>Nabokov, Neruda and Borges revealed as losers of 1965 Nobel prize
>Nobel archives have been opened to reveal who was nominated for the 1965 prize for literature, a controversial year won by divisive victor Mikhail Sholokhov
who the fuck is sholokhov
>tfw you will never win the Nobel prize for literature, beating Nabokov, Neruda, and Borges
Yeah - he's one of the better 20th century Russian writers. I'm guessing the main reason for him getting it And Quiet Is The Don, which is pretty good though probably not a work of overwhelming genius. Think War And Peace but with cossacks between 1905 and 1920.
The Nobel is a joke
>Vargas Llosa got it
>Jorge Luis Borges, the most influential writter of the XX Century with Joyce and Kafka didn't
>Yasunari Kawabata got the same year Mishima was nominated.
Fuck that shit. The NBA for fiction is a better award in comparison, and Stephen King is an honorary winner.
The verdict is in - you are both gargantuan faggots. The initial banter >>7592555 was well executed and blessed with trips, but the lengthy shit-smearing that followed was highly homo, and detracted entirely from the initial value of the bantz.
Stop being such faggots, please.
Hesse won tho. But again, he wasn't a nazi.
>Implying nobel prize has any reasonable basis
Modiano, Munro, Tranströmer, Vargas Llosa, Pinter, Coetzee, Naipaul, Grass and Saramago were already among the most well-known and highly-regarded authors in the world prior to winning the prize, actually, and the same is probably true for most of the others.
It never matters the quality of the work, but only the qualities of the writer. Ie... how they are outside of the work. Like most if not all lit rewards, its a joke to anybody who cares about quality or the art form as a whole.
I'd say the winners for the past twenty-odd years have all been authors with one Goldfinch-esque bestseller in their respective countries, but you could all accuse of them of the same provincialism that the Nobel Committee trotted out to explain why Americans haven't won for so long.
>>Jorge Luis Borges, the most influential writter of the XX Century with Joyce and Kafka didn't
Borges is great by the standards of Argentina, because pretty much everything from there is shit, but he is not worthy of even cleaning Kafka's shoes.
Borges was hardly influential outside L.A, in fact, all of his work has nothing remotely original, since it is instead an application of the things new literary movements in Europe were doing at the time. He was innovative by L.A standards, but he didn't change literature in any way.
In terms of influence in general literature, Borges is subpar compared to most Nobel prize winners.