<< Parodic Repetitions | Front Page | The National Book Award Open (But Primed) Thread >>
Thursday, October 13, 2005
The Nobel Prize in Literature Open (But Primed) Thread
[So much for speculation: Harold Pinter won. ("Odd, I don’t think it’s 1:00 PM on the East Coast yet,” wrote Scott at 11:30 AM EST.) Feel free to discuss the merits of Pinter’s work, the fact that his name’s become an adjective, or that he retired from writing in 2002 to work for peace.]
The Nobel Prize for Literature will be announced later this afternoon. Philip Roth and Joyce Carol Oates are the most likely American recipients, according to the article Ralph linked to this morning:
Oddsmakers say the favorites for the 2005 prize include American authors Joyce Carol Oates and Philip Roth; Syrian poet Ali Ahmad Said, known as Adonis; and Korean poet Ko Un.
I think we’re meant to take “oddsmakers” seriously, since there’s little one can’t bet on in Vegas. However, my cursory examination of all the major gambling sites has turned up nothing. Where would one go to find the odds of a particular author winning the Nobel Prize in Literature?
From the same article, there’s also this…
Earlier this week, a long-time member of the Swedish Academy which awards the literature prize, writer Knut Ahnlund, resigned over the choice of last year’s winner, Austrian author Elfriede Jelinek.
He called her work a “mass of text that appears shoveled together without a trace of artistic structure."
...and from another, this:
In a signed newspaper article, Ahnlund said giving the prize to Jelinek—which surprised even Austria—“caused irreparable harm to the value of the award for the foreseeable future.”
He called Jelinek’s writing “whingeing, unenjoyable, violent pornography."
Odds are he decided to wait a year to quit in order to spoil this year’s announcement. But as I can’t find them either, I can’t speak to his true motivation.
Comments
Alas, you were a bit late posting this. The winner has already been announced: Harold Pinter.
Well, that was quick. I actually quoted from what’s now the second article in the Times’ Book Section in the NBA entry above. At the time it was the first article.
[long awkward pause]
I’m guessing it’s going to be Harold Pinter. Where can I place that bet?
Why the long awkward pause? Did you see the amended headline? [Rest deleted. The joke was on me.]
Scott: Why the long awkward pause?
[Long awkward pause]
blah: It was a joke.
Scott: A joke?
blah: Yeah, a joke. You know, Pinter.
[Long awkward pause]
Scott: Pinter. Oh.
I missed that how, I ask you, how? Well, that’s what you get when you spend your day locked in a small room with a chainsaw and a chapter. Wait, I missed a joke! Now I’m never going to be hired!
By the way: we’ve been served. An “anonymous” email arrived which states that John Bruce has pointed out that while we talk about Nobel Prize winners, the little magazines of yore had articles written by Nobel Prize winners. Because that’s a perfectly reasonable standard to hold a body to. I mean it: if you write about literature but don’t yourself have a Nobel Prize in it, you must not be one of the ninety-nine people ever to have won a Nobel Prize in Literature. And if you ain’t one of “The Ninety-Nine,” who are you?
I nominate John Bruce for the next Nobel Prize in literature.
&32;
I want you all to know that this conspiracy of silence has gone on long enough. I’ve taken decisive action, babelfish gutting Long Awkward Pause’s comments into German.
It looks like we’ve got a sock-puppet. I thought ‘short self-righteous pause’ had a similar style to ‘long awkward pause’. So I went in to check and - sure enough - same IP. I want you to know that I KNOW WHO YOU ARE and I can keep this up all day, if that’s how long it takes to make you fold your Johannes de Silentio tent and go home. I suppose you think this whole ‘whereof we cannot troll, therof we must troll over in silence’ schtick is very clever. But. It. Isn’t. If you want to shut up, take it outside.
We need more of these.
Esp. this one and this one and possibly this one but not this one. Then this would be the best BBS ever! (What do you mean “What is a BBS?” This is a BBS!)
The real irony about Bruce’s complaint is that I - and most (not all!) of the other Valve authors - DO have Nobel Prizes in Literature, but the committee told us to ‘keep it under our hats for the time being’.
[There. That ought to hold Bruce for a while. He doesn’t get irony so he won’t see the humor in this whole situation.]
Wait, I missed a joke! Now I’m never going to be hired!
Actually, it’s when you get it you’re in trouble. Cf. Richard Russo on the stiffest competition in any English dept.: for straight man.
Richard Russo on the stiffest competition in any English dept.: for straight man.
That’s because universities show such favoritism towards women and other sexual minorities, Sean. Damn their liberal pieties!
Speaking of which, I can’t help but notice that the Nobel Prize ONCE AGAIN was not awarded to John Milton. Instead it went to a television writer! What next, a Peace Prize for a “rock-a-billy” beatnik? I wish they would give us some peace!
(Pardon me a moment; my pipe dropped during that extended chuckle and I have to find something with which to douse my lap....)
I just gotta say that a) I’ve never heard of Ko Un before this post, and b) I now have an urge to read everything he’s written that’s been translated.
None of the evidence suggests much change in the humor quotient of English depts over time, Ray. Sadly, pedantry knows no politics.