Only Gassy Old Windbags Need Apply

The Nobel Prize for Literature has finally been announced, a week after the originally scheduled time, and it has gone to Harold Pinter of the UK.

I have no opinion on the Pinter. I've not read him. I know his political views, which are a dime a dozen in the literary world, but I don't know his actual work, so it may be he well deserves it. He may be the best pick ever for all I know.

But what is far more interesting than the Pinter is the possibility as reported for the past week is that the Nobel committee hesitated because it was split on giving the Prize to the Turkish novelist, Orhan Pamuk. Why? Because Pamuk has publically come out against genocide, stating that the Turkish government was responsible for genocide against the Armenians and the Kurds, a statement for which he will soon be tried.

So now with the announcement of Pinter, we see the Academy has shown it's usual courage, the courage it so boldly displayed during the Rushdie affair. The much mentioned possibility that Pamuk was too young for the award is completely specious. Much tosh is talked about how the Nobel is an award for "lifetime achievement" and at 54 Pamuk doesn't have a large enough canon (Only 7 novels. Shocking!) to justify the award. Nonsense. If you look at the history of the Nobel, it has been given many times to authors in their 50's or even YOUNGER. Gracious this author didn't publish her most impressive work until 15 years AFTER her Nobel.) But then people used to think that quality trumped quantity. Now apparently the Nobel Committee thinks that if you want to be considered, you have to be a gassy old windbag. If I were Mr. Pinter I wouldn't be very flattered.


I don't know whether Mr. Pamuk is Nobel worthy. I've never read him, and it's not my call anyway. (If it were, here would be the 2005 winner for Literature.) The point is the Committee thought Pamuk Nobel worthy but then backed away because it values politics over literature. The last courageous choice the Nobel committee made of literature over politics was in 1970. Judging from this year's actions, the committee will never be as courageous again. The only good thing about this decision for me is that it has inspired to me not only to read Pamuk, which I've never done, but to buy his books as well. I may well hate his writing, but I say the courageous should at least get some royalties.