Understanding Nobel Prize: 1907--- 1912

[Ben Jackson]

Concerning Bernard Shaw's Mrs Warren Profession, the Nobel Committee considered the dramatic piece "through its subject frankly scandalous act," and that "Shaw actually fails considerably, however efficient in pathos, Shaw's characterization's (in his literary career) has been perverse." The Committee's assessment "was that Shaw's work was full of vigor and brutal," which has made the recommendation for the Prize inconceivable.

The Committee considered Henry James' Portrait of a Lady:

A rational work with Isabel Archer, which with known perfection, equipped with heroine look with little keen-sighted people, after the excellent Lord Warburton and selfish and amateur Osmond. The minute analysis of the soul, which becomes outspread in minor details, becomes tiring.

And Wings of a Dove:

Likewise, he has built an improbable and abominable motif. And that the lack of concentration in James work shows. For a writer with genius of a Walter Scott, have elegant style but fairly tiresome.

For those who have read James Portrait of Lady, how do you rate the novel? Do you think it's deserves it's reputation as one of the greatest novels? Do you agree with the Nobel Committee that its tiresome and tedious? Do you think the novel, been a 19th Century novel, is still appealing to modern readers? I haven't read this work, so I'm curious.

 

[Liam]

Do you agree with the Nobel Committee that its tiresome and tedious?

TBH, I find the Nobel Committee to be tiresome and tedious most of the time, ?

 

[Phil D]

For those who have read James Portrait of Lady, how do you rate the novel? Do you think it's deserves it's reputation as one of the greatest novels? Do you agree with the Nobel Committee that its tiresome and tedious? Do you think the novel, been a 19th Century novel, is still appealing to modern readers? I haven't read this work, so I'm curious.

I loved Portrait and think it's a book that absolutely stands up to a contemporary readership. Later Henry James can be trying, but Portrait is from his middle period (maybe even early period?) when he's easy to comprehend. Wonderful novel.

Edit: Wikipedia says it's the culmination of his early period, and who am I to disagree.

 

[Leseratte]

TBH, I find the Nobel Committee to be tiresome and tedious most of the time, ?

But Ben is taking it out of their Olympus all right.

 

[Leseratte]

I loved Portrait and think it's a book that absolutely stands up to a contemporary readership. Later Henry James can be trying, but Portrait is from his middle period (maybe even early period?) when he's easy to comprehend. Wonderful novel.

Edit: Wikipedia says it's the culmination of his early period, and who am I to disagree.

I simply love Henry James!

 

[The Common Reader]

Concerning Bernard Shaw's Mrs Warren Profession, the Nobel Committee considered the dramatic piece "through its subject frankly scandalous act," and that "Shaw actually fails considerably, however efficient in pathos, Shaw's characterization's (in his literary career) has been perverse." The Committee's assessment "was that Shaw's work was full of vigor and brutal," which has made the recommendation for the Prize inconceivable.

The Committee considered Henry James' Portrait of a Lady:

A rational work with Isabel Archer, which with known perfection, equipped with heroine look with little keen-sighted people, after the excellent Lord Warburton and selfish and amateur Osmond. The minute analysis of the soul, which becomes outspread in minor details, becomes tiring.

And Wings of a Dove:

Likewise, he has built an improbable and abominable motif. And that the lack of concentration in James work shows. For a writer with genius of a Walter Scott, have elegant style but fairly tiresome.

For those who have read James Portrait of Lady, how do you rate the novel? Do you think it's deserves it's reputation as one of the greatest novels? Do you agree with the Nobel Committee that its tiresome and tedious? Do you think the novel, been a 19th Century novel, is still appealing to modern readers? I haven't read this work, so I'm curious.

Dear Ben,
I envy you. You have a treat awaiting you. I read Portrait when I was 16 and have ever since wondered why did she did that. I look forward to what you think.
And then, I recommend “Daisy Miller,” Roderick Hudson, “The Turn of the Screw,” The Bostonians, The Princess Casamassima, and The Golden Bowl.
Enjoy!

 

[Liam]

^Washington Square is also a treat,

 

[Ben Jackson]

Dear Ben,
I envy you. You have a treat awaiting you. I read Portrait when I was 16 and have ever since wondered why did she did that. I look forward to what you think.
And then, I recommend “Daisy Miller,” Roderick Hudson, “The Turn of the Screw,” The Bostonians, The Princess Casamassima, and The Golden Bowl.
Enjoy!

I did read Golden Bowl some years ago. It was the first of James (the second was Aspern Papers) I had read and It was good. Loved how compact the story was: just four major characters. I haven't read anything from him since.

 

[Liam]

^The Golden Bowl is probably his most difficult text, so congratulations, you already got it out of the way,

 

[Leseratte]

I did read Golden Bowl some years ago. It was the first of James (the second was Aspern Papers) I had read and It was good. Loved how compact the story was: just four major characters. I haven't read anything from him since.

It you enjoyed The Golden Bowl I think you will like The Portrait of a Lady which has a more transparent plot.

 

[Ben Jackson]

^The Golden Bowl is probably his most difficult text, so congratulations, you already got it out of the way,

I think the critics grouped Golden Bowl as one of finest achievements of the early years of the last century (before 1920) along with The Ambassadors, Wings of a Dove and Beast of the Jungle. Golden Bowl was really difficult (but a rewarding read) that I didn't pick up a book for about two weeks. That was, if I remember correctly, July 2019.

 

[Ben Jackson]

I loved Portrait and think it's a book that absolutely stands up to a contemporary readership. Later Henry James can be trying, but Portrait is from his middle period (maybe even early period?) when he's easy to comprehend. Wonderful novel.

Edit: Wikipedia says it's the culmination of his early period, and who am I to disagree.

Yes. It was early period that comprised of Roderick Hudson, Europeans and Daisy Miller. The book I tried picking from James' middle period was The Bostonians, but my mind wasn't ready for it then.

 

[Leseratte]

I think the critics grouped Golden Bowl as one of finest achievements of the early years of the last century (before 1920) along with The Ambassadors, Wings of a Dove and Beast of the Jungle. Golden Bowl was really difficult (but a rewarding read) that I didn't pick up a book for about two weeks. That was, if I remember correctly, July 2019.

It´s the book that made me love Henry James.

 

[Ben Jackson]

The Nobel Literature Prize for 1912 was awarded to Gerhart Hauptmann "primarily for recognition of his fruitful, varied and outstanding production in the realm of dramatic art." It was announced on 10th October, 1912.

30 writers was nominated for the Nobel Prize this year. The shortlisted writers and their key works:

Gerhart Hauptmann (the same books evaluated in 1902 plus And Pippa Dances, Fool in Christ Emmanuel, The Rats and Atlantis)

Carl Spitteler
Olympian Spring
Imago
Bombardment of Abo

Karl Schonherr
Judas of Trol
Wood carvers
Earth
Faith and Homeland

First Time Nominees

Henri Bergson
Carl Spitteler
Pencho Slaveykov
Sven Hedin
Henri Fabre
Salvador Farina
Benito Perez Galdos
Adolf Frey
Hans Kunick
James G Frazer

Writers nominated by Nobel Laureates

Henri Fabre (Maurice Maeterlinck, Federic Mistral)
Benito Perez Galdos (Jose Echegaray)

Nominees that would become Laureate

Verner Heidenstam (1916 Winner)
Karl Gjellerup (1917 winner)
Anatole France (1921 winner)

No female writer nominated this year

 

[Ben Jackson]

Concerning Gerhart Hauptmann's candidature's, after been rejected for his earlier "stark naturalism and symbolism," he was praised "for creating extraordinary and significant drama marked with realistic dream poetry, that with a wonderful force (in The Weaver and Assumption of Hanele) has found no equal correspondence in world literature. Spittler was rejected for creating minor compositions even though the Committee found artistic merits in Olympian Spring.

 

[The Common Reader]

The Nobel Literature Prize for 1912 was awarded to Gerhart Hauptmann "primarily for recognition of his fruitful, varied and outstanding production in the realm of dramatic art." It was announced on 10th October, 1912.

30 writers was nominated for the Nobel Prize this year. The shortlisted writers and their key works:

Gerhart Hauptmann (the same books evaluated in 1902 plus And Pippa Dances, Fool in Christ Emmanuel, The Rats and Atlantis)

Carl Spitteler
Olympian Spring
Imago
Bombardment of Abo

Karl Schonherr
Judas of Trol
Wood carvers
Earth
Faith and Homeland

First Time Nominees

Henri Bergson
Carl Spitteler
Pencho Slaveykov
Sven Hedin
Henri Fabre
Salvador Farina
Benito Perez Galdos
Adolf Frey
Hans Kunick
James G Frazer

Writers nominated by Nobel Laureates

Henri Fabre (Maurice Maeterlinck, Federic Mistral)
Benito Perez Galdos (Jose Echegaray)

Nominees that would become Laureate

Verner Heidenstam (1916 Winner)
Karl Gjellerup (1917 winner)
Anatole France (1921 winner)

No female writer nominated this year

http://www.muzeumdomhauptmannow.pl/index.php?page=wystawy-stale

I once visited his country house in the foothills of the Silesian mountains, now southwestern Poland.