American Writers and the Nobel Prize for Literature

[Bibliomaniac]

Poll to follow.

And yes, I realize that this is my first poll and it has nothing to do with baseball. I guess I'm just trying to live up to my screen name.

Several things lately have had me thinking about this topic: The recent controversy over a member of the Nobel Academy saying that he didn't think there were any American writers good enough for the Nobel, the recent controversy (no politics - I'm not dwelling on it) over last year's Nobel for Peace, and the fact that over the last dozen years or so, we have lost the following writers who may have been considered by some to be Nobel-worthy: William S. Burroughs, Guy Davenport, Allen Ginsberg, Normnan Mailer, Arthur Miller, John Updike, Kurt Vonnegut, David Foster Wallace, and just recently, J. D. Salinger.

These things led me to think, what living American writer will win the Nobel for Literature next? I have provided eight names, plus a choice for you to submit another name, plus a choice foir you to state that you believe there is no currently living American writer who qualifies.

I know that there are more intellectuals on this board than one might think, so let's start the debate.

[sakata_catching]

Philip Roth and John Ashbery were the first two names to spring to mind.

[Lucky Jim]

Philip Roth and John Ashbery were the first two names to spring to mind.

Those are the only two living who currently have the resume and the profile to win, unless it's a dark horse candidate. Doubtful, I think. I would say that one or both of those two will win before they die. Which could be soon, for Ashbery. Not sure about Roth's health. He looked good when I saw in the Russian Samovar in NYC in 2004.

Billy Collins: no chance. He's not all that well-respected at home, and not particularly well known or important abroad. The interest in American populist poetry died circa Frost.
Lawrence Ferlinghetti: no chance. A mediocre writer who's important more for selling books than for writing them.
Jonathan Lethem: no chance. Terrible sentences, limited output.
Joyce Carol Oates: no chance. Middling books, huge output.
Robert Pinsky: no chance. Not particularly well-respected at home. Irrelevant abroad.
Thomas Pynchon: moderate chance, past his moment.
Gore Vidal: no one considers him literature.
William T. Vollmann: no chance. Interesting guy, but unlikely. His iconoclastic nature limits international appeal?

[Scrat1]

If it's going to be anyone, it's going to be Roth. Given the global political climate, I'd be shocked if he won it.

[Lucky Jim]

If it's going to be anyone, it's going to be Roth. Given the global political climate, I'd be shocked if he won it.

Ashbury is a solid choice, too. Major writer who fits within the tradition while popularizing (as far as poetry goes) both experimental and French poetry. Big favorite of contemporary critics on the right (Perloff) and the left (everyone else). Political, but only obliquely (gay). And member of America's most amazing generation of poets: those born between 1925 and 1930.

I can see Ashbery (who is getting old) a bit more than Roth. Roth's politics are tough. (Plus, I think his recent output is wildly overrated.)