I know it's a bit early, but I'm writing an article for my school newspaper. It's satirical only in the sense that its seriousness is a parody of the almost religious gravity with which the rest of the writing staff writes about The Emmies and the Academy Awards. Their forms of prediction, based upon personal bias and taste alone, have become rather annoying.
So I've decided to write a serious prediction piece myself. But my only passion is literature, so perhaps that's the only thing I can write about with some degree of competence.
Regardless, I'm somewhat blind to the politics behind the Nobel Prize, so authors whom I think deserve the prize are probably laughable in actual contest. So far, I've come up with possible candidates for the Nobel Prize in Literature.
- John Updike: He's won everything else, already.
- Gore Vidal: He's pretty well respected and holds the degree of obscurity that seems to automatically make one a candidate for the Prize.
- Alice Walker: My Creative Writing teacher told me she had a chance. I don't see it, but he seems pretty intelligent on these matters.
- Arthur C. Clarke: Personally, I think he should win. He's done so much for the world. It'd be so sad if he died without a Nobel Prize.
-Kurt Vonnegut: I really, REALLY doubt he stands a chance, and I'm still arguing with myself whether he even deserves it.
-Margaret Atwood: Someone one this board recognizes her value as a novelist, and I agree. I think she stands a shot.
-Samuel R. Delany: If he's still alive, I think his Joycean science fiction is worthy of at least a passing mention to the commitee.
-Stephen King: I hate his guts, but he's been mentioned before. Would they, COULD they, possibly give him a Nobel Prize?