Nobel Prize in Literature 2016

Marba

Reader

abecedario

New member
Hello, I'm new in this forum. I was wondering if there was any sort of internet archive of the Ladbrokes betting pools from previous years. Thanks in advance.
 

Stevie B

Current Member
Hello, I'm new in this forum. I was wondering if there was any sort of internet archive of the Ladbrokes betting pools from previous years. Thanks in advance.

Movements in Ladbrokes' odds are often noted on this forum, but I'm not sure where you'd be able to find actual archives. I remember when we'd laugh each year as Dylan would move up the board and then they went ahead and gave him the award and ruined the joke. Welcome to the forum, abecedario!
 

redhead

Blahblahblah
If you go to the speculation threads, toward the end you should find posts that note all odds movement, but I haven't found any actual archives.

And as for Dylan winning, 2016 in general seemed to be a good year for joke candidates winning...
 

Liam

Administrator
Dylan was easily the best American choice
Seriously? Not Ashbery or Donald Hall? They could have given it to Joan Didion if they wanted to branch out and get "experimental." I could think of any number of American writers and/or poets that should have been awarded before Dylan's name was even going to be considered. But then, the Swedish Academy doth move in mysterious ways...
 

JCamilo

Reader
The world's most influential living lyricist winning is hardly a joke candidate compared to some of the other names that have been floating around the betting odds for years. Given that Pynchon is never going to happen because he's a recluse Dylan was easily the best American choice that fits the Academy's criteria for winning.

Forget Isashoinp, there will be tombstones with "There lies the one who disagrees with Bob Dylan nobel" because the exercise of butthurtness in this thread is worth a meta-fictional work where someone creates a song lyricist novelist from american who published books that nobody read, became famous once Dusty Springfield recorded the chapters (only the even numbered chapters of every novel) and goes to sweden, visiting each member of the nobel to prove that was the genuine winner and that they jsut gave the nobel to win because someone wanted to have a private performance of Dylan.
 

Stevie B

Current Member
Seriously? Not Ashbery or Donald Hall? They could have given it to Joan Didion if they wanted to branch out and get "experimental." I could think of any number of American writers and/or poets that should have been awarded before Dylan's name was even going to be considered. But then, the Swedish Academy doth move in mysterious ways...

Is it just me Liam, or have you mellowed over the years? I expected all that time and work at Harvard would have been a major stressor, but you seem to have turned into Mr. Happy-Go-Lucky. :rolleyes: What gives?
 

Gregg H.

Reader
John Ashbery is 89 years old. He's too old to win. The oldest winner so far was Doris Lessing, who was 87 at the time of the announcement. I don't see them awarding it to anyone older than that or anyone in their 90s. Likewise Donald Hall is 88 years old. Both are older than most reasonably expect a winner to be these days. ... So around 40-87 years old. They fall out of that age range.

Joan Didion is best known as a novelist. She hasn't published a novel since 1996. 20 years ago. After that all of her recent publications are various non-fiction works and collections of essays. None of which seem likely to earn her a Nobel.

Please, list these authors and explain how they've had a bigger literary influence on American society and English language writing, as well as their influence around the world as a whole. Because few if any of them can measure up to the 5+ decades of work that Dylan has provided.

You can't be serious about an age limit. You're saying Lessing is the oldest literature laureate, so before she won the age was lower. So obviously age is not a criterion.

In what quantum universe is Didion best known for her fiction? Everyone knows it is her essays that are best know, especially those in her first two collections, Slouching Toward Bethlehem and The White Album. Next in line for best known Didion would be her two memoirs, The Year of Magical Thinking and Blue Nights.

Now if you're going to play the influence card in writing about Dylan, then not only are there zero American writers who can compete, but you pretty much have to wipe out most of the other laureates from the beginning. Faulkner, Garcia Marquez, maybe one or two others. That would suggest they should only give out the award every 30 or 40 years. Except that you use the word literary. I've never understood Dylan's influence to be literary.

And the next time anyone wants to refer to Dylan as a poet, I suggest they go back to the citation and bio portion of the bio-bibliography on the Nobel website where Dylan is clearly portrayed as a song writer and musician. "The great American song tradition," places Dylan in the company of Stephen Foster, Cole Porter, Woddy Guthrie, Willie Nelson and such. That is easy to accept,. The implication that by using techniques learned from modernist and Beat poets Dylan changed the nature of the song lyric is interesting and worth exploring. But none of this puts Dylan in the great American poetry tradition of Walt Whitman, William Carlos Williams, Marianne Moore, W. S. Merwin and such. The fact that 2 out of 17 members of the Swedish Academy have suggested otherwise convinces me that they are not familiar with American poetry, let alone the broader range of English language poetry. Dylan as a great song writer, no contest. Dylan as a great poet, don't make a fool of him.
 
Last edited:
I wasn't expecting this thread to pop up again anytime soon. I'm almost disappointed. But kind of not.

I'm not here to add anything, other than that I'm glad that Gregg stepped up to the Joan Didion plate. Her fiction is considered to be of a high quality, but it is her non-fiction that is, according to some, truly stellar. To be honest, what I have read I couldn't really get into, but I accept that it is fiction written for somebody else and for another time.

I also appreciate what he said about Dylan. I still like Dylan. But it has taken me up until very recently to listen to any of his albums again. When I read his lyrics as poetry I often find it trite or underdeveloped. There is the rare case where that isn't the case, but that is rare. I mean, it is impossible to read some of his poetry without music because, well, it just doesn't have any line or any sense to it in the words, and sometimes it is downright bad once you go past a few lines. That said, his work really flourishes when it is applied to music. It needs the beat and the drums and the guitar. And even then some of it cannot be salvaged.

I also find myself more and more concerned with the ways that he objectifies women in some of his work.

It will be curious to see what happens with the legacy of this prize. Not that it matters much. On the plus side, the award didn't add much space to my book shelf or to my Nobel Laureates To Be Read pile which grows, with each passing year, in my head.
 

JCamilo

Reader
Yeah, lyric poetry is poetry, etc. But Gregg is correct in his point, the main aspect or critery used to justify Dylan is his contribution to a specific form of writting, which is song writting. It does not matter if Cormac McCarthy wrote a better novel than Dylan, the point is Dylan wrote quite well his song lyrics to the point it is insane to argue he is one of the best representative writers in this field. Does not matter if there are great writers in other fields (you do not need to compare then, to reckon they are good, it is not a sport), it is good there is such diversity. Prizes are not inclusive anyways, they have the tendency to leave more people out than in.

After all, if one year we get in a momment that there is only one writer worth of reckognition and only one form of writting, to the point we cannot list other worth candidate, then Literature would be dead. There are many things that can be discussed about Dylan choice other than those comparassions, which made me remind an anedocte about Alexander Pope and Voltaire meeting.

They started discussing Newton (The Isaac) and Samuel Clarke ideas. Voltaire, at time, was favorable to Clarke notions of religion and commented with Pope: You certainly agree Clarke is greater than Newton and Pope answered "Perhaps, but that is like arguing who is better throwing a ball".
 
Last edited:

Liam

Administrator
Is it just me Liam, or have you mellowed over the years?
I think so, :) At 32, I hope I have learned to be more patient with other people (and to admit to myself that I'm wrong when I'm proved to be wrong). Sometimes I read my own posts from 2008/2009 and think, My god, did I really think like that? LOL. I still occasionally "lose" it, such as recently over Bob Dylan's win, and I'm not really proud of myself when that happens; I try to go back and rectify things if possible.
 

Daniel del Real

Moderator
I think so, :) At 32, I hope I have learned to be more patient with other people (and to admit to myself that I'm wrong when I'm proved to be wrong). Sometimes I read my own posts from 2008/2009 and think, My god, did I really think like that? LOL. I still occasionally "lose" it, such as recently over Bob Dylan's win, and I'm not really proud of myself when that happens; I try to go back and rectify things if possible.

We're getting old Liam. No more those late 20's fools who used to rant against good ol' Eric almost 10 years ago!
 
Top