-
Welcome
to BookAndReader! We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!
Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.
Nobel Prize in Literature: Laureates
- Thread starter lies
- Start date
francesca
New Member
That's a coincidence, I just posted in another thread about Grazia Deledda.
Sometimes partly autobiographical, sometimes drawing on Sardinian folklore, her writing is very 'quiet', understated but quite beautifully observant. Given her surroundings - the mountain town of Nuoro, still harbouring a 'wild' reputation even today- its remarkable that she ever got into print, let alone won the Nobel Prize.
I do recommend her- Cosima is an excellent introduction to her work.
Sometimes partly autobiographical, sometimes drawing on Sardinian folklore, her writing is very 'quiet', understated but quite beautifully observant. Given her surroundings - the mountain town of Nuoro, still harbouring a 'wild' reputation even today- its remarkable that she ever got into print, let alone won the Nobel Prize.
I do recommend her- Cosima is an excellent introduction to her work.
Libre
Member
Martin said:
This is my first post - I just signed up. During the sign up process, they asked for the 3 best books I ever read. I just finished Waiting for the Barbarians, J.M. Coetzee. I was so impressed with it, found it so provocative and well done, that I listed it as one of my 3. Martin, did you try Barbarians? I just can't see being bored by it. After I finished Barbarians, I tried 2 other books by Coetzee - In the Heart of the Country, and Foe, and I must say I was NOT drawn into either one, and abandoned both very quickly. But Waiting for the Barbarians? Unbelievable. Stupendous. Magnificent. Nobel Prize calibre stuff. Did you read it? Anybody else?
clueless
New Member
The Noble prize committee may grant the prize for three reasons:
-To reward a country, especially when there is no chance that anybody from that country will win in any of the other cathegories.
-To reward or 'compensate' a minority group or political stance
-To reward good writing (but only when they don't need to give the prize for the other two reasons)
There might be a fourth reason, which follows the same logic as the Eurovision Song Contest.
The funny thing is that the Prize was first envisaged as a way to encourage new writers, so they could write full time.
-To reward a country, especially when there is no chance that anybody from that country will win in any of the other cathegories.
-To reward or 'compensate' a minority group or political stance
-To reward good writing (but only when they don't need to give the prize for the other two reasons)
There might be a fourth reason, which follows the same logic as the Eurovision Song Contest.
The funny thing is that the Prize was first envisaged as a way to encourage new writers, so they could write full time.
Kenny Shovel
Active Member
Blimey, well I’ve only read about a third of those, if that. But from the ones I do know, favourites would be Knut Hamsun, Halldór Laxness and Yasunari Kawabata. I also have a soft spot for the poems of Wislawa Szymborska.lies said:
Well, as this is a choice made every year rather than 100 picked at the end of the century worthy winners will miss out. From my personal taste I'm disappointed not to see G Greene in there somewhere. Also I'd say they is a definate underrepresentation of Czech literature, which for my money has been one of the strongest literary traditions of the last century. I think you could make a case for Kafka, Hrabal, Capek and even Hasek to be included.lies said:
Not massively, no...lies said:
Regards,
K-S