Link: Copy link
LOL. Yes, no need to defend him to me; I agree with you completely, and I've read the essays Nathan's written about him. Still intrigued about that whole scandal of his recounting Mishima [fictitiously?] calling Oe's wife a cunt. The best part about the librarian: "Oh, and if he loves Sartre so much, why didn't he refuse the prize like his idol? HMM? Because he's so hypocritical!"wrote:But Oe as a "French poser" that's some huge bullshit, and it's certainly not reflective of broader consensus opinion on him.The librarian may well have been right wing in their politics, since the nationalist right-wing crowd despises Oe for his attacks on the Japanese military establishment and brutal forays into critiquing Japanese conduct towards minorities and dissidents. Sure Oe does have plenty of French influences, but the man is ridiculous well read, and not just in French but also English and Italian (though his speaking ability is apparently really bad). John Nathan wrote that Oe, from reading Auden only in the original English, had brought him to new insights in the poet. And Oe also has a huge deal of love for Selma Lagerlof and her Wondrous Adventures of Nils, as well as Huckleberry Finn, two novels that seem as much as anything to influence him. I would say it's also clear that he has an intimate sense of Japanese tradition, and older Japanese writers and is in some ways representing a violent gap between them and contemporary Japan and has been doing so for decades. Maybe I'm being defensive because Oe is my favorite living writer, but he's a complex and original stylist, and more importantly, has a nuanced and often destructive moral vision and pessimism that interrogates the darkness and the vivid subjectiveness of life.
wrote: The Name of the Rose made Eco's reputation as a novelist, but it has also proved difficult to match. "Sometimes I say I hate The Name of the Rose," he admits, "because the following books maybe were better. But it happens to many writers. Gabriel Garcia Marquez can write 50 books, but he will be remembered always for Cien Aos de Soledad [One Hundred Years of Solitude]. Every time I publish a new novel, sales of The Name of the Rose go up. What is the reaction? Ah, a new book of Eco. But I have never read The Name of the Rose.' Which, by the way, costs less because it is in paperback." He laughs, as he frequently does. Eco's great virtue is that he is an intellectual who doesn't take himself too seriously. Life, like fiction, is a wonderful game.
I can't help but feel a little miffed, but maybe that's a difference between American and English dialects. Since when have Nobel blurbs meant anything at all though? They are vague and very laconic, and I've read most of them.oneofmurphysbiscuits wrote:read the academy blurb even if you can't be arsed to read anything besides the most well known
That apart i don't really care about who wins what or get excited about
What is that supposed to tell me? Well I guess there is his neanderthal book which does look interesting. I will probably end up buying that one.wrote:for his novels which, with the perspicuity of realistic narrative art and the diversity and universality of myth, illuminate the human condition in the world of today
Roger, good point. Levity, playfulness and humor being considered as negatives helps explain why writers of delightful fiction like Peter Esterhazy, Pynchon (heck, even Nabokov) are passed over for the Nobel.roger wrote:I would like to see Pynchon win, though, as he has given me the most pleasure of those I've read. I had hoped he would win before Professor Irwin Corey passed away, he had picked up Pynchon's NBA award with double-talking mania. Pynchon's humor can be seen as subversive but also silly and I expect the serious minded judges look askance at such low comedy.