A SHEPHERD MUST TEND HIS FLOCK. And at times, fight off the wolves
IT’S NOT “VANDALISM,” IT’S “PEOPLE’S ART.” Wall of banana exhibit vandalized with lipstick at Art Basel: ‘Epstein didn’t kill himself.’“This is the gallery where anyone can do art, right? . . . If someone can eat the $120,000 banana and not get arrested, why can’t I write on the wall?”
It's Nobel ceremony time, and they're getting busy in Stockholm.
Early today (13:00 CET) the two Nobel laureates, Olga Tokarczuk and Peter Handke, will be participating in a sure to be well-attended press conference, so that should be fun ..... (Will there be cake ? It's Handke's birthday -- he turns 77 today.)
Tokay and Handke will be delivering their Nobel lectures tomorrow -- and you can catch them (and all the Nobel lectures) online.
Finally, the medals will be handed over 10 December at the official ceremony, with the fancy banquet to follow.
Nobel Prize in Literature lectures
The two Nobel Prize in Literature laureates honored this year -- 2018 winner Olga Tokarczuk and 2019 winner Peter Handke -- were among Nobel Prize winners who delivered their Nobel lectures yesterday (another batch does so today).
You can watch and read both online now
They are very different kinds of lectures, and no doubt the Tokarczuk is the more memorable (and accessible) one. The fuss around Handke has not died down -- though everyone was all decorum at the lecture --, in no small part because Handke really does not know how (or, apparently, want) to help (or. more specifically, explain) himself, witness the Friday press conference (see, for example, the reportin The Guardian) -- but his lecture reflects his art, and his focus on (his personal) experience and art, which has an unworldly feel in this hyper-politicized day and age (and in contrast to, for example, Tokarczuk). We seem to expect activism and position-taking at near every turn from our contemporary authors; as Handke's unfortunate and very limited (in every respect) forays out of his comfort zone and into that area suggest, maybe that's not always desirable.
In The Observer Johanna Thomas-Corr reports that Without women the novel would die: discuss -- based on Helen Taylor's forthcoming Why Women Read Fiction (see the Oxford University Press publicity page, or pre-order your copy at Amazon.com or Amazon.co.uk).
I am a bit surprised to learn that:
The idea that fiction is a female domain is taken for granted by most people involved in books. According to Nielsen Book Research, women outbuy men in all categories of novel except fantasy, science fiction and horror.And even more surprised that: "surveys show they account for 80% of sales in the UK, US and Canadian fiction markets".
As someone who values fiction (and specifically the novel) above all else, I'm baffled by anyone, male or female, who doesn't recognize the value and pleasure of fiction -- but given the disparity in what I read/cover -- less than 20 per cent of the reviewed titles at the complete review are by women --, regardless of other factors (notably availability: the focus here is on fiction in translation, and until recently male author were much, much more likely to be available in translation), gender obviously does play a role in the kind of literature I engage with -- and one that I should probably examine more closely.
I do like Jonathan Coe's observation:
“Female readers in the signing queue will sometimes tell you directly how much a book has moved them, whereas male readers will say how much they share my enthusiasm for obscure bands like Hatfield and the North,” he says. “But I think, essentially, they are saying the same thing: it’s just that men sometimes need these proxies, these intermediaries – football, music, etc – as a way of voicing their emotions.”
