The Nobel Prize in Literature from an Alternative Universe

[pegkerr]

Ted Gioia indulges in a lovely daydream:

"I had a hunch a woman writer living in England would win the Nobel Prize in Literature this year. But I still wasn't prepared for the thrill I experienced when I learned that J.K. Rowling had won the coveted prize. After all, who has done more for the cause of reading in recent decades? The last time a British woman had received this honor was back in 1966 when Dame Agatha Christie shared the award with Jorge Luis Borges. I expect Rowling's acceptance speech will rank among the most memorable. (Although it's hard to imagine anything topping that moment in 1997, when Dr. Hunter S. Thompson mounted the podium in Stockholm to share his surprising sentiments with the audience.) . . ."

No, this is not the real Nobel Prize in Literature, but the way the award might exist in an alternative universe -- a world in which such honors are exempt from pettiness, politics and tokenism. Imagine a Nobel Prize in which the contributions of Proust, Kafka, Nabokov and Joyce are not forgotten. Imagine a Nobel Prize in Literature in which genre writers have a chance. Imagine a Nobel Prize in Literature that doesn't bend over backward to exclude native born U.S. writers (only three honored during the last 52 years!). Ah, don't just imagine . . . read about it here.

For my part, I'm just happy the committee from the alternative universe honored Philip K. Dick three years before his passing.

Well? What do you think of his proposed list of winners? (J.K. Rowling wins it for the year 2007.)

Comments

[prunesnprisms.livejournal.com]

As a huge Agatha Christie fan, I'd applaud.

[takumashii.livejournal.com]

I don't feel like the Nobel committee has always made sensible (or even defensible) choices, but on the other hand, I feel like J.K. Rowling and Agatha Christie already have the recognition that they deserve... I mean, you're a popular author, you have more money than a small nation would know what to do with, and you need the big important prizes too?

A Nobel prize would bring Rowling no more recognition than she already has; somebody like Orham Panuk (sp?), on the other hand, can benefit from the recognition.

[aome.livejournal.com]

Except that I don't recognize most of the actual winners.

[baldanders.livejournal.com]

That's not the fault of the Nobel committee, though; in almost every case, the writers are deserving of recognition but our culture simply doesn't care if they don't write in English.

[avengangle.livejournal.com]

Yeah. Agreed.

I was also going to be catty and point out that neither Christie nor Rowling is nearly as good a writer as the other hundred on his list, but I think it's a moot point. (And not to be construed as me disliking either author, since I'm quite a fan of both.)

Although I did like the inclusion of Sondheim and Cole Porter.

[huladavid.livejournal.com]

He forgot to include me.

[aome.livejournal.com]

I love that Theodore Seuss Geisel is on there. I'd vote for that!

[naomikritzer]

That one made me choke up.

If anyone has a harder time being taken seriously than genre writers, it's children's writers.

And yet Dr. Seuss wrote a book about racial discrimination and prejudice that was published in 1960 with apparently no controversy whatsoever -- I've never once seen The Sneetches on a "banned/challenged books" list, although The Butter Battle Book and The Lorax came late enough that people had started to notice he wasn't just writing frivolous funny rhyming stuff with no wider significance. He wrote brilliant, incisive social commentary that flew far enough below the radar that it reached the children of the very people he was criticizing, and none of them noticed. (The Sneetches deals with discrimination and segregation. What Was I Scared Of deals with prejudice. And I am convinced that The Zax is actually a metaphore for the U.S. Senate. I haven't been able to come up with a larger significance for Too Many Daves, alas.)

[pegkerr.livejournal.com]

He also said that Yertle the Turtle was actually Adolph Hitler.

[flemmings.livejournal.com]

He lost me when he picked that pretentious bloat Mishima over Kawabata.

[pameladean]

The list is interesting, but I could do without the whiny aspect. Only three native-born U.S. writers in 52 years! Out of the ENTIRE WORLD! The horror!

P.

[baldanders.livejournal.com]

Thank you.

[baldanders.livejournal.com]

I think it's odd that this complaint is being raised in a year in which they actually gave the award to a popular writer who has written genre fiction and been honored by that genre.

[anghara.livejournal.com]

His list has its own demerits. It's OBVIOUS. What is he saying, that the only reason you can win a Nobel is if your name is even vaguely familiar to English speakers? Has this person ever read Ivo Andric (yes, he IS available in translation) or Sigrid Undsett or Henryk Sienkieqicz? Or is it just easier to award the Nobel Prize in Literature to Cole Porter - "Anything Goes"?...

I'll be the first to agree that often my response to the NobelLit Prize is a confused, "Who?" - but there's a world of writers out there, and many of them are more than deserving even if their name IS obscure to Western ears. And maybe I'm just being over-sensitive again, but the comment that the committee "bends over backwards" to avoid honouring US-born writers smacks of America's usual self-centredness to me. It shouldn't matter where an author is born. At ALL.

And frankly... J K Rowling is a populist and popular writer, but she is hardly the Best of the Best. She just outsells everyone. Part of the Nobel award is money and fame, and she's already got more of both than a Nobel could possibly bestow on her.

I

[ladyvorkosigan.livejournal.com]

Yes, no disrespect to Mr. Rushdie, but I can't help but wonder why he displaced Naguib Mahfouz, for instance.

[sdn.livejournal.com]

no. just: no. bob dylan? lennon and mccartney? dr. seuss? j.k. rowling???

and also note: not many women, perhaps fewer than the actual nobel list.

[jenett]

I found the substitution of Toni Morrison with Ralph Ellison particularly interesting, in that vein.

(I don't agree with it, mind you, but I'm really curious about the rationalisation.)

[wintersweet.livejournal.com]

Noooo. I enjoy JKR no end, but she's not a highly skilled writer. She's a great world-builder, but just an average wordsmith, in my opinion.

Also, I thought Doris Lessing *was* a genre writer, at least part-time.

[johnridley.livejournal.com]

Yes, the list seems to be mainly things that are popular. All of us have loved works by people on that list, but I think the Nobel is about seeking out extraordinary talent, perhaps talent that would not otherwise get deserved recognition.

This list seems to be a popularity contest. There's already an award for popularity; it's called "getting paid." I don't think most of the people on that list would appreciate the Nobel prize as much as the people who have actually received it have, nor would it help their careers as much.