Hooker - 2012-12-05 Kurt Vonnegut is why I think either I don't understand literature or the people that understand it don't understand it.
I've heard people talk about how authors like Stephen King or Michael Crichton should be (or have been) considered for the Nobel Prize. Frequently I've heard such things. Obviously those people don't understand literature. But my understanding is that Kurt Vonnegut was never seriously considered for the prize.
This year, my favourite living author, Haruki Murakami was one of the heavy favourites for the prize. Murakami is a fantastic author and may be the best ever at writing surrealist fiction, but I know enough about literature to know that he's no Vonnegut. Why on Earth did Vonnegut constantly fail to find critical respect?
memedumpster - 2012-12-05 No one will ever win that can"t be digested easily by a community college English101 class.
Vonnegut invalidates the entire field of literary criticism and shows it to be the arbitrary sham that it is.
fatatty - 2012-12-05 Vonnegut is one of the most easily digestible authors I've read. If I'd discovered him in grade school I might have realized that reading could be enjoyable a lot sooner.
I think he even said that he tried to write as unpretentiously as possible so that as many people could enjoy his work as possible. It's sad he didn't receive more acclaim, but it's not as if he was a Kilgore Trout or something.
poorwill - 2012-12-05 Bunch of weird snobbery surrounding Vonnegut. I think people who straddle the margins between popular art and regular art always open themselves up for a special kind of venom, even or maybe especially when it's totally undeserved.
kingarthur - 2012-12-05 I met him waaaaay back in the 90s and he advised me and several others in the group to write a one-page story or poem to myself and then throw it away without showing it to anyone. I remember after his lecture, he also exited the stage singing "Paperback Writer".