Nobel Prize

[Rosalind]

And the Nobel Prize for Literature goes to…Harold Pinter! He’s a London-born playwright who works mostly with character driven drama. I was wondering if anyone is familiar with his work? If anyone agrees or disagrees with this year’s award, or would prefer to see someone else getting it?

Here’s a list of Pinter’s English language plays, from the Nobel prize website (http://nobelprize.org/literature/lau...nter-bibl.html).

The Room (1957). – in The Birthday Party, and Other Plays. – London : Methuen, 1960. – (Bristol, 1957)
The Birthday Party (1957). – in The Birthday Party, and Other Plays. – London : Methuen, 1960. – (Arts Theatre, Cambridge, 28 April 1958)
The Dumb Waiter (1957). – in The Birthday Party, and Other Plays. – London : Methuen, 1960. – (Kleines Haus, Frankfurt, February 1959)
A Slight Ache (1958). – in A Slight Ache and Other Plays. – London : Methuen, 1961. – (Broadcast 1959)
The Hothouse (1958). – in The Hothouse. – London : Eyre Methuen, 1980. – (Hampstead Theatre, London,
24 April 1980)
The Caretaker (1959). – in The Caretaker. – London : Methuen, 1960. – (Arts Theatre, London, 27 April 1960)
A Night Out (1959). – in Slight Ache and Other Plays. – London : Methuen, 1961. – (Broadcast on the BBC Third Programme, 1 March 1960)
Night School (1960). – in Tea Party and Other Plays. – London : Methuen, 1967. – (Broadcast on Associated Rediffusion Television, 21 July 1960)
The Dwarfs (1960). – in Slight Ache and Other Plays. – London : Methuen, 1961. – (Broadcast 1960; New Arts Theatre, London, 18 September 1963)
The Collection (1961). – in The Collection. – London : French, 1963 (1962?) ; in The Collection, and The Lover. – London : Methuen, 1963. – (Televised 1961)
The Lover (1962). – in The Collection, and The Lover. – London : Methuen, 1963. – (Televised 1961)
Tea Party (1964). – in Tea Party and Other Plays. – London : Methuen, 1967. – (Eastside Playhouse, New York, October 1968)
The Homecoming (1964). – in The Homecoming. – London : Methuen, 1965. – (Aldwych Theatre, London, 3 June 1965)
The Basement (1966). – in Tea Party and Other Plays. – London : Methuen, 1967. – (Televised 1967)
Landscape (1967). – in Landscape. – London : Pendragon Press, 1968 ; in Landscape, and Silence. – London : Methuen, 1969. – (Broadcast 1968)
Silence (1968). – in Landscape, and Silence. – London : Methuen, 1969. – (Aldwych Theatre, London, 2 July 1969)
Old Times (1970). – in Old Times. – London : Methuen, 1971. – (Aldwych Theatre, London, 1 June 1971)
Monologue (1972). – in Monologue. – London : Covent Garden Press, 1973. – (Televised on the BBC Television, 13 April 1973)
No Man's Land (1974). – in No Man's Land. – London : Methuen, 1975. – (Old Vic, London 23 April, 1975)
Betrayal (1978). – in Betrayal. – London : Eyre Methuen, 1978. – (National Theatre, London, November 1978)
Family Voices (1980). – in Family Voices. – London : Next Editions, 1981. – (Broadcast on Radio 3,
22 January 1981)
Other Places (1982). – in Other Places : Three Plays. – London : Methuen, 1982. – (Cottesloe Theatre, London, October 1982)
A Kind of Alaska (1982). – in A Kind of Alaska. – London : French, 1982 ; in Other Places : Three Plays. – London : Methuen, 1982. – (Cottesloe Theatre, London, October 1982)
Victoria Station (1982). – in Victoria Station. – London : French, 1982 ; in Other Places : Three Plays. – London : Methuen, 1982. – (Cottesloe Theatre, London, October 1982)
One for the Road (1984). – in One for the Road. – London : Methuen, 1984. – (Lyric Theatre Studio, Hammersmith, March 1984)
Mountain Language (1988). – in Mountain Language. – London : French, 1988 ; in Mountain Language. – London : Faber, 1988. – (National Theatre, London, 20 October 1988)
The New World Order (1991). – in Granta (no 37), Autumn 1991. – (Royal Court Theatre Upstairs, London, 19 July 1991)
Party Time (1991). – in Party Time. – London : Faber, 1991. – (Almeida Theatre, London, 31 October 1991)
Moonlight (1993). – in Moonlight. – London : Faber, 1993. – (Almeida Theatre, London, 7 September 1993)
Ashes to Ashes (1996). – in Ashes to Ashes. – London : Faber, 1996. – (Royal Court at the Ambassadors Theatre, London, 12 September 1996)
Celebration (1999). – in Celebration. – London : Faber, 2000. – (Almeida Theatre, London, 16 March 2000)
Remembrance of Things Past (2000). – in Remembrance of Things Past. – London : Faber, 2000. – ( Cottesloe Theatre, London, 23 November, 2000)

[EAP]

Stephen King should have gotten it. Or Salman Rushdie. Or Roddie Doyle; William Trevor, George R. R. Martin, Paulo Coelho - even Ursula Le Guin would be deserving.

Not that I say this guy is not deserving, having not read him I really cannot offer an opinion.

[Pensive]

I agree with EAP that Rushdie or Stephen King should have gotten it.
I have not read Pinter's works therefore I don't know whether he deserved it or not...

[mickeymack]

No offence but Stephen King will never win the Nobel Prize for Literature.It usually is awarded to an author who ,to quote the Nobel Foundation, "shall have produced in the field of literature the most outstanding work of an idealistic tendency". Pinter deserves the recognition for his 3 plays The Birthday Party, The Caretaker and The Homecoming, not to mention the rest of his prolific output.The Swedes recognise his greatness by awarding the prize, the Irish recognise his greatness by staging a retrospective of his works at the Gate Theatre in Dublin while the old trooper goes unsung in England. Somehow I suspect that will all change now. The cynical journos will be lauding him in the papers tomorrow no doubt. Perhaps some of his plays will be staged again! Who knows?! Mercy me, could there be enthusiasm for the old prophet in his own land! Pass the smelling salts!

[Scheherazade]

I read A Night Out and The Caretaker while at university, both of which I enjoyed very much. Pinter has a flair to display humanbeing without their daily decorum. His characters are so close to home that they are almost too disturbing to read.

However, I don't know if he is Nobel material. He would not have been one of the names coming to my mind had someone asked.

*edit*

I have never had the luxury of seeing his plays on stage but that does not bother me. I know some will disagree with me but I like reading plays and being my own stage director, imaging things for myself.

I have not read any of King's works so I cannot say whether he is Nobel material.

[Rosalind]

[QUOTE=EAP]Stephen King should have gotten it. Or Salman Rushdie. Or Roddie Doyle; William Trevor, George R. R. Martin, Paulo Coelho - even Ursula Le Guin would be deserving.[QUOTE]

I have to say I'm with mickeymack on the issue of Stephen King--the guy's hardly Nobel material. I love the Song of Ice and Fire, but I don't think GRRM is quite what the Nobel committee is looking for, either. His books are great for what they are, but Nobel literature they are not. Rushdie might be making it one of these days, but I think they look at writers with larger bodies of work. Er-Am I the only one who didn't really like Ursula Le Guin's books? I can see why people do like them, though, but I don't think the comittee is any better disposed towards fantasy books than the Academy is towards sci fi/fantasy movies. (Though LOTR may indicate a changing trend there.)

It sounds like Pinter's work is very interesting! I hope that his winning the prize will at least get his plays performed more. I'd love to see some.

[Aurora Ariel]

There is also a writer who was awarded a Nobel Peace Prize.Elie Wiesel, wrote the very powerful book Night, which tells about his own experience of the holocaust and Jews trasportation to Auschwitz, Buna, and finally Buchenwald during the war years of the 1940s.He was a young survivor of the Nazi regime and wrote this more than ten years after his liberation.It is a deep reflection of his own experience, and can be disturbing memoir to read as he and his family struggle to survive, but it leaves one with a profound effect.I would suggest to everyone that you should definately read this book, if you haven't already.He was one of too few who lived on to write about some of the atrocities that Adolf Hitler and his Nazi German officials conducted on many poor and vulnerable victims, who were treated as sub-humans and left in the most wretched states.Elie Wiesel became a Nobel laureate in 1986.They also celebrated the 100th anniversary year of the nobel prize.

[subterranean]

Hmm...I just read about him in sunday paper yesterday....

[IrishCanadian]

Er-Am I the only one who didn't really like Ursula Le Guin's books? I can see why people do like them, though, but I don't think the comittee is any better disposed towards fantasy books than the Academy is towards sci fi/fantasy movies.

I'm with you on LeGuinn. I only read one of her books, but reviews from my father tell me that I'm in for more of the same if I read more. My theory is (actually its my Dad's theory) that she has excelent ideas that need to be rushed for publication. In "Away" the first half of the book was excelent, but it seemed to rush to an unfit ending. Her style is beyond compare but theres a lot to be said about well rounded plot that plods at the common pace

[Kiwi Shelf]

I have read Noble Peace winners writings in the past, I never liked them because they usually pick such boring stuff. My personal hatred is "My Century" by Gunter Grass. I hated that book too much for words. As for Ursula Le Guin, I really didn't think that woman was still writing! I have read one of her novels: "The Left Hand of Darkness," I remember liking it but it was too long ago for me to remember details.

[OedipusReD]

i nominate R.L. Stine

[Kiwi Shelf]

R.L. Stine still writes?

[OedipusReD]

damn straight
Curse of the Shrunken Mummy's Head in Fever Swamp

[vidyanjali]

I guess what is important to win a Nobel is to see whther the writer can contribute something of consequence to his particular age. Harold Pinter's USP was not only his prolific production or popular plays but his unrelenting campaigning against the US's Foreign Policy.

A Nobel Prize winner must necesssarily be universal. His universality lies in using Theatre of The Absurd in his plays. It emerges from the modern theory of the World being a Wasteland and that life in itself is absurd in the modern times... I think events like the Iraq War only testify the absurdity of life and projects our present world as comprising of a 'faceless humanity'.

Harold Pinter is RELEVANT, and has been working towards contributing positivelt to society thru active campaigning.

So he bags the Nobel Prize....

Vidyanjali.

[EAP]

Rosalind posted,

I have to say I'm with mickeymack on the issue of Stephen King--the guy's hardly Nobel material. I love the Song of Ice and Fire, but I don't think GRRM is quite what the Nobel committee is looking for, either. His books are great for what they are, but Nobel literature they are not. Rushdie might be making it one of these days, but I think they look at writers with larger bodies of work. Er-Am I the only one who didn't really like Ursula Le Guin's books? I can see why people do like them, though, but I don't think the comittee is any better disposed towards fantasy books than the Academy is towards sci fi/fantasy movies. (Though LOTR may indicate a changing trend there.)

The bolded part begs the question: What exactly is noble quality literature?

And the italicized part is the real reason why any science fiction/popular fiction author will never be considered for the Nobel Prize - the committee is inherently baised towards popular fiction of all kinds, not because it is devoid of merit but because it is popular.

The problem with Noble Prize is that it is generally precieved as being awarded to the 'best' writer out there, not to a writer whose work fullfills (an admittedly vague) set of criteria.

This preception has become so widespread that I feel that it is time the Academy did something to address it - make it clear that it is not THE BEST of THE BEST award but BEST among a certain type one.