and freedom to simply have our spirits moved by what we read and the realms they revealed.

In effect, then, we followed the guidelines established in the fourteenth century so meticulously (and so typically irreverently!) by my most beloved Sufi Poet, Hafiz:

(tr Daniel Landinsky, p. 19 the subject tonight is love)

We considered, each of us, with our distinct sensibilities, the effect each submission had on us. Ultimately, we moved towards those which did indeed succeed in doing "all of the above": which fulfilled, and, more importantly, transcended the categories and guidelines we had established.

We poured our individual insights – which often diverged quite widely – into the bowl of our collective judgment. In the course of long conversations over long distance telephone lines, we were able to move over the past three months from points of dissension to the final consensus on the five finalists we will unveil to you today. We also often found that we were able to review and reappraise our initial judgment based on the insistence of one member of our panel of judges; we were able to discover passion in a work we might first have found tepid, or to relinquish a piece we preferred based on the critical literary analysis of our co-panelists. This consensus which we will share with you today then is the result of close consideration of each text; critical appraisal based on our many criteria, first individual and then joint; lively interchange of our disparate analyses; and some initially grudging but ultimately good natured compromise -- without diluting our criteria or lowering the Gratiaen’s standards.

What emerged were also some critically constructive observations which we would wish to bring to the attention of all 56 applicants as well as all future applicants.

* Seek dispassionate distance from your work and make unemotional decisions on what is truly worth submitting to rigorous review. Don’t be tempted to submit your life’s entire repertory. In some cases, a brilliant submission was disqualified because alongside some shining prose or gems of poetry was work of inferior quality that did not make the grade.

* Do not shy away from being politically engaged and revealing your ethics in your work, but be rigorous about avoiding propaganda or dogma. We appreciated authors and poets who were able to weave deftly into their work issues of war, division, racism, sexism and homophobia without losing sight of their craft, and without instrumentalizing literature. We also particularly appreciated those writers who were able to combine various themes rather than work a single issue into the ground.

* Engage, by all means, with social subjects - for all good art does directly or indirectly engage with the time and space in which it is set - but avoid being overly sentimental. There were a couple of works we considered closely for their passionate engagement with burning social issues, but we found that those that avoided melodrama and preferred understated poignancy were more effective.

* Humour? I say this flippantly, but in a rich and varied bag of submissions, humour was perhaps the only element in short supply. Humour, we know, can be effective even in dealing with themes of great sobriety, when well calibrated and sparingly or adeptly used. I hope that next year’s judges will have more laughs – and not just at each other’s expense!

* TRIPLE-check your work before submission. However great your literary mastery and however compelling your content, a professional clean and correct presentation of your work is essential.

o double check every single page; get a friend’s help.

o ensure your work has been edited, copy edited and proof read by you and a professional editor or skilled amateur;

o Include a table of contents and check that it is correct;

o Number your pages – and do so accurately!

Most submissions had been painstakingly and meticulously prepared. However a few were sloppy and unprofessionally presented. In rare cases, the merit of the work enabled us to overlook such weaknesses; in others, the shoddiness, unfortunately, overshadowed other attributes of the work. There was at least one case where an author who had obvious literary flair had submitted a work that had so many grammatical errors and typos that we could not short list it.

Within moments you will know the five finalists. But before we reveal those names to you, we wish you to know how many of your submissions gave us pause, as they touched our minds, bodies or souls. We wish to pay tribute to the enduring richness and diversity of creative writing in Sri Lanka. While 51 submitted entries did not ultimately make it on our short list this year, we congratulate and wish to encourage all those who submitted their works this year. We express our hope that each successive year sees an even wider and more diverse range of submissions of creative writing for the Gratiaen Award.

In closing I wish to express how delighted I am to have the privilege of serving on this distinguished jury, and to thank the Gratiaen Trust for according me this honour. I am deeply disappointed that I cannot be with you in person today, for these are the moments – where we pay tribute to creativity and artistic talent – I cherished most in my time in Sri Lanka.

This day is particularly poignant for me, as it is exactly two months ago today – on 7 February 2008 - that I had to leave Sri Lanka prematurely, and, with it, the multitude of people who had, much like the submissions to this award, touched my heart, mind, and soul. Here, with 56 of this year’s contestants, and so many more accomplished writers in the room, I can reiterate indubitably that the feature that most moved me about Sri Lanka, and that I shall miss abidingly, is the undiminished creativity and vitality of its inhabitants. Having worked in so many countries torn apart by war, I marvel in Sri Lanka at how you turn inexorably today -- as you have through decades of conflict and centuries of history -- to prose and poetry, to music and theatre, to every form of creative expression. I marvel at how you unfailingly find words and notes and gestures that capture the ethos of your unique time and space; that transmute and transcend the violence of your generation.

No ‘leaving present’ could have been more meaningful to me than to remain on this distinguished jury despite my geographical estrangement from the island, and to carry with me across the oceans your creative submissions.

I thank the Gratiaen Trust for placing their confidence in me, for appointing me to serve on this jury, and for so kindly insisting that I remain on it. And I so warmly appreciate the camaraderie and support of my fellow judges, in bearing with me despite the distance.

I look forward most warmly to the next three weeks of deliberation and to the final selection of the winner on 26 April 2008. Meanwhile, I convey my congratulations to the five short listed applicants, my heartfelt appreciation and encouragement to all 56 applicants, and my warmest encouragement to the many thousand more latent talents in Sri Lanka.

Let your pens never run dry, and your voices never fall silent!