Nobel Prizes in Literature 2019 Speculation

[redhead]

It's incredibly early for this (I think someone usually starts these threads in July), but there were already some rumblings in another thread, so why not get started now. Besides, two winners this year means we should have double the amount of speculation time, right???

In the past few years, for winners we've had:

2012: A Chinese novelist
2013: A Canadian short story writer
2014: A French novelist who dabbled in detective noir
2015: A nonfiction writer
2016: In an incredibly controversial move, a songwriter
2017: A British/Japanese novelist, arguably one of the safest picks they could have made after the salt-storm the year before

This year, they'll award both the 2018 and 2019 prizes. Will they use the awards to "balance" each other? (ex. a man and a woman, a perennial and a newer unknown, a novelist and a poet, yet another French writer and someone from a country that's never had a writer win?) Will they double down?

Two things that may end up being useless but may also be helpful: maybe there's something to looking through their library, as stupid as it initially sounded; and unless it's a perennial, it's somewhat likely the laureate will have published something notable in the past five or so years. Of course, for Ishiguro, that "notable work" was The Buried Giant, which we all pretty much wrote off, so who knows what "notable" actually means to the SA.

 

[Bartleby]

Yay! 4 months and 28 days of pure excitement

Thanks for opening the thread, red.

Right now, since it caught my attention that 10 of her works are checked out from the library, I want to read some Can Xue to see if she's really got what it takes to become a nobel laureate. What about you? What will you be reading?

 

[redhead]

Funnily enough, I've had Can Xue's Frontier on my shelf for a while and was thinking of finally reading it (along with some Murnane). I enjoyed a lot of her fiction, and in regards to the Nobel I feel like the common opinion I've seen on here is that she certainly deserves it, but her work may be a bit too "out there" and avant-garde to win. Out of what I've read, my favorite of hers is definitely The Last Lover.

 

[Ludus]

Oh boy, it's that time of the year already!

I may be more excited with the speculation than with the prize itself. The academy has interesting picks for sure, but I've discovered many more interesting writers through the speculation thread. Even if some writers have "no chances" of winning the prize, the fact that you guys say they are worthy makes me want to read them. Most of my contemporary literature reading list comes from suggestions made here.

In a few weeks (when the paycheck finally arrives) I might get Can Xue's "Frontier", but my heart right now is still with Tokarczuk.

 

[Bartleby]

Also, I couple of weeks ago I was looking at the winners of the nonino prize, and this chinese poet caught my attention, Yang Lian, I was also surprised to see that back then he had 6 books checked out from the library (now I think they are 5). Has anyone read him?

 

[peter_d]

It's not taking off as rapidly as it used to in previous years. Probably because it is a bit early, but also these speculation threads have become a bit of a repitition exercise of earlier years. Yet I think it could become an interesting discussion because there are quite some new aspects to it: First of all they're picking two names this time, will they use that to come to a balanced choice? Secondly, the committee went through a complete renovation, what kind of impact will that have? Thirdly, two years have passed since the last price, so some new names must come up in this thread. I am specifically interested in the last point. What new serious names will come out of this speculation this year?

The one mentioned by Bartleby, Yang Lian, has not been prominently present in any of the speculation threads that I recall. Who knows he's a candidate. But will they chose a Chinese writer relatively soon after 2012? If we're looking at the Nonino laureates I'd rather see Ismail Kadare.

Let me throw in a new name. As far as I can remember, no one ever mentioned the name of Geert Mak in any of the Nobel speculation threads. A quick search on this board confirms that what I remember is correct. Mak was mentioned a couple of times in other threads, but the last time was more than 5 years ago. Mak is a historian, journalist and non-fiction writer from the Netherlands and has published many books specifically about European topics. You could probably place him in the same category as Svetlana Alexievitch. He was mentioned as a possible candidate in a radio interview last year with Prof. Henk van der Liet who is professor of Scandinavian Languages and Literature at the University of Amsterdam. He said he wanted to make a case for Mak and, if I understand the system correctly, these Literature professors do have some influence on nominations etc. So, who knows. Personally, I have not read much by Geert Mak, because I don’t read much non-fiction (I have enough non-fiction in daily life). What I read was good and interesting, though. So, I didn’t think the professor was saying something very strange. Let’s see if his name will come up anywhere else in speculations this year.

 

[Deleted member 83959]

Funnily enough, I've had Can Xue's Frontier on my shelf for a while and was thinking of finally reading it (along with some Murnane). I enjoyed a lot of her fiction, and in regards to the Nobel I feel like the common opinion I've seen on here is that she certainly deserves it, but her work may be a bit too "out there" and avant-garde to win. Out of what I've read, my favorite of hers is definitely The Last Lover.

I hated Frontier. It was a 3/5 for me. It’s like she’s writing this “fun house” where if you’re super into “exploring the house” (in this case a town) its interesting but it never goes anywhere. It’s reads like someone who worships Kafka wants to write something weird just for the sake of it being weird.

There’s also a terribly written character who’s black (his race) solely for the point of writing someone black into it and it’s sloppily done and incredibly awkward. I’m not sure if it’s because as a Chinese author she just doesn’t have much exposure to writing characters of other races but it’s the kind of thing I’d expect any white, American author to be lambasted for in critical reviews.

 

[Deleted member 83959]

Y’all it’s gonna be Olga Tokarczuk and Anne Carson.

For some more of my personal opinions on this year’s two winners:

A European male is not going to win. I could go into a whole big long rant about why and shoot down specific authors but for a more simple reason it just wouldn’t be good. After the gigantic mess the Academy has had and the loss of face the prize has had giving the prize to white European males this year would be very heavily criticized.

So many of these dudes have been in the running forever and I see no compelling reason why they’d win in 2019.

For Australia: I don’t think Gerald Murnane is going to win or is even being seriously considered. He’s gotten tons of press and speculation lately but the Nobel library does not look to be in his favor. If we’re going to seriously consider him Peter Carey may as well be seriously considered too (I do not think he will win in the slightest).

Japanese: Murakami is definitely not going to win. His last two releases, Men Without Women and Killing Commendatore, were passable/mediocre/uneven. They were not the kind of books that push a Nobel win through. In Commendatore especially the novel could have been great but he bungles passages with awkward references to technology that will soon be dated. The ending of the book could have really gone somewhere and become an interesting discussion into WW2 but he oddly turns away from this at the last minute. Perhaps it would have been to obvious? Regardless, it’s not Nobel winning work. Men Without Women contains some of my favorite short stories of his but also the worst thing he’s ever written.

I don’t believe any other Japanese authors are being considered.

Yoko Tawada is getting bigger but I don’t believe she’s anywhere near Nobel level. Minae Mizumura just doesn’t seem like the Nobel type to me. She’s best known for a book that’s a copy of Wuthering Heights and a book where she whines about globalization and how she doesn’t look many of her peers. It just doesn’t seem like something they’ll go for.

Koreans: Ko Un is never going to win. He’s a national embarrassment and the Academy would destroy any credibility they have left by giving it to him. I also find his poems simplistic and mediocre (this could also just be because they’re bad English translations).

Han Kang hasn’t written enough of note. Maybe in 10 years though.

Chinese: Yan Lianke’s works are too uneven imo. Dream of Ding Village was simplistic and dull. Serve the People was funny but essentially just a satire written to piss off the Party. His reputation is growing and all of his latest translated releases have gotten heaps of praise but he doesn’t seem like the type the Academy would champion. Goran Malmqvist hates simplistic, vulgar, protest type works (his personal blog has plenty of examples of this) and I just don’t see him going for Yan Lianke.

Yu Hua seems the most likely if a Chinese author were to win.

Americans: Marilynne Robinson appears to have been looked into but I’d rather she didn’t win. Her preachy essays about religion in America are off-putting and I don’t think they have global relevance.

Africans: the most deserving African author, Ngugi, seems destined to never win. For whatever reason the Academy has given up on him. Given this, I doubt they’re seriously considering any other African authors.

Scandinavia: several Icelandic authors had tons of books checked out back in 2017. That was likely because they were being considered for the Swedish Academy Nordic Prize.

Knausgård won this prize. He is not going to win the Nobel any time soon because of this. Due to My Struggle and his Seasons quartet being loaded with pop culture, technology, and internet references I also doubt he’d win unless he cranks out a ton of fiction in the vein of his first two novels.

Margaret Atwood: Gag.

Lyudmila Ulitskaya: could win

Random people (just feel like commenting on them, I doubt the European men win though):

I could see David Grossman winning at some point.

Abraham B Yehoshua - very doubtful considering his weird comments on Jews who don’t live in Israel.

Michael Ondaatje as an “out of nowhere” win.

Audunis: still a possibility but he’s really old and I just question if they even care about him at this point.

Javier Marias - could win

Jon Fosse - could win but I see him as less likely than many others

Ismail Kadare - will not win. Everything I’ve read by him has been a clumsy mess with sexist portrayals of women, prose that was so lazy it was unintentionally sexist, and surface level allusions to Greek classics.

António Lobo Antunes: the crying from laughing emoji. The way he speaks about himself and keeps claiming the Academy changed their mind at the last minute is embarrassing. Will never win.

Laszlo Krasznahorkai - could win

Claudio Magris - will never win

Cesar Aira - his style is unique but I question if he’s really Nobel material. Think it’s sort a wait and see scenario. Will his style stick or prove influential?

Peter Handke - never

Peter Nadas - I doubt the Academy is reading through his doorstoppers and doubt he’ll ever win. His stuff has had movement in the library but I don’t see him ever winning

Adam Zagajewski - could win but after having two polish poets is there really a compelling case for him?

Milan Kundera - nope

Enrique Vila-Matas - could win

Rohinton Mistry - hasn’t written enough and it’s been too long since he released anything.

Don DeLillo - nope

Joyce Carol Oates - nope

Lydia Davis - nope

Joan Didion - nope

Cormac McCarthy - nope, hasn’t written in over a decade

Thomas Pynchon - extremely doubtful plus his latest novel was about technology and I find that a turn off for winning since it becomes dated quickly.

Richard Ford - racist anger management freak. Nope.

John Banville - no

Colm Toibin - no

Tom Stoppard - one of the most likely playwrights but I don’t see him winning. Wouldn’t surprise me if he did though.

Salman Rushdie - no

AS Byatt - no

Hillary Mantel - no

Elena Ferrante - no

Nawal El Saadawi - she’s less an author and more of An activist. No.

Cees Nooteboom - no

Any of the Misty Poets - no. Seems like they had a chance in the 90s and were pushed and they all got rejected.

Nuruddin Farah - has anyone seriously thought he was going to win it in decades?

Kamau Brathwaite - meh, maybe if they’re feeling really random?

Antonio Muñoz Molina - he seems like a grouchy cynical douche. Just my type. Are his works Nobel worthy? No clue. He’s a member of Spain’s language academy. In the past that was a huge factor for winners but I have no clue if it has any bearing now (I’m guessing no).

Dubravka Ugresic - could win

Mircea Cartarescu - would be a cool winner but some of his works strike me as not literary enough, idk, it’s possible

Jonathan franzen - never

Anyone from Southeast Asia - unfortunately I doubt it. This is the area of the world that needs the most effort put into western language translations. While there are surely deserving authors I doubt the Academy has enough intel/there are enough translations existing to warrant deeper looks into specific authors. I’m not sure how the Nobel is received or if it’s a big deal to literary professionals in these countries. Is the Academy getting nominations from this region? I also don’t know if there are any/enough western experts that care enough about the prize to send in nominations

Annie Ernaux - the library doesn’t seem like it has enough going on to truly consider her

Hélène Cixous - could be a great winner and the library looks promising. She’s obscure enough that from a surface level most non-French critics won’t be able to complain much. She’s foundational in her field. Her works would certainly fit a redemptive theme if the Academy is trying to save face.

Emmanuel Carrère - I don’t see him winning

Pierre Michon - possible but I doubt it.

Michel Houellebecq - possible but he hardly seems like the type.

 

[Daniel del Real]

Don't know why I bothered to read all that crap above. Nothing meaningful or at least interesting. Besides, it's not like this guy has been accurate at all in the past.

 

[Liam]

Come on, Dan, this is hilarious

I can't say I disagree with the kid about at least SOME of these names...

 

[Daniel del Real]

Yes Liam but that is a mere list of disqualifications based on childish and trivial observations. I mean, there are very good writers followed with "no, no, no" based on absolutely nothing. This is nonsense and an absolute waste of time. If you have no idea about the author's ouvre then just skip its name; I'm sure there are members that can say something substantial about them.

 

[Cleanthess]

Regarding the no, no, noes.


Peter Handke and Milan Kundera, while being great writers who I would absolutely love to see win the Nobel, also carry some political baggage that might weight against them, specially during this year of reconciliation and conflict-avoidance.


There's also a bunch of writers who write in the same language as the last two laureates: DeLillo, Oates, Davis, Didion, McCarthy, Banville, Toibin, Rushdie, Byatt, Mantel.


Both Ferrante and Nooteboom look like viable candidates. Ferrante's stuff is not any more pop than some of Ishiguro's books, and more popular. Nooteboom is an excellent poet and travel writer as well as a good novelist.

 

[HaveOneOnMe]

Anne Carson seems like a no-brainer choice. She's female (I hate gender politics but it's going to be very central to the nominations this year, whether you like it or not), and that's just for starters. She's hugely revered amongst a small group of readers who follow her work feverishly, she's critically and academically worshiped, she's experimental and is contantly pushing herself into new territories, refusing to write the same thing over and over again. None of her work is like any of the other stuff, but her voice is singular and unique, nonetheless. She's also really productive: she's just written a theatre piece with Ben Whishaw and Renee Fleming (which I saw in NY and it's incredible), and before that, there was her 2016 collection Float, red doc> in 2013, she's always publishing poems in the LRB, the New Yorker, the NYRB, etc. She's delivered extraordinary "lectures" in the last couple of years too (on everything from "chairs", "silence", "corners", "the sky", and, most incredibly of all, a fictional narrative essay called, mysteriously, "An Essay On Threat, in three parts", readings of which are available on Youtube, and come, from me, highly, highly recommended). She's even branched into short story writing. She has one called "We've Only Just Begun", which was published in the New Yorker; it's a stream of thoughts of a woman, who's just been car-jacked and brought back to her apartment, along with her lover, to be tortured...it's extraordinary...I have no idea how of much of this will be known to, or seen by, members of the academy but I think Carson's work achieves that rare thing: a fusion of the qualities of contemporary urgency, timelessness, and singularity of vision...

I met her in NY, when I visited the city to see Norma Jean Baker of Troy. It was brought to my attention that she was doing a reading at a Proust conference the following day, which Sara Danius was going to be attending to, but she had to pull out at the last second! At one of the breaks, Anne was just pacing around the foyer by herself and I went over to her and introduced myself. She's kind of amazing. She has that je ne sais quois aura/energy...she's really beautiful and polite and quiet but friendly in her own quiet way, and you can tell she's extremely intelligent but would never in a million years make you feel dumb...she seems like a really gentle and kind spirit. It was a dream come true to meet her.

 

[Stiffelio]

Don't know why I bothered to read all that crap above. Nothing meaningful or at least interesting. Besides, it's not like this guy has been accurate at all in the past.

I agree with you. The above list of 'no-nos' and 'coulds' is no more than a baseless, childish rant.

 

[EllisIsland]

I disagree with you guys, even though he does not provide the reasoning behing many of his 'nos', I think that he could be right with them nevertheless.

And I think that Anne Carson and Olga Tokarczuk are reasonable candidates. I would agree that at least one of them could have won the Nobel prize for last year.

 

[DouglasM]

As is the case with other fellow users on this forum, I do think that, due to a complex and thorny conjuncture (and because it's the 21th century), this year we'll have at least one woman awarded. That makes Anne Carson and Olga Tokarczuk reasonable winners. I'm not specialist in their works, but it seems to me that Olga is becoming more and more known internationally in the last few years, being a recurrent name in certain prizes (Man Booker International, I'm lookint at you). Considering the last couple of winners wrote in English, I'd put my money on Olga instead of Anne.

At least here in these boards both names are well established containders. What others would you mention?

I've been reading a lot less literature than I want due to my postgrad studies and work overload. But I can't stop thinking what a wonderful winner Yu Hua would make.

 

[redhead]

I'm a bit late in replying here, but I hope you guys didn't scare Isa away! I always enjoy reading his posts.

Anyway, I noticed that Can Xue has 12 books checked out currently. Anne Carson has far fewer, to the point where I'd say it's probably not that noteworthy, except one of her books has a due date in August. The public can take books out there, but they can only do it for one month at a time, so this has to be an Academy member or a researcher--could mean something.

Anyway, the best part of these threads was always discovering new brilliant writers, anyone read any lesser known writers recently? Scifi/fantasy usually gets a bad rep, but Gene Wolfe is one of the greatest writers I've read (I've probably already recommended him a bunch of times on here, but oh well ). Also within that genre are Ursula K. Le Guin and Samuel Delany, who are also both incredible.

Btw, DouglasM, what are you studying?

 

[Ludus]

Can Xue sounds like a good choice. I read a few short stories from "Blue light in the sky" and I found them fascinating. By the way, what do you people think about Ernesto Cardenal's chances? He has to be one of the most important living poet in the Spanish language, and his books are widely available in translation in the Nobel Library.

 

[Daniel del Real]

I really like Cardenal, as a poet and as a person. I've never dared to read his Canto Cósmico, which I've heard it's really impressive (by its lenght & content) but I have read five or six of collections and I enjoyed them. I like more his political, humanist poems, which are closer to people, their ideals and the Revolución Sandinsita; on the other hand his poems more oriented to misticism are less appealing.
All of this being said, it's hard to consider him for the Nobel: he's 94 years old and although it's not a must, he hasn't won the Cervantes yet (probably they're waiting him to be 99 like Nicanor to award him).

Can Xue sounds like a good choice. I read a few short stories from "Blue light in the sky" and I found them fascinating.

That looks like a good option to read her instead of his long novels. Nothing against long novels, but when you have in line A House for Mr. Biswas, Celestial Harmonies & El Obsceno Pájaro de la Noche, to read in what is left of the year, you need to be careful with what new you choose.

 

[EllisIsland]

Wolfe and Le Guin are both dead, but I guess you know that...