Now the the nominations are out and the voting is open, commentary's streaming in from an assortment of places. AP's Hillel Italie collects quotes from publishing industry top dogs, some of which confirm an overall complaint about last year's ceremony: readers showed little interest in last year's awards and that the Quills had no discernible affect on sales.

But even though HarperCollins president and CEO Jane Friedman could not cite a specific book that was helped by the Quills, she said they were important because "we need everything we can to bring books to the attention of the public." Susan Petersen Kennedy, president of Penguin Group USA (and a member of the Quills' advisory board, one must add), also praised the Quills and noted, "What we saw (last year) is what happens at the beginning stage of an award, when much of the talk is among industry insiders."
Sonny Mehta, president of Alfred A. Knopf, probably says it best: "I'm in favor of any award that draws attention to books. I just wish all of them had the effect that the Booker Prize has on sales."

Around the 'sphere, reaction is a bit more, shall we say, exuberant. "There are possibly sillier book awards elsewhere in the world, but in the English-speaking world The Quill Book Awards surely take the cake," said the Literary Saloon. But Carolyn Kellogg at Pinky's Paperhaus thinks the awards aren't so bad. "...why not have book awards where the voting is open to anyone? There are already plenty of awards selected by well-qualified committees -- why not let the unwashed masses have a turn? The argument could be made that the people have voted with their wallets, but as far as I'm concerned, the more hoopla, fun and even, yes, fluff there is around reading, the better."

No kidding - if the Quills give me an opportunity to wear something like this to the gala ceremony, I am all for it, baby...