Nobel Prize in Literature 1972

[hayden]

Green was a catholic writer who wrote about the catholic apologetics, Psyochology, sexual and cultural education for youth.
I think he isn't your cup of tea.


I read one of his books when I was a catholic child. A great book about Sexuality.

Oh.

Yuck.

 

[hayden]

Out of the new names— after a quick bit of research— I'm most interested in Said Akl, Ferenc Juhász, Pak Dujin, Veijo Meri & Vu Hoàng Chuong.

The first two in particular seem to be a big deal in their respective countries— shame that I haven't heard of either before and I'm having difficulty finding their work... (it's definitely out there though, so I'll keep digging).

 

[hayden]

Sorry for the triple post, but I don't feel like this fits in either of the last two—
In regards to the laureate, the go-to headshot of Heinrich Böll is kinda unflattering, so here's some cooler ones—

 

[Leseratte]

Sorry for the triple post, but I don't feel like this fits in either of the last two—
In regards to the laureate, the go-to headshot of Heinrich Böll is kinda unflattering, so here's some cooler ones—

They are cool indeed and I like Böll very much.

 

[nagisa]

Green was a catholic writer who wrote about the catholic apologetics, Psyochology, sexual and cultural education for youth.
I think he isn't your cup of tea.


I read one of his books when I was a catholic child. A great book about Sexuality.

AFAIU, Julien Green is still quite highly regarded in France. He was elected to the Académie Française in 1971, despite, horrors, being UN AMÉRICAIN. Bien manier le passé simple pardonne tout, it seems.

Amusing that his reputation rests on his voluminous Diary (19 volumes, from 1919 to 1998!), which only recently (2019) is being published unexpurgated. Turns out that about 60% was missing — with lots of gay sex ? (source) Curious catholic – or perhaps not.

 

[Verkhovensky]

The fact of Green's homosexuality wasn't hidden during his lifetime, he openly discussed it in his published works, which often deal with conflict between spiritual and sensual.
This obituary recounts his career and personal journey: https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Remembering+Julian+Green.-a054743313

I have his most famous novel Leviathan somewhere on my to-read pile.

 

[Benny Profane]

AFAIU, Julien Green is still quite highly regarded in France. He was elected to the Académie Française in 1971, despite, horrors, being UN AMÉRICAIN. Bien manier le passé simple pardonne tout, it seems.

Amusing that his reputation rests on his voluminous Diary (19 volumes, from 1919 to 1998!), which only recently (2019) is being published unexpurgated. Turns out that about 60% was missing — with lots of gay sex ? (source) Curious catholic – or perhaps not.

Oh my! Don't allow that the fanatic religious people discover this!!! ?

 

[Ben Jackson]

Out of the new names— after a quick bit of research— I'm most interested in Said Akl, Ferenc Juhász, Pak Dujin, Veijo Meri & Vu Hoàng Chuong.

The first two in particular seem to be a big deal in their respective countries— shame that I haven't heard of either before and I'm having difficulty finding their work... (it's definitely out there though, so I'll keep digging).

Ferenc Juhasz and his countryman Sandor Weores, at the time, were hailed as two of Central Europe's finest poets. Rumours had it that Juhasz was shortlisted for the Nobel in 1976. We'll wait and see.

I want to hear from you guys about Norman Mailer. I've read that he was one of America's finest novelists of the last century. Do you guys think he's worth it? What are his strongest works?

 

[Ben Jackson]

Sorry for the triple post, but I don't feel like this fits in either of the last two—
In regards to the laureate, the go-to headshot of Heinrich Böll is kinda unflattering, so here's some cooler ones—

Nice pics. I could see the signs of his sudden death in 1985 from his face, most especially the second pic. A great writer no doubt.

 

[errequatro]

One question for you guys: if you were in the Noble Commitee at the time, who would have been your candidate (among those shortlisted)? For me, I could have gone for White, since I haven't read Grass.

I would probably have voted for Boll. I completely disagree with him "not being relevant" for the 21st century... In fact, I think he is more and more relevant. Everything I read by him was of a very strong caliber... Grass and White are amazing too, but they were right not to ignore Boll.

 

[hayden]

One question for you guys: if you were in the Noble Commitee at the time, who would have been your candidate (among those shortlisted)? For me, I could have gone for White, since I haven't read Grass.

Montale.

I know a titan poet had just won the year prior, but he still would have been my choice. Grass, Boll and White were all (on average-ish) two decades younger. The fact three of the four won in rather quick succession (with a bump in the middle) and the fourth won 27 years down the road makes it a bit of a relief— it's not like anyone missed out— but I feel if the SA believed all were worthy, they should have gone with the writer who (erm...) was... (closest to death?). Y'know.

Sidenote— considering there was an empty spot in the shortlist, I'm surprised Auden, Ionesco, Frisch and Dürrenmatt weren't in the final bunch. Surprised none of them managed to become laureates.

 

[Liam]

Out of the new names— after a quick bit of research— I'm most interested in... Ferenc Juhász...

We have a thread on Ferenc Juhasz here.

 

[Ben Jackson]

Montale.

I know a titan poet had just won the year prior, but he still would have been my choice. Grass, Boll and White were all (on average-ish) two decades younger. The fact three of the four won in rather quick succession (with a bump in the middle) and the fourth won 27 years down the road makes it a bit of a relief— it's not like anyone missed out— but I feel if the SA believed all were worthy, they should have gone with the writer who (erm...) was... (closest to death?). Y'know.

Sidenote— considering there was an empty spot in the shortlist, I'm surprised Auden, Ionesco, Frisch and Dürrenmatt weren't in the final bunch. Surprised none of them managed to become laureates.

Just like I said earlier, it's not all the years that the shortlist is five, some years it's higher, some other years it's lower. Like 1961, 63, 68, the shortlist were 9, 8 and 8 respectively, while 1969 only had three.

An article in New York Times around 1983 suggested that the shortlist is usually between five and seven.

 

[hayden]

Just like I said earlier, it's not all the years that the shortlist is five, some years it's higher, some other years it's lower. Like 1961, 63, 68, the shortlist were 9, 8 and 8 respectively, while 1969 only had three.

An article in New York Times around 1983 suggested that the shortlist is usually between five and seven.

Right ?‍?️
I knew this.

We have a thread on Ferenc Juhasz here.

Yeah— I gotta check out his stuff. Just one of those names that's eluded me I guess. Seems his (slim volumed) selected poems are findable.

 

[Bartleby]

On 29 September 1973 Auden died. It would be sad if next year we see that he was on the shortlist again and was finally being backed by a majority only for his passing days before the announcement preventing him from winning ?

 

[Benny Profane]

I'd like to do a reflection here about screenwriters/directors.

We see again the name of Luís Buñuel on the list.
I think a lack of a prize by a Screenwriter or a Philologist a is the most negligence by SA.

We had brilliant minds realizing some masterpieces such as the own Buñuel, Bergman, Menzel, Tarkovsky, Kurosawa, Godard, Fellini etc.
They are great theorists of Cinema (they inovated it in many times), wrote essays about Esthetics of Cinema and, by this fact, all deserved the Prize at any moment, in my opinion.

 

[Verkhovensky]

I'd like to do a reflection here about screenwriters/directors.

We see again the name of Luís Buñuel on the list.
I think a lack of a prize by a Screenwriter or a Philologist a is the most negligence by SA.

We had brilliant minds realizing some masterpieces such as the own Buñuel, Bergman, Menzel, Tarkovsky, Kurosawa, Godard, Fellini etc.
They are great theorists of Cinema (they inovated it in many times), wrote essays about Esthetics of Cinema and, by this fact, all deserved the Prize at any moment, in my opinion.

The problem is that screenplays are rarely published in a book form. They are filmed, but oftentimes the finished product of a film is different than written screenplay, sometimes actors improvise, sometimes director changes major portions of a screenplay (if it was written by another person) etc.

Also most of writer-directors don't only express themselves through writing a screenplay, but also through other cinematic techniques. Which are not literature.

 

[Ben Jackson]

Montale.

I know a titan poet had just won the year prior, but he still would have been my choice. Grass, Boll and White were all (on average-ish) two decades younger. The fact three of the four won in rather quick succession (with a bump in the middle) and the fourth won 27 years down the road makes it a bit of a relief— it's not like anyone missed out— but I feel if the SA believed all were worthy, they should have gone with the writer who (erm...) was... (closest to death?). Y'know.

Sidenote— considering there was an empty spot in the shortlist, I'm surprised Auden, Ionesco, Frisch and Dürrenmatt weren't in the final bunch. Surprised none of them managed to become laureates.

We might see Ionesco in the shortlist before the end of 70s and Frisch will definitely show up in the 80s. For Frisch I suspect the years 1981 and 1989. Am not sure if Durrenmatt made it to the shortlist.

About Ionesco and Frisch, have you read them? I read Ionesco's Rhinoceros and Frisch's Montaux and found both works amazing.

 

[Benny Profane]

The problem is that screenplays are rarely published in a book form. They are filmed, but oftentimes the finished product of a film is different than written screenplay, sometimes actors improvise, sometimes director changes major portions of a screenplay (if it was written by another person) etc.

Also most of writer-directors don't only express themselves through writing a screenplay, but also through other cinematic techniques. Which are not literature.

I see a film as a play who is filmed in many cases. "Art house" and "art films" are example of plays with dynamic scenarios and stages, in my humble opinion.
Authors in many plays improvise too and this fact doesn't compromise the final result .

But I agree with you regarding many films (principally, "popular" films) aren't art which go for an "ideal direction".

These screenplayers/direction I've cited wrote essays about Cinema and arts, in general and, in my humble opinion, they have a cultural and literary value.

 

[hayden]

I'd like to do a reflection here about screenwriters/directors.

We see again the name of Luís Buñuel on the list.

We had brilliant minds realizing some masterpieces such as the own Buñuel, Bergman, Godard

I'm doubting Menzel was seriously considered (perhaps never even nominated), but I do think Bergman and Godard could have landed a shortlist or two, particularly since '95. Godard may have been up against Xingjian or Fo, and I could see Bergman being up against Pinter. Not to downplay the three laureates, but I think Godard and particularly Bergman deserved it more so.

I'm not sure which living screenwriters have a serious shot— David Lynch, Wes Anderson, Woody Allen, Almodovar, Werner Herzog, Miyazaki, Lars von Trier, Tarantino & maaaaaybe Haneke. A decade down the road, maybe a Korean— Park Chan-wook or Bong Joon-Ho. I'm having a hard time picturing any of them actually winning though, especially if they passed on Bergman.

Makes you wish there was a Nobel for cinema.

We might see Ionesco in the shortlist before the end of 70s and Frisch will definitely show up in the 80s. For Frisch I suspect the years 1981 and 1989. Am not sure if Durrenmatt made it to the shortlist.

About Ionesco and Frisch, have you read them? I read Ionesco's Rhinoceros and Frisch's Montaux and found both works amazing.

Yup— albeit, I've been meaning to read more Frisch (I have two of his books in my to-read pile).

I've read quite a bit of Ionesco—
Exit The King
Rhinoceros
The Killer
The Chairs
The Future Is In Eggs (or It Takes All Sorts to Make a World)
The Lesson
&
The Bald Soprano

And I've only read two works by Frisch, but I think both are (truly) perfect—
Man in the Holocene
Homo Faber

Coincidentally, I've never read a play by Frisch. I should probably get on that.