Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to The Fictional Woods. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Nobel Prize 2017
Topic Started: Aug 23 2017, 10:58 PM (12,833 Views)
oneofmurphysbiscuits
Member Avatar
marmalade modernist
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
hey thanks, Bloss...and I forgot curries
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Uemarasan
Literary lunatic
[ *  *  * ]
Yeah, I like this choice. I thought they would go with someone more obvious (Antunes, Atwood, Cartarescu, Marias, Krasznahorkai, Thiong'o). I'm glad to be blindsided and that the Academy supports the idea of a Nobel-worthy author as someone who doesn't have to appeal only to the literati. There are great and deserving popular and mainstream authors as well and not every winner has to be challenging, little-known, or unorthodox.

An Artist of the Floating World is my favorite.

I did quite poorly with my predictions this year and only guessed the most obvious prize (Physics).
Edited by Uemarasan, Oct 5 2017, 09:27 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Cleanthes
Member Avatar
Dinanukht wannabe
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
A silver lining to this year's prize is that the Academy followed the advice of my favorite poet, Horace and embraced a golden mediocrity:

You will live better, Licinius, by neither
always pressing the deep nor, while you carefully
dread storms, by excessively pressing
the treacherous shore.

Whoever seeks a golden mediocrity
is safely free...

Rectius vives, Licini, neque altum
semper urgendo neque, dum procellas
cautus horrescis, nimium premendo
litus iniquum.

Auream quisquis mediocritatem
diligit, tutus caret obsoleti...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
oneofmurphysbiscuits
Member Avatar
marmalade modernist
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
He's not up to it, other arguments pro and contra are straw men at best.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
nnyhav
Member Avatar
itinerant kibitzer
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I don't consider Ishiguro a mediocre writer by any standard, but his selection as laureate is meh: safe, popular, yes all that and more, or less. Though it's the first time in a while (how long?) that the winner didn't appear on Ladbrokes' list (also, first "professionally trained and accredited writer", MA-CW equiv of US MFA; mo meh visavis awarding, not to knock Ishiguro's craft or style). While not last year's nadir, this does little to change the downward arc the prize has taken in recent years for "relevance" (not to literature).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Cleanthes
Member Avatar
Dinanukht wannabe
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
When I read The Remains of the Day, I was actually pissed off at the willing, deliberate blandness. Maybe Ishiguro was experimenting with diluting Jamesian narratives in an effort at achieving homeopathic fiction. He sure seemed to be aiming for golden mediocrity to me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
oneofmurphysbiscuits
Member Avatar
marmalade modernist
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
he's competent, Cleanthes, no more than,if you needs must give a global prize to a writer (even of) British English, could you not try harder and look around a bit more. They're the self selecting prize givers after all. Also concur with Dave's MFA analogy. Prizes neither deter or encourage me, I've no interest in, but I admit to being curious as to how and why Danius and crew believe that Ishiguro will do.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Cleanthes
Member Avatar
Dinanukht wannabe
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
OOMB, as usual, you're right. A competent writer writing about interesting topics: they could have chosen worse.

But I'm grateful for this year's Nobel thread at the WWLF, it made me read Ewa Lipska, Mayrocker and Karl Krolow, Mario Lunzi, Vittorio Sereni and Giorgio Caproni among others. So

Ed ora, disse, lasciamo
questa stanza delle cose inutili. Saliamo
insieme sulla terrazza
della Cattedrale, e insieme
- sollevato il bicchiere -
brindiamo, goethianamente,
al bel sole cadente.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kline19
Member Avatar
worker bee
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
i agree with nnyhav pretty much. Ishiguro's writing has mastery to it that can't be reduced to some formula.

Although, picking him says more about the new handlers of the Nobel Committee than about Ishiguro.

Also, does anyone think that by giving Ishiguro, Nobel Committee have effectively picked the "winner" among his peers, the cohort of such London writers like McEwan, Rushdie and Amis? and so these guys have been effectively passed over? (not that they would be considered Nobel worthy types in this thread anyway :P )
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Cleanthes
Member Avatar
Dinanukht wannabe
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Great points kline.

That generation of writers born after 1945 and before the '60s (which also includes Hanif Kureishi, Allan Holinghurst and Julian Barnes) is likely done for. I would have chosen Julian Barnes among them to win the Nobel.

This is what the official fish wrapper had to say when ranking the British writers after 1945:

https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/288486-the-times-list-of-50-greatest-writers-since-1945

Salman Rushdie - 13
Martin Amis - 19
Kazuo Ishiguro - 32
Ian McEwan - 35
Hanif Kureishi - 37
Julian Barnes - 44
Hollinghurst - MIA
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
mandm
Member Avatar
Forum junkie
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I can only agree that they could have done worse, but were far from challenging in their choice. My favourite is Remains, though I've only read three of his in all. It's been over two years snince anyone said anything about him on these threads, and we are the real arbiters of taste, so...

Haven't read The Unconsoled. Probably should, I spose. But I might wait a bit first.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Bjorn
Member Avatar
Forum junkie
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Via Orthofer:

What Happened to the Nobel Prize in Literature?

Quote:
 
Given its pedigree, the Nobel Prize doesn’t have to keep sponsors happy, which means it doesn’t necessarily face this kind of pressure. And yet it’s also shifted its identify over the last three years, embracing a kind of populism. Obscurity is no longer a virtue, and all literary forms are welcome. But that change has also come at a cost. Despite being dismayingly Eurocentric—a black African writer has not won since 1987, for instance—the Nobel was the premier way for difficult and strange writing of high quality to get a wider audience. With the Nobel edging toward the likes of Dylan and Ishiguro, this is a loss for global literature.


Of course, there's always the problem that with only ONE winner per year and no public short list, we're inevitably drawing conclusions about trends based on a very small sample. Would the "what happened to the Nobel Prize" discussion look much the same if they'd chosen an obscure writer this year and Ishiguro in 2018? Would Dylan look as weird if we'd known who he beat out? (Well, yeah.)
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Uemarasan
Literary lunatic
[ *  *  * ]
mandm
Oct 5 2017, 03:31 PM
...and we are the real arbiters of taste, so...
...? Being facetious? ;)

I am in disagreement with MAO there. I don't mind an established laureate. The Nobel Prize can be for everyone and not just those who read a lot of literature. They should award any author they deem worthy regardless of popularity or obscurity, ease or difficulty. The work above all else. Personally, I do enjoy Ishiguro even though he's not a favorite and isn't really to my taste. I think a convincing case can be made for his distinction as a very good writer, even a great one.

I'm actually glad that they're looking at popular candidates alongside more unfamiliar ones. It sends a message that they are committed to literary quality first and foremost. For those who want only obscure, previously unknown, or unheralded authors, I don't believe the Nobel Prize should serve that function.

MAO disappoints more and more as the years go by... Just my opinion.
Edited by Uemarasan, Oct 5 2017, 04:04 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Bjorn
Member Avatar
Forum junkie
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
To be clear, Orthofer didn't write that article, just linked to it.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
mandm
Member Avatar
Forum junkie
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Uemarasan
Oct 5 2017, 03:59 PM
mandm
Oct 5 2017, 03:31 PM
...and we are the real arbiters of taste, so...
...? Being facetious? ;)

I am in disagreement with MAO there. I don't mind an established laureate. The Nobel Prize can be for everyone and not just those who read a lot of literature. They should award any author they deem worthy regardless of popularity or obscurity, ease or difficulty. The work above all else. Personally, I do enjoy Ishiguro even though he's not a favorite and isn't really to my taste. I think a convincing case can be made for his distinction as a very good writer, even a great one.

I'm actually glad that they're looking at popular candidates alongside more unfamiliar ones. It sends a message that they are committed to literary quality first and foremost. For those who want only obscure, previously unknown, or unheralded authors, I don't believe the Nobel Prize should serve that function.

MAO disappoints more and more as the years go by... Just my opinion.
Sure, of course.

I like to discover authors I don't yet know, so it's a little disappointing to see Dylan then Ishiguro winning. Beside which, it's only been ten years since a British writer won. Is that justified?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Bloß ein Língshān
Member Avatar
Tropften Fingernägel
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I wonder if it's due to him being around for decades and a big-name author, but I checked my university library, and only the three copies of The Remains of the Day have been checked out. All of his other books are available! Surprised Danius' mention of The Buried Giant did nothing.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
redhead
Member Avatar
books & beer
[ *  *  * ]
I remember for Alice Munro, it was the same for my public library at first, but after a few months, when all the local book clubs had put her on their lists, it was difficult to find anything by her.
Edited by redhead, Oct 7 2017, 09:31 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Cleanthes
Member Avatar
Dinanukht wannabe
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Fame is transient, even for Nobel Prize winners.

For example, remember Jose Echegaray, who was greatly admired by George Bernard Shaw and Luigi Pirandello, who like them won the Nobel Prize in literature (in 1904, let me point out that from the whole set of great writers from the whole world living around the time, Tolstoy, Henry James, Mark Twain, etc. he was the FOURTH one to win it); according to Wikipedia, he was president of the most prestigious literary association of Spain, the Ateneo de Madrid (1888); President of the Asociación de Escritores y Artistas Españoles, member of the Spanish Language Association, the "Real Academia Española" between 1894 and 1916; Senator-For-Life (1900) and twice president of the Spanish Sciences Association, the Real Academia de Ciencias Exactas, Físicas y Naturales (1894–1896 y 1901–1916); he was the first President of the Spanish Chemistry and Physics Society, the 'Sociedad Española de Física y Química', the first president of the Spanish Mathematical Association, the Sociedad Matemática Española(1911), candidate for the Nobel Prize in Physics, and, in 1907, upon a request from Nobel Prize Winner Santiago Ramón y Cajal, the Spanish Sciences Academy created the Jose Echegaray Prize for lifelong outstanding contribution to the sciences, and it was awarded first... to Jose Echegaray himself. Echegaray dominated Spanish drama for a quarter century like no one else had dominated it since Calderon and Lope, he was widely translated and won other prizes lesser than the Nobel. Streets were named after him, Governments consulted with him in matters, cultural, scientific and economic.

And yet, who the heck is Jose Echegaray? Who remembers him today?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Bloß ein Língshān
Member Avatar
Tropften Fingernägel
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
But see, I like that time-capsule effect of the prize because, as we all know, authors are unjustly neglected. You make me want to run out and purchase what I can find of Jose Echegaray. If he was admired by Shaw and Pirandello, basically ruled the Spanish cultural scene, got the prize... who cares if he's known or unknown? Always time for (re)discovery!

Do you like him? And thanks for the post, Cleanthes.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Heteronym
Member Avatar
Forum junkie
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Kauzo Ishiguro: "I come in the line of lots of my greatest heroes. Absolutely great authors. The greatest authors in history have received this prize."

http://www.latimes.com/books/jacketcopy/la-et-jc-nobel-ishiguro-20171005-story.html

Remember, children, next time your career depends on you being a spineless coward, ask yourself, "How low can I sink?" And then try to surpass the 2017 Nobel Laureate. Everything will turn out just fine.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · General discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply