Nobel Literature Prize Speculation: Jon Fosse

[Jo498]

8 hours ago, Clueless Northman said:

(I also agree that the committee seems to favour way more often European writers than US ones these last years, specially a few countries like France and Germany - as if modern French literature was more than a shadow of what it once was)

This does not seem to be correct. From 1991 until today there are 10 laureates writing in English, so one cannot claim that English language literature is not adequately represented (the US might well be underrepresented but there could be all kinds of reason for this and it seems ever more strange to give it to Dylan if underrepresentation of the US would be a factor).

Gordimer, Walcott, Morrison, Heaney, Naipaul, Coetzee, Pinter, Lessing, Munro, Dylan

two French (+ one guy writing Chinese who has become a French citizen), three German, one of which is the Austrian  Jelinek (justifiedly controversial), one was long overdue (Grass) and one was also controversial and surprising (Müller).

[maarsen]

I was raised in the 60's and I can honestly say that I was never that much into Dylan, even with his Canadian connection in hiring The Band. As a Nobel prize pick, maybe the Swedish  Academy realized that the odds were set for a decent payout at Ladbrookes. If you are going with unconventional writing, why not the writers for a show like The Wire? 

[Myshkin]

Nobody's saying the English language is underrepresented; we're saying that there's been what amounts to an embargo against American writers for more than two decades. And we know why. Horace Engdahl told us. Bob Dylan's selection is not only an insult to American literature, it was intended to be an insult. The Swedish Academy did not so much choose Dylan as ostentatiously not choose Roth, Pynchon, DeLillo or the handful of other deserving American writers.

[C.T. Phipps]

I think Bob Dylan is a good choice actually if we're actually judging people by "music which has social relevance as well as a net positive effect on the world." However, they should have a prize for music. They shouldn't give him the Literature award because of its absence.

Edited October 15, 2016 by C.T. Phipps

[Clueless Northman]

The way it would make the most sense, to me, would be if it was a way to state the obvious and acknowledge it once and for all: US music has had a tremendous influence and importance on the world for the last 100 years, way more than any other country, and way more than US poetry or high literature.

Though Myshkin is probably right that it was definitely not the intent. Yet I still don't know how Engdahl could actually keep his post in the Nobel committee after making such ridiculous comments - European national literatures are definitely not less insular than US one, and are definitely not the centre of world literature anymore (as far as I can see, there's no centre anymore, in fact).

[Myshkin]

Apparently Bob Dylan isn't answering the Swedish Academy's phone calls. 

[Isalie]

I think Horace's comment was his opinion, not something that was meant to represent the Academy as a whole.

Anyway, the prize has been very well received in Swedish media at least, someone even wrote that now the US people have no cause to be upset  

Someone else wrote that the Academy benefits more from giving the prize to Dylan than Dylan does receiving it, it will be interesting to see what he does of it, but also kind of embarassing if he declined it.

[banjax451]

On 10/18/2016 at 0:30 AM, Myshkin said:

Apparently Bob Dylan isn't answering the Swedish Academy's phone calls. 

I saw that!

And as Myshkin points out correctly, this is intended as a slap in the face of American publishing and American writers. I personally think their big problem is with American publishers but they've chosen to take it out on the authors. Engdahl said as much. We don't "translate enough," which is rich since as far as I know, Dylan has never been "published" in any language other than English. That's just one of the complaints he made.

My only hope is that in the next 5 years, the Academy decides to also award an American writer/author as a way to appease folks. Not that I believe that will ever happen, mind. They honestly don't care what Americans think of them.

If there was a Nobel Prize for Music, I wouldn't question this one bit. But I think I may be done with this award. It's broken - it's always been broken - it always will be broken.

Edited October 20, 2016 by banjax451
atrocious spelling mistakes

[Clueless Northman]

On ‎18‎.‎10‎.‎2016 at 4:31 PM, banjax451 said:

 it's always been broken

Case in point:

https://www.nobelprize.org/nomination/archive/show_people.php?id=9303

 

At least, the Peace Prize got it right the first time - but they had plenty to choose from for the 1901 prize. Though I'm still laughing hysterically at the Austrian officiales who proposed czar Nicholas II for it.

[Werthead]

The Guardian points out that Dylan is not the first songwriter to win the prize. Indian songwriter Raindranath Tagore won it in 1913.

[banjax451]

On 10/21/2016 at 7:18 PM, Werthead said:

The Guardian points out that Dylan is not the first songwriter to win the prize. Indian songwriter Raindranath Tagore won it in 1913.

Fair enough, though Tagore also wrote poetry, drama, fiction as well as his work translating. He isn't known solely as a songwriter.

I increasingly feel that Dylan's rejection (if that's what's happening) is the greatest thing that has happened to this prize in forever.

[Datepalm]

Nobody but Dylan (or someone of very similar ilk in this context - and I'm not sure a person like that exists, RIP David Bowie) could be doing this rather glorious slow rejection mystery dance either. Any writer - who isn't backed up by massive independent celebrity - not picking up the phone for the Nobel prize would just be seen as unspeakably snobby, or politicizing the prize. 

[C.T. Phipps]

The scene in A Beautiful Mind where the Nobel rep says, "We always check with the acceptors beforehand" seems like it was made up now.

Which is a shame as it would prevent things like this.

[maarsen]

On Tuesday, October 25, 2016 at 6:51 AM, Datepalm said:

Nobody but Dylan (or someone of very similar ilk in this context - and I'm not sure a person like that exists, RIP David Bowie) could be doing this rather glorious slow rejection mystery dance either. Any writer - who isn't backed up by massive independent celebrity - not picking up the phone for the Nobel prize would just be seen as unspeakably snobby, or politicizing the prize. 

Not even Pynchon? 

[Myshkin]

Dylan has finally acknowledged that he has indeed heard that he won the Nobel. Says he'll be at the ceremony "if it's at all possible". I'm loving the way Dylan is treating the Academy right now, and I sincerely hope showing up to the ceremony turns out to be not "at all possible" for him. Hopefully this will make the Academy think twice before pulling another shitty stunt like this again.

[Myshkin]

Well, this year's prize will be handed out on Thursday. I haven't been able to muster up much interest in the prize since last year's travesty. I won't bother trying to guess who it will be this time around, but after three straight years of surprise picks, two years of extremely unconventional picks, and last year's insulting pick, I'm hoping this year we'll get a more straightforward pick. Maybe Ngugi, Kadare, or Kundera. Hey, maybe they even try to fix the damage from last year, and give it to DeLillo. Probably not though.

[Ormond]

Is it too late for Adonis?

And does Isabel Allende have enough of a literary reputation to be a straightforward pick? Is the Academy perhaps at the point where it would like to go back and forth between male and female winners year to year?

[Myshkin]

8 minutes ago, Ormond said:

Is it too late for Adonis?

And does Isabel Allende have enough of a literary reputation to be a straightforward pick? Is the Academy perhaps at the point where it would like to go back and forth between male and female winners year to year?

Adonis wouldn't be a surprising or controversial (in a literary sense) pick. I'd certainly put him in the running. Allende doesn't really have the literary reputation to be considered. I think the Academy is acutely aware of how male the prize has been throughout its history, but I doubt they'd do something so obvious as make it a point to rotate between male and female authors on a yearly basis. I'd like to see them finally give back-to-back prizes to female authors. Say, Desai and Atwood, or Erdrich and Maraini. 

It's obvious that the Academy likes to surprise (which has led to some really bad choices), but they also need to choose worthy writers if they want to protect the Nobel's reputation. If they want to do both this year, the obvious choice would be Rushdie. 

BTW, Ladbrokes currently has Ngugi at 4/1, Murakami at 5/1, and Atwood at 6/1. I'm skeptical of those odds. Ngugi has been a front runner for the past 5 or 6 years, and I've lost faith in his chances. Murakami is also a perennial front runner in the betting odds, but he's the type of writer that the Academy seems to hate; massively popular with a huge international following. Atwood's chances were diminished when Munro won the prize in 2013, plus her recent surge in popularity due to the Hulu adaptation of The Handmaid's Tale will probably be counted against her. If I were to place a bet I'd put my money on Javier Marias at 10/1. But then what do I know? I'm on record as saying that neither Alexievich or Dylan would ever win the prize.

[banjax451]

Likewise, I've had trouble mustering interest this year after last year's middle-finger from the Academy towards an entire generation of American writers (I could make a case that it was a middle-finger towards ALL writers). I think Adonis's time has come and gone - with what's going on in Syria, I just don't think it'll happen (even if he deserves it). And I likewise think Atwood's chances of the award were killed by the three-prong assault of:
- Munro won in 2013

- Handmaid's Tale is both popular and award winning, which the Academy doesn't like

- writes genre fiction...even if she doesn't want to admit it

But more than anything else...I just don't care. They could make up for last year's travesty, but they won't. They could give the award to deserving people - but they likely won't. This award has always been broken - it's just more noticable now.

[Myshkin]

I'll make a bold prediction: Horace Engdahl and Peter Englund will share the prize this year.