THE hunt for an official new Scottish scriever has resulted in a bourach, a rammy and a stooshie, with the National Library of Scotland (NLS) and Creative Scotland accused of changing the criteria after applications had closed.
One prominent Scots writer said the process “reeked”.
Both NLS and Creative Scotland say they’re confident the job has gone to the best candidate.
Emails seen by The National show that two weel-kent Scots writers were not interviewed for the job because they lacked sufficient “digital skills”.
Stuart Paterson (above), until recently the BBC Scotland Poet in Residence, asked for feedback when NLS knocked back his application.
He was told that failure to give due emphasis to digital media in his application resulted in his overall score being lowered.
He was told the panel had assessed him and all candidates by looking at the “quality and artistic merit of work”, the “quality of vision for the residency”, his “experience of working collaboratively with a range of different audiences”, his “familiarity with and use of digital media”, and the “expected impact of the residency on the applicant’s creative development”.
The original advert lists all of those criteria apart from the use of digital media.
Instead it said candidates would be judged on their track record in Scots.
National columnist Rab Wilson was also not interviewed for the post.
The National understands NLS and Creative Scotland will be announcing the name of new Scots Scriever later this week.
But Paterson says the process was “unfair and inequitable” and has asked NLS for an apology and a reversal of their decision not to interview him.
For the past two years the position has been held by Hamish MacDonald (bottom). The role is a two-year residency based at the NLS, supported with funding from Creative Scotland.
The purpose of the role is to produce original creative work in Scots and to raise awareness, appreciation and use of Scots across the country and amongst all parts of the population.
Paterson said: “Hoo are we meant tae ken whit it is they’re luikin for when whit they say they want in public’s ane thing, an whit they’re really luikin at in private’s anither? Ah pit it tae them three times that the selection process wis wrang an heard nocht back aboot it, jist hoo Ah’d scored laigh in a criteria that wisnae a criteria ava when the advert came oot.
“An no been scored ava in a criteria they’d taen aff the list. Hoo can they gan aboot appyntin tae sic a muckle national role when they dinnae select on the criteria o ‘proven track record in Scots?’”
“The hail process reeks,” Paterson added.
A library spokeswoman said: “We received a very strong field of applicants for the Scriever position, and all were assessed on the same criteria.
“We are confident that we selected the best person for the role and will be in a position to announce them shortly.”
Creative Scotland published its first Scots Language Policy in June 2015, in which the role of Scots Scriever was identified.
A Creative Scotland spokeswoman said: “The quality and strength of applications received for the Scriever position were extremely high. All shortlisted candidates had an extensive track record in Scots and presented exciting plans to progress and develop the language. Candidates were reviewed in terms of suitability for the role and all applications were assessed and scored against criteria as outlined in the job spec. We realise that unsuccessful applicants will be disappointed but are confident that we have selected the strongest candidate for the role and look forward to announcing them shortly.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here