Name: Mikhail Sholokhov
Year Won: 1965
Read: Tales of the Don
Original Language: Russian
Reason: "for the artistic power and integrity with which, in his epic of the Don, he has given expression to a historic phase in the life of the Russian people"
About: "Tales of the Don" is a series of short stories about a number of Cossacks living near the river Don. They do great and heroic things! They fight bandits, they battle the foes of communism, they live their best lives, comrades!
What I liked: As expected for a Nobel prize winner, the writing is lovely. Also, the stories are fun. They're action packed, with lots of fun heroism and swash buckling.
What I Disliked: It's hard to escape the feeling that this is all a bit too rosy and a bit too good to be true. It feels very much like propaganda at times, which isn't the *worst* thing ever (and was probably necessary for someone writing in the former USSR), but also can make this feel a bit more like a Saturday morning cartoon than like a great work of literature.
Should it have won a Nobel: I guess? This is hardly the worst thing that has won a Nobel prize, and it's genuinely a fun read (unlike some of the many, many other novels on this list). But compared to other contemporary writers who *didn't* win (Graham Greene, Walter Tevis, etc.) this feels *very* slight. Maybe the other stories in the epic feel more thought provoking (or maybe I'm overly harsh)...but it does seem like an awful lot of really good authors didn't win a Nobel. So while this isn't bad (and, again, it's pretty entertaining to read), based on this alone I'm seeing more "fun stories about great heroes" than "great, thought provoking drama".
Next Up: "O the Chimneys" by Nelly Sachs or "Betrothed & Edo" and "Edam" by Shmuel Yosef Agnon (both won in 1966 and both are Jewish writers)
Tuesday, September 14, 2021
Friday, September 10, 2021
Nausea by Jean-Paul Sartre
Name: Jean-Paul Sartre
Year Won: 1964
Read: Nausea
Original Language: French
Reason: "for his work, which rich in ideas and filled with the spirit of freedom and the quest for truth, has exerted a far-reaching influence on our age"
About: "Nausea" is a story about existentialism. Seriously. There's sort of a protagonist who find himself all alone and feeling nausous at a number of things. He also goes out to dinner and talks about philosophy a lot. Seriously. A lot.
What I liked: The writing can be very lovely. Sartre is very good at creating a sense of impending doom.
What I Disliked: There honestly isn't much of a plot. It's just a dude observing things and feeling unsettled. For over a hundred pages. It's more or less "this is my philosophy, told as a novel" which, to be frank, was done more gracefully and subtly in "Atlas Shrugged" (which is saying very, very little).
Should it have won a Nobel: For this alone, no. It's not a very good book in my mind (I'm sure others will differ, but from the perspective of a novel being a novel, it SUCKS). But Sartre is a pretty big deal from a philosophy perspective and other works of his (like "No Exit") are classics for a reason. So he probably deserves it, but I would not pick "Nausea" as something to read a second time. (Or even a first.) I can see why it was widely rejected by publishers after it was written.
Next Up: "Tales of the Don" by Mikhail Sholokhov
Year Won: 1964
Read: Nausea
Original Language: French
Reason: "for his work, which rich in ideas and filled with the spirit of freedom and the quest for truth, has exerted a far-reaching influence on our age"
About: "Nausea" is a story about existentialism. Seriously. There's sort of a protagonist who find himself all alone and feeling nausous at a number of things. He also goes out to dinner and talks about philosophy a lot. Seriously. A lot.
What I liked: The writing can be very lovely. Sartre is very good at creating a sense of impending doom.
What I Disliked: There honestly isn't much of a plot. It's just a dude observing things and feeling unsettled. For over a hundred pages. It's more or less "this is my philosophy, told as a novel" which, to be frank, was done more gracefully and subtly in "Atlas Shrugged" (which is saying very, very little).
Should it have won a Nobel: For this alone, no. It's not a very good book in my mind (I'm sure others will differ, but from the perspective of a novel being a novel, it SUCKS). But Sartre is a pretty big deal from a philosophy perspective and other works of his (like "No Exit") are classics for a reason. So he probably deserves it, but I would not pick "Nausea" as something to read a second time. (Or even a first.) I can see why it was widely rejected by publishers after it was written.
Next Up: "Tales of the Don" by Mikhail Sholokhov
Wednesday, September 8, 2021
The Collected Poems of Giorgos Seferis
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
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
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)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)