4 ms·

Another year goes by, and once again the Nobel prize comitee fails to award the prize to Thomas Pynchon. Really. If I was president of the US, I would declare n

by krylon 12y ago

Another year goes by, and once again the Nobel prize comitee fails to award the prize to Thomas Pynchon. Really. If I was president of the US, I would declare not awarding the prize to Pynchon (or maybe Cormac McCarthy) an act of war and threaten to nuke the hell out of Sweden if Pynchon does not get the prize (just imagine the delicious irony if Barack "Nobel Peace Prize" Obama did that!). That is not to say that whoever got it this year does not deserve it. But still.

CamperBob2 12y ago
Bah, Pynchon can get in line behind Borges. The Nobel committee is becoming a standing joke. Their general incompetence and overt political bias is even evident in the physics category these days. (Blue LEDs? Really?)
- crimsonalucard 12y ago
  What's wrong with Blue LED's?
  - walexander 12y ago
    I think he's implying that they awarded it to blue LEDs in order to promote low power consumption/green tech.
    - CamperBob2 12y ago
      That's part of it, yes. But on what planet does it make sense to award the prize to the blue LED guys when the original developer of commercially-viable LEDs didn't receive it?
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
- Panoramix 12y ago
  Blue LEDs, and the more general Gallium Nitride film technologies have tremendous impact in our everyday world. Enormous, tangible energy savings in lighting. Enabling of zillion medical applications. Blu-Rays, high density DVDs, high mobility transistors...seriously, what discovery do you have in mind? Secondly: There are different committees for each category. The Peace prize (which I agree it's a joke) is awarded by the Norwegian Nobel committee. I strongly disagree with your claim that the other prizes, specifically physics and chemistry, are either incompetent or obviously biased.
  - CamperBob2 12y ago
    Blue LEDs, and the more general Gallium Nitride film technologies have tremendous impact in our everyday world. Enormous, tangible energy savings in lighting. Enabling of zillion medical applications. Blu-Rays, high density DVDs, high mobility transistors... And if there were a Nobel Prize in Engineering, I'd be on board with this. seriously, what discovery do you have in mind? I don't know. It's not my job to keep up with physics research, it's the Nobel committee's.
daturkel 12y ago
The Nobel Prize in Literature always has been and likely always will be a controversial category. No doubt any book-lover can name a handful of authors that ostensibly deserve the honor, but there are a lot of great authors and only one Nobel Prize per year! For what it's worth, Pynchon is notoriously reclusive and not the kind of person who's likely waiting for the spotlight that the Swedish Academy would be shining. As things stand, the film adaptation of Inherent Vice seems to bring promise of greater attention to his work that it has received in a while now.
- krylon 12y ago
  I suspect that is a big part why he didn't get the prize and probably won't in the future. If I remember correctly, the Nobel prize commitee was already kind of annoyed that Elfriede Jellinek did not come in person to receive her prize, and Pynchon most likely would not even send a video message. That, and the fact that there are, of course, lots and lots and lots of breathtakingly great writers out there. I've had the feeling over the past couple of years that the Nobel for literature was often given to authors the commitee felt deserved more attention.
lobster_johnson 12y ago
There are many who might deserve a Nobel. But it's worth keeping in mind that the literature prize has traditionally followed the precept given by Nobel that it be given for writing that is "idealistic". I'll just quote Wikipedia here: Nobel's choice of emphasis on idealism in his criteria for the Nobel Prize in Literature has led to recurrent controversy. In the original Swedish, the word idealisk translates as either "idealistic" or "ideal".[2] In the early twentieth century, the Nobel Committee interpreted the intent of the will strictly. For this reason, they did not award certain world-renowned authors of the time such as James Joyce, Leo Tolstoy, Anton Chekhov, Marcel Proust, Henrik Ibsen, and Henry James. More recently, the wording has been more liberally interpreted. Thus, the prize is now awarded both for lasting literary merit and for evidence of consistent idealism on some significant level. In recent years, this means a kind of idealism championing human rights on a broad scale. Hence the award is now arguably more political. This is why a lot of authors, who are otherwise considered world-class, don't win.

by krylon 12y ago

CamperBob2 12y ago

Bah, Pynchon can get in line behind Borges. The Nobel committee is becoming a standing joke. Their general incompetence and overt political bias is even evident in the physics category these days. (Blue LEDs? Really?)

crimsonalucard 12y ago
What's wrong with Blue LED's?
- walexander 12y ago
  I think he's implying that they awarded it to blue LEDs in order to promote low power consumption/green tech.
  - CamperBob2 12y ago
    That's part of it, yes. But on what planet does it make sense to award the prize to the blue LED guys when the original developer of commercially-viable LEDs didn't receive it?
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
Panoramix 12y ago
Blue LEDs, and the more general Gallium Nitride film technologies have tremendous impact in our everyday world. Enormous, tangible energy savings in lighting. Enabling of zillion medical applications. Blu-Rays, high density DVDs, high mobility transistors...seriously, what discovery do you have in mind? Secondly: There are different committees for each category. The Peace prize (which I agree it's a joke) is awarded by the Norwegian Nobel committee. I strongly disagree with your claim that the other prizes, specifically physics and chemistry, are either incompetent or obviously biased.
- CamperBob2 12y ago
  Blue LEDs, and the more general Gallium Nitride film technologies have tremendous impact in our everyday world. Enormous, tangible energy savings in lighting. Enabling of zillion medical applications. Blu-Rays, high density DVDs, high mobility transistors... And if there were a Nobel Prize in Engineering, I'd be on board with this. seriously, what discovery do you have in mind? I don't know. It's not my job to keep up with physics research, it's the Nobel committee's.

daturkel 12y ago

The Nobel Prize in Literature always has been and likely always will be a controversial category. No doubt any book-lover can name a handful of authors that ostensibly deserve the honor, but there are a lot of great authors and only one Nobel Prize per year! For what it's worth, Pynchon is notoriously reclusive and not the kind of person who's likely waiting for the spotlight that the Swedish Academy would be shining. As things stand, the film adaptation of Inherent Vice seems to bring promise of greater attention to his work that it has received in a while now.

krylon 12y ago
I suspect that is a big part why he didn't get the prize and probably won't in the future. If I remember correctly, the Nobel prize commitee was already kind of annoyed that Elfriede Jellinek did not come in person to receive her prize, and Pynchon most likely would not even send a video message. That, and the fact that there are, of course, lots and lots and lots of breathtakingly great writers out there. I've had the feeling over the past couple of years that the Nobel for literature was often given to authors the commitee felt deserved more attention.

lobster_johnson 12y ago

There are many who might deserve a Nobel. But it's worth keeping in mind that the literature prize has traditionally followed the precept given by Nobel that it be given for writing that is "idealistic". I'll just quote Wikipedia here: Nobel's choice of emphasis on idealism in his criteria for the Nobel Prize in Literature has led to recurrent controversy. In the original Swedish, the word idealisk translates as either "idealistic" or "ideal".[2] In the early twentieth century, the Nobel Committee interpreted the intent of the will strictly. For this reason, they did not award certain world-renowned authors of the time such as James Joyce, Leo Tolstoy, Anton Chekhov, Marcel Proust, Henrik Ibsen, and Henry James. More recently, the wording has been more liberally interpreted. Thus, the prize is now awarded both for lasting literary merit and for evidence of consistent idealism on some significant level. In recent years, this means a kind of idealism championing human rights on a broad scale. Hence the award is now arguably more political. This is why a lot of authors, who are otherwise considered world-class, don't win.