THE moment Alan Hollinghurst was announced as winner of the Man Booker Prize on Tuesday evening, printers pressed the button for a massive reprint.

Such is the impact on sales that the printers were under instruction from Hollinghurst’s publishers, Picador, to watch the television coverage and to begin printing a second after the 10.25pm announcement — if their man won.

Ed Ripley, Picador’s head of high-street sales, said: “They pressed the print button last night and the books will be out of the warehouse tomorrow. We expect a 500 per cent uplift on sales.” He believes that all other publishers of the six shortlisted writers will have given the same instructions.

Hollinghurst won the Booker with The Line of Beauty, a novel about Thatcherism and gay sex. It became the first work of gay fiction to win the prize in its 36-year history.

The £50,000 award is just the tip of the iceberg, judging from the success that DBC Pierre has had with Vernon God Little, last year’s winner: it has sold nearly half a million copies.

But, a day after the prize ceremony, it emerged that Chris Smith, as chairman of the Booker judges, had repeatedly refused to vote for Hollinghurst.

As the judges sat down to dissect the shortlist, they quickly ruled out Achmat Dangor, Sarah Hall and Gerard Woodward. As the bookies and publishers had predicted, it became a three-horse race between Hollinghurst, David Mitchell and Colm Tóibín.

Three judges — Tibor Fischer, the novelist, Robert Macfarlane, the writer and academic, and Rowan Pelling, the editor of The Erotic Review — backed Hollinghurst. Fiammetta Rocco, the literary editor of The Economist, particularly favoured Tóibín, but was happy to back Hollinghurst if she could not get her colleagues’ support.

One judge revealed yesterday that the judging session lasted as long as it did — well over two hours — because the former culture secretary would not vote for Hollinghurst.

“We assumed that he thought the first thing people would say was that he was chosen because Chris Smith is gay. It’s very curious as he’s openly gay. But it was extremely annoying. In the end, it was 4-1.”

He added: “Chris wanted David Mitchell. A stronger-willed chairman could have ended at 6.30 pm, rather than 7.15 pm. But every five minutes, Chris was saying, ‘Why not go through this again?’ “It was really frustrating. Chris is well-read and well-educated, but I’m sure some of the former Booker Prize chairmen, such as Lisa Jardine or Kenneth Baker, would have got a decision by 6.20pm. We kept debating and redebating the three books, but there was never a raised voice and never a raised temper, all of which are common, I hear.”

At a press conference after the prize-giving, Mr Smith said that the homosexual nature of the novel “did not figure” in the judges’ discussions, a reflection of how times have changed: “That in itself is something worth celebrating. It was a novel that happened to be about gay sex and gay relationships.”

Mr Smith said: “That surprises me. It was a remarkably courteous and well-conducted meeting. There were vigorous opinions being advanced on behalf of the three closely contested novels and I do not recognise your description as you’re telling it to me. I really don’t.”

Explore UK News

• Crime News

• Education News

• Health News

• Scotland News

Times Recommends

• UK regional accents thrive against the odds
• ‘Scarecrow’ wind farms put rare birds to flight
• What an anti-climax: G-spot is a myth