Pulitzer as a measure of good literature

[ucdawg12]

Hi, I am a fairly new reader(I am 16) and I am trying to enlighten myself as much as possible by reading great or acclaimed literature such as Moby-Dick, A Portait of the Artist as a Young Man, Ulysses, etc because I love the symbolism and such that is hidden deep in these books.

Anyway on my quest to find more classic books I figured that the Pulitzer would be a good measure of the literature I am looking for, but the only piece of work I noticed on that list was The Magnifcent Ambersons, which I also plan to read, and that was only because I know that the movie was directed by Orson Welles and butchered etc...

But, I was just wondering, is this a legit source? I think its pretty prestigious but so are the Academy Awards yet they have made some unequivocal errors over the years.

Thanks! :D

[amuse]

last week i had an assignment re: pulitzers (ended up writing about eddie adams - the winner of spot photography in '69); here is the website:
http://www.pulitzer.org/
i'm not sure what you mean by "legit source," if you're referencing pulitzer prize winners there are 21 different categories, and they are judged by a board (http://www.pulitzer.org/year/2001/board.html). there are guidelines that must be followed, and if you don't like the "fiction" winner one year, there's also the category of non-fiction, drama, bio, poetry, photography, music, et cetera.

[ucdawg12]

when I mean legit source, are these books any good or do they just fit the views of the Pulitzer board, like are the fiction and drama books that win actually the ones that deserve to win, or are there politics involved? One reason I ask is that because the latest great book that is well-known, to me atleast, is To Kill a Mockingbird but that was published in 1960 or around that time, maybe I am out of the loop cause I'm new at this...

[IWilKikU]

dawg, there are great books published every year. Not all of them become household names within a decade, but if you want to read a book that is generally considered "good" by the literature comunity, you can't go wrong with anything published in a "classics series", such as Penguin, Signet, Bantam, ect... If you're looking for 10th century writers or even as recent as 21st century, people on this forum seem to know some good ones. Some of the most well liked classic authors on this board seem to be Dumas (3 Musketeers, Count of Monte Cristo), Hugo (Hunchback of Notre Dame, Les Misrebles), Joyce (which you seem to be familiar with), and I'm sure people could give you further recomendations.

One reason that you didn't recognise alot of the pulitzer winners is because they don't tend to select mainstream comercialized books. You're looking at the titles of some damn good books that weren't heavily publisized, but that doesn't make them any less good. I would trust pulitzer for a good read, but if you want to be able to discuss books with other lit nuts thats not the place to start.

[Lara]

Welcome. May I commend you on your desire to enrich your life with literature. The only books I read as a teen consisted of Conan the Barbarian and books from the Forgotten Realms series. Then I don't think I even read for a decade, and tackled Moby Dick when I was thirty, or so. :D

In my opinion, good literature is, just that, a matter of opinion. Some people think the award winners are boring and crap. I think one has to read everything with an open mind. Try to appreciate what the author is intending to tell you. You don't have to agree with it or like it. Books are judged on character development, structure, style, etc.

There are more book awards, besides the Pulitzer. Here's a website I found that gives some information on these awards:

http://www.literature-awards.com/

[hal9000]

Originally posted by Lara


In my opinion, good literature is, just that, a matter of opinion. Some people think the award winners are boring and crap. I think one has to read everything with an open mind. Try to appreciate what the author is intending to tell you. You don't have to agree with it or like it. Books are judged on character development, structure, style, etc.



Agreed Lara. Here's an excerpt from an interesting speech given by Steven King at the 2003 National Book Awards.

But giving an award like this to a guy like me suggests that in the future things don't have to be the way they've always been. Bridges can be built between the so-called popular fiction and the so-called literary fiction. The first gainers in such a widening of interest would be the readers, of course, which is us because writers are almost always readers and listeners first. You have been very good and patient listeners and I'm going to let you go soon but I'd like to say one more thing before I do.

Tokenism is not allowed. You can't sit back, give a self satisfied sigh and say, "Ah, that takes care of the troublesome pop lit question. In another twenty years or perhaps thirty, we'll give this award to another writer who sells enough books to make the best seller lists." It's not good enough. Nor do I have any patience with or use for those who make a point of pride in saying they've never read anything by John Grisham, Tom Clancy, Mary Higgins Clark or any other popular writer.

What do you think? You get social or academic brownie points for deliberately staying out of touch with your own culture? [I would say pop culture, but point taken] Never in life, as Capt. Lucky Jack Aubrey would say. And if your only point of reference for Jack Aubrey is the Australian actor, Russell Crowe, shame on you.

There's a writer here tonight, my old friend and some time collaborator, Peter Straub. He's just published what may be the best book of his career. Lost Boy Lost Girl surely deserves your consideration for the NBA short list next year, if not the award itself. Have you read it? Have any of the judges read it?

There's another writer here tonight who writes under the name of Jack Ketchum and he has also written what may be the best book of his career, a long novella called The Crossings. Have you read it? Have any of the judges read it? And yet Jack Ketchum's first novel, Off Season published in 1980, set off a furor in my supposed field, that of horror, that was unequaled until the advent of Clive Barker. It is not too much to say that these two gentlemen remade the face of American popular fiction and yet very few people here will have an idea of who I'm talking about or have read the work.

This is not criticism, it's just me pointing out a blind spot in the winnowing process and in the very act of reading the fiction of one's own culture. Honoring me is a step in a different direction, a fruitful one, I think. I'm asking you, almost begging you, not to go back to the old way of doing things. There's a great deal of good stuff out there and not all of it is being done by writers whose work is regularly reviewed in the Sunday New York Times Book Review. I believe the time comes when you must be inclusive rather than exclusive.

That said, I accept this award on behalf of such disparate writers as Elmore Leonard, Peter Straub, Nora Lofts, Jack Ketchum, whose real name is Dallas Mayr, Jodi Picoult, Greg Iles, John Grisham, Dennis Lehane, Michael Connolly, Pete Hamill and a dozen more. I hope that the National Book Award judges, past, present and future, will read these writers and that the books will open their eyes to a whole new realm of American literature. You don't have to vote for them, just read them.

full speech:

http://www.nationalbook.org/nbaacceptspeech_sking.html

[IWilKikU]

That was beautiful. Just beautiful.

<slow applaud growing to standing ovation with tears running down face>

[atiguhya padma]

I stopped reading King after Firestarter. Got bored with it.

[IWilKikU]

Is that the only King you've read? Because if it is I would recomend the Bachman Books, The Stand (not everyone can handle the 1400+ pages, but I'm sure you can ;) ), The Darktower Series (although its much more enjoyable if you're familiar with his other writings), and my personal fav Needful Things. Those are the books that I imagine people on this forum could get something from. I'm sure there are more, but its so hard to get lit snobs to read King to begin with.

[atiguhya padma]

I read everything up to Firestarter. I thought The Stand and The Dead Zone were probably the best. But I just don't think I could get enough enthusiasm now to read any of his other stuff. The problem that I find with his work, is it lacks credibility. I am not convinced by his fiction.

[hal9000]

Originally posted by IWilKikU
That was beautiful. Just beautiful.

<slow applaud growing to standing ovation with tears running down face>

LOL! Wow...

Most of his stuff doesn’t interest me, but King’s written a couple gems in my estimation. His book, On Writing, was one of the best books on writing I’ve read. He claims to do little if any preparation, outlines nothing, and just goes. He does one draft, (with the door closed as he puts it) goes back and does a final draft. Who knows if it's true. My guess is he does a lot more editing than that.

[atiguhya padma]

I would seldom trust what writer's say about their writing habits. They nearly always want to impress you, masquerading a falsity as truth.

[papayahed]

I usually take my recommendations from sites like this, but popular writers have their place, I like to think of them as the "television" form of books - fluffy, with not a lot of thinking.

I'm wondering though - Thousand years of solitude is a selection of the month for some book club (I think Oprah), does any one else find it annoying that the masses are being turned on to this book?

[hal9000]

Originally posted by den
I get suspicious of `popular' writers, as I wonder how much help they get from others and also they're just too `hollywood' for me, King included.

I'm glad when an obscure writer gets some recognition, but I usually don't listen to others recommendations, I like to make my own mind up about what and whom I will read. :p

I’m suspicious of popular writers as well, and rarely buy any of their books - I did like The Shining though. What turns me off is the way writers are packaged and marketed like brand names with the John le Carres and Tom Clancys, and John Grishams always seemingly forced to stick to the same theme. A few contemporary writers I presume are on the fringe of mainstream that I like are Vonnegut, Pat Conroy, and John Irving.

[subterranean]

Hi welcome.

I think for some people, pulitzer is indeed become a sign for the so called good books. But personally, I don't really attracted with those words or advertisement on the book covers, such as "this year's best selling..author of the year..etc". Coz some books are tricksters, I mean you can only love their covers.

[IWilKikU]

Originally posted by papayahed

I'm wondering though - Thousand years of solitude is a selection of the month for some book club (I think Oprah), does any one else find it annoying that the masses are being turned on to this book?

I think that being annoyed that a really really good read is being recognized by the public for what it is is rediculous. You should be praising society for recognizing a good book rather than wanting to keep good literature obscure and hidden from the masses. Its a direct cause and effect relationship: Oprah suggests to her readers a good book that makes them think; her readers discover that good literature is beautiful; popular society gets smarter because their reading thought provoking material; suddenly its not such a bad thing to be part of popular society. You people who reject popular works on the basis that they are popular are what I like to refer to as literary snobs. You are smarter than average joe fiction reader and want it to stay that way rather than having average joe fiction reader better his habits.

[Lara]

Perhaps the point is the immense power of persuasion one individual has over the population. Yes, it is a good cause. Literature is being exposed. Do we really want Oprah, or anyone else telling us whats good to read? I used to work in a bookstore. People were phoning to get books she recommended before the show was even over. It gets pathetic. If she said go and jump off a bridge, would people do it?

Literary snob is a bit harsh of a term to describe someone who is only asking a question. That person didn't say they were turned off by popular fiction.

[hal9000]

Well, when the same ten writers dominate the Best-Seller list for decades with variations on the same three or four themes, maybe Oprah’s a good thing. But look what happened to Jonathan Franzen when he had second thoughts on putting Oprah’s big fat corporate logo on his book, The Corrections. All of a sudden he was vilified as a literary snob by the press, and the big “O” as she’s called, refused to have him on her show.

And so, "Do we really want Oprah, or anyone else telling us whats good to read?"

Good question.

[Lara]

Oh yes! I remember that. I think though, that she had already announced his book before he bailed out of the contract. Regardless, he got publicity linked to her name, and people bought his book because of it. It's unfortunate that authors aren't recognised, simply because they have a good story to tell.

[papayahed]

First of all people reading is usually (except perhaps in north Korea if 60 minutes is correct) always a good thing. It's unfortunate that someone as famous as Oprah has to tell people it's a good thing, inorder for them to pick up a book. In this respect i think the outcome outweighs the means.

Secondly I realize my annoyance is irrational and shelfish, and it is just that an annoyance, I'm not trying to get a movement together. Honeslty though, after somebodies favorite author, band, what have you, gets famous who hasn't thought of them as a "Sell Outs", artists works are never as good after they become famous as it was when they were "your" artist (in the individuals eyes of course). Don't tell me nobody feels a sense of ownership over they're favorite artist, even more so when artists are unknown.

[IWilKikU]

I see your point, but I think people need to recognize the difference between "selling out" and becoming popular. Do you think that your favorite writer/band/artist liked being a tiny little unknown, getting no recognition and only gathering a cult following? When people create somthing beautiful they deserve to be recognized. One of my favorite bands is System of a Down. I got there first album within a month of its release. Before that I had heard one of their demo's and seen them live. When their second album came out, I was thrilled at the mainstream attention they were getting. It was about damn time popular music recognized a GOOD rock band rather than a bunch of Limp Bizkit sound-a-likes.

It is stupid to asume that if Oprah doesn't endorse it, than its not worth reading, but whats wrong with giving the "O" bookclub people a glimpse of somthing better? Maybe 100 Years will be that push that they needed to get reading lit on their own rather than sticking to the "O" club.

Is anyone here a member of Oprah's club, or does anyone look to Oprah for book recomendations? If you are/do I would love to hear your take on this.

[Robert E Lee]

Originally posted by hal9000
Agreed Lara. Here's an excerpt from an interesting speech given by Steven King at the 2003 National Book Awards.

But giving an award like this to a guy like me suggests that in the future things don't have to be the way they've always been. Bridges can be built between the so-called popular fiction and the so-called literary fiction. The first gainers in such a widening of interest would be the readers, of course, which is us because writers are almost always readers and listeners first. You have been very good and patient listeners and I'm going to let you go soon but I'd like to say one more thing before I do.

Tokenism is not allowed. You can't sit back, give a self satisfied sigh and say, "Ah, that takes care of the troublesome pop lit question. In another twenty years or perhaps thirty, we'll give this award to another writer who sells enough books to make the best seller lists." It's not good enough. Nor do I have any patience with or use for those who make a point of pride in saying they've never read anything by John Grisham, Tom Clancy, Mary Higgins Clark or any other popular writer.

What do you think? You get social or academic brownie points for deliberately staying out of touch with your own culture? [I would say pop culture, but point taken] Never in life, as Capt. Lucky Jack Aubrey would say. And if your only point of reference for Jack Aubrey is the Australian actor, Russell Crowe, shame on you.

There's a writer here tonight, my old friend and some time collaborator, Peter Straub. He's just published what may be the best book of his career. Lost Boy Lost Girl surely deserves your consideration for the NBA short list next year, if not the award itself. Have you read it? Have any of the judges read it?

There's another writer here tonight who writes under the name of Jack Ketchum and he has also written what may be the best book of his career, a long novella called The Crossings. Have you read it? Have any of the judges read it? And yet Jack Ketchum's first novel, Off Season published in 1980, set off a furor in my supposed field, that of horror, that was unequaled until the advent of Clive Barker. It is not too much to say that these two gentlemen remade the face of American popular fiction and yet very few people here will have an idea of who I'm talking about or have read the work.

This is not criticism, it's just me pointing out a blind spot in the winnowing process and in the very act of reading the fiction of one's own culture. Honoring me is a step in a different direction, a fruitful one, I think. I'm asking you, almost begging you, not to go back to the old way of doing things. There's a great deal of good stuff out there and not all of it is being done by writers whose work is regularly reviewed in the Sunday New York Times Book Review. I believe the time comes when you must be inclusive rather than exclusive.

That said, I accept this award on behalf of such disparate writers as Elmore Leonard, Peter Straub, Nora Lofts, Jack Ketchum, whose real name is Dallas Mayr, Jodi Picoult, Greg Iles, John Grisham, Dennis Lehane, Michael Connolly, Pete Hamill and a dozen more. I hope that the National Book Award judges, past, present and future, will read these writers and that the books will open their eyes to a whole new realm of American literature. You don't have to vote for them, just read them.

full speech:

http://www.nationalbook.org/nbaacceptspeech_sking.html

Boo hoo. Poor commercial fiction writers. Some people spend years mastering the writing of literature and suffer poor sales while these hacks like King make cash off appealing to the dumb side of their readers. :rolleyes:

[Robert E Lee]

Originally posted by IWilKikU
I think that being annoyed that a really really good read is being recognized by the public for what it is is rediculous. You should be praising society for recognizing a good book rather than wanting to keep good literature obscure and hidden from the masses. Its a direct cause and effect relationship: Oprah suggests to her readers a good book that makes them think; her readers discover that good literature is beautiful; popular society gets smarter because their reading thought provoking material; suddenly its not such a bad thing to be part of popular society. You people who reject popular works on the basis that they are popular are what I like to refer to as literary snobs. You are smarter than average joe fiction reader and want it to stay that way rather than having average joe fiction reader better his habits.

You can call me what you like, but I say **** the masses. I just steer clear of anything with an Oprah logo on it.

[subterranean]

I suppose sometimes it depends to person/party who speaks. I mean we might get interested and considered a book as a good book coz Oprah said so, and perhaps Oprah is trustable enough in this matter. Or perhaps we think "who the hell is Oprah, what does she know about good book..etc". It depends, though it's still u to us to decide.
I mean I stopped believin the Rolling Stones magazine since they put David Gilmoure (of Pink FLoyd) below some guitarrist names who can't even compared to him on the 100 best guitarrists of all time. This is not a subjective opinion since some other people i know also think that David's rank should be higher.

[Black Flag]

Originally posted by Robert E Lee
You can call me what you like, but I say **** the masses. I just steer clear of anything with an Oprah logo on it.




Hear, Hear! (I raise my glass and drink).

[IWilKikU]

Ah, E. Lee, how I've missed your presence.

[Scheherazade]

I feel uncomfortable with the ready eagerness to ignore or neglect any book because they are commercially or publicly popular.

I would like to read what everyone is reading and also the less popular books (some of the classics maybe); I would like to read The Da Vinci Code and Crime and Punishment and Harry Potter; I would like to read and decide for myself. So I usually, like Papayahed, get my advice from people I know (like you guys on here), from the Pulitzer committee and sometimes from Oprah as well... So what?

If I turn my back to a book simply because it happens to be promoted by Oprah, who is losing out here?

[Sitaram]

Yes, I agree. We should discipline ourselves to be undisciplined (that is when we are not busy renouncing renunciation).

We should force ourselves to study things that do not appeal to us, so that we may remain open minded and grow.

We should read "bad" books once in a while (or books which we suspect of badness) in order to savour the essence of what makes them bad.

And we should eat leafy green vegetables once in a while, raw, mind you.

[Capnplank]

My mom watches Oprah every day. The last year or so, Oprah has been doing "the classics", with books like One Hundred Years of Solitude, Anna Karenina, East of Eden, The Heart is a Lonely Hunter, and most recently I think a triad of Faulkner; As I Lay Dying, The Sound and the Fury, and Light in August. I get a phone call from her whenever the new book is announced and I'll grab it off my shelf (since she's not going to pay $14 for the Oprah Book Club sticker), and bring it to her so she can read it. It took time to get her East of Eden, and in the meantime she read about three other books by Steinbeck, because she liked them. She enjoys the discussions they bring up about the books, both on the show and elsewhere, and enjoys the reading itself (or if she doesn't, as with Garcia Marquez, she quits reading it). She would not jump off a bridge at Oprah's beckon (at least I don't think so), but it is slightly different reading than she might otherwise take up. I've even had some discussions about a few things from some of the books with her.

It's just a book club, the same as the one here where you guys pick a book every month to read and then discuss it as you go, but more to the taste and convenience of some people. That it's on a larger scale doesn't make it any worse -- people are still being opened up to different works and maybe, just maybe they're thinking about them a little. How's this a bad thing? That Oprah might have an outline isn't any worse than the structured way you often study a specific text in a class.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

You can call me what you like, but I say **** the masses. I just steer clear of anything with an Oprah logo on it.

I would concur, but then Faulkner's Light in August has one of those horrible stickers on it. It's not Faulkner's fault.

[Mr.lucifer]

Congrats on posting on a thread that is 5 years dead

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

I searched Robert E. Lee's posts and found this. Didn't look at the dates. I'm sooooooooooo sorry, lol.

[kelby_lake]

Pulitzer is a pretty good measure of drama, so if you're looking for modern classic plays...

[JBI]

It's a good list for what it is, albeit, it is so limited and there are so many bad picks floating around there, not to mention it is so American, and totally reflects American sensibilities of the arts.

I see the point of it, but at the same time, if you want to read truly great work, you need to get beyond lists like this. The best way is to just get an anthology and look into authors that catch your eye.

If you are very serious, pick a focus on, and then just ask for recommendations around your interest; works that compliment or are like works you like, even if they are genre works.

So, for instance, I liked Ezra Pound, so I went and read Moore, and Stevens - something along those lines. It's much better than just looking for the "best" works of a given year, when they are so hit and miss and so limited.

Edit: for what the above poster said about Drama, that is true, however one must remember that it is still limited to a certain type of drama. Poetry too has only 3-4 "miss-awards" each decade it would seem (up until the 70s, then they sort of lose it as the American academies go under), but that still isn't really reflecting poetry.


The award itself seems so damn American to me; I can't explain it, but it feels like most of them were the "obvious" American choice, in that they reflect an American sensibility, rather than a world one - that of course is justifiable, but at the same time it is cagey.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Well, the Pulitzer is an American reward . . .

[JBI]

Well, the Pulitzer is an American reward . . .

Oh, no doubt, but to the original post: "I am trying to enlighten myself as much as possible by reading great or acclaimed literature"

Just thought that it is worth mentioning that to enlighten one as much as possible really implies reading outside of what one considers their current scope; like for instance someone who only reads novels reading a play or poems, or someone who only reads American fiction picking up a German novel.

Luckily there is much available in translation, as well as a great deal of good, accessible literature in English with a less "Pulitzer" feel - even things in the US - the award in general has been more successful than most, but it offers but one angle on literature in the US, and also but one country's tradition.

Sadly though, now I realize the original poster is long gone, so we can just pretend this never happened, as debates about awards are usually rather unproductive; the best writers rarely win.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Okay, I get what you're saying, and completely agree.