the ask@AAR: Do you read prize-winning fiction?
I’m feeling like a heathen–I have no idea who Han Kang is, the author who was just awarded the Pulitzer Prize in literature. Yesterday, writing about the prize, A. O. Scott wrote in the NYT:
“The great books are the ones you’re supposed to feel bad about not having read. Great writers are the ones who matter whether you read them or not.”
Not me. I don’t feel bad. I’ve never read Ulysses and I have no plans to–not even for 0.29! I have, of course, read many great books. Of Pulitzer prize winning books, published in the last 75 years, I’ve read 28. I consider that respectable.
That said, I tend to NOT read a Booker Prize winner. In the past 25 years, I’ve read seven and very few recent ones. The Bookers always seem to me to be so grim.
How about you? Do you read prize winners? What’s your fave? Do some prizes work better for you than others?
Yes, but never because of critical acclaim.
I read the required books in high school, and I’ve checked off around 40 or so book on a couple of “100 books you should read” lists, but I don’t pay attention to book awards. I rarely read modern “literary fiction” since the requirement for a sad, depressing story seems almost as unbreakable as an HEA for romance. I agree with Caz and Lil, I don’t need that in my life since too many headlines are depressing enough. The last award winning book I can remember reading when first published was Snow Falling on Cedars in 1995. I admit it was good, but I think it appealed because it was basically a mystery at it’s core. I have read several of Toni Morrison’s books, which are incredibly well written but hard to read.
I did fill a big gap in my literary knowledge while I was homeschooling my kids. We did a literature based program for history, and I ended up reading most of the Newberry winners, plus a couple hundred more excellent JF/YA fiction books from authors like Rosemary Sutcliffe and E.L. Konigsburg. Some were difficult to read (The Shining Company and Roll of Thunder, Hear my Cry), but since they are written for a youger audience they aren’t over the top sad. I also read many of the books my kids were reading for their private lit classes in highschool, so I caught up on some great books I’d missed, like All Quiet on the Western Front and Night by Wiesel.
I now read almost exclusively for escape and the HEAs. I don’t mind some tough emotions, but I’m not an big angst lover in my romances. Some days I just need to listen to a happy, escapist story to get my mind off everything else.
Sometimes… I recently picked up “Small Things Like These” by Claire Keegan because I saw the trailer for the movie, and several people mentioned the novella. It won the Orwell Prize for Political Fiction and was shortlisted for the Booker Prize and the Rathbones Folio Prize. What I’ve read so far has been very good — though I’m sure I will get depressed. But I was going to buy that one anyway because I’ve gotten interested in Irish history, including Magdalene Laundries. (Blame Irish Twitter.)
I’m more likely to pay attention to genre awards like the Edgar, the Hugo Award, etc. — even though some of those awards have gone through recent controversies.
I loved this book and also loved “Foster” (made into the movie “The Quiet Girl”). Keegan knows how to create fully rounded characters and evocative settings in very few pages. The books are sad but hopeful, populated by people leading seemingly small lives but who turn out to be heroes of the very best sort.
The Edgars have gone through controversy as well? I know the RITAs kind of imploded…
There was a controversy when author Linda Fairstein was named as the recipient of the 2019 Grand Master Award. It was rescinded a couple of days later. Some believe it because of her role in the prosecution of the Central Park Five. (She still insists they are guilty.) Some people applauded the change, while many MWA members (such as Otto Penzler) were angry.
I was thinking more of the Hugo Award controversies, but it seems no genre award can go unscathed these days.
No, only what was required in school
This is not a complete list, but here are some books that would be on my list of the greatest novels ever written:
Anna Karenina by Leo Tolstoy
In Cold Blood by Truman Capote
One Hundred Years of Solitude by Gabriel Garcia Marquez
The Poisonwood Bible by Barbara Kingsolver
East of Eden by John Steinbeck
And Then There Were None by Agatha Christie
The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald
Atonement by Ian McEwan
Song of Solomon by Toni Morrison
A Tale of Two Cities by Charles Dickens
The Sparrow by Mary Doria Russell
Small Mercies by Dennis Lehane
His Dark Materials by Philip Pullman
Possession by A. S. Byatt
Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone by J. K. Rowling
A Map of the World by Jane Hamilton
The Thousand Autumns of Jacob DeZoet by David Mitchell
All the Light We Cannot See by Anthony Doer
11/22/63 by Stephen King
Gone Girl by Gillian Flynn
Circe by Madeline Miller
Tomorrow and Tomorrow and Tomorrow by Gabrielle Zevin
The Light Pirate by Lily Brooks-Dalton
No Jane Austen or anything by the Brontes? Dickens as the only 19th century novel except for the often impenetrable Tolstoy? Interesting selection but not what I would choose as “the greatest novels ever written”. I wonder how others feel about your list. Re The Song of Solomon, the Biblical book by that name is a wonder. I first read it in a course on literature of the Ancient World. I had passages from it read as part of a renewal of vows church service for our 40th anniversary. It expresses human love in its bodily and spiritual forms so well. So much so that some of the very old members of the congregation were a bit shocked!!!
I hate Wuthering Heights and think Jane Eyre is good but not great. I should have added Pride and Prejudice to the list!
Agree with you about WUTHERING HEIGHTS but disagree about JANE EYRE. I loved that Jane is always entirely herself, from her response to Mr. Brocklehurst, the director of Lowood School when he is interviewing her at her aunt’s house, to when she runs away from Thornfield Hall, and later her reasoning when she turns down St John Rivers’ marriage proposal. I don’t find Mr. Rochester a particularly attractive romantic hero; he’s better than Heathcliff but that’s not saying much. I read and liked WIDE SARGASSO SEA, the first Mrs. Rochester’s story, many years ago and should probably reread it.
I read prize winning authors rather than prize winning books. And I have read many Nobel prize, Booker and Pulitzer, National Book Award winners.
I have read only one of Michael Chabon, The Final Solution, which was lovely. I liked Jhumpa Lahiri’s Namesake better than Interpreter of Maladies. I disliked most of Salman Rushdie’s books except a little novella called Harun and the Sea of Stories. I liked Ishiguro’s Never Let me Go more than Remains of the Day. I tried to read non-English Nobel winners. Not all of them worked for me—All of Gabriel Garcia Marquez were DFN for me. At present, on my kindle I have Perceval Everett’s James (Booker nominee). But I am determined to read Huckleberry Finn first (I did not go to school here and so missed reading all high school reading list favorites).
Agree about the better Lahiri–I also like her short story collection Unaccustomed Earth. I adore Marquez but magical realism is my jam. I’d be curious what you think of James.
Magical realism does not always work for me; that’s why Rushdie’s Midnight’s Children was a DNF for me despite repeated tries.
I love a tragic book, big-hearted book and so I’ve read a respectable number of Bookers, most of which are from decades’ past. I have also probably read a decent number of National Book Award winners and Pulitzers, because I love nonfiction.
I like a lot of critically acclaimed books, but I don’t like books which are mean or hopeless about humanity. So for instance, a Fine Balance is really, really heartbreaking, but I love it because everyone’s humanity is displayed so touchingly.
The Nobels often honor people whose writing strikes me as pretentious. There are some writers I’ve loved in the mix (Sigrid Undset, GGM, Salman Rushdie) but also some that seem boring and pedantic. I DID happen to read the Vegetarian because it was at my MIL’s house and it was basically vicious, mean and pointless. I think it was trying to make a point about the treatment of women in Korean society, but I can’t be sure.
I routinely used to look at RITAs (and whatever their newer prize is) and also the Edgars because I think good genre fiction can be difficult to suss out just by recommendation.
I don’t read a book or see a movie because its won a prize. I read something because I find the author, plot, etc., interesting. That said, I have read some books that won either a Pulitzer or Booker prize. Mostly, if I’m not familiar with the author I will rely on reviews to let me know whether a book might be interesting. I’m probably never going to attempt Ulysses and I DNF’d Moby Dick about half way through. But I do occasionally tackle something more difficult. Although tough reads, I enjoyed A Thousand Acres and Wolf Hall. I found The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay to be delightful, and To Kill a Mockingbird is a treasured book in my bookcase.
Here are the Pulitzers I think are great books.
All the Light We Cannot See, by Anthony Doerr
The Goldfinch, by Donna Tartt
Olive Kitteridge by Elizabeth Strout
Middlesex by Jeffrey Eugenides
The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier & Clay by Michael Chabon
Interpreter of Maladies by Jhumpa Lahiri
A Thousand Acres by Jane Smiley (the second most depressing book on this list but I love it.)
To Kill A Mockingbird by Harper Lee
Here are the Bookers:
The Bone People by Keri Hulme (possibly the most depressing book ever written but worth it)
The Remains of the Day by Kazuo Ishiguro
Possession by A. S. Byatt (one of my favorite reads)
Lincoln in the Bardo by George Saunders (I thought I’d hate this but, shockingly, I loved it.)
I’ve read and liked all of these. I don’t know that they are all like the best ever books though. Of these, the only ones that really lingered with me were the Interpreter of Maladies (but I liked the Namesake better) and the Goldfinch, but I am a huge sucker for the redemptive power of a mother’s love as a theme.
Oh, I would not say these are the best books ever with the exception maybe of All The Light We Cannot See. I’ll have to think about my list of the best books ever!
Like everything in our culture right now, I find that awards are heavily skewed by politics. So we aren’t necessarily reading the best book written but the book that most speaks to a particular political moment or movement that matches the political views of the award givers or their audience. And frankly, I’m just done with that. When I’m looking for a good book, I look for buzzy books or check out reviewers I trust. If, ten years later, people are still talking about that book, I’ll look for it, but that rarely happens. For example, Gone Girl is still being spoken of and has tons of influence on the market even twelve years after its release. If I hadn’t already read it, I would probably look for it. Mo Yan, the 2012 Noble prize winner? Haven’t heard a thing about his work and have no desire to go looking for it. (There are a lot of great Chinese graphic novels and drama right now. Mo Yan didn’t write any of those that are buzzy.)
My sister is always urging me to read such-and-such a book—”It’s depressing, but it’s very well written.” No thanks. I read newspapers. No further depression is needed. I think the last book I read that “everybody” was talking about was A Gentleman in Moscow, and I did enjoy that. But I figure I’m old enough to feel no need to impress others and I can read what I enjoy.
I consider myself relatively well-read: I have a degree in English and have read most of the “greats” of the western canon. However, every week when I read the New York Times’ By the Book column (sort of a “What Are You Reading?” for the intelligentsia), I am painfully aware of the enormous gaps in my knowledge of writers and books. But we all have gaps in our knowledge, and I’ve reached the point where I read for pleasure not for a class or a degree or just to be able to say I’ve read something, so I shrug and move on. If someone truly enjoys the work of an obscure Lithuanian author from the 1920s, more power to ‘em, but I’ll be over here indulging in my umpteenth reread of TIME SERVED, lol.
So-called literary fiction is not for me. I have read a number of Booker winners over the years and was either bored or they dealt with things I’d rather not read about. Hilary Mantel bored the socks off of me; pretension as Caz said. Life is too short to punish myself with things (e.g. books) that don’t make me happy.
I feel like in a culture where so many are depressed, reading for joy is underrated.
I don’t read prizewinners BECAUSE they’re prizewinners – I read a book because I want to read it and for no other reason. In fact, I probably avoid prizewinners because so many are bundles of pretension.