The Nobel Prize in Literature is Prestigious, Rich, and out of this World

Dive into the world of the Nobel Prize in Literature, meet lesser-known winners like Jon Fosse, and uncover the challenges of picking the best books. Discover the secrets behind prestigious literary awards.

on Dec 07, 2023

The Nobel Prize in Literature is Prestigious, Rich, and out of this World | Frontlist

When the winner of the Nobel Prize in Literature is announced, one of three reactions usually occurs. The first is "Who?" The second is "Why?" The third, and by far the most uncommon, is "Hurrah!" This year's reactions fell squarely into the first two categories. Jon Fosse, a Norwegian, was won the world's most prestigious literature prize on October 5th. Many literary connoisseurs had never heard of him. Mr. Fosse primarily writes in Nynorsk, a dialect of Norwegian that is only used by a small number of the country's writers. His best-known (but yet little-known) work is the "Septology" trilogy, which bills itself as a "radically different reading experience."
In some ways, awarding this reward is a straightforward procedure.

As is traditional, Mr Fosse was called and informed that he had won the coveted reward of SKr11 million (about $1 million). He may have then opened the champagne, as many Nobel laureates do. Or, like Doris Lessing, he might have groaned and exclaimed, "Oh, Christ."

In practically every other regard, the reward is a convoluted nightmare. Even judging a 100-meter race can be difficult. Judging literature—a symphony, not a sprint—is far more difficult. There will be people who criticise the judges' decisions for any literary prize, from the Nobel (given for an author's oeuvre) to the Booker (for their most recent novel). Especially when they don't win.

Julian Barnes, an author, once described the Booker Prize as "posh bingo" (which he won on his fourth nomination).

Prize judges may appear to be drawing names from a hat rather than making calculated, critical selections. As the committee's current chair, Anders Olsson, observed, "we always get criticism." The Nobel committee provoked anger in its inaugural year when it failed to award the prize to Leo Tolstoy and instead chose Sully Prudhomme, a French poet—a name that was as unimpressive then as it is now. Many great writers were overlooked, including Anton Chekhov, James Joyce, Marcel Proust, and Virginia Woolf.

The judging criteria for the Nobel Prize are, at best, arcane, and at worst, completely obscure. Alfred Nobel, who was better at chemistry than writing, declared in his will that a prize in his honour should be granted to "the person who shall have produced the most outstanding work in an ideal direction in the field of literature." Whatever that entails.

The literary prize has a large field of competitors. Authors are not permitted to nominate themselves. Instead, judges select from among all live writers writing in every language in the globe (there are 7,000). Mr Olsson admits that the challenge is "enormous." And, of course, rubbish. The oeuvres of every Irish novelist working in Gaelic or every Papua New Guinean author writing in Hiri Motu are not being considered by the six members of the judgement committee.

However, judges are considering a large number of them. Each year, the committee sends out over 4,000 invitations to literary bodies worldwide, soliciting nominations by February. These nominations result in a longlist of 200 authors, which is then narrowed down to a shortlist of 20 by April. By May, they'd created a new, shorter list of five candidates (embargoed for 50 years, like the others). The judgement and reading will then commence in earnest. It is as fair as it can be, i.e. exceedingly unfair.

Choosing between novels is "extremely difficult," according to Neil MacGregor, former director of the British Museum and chair of the Booker Prize committee in 2022. Judges must decide between a book about the Sri Lankan civil war and the inner thoughts of a middle-class American woman. In other words, they're deciding between "apples and oranges" in terms of literature. They must also concur. Mr MacGregor describes it as "similar to a criminal jury." The environment on awards can be as entertaining as that sounds. After judging the Booker Prize, British actress Joanna Lumley concluded that the "so-called bitchy world of acting" was a "tea party compared to the piranha-infested waters of publishing."

Other issues arise when judging literature. Modern award longlists are just that: long. Booker judges must read approximately 170 works in seven months; Nobel judges must read the output of 200 authors in just two months. "I don't believe they can," says Michael Wood, who led a different nonfiction award, the Baillie Gifford prize.

Each judge follows her own procedure; some read 30-40 pages of each. Others examine them to determine if they are a contender. Fortunately for judges (if not readers), the answer is all too often a flat no. The author Malcolm Muggeridge resigned from the Booker Prize jury because he was "nauseated and appalled" by the entries. Mr. MacGregor found himself asking on multiple instances, "How could anybody have thought this was worth publishing?" Other difficulties arise when judging the Nobel Prize. It considers works in translation, but even "Je ne sais quoi" loses some of its zing when translated into English. The prize pretends to be worldwide, although it has tended to be Eurocentric: over 100 of the 120 winners to date have been from Europe or America. This is a bias that the Academy is acutely — and uncomfortably — aware of.

The Swedish Academy was well aware of the prize's challenges from the start. According to Mr Olsson, the Academy had "some hesitations" about accepting the Nobel contribution when it was presented. Given the Academy's occasionally harsh criticism, perhaps it wishes it hadn't. Naturally, all Nobel Prizes have sparked debate—but few as heated as those sparked by the literary one.

Not everyone is upset. As Mr Barnes remarked, authors regard rewards as a lottery—until they win. Then they learn that the cursed award judges are actually "the wisest heads in literary Christendom."