AJAs 2024 Finalists
Requiem for a writer: Harry Bruce (1934-2024)
| Slug/Label | opinion-comment |
|---|---|
| Date Aired or Published | September 9 2024 |
| Media outlet where first aired or published: | Atlantic Business Magazine |
| Name of Program: | N/A |
| If co-produced, list partner: | N/A |
| Location: | Halifax |
| List awards, grants: | N/A |
| Running time (TV/Radio): | N/A |
|
Short explanation of the story and how it developed: Submission Statement – Commentary Category: April 3/2025 Alec Bruce, “Requiem for a writer” “Requiem for a writer” was written in the days following the death of my father, Harry Bruce—an award-winning journalist, author, editor, and lifelong champion of Atlantic Canadian writing. It began not as an assignment, but as a deeply personal act of remembrance. In its final form, it became a published commentary that wove memoir with journalism, offering readers not just a eulogy, but a meditation on writing itself—its compulsions, its costs, and its place in the life of a region and a country. The piece was written and filed within three days, with no budget, no travel, and no outside resources—just a keyboard, a deadline, and a lifetime of proximity to the subject. But that intimacy, and the urgency of grief, sharpened its perspective. What emerged was an editorial reflection on legacy, mortality, and the peculiar vocation of writing, anchored in the vivid imagery of East Coast sailing and the stubborn defiance of a man who quite literally kept writing with one finger tied behind his back. The column was shaped entirely by my own reporting, memory, and archival knowledge of Harry Bruce’s published work. Its structure is deliberately anecdotal, leading with a harrowing (and darkly funny) true story that sets up the central themes: resilience, irreverence, and an unshakeable devotion to the written word. In tone and content, it aims to be elegiac without being sentimental, journalistic without being dispassionate, and regional without being parochial. The piece fulfills the core judging criteria as follows: Cogency of the Argument (20%) At its heart, the commentary argues that the craft of journalism is not a gift or calling so much as a daily, deliberate act of will—one pursued in defiance of obstacles, distractions, and even physical injury. Through a tightly focused narrative lens—the death of a legendary Atlantic journalist—it contends that true dedication to the written word is a working discipline. The argument unfolds subtly, supported by concrete examples from a lifetime of literary persistence. Quality of the Writing (20%) The prose is spare, evocative, and layered with irony, humour, and emotional restraint. Stylistic choices—like the juxtaposition of violent imagery (“a guillotine,” “shoved the bloody stump into his mouth”) with the quiet interiority of reflection—create a rhythm that draws the reader in without sentimentality. It reads like a story, but functions as commentary: clear, economical, and emotionally resonant. Significance of the Issue (20%) Though deeply personal, the piece speaks to broader, enduring questions about the role of journalism—especially regional journalism—in society. It reflects on the fragility and determination behind the bylines, the value of mentorship, and the quiet erosion of self-sustaining journalistic careers. It also prompts reflection on mortality, memory, and the precarious continuity of written culture. Effectiveness in Generating Light as Well as Heat (20%) The commentary evokes strong emotion without descending into eulogy. Instead, it illuminates the habits, humility, and quiet stubbornness of a working journalist. It invites readers to consider what it means to keep writing through adversity, and why that effort still matters. Resources Used (20%) This piece was produced independently, on deadline, with no external funding or institutional support. It relied entirely on lived experience, first-hand memory, and professional familiarity with the subject’s body of work and historical context. What it lacked in budget, it made up for in immediacy, access, and narrative authority. |
|
|
Resources of the newsroom (money and time) available to complete the story: Not applicable. |
|