It seems like their standards shifted over time. After Faulkner, every American who won the prize dealt as much with international themes as with specifically American ones, up to Morrison, who’s arguably a step beyond writers like Delillo in her willingness to integrate modernist methodology into her stuff. Philip Roth seems to have been a contender for a while, but he’s been pretty universal in his themes for a long time.
International literature is such an embarrassment of riches these days that they’re justified in continuing to name European writers - Milan Kundera is deserving, and it’ll be a shame on them if they never pick Peter Handke - but his line about the safety of writing in Europe doesn’t make much sense. Freedom alone doesn’t make for great writing anywhere.
It’s not just being nitpicky, though- as a European (expat), I can assure you that the various bits of Europe spend much more time hating each other than they do hating America.
No, I certainly understand that, and I lived in London for a while and traveled around Europe a bit. Only for half a year, but I still got a bit of a taste.
I’m well aware that the various nations that compose the EU have their own distinct cultures, histories, politics, cuisine, etc, etc, etc… (Then again, so do America’s states to a lesser degree).
I needed to find a word that would express someone treating Europe-as-an-entity the same way they might treat their own nation if they were overly nationalistic. Eurocentric, while accurate in this case, doesn’t tell the whole story. I still think that ‘nationalistic’ is fairly apt, and ‘unionistic’ is too unwieldy.
What would you suggest instead to describe a European who treats Europe the same way an overly patriotic… I don’t know… Canadian might treat Canada?
Well, I’d call the Canadian nationalistic or xenophobic depending on the tone of his patriotism. Canada is a country too, y’know.
As for the pro-Europe guy… I dunno. “Regionalist”? “Continentalist”? I like continentalist. “Minion of ZOG”, maybe, if you’re one of those freako “the Rothschilds are taking over the world” types.
ETA: I think the Nobel voter guy’s tone is more anti-American than pro-European. It isn’t so much that he’s dismissing the rest of the world, he just has a sort of patrician attitude to it - “if you write a cookbook in Singapore you will be killed!” He’s critical of American authors, rather than the government, though; it’s as if he’s saying “African/Asian writers are good and are being held back, but American writers just aren’t good”.
Oh, I’d agree on that point. But his claim that Europe is the only place in the world with freedom of speech is regionalistic enough to redline my BS sensor.
The guy’s an idiot, and speaking English as a second language/poor translation possibly didn’t help (if that’s what happened). Does anybody even pay any attention to the “soft” Nobel prizes any more, anyway?
By the way, who are the big American authors these days? Who are the authors competing with Faulkner and Hemingway?
Absolutely. That said, Europe doesn’t have the religious thought police we do- while there may be grumbling from conservative religious groups about A Brief History of Christ’s Sex Life being available through public libraries, it certainly wouldn’t be banned, as it might in, say, Kansas.
Well I wasnt accusing you of not reading it. I was doubting you had understood it.
Reading comprehension implies reading between the lines not just understanding all the words. Obviously hes not saying that america beats writers (well unless they say america sucks)
I thought this was Obvious™
irony - Using elucidative and gasbag in the same sentence.
Yes I was using the faux newspaper headline motif there.
Obviously the joke failed. wich is why I “weaseled” and tried to refine my point in the [ETA: third post] next post.
While you seem to be quite good at it.
Yes I was told to fuck off, in a thread discussing free speach for writers and you are calling ME a disingenuos twat?
Well since we are not playing games here. You sir are an overbearing ass.
Defining your point is not weaseling.
And I actually had a point, I thought the thread was unfair.
Annoying you, heinous crime as it may be, is not the definition of a troll.
Just off the top of my head, along with the authors previously mentioned, Tom Wolfe, Michael Chabon, John Updike and Larry McMurtry all are the equal of any author Europe can produce, and are better than most of them.
Yep, and speaking of which, Chabon’s The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier & Clay happened to be set in America, but a huge part of it dealt with a Jewish European refugee from the Holocaust. But I guess writing about the experiences of diverse people melting together to form a national identity is just so very isolationist
Not to mention The Yiddish Policemen’s Union, which, while based in Alaska, deals with world issues throughout the novel. Chabon’s a good candidate, but I’m not sure his literary output is quite there yet.
However, Chabon’s Gentlmen of the Road should silence anyone who thinks American writers are insular. A buddy-story with an African Jew traveling in Turkey 1000 years ago that’s dedicated to Michael Moorcock and inspired by Alexandre Dumas?!?
I think it was David Sedaris who wrote something to the line of “Most countries have a national sloagan, none of these are ‘We’re number 2’.” Sure Americans think their country is great. Most people think their country is great. Just some of us are a little more boistrous about it. it’s just like religion, there are a lot of people out there who are keen on Jesus/Yaweh/Allah. Only a few loud mothed people shout it from the rafters. They’re the ones that end up getting the others labeled poorly.
Exactly. Engdahl’s points are not entirely without merit, but they were put in a deliberately antagonistic way that clearly shows the parochialism he professes to despise. While it’s true that America isn’t a patchwork of small, diverse nations and regions each with its own ancient history in situ, the culture and economic shock incurred in crossing our one southern border must be worth at least a few of the umpteen international boundaries separating European countries, which are largely similar in economic structure, cultural values, and ways of life even if they do represent distinctively different historical cultures that define their visual aspects. Nor should we expect that America is automatically entitled to be in the running, because we’re geographically big, or have the biggest army, or more people than any three European countries (or not, I’m not sure). We’re just another country. On the other hand, America is ahead in terms of cultural inclusiveness and a long history of assimilating numerous immigrants from all over the earth. The diversity here is not in being able to cross two language regions in less than a day on the train, it’s all around us, every day.
What’s troubling is that the caricature of Americans as pop-culture, hamburger wolfing, gun shooting, and yee-hawing buffoons seems to be increasingly projected, by European writers, on all of us. Palin is an admittedly cringe-worthy target, to name just one example, but what’s hardly ever acknowledged is that there are plenty of us here cringing about her as well. I don’t know if the picture I get of this, mainly from the Internet but also from various American newspapers, is accurate, or if it’s being shaded by editors hoping to foment anti-Euro resentment. From the New York Times though, I doubt that.
Like I said - the USA has many fine writers. I’d pick Gore Vidal for a Nobel. He certainly isn’t insular and unengaged with world literature or themes.
Not to change the subject, but I’ve been thinking a lot about Tom Wolfe lately - as he has been ahead of most commentary on important issues in our society for an awfully long time.
His last couple of books sold like hotcakes, but were panned a bit by critics. I wonder whether they deserve a reassessment - as Charlie Croker in A Man In Full seemed an embodiment of all of those people slammed today by dabbling in real estate speculation, and in I Am Charlotte Simmons he portrayed a campus culture that is hypersexualized and corrupted by high-profile sport. In short order, the Duke rape case and football scandals at Alabama and Colorado, among others, make his observations seem particularly germane.
It might seem strange to seek a reassessment of a popular author who has his critical fans, but Wolfe has his critics too. I’m wondering whether they might change their minds a bit looking at these books now.
