Nobel Prize in Literature 2021 Speculation

[namelesshere]

oh, that one could go on forever...!
I was today taking a look at Peter Englund's instagram and he posted that he was reading Woolf's Diaries and saying he would have given her the prize for the Diaries alone.

Yeh, dangerous question really! I just looked up at my nearest bookshelf and picked someone, but I could easily have said several people (and Woolf was one of them!), so I decided to restrict myself by giving just one name!

 

[Cleanthess]

Agree on Ana Blandiana. Quite formidable on her own. Circe Maia and Ida Vitale of Uruguay can get into this equation for comparison and contrast. {...} Daniel you are lucky that you can read them in the original. For someone like me, a stranger to both Spanish and Portuguese, getting English translations of Circe Maia or Ida Vitale is a task by itself.

Seconded on the Blandiana. Buried somewhere on this forum's back pages there are some amateur "translations" of a few of her poems.

Circe Maia translated Odysseas Elytis, Yannis Ritsos (and Cavafy!); between that fact and your recommendation, you've convinced me to buy Visor's anthology of her poetry.

 

[Ater Lividus Ruber & V]

Nashiki-sensei's books sound yummy, so I'll take the plunge. What clinched the deal for me was the Amazon reviewer who said that, if you liked Tomihiko Morimi, you'd like Nashiki's Kitsune Tales.

Tomihiko Morimi is a favorite of us Anime otaku, due to the brilliant adaptations of his novels The Tatami Galaxy and The Night is Short, Walk On Girl done by Masaaki Yuasa (and, to a lesser extent, due to Studio Colorido's adaptation of Penguin Highway).

Yeah, I'll probably go to the bookstore over the weekend and pick up a pile of her books. Unfortunately... my backlog is so long... but I will read her! Morimi is a lot of fun! I read 夜行, which didn't blow me away but was very enjoyable and brisk. I either want to read 熱帯 or 聖なる怠け者の冒険 next. Shout out to Tristan for tirelessly advocating for him and translating a lot of his books into English (a new one is coming soon).

Just looked up What the Birds See and it has gone straight onto The List.

I hope you like it! Some of these goodreads reviews crack me up, "I can recognise that this book is well-crafted without wanting to recommend it to anybody. The two stars are for the quality of the writing. But I don’t think anyone needs, in this age of general hopelessness, a book that is completely devoid of hope. This is a book to make you miserable. I am reminded of the old description of depressing music - ‘music to kill yourself by’. That’s how I felt about this book."

as well as, "Another book for the DO NOT READ shelf. I've read a couple of books lately from what I am calling the "oversensitive child" genre. It must come from adults having too much therapy or something. And from not having any real children. Can you say "SPOILER OMITTED" only beautifully written? Beautiful writing is no excuse for morose, completely hopeless, depressing content. Sorry! but I've seen real children suffer excruciatingly and survive--this is not real, it's just depressing. Put down the book and go volunteer somewhere."

 

[redhead]

At the time I remember someone here saying they might have given him the prize since 2016 was such a grim year and the members were nostalgic for better days.

I kinda feel like Murakami has a chance this year because of something similar. His works seem somehow fitting for covid quarantine. I reread some of his earlier works last winter and was surprised at how much I liked them. There’s something about his relatable (and oddly uplifting because it’s relatable) brand of depression and loneliness that fits well with everything happening, and given all the stresses of the past year I appreciated his easy-to-read style—I don’t know, I just don’t think I would have liked him as much if I’d reread those books before covid, and I think he might have a better shot this year then he’s had in the past if others feel similarly.

I know she won't win the prize, but I really wish more people would read Sonya Hartnett. @tiganeasca @Liam, if you two enjoyed Prichard's One Moonlit Night, read Of a Boy/What the Birds See (Aussie/U.K. names). @redheadshadz, I think you'd also enjoy that novel. She writes bleak so well. Her prose is impeccable.

Thanks for the rec. I just looked it up and it seems right up my alley!

In answer to the unasked 4th question, which is "Which one writer should have won the Nobel prize but didn't because they died", my answer is: Penelope Fitzgerald

My picks, aside from some usual suspects like Borges, would be Ursula K. Le Guin and Shen Congwen

 

[Bartleby]

I kinda feel like Murakami has a chance this year because of something similar. His works seem somehow fitting for covid quarantine. I reread some of his earlier works last winter and was surprised at how much I liked them. There’s something about his relatable (and oddly uplifting because it’s relatable) brand of depression and loneliness that fits well with everything happening, and given all the stresses of the past year I appreciated his easy-to-read style—I don’t know, I just don’t think I would have liked him as much if I’d reread those books before covid, and I think he might have a better shot this year then he’s had in the past if others feel similarly.

if he has any chance this year might be his time, especially since, apart from the reasons you've given, with his latest novel some have said he's shown some signs of decline in vigour, repeating old themes, sort of almost parodying himself. Seems like he's not quite lost it, but could soon. Although who knows what he could have come up with next. Maybe another triumph like 1Q84 (as much as some have quibbles with it being long and slow...).

 

[redhead]

if he has any chance this year might be his time, especially since, apart from the reasons you've given, with his latest novel some have said he's shown some signs of decline in vigour, repeating old themes, sort of almost parodying himself. Seems like he's not quite lost it, but could soon. Although who knows what he could have come up with next. Maybe another triumph like 1Q84 (as much as some have quibbles with it being long and slow...).

I haven't read any his latest works other than that god awful book-length interview he did with a Japanese composer so I refrained from commenting on them. But I’ve repeatedly seen that sentiment here and elsewhere online, and both After Dark and the third part of 1Q84 seemed like lesser works to me, the like beginnings of a possible descent into self parody.

That said, they gave it to Pinter when he hadn’t put out any noteworthy plays in over a decade, so who knows, maybe they won’t hold newer, lesser work against Murakami.

 

[Bartleby]

In answer to the unasked 4th question, which is "Which one writer should have won the Nobel prize but didn't because they died", my answer is: Penelope Fitzgerald

My pick, which would have never happened, nor could I see it happening today were she a contemporary of ours, would be Gertrude Stein.

 

[Morbid Swither]

The Dalkey Archive series is great! I’ve been meaning to read more from it. I also read Private Life of Plants, and while I wasn’t exactly a fan, Le Clezio has previously spoken very highly of the author Lee Seung-u. And speaking of Le Clezio, he’s been very supportive of South Korean literature. It wouldn’t surprise me if he’s nominated some authors.

And what do you think of Hwang Sok-yong? I think he has a chance in the coming years.

I think Hwang Sok-yong has been nominated by Oe and I think he would be a great laureate.

 

[Morbid Swither]

My pick, which would have never happened, nor could I see it happening today were she a contemporary of ours, would be Gertrude Stein.

I see strong Gertrude Stein influences on Cixous.

 

[Morbid Swither]

It’s premature for me to strongly praise or criticize Fosse; but I am reluctant to advocate for him winning. I consider his output to be inconsistent, and for the lesser pieces just a bit too much like stylists that have previously won. But, I remain interested in him and look forward to reading Septology eventually. For this reason he is among the strong contenders that I don’t really endorse.

Who would I like to win? — Ana Blandiana, Wieslaw Mysliwski, Can Xue, Elias Khoury, Miljenko Jergovic, Duong Thu Huong, Hamid Ismailov, Mario Bellatín, Gerald Murnane, Fleur Jaeggy!!!!

Who do I think will win? — Michel Houellebecq, Annie Ernaux, Mia Couto, Laszlo Krasznahorkai, Ngugi wa Thiong’o

Who is now deceased but “should” have won? — limited to past decade — Adam Zagajewski, Amos Oz, Mahmoud Darwish, João Gilberto Noll, Carlos Fuentes, Antonio Tabucchi!

 

[Morbid Swither]

I see strong Gertrude Stein influences on Cixous.

Sorry! I’m with you. BIG Stein fan here

 

[Morbid Swither]

Albeit Herta Müller is a German citizen and German language author, I don’t think it’s prudent to portend no Romanian author has been awarded.

 

[Americanreader]

who do you want to see awarded the prize?: Carson, Thiong'o, Adonis, Abdellatif Laabi (Moroccan poet, I was his sole nominator for the WLF prize this year, he's great)
who do you think will win this year? Annie Ernaux, she's the kind of candidate I could see the SA tripping over themselves to award. Plus, they love the French and 7 years without one shows great restraint ha ha!
who will never win? Pynchon, if they weren't going to give it to him in the year when you didn't have to give an in person speech, it's never going to happen. (Although awarding him would have been awesome)

 

[redhead]

I consider his output to be inconsistent, and for the lesser pieces just a bit too much like stylists that have previously won.

I’m curious who you’re thinking of? His work bears similarities to Beckett, Pinter, Müller, and Handke, but I think he has his own sort of style.

 

[Morbid Swither]

I’m curious who you’re thinking of? His work bears similarities to Beckett, Pinter, Müller, and Handke, but I think he has his own sort of style.

He does, that’s true. But really, of all the names you’ve mentioned, Beckett is really what comes to the fore. You know, it’s not just that he’s elliptical and repetitive. Or minimalist—or miniturist. Or that the writing deploys an aesthetics of the peripheral. But taken altogether, it’s just a little less exciting. These are vague criticisms. Fosse is a major world writer, but as far as enthusiasm for his work goes, here on this forum, I have to admit, I’m kinda stumped. Even among fellow Norwegians, I don’t prefer his work above all. For me, that would be Kjell Askildsen. But I also think Solstad and Knausgaard are equally as good…. Just my take here. I realize Fosse is well regarded and I do like the obscure mysticism of his vision. But…

 

[Abhi]

By the looks of the library

a) Francophone: they considered Ernaux, and then weighed her up against Houellebecq (apparently discarded now?), then Cixous and then threw Conde into the mix...

b) Norwegian: considered Fosse and weighed up Knausgaard against him, and...Eldred Lunden?

c) African continent: Couto weighed against Vladislavic (and Wicomb), Okri, and (!!!) Ngugi...

d) Probably not going with Chinese authors.

e) i don't get the check out surge in Ulitskaya...

have I missed/overstated anything?

(Btw, just joined the forum. This is my first post. This is all so exciting!!!!!)

 

[namelesshere]

By the looks of the library

a) Francophone: they considered Ernaux, and then weighed her up against Houellebecq (apparently discarded now?), then Cixous and then threw Conde into the mix...

b) Norwegian: considered Fosse and weighed up Knausgaard against him, and...Eldred Lunden?

c) African continent: Couto weighed against Vladislavic (and Wicomb), Okri, and (!!!) Ngugi...

d) Probably not going with Chinese authors.

e) i don't get the check out surge in Ulitskaya...

have I missed/overstated anything?

(Btw, just joined the forum. This is my first post. This is all so exciting!!!!!)

Welcome! It IS exciting isn't it.

 

[redhead]

He does, that’s true. But really, of all the names you’ve mentioned, Beckett is really what comes to the fore. You know, it’s not just that he’s elliptical and repetitive. Or minimalist—or miniturist. Or that the writing deploys an aesthetics of the peripheral. But taken altogether, it’s just a little less exciting. These are vague criticisms. Fosse is a major world writer, but as far as enthusiasm for his work goes, here on this forum, I have to admit, I’m kinda stumped. Even among fellow Norwegians, I don’t prefer his work above all. For me, that would be Kjell Askildsen. But I also think Solstad and Knausgaard are equally as good…. Just my take here. I realize Fosse is well regarded and I do like the obscure mysticism of his vision. But…

That’s true, they both have all those elements, and I don’t think Fosse himself would deny the influence. I guess I just think that despite the similarities, the end results are different enough that it’s not derivative (or doesn’t seem so to me).

who do you want to see awarded the prize?
who do you think will win this year?
who will never win?

By the way, piggybacking off of this, who are writers you don’t want to win?

I’d rather not see Houellebecq get it. And I know he’s held in high regard by some users here, but Cartarescu. I’ve never been able to get through Blinding or Nostalgia.

 

[hayden]

@hayden just curious, why do you think Ulitskaya has no chances?

e) i don't get the check out surge in Ulitskaya...

Missed this (only saw it scrolling through... no notif for some reason)— regardless, I'm probably going to be eating my words looks like she has a whole bunch of books checked out. I think I've just had a bad experience with her. I've only read The Funeral Party and thought it was dry as toast, but apparently it's not one of her hotter works. After that I read a collection of her short stories (her debut? I think) that did even less for me. Dealt with a lot of topics that don't particularly interest me much. Deterred me from continuing with her longer novels, but apparently that's where the good stuff's at. I shouldn't have put her in the 'don't think will win' category as much as a 'wouldn't be excited if she won' category. Might need to dive into one of her bigger works and give it a shot. Biggest reason though is because she's on the older side of things (and a somewhat late-bloomer to the scene) and there's a solid list I think the Nobel would award before her.

And welcome Abhi!

Thanks to everyone mentioning some new names in the past few pages (among other recs)... have to write some of these down. Will note I'm also in the club cool with Blandiana winning.

 

[ministerpumpkin]

He does, that’s true. But really, of all the names you’ve mentioned, Beckett is really what comes to the fore. You know, it’s not just that he’s elliptical and repetitive. Or minimalist—or miniturist. Or that the writing deploys an aesthetics of the peripheral. But taken altogether, it’s just a little less exciting. These are vague criticisms. Fosse is a major world writer, but as far as enthusiasm for his work goes, here on this forum, I have to admit, I’m kinda stumped. Even among fellow Norwegians, I don’t prefer his work above all. For me, that would be Kjell Askildsen. But I also think Solstad and Knausgaard are equally as good…. Just my take here. I realize Fosse is well regarded and I do like the obscure mysticism of his vision. But…

I've never read Fosse but definitely will if he wins. As a non-superfan of his, you might be a good person to get an objective recommendation from as to what would be a worthwhile point of introduction to his work. I'll weigh your judgement against what possible works the SA emphasizes in those bio-bibliographies they whip up for each winner. I really love those things!