Nobel Prize in Literature 2019

Good choice?


  • Total voters
    26
  • Poll closed .

Liam

Administrator
I remember reading his Transparent Things and not having a clue about it being a ghost tale as told by a ghost to one of the other characters in order to assist with the transition into the next life.
Way to spoil it for the rest of us, :)
 

Vitrvvivs

Member
Cleanthes exists at the centre of Elysium, reaching his hand down to the maggots, from his omniscient height, to tell us of the lofty things. The things we have come to know, and will come to know, are 'consolations'. Thank you for reducing our hearts to their rightful place. Thank you, Cleanthes. Truly.
 

redhead

Blahblahblah
Same thing happened with GOT's ending, I couldn't understand Khaleesi's actions and fate until somebody clued me in to the fact that she was a bique émissaire, intended to atone for the sins of the many Gary Stu and Mary Sue "chosen ones" who infest popular fiction, but I digress...

You couldn’t understand it because there really weren’t any understandable reasons for some of her actions that last season :p
 

Liam

Administrator
You couldn’t understand it because there really weren’t any understandable reasons for some of her actions that last season
Even though some die-hard fans of the show are trying to convince us that the "seeds of her madness" were planted very early, at the very start, and they start pulling scenes from Season 1, like her unperturbed reaction to what essentially amounts to her own brother's execution by Drogo (never mind that he was a malicious prick, and all that, he was still her only brother) as "evidence" of the early manifestation of her madness. There's a point there, I think, but the show could have done a much better job developing her character over the six seasons before springing that shit on us. I thought they did wonders with Cersei. Lena Headey inhabits the role beautifully, and her actions are always perfectly consistent with her malicious nature, with a few infrequent episodes of kindness where she shows her human face. So yeah, completely agree!
 

Cleanthess

Dinanukht wannabe
Agreed. The explanation I received was that the new writers hated the Khaleesi character, in fact, disliked all "chosen one" characters in general, and decided to teach a lesson to us, fanboys of Gary Stus and Mary Sues.

I remember hating how the decisions made by the protagonist and antagonist of that cartoon, Aeon Flux, affected others (those others sometimes including all of humankind), so I can understand at least a bit why said writers' took advantage of their position to enact their revenge against Chosen-kind.

Nietzsche wrote something apposite, but I'll have to wait until I get home to get the quote right. The gist of it being that some leaders may have decided it was worth paying any price and enduring any punishment in the future in order to seize the chance to avenge themselves on their God's chosen one for all the suffering their God had allowed their people to go go through.
 

Verkhovensky

Well-known member
I remember reading his Transparent Things and not having a clue about it being a ghost tale as told by a ghost to one of the other characters in order to assist with the transition into the next life.

What the hell, I read that book a few years ago but I never realized this :oops:
That's what happens when you're reading an edition without any "extras", no introduction, afterword, even blurb, just plain text.
 

Vitrvvivs

Member
Just watched 'the never ending story', and, aside from the ecstatic images contained therein, I was afraid it was to be a middling fairy tale, but when he gets to the wolf, the wolf explains how he, and his master, are taking over the world of dreams, because the people on earth are hopeless, or too rational, and that this is easy to prey upon. There's more wisdom in this film than Clea's post, really.
 

redhead

Blahblahblah
Even though some die-hard fans of the show are trying to convince us that the "seeds of her madness" were planted very early, at the very start, and they start pulling scenes from Season 1, like her unperturbed reaction to what essentially amounts to her own brother's execution by Drogo (never mind that he was a malicious prick, and all that, he was still her only brother) as "evidence" of the early manifestation of her madness. There's a point there, I think, but the show could have done a much better job developing her character over the six seasons before springing that shit on us. I thought they did wonders with Cersei. Lena Headey inhabits the role beautifully, and her actions are always perfectly consistent with her malicious nature, with a few infrequent episodes of kindness where she shows her human face. So yeah, completely agree!

You're right that those fans have a point there about her brother, but that just makes me more annoyed with Dany's turn. Like, the seeds were there all along, and with minor changes--not even any real changes to the overall plot--they could have made her madness much more believable. Literally just reframe her conquests so that there's more ambiguity with her actions and less "You go, Dany!" It wouldn't be perfect, but it would make some sense at least.

I agree with you about Lena Headey, she's wonderful. I just wish her twin got a better ending (more spoilers ahead: in theory I don't mind what happens to him, but they really needed to change his season 8 storyline if they wanted him to return to Cersei).
 

nagisa

Spiky member
You're welcome Cleanthess; I'm glad I could contribute a bit to the debate. And thank you for your appraisal of Handke, which does bring out the best in him.


On GoT we all agree at least: bad writing :/
 

nagisa

Spiky member
Thanks Isa; I'd seen that too. These two as well:

Not pretty...
 

peter_d

Reader
To me this shows why Petersen and Runesson (among others) should have stuck to their initial line of reasoning of 'seperate the art from the artist' and 'this is not the Peace Prize'. That's something you can agree or disagree on and have civilized discussions about. But somehow they got themselves dragged into defending their choice by defending the author. That was an incredibly foolish thing to do.
 

JCamilo

Reader
Well, that was a very fragile reasoning anyways, but don't you find worrying that members of an organization that should be promoting literature, therefore reading, seems to be prone to such lazy un-critical reading, accepting fake stories without a deeper research (if this story is true? What next, Reddit Nobel Group?
 

Ludus

Reader

Read the article cited. Was that really trying to give him some kind of good service? The attempt to be as objective as possible seems kind of naïve to me. I mean, the fact that he does not deny all the horrible shit that happened makes his speech in Milosevic´s funeral even worse. Very hard for me to grasp that someone who is so "anti-nationalist", that is so concerned with the victims of the atrocities, can say such things. Either he tried to be too objective for his own abilities, or he really is a giant shitlord but tries to hide that awfullness in the form of an ill-intentioned objectivity.

Still believe that this should not be considered when deciding if he is deserving for the prize, but man, what a douchebag the Academy is trying to defend! Can´t they just say "yeah he sucks but he writes good idk"?
 

Bartleby

Moderator

The only good thing this... man has done is, by showing this letter, make more people aware of this blog https://thegoaliesanxiety.wordpress.com/

this whole media coverage thing's gone beyond ridiculous now, culminating with this [no] Maas guy’s continual bending of Truth for who knows what reason; or rather it only shows one’s willingness to bow down to blind hatred and ignorance, it’s disgusting me. Can’t take it anymore. It makes me literally physically ill. That one can, just because of disagreements over another's statements, propagate hateful and false utterances against you, and that it can grow and silence Truth, so that no matter what is said, the raging masses won’t listen. Where’s civility in all this? Where’s tolerance? Tolerance so preached about... And it’s as much my indignation over this whole Handke situation, as it is the fear that it may happen to anyone of us - me, you. If one can learn something about this is that, when you lead a public life, it is best to keep your mouth shut at all costs, lest you live a life in fear forevermore. And even this attitude is living in fear, so there’s no escape, I guess.

as a final message: Love. Love conquers all, we should all hold onto it. Be well.

I quit following this topic. Not because of you, I should clarify. You've been the most polite ones and this forum the safest place to be on the Internet, and for that I could not thank you enough. Just can't stand to participate in this particular discussion anymore.
 
Last edited:

Johnny

Well-known member
Well said. This seems to be the worst form of journalism, written to an agenda. I’m out of here also. I would much prefer to discuss his literature which is of the highest order. I’m reading Repetition at the moment and it’s one of the very best books I’ve ever read.
 

JCamilo

Reader
Still believe that this should not be considered when deciding if he is deserving for the prize, but man, what a douchebag the Academy is trying to defend! Can´t they just say "yeah he sucks but he writes good idk"?

That is the point for me, not Handke, but how the Academy cannot just come and be honest about instead of trying to disguise or dont address the issue in first place. You can read a work despite the political/ideals on it, but you cannot deny that an individual had or have them and they exist in the work or that an Institution has one neither.
 
Top