Nabokov, Neruda and Borges revealed as losers of 1965 Nobel prize http://trib.al/uVyA83G

[Mark Kohut]

nice points and I bow acknowledging my bloating ignorance
......I haven't read him, although I've owned a paperback copy of AND
QUIET all my life....

MY lit crit/academic canonical circles of what has lasted are narrow,
I'm sure.....

On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 11:29 AM, Mark Sacha <msacha1121 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Although I would never have picked him over the competition, I have to stand
> up for Sholokhov... the people he wrote about didn't last, and I for one
> think he did them a service. Recently retranslated as well, usually a sign
> of staying power.
>
> On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> in what ways?.....Sholokov was the wrong choice now or later....hasn't
>> lasted....
>> They have always wanted to choose THE BEST of the world.
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 11:04 AM, Johnny Myers <jtmyers586 at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > To be fair, the Nobel Prize's definition was restrictive and very
>> > particular about literature... Which explains why James Joyce lost, too.
>> >
>> > Johnny
>> >
>> >> On Jan 6, 2016, at 11:02, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Nabokov, Neruda and Borges revealed as losers of 1965 Nobel prize
>> >> http://trib.al/uVyA83G
>> >> -
>> >> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l
>> -
>> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l
>
>
-
Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l