It is fraught with controversy, with serious omissions in the list of winners. But it remains an important reminder to read more widely and in translation across cultures and geographies.
It is fraught with controversy, with serious omissions in the list of winners. But it remains an important reminder to read more widely and in translation across cultures and geographies.
It’s October, and it’s that time of year again when bookies urge people to discuss who will win the Nobel Prize in Literature. Except that, after the corruption and sexual harassment scandals, I’m not sure anyone cares any more.
It’s strange that it should have taken so long to explode. It was already so impossible. The Swedish Academy was an elite and closed group since it was founded in 1786 to further the cause of the Swedish language and literature. Its membership included 18 Swedish intellectuals, who were ordained to life in a centuries-old mystical tradition. The task before him was in accordance with the will of Alfred Nobel: to identify “the most outstanding work in an ideal direction”—that is, to judge the literature of the whole world, and to mysteriously produce a winner out of a hat.
House of cards
It took more than a hundred years after the Nobel Prize in Literature for a change in the Academy, and only after a scandal. In 2018, Jean-Claude Arnault, the wife of Academy member Katarina Frostenson, was convicted of rape and sentenced to two years in prison. He was earlier accused of sexual harassment by 18 women. There were also allegations of financial irregularities and corruption in leaking names of potential winners to bookies. The head of the Academy stepped down. Some members withdrew. No literature award was given in 2018. The scandal was deeply damaging to the Academy’s esteemed reputation, not least because Arnault bragged about being its 19th member.
In the aftermath of the crisis, the Academy has tried to become more transparent, but the damage has been done, and the brilliance of the Nobel Prize in Literature, as it were, will never happen again.
A flawed premise?
As it was – because, more fundamentally, some commentators have pointed out that not only the selection process but the entire premise of the award is flawed. Writer Tim Parks has dismissed the whole idea of a highly selective literary award as “nonsense”. He explains that all prizes are lottery, and literary prizes more. Literature is neither a 100m sprint nor a football match; It’s not about winning a medal or scoring a goal. Literature is a creative process that is based on a tradition that has existed before it, and speaks to a community of readers. Comparing authors and writings in different cultures and geographies for a specific award is, he says, meaningless.
How exactly is a Nobel Prize winner in Literature chosen? According to the Academy’s website, nominations are invited from the following individuals (and only among them): Members of the Academy; members of academies and societies similar in membership and purpose; Professor of Literature and Languages; former Nobel laureate in literature; and presidents of writers’ organizations that are representative of their country’s literary production. Nominations to the Nobel Committee should only be sent by regular mail, not by email. About 350 proposals reach the Nobel Committee every year. The committee goes through the names and first prepares a long list of 200 names, and then a short list of 20-25 names. The list has been further reduced to around five names ahead of the Academy’s summer break.
Academy members are then granted access to the shortlisted authors’ works in complete privacy, “ensuring that the work is studied without attracting the attention of even a fly on the wall.” When they finally meet to choose a winner, the members give elaborate arguments in favor of their choice. But privacy rules seal these accounts “from outsiders” for a period of 50 years. Finally, in October, the Academy announces – as the website informs us, it is “always on Thursdays and always at one o’clock in the afternoon”.
Mystical rituals can add to the mystery of the prize and the spirit of long and sacred traditions. However, a cursory glance at the selections from the inception of the award reveals the extent of systemic bias. In 121 years, only 16 female writers have been considered eligible to be awarded the prize; And some people of color. Most of the awards went to authors working in English, followed by French.
value of prize
It is true that a top literary award can provide never-before-seen visibility to unknown authors. To that extent, many literary awards are valuable because they bring to the attention of people reading the works of authors such as Patrick Modiano, Louise Gluck, and Svetlana Alexievich. But we must think why. Certainly, more broadly, and in translation, across cultures and geographies, we can change the terms of evaluation and value of literary expression itself.
, Uma Mahadevan-Dasgupta is an IAS. These are his personal views.,