I’m trying to read an article about this year’s National Book Award, but the reading is not going well because the article is as follows:
Two of the shortlisted novels, by Washington and Alameddine, explore distance and connection between gay men and their mothers. Rutherford’s and Russell’s books are historical fiction, while Majumdar’s novel spends one tense week with an Indian woman trying to emigrate in the face of a climate crisis.
Several of the nonfiction finalists tackle contentious contemporary issues head-on. Omar El Akkad’s “One Day, Everyone Will Have Always Been Against This” is about the response of America and Europe to the destruction in Gaza. In “When It All Burns: Fighting Fire in a Transformed World,” Jordan Thomas digs into a destructive six-month fire season sparked by climate change. . .
The other finalists are Kyle Lukoff’s “A World Worth Saving,” which mixes Jewish mythology and adventure in a story about a trans teenager’s efforts to dismantle a conversion therapy program.
These might all be talented books, by the way. They sound moronic because the person The New York Times paid to write the article is a moron who hates literature. She thinks that reading is about familiarizing yourself with “issues.” An intellectual invalid who has no idea how to derive pleasure from reading.
I researched her, and it turns out she wrote a novel. About issues. And fashionable identities.
Clarissa's Blog 
Have you spent any time on state or national or organizational award committees?
If yes, recall how many of the people on them run to your NYT book reviewers type. If only because there’s a weird correlation between enjoying committee work and Stalinists. And like Stalin tend to
Here’s one for your AMA question box thing-y: Are these reviewers all-in on the notion that “representation matters” in fiction because, in your experience in the field they, themselves lack a theory of mind? From my experience the claim comes from conformist women (who may merely be repeating what appears to be normative) and children and teens (ditto also, to please) who are still developing one.
Because it’s a queer claim against the great virtue of the novel as an art that reveals other minds and experiences.
LikeLike
*And like Stalin tend to have cast-iron backsides.
mi dispiace
LikeLike
I was on the verge of buying a book I’d seen recommended peripherally several times, and mentioned positively by someone I know, so… why not give it a chance? And then I pulled up the purchase page and saw the list of awards and bestseller lists, sat there a minute, and closed the page. Nope. Most awards these days are a negative indicator for me, particularly ones with “women” in the name.
LikeLike
It’s true. What gets awarded is almost always extreme crap. And that’s a shame. People are desperate for good recommendations. People want to read. Our literary establishment is failing us.
LikeLike
OT: Hungarian László Krasznahorkai wins the nobel prize. I haven’t read anything by him though I have heard of Satantango and the Horse of Turin….
The Nobel Prize on X: “BREAKING NEWS The 2025 #NobelPrize in Literature is awarded to the Hungarian author László Krasznahorkai “for his compelling and visionary oeuvre that, in the midst of apocalyptic terror, reaffirms the power of art.” https://t.co/vVaW1zkWPS” / X
LikeLike
Never heard of him. Very interesting, I’ll look him up.
LikeLike