Pulitzer Prize Winning Fiction Project discussion
Help med understand why Confederacy of Dunces won...
date
newest »
newest »
Hi Diana,I'm new to this group, too. I've only recently decided to make a concerted effort to read all of the Pulitzer Prize winners and at least one thing from each of the Nobel Laureates for literature. I'm glad to have found this group.
I read Confederacy of Dunces a very long time ago and remember that I liked it a lot, without remembering the whole story, or even very much of it. I thought it was funny and well written. Why a Pulitzer? I'm not too good at answering that question for any of them, although I feel excited when a book I like wins.
Mod
Welcome to the group! I loved the absurdity of Ignatius J. Reilly...and had just read American Pastoral, so the dichotomy of the two was a pleasure. There are several other books on the list that baffle me as to why they're on the list, but apparently there's no accounting for taste. What I find more interesting is why there are years when no winner was chosen. Was it because there was a war? Were there no novels of worth?
The question of why there are years when no winner was chosen brings me to the question of how novels are chosen in the first place. It's a contest that you have to enter. So perhaps on the years no winner was chosen, no good author thought to enter their novel? Or is it the publishers who usually suggest an author enter the novel into the competition?
You really have to enter? I didn't know that. That must take chutzpah.I know sometimes prizes aren't given to particular books because of politics--I read somewhere that that happened to Hemingway's For Whom the Bell Tolls.
Do you think part of how Confederacy got the prize was because of the interesting story of his mother and his suicide?
Ok, I was searching The Pulitzer web site. To quote: "24. Why in some years was there no award given in a particular category?According to The Plan of Award "If in any year all the competitors in any category shall fall below the standard of excellence fixed by The Pulitzer Prize Board, the amount of such prize or prizes may be withheld."
So, there you go.
I too regard Confederacy of Dunces as undeserving of the Pulitzer. I was looking forward to reading the book, especially after living in New Orleans for 40+ years, but was very disappointed when I finally did read it. The characters did resemble many people I encountered or knew of in N.O., but generally I found they lacked substance...perhaps, that was the point. Nevertheless I found nothing to recommend about the book.
I'm very late to this discussion I see, but I had to weigh in because "A Confederacy of Dunces" is one of my favorite novels, perhaps my outright favorite novel of all time. I have never laughed so hard and so often at any work of fiction. Ignatius is a skewed hero, and although one can be delighted at his increasingly outrageous opinions, as recorded in his Big Chief writing tablets, in his letters to his "sweetheart" Myrna, or in his exhortations at the movie theater, pants factory, or flamboyant party, there are, in a closer reading, glimpses of true if misapplied genius, as well as some real pain buried under the hunting cap and rolls of flesh.For finally Ignatius is the Everyman of outcasts, not understanding anything about the world he becomes so reluctantly a part of, using sarcasm and hyperbole to mask his sense of not-belonging.
I rather regard Ignatius as a heavily disguised depiction of the author himself, John Kennedy Toole. I think Toole was brilliant, and the book was cleverly and intelligently written. And if Ignatius had not been so out of touch despite his "genius", one wonders if he might have met the same fate as his creator. While the unusual circumstances of the novel's posthumous publication may deepen one's appreciation of the book's underlying sadness, I still find it hard to pick up this imaginative and wonderfully funny book, turn to any page, and not be smiling and laughing within a page or two.
I think it's a marvelous, and admittedly offbeat, choice for the Pulitzer committee to have made, to their great credit.
Nice post, Tom. A writer friend of mine lists this as her favorite book.
Denise wrote: "Nice post, Tom. A writer friend of mine lists this as her favorite book."Thank you Denise...It's so nice to be recognized!! I just edited the post somewhat, I think it flows better now....
I must review your profile and see what other books we have in common.
Tom
I agree with you Tom, I think that this book is one of the best satires that I have read in a long time. I loved the characters in this book that seemed to me to be not so much distinct individuals and more concepts, the police officer is not so much a specific man as a representative of Law in our society. Great book!
My name is Diana and I just joined your group (I hope that is ok). I have been reading at and around the list of Pulitzers for a while now. I am up to 15. Usually when I read a Pulitzer, I fully understand and appreciate why it won, but i just finished Confederacy of Dunces and I have to say, I just don't get it. The main character was the source of most of the humor, but he struck me as more Aspergers or Autistic than simply ridiculous, and that just didn't strike me as that funny. I also thought the characters were really one dimensional. The plot was pretty episodic at first, although I will concede that it came together in a really satisfying way at the end. Still, why a Pulitzer? Any thoughts?