Hello Gentle Reader,
The Booker Prize Shortlist has been revealed, leaning heavily towards established authorial voices with a few up and comers in the fray to even it out. Without further delay here is this year’s shortlist:
Elizabeth Strout – “The Things We Never Say,”
M. John Harrison – “The End of Everything,”
Rebecca Perry – “May We Feed the King,”
Luke Kennard – “Black Bag,”
Douglas Stuart – “John of John,”
The shortlist is dominated by Marlon James, Elizabeth Strout and Douglas Stuart. Both Marlon James and Douglas Stuart have both already won the award, and by all accounts relatively recently, 2015 for James and 2020 for Stuart. There was a relatively short double award period for Hilary Mantel as well (2009 and 2012), where previous double winners waited over a decade to win the prize a second time. This has always been a massive complaint leveraged against the Booker Prize, with its inability to look beyond itself at times. Re-awarding the usual candidates who have already won or been nominated prior. This year’s shortlist is a prime example of this insularity in judging; however, Marlon James's novel “The Disappearers,” has been described as yet another masterpiece. It would not be surprising to see James win this year’s award.
Luke Kennard and Rebecca Perry are the two outliers on this year’s award. Both of their novels are certainly an off-kilter injection of the world. Specifically in the case of Luke Kennard whose novel “Black Bag,” has all the satire and almost implausible premise of Ali Smith’s novel “There but for the,” which was critically omitted from the Booker Prize in 2011, and was considered a massive snub. “Black Bag,” equally delights in its psychological probing and satire of the modern world, and just how warped our definition of reality is becoming. Whereas Rebecca Perry’s novel “May We Feed the King,” has been praised as a strong debut. Recounting the parrel lives of one museum curator and one reluctant king, the novel has been described as a meditation on history and the nature of storytelling, in addition to our fantasies of the past in attempts to escape from our present.
To go without saying, M. John Harrision is this year’s dark horse with his unapologetic literary science fiction novel: “The End of Everything.”
Ultimately, Gentle Reader, Marlon James appears to be the strongest contender (based on critical consensus) for this year’s prize. Though, either Luke Kennard, Rebecca Perry or M. John Harrison may challenge this assumption, with their unique visions and purviews of society. It is, however, disappointing to see some writers cut. Specifically, Gwendoline Riley with her novel “The Palm House.” There’s something compelling about Riley’s stainless-steel musical prose. How on a prosody level its euphonious intricacies ring out crystalline clarity in its brevity; a complete contrast to Riley's contemporaries, who are the usual austere anemic grey minimalists. Nothing short of a lifeless brood. Whereas Riley’s work has the surgeon’s proclivity and pathologist eye for examining the existential and urban dissatisfaction of individuals cast a drift in an increasingly alienated, damaged and fragmented reality, which reveals a loss of innocence and a growing sense of disillusionment; all delivered in Riley's signature deadpan manner; the other hallmark of Riley's dry ice wit is her gallows humour. Certainly, an underrated writer.
Congratulations to the shortlisted writers. It’ll be interesting to see who wins this year’s prize.
Take Care
And As Always
Stay Well Read
Will you be publishing your Nobel Prize forecast article this year? I have been eagerly awaiting it.
ReplyDeleteHello Anonymous,
DeletePlease Note: this is not M. Mary. A group of us is now working with M. Mary to maintain the blog, under M. Mary’s discretion and final say.
Unfortunately, over the past few years M. Mary’s health has experienced some complications and late last year it took a turn; though it has since stabilized now.
It is our understanding that over the past few years M. Mary has sought to wind down the Nobel Speculation and streamline it. Last years post was drafted and written months in advance, and was considered the last big hurrah, if their health continued to slide.
We will pass your message on though; but please know, M. Mary is very disappointed to have not been able to have published anything this year or share any thoughts, however minimal they may be, considering the changing literary landscape, with the death of many of the old guard and others considered to be aging out of contention.
Thank you very much for your comment.
Please know, M. Mary is eagerly anticipating tomorrow’s announcement and hopes to have some thoughts ready for publications in the days after the announcement.
Your description of Riley's prose as musical, yet capable of that dry-ice wit, caught my attention. Does the music come mainly from sentence rhythm, or from the precision of individual words?
ReplyDeleteHello Quiet Pages from Korea,
DeletePlease Note: this is not M. Mary. A group of us is now working with M. Mary to maintain the blog, under M. Mary’s discretion and final say.
We have not read Gwendoline Riley yet. In fact, early assessment did not originally provoke or entice interest. However, when reading reviews of Riley’s fiction, it became apparent there maybe more to the writer then what was originally considered.
All reviewers praised Riley’s prose, which initially as being meticulous, lean and cutting. We originally dismissed this as yet another writer endorsing manufactured minimalism as the literary style so prevalent with many contemporary writers today. After reading a few pages of some of her novels, it’s clear that there’s a something more to Riley’s work.
To answer your question on our limited exposure at this time, we would say its more sentence level. Riley’s novels appear to be designed in episodes of vignettes, whose pointillistic accumulation is deliberately paced to accumulate and expose, rather than speed forward in a revelation. When we do read Riley’s work in full, however, we’ll able to provide a more substantive response to your question. This assessment is merely a reflection on a sampling of work and synthesising from reviews and readers comments.
Thank you for the careful distinction, and for being clear about the limits of the sample. Your description suggests that the music comes from how sentences and small scenes build on one another, rather than from ornate wording. That slow accumulation is an interesting way to think about restraint: a spare sentence can still change the weight of what follows. I appreciate the thoughtful answer.
DeleteHello Quiet Pages from Korea,
Delete[This is M. Mary]
Thank you so much for stopping by and for the comment. I do hope if you do read Gwendoline Riley before any of us do, that you let us know what you think of her!
M. Mary
Thank you, M. Mary. I appreciate the invitation, and your team's careful distinction between sampling and reading a whole novel. I don't have a full-reading assessment of Riley to add yet; the question of how her sentences and scenes accumulate across a book remains an interesting one.
Delete