I haven’t paid much attention since it was announced that Chinese writer Mo Yan was to receive the Nobel for literature this year. Bookman found we had one of his books on our shelf, Life and Death are Wearing Me Out. He brought it upstairs and it has been sitting sideways on our poetry bookshelf for several weeks now. Over the weekend Bookman decided he would start reading it and put it on his nightstand. I don’t know if he has started it yet or not. Anyway, that’s been about the extent of thinking of Mo Yan.
But then the other day I read a review article in The New York Review of books, Does This Writer Deserve the Prize? Though the article begins with a list of Mo Yan’s books, it doesn’t spend much time actually talking about them. Most of the article is devoted to biography and whether a writer who is supported by and supports the Chinese government is worthy of a Nobel. It doesn’t come to any clear conclusion, instead, like Mo Yan who has had to compromise in order to practice his craft, the article compromises as well by trying to have it both ways: Mo Yan is part of the “system” but maybe not as much as appears.
The NYRB article was written several weeks before Mo Yan received his award which happened on Monday. Now the lit sites are buzzing. Apparently Salman Rushdie called Mo Yan a patsy for refusing to sign a petition calling for the release of of Liu Xiaobo, Nobel winner from a few years ago, a countryman, and a writer the Chinese government does not like.
Mo Yan is also being criticized for some things he said in his acceptance speech. The most controversial was his insistence that censorship could be a good thing like airport security checks.
I was starting to feel a bit sorry for the man. Did he really deserve so much anger from the literary community? I mean, shouldn’t we be looking at his writing rather than criticizing his politics? Just because a writer comes from a repressive country, are they required to speak out against their government? I thought the prize for literature was given because of the literature, not because of who the person is and what he believes.
Admittedly I was put off when I learned that he wore a shirt printed with a pattern made from his own name. So maybe he is a Communist Party member and an ass, does that disqualify him from the prize? There may not have been many Communist Party members who won a Nobel in the past, but I am sure there must have been some writers who were asses.
I don’t know what I think about Mo Yan the person and I don’t know that it really matters. I would like to read Life and Death are Wearing Me Out when Bookman is done with it. Then I’ll have an opinion of Mo Yan the writer and whether he deserved the Nobel Prize.
I, too, know nothing of him outside of what I read in that article but, then again, how is it that I (someone who reads pretty broadly) had never heard of this guy before he won the prize (the prize that, I should admit, I really think ought to have gone to Murakami)? And then to learn that he is inside the system – well, I have to admit it makes me wonder whether he does in fact deserve the prize. I don’t think that Nobel-quality literature is only that which agitates against the system (whatever system applies), but we know how censorship and working within a repressive system curtails creativity and life. Much of the world’s greatest literature has in fact been that which rocks boats – and I just don’t see how someone who isn’t just endorsed by but is actually a part of the repressive Chinese system can stand that test, of time and broad appeal and the highest levels of creative genius. (But then again, I haven’t read his works, so I guess I could change my mind; on the other hand, I have some real beefs with the selections made by the Nobel committee in recent years).
Sarah, I was rooting for Murakami too so I understand your disappointment! Since I had one of Mo Yan’s books on my bookshelf I can’t say I have never heard of him, only that I don’t know much about him. I don’t require to have heard of the Nobel winner, in fact, a good many of the winners I had never heard of until they won so I consider their winning a sort of bonus since I get to learn about a new to me good writer. I agree that a good deal of the world’s best literature rocks the boat. The Nobel is supposed to be awarded on the basis of literary merit and consistent idealism. Maybe even within a repressive regime Mo Yan has managed idealism? Don’t know, though I admit it seems unlikely.
Found Mo Yan’s ”Bull” on The New Yorker. Bookmarked it a while back, but didn’t have time to read it yet! Anyways, here is the link.
http://www.newyorker.com/fiction/features/2012/11/26/121126fi_fiction_mo?currentPage=all
Ramblings, oh, thanks for that link! Hopefully I can find time to read it soon!
I’ve read Mo Yan before with some success and some failings, and I was kind of nonplussed by the Nobel choice. Mo Yan is daring in the grotesque genre, sometimes darkly funny, sometimes unnecessarily lurid (in which he clearly rocks the boat of his prudish countrymen), but to me it’s nothing as creative in literature as the previous Chinese nominate, Gao Xingjian in 2000 or his contender Murakami. Again a political choice that has nothing to do with literature, but who said that the Nobel for literature was to be coupled with the peace prize (which would require indeed to not work with the system)? We Western readers kind of expect every writer to be an embodiment of virtues but Mo Yan is only too human in this respect.
Haven’t yet read Mo Yan so really can’t comment. Perhaps the Nobel Prize for literature is inherently a bit impossible – and I don’t mean because writers chosen are sometimes those who the American and British readers have not heard of (that is the best justification for it). The Chinese government will inevitably use his victory as a propaganda gift.
Of course one other China related Nobel prize winner was Pearl Buck and I would recommend to anyone Hilary Spurling’s superb biography of this once massively popular writer. Spurling makes a strong case for Buck being perhaps the most successful novelist ever to interpret one culture to another.
Hilary Spurling is author of Burying The Bones/ Pearl Buck In China.
Ian, I agree that there is something inherently impossible about the prize. Smaller prizes like the Pulitzer and the Booker always generate controversy, a big prize like the Nobel, there is always going to be unhappiness about the results and there will always be a swirl of politics surrounding it. It will be interesting to see who gets the prize next year and whether the committee will play it safe or cause more controversy. Thanks for the info about the Pearl Buck bio. She is one of those authors on my must get around to reading sometime list!
Mine too – how many times have I passed buying copies of The Good Earth in library sales or charity shops! Spurling persuades me it is worth reading her China novels even if for perhaps extra- literary reasons.
Good to know since her reputation in the US has slipped quite a lot since her day.
Smithereens, thanks for sharing your experience reading Mo Yan! He is indeed only human and he didn’t choose the prize for himself after all. If people are unhappy with the choice he shouldn’t be the one attacked, the Nobel committee should be getting the criticism. One does wonder what the Nobel decision-making process is like. Committee politics, country politics, I’ll vote for your author next year if you vote for mine this year; oh to be a fly on the wall! We’d probably be horrified if we knew all the details.
Pankaj Mishra has a really thoughtful piece about this issue in the Guardian this week: http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2012/dec/13/mo-yan-salman-rushdie-censorship?CMP=twt_fd
Thanks Colleen! That was a well done article!
I’m afraid the farthest I’ve gotten so far is pulling out a copy of Red Sorghum (which I bought ages ago I might add…see what a good thing it will be for me to read from my own shelves next year?). I’ve not read anything about the man himself, but I guess I had better pull out my copy of that NYRB and read it! It’s a difficult question and awards are always going to be problematic–I guess one good thing is it brings awareness and discussion.
Danielle, at least you have one of his books, that’s something! You are right, awards will always be problematic in one way or other but it does make for some interesting discussion.
There’s always a system with people forced to be inside it. In the liberal Western world, we call it genre. Hence I suppose the question whether genre novels can/should win literary prizes. We are relatively lucky in that genre doesn’t come at the cost of anyone’s personal freedom, but genre is still about adhering to a formula and an ideology, as anyone who has ever tried to write and publish a genre novel knows to their cost… Like you, I think I’d want to read his works first before passing judgement. If we couldn’t have literary figures who’d joined something suspect or been on the wrong side in a political debate, the literary world would shrink to half its size.
Litlove, love the analogy you made! And you are right, if all literary figures had to be on the “right” side, then literature would indeed be a smaller place and much less interesting!
I try to focus more on the works than on the personality of the Nobel literature prizes. Now, if I dislike the attitudes portrayed in his books, I might not like the books…but I’ll see when I read some of them. I plan on reading Red Sorghum first.
I agree with you and would like to judge his writing as a work of literature. As far as his other opinions or actions, they should be judged on their own.
Boarding, exactly! Though I admit it is sometimes difficult to keep them separate. Now, I hope I can manage to read him in 2013!