Nobel Prize in Literature 2010 Speculation

[Sevastefo]

I don't know Alvaro Mutis, can you give some details?

well he's a colombian poet and novelist, who has won the M?dicis, Pr?ncipe de Asturias, Cervantes and the Neustadt Prizes.
his work has been compiled in The Adventures and Misadventures of Maqroll (in spanish : Empresas y tribulaciones de Maqroll el Gaviero), in which you can read his seven his novellas about Maqroll the Lookout, a wandering sailor and adventurer.
I think his literature represents one of the highest moments in colombian and, in general, Latinamerican production. as the Pr?ncipe de Asturias committee has said "his literary creation, unanimously recognized as one of the Spanish-speaking world?s highest achievements, links the tenets of Magic Realism with the concerns of modern man."
Although he writes in Spanish, his works have been widely translated into most of the major languages and many of the smaller languages of the world.
“Alvaro Mutis is one of the most beloved, respected, and celebrated of Latin American authors in the Spanish-speaking world and in Europe," observes David Clark, World Literature Today's editor

[Latina]

Ladbrokes has its list of odds for this year Nobel Prize in Literature. Here we go: Nobel Literature Prize Betting Odds | Bet Online at Ladbrokes.com

[Elie]

Ladbrokes has its list of odds for this year Nobel Prize in Literature. Here we go: Nobel Literature Prize Betting Odds | Bet Online at Ladbrokes.com

I don't even recognise the first name on the list. To wikipedia I go..

[Stewart]

I don't even recognise the first name on the list. To wikipedia I go..

http://www.worldliteratureforum.com/...nstroemer.html ? That's our thread on him. He's one of those names that appears every year - like Adonis - but is unlikely to win because of the 1974 awarding of Swedes within the Academy and no Swede has won since. In a way I'd like him to win, if only to purge the stigma of 1974, especially since all Academy members present then have since died.

[Daniel del Real]

It is evident that Ladbrokes list this year is oriented towards poets by watching the top 4 names. From those four I've read three of them and in IMHO no one deserves the Nobel. The one I liked the most was Transtr?mer but still wasn't that impressed. About Zagajewski I've heard really good comments from Heteronym and some other folks in here. I'll have to read him sooner or later.
Personally I think they are missing a lot of poets writing in Spanish: Cardenal is the only one, but the names of Juan Gelman, Nicanor Parra and Jos? Emilio Pachecos should be around just by probabilities ( 14 years without a poet, 20 without a writer in Spanish language).
Kadare at 50/1, Oz 25/1 is too low and Amin Maalouf & Juan Goytisolo are not even on the list.
Finally this guy Amarilla appears on the list with 100/1 and we couldn't miss the Dylan odd with 150/1.
I see a typical list like every other year, no big surprises on the list. Let's see who climbs up like Le Clezio and Muller in past years.

[alik-vit]

yes, list oriented for poets and in first time this list includes two russian poets - Bella Akhmadulina and Evgeny Evtushenko. The least one is absurde candidature, of course. And Antonio Tabucchi at 3rd place it's something new too.

[peter_d]

- Sometimes I get the impression that those people at ladbrokes read our Nobel thread, some of the names that have been discussed here appear on the list for the first time, e.g. Bella Akhmadulina.

- No big surprises? Apparently there is a personal friend of Jonathan Littell on that Ladbrokes committee... They must have thought ?now that Jonathan has reached the age of Kipling when he was awarded, we can finally put him on the list.'

- If Ian McEwan must be on that list, than please don't put him at the same odds as Ismail Kadare. I can hardly stand seeing those two names together there.

- Ngugi is too low in my eyes, but I realise I might be biased writing this very message from Nairobi.

[Eric]

Tabucchi is maybe so high on the list because he gave a talk in Stockholm two or three weeks ago. Whether there is any significance in this is hard to tell. I mean, Jeanette Winterson gave a talk at the same venue last year. But I'm not sure that they've got her lined up for the Nobel.

Adonis, Zagajewski, and Transtr?mer are certainly likely candidates. As Transtr?mer is Swedish but not a Member of the Swedish Academy, he stands a chance.

One of the Ladbroke list whose prose style I like, but who is better known as a playwright, is Jon Fosse.

[Daniel del Real]

- Sometimes I get the impression that those people at ladbrokes read our Nobel thread, some of the names that have been discussed here appear on the list for the first time, e.g. Bella Akhmadulina.

- No big surprises? Apparently there is a personal friend of Jonathan Littell on that Ladbrokes committee... They must have thought ?now that Jonathan has reached the age of Kipling when he was awarded, we can finally put him on the list.'

- If Ian McEwan must be on that list, than please don't put him at the same odds as Ismail Kadare. I can hardly stand seeing those two names together there.

- Ngugi is too low in my eyes, but I realise I might be biased writing this very message from Nairobi.

Of course there are ridiculous names like every year, what I mean is that the are not shown as real contenders because they have really low odds to win: Jonathan Littell, Maya Angelou, Nestor Amarilla or Bob Dylan have nothing to do here.

[peter_d]

Of course there are ridiculous names like every year, what I mean is that the are not shown as real contenders because they have really low odds to win: Jonathan Littell, Maya Angelou, Nestor Amarilla or Bob Dylan have nothing to do here.

You are right, Daniel. There are no big surprises among the real contenders, although you might call it a surprise that Vargas Llosa has been ranked so low. He used to be much higher on the list in previous years.

[Latina]

I personally would like a non European. Between the Poets I would go for the South Korean Ko Un. Here is a nice article about it in the Montreal's paper: Poets poised for Nobel glory; Swede is favorite

[Daniel del Real]

You are right, Daniel. There are no big surprises among the real contenders, although you might call it a surprise that Vargas Llosa has been ranked so low. He used to be much higher on the list in previous years.

I don't think that's surprising anymore. Every yeat that passes by are less chances for the eternally present latin american candidates Vargas Llosa and Carlos Fuentes. Right now I'm with 80% of the possibilities they're never going to get and so does the speculation goes. As I've said before it's a relationship of love/hate with me and those two because as far as I admire them as writers I detest them as a person. In literary merits they're totally deserving of the prize, but the accademy takes a lot in consideration also and that is where their weak position is.

On the other side I'm glad about Tabucchi being the first prosist in the list. I'd be glad if he gets the award and more if it is because of his short stories as he is one of the masters of that genre in our days.

[Eric]

I'm a bit sceptical about the term "non-European", Latina. That makes Europe the norm, the default position. And, after all, the million dollars to the Nobel winner is Swedish money. All those people who grumble about capitalists and profits must remember where the Nobel money came from in the first place.

Why don't rich Asian nations such as Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan have a literary prize for the whole world that is worth a million dollars?

But with regard to Ko Un, a South Korean winner would be a nice thing. There is an Englishman, Brother Anthony of Taiz?, a friar, who also teaches at the university in Seoul and has translated quite a lot of Korean prose and poetry. So there is a route whereby Europeans can reach and examine Korean literature.

[JTolle]

Great to see the poets on top. Though I haven't read Ko Un with any seriousness, I'd say of the four Transtromer deserves it most. Kundera with reasonable odds; Gass with slim ones, but it makes me smile to see him on the list again; was surprised how low McCarthy got; and I thought Oz was too low.

Luis Goytisolo, based on what I've read of 360 Degree Diary (which, I'm nearly finished with), and assuming that Antagonia is even better, is a great pick, maybe not as good as Juan, but who knows, maybe ladbrokes really do have the names mixed up.

Totally started dancing when I saw Anne Carson there 50/1. It'd be a shocker if she got it though, give her another 5 or 10 years, then it'll be perfect.

- Sometimes I get the impression that those people at ladbrokes read our Nobel thread, some of the names that have been discussed here appear on the list for the first time, e.g. Bella Akhmadulina.

I'd say you might have something there. Anne Carson's first time on the list as well.

[Stiffelio]

Betting is a game and betting for the next Nobel awardee is as dicey as tombola. Having said that, Ladbrokes' list makes better sense than Unibet's. You can still find some of the same patterns though, e.g. Pynchon, Roth and Oates are always neck-to-neck: I'm sure they're punted for by the same people year after year.

Of my favorites, I'm surprised Tabucchi is so high up and Vargas Llosa so far below (maybe he gave up on his chances and requested not to be considered - can a writer do this?).

My hunch is that the 2010 Prize will befall on somebody who is not from Europe or the US, probably a poet.

[waalkwriter]

Amos Oz, still whom I'm inclined to say is the favorite this year.

But a few things. One, Jtolle, that really doesn't sound like Vidal. One, I've never really seen him openly label himself and identify himself with homosexuality. He doesn't tend to assign some greater worldly importance with who he likes to fuck, to put it bluntly. And two, I've also never found him to be too preoccupied with awards.

Another, Ladbrookes, Unibet, both those are closed-ended lists, neither of which even admit the possibility of Edward Albee or Gore Vidal, or numerous other possibilities. What happens if the winner turns out to be someone they weren't even including in the betting pool? Everyone gets their money back? I was also sadly disappointed to be rejected from both unibet and Ladbrookes for being an American; apparently there is no online international betting agency that is legal in America, though I don't understand why. And no American betting agencies that I have access to offer pools on the Nobel Prizes. Ah well.

[Latina]

I'm a bit sceptical about the term "non-European", Latina. That makes Europe the norm, the default position. And, after all, the million dollars to the Nobel winner is Swedish money. All those people who grumble about capitalists and profits must remember where the Nobel money came from in the first place.

My point was that 90% of the winners of the past 10 years, were Europeans. The Nobel suppose to be a worldly prize, otherwise we should just call it The European Nobel Prize, and you are not going to tell me that the reason is because Europe has the best writers. Don't get me wrong, many of my favorites are Europeans but give me a break, there are so many other good writers from all over the world.
Even Mr Englum has said it, lately the Nobel Prize in Literature has become too Europeanista. And he has said that it is an unconcious discrimination of the judges.

[Stewart]

My point was that 90% of the winners of the past 10 years, were Europeans. The Nobel suppose to be a worldly prize, otherwise we should just call it The European Nobel Prize, and you are not going to tell me that the reason is because Europe has the best writers.

No, but Europe does have a high concentration of literate nations, all with their own cultures, literatures, languages, and traditions that will widen the scope of what is produced and slant the odds in Europe's favour. As many varied countries as the US has states.

[alik-vit]

But with regard to Ko Un, a South Korean winner would be a nice thing.

But he has published approximately 135 volumes (quotation from WIki). Academicians can read only trifling part of this oeuvre. He is very risky choice.

[Eric]

I rather agree with Stiffelio in #218 that betting and speculating on who is going to win the Nobel is a bit of harmless fun. After all, once the prize is announced, all our speculations will have been in vain, not so with the betting money, however, if an outsider wins. One or two people will be able to pat themselves on the back saying they guessed rightly, but these people will probably also have listed another half dozen names to hedge their bets.

*

As for homosexuality, I don't think it's ever been a big deal with the Nobel people. Homosexuals will be in the minority, but they are in everyday life too. You can list all the Nobel prizewinners for literature who were homosexual or bisexual, but I don't know what you will prove.

*

One thing you can prove, however, is that the Nobel Prizes result from the sensible investment made by the Foundation of the large sum of money that left in his will and testament by Alfred Nobel, when he died at a relatively early age in 1896. Read his biography here:

Alfred Nobel Timeline

Most of the money was originally earnt from the fact that the family company patented the invention of nitro-glycerine, which was used in mining. The fact that such explosives, including dynamite, have been used in warfare later on is not entirely relevant. But the company was what is nowadays termed a multinational, with branches in Hamburg and London. Nobel was a pacifist, but in commercial terms, the money came from a large capitalist enterpise. So when people like Sartre, Neruda, Sholokhov, and Jelinek won it, this is always a little ironic, given their politics.

*

My point about Europe is partly supported by Stewart's comment. Europe has, after all, got the biggest concentration of literate and disparate countries in the whole world. Giving the shocking amount of illiteracy throughout Africa, even decades after the colonial powers pulled out, it is much less likely that a winner will come from there, unless brought up in European style, as was Coetzee, or Ngugi, once he started working full-time for an American university.

Allied to this fact is my point that if Asia, Africa, or Latin America want to make a splash, they could start up their own international book & author prize. After all, we now hear that Brazil is the economic powerhouse of Latin America, so maybe Lula can start a prize. This would get rid of the accusation that the Europeans, Whites, or the West are dominating book prizes with their neo-colonial or racist agenda. Let the other continents invest a few million dollars in a big prize, the interest from which can be paid to the prizewinner each year.

Unlike Africa and most of the Middle East, I believe that Latin America, the Caribbean, and Asia have a large number of authors (look at India!), some of whom could certainly be eligible for an international prize, where they are competing on equal terms with Europeans and North Americans. And I mean on equal terms, not some feelgood prize for people who haven't quite made it for a European prize.

As I keep saying: it is the size of the prize that makes the Nobel so visible internationally. So come on Lula, fork out a few millions!