Reforms have been proposed to the voting system for the Professor of Poetry post at Oxford in an attempt to increase accessibility and voter participation.
However, there have been criticisms that public scrutiny will discourage potential candidates.
Under the new proposals it will be possible to vote online as well as in person, with the election held over a longer period of time. It is hoped that this will increase accessibility. Previously it was difficult for the electorate who live away from Oxford to vote, as voting was only possible in person in Oxford, on a single day. The reforms will apply from the next election, due to take place in mid-2010, with the winner to take on the post from that autumn.
The vote is open to all Oxford graduates as members of Oxford University’s Convocation. Of around 300,000 potential voters in May’s election, less than 500 turned out to vote.
The news comes after the last election in May, contended by Derek Walcott, Ruth Padel and Arvind Mehrotra, ended in farce.
Walcott, a Nobel laureate, withdrew, claiming the election had “degenerated into a low and degrading attempt at character assassination”, after details of sexual harassment allegations made against him decades earlier were sent anonymously to academics in Oxford.
Padel won the subsequent vote over Mehrotra, but later admitted previously sending emails related to the allegations to two journalists, and, although denying any association with the mailshot, resigned.
The deputy chair of the English Faculty board, Seamus Perry, lauded the proposed reforms as a solution to this non-participation, saying, “It is good news that the election will be so much more accessible to the large community of graduates of the university that have the chance to vote for Oxford’s professor of poetry.”
However, in light of May’s scandal, the campaign tactics and media attention associated with popular elections has led to some criticism of such a system, the problems of which are likely only to be exacerbated by further accessibility and voter participation.
Judith Palmer, director of the Poetry Society, claimed the position’s “showbiz aspect” discourages “many excellent poets”, and that the changes “will probably increase the number… ruling themselves out.”
One such poet is Clive James. He has admitted that the Professorship “is the only job I want”, but says that he would “rather throw himself off a cliff” than stand for election. James cites problems with the election process far before the Padel-Walcott debacle.
Pedro Ferreira, Ruth Padel’s campaigner during the last election said, “if there is to be an election to decide who gets the post, then being able to vote online is a great idea”, but added that he was “not at all sure that elections are the bes
t way to award the professorship
“, admitting “there are problems” with such a system.
The new proposals are still subject to approval by Oxford University’s Congregation of academic and administrative staff, and are due to be considered early in the new year.
