Name: Giorgos Seferis
Year Won: 1963
Read: Collected Poems
Original Language: Greek
Reason: "for his eminent lyrical writing, inspired by a deep feeling for the Hellenic world of culture"
About: This was a poetry collection of Seferis' poems. They are lovely lyrical poems that mostly describe the beauty of Greece and seem to focus heavily on the sea and classical mythology.
What I liked: I really love how the poems often dip between the ancient and the modern, bridging mythology with the eternal landscape of Greece.
What I Disliked: Not really anything. This was a very lovely collection of poetry and it's all quite lovely. With that said, I'm not sure that it made me think the way the best literature tends to. (It mostly just felt very lovely.)
Should it have won a Nobel: Probably? It's really hard for me to judge poetry, particularly in another language. To me, this felt like very lovely poetry (and it was probably better in its native language), but whether that is or should be enough is hard for me to tell. This didn't feel like it had the novelty or timelessness of, say, Hemmingway or Steinbeck, but I'm not sure that that's necessary either.
Next Up: "Nausea" by Jean-Paul Sartre
Wednesday, September 8, 2021
Sunday, August 29, 2021
The Grapes of Wrath by John Steinbeck
Name: John Steinbeck
Year Won: 1962
Read: "The Grapes of Wrath"
Original Language: English
Reason: "for his realistic and imaginative writings, combining as they do sympathetic humour and keen social perception"
About: "The Grapes of Wrath" follows an okie (e.g. a pejorative given to economic immigrants from the middle of the country by California - many of whom were from Oklahoma) family immigrating to California. Their goal is mostly just to live and raise their family. But they face enormous prejudice (including farmers unwilling to pay them a decent wage because their neighbors will burn their crops, police raids, vigilante raids, etc.) from the lovely folk of Salinas who do NOT want them there.
This is the first time I've read this particular book by Steinbeck (although I've read a number of others and loved them), but he always feels particularly resonant to me as I lived for a while in Monterey California (near Salinas), so am well aware of the hatred that still continues towards the okies. (FWIW, Steinbeck is not well loved in Salinas, who mostly tries to forget that he exists.)
What I liked: Steinbeck does an amazing job of capturing the economic desperation of the family (e.g. them desperately hoping their car doesn't break along Route 66 stranding them in the desert without food or water), the beauty of Salinas valley, and the incredible prejudice they face upon arriving in California. This truly is a masterwork.
What I Disliked: It's actively painful to read about how the family is treated, as well as their hardships. I think that's the point, but still...
Also, while I liked some of the asides in which he sort of just describes things, I could see how they might get tedious after a while. (And they do seem to distract somewhat from the plot, which Steinbeck seems only marginally interested in.
Should it have won a Nobel: Yes. There's a reason Steinbeck is almost always taught in high school classes in the US (unless you live in Salinas, LOL). He's an incredibly talented writer who is able to make us feel sympathy for the downtrodden. (He's also pretty good at weaving an epic narrative about a family - see "East of Eden", which I actually enjoyed more, but both are great books.)
Next Up: The Collected Poems of Giorgos Seferis
Year Won: 1962
Read: "The Grapes of Wrath"
Original Language: English
Reason: "for his realistic and imaginative writings, combining as they do sympathetic humour and keen social perception"
About: "The Grapes of Wrath" follows an okie (e.g. a pejorative given to economic immigrants from the middle of the country by California - many of whom were from Oklahoma) family immigrating to California. Their goal is mostly just to live and raise their family. But they face enormous prejudice (including farmers unwilling to pay them a decent wage because their neighbors will burn their crops, police raids, vigilante raids, etc.) from the lovely folk of Salinas who do NOT want them there.
This is the first time I've read this particular book by Steinbeck (although I've read a number of others and loved them), but he always feels particularly resonant to me as I lived for a while in Monterey California (near Salinas), so am well aware of the hatred that still continues towards the okies. (FWIW, Steinbeck is not well loved in Salinas, who mostly tries to forget that he exists.)
What I liked: Steinbeck does an amazing job of capturing the economic desperation of the family (e.g. them desperately hoping their car doesn't break along Route 66 stranding them in the desert without food or water), the beauty of Salinas valley, and the incredible prejudice they face upon arriving in California. This truly is a masterwork.
What I Disliked: It's actively painful to read about how the family is treated, as well as their hardships. I think that's the point, but still...
Also, while I liked some of the asides in which he sort of just describes things, I could see how they might get tedious after a while. (And they do seem to distract somewhat from the plot, which Steinbeck seems only marginally interested in.
Should it have won a Nobel: Yes. There's a reason Steinbeck is almost always taught in high school classes in the US (unless you live in Salinas, LOL). He's an incredibly talented writer who is able to make us feel sympathy for the downtrodden. (He's also pretty good at weaving an epic narrative about a family - see "East of Eden", which I actually enjoyed more, but both are great books.)
Next Up: The Collected Poems of Giorgos Seferis
Monday, August 16, 2021
The Bridge on the Drina by Ivo Andrić
Name: Ivo Andrić
Year Won: 1961
Read: "The Bridge Over the River Drina"
Original Language: Serbian
Reason: "for the epic force with which he has traced themes and depicted human destinies drawn from the history of his country"
About: "The Bridge Over the River Drina" is actually a pretty accurate title. The novel is about a bridge. On the River Drina. Like, seriously. The story is about a bridge. There are descriptions of the bridge, how the bridge is made, and what happens around the bridge.
To be a bit less sarcastic, the rest of the novel plays out of things happening around the bridge. People fall in love. There are wars. Children play by it, etc. Most of the "novel" is a series of vignettes about daily life around the bridge, both Christian and Turkish. It's not really a story, per se, as vignettes of life near a bridge. (Oh, and stories about the bridge's construction, how people see it, etc.
What I liked: Some of the stories are pretty interesting. Also, Bosnia/Serbia sound like pretty interesting places, full of history and clashing cultures. I kind of want to visit now.
What I Disliked: This isn't a novel in any kind of conventional sense. It really is a bunch of vignettes. They're beautifully written, but the only thing connecting them is a bridge.
Should it have won a Nobel: I didn't really like it and will admit that I'm far more a fan of novels that, y'know, are actually novels. With that said, it *did* paint a very interesting picture of hundreds of years of daily life in a country and is a very unique format. So maybe? I feel like it's too experimental for my taste, but is an impressive work all the same.
Next Up: "The Grapes of Wrath" by John Steinbeck
Year Won: 1961
Read: "The Bridge Over the River Drina"
Original Language: Serbian
Reason: "for the epic force with which he has traced themes and depicted human destinies drawn from the history of his country"
About: "The Bridge Over the River Drina" is actually a pretty accurate title. The novel is about a bridge. On the River Drina. Like, seriously. The story is about a bridge. There are descriptions of the bridge, how the bridge is made, and what happens around the bridge.
To be a bit less sarcastic, the rest of the novel plays out of things happening around the bridge. People fall in love. There are wars. Children play by it, etc. Most of the "novel" is a series of vignettes about daily life around the bridge, both Christian and Turkish. It's not really a story, per se, as vignettes of life near a bridge. (Oh, and stories about the bridge's construction, how people see it, etc.
What I liked: Some of the stories are pretty interesting. Also, Bosnia/Serbia sound like pretty interesting places, full of history and clashing cultures. I kind of want to visit now.
What I Disliked: This isn't a novel in any kind of conventional sense. It really is a bunch of vignettes. They're beautifully written, but the only thing connecting them is a bridge.
Should it have won a Nobel: I didn't really like it and will admit that I'm far more a fan of novels that, y'know, are actually novels. With that said, it *did* paint a very interesting picture of hundreds of years of daily life in a country and is a very unique format. So maybe? I feel like it's too experimental for my taste, but is an impressive work all the same.
Next Up: "The Grapes of Wrath" by John Steinbeck
Wednesday, August 4, 2021
Anabasis by Saint-John Perse
Name: Saint-John Perse
Year Won: 1960
Read: "Anabasis"
Original Language: French
Reason: "for the soaring flight and the evocative imagery of his poetry, which in a visionary fashion reflects the conditions of our time"
About: "Anabasis" is a long prose poem about someone marching from the coast inland through the wild beauties and mysteries of the Orient.
What I liked: The language is quite beautiful (although that may be the translation, done by the masterful T.S. Eliot)
What I Disliked: You know how sometimes things age really poorly? This is one of them. It's hard to imagine that the world needed a long description of some dude walking through the stereotypical Arabian nights.
Should it have won a Nobel: I will always admit that there may be things that I am missing, don't get, etc. But with that said, unless I'm missing an awful lot, no. (I think this may have seemed a lot cooler and deeper in '59 as well. Right now, it reads like, "Dude, I totally did acid on my trip to Jordan and had like these *thoughts*." Which may have read a lot deeper before that was, y'know, a thing.)
Next Up: "The Bridge on the Drina" by Ivo Andrić (Also, I've now read 60 years worth of Nobel laureates...and only have 61 years to go. Whoo!!!!)
Year Won: 1960
Read: "Anabasis"
Original Language: French
Reason: "for the soaring flight and the evocative imagery of his poetry, which in a visionary fashion reflects the conditions of our time"
About: "Anabasis" is a long prose poem about someone marching from the coast inland through the wild beauties and mysteries of the Orient.
What I liked: The language is quite beautiful (although that may be the translation, done by the masterful T.S. Eliot)
What I Disliked: You know how sometimes things age really poorly? This is one of them. It's hard to imagine that the world needed a long description of some dude walking through the stereotypical Arabian nights.
Should it have won a Nobel: I will always admit that there may be things that I am missing, don't get, etc. But with that said, unless I'm missing an awful lot, no. (I think this may have seemed a lot cooler and deeper in '59 as well. Right now, it reads like, "Dude, I totally did acid on my trip to Jordan and had like these *thoughts*." Which may have read a lot deeper before that was, y'know, a thing.)
Next Up: "The Bridge on the Drina" by Ivo Andrić (Also, I've now read 60 years worth of Nobel laureates...and only have 61 years to go. Whoo!!!!)
Friday, July 23, 2021
Doctor Zhivago by Boris Pasternak
Name: Boris Pasternak
Year Won: 1958
Read: "Doctor Zhivago"
Original Language: Russian
Reason: "for his important achievement both in contemporary lyrical poetry and in the field of the great Russian epic tradition"
About: To be honest, I'd have a hard time saying exactly what "Doctor Zhivago" is about. This is in part due to its enormous cast of charaters, in part due to the plot more or less changing every "act" (think chapter - they're not super long).
To the extent that "Doctor Zhivago" is about anything, it's about the upheaval of the Russian world after the Soviet Union, told very realistically. (There is a hint of a love story between two characters, but it's pretty subdued.
What I liked: It's fascinating (and kind of depressing) to read about what revolution is like to ordinary people who don't care much about the politics of it. It SUCKS. (And perhaps this should be required reading for everyone who wants to bring about the great revolution.)
What I Disliked: It is really, really, REALLY hard to follow this book due to the huge numbers of characters, the seemingly lack of plot, etc. It's annoying.
Should it have won a Nobel: I'm torn. On one hand, this was a greatly influential book. On the other, it's (in my opinion), not an especially good book.
Next Up: "Anabasis" by Saint-John Perse (my library has nothing by Salvatore Quasimodo)
Year Won: 1958
Read: "Doctor Zhivago"
Original Language: Russian
Reason: "for his important achievement both in contemporary lyrical poetry and in the field of the great Russian epic tradition"
About: To be honest, I'd have a hard time saying exactly what "Doctor Zhivago" is about. This is in part due to its enormous cast of charaters, in part due to the plot more or less changing every "act" (think chapter - they're not super long).
To the extent that "Doctor Zhivago" is about anything, it's about the upheaval of the Russian world after the Soviet Union, told very realistically. (There is a hint of a love story between two characters, but it's pretty subdued.
What I liked: It's fascinating (and kind of depressing) to read about what revolution is like to ordinary people who don't care much about the politics of it. It SUCKS. (And perhaps this should be required reading for everyone who wants to bring about the great revolution.)
What I Disliked: It is really, really, REALLY hard to follow this book due to the huge numbers of characters, the seemingly lack of plot, etc. It's annoying.
Should it have won a Nobel: I'm torn. On one hand, this was a greatly influential book. On the other, it's (in my opinion), not an especially good book.
Next Up: "Anabasis" by Saint-John Perse (my library has nothing by Salvatore Quasimodo)
Saturday, June 12, 2021
The Plague by Albert Camus
Name: Albert Camus
Year Won: 1957
Read: "The Plague"
Original Language: French
Reason: "for his important literary production, which with clear-sighted earnestness illuminates the problems of the human conscience in our times"
About: "The Plague" follows what happens as a plague hits a French Algerian town. At first, it seems like nothing but dead rats. But before long, the hospitals are crowded with people who have the bubonic plague. The city is quaratined. Supplies dip low. Plague serum is rushed in. People panic. And then, at last, it goes away.
It's really interesting reading this in the time of COVID to compare the two. Oddly, things like the opera continue despite the characters warning that the plague may go pneumatic. (Why????) Alternately, it's kind of weird that the town gets so low on supplies (even with the quarantine), considering that it doesn't seem that hard to ship them in. (Esp. as it's only this town that's affected.) Also, for all the gnashing of teeth and wailing, not all that many people die, considering. Aside from that, though, it seems a fairly accurate portrayal of what a plague actually *is* like, down to it not affecting the rich very much, but being horrifying to the poor.
What I liked: I can see why this became a go-to read in the time of COVID. It really is an incredibly well thought out scenario as to what a plague would be like.
Strangely, I don't think this is even what Camus was trying to achieve. (Wikipedia claims this is a nilhist masterpiece, not a supposedly accurate portrayal of a small town affected by plague. Go figure?) So that he does this as well as creates a well written, nilhistic work is quite impressive indeed.
What I Disliked: There's not much of a plot besides "plague ravishes small town". And I never cared much for the characters, so their ultimate fates didn't especially bother me. Definitely if I wanted a page turner about the plague, I'd check out "The Stand" by Steven King, instead. (But this isn't much of a critique as I don't think this was what Camus was trying to achieve. Also, at 300 pages, this isn't a huge book, so the fact that I was fairly indifferent to the fates of the characters wasn't as big a deal as it would have been in something longer.)
Should it have won a Nobel: I don't think Camus is really known for his fiction, per se. He's considered more of a philosopher. So that his fiction *is* this good - and still relevant decades later - is really a testimate to his genius. So yes.
Next Up: "Doctor Zhivago" by Boris Pasternak
Year Won: 1957
Read: "The Plague"
Original Language: French
Reason: "for his important literary production, which with clear-sighted earnestness illuminates the problems of the human conscience in our times"
About: "The Plague" follows what happens as a plague hits a French Algerian town. At first, it seems like nothing but dead rats. But before long, the hospitals are crowded with people who have the bubonic plague. The city is quaratined. Supplies dip low. Plague serum is rushed in. People panic. And then, at last, it goes away.
It's really interesting reading this in the time of COVID to compare the two. Oddly, things like the opera continue despite the characters warning that the plague may go pneumatic. (Why????) Alternately, it's kind of weird that the town gets so low on supplies (even with the quarantine), considering that it doesn't seem that hard to ship them in. (Esp. as it's only this town that's affected.) Also, for all the gnashing of teeth and wailing, not all that many people die, considering. Aside from that, though, it seems a fairly accurate portrayal of what a plague actually *is* like, down to it not affecting the rich very much, but being horrifying to the poor.
What I liked: I can see why this became a go-to read in the time of COVID. It really is an incredibly well thought out scenario as to what a plague would be like.
Strangely, I don't think this is even what Camus was trying to achieve. (Wikipedia claims this is a nilhist masterpiece, not a supposedly accurate portrayal of a small town affected by plague. Go figure?) So that he does this as well as creates a well written, nilhistic work is quite impressive indeed.
What I Disliked: There's not much of a plot besides "plague ravishes small town". And I never cared much for the characters, so their ultimate fates didn't especially bother me. Definitely if I wanted a page turner about the plague, I'd check out "The Stand" by Steven King, instead. (But this isn't much of a critique as I don't think this was what Camus was trying to achieve. Also, at 300 pages, this isn't a huge book, so the fact that I was fairly indifferent to the fates of the characters wasn't as big a deal as it would have been in something longer.)
Should it have won a Nobel: I don't think Camus is really known for his fiction, per se. He's considered more of a philosopher. So that his fiction *is* this good - and still relevant decades later - is really a testimate to his genius. So yes.
Next Up: "Doctor Zhivago" by Boris Pasternak
Thursday, June 10, 2021
Juan Ramon Jimenez's "The Poet and the Sea"
Name: Juan Ramon Jiménez
Year Won: 1956
Read: "The Poet and the Sea"
Original Language: Spanish
Reason: "for his lyrical poetry, which in Spanish language constitutes an example of high spirit and artistical purity"
About: "The Poet and the Sea" is a collection of poems. Almost all of them are about the ocean. I have no idea whether Jimenez has written non-ocean based poetry, but that's what's in this collection.
What I liked: The poetry is quite lovely and has a rhythmic cadence almost like crashing waves. The meter is almost meditative.
What I Disliked: It's several hundred pages...of descriptions of the ocean. And they're almost all meditative in nature. (e.g. no angry, furious waves. Which waves can be.) It never changes. Eventually it gets pretty dull. There's only so many times I can read, "Olas, olas, olas" before wondering whether Jimenez had literally anything else to inspire him.
Should it have won a Nobel: If this is the full extent of his range, probably not. It just got really repetitive. But I'm assuming that the translators picked out specifically the ocean related poems for this volume. Maybe? Hopefully? If so, his writing is beautiful and may deserve a Nobel.
Next Up: "The Plague" by Albert Camus
Year Won: 1956
Read: "The Poet and the Sea"
Original Language: Spanish
Reason: "for his lyrical poetry, which in Spanish language constitutes an example of high spirit and artistical purity"
About: "The Poet and the Sea" is a collection of poems. Almost all of them are about the ocean. I have no idea whether Jimenez has written non-ocean based poetry, but that's what's in this collection.
What I liked: The poetry is quite lovely and has a rhythmic cadence almost like crashing waves. The meter is almost meditative.
What I Disliked: It's several hundred pages...of descriptions of the ocean. And they're almost all meditative in nature. (e.g. no angry, furious waves. Which waves can be.) It never changes. Eventually it gets pretty dull. There's only so many times I can read, "Olas, olas, olas" before wondering whether Jimenez had literally anything else to inspire him.
Should it have won a Nobel: If this is the full extent of his range, probably not. It just got really repetitive. But I'm assuming that the translators picked out specifically the ocean related poems for this volume. Maybe? Hopefully? If so, his writing is beautiful and may deserve a Nobel.
Next Up: "The Plague" by Albert Camus
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)