[bksvol-discuss] Re: Nobel Prize winners in Literature from 1901 was Special COllections
- From: Cindy <popularplace@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: "bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2012 19:56:56 -0700 (PDT)
o.k. Sorry, Mayrie. I nver go to that site, but if I have more comments n the
subject I will smile
Cindy
>________________________________
> From: Mayrie ReNae <mayrierenae@xxxxxxxxx>
>To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2012 5:14 PM
>Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: Nobel Prize winners in Literature from 1901 was
>Special COllections
>
>
>Message
>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 <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 <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
>>>>>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 <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%20Winners
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>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
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
Other related posts:
