Isaac Singer vinder Nobelprisen i litteratur

Isaac Singer vinder Nobelprisen i litteratur

Den 5. oktober 1978 vinder Isaac Bashevis Singer Nobelprisen i litteratur. Singer skrev på jiddisch om jødisk liv i Polen og USA, og oversættelser af hans arbejde blev populære i mainstream -Amerika såvel som jødiske kredse.

Singer blev født i Polen i 1904 i en lang række hasidiske rabbinere. Han studerede på Warszawa Rabbinical Seminar, og inspireret af sin ældre bror Joshua, en forfatter, begyndte han at skrive sine egne historier og romaner. Han udgav sin første roman, Satan i Goray, i Polen i 1935.

Samme år immigrerede han til USA, hvor Joshua allerede var flyttet, for at undslippe den voksende antisemitisme i Europa. I New York skrev han for en avis på jiddisch. Hans mor og en anden bror blev dræbt af nazisterne i 1939, samme år som Singer giftede sig med Alma, datter af en jødisk købmand, der var flygtet til USA. I 1943 blev Singer amerikansk statsborger. Hans mest kendte værker omfatter Familien Moskat (1950), Herregården (1967) og Godset (1969), alt om ændringer i og opløsning af jødiske familier, der reagerer på assimilationstryk. Sangers arbejde er fuld af jødisk folklore og legender, der er fyldt med djævle, hekse og nisser. Han skrev 12 noveller, 13 børnebøger og fire erindringer. En af hans historier, Yentl, blev lavet til en film instrueret af og med Barbara Streisand i 1983. Singer delte sin tid mellem New York og Miami indtil hans død, i 1991.


Dyrets rettigheder og Holocaust

Flere forfattere, herunder den jødiske nobelpristager, Isaac Bashevis Singer, og dyrerettighedsgrupper har foretaget en sammenligning mellem behandling af dyr og Holocaust. [1] Sammenligningen begyndte umiddelbart efter afslutningen på Anden Verdenskrig, da jødiske forfattere berettede om manglende modstand fra europæiske jødiske ofre for Holocaust, som blev ført til deres død som "får til slagtning". [2] Sammenligningen betragtes som kontroversiel og er blevet kritiseret af organisationer, der kæmper mod antisemitisme, herunder Anti-Defamation League (ADL) og United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. [3]

En karakter i en af ​​Singer's historier beskrev menneskers behandling af dyr som "en evig Treblinka". [4] Tilsvarende den samme navn i J. M. Coetzee Elizabeth Costello sammenlignede nazisternes behandling af jøder med metoder, som kødindustrien brugte til at besætte og slagte kvæg. [5]


Om Isaac Bashevis Singer

Isaac Bashevis Singer var en af ​​det store historiefortællere i det tyvende århundrede. Hans forfatterskab er en unik blanding af religiøs moral og social bevidsthed kombineret med en undersøgelse af personlige ønsker. Selvom hans arbejde ofte havde form af lignelser eller fortællinger baseret på en tradition fra det nittende århundrede, var han dybt bekymret over begivenhederne i sin tid og fremtiden for hans folk og deres kultur.

Isaac Bashevis Singer blev født den 24. juli 1904 i Radzymin, Polen. Hans forældre var religiøse jøder og skubbede ham mod en karriere som religionsforsker. I 1921 meldte han sig ind på rabbinsk skole, men forlod kun to år senere for at arbejde for et jiddisk litterært magasin. Selvom hans rabbinske studier ville forblive en stærk indflydelse på ham, længtes han efter at være en del af et litterært samfund. Singer arbejdede som journalist, oversætter og korrekturlæser og begyndte at skrive noveller på siden. I 1935 havde han udgivet sin første bog, SATAN IN GORAY (1935).

Samme år fulgte Singer sin bror, Isaac Joshua Singer til Amerika. Isaac Joshua Singer betragtes som en af ​​de store jiddiske forfattere i det tyvende århundrede og var den første og største litterære indflydelse på sin yngre bror Isaac. I New York begyndte Isaac Bashevis Singer at arbejde for THE JEWISH DAILY FORWARD, en jiddisk avis dedikeret til spørgsmål af interesse for sit nyindvandrede læsertal. I løbet af 1940'erne udgav Singer sit arbejde i en række tidsskrifter såvel som serielt i FREMTIDEN. I hele sin karriere ville Singer fortsat være en bidragsyder og tilhænger af FREM, som stadig eksisterer i dag som ugeblad.

I hele 1940'erne begyndte Singer's ry at vokse blandt de mange jiddisk-talende immigranter. Efter Anden Verdenskrig og den nærliggende ødelæggelse af de jiddischtalende folk virkede jiddisk som et dødt sprog. Selvom Singer var flyttet til USA, troede han på magten i sit modersmål og vidste, at der stadig var et stort publikum, der længtes efter nyt arbejde, arbejde, der ville tage fat på deres og hans liv. I 1950 producerede Singer sit første store værk, THE FAMILY MOSKAT - historien om en polsk jødisk familie fra det tyvende århundrede før krigen. Han fulgte denne roman med en række velmodtagne noveller, herunder hans mest berømte, “Gimpel, The Fool. ”

Selvom det ikke først og fremmest var nostalgisk, lyttede Singers arbejde tilbage til en tidligere tid. Rammen for en stor del af værket var hans hjemland Polen, og skriften behandlede eksistentielle og åndelige spørgsmål gennem folkeeventyr og lignelser. Disse værker vakte opmærksomhed fra en række amerikanske forfattere, herunder Saul Bellow og Irving Howe, der i høj grad var ansvarlige for ikke kun at oversætte Singers arbejde, men også kæmpe for det. I hele 1960'erne fortsatte Singer med at skrive om spørgsmål om personlig moral. En af hans mest berømte romaner (på grund af en populær filmindspilning) var FJENDER: EN KÆRLIGHEDSHISTORIE, hvor en Holocaust -overlevende behandler sine egne ønsker, komplekse familieforhold og tab af tro. Singer skrev også to romaner om det nittende århundredes polsk-jødiske historie, inden han vendte tilbage til mere moderne emner i 1970'erne.

I 1970'erne var han blevet en stor international forfatter. Efter Anden Verdenskrig var der få jiddiske forfattere tilbage, og Singer var ikke kun en vokal fortaler for jiddisk forfatterskab, men hovedfiguren i jiddiske bogstaver. I hele 1970'erne skrev han snesevis af historier, der til sidst blev samlet i bøger og udgivet på jiddisch og engelsk samt mange andre sprog. Han forgrenede sig og skrev erindringer og børnebøger samt to andre store romaner fra det tyvende århundrede, THE PENITENT (1974) og SHOSHA (1978). Samme år som hans udgivelse af SHOSHA vandt Singer Nobelprisen i litteratur. For mange var denne pris bittersød, idet den bragte verdensomspændende opmærksomhed til et vigtigt sprog, samtidig med at det syntes at signalere sprogets død.

Efter at have fået Nobelprisen fik Singer en monumental status blandt forfattere over hele verden. Han fortsatte med at skrive i løbet af de sidste år af sit liv og vendte ofte tilbage til polsk historie, som så begejstrede ham gennem hans tidlige liv. I 1988 udgav han THE KING OF THE FIELDS og tre år senere, SCUM, en historie om en mand, der levede i en polsk shtetl fra begyndelsen af ​​det tyvende århundrede. Samme år døde Isaac Bashevis Singer i en alder af syvogfirs i Surfside, Florida. Utroligt produktiv skabte Singer en indsigtsfuld og dyb arbejdsgruppe, der for altid vil forblive en vigtig del af litteraturhistorien.


Isaac Bashevis sanger

Vor tids historiefortæller og digter må, som i enhver anden tid, være en underholder af ånden i ordets fulde betydning, ikke kun en forkynder af sociale eller politiske idealer. Der er ikke noget paradis for kede læsere og ingen undskyldning for kedelig litteratur, der ikke fascinerer læseren, løfter ham, giver ham den glæde og flugt, som ægte kunst altid giver. Ikke desto mindre er det også rigtigt, at vor tids seriøse forfatter må være dybt bekymret over problemerne i sin generation. Han kan ikke andet end se, at religionens magt, især troen på åbenbaring, er svagere i dag, end den var i nogen anden epoke i menneskets historie. Flere og flere børn vokser op uden tro på Gud, uden tro på belønning og straf, på sjælens udødelighed og endda i etikens gyldighed. Den ægte forfatter kan ikke ignorere, at familien mister sit åndelige fundament. Alle de dystre profetier om Oswald Spengler er blevet virkeligheder siden anden verdenskrig. Ingen teknologiske præstationer kan dæmpe det moderne menneskes skuffelse, hans ensomhed, hans mindreværdsfølelse og frygt for krig, revolution og terror. Ikke alene har vores generation mistet troen på forsynet, men også på mennesket selv, på sine institutioner og ofte på dem, der er nærmest ham.

I deres fortvivlelse ser en række af dem, der ikke længere har tillid til ledelsen af ​​vores samfund, op til forfatteren, ordmesteren. De håber mod håb om, at talentens og følsomhedens mand måske kan redde civilisationen. Måske er der trods alt en gnist af profeten i kunstneren.

Som søn af et folk, der modtog de værste slag, som menneskelig vanvid kan påføre, må jeg gruble over de kommende farer. Jeg har mange gange sagt op for mig selv for aldrig at finde en sand vej ud. Men der dukker altid et nyt håb op, der fortæller mig, at det endnu ikke er for sent for os alle at gøre status og tage en beslutning. Jeg blev opdraget til at tro på fri vilje. Selvom jeg kom til at tvivle på al åbenbaring, kan jeg aldrig acceptere tanken om, at universet er en fysisk eller kemisk ulykke, et resultat af blind evolution. Selvom jeg lærte at genkende løgnene, klichéerne og afgudsdyrkelserne i det menneskelige sind, klamrer jeg mig stadig til nogle sandheder, som jeg tror, ​​vi alle kan acceptere en dag. Der skal være en måde for mennesket at opnå alle mulige fornøjelser, alle de kræfter og viden, som naturen kan give ham, og stadig tjene Gud – en Gud, der taler i gerninger, ikke i ord, og hvis ordforråd er Kosmos.

Jeg skammer mig ikke over at indrømme, at jeg tilhører dem, der fantaserer om, at litteratur er i stand til at bringe nye horisonter og nye perspektiver – filosofiske, religiøse, æstetiske og endda sociale. I historien om gammel jødisk litteratur var der aldrig nogen grundlæggende forskel mellem digteren og profeten. Vores gamle poesi blev ofte lov og en livsstil.

Nogle af mine kammerater i cafeteriet nær Jewish Jewish Forward i New York kalder mig pessimist og dekadent, men der er altid en trosbaggrund bag fratræden. Jeg fandt trøst hos sådanne pessimister og dekadenter som Baudelaire, Verlaine, Edgar Allan Poe og Strindberg. Min interesse for psykisk forskning fik mig til at finde trøst hos mystikere som dit Swedenborg og i vores egen rabbiner Nachman Bratzlaver samt i en stor digter i min tid, min ven Aaron Zeitlin, der døde for et par år siden og efterlod en litterær arv af høj kvalitet, det meste på jiddisch.

Den kreative persons pessimisme er ikke dekadence, men en mægtig passion for menneskets forløsning. Mens digteren underholder, fortsætter han med at lede efter evige sandheder, efter essensen af ​​væren. På sin egen måde forsøger han at løse tidens og forandringens gåde, finde et svar på lidelse, afsløre kærligheden i grusomhedens og uretfærdighedens afgrund. Hvor underligt disse ord kan lyde, leger jeg ofte med tanken om, at når alle de sociale teorier bryder sammen, og krige og revolutioner efterlader menneskeheden i fuldstændig dyster, kan digteren, som Platon forbød fra sin republik, rejse sig for at redde os alle .

Den høje hæder, som det svenske akademi har givet mig, er også en anerkendelse af det jiddiske sprog og et eksilsprog uden land, uden grænser, ikke støttet af nogen regering, et sprog, der ikke har ord for våben, ammunition, militære øvelser, krigstaktik et sprog, der blev foragtet af både hedninger og frigjorte jøder. Sandheden er, at hvad de store religioner prædikede, praktiserede de jiddisk-talende mennesker i ghettoerne dag ud og dag ind. De var bogens folk i ordets egentlige betydning. De kendte ikke til større glæde end studiet af mennesker og menneskelige relationer, som de kaldte Torah, Talmud, Mussar, Cabala. Ghettoen var ikke kun et tilflugtssted for en forfulgt minoritet, men et stort eksperiment i fred, i selvdisciplin og i humanisme. Som sådan eksisterer den stadig og nægter at give op på trods af al den brutalitet, der omgiver den. Jeg blev opdraget blandt disse mennesker. Min fars hjem på Krochmalna Street i Warszawa var et studiehus, en domstol, et bedehus, historiefortælling samt et sted til bryllupper og chassidiske banketter. Som barn havde jeg hørt fra min storebror og mester, I. J. Singer, som senere skrev Brødrene Ashkenazi, alle de argumenter, som rationalisterne fra Spinoza til Max Nordau fremførte mod religion. Jeg har hørt fra min far og mor alle de svar, som troen på Gud kunne tilbyde dem, der tvivler og søger sandheden. I vores hjem og i mange andre hjem var de evige spørgsmål mere aktuelle end de seneste nyheder i den jiddiske avis. På trods af alle disenchantments og al min skepsis tror jeg på, at nationerne kan lære meget af disse jøder, deres måde at tænke på, deres måde at opdrage børn på, at de finder lykke, hvor andre ikke ser andet end elendighed og ydmygelse. For mig er det jiddiske sprog og adfærden hos dem, der talte det, identisk. Man kan finde på jiddisk tunge og i jiddisk ånd udtryk for from glæde, livslyst, længsel efter Messias, tålmodighed og dyb værdsættelse af menneskelig individualitet. Der er en stille humor på jiddisch og en taknemmelighed for hver eneste dag i livet, for hver smule af succes, for hvert møde med kærlighed. Den jiddiske mentalitet er ikke hovmodig. Det tager ikke sejren for givet. Det kræver ikke og befaler, men det mudrer igennem, sniger sig forbi, smugler sig selv midt under ødelæggelsens kræfter og ved et eller andet sted, at Guds plan for skabelse stadig er i begyndelsen.

Der er nogle, der kalder jiddisch et dødt sprog, men sådan blev hebraisk kaldt i to tusinde år. Det er blevet genoplivet i vores tid på en yderst bemærkelsesværdig, næsten mirakuløs måde. Arameisk var helt sikkert et dødt sprog i århundreder, men så bragte det Zohar frem, et mystisk værk af sublim værdi. Det er en kendsgerning, at klassikerne i jiddisk litteratur også er klassikerne i den moderne hebraiske litteratur. Jiddisch har endnu ikke sagt sit sidste ord. Den indeholder skatte, der ikke er blevet afsløret for verdens øjne. Det var tungen til martyrer og helgener, drømmere og kabalister – rig på humor og i minder, som menneskeheden måske aldrig glemmer. På en billedlig måde er jiddisch det kloge og ydmyge sprog for os alle, formsprog for bange og håbefulde menneskelighed.

Fra Nobelforelæsninger, litteratur 1968-1980, Ansvarlig redaktør Tore Fr & aumlngsmyr, Editor Sture All & eacuten, World Scientific Publishing Co., Singapore, 1993

* Ansvarsfraskrivelse
Udgiveren har gjort alt for at kreditere organisationer og enkeltpersoner med hensyn til levering af lydfiler. Giv venligst udgiverne besked om rettelser. Copyright & kopi Nobelfonden 1978


Litteratur i historie

Nobel Præmie

1948-11-04 Amerikanskfødt britisk digter T. S. Eliot vinder Nobelprisen i litteratur

Nobel Præmie

1950-11-10 Nobel for litteratur tildelt William Faulkner

Nobel Præmie

1954-10-28 Nobelprisen i litteratur tildeles Ernest Hemingway

Nobel Præmie

1957-10-17 Fransk forfatter Albert Camus tildelt Nobelprisen i litteratur

Nobel Præmie

1958-10-23 sovjetiske romanforfatter Boris Pasternak, vinder Nobelprisen i litteratur

Nobel Præmie

1962-10-25 tildelte den amerikanske forfatter John Steinbeck Nobelprisen i litteratur

Nobel Præmie

1970-10-08 sovjetisk forfatter Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn vinder Nobelprisen i litteratur

Nobel Præmie

1971-10-21 Nobelpris for litteratur tildelt Pablo Neruda

Nobel Præmie

1976-10-21 Nobelpris for litteratur tildelt amerikanske Saul Bellow

    Isaac Bashevis Singer vinder Nobelprisen i litteratur Nobelprisen i litteratur tildelt Czesław Miłosz Den franske forfatter Claude Simon vinder Nobelprisen i litteratur Nobelprisen for litteratur tildelt Joseph Brodsky Naguib Mahfouz er den første arabiske forfatter, der vinder Nobelprisen i mexicansk litteratur forfatter Octavio Paz tildeles Nobelprisen i litteratur Nobelprisen for litteratur gives til den vestindiske digter Derek Walcott

Nobel Præmie

1993-10-07 Nobelpris for litteratur tildelt den amerikanske forfatter Toni Morrison


Indhold

Alfred Nobel fastslog i sit sidste testamente, at hans penge skulle bruges til at skabe en række præmier til dem, der giver "den største fordel for menneskeheden" inden for fysik, kemi, fred, fysiologi eller medicin og litteratur. [8] [9] Selvom Nobel skrev flere testamenter i løbet af sin levetid, blev den sidste skrevet lidt over et år før han døde, og underskrevet i den svensk-norske klub i Paris den 27. november 1895. [10] [11] Nobel testamenterede 94% af hans samlede aktiver, 31 millioner svenske kroner (198 millioner dollars, 176 millioner euro i 2016), til etablering og tildeling af de fem nobelpriser. [12] På grund af skepsisens niveau omkring testamentet var det først 26. april 1897, at Stortinget (det norske parlament) godkendte det. [13] [14] Udførere af hans testamente var Ragnar Sohlman og Rudolf Lilljequist, der dannede Nobelfonden for at tage sig af Nobels formue og organisere præmierne.

Medlemmerne af den norske Nobelkomité, der skulle tildele fredsprisen, blev udnævnt kort efter, at testamentet blev godkendt. De prisuddelende organisationer fulgte: Karolinska Institutet den 7. juni, det svenske akademi den 9. juni og det kongelige svenske videnskabsakademi den 11. juni. [15] [16] Nobelfonden nåede derefter til enighed om retningslinjer for, hvordan Nobelprisen skal uddeles. I 1900 blev Nobelfondets nyoprettede vedtægter bekendtgjort af kong Oscar II. [14] [17] [18] Ifølge Nobels testamente skulle prisen i litteratur bestemmes af "Akademiet i Stockholm", som blev specificeret af statutterne for Nobelfonden til at betyde det svenske akademi. [19]

Hvert år sender det svenske akademi anmodninger om nomineringer af kandidater til Nobelprisen i litteratur. Medlemmer af Akademiet, medlemmer af litteraturakademier og -samfund, professorer i litteratur og sprog, tidligere Nobel -litteraturpristagere og præsidenter for forfatterorganisationer har alle lov til at udpege en kandidat. Det er ikke tilladt at nominere sig selv. [20]

Tusindvis af anmodninger udsendes hvert år, og fra 2011 [opdatering] blev der sendt omkring 220 forslag. [21] Disse forslag skal være Akademiet i hænde inden den 1. februar, hvorefter de undersøges af Nobelkomiteen. I april indsnævrer akademiet feltet til omkring tyve kandidater. [21] I maj godkendes udvalget af en kort liste med fem navne. [21] De næste fire måneder bruges på at læse og gennemgå de fem kandidaters værker. [21] I oktober stemmer medlemmer af Akademiet, og den kandidat, der modtager mere end halvdelen af ​​stemmerne, udnævnes til Nobelpristager i litteratur. Ingen kan få prisen uden at være på listen mindst to gange, så mange forfattere dukker op igen og gennemgås gentagne gange gennem årene. [21] Akademiet er mester [ præcisering nødvendig ] på tretten sprog, men når en kandidat er på listen fra en ukendt [ præcisering nødvendig ] sprog, opfordrer de oversættere og edsvorne eksperter til at give eksempler på denne forfatter. [21] Andre elementer i processen ligner dem i andre nobelpriser. [22] Dommerne består af et 18 medlemsudvalg, der vælges på livstid, og indtil 2018 ikke teknisk tilladt at forlade. [23] Den 2. maj 2018 ændrede kong Carl XVI Gustaf akademiets regler og gjorde det muligt for medlemmer at trække sig. De nye regler siger også, at et medlem, der har været inaktivt i akademiets arbejde i mere end to år, kan blive bedt om at fratræde. [24] [25]

Prisen annonceres normalt i oktober. Nogle gange er prisen imidlertid blevet annonceret året efter det nominelle år, hvor den seneste sag er 2018 -prisen. Midt i kontroversen omkring påstande om seksuelle overgreb, interessekonflikter og fratrædelser fra embedsmænd den 4. maj 2018 meddelte det svenske akademi, at 2018 -vinderen blev annonceret i 2019 sammen med 2019 -vinderen. [6] [5]

En litteratur Nobelpristager vinder en guldmedalje, et eksamensbevis og en sum penge. [26] Det beløb, der tildeles, afhænger af Nobelfondens indkomst det år. [27] Hvis en præmie uddeles til mere end én vinder, fordeles pengene enten jævnt mellem dem, eller for tre vinderne kan de deles i en halv og to fjerdedele. [28] Hvis en præmie uddeles i fællesskab til to eller flere pristagere, deles pengene mellem dem. [28]

Nobelprisens præmiepenge har svinget siden indvielsen, men fra 2012 [opdatering] stod den på 8.000.000 kr. (Ca. 1.100.000 dollars), tidligere var de 10.000.000 kr. [29] [30] [31] Dette var ikke første gang præmiebeløbet blev reduceret-begyndende med en nominel værdi på 150.782 kr. I 1901 (værd 8123.951 i 2011 SEK) den nominelle værdi har været så lav som 121.333 kr. ( 2.370.660 i 2011 SEK) i 1945-men det har været op ad bakke eller stabilt siden da med et højdepunkt på en SEK-2011-værdi på 11.659.016 i 2001. [31]

Vinderen er også inviteret til at holde et foredrag under "Nobelugen" i Stockholm højdepunktet er præmieoverrækkelsen og banketten den 10. december. [32] Det er den næst rigeste litterære pris i verden.

Medaljer Rediger

Nobelprismedaljerne, præget af Myntverket [33] i Sverige og Norges Mønt siden 1902, er registrerede varemærker tilhørende Nobelfonden. Hver medalje har et billede af Alfred Nobel i venstre profil på forsiden (forsiden af ​​medaljen). Nobelprismedaljerne for fysik, kemi, fysiologi eller medicin og litteratur har identiske obverser, der viser billedet af Alfred Nobel og årene for hans fødsel og død (1833–1896). Nobels portræt vises også på forsiden af ​​Nobels fredsprismedalje og medaljen for økonomiprisen, men med et lidt anderledes design. [34] Billedet på bagsiden af ​​en medalje varierer afhængigt af institutionen, der tildeler prisen. Bagsiderne af Nobelprismedaljerne for kemi og fysik deler samme design. [35] Medaljen til Nobelprisen i litteratur er designet af Erik Lindberg. [36]

Diplomer Rediger

Nobelpristagere modtager et diplom direkte fra Sveriges konge. Hvert diplom er unikt designet af de prisuddelende institutioner til den vinder, der modtager det. [37] Diplomet indeholder et billede og en tekst, der angiver navnet på vinderen og normalt et citat af, hvorfor de modtog prisen. [37]

Nobelprisen i litteratur er blevet uddelt 113 gange mellem 1901 og 2020 til 117 personer: 101 mænd og 16 kvinder. Prisen er delt mellem to personer ved fire lejligheder. Det blev ikke uddelt ved syv lejligheder. Vinderne har inkluderet forfattere på 25 forskellige sprog. Den yngste vinder var Rudyard Kipling, der var 41 år gammel, da han blev tildelt i 1907. Den ældste vinder, der modtog prisen, var Doris Lessing, der var 88, da hun blev tildelt i 2007. Det er blevet uddelt posthumt én gang, til Erik Axel Karlfeldt i 1931. To forfattere har afvist prisen, Boris Pasternak i 1958 ("Accepteret først, senere forårsaget af myndighederne i hans land (Sovjetunionen) til at afslå prisen", ifølge Nobelfonden) og Jean-Paul Sartre i 1964. [38]

Fortolkninger af Nobels retningslinjer Rediger

Alfred Nobels retningslinjer for prisen om, at kandidaten skulle have skænket "den største fordel for menneskeheden", og at skrive "i en idealistisk retning" har skabt megen diskussion. I præmiens tidlige historie blev Nobels "idealisme" læst som "en høj og sund idealisme". Kriterierne, der er kendetegnet ved dens konservative idealisme, holder kirke, stat og familie hellige, resulterede i præmier til Bjørnstjerne Bjørnson, Rudyard Kipling og Paul Heyse. Under første verdenskrig var der en neutralitetspolitik, som delvis forklarer antallet af priser til skandinaviske forfattere. I 1920'erne blev "idealistisk retning" fortolket mere generøst som "bredhjertet menneskehed", og forfattere som Anatole France, George Bernard Shaw og Thomas Mann blev tildelt. I 1930'erne blev "den største fordel for menneskeheden" fortolket som forfattere inden for alles rækkevidde, hvor forfattere som Sinclair Lewis og Pearl Buck blev tildelt. Fra 1946 ændrede et fornyet akademi fokus og begyndte at tildele litterære pionerer som Hermann Hesse, André Gide, TS Eliot og William Faulkner. Fra denne æra blev "den største fordel for menneskeheden" fortolket på en mere eksklusiv og generøs måde end før. Siden 1970'erne har akademiet ofte lagt vægt på vigtige, men internationalt ubemærket forfattere, og tildelt forfattere som Isaac Bashevis Singer, Odysseus Elytis, Elias Canetti og Jaroslav Seifert.

Fra 1986 anerkendte akademiet den internationale horisont i Nobels testamente, der afviste enhver hensyntagen til kandidaternes nationalitet og tildelte forfattere fra hele verden som Wole Soyinka fra Nigeria, Naguib Mahfouz fra Egypten, Octavio Paz fra Mexico, Nadine Gordimer fra Sydafrika, Derek Walcott fra St. Lucia, Toni Morrison, den første afroamerikaner på listen, Kenzaburo Oe fra Japan og Gao Xingjian, den første vinder, der skrev på kinesisk. [19] I 2000'erne VS Naipaul, Mario Vargas Llosa og den kinesiske forfatter Mo Yan er blevet tildelt, men politikken om "en præmie for hele verden" har været mindre mærkbar, da akademiet mest har tildelt europæiske og engelsksprogede forfattere fra den vestlige litterære tradition. I 2015 blev en sjælden pris til en faglitterær skribent tildelt Svetlana Alexievich. [39]

Delt præmie Rediger

Nobelprisen i litteratur kan deles mellem to personer. Akademiet har imidlertid været tilbageholdende med at uddele delte præmier, hovedsageligt fordi divisioner kan tolkes som et resultat af et kompromis. De delte præmier tildelt Frederic Mistral og José Echegaray i 1904 og til Karl Gjellerup og Henrik Pontoppidan i 1917 var faktisk begge et resultat af kompromiser. Akademiet har også tøvet med at dele prisen mellem to forfattere, da en delt præmie risikerer at blive betragtet som kun en halv laurbær. Delt præmier er enestående, og for nylig har akademiet kun delt en delt pris ved to lejligheder, til Shmuel Yosef Agnon og Nelly Sachs i 1966 og til Eyvind Johnson og Harry Martinson i 1974. [19]

Anerkendelse af et specifikt værk Rediger

Nobelprisvindere i litteratur tildeles for forfatterens livsværk, men ved nogle lejligheder har akademiet udpeget et specifikt værk til særlig anerkendelse. For eksempel blev Knut Hamsun tildelt i 1920 "for sit monumentale arbejde, Jordens vækst", Thomas Mann i 1929" hovedsageligt for sin store roman, Buddenbrooks, som har vundet støt øget anerkendelse som et af de klassiske værker i samtidslitteraturen ", John Galsworthy i 1932" for sin fornemme fortællingskunst, der tager sin højeste form i The Forsyte Saga", Roger Martin du Gard i 1937" for den kunstneriske kraft og sandhed, hvormed han har skildret menneskelig konflikt samt nogle grundlæggende aspekter af nutidens liv i sin roman-cyklus Les Thibault, "Ernest Hemingway i 1954" for hans beherskelse af fortællingskunsten, senest demonstreret i Den gamle mand og havet, og for den indflydelse, han har udøvet på nutidig stil "og Mikhail Sholokhov i 1965" for den kunstneriske kraft og integritet, hvormed han i sit epos om Don har givet udtryk for en historisk fase i russernes liv mennesker ". [38]

Potentielle kandidater Rediger

Nomineringer holdes hemmelige i halvtreds år, indtil de er offentligt tilgængelige på The Nomination Database for Nobel Prize in Literature. I øjeblikket er kun nomineringer indsendt mellem 1901 og 1966 tilgængelige for offentlig visning. [40]

Hvad med rygterne rundt om i verden om, at visse mennesker er nomineret til Nobelprisen i år? - Nå, enten er det bare et rygte, eller også er nogen blandt de inviterede nominatorer lækket information. Da nomineringerne holdes hemmelige i 50 år, skal du vente til da for at finde ud af det. [41]

Selvom Nobelprisen i litteratur er blevet verdens mest prestigefyldte litteraturpris, [42] har det svenske akademi tiltrukket sig betydelig kritik for håndteringen af ​​prisen. Mange forfattere, der har vundet prisen, er faldet i uklarhed, mens andre, der afvises af juryen, stadig er meget undersøgt og læst. Prisen er "blevet bredt betragtet som en politisk en - en fredspris i litterær forklædning", hvis dommere er fordomsfulde over for forfattere med en anden politisk smag end deres. [43] Tim Parks har udtrykt skepsis over for, at det er muligt for "svenske professorer. [At] sammenligne [e] en digter fra Indonesien, måske oversat til engelsk med en romanforfatter fra Cameroun, måske kun tilgængelig på fransk, og en anden, der skriver i Afrikaans, men er udgivet på tysk og hollandsk. ". [44] Fra 2016 har 16 af de 113 modtagere været af skandinavisk oprindelse. Akademiet er ofte blevet påstået at være forudindtaget i retning af europæiske, og især svenske, forfattere. [45]

Nobels "vage" formulering af kriterierne for prisen har ført til tilbagevendende kontroverser. På den originale svenske, ordet idealisk oversættes som "ideelt". [4] [46] Nobelkomiteens fortolkning har varieret gennem årene. I de senere år betyder det en slags idealisme, der kæmper for menneskerettigheder i bred skala. [4] [47]

Kontroverser om Nobelpristagerens valg Rediger

Fra 1901 til 1912 afvejede udvalget, ledet af den konservative Carl David af Wirsén, den litterære kvalitet af et værk mod dets bidrag til menneskehedens kamp 'mod idealet'. Leo Tolstoy, Henrik Ibsen, Émile Zola og Mark Twain blev afvist til fordel for forfattere, der var lidt læste i dag. [46] [48]

Førstepræmien i 1901, tildelt den franske digter Sully Prudhomme, blev stærkt kritiseret. Mange mente, at den anerkendte russiske forfatter Tolstoy skulle have været tildelt den første nobelpris i litteratur. [49]

Valget af filosof Rudolf Eucken som nobelpristager i 1908 betragtes bredt som en af ​​de værste fejltagelser i Nobelprisens litteraturhistorie. Hovedkandidaterne til prisen i år var digteren Algernon Swinburne og forfatteren Selma Lagerlöf, men Akademiet blev delt mellem kandidaterne og som et kompromis blev Eucken, repræsentant for Akademiets fortolkning af Nobels "ideelle retning", lanceret som et alternativ kandidat, man kunne blive enige om. [50]

Valget af Selma Lagerlöf (Sverige 1858–1940) som nobelpristager i 1909 (for 'høj idealisme, levende fantasi og åndelig opfattelse, der kendetegner hendes skrifter' [51]) fulgte voldsom debat på grund af hendes skrivestil og emne, som ødelagde datidens litterære indretning. [52] [53]

Under Første Verdenskrig og dens umiddelbare eftervirkninger vedtog udvalget en neutralitetspolitik, der favoriserede forfattere fra ikke-stridende lande. [46] The pacifistic author Romain Rolland was awarded the prize for 1915. Other years during the war Scandinavian writers were favoured, or the award was postponed. [54]

In 1931 the prize was awarded posthumously to the poet and former permanent secretary of the Swedish Academy Erik Axel Karlfeldt, who had died earlier that year. The prize was controversial not just because it was the first and only time the Nobel Prize in Literature was awarded posthumously, but because the Academy had previously awarded two other Swedish writers of the same literary era, Selma Lagerlöf in 1909 and Verner von Heidenstam in 1916. Internationally it was heavily criticised as few had heard of Karlfeldt. [55]

The Nobel Prize awarded to Pearl Buck in 1938 is one of the most criticised in the history of the prize. The Academy awarded Buck "for her rich and truly epic descriptions of peasant life in China and for her biographical masterpieces", referring to acclaimed and popular books published only a few years earlier. But her later work is generally not considered to be of the literary standard of a Nobel Laureate. [56]

John Steinbeck received the 1962 Nobel Prize in Literature. The selection was heavily criticised, and described as "one of the Academy's biggest mistakes" in one Swedish newspaper. [57] The New York Times asked why the Nobel committee gave the award to an author whose "limited talent is, in his best books, watered down by tenth-rate philosophising", adding, "we think it interesting that the laurel was not awarded to a writer . whose significance, influence and sheer body of work had already made a more profound impression on the literature of our age". [57]

In 1964, Jean-Paul Sartre was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature, but he wrote declining it, stating that "It is not the same thing if I sign Jean-Paul Sartre or if I sign Jean-Paul Sartre, Nobel Prize laureate. A writer must refuse to allow himself to be transformed into an institution, even if it takes place in the most honorable form." [58] Nevertheless he was awarded the prize. [59]

Soviet dissident writer Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, the 1970 prize laureate, did not attend the Nobel Prize ceremony in Stockholm for fear that the USSR would prevent his return afterwards (his works there were circulated in samizdat—clandestine form). [60] After the Swedish government refused to honor Solzhenitsyn with a public award ceremony and lecture at its Moscow embassy, Solzhenitsyn refused the award altogether, commenting that the conditions set by the Swedes (who preferred a private ceremony) were "an insult to the Nobel Prize itself." Solzhenitsyn did not accept the award and prize money until 10 December 1974, after he was deported from the Soviet Union. [61] Within the Swedish Academy, member Artur Lundkvist had argued that the Nobel Prize in Literature should not become a political prize and questioned the artistic value of Solzhenitsyn's work. [62]

In 1974, Graham Greene, Vladimir Nabokov, and Saul Bellow were believed to be likely candidates for the prize but the Academy decided on a joint award for Swedish authors Eyvind Johnson and Harry Martinson, both members of the Swedish Academy at the time, [63] and unknown outside their home country. [64] [65] Bellow received the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1976 neither Greene nor Nabokov was awarded it. [66]

The award to Italian performance artist Dario Fo in 1997 was initially considered "rather lightweight" [67] by some critics, as he was seen primarily as a performer, and Catholic organizations saw the award to Fo as controversial as he had previously been censured by the Roman Catholic Church. [68] The Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano expressed surprise at Fo's selection for the prize commenting that "Giving the prize to someone who is also the author of questionable works is beyond all imagination." [69] Salman Rushdie and Arthur Miller had been strongly favoured to receive the prize, but the Nobel organisers were later quoted as saying that they would have been "too predictable, too popular." [70]

Camilo José Cela willingly offered his services as an informer for Franco's regime and had moved voluntarily from Madrid to Galicia during the Spanish Civil War in order to join the rebel forces there an article by Miguel Angel Villena, Between Fear and Impunity which compiled commentaries by Spanish novelists on the noteworthy silence of the older generation of Spanish novelists on the Francoist pasts of public intellectuals, appeared below a photograph of Cela during the Nobel ceremony in Stockholm in 1989. [71]

The choice of the 2004 laureate, Elfriede Jelinek, was protested by a member of the Swedish Academy, Knut Ahnlund, who had not played an active role in the Academy since 1996 Ahnlund resigned, alleging that selecting Jelinek had caused "irreparable damage" to the reputation of the award. [72] [73]

The selection of Harold Pinter for the prize in 2005 was delayed for a couple of days, apparently due to Ahnlund's resignation, and led to renewed speculations about there being a "political element" in the Swedish Academy's awarding of the prize. [47] Although Pinter was unable to give his Nobel Lecture in person because of ill health, he delivered it from a television studio on video projected on screens to an audience at the Swedish Academy, in Stockholm. His comments have been the source of much commentary and debate. The issue of their "political stance" was also raised in response to the awards of the Nobel Prize in Literature to Orhan Pamuk and Doris Lessing in 2006 and 2007, respectively. [74]

In recent years, the choices of Bob Dylan for the 2016 Nobel Prize in Literature and Peter Handke for the 2019 Nobel Prize in Literature have been heavily criticised. [75] [76]

Nationality-based criticism Edit

The prize's focus on European men, and Swedes in particular, has been the subject of criticism, even from Swedish newspapers. [77] The majority of laureates have been European, with Sweden itself receiving more prizes (8) than all of Asia (7, if Turkish Orhan Pamuk is included), as well as all of Latin America (7, if Saint Lucian Derek Walcott is included). In 2009, Horace Engdahl, then the permanent secretary of the Academy, declared that "Europe still is the centre of the literary world" and that "the US is too isolated, too insular. They don't translate enough and don't really participate in the big dialogue of literature." [78]

In 2009, Engdahl's replacement, Peter Englund, rejected this sentiment ("In most language areas . there are authors that really deserve and could get the Nobel Prize and that goes for the United States and the Americas, as well") and acknowledged the Eurocentric nature of the award, saying that, "I think that is a problem. We tend to relate more easily to literature written in Europe and in the European tradition." [79] American critics are known to object that those from their own country, like Philip Roth, Thomas Pynchon, and Cormac McCarthy, have been overlooked, as have Latin Americans such as Jorge Luis Borges, Julio Cortázar, and Carlos Fuentes, while in their place Europeans lesser-known to that continent have triumphed. The 2009 award to Herta Müller, previously little-known outside Germany but many times named favorite for the Nobel Prize, re-ignited the viewpoint that the Swedish Academy was biased and Eurocentric. [80]

The 2010 prize was awarded to Mario Vargas Llosa, a native of Peru in South America, a generally well-regarded decision. When the 2011 prize was awarded to the Swedish poet Tomas Tranströmer, permanent secretary of the Swedish Academy Peter Englund said the prize was not decided based on politics, describing such a notion as "literature for dummies". [81] The Swedish Academy awarded the next two prizes to non-Europeans, Chinese author Mo Yan and Canadian short story writer Alice Munro. French writer Patrick Modiano's win in 2014 renewed questions of Eurocentrism when asked by The Wall Street Journal "So no American this year, yet again. Why is that?", Englund reminded Americans of the Canadian origins of the previous year's recipient, the Academy's desire for literary quality and the impossibility of rewarding everyone who deserves the prize. [82]

Overlooked literary achievements Edit

In the history of the Nobel Prize in Literature, many literary achievements were overlooked. The literary historian Kjell Espmark admitted that "as to the early prizes, the censure of bad choices and blatant omissions is often justified. Tolstoy, Ibsen, and Henry James should have been rewarded instead of, for instance, Sully Prudhomme, Eucken, and Heyse". [83] There are omissions which are beyond the control of the Nobel Committee such as the early death of an author as was the case with Marcel Proust, Italo Calvino, and Roberto Bolaño. According to Kjell Espmark "the main works of Kafka, Cavafy, and Pessoa were not published until after their deaths and the true dimensions of Mandelstam's poetry were revealed above all in the unpublished poems that his wife saved from extinction and gave to the world long after he had perished in his Siberian exile". [83] British novelist Tim Parks ascribed the never-ending controversy surrounding the decisions of the Nobel Committee to the "essential silliness of the prize and our own foolishness at taking it seriously" [84] and noted that "eighteen (or sixteen) Swedish nationals will have a certain credibility when weighing up works of Swedish literature, but what group could ever really get its mind round the infinitely varied work of scores of different traditions. And why should we ask them to do that?" [84]

Although several Scandinavians were awarded, two of the most celebrated writers, Norwegian playwright Henrik Ibsen and Swedish author August Strindberg were repeatedly bypassed by the committee, but Strindberg holds the singular distinction of being awarded an Anti-Nobel Prize, conferred by popular acclaim and national subscription and presented to him in 1912 by future prime minister Hjalmar Branting. [85] [86] [87]

Paul Valéry was nominated twelve times between 1930 and 1945, but died just as the Academy intended to award him the prize in 1945. [88] [89]

James Joyce wrote the books that rank 1st and 3rd on the Modern Library 100 Best Novels – Ulysses og Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man – but Joyce was never nominated for the prize. Kjell Espmark, member of the Nobel Prize committee and author of the history of the prize, claimed that Joyce's "stature was not properly recognized even in the English-speaking world", but that Joyce doubtless would have been awarded if he had lived in the late 1940s when the Academy began to award literary pioneers like T. S. Eliot. [90]

Argentine writer Jorge Luis Borges was nominated for the prize several times but the Academy did not award it to him, though he was among the final candidates some years in the 1960s. [91]

Graham Greene was nominated for the prize twenty times between the years 1950 and 1966. [92] Greene was a celebrated candidate to be awarded the prize in the 1960s and 1970s, and the Academy was criticised for passing him over. [19]

French novelist and intellectual André Malraux was seriously considered for the prize in the 1950s. Malraux was competing with Albert Camus but was rejected several times, especially in 1954 and 1955, "so long as he does not come back to novel". Thus, Camus was awarded the prize in 1957. [93] Malraux was again considered in 1969 when he was competing with Samuel Beckett for the prize. Some members of the Nobel committee supported a prize to Malraux, but Beckett was awarded. [94]

W. H. Auden was nominated to the Nobel Prize in Literature ten times in the 1960s [95] and was among the final candidates for the prize several times, but the Academy favoured other writers. In 1964 Auden and Jean-Paul Sartre were the leading candidates, and the Academy favoured Sartre as Auden's best work was thought "too far back in time". In 1967 Auden was one of three final candidates along with Graham Greene and the awarded Guatemalan author Miguel Ángel Asturias. [96] [97]

Controversies about Swedish Academy board members Edit

Membership in the 18-member academy, who select the recipients, is technically for life. [23] Until 2018 members were not allowed to leave, although they might refuse to participate. [23] For members who did not participate their board seat was left vacant until they died. [98] Twelve active/participating members are required for a quorum. [98]

In 1989, three members, including the former permanent secretary Lars Gyllensten, resigned in protest after the academy refused to denounce Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini for calling for the death of Salman Rushdie, author of The Satanic Verses. [23] A fourth member, Knut Ahnlund, decided to remain in the academy, but later refused to participate in their work and resigned in 2005 in protest to the Nobel Prize in Literature awarded to Elfriede Jelinek. According to Ahnlund the decision to award Jelinek ruined the worth of the Nobel Prize in Literature for a long time. [99] [100]

2018 controversy and award cancellation Edit

In April 2018, three members of the academy board resigned in response to a sexual-misconduct investigation involving author Jean-Claude Arnault, who is married to board member Katarina Frostenson. [98] Arnault was accused by at least 18 women of sexual assault and harassment. He and his wife were also accused of leaking the names of prize recipients on at least seven occasions so friends could profit from bets. [101] [98] He denied all accusations, although he was later convicted of rape and sentenced to two years and six months in prison. [102] [103] [104] The three members resigned in protest over the decision by Sara Danius, the board secretary, not to take what they felt was appropriate legal action against Arnault. [98] [23] [105] Two former permanent secretaries, Sture Allén and Horace Engdahl, called Danius a weak leader. [98]

On 10 April, Danius was asked to resign from her position by the Academy, bringing the number of empty seats to four. [106] Although the Academy voted against removing Katarina Frostenson from the committee, [107] she voluntarily agreed to withdraw from participating in the academy, bringing the total of withdrawals to five. Because two other seats were still vacant from the Rushdie affair, this left only 11 active members, one short of the quorum needed to vote in replacements. On 4 May 2018, the Swedish Academy announced that the selection would be postponed until 2019, when two laureates would be chosen. It was still technically possible to choose a 2018 laureate, as only eight active members are required to choose a recipient. However, there were concerns that the academy was not in any condition to credibly present the award. [5] [6] [7] [108] The New Academy Prize in Literature was created as an alternative award for 2018 only. [109]

The scandal was widely seen as damaging to the credibility of the prize and its authority. "With this scandal you cannot possibly say that this group of people has any kind of solid judgment," noted Swedish journalist Björn Wiman. [98] As noted by Andrew Brown in The Guardian in a lengthy deconstruction of the scandal:

"The scandal has elements of a tragedy, in which people who set out to serve literature and culture discovered they were only pandering to writers and the people who hang around with them. The pursuit of excellence in art was entangled with the pursuit of social prestige. The academy behaved as if the meals in its clubhouse were as much an accomplishment as the work that got people elected there." [110]

King Carl XVI Gustaf of Sweden said a reform of the rules may be evaluated, including the introduction of the right to resign in respect of the current lifelong membership of the committee. [111] On 5 March 2019, it was announced that the Nobel Prize in Literature would once again be awarded, and laureates for both 2018 and 2019 would be announced together. The decision came after several changes were made to the structure of the Swedish Academy as well as to the Nobel Committee members selection, in order to "[restore] trust in the Academy as a prize-awarding institution". [112]

The Nobel Prize in Literature is not the only literary prize for which all nationalities are eligible. Other notable international literary prizes include the Neustadt International Prize for Literature, the Franz Kafka Prize, the International Booker Prize when it was previously awarded for a writer's entire body of work, and in the 1960s the Formentor Prix International. In contrast to the other prizes mentioned, the Neustadt International Prize is awarded biennially. The journalist Hephzibah Anderson has noted that the International Booker Prize "is fast becoming the more significant award, appearing an ever more competent alternative to the Nobel". [113] However since 2016 the International Booker Prize now awards an annual book of fiction translated into English. [114] Previous winners of the International Booker Prize who have gone on to win the Nobel Prize in Literature include Alice Munro and Olga Tokarczuk. The Neustadt International Prize for Literature is regarded as one of the most prestigious international literary prizes, often referred to as the American equivalent to the Nobel Prize. [115] [116] Like the Nobel Prize, it is awarded not for any one work, but for an entire body of work. It is frequently seen as an indicator of who may be awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature. Gabriel García Márquez (1972 Neustadt, 1982 Nobel), Czesław Miłosz (1978 Neustadt, 1980 Nobel), Octavio Paz (1982 Neustadt, 1990 Nobel), Tomas Tranströmer (1990 Neustadt, 2011 Nobel) were first awarded the Neustadt International Prize for Literature before being awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature.

Another award of note is the Spanish Princess of Asturias Award (formerly Prince of Asturias Award) in Letters. During the first years of its existence it was almost exclusively awarded to writers in the Spanish language, but in more recent times writers in other languages have been awarded as well. Writers who have won both the Asturias Award in Letters and the Nobel Prize in Literature include Camilo José Cela, Günter Grass, Doris Lessing and Mario Vargas Llosa.

The America Award in Literature, which does not include a monetary prize, presents itself as an alternative to the Nobel Prize in Literature. To date, Harold Pinter, José Saramago, and Peter Handke are the only writers to have received both the America Award and the Nobel Prize in Literature.

There are also prizes for honouring the lifetime achievement of writers in specific languages, like the Miguel de Cervantes Prize (for Spanish language, established in 1976) and the Camões Prize (for Portuguese language, established in 1989). Nobel laureates who were also awarded the Miguel de Cervantes Prize include Octavio Paz (1981 Cervantes, 1990 Nobel) Mario Vargas Llosa (1994 Cervantes, 2010 Nobel) and Camilo José Cela (1995 Cervantes, 1989 Nobel). José Saramago is the only author to receive both the Camões Prize (1995) and the Nobel Prize (1998) to date.

The Hans Christian Andersen Award is sometimes referred to as "the Little Nobel". The award has earned this appellation since, in a similar manner to the Nobel Prize in Literature, it recognizes the lifetime achievement of writers, though the Andersen Award focuses on a single category of literary works (children's literature). [117]

  1. ^"Nobel Prize amount is raised by SEK 1 million". Nobelprize.org.
  2. ^
  3. "Current Affairs". PendulumEdu. PendulumEdu . Retrieved 8 October 2020 .
  4. ^
  5. "Alfred Nobel will". nobelprize.org . Retrieved 20 January 2021 .
  6. ^ abc
  7. John Sutherland (13 October 2007). "Ink and Spit". Guardian Unlimited Books. The Guardian . Retrieved 13 October 2007 .
  8. ^ abc
  9. "Nobel Prize for Literature postponed amid Swedish Academy turmoil". BBC. 4 May 2018 . Retrieved 4 May 2018 .
  10. ^ abc
  11. Press release. "Svenska Akademien skjuter upp 2018 års Nobelpris i litteratur". Svenska Akademin. Swedish Academy . Retrieved 4 May 2018 .
  12. ^ ab
  13. Wixe, Susanne (10 April 2018). "Detta har hänt: Krisen i Svenska Akademien – på 3 minuter" [Previously: The crisis in the Swedish Academy in 3 minutes]. Aftonbladet . Retrieved 4 May 2018 .
  14. ^
  15. "History – Historic Figures: Alfred Nobel (1833–1896)". BBC. Retrieved 15 January 2010 .
  16. ^
  17. "Guide to Nobel Prize". Britannica.com . Retrieved 15 January 2010 .
  18. ^
  19. Sohlman, Ragnar (1983). The Legacy of Alfred Nobel – The Story Behind the Nobel Prizes. The Nobel Foundation. p. 7.
  20. ^
  21. von Euler, U.S. (6 June 1981). "The Nobel Foundation and its Role for Modern Day Science". Die Naturwissenschaften. Springer-Verlag. Archived from the original (PDF) on 14 July 2011 . Retrieved 21 January 2010 .
  22. ^"The Will of Alfred Nobel", nobelprize.org. Retrieved 6 November 2007.
  23. ^
  24. "The Nobel Foundation – History". Nobelprize.org . Retrieved 12 October 2010 .
  25. ^ ab
  26. Levinovitz, Agneta Wallin (2001). Nils Ringertz (ed.). The Nobel Prize: The First 100 Years. Imperial College Press and World Scientific Publishing. p. 13. ISBN978-981-02-4664-8 .
  27. ^
  28. "Nobel Prize History —". Infoplease.com. 13 October 1999 . Retrieved 15 January 2010 .
  29. ^
  30. Encyclopædia Britannica. "Nobel Foundation (Scandinavian organisation) – Britannica Online Encyclopedia". Britannica.com . Retrieved 15 January 2010 .
  31. ^ AFP, "Alfred Nobel's last will and testament"Archived 9 October 2009 at the Wayback Machine, The Local(5 October 2009): accessed 20 January 2010.
  32. ^"Nobel Prize" (2007), in Encyclopædia Britannica, accessed 15 January 2009, from Encyclopædia Britannica Online:

After Nobel's death, the Nobel Foundation was set up to carry out the provisions of his will and to administer his funds. In his will, he had stipulated that four different institutions—three Swedish and one Norwegian—should award the prizes. From Stockholm, the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences confers the prizes for physics, chemistry, and economics, the Karolinska Institute confers the prize for physiology or medicine, and the Swedish Academy confers the prize for literature. The Norwegian Nobel Committee based in Oslo confers the prize for peace. The Nobel Foundation is the legal owner and functional administrator of the funds and serves as the joint administrative body of the prize-awarding institutions, but it is not concerned with the prize deliberations or decisions, which rest exclusively with the four institutions.

Each Nobel Prize consists of a gold medal, a diploma bearing a citation, and a sum of money, the amount of which depends on the income of the Nobel Foundation. (A sum of $1,300,000 accompanied each prize in 2005.) A Nobel Prize is either given entirely to one person, divided equally between two persons, or shared by three persons. In the latter case, each of the three persons can receive a one-third share of the prize or two together can receive a one-half share.


The documentary [2] Isaac in America: A Journey With Isaac Bashevis Singer is a characterization of the writer Isaac Bashevis Singer. It was filmed only a few years before he died, and depicts the author looking back on his professional and life experiences. Singer is best known for his Yiddish stories, which have a universal appeal. He went on to win a Nobel Prize in literature.

From the documentary the viewer is able to see that Singer's personality matches his unconventional and unique written works. His office is filled with diplomas and awards, but Singer is well aware that the events of his life could have turned out in a very different manner. Born in 1902 in a small, Yiddish-speaking town not far from Warsaw, he escaped Nazi occupation by fleeing to the United States of America and settling in New York City. There is a possibility that he could have starved if the Yiddish newspaper The Jewish Daily The Forward had not acknowledged the promising writer's talent and printed his stories frequently. Isaac in America focuses on the Nobel Prize winner during the final years of his existence.

Singer spent the majority of his life in America, yet he and his work were strongly affected by his birthplace. Despite venturing off to different locations, his work and experiences were measured against the backdrop of his hometown. The people Singer associated with and desired to write about were entirely Old World Yiddish speakers, people filled with fear and inquisitiveness about the supernatural. As Singer discusses in the film, he could not have written about Texan cowboys because he had no knowledge how they operated or their vernacular. Saul Bellow and many other contemporary Jewish writers saw themselves as American writers who happened to be Jewish, conversely Singer viewed himself as a Jewish writer — one whose roots were demolished by the Holocaust, but could live on forever through his writings. Isaac in America provides the observer an additional layer of admiration to Singer's writing by exploring its memoir-like themes and displaying the writer's personal understanding of his pieces. The story “A Day at Coney Island,” for example, was crafted upon Singer's first summer in America.

Singer reads excerpts from the above-mentioned short story and goes into details about it, he even shares self-effacing anecdotes and very intimate memories. The author goes so far as to revisit the characters and places that appeared in the work many years ago Singer is both surprised and saddened by how they have been changed by time. The viewer is offered a rare glimpse of Singer in his apartment on the Upper West Side of Manhattan his office is so full of books and documents that there is barely any space to move about. However, Singer is not bothered by the disarray. “Chaos is not really ugly,” he explains, “The chaos was before the world was created. Before God said, 'Let there be light,' there was chaos.” And because of this logic, he sees no reasoning in tidying up the clutter.

The documentary takes a strict approach when Singer discusses his writing, making him a valuable asset for up-and-coming writers. The author is also filmed in a classroom, where he lectures to pupils on the value of having a beginning, middle and end to a story and of maintaining a clear plot and comprehensible language, because “there's no great art in confusing the reader.” As Singer goes on to talk about his profession, the more he reveals about himself. He asserts that all good stories are love stories because it is in love that a person becomes exposed and shows their true self. “No where is the human being, character, personality expressed so clearly as in love,” he says. With that he appears to reveal what becomes apparent from studying him: the writer's fondness for words are equaled only by his adoration for women.

The film premiered at the New York Film Festival in 1986. It also played festivals at Sundance Film Festival, in Berlin, and at the Visions du Réel documentary film festival, Nyon, Switzerland - where it won Best Film. The film was also nominated for an Academy Award as Best Documentary Feature. It was later broadcast on the PBS series American Masters. [ citat nødvendig ]


The Ghost Shtetl of Isaac Bashevis Singer’s Youth

In his 1978 acceptance speech for the Nobel Prize in Literature, Isaac Bashevis Singer employed memories from his earliest years as a source of hope for coping with the troubles of modern times:

“In our home and in many other homes the eternal questions were more actual than the latest news in the Yiddish newspaper. In spite of all the disenchantments and all my skepticism I believe that the nations can learn much from those Jews, their way of thinking, their way of bringing up children, their finding happiness where others see nothing but misery and humiliation.”

As a teenager, in the midst of the First World War, Singer moved with his siblings and his mother to her hometown, the small shtetl of Biłgoraj, where they belonged to a prominent rabbinical family. The main square in Biłgoraj around the time Singer lived there

Following a short stint in a Warsaw rabbinical seminary, a young Singer would return to the ancestral shtetl, where he would fail to support himself by giving Hebrew lessons – an interesting historical detail for the man destined become the first Yiddish writer to win the Nobel Prize.

Biłgoraj was home to a thriving, if modest, Jewish community, and would inspire many of Singer’s later works. A rabbinic text printed in Biłgoraj, 1912. From the National Library of Israel collection

Nearly a century has passed since Singer left Biłgoraj for good. Other notable former residents included Rabbi Mordecai Rokeach of the Belz Hasidic Dynasty, who famously fled Europe for the Land of Israel in 1944, and the well-known writer and educator Shmuel Ben-Artzi, father-in-law of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

The town has long been bereft of Jewish inhabitants, yet a replica shtetl now stands there, the brainchild of Tadeusz Kuźmiński, a businessman and philanthropist, who recently passed away. Tadeusz Kuźmiński stands in front of the replica synagogue in Biłgoraj, 2016 (Photo: Ruth Ellen Gruber)

Kuźmiński dreamed of building a site that reflected the multicultural nature of pre-War Poland, which could also serve as a contemporary cultural, commercial and residential center. With the vision only partially realized, Biłgoraj is now home to a recreated Jewish marketplace, with plans ready for a second market square set to include replicas of wooden churches and a wooden mosque (of the type long-used by some descendants of Tatars in eastern Poland). The new square in Biłgoraj, 2016 (Photo: Ruth Ellen Gruber)

A small museum in Singer’s honor is housed in one of the replica town’s structures, yet the most striking feature of the modern reincarnation of Jewish Biłgoraj is Kuźmiński’s full-scale reproduction of the destroyed wooden synagogue of Wolpa (a town in modern-day Belarus) – some 400 km (250 miles) away. Postcard featuring a ca. 1930 photo of the Wolpa Synagogue (Publisher: Tomy). From The Joseph and Margit Hoffman Judaica Postcard Collection, The Folklore Research Center at the Mandel Institute of Jewish Studies, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem available via the NLI Digital Collection Prayer for the czar inside the Wolpa Synagogue (Photo: Alois Breyer). From the Center for Jewish Art at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem available via the National Library of Israel Digital Collection

Somewhat ironically, Wolpa was probably most well-known for the very synagogue now recreated in Biłgoraj.

Wood synagogues were quite common throughout Eastern Europe, and yet the Wolpa Synagogue was considered to be one of the finest examples, an aesthetic and technical masterpiece, which stood for well over two centuries – surviving one world war before being destroyed in the next. Interior photo of the Wolpa Synagogue’s dome, ca. 1910-1913 (Photo: Alois Breyer). From the Center for Jewish Art at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem available via the National Library of Israel Digital Collection

After receiving his Nobel Prize, Singer addressed the distinguished guests at the subsequent banquet:

“People ask me often, ‘Why do you write in a dying language?’ And I want to explain it in a few words.

Firstly, I like to write ghost stories and nothing fits a ghost better than a dying language. The deader the language the more alive is the ghost. Ghosts love Yiddish and as far as I know, they all speak it.

Secondly, not only do I believe in ghosts, but also in resurrection. I am sure that millions of Yiddish speaking corpses will rise from their graves one day and their first question will be: “Is there any new Yiddish book to read?” For them Yiddish will not be dead.

Thirdly, for 2000 years Hebrew was considered a dead language. Suddenly it became strangely alive. What happened to Hebrew may also happen to Yiddish one day, (although I haven’t the slightest idea how this miracle can take place).

There is still a fourth minor reason for not forsaking Yiddish and this is: Yiddish may be a dying language but it is the only language I know well. Yiddish is my mother language and a mother is never really dead.”

Isaac Bashevis Singer preparing his speech before the official Nobel Prize ceremony, 1978 (Photo: Israel Zamir). From the Dan Hadani Archive, the Pritzker Family National Photography Collection at the National Library of Israel

Isaac Bashevis Singer passed away some two decades before Tadeusz Kuźmiński’s dream of a simulated pre-War Biłgoraj began to take shape.

What would Singer have thought or written about Kuźmiński’s renascent Biłgoraj?

Would he have seen humor in the idea of a replica shtetl with no Jews?

Or the notion of a once-iconic synagogue transported through space and time, plopped down in tiny Biłgoraj, steps away from a modest museum in his honor (despite the fact that he himself only lived there for a brief period)?

Is Kuźmiński’s Biłgoraj a living ghost? A mother that was never really dead?

Or – in the spirit of Singer’s childhood home – an attempt in post-Holocaust Poland to “find… happiness where others see nothing but misery and humiliation”?

This article has been published as part of Gesher L’Europa, the National Library of Israel’s initiative to share stories and connect with people, institutions and communities in Europe and beyond.


NEVER WROTE FOR PRIZES

Simon Weber, editor of the Forward, said that Singer told him that he never wrote for prizes. “I am not forgetting for one moment that writers in previous times did not write for prizes but this did not diminish their greatness,” Weber said Singer had told him.

Singer, Weber added, said he would always remember that he owes everything to the Forward because it was there that his writings first appeared. Weber told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency that for him the Nobel award to Singer was “the proudest moment for the Forward and for myself. It is the greatest thing to have happened to Yiddish literature. It is the first time a man won the Nobel award who is known mostly in translation.”

Weber said the award would give “a tremendous boost” to Yiddish literature. He said he had been receiving calls all morning, following the announcement of the award, from readers wanting to know where they could get Singer’s work in Yiddish. Morris U. Schappes, historian and editor of Jewish Currents, said “it is high time that a Yiddish writer was recognized with a Nobel award.”


Wislawa Szymborska (1923-2012)

On the surface Wislawa Szymborska’s writing seems much simpler than Milosz’s. Her sensitive yet poised observations are brought to life by uncomplicated language and a lyricism that speaks to all readers. But this is the crux of her oeuvre.With simple expression, she suffuses words with the virtue of metaphor, figurative depth and allusions to the instability of the human condition.

In the early 1950s, Szymborska was seduced by the promises of Poland’s flourishing Stalinism and her verses briefly fell into the propaganda-led bucket of socialist realism. But the poet soon returned to her own fiercely independent insight. Her fresh humour and wit, lyrical storytelling and ambiguity, irony and wordplay, define the tone of such masterpieces as Nic dwa razy (Nothing Twice), Kot w pustym mieszkaniu (Cat in an Empty Apartment) or O śmierci pez przesady (On Death, without Exaggeration). Although she remained modest and discreet as a person, the voices of her poems still call out with strength and conviction.

Szymborska’s legacy was honored by a period of national mourning in Poland upon her death in February 2012.


Se videoen: An interview with the Nobel laureate Isaac Bashevis Singer