Pulitzer Prizes
- Thread starter learna
- Start date
Re: 2017 Pulitzer Prizes
It wasn't that terrible of a book. I didn't love it, it is a tad bit overrated in my view, but I can see why it won the prizes. Once again, it is the kind of book that fits right in the "goldie locks" zone for literary prizes. Mainstream enough so that someone like my dad will pick it up and enjoy it, serious enough for analysis in a high school english class.
It wasn't that terrible of a book. I didn't love it, it is a tad bit overrated in my view, but I can see why it won the prizes. Once again, it is the kind of book that fits right in the "goldie locks" zone for literary prizes. Mainstream enough so that someone like my dad will pick it up and enjoy it, serious enough for analysis in a high school english class.
Stevie B
Current Member
Re: 2017 Pulitzer Prizes
So if someone else has a different opinion than you when it comes to assessing the quality of books, they're either clueless, lazy, or politically-motivated? That sounds like sheer arrogance, my friend. And as the infallible arbiter of literary works, were you appointed or self-anointed?
So if someone else has a different opinion than you when it comes to assessing the quality of books, they're either clueless, lazy, or politically-motivated? That sounds like sheer arrogance, my friend. And as the infallible arbiter of literary works, were you appointed or self-anointed?
Stevie B
Current Member
Re: 2017 Pulitzer Prizes
I have not read Whitehead's novel and I have no particular interest in reading it. I'm not arguing the merits or demerits of the novel. What I take issue with is your writing in such absolutes. Clearly, you think The Underground Railroad is shit and that's fine. You're entitled to your OPINION. Continue to shout it at the top of a mountain, if you're so inclined. The arrogance comes in when you take the next step of presenting your conjecture as irrefutable fact. You clearly state Whitehead got the Pulitzer because of tokenism or because the judges were too lazy to read The Sport of Kings properly. There is a third alternative - the judges carefully read both novels and found The Underground Railroad to be superior. Perhaps, just perhaps, they're right and you're wrong or better yet - they simply came to a different conclusion than you did. Regardless, you weren't privy to those discussions and so I think it's absolute bullshit to level a charge of tokenism. It demeans the award, its judges, the winning author, and the novel itself, and, in my opinion, makes you look pretty foolish in the process.
I have not read Whitehead's novel and I have no particular interest in reading it. I'm not arguing the merits or demerits of the novel. What I take issue with is your writing in such absolutes. Clearly, you think The Underground Railroad is shit and that's fine. You're entitled to your OPINION. Continue to shout it at the top of a mountain, if you're so inclined. The arrogance comes in when you take the next step of presenting your conjecture as irrefutable fact. You clearly state Whitehead got the Pulitzer because of tokenism or because the judges were too lazy to read The Sport of Kings properly. There is a third alternative - the judges carefully read both novels and found The Underground Railroad to be superior. Perhaps, just perhaps, they're right and you're wrong or better yet - they simply came to a different conclusion than you did. Regardless, you weren't privy to those discussions and so I think it's absolute bullshit to level a charge of tokenism. It demeans the award, its judges, the winning author, and the novel itself, and, in my opinion, makes you look pretty foolish in the process.
Last edited:
Daniel del Real
Moderator
Re: 2017 Pulitzer Prizes
Oh Stevie, you haven't lost the touch. Thank you so much my friend.
Oh Stevie, you haven't lost the touch. Thank you so much my friend.
OverTheMountains
Reader
Re: 2017 Pulitzer Prizes
Thank you, Stevie. When I read this thread the other day I couldn't even imagine how the post announcing the winners even made it possible to have a discussion here. I mean, as you point out, there are ways to have an opinion about a book and still make space for discussion.
Whenever I see posts on forums like the one above I am reminded of just how wretchedly reviewed Moby Dick was when it was released. Same with Les Miserables, or that, as it pertains to the Pulitzer, William Faulkner, the single most important white American writer of his century, didn't win the Pulitzer until his excellence was recognized by that weird Swedish committee which hands out medals. As Liam pointed out, the long run of time determines, largely, if something is to maintain its power. And I suspect that our posturings for intelligence on this forum will have any longterm impact on that process. As we may not ever get to see how this book is viewed in 50, 60, or 150 years, can we instead try and use language that opens up the possibility of discussion? That is, mostly, done by asking questions.
Though I will say I am more interested in reading this book because of Isahoinp's objections. I mean, his reviews in a few of the other threads are just so damned inconsistent and confusing in their criteria that I might as well take the chance to understand something he thinks is poor literature.
I'm not entirely thrilled by the winner. I really love Louise Erdrich and think she has consistently released incredible literature which is more than worthy of any award that is available. That said, I don't much care for the Pulitzer. For some reason, of all the major awards in the States, it is the one that intrigues me least.
Thank you, Stevie. When I read this thread the other day I couldn't even imagine how the post announcing the winners even made it possible to have a discussion here. I mean, as you point out, there are ways to have an opinion about a book and still make space for discussion.
Whenever I see posts on forums like the one above I am reminded of just how wretchedly reviewed Moby Dick was when it was released. Same with Les Miserables, or that, as it pertains to the Pulitzer, William Faulkner, the single most important white American writer of his century, didn't win the Pulitzer until his excellence was recognized by that weird Swedish committee which hands out medals. As Liam pointed out, the long run of time determines, largely, if something is to maintain its power. And I suspect that our posturings for intelligence on this forum will have any longterm impact on that process. As we may not ever get to see how this book is viewed in 50, 60, or 150 years, can we instead try and use language that opens up the possibility of discussion? That is, mostly, done by asking questions.
Though I will say I am more interested in reading this book because of Isahoinp's objections. I mean, his reviews in a few of the other threads are just so damned inconsistent and confusing in their criteria that I might as well take the chance to understand something he thinks is poor literature.
I'm not entirely thrilled by the winner. I really love Louise Erdrich and think she has consistently released incredible literature which is more than worthy of any award that is available. That said, I don't much care for the Pulitzer. For some reason, of all the major awards in the States, it is the one that intrigues me least.
Stevie B
Current Member
Re: 2017 Pulitzer Prizes
I'm an Erdrich fan as well, though I've only read her early works. I make occasional trips down to Minneapolis and still hope to meet her some time at her book and gift shop.
I'm an Erdrich fan as well, though I've only read her early works. I make occasional trips down to Minneapolis and still hope to meet her some time at her book and gift shop.
Last edited:
Stevie B
Current Member
Re: 2017 Pulitzer Prizes
I'll get off my soap box now, Isahoinp. Though I might not agree with all of your conclusions, I appreciate your passion and your ability to generate lively debate. Keep posting.
I'll get off my soap box now, Isahoinp. Though I might not agree with all of your conclusions, I appreciate your passion and your ability to generate lively debate. Keep posting.
OverTheMountains
Reader
Re: 2017 Pulitzer Prizes
Stevie! Did you know you can order signed copies of her books off of her website? I keep on hinting to my parents that it is the only thing I want for Christmas, but they never seem to look into it. One of these days I'm going to have to go buy one myself. I've thought of driving from my hometown in Canada to Minneapolis with friends just to visit her book store and accidentally run into her.
I'm glad I'm not to only one in the world with that silly hope. May one of us, one day, be so lucky to meet her (and report back to the other upon doing so).
Stevie! Did you know you can order signed copies of her books off of her website? I keep on hinting to my parents that it is the only thing I want for Christmas, but they never seem to look into it. One of these days I'm going to have to go buy one myself. I've thought of driving from my hometown in Canada to Minneapolis with friends just to visit her book store and accidentally run into her.
I'm glad I'm not to only one in the world with that silly hope. May one of us, one day, be so lucky to meet her (and report back to the other upon doing so).
WolfmanK
Reader
Re: 2017 Pulitzer Prizes
I work in a used bookstore very near to Erdrich's store. Keep thinking she'll drop by and I'm always prepared to see her. (Been three years, though, and no such luck!)
I'm a slow reader, and I come to these forums to keep me in the loop about what is good and what might not be. Often, when language gets expressive, it tends to rub a few people the wrong way. But that's what's important about discussions...getting the passion out. If Isahinp bashes a few books, that's fine with me. If you're drinking a beer with friends and someone says "Kafka is shit!" ('cause they can't stand cockroaches) you don't throw her out of the bar. You say "have another beer and shut up!"
I do think that the big America awards are something to be skeptical of. They do tend to ride contemporary waves of opinion, but alas, that is what they capture...a moment in contemporary passion. A year on, something else will dominate the zeit and the geist and be the next thing to drape with perhaps undue adoration. And all of us will continue to love the books we love for reasons we often stumble in explaining.
Onward!
I work in a used bookstore very near to Erdrich's store. Keep thinking she'll drop by and I'm always prepared to see her. (Been three years, though, and no such luck!)
I'm a slow reader, and I come to these forums to keep me in the loop about what is good and what might not be. Often, when language gets expressive, it tends to rub a few people the wrong way. But that's what's important about discussions...getting the passion out. If Isahinp bashes a few books, that's fine with me. If you're drinking a beer with friends and someone says "Kafka is shit!" ('cause they can't stand cockroaches) you don't throw her out of the bar. You say "have another beer and shut up!"
I do think that the big America awards are something to be skeptical of. They do tend to ride contemporary waves of opinion, but alas, that is what they capture...a moment in contemporary passion. A year on, something else will dominate the zeit and the geist and be the next thing to drape with perhaps undue adoration. And all of us will continue to love the books we love for reasons we often stumble in explaining.
Onward!
Stevie B
Current Member
Re: 2017 Pulitzer Prizes
I'm curious which used bookstore you work at. I usually visit Sixth Chamber and Magers and Quinn when I'm down in the Cities, and occasionally make it to Midway Books and The Book House.
I'm curious which used bookstore you work at. I usually visit Sixth Chamber and Magers and Quinn when I'm down in the Cities, and occasionally make it to Midway Books and The Book House.
redhead
Blahblahblah
Re: 2017 Pulitzer Prizes
2018 Fiction prize goes to Less by Andrew Sean Greer (the two other nominees were In the Distance by Hernan Diaz and The Idiot by Elif Baruman).
http://www.pulitzer.org/prize-winners-by-year/2018
Haven't really paid attention to American fiction in the past year, so I don't know anything about it. But among those who have kept up, this seems to be considered a surprise pick, and reading some online summaries, I have to agree. Doesn't really seem like your typical winner.
(Perhaps the bigger story is that Kendrick Lamar is now a Pulitzer Prize winner.)
2018 Fiction prize goes to Less by Andrew Sean Greer (the two other nominees were In the Distance by Hernan Diaz and The Idiot by Elif Baruman).
http://www.pulitzer.org/prize-winners-by-year/2018
Haven't really paid attention to American fiction in the past year, so I don't know anything about it. But among those who have kept up, this seems to be considered a surprise pick, and reading some online summaries, I have to agree. Doesn't really seem like your typical winner.
(Perhaps the bigger story is that Kendrick Lamar is now a Pulitzer Prize winner.)
Daniel del Real
Moderator
Re: 2017 Pulitzer Prizes
Now you can tell Kendrick Lamar and William Faulkner have won the same prize. This world is going to the toilet.
Now you can tell Kendrick Lamar and William Faulkner have won the same prize. This world is going to the toilet.
Daniel del Real
Moderator
Re: 2017 Pulitzer Prizes
Before this thread, I had no idea a Pullitzer in music existed, so probably in terms of advertising you might be right.
Before this thread, I had no idea a Pullitzer in music existed, so probably in terms of advertising you might be right.
OverTheMountains
Reader
I knew about the prize in Music, but I studied classical music and would pay attention to the prize as a means of discovering new composers. Kendrick is a worthy winner, though. It is fair to say that there are no other wordsmiths in the English language who have his sense of timing and rhythm, and his structure and composition of his work is phenomenal - speaking from the perspective of a classical musician. He pushes and pulls the shape of his pieces in directions that very few people have even begun to imagine, and his influence on the medium was immediate and essential. You cannot understand contemporary American music without exploring a bit of what Kendrick does.
I have no comments on any of the other winners. Neither the writers nor the books that they wrote strike me as interesting - but this is far from a prize that I pay any attention to.
I have no comments on any of the other winners. Neither the writers nor the books that they wrote strike me as interesting - but this is far from a prize that I pay any attention to.