Peter Handke Should Not Have a Nobel Prize
Peter Handke was awarded the Nobel Prize this month.
I’ve read multiple books by Handke. I’ve seen films that he’s written or co-written. He co-wrote with Richard Reitinger and director Wim Wenders what I believe is one of the greatest films ever made (Der Himmel über Berlin – Wings of Desire).
Handke should not have received this prize.
Of course since winning, Handke did a few interviews and then began playing victim by complaining that journalists are only asking about his politics and not engaging with his writing, and has pledged that he will never speak to a journalist again.
The reason for this is because Handke wrote a book about the Yugoslav wars, A Journey to the Rivers: Justice for Serbia. He also spoke at the funeral of war criminal Slobodon Milosevic. He blamed the media for misrepresenting and misunderstanding the Yugoslav wars and that Serbia was a victim. Handke denied the Srebrenica genocide, an event that is very well documented. Handke later admitted that it did happen, but wasn’t really that bad and besides, everyone in the war did bad things. Handke suggested that Sarajevo’s Muslim population massacred themselves to frame the Serbs for such a crime. (Presumably the Muslims buried their own bodies to frame the Serbs?)
As I said, I have read Handke’s work. I have seen films he has written. Maybe that means that I possess something that makes me worthy in his eyes of saying that Peter Handke is a fucking vile human being. He does not deserve the Nobel Prize and the Nobel committee should be ashamed of themselves for awarding it to him.
I could be petty – though accurate – when I say that Handke isn’t the best Austrian writer of the postwar era. I could be even pettier by mentioning that there are far better European writers alive today doing incredible, innovative work far more deserving of acclaim and praise than Handke.
Writers – like anyone – do not always behave in moral ways. Even by the standards of their own time, so, so many writers and artists are horrible people. These associations stick to their work. Much as we might try to separate the art from the artist, it is often impossible.
Writers like Knut Hamsun and Ezra Pound will always be associated with fascism. Their love for and support of Adolf Hitler and the Nazis will forever stain their work.
One reason that Jorge Luis Borges – one of the 20th Century great writers – never received the Nobel was because of his politics. He was considered too close to Right wing dictators. He publicly supported Pinochet, though he broke with the junta over the dirty war, and publicly stated on multiple occasions that he was skeptical of democracy. Handke continues to support Milosevic and deny that genocide ever existed. Handke’s work is at a much lesser standard than Borges, and his politics are being held to no standard at all.
I don’t even find Handke to be a great writer in relation to many of his contemporaries. When I compare him to other contemporary writers like Milan Kundera and Ismail Kadare and László Krasznahorkai and Dubravka Ugrešić and Claudio Magris and Cees Nooteboom and Amin Maalouf – Handke falls short.
And what about Adunis and David Malouf? Ngugi wa Thiong’o and Nuruddin Farah? Margaret Atwood and Anne Carson? Thomas Pynchon and Cesar Aira? Kamau Braithwaite and Edwidge Danticat? Marilynne Robinson and Patrick Chamoiseau? Ma Jian and Salman Rushdie?
(I’m sure if I tried, I could think of more writers who are far, far more deserving of this prize for multiple reasons than Handke)
Haruki Murakami gets mentioned every year as a possible winner and every year is not awarded the prize despite being one of the world’s great writers and unique artistic voices by almost every possible metric.
What would it mean to give the award to Milan Kundera? To talk about how he used humor and philosophy to puncture the lies and absurdities of authoritarianism. His rejection of blind nationalism. Towards a goal of cosmopolitanism, of moving between cultures and languages. Of using art to fight against the lies that authoritarians tell people to blind them from reality.
What would it mean to give the award to Adunis? To talk about him as a major contemporary poet and scholar, a key figure in this great poetic tradition that stretches back centuries, a tradition that remains so vital today. Because today there are poets on the front lines fighting for democracy. There are reality show competitions in the Arab world featuring poets. To celebrate a figure who has gone into exile more than once. To celebrate the literary contributions of exiles in so many cultures and traditions across time.
Instead the Nobel committee gave it to a writer who denies reality, denies war crimes, denies massacres. To a writer who does not care for human rights and human dignity. Who dismisses genocide by making insane claims and standing with butchers like Milosevic.
The Nobel committee has endorsed Putin and Trump and others who chant “fake news” at whatever they dislike. Maybe Putin will win next year for the way that he’s warped and denied reality? Maybe next year’s laureate will deny the Holocaust or cheer Pinochet’s dirty war? A white nationalist who also thinks the Magdalene laundries in Ireland should be brought back with more death and brutality? Someone who cheers how Franco’s fascist government brutalized children in orphanages?
So good news, Trump loving morons spending time and energy making racist attacks on Muslims, Mexicans, Kurds, and well, almost everyone on the planet. Work on your prose! Because it doesn’t matter how many people you dehumanize. It doesn’t matter if you deny genocide. It doesn’t matter if you support mass murderers. The only thing keeping you from winning a Nobel Prize is being able to write well.