What is it that makes an author worthy of Nobel?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...usaolp00000003
What is it that makes an author worthy of Nobel?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...usaolp00000003
I wrote a poem on a leaf and it blew away...
I'd love to see Rowling win. What a Bugsbunny Curveball that would be!
What more can books do than that? What more can books do than that! Go read Dante, Shakespeare, Homer, Milton, Virgil, Tasso, Firdawsi, Rumi, Horace, Hafez, Nizami, Vyasa, Valmiki, Aeschylus, Sophocles, Euripides, Aristophanes, Herman Melville, Charles Dickens, Racine, Calderon, Goethe, etc. and then ask that question. They can lift you to another planet and make you proud to be a human being and somehow distantly related to the kind of beings who are capable of such magnificence. Blinding, unquestionable, world shaking talent, that should be the criterion for the Nobel Prize.She doesn’t write great sentences, and it would be hard to argue that the subject matter is hugely important. But the questions, characters, stories, and values in her work have resonated with the world.
And what more can books do than that?
Since Gabriel Garcia Marquez already has one, I wouldn't mind if Tom Stoppard, Edward Albee, Adonis, or Haruki Murakami also got one to hang on their walls. At the moment, I can't think of anyone else who would be worthy. Getting people to read shouldn't be the goal of the Nobel Prize committee. If that's all literature was about then you could give the prize to Rupert Murdoch who put tits in newspapers and Amazon.com for inventing the Kindle.
Last edited by mortalterror; 01-17-2012 at 09:24 AM.
"So-Crates: The only true wisdom consists in knowing that you know nothing." "That's us, dude!"- Bill and Ted
"This ain't over."- Charles Bronson
Feed the Hungry!
The Huffington article isn't endorsing Rowling based on literary merit. In fact, it concedes that literary merit wise her writing falls far short of the ideal.
The endorsement is based on altruism which is a strong element in all the Nobel prizes. And altruism wise, one could argue Rowling is at the very forefront.
I wasn't in the least surprised to see that the poll registered 63.39% for and 36.61% against. It's what living in a declining civilisation is all about.
"L'art de la statistique est de tirer des conclusions erronèes a partir de chiffres exacts." Napoléon Bonaparte.
"Je crois que beaucoup de gens sont dans cet état d’esprit: au fond, ils ne sentent pas concernés par l’Histoire. Mais pourtant, de temps à autre, l’Histoire pose sa main sur eux." Michel Houellebecq.
The Nobel awards... pfff... look who are all the fools they give the peace prize to...I wouldn't be surprised if the Nobel for literature took the same dive...
It would be tragic if Rowling and Steinbeck were in the same 'club.'
"All gods are homemade, and it is we who pull their strings, and so, give them the power to pull ours." -Aldous Huxley
"Sooner murder an infant in its cradle than nurse unacted desires." -William Blake
When I read the title of the article, "Should J.K. Rowling get the Nobel Prize," I literally thought, "for what." It took a few seconds to register that they actually meant the prize for literature.
It seems that the giving of the prize is more political than anything. No matter how you feel about Obama and his political viewpoints, consider the reasoning that he received his Nobel. He received it without actually accomplishing anything for it yet. I think that J.K. Rowling has entertained lots of people, but should the prize be awarded based on popularity?
Les Miserables,
Volume 1, Fifth Book, Chapter 3
Remember this, my friends: there are no such things as bad plants or bad men. There are only bad cultivators.
Hope for freedom, evolution and globalization of science.Originally Posted by Charles Darnay
The Freedom part is good...
Les Miserables,
Volume 1, Fifth Book, Chapter 3
Remember this, my friends: there are no such things as bad plants or bad men. There are only bad cultivators.
While I agree with you, I can hear Jeff Bridges saying "yeah, well, you know that's just like uhh your opinion, man."
"They can lift you to another planet and make you proud to be human" - can't Harry Potter do that?
I'm just playing Devil's advocate here.
I wrote a poem on a leaf and it blew away...
Despite his inclination for science, Nobel recognized Literature's importance as well and that is why is part of the legitimate awards....unlike Economics who slid under the wire and said "yeah, we're here too! We're important!" (not that economists aren't important.)
I wrote a poem on a leaf and it blew away...
True. But Nobel-recognized literature does not cause antiscientific currents. And Economics is pretty much US Federal Reserve conducted when it wins. Which is a good thing and will remain so.
An interesting thing happened with Octavio Paz, for example. After receiving the Cervantes around 1980, he spend the next decade pretty much reconciling himself with Rivera and Neruda, and most important, criticizing the Catholic faith in Mexico, through critics of the most famous nun. Soon he received the Nobel around 1990. Spainish conservatives were totally disgusted.
Last edited by cafolini; 01-17-2012 at 12:07 PM.
As always Emil, Here Here!!
In our culturally declinding and technologically advancing society our Technology has exceeded our Humanity a long time ago.
We could go back to William James probably, but probably at least Henry Ford and his birdwatching friend. It's a good thing. We have come a long ways and moving on.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
