Munro v. Atwood: Nobel for whom
Aug. 20th, 2007 03:09 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
jawnbcAm reading Dance of the Happy Shades (1968), Alice Munro's first collection of short stories. For those unfamiliar, Munro works exclusively as a short story writer, have only published one very short story collection-ish novel in her 40 year career. Many consider the best living short fiction writer in English. As something of a fan of the genre, I agreed. Heartily.
In Can-Lit circles however, Margaret Atwood is considered by many to be Canada's greatest living fiction writer. Having read several of her books I'm inclined to say...not. She is a great writer: witty, clever, entertaining even. But I think the only reasons Peggy (as Atwood is allegedly know to friends) is of a somewhat higher profile are:
-she writes lit crit and poetry in addition to fiction;
-she was at the vanguard of second wave feminism;
-she garnered more capital outside Canada than inside for many years; and
-Can-Lit circles largely view short stories as the lesser version of "real" fiction
So I suspect--as do many--that the Can-Lit (even Commonwealth Lit) sphere is obsessed with Peggy, leaving Alice quietly writing better fiction. And unless there's a shift away from the Atwood=Can-Lit reduction - by winning or by people deciding she ain't never gonna get it - where will support for Munro come from? Because you and I can't nominate anyone for a Nobel; nominators are a rarified breed. The Establishment, in other words.
But as I read what is probably her earliest, roughest work, I remain impressed. Munro squeezes a whole novel into each story. They're readable, insightful, wry and credible. It's no surprise that one of her stories - The Bear Came Down from the Mountain - has been turned into an equally brilliant 2 hour film (Away From Her). Because Munro gives us the whole package: rich description, believable dialogue, and the everywoman internal monologue that we each has, in order to make sense of the world.
So I say Alice for the 2007 Nobel Prize for Literature. Nominate her for the next 3 years: if she doesn't win, we'll give Peggy another crack.
In Can-Lit circles however, Margaret Atwood is considered by many to be Canada's greatest living fiction writer. Having read several of her books I'm inclined to say...not. She is a great writer: witty, clever, entertaining even. But I think the only reasons Peggy (as Atwood is allegedly know to friends) is of a somewhat higher profile are:
-she writes lit crit and poetry in addition to fiction;
-she was at the vanguard of second wave feminism;
-she garnered more capital outside Canada than inside for many years; and
-Can-Lit circles largely view short stories as the lesser version of "real" fiction
So I suspect--as do many--that the Can-Lit (even Commonwealth Lit) sphere is obsessed with Peggy, leaving Alice quietly writing better fiction. And unless there's a shift away from the Atwood=Can-Lit reduction - by winning or by people deciding she ain't never gonna get it - where will support for Munro come from? Because you and I can't nominate anyone for a Nobel; nominators are a rarified breed. The Establishment, in other words.
But as I read what is probably her earliest, roughest work, I remain impressed. Munro squeezes a whole novel into each story. They're readable, insightful, wry and credible. It's no surprise that one of her stories - The Bear Came Down from the Mountain - has been turned into an equally brilliant 2 hour film (Away From Her). Because Munro gives us the whole package: rich description, believable dialogue, and the everywoman internal monologue that we each has, in order to make sense of the world.
So I say Alice for the 2007 Nobel Prize for Literature. Nominate her for the next 3 years: if she doesn't win, we'll give Peggy another crack.
