The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered  |  Archives [3] 
 
 
User: Guest

Home / Life  % width posts: 38

Why Milosz not Herbert ?


Ironside
4 Feb 2012 #1
Why Miłosz not Herbert got the Noble Prize ?
Evidently Herbert was much better poet and a human being as well.

Miłosz :

f

I don't remember exactly when Budberg died, it was either two years
ago or three.
The same with Chen. Whether last year or the one before.
Soon after our arrival, Budberg, gently pensive,
Said that in the beginning it is hard to get accustomed,
For here there is no spring or summer, no winter or fall.


Herbert:

We halted in a town the host
ordered the table to be moved to the garden the first star
shone out and faded we were breaking bread
crickets were heard in the twilight loosestrife
a cry but a cry of a child otherwise the bustle
of insects of men a thick scent of earth
those who were sitting with their backs to the wall
saw violet now - the gallows hill
on the wall the dense ivy of executions

Alligator
4 Feb 2012 #2
Any Nobel Prize Committee member here?!
No...
hmmm,
then I guess we will never know

Why Miłosz not Herbert got the Noble Prize ?

JonnyM
4 Feb 2012 #3
Milosc (who was a good person) had the edge and came to the attention of the Nobel Committee.

Any Nobel Prize Committee member here?!

No doubt Zbigniew Herbert was nominated too, however there's one prize per year and the world has a lot of good poets and authors.
Alligator
4 Feb 2012 #4
No doubt Zbigniew Herbert was nominated too, however there's one prize per year and the world has a lot of good poets and authors.

Fully agree.

Milosc (who was a good person) had the edge and came to the attention of the Nobel Committee.

I don't think that is completly true. Not every decision of Nobel Prize Committee is measurable and rational.
JonnyM
4 Feb 2012 #5
Not every decision of Nobel Prize Committee is measurable and rational.

There's something in that. One of the current committee, an Elderly Swedish professor (I forget his name) intensely and openly dislikes American novels which is why Phillip Roth hasn't got one. There's also the rush to give the prize to people when they're still alive and when the choice is between an 80 year old and a 90 year old, the 90 year old gets it. Herbert died in his late seventies.
OP Ironside
4 Feb 2012 #6
Milosc (who was a good person) had the edge and came to the attention of the Nobel Committee.

Did you ever meet him?

then I guess we will never know

Do you agree that Herbert was a better poet ?
JonnyM
4 Feb 2012 #7
Did you ever meet him?

How well did you know them both personally? To compare,,that is.
Alligator
4 Feb 2012 #8
Do you agree that Herbert was a better poet ?

Their poetry is distinctive. I don't really think, that you can compare poets or any other writer, painter etc. and measure which is better. You can only say which you like better. I like both Miłosz and Herbert.

For reason stated above I can't understand how Nobel Committee chooses who's the best writer. The idea seems absurd to me.
Barney
4 Feb 2012 #9
One of the current committee, an Elderly Swedish professor (I forget his name) intensely and openly dislikes American novels which is why Phillip Roth hasn't got one. There's also the rush to give the prize to people when they're still alive and when the choice is between an 80 year old and a 90 year old, the 90 year old gets it.

I agree with the thrust of what you say but Roth is crap.

Incidentally in the English speaking world American fiction is far superior to any thing else and has been for some time.
Alligator
4 Feb 2012 #10
Incidentally in the English speaking world American fiction is far superior to any thing else and has been for some time.

Then make a new thread, where all trolls could gather.
Barney
4 Feb 2012 #12
Then make a new thread, where all trolls could gather.

OK, yes post was off topic, just responding to a comment about Roth. For goodness sake don't be so touchy.
OP Ironside
6 Feb 2012 #13
How well did you know them both personally? To compare,,that is.

I met only Miłosz. I don't have to know them personal to compare. Also Miłosz spent most of his live in America. Should get his prize as an American. He even wrote some of his poems in English, that telling.

Their poetry is distinctive. I don't really think, that you can compare poets or any other writer, painter etc. and measure which is better. You can only say which you like better.

I think that you can say who is a better poet.
Alligator
6 Feb 2012 #14
Also Miłosz spent most of his live in America. Should get his prize as an American. He even wrote some of his poems in English, that telling.

Here I thought that I finally found interesting thread, where I could talk to intelligent and well-mannered people. Bummer again!
OP Ironside
6 Feb 2012 #15
Also Miłosz spent most of his live in America. Could get his prize as an American.

should be could - bummer!
OP Ironside
8 May 2021 #16
Why Milosz was buried at Skalka (Saint Michael the Archangel and Saint Stanislaus the Bishop and Martyr Basilica)?
1. He wasn't from Krakow.
2. He spend most of his life in the USA.
3. He wasn't particularly distinguished (yes there is the Nobel Prize but still)
4. He collaborated with Soviets at the very beginning of the Soviet occupation of Poland. When only very few people were corroborating with Soviet installed Puppets. Most was against them and quite a few were resisting - shooting at them.

That makes him a traitor and a commie.
What that because he was supported by post-PRL Soviets' in Poland?
Was that because he wanted to be remembered as a distinguished Polish poet not a third rate English author and a commie without a country?

None ask even ask those questions. They should be asked.

Note to Mods:( I post it here knowing you will marge it anyway, if I'm wrong feel free to repost it as a thread in its own right, All the best.)
jon357
8 May 2021 #17
He was a great poet.

Politically, somewhat conservative in outlook which caused tension with his contemporaries in France who fortunately weren't, however his poems deserve to be read and read. His Nobel was well deserved.
pawian
11 May 2021 #18
Why Miłosz not Herbert got the Noble Prize ? Herbert was much better poet and a human being

Whether a better poet is disputable coz everyone may have a different taste in the reception of their poetry.

As for the Nobel Prize, the explanation is simple -Herbert had mental problems in 1980s. Read this interview with their biographer:

neweasterneurope.eu/2018/09/01/like-two-gods-herbert-milosz/

He suffered from depression and at times was experiencing a persecution complex. He was convinced that publishers were stealing his work from him and translators were doing a poor job. He would cancel contracts and send letters to translators prohibiting them from working on his poetry.

That makes him a traitor and a commie.

Sort of. But another Prize winer, Wisława Szymborska, also supported communism right after the WW2. And many other people of culture were infatuated with it, too. Later they sobered and came to their senses, and sort of redeemed their sins, often by attacking communism.

They should be asked.

Of course. But don`t expect simple answers. This is true life, not a soap opera. .
OP Ironside
11 May 2021 #19
But don`t expect simple answers.

those question should be asked before he was buried there. Never was even addressed.
The same goes for entomb people on Wawel. Nobody but Kings should lay there, Pilsudski that was just too much, the same Kaczynski. I know I was kind on the fence at the time but that only because really disgusting people stoked flame of political emotions in Poland and I was carried along for a short while. ..

Later they sobered and came to their senses,

Oh really? I haven't noticed it! One was going with the flow her whole life the other just jumped the ship he was supporting and never apologized or faced any consequences of his choices.

Damn opportunists both. Apart from that their poetry is not the top notch anyways. Ah the Noble prize - do what?
Walesa got it too.

As for the Nobel Prize, the explanation is simple

Herbert did not fit profile of a conformist that is bland and not overtly patriotic cause that passé. The Nobel Prize Committee is overrun by commies - and they look for those who fit their ideological guidance booklet not for merits of their achievement. So yes the explanation is simple.
Lyzko
11 May 2021 #20
A real "bummer" is that Jaroslaw Iwaszkiewicz was never considered for the Nobel Prize!
mafketis
12 May 2021 #21
I always thought that Miłosz won for The Captive Mind (Zniewolony umysł) more than anything else. It's one of the definitive texts on the totalitarian mindset...
pawian
12 May 2021 #22
Walesa got it too.

Yes., for fighting against communism.

The Nobel Prize Committee is overrun by commies -

If so, Wałęsa wouldn`t have gotten a prize. :):) You contradict yoursefl now.

So yes the explanation is simple.

Yes, Herbert didn`t suit them coz he behaved strangely. They feared he might refuse the Prize or sth. They would be really stupid to provoke such a scandal out of choice. That is why he was turned down. .
OP Ironside
12 May 2021 #23
Yes., for fighting against communism.

So what? I used his example to stress my point. Meaning the Nobel Prize went to the dogs a long time ago.

Wałęsa wouldn`t have gotten a prize.

Why not? He made a deal with commies ensuring a smooth transition without missing a step.

Herbert didn`t suit them coz he behaved strangely.

Sure, he was ...lol lies spread by Soviet Secrets Services tsk tsk
Do you think that Commies in PRL would like Herbert to have this kind of publicity? A rhetorical question.
pawian
12 May 2021 #24
He made a deal with commies

Oh, I see, and in 1983 the Nobel Comittee knew everything about it and as they were commies themselves as you claim, they decided to award Wałęsa. hahaha Funny logic you are using.

I used his example to stress my point

Which proved illogical. Simple.
OP Ironside
12 May 2021 #25
he Nobel Comittee knew

I never said what they knew. I told you why I have mentioned Walesa. OK dude lay off drugs or whatnot.
We are talking about Milosz and Herbert here.
In conclusion Milosz got that Prize because Soviet Secret Services done what they could to exclude/eliminate Herbert from the pool.
They have nothing against Milosz at this point. He might be an interesting spicy exotic taste for American buds but he was nothing or nothing much for Poland or Polish causes.

On the other hand Herbert was and hence he was scorned by all collaborators and soviets.
While Milosz a traitor and a soviet collaborator himself was a nice model how to transition smoothly from being a Soviet scum into an 'respected' man in a blink of an eye without even a proper apology. Bevosue half-hearted excuse doesn't do the trick.
pawian
12 May 2021 #26
They have nothing against Milosz at this point

The problem is you are immersed in conspiracy theories which are a creation of your mind or you heard them some biased source. Try to prove what you are talking about.
Novichok
12 May 2021 #27
Nobel Prize should be for what makes us live longer, not for wierszyki. Today, a 500-buck laptop can write poetry and compose music. It will never be depressed or on drugs.
pawian
12 May 2021 #28
for what makes us live longer, not for wierszyki.

Try to prove that reading good or excellent poetry doesn`t make us live longer. hahaha

There was a time in my life when tragic love poetry consoled me after a personal tragedy - I didn`t commit a suicide which made me live longer. Ha!
Novichok
12 May 2021 #29
Try to prove that reading good or excellent poetry doesn`t make us live longer.

Cute. You can't prove that something doesn't exist. The burden is on the affirmative side.
Besides, if what makes us feel good deserves Nobel Prize, Chris Rock should get at least two.
pawian
12 May 2021 #30
Besides, if what makes us feel good deserves Nobel Prize,

Now you are twisting around. We aren`t talking about feeling good but living longer by not committing suicides. .

Home / Life / Why Milosz not Herbert ?
BoldItalic [quote]
 
To post as Guest, enter a temporary username or login and post as a member.