National Book Award

[Liam]

Re: National Book Award 2015

Which was sort of my point. These lists don't usually reflect the best literature in the language because, instead of focusing on good writing, they pay lip service to political agendas the judges find themselves agreeing with. Still, occasionally, like once every thousand years, a book wins that is both politically aware AND beautifully written.

 

[DouglasM]

Re: National Book Award 2015

And I think good literature ought to surpass considerations of gender, race, sexuality and class--and awards should be given for good writing, not good politics. I agree with hoodoo's point above--this list probably does not represent the "best of the best" published in the U.S. last year. But such are the times we live in. Or perhaps it was ever so.

Prizes and awards usually reflect the fashion, including political fads, of their time; I mean, just look at the Nobel Prize! Would an author like Elfriede Jelinek win circa 1925? Would Sigrid Undset win circa 2015? I don't think so. The former would probably have been deemed vulgar and immoral and the latter would (with good reason) be judged as boring because she's not political enough. And yet they both won the Nobel Prize. Why?

You're right, Liam. My point, and I don't think I made it clear enough, was that historically few women were ever considered for serious prizes in any area and this reality is changing. This is the the welcome twist. We were used to see the opposite: lists where women were exceptions. And now the NBA presents a longlist like this.

I'm in no position to judge the works, as I haven't read them. Hope they're there for literary merits. As I mentioned before, the only want that interests me is Jesmyn Ward.

 

[hoodoo]

Really interesting article!

This one is also interesting : http://www.thedailybeast.com/will-commercialit-ruin-great-fiction

 

[hoodoo]

After review, I decided that I will try and check out Her Body and Other Parties : Stories by Carmen Maria Machado. The reason being that it was published by Graywolf, an independant press, that I respect. They published a few of Joshua Cohens earlier works. But the book hasn't even been released yet (slated for october 3rd)

 

[redhead]

Short list:
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-...e-finalists-for-the-2017-national-book-awards

 

[tierraylibros]

Commercialit. A fitting term. I've also seen these types of works frequently labeled as "Lit Light."

I agree. It's weird how the actual publishing industry has a stranglehold on these kinds of things. In the US books tend to published in page counts of 14 little packets of pages to be glued in depending on the company. You can honestly see where books are artificially lengthened or shortened based on costs. So many books come in at 337, 272, or other eerily identical page counts to account for the needs of the printer.

Also, it's apparently US MFA 101 to put the words "detritus" and "avuncular" in every new novel, to use the parable of the frog in cold water, or to have your characters react to "Claire de Lune".

I end up reading less popular old mean British ladies from the 30s-60s because they didn't play around and aren't beholden to these constraints.

 

[Gregg H.]

The winners have been announced.

http://www.nationalbook.org/

Let me direct your attention to the winner in the poetry category. Frank Bidart is a poet well worth the read. Jesmyn Ward's win in fiction is her second. The linked page currently has video of the awards ceremony.

 

[OverTheMountains]

I can understand your confusion, to a degree.

But it depends on the voices that they intend to focus on in nominees and winners.

There are writers in the US writing in a great many languages other than American English, and whose work reflects their experiences with America.

Also, anybody from outside the US would be quick to point out that "American literature" includes, technically, the literature of all countries from North and South America and the Carribrean. But that's a whole other discussion...

 

[Liam]

^Also, perhaps there's a stipulation that the translator must also be American? I'm just randomly guessing though--

 

[Stevie B]

^Also, perhaps there's a stipulation that the translator must also be American?

It is with both a sense of nostalgia and a devilish smile that I can imagine a grumbling post from Eric bemoaning the unfairness of such a possibility.

 

[Ater Lividus Ruber & V]

They've done this in a bunch of countries, so I'm not surprised. It's a great way to get translations more publicity and hopefully will get translators a living wage in America. I approve.

 

[garzuit]

English is not even the official language of the USA. Isaac Bashevis Singer wrote in Yiddish inside the USA and many authors write in Spanish, German, Navajo, you name it. It makes sense to have a prize for translations too.
By the way, outside the USA we don't like when only yanks call themselves "America". America is the continent, just ask anyone south of the border.

 

[Stiffelio]

English is not even the official language of the USA. Isaac Bashevis Singer wrote in Yiddish inside the USA and many authors write in Spanish, German, Navajo, you name it. It makes sense to have a prize for translations too.
By the way, outside the USA we don't like when only yanks call themselves "America". America is the continent, just ask anyone south of the border.

You're right. I recently learned that Jhumpa Lahiri now writes in Italian and then she herself translates her stories into English. It would be quite funny if she won, actually!

 

[Liam]

English is not even the official language of the USA.

You're confusing language issues with nationality issues. Isa is not claiming that anyone who doesn't speak English can't be American. He's saying that only the citizens of USA have historically come to be called, and known globally, as Americans. And there is some truth to that. If you ask somebody outside the U.S. who their favorite "American" singer is, the answer is not going to be Shakira.

Also, while (strictly speaking) it IS true that the United States does not have an official language on the federal level (despite numerous attempts to write it into the constitution), it has been left to the individual states to decide whether they designate English as their official language (sometimes their sole language, sometimes not: Hawaii, for instance, has at least two official languages).

By the latest count, here are the states that have proclaimed English to be their official language state-wide: Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Carolina, North Dakota, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, and Wyoming.

 

[OverTheMountains]

This has been discussed before and it's simply not true. The United States of America is the only country in all of the American continents with "America" in its name. Thus it is the only country for which this applies. No other country makes reference to the continent or Amerigo Vespucci in its name.

There is no other existing term that is widely used to refer to citizens of The United States. Numerous failed attempts at changing this never took hold and never will.

Likewise there are no European countries with "Europe" in their names, which is why "European" specifically refers to the continent.

Europeans don't refer to Canadian and Mexican writers as "Americans."

Collectively the Western Hemisphere is known as the Americas but when referring to the citizenship of a country it only refers to one specific one.

Your English is showing.

There is a reason that people from the US are not called Americanos by Latinos outside of Northern Mexico. And it has nothing to do with the extra thick coffee based drink and everything to do with the imprecision of the language that people from the States have been wrongly using.

Son los Estadounidenses. Y se llaman asi exactement porque tú razón no está suficiente.

 

[Daniel del Real]

Isa, your comment is just stupid and let us know you know nothing about History. Your country, which is not America (America is the continent, which to begin with it should be named Colombia, Vespucci did nothing more relevant than what Colombo did) has always tried to take over the whole continent and it started a while ago with the Monroe Doctrine. "America for the Americans" it was a not very subtle way to say, these lands belong to us and we can rule over them, not Europeans. And they have done it in several ways, expading a certain colonialism, being intrusive in politics, supporting coup's against democratic elected governments not suitable for their interests etc. The least they've done is to call themselves americans, it is way more the damage they have done to the whole continent. People from the United States of America are americans but not only them.
So keep on talking about literature that I think you know something about it and shut up on these topics when it's clear you have the same miopic view as all the Trump voters.

 

[Daniel del Real]

And just because a term has an accepted usage it means it is correct?
Terminology has to evolve and if the Brittish only knew at the time about their US territory colonies, later becoming the first independent country in the continent, guess what? History didn't stop there!
USA is not even a majority in terms of territory, population or language when it comes to America. In this aspect, the majority of real Americans, speak ESPAÑOL.

 

[garzuit]

This is going way off-topic. May I offer some conciliatory points?

Isa is right that in English the term Americans refers only to people from the USA. In Spanish, American means anything from the continent. It's lost in translation, as they say here.

Now my original point was that either because there are many authors in the US writing in their native tongues or because they want to reward American (i.e. yanks) translators, they came up with that prize. We're splitting hairs, I think.

 

[Liam]

Fake Americans... in the fake news

Love it!

 

[peter_d]

Please go on, folks! There is such an incredible shitload of nonsensical brawling on the internet by stupid people. This type of quarrelling by civilized, intelligent and well-educated individuals is a true delight. The crowd loves it!