Dear Sumal and other Holmesians,
 
You are very correct in your statement that most writers with a Nobel
prize in Literature are actually not very popular amongst readers. Not only a
Nobel, even other renowned prizes like the Booker. For example, I've read both
Arundhati Roy and Salman Rushdie (well, I couldn't actually get through the
Moor's Last Sigh) and I find neither as likeable as, say, a Terry Pratchett or a
PG Wodehouse (or even Sir ACD whose short stories are much more popular than his
novels).
 
I don't know exactly what kind of things the selectors take into consideration,
but they can't be very good now, can they?
 
 
Sridhar
PS: Or the reason I don't like those "winners" is because I exclusively read
fast-paced adventure/fantasy/sci-fi/humour novels and murder mysteries and,
frankly, non-fiction bores me to death.

--- On Thu, 10/2/08, sumalsn <no_reply@...> wrote:

From: sumalsn <no_reply@...>
Subject: [sherlock holmes society of india] Nobel prize- Literature
To: SherlockHolmesSocietyofIndia@...
Date: Thursday, October 2, 2008, 7:16 AM






Dear Holmesians,
It is a well known fact that Nobel prize In Literature is given to
writers whose ability is beyond doubt, however their popularity is
never as much as that of popular fiction writers.A mere look at the
list of winners is testimony to the fact that most of them are hardly
read , far less remembered. Why is that writers like Sir Arthur Conan
Doyle miss out on the Nobel Prize?Their works are as much a commentary
on human life as any other.Mebers, rush in with your discussions.
Sumalsn


















[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]