Just like I read reddit in order to stay up to date on current events.
\nYeah, that too. His novels have gems like that that creep up years after finishing the book.
\nEven more, he prefers sentimental romances written for a female audience, 'because they contain classy conversation', which he claims to be the most useful for him (paraphrased from memory).
\nI learned something about lies. The butler's reason for reading novels was to improve his "command of the English language". He cannot admit that he actually enjoyed them.
\nIt's a very stiff upper lip English story, especially early in the novel, so like any good piece of fiction, let it unravel its secrets to you at its own pace. Extremely rewarding book to finish.
\nThanks for this. Really considering checking this out now
\nThe book (and movie) center around Stevens, who is the consummate English butler, and his life at Darlington Hall from ~World War 1-1950's. During most of this time he served Lord Darlington, and considers himself (at least at first) to have led an honorable life serving a great man. During the course of the book Stevens reflects on his life while taking a drive across part of England at the behest of the new owner of Darlington Hall, a wealthy American, who finds out he hasn't ever taken a vacation in 40+ years of service. He sets out to meet with a woman who once worked at the hall decades before, and with whom it is implied he was in love. Over the course of his drive, while he reflects, he begins to question himself about aspects of his life, Lord Darlington (who, it is implied, collaborated with or at least sympathized with the Nazis in an effort to avert World War 2), etc. Really great read, I highly recommend it.
\nFresh tomato?
\nFresh yo
\nboobs
\nYou could study the brains neuro-synapses ( I'd like to say 90% grey matter?)
\n\n\n\nYou can read the fantastic movie reviewers rough notes (I want to say 2-3 pages?)
\n
Give me the rundown on human thought.
\nYou can read the fantastic movie reviewers rough notes (I want to say 2-3 pages?)
\n\n\n\nYou could read the fantastic Rotten Tomatoes synopsis (I want to say, 90% fresh?)
\n
Give me the rundown on the review.
\nYou could read the fantastic Rotten Tomatoes synopsis (I want to say, 90% fresh?)
\n\n\n\nYou could watch the fantastic film with Anthony Hopkins (and I want to say Emma Thompson?)
\n
Give me the rundown on this movie.
\nYou could watch the fantastic film with Anthony Hopkins (and I want to say Emma Thompson?)
\nBasically it's a masterpiece of unreliable narration. The story is told by a very proper English butler but you begin to understand how his "propriety" has undermined his entire life. I'm always down to watch an Anthony Hopkins movie but really, with a story like this one whose main strength is the narration, it's impossible to adapt properly to the screen (see also The Catcher in the Rye). Read the book.
\n\n\n\nThe Remains of the Day
\n
Give me the rundown on this book.
\nIshiguro is a master of subtext. Amazing novel.
\nIts one of the best written books that I have ever read. So subtle yet so very critical.
\nIt isn't arty-farty at all, but it is very low-key so might not appeal to your fantasy tastes.
\n\nIt is very much a portrait of one man, whereas fantasy is typically world-building and involves dozens of characters.
\n\nRegardless, it is a short book so give it a go if you're curious.
\nThe Buried Giant by Ishiguro is a straight-up fantasy (but slow and atmospheric, not like most commercial fantasy). Never Let Me Go is science fiction.
\nI am a fantasy fan and I really enjoyed The Buried Giant. It is quite different from his other work, and it is also quite different from the fantasy genre more generally. However I found it really rich in emotional complexity and subtly. Definitely worth a read.
\ncool I'll start with that one then
\nI took that one out of the library yesterday on a lark, and was planning on starting it on my lunch break today. I'm extra excited to try it now!
\nI think it is a book most people could enjoy. If you like fantasy, you may prefer his other book The Buried Giant, which is also great.
\nLike others have said it's quite slow, but not in a bad way - I find the pace to be very relaxing. I don't think the writing is ever pretentious or arty-farty, it just felt like I was listening to the main character talk about their past while driving together through the countryside.
\nKing killer chronicles is great.
\nI'm a pretty casual reader. For easy-to-read entries to the genre, try David Gemmell's 'Legend' or Weis/Hickman 'Death Gate Cycle'
\nAlso anythibg by Brandon Sanderson is a good time
\nDo you have any fantasy books suggestions for someone new to the genre?
\nAny layman can read it, but you'll need closer examination to dissect the meaning behind what is being said. It's pretty boring at the start and it's monotonous, but picks up the pace later as they explore the history behind the people and the house
\n\nSource: studied this text
\nI typically read fantasy but I occasionally read a literature novel now and then, is it a book a regular person would enjoy or is it a literature book for arty-farty people?
\nI'd say When We Were Orphans and The Buried Giant, and Never Let Me Go. I know that's three, but, well, they're just that good...
\nthey would probably have to be Emma (Jane Austen) and The Count of Monte Cristo (Alexandre Dumas).
\nWhat are ur other two favorites?
\nThe Remains of the Day is such a beautiful book, it's definitely in my top three favourites
\nI agree with you. Fantastic novel.
\nIt is, but "Never Let Me Go" will always be my favourite
\nyess dats right majulah singapura haha im from dunman high btw, 'A' levels was a nightmare 😂
\nare u a singaporean lol
\nI had to read it for my first year of A levels too, it's absolutely brilliant.
\nI had this with one Ishiguro's tutors: Angela Carter's Wise Children.
\nTROTD was one of the titles we had to read for my literature 'A' levels and at first, I couldn't understand why my school had selected such a dreary and uneventful book, but after scrutinising, it was really heartwarming to slowly pick out all the sprinkles of literature cues dotted throughout the book. Now that I think about it, I am super thankful to have been 'forced' to read the book because I probably would not have stumbled upon this masterpiece otherwise
\n"The Remains of the Day" is one of the finest novels I have ever read and IMHO one of the finest novels ever written. The nuance on so many levels is pure genius.
\nPeople who are super duper into a field, like the people who judge for Nobel prizes, tend to develop lots of obscure favorites. Personally, I don't mind that they boost people who don't already have huge followings.
\n\nBut also last year they gave it to fucking Bob Dylan, so clearly they're not always going for hidden gems.
\nOkay, I understand what you mean.
\nAgain, I'm referring to the general public. IME when randomly discussing books with strangers, the general public tends to recognize and read authors on the level of Stephen King, JK Rawlings, Tolkien, James Patterson and John Grisham. Although Pamuk may be critically acclaimed, as well as Turkey's best selling author, I'm willing to bet that here in America at least, if you walked down the street and randomly asked 100 people if they knew who Pamuk was, or if they could name a single work he has written, maybe five or so people might say yes; and I honestly doubt it would be even that many people.
\nI don't know what to say, but Orhan Pamuk was well known before the prize. His recent novels, Snow and My name is Red had received acclaim all over the world.
\nI agree, but I was speaking more from a general public viewpoint (edit: in America). I consider myself fairly well read, yet there's many Nobel Prize winners for lit that I've honestly never heard of before they won the award. For example, I highly doubt Orhan Pamuk is very well known outside literary and academic circles. And I'm fairly sure you won't see any of his works on very many Lit 101 syllabuses (edit: yet, at least).
\n\nI know it's not just me, because I've spoken with friends irl who love to read and have never heard of some of these authors either.
\nA fair amount are already regarded, like Vargas Llosa, Transtromer, and Munro, and a bunch of the others (Le Clezio, Modiano, Mo Yan) were quite well known in their home countries before the award.
\n\nI don't know if in 50 years ppl will look at them the way we view laureates you listed, but they're not as unknown as people have been hinting.
\nI completely agree, but I sometimes wonder if contemporary Nobel Prize winners for Literature will one day be as famous and well-regarded as past winners of this category. After all, quite a number of winners of this award in the past, IMO, are fairly well known by the general public and whose works are still taught in classrooms around the world, such as: John Steinbeck, Ernest Hemingway, William Faulkner, Eugene O'Neill, Sinclair Lewis, Jean-Paul Sartre, and Samuel Beckett.
\n\nPerhaps more time just needs to pass before these modern authors become as well known as some of the past winners. Then again, within the past few decades, there has been a large paradigm shift within society that has sadly shifted away from the prestige the general public once held for writing.
\nSteinbeck's win, if I recall correctly, was somewhat controversial. There were numerous individuals that believed he never should have been awarded the prize. In fact, I think the Swedish Academy truly believed there shouldn't have been an award for literature that year but wound up compromising on Steinbeck.
\n\nAlso, fun fact: Hemingway's Nobel win in 1954 may have been influenced by his near death experience after a plane crash on safari in 1952.
\nSteinbeck? Ninja edit: he won the Nobel prize himself in 1962.
\nI barely read American novels (I can't think of any right now, but there probably are some), and the majority of Nobel Prize winners are mostly pretty obscure to me.
\nOnly if you read only american novels. Like 99% of this sub. pff
\nThey always award it to someone obscures but finally !
\nThanks, I’ll check it out!
\nIf you love it, read the short novel "The Summer After the War", the earliest form of the Remains of the Day.\nIt's an incredible piece of literature
\nI've got it sitting on the bookshelf beside my bed. This definitely just bumped it up a few spaces on my "to read" list.
\nThat was my thinking too. Looks like it just got bumped to the top of my reading list.
\nThe Remains of the Day is a masterpiece so I’m cool with this
\nBut she doesn't have your fire!
\nAnd as an added bonus, Ishiguro doesn't make his virginal protagonist an uber sex god halfway through the sequel either.
\n\n\n\nIshiguro sneaks up on you.
\n
Amen. Never Let Me Go was a pretty crushing book by the end.
\nIt's Kazuo Ishiguro, not Patrick Rothfuss or whoever. You pick up one of his books and you know you're not getting some exciting action adventure or anything. The Remains of the Day sounds like the single most boring thing in the world when it's described, but it's beautifully written, thematically rich, and emotionally devastating by the end. Ishiguro sneaks up on you. He's an amazing writer and I'm very happy he won. Thought he was a bit too mainstream for the committee, but pleasantly surprised.
\nIt's very lowkey but I personally think it's sublime!
\nIs it fantastic?
\nThe Buried Giant!
\nWhat book is this? Buried Giants? Is it good? It sounds good.
\nIt's sleepy and dreamy but in a good way. OC is talking about the themes of the book but the story itself is very simple. It's just about an old couple, knights, a dragon and a fog that makes people forgetful.
\nIt's a slow book but by no means boring
\nIt has a dragon apparently.
\nIt is, but it's quite beautiful in its own way.
\nI nodded off just reading your comment. The actual book must be a real sleeper.
\n\n\n\nThematically it's primarily about the ethics of memory and forgetting
\n
There's also the bit about repeating cycles of generational hate for opposing factions/tribes.
\nIt's been awhile since I read it, but narratively speaking doesn't it become a take on the quest narrative really? Thematically it's primarily about the ethics of memory and forgetting—when is it better to remember, when is it better to let go? What responsibility do we have to keep the memories of past traumas, individual and collective, alive or is it better to forget a painful past and wrongs? I quite liked it, though not as much as his top tier stuff. But that's a high bar, Never Let Me Go and The Remains of the Day are two of my all time favorite books.
\nIt's obviously an allegory/metaphor, but it's hard to tell specifically what message he's trying to convey. The surface story is simple but there's much much more going on beyond that.
\nThis is strange to me; it's a rather simple story. Were you thrown off by the memory spell enchanting the land?
\nFirst of all, you must finish his books for the payoff. They will be slow along the journey. In an attempt to not spoil anything, think about these questions as you read:
\n\nThe dragon has created a cloud of forgetfulness across the lands. How did it get there? Is it protecting anything? What is it we (the characters) seek in this life? Our two main characters are in love, but how does their love thrive in this cloud? And then at the end, and I'll try not to spoil anything, what are the secrets we keep from our loved ones and from ourselves? And when do you know you've reached the end of your journey?
\nI reaally loved this book, and I couldn't really tell u exactly what it's about, but that it's about not forgetting the past (o rather, the bad things that come with forgetting it).\nI really loved the style, though, so i'm ok with the narrative still being a bit hazy in my mind
\n\n\n\nI think it's about how sometimes in order to move on, to forgive and forget, we need to sacrifice our memories.
\n
Nail on the head. The dragon was actually trying to help in that regard. Once memories started coming back opposing tribes started remembering why they hated each other.
\nIt's a low fantasy tale that takes place within Ishiguro's interpretation of the Arthurian myth. The plot itself won't make sense until the end but basically I think it's about how sometimes in order to move on, to forgive and forget, we need to sacrifice our memories.
\nI read it twice because I didn't get much out of it the first time. I got a little more the second time, but still didn't grok it.
\nI fucking love the Buried Giant. I've read the Buried Giant, the Remains of the Day and Never Let Me Go, and I think the Buried Giant > the Remains of the Day > Never Let Me Go, though they are all great.
\nI don't mean to be a jerk, but I feel like you may have heard rumors of the plot being confusing and hard to understand and then convinced yourself that they were true as you were reading. Of course the story is rife with symbolism, but that's up to you to interpret. The actual plot is pretty linear and self explanatory. Is there something specific you'd like clarified?
\nCan you explain the buried giant to me? Honest request, I got a third of the way through it and just had no idea what was going on
\nI think this is a really important point! I think you've got to read Ishiguro without expectation AND trusting that he knows what he's doing - otherwise it's easy to feel like "what the hell was that." I loved Never Let Me Go because I didn't know anything about it when I started it, and as it sort of... turned into what it ended up being about, I guess? I got more and more creeped out and unnerved and emotionally invested until the ending wrecked me completely. Stoked to see him win the Nobel.
\nHm, was it recommended to you specifically as being similar to The Time Traveler's Wife, or in the sense of, "if you liked TTTW, you will like this"? Because in terms of style, themes, and narrative I don't consider them similar at all (except I suppose the theme of resignation), but I can definitely see how they appeal to the same reader. They both appealed to me, anyway.
\nI have to admit, I did not care for Never Let Me Go.
\n\nBut that is probably because I went into it with the wrong set of expectations. Someone recommended it to me as being similar to The Time Traveler's Wife, and it... was not.
\nSo does Remains of the Day, and it also is excellent.
\nIt's good too, the cast is stellar and all deliver solid performances—Keira Knightley, Andrew Garfield, Carey Mulligan, Domhnall Gleeson pops up for a minute, \nSally Hawkins, Charlotte Rampling... Kind of ridiculous level of talent there. I liked it a lot, Garfield has a few really impressive scenes in particular.
\nTIL Never Let Me Go has a movie adaptation. Gonna watch that.
\nWhen Tommy has Carey pull the car over so he can run out into the middle of the road and breakdown. OMG
\nI would recommend everybody to watch the film to Never Let Me Go. We watched it in class once after reading the book and I wanted to cry SO DAMN MUCH, but... you know the struggle.\nSo I watched it at home some days later and I was so happy to cry my eyes out!
\nPicked up The Buried Giant at an airport bookstore on a whim before a 4-hour flight. Finished it before the wheels touched down. I don't usually do that with books, but man, that was an excellent read.
\nSuper happy with this, love his books Never Let Me Go, The Buried Giant and When We Were Orphans!
\nNot OP, but you might be interested in Punjabi-Mexican Americans.
\nIntrigued by your name..
\n\nAre you really ?
\nM. Night Shyamalan finally got the Nobel.
\nHis acceptance speech will have one simple declarative sentence toward the end that spins the whole thing on its axis.
\nOne day they should give themselves a nobel prize in literature for writing these little snippets for each author since the early 1900s.
\nWhy is Murakami a hack?
\nWouldn't call him a hack but it would be a stretch to say he isn't vastly overrated, IMO.
\n\n\n\nthat sounds more like murakami
\n
The difference is that Ishiguro is a fine author, with real insight. Murakami is a hack, albeit a popular one.
\nthat sounds more like murakami
\ndamn
\nOfficial statement:
\n\n\n\nwho, in novels of great emotional force, has uncovered the abyss beneath our illusory sense of connection with the world.
\n
I mean publishers are the ones that put the price point on the book itself. Bookstores determine whether or not to put a discount on that book.
\n\n\n\nbookstores don't set prices, publishers do!
\n
Yeah....but not really.
\nbookstores don't set prices, publishers do! They offer sales and discounts though. But the prices will definitely rise on eBay and other used retailers.
\nThere's always used books store you could go to.
\nOff to the book store before they get a chance to hike the prices!!
\nIt's pronounced "Salmon"
\nI think Franzen's 'The Corrections' or Heller's 'Catch 22' give Midnight's Children a run for its money, but you have a point. I read Midnight's Children 20 years ago knowing I would probably never read anything better and ... I kind of haven't. The rest of Rushdie's stuff is a bit of a slog, though. \nEDIT: not comparing Nobel winners, just writers in general.
\nThat's a huge statement. I agree that at any given time there are a dozen or more writers inn the world that are deserving, but to say that MC surpasses most works is hyperbolic at best.
\nI like Rushdie and you're entitled to your own opinion but I could not disagree more, Daniel Handler's What the Swedes Read column is really great if you are interested in getting to know some of the lesser known laureates' work better :)
\nThat wasn't a dig. And Rushdie's quality may have declined a bit, but Midnight's Children is still better than anything most Nobel winners have produced.
\nI just went back and now noticed that on mobile my phone showed the comment of American nationalism came after this rabbit hole. Mea culpa. I thought the comment was a direct response to that thread.
\n\nEdit: I don't think your comment about American nationalism regarding taking Rushdie's comment as a dig at Bob Dylan is unfounded. I saw it as more of a joke rather than a dig personally. I apologize for my comment getting tagged onto you.
\nI don't get it. All the original comment did was quote a joke at the expense of Bob Dylan. Where do you get all the rest from ?
\nI don't think their offense is based on nationalism. It feels offensive when you're told that your entire literary culture is summed up by a pulp writer like Stephen King. As someone mentioned above it's as if I said JK Rowling is the pinnacle of British literature or Paulo Coehlo for Brazilian literature. Just because a writer is hugely successful doesn't mean they're the pinnacle of literary talent.
\nRushdie has a habit of attacking America or calling Americans various non flattering things.
\nOnce again I'm amazed how Americans will bring their nationalism into literally any subject.
\nIt felt more like a light joke then a dig.
\nlol, I was joking.
\n\nJust another day I read King and posted here.
\n\n\n\nNow go read your Stephen King. ;)
\n
Before or after my Pratchett & Rowling? You sure you wanna play the culture snob game? Try /r/literature
\nJesus wept. American literature has been where it's been at the last fucking 100 years.
\nYep.
\n\nA random reddit user or Peter Englund? I do not know. Looks hard.
\n\nHmmm...
\n\n\n\namerican lit is shallow and too much self-centered.
\n
I pity someone who hasn’t yet read Steinbeck, Hemingway, Fitzgerald, Salinger, Melville, Vonnegut, Vidal, Capote, James, DeLillo, Twain, Williams, Miller, Angelo or Roth... for starters.
\n\nBecause only an idiot who has read any of them would say something as stupid as that.
\n\n\n\nYou do not need to accept my opinion, but you need to respect it. And not that you can say will change my opinion formed after years of reading, ok?
\n
Wow I would think you'd like shallow and self-centered.
\nIt's based on what I read. Simply. Am I wrong? Am I right? It does not matter, it is just my opinion.
\n\nI think that american literature is weak (and I like Thomas Pynchon and Ben Lerner a lot), but compared to british literature, american lit is shallow and too much self-centered.
\nI was thinking more along the lines of Cormac, but ok.
\n\nOpinion or not, I am still interested in evaluating your criteria for Rushdie automatically being better than any living american author (and don't think I didn't notice that you've already limited the available selection of great american authors).
\nYou're a fucking nitwit imbecile. Pynchon is up there with the all time greats, Rushdie take a fucking seat.
\nIt's only my opinion, after all, that's my name username just before my post.
Now go read your Stephen King. ;)
\n\n\n\nAnd Rushdie is better than any living american author.
\n
ummm ok bud. you wanna fight?
\n\nedit: As one working example that most serious readers are familiar with, tell me how he is better than Cormac McCarthy. Objectively.
\n\nI don't normally rate great authors above others in the way that you seem to (they all contribute to the advancement of the art in different ways), but since you seem to assert that such a method of qualification exists, I want to see your rationale for why Sandman Rushyface is better than any living american author.
\nI'm a first generation American of Indian parents. I began reading Rushdie in the hopes of finding an Western/Indian/Apostate Muslim voice tho identify with, because that's also me. He's not terrible, outta just that I guess other people hyped him up so much to me that I was ultimately disappointed. Most of his books start with interesting and compelling premises but fail in the end to be profound or to me relevant. As someone else noted, midnights children is an exception. However, it's not enough to makes him great, just popular.
\nDepends on your definition of relevant. Indian here. For me, he is far more relevant than Pynchon or Mccarthy.
\nHe also doesn't need to respect it, he just needs to accept that you have one. You know what they say about opinions
\nBecause he is one of the most popular writer. Wow, what a coincidence he would be talked about more!
\nWell, every day we have a new thread about Stephen King...
\n\nHe is, by far, the author most referenced in this sub.
\n\nSo...
\nI'm not required to respect opinions, especially those from someone who apparently believes American literature is nothing more than works by Stephen King. If that puerile quip was your opinion of American literature, your opinion is not something I should respect because it is founded on ignorance.
\nAmericans, Canadians, and libertarians aren't the same thing. But it's good to know you think that. I'm French-Canadian.
\nMaybe I worded wrong because I'm still learning english.
\n\nI wanted to say that people need to respect my right to have an opinion. Wrong or right, it does not matter. It is personal.
\nSays the guy who expects everyone to respect his opinion no matter what. I'm also not American.
\n\nYou honestly believe that everyone needs to respect your opinion no matter what? You must think very highly of yourself if that's true.
\nTypical ordinary american. hahaha
\nNobody needs to respect your opinion, lol. You haven't earned my respect so why would you think that? Do you expect everyone do respect your opinion? Respect is earned, not given. Get real.
\nI do not say that he is more relevant. I said that he is better. And for me, he is.
\n\nYou do not need to accept my opinion, but you need to respect it. And not that you can say will change my opinion formed after years of reading, ok?
\nIts still a dig for no reason.
\n\nBetter than any living American author, LOL. I've read most of Rushdie, it's pulp entertainment that courts controversy for its own sake. You've got to be kidding if you consider him more relevant than Pynchon, Wolfe, or Mcarthy.
\nYeah right, dude. Thomas Pynchon has no life to his writing. I've read some of his books (Gravity's Rainbow, some short stories, V, and some of Mason and Dixon), and they're complex for the sake of being complex. There's nothing underneath.
\nThomas Pynchon is at least as good and I'm sure Mr. Rushdie would agree since he seems to be a fan.
\nHe congratulated Bob Dylan last year.
\n\nAnd Rushdie is better than any living american author.
\nTrust Rushdie to take an unwarranted dig at an American. Some of his books are good but in general overrated. If they ever give him a Nobel they will have jumped the shark.
\nSalman Rushdie
\n\n\n\nMany congratulations to my old friend Ish, whose work I’ve loved and admired ever since I first read A Pale View of Hills. And he plays the guitar and writes songs too! Roll over Bob Dylan.
\n
Also, it's not necessary that the correction was made in bad taste! Frankly, although everyone can fall victim to that mistake it is quite jarring to read :)
\nSeeing as we are honoring a great writer, I think in this case the correction should be taken in stride. Normally a correction like that would be juvenile, but in this case I feel like the atmosphere allows for it.
\nDon't be that guy.
\n*you're
\nArtist is great, but the remains of the day is somehow even better, it's a masterpiece in my mind. Your in for a treat when you get to that one.
\nBy far my favorite of his books!
\nI read An Artist of the Floating World after coming back from living in Japan. What a beautiful, succinct and powerful introduction to him. Also had the privilege of meeting him at an event in Chicago.
\nKazuo Ishiguro about his prize.
\n\n\n\nSpeaking to the BBC, the author has called the award a “magnificent honour, mainly because it means that I’m in the footsteps of the greatest authors that have lived”.
\n\n“The world is in a very uncertain moment and I would hope all the Nobel prizes would be a force for something positive in the world as it is at the moment,” he said. “I’ll be deeply moved if I could in some way be part of some sort of climate this year in contributing to some sort of positive atmosphere at a very uncertain time.”
\n
"dystopian Ian McEwan novel"
\n\nTHIS SO MUCH. Maybe I agree because I happened to have read Atonement right before Never Let Me Go though.
\nWhat a great analysis. Not sure yet whether I agree 100%, but certainly thought provoking.
\n\nThank you.
\nI always thought it felt much more like a dystopian Ian McEwan novel. The initial mystery and slow reveal of the purpose of the donors isn't very Kafkaesque - in Kafka's writing, the complete lack of explanation or justification is pivotal.
\n\nAlthough they do feel trapped, there's not the same heavy atmosphere of hopelessness, one in which an identity is stripped away. The bulk of Never Let Me Go is a positive search for identity, even if it is ultimately lacking in meaning, not a negative removal of an existing identity due to an oppressive and suffocating system.
\nAs is the unconsoled, probably his most kafkaesque.
\nNever Let Me Go is very reminiscent of Kafka
\nI've never read Remains of the Day but I've read and reread Village after Dark and I can see why people would liken it to Kafka stylistically.
\nI agree, any comparison to Kafka or Proust is embarrassingly off the mark. He's good but his books have much more modest ambitions.
\n\nKafkaesque is a warning sign anyway, as one of the most misused literary terms of all time. People use it in very vague ways to mean something is ironic, has an atmosphere of paranoia or is simply "creepy"; very rarely to denote a meaningful similarity to Kafka's writing. Apparently this applies to literary judges as well as the rest of us.
\nThat Kafkaesque reading of The Remains of the Day is rather bizarre. I follow the Austen comparison, but Ishiguro isn't at all like Kafka or Proust.
\nIt's not for her to judge whether this decision will appease all the people who were upset that Dylan won last year
\nI didn't get it. After all, they are the people who judge!
\n\nBut I think that she was talking about what she thinks in a personal level.
\nAny idea what the "that's not for me to judge" was a response to?
\n\n\nAt the announcement, the academy’s Sara Danius described Ishiguro’s style as a mix of Jane Austen and Franz Kafka, adding: “But you have to add a little bit of Marcel Proust into the mix, and then you stir, but not too much, and then you have his writings.”
\n\n“He’s a writer of great integrity. He doesn’t look to the sidee’s developed an aesthetic universe all his own,” she said. Danius says her favourite Ishiguro novel is The Buried Giant, but called The Remains of the Day “a true masterpiece, which starts as a PG Wodehouse novel and ends as something Kafkaesque”.
\n\n“He is very interested in understanding the past, but he is not a Proustian writer – he is not out to redeem the past, he is exploring what you have to forget in order to survive in the first place, as an individual or as a society,” she said, adding – in the wake of last year’s uproar about Dylan – that she hoped the choice would “make the world happy”.
\n\n“That’s not for me to judge. We’ve just chosen what we think is an absolutely brilliant novelist,” she said.
\n
In my case, the work didn't change, but my appreciation of it did as the novel went on.
\nI started to read it because a friend recommended it to me because I like these kind of science fiction books. So if I keep reading I should be more interested?
\nThey definitely have the same sort of deeply sad resignation that you as a reader just have to endure. Love both books a lot.
\nUgh. That reminds me of one of my favorite books, The Beach by Neville Shrute. Maybe it's a bit cliche but I read it in college for a seminar class and it's the only book I've been forced to take breaks from because I couldn't stop crying.
\nYeah, you definitely stopped too early. I think it's supposed to almost bore you with its mundane events and bland character and overwhelm you with insignificant details. It does so in a way that if you keep reading, you know so many intimate details of the characters that you can't help but to love them and feel the horror that is their doom.
\nI've tried to read Never Let Me Go but I just can't seem to pull myself to do it. I've gotten maybe a little more than a quarter of the way through the book but it just hasn't drawn my attention. I forced myself to keep going but it just hasn't really kept me interested. Did I stop reading it too early? All the talk with her in the school just lost my interest.
\nNever Let Me Go if you enjoy Scifi/speculative dystopian fiction.
\n\nThe Remains of the Day if you want something more down to earth, slow and personal.
\n\nBoth books are very touching.
\nRemains of the Day is probably his most famous and arguably his best.
\nArtist of the Floating World, Remains of the Day, and Pale View of Hills are all explorations of lifelong self deception as defense against regret and honest recrimination. Love all of them.
\nI guess I gotta finish this one now
\nNever Let Me Go
\nI've read a bunch of his novels. Pick any, but finish it. They are slow moving until it's over and you realize just what had been going on the whole time. They always leave you with something to contemplate. The Remains of the Day is my favorite, but The Buried Giant is the one I think about most often.
\nI really liked Nocturnes
\nI think the Nobel committee just recommended all of them!
\nI read 3 of his, one is The Remains of the Day. But Never let me go always wins it for me. The audiobook is spectacular, made me read the book then watch the movie. The emotion in it is so raw and real. I never cry so much reading a book.
\nOf his British track, Remains of the Day is a delight, and Never Let Me Go is his most mainstream/accessible. Both are taught in schools.
\n\nOf his Japanese track, A Pale View of Hills is absolutely stunning in an understated way to me. There's also An Artist of the Floating World, which should be read as a mirror image of The Remains of the Day - same character, themes, ending era, but at in Japan rather than England.
\nAny recommendations of his work?
\nI've been recommending him to anyone that will listen for years. His back catalogue is so diverse, sci-fi, historical romance, detective fiction, a kafkaesque novel, horror, short stories and more.\nWhat unites them all is a theme, about memory and nostalgia and the reliability of ourselves to see things clearly both in the moment and when looking back.\nHis style is beautiful and readable and I think he is a great choice, really pleased by this!
\nEver the pretentious arse
\nWill Self
\n\n\n\nHe’s a fairly good writer, and surely doesn’t deserve the dread ossification and disregard that garnishes such laurels.
\n
I guess it comes down to definitions. Not sure what the difference between magic realism and fantasy is. I guess it's just different literary heritages. I just generally see The Buried Giant categorized as Fantasy, One Hundred Years of Solitude as Magic Realism and The Jungle Book as a childrens book.
\nI'm not saying it's not fantasy, just that it's not the first fantasy novel written by a Nobel winner. I've read the book and definitely agree that is fantasy. Maybe it's better to say that it's more obviously fantasy than some other previous winners' books.
\nThe Buried Giant is atypical fantasy and leans more toward literary fiction but at the end of the day it has dragons, knights, fairies, and magic in it. Gotta file it under fantasy.
\nI don't know. You could just as easily call The Jungle Book fantasy. I also feel like One Hundred Years of Solitude is closer to fantasy than The Buried Giant.
\n\n\nHowever, even if he had laid claim to the term, Ishiguro wouldn’t be the first writer of fantasy to win: Rudyard Kipling, Maurice Maeterlinck, Hermann Hesse (The Glass Bead Game) and Isaac Bashevis Singer (who wrote short stories featuring ghosts and devils).
\n\nThere are also laureates who wrote speculative fiction – which Ishiguro is also known for since his 2005 novel Never Let Me Go: Doris Lessing (Canopus in Argos), José Saramago (Blindness) and Nadine Gordimer (July’s People).
\n
The Glass-Bead Game by Herman Hesse might also qualify as science fiction.
\nThat's true! Not sure how I missed that one.
\nHarry Martinsson was way ahead of Lessing (Aniara).
\nJose Saramago (98 Nobel) has many many fantasy(ish) books.
\nThis has to be the first time that an author who has written a Fantasy novel (The Buried Giant), is awarded with the Nobel Prize. He has also writted Sci-fi (Never Let Me Go), but Doris Lessing was first there (Shikasta).
\nDo you mean he deserves to lose or deserves the prize?
\nLet's hope again next year.
\nNot up voting to say I like it but that he deserves it.
\nI like Murakami as well, I just don't think he is particularly deserving of the award.
\nThe problem is that not only is Murakami insanely repetitive, but that he's simply not a very good writer (in terms of style), and hasn't had any real ideas in decades.
\n\nOn the other hand, he is very popular.
\n\nI presume the Nobel committee cares more about good writing and/or insight than popularity.
\nO SHIT. I personally love Murakami, but I think his style is so consistent and similar (some might say stale) that a lot of people are turned off by it. I think his work is best as a collective text consisting of all his novels, short stories and non-fiction that all progress similar themes with a slight difference in perspective. I'll always keep my fingers crossed for by boi Haruki in the future.
\nRemember it's probably a little unfair to compare them too much. Even know Ishiguro has a Japanese name, he was born in England (I believe) and writes all his novels in English.
\n\nEDIT: as /u/SirTopKekington said, he was born in Japan, but he moved to England when he was 5.
\n\nMurakami writes in Japanese so if you are reading a translation, you are inevitably not reading his original prose (though I've heard his translations are good as he collaborates with the translator on them, or something? Not sure).
\nYou pose the question to me as if I was a selection committee member. I could care less about Bob Dylan
\nIf that's the only criteria then does that mean Bob Dylan is on the same level as a writer as Ishiguro?
\nprobably because ishiguro can write circles around him
\nmurakami loses again
\nRemains of the Day is a life changer!
\nYou either die a hero, or you live long enough to see yourself become the erotica author.
\nsome people get mainstream due to their talent and hard work
\n\nother people write awful erotica and have a great marketing team though for example!
\nCall it a safe choice after last year's not-so-safe one.
\nWell I just disagree with that 100%
\nHe's sold millions of books (many of which have won prestigious awards) and had some turned into movies. If you haven't heard of him, you're living under a rock.
\nMainstream? I had never heard of him.
\nWow, I did not expect this one. Don't get me wrong, I love his books, but he's way more mainstream than I expected.
\nNot a bad pick. Remains of the Day and Never Let Me Go are amazing. Still shocked that Haruki Murakami and Cormac McCarthy are yet to have won though.
\nIt's not a book to love necessarily haha. But the surrealist atmosphere, lack of setting, and absence of real characters does make it an interesting novel for analysis. And no, the entire novel is essentially like that: seemingly nonsensical dialogue rooted in memory that has little connection to the circumstances in which it's spoken. Most people tend to think of it as the retelling of a bad dream or something like that.
\nCoincidentally, i am reading Unconsoled now(around page100). I have read Never Let me go and Nocturnes and i absolutely loved them both but i cant say the same for this one. I love the melancholic feeling it leaves you with but some dialogues are really weird imo. Like people giving extremely detailed and personal information out of nowhere. Is there any reasoning behind this that i will learn later?
\nI'm also a massive fan of his and so pleased for him. The Unconsoled is one of my favourite books of all time. I know it's not for everyone but just couldn't put it down and even now, years after reading, I can still remember how the book made me feel at the time.
\nOne of my absolute favorite writers. Well deserved. I wrote my honors thesis as an undergrad on his the Unconsoled.
\nI hated remains of the day, but it was definitely extremely well written. Conflicted. Kazuooooo .
\n\n\nThe former poet laureate Andrew Motion said that “Ishiguro’s imaginative world has the great virtue and value of being simultaneously highly individual and deeply familiar - a world of puzzlement, isolation, watchfulness, threat and wonder”.
\n\n“How does he do it?” asked Motion. “Among other means, by resting his stories on founding principles which combine a very fastidious kind of reserve with equally vivid indications of emotional intensity. It’s a remarkable and fascinating combination, and wonderful to see it recognised by the Nobel prize-givers.”
\n
I am incredibly happy at this development. Well deserved.
\nWell if he doesn't win it in his lifetime, he doesn't win it at all.
\ndo you think haruki murakami will win this in his lifetime?
\nCongratulations.
\nI'm a huge fan of his work. It's very well-deserved.
\n:(
\nYou don't need to be Benedict Cumberbatch to spot a howler like that.
\nHaha, you're correct my friend! Reddit misses nothing.
\nSorry to argue semantics, but the Nobel Prize is in Literature, separate from the Peace Prize. There is no Nobel Peace Prize in Literature.
\nI seriously scoured the comments looking for my fellow Murakami lover. He's like the Leo DiCaprio of The Nobel Peace Prize in Literature. I'm convinced sometime here soon, he will shine through. Although this years winner is a wonderful author as well.
\n\nEDIT: Nobel Prize in Literature, actually. Good to know. Although my guy is still a winner in my heart.
\nWas so sure Murakami would win this year. Gutted 😭
\nCouldn’t disagree more. Krasznahorkai is brilliant.
\nKrasznahorkai is far too boring though to win a prize. It's outrageous that he even won a Man Booker. I think it's good that the Nobel Prize has started premiering good storytelling and/or brilliant writing before pretentiousness.
\nWell thank the heavens it wasnt fricken murakami
\nPersonally find this a quite boring pick. I didn't expect Krasznahorkai to get it but he's the one I've been hoping for for a while now.
\n\nA lot of people will be happy over this though. Surprisingly well known name to give the Nobel to. I feel like that's been the main argument against Murakami but I guess this disproves that argument.
\nRemains and The Unconsoled are the only books of his that I enjoyed, but they are good enough that I feel this award is fair.
\nSo, I’m taking from this discussion that The Unconsoled isn’t widely regarded as his major work?
\nHe deserves it
\nSuper deserved, Remains of the Day and Never Let Me Go are two of my favorite books.
\nNever Let Me Go has been on my to-read list for a long time! Congratulations, sir!
\nI've been waiting to read some of his books for awhile now! I guess this settles it!
\n\n(Also hoping Murakami wins one eventually)
\nI gave my mom The Remains of The Day to read on summer vacation, because she forgot to bring her usual books (romance and historical romance). I told her it was "a romance", sort of, and she has never been angrier to read a book in her entire life.
\n\nShe was like THEY DON'T EVEN KISS.
\n\nI just told her the book won a Nobel Prize. I'm dying.
\nI'm surprised by this. I read The Buried Giant and thought it was mediocre and then I happened to read Never Let Me Go after seeing it recommended here without checking the author. I realized about 100 pages in based off his writing style and how often he uses a variation of the phrase "he/she felt something was off but wasn't sure what."
\nGotta admit I've never heard any of this guys lyrics
\nYes, he's 62.
\nOrhan Pamuk won it in 2006 when he was 51 or 52, and I remember being surprised by that. I think Ishiguro is in his 60s...
\nI would have thought him a bit too young, but I love his work so can't complain.
\nI was cheering for Murikami. I love his books and he deserves it.
\nVery well deserved. Never Let Me Go is one of my all time favorite books.
\nMurakami isn’t the essential part of my comment, I have sympathy for him, so I feel sorry for him, but nothing more.
\nThis is my beef with Murakami too. It's always some vanilla guy who meets a quirky girl that likes sex or speaks very directly.
\n\nBecause you know, women enjoying sex and having direct ways of expressing opinions is strange.
\nI mean, why do you think Murakami would win? At least some of his contemporaries in Japan write just as well as he does, and several of them write better stories.
\n\nPeople eventually get tired of apathetic guys with mommy-issues who listen to jazz and classical music while interacting with weird women, often from the past to end up having weird sex in far-flung, isolated locations with weird descriptions of their genitals. And cats.
\nI really hate how the political lobby prevents that some authors receive the prize. I’m specifically thinking on Kundera and Nicanor Parra, both reached the level of transcendence required to win the prize a long time ago and still don’t receive it because they offended the wrong countries at one moment of their lives. I really can’t feel satisfied seeing how some authors -even if they are great authors- win the prize and them no.
\n\nAnd poor Murakami too, at least the memes will continue.
\nAlice Munro won in 2013 so another Canadian woman winning was apparently a slim chance so close to that.
\n\nAlso personally I was quite disappointed with Atwood's latest, The Heart Goes Last.
\nSo happy for Ishiguro, but i was secretly hoping Atwood would finally win.
\nI was cheering for Murikami. I love his books and he deserves it.
\n(Which one is the masterpiece? Remains, I presume.)
\nSure. Is one masterpiece all we need for a Nobel now? That would certainly open it up to many more writers…
\none masterpiece is well above the global average
\nOne masterpiece and a bunch of average or slightly above average books. I'm not impressed.
\nI thought that they would keep the trend from last year and give it to Ke$ha or something.
\nNot Eminem?
\n