Not sure if this has already been posted here elsewhere, but this article (http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,19795992-28477,00.html) makes for some interesting reading. :)
July 14th, 2006, 08:15 PM
I didn't know you were still hanging around here Erebus, hello! :)
That was an interesting article. I didn't really find it very shocking though. A lot of Nobel Prize winning books are difficult to read, and probably aren't the type of thing a lot of publishers are looking for because they aren't the type of thing a lot of readers are looking for.
In other words, not every publisher is looking for highly literary stuff to begin with.
Still, it is somewhat encouraging to amateur writers that a Nobel Prize winning novel could be rejected so soundly so many times. But only only somewhat. :)
July 15th, 2006, 09:24 AM
I have not read this book, but that probably makes me more qualified to say what I am going to say because I have no pony in this race. There are lots of possibillities here: 1) maybe it sucks. What makes a few egg-headed Swedes so damned good at judging books anyway? The Nobel Prize is rarely given for the actual work that merits it, but--in my opinion--is usually awarded to an author who's best work is behind her. It's more often a reward for better work that was overlooked in the past. 2) maybe chapter three sucks. After all--chapter three? I could see evaluating chapter one or chapters one through three, but a randomly sleected chapter from the middle of any book is not a fair test. I'd have rejected it on that ground alone. 3) reading assistants suck. This is a given, right? Honestly, how many editors or big-time agents actually read anything from a no-name, unsolicited author? None is my guess. 4) editors and agents suck. It's a business after all. Do editors and/or agents actually try to winnow Nobel Prize winning stuff out of their slush pile? I doubt very many do; they're too busy looking for the next Davinci Code--which is very clearly not prize winning caliber, but sells lots and lots of copies.