What Type of Book Deserves to Win Literary Prizes? The Case of Less (A Pulitzer Prize Deep Dive)
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 12 ก.ย. 2024
- Expand for more information 👇
Andrew Sean Greer won the 2018 Pulitzer Prize for Fiction for Less, a comedic novel that flies in the face of what is typically considered a candidate for major literary prizes. But does it have a surprisingly toxic side? Did it deserve to win? And do we need to challenge our expectations for what constitutes an award-worthy book?
UPDATE: You can find my review of Less' sequel, Less Is Lost, here: • My Thumbs Down Rant Re...
Links 💻
My full blog post about Less: supposedlyfun....
Further Viewing 🎥
2022 Pulitzer Takeaways: • Pulitzer Prize for Fic...
2022 Booker Longlist Reaction: • Booker Prize Longlist ...
What Is the Great American Novel? • What Is the Great Amer...
Is Gone With the Wind Racist? • Is Gone With the Wind ...
The 2012 Pulitzer Controversy: • Do Book Prizes Owe Us ...
Is Lonesome Dove the Great American Novel? • Is Lonesome Dove the G...
Beloved and the Ghosts of Slavery: • Can America Reckon Wit...
Time Stamps ⏰
Snapshot: 2017: 02:06
Intro to Less: 06:10
What Type of Book Is Prize-Worthy? 07:25
What Is Less About? 12:57
Why Does This Matter? 18:01
Is This a Gay Eat, Pray, Love? 20:28
LGBTQIA+ Representation in Literature (And Why It Matters): 23:43
Is Less a Satire? 25:02
Why is Less a Meta Novel? 28:30
Why is Less Toxic? 31:08
Who is Andrew Sean Greer? 34:40
Are There Adaptations Or Sequels? 36:04
Is Less the Great American Novel? 36:54
What Was Less’ Competition for the Pulitzer? 37:22
Should Less Have Won the Pulitzer Prize? 39:20
Titles Mentioned 📚
Less, Andrew Sean Greer
Less is Lost, Andrew Sean Greer
The Confessions of Max Tivoli, Andrew Sean Greer
Sing, Unburied, Sing, Jesmyn Ward
Lincoln in the Bardo, George Saunders
In the Distance, Hernan Diaz
The Idiot, Elif Batuman
My husband made a cookbook! Check it out here:
www.blurb.com/...
But wait, there's more!
Email: supposedlyfungreg-at-gmail.com
Storygraph: app.thestorygr...
Instagram: / supposedlyfun
Twitter: / supposedlyfun
Website: supposedlyfun....
I neglected to mention in this video that I don't think people would have taken Less anywhere near as seriously (or deemed it worthy of winning a prize) if the protagonist and author weren't white men. If this type of book centered on a female character, audiences would immediately dismiss it.
I think you are going to have a hard time with Updike!
Not that you're wrong!
@@weverage I very much agree!
I would not have dismissed it if Arthur was a female character. I don't think of myself as male or female. Maybe that makes a difference.
@@l.georgealexander8330 It may change in the future, but I think most people still pay attention to gender as a binary, and a lot of people still dismiss stories that are female-focused.
Ha! If the character weren't gay the novel would have been dismissed as a boring, self indulgent mediocre white man novel....which it is still, actually. The absolutely most insipid story I've read that the Pulitzer has ever awarded. But still mildly amusing. But, white man literary novels are falling out of fashion and fast. I mean, there were other white man novels to award that year. So, the gay man box is checked again, at least (but, there were also better gay man novels that year too, btw).
Am I the only one that thought the writing -- the word choices, the sentences-- was stunning?
"He kisses-how do I explain it? Like someone in love. Like he has nothing to lose. Like someone who has just learned a foreign language and can use only the present tense and only the second person. Only now, only you."
"There on the dune, beside the table, one of the camel boys has his arm around the other, and they sit there like that as they watch the sun. The dunes are turning the same shades of adobe and aqua as the buildings of Marrakech. Two boys, arms around each other. To Less, it seems so foreign. It makes him sad. In his world, he never sees straight men doing this. Just as a gay couple cannot walk hand in hand down the streets of Marrakech, he thinks, two men, best friends, cannot walk hand in hand down the streets of Chicago. They cannot sit on a dune like these teenagers and watch a sunset in each other’s embrace. This Tom Sawyer love for Huck Finn."
Also, I have to disagree with your view of the 'toxicity' in Less. (And particularly, lumping it in with Charlottesville and 'White Grievance' politics - which is real and scary - is a bit unfair to me. ***EDIT: not sure I still have this opinion due to the response below.) I think that Zohra's statement about no one caring about Less's book and its main character's troubles (and Less's trouble's therefore by proxy) is Greer's own feeling toward his book at the start and main character. I think Greer is speaking his own beliefs about how he viewed his own novel (and why he changed so much, just like Less - so meta) through Zohra. Notice he doesn't argue with Zohra after she says what she says. He doesn't yell, "YOU WILL NOT REPLACE ME!" He agrees! (You can also see this from how he gets embarrassed as she questions him. He sees it before she even says anything.)
This theme, that Less's life is fine - good in fact - comes up time and time again. Heck the first sentence in the book is 'From where I sit, the story of Arthur Less is not so bad.'
Less is charmed and he doesn't know it. Even though everyone keeps telling him.
Finally, another topic that wasn't brought up is this: Zohra isn't the only person who criticizes his writing. There is a theme of him being a kind of sell-out by another enemy of Less's: Finley Dywer, who says of Less's work during an awards speech:
'I admit I will be disappointed tonight if we reward the assimilationists, the ones who write the way straight people write, who hold up heterosexuals as war heroes, who make gay characters suffer, who set their characters adrift in a nostalgic past that ignores our present oppression; I say we purge ourselves of these people, who would have us vanish into the bookstore, the assimilationists, who are, at their core, ashamed of who they are, who we are, who you are!'
Deep down he knows he is lightweight. He fears he is, well, an empty suit. Speaking of: 'Without the blue suit, there is no Aurther Less,' It is a running motif.
I think there is more to this character and book if read more charitably. And I can't help but feel that you might be misjudging the author by attributing him with a viewpoint that I am not sure is borne out in the book. I mean, it's not Greer's fault he won. And maybe he didn't deserve it, but I think this not just an okay book, but for what it is trying to be -- warm and funny and romantic and tender-hearted -- I think it succeeds (and I don't think Greer ever said this was to be a satire). It is, in my opinion, a very good book.
For what it is.
Thank you for the thoughtful comment. I don't think I am attributing viewpoints to Greer that he doesn't possess--I tried to be careful in pointing out that I don't think he had any malicious intent in this novel. But I do think there's a level of obliviousness to where the conversation around the topic of white males and their role in society was going. My point about the Unite the Right rally was not to equate what they were saying with what Less is saying--it was to point out that it's a little surprising that this book was published while things like that were happening and no one thought to consider if it was tonally off to have a white male author character spend an entire novel being sad about how no one wants to read a book about his experience. And I do disagree with the notion that Less agrees with Zohra's perspective. Rather, I think he accepts it--but then, bucking the system has never been Arthur Less' style. He's an extremely passive person.
From the perspective of someone reading this in 2017, it is easy not to consider how much time Less spends thinking about how no one wants to read about a white male. As I say in the video, this is a topic that really metastasized in the years since this book was published. However, it's far more difficult to read it now, in the wake of the comments from James Patterson and Joyce Carol Oates, and not roll your eyes at it. And again: all the signs were there in 2017 that this is the direction this topic was headed in, if you chose to pay attention to them.
Again, I do not think Greer was intentionally making a case that white people are being replaced. Because I suspect that Greer's actual intention was to use the publisher's feedback as an extension of his portrayal of the ways in which a midlist, middle-aged writer might as well not exist. But I do think the way he approached that idea through Less' white maleness feels tone deaf now.
Less is Lost and its approach to Arthur Less will be the true test, I think.
The writing is indeed gorgeous, though.
@@SupposedlyFun
Yep! I see what you as saying! (Weird. Seeing your thoughts written somehow hit different, or perhaps I am just easily swayed!) Maybe I am the one who is doing the misinterpreting here! Especially about what you said about the Charlotteville rally. Not saying he was like-minded too such a degree, but that it was 'in the air' and maybe more reflecting on this topic was needed here. Fair point! (Plus, a bummer about J. Carol Oats.)
The more I think on it, the more I can see your point. It's like... You ever see a movie where you like individual scenes but at the end, the movie never goes anywhere?
Maybe that is where I am with this book. I love the little scenes (The Paris rooftop is such a scene!)
Anyway,thank you for your comment!!
See, this is why this is my FAVORITE booktube channel! (The takedown of 'Gone with the Wind' is worth the price of admission! Please do another 'hate read' vid again soon!)
PS I couldn't get into Updike either! He is like literary vegetables everyone says I need to ingest!
So I am very curious to see how it goes when you get there! 😁
PSS (or PPS - I can never remember) I know this is a little late, but I was very sorry to hear about your little dog. He seemed sweet and had a cute face!
@@weverage Thank you so much for all the kind words. I probably explained myself better in the comment. And thank you for the condolences. Guinness had a very cute face indeed and he was just the sweetest boy. I miss him every day.
i love how much context you gave, even if i remember 2017, feels crazy to think all of that happened in the same year and so recently too! you really made a strong case for your conclusion, i recently read less and i agree i think the satirical elements weren't as intentional, thought through and 'sharp' as they could've been. i enjoyed the idiot a lot more! i hadn't heard of the other nominees so i'll definitely give jesmyn ward a try, sounds fascinating.
I definitely remember reading Less and yet I don’t really remember anything about it. That always says something
I think it definitely says something here.
I thought Less was fantastic. Exquisite prose, deft plotting, memorable characters, and an ending that could have landed terribly in different hands. Andrew Sean Greer wrote exactly the novel that he intended to write. I don't think it's for us to say that he should have crafted some post-woke, post-racial, post-whatever novel instead back then, or posit that it's that kind of novel he should create today. If Greer stumbled into some unfortunate "downfall of the white man" or Unite the Right thematic territory with anything regarding Arthur Less's characterization, it was purely coincidental and ultimately tame. I might be the only one here eagerly anticipating Less Is Lost, since I didn't know Less was getting a sequel until I watched this video. I want more pratfalls, more bad German, and more frenemy banter between Arthur and Carlos! Maybe it did surprise me when the novel won the Pulitzer, but I think it's perfectly deserving of the honor. I'm choosing to celebrate a queer work reaching this literary pinnacle, because I doubt that it will happen again for a long, long time, if ever. This feels like the same type of criticism that's leveled when a comedy rarely wins the best picture Oscar over a drama, re: Shakespeare in Love over Saving Private Ryan, or even this year with CODA over The Power of the Dog. Takedown pieces like this one feel unnecessarily churlish, and I suspect that if Less hadn't won the Pulitzer, it would be held in much higher regard today.
I did ponder over the really interesting point you made about the Pulitzer Prize overlooking deserving POC writers, particularly black women. I've always thought that both the Fiction jury of three (?) and the small Pulitzer board were too insular, tastes-wise, and when in your bubble, anything is sadly likely to happen. Let's look out for prominent possibilities like Leila Mottley and Gayl Jones to see what happens to them next year, or others in the future like Edwidge Danticat, Tayari Jones, and Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie. I agree that Jesmyn Ward will get her Pulitzer due one day, but two National Book Awards is no small feat to gloss over. That's what probably cost her the Pulitzer. Absolutely agree that Toni Morrison should have won more than once.
On another note, I really tried with George Saunders, but Tenth of December was practically unreadable. I DNR'd that one so fast and never looked back. I'll give Lincoln in the Bardo a proper shot, since so many seem to call it his masterwork. Haven't read the Fiction finalists that year either, but they both sound promising.
Thank you for a fascinating discussion. I will say that I feel about "Less" the same way I feel about "The Netanyahus": an amusing story that I'm glad I read, but that beat a very serious and worthy contender by a black woman. In "Less"'s case, "Sing, Unburied, Sing" and in "Netanyahus" case, "Love Songs of WEB Du Bois."
In both cases, I think the Pulitzer Committee, frankly, got it wrong. I don't think we'll be reading either in 50 years (even though neither is a bad novel).
I do hope that we don’t get another example of a distinguished work by a black woman getting overlooked again soon. That would be deeply unfortunate.
Excellent, excellent video! I appreciated your thorough analysis of this book and the sociopolitical climate around the time of its release. I usually read the Pulitzer winners and contenders and echo your feelings about Less. I read both Bautman’s and Diaz’s books as well. I would have been happier if Jesmyn Ward would have won.
I also think that if this Less were written by a Black man it wouldn’t have even been nominated. I think these prizes (Pulitzer, Booker and even the Oscars) only recognize pain art from writers (and directors) of color.
I don’t always comment but I love your Pulitzer content! It’s a prize I follow but have such conflicted and ambivalent feelings about their selections (or lack thereof) of diverse books that truly represent American life.
I completely forgot to include the question of whether or not Less would have been taken seriously with a non-white-male author, because I absolutely agree with you. No one would have taken it seriously at all.
I'm so glad you enjoy the Pulitzer videos! They're a lot of work and energy but I like making them and figuring out what's interesting about each winner. They are definitely a mixed bag of books but I hope my videos make a case that what book is deemed worthy of the prize says something about this country and where it was at the time. I'm still in the early days of the project but it's been fascinating so far.
I don’t have anything intelligent to add to this discussion, but this was a really fascinating and thorough video, such interesting points you raise. I think it’s always worth remembering, and you definitely highlight this, that prize judges bring their individual opinions, politics, and biases to the job and therefore it’s difficult to get complete objectivity. They saw something in Less that other judges may not have, and let that persuade them it was worthy.
People tend to get upset that a prize might be subject to biases or politics, but I think it’s one of the more fascinating things about prizes in the first place. We all have different opinions on books and that’s okay! For time purposes, I didn’t get into how another gay author calls Arthur Less a bad gay because he isn’t political, and there’s a fascinating discussion to be had there as well.
@@SupposedlyFun I’ve still not read Less but I think now after everything I’ve heard you say about it I would be too biased. It’s interesting that another gay author would say that, seems slightly like the character is one of those gays that works really well for a straight audience.
@@JentheLibrarianreads I think that is the case!
I’m surprised Less hasn’t had any adaptation buzz. It feels like it was made to be turned into a Neil Patrick Harris movie.
I couldn’t agree more!
That does feel like it would be solid casting. I feel like a limited series would make sense given that there’s already an episodic structure.
I think that I discovered Less because of the Pulitzer. I remember enoying it while reading, but haven't thought about it since. Now, Lincoln in the Bardo is one of my all time favorite books. That is a book certainly worthy of a prize!
The two heavy hitters that year (Sing, Unburied, Sing and Lincoln in the Bardo) were incredible. Even more incredible that they weren't finalists here.
I 100% agree that Jesmyn Ward should have won. One thing about finalists is how the submissions work. Many POC and minority authors do not receive the same size "award budgets" as others. From my understanding that is true across genres. Authors have to submit to be considered by the Pulitzer Board. There's a submission fee plus they have to submit physical (unless that has changed) copies of the books. Authors aren't just given copies of their books. Odds are good many who submitted for consideration had to pay for those copies. We also don't always know what books were submitted. We are only told the finalists and the winner. So it is possible that she spent her award budget on the NBA. I know on Twitter she was very open about struggling to get a respectable advance after her success, and it wouldn't surprise if that struggle extends to marketing aspects and/or awards support.
That's a very good point--I'm sure there's a lot of behind the scenes drama we as the public aren't privy to. When I worked in publishing I knew someone whose job was to oversee prize submissions and she basically submitted the publisher's entire eligible list, but I'm sure there are oversights and books that get much more budget/campaigns to go along with them.
I read "Less" when it came out because Arthur reminded me of myself. I am not gay but asexual but everything else was like reading myself. I wanted to see how he dealt with his problems and situations. I did not see the book not so much as comedy but irony. As for winning the Pulitzer, I noticed it when it did, but it was not very important. I don't see that many people like me, so it was wonderful to see a fictional character who is.
I'm glad that you found a book that allowed you to see yourself. I hope that happens for you more and more in the future!
What a masterful video! Thanks a lot for really bringing us back to the events of that year and why it could’ve been relevant to the Pulitzer’s choice. Keep up the great work Greg!
I’ve been circling in my thoughts of
reading this and the sequel was pushing me further to do so. I still think I will, but with much clearer expectations and considerations.
Hopefully that will help!
Thanks for making this video. It was Informative and very enjoyable!
I was pleasantly surprised when Less won the Pulitzer, as I thought it might signal some diversification of genre on the part of the panel. Hearing your analysis made me want to reread - I had interpreted the bumbling, inadvertently toxic outlook as intentional on ASG’s part, and I wonder if, with the advantage of hindsight, I would feel differently now.
It probably did seem innocent at the time but the news cycle the last few years has made it feel gross (to me at least). I think the real test will be the sequel and how it handles the topic.
An excellent and insightful commentary video. Thanks Greg! I thought the novel was just okay, and I was shocked when it won. I suspect it's win had more to do with the members of that particular jury, than with the actual content of the book. They were judges with their personal agendas that were in direct opposition to nomination of a work that was truly distinguished. Did they want to shake things up by choosing an underdog? Another panel might have laughed at the choice of this panel. Good old ASG just lucked out. I'm cynical. It's all just my opinion, but there it is.
I think the fact that all prizes ultimately come down to a matter of personal opinion is the most interesting thing about them. The jury clearly saw something in Less that they saw fit to reward-and while I disagree, I can see how they got there. It was, if anything, an interesting selection.
Excellent overview of the topic.
Thank you!
was on the fence with this book but after watching this review, I'll probably read it..
I hope you like it!
Oh wow, once you explained Less's win in context with the others it was up against, I can see how surprising this book's win was.
If not for Tinkers it would be the biggest surprise of the last twenty years.
When it comes to the Pulizter, I always love when they choose something completely unexpected (and indie or unknown). The idea of giving an independent publisher or an unknown writer a platform is exciting. My primary motivation for following the Pulitzer prize is to discover writers that I wouldn't normally read. Any year where I've read the book that won before the prize was announced or the book everyone is predicting wins, I feel disappointed. Very interesting video! I didn't like Less at all, but I "think" I'll give "Less is Lost" a try.
I get the cheapest of thrills when I've already read the book that wins the Pulitzer. I feel so fancy. 😉
Regarding your comments about Americans in the world, while Arthur Less doesn't really engage with the places he visits, Andrew Sean Greer does, at least when it comes to the European sections of the book. It's rare to see a book by an American writer that is set in Europe depict the intricacies of race realtions in Europe in a way that does not simply apply American race relations to Europe [which isn't to say that the level of racism is different, it simply takes a different form because the US is a settler colonial country and the European countries are not, they are the (former?) colonial powers and Greer does a good job describing that form]. The example being that Less meets two Black men in Europe, one in Germany and one in France. The difference being that the one in Paris is an American expat while the one in Berlin is a Black German man. The American one is living his James Baldwin/Josephine Baker fantasy and the German is depicted as identifying most with his home region of Bavaria which is a thing for people of color in Europe. Their national identity is often called into question, so much so that the primary identification is with their home town or region rather than the country as a whole. The implication is that people of color from the global North are welcome in Europe until they want to become citizens of a European country. Greer makes a lot of these observations that Less is then oblivious to. In a way Greer wrote a book about an American in the world that unlike his protagonist meets the people of the places the American visits halfway. In that sense it is the antithesis to all of these novels about gay men going to foreign countries for sex like What Belongs to You or Goodbye to Berlin that feel very imperial.
All of that also ties back to what you said about the timing of the award. The Pulitzer went to a book that actually engages with the rest of the world and is willing to meet the rest of the world halfway at a time when the former host of The Celebrity Apprentice made it clear that the US would no longer do that.
Maybe your discomfort with Less winning comes in part from it not being an Americana sort of book that grapples with internal topics but one that spends a significant amount of time looking outside. In that sense it is an unusual book to win the Pulitzer and as a fan of the prize (and the books the Pulitzer typically goes for) you kind of don't like that. I had that feeling when Bob Dylan won the Nobel.
I felt a similar discomfort about the parts of the book that described gay novels as no longer being interesting because I sometimes get the vibe from gay transphobes that they buy into a conspiracy theory that is similar to the great replacement theory racist white people buy into. But I would need to go back and read it again to say anything more substantial about that.
I am glad that Less won the Pulitzer because it led to it being widely translated and put a relatively unknown author on the map. Had Sing, Unburied, Sing or Lincoln in the Bardo won, Ward or Saunders would be $15,000 richer and thats it. But I guess we have different relationships with literary prizes. I would also say that it is a Great American Novel in the subcategory of novels about Americans in the world because it depicts American exceptionalism without suffering from it and invites non American readers to also enjoy the book (the bar in this subcategory is low!).
Great video as always!
Thank you for the thoughtful comment. I agree that the best thing about Less is how carefully Greer places it in the world. I do actually love the idea of a book about Americans in the world winning the Pulitzer (I always appreciate a fresh perspective), but I'm not sure Less is the one I would choose. The tricky thing is that I don't have an alternative either. Perhaps Foreign Affairs by Alison Lurie (A Pulitzer winner from the 80s about American academics abroad) will do the trick... but I'm skeptical given the era in which it was published.
Excellent discussion. Really interesting, particularly the meta bit about the novel initially being rejected before he made it “funny”. I have absolutely no interest in reading this book or its sequel. When did white men get so woe-is-me? Any bets on whether Arthur learns anything touring Trump’s America?
The idea of prizes not wanting to play in another prize’s pool is a bit annoying. On one hand, it would be a bit dull to have one book win a bunch of prizes, but what if it really deserves it? On the other hand, it’s great to be able to bring attention to a really worthy novel that has flown under the radar. I guess the format and secrecy of the Pulitzer (no longlist, finalists announced with winner) really don’t allow it to benefit from the second perspective. Less might be a worthy longlist book, but a winner? It brings me back to The Netanyahus from this year’s prize. There seem to be some parallels there. Overall, the Pulitzers seem to hold themselves above all the other prizes, perhaps deservedly, perhaps to the detriment of their legacy, particularly when you include the years when they didn’t award a prize at all.
Definitely willing to bet no lessons have been learned! The Pulitzer has definitely been around longer than a lot of the other major prizes--the Nobel Prize for Literature is the only older one I can think of. And I agree that the politicking around the prizes can be annoying, but it's always interesting.
“The idiot” is an actual masterpiece though! Give it a try, it’s absolutely worth your time! The audiobook is phenomenal as well!
I do look forward to reading it someday--thanks for the feedback on it.
The Name of the Rose did win some literary awards, although none I was familiar with. So a worthy mystery does exist, as I'm sure great examples exist in other genres, Another all time favorite.
The Name of the Rose is definitely a good example of an exception but I feel like it's more critically well regarded and enjoyed by audiences than it was rewarded with prizes. I could be wrong though.
I agree with you on this review of Less, but only with the gift of hindsight. Similar to how many books no longer hold up. I think it’s unfair to give The Pulitzer to Sing Unburied Sing when you haven’t read InThe Distance. I found Sing Unburied Sing very powerful, but In The Distance not a typical book that’s being released and an amazing read
Well, to be fair I’m not actually giving the Pulitzer to anything. If I did have that power I would certainly make sure I read all the contenders. I do look forward to reading In the Distance.
I heard that Goldfinch by Tartt is the worst winner. I don't know. I wonder what you think.
Fascinating video.
Well, I DNF'ed The Goldfinch when I first started reading it, so I can say that much. I'm going to have to get further into my project (and attempt a reread of Goldfinch) to be sure, though.
I always love your thoughts and deep dives!
Thank you!
Interesting deep dive! I really appreciate you sharing your perspective. I read Less in 2019 and being Australian straight woman in her 50s I didn't think of the male toxicity that you found overbearing, but now you mention it, it is very obvious. Also we are a bit removed from the whole despicable Trump thing,
I took on face value what the character, Art Less, was saying about being an aging gay man who survived the AIDS epidemic. I was in my late teens when AIDS reared it's ugly head and it was worrying for everyone, but the additional stigma on gay men was horrible (thought that at the time). In Australia we were a little shielded from some of the AIDS outbreak (as we were for a while with covid) but also it was not really safe for gay men to be out and talking about it, despite gay mardi gras beginning to take off in Sydney. It's since been publicised in recent years that there were terrible violent assaults and murders, talked about as "gay bashings" in Sydney in the 1970s and 1980s (some accused off-duty police of being involved). I'm not much into celebrity but when Rock Hudson died of AIDs in 1985 and Freddy Mercury died in 1991 they were not open about being gay men. A very different time, thankfully, hopefully it never is as bad again.
Apart from making me pause to think back to those times, I didn't think too much about how the novel fitted into the whole scheme of the Pulitzer and wasn't hugely impressed with the novel, but I did have a chuckle when he got to Morocco and was delivered a few home truths from his friend, camels and food sickness added that other comedy element.
I really have to get to Sing Unburied Sing. Loved The Lincoln in the Bardo audiobook, not sure how I would have gone reading it directly from the page.
I think it would be interesting to compare the possible male toxicity of Fleishman Is in Trouble and the who Trump cultural thing too.
Also Australian straight woman... I have met a few gay men who did contract HIV during the 1980s but who survived and are still alive today. They experience considerable survivor guilt in addition to grief at the many losses they experienced. Thankfully there are support services available for these men nowadays. Personally I thought Less was okay, but that's as far as it went for me.
@@janethansen9612 Hope those gay men that you know are doing well today and did get all the support they needed, even if it was well after they had been through so much.
I just finished listening to Hannah Gadsby's 10 steps to Nanette and she puts the whole growing up gay in Tassie really into perspective (also in terms of State legislation) and she's only in her 40s. She didn't have to deal with the AIDs era but what she's been through is no walk in the park.
I have not read "Less" yet, but I appreciate your video and your commentary on the Pulitzer. While I have not read "Less", I can say that "Sing, Unburied, Sing" is, in my opinion, one of the best novels of the last 20 years and Jesmyn Ward is one of my favorite living American writers.
From your description, it sounds like "Less" is in the Updikean white male tradition, only from the point of view that is not heteronormative--- that is last part is a good thing. There definitely needs to be more LGBTQIAP+ representation in literature, and it definitely needs to be recognized. And one of the worst things, in my opinion, about the Updike/Roth/etc. tradition was the idea that the great "men of letters" were very, very heterosexual with abundant heterosexual appetites.
But yeah, they are also very, very white.
I agree that the Pulitzer is trying to change, but there is still work to do, and it must boil down to the judges and the committee... I am not saying straight white males shouldn't be judges (or indeed winners oft the prize), but there should be a diverse panel, of women, people of color, immigrants, the LGBTQIAP+ community--- basically, facets of American life that are not through the straight white male lens.
Thanks for the thorough video.
Yes--I absolutely agree with your assessment of how Less fits in with the Updikean tradition (I'm stealing the word Updikean, by the way). I don't think anyone would take this book seriously at all if it weren't about a white male (and if it hadn't been written by a white male).
I can't wait to see what Jesmyn Ward does next. I worry that my assumption that she's bound to win a Pulitzer is wrong because after Sing, Unburied, Sing and The Love Songs of W.E.B. DuBois were so thoroughly snubbed, I wonder what a black female author needs to do to get a win.
Thank you for watching.
@@SupposedlyFun I am also looking forward to what Jesmyn Ward does next. Amazon just released a short story of hers called "Mother Swamp" that I think is an exclusive to Amazon and Kindle. While I don't love buying my books on Amazon, I did make an exception to read this story (it was 99 cents I believe), since it was the only format available. It was twenty pages or so, but, of course, really well-written, and only makes me that much more excited for her next book.
@@bobbykeniston7240 Hopefully it will be soon! It's been five years since Sing, Unburied, Sing. 🤞
I picked up a copy at the library and looked at a few pages. I found the writing so weak I didn't even want to read it for free. Just my opinion.
Fair enough!
Yes for Less! Awesome video
Thanks!
Excellent video! For me, I feel this novel fundamentally does not work. It hinges upon two main ideas for its main character, which are not true:
- he's an ageing, flabby, foolish, hasbeen, never-was - except he's so gorgeous and charismatic that people are infatuated with him everywhere he goes, and he's successful beyond most people's wildest dreams. His most successful novel has been translated into several languages and a more recent novel of his has just won an award. Strangers regularly tell him how much they love his most famous novel.
- he's a buffoon who bumbles his way around the world making mistakes - but he very rarely does. His German is silly, yes, and standing on a needle is perhaps clumsy, or simple bad luck. The book constantly teases that Less is about to cause some catastrophe: he's in the wrong taxi going to the wrong hotel! No he isn't. He's about to get on the wrong plane! No he isn't. Oh no, he's about to get his bag strap caught! No he isn't.
Other assorted thoughts:
- the narrative device (an omniscient narrator who is rarely present, yet knows months' worth of Less's thoughts and actions) made absolutely zero sense to me.
- I think it's generous to say this book doesn't use cultural stereotypes.
- I suspect this book was so popular with Pulitzer types for the same reason the Oscars loves to award films about films (The Artist, Argo)
I don’t think it deserved it.
Fair enough!