Name: Hermann Hesse
Year Won: 1946
Read: Siddharthan
Original Language: German
Reason: "for his inspired writings, which while growing in boldness and penetration, exemplify the classical humanitarian ideals and high qualities of style"
About: "Siddhartha" follows Siddhartha on his quest for enlightment. He meets the Buddha. He also meets another friend who follows the Buddha and seeks enlightment while he, instead, pursues the courtesan Kamala. Eventually he sits by the river and seeks enlightment and finds it after Kamala shows him his son and he sets him free. It's a strange book.
What I liked: The writing is beautiful and it's permeated with an intense sense of spiritual questioning. What makes life worth living? What is enlightment? Which way are there of achieving it? It's really a very thought provoking novel.
What I Disliked: It's a peculiar novel, to put it mildly. It doesn't make a huge amount of sense as a novel from a standard perspective and there's something a bit weird about Siddhartha's hemming and hawing over being with the courtesan. (He very much wants to be with her, but also wants enlightment and...???) I also felt that Kamala could have used a bit more agency. (Although I was pleased that she, too, reached enlightment in the end which makes this feel very progressive for a novel from 1946 and definitely more so than many of the others I've read as part of this project.)
Should it have won a Nobel: Yes. It's a solid novel and holds up well even today. It made me really think, "What is the purpose of life and what am I doing to achieve it?" which is a question most books don't make me question. It's obvious from reading it as to why it's remained well known.
Next Up: Wastelands by Andre Gide
Sunday, March 14, 2021
Tuesday, March 9, 2021
The Poems of Gabriela Mistral
Name: Gabriela Mistral
Year Won: 1945
Read: Selected Poems
Original Language: Spanish (note - read in Spanish and English)
Reason: "for her lyric poetry, which inspired by powerful emotions, has made her name a symbol of the idealistic aspirations of the entire Latin American world"
About: Gabriela's poetry is poetry, so doesn't follow a plot. But it's lyrical, dark, and moving. She speaks movingly of passion - the passion of lovers, the enduring love of children, the pain of heartbreak, of loss, and spirtuality. Throughout it, there's an interesting intersection between the mudane and the spiritual, the divine and ordinary. There's a darkness through all of them as well.
It is also of some interest that Mistral was the first Latin American to win a Nobel prize for literature. (Long overdue!)
What I liked: The poetry is deeply beautiful and there's a thread of darkness that keeps them from feeling trite. In addition, she has a way of choosing words that make you think. (e.g. I rarely hear of a seed being described as violent, but it works in her poetry.
What I Disliked: Not much. Some poems are better than others (as is always the case), but her poetry is breath taking, even in translation. This has been one of my favorites so far. (And, honestly, I prefer her to Yeats.)
Should it have won a Nobel: Yes. Aside from them being long overdue in awarding a Latin American (and that their ratio of men to women has been pretty lopsided so far), Mistral's poetry is truly breathtaking. She deserves all the praise.
Next Up: Sidhartha by Hermann Hesse
Year Won: 1945
Read: Selected Poems
Original Language: Spanish (note - read in Spanish and English)
Reason: "for her lyric poetry, which inspired by powerful emotions, has made her name a symbol of the idealistic aspirations of the entire Latin American world"
About: Gabriela's poetry is poetry, so doesn't follow a plot. But it's lyrical, dark, and moving. She speaks movingly of passion - the passion of lovers, the enduring love of children, the pain of heartbreak, of loss, and spirtuality. Throughout it, there's an interesting intersection between the mudane and the spiritual, the divine and ordinary. There's a darkness through all of them as well.
It is also of some interest that Mistral was the first Latin American to win a Nobel prize for literature. (Long overdue!)
What I liked: The poetry is deeply beautiful and there's a thread of darkness that keeps them from feeling trite. In addition, she has a way of choosing words that make you think. (e.g. I rarely hear of a seed being described as violent, but it works in her poetry.
What I Disliked: Not much. Some poems are better than others (as is always the case), but her poetry is breath taking, even in translation. This has been one of my favorites so far. (And, honestly, I prefer her to Yeats.)
Should it have won a Nobel: Yes. Aside from them being long overdue in awarding a Latin American (and that their ratio of men to women has been pretty lopsided so far), Mistral's poetry is truly breathtaking. She deserves all the praise.
Next Up: Sidhartha by Hermann Hesse
Wednesday, March 3, 2021
The Long Journey - Johannes Jensen
Name: Johannes V. Jensen
Year Won: 1944 (Note that the Nobel wasn't awarded during WWII. Hence the reason for the huge break!)
Read: The Long Journey
Original Language: Danish
Reason: "for the rare strength and fertility of his poetic imagination with which is combined an intellectual curiosity of wide scope and a bold, freshly creative style"
About: "The Long Journey" follows a number of *important men* as they create civilization. This goes from the first book ("Fire and Ice"), in which a GREAT MAN (named Carl, LOL) discovers fire, to the novels in which Columbus discovers civilization (Yeah...I mean, Columbus did not discover a great untouched paradise, but that's more or less the way this story goes.)
What I liked: The writing for this really is quite lyrical and lovely, even in translation. I could see how it could be fun to read. Kind of like a super dude-bro Clan of the Caveman where GREAT THINGS are DISCOVERED by GREAT PEOPLE. It's well written and pleasantly melodramatic.
What I Disliked: It's such, such SUCH a period of its time. Carl (seriously, who names a cave dude CARL? Esp. when his wife is only described as "Ma"?) is adored and worshipped since, duh, he's a cave dude bringing fire to his people. What's not to like? (Maybe, like, the time he lames a girl for no explicable reason other than that she's there and he wants to make a point to her clan, so he graphically destroys her ankle. But, c'mon, this is CARL! CARL! He's giving us fire without a volcano, y'all. We ought to be grateful to him no matter what he does to our people...)
I honestly couldn't get through this one. It feels like this weird mix of Randian superheroism imposed upon history. In retrospect, it feels pretty damned gross. But I am willing to say that the hero worshipping of a random dude bro (CARL!) would have been far less jarring when it was published. So am trying to withold some of my scorn.
Should it have won a Nobel: It is very much a product of its time. As such, it's hard to say. It's a unique novel, and the writing is REALLY good. But it also feels ickier even than a number of writings that are now heavily disputed (looking at you, Kipling). So it probably earned its award, but also is a sign that the past can't predict the future.
Next Up: Selected poems from Gabriela Mistral
Year Won: 1944 (Note that the Nobel wasn't awarded during WWII. Hence the reason for the huge break!)
Read: The Long Journey
Original Language: Danish
Reason: "for the rare strength and fertility of his poetic imagination with which is combined an intellectual curiosity of wide scope and a bold, freshly creative style"
About: "The Long Journey" follows a number of *important men* as they create civilization. This goes from the first book ("Fire and Ice"), in which a GREAT MAN (named Carl, LOL) discovers fire, to the novels in which Columbus discovers civilization (Yeah...I mean, Columbus did not discover a great untouched paradise, but that's more or less the way this story goes.)
What I liked: The writing for this really is quite lyrical and lovely, even in translation. I could see how it could be fun to read. Kind of like a super dude-bro Clan of the Caveman where GREAT THINGS are DISCOVERED by GREAT PEOPLE. It's well written and pleasantly melodramatic.
What I Disliked: It's such, such SUCH a period of its time. Carl (seriously, who names a cave dude CARL? Esp. when his wife is only described as "Ma"?) is adored and worshipped since, duh, he's a cave dude bringing fire to his people. What's not to like? (Maybe, like, the time he lames a girl for no explicable reason other than that she's there and he wants to make a point to her clan, so he graphically destroys her ankle. But, c'mon, this is CARL! CARL! He's giving us fire without a volcano, y'all. We ought to be grateful to him no matter what he does to our people...)
I honestly couldn't get through this one. It feels like this weird mix of Randian superheroism imposed upon history. In retrospect, it feels pretty damned gross. But I am willing to say that the hero worshipping of a random dude bro (CARL!) would have been far less jarring when it was published. So am trying to withold some of my scorn.
Should it have won a Nobel: It is very much a product of its time. As such, it's hard to say. It's a unique novel, and the writing is REALLY good. But it also feels ickier even than a number of writings that are now heavily disputed (looking at you, Kipling). So it probably earned its award, but also is a sign that the past can't predict the future.
Next Up: Selected poems from Gabriela Mistral
Friday, February 26, 2021
The Good Earth by Pearl Buck
Name: Pearl Buck
Year Won: 1938
Read: The Good Earth
Original Language: English
Reason: "for her rich and truly epic descriptions of peasant life in China and for her biographical masterpieces"
About: "The Good Earth" follows Wang Lung and his wife O-Lan as they farm the land in their small peasant village and have children. During a famine, they flee south, just to return north again to farm when things recover. Eventually they become wealthy and Wang Lung acquires a concubine, which breaks O-Lan's heart.
What I liked: This is a really, really good book. It's often considered a contributing factor in the US choosing to side with/protect China during WWII. It became an Academy Award winning movie. It was a best seller for two years after its release and recently was an Oprah book club pick. It's unusual for a book to have that level of popularity and critical acclaim, especially over that period of time. But reading it, you can see why it's been so popular and so well regarded for so long.
The characters in "The Good Earth" feel timeless and eternal, yet really, really interesting. The descriptions of peasant life are vivid and sympathetic. The drama is consistent, yet never feels melodramatic. The writing is beautiful. This is one of the better books I've read in a long time and am happy I read it because of this project.
What I Disliked: There isn't much in the way of a conventional plot. It's mostly just peasants doing peasant things. Also, Wang Lung's sometimes callous treatment of O-Lan can be heartbreaking, as can some of the things she endures.
Should it have won a Nobel: Yes. It's a really good book. It also holds up much better nearly a century after it was written than most on this list.
Next Up: "The Long Journey" by Johannes V. Jensen (there was nothing at the library by Frans Eemil Sillanpää)
Year Won: 1938
Read: The Good Earth
Original Language: English
Reason: "for her rich and truly epic descriptions of peasant life in China and for her biographical masterpieces"
About: "The Good Earth" follows Wang Lung and his wife O-Lan as they farm the land in their small peasant village and have children. During a famine, they flee south, just to return north again to farm when things recover. Eventually they become wealthy and Wang Lung acquires a concubine, which breaks O-Lan's heart.
What I liked: This is a really, really good book. It's often considered a contributing factor in the US choosing to side with/protect China during WWII. It became an Academy Award winning movie. It was a best seller for two years after its release and recently was an Oprah book club pick. It's unusual for a book to have that level of popularity and critical acclaim, especially over that period of time. But reading it, you can see why it's been so popular and so well regarded for so long.
The characters in "The Good Earth" feel timeless and eternal, yet really, really interesting. The descriptions of peasant life are vivid and sympathetic. The drama is consistent, yet never feels melodramatic. The writing is beautiful. This is one of the better books I've read in a long time and am happy I read it because of this project.
What I Disliked: There isn't much in the way of a conventional plot. It's mostly just peasants doing peasant things. Also, Wang Lung's sometimes callous treatment of O-Lan can be heartbreaking, as can some of the things she endures.
Should it have won a Nobel: Yes. It's a really good book. It also holds up much better nearly a century after it was written than most on this list.
Next Up: "The Long Journey" by Johannes V. Jensen (there was nothing at the library by Frans Eemil Sillanpää)
Saturday, December 19, 2020
The Postman - Roger Martin du Gard
Name: Roger Martin du Gard
Year Won: 1937
Read: The Postman
Original Language: French
Reason: "for the artistic power and truth with which he has depicted human conflict as well as some fundamental aspects of contemporary life in his novel cycle Les Thibault"
About: I did not read Kes Thibault. It's supposedly yet another epic novel about the rise and fall of a family and at this point...no. No. If there is one thing I've learned from this project it's that the Nobel prize committee picks startlingly similar novels every year for a long run and it gets dull.
The Postman follows the titular postman as he observes life in a small village. There's no plot. He describes the various townspeople he meets there and...that's about it.
What I liked: The character sketches are brilliant and well done. There are some wonderfully interesting metaphors. The writing is excellent, even in translation.
What I Disliked: There is no plot. It's just character sketches and more character sketches.
Should it have won a Nobel: It's hard to know, as I didn't read the body of work that was cited in for the Nobel prize. I'm tempted to say "no", as this seems to be a thing during the 30s with the Nobel prize committee. Then again, this might be the GREAT rise and fall of a family epic. (Note: It's not. That would be The Dream of Red Chambers. But it might still be pretty good.)
Next up: "The Good Earth" by Pearl Buck
Year Won: 1937
Read: The Postman
Original Language: French
Reason: "for the artistic power and truth with which he has depicted human conflict as well as some fundamental aspects of contemporary life in his novel cycle Les Thibault"
About: I did not read Kes Thibault. It's supposedly yet another epic novel about the rise and fall of a family and at this point...no. No. If there is one thing I've learned from this project it's that the Nobel prize committee picks startlingly similar novels every year for a long run and it gets dull.
The Postman follows the titular postman as he observes life in a small village. There's no plot. He describes the various townspeople he meets there and...that's about it.
What I liked: The character sketches are brilliant and well done. There are some wonderfully interesting metaphors. The writing is excellent, even in translation.
What I Disliked: There is no plot. It's just character sketches and more character sketches.
Should it have won a Nobel: It's hard to know, as I didn't read the body of work that was cited in for the Nobel prize. I'm tempted to say "no", as this seems to be a thing during the 30s with the Nobel prize committee. Then again, this might be the GREAT rise and fall of a family epic. (Note: It's not. That would be The Dream of Red Chambers. But it might still be pretty good.)
Next up: "The Good Earth" by Pearl Buck
Friday, November 20, 2020
Eugene O'Neill's Emperor Jones
Name: Eugene O'Neill
Year Won: 1936
Read: Emperor Jones
Original Language: English
Reason: "for the power, honesty and deep-felt emotions of his dramatic works, which embody an original concept of tragedy"
About: Emperor Jones is an experimental play told mostly in monologue form by the titular Emperor Jones, a black man who sets himself up as the emperor of a small Carribean island. Eventually he dies, after going through descents into grandiosity and madness.
What I liked: The concept is intriguing and I love the titular character. He's quite interesting. And the play is short yet succinct.
What I Disliked: The dialectic is so heavy that it's hard to read. It's also potentially offensive, due to heavily using a particular slur.
Should it have won a Nobel: Probably. This is only one of O'Neill's many great plays (and probably not the greatest), yet it's still pretty good. (I do feel that it would be more interesting to catch this on stage, but que sera.)
Next up: "The Postman" by Roger Martin du Gard
Year Won: 1936
Read: Emperor Jones
Original Language: English
Reason: "for the power, honesty and deep-felt emotions of his dramatic works, which embody an original concept of tragedy"
About: Emperor Jones is an experimental play told mostly in monologue form by the titular Emperor Jones, a black man who sets himself up as the emperor of a small Carribean island. Eventually he dies, after going through descents into grandiosity and madness.
What I liked: The concept is intriguing and I love the titular character. He's quite interesting. And the play is short yet succinct.
What I Disliked: The dialectic is so heavy that it's hard to read. It's also potentially offensive, due to heavily using a particular slur.
Should it have won a Nobel: Probably. This is only one of O'Neill's many great plays (and probably not the greatest), yet it's still pretty good. (I do feel that it would be more interesting to catch this on stage, but que sera.)
Next up: "The Postman" by Roger Martin du Gard
Tuesday, November 10, 2020
Luigi Pirandello's Six Characters in Search of an Author
Name: Luigi Pirandello
Year Won: 1934
Read: Six Characters In Search of an Author
Original Language: Italian
Reason: "for his bold and ingenious revival of dramatic and scenic art"
About: Six Characters in Search of an Author is an extremely unusual play. It starts with the production staff of a play (director, stage hand etc.) getting ready to perform a play just for six characters (two of whom don't speak) to arrive on set and demand an author for their play. The charaters then perform scenes, sometimes with input from the production staff (the director wants to recreate some of what they're saying), and sometimes with input from the other characters (who are sometimes appalled by what their family members are saying). It's all very strange.
What I liked: This is one of the most unique pieces I have ever read. Especially considering how long ago it was written, it's quite unusual.
What I Disliked: I never felt especially emotionally stirred by this. (Which is fairly typical for things that seem more to taking major steps in how to change the standard form of things). It might also suffer, somewhat, from that it's a play, which is meant to be performed vs. read. (I think some of the shock of seeing the staff of a play discussing things vs. an actual play, then the actors breaking in is somewhat muted when you'r not seeing it happening.)
Should it have won a Nobel: A quote from the little "about" said something about how this might not be the greatest play, but it was the most unique. I'd agree (well, maybe not most, but it sure as heck was unique). As such, it probably does deserve an award. (Esp. if you throw in that this is hardly Pirandello's only work. If he regularly put out work as unique and ground breaking as this, he definitely deserves a prize for it.)
Next up: The Plays of Eugene O'Neill (unsure which. The library just has a collection so we'll see what catches my interest!)
Year Won: 1934
Read: Six Characters In Search of an Author
Original Language: Italian
Reason: "for his bold and ingenious revival of dramatic and scenic art"
About: Six Characters in Search of an Author is an extremely unusual play. It starts with the production staff of a play (director, stage hand etc.) getting ready to perform a play just for six characters (two of whom don't speak) to arrive on set and demand an author for their play. The charaters then perform scenes, sometimes with input from the production staff (the director wants to recreate some of what they're saying), and sometimes with input from the other characters (who are sometimes appalled by what their family members are saying). It's all very strange.
What I liked: This is one of the most unique pieces I have ever read. Especially considering how long ago it was written, it's quite unusual.
What I Disliked: I never felt especially emotionally stirred by this. (Which is fairly typical for things that seem more to taking major steps in how to change the standard form of things). It might also suffer, somewhat, from that it's a play, which is meant to be performed vs. read. (I think some of the shock of seeing the staff of a play discussing things vs. an actual play, then the actors breaking in is somewhat muted when you'r not seeing it happening.)
Should it have won a Nobel: A quote from the little "about" said something about how this might not be the greatest play, but it was the most unique. I'd agree (well, maybe not most, but it sure as heck was unique). As such, it probably does deserve an award. (Esp. if you throw in that this is hardly Pirandello's only work. If he regularly put out work as unique and ground breaking as this, he definitely deserves a prize for it.)
Next up: The Plays of Eugene O'Neill (unsure which. The library just has a collection so we'll see what catches my interest!)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)