Nobel Prize in Literature 2022 Speculation

Status
Not open for further replies.

Verkhovensky

Well-known member
I'm yet to read his works. Do you mean their linguistic or syntactical style might pose a challenge to readers outside Scandinavia? Or the pacing in his plot? Or the things he writes about are difficult to fol
I think he thinks that the Academy is unwilling to give the award to a Scandinavian, because of potential backlash. Many Scandinavians, some of them pretty undeserving, have won the award in the past so the award was often accused of Scandinavian bias.
 

redhead

Blahblahblah
I'm yet to read his works. Do you mean their linguistic or syntactical style might pose a challenge to readers outside Scandinavia? Or the pacing in his plot? Or the things he writes about are difficult to follow or relate to for readers outside due to lack of familiarity?

Pretty much what the others said. And his earlier works have even more repetitions. If you’re not onboard with it, it can be maddening.

Plus, after favoring Nordic writers in the first few decades of the prizes, it seems they’ve changed course and are now far stricter with them (unless, apparently, they happen to be a part of the SA…). That book Bartleby posted has a section on it. Karen Blixen missed out because she was from a Nordic country, and it sounds like they almost did the same with Tranströmer.
 

Bartleby

Moderator
Does anyone think Colm Tóibín has any chance? I haven't read him yet, only a couple of pages from his novels, and I find his style quite beautiful, but from the little I've read he doesn't seem to be the most immediate of writers — what I wonder is whether in the whole of his books he is able to communicate something with meaning and great emotional impact, or if it all doesn't amount to much other than bland portraits of simple (or in the cases of James and Mann, not so simple) people...

I'm intrigued by his work tho, it's something I intend to explore giving the time and opportunity...
 

Ben Jackson

Well-known member
Does anyone think Colm Tóibín has any chance? I haven't read him yet, only a couple of pages from his novels, and I find his style quite beautiful, but from the little I've read he doesn't seem to be the most immediate of writers — what I wonder is whether in the whole of his books he is able to communicate something with meaning and great emotional impact, or if it all doesn't amount to much other than bland portraits of simple (or in the cases of James and Mann, not so simple) people...

I'm intrigued by his work tho, it's something I intend to explore giving the time and opportunity...
I did watch the movie Brooklyn, based on his novel which's about an Irish immigrant played by Saorise Ronan, and The Master, shortlisted for the Booker Prize; as you stated earlier, it's a portrait of one of his influence Henry James. The Magician, a portrait of Thomas Mann, is another book I hope to read soon. The Master is very beautiful and well written, but he seems he's beautiful writer who doesn't have so much spotlight, unlike writers like McEwan and Banville.
 

Verkhovensky

Well-known member
Does anyone think Colm Tóibín has any chance? I haven't read him yet, only a couple of pages from his novels, and I find his style quite beautiful, but from the little I've read he doesn't seem to be the most immediate of writers — what I wonder is whether in the whole of his books he is able to communicate something with meaning and great emotional impact, or if it all doesn't amount to much other than bland portraits of simple (or in the cases of James and Mann, not so simple) people...

I'm intrigued by his work tho, it's something I intend to explore giving the time and opportunity...

My review on this board of his novel(la) Testament of Mary from January 2020

Colm Toibin, The Testament of Mary 2+

This book is really nicely written. Toibin shows great knowledge of New Testament and tries to give us different perspective of narrative we probably heard/read/saw dozens of times. But, the biggest problem for me was that I haven't found the narrative voice believable at all. The book is 1st person narration from Mary, Mother of Jesus. Still, I didn't feel that Mary would speak that way, or that any person from 2,000 years ago would speak that way. She sounds like modern person. And the events too just don't feel like they are happening in real historical period. There are a lot of nice details, for example how Lazarus is shown to be zombie-like after his resurrection or the scene of crucifixion that was moving. Still, nothing really special or IMHO worth of being in final of prestigious prize which Booker is/wants to be. Interesting novella, but that's all.

Also toughts of our dear lucas

I remember reading it and feeling like the voice, like you said, wasn't believable at all. However, I think that the writing pays off and eclipses all the flaws this short novel has. I love it and want to read it in the original soon. High school me would give it a 5 but yeah, nowadays it'd be a 3+ for me.
 

Stevie B

Current Member
Does anyone think Colm Tóibín has any chance? I haven't read him yet, only a couple of pages from his novels, and I find his style quite beautiful, but from the little I've read he doesn't seem to be the most immediate of writers — what I wonder is whether in the whole of his books he is able to communicate something with meaning and great emotional impact, or if it all doesn't amount to much other than bland portraits of simple (or in the cases of James and Mann, not so simple) people...

I'm intrigued by his work tho, it's something I intend to explore giving the time and opportunity...
I'm not sure whether Tóibín deserves the Nobel or not, but I read an interview with him years ago where he suggested that writing was often more of a chore or a job for him, and not something he was passionate about doing. That saddened me and made me want to root for someone else to win.
 

Liam

Administrator
Does anyone think Colm Tóibín has any chance?
I don't think the SA will find him "universal" enough.

You should absolutely read him though! His style is beautiful, as you said, and his plots are very tightly constructed. I especially recommend The Master and the short stories collected in Mothers & Sons.
 

meepmurp

Active member
Are we considering playwrights this year? I am listing Caryl Churchill, Botho Strauss, Wajdi Mouawad, Tom Lanoye, Dea Loher, Fernando Arrabal, Yasmina Reza, Tom Stoppard. Does any of them seem Nobel-worthy to you all? (I'm not very familiar with playwrights)
Caryl Churchill is one of the greatest - if not the greatest - and most influential playwrights writing in today, albeit in English. I've long thought that she would make an incredible laureate. She's had a very long career marked by some very different "phases" and she's written some flat-out masterpieces. (See: Cloud Nine or A Number or Far Away or The Shriker or Top Girls.) She's literally invented forms that legions of contemporary playwrights have copied again and again - and she's still innovating and she's in her 80s! She's just amazing.

There are also some really interesting dramatists working/who have worked in the German language - Strauss and Loher being two of them, but also Roland Schimmelpfennig and Franz Xavier Kroetz and Rainald Goetz - but I suspect that Handke's win may have hit pause on some of them. And I personally think that the most interesting German playwrights are actually just a hair too young to be in serious consideration at this point.

I read a couple of things by Wadji Mouawad a few years ago and recall not being blown away as much as I was led to believe I would be - granted they were in translation. I suspect that he's a better theatre director and that it's really about his productions?

Tom Stoppard is... fine. In some ways, he strikes me as a kind of obvious choice, just looking at his biography and his body of work and its influence but I also feel like the obviousness is what makes me sort of shrug my shoulders. Like some of those early plays strike me as a little smug now and his big hits - like Arcadia and The Real Thing - have always left me a little... skeptical. Like a style over substance kind of thing. I feel somewhat similarly about Reza's work. Entertaining but ultimately a bourgeois shell game? (Though, honestly, sometimes I feel like this prize is a bourgeois shell game, so what do I know?)

Other names that sometimes come to mind: Tony Kushner, whose larger body of work is (understandably) overshadowed by his Angels in America, which is just one of the great classics of the 20thcentury. There's Athol Fugard from South Africa, whose work was pretty undeniably impactful. Adrienne Kennedy, an incredibly influential and super avant-garde America dramatist and the last surviving member of that revolutionary generation that included Edward Albee and Sam Shepard. Patricia Cornelius, this kind of wild Australian playwright who won the Windham Campbell Prize some years ago.

And though they're not playwrights, I sometimes find myself rooting for director-screenwriters like Pedro Almodovar or Wong Kar Wai or Mike Leigh or Michael Haneke, though he may again be a victim of the Handke selection.
 

Ben Jackson

Well-known member
Caryl Churchill is one of the greatest - if not the greatest - and most influential playwrights writing in today, albeit in English. I've long thought that she would make an incredible laureate. She's had a very long career marked by some very different "phases" and she's written some flat-out masterpieces. (See: Cloud Nine or A Number or Far Away or The Shriker or Top Girls.) She's literally invented forms that legions of contemporary playwrights have copied again and again - and she's still innovating and she's in her 80s! She's just amazing.

There are also some really interesting dramatists working/who have worked in the German language - Strauss and Loher being two of them, but also Roland Schimmelpfennig and Franz Xavier Kroetz and Rainald Goetz - but I suspect that Handke's win may have hit pause on some of them. And I personally think that the most interesting German playwrights are actually just a hair too young to be in serious consideration at this point.

I read a couple of things by Wadji Mouawad a few years ago and recall not being blown away as much as I was led to believe I would be - granted they were in translation. I suspect that he's a better theatre director and that it's really about his productions?

Tom Stoppard is... fine. In some ways, he strikes me as a kind of obvious choice, just looking at his biography and his body of work and its influence but I also feel like the obviousness is what makes me sort of shrug my shoulders. Like some of those early plays strike me as a little smug now and his big hits - like Arcadia and The Real Thing - have always left me a little... skeptical. Like a style over substance kind of thing. I feel somewhat similarly about Reza's work. Entertaining but ultimately a bourgeois shell game? (Though, honestly, sometimes I feel like this prize is a bourgeois shell game, so what do I know?)

Other names that sometimes come to mind: Tony Kushner, whose larger body of work is (understandably) overshadowed by his Angels in America, which is just one of the great classics of the 20thcentury. There's Athol Fugard from South Africa, whose work was pretty undeniably impactful. Adrienne Kennedy, an incredibly influential and super avant-garde America dramatist and the last surviving member of that revolutionary generation that included Edward Albee and Sam Shepard. Patricia Cornelius, this kind of wild Australian playwright who won the Windham Campbell Prize some years ago.

And though they're not playwrights, I sometimes find myself rooting for director-screenwriters like Pedro Almodovar or Wong Kar Wai or Mike Leigh or Michael Haneke, though he may again be a victim of the Handke selection.

Welcome on board, my friend. And I love your analysis on the playwrights you've listed. I always thought that Fugard will get the Nobel about ten or twelve years ago, but I think his chances has become so slim for the past five years or so. I will check out Adrienne Kennedy and Caryl Churchill soon.
 

Ben Jackson

Well-known member
Talking about drama, spanish playwright Juan Mayorga won the Princesa de Asturias de Las Letras.

A new name on the board.

Thank you for this info, my friend.

I just read a short bio on Juan Mayorga. According to the bio, . about 58/59,; one of the most distinguished living playwright in Spain. His style of writing seems to echo Vaclav Havel for what I've observed. His famous plays, Way to Heaven, is set during the Holocaust, based on the review I read on New York Times, and Nocturnal, about migrants, might have contributed to his Prince of Asturias Prize. Will check these works soon.

Thanks once again for this info, my friend.
 
We never went away, you know, we're ALWAYS here, Nobel or no Nobel, :)
I know, I Know...
I must say that I come regularly on this Forum, I specially like read the Forum "Obituaries", but I reserve my comments for this annualy speculation...
 
Are we considering playwrights this year? I am listing Caryl Churchill, Botho Strauss, Wajdi Mouawad, Tom Lanoye, Dea Loher, Fernando Arrabal, Yasmina Reza, Tom Stoppard. Does any of them seem Nobel-worthy to you all? (I'm not very familiar with playwrights)
Fernando ARRABAL would be a great pick... But he's 89 year's old ! So maybe to late for him...
Wajdi MOUAWAD is a very strange author. If you want to read a very unbeliveble book, don't hesitate to read "Anima".
I have rarely read such a strange and bizarre book.
His 4 books from the series "Le sang des Promesses" ("The Blood of Promises"). "Littoral" ("Coastline") ; "Incendies" ("Fires") ; "Forêts" ("Forests") and "Ciels" ("Skies"), is really good too.
But he's 55... So maybe to young?
 
I think he thinks that the Academy is unwilling to give the award to a Scandinavian, because of potential backlash. Many Scandinavians, some of them pretty undeserving, have won the award in the past so the award was often accused of Scandinavian bias.
Probably true, but one could say exactly the opposite too...
 

The Common Reader

Well-known member
I agree with this.
In this case a good choise from the SA will be Lioudmila OULITSKAÏA
A recent favorite of mine is her novel, The Big Green Tent. (The title might have been rendered as The Green Pavilion, but that is a quibble.) It follows a group of friends, all members of that particularly Russian social class and state of mind known as the intelligentsia, from the mid 1950's to the mid 1990's: the novel begins in the aftermath of the death of Josef Stalin, and ends with the death of the poet Joseph Brodsky.

It moves from one individual to another and also lurches back and forth in time in a way that seems haphazard, indeed perverse, but that later begins to make sense. For me it feels like a book that helps to explain the people I met there in what was then the Soviet Union in 1985 and later throughout the nineties, it is both intimate and expansive. Ulitskaya’s academic background was in genetics, and she worked for some years as a scientist, and the reader senses that she cares intensely about getting facts straight—how things work, how they look, how abstract ideas (about music theory, or deaf pedagogy) come to life in the experience of the main characters.

The novel has a kind of pointillist detail that builds slowly and has a great cumulative power.

I plan to comment more about Ulitskaya as the summer goes on, but what I want to say straight out is that 2022 could/should be her year to win the Nobel Prize in Literature. (Her name has been mentioned on the forum over the past few years.) What the Swedish Academy said about Solzhenitsyn in 1970 holds equally true for her work, which is remarkable “for the ethical force with which [it] has pursued the indispensable traditions of Russian literature.”
 

Ben Jackson

Well-known member
Same, and I can add Jaroslav SEIFERT and Joseph BRODSKY...

Brodsky is a great Nobel choice any day, one of my favourite poets to ever win Nobel Prize. I'm reading a bio of him now and I'm seeing the display of intelligence and artistry in his poems. A great choice.

Another choice I'll add is Seferis and Walcott.
 

Ben Jackson

Well-known member
A recent favorite of mine is her novel, The Big Green Tent. (The title might have been rendered as The Green Pavilion, but that is a quibble.) It follows a group of friends, all members of that particularly Russian social class and state of mind known as the intelligentsia, from the mid 1950's to the mid 1990's: the novel begins in the aftermath of the death of Josef Stalin, and ends with the death of the poet Joseph Brodsky.

It moves from one individual to another and also lurches back and forth in time in a way that seems haphazard, indeed perverse, but that later begins to make sense. For me it feels like a book that helps to explain the people I met there in what was then the Soviet Union in 1985 and later throughout the nineties, it is both intimate and expansive. Ulitskaya’s academic background was in genetics, and she worked for some years as a scientist, and the reader senses that she cares intensely about getting facts straight—how things work, how they look, how abstract ideas (about music theory, or deaf pedagogy) come to life in the experience of the main characters.

The novel has a kind of pointillist detail that builds slowly and has a great cumulative power.

I plan to comment more about Ulitskaya as the summer goes on, but what I want to say straight out is that 2022 could/should be her year to win the Nobel Prize in Literature. (Her name has been mentioned on the forum over the past few years.) What the Swedish Academy said about Solzhenitsyn in 1970 holds equally true for her work, which is remarkable “for the ethical force with which [it] has pursued the indispensable traditions of Russian literature.”

Thanks for mentioning this book. Will check this book out.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top