Wednesday, November 17, 2004

You can feel the excitement in the air!

The National Book Awards will be announced tonight, and I think I can speak for most of the country when I say, "Who?"

The fiction nominees have a few things in common: I hadn't heard of any of them. Their authors are all women (not being sexist, just saying). Their authors are all in New York. About 50 people have read each book (not really, but "Florida," for example sold 1,099 copies). Oh and one other thing, I can't read their synopses without nodding off. Here are some examples:

"Part fairy tale, part coming-of-age story, this novel follows the real and surreal adventures of a girl from a small French village who falls into an unexpected triangle of desire and love."

"An orphan finds consolation in books, storytelling, and in the life-giving power of language and memory." (No wonder she's an orphan. Blech.)

"A historical epic that tells an unusual love story, this novel offers a kaleidoscopic portrait of nineteenth-century Paraguay."

It's as if the entry requirements this year included, "Nothing may happen throughout the text." Granted, my tastes tend toward the lurid, but I'm no schlub. I don't take any advice from Oprah, and a book on the bestseller list will likely never touch my hands. But why can't an important award like this make it past this kind of literary oat bran? I'm not saying these aren't outstanding books, but how many coming of age tales, or stories about women coming to terms with love and family, can we celebrate? Just like I'm not gonna read the new Grisham, I'm just not gonna read these books.

Are there no comic or genre novels, or god forbid, graphic novels, that deserve a nod? Are we to believe that Poe, Aldous Huxley, George Orwell, Henry James, or Kurt Vonnegut would be ineligible for recognition because their stories feature ghosts, aliens or (gasp!) a story? Does David Sedaris stand a chance?

I'm not expecting my hero Joe Lansdale to win any big awards soon (although he did win an Edgar one year). But it seems like the problem with the NBAs, this year at least, is the opposite of the problem with the Grammys. Anything remotely fit for mass enjoyment is shunned.

Anybody want to volunteer their picks for Lounge Book Award 2004?

1 Comments:

At 10:31 PM, Blogger Mr. Chair said...

Webster's New World Collegiate:
lu-rid adj. 1. (Rare) deathly pale; wan 2. glowing through a haze, as flames enveloped by smoke 3. a)vivid in a harsh or shocking way; startling; sensational b)characterized by violent passion or crime [a lurid tale].

While I like to use (probably overuse) the word in sense 3.a., I'd say you guys fit each and every one of these definitions.

P.S. I wish I were in school.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home