The show must - and will - go on...

Dear partners in crime.
I write this in English in the hope that I will be able to express myself more clearly and so be in less danger of being misunderstood, as this is an important message for all of us, who are concerned about SKS's future. It's a message I do not want to write, but I have to. Anything else is simply not an option, and believe me, I've looked at it from every angle, hoping to find a way to wriggle out of it and pass the buck to someone else. So here goes:

This year, the Glass key will be awarded for the 14th time. For the first time in SKS's history, a nominated work has been rejected as a valid candidate for the Glass Key. Yes indeed, rejected. I am referring to the norwegian tv-manuscript "Svarte penger, hvite lögner" which Riverton klubben awarded with its Golden revolver and subsequently sent in as its contender for the Glass Key.
Before this was done, a representative of Rivertonklubben, Mariann Fugelsö Nilssen, sent a preliminary query (late february) to Anton Koch Nielsen, who then forwarded it to Anders Hammarqvist and myself, as to the feasibility of nominating a tv-manuscript.
Anders and Anton responded, guardedly, that this might possibly be considered, but both stressed that the main rule was, and should remain - at least until otherwise decided on an AGM, that the nominated literary work should be a book, according to the SKS-rules, or at least be available as a printed document. Neither of them gave a definitive answer at that point, and both voiced doubts as to whether this could be done without changing the rules - and that, of course, could not be done in time for this years Glass Key awards, but only at the AGM two days later.
Before I got my answer out, Mariann wrote back, thanking Anders and Anton for their input, and interpreted their answers, quite correctly, as to mean that there was a possibility ("en liten mulighet") for the manuscript being admitted into the race. This was on february the 24th.
As soon as I read this, I sent a reply to Mariann, Anton and Anders, as follows:

"Jeg må sige, at selv om jeg er meget glad for enhver ny, spænnende nordisk krimiserie på tv, så har jeg mange tvivl om at det kan aksepteres som kandidat til Glasnöglen, og tvivler endnu mere på at det kan lade sig göre denne gangen, sådan uden videre diskussion. Anton og Anders, det ville være meget godt hvis I kunne tage det op - om ikke andet end uformelt - med jeres kollegaer, og få frem hvad de synes om dette. Jeg vil göre det samme her på Island - uden at röbe noget om at det handler om den evtl. norske Riverton-prisen naturligvis - og bede vores vize-presidenter i Norge og Finnland om det også.
Spörgsmålerne er jo to og vi må forsöge at få frem et klart svar til begge to:
1. Kan - og vil - SKS akseptere filme, tv-serier, hörspil o.s.v. som kandidater til Glasnöglen? Det ville, mener jeg i det mindste, ikke bare være en "teknisk" ændring på SKS "stadgar" men en ret stor ændring på SKS's principier. Er glasnöglen en literaturpris, eller er den noget andet (og mere måske?)
2. Selv om vi alle skulle være enige om at vi gerne vil ændre SKS's vedtægter så at vi i fremtiden også aksepterer filme, hörspil o.s.v. som Glasnögle-kandidater, kan vi så også göre det nu i år, uden at diskutere og bestemme det formelt på SKS-årsmöde?

Personligt tror jeg, desværre, at svaret til spörgsmål nr. 2 må være "nej", uanset hvordan vi svarer på det förste spörgsmål. Det bliver i hvert fald tema i Köbenhavn i maj."

This, too, was sent on february 24th, well before the norwegian candidate for the Glass key - or the Golden revolver - was announced. I consequently sent out a query to Kristinn Kristinsson and Taavi Soininvaara, the SKS-vice presidents in Iceland and Finnland.

On tuesday, march 1st, I received the following message from Anton Koch Nielsen, which was also sent til Anders Hammarqvist and Mariann Fugelsö Nilssen:


"Kære Ævar Ørn
Neden for Bo Taos bemærkninger - som blankt afviser det norske ønske. Det tredje danske jurymedlem (Kirsten Holst) er vistnok bortrejst for tiden.
Jeg er mest enig med Bo. Vi må (som jeg skrev i mit første svar) stå fast på, at det, der skal bedømmes, er en trykt tekst. En roman, en novellesamling eller måske et trykt drama. Men ikke noget i andre medier. (Og hvis man ville præsentere en film som "værk", hvem skulle så i givet fald have prisen? Instruktøren? Producenten? Hovedrolleindehaveren? Drejebogsforfatteren? - allerede det spørgsmål viser vist, at det er en farlig vej)
Vennehilsen
A K-N

[...]
Emne: Re: Film som Glæasnoeglekandidat?
Kære Anton. Her gælder ingen norsk lillemor! Og som
sædvanlig er jeg fundamentalisten i selskabet! Prisen
er en LITTERÆR PRIS og selv et filmmanus er på grænsen
i og med at filmmanuskriptet hører ind under filmkunst
og ikke litteratur i gængs forstand. Så min holdning
er klar - her må vi danskere stå fast og afvise med
mindre der er tale om fundatsændring. Hvis vi lader en
film glide igennem er vi på et skråplan også som pris
i internationalle sammenhænge. Hvem siger f. eks. at
vi er de rette til at vurdere en film på lødig vis?
Nej - og atter nej, de er gale de nordmænd. ' Og dette
års Oscar går til Henrik Ibsen for Et dukkehjem! Kh Bo [Tao Michaëlis]"

An hour and a half later, Anton, myself and Mariann received this message from Anders Hammarqvist:

"Kära vänner, [...] Jag kan konstatera att min beredvillighet att diskutera en *eventuell* utökning av kandidatunderlaget inte delas av någon annan i den svenska juryn.
Och efter att ha tagit del av Bo Taos och Antons invändningar, som jag faktiskt instämmer i, står det klart att det inte finns underlag för annat än att stå fast vid att Glasnyckeln är ett litterärt pris.
Marika [Hemmel, member of the Swedish jury] nämnde att *om* man ville belöna audio/video skulle man behöva instifta ett särskilt pris för det. Och förmodligen även en särskild jury. Det känns varken önskvärt eller realistiskt."

At this point, I - and perhaps others as well - made the big mistake of thinking that this was enough, and I didn't bother to press Kristinn and Taavi to give their views on this matter, nor did I forward Taavis - and other finnish SKS-members - views regarding this question to the others when it came, on march 4th:

"On your question on should tv-series be accepted to be nominated for the Glasskey: the question didn't arouse any strong feelings here, though it seems clear that books should be favoured. I'm sure we can reach a decision after discussing this at the meeting."

Although quite open minded at this point in time, this message clearly indicates that at least this time around, a tv-manuscript is seen as unfit for nomination by the Suomen Dekkariseura, whatever happens in the future - after a discussion on the AGM. But, as I said, I failed to forward this message to the others, in the mistaken belief that it would already be abundantly clear to Rivertonklubben that a tv-manuscript would not be accepted as a candidate for the Glass key.

Then nothing happened for three weeks. On march 27th, however, Rivertonklubben announces that the authors of the manuscript for the tv-series "Svarte penger, hvite lögn" have not only been awarded the Golden revolver - which, of course, is their undisputed priority to do - but also nominated for the Glass key on Norways behalf.
This prompted me to send the following letter - after a few days of wondering how to respond - to Mariann Fugelsö Nilssen, Kristinn Kristjánsson, Anton Koch Nielsen, Taavi Soininvaara and Anders Hammarqvist:

"Hej alle sammen.
Jeg föler mig ikke rigtigt - hvad hedder det på dansk? "befogad" er det svenske ordet, tror jeg (eller befogat?), at ta' stillning til dette spörgsmålet, fordi jeg er selv blandt kandidaterne for glasnöglen denne gangen, men spörgsmålet må stilles alligevel:
Vores norske kollegaer stiller op med en tv-manuskript som deres kandidat for Glasnöglen i år. For nogle uger siden har vi diskuteret spörgsmålet, om det går eller ej, via e-mails, og selv om vi ikke er kommet frem til et absolut ja eller nej som svar, så fik jeg det for mig at de fleste menede, at det ikke var nogen god idé.
Men nu står vi altså framme for dette faktum, at vi har et tv-manuskript blandt de fem literære værker, som skal bedömmes av vores juryer.
Situationen byder kun på to muligheder: Vi aksepterer manuskriptet, eller vi aksepterer det ikke...
Jeg foreslår, at vi aksepterer det - denne gangen. Men hvad end vi gör, så må vi diskutere dette spörgsmål på årsmödet og komme frem til en klar definition for hvad kan aksepteres og hvad ikke i fremtiden.
At vi aksepterer manuskriptet er altså kun mit foreslag - jeg föler mig, som sagt, ikke befogat til at si' noget definitivt. Jeg antager, at vores norske kollegaer naturligvis vil, at det aksepteres, og vil gerne höre hvad I andre tænker om det, så snart som muligt. Venligst send jeres tanker ang. dette via e-mail - Reply to All -optionen skulle gerne nyttes i dette sammenhæng. "

These were the answers I - and everyone else on the recipients list, including Rivertonklubbens representative - received:

"Jag har frågat finska SKS medlemmar vad dom tycker om Norges kandidat = manuskriptet. Det verkar vara så att alla här tycker att vi borde följa nuvarande SKS regler och inte acceptera manuskriptet som kandidat innan reglerna har ändrats. Det här är en av de frågor vi måste diskutera i Copenhagen.
Hälsningar från Helsingfors,
Taavi Soininvaara"

"Jag håller med vad Taavi skrev. För att ta emot ett tv-manus som kandidat måste vi ändra stadgarna. I paragraf 6 står det: "SKS:s stora pris - Glasnyckeln - ges till det bästa skandinaviska kriminallitterära verket under föregående år." Och i resten av texten omtalas sedan kandidaterna som "böcker".
Som jag förstår det måste ett tv-manuskript alltså finnas utgivet i bokform (på ett av de skandinaviska språken) för att vi ska kunna ta ställning till det.
Det är trist för Norge, men jag kan inte tyda det på annat sätt.
Anders Hammarqvist"

"Om det står i stadgarna att det ska vara en bok så måste det vara en bok. Så vi säger nej till tv-manuskriptet. Vi hade tänkt oss säga ja för jag hittade inte stadgarna, så alla kunde var med. Men vi alltså säger nej. Kan Norge inte välja en annan kandidat?
Hälsningar, Kristinn
vice-president Island"

"Jeg har d.d. meddelt Ævar Örn, at den danske jury fortsat er imod nordmændenes idé med at nominere et tv-manus – vi kan kun acceptere en bog som kandidat. [...]
venlig hilsen
Ak-n"

On march 13th, Mariann Fugelsö Nilssen wrote, on behalf of Rivertonklubben:

"Hei!
Det har vært mye korrespondanse frem og tilbake om dette, noen har åpnet for mulighet for å vurdere manus/TV-serie, andre har forkastet det.
Ettersom vi i Rivertonklubben har forstått sier statuttene at Glassnøkkelen skal gå til det beste ”kriminallitterære verk” fra foregående år.
Ordlyden er faktisk identisk med pkt i Rivertonklubbens statutter som omtaler det samme.
Rivertonklubben har da også tre ganger siden 1972 latt prisen gå til andre sjangere enn romanen.
(Det er kanskje dette Bo Tao Michaelis sikter til med å havne på ”skråplanet”.)
Uansett, årsmøtet i Rivertonklubben står samlet bak nominasjonen, og skjønner ikke at det skal være så vanskelig å vurdere ”Svarte penger, hvite løgner” som et kriminallitterært verk.
Manuskript og DVD er på vei til jurymedlemmer i posten."

And now, the big question is, where does this leave us?
The easy way out, of course, would simply have been to act as if nothing had happened. The juries could, if they wished to, simply ignore the manuscript and concentrate on the other candidates. This would, however, demand that whoever is going to present the candidates in Copenhagen, would have to pretend that it was genuinely in the running for the prize, and present it as a valid candidate, even if he/she knew, that this was not really the case. An act of hypocrisy no-one can be expected or asked to perform. It would also, it has to be pointed out, have been unfair to Rivertonklubben and its candidates, to let them think that everything was as it should.
At the end of the day, it comes down to this: A question was asked, an answer was given, and ignored. The answer could have been clearer in the beginning, I admit, but it was clear enough before it was too late to react to it accordingly.
There is a broad agreement, it seems, that tv-manuscripts cannot be accepted - at least not this time around - as Glass key material. I consider - rightly or not - the query to the respective vice-presidents to be in accordance with paragraph 7 of SKS's rules, where it says: "Särskilda angelägenheter og frågor utreds av för ändamålet tillsatta kommitéer," even if the appointment of this particular "committee" was less than formal. I also would like to point out the fact, that some of SKS's rules, as they stand now, simply cannot be followed to the letter. The one stating that the winner of the Glass key shall be appointed before the end of march is a point in case. This calls for a change in the rules, but it does NOT mean that we should not adhere to the rules that CAN be followed.

As most of you know, I am in a rather peculiar and, to put it mildly, precarious situation, being not only SKS's president for the time being, but also a candidate for this year's Glass Key - something I admittedly hoped for, but could in no way count on, when I let myself get talked into running for president (not least because I, lazy as I am, was told that this was an easy job, requiring hardly any work on my behalf and devoid of any possibilities of conflicting interests...). This, of course, is the main reason for my reluctance to address this problem in a formal way, and, as I said, I tried very hard to find a way around this problem for just this reason. But at the end of the day, there is nothing I can do but take the bull by the horn and make the official statement regarding this matter, that I - as president of the SKS - have repeatedly been asked to make. There is, as I said before, no-one I can pass the buck to.

I have to declare, after getting the views - as shown above - from the vice presidents in Finnland, Denmark, Sweden and Iceland, that the norwegian entry for this year's Glass key, cannot be accepted.

I wish all this would not have happened, I wish we had a norwegian crime novel or compilation of short stories or whatnot amongst the contenders, but we don´t.
This saddens me no end. And it makes me worry about SKS's future and the future of the Glass key, which has proved itself to be an invaluable - and increasingly effective - tool for the marketing and success of Nordic crime literature in the Nordic countries and Europe as a whole.
Norway has a legion of brilliant crime writers, whose record in the history of the Glass key is impressive. I can only hope, that this year's dispute will not cause permanent damage to SKS's reputation and, most of all, its continuance, which is important to every Nordic crime-writer.
On a more personal note, I must also express my hope, and my firm belief, really, that this year's juries will not let this dispute influence their decision - one way or the other - when they decide which novel is worthy of the 14th - and hopefully nowhere nearly the last - Glass key.
Please do not hesitate to post a comment on this article, or, if you prefer, write your own article regarding this and mail it to me for publishing. I also refer you to Terje B. Hansens, Bo Tao Michaëlis and Bo Lundins articles on this matter, published below.
Yours sincerely,
Ævar Örn Jósepsson

ps. I changed the title of this article on may 9th. The original one seemed a tad too melodramatic...