WLF Prize in Literature 2022

[Liam]

Might even be the best book to come out of Australia.

Personally, I would give that honor to Patrick White's Voss,

 

[Ben Jackson]

I have neither read White's Voss not Murnane's The Plains, but I have read three works from both writers and I can confidently say both writers are the best writers from Australia, if you add the poet Les Murray.

 

[Cleanthess]

This A. D. Hope fanboy would add his shining name to that list.

 

[tiganeasca]

And, never one to be left out, I'd suggest at least consideration for adding David Malouf. (Though I haven't read enough of him to say so confidently, Peter Carey's not bad.... ) I guess I would note only that I find Murnane a bit of an acquired taste. Not saying he isn't worthy, just that he's not my favorite. Or my second favorite.

 

[Patrick Murtha]

This A. D. Hope fanboy would add his shining name to that list.

Beware of ruins: they have a treacherous charm;
Insidious echoes lurk among their stones;
That scummy pool was where the fountain soared;
The seated figure, whose white arm
Beckons you, is a mock-up of dry bones
And not, as you believe, your love restored.

 

[namelesshere]

Do we have any plans for voting on this yet?

 

[Liam]

I think we waited till the end of September last year to let the participants finish their reading and/or to squeeze in one (or more) final books by an author, if they so chose. Not sure, if you want to vote on this before or after the Nobel announcement? Maybe before? Imagine the surprise if we ended up picking the same person! ?

 

[hayden]

Maybe before? Imagine the surprise if we ended up picking the same person! ?

Oh, it should definitely be before.

 

[Liam]

^How about the last week of September? We can begin voting on the 25th (and members can continue to read and/or finish anything they want for the next five days), and end on the 30th? or the 1st of Oct? That way we'll have the results before the Nobel announcement, which remind me again, is going to be on the 4th, right?

 

[hayden]

^How about the last week of September? We can begin voting on the 25th (and members can continue to read and/or finish anything they want for the next five days), and end on the 30th? or the 1st of Oct? That way we'll have the results before the Nobel announcement, which remind me again, is going to be on the 4th, right?

Nope.
October 6th.

 

[Liam]

^Then it looks like we've got ourselves an extra week to finish our reading. I don't see any harm in Bartleby starting the poll soon though--some of us are ready to cast our vote, and for those who are not there could be a deadline in early October or something, ?‍

 

[Ben Jackson]

I will cast my vote sometime next week. I don't know if I'll get the chance around the end of September/first week of October. School work might occupy my time. Don't know if it'll be alright?

Already done with reading the shortlist (three works that are available from each writers that's). Already reviewed Jaeggy in her thread, so within two days, I'll review the other two writers in their threads.

I read last year's deliberations yesterday, loving to be part of this year's.

For next year's nominations, I propose for each member to nominate five writers: four writers working in the literary sphere (poetry, drama, fiction), and the other a non-fiction writer (philosopher, critic, historian, travel writers). I do think for a fairer representation and good for all categories of writing. What do you guys think?

 

[Leseratte]

Nope.
October 6th.

It would be almost ditectly after the Brazilian general elections fot president on the 2nd.

 

[errequatro]

Friends, because of an "incident" on a different thread related to Javier Marias, I decided to withdraw from voting.
Consider my participation in the awarding of our prize (this year) over.
Please forgive me for this.
Best of luck with the awarding.
We had a wonderful shortlist. It was a lot more difficult to choose who to vote for this year, which is brilliant!
I thoroughly enjoyed reading all the candidates, with no exceptions.
Best of luck to all!

 

[Patrick Murtha]

For next year's nominations, I propose for each member to nominate five writers: four writers working in the literary sphere (poetry, drama, fiction), and the other a non-fiction writer (philosopher, critic, historian, travel writers). I do think for a fairer representation and good for all categories of writing. What do you guys think?

Seconding the love for non-fiction writers! For example, Barbara Tuchman would have been completely worthy of Nobel consideration, especially since Winston Churchill had won for writing history.

 

[errequatro]

Seconding the love for non-fiction writers! For example, Barbara Tuchman would have been completely worthy of Nobel consideration, especially since Winston Churchill had won for writing history.

The only trouble with this is that the Nobel Academy is trying to get back on their feet after the scandal so they are looking to regain public trust. This means that whilst they will choose people who are relatively unknown (Gurnah) and some slight controversial ones (Handke) they will avoid "questionable" choices. Gurnah and Handke (especially him) are bona fide quality writers, even if obscure and controversial, respectively. But I don't see them going back to doing what they were doing in the Danius period, i.e. experimental choices (Alexievich, a good choice, and Dylan, a problematic one).
The recent spell of winners is consistent in terms quality. I can't see anyone who is "unworthy" of the prize, even if it not to my subjective taste.
So I think this year it will be someone predictable or, at least, not unexpected.
Grossman fits the bill, for example.
But the main point is that it won't be some "new direction".

 

[namelesshere]

The only trouble with this is that the Nobel Academy is trying to get back on their feet after the scandal so they are looking to regain public trust. This means that whilst they will choose people who are relatively unknown (Gurnah) and some slight controversial ones (Handke) they will avoid "questionable" choices. Gurnah and Handke (especially him) are bona fide quality writers, even if obscure and controversial, respectively. But I don't see them going back to doing what they were doing in the Danius period, i.e. experimental choices (Alexievich, a good choice, and Dylan, a problematic one).
The recent spell of winners is consistent in terms quality. I can't see anyone who is "unworthy" of the prize, even if it not to my subjective taste.
So I think this year it will be someone predictable or, at least, not unexpected.
Grossman fits the bill, for example.
But the main point is that it won't be some "new direction".

100% agree. For example, no chance of it being Michel Houellebecq this year, I would say.

 

[errequatro]

Michel Houellebecq this year

Or any year. Ever.
For me, at least
He's an opportunistic polemicist, a satirist (and this aspect is good about him), but honestly that is all.

 

[Bartleby]

Good day to all!

As we've seen from the voting poll on Javier Marías' thread, he's still in contention for this year's prize. For next year, if we're still doing this, we should think of a rule concerning the passing of an author on our shortlist.

I believe we can fix a date by the end of next week as a deadline for casting our votes. Does 29 September sound nice to everyone? This way we can wrap our discussions here in time for us to focus back entirely on this year's Nobel Prize.

Please remember to say how many/which books from each author you've read when casting your votes, and please do so making it clear the order of preference, for instance:

1. Author A
2. Author B
3. Author C

Where the first position (1) is your most prefered candidate, the last (3) your least one.

Feel free in the meantime to share your thoughts on why a given author should be the winner. Also, you may change your votes until the final date.

Any doubts, let us know !

 

[namelesshere]

Ok here we go.

1 - Javier Marias - it would be easier to list which works of his I have *not* read...
2 - Gerald Murnane - Border Districts, Tamarisk Row, Invisible Yet Enduring Lilacs, The Plains
3 - Fleur Jaeggy - Sweet Days of Discipline, Proleterka

I found it hard to warm to Jaeggy's style - I am not a great fan of cold, stripped prose in general - I felt very distant from both narratives, and the characters therein. Marias and Murnane I think are both phenomenal, and in a way I regret that they're up together. But, I find Marias more engaging a writer than Murnane. They're both share a digressive, repetitive, circling-around-the-point, quality which I really love, but I prefer the way Marias does it, and I prefer his themes and his sense of the dramatic. Your Face Tomorrow & A Heart So White are remarkable pieces of work.