However, when one reads up a lot, one understands multiple aspects of the prize. To begin with, one gets to know the life of Alfred Nobel who bequeathed the prize money. He was himself a brilliant man. He had many inventions and scientific achievements to his credit. THE one invention associated with him, however, is that of dynamite.
Apparently, though this anecdotal account cannot be confirmed authentically, when his brother expired, it was mistakenly believed that he had died. There were a number of obituaries dedicated to him due to the misunderstanding. Most were highly critical. In fact, a French reporter apparently called him "the merchant of murders" alias "merchant of death."
Apparently, hence, he wanted to leave behind a positive legacy even when he himself never intended the dynamite for destructive purposes. Hence he instituted these prizes, it seems. In other words, the prizes were more a reparation money according to this version which seems to take some sheen off the prizes.
Yet another issue is the politics involved apparently in awarding them. Hence the sins of omission are many. At times, moreover, why a particular individual was awarded the prize is absolutely a mystery wrapped in a riddle.
One such example in the field of literature is the 2016 prize to Bob Dylan. True, his songs are popular. Yes, they are associated with civil rights and anti-war movements. They did contribute to counter-culture. Yet by no strech of imagination are they literature. At times, ad copies are as good or bad as the Dylan ditties! To call them literature is indeed travesty of creativity.
Yet that is the way of the world. Often all that glitters is thought to be gold. That does not diminish the preciousness of gold. Equally true it is of the Nobel prize, too, (as well as of the Acceptance Speeches) as it celebrates quality year after year.
Pratima@ "Truth is not always beauty" opined Nadine Godimer, herself a Nobel Prize winner, who said, "The search for it is." And, eternally!
No comments:
Post a Comment