oneofmurphysbiscuits
Forum junkie
Joined: 9:12 PM - Apr 15, 2007

2:12 PM - Oct 05, 2017 #101

hey thanks, Bloss...and I forgot curries
I only think, if that is the name for this vertiginous panic as of hornets smoked out of their nests, once a certain degree of terror has been exceeded
Quote
Like
Share

Uemarasan
Literary lunatic
Uemarasan
Literary lunatic
Joined: 7:04 PM - Sep 07, 2015

2:19 PM - Oct 05, 2017 #102

Yeah, I like this choice. I thought they would go with someone more obvious (Antunes, Atwood, Cartarescu, Marias, Krasznahorkai, Thiong'o). I'm glad to be blindsided and that the Academy supports the idea of a Nobel-worthy author as someone who doesn't have to appeal only to the literati. There are great and deserving popular and mainstream authors as well and not every winner has to be challenging, little-known, or unorthodox.

An Artist of the Floating World is my favorite.

I did quite poorly with my predictions this year and only guessed the most obvious prize (Physics).
Vulgar Auteurist
Quote
Like
Share

Cleanthes
Forum junkie
Cleanthes
Forum junkie
Joined: 12:10 AM - Mar 16, 2013

3:12 PM - Oct 05, 2017 #103

A silver lining to this year's prize is that the Academy followed the advice of my favorite poet, Horace and embraced a golden mediocrity:

You will live better, Licinius, by neither
always pressing the deep nor, while you carefully
dread storms, by excessively pressing
the treacherous shore.

Whoever seeks a golden mediocrity
is safely free...

Rectius vives, Licini, neque altum
semper urgendo neque, dum procellas
cautus horrescis, nimium premendo
litus iniquum.

Auream quisquis mediocritatem
diligit, tutus caret obsoleti...
Don't take life so serious, son. It ain't nohow permanent.
?\_(ツ)_/?
Quote
Like
Share

oneofmurphysbiscuits
Forum junkie
Joined: 9:12 PM - Apr 15, 2007

3:21 PM - Oct 05, 2017 #104

He's not up to it, other arguments pro and contra are straw men at best.
I only think, if that is the name for this vertiginous panic as of hornets smoked out of their nests, once a certain degree of terror has been exceeded
Quote
Like
Share

nnyhav
Forum junkie
nnyhav
Forum junkie
Joined: 12:26 PM - Oct 06, 2008

3:45 PM - Oct 05, 2017 #105

I don't consider Ishiguro a mediocre writer by any standard, but his selection as laureate is meh: safe, popular, yes all that and more, or less. Though it's the first time in a while (how long?) that the winner didn't appear on Ladbrokes' list (also, first "professionally trained and accredited writer", MA-CW equiv of US MFA; mo meh visavis awarding, not to knock Ishiguro's craft or style). While not last year's nadir, this does little to change the downward arc the prize has taken in recent years for "relevance" (not to literature).
Quote
Like
Share

Cleanthes
Forum junkie
Cleanthes
Forum junkie
Joined: 12:10 AM - Mar 16, 2013

4:43 PM - Oct 05, 2017 #106

When I read The Remains of the Day, I was actually pissed off at the willing, deliberate blandness. Maybe Ishiguro was experimenting with diluting Jamesian narratives in an effort at achieving homeopathic fiction. He sure seemed to be aiming for golden mediocrity to me.
Don't take life so serious, son. It ain't nohow permanent.
?\_(ツ)_/?
Quote
Like
Share

oneofmurphysbiscuits
Forum junkie
Joined: 9:12 PM - Apr 15, 2007

5:09 PM - Oct 05, 2017 #107

he's competent, Cleanthes, no more than,if you needs must give a global prize to a writer (even of) British English, could you not try harder and look around a bit more. They're the self selecting prize givers after all. Also concur with Dave's MFA analogy. Prizes neither deter or encourage me, I've no interest in, but I admit to being curious as to how and why Danius and crew believe that Ishiguro will do.
I only think, if that is the name for this vertiginous panic as of hornets smoked out of their nests, once a certain degree of terror has been exceeded
Quote
Like
Share

Cleanthes
Forum junkie
Cleanthes
Forum junkie
Joined: 12:10 AM - Mar 16, 2013

5:43 PM - Oct 05, 2017 #108

OOMB, as usual, you're right. A competent writer writing about interesting topics: they could have chosen worse.

But I'm grateful for this year's Nobel thread at the WWLF, it made me read Ewa Lipska, Mayrocker and Karl Krolow, Mario Lunzi, Vittorio Sereni and Giorgio Caproni among others. So

Ed ora, disse, lasciamo
questa stanza delle cose inutili. Saliamo
insieme sulla terrazza
della Cattedrale, e insieme
- sollevato il bicchiere -
brindiamo, goethianamente,
al bel sole cadente.
Don't take life so serious, son. It ain't nohow permanent.
?\_(ツ)_/?
Quote
Like
Share

kline19
Forum junkie
kline19
Forum junkie
Joined: 3:19 AM - Nov 24, 2006

6:17 PM - Oct 05, 2017 #109

i agree with nnyhav pretty much. Ishiguro's writing has mastery to it that can't be reduced to some formula.

Although, picking him says more about the new handlers of the Nobel Committee than about Ishiguro.

Also, does anyone think that by giving Ishiguro, Nobel Committee have effectively picked the "winner" among his peers, the cohort of such London writers like McEwan, Rushdie and Amis? and so these guys have been effectively passed over? (not that they would be considered Nobel worthy types in this thread anyway :P )
The love hoarded all your life ... for the work, and his lips still moved silently over that last word - TR
Quote
Like
Share

Cleanthes
Forum junkie
Cleanthes
Forum junkie
Joined: 12:10 AM - Mar 16, 2013

7:17 PM - Oct 05, 2017 #110

Great points kline.

That generation of writers born after 1945 and before the '60s (which also includes Hanif Kureishi, Allan Holinghurst and Julian Barnes) is likely done for. I would have chosen Julian Barnes among them to win the Nobel.

This is what the official fish wrapper had to say when ranking the British writers after 1945:

https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/28 ... since-1945

Salman Rushdie - 13
Martin Amis - 19
Kazuo Ishiguro - 32
Ian McEwan - 35
Hanif Kureishi - 37
Julian Barnes - 44
Hollinghurst - MIA
Don't take life so serious, son. It ain't nohow permanent.
?\_(ツ)_/?
Quote
Like
Share