Pretty interesting post. I guess I'm surprised that it's just like 5 people doing most of it and the most complex structure is still just 2 stages usually (Pulitzer: 5 judges send 3 books to a special council to pick a winner). It makes me think you probably get as much value from following a few specific critics as you would from following these prizes

I wonder how the reviewers feel when authors like Ursula K. Le Guin refuse awards

>1) Not every judge can look at every single book; and 2) When a judge realizes they don’t love a book, they can put it down.

There is room for LLMs to disrupt book judging by being able to read every single book.

Good post which basically states the f*cking obvious about how any "prize" or "winner" of any subjective category works.

Related read; a first hand account by one of the 2012 Pulitzer jury members giving a good account of the process and attempting to explain why no literature prize was awarded that year.

https://www.newyorker.com/books/page-turner/letter-from-the-...