In a stunning turn of events, Australian literary icon Helen Garner has defied all expectations by clinching the prestigious Baillie Gifford Prize for Non-Fiction with her collected diaries, How to End a Story. But here’s where it gets controversial: can a book of personal reflections truly compete with more traditional, research-heavy non-fiction works? Garner herself seemed to doubt it, admitting in her heartfelt acceptance speech—live-streamed from her Melbourne home—that she was "utterly staggered" by the win. "I never imagined this book would be prize-worthy," she confessed. "It felt like it didn’t fit neatly into any category." And yet, the judges were captivated. Rachel Lloyd, deputy culture editor of The Economist, praised the work as "fascinating and utterly compelling." She described the diaries as "shimmering fragments that, when pieced together, create a scintillating whole." Garner’s reflections on motherhood, marriage, and the life of a writer are remarkably fluid and readable—a feat not easily achieved in the often-introspective genre of diaristic writing. And this is the part most people miss: Garner’s ability to transform the mundane into the extraordinary challenges our preconceptions about what constitutes 'serious' literature. Is How to End a Story a groundbreaking work of non-fiction, or does it blur the lines between genres? Let’s spark a conversation—what makes a book prize-worthy in your eyes? Does it need to be academically rigorous, or can personal narratives hold equal weight? Share your thoughts below!
