louise adler

Louise Adler Resigns: Free Speech and Festival Programming Under Scrutiny at Adelaide Writers' Week

The Australian literary community has been plunged into a heated debate about free expression, festival programming, and political pressure following the high-profile resignation of Louise Adler as co-director of the Adelaide Writers' Week. The controversy, which erupted in January 2026, centres on the decision to disinvite Palestinian author Susan Abulhawa from the festival lineup, a move that has drawn sharp criticism from fellow writers and international observers alike.

This significant event highlights the delicate balancing act arts festivals must perform between diverse viewpoints, community expectations, and political sensitivities. Adler's resignation is not merely a personnel change; it is a flashpoint in a broader cultural conversation about who gets a platform in Australia's prestigious literary events.

A Director's Stand: The Timeline of a Resignation

The chain of events unfolded rapidly in mid-January 2026, culminating in a decisive statement from one of Australia's most respected figures in publishing and the arts.

According to verified reports from The Age, Louise Adler resigned from her position as co-director of the Adelaide Writers' Week after the festival's board decided to remove Palestinian author Susan Abulhawa from its program. Adler, a veteran of the literary scene, made her position unequivocally clear. She stated she "cannot be party to silencing writers" and expressed her profound disagreement with the board's decision to cancel Abulhawa's appearance.

The initial decision to axe the author was reportedly supported by South Australian federal minister Amanda Rishworth. As reported by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), the minister backed the festival's decision, citing concerns over the author's public statements. This political endorsement of the festival's move added a layer of governmental scrutiny to what is typically a cultural decision, escalating the issue into the public sphere.

The timeline of key developments is as follows:

• Early January 2026: The Adelaide Writers' Week program is announced, initially including Palestinian author Susan Abulhawa.
• January 12, 2026: Reports emerge that the festival has decided to axe Abulhawa from the lineup. The ABC confirms that federal minister Amanda Rishworth supports this decision. Concurrently, the AFR reports that former New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has pulled out of the festival in solidarity.
• January 13, 2026: The Age publishes a detailed report on Louise Adler's resignation, quoting her directly on the principle of not silencing writers.
• Ongoing: The story continues to generate national and international discussion about artistic freedom and festival governance.

This sequence of events demonstrates a rapid escalation from an internal programming decision to a major public controversy, resulting in the loss of both the co-director and several high-profile international authors from the festival.

The Core Conflict: Programming, Politics, and Principle

At the heart of this issue is a fundamental question facing cultural institutions globally: where is the line between curating a festival and censoring voices? The decision to remove Susan Abulhawa was likely based on her vocal political commentary, which has been described as controversial. However, the response from Louise Adler and other prominent figures suggests that for many in the literary world, the principle of platforming diverse—even challenging—voices is paramount.

The resignation of Louise Adler is particularly significant given her stature. As a leading Australian publisher and cultural commentator, her departure signals a deep fracture between festival leadership and its governing body. It suggests that the decision was not merely a logistical adjustment but a matter of professional and ethical conviction.

Furthermore, the withdrawal of Jacinda Ardern, a globally respected leader known for her empathetic and inclusive approach, underscores the gravity with which the international community is viewing this situation. Her action was a clear vote of no confidence in the festival's decision and a show of solidarity with the principle of free expression.

The Wider Context: A Pattern of Festival Dilemmas

This is not the first time an Australian writers' festival has found itself embroiled in a controversy over author invitations. In recent years, several festivals have faced pressure from various community groups and political figures regarding the inclusion of authors with strong or divisive views. These incidents often pit the concept of a "marketplace of ideas" against concerns about platforming hate speech or causing community distress.

The Adelaide controversy taps into a broader, ongoing debate within the arts and culture sector. It raises questions about the role of festivals: Are they places for safe, curated conversations, or are they arenas for robust, and at times, uncomfortable debate?

The involvement of a federal minister in a festival's programming decision is a particularly noteworthy aspect of this event. It brings political considerations directly into the cultural space, setting a potential precedent for future government involvement in the arts. This dynamic creates a challenging environment for festival directors and boards, who must navigate not only audience and artistic expectations but also political pressures.

For the Australian literary landscape, this situation is a stark reminder of the fragility of artistic freedom. It highlights the complex ecosystem of stakeholders—authors, directors, boards, government bodies, and audiences—and how easily friction between them can erupt into a public crisis.

Immediate Fallout: Who Loses in This Standoff?

The immediate effects of this decision and subsequent resignation are felt across multiple sectors.

For the Adelaide Writers' Week: The festival faces a significant reputational challenge. The loss of its co-director, a figure of Adler's experience and respect, is a major blow to its leadership and programming credibility. Furthermore, the public loss of several high-profile international authors, including Ardern, diminishes the festival's global standing and appeal. The controversy risks alienating a segment of its audience, regardless of which side of the debate they fall on.

For the Literary Community: The event has become a rallying point for discussions on free speech. Many authors and industry professionals have expressed support for Adler's stance, fearing a chilling effect where festival programmers may become overly cautious, leading to a tamer and less diverse literary scene. There is a palpable concern that self-censorship could become more prevalent as writers and organisers weigh the potential for backlash.

For the Public Discourse: The controversy has pushed the conversation about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict into an Australian cultural setting. It forces a public reckoning with how and where difficult geopolitical discussions can take place. The debate is no longer just about one author at one festival; it has become a proxy for larger arguments about tolerance, identity politics, and the responsibilities of cultural institutions.

The Future of Festival Curation in Australia

Looking ahead, the fallout from the Adelaide Writers' Week controversy will likely influence how other Australian festivals approach their programming and governance.

A Precedent for Governance? Festival boards may become more risk-averse, implementing more stringent vetting processes for speakers. This could lead to a more homogenised festival landscape, where potentially contentious but vital voices are filtered out before they even reach the programming stage. Conversely, some festivals might double down on their commitment to free expression as a core value, using this moment to distinguish themselves as bastions of open debate.

The Role of the Director: The role of the festival director may become increasingly precarious. Caught between the artistic vision and the board's risk management, directors like Louise Adler may find their autonomy curtailed. Her resignation serves as a stark warning about the potential for a breakdown in trust between creative leadership and governance bodies.

Engagement with International Authors: International authors and speakers may become more wary of engaging with Australian festivals, perceiving them as spaces subject to undue political pressure and controversy. This could make it harder for Australian audiences to access global voices.

A Need for New Models? This event may spur a necessary industry-wide conversation about developing clearer frameworks for handling controversial speakers. Perhaps new models of engagement are needed, one that allows for difficult conversations to happen in a structured, thoughtful way, rather than through sudden disinvitations and public resignations.

A Stand for Principle: The Lasting Legacy of Louise Adler's Decision

The resignation of Louise Adler from the Adelaide Writers' Week is a defining moment for the Australian arts community. It is a story that began with a programming decision but quickly evolved into a profound statement about the values that underpin our cultural institutions.

Adler's parting words—that she "cannot be party to silencing writers"—will likely echo for a long time. They encapsulate a principled stand that has resonated with many who believe that the role of a literary festival is to provide a platform for a multitude of perspectives, especially those that challenge us.

While the immediate future of the Adelaide Writers' Week remains uncertain, the broader conversation it has ignited is more important than ever. The questions it raises about free speech, artistic integrity, and the intersection of culture and politics are not easily answered. However, navigating them with openness and integrity is essential for the health of Australia's democratic and cultural life. The legacy of this controversy will be a test case for how we, as a society, choose to engage with difficult ideas and the people who voice them.