Editorial cartoonists who want to win awards got some tips Thursday from the experts at a gathering of
editorial cartoonists in Sacramento, CA -- people who have served as judges for the Pulitzer Prize and
various other contests.
Still, several attendees at the 2005 Association of American Editorial Cartoonists convention session
wondered if some factors -- such as working for a smaller paper, or being very liberal or very conservative
-- make it almost impossible to win major awards no matter what they do.
One piece of advice? Follow the rules. The AAEC panelists said that if judges are looking at a group of
entries that are almost equally good, they might eliminate some of them for relatively minor reasons -- such
as the package being sloppy, being too large, or containing the wrong number of cartoons.
But panelists also encouraged cartoonists to think outside the box a little to differentiate their entries from
other contestants. Lucy Shelton Caswell, for instance, said "cliche cartoons" should be avoided. "Judges
use those to eliminate people," said the curator of Ohio State University's Cartoon Research Library.
Another way to be different is to include local cartoons in the entry mix for national contests -- with a brief
explanation, if necessary, of the issues the cartoons are commenting on. Audience member David Horsey
of the Seattle Post-Intelligencer and Tribune Media Services said local cartoons might have "put me over
the edge" to win his first Pulitzer.
But is being different politically -- very liberal or very conservative -- a hindrance to winning? "Tom
Tomorrow doesn't enter the Pulitzers any more," said audience member Ted Rall of Universal Press
Syndicate. "He feels a lefty like him could never win. Is a left-wing or right-wing cartoonist considered?"
Keefe replied: "Anyone can win on either end of the spectrum." But while a number of liberals and the
occasional conservative have indeed received a cartooning Pulitzer, creators who are very left or very
right have rarely been honored.
Audience member Steve Greenberg of the Ventura County Star in California asked: "Does the size of a
publication factor in? The Washington Post has to carry a little weight." A couple of panelists said size
doesn't matter. But people on larger dailies have won a disproportionate share of Pulitzers.
Cartoonists on smaller papers also often have to pay their own entry fees for various contests, which can
get expensive.
Then there's the problem of judges knowing little about editorial cartooning. In those scenarios, there's
"more resemblance to a lottery than a competition," said panelist Joel Pett of the Lexington, Ky.,
Herald-Leader and Cartoonists & Writers Syndicate, which is marketed by the New York Times Syndicate.
Panelist Mike Keefe of the Denver Post said Pulitzer cartooning juries, in the past, rarely had many judges
familiar with that field. This, he added, has improved in recent years. Keefe, Pett, and Caswell have all
served on Pulitzer juries since the latter part of the 1990s.
Judges unfamiliar with cartooning might not know what makes a good cartoon, and also might not be aware
that some contest entrants are capable of doing only a few good cartoons a year while the rest of their
work is mediocre. But a couple of panelists noted that judges are asked to just consider submissions, not a
creator's work that isn't entered in a contest.
Audience member Bob Englehart of The Hartford (Conn.) Courant said cartoonists shouldn't put too much
emphasis on prizes. He recalled being devastated a quarter century ago when a more famous cartoonist
won the Pulitzer in a year that Englehart felt he did better work. Englehart finally got over the
disappointment when he realized that the most important thing was what readers thought of his cartoons.
The session was moderated by Kevin "KAL" Kallaugher of The Sun in Baltimore and the Cartoonists &
Writers Syndicate/New York Times Syndicate.
editorial cartoonists in Sacramento, CA -- people who have served as judges for the Pulitzer Prize and
various other contests.
Still, several attendees at the 2005 Association of American Editorial Cartoonists convention session
wondered if some factors -- such as working for a smaller paper, or being very liberal or very conservative
-- make it almost impossible to win major awards no matter what they do.
One piece of advice? Follow the rules. The AAEC panelists said that if judges are looking at a group of
entries that are almost equally good, they might eliminate some of them for relatively minor reasons -- such
as the package being sloppy, being too large, or containing the wrong number of cartoons.
But panelists also encouraged cartoonists to think outside the box a little to differentiate their entries from
other contestants. Lucy Shelton Caswell, for instance, said "cliche cartoons" should be avoided. "Judges
use those to eliminate people," said the curator of Ohio State University's Cartoon Research Library.
Another way to be different is to include local cartoons in the entry mix for national contests -- with a brief
explanation, if necessary, of the issues the cartoons are commenting on. Audience member David Horsey
of the Seattle Post-Intelligencer and Tribune Media Services said local cartoons might have "put me over
the edge" to win his first Pulitzer.
But is being different politically -- very liberal or very conservative -- a hindrance to winning? "Tom
Tomorrow doesn't enter the Pulitzers any more," said audience member Ted Rall of Universal Press
Syndicate. "He feels a lefty like him could never win. Is a left-wing or right-wing cartoonist considered?"
Keefe replied: "Anyone can win on either end of the spectrum." But while a number of liberals and the
occasional conservative have indeed received a cartooning Pulitzer, creators who are very left or very
right have rarely been honored.
Audience member Steve Greenberg of the Ventura County Star in California asked: "Does the size of a
publication factor in? The Washington Post has to carry a little weight." A couple of panelists said size
doesn't matter. But people on larger dailies have won a disproportionate share of Pulitzers.
Cartoonists on smaller papers also often have to pay their own entry fees for various contests, which can
get expensive.
Then there's the problem of judges knowing little about editorial cartooning. In those scenarios, there's
"more resemblance to a lottery than a competition," said panelist Joel Pett of the Lexington, Ky.,
Herald-Leader and Cartoonists & Writers Syndicate, which is marketed by the New York Times Syndicate.
Panelist Mike Keefe of the Denver Post said Pulitzer cartooning juries, in the past, rarely had many judges
familiar with that field. This, he added, has improved in recent years. Keefe, Pett, and Caswell have all
served on Pulitzer juries since the latter part of the 1990s.
Judges unfamiliar with cartooning might not know what makes a good cartoon, and also might not be aware
that some contest entrants are capable of doing only a few good cartoons a year while the rest of their
work is mediocre. But a couple of panelists noted that judges are asked to just consider submissions, not a
creator's work that isn't entered in a contest.
Audience member Bob Englehart of The Hartford (Conn.) Courant said cartoonists shouldn't put too much
emphasis on prizes. He recalled being devastated a quarter century ago when a more famous cartoonist
won the Pulitzer in a year that Englehart felt he did better work. Englehart finally got over the
disappointment when he realized that the most important thing was what readers thought of his cartoons.
The session was moderated by Kevin "KAL" Kallaugher of The Sun in Baltimore and the Cartoonists &
Writers Syndicate/New York Times Syndicate.
| Cartoonists' Confab: Some Prize Advice By Dave Astor, Editor & Publisher, June 10, 2005 |
| CARTOONISTS AS CONTEST JUDGES By Jimmy Margulies -- Caglecartoons.com May 1, 2004 |
In recent years , editorial cartoonists have served as judges for The Pulitzer Prize, and this year it was
announced that the winner of the Herblock Award would be one of the judges for next year's competition.
On the surface this sounds pretty reasonable. Who better to judge the cartoon entries than those who do
the job daily and are intimately familiar with what it takes. Additionally, cartoonists want to be taken
seriously as journalists, and including them among the editors and columnists who make up the bulk of
prestigious contest judges is definitely a mark of respect.
But I believe the reasons for editorial cartoonists not to be judges far outweigh the positives.
Just as a panel of jurors in a courtroom are vetted for anything in their background which might prevent
them from being totally open minded, contest judges should also be free of any sort of bias or conflict.
Among editorial cartoonists this is impossible. The field is so small that most of us know one another either
very well, or at least a bit.
In addition, cartoonists are not only opiniated about the public officials and issues we cover, but also about
the work of our colleagues. We know whose work we admire, and whose we may not think as highly of.
Having strong feelings and being passionate about what we think is good work makes for lively discussion
when cartoonists get together, but such views cannot be easily left behind when it becomes time to judge
the work of others.
I have had the experience of judging smaller scale contests than the Pulitzer, and I recently spoke with
another cartoonist who also judged something on this order. We both agreed how awkward it was to have
to judge the work of people with whom we are friendly.
Particularly unfortunate in my view was the announcement in advance of next year's contest that Matt
Davies, winner of the Herblock Award, will be a judge for next year. That puts Matt in a very uncomfortable
postion amidst his peers.
While a panel of editors judging cartoons may not be the absolute ideal, I still feel it is superior to the
possibility of cartoonists who are not totally free of complications doing the judging.
announced that the winner of the Herblock Award would be one of the judges for next year's competition.
On the surface this sounds pretty reasonable. Who better to judge the cartoon entries than those who do
the job daily and are intimately familiar with what it takes. Additionally, cartoonists want to be taken
seriously as journalists, and including them among the editors and columnists who make up the bulk of
prestigious contest judges is definitely a mark of respect.
But I believe the reasons for editorial cartoonists not to be judges far outweigh the positives.
Just as a panel of jurors in a courtroom are vetted for anything in their background which might prevent
them from being totally open minded, contest judges should also be free of any sort of bias or conflict.
Among editorial cartoonists this is impossible. The field is so small that most of us know one another either
very well, or at least a bit.
In addition, cartoonists are not only opiniated about the public officials and issues we cover, but also about
the work of our colleagues. We know whose work we admire, and whose we may not think as highly of.
Having strong feelings and being passionate about what we think is good work makes for lively discussion
when cartoonists get together, but such views cannot be easily left behind when it becomes time to judge
the work of others.
I have had the experience of judging smaller scale contests than the Pulitzer, and I recently spoke with
another cartoonist who also judged something on this order. We both agreed how awkward it was to have
to judge the work of people with whom we are friendly.
Particularly unfortunate in my view was the announcement in advance of next year's contest that Matt
Davies, winner of the Herblock Award, will be a judge for next year. That puts Matt in a very uncomfortable
postion amidst his peers.
While a panel of editors judging cartoons may not be the absolute ideal, I still feel it is superior to the
possibility of cartoonists who are not totally free of complications doing the judging.
| While the following articles regard the judging of, and advice on submitting to the American Pulitzer Prize competition, much of the text can easily be applied to judging and submitting to Canada's NNA's. |