[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 79 KB, 407x286, trolly.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3779045 No.3779045 [Reply] [Original]

> The Nobel Prize
Since it's only going to be awarded to an author who has provided "in the field of literature the most outstanding work in an ideal direction," most Americans are out. Roth, McCarthy and Pynchon simply don't fall within the parameters.
To be fair, international authors are excluded as well. Coetzee is probably deserving and would be a hip pick as a South African, but isn't optimistic enough to qualify as 'ideal' under the current committee's understanding of Nobel's will. My bet is that Achebe wins it posthumously this year, even though Things Fall Apart is a downer.
Louise Erdrich is the only American dark horse, really.
Anyway,
> ITT: The most prestigious literature award is only given to happy endings and who will win next?
no one is talking about books, comeon now. is it just nighttime?

>> No.3779047

probably some chink or swede no one's heard of

>> No.3779079

o god please talk to me about books

>> No.3779082

I say Cees Nooteboom for this year.

>> No.3779085

Er...

Coetzee has already won the Nobel in Lit. Do you know what you're talking about?

>> No.3779091
File: 112 KB, 500x372, fffff.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3779091

You rustlin'? Coetzee won in 2003.

>> No.3779195

>>3779045
>Louise Erdrich
What?? She's utter shit. Even by standards that made the likes of McCarthy and Pynchon quote-unquote-literary-masterpieces.

>> No.3779238

>>3779195
It's a troll thread. I hope.

>> No.3779246

>>3779045
You can't win a Nobel prize posthumously.

>> No.3779255

>>3779045
Oh, god, the thread from OP's pic
best /lit/ thread ever

>> No.3779290

Aha, a fellow Grauniad reader

>> No.3779322

>>3779255
link?

>> No.3779338

They'll give it to a norwegian

I say Jan Kjærstad or Karl-Ove Knausgaard

>> No.3779358

>>3779322
After digging a little, I found it. Damn, that looks good; I can't believe I missed it.

>> No.3779363

>>3779358
Aaaaand, as always, forgot the link. Goddammit, I'm still half asleep:

http://fuuka.warosu.org/lit/thread/3748579#p3748731

>> No.3779425

>>3779363
Jesus, /lit/'s OC is pretty good. We should do this more often.

& thanks for finding the thread.

>> No.3779529

We're probably due a female winner. Alice Munro? Olga Tokarczuk?

I'd prefer if it went to Kundera or Eco, though.

>> No.3779617

>>3779195
Why do you write out "quote-unquote" instead of using citation marks?

Tranströmer should be given another one

>> No.3779659

An American won't win it because Europe is desperately clinging to its status as the so-called "last bastion of culture."

If by some divine intervention an American did win, I'd hope they would have the decency to turn it down.

>> No.3779676
File: 154 KB, 400x592, average american.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3779676

>>3779659
There have been more American winners than anywhere else, you moron. Will you not be happy unless a yank wins it every year?

>> No.3779909

>>3779085
>>3779091
I didn't know he had won!

>>3779195
Louise Erdrich fits the criteria and would be a hip choice as a native American/French mutt. She's also my favorite American writer since Steinbeck, come at me bro.

>>3779676
It's been too long and we have too many quality writers to be getting passed up with such regularity.

>>3779529
Munro would be a good choice, but who is Olga Tokarczuk? Should I fuck with her?

>> No.3779947

>>3779909
>It's been too long and we have too many quality writers to be getting passed up with such regularity.

Every other country has their share of quality authors as well. You only think yours are better because you have more exposure to them.

>who is Olga Tokarczuk? Should I fuck with her?

If you like One Hundred Years of Solitude, check out Primeval and Other Times.

>> No.3779960

>>3779947
There's a gulf between the level of talent and the level recognition a notoriously and admittedly Eurocentric institution is giving to the writers of my country, and to argue anything otherwise would reflect a deep lack of critical capacity. If it means anything, I also think Ireland keeps getting a stiff shaft. Thanks for the recommendation.

>> No.3779968

America might be due a winner, but I can't think of any good candidates. I suppose Munro is from the continent of North America, so she might suffice. Or how about Ozick? She is surely qualifies as a stalwart by now.

>> No.3779972

>>3779960
>I also think Ireland keeps getting a stiff shaft.

William Trevor is a perennial candidate; perhaps this will be his year.

>> No.3780397

They are overdue to give it to an Arabic writer, especially considering recent history.

>> No.3780410

I don't think "Ideal" means what you think it means, friend.

>> No.3780419

>>3780410
My interpretative opinion doesn't much matter. The present committee, on the other hand, seems like they've made their view on the matter clear.

>> No.3780435

>>3779960

Contemporary American literature is not as good as you think, at all.

>> No.3780445

>>3780419

Substitute "interpretation" for "interpretive opinion," then we can talk.

On a more serious note, I don't believe that's the case. Hemmingway's winning text goes against your interpretive opinion, for example.

To put the final nail in, "ideal" is meant in the sense of an artistic ideal, not a narrative one.

>> No.3780485

>>3780445
Nigger I'll emphasize degrees of subjective variance as much as I damn well please, and if it ruffles your feathers go have a cup of tea over Strunk and White until you feel better.
http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/literature/articles/espmark/index.html
While the "happy ending" point made in my OP is admittedly a simplified look at the selection criteria, it's not inaccurate. The Hemmingway example is a good one -- ultimately human will triumphs. Pessimism or misanthropy isn't going to qualify.

>> No.3780595

>>3780485
Are you forgetting Elfriede Jelinek? Her work has a very dark view of human interactions.

>> No.3780596

>>3780485

Hmm. Who comes across as most ruffled here?

And since when is the theme of "will" central to Nobel Prize winning art? There are plenty of poets and writers whose finest works have been WILL-LESS. Drop your hypothesis, enjoy the Nobels for what they are, get over yourself.

>> No.3780612

>>3780595
Dunno, haven't read any of her, though she sounds like a more talented Sebold based off her wikipedia page
I'll read a couple of her plays and respond if the thread is still up in a few days.
The darkest I know of that won the prize is Beckett and wole soyinka lel

>> No.3780626

>>3780596
Dude, as I've said in three posts running, it's not a personal hypothesis. It's their selection criteria, as set forth by Nobel's will and executed by the committee. I'll find you a second official site where they say as much, since one source isn't good enough for you.

Secondly, the triumph of human will isn't a perquisite theme to winning the prize, and I didn't claim as much. I was simply pointing out that your example of Old Man doesn't in any way go against how they have traditionally selected the winners in the past.

>> No.3780675

>>3780612
You don't seem to "know" many of the winners though. You weren't even aware that Coetzee had won. Why are you making such sweeping statements when you know so little?

>> No.3780686

Wait why don't you like Pynchon sorry I'm not really hip or anything I read The Crying Of Lot 49 and thought it was pretty good.

>> No.3780691

>>3780485
>pessimism or misanthropy isn't going to qualify

Andre Gide, Albert Camus, Kenzaburo Oe, Heinrich Boll, Eugene O'Neill?

>> No.3780694

>>3780686
He just doesn't think they're going to win a Nobel Prize. Because he's angry America isn't getting yet another one, when they've already won too many compared with how many better non-American authors are out there.

>> No.3780700

>>3780694
Oh. So people don't mind Pynchon then? Okay. Is the Nobel Prize very important in the literary criticism world kind of thing? Like how seriously do people take it? I know William Faulkner won it and I really like him, but I don't know that many other people who won it. And I don't think it really did much for Faulkner, it's not like people think of him as Nobel Prize-winning William Faulkner, he just is who he is. Is it just nice for money or something?

>> No.3780704

some random Scandi with just a stub article on Wikipedia

>> No.3780708

>>3780704
They really don't give it to Scandinavians that often. They did when it was established about a century ago, but not anymore.

It's ridiculous how many people are still hung up on Transtromer winning.

>> No.3780711

>>3780704
>>3780708
Since 1956, it has been awarded to Scandinavians twice (though one of those was for two authors combined). 1955 was Halldor Laxness. That is not over representation.

>> No.3780770

>>3780675
I'll take the sophistry as a sign that you're ceding the initial argument. Do you need that second source, or are we all cleared up?

>>3780694
One in the last twenty years is simply not proportionate to the level of talent that America has to offer.

>> No.3780792

>>3780691
You know what -- I'll be fair. If the "ideal" guidelines can be bent enough to include O'Neill, then Pynchon and Roth could well get the nod under them.
McCarthy is probably still out.

>> No.3780795

>>3780792
You think McCarthy pushes things in a bad direction?

>> No.3780797

>>3780770
In the same period as I took for Scandinavia, US has had three winners.

I don't think you are very familiar with contemporary world literature, else you would realize how many other countries out there are producing literature that is just as worthy of winning.

>> No.3780824

>>3780795
>>3780795
Oe's best book, A Personal Matter, straight up has the happiest ending serious literature can afford. Camus is a tougher sell for "ideal," but in his acceptance speech he rails pretty aggressively against the nihilists of his age. Boll seems to use various strains and brutalities only to trumpet the strength of human dignity and endurance, but I've only read the one book. Never read any Gide.

They can all be put under the "ideal" parameters relatively easily, but McCarthy? Not to have a rushed interpretation of a contemporary masterpiece, but Blood Meridian argues pretty convincingly for a fundamental violence and hatred lurking in the spirit of man. The Road doesn't quite redeem it.

>> No.3780829

>>3780797
You wouldn't happen to be Scandinavian by any chance?

>> No.3780832

>>3780829
No, I'm from the Southern US.

>> No.3780834

>>3780824
Okay, I like that. Thanks. I thought The Plague was oddly life-affirming and positive.

>> No.3780841

>>3780700
Faulkner actually received most of his renown after winning it. The French discovered Faulkner. He was mostly ignored in America till then.

>> No.3780845

>>3780841
Really? I had no idea, I apologize for my ignorance. I think he's just great

>> No.3780854

>>3780770
I'm not sure how many American authors need the recognition. In my opinion the Nobel should attempt to spotlight authors who deserve a global audience but have been hindered by language or cultural barriers.

>> No.3780861

>>3780854
That's not the point of the award though, is it? Maybe you should start another award whose goal is to do that.

>> No.3780873

>>3780861
From the link posted above it would appear to be part of the Academy's criteria:
>Another policy, partly coinciding with the one just outlined, partly replacing it, is "the pragmatic consideration" worded by the new secretary, Lars Gyllensten, and, again, taking into account the "benefit" of the Prize. A growing number within the Academy wanted to call attention to important but unnoticed writers and literatures, thus giving the world audience masterpieces they would otherwise miss, and at the same time, giving an important writer due attention. We get glimpses of such arguments as far back as the choice of Rabindranath Tagore in 1913 but there was no programme until the early 1970s. The full emergence of this policy can be seen from 1978 and onwards, in the Prizes to Isaac Bashevis Singer, Odysseus Elytis, Elias Canetti, and Jaroslav Seifert. The criterion gives poetry a prominent place. In no other period were the poets so well provided for as in the years 1990-1996 when four of the seven prizes went to Octavio Paz, Derek Walcott, Seamus Heaney, and Wislawa Szymborska, all of them earlier unknown to the world audience.

>> No.3780877

>>3780854
>>3780861
http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/literature/articles/espmark/index.html
^Says there that the committee is, in part at least, trying to do a little of that, actually.
I'll admit that there is a little bit of huffy foot-stomping here, but the indignity isn't because they don't have recognition -- regardless of the criteria, the Prize is regarded as literature's highest honor, and I think Americans are writing some of the finest literature today. Llosa over Pynchon? "Herta Who? Wherta Who?" over Roth? Be it critical instinct or patriotism, I'd like the greatest prize to go to the greatest authors.

>> No.3780879

>>3780873
I'm an idiot. Sorry. I agree with you then

>> No.3780885

>>3780861
That prize exists, it's called the Man Booker
lel[

>> No.3780891

>>3779617
you have better taste than anyone I've ever seen on this board

>> No.3780901

>>3780397
TAYEB SALIH TAYEB SALIH TAYEB SALIH TAYEB SALIH TAYEB SALIH TAYEB SALIH

>> No.3780916

>>3780901
Too dead.

>> No.3780962

>>3780397
Probably Adonis. He's been high on the betting lists for a while, and the academy's library has a lot of volumes of his poetry.

>> No.3781154

>>3780686
Unbeknownst to OP Pynchon has a history of antipathy towards the Nobel. I think (wasn't reading anything near Pinecone-tier back then) people saw GR as a strong candidate for the nobel and were disappointed when he didn't get it. If you follow his career after GR you'll notice he pokes fun at the academy and the prize.
>after GR is released TP settles down in northern California to begin work on his next novel, 'Vineland'
>Wanda Tinasky (a.k.a. TRP) begins indicting local poets and figures by writing letters to Bruce Anderson, editor of a local paper
>Makes fun of the Nobel academy numerous times, suggest that Anderson should get the peace prize, etc.
>Vineland is released. The principal character is intimately involved in a rebel enclave of artists who succeed from the US.

I haven't finished M&D or started any of the later works so who know if the thread goes on.

>> No.3782122

>>3780795
>>3780824
McCarthy won't win because he's plain not good enough. I mean he's borderline genre fiction.

>> No.3782125

>>3780877
Pynchon and Roth are not that great. Seriously. Get your heads out your asses, yanks.

>> No.3782132

>>3781154
Pynchon might have had a shout based on his '60s and '70s output, but everything after that is just not up to scratch. To win the Nobel you usually need a long career of consistent quality behind you. No one who has published an Inherent Vice stands a chance.

>> No.3782157

>>3782122
>I mean he's borderline genre fiction.
That's an insult to genre fiction.

>> No.3782195

>>3782125
Who is better in America?

>> No.3782205

Who was on the shortlist, anyway? The Nobel Prizes completely went over my head, this year.

>> No.3782215

Who the hell are cnosidered the elite in the American sphere, anyway? I don't really pay attention to modern literature, except for a select few authors.

>> No.3782468

>>3782205
It's not for a few months, yet. And we are not privy to the shortlist until decades afterwards.

>> No.3782471

>>3782195
Don't know. But I know plenty of non-American authors who are better. Most of the ones who've already been mentioned ITT are better, in fact.

>> No.3782527

You know what I've NEVER seen on this board, which surprised me a lot? All things considered, it's surprising.

People complaining about David Foster Wallace never winning the Nobel Prize (while alive, obviously). I mean, what's the argument or arguments against him winning it? People here think Infinite Jest is manna from Heaven.

>> No.3782537

>>3782527
DFW's worship has now gone full circle. Now, people who have not read DFW dislike him as a sort of backlash against people saying good things without reading him. I suspect this cycle will continue for some time.

>> No.3782548

>>3782527
Because he was too young. He was never a realistic candidate.

I'm pissed off that the Pulitzer snubbed The Pale King, though.

>> No.3782815

>>3782132
I definitely agree that he isn't Nobel material. Perhaps that is why his work is decreasing in literary merit. It seems to me that he is just a huge literature/science/history nerd who loves to write. Either he has a deep seated resentment for the Nobel institution or he is making of a joke of it, in my opinion.

>> No.3782834

>>3782815
I think he is just doing what he wants, which happens to be not what they want. I doubt he is that hung up on the whole thing, and nor should he be.

>> No.3782843

>>3782132
The Nobel isn't just about quality and having written many great books, some authors have won with only one truly great work. It's about showing "idealism" in your books.
In the past the requirements were much stricter and some great authors missed out because of it, but nowadays it's more about writing about humanism and even political idealism (if it's left winged).
I haven't read much of Pynchon, but what I've gathered is that his themes aren't too focused on lofty ideals. That's why he doesn't have a legitimate chance.

>> No.3782847

>>3782527
One novel does not constitute enough to win the nobel prize

>> No.3782859

>>3782843
Pynchon is pretty political, actually. He's just not Serious enough for the Nobel Committee.

>> No.3782873

>>3780834
Did we read the same book?
The fucking dog died.

>> No.3782875

>>3782843
>some authors have won with only one truly great work

Who? I'm sure they are exceptions rather than the rule.

>> No.3782899

>>3782875
They probably are the exceptions, but if you read the citation on wikipedia, with the reason behind the award, you will notice that some of them have received they with special appreciation of a single work.