Pulitzer Prize – not always the best arbiter of literary excellence

I found that the Pulitzer committee often overlooked excellent books and awarded lacklustre ones. Here is my Top 10 list of books which I felt were absolutely not Pulitzer-worthy.

Scarlet Sister Mary by Julia Peterkin (1929) was just a disaster cover to cover. Why the committee would award this book of racist stereotypes about black women by a white woman just boggles my mind. Granted, 1928 was rather weak in terms of novels with no output from Hemingway, Cather, Faulkner, or Fitzgerald, there was not another clear choice. But there was a precedent for no prize being given (1920), so why award something so derivative and corny? I truly did not understand this one.Laughing Boy by Oliver La Farge (1930) was just as bad in terms of stereotypical depiction of sensual, unintelligent American Indians and its choice baffles me. Particularly in light of the fact that the monumental The Sound and the Fury by Faulkner was published the same year and was an astounding work of art. Why Faulkner had to wait until 1955 (!) for a relatively inferior novel (A Fable) and after already having won a Nobel Prize for Literature in 1949, well, it is just hard to comprehend in retrospect.All the Light We Cannot See by Anthony Doerr (2015) absolutely underwhelmed me. I felt that the tropes (blind French girl meets “nice” German soldier malgré-lui) were overwrought and annoying. The characters did nothing to really draw me into the narrative which I found stiff and predictable. Lila by Marilynne Robinson, Station 11 by Emily St John Mandel, and Euphoria by Lily King were all better and more original books. This one just seemed begging Spielberg to turn his post-Schindler’s list scriptwriters over to Doerr for a new film. The Nickel Boys by Colson Whitehead (2020) was also a disappointing choice. I enjoyed Whitehead’s earlier fiction (especially The Colossus of New York), and only mildly liked his 2017 Pulitzer winning The Underground Railroad. I can see that in light of the US political situation, the topic of black men mistreated in Florida prisons and reform schools was very topical, but did Whitehead truly deserve to be on the tiny list of two-time Pulitzer winners with Updike, Tarkington (ok maybe him), and Faulkner (albeit as already mentioned, Faulkner should have been compensated decades before he was) when authors like Philip Roth should have been there, Toni Morrison easily deserved a second one, etc. There were other excellent books printed that year: The Dutch House by Ann Pratchett and Disappearing Earth by Julia Philips (an excellent debut novel!) both being excellent.Less by Andrew Sean Greer (2018) also disappointed me. I suppose that it was the first book by an openly gay man (unless we count Middlesex by Jeffrey Eugenides although I don’t think Eugenides has come out as either gay or trans) was overdue, but this book is just a comedic travelogue and not really that spectacular from a literary point of view. 4 3 2 1 by Paul Auster was absolutely incredible and a far more American novel than Less (and considerably better than the two runner-ups, The Idiot by Elif Bautman and In the Distance by Herman Diaz.)The Executioner’s Song by Norman Mailer (1980) was just long and, if we believe his protagonist’s brother in his autobiography, largely plagiarised from his colleagues. It is billed as the first “non-fiction novel” but really, wasn’t In Cold Blood by Truman Capote already a masterpiece in that category? The book just drags on for over 1000 pages (making it the longest Pulitzer winner on record) and spends too much time on trying to build sympathy for the murderer at the heard of the story. Roth’s Ghost Writer was a better book, but only got a runner-up that year. Just Above My Head by James Baldwin would also have been a better choice, but perhaps they thought that the lacklustre award to McPherson in 1978 for Elbow Room fulfilled their African-American quota. As for Jewish writers, I find that fellow Jewish laureats Bellow, Roth, Chabon, and even Malamud were all far superior to Mailer, but anyway…The Mambo Kings Play Songs of Love by Oscar Hijuelos (1990) is the ONLY Pulitzer winner of Spanish-American origin besides Junot Diaz (The Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao (2008)) which is probably surprising given that the prevalence of immigrants from South and Central America in the latter half of the 20th century. I felt that the sob story of two brothers from Cuba trying to make it in New York in the 50s was just too sexist and too boisterous to be fun or even interesting reading. There is some horrific (if somewhat gratuitous) violence against women and once again, I felt no sympathy for the protagonists. Maybe Billy Bathgate by E.L. Doctorow or The Joy Luck Club by Amy Tan would have been better choices but as yet, I haven’t read them. I just did not like Mambo Kings.Tinkers by Paul Harding (2010) was so underwhelming and so tiny that I almost forgot it as I was reading it. OK, so there are clocks and stuff. And? I just did not see how this book gets the same honors as something as consequent as another tiny book but absolute masterpiece, The Old Man and the Sea by Hemingway (1953). I mean why not just go to Thomas Harris for Hannibal for that matter? At least the latter provoked some strong emotions (fear, terror) rather than the indifference engendered by Hardings short forgettable book.The Reivers by William Faulkner (1963) will shock those that know me. How could I possibly list a Faulkner in my “worst” list? Well, I would say that (1) this is one of his weakest books and only published (and awarded) posthumously as an afterthought (2) he should have won it (as already pointed out in #2 above) for The Sound and the Fury, Light in August, As I Lay Dying…and so why just try to “ratrapper le coup”? (3) there was a far better book that was more original, more revolutionary, more mind-bending that was published the same year: One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest by Ken Kesey. A thrilling story made into one of the monuments of American cinema, it was shameful that the negligence of the Pulitzer committee over the 25 years of production of Faulkner before the 50s had to be paid at the expense of Kesey’s masterpiece.No award given – 1941: For Whom the Bell Tolls by Ernest Hemingway, 1946: Black Boy by Richard Wright, 1954: The Adventures of Augie March by Saul Bellow, and 1974: Gravity’s Rainbow by Thomas Pynchon. In each of these cases, the Pulitzer passed on committee recommendations and refused to grant a reward. (I’d probably add 1957 : The Voice at the Back Door by Elizabeth Spencer as well, but I haven’t read it yet). There were a few other years when no novel stuck out, but I feel that these particular novels were totally ripped off for spurious reasons. In the case of Wright, they said it was a memoir and so disqualified (but then they gave a non-fiction book the award in 1980 (see #6 above). For Hemingway and Pynchon, they claimed the books were too vulgar which just drives me crazy because the former is not vulgar at all and the second’s vulgarity concerns Nazi perverts and so seemed absolutely justifiable to me. Of all of these, I think the worst omissions were those of Augie March which is my favorite Bellow of all (and Roth’s inspiration as well) and Gravity’s Rainbow which is one of the most difficult but rewarding books I have ever read.