Nobel Prize in Literature 2010 Speculation

[adaorardor]

OK here's a question. They say they don't publish the nominations until 50 years afterwards. But where do they publish them?? Where can we read this year about who were the runners-up in 1960??

[Amoxcalli]

Here's the database:

Nomination Database

I just noticed that an incredible number of Danes have been nominated. 133 of them. That's more than any other country, besides the United Kingdom, France and Germany. As far as I know, only three Danes actually received the prize.

[Latina]

OK here's a question. They say they don't publish the nominations until 50 years afterwards. But where do they publish them?? Where can we read this year about who were the runners-up in 1960??

Very good point. I suggest going to nobelprize.org and leaving that message. It would be nice to start reading about Nobel Prize 1960 and before.

[Daniel del Real]

Here's the database:

Nomination Database

I just noticed that an incredible number of Danes have been nominated. 133 of them. That's more than any other country, besides the United Kingdom, France and Germany. As far as I know, only three Danes actually received the prize.

Those nominations are really ambiguous and not that interesting. At first I expected to see a long list for every year, then a short list of let's say 3 to 6 candidates and there check who was really close to get it but never did.
And for example, if a same candidate gets into the short list a lot of years in a row, do the members of the academy keep re-reading their works the whole summer to decide if this is the year for that writer? I wouldn't think so. I don't think the same candidate can be in the short list for, let's say 3 years, as the members already read all of his/her works and still didn't choose him for the award.
Don't know, there are so many possibilities and combinations in this tricky universe of those old Swedishs.

[Stewart]

The database has its faults. Under the UK is a Russian writer called Dmitry Merezhkovsky.

[adaorardor]

And this page shows who the Laureates themselves nominated!
Nominations by Nobel Laureates

Why is it only showing up through 1950 if the statue of limitations if 50 years??

[Taleb]

And this page shows who the Laureates themselves nominated!
Nominations by Nobel Laureates

Why is it only showing up through 1950 if the statue of limitations if 50 years??

I've just opened the link and.......an italian recommended T.S. Eliot??

[liehtzu]

I've read Melville and Twain. I think Tolstoy, Dostoyevsky, E?a de Queir?s and Ibsen are more deserving of the Nobel prize, if you ask me. That said, I wouldn't mind seeing the prize go to either of them either. I don't think you can compare them with modern writers either, as whether a writer is deserving of the prize depends completely on the quality of his or her contemporaries.

I've started Pynchon's Gravity's Rainbow, but couldn't finish it. If there's a more accessibly novel by him, I'd be glad to read it. Maybe he does deserve the Nobel prize. I can't tell.

Same goes for the others, hence why I said that I had never read an American author deserving of the Nobel prize. I never meant to imply that they don't exist. I can't judge American literature. I can only observe it from my point of view.

This tiresome "give a poor deserving American a Noble Prize, shucks" runaround goes on every time the award comes up. "We ain't won any of them prizes in 17 years!" Somewhat less time than, say, India (97 years). Again, it only reinforces some from the international community who see the US as a nation of privileged whiners who can't rest unless their greatness is validated at their every whim.

That there are great and influential American writers is beyond dispute. Poe, for instance, influenced the whole school of French literature in the 19th century, as well as Dostoevsky and a number of other Russian writers. The Faulkner influence in Latin America is undeniable. However, the raging debate over whether Herman Melville shoulda got a Nobel has a minor flaw - old Hermie passed away in 1891. As for Twain, he was known mostly as a writer for adolescents even in his home country, and his humor was of a distinctly American variety that probably doesn't translate well. Every country has its beloved comedian who they know just wouldn't make it outside the borders. Doesn't mean they need a Nobel Prize.

But the question is: is there really a gallery of Nobel-worthy American writers suffering neglect at the hands of the evil America-denying literary committee that chooses these things? As I've mentioned before, I don't think so. Nothing I've read of Roth, DeLillo, Pynchon, Auster, or McCarthy has convinced me that these writers are living giants. I should admit that I have nothing but scorn for almost anything that falls under the umbrella of post-modernism, and this handicaps my appreciation of, say, Pynchon, whose grating "pyrotechnics" send me to the aspirin after a few pages. What is current American literature? It is the art of showing off. One knows about the customs of the three-toed sloth and the mating habits of Vanuatan islanders and whatnot, or the World Trade Fair of 1913 - all of which shows that one spends way too much time reading encyclopedias. This is all really superficial stuff.

Roth's aging Jewish university professors want to bang coeds. DeLillo satirizes shopping mall culture (fish, barrel). Auster writes clever mysteries that end up being "existential" ones. Pynchon gives his characters funny names and sends them to Timbuktu. McCarthy has monosyllabic cowboys show us yet again the tedious observation that America was born in/is steeped in violence. Am I being unfair to these authors? Probably. But I just don't see them tackling BIG THEMES. Most of them seem woefully trapped in their own heads and impressed with themselves - admittedly far less so than the current crop of young hotshots being trumpeted by the major papers. But the reprehensible The Brief Life of Oscar Wao is nothing if not the dead-eyed bastard child of Thomas Pynchon.

To my mind the US hasn't produced a major novelist since Saul Bellow. Who wrote books that could certainly be a little too impressed with themselves, but that were nonetheless about something other than what a great and clever guy Saul Bellow is. In his best novels and stories he really had something to say about the 20th century.

And it ain't just literature. Almost all the great, truly profound American filmmakers are dead. Terrence Malick walks a lonely path. American painting, what? As my kid brother, who designs computer games, says: Most American artists with any talent are designing computer games. I don't know if that's true or not, but the thought makes me shudder.

Oh, and I'm American. So no one need accuse me of being a condescending European elitist. That I will be accused of a number of other things after this post I have little doubt. As my fine, Christian, freedom-peddling former President - a truly literary chap - once said: "Bring it on."

[liehtzu]

Obviously. Albert Camus, Jean-Paul Sartre, Jul?o Cort?zar, Gabriel Garc?a M?rquez, Mario Vargas Llosa, Milan Kundera, Naguib Mahfouz, Jos? Saramago, Orhan Pamuk, Jorge Luis Borges, Heinrich B?ll, Eug?ne Ionesco, Samuel Beckett, William Golding, Boris Pasternak, Chinua Achebe, G?nter Grass, Raymond Queneau, Anthony Burgess, V.S. Naipaul, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, Doris Lessing, Carlos Fuentes, Wole Soyinka, Italo Calvino, Nadine Gordimer, Umberto Eco, Salman Rushdie, Ian McEwan, Haruki Murakami, Kazuo Ishiguro, Michael Ondaatje, Herta M?ller, J.M.G Le Cl?zio and Kenzaburo Oe are second-rate writers who really should just give up on writing and plough a field or something. The United States of America, that's where literature's at.

Somehow, I doubt Mr. Roth has read even half of these authors. He has greatly discouraged me from reading any of his books with a silly statement like that.

It may indicate that Mr. Roth has become more conservative in his old age. He made a genuine effort to spotlight terrific Central and Eastern European authors when he edited the "Writers From the Other Europe" series through Penguin in the 1970s: Milan Kundera, Bruno Schulz, Danilo Kis, Tadeusz Borowski, Bohomil Hrabal, Jerzy Andrzejewski, George Konrad, and others.

And some of those you mention above ARE second-rate writers.

[liehtzu]

And since this is hopefully the year for poetry, Liehtzu reiterates:

Tomas Venclova

with, as dark horses:

Miodrag Pavlovic

Hans Magnus Enzensberger


Ladbrokes be damned!

[Latina]

This is a question for the Swedish on this forum. What have the Sweds newspapers published? Have they talked about the odds or have they interviewed some author? Do they usually speculate about it or not at all?

[Stiffelio]

The Academy has got a history were the name of the winner was leaked out to journalists more or less every year. After a change to a more secretive policy (I think it might have been in the eighties) there have been no apparent leaks until the LeCl?zio-case though. I very much doubt that a current academy member is leaking information as it used to happen in the old days however. There's simply too much at stake and a too big risk of getting caught.

There must however be people working near the academy which have no access to meetings but perhaps still get enough information to make very valid guesses (or if they are really curious, good old eavesdropping is probably not that hard in an old building with wooden doors such as that in which the academy houses?). If I wanted to find my source of information I would definitely look there. And who makes the profit? Probably no one even near the academy as it would be too obvious. My guess would be some professional gambler rather than anyone from the literary world. But these are just speculations.

As for Herta M?ller last year there were definitely an interesting pattern in changes at the betting agencies but it is also interesting that the dramatically lowered odds was presented right after the publication of an article were a renowned Swedish journalist predicted that M?ller would get the prize. The same journalist had guessed for Le Cl?zio the year before so maybe she just gave the agencies a scary feeling of d?ja vu...

Many of course believe that she has got some kind of insider but personally I don't think it is that strange that a person who probably both knows the personal taste of the academy members and pretty much everything that is happening around the academy can make two really good guesses in a row. When pretty much half the academy shows up at a Herta M?ller-seminar in Stockholm of course people start to put two and two together?
You must also remember that although M?ller and Le Cl?zio might have appeared to come out of the blue in the English speaking world they had been considered top names here for years. I personally think they were quite predictable choices.

But still, if someone knows how to get the information it's probably her.

I really hope the academy can keep tight this year. Last year?s excitement was pretty much spoiled and I absolutely love a big surprise. I have a feeling that anyone except Oz and perhaps Adonis will have to be considered like a minor upset though. There are so many factors among the ?favorites? that could be considered as negative. ?Not a poet?, ?another woman?, Swedish, American, ?is a poet? etc?

Isn't it possible that the leak may come from the actual recipient of the price? From what I know of the rules, the selected winner has first to accept the prize before it is announced to the media. So it is conceivable that a window of many hours, even a day, may exist between the time the academy first attempts to get in touch with the winner and the announcement. The search for the author may involve his/her agent, secretray, spouse, etc. each one of whom may be a source of leakage.

[adaorardor]

This tiresome "give a poor deserving American a Noble Prize, shucks" runaround goes on every time the award comes up. "We ain't won any of them prizes in 17 years!" Somewhat less time than, say, India (97 years). Again, it only reinforces some from the international community who see the US as a nation of privileged whiners who can't rest unless their greatness is validated at their every whim.

That there are great and influential American writers is beyond dispute. Poe, for instance, influenced the whole school of French literature in the 19th century, as well as Dostoevsky and a number of other Russian writers. The Faulkner influence in Latin America is undeniable. However, the raging debate over whether Herman Melville shoulda got a Nobel has a minor flaw - old Hermie passed away in 1891. As for Twain, he was known mostly as a writer for adolescents even in his home country, and his humor was of a distinctly American variety that probably doesn't translate well. Every country has its beloved comedian who they know just wouldn't make it outside the borders. Doesn't mean they need a Nobel Prize.

But the question is: is there really a gallery of Nobel-worthy American writers suffering neglect at the hands of the evil America-denying literary committee that chooses these things? As I've mentioned before, I don't think so. Nothing I've read of Roth, DeLillo, Pynchon, Auster, or McCarthy has convinced me that these writers are living giants. I should admit that I have nothing but scorn for almost anything that falls under the umbrella of post-modernism, and this handicaps my appreciation of, say, Pynchon, whose grating "pyrotechnics" send me to the aspirin after a few pages. What is current American literature? It is the art of showing off. One knows about the customs of the three-toed sloth and the mating habits of Vanuatan islanders and whatnot, or the World Trade Fair of 1913 - all of which shows that one spends way too much time reading encyclopedias. This is all really superficial stuff.

Roth's aging Jewish university professors want to bang coeds. DeLillo satirizes shopping mall culture (fish, barrel). Auster writes clever mysteries that end up being "existential" ones. Pynchon gives his characters funny names and sends them to Timbuktu. McCarthy has monosyllabic cowboys show us yet again the tedious observation that America was born in/is steeped in violence. Am I being unfair to these authors? Probably. But I just don't see them tackling BIG THEMES. Most of them seem woefully trapped in their own heads and impressed with themselves - admittedly far less so than the current crop of young hotshots being trumpeted by the major papers. But the reprehensible The Brief Life of Oscar Wao is nothing if not the dead-eyed bastard child of Thomas Pynchon.

To my mind the US hasn't produced a major novelist since Saul Bellow. Who wrote books that could certainly be a little too impressed with themselves, but that were nonetheless about something other than what a great and clever guy Saul Bellow is. In his best novels and stories he really had something to say about the 20th century.

And it ain't just literature. Almost all the great, truly profound American filmmakers are dead. Terrence Malick walks a lonely path. American painting, what? As my kid brother, who designs computer games, says: Most American artists with any talent are designing computer games. I don't know if that's true or not, but the thought makes me shudder.

Oh, and I'm American. So no one need accuse me of being a condescending European elitist. That I will be accused of a number of other things after this post I have little doubt. As my fine, Christian, freedom-peddling former President - a truly literary chap - once said: "Bring it on."

Pynchon and McCarthy are giants. DeLillo and Roth aren't quite as good but are major writers. You're just wrong.

This goes back to why I think the one diversity consideration should be LANGUAGE, rather than COUNTRY. "An American hasn't won in 17 years" is not a very good argument. "Spanish hasn't won in two decades" is a good argument.

[adaorardor]

Isn't it possible that the leak may come from the actual recipient of the price? From what I know of the rules, the selected winner has first to accept the prize before it is announced to the media. So it is conceivable that a window of many hours, even a day, may exist between the time the academy first attempts to get in touch with the winner and the announcement. The search for the author may involve his/her agent, secretray, spouse, etc. each one of whom may be a source of leakage.

They don't have to accept the prize before it's announced to the media. They call the writer to let her or she know first, but if, like Doris Lessing, he or she isn't by the phone, they just announce it.

[Latina]

They don't have to accept the prize before it's announced to the media. They call the writer to let her or she know first, but if, like Doris Lessing, he or she isn't by the phone, they just announce it.

Exactilly, according to the Accademy, they make a call only five minutes before the public announcement. But it was a good point. How do they get the author's number? Don't they have to call the agent, the family etc?

[waalkwriter]

This tiresome "give a poor deserving American a Noble Prize, shucks" runaround goes on every time the award comes up. "We ain't won any of them prizes in 17 years!" Somewhat less time than, say, India (97 years). Again, it only reinforces some from the international community who see the US as a nation of privileged whiners who can't rest unless their greatness is validated at their every whim.

That there are great and influential American writers is beyond dispute. Poe, for instance, influenced the whole school of French literature in the 19th century, as well as Dostoevsky and a number of other Russian writers. The Faulkner influence in Latin America is undeniable. However, the raging debate over whether Herman Melville shoulda got a Nobel has a minor flaw - old Hermie passed away in 1891. As for Twain, he was known mostly as a writer for adolescents even in his home country, and his humor was of a distinctly American variety that probably doesn't translate well. Every country has its beloved comedian who they know just wouldn't make it outside the borders. Doesn't mean they need a Nobel Prize.

But the question is: is there really a gallery of Nobel-worthy American writers suffering neglect at the hands of the evil America-denying literary committee that chooses these things? As I've mentioned before, I don't think so. Nothing I've read of Roth, DeLillo, Pynchon, Auster, or McCarthy has convinced me that these writers are living giants. I should admit that I have nothing but scorn for almost anything that falls under the umbrella of post-modernism, and this handicaps my appreciation of, say, Pynchon, whose grating "pyrotechnics" send me to the aspirin after a few pages. What is current American literature? It is the art of showing off. One knows about the customs of the three-toed sloth and the mating habits of Vanuatan islanders and whatnot, or the World Trade Fair of 1913 - all of which shows that one spends way too much time reading encyclopedias. This is all really superficial stuff.

Roth's aging Jewish university professors want to bang coeds. DeLillo satirizes shopping mall culture (fish, barrel). Auster writes clever mysteries that end up being "existential" ones. Pynchon gives his characters funny names and sends them to Timbuktu. McCarthy has monosyllabic cowboys show us yet again the tedious observation that America was born in/is steeped in violence. Am I being unfair to these authors? Probably. But I just don't see them tackling BIG THEMES. Most of them seem woefully trapped in their own heads and impressed with themselves - admittedly far less so than the current crop of young hotshots being trumpeted by the major papers. But the reprehensible The Brief Life of Oscar Wao is nothing if not the dead-eyed bastard child of Thomas Pynchon.

To my mind the US hasn't produced a major novelist since Saul Bellow. Who wrote books that could certainly be a little too impressed with themselves, but that were nonetheless about something other than what a great and clever guy Saul Bellow is. In his best novels and stories he really had something to say about the 20th century.

And it ain't just literature. Almost all the great, truly profound American filmmakers are dead. Terrence Malick walks a lonely path. American painting, what? As my kid brother, who designs computer games, says: Most American artists with any talent are designing computer games. I don't know if that's true or not, but the thought makes me shudder.

Oh, and I'm American. So no one need accuse me of being a condescending European elitist. That I will be accused of a number of other things after this post I have little doubt. As my fine, Christian, freedom-peddling former President - a truly literary chap - once said: "Bring it on."

My god that was beautiful. It truly made me tear up. Were we separated at birth? I've never run into someone who so keenly said exactly what I think with regards to Pynchon and post-modernism, and even matched up pretty well in my thoughts of Roth, DeLillo, and McCarthy. America has few great writers; they're all so far stuck up in their own little world I can barely stand to read them, to read anything from the last fifty years.

I mean I hate what widespread critical academia has done to shift and change the spectrum of what is vogue and "in" at the moment. As an American I can't stand the insufferably boring middle class American angst that dominates John Updike, or even Joyce Carol Oates. I read very little "literary" authors from America nowadays, preferring to go over seas for authors like Le Clezio, Grass, Kenzabura Oe, Marquez, Rushdie, Eco, and others abroad before I ever look up any American author. As I've said before, there are but two that I think are genuinely deserving of it, Albee and Vidal, and oddly enough those are two that no one in the critical circles ever mentions in the speculation articles.

And I say this as both an American, and someone with a deep appreciation of it's past literature, of Poe, Faulkner, Whitman, Twain, Steinbeck, Eugene O'Neil, Thomas Wolfe, and beyond.

I did want to say to whoever said that Twain is a specifically American comic who doesn't connect well to foreign readers, I have to say you are dead wrong. For one Twain was, in his own day, an international famous entertainer, he went around the world raising money to pay off his debts with glorified stand up comedy routines. Since then his works have been one of the most translated, and the most appreciated bits of literature to come out of America; countless foreign authors cite him when discussing who some of their favorite authors and books are. I'd argue Twain is more popular abroad than Moby Dick is.

[Bjorn]

This is a question for the Swedish on this forum. What have the Sweds newspapers published? Have they talked about the odds or have they interviewed some author? Do they usually speculate about it or not at all?

Caustic Swedish literary critic Jonas Thente had a very funny article a few years ago about how foreign newspapers kept calling him and asking for "inside tips", "as if mere geographic proximity makes me have some special knowledge". He said he usually gave each of them a different name so they all felt they got their money's worth.

But no, so far it's been unusually quiet this year. Some papers have commented on the fact that Transtr?mer is at the top of Ladbrokes' list (and that Bob Dylan is on it again), but of course all the serious journalists know that (barring a last-minute leak, like last year) the odds have nothing whatsoever to do with who gets it.

[Latina]

Caustic Swedish literary critic Jonas Thente had a very funny article a few years ago about how foreign newspapers kept calling him and asking for "inside tips", "as if mere geographic proximity makes me have some special knowledge". He said he usually gave each of them a different name so they all felt they got their money's worth.

But no, so far it's been unusually quiet this year. Some papers have commented on the fact that Transtr?mer is at the top of Ladbrokes' list (and that Bob Dylan is on it again), but of course all the serious journalists know that (barring a last-minute leak, like last year) the odds have nothing whatsoever to do with who gets it.

Thank you Bjorn, and that was funny. Please keep us posted if there is any article on the nominees. I would think that some Swedish journalist would have some more inside information. I am not sure.

[Taleb]

My god that was beautiful. It truly made me tear up. Were we separated at birth? I've never run into someone who so keenly said exactly what I think with regards to Pynchon and post-modernism, and even matched up pretty well in my thoughts of Roth, DeLillo, and McCarthy. America has few great writers; they're all so far stuck up in their own little world I can barely stand to read them, to read anything from the last fifty years.

I mean I hate what widespread critical academia has done to shift and change the spectrum of what is vogue and "in" at the moment. As an American I can't stand the insufferably boring middle class American angst that dominates John Updike, or even Joyce Carol Oates. I read very little "literary" authors from America nowadays, preferring to go over seas for authors like Le Clezio, Grass, Kenzabura Oe, Marquez, Rushdie, Eco, and others abroad before I ever look up any American author. As I've said before, there are but two that I think are genuinely deserving of it, Albee and Vidal, and oddly enough those are two that no one in the critical circles ever mentions in the speculation articles.

And I say this as both an American, and someone with a deep appreciation of it's past literature, of Poe, Faulkner, Whitman, Twain, Steinbeck, Eugene O'Neil, Thomas Wolfe, and beyond.

I did want to say to whoever said that Twain is a specifically American comic who doesn't connect well to foreign readers, I have to say you are dead wrong. For one Twain was, in his own day, an international famous entertainer, he went around the world raising money to pay off his debts with glorified stand up comedy routines. Since then his works have been one of the most translated, and the most appreciated bits of literature to come out of America; countless foreign authors cite him when discussing who some of their favorite authors and books are. I'd argue Twain is more popular abroad than Moby Dick is.

I don't like to say this, buf Roth's defensive comment can be considered offensive to the secretary's thought that the best literature is still produced in the Europe, and will most likely affect the oreintaition of the prize to another nation, although the literary field is not about award competetion at all in my viewpoint.

[Bjorn]

The Literary Saloon (hi guys!) has a good write-up about the odds for those interested:

the Literary Saloon at the complete review - 21 - 30 September 2010 Archive