[ad_1]
Every year, as the date of the announcement of the winner of the Nobel Prize in Literature approaches, controversy arises over the way the prize is administered, and its orientations, and before the announcement of the Nobel Prize in Literature for the year 2020 , the winner or winner of this year’s award should apologize for accepting it, and even publicly reject it.
There is no doubt that the year 2020 is the year of emergency, and after the Swedish Academy, which awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature, became notoriously corrupt and overlooked, and the last charges that followed and were placed were the denial of genocide and sexual assault.
Before we know the name of the winner or the Nobel Prize winner in Literature, it would be best if those who receive a phone call from the Swedish Academy today inform them that they have won the award for their response: “Thank you, but no thank you.”
According to writer Peter Maas, the American journalist in an article published on the intersection, the Nobel Prize for Literature, in its current form, exceeded its usefulness and caused enormous damage. Last year, the Nobel Prize for Literature was awarded to Peter Handke, an Austrian writer who wrote a variety of literary works. Magnificent in the early part of his career, but since the 1990s he has fallen into the swamp of denial of genocide.
Genocide against Muslims in Serbia
In recent decades, Peter Handke has written no less than six books and plays that downplay and deny the genocide that Serbs committed against Muslims during the Bosnian war. Handke even attended the funeral and delivered eulogy to former Serbian leader Slobodan Milosevic, who died during his war crimes trial.
According to Peter Maas, we can be grateful for these scandals because they are a reminder of the need to implement a radical and secondary reform of the Nobel Prize in Literature. For much of its existence, the award has generally been a referendum on the best of Western literature. For this task, the eighteen members of the Swedish Academy were a useful jury. But the scope and ambition of the Nobel Prize long ago became truly universal. It is funny and tragic that the prize for such influence is controlled by a small and secretive group of Swedes, not to mention those who have shown themselves to be instigators of sexual assault and denial of genocide.
Therefore, since we are in the world of emergency – according to Peter Maas – it is a good idea to demand the formation of a diverse jury in which non-European languages - such as Chinese, Hindi, Arabic and Urdu – – are the first or second language. It would be wise not to appoint jurors for life, because irreplaceable privilege is an inherent force of the mold.
Peter Maas believes that even if the Nobel Prize for Literature is announced, the choice of a book, unlike Peter Handke, does not endorse genocide and is neither European nor male, so that the Academy will get rid of its scandals and show its ability to carry out the task, but this does not negate his legacy of corrupting literature in recent years.
Therefore, whoever wins the award must reject it, to impose the much-needed change that would benefit the world’s readers and writers. If the writer or writer turns down a million dollar award, this can lead to an increase in the sales of their books, and they will not lose much, but will win. Respect for readers around the world, as happened in 1964, when Jean-Paul Sartre refused to accept the Nobel Prize for Literature.
