Hatrack River Writers Workshop: Nobel prize judge slams American literature

This is topic Nobel prize judge slams American literature in forum Open Discussions About Writing at Hatrack River Writers Workshop.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
http://www.hatrack.com/ubb/writers/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=005250

Posted by WouldBe (Member # 5682) on :

This is from early October, but interesting. The judge does seem to have pre-judged IMHO.

Posted by Robert Nowall (Member # 2764) on :

I didn't look, but, if it's the story I heard at the time---and WARNING! this quick rant is going to involve political positions---it's just another example of the European positions, simultaneously anti-American and leftist, that infest Western Europe at nearly every level.

Every ostensibly-neutral organization gradually moves to the left, especially once it's out of the hands of those who actually created and funded it. The MacArthur Foundation, the Ford Foundation, and the Nobel Prize Committee.

(Does anybody really think Al Gore or Jimmy Carter really deserved their Nobel Peace Prizes?)

Posted by tchernabyelo (Member # 2651) on :

Leftist and anti-American aren't always the same thing, though they've been able to share platforms for some while now courtesy of a particularly hawkish regime in the US.

"Infesting". Interesting word choice, Robert.

Europe is actually a lot less anti-American than most Americans seem to think. There's a big difference between not liking the foreign policies of a country's ruling regime, and not liking members of the population of that country. I sometimes think that certain interests in America find it very convenient to conflate the two.

Posted by TaleSpinner (Member # 5638) on :

Right on, tchernabyelo.

Engdahl doesn't speak for Europe's population of about 700 million people, a federation of nations considerably less united than the United States. Here in Britain, we can barely hold England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales together let alone agree upon our attitude towards “American literature”.

Furthermore, in the literature establishment such as it is, both here and in the USA, there isn’t even common ground on what constitutes “literature”, let alone the American variety. I would include F&SF in “literature” and in SF at least, American fiction leads the world.

If believing in liberal values--liberty, the rights of others to live their lives without unnecessary government or religious interference, and to care for the weak and vulnerable--is “infestation”, then I’ll vote for rats and roaches every time. And because of our liberal respect for the views of others, accusations of “infestation” from foreigners--who understand us better than we do ourselves on account of their frequent visits to our shores, understanding of our languages, knowledge of our various national histories and appreciation of the diversity of our cultures--never reinforce prejudices some feel against Americans.

The Guardian is Britain's foremost rat ‘n roach colony and here's its evil, leftist, subversive demolition of Engdahl's ignorant nonsense:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2008/oct/01/nobelprize.usa

Cheers,
Pat

Posted by luapc (Member # 2878) on :

Well, being a genre writer and knowing the disdain that even American literary elites hold for it, I doubt anything genre would be considered literary by this man, so I could care less what he thinks. After all, I don't think any genre writer, American or otherwise, ever has, or ever will have, the chance at a Nobel Prize, even though there certainly are genre works that outshine some of the literary winners. It's all in your point of view, and if the Nobel judges refuse to consider everyone and every type of literature equally, they're always going to miss some treasures, so it's really a shame.

And to be fair to my fellow European genre writers, they are as left out as American genre writers. Someday I think that many genre works will be considered literary and worthy of Nobels, but probably not any day soon.

Posted by Nick T (Member # 8052) on :

Hi,

In response to the statement that a genre writer will never win the nobel prize, Doris Lessing won the 2007 prize. She's written at least five science-fiction novels and is on record as stating that she considers the science fiction books as her most important books. She's a strong supporter of Greg Bear's Blood Music and she's been quite open about writing science fiction and being a strong supporter of it.

Having said that, she probably won on the strength of her psychological and social novels rather than her science fiction work.

Getting back to the thread topic, it's the ridiculous argument of one man. I think the nobel panel's choices over the past few years have more to do with the fashionability of "exotic" writers rather than any real anti-Americanism. There's a good handful of American writers who should be in contention every year and it will be a real tragedy if they're not recognised within their lifetimes.

Cheers,

Nick

Posted by skadder (Member # 6757) on :

Who cares what he says? I'm never going to win it (yeah, it's all about me).

Besides, despite getting a big fat cheque, they don't print your story or send you a copy--not as far as I can tell, anyway.

WOTF is better (except for the big fat cheque bit).

Posted by philocinemas (Member # 8108) on :

I would consider McCarthy's The Road as genre literature, and it won the Pullitzer a year or two ago.

Posted by tchernabyelo (Member # 2651) on :

And there's Margaret Atwood, who despite spending a great deal of time denying that she writes science fiction, writes science fiction. And there was that Kurt Vonnegut chap. And others...

It's an old argument and unlikelyt o be resoved. There is snobbishness in "literary" (usually = academic) circles, on both sides of the Atlantic, about genre fiction. Much genre fiction, however, continues to sell far better than much literary fiction. The literary elite are, frankly, just fighting a defensive rearguard action against what they see as "mediocrity" while failing to address the actual concerns and issues of most real people (who are not, and do not want to read about, college professors).

Posted by luapc (Member # 2878) on :

I stand corrected. Thanks for pointing it out to me.

It just goes to show how uneducated I am about the Nobel, and also how little I care about the award, or this judge's opinion.

Posted by Robert Nowall (Member # 2764) on :

I've thought of writing an autobiographical novel about how I struggled for success as an SF writer, but met with only failure. I'm sure I could win the Pulitzer if I did.

*****

True, "leftist" and "anti-American" are not strictly interchangable, at least as far as Western Europe goes---but "infest" is the correct term for both.

A while ago, I saw a couple of comparisons of anti-American varieties from Europe, where one writer put out "I hate the United States because..." and listed a reason---and compared it with another writer who wrote "I hate the United States because..." and listed a reason one hundred eighty degrees opposite those of Writer Number One.

So in these two writers, and I don't doubt many others, anti-Americanism is reflexive---they hate the United States first and only then come up with reasons.