Published in Overland Issue 225 Summer 2016 · Uncategorized Judges’ report Editorial team Judges: Emily Bitto, Michelle Law and Melissa Manning We were impressed by the breadth of voices and stories submitted; the body of entries took us around the world before landing us in our own backyard. In runner-up ‘Silver gates’, the authenticity of voice and the portrayal of the simple, domestic aspects of grief was striking. ‘Silver linings’, the other runner-up, gorgeously depicted the quiet tragedy of a disintegrating family against the backdrop of a wild Australia, revealing the power of childhood memory and family disappointments. In ‘Sweeping’, the winning story, we were drawn into and then deftly ejected from a fully formed world. An evocative, lyrical story, ‘Sweeping’ is a beautifully written commentary on the gravity of loss and notions of masculinity. Again and again, it’s the final line that’s a kick in the guts. Read the rest of Overland 225 You can also buy the issue Or subscribe and receive four outstanding issues for a year Editorial team More by Editorial team › Overland is a not-for-profit magazine with a proud history of supporting writers, and publishing ideas and voices often excluded from other places. If you like this piece, or support Overland’s work in general, please subscribe or donate. Related articles & Essays 21 February 202521 February 2025 · The university Closing the noose: a dispatch from the front line of decasualisation Matthew Taft Across the board, universities have responded to legislation aimed at rectifying this already grim situation by halting casual hiring, cutting courses, expanding class sizes, and increasing the workloads of permanent staff. This is an unintended consequence of the legislation, yes, but given the nefarious history of the university, from systemic wage theft to bad-faith bargaining, hardly a surprising one. 19 February 2025 · Disability The devaluing of disability support Áine Kelly-Costello and Jonathan Craig Over the past couple of decades, disabled people in much of the Western world have often sought, or agreed to, more individualised funding schemes in order to gain greater “choice and control” over the support we receive. But the autonomy, dignity and flexibility we were promised seems constantly under threat or out of reach, largely because of the perception that allowing us such “luxuries” is too expensive.
