Literature and Medicine: A Nobel week for France

 

Two major Nobel prizes in one week is not bad for a country that is anguishing about its cultural decline.

France has just pulled it off with the literature award for its novelist JMG le Clézio after Luc Montagnier and Françoise Barre-Sinouss (below) shared the medicine prize with Germany's Harald zur Hausen for their discovery of the HIV virus.

   

It was only the third time that a French writer has won the Literature Nobel since Jean-Paul Sartre was anointed but refused the honour in 1964. Not since 1952 had it won two prizes. They went that year to Albert Schweitzer for Peace and François Mauriac for literature. There was even an outside chance that this week could have produced a hat trick. Ingrid Betancourt, the Franco-Colombian former hostage, was thought to have been in the running for the peace prize and had even tempted fate by reserving a hotel room for a victory news conference.

Here's my story from today's newspaper. One of the first conclusions is that Le Clézio, 68, was well qualified for a Nobel. His style may be avant garde, but he is not one of the navel-gazing introverts who have given a bad name to the modern French novel (see last month's post on Christine Angot). He is seen as a big picture writer, dealing in universal human themes in the tradition of Hugo and Zola. He is also an apostle of the environment and specialist in endangered cultures -- qualities that play well with the Stockholm committee.   

Le Clézio, whose father had British nationality, is a polyglot globe-trotter who lives mainly in New Mexico after a life travelling in Latin America, Africa and Asia. He was one of the signatories of a proposal by a group of authors last year to save the Gallic novel by uncoupling the language from France and turning French literature into "world literature" written in French.

An enigmatic character with the looks of a handsome adventurer, JMG le Clézio had been tipped for a Nobel for the past two decades and he was favourite yesterday. He is quite familiar in France from his television appearances and he has a devoted following but he has a reputation for being difficult and never been really fashionable. Most of his 48 novels have been translated, but he is far from a celebrity in the English-speaking world. Newsrooms scrambled yesterday to find background and  commentary on him. I had to confess that I had never read him -- a shameful admission for a long-serving Paris journalist. All that will change as his work, ranging from his 1963 Procès Verbal (The Interrogation) to Ritournelle de la Faim (Same old Story About Hunger), published last week, reach global bookshops.

Here are some excerpts in English from Clézio's texts, in today's NYT

President Sarkozy was naturally quick to hail Le Clézio for bringing honour on his country. "He embodies the influence of France, its culture and its values in a globalized world," said the President's statement. "A child in Mauritius and Nigeria, a teenager in Nice, a nomad of the American and African deserts, Jean-Marie Le Clézio is a citizen of the world, the son of all continents and cultures."  I would guess that Sarko, who is no great lover of fiction, may be among those inculte people who have not read him yet.

In the eternal contest of France versus les Anglo-Saxons, it has been a pretty good month for Gallic pride. As well as the Nobels, many in France have been saluting what is seen as the end of the "Anglo-Saxon" creed of deregulation and free markets which has held sway since the early 1980s.

Comments

[dot king]

Haha!! I've read one - one out of forty, well it's a start . . .
"Le peuple du ciel" that's the one, but I can't remember what it's about, but that's parr for the course for me too!

Apologies in advance to ultra-sensitive Americans, but he's more readable than Toni Morrison, even if the interest she brings as a speaker makes you want to read her (that's how I come to have 3 of her books, 2 only half-read).

I'd heard too that Bétancourt was on the list for the Peace Prize. That would have considerably diminished the value and distinction of the Nobel institution - what a nonsense it would have been when there are people who strive for and achieve something, qui font avancer le monde and thus merit recognition. It would have been an insult and would have reduced respect for other more deserving recipients.

[Mauvezin]

In the eternal contest of France versus les Anglo-Saxons
****************
Contest or contempt !?

[Randy_Flagg]

"In the eternal contest of France versus les Anglo-Saxons,"

In the 'how dare those frogs continue to have a strong and independant seperate culture and way of life seperate from our oh so superior anglo-saxon ways contest' you mean.

It is no secret that anything but total subservience from the French is taken as an insult to your misplaced sense of superiority.

By the way, the contest is only in your head and those of your fellow hate mongers who lie through their teeth about the French in their populist rags.
French people don't spend their days lamenting about some pseudo-contest with 'anglo-saxons'(since you have chose to tuse this French terminology).

"it has been a pretty good month for Gallic pride"

Newsflash, Gaul has been dead for 1600 years.
And seriously why are you people so obsessed with what the France's supposed wounded pride ? Go see a shrink already.

And if you're gonna tell us you're a francophile then tell us what is a francophile doing working for a man like Rupert Murdoch who has made francophobia his bread and butter for decades please...

[Thanks "Randy", your thoughtful comments are an elegant balance to the ranting here from American rednecks lately. I suspect you may be one of them in disguise. CB]

[John Gregory Flinn]

Well I'm no literary buff, but the excerpts I read remind me of John Steinbeck. Easy to read and with very human themes.

Charles - lest your final sentence be intepreted as a jibe, as MAUVEZIN asks, I thought including John Steinbeck would help...
Actually "globalization" is more relevant as a culprit. Because this has made human-kind's inclination to create (asset) bubbles global, and therefore much bigger and more dangerous, as we are experiencing.

[Randy_Flagg]

Sorry, Charles.
But French people have no reasons to be nice and/or cordial with Murdch's henchmen.

I'm sorry if that hurt your feelings.
You may have noticed, though, that
my attacks are focused on you and your biased anti-French propaganda.

But hey, if you want to compare that with calling the French stinky and cowards (you know, those comments you never moderate), more power to us. Lose what little credibility you
have left with the French (and no rocket doesn't count).

Je suis français et fier de l'etre. Ce n'est ni la première ni la dernière qu'on vous attaque pour French-bashing, Charles. Il serait peut-etre temps de vous remettre en question.

[Bernard Pereire]

Funny how your blog draws irrational mail from people like Randy Flagg above. It's such a misplaced caricature of what you write that I wonder if it's an envious colleague or perhaps one of your ex-épouses?.

[Joan Arles]

I admit I haven't read any of him either. I like the idea of all those media people informing the world knowledgably about "the nomad writer" and the great traveller just copying it all out of old files... but i suppose that's the only thing to do with a deadline.

[Rick]

CHARLES, I fear you are inciting people to fling themselves into injudicious crowing, on the one hand, or in to insensitive ‘put-downs’, on the other. It’s better to remain above the clamour, coughing now and then up one’s sleeve and thinking one’s thoughts... Or is it?

Why, for God’s sake did such trite announcements occupy the top spot on news programmes?

The CAC40 loses half its value but all’s for the best in the best of all possible worlds ‘coz France’s picked up a couple of Nobels!

[The Nobel item was a genuine salute to France. It is significant to win these two prizes surely. And it is legitimate to bring up Franco-Anglo-Saxon rivalry. Look at the huge media ride that France has given to the Morrison article in Time magazine alleging French cultural decline. I can put up with mindless ranting against me from both sides. They cancel one-another out.. CB]

[Pierre]

Randy Flagg

Je comprends votre irritation, et la partage parfois. Ceci posé, vous vous trompez de cible et de constat en confondant l'auteur de ce blog et les commentaires ou posts qu'il peut susciter. L'acuité du regard posé sur les diverses facettes de l'actualité française témoigne d'une profonde et enviable connaissance de cette culture dont vous dites être fier, et fait de ce blog un pont entre deux rives bien plus que la barrière de préjugés que vous décrivez. Mais probablement la lecture des commentaires vous aura-t-elle occupé au point de négliger celle des chroniques.

This said/written it's interesting to notice that the use of the word "gallic" annoyed Randy Flagg. The word has been used as an eternal metaphore used by AS medias observers of french news and is genrally associated with variations on particularism, such as flair or pride, but more often complex of superiority, outdated traditions, bureaucracy ASO....
It's interesting to notice that until recently the reference had disappeared from french langage, except to mock the old nationalist constuction of a hitorical identity beginning with "Nos ancêtres les Gaulois...".
The word came back in everyday language not thanks to our AS scrutators but with youngsters issued from immigration calling "gaulois" any symbol or representant of a society not often keen to consider them as being a part.

[Thank you Pierre. I think our friend Randy and others who dislike the word Gallic do not understand that it is merely a neutral variation for the word French. Writers use it to avoid saying "French" twice in the same sentence. It does not carry any of the negative tones of gaulois in French. CB]

[dot king]

"The CAC40 loses half its value but all’s for the best in the best of all possible worlds ‘coz France’s picked up a couple of Nobels!"

RICK

Oh, come on Rick! This is a blog article ABOUT the Nobel Prize for literature - it's of more interest to some of us than eternal ramblings about the stock exchanges, US capitalism vs French market regulation, each side blaming it on the other and nothing new being said.
There are other threads for those subjects - keep it off this one, let those of us who can take pleasure in someone's success have a little moment of it here and there. Honestly! :)
(I come in peace, in a general sort of way.)

[dot king]

The word "gallic" must have entered the English language as long ago as 1066 to describe those coming from Gaul, surely?
There's nothing réducteur about it, it's a perfectly respectable English word and has no anti-French connotation, not like "Frogs" for example which carries all sorts of implications of mockery.
If Randy_Flagg is French and proud to be so, perhaps he should reconsider his pseudonym for blogging as it certainly does him no credit. (With my luck in these matters, it's probably his real name - in which case oops:))

[Daniel Strohl]

RANDY-FLAGG,

Je suis français comme vous et heureux de l'être. Vous me permettrez à ce titre de vous dire que vous êtes complètement à côté de la plaque. Si le blog de CHARLES ne vous convient pas, personne ne vous oblige à le lire.

Pour ma part, je lis ce blog depuis au moins deux ans, et toujours avec plaisir, même si je m'intéresse plus à certains sujets qu'à d'autres.

Je n'ai jamais remarqué de "biased anti-French propaganda". Propaganda, avec un P majuscule :), est un mot très fort et complètement déplacé dans le cas présent.

Par ailleurs, vous ne pouvez pas non plus attendre d'un journaliste étranger, britannique en l'occurence (mais il pourrait être allemand ou japonais) qu'il se transforme en hagiographe de la société française, dont quelques éléments ne brillent pas toujours par leur ouverture d'esprit et leur humour, du moins si l'on extrapole à partir de ce vous avez écrit ci-dessus :)

CHARLES,

"among those inculte people who have not read him yet"

This is also my case - I am waiting my turn at the confessional :).

[Blendi Progri]

Well done to FRANCE! What else can I say. Well deserved too!

Now, will have to find something from this guy, JMG le Clézio and read it.
----

Randy, Murdoch isnt the devil, Berlusconi is..., and careful as Rupert reads this blog too.

Try as he might Randy can't be a real reactionary ( a lil extreme, yes), but I like him, as Randy Flag (?) brings ( adds?) some colour to this blog.

Let's hear what R.F. has to say, lets weight his grievances and then say sorry for any name calling to the French (I never did thou...) and toast the free speach.

Extreme* -as he may be- I like Randy!

[ patriots, visionaries and nationalists have all been called extremist in their earlier stages, but later people accept them- so why not Randy ;) ]

[azloon]

Charles, as a former journalist from a family of journalists, who reads way too many newspapers and magazines, i can only wonder what the hell anyone sees to object to in your perfectly balanced piece about the nobel.

congrats to france for its recognition by the nobel committe.

congrats to the winner for choosing to live in one of the world's most beautiful areas, the southwest (u.s.) desert.

and a bronx cheer for Randy.

[richard.jones]

I as red two books by le Clezio an ee remind me of J.Dee. Salinger. I fink I red 'Le procès-verbal' an 'Trois villes saintes'.
I fink he deserve the Nobble Prize cus I can't unnnerstand most of the books like wot the uvvers rote.

[Rick]

I took some care over my contribution to your blog, CHARLES, and deny that it was ‘mindless ranting’. If you re-read what I wrote, you will find that it is a plea for a modicum of sanity in the prioritization of news items; plus a salutary warning on winning graciously.

[Misunderstanding Rick. The words were absolutely not directed at you in the slightest. I was referring to people who have been accusing me of being an agent of supposed anti-French and pro-French propaganda. Thanks for the sensible contributions. CB]

[Don]

[CB: In the eternal contest of France versus les Anglo-Saxons, it has been a pretty good month for Gallic pride.]

This made me curious so I looked up some figures for the US part of the Anglo Saxon world:

Number of French Winners of Nobel Prize in Medicine vs US

France - 12
US - 90

For all categories of Nobel Prize

France

28 - pre WW II (pre 1945)
29 - post WW II (post 1945)

United States

28 - pre WW II (pre 1945)
276 - post WW II (post 1945)

[Don]

Regarding my last post, I undercounted the number of Nobels for the U.S. by leaving out the 2008 wins

U.S. in all categories

28 - pre WW II (pre 1945)
279 - post WW II ( post 1945)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nobel_laureates_by_country

[Dodo]

DON
"Number of French Winners of Nobel Prize in Medicine vs US

France - 12
US - 90"

Fine !
Now what about France against Monaco ?

[christopher muir]

I’ll put my hand up. It must have been 1970 when I came across a copy of le Clézio’s Procès Verbal. After all this time, I remember it as being rather dark and certainly quirky. The novel should have been made into a ground-breaking feature film, much in the style of Betty Blue. Anybody who has read the work will understand why - for many years - the sight of a stray dog made me think of author le Clezio. I see that the book’s Engish edition is out of print.

[Francois D]

Montagnier, we knew he would one day the Nobel Prize. The controversy with US Gallo has certainly delayed that.

It is very pleasant that Ms. Barre Senoussi is involved because she is a quiet person (and was almost .. student at the discovery).

It is Willy Rozembaum, a clinician (now in Salpêtrière Hospital), who came in their laboratory one day (January 1983) with a ganglion taken from a young homosexual, clinically suspect, asking them to "research a virus in that".

Ms. Barré has shown, by a specific producing enzyme (transcript reversase), that there was a virus in the sample. Virus was seen by electron microscopy in an another Institut Pasteur Laboratory, at the beginning following month by C Dauguet. Mrs Barre was learning in JC Cherman laboratory. He is now in Marseille (and disapointed).

Montagnier ans Barre have publicly recognized their importance for discovery.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luc_Montagnier

Rozembaum, seen past evening at TV is faiplay after distinction.

About JM Le Clezio, I have always imagined that, with a physic like that, he was a writer exclusively for women.. His father was british..

When I shall have a little time, I shall read one book (what please?). But for me, it's a WE work. So sorry in advance for bad translation..Important is message about Mrs Barre Senoussi.

[Don]

[Dodo : DON
"Number of French Winners of Nobel Prize in Medicine vs US

France - 12
US - 90"
Fine !
Now what about France against Monaco ?]

I deliberately did NOT do the per capita analysis so as not to embarrass France.

OK, let’s do the arithmetic.
And let’s apply ourselves to ALL categories of Nobel prizes – since it’s not just Medicine that benefits mankind.

France in all categories:
28 - pre WW II (pre 1945)
29 - post WW II (post 1945)

U.S. in all categories
28 - pre WW II (pre 1945)
279 - post WW II ( post 1945)

I am only going to analyze post WW II because in reality, pre WW II is too far in the past to be relevant and the U.S. population figures were changing incredibly rapidly pre- WW II due to massive immigration from (mostly) Eastern Europe so it hard to be accurate. [Eastern Europe immigration due to the fact that the Nobel prize only began in 1901. There was much immigration from Western Europe pre 1901].

Post WW II covers 63 years (almost 3 generations).

The U.S today has about 5 times the population of France;
therefore PER CAPITA the U.S has won approximately twice ( 2X ) the number
of Nobel prizes as France.

The U.S. is only part of the Anglo-Saxon world.
[CB referred to the Anglo Saxon world in his blog, not just the U.S. but I chose to only look at the U.S. ] If you add in all the Nobel prizes from Great Britain, Australia,
New Zealand etc. the numbers are even more in favor of the Anglo Saxons.

I welcome your comments. No comment from you will say volumes to any thoughtful person.

[Karthic Dixit]

Charles, I respect your freely allowing the occasional tilting at windmills in the comments. The Quixotes invariably do an excellent job of hoisting themselves on their own petards; why even bother, therefore, to respond, or, as some readers have understandably done, take exception?
As for Dot king's relief at The Academy avoiding a diminution in its stature by glossing over Betancourt, I'm afraid the horse has already bolted with Henry Kissinger astride it.

[dot king]

DON, DODO, Why, oh why, does EVERYTHING have to be turned into a dogfight?
There are individuals of all nationalities who have contributed to the advancement, understanding (and sometimes by the same token, the regression) of mankind and the world we live in.

Where these brilliant people came from is immaterial.

It is wrong to dismiss everything that happened pre-WW2 as irrelevant because every discovery, invention, development, has it's origins in work that has been painstakingly carried out before.
Don seems to want to "prove" USA superiority, why do Americans or "Anglo Saxons" (in general) have this need?
Perhaps, Don, you should look at your figures again and find out how many of the Nobel recompensed researchers were first generation French or other European first generation immigrants; then you could see how many were second generation immigrants and where their parents came from and back into their ancestry and then their genes, why not?
You could post detailed family trees of all Nobel prize winners WOW!! You might even get a Nobel prize for it - though it wouldn't be for either Peace or Literature.

Can we not talk quality instead of quantity?

The lack of generosity of spirit towards those who achieve never fails to surprise, it's even depressing.

[V]

"I am only going to analyze post WW II because in reality, pre WW II is too far in the past to be relevant"

And that kind of suits you too, since you compare a booming post war economy with a devastated Europe. No wonder the results.

I could also point to the population, since you speak of today's population, which is hardly relevant.

I could also point to the well known american habit of talent recruiting. Like in sports, in science too most top performers have been tempted in the US from Europe. I suppose you count Einstein too as an american scientist, right :)

I'm not criticizing the procédée: often americans put a lot of ressources in research, because their research is much more applied, ie, connected to the industry, so in the end it was all for the benefit of the world.

Let alone the more general idea of the origin of the US: we're not speaking about american native peoples, but about the most adventurous, pioneering, looking for something better people from the whole world, especially from Europe. I find it odd to see such comparisons from a country inspired from Europe and until recently made up of European immigrants. America now is the world in miniature, one more reason to drop some of this annoying arrogance, and play more for the team.

[dot king]

RICK - I'd like to add to what I said yesterday - why should the greedy cynical speculators who have brought the world to the edge of financial ruin occupy all our thoughts? Why should we be preoccupied by those who do harm, are themselves preoccupied only by the accumulation of money?

Le Clézio, Montagnier, and Barre-Sinousse have been awarded a prize that recompenses the work of their whole lives, they are all past their 60th birthday. They have all contributed positively to the world we live in, not set out with self-aggrandisement in mind, not unbridled greed and selfishness.

I wonder how many of the "golden boys" will get such recognition? Can we even hope for notoriety in their case? Will any go to jail where they belong?

Here's a parachute doré JFY :)

http://tempsreel.nouvelobs.com/actualites/buzz_sur_le_web/20081008.OBS4846/alain_souchon_offre_un_parachute_dore_aux_internautes.html

[V]

"Look at the huge media ride that France has given to the Morrison article in Time magazine alleging French cultural decline"

"In the eternal contest of France versus les Anglo-Saxons, it has been a pretty good month for Gallic pride. As well as the Nobels, many in France have been saluting what is seen as the end of the "Anglo-Saxon" creed of deregulation and free markets which has held sway since the early 1980s."
(CB)

I confess I didn't notice any of these.
The Time article was taken in the self-analyzing way in France, from what Ive seen, as in: is it true, are they correct, or is this yet another neocon rant at France.

Also, speaking of navel gazing French, writers or not, is a well known bashing reply from americans annoyed by redneck libeling.

Also, living in Paris, I didn't notice remarks on US/french Nobel rivalry - it would be misplaced, as it is well known that due to their economical weight, the US dominate the Nobel prizes by a huge length.

Also, off the top of my head I cant see what regulation of financial markets have to do with Nobels or Le Clézio. Europe is mostly angered at americans for their dire economic mismanagement and narrow ultra-short-term thinking.

So maybe the rant about Murdoch wasn't justified, but CB's thoughts weren't much either and risk sending us on yet another redneck showoff about who has the biggest muscles.
(which offensive posts will of course be allowed, so that we can "make an idea").

[Thanks V. Just for your and other critics' information, I have censored zero anti-American, anti-me comments while I have erased dozens of nasty anti-French comments comments that landed on the blog over the past couple of weeks. CB]

[J]

And, dear Don, how many US nobel prize winners were born and educated abroad ( yes I know that Marie Curie was from Poland)?

[dot king]

"As for Dot king's relief at The Academy avoiding a diminution in its stature by glossing over Betancourt, I'm afraid the horse has already bolted with Henry Kissinger astride it."

Karthic Dixit

Unfair comment - nothing to do with Kissinger in my post which was focussed only on Bétancourt - though I see what you're saying.
If anything, Bétancourt has done even less in the cause of "Peace" than HK.

[Randy_Flagg]

""[CB referred to the Anglo Saxon world in his blog, not just the U.S. but I chose to only look at the U.S. ] If you add in all the Nobel prizes from Great Britain, Australia,
New Zealand etc. the numbers are even more in favor of the Anglo Saxons.]

So, in your twisted logic France is to take alone, the US, Great Britain, Australia, Canada, New Zealand etc... lol

That's a nice made up fantasy, you have concocted yourself there.
No wonder you feel so superior if you have based your entire fantasy on those odds.

[Randy_Flagg]

"[Thanks V. Just for your and other critics' information, I have censored zero anti-American, anti-me comments while I have erased dozens of nasty anti-French comments comments that landed on the blog over the past couple of weeks. CB]"

So, on the Obama thread, instead of letting through 520 vile anti-French comments, you only let through like 500.

Thanx for the laugh, Charles.

Charles, on a more serious note.
What do you think about the role Rupert Murdoch's media oulets, (Fox News, the Sun, the NY Post, the newspaper currently employing you and others...) played in fostering anti-French feelings in the anglo-saxon world in the run up for the war in Iraq ?

[sebastien]

DON:
If you're still in book-keeping mood, could you indulge in another futile exercise and give us the figures for Nobel Literature prizes?

[Pierre]

Don:
So what?

That would be my main comment.

I'll add a few.
*Dot is righ about the dogfight. If Nobel are to be observed through the same reductionist perspective as the Olympic games have turned to be (a national counting of medals) the Institution's value is in real trouble.

*Lead by American economical and cultural expansion and domination values common to the "AS" sphere have been adopted throughout the world. Who would deny that?

*The same global development has boosted and been boosted by research in various fields. It is logically "transcripted" in Nobel awards. Who would be surprised by that?

*As any domination, this dynamic also supports itself, many claim not only the Gallic sphere, and gives another advantage in promoting its results and claiming the awards. The Montagnier/Gallo case provides some sort of illustration that merit can be wrongfully denied or claimed. There again who would be surprised?

[Rick]

You tease, DOT. Alain Suchon wanted my particulars before he’d part with any of his ‘parachute doré’. I fear that we differ in this respect: I see it as being rather more amusing and much less pink than you do. As for ‘parachute doré’, shouldn’t this strictly speaking denote an inducement to take up a particular post; plus something of a ‘shoe-in’ as par as ‘due process’ and fair play are concerned?

You objected to the ‘discussion’ (I use the term loosely) between the ‘boys’ (I use the term loosely) about something or other to do with number of Nobels/conkers/goals/girls acquired. As Kate Fox noted in her book on the English, men’s conversation is pitched somewhere between boasting and arguing and, ‘au fond’, concerns respective ‘lengths’ – hence, the obsessive quoting of numbers as they circle each other in the conversational ring.

As for the Nobel prize: cue Gallic shrug. Hell, it comes round every year, doesn’t it? As for the jury picking literary greats – it’s ‘a custom more honoured in the breach than in the observance’, as I’m not the only person to maintain.

BTW, I’m looking to the Montauban ‘Verts’ to wallop Munster in the return-leg.

Does JFY mean ‘just for you’? I’m blushing...

[dot king]

BTW, I’m looking to the Montauban ‘Verts’ to wallop Munster in the return-leg. RICK

Oh, me too, absolutely! ;D

JFY - yes just for you, but don't blush it soesn't suit you.

PS if you give Mr Suchon your name and e-mail address you get the song sent to you for free and then you can click out of his newsletter - peasy no problem.
PPS I've often wondered who his hairdresser is . . . :)

[Lex]

The Nobel Assembly is a bit of a closed circuit, so it only follows that the numbers for nations will increase disproportionately.

We must also remember that, thanks to Mr. Hitler, an enormous percentage of the European intelligentsia decamped to the United States in the 1930's. Were it not for WWII, the US would look nothing like it does today.

To get a better image of national influences in the arts and sciences, I think one would need to also look at who the "American" Nobel laureates studied under, as well as the founders of the university departments where they studied.

Outside of what one considers a proper breakfast and what unintelligible national sport one enjoys, aren't most things transcendent? The sciences must be, if they are to be truly called science, and the arts that win the Nobel must be if they have appealed to so many across national borders.

The fact of the matter is that western culture has been in decline since the end of the 1960's. After the upheavals of the sixties and early seventies we patched things up, fixed our hair, sat back down and said, "Now, dear, where were we?" Alors, continuons.

[dot king]

"we patched things up, fixed our hair, sat back down and said, "Now, dear, where were we?" Alors, continuons."
LEX

priceless! next door is still for sale . . .

[rocket]

J

"And, dear Don, how many US nobel prize winners were born and educated abroad ( yes I know that Marie Curie was from Poland)?"

Very good point J but may I ask how many of these people would have won the Nobel Prize had the means not been given them by the United States.

[azloon]

[the same reductionist perspective as the Olympic games have turned to be (a national counting of medals) the Institution's value is in real trouble] Pierre

imo, it's been in trouble for some time. the literature prize, france's win notwithstanding, is sort of joke. many recent winners have been barely readable. in fact, the 'ulysses' factor, as it might be thought of, seems to work in a candidate's favor. the french winner seems not to be in this mold, so i think i'll check him out.

the best thing ever to come out of the nobel literature awards, imo, is william faulkner's acceptance speech in 1950 (yes, much of his stuff is barely readable):

http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/literature/laureates/1949/faulkner-speech.html

it has the quality of abraham lincoln about it. faulkner and lincoln are two americans who clearly don't fit the insular, ethnocentric american stereotype. these guys 'get it

----------------

re: medals, prizes

we are score-keepers*: of olympic medals, nobel prizes, GDP and 'notional' value of financial derivatives.

live by the sword, die by the sword (big ouch!). oh yeah, Terry, i 've heard the nobel committee is reviewing its economic prize to milton friedman for possible posthumous confiscation.

* it's in our DNA which we know about from the pioneering work of OUR nobel laureate james watson.

USA 1, world 0.

:)

[Rick]

Talking of Nobel literature laureates, does somebody recall the unspeakable 2004 winner, Elfriede Jelinek?

[Don]

[“DON, DODO, Why, oh why, does EVERYTHING have to be turned into a dogfight?” –
Dot King]

My first email on this subject was generated by CB’s statement that there is
an “eternal contest of France versus les Anglo-Saxons” when he was writing about the recent Nobel prizes France has won I apologize for wanting to know more in this area and presenting my findings (and giving the web site where I found them so that the numbers I was presenting could be checked by anyone else.) I presented the figures with ZERO comments from me.

My second email was in response to DODO writing “Fine! Now what about France against Monaco?” implying that I was unfairly comparing France to the U.S since the U.S. is a larger country. So, I did the only thing that any responsible, rational person would do: I took up the challenge and did a per capita analysis of Nobel Prize wins.
I apologize here as well. I should have let stand the totally erroneous idea that I was unfairly comparing a smaller country to a larger country.

It is interesting to see all the heated responses I have received from two emails based upon a few simple numbers. If it is all so meaningless, as some claim, why all this vitriol directed at me for just presenting some “meaningless” numbers?

J wrote: “And, dear Don, how many US nobel prize winners were born and educated abroad (yes I know that Marie Curie was from Poland)?”.

My response: When France stops taking credit for Marie Curie the United States will stop taking credit for its Nobel prize winners. When France stops taking credit for its soccer wins because many (most?) of its members were born outside of France.

Rocket wrote: “Very good point J but may I ask how many of these people would have won the Nobel Prize had the means not been given them by the United States.”

That is, of course, an excellent point. It takes a rich country to be able to afford the research facilities for these people to do their work. On average, it costs $800 million and 10 to 12 years to produce one drug on the market. 80% of the world’s biotech firms are in the United States which takes tens of billions of dollars from venture capital firms. The U.S. spent billions of dollars to decode the human genome upon which most of the future advances in medicine will come. And the decoded genome is on the internet for anyone to use and access regardless of what countries those researches are in. The U.S. may not win a Nobel prize for that work, but you can bet that many Nobel prizes will be won (in the U.S. and around the world) for medical research based on that genome decoding. Millions of people are alive today in Africa because the U.S has spent billions of dollars developing anti-viral HIV drugs.

There has been much talk recently in France about the end of capitalism. If that happens, then the world should understand that the greatest medical research machine will come to a grinding halt. And, in the end, that will cost millions of lives. It’s not just the enormous sums of money that medical research requires. It also requires a culture that is willing to take risks and put their money where their mouth is. It takes a “cowboy” culture that is so demeaned and criticized these days. No system is perfect, but without the U.S. capitalist society, many advances in medicine from ibuprofen to MRI machines and laser surgery that people take for granted would not be available. The French do not seem to understand the connection between capitalism and research and innovation.

Modern medical research is not just done in the traditional laboratory. It takes huge amounts of computer power in addition to test tubes. Silicon Valley is the world center for developing computers. Chances are almost 99% that the heart [processor] of the computer you are using to access this blog was developed in Silicon Valley. It takes an economic system and a certain culture to nurture innovation. If the current financial crisis results in the U.S. becoming more like France, than the innovation in computers, networks and medical research will be similarly affected. If the U.S. becomes more socialist its pace of innovation will slow to a crawl.

If you are a poor person in Africa with AIDS, your best hope is that the U.S. continues its economic system and its culture that enabled it to win so many Nobel prizes. It’s not simply a matter of proving one system superior over another. It is a matter of life and death for some people. The EU has a bigger population and a larger GDP than the U.S. I truly welcome those countries to step up their research into AIDS, cancer, biotechnology etc. We would all be better off if they did. They should develop their own Silicon Valleys, their own biotech firms. If they don’t , it’s not because they don’t have the means. It will be because their economic and cultural systems do not foster innovation and risk taking.

[Lex]

"...how many of these people would have won the Nobel Prize had the means not been given them by the United States." Rocket

I imagine if the Germans had chosen someone more like Roosevelt instead of Hitler, there would be more Nobel prizes from Germany, Austria & France. That's always the problem with history: it isn't possible to have a control group, or to run the experiment again.

As for HIV, Gallo should have been taken into the alley and shot.

Azloon -- Faulkner is pure genius. Try again. Start with "Go Down, Moses" or "The Reivers." The Reivers is my favorite.

[Blendi Progri]

I know this subject is supposed for us to be taking sides, either pro -usa, or pro france. ( I am pro both BTW, strangely I like them the same) but I am in deeper thinking mode.

This Blog doesnt have a Topic called:
'Helping Others'

So, here I am, going completely OTT in the hope of some help.*

Today went around London, central london to be precise, on foot and on a bus, so many people moving around, so much life and camaradery (not really- but it goes better like this) and I felt something was missing.

Didnt know what, till from the top floor of the bus it hit me, it hit me so bad, it nearly blinded me, literally, for more than 3 bus stops the Sun was so strong I couldn't believe it.

Then I thought, its a nearly a week the weather has been so good, unseemingly good, what is ging on?
Global warming. Am I still in London or is this a joke.

1 week, a full, uninterrupted week with glowing, warm Sun (it could be 4-5 days, but brothers, it feels much more)I could be tempting fate and wake this very morning - onto a choir of We Told you So - amidst the usual Rain ( Department of T&T is considering to make UK rain a TM) and then go out and get wet.

Another thing I wonder in London is why do I get wet. Always Rain, never with an umbrealla in my hand and yet am surrounded by Umbrellas.

The beauty of it is that I have 2-3-4 umbrellas at work, 4-5-6 at home in cupboards and in other places, 2-3 in my car (1 small & 2 big ones) and always I am out without an umbrella in the rain.
Thinking its light rain, I can walk up to there, I walk..and get wet.lol.

That is what I missed this SATurday morning, getting wet.

20-1 that come Monday my wish will come true... and I may need to buy one umbrella, just one more. :)

* What is going on, anyone who's good at weather...I only need to know that the coming week wont be sunny, so can happily go back to my former life...rainy as it was before, indeed the whole summer.

[Judith]

Azloon
In the context of the current financial upheaval, I do think it is ironic that the US has consistently won the Noble economic prize between 2000 and 2007.

[Ranokivio]

"[Thank you Pierre. I think our friend Randy and others who dislike the word Gallic do not understand that it is merely a neutral variation for the word French. Writers use it to avoid saying "French" twice in the same sentence. It does not carry any of the negative tones of gaulois in French. CB]"

"The word "gallic" must have entered the English language as long ago as 1066 to describe those coming from Gaul, surely?
There's nothing réducteur about it, it's a perfectly respectable English word and has no anti-French connotation, not like "Frogs" for example which carries all sorts of implications of mockery."

Well, it seems some linguists have a different opinion:
http://people.ischool.berkeley.edu/~nunberg/gallic.html

[Ranokivio]

Excerpt from the link above:
"
But one way or the other, Gallic always implies the traits of character -- you don't see people talking about "Gallic aircraft carriers" or "Gallic pharmaceutical companies." According to Edward Knox, a professor at Middlebury who has studied the way France is reported in the American press, Gallic isn't really a synonym for French at all -- it's more like a shorthand for "the French are at it again." "

[Maybe in the US media, but not in the British. As I said, Gallic is used most of the time as a simple variation of French. And we do talk about Gallic aircraft carriers or industries if we've already used the word 'French'. CB]

[Monika]

If you want to count Nobel prize winners per country in order to compare you should consider population, too.

US: 304 482 526 people
France: 64 473 140

This makes 4.7 times more Americans than Indians.

So if you multiply the number of French Nobel Prizes (57) with the factor 4.7 you come up to 267.9 = 268 versus the 307 for the US. I'd say that's not so bad at all for our Gallic friends.

PS: I am not French.

[christopher muir]

Here’s a sobering thought for any aspring Nobel winner. It comes from TS Eliot.

"The Nobel is a ticket to one's own funeral. No one has ever done anything after he got it."

[Monika]

Me: This makes 4.7 times more Americans than Indians.

Arg, I meant "French" not "Indians"

(This happens if one does two things at the same time ^^)

[Dodo]

DOT [DON, DODO, Why, oh why, does EVERYTHING have to be turned into a dogfight?]

...mais c’est lui qu’a commencé. Y fait rien que nous embêter.. ;)
Where this strange idea to look up figures comes from ? From DON.
Why ? Because CB said “in the eternal contest of France versus les Anglo-Saxons, it has been a pretty good month for Gallic pride.” . Is now DON was accusing Charles of pro-french bias.
My suggestion to look up with Monaco (or Andorra or whatever ) was ironic.

On the Morrison article in Time Magazine, what offended the French was the title “The Death of French Culture”

Of course Vincent Josse (France-Inter) called Morrison after the Le Clezio Nobel.
After a couple of embarrassed answer he put the blame to a London based editor accusing him for the choice of the provocative title. Où est donc passée la fraternité Anglo Saxone ? ;)
Listen at 6:40
http://www.tv-radio.com/ondemand/france_inter/ESPRIT/ESPRIT20081010.ram