An "Exasperating Farrago" of Words

Image Credit: Blatant World / Attribution 2.0 Generic (CC By 2.0)

Attribution 2.0 Generic (CC BY 2.0)

Read this next phrase, then close your eyes for 30 seconds and try to figure out what it means: “An influential work that with linguistic ingenuity has explored the periphery and specificity of human experience.”

Did you understand it? Well, unless you’re a walking encyclopaedia, I’m pretty sure you didn’t get it immediately. What I have discerned it to mean (after a considerable amount of research, because I am not a mastermind though I may come across as one) is “An influential work about the boundaries and unique qualities of human experience described in a shrewd, innovative way.”

So what is this phrase describing exactly? It’s the reason the Nobel Foundation gave for awarding Peter Handke the Nobel Prize in Literature. But why is it so difficult to comprehend? Doesn’t that make the reasoning inaccessible for average literature lovers like me or maybe you? And would Alfred Nobel be satisfied with that? 

To answer these questions, we’ll have to explore several different sources including Alfred Nobel’s writing, the Nobel Foundation’swebsite, and many more. So buckle up and brace yourself for a legendary expedition back in time!

First, let’s travel to November 27, 1895 and watch as Alfred Nobel sits bent over a piece of paper, thoughtfully penning his will, perhaps the most instrumental will ever to be created. The will is written in simple words, and can be understood easily. In his testament, Nobel writes:

“All of my remaining realisable assets are to be disbursed as follows: the capital, converted to safe securities by my executors, is to constitute a fund, the interest on which is to be distributed annually as prizes to those who, during the preceding year, have conferred the greatest benefit to humankind. The interest is to be divided into five equal parts and distributed as follows: one part to the person who made the most important discovery or invention in the field of physics; one part to the person who made the most important chemical discovery or improvement; one part to the person who made the most important discovery within the domain of physiology or medicine; one part to the person who, in the field of literature, produced the most outstanding work in an idealistic direction; and one part to the person who has done the most or best to advance fellowship among nations, the abolition or reduction of standing armies, and the establishment and promotion of peace congresses.”

Further, Alfred Nobel names the organisations that would award the prizes. He makes sure that his will is as precise as possible, to make it indisputable. This brings me to the conclusion that Alfred Nobel probably would have liked the Nobel Foundation’s website to be comprehensible to the general public. He most likely wouldn’t be pleased with the complicated language used by the Nobel Foundation to explain their laureate choices. 

But was it always like this? 

The first Nobel Prize in Literature was presented to Sully Prudhomme in 1901 “in special recognition of his poetic composition, which gives evidence of lofty idealism, artistic perfection and a rare combination of the qualities of both heart and intellect”.

More understandable? I thought so too. The second literature prize was given to Christian Mommsen for being “the greatest living master of the art of historical writing, with special reference to his monumental work, A History of Rome”. 

Again, clearly comprehensible and straightforward. Now let’s go forward in time to the year 2000, when the prize was bestowed upon Gao Xingjian for “for an æuvre of universal validity, bitter insights and linguistic ingenuity, which has opened new paths for the Chinese novel and drama”.

As you can see, this is much more arduous and puzzling. Over time, the Nobel Foundation's laureate reasoning has become more and more complicated to understand.

So what is the solution to this? Of course the Nobel Foundation has the right to give their own reasons for their choice of laureates, but perhaps they could make it more digestible for ordinary folk by using words that are reader-friendly. This would encourage more people to visit the website, and maybe even start reading the laureates' works.

I don’t want to offend the Nobel Foundation by writing this, but I hope my suggestion is considered. After all, I wouldn’t want to ruin my chances of a future Nobel Prize!