Why the split?

I don’t quite understand the reason the Booker prize was split between Margaret Atwood and Anglo-Nigerian author Bernardine Evaristo, despite the rules being to the contrary that the prize should not be split.

Since the judges had to deliberate for so many hours, the story doesn’t give inkling about the reasons why Margaret Atwood’s book was also chosen, or the reasons they felt compelled to split the prize. Why was the decision so tough between these two particular books and how and why was it easy in the earlier years to choose one book?

Did Evaristo’s black heritage have a role to play? Of course now she is the first black woman and the first black British author to win the Booker. This is Atwood’s second. But if the entire Booker prize had gone to Evaristo, it would mean such an honour for the black community which has been forever downtrodden and considered undeserving.

Carol Ross
By email