[bksvol-discuss] Re: Nobel Prize winners in Literature from 1901 was Special COllections
- From: "Ixchel, Jackie" <starsandhearts2@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2012 20:20:15 -0400
Hi Mayrie,
How do you get on to the bookshare discuss list?
Thanks,
Jackie
On 3/11/12, Mayrie ReNae <mayrierenae@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
>
> Would you mind moving this discussion to the bookshare-discuss
> list, please? It is very appropriate for that list, but less so for this
> list since it's wandered from volunteering topics to opinion sharing.
>
> Thanks very much.
>
> I don't want to kill the discussion. I just want to make sure that new
> volunteers are willing to stay and find the discussions pertinent directly
> to volunteering tasks. We do tend to lose folks when discussions diverging
> from volunteering happen.
>
> Sorry, and thank you.
>
> Mayrie
>
>
>
> _____
>
> From: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Roger Loran Bailey
> Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2012 5:01 PM
> To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: Nobel Prize winners in Literature from 1901
> was Special COllections
>
>
> I prefer Dickens over Faulkner myself, but, also like you, Dickens is far
> from my favorite too. It is subjective though. Again, it is fine with me
> that other people like Faulkner. It is not fine with me that Faulkner
> readers look down on non Faulkner readers as if they were pond scum.
>
> On 3/11/2012 5:37 PM, Cindy wrote:
>
> If you read the criteria on which the prize was awarded to each author you
> can see the committee wasn't a Literary snob. My liking for a book is
> somewhat like Kim's. I tried to Faulkner but couldn't get "into": him. I
> never did like Dickens, and still don't, except for Tale of Two Cities (the
> other bks are too depressing fr me. We started watching the recent
> Masterpiece Theater production but gave up for that reason. I did enjoy the
> Sinclai Lewis book I proofed. It was a long time ago, but as I recall it
> satirized society and was was written. The Good Earth got me very in volved
> with the characters and,and ofcourse, like any good historical novel with
> the China of the time. I did proof one or 2 (2, I think), Booker prize
> winners. There your criticism, Roger, of the judging panel might be
> warranted. The 2 books were interesting more because of the different
> styles of writing--where they placed the characters in time and the very
> different construction of the plot and setting. One I found very interesting
> on a purely intellectual level; I admired the "differentness ": and
> cleverness of what the author did. The other was a sort of science fiction
> and I didn'dt like it; it wasn't really xcoherent, imo. and I couldn't get
> involved with the characters.Like Kim, I l ike to become emotionally
> involved with the characters.
> Ihaven't read any Doris Lessing
> Cindy
>
>
> From: Kim Friedman <mailto:kimfri11@xxxxxxxxxxx> <kimfri11@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2012 1:16 PM
> Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: Nobel Prize winners in Literature from 1901
> was Special COllections
>
>
> Hi, Roger, I think it isn't necessarily the snob appeal which might win
> someone a prize. I think William Faulkner won for his experimental writing
> style and how he tried to narrate the history in a pocket universe he
> created, Yoknapatawpha County. Just because he may not be your choice of
> reading matter, he must have appealed to some people who really enjoyed his
> style of writing and telling a story. It seems to me there are all kinds of
> folk who read for a variety of reasons: personally, I read for a good story
> and for me this involves caring about and identifying with the characters. I
> suppose other people have different criteria. Speaking for myself, I
> couldn't enjoy Virginia Woolf's To The Lighthouse because nothing really
> happened in the story. Sure, you found out about the interior thoughts and
> feelings of the characters, but for me, this wasn't enough to engage my
> interest. I suppose there are others who are first caught by the mechanics
> the author uses in telling a story and are willing to ferret out what makes
> the author appeal to them. They don't have to like the characters (if any),
> but they might be delighted in how the author describes the setting or
> his/her word usage. I think what really struck me about Winston Graham (I
> don't think he ever won the Nobel Prize) was how his word choice, dialog,
> and powers of description got me to know the milieu of his stories, his
> characters and the interest the author had in them and how he was able to
> make me share his interest. In other words, I like someone who can tell a
> story. I think readers of literature sometimes get so caught up in whatever
> they're experiencing with the author that they forget about the storytelling
> part which is so vital to most readers. I suppose there may be some folks
> who have snobbery about what constitutes literature with a capital L, but I
> wouldn't say that all English teachers forget about the value of
> storytelling. I also think that some works require the reader to have a bit
> more life experience so they can be fully appreciated. I think I appreciated
> Charles Dickens's works when I was older. When I was required to read Great
> Expectations in Junior High, I couldn't really get into the story. When I
> read him in my thirties, I was struck by how he used words in setting a
> scene and how his characters acted. He was quite theatrical. I'm certainly
> willing to concede there may be folks who are snobbish or pretentious, who
> might read something because it is the done thing or because they feel they
> ought to like something but I don't know that the majority of people are
> like that. I don't even know if the "intelligentsia" are like that. Regards,
> Kim Friedman.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Roger Loran Bailey
> Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2012 8:44 AM
> To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: Nobel Prize winners in Literature from 1901
> was Special COllections
>
>
> This kind of reinforces my disdain for literary awards. They are based on
> the subjective judgements of people who have gotten onto committees by way
> of their connections, that is, snob societies. If you happen to share the
> tastes of the members of the Nobel Committee then you will agree with their
> choices. If you don't then you are likely to think that the Nobel Committee
> chooses some incredibly boring authors. I would suggest that if you want to
> really enjoy books, that you follow your own interests in reading. If you
> want to feel superior to the reading rabble then read the award winners and,
> hopefully, you will not be turned off from reading like so many are by
> English teachers who assign Literature with a capital L as the only
> worthwhile reading material without regard to the students' interests.
>
> On 3/11/2012 6:52 AM, Cindy wrote:
>
> At first I thought you are right; then I began to think that maybe it was
> awarded for a body of work, so I went to a Nobel.org site and found this:
> so I guess it's not one particular book. For Sinclair Lewis I found this:
>
>
> Sinclair Lewis
>
> The Nobel Prize in Literature 1930 was awarded to Sinclair Lewis "for his
> vigorous and graphic art of description and his ability to create, with wit
> and humour, new types of characters".
> for Pearl Buck I found this:
>
>
>
> Facts on the Nobel Prize in Literature
>
> On 27 November 1895, Alfred Nobel signed his last will and testament, giving
> the largest share of his fortune to a series of prizes, the Nobel Prizes. As
> described in Nobel's will one part was dedicated to “the person who shall
> have produced in the field of literature the most outstanding work in an
> ideal direction”. Learn more about the Nobel Prize in Literature from 1901
> to 2011.
>
> That dosn't make it very clear, though; does "most outstanding work mean one
> book or body of work
> I checked the Nobel site for Sinclair Lewis and found this:
>
> The Nobel Prize in Literature 1930 was awarded to Sinclair Lewis "for his
> vigorous and graphic art of description and his ability to create, with wit
> and humour, new types of characters".
>
> For Pearl Buck I found this:
>
>
> The Nobel Prize in Literature 1938 was awarded to Pearl Buck "for her rich
> and truly epic descriptions of peasant life in China and for her
> biographical masterpieces". , . for Pearl Buck I found this:
>
> The Nobel Prize in Literature 1938 was awarded to Pearl Buck "for her rich
> and truly epic descriptions of peasant life in China and for her
> biographical masterpieces". and for Rudyard Kipling, this:
>
>
>
>
>
> The Nobel Prize in Literature 1907 was awarded to Rudyard Kipling "in
> consideration of the power of observation, originality of imagination,
> virility of ideas and remarkable talent for narration which characterize the
> creations of this world-famous author".I also learned that Kipling was the
> youngest author to receive the prize ( That year The Jungle Book was
> mentioned whenhe won. Doris Lessing was the oldest winner, age 88 (I think
> it was 2007, but now I don't remembered, even though I just read it.
>
> I don't hink we'd necessarily have to have all the books a prizewinner
> wrote, maybe just one or a few that are representative of the author. It's
> odd to hink that The Jungle Book was mentioned when Kipling won when he
> wrote so many others--or maybe I'm thinking og pems, like Kim (was that a
> book). I know Pearl Book wrot a lot of books about China because I've read
> most of them, especially her children's book, The Chinese Children Next
> Door). The award mentioned her biographies. I didn't know she wrote
> biographies. Her most famous book is probably The Great Earth, but there
> were sequels, too which I read--all very good.
> Cindy
>
>
> From: Sue Stevens <mailto:siss52@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <siss52@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2012 11:55 PM
> Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: Nobel Prize winners in Literature from 1901
> was Special COllections
>
>
> Wow, Cindy! Thanks for all this info!!
>
> Sue S.
>
>
> From: Cindy <mailto:popularplace@xxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2012 11:28 PM
> To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: Nobel Prize winners in Literature from 1901
> was Special COllections
>
> For those who want more information about the Nobel Prize for Literature,
> here's some general info,including a list of all winners since 1901. If
> anyone wants to make a project of scanning any of the books we don't have
> I'd be happy to proof them, although I don't know how we could do
> non-English books unless they have been translated. I knosw there'a at least
> one Sinclair Lewis book because I proofed it, and Kipling's poetry is
> in,because Amy scanned that and I proofed it. I don't know about his novels;
> and I'm sure, though I didn't check that The Good Earth must be in.
> Here's the info I copied from online:
>
> All Nobel Prizes in Literature
>
> The Nobel Prize in Literature has been awarded 104 times to 108 Nobel
> Laureates between 1901 and 2011. All Nobel Prizes in Literature
>
> The Nobel Prize in Literature has been awarded 104 times to 108 Nobel
> Laureates between 1901 and 2011.
>
>
> Here's the list:
>
>
> 2011
> Tomas Tranströmer
> 2010
> Mario Vargas Llosa
> 2009
> Herta Müller
> 2008
> Jean-Marie Gustave Le Clézio
> 2007
> Doris Lessing
> 2006
> Orhan Pamuk
> 2005
> Harold Pinter
> 2004
> Elfriede Jelinek
> 2003
> John M. Coetzee
> 2002
> Imre Kertész
> 2001
> Sir Vidiadhar Surajprasad Naipaul
> 2000
> Gao Xingjian
> 1999
> Günter Grass
> 1998
> José Saramago
> 1997
> Dario Fo
> 1996
> Wislawa Szymborska
> 1995
> Seamus Heaney
> 1994
> Kenzaburo Oe
> 1993
> Toni Morrison
> 1992
> Derek Walcott
> 1991
> Nadine Gordimer
> 1990
> Octavio Paz
> 1989
> Camilo José Cela
> 1988
> Naguib Mahfouz
> 1987
> Joseph Brodsky
> 1986
> Wole Soyinka
> 1985
> Claude Simon
> 1984
> Jaroslav Seifert
> 1983
> William Golding
> 1982
> Gabriel García Márquez
> 1981
> Elias Canetti
> 1980
> Czeslaw Milosz
> 1979
> Odysseus Elytis
> 1978
> Isaac Bashevis Singer
> 1977
> Vicente Aleixandre
> 1976
> Saul Bellow
> 1975
> Eugenio Montale
> 1974
> Eyvind Johnson, Harry Martinson
> 1973
> Patrick White
> 1972
> Heinrich Böll
> 1971
> Pablo Neruda
> 1970
> Aleksandr Isayevich Solzhenitsyn
> 1969
> Samuel Beckett
> 1968
> Yasunari Kawabata
> 1967
> Miguel Angel Asturias
> 1966
> Shmuel Yosef Agnon, Nelly Sachs
> 1965
> Mikhail Aleksandrovich Sholokhov
> 1964
> Jean-Paul Sartre
> 1963
> Giorgos Seferis
> 1962
> John Steinbeck
> 1961
> Ivo Andric
> 1960
> Saint-John Perse
> 1959
> Salvatore Quasimodo
> 1958
> Boris Leonidovich Pasternak
> 1957
> Albert Camus
> 1956
> Juan Ramón Jiménez
> 1955
> Halldór Kiljan Laxness
> 1954
> Ernest Miller Hemingway
> 1953
> Sir Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill
> 1952
> François Mauriac
> 1951
> Pär Fabian Lagerkvist
> 1950
> Earl (Bertrand Arthur William) Russell
> 1949
> William Faulkner
> 1948
> Thomas Stearns Eliot
> 1947
> André Paul Guillaume Gide
> 1946
> Hermann Hesse
> 1945
> Gabriela Mistral
> 1944
> Johannes Vilhelm Jensen
> 1943
> No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was with 1/3 allocated
> to the Main Fund and with 2/3 to the Special Fund of this prize section.
> 1942
> No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was with 1/3 allocated
> to the Main Fund and with 2/3 to the Special Fund of this prize section.
> 1941
> No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was with 1/3 allocated
> to the Main Fund and with 2/3 to the Special Fund of this prize section.
> 1940
> No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was with 1/3 allocated
> to the Main Fund and with 2/3 to the Special Fund of this prize section.
> 1939
> Frans Eemil Sillanpää
> 1938
> Pearl Buck
> 1937
> Roger Martin du Gard
> 1936
> Eugene Gladstone O'Neill
> 1935
> No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was with 1/3 allocated
> to the Main Fund and with 2/3 to the Special Fund of this prize section.
> 1934
> Luigi Pirandello
> 1933
> Ivan Alekseyevich Bunin
> 1932
> John Galsworthy
> 1931
> Erik Axel Karlfeldt
> 1930
> Sinclair Lewis
> 1929
> Thomas Mann
> 1928
> Sigrid Undset
> 1927
> Henri Bergson
> 1926
> Grazia Deledda
> 1925
> George Bernard Shaw
> 1924
> Wladyslaw Stanislaw Reymont
> 1923
> William Butler Yeats
> 1922
> Jacinto Benavente
> 1921
> Anatole France
> 1920
> Knut Pedersen Hamsun
> 1919
> Carl Friedrich Georg Spitteler
> 1918
> No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was allocated to the
> Special Fund of this prize section.
> 1917
> Karl Adolph Gjellerup, Henrik Pontoppidan
> 1916
> Carl Gustaf Verner von Heidenstam
> 1915
> Romain Rolland
> 1914
> No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was allocated to the
> Special Fund of this prize section.
> 1913
> Rabindranath Tagore
> 1912
> Gerhart Johann Robert Hauptmann
> 1911
> Count Maurice (Mooris) Polidore Marie Bernhard Maeterlinck
> 1910
> Paul Johann Ludwig Heyse
> 1909
> Selma Ottilia Lovisa Lagerlöf
> 1908
> Rudolf Christoph Eucken
> 1907
> Rudyard Kipling
> 1906
> Giosuè Carducci
> 1905
> Henryk Sienkiewicz
> 1904
> Frédéric Mistral, José Echegaray y Eizaguirre
> 1903
> Bjørnstjerne Martinus Bjørnson
> 1902
> Christian Matthias Theodor Mommsen
> 1901
> Sully Prudhomme
>
>
> And here's the list of all winners since 1901
>
>
> Cindy
>
>
> From: Mayrie ReNae <mailto:mayrierenae@xxxxxxxxx> <mayrierenae@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2012 6:57 PM
> Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: Special Collections
>
>
> Hi Sue,
>
> Is Pulitzer Prize the same thing but by a different name?
>
> If so, you can find the list of books here:
>
> http://www.bookshare.org/browse/collection/31/Pulitzer%20Prize%20Award%20Win
> ners
>
> Hope that was what you're looking for!
>
> Mayrie
>
>
>
> From: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Sue Stevens
> Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2012 6:35 PM
> To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Special Collections
>
>
> Hi All,
>
> In checking the special collections I do not see the Nobel Literature
> prizewinners listed. Am I just missing them, or do we not have them?
>
> Sue S.
>
>
>
>
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2114/4863 - Release Date: 03/10/12
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
Currently Reading: The Lost Hero by Rick Riordan and Hex Hall by Rachel Hawkins
To unsubscribe from this list send a blank Email to
bksvol-discuss-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
put the word 'unsubscribe' by itself in the subject line. To get a list of
available commands, put the word 'help' by itself in the subject line.
Other related posts:
