LONDON—Award-winning writer Lionel Shriver has been sacked from a competition panel after describing a publishing giant as “drunk on virtue” in an article challenging the supremacy of diversity over talent.
She also took umbrage with the publisher’s “proud” declaration that having a degree was no longer a requirement.
She wrote, “Drunk on virtue, Penguin Random House no longer regards the company’s raison d’être as the acquisition and dissemination of good books. Rather, the organization aims to mirror the percentages of minorities in the UK population with statistical precision.”
Women’s magazine Mslexia subsequently fired Shriver on June 12 from her role as judge in their short story competition, part of their annual Women’s Fiction Awards in October.
“This freedom boat, I’ve realized over the past half decade, is the same boat for all of us, even if we sit in different parts,” Aaronovitch concluded in his article. “Sink it, and we’re all drowned. There’s no ‘but’ after ‘open debate’.”
Some publishers specializing in recruitment of those from minority groups slammed Shriver’s comments, taking it as opportunity to recruit more writers.
Disabled author Thomas Clements, however, backed what he described as Shriver’s “absolutely justified censure of Penguin’s virtue-signalling equity policy.”
“As a disabled author, I'd despise being the beneficiary of some tokenist diversity initiative. I want to be recognized on my merits, just like everyone else.”
Shriver’s criticisms of the supremacy given to diversity weren’t limited to Random House.
Writing in the Spectator she said: “In the news last week, we find the ultimate example of this fatal confusion over what is your actual job. Will Norman, London’s ‘walking and cycling commissioner,’ bemoaned the fact that too many cyclists in the city are white, male, and middle-class. ‘The real challenge for London cycling,’ he declared, ‘is diversity.’ As opposed to building more cycle lanes for everybody, or fixing potholes lethal to everybody’s wheel rims.”
“The U.S. has had much more experience with affirmative action [positive discrimination] than the UK, and the policy has had unfortunate consequences. Even the U.S. has moved consistently away from numerical diversity targets.”