You have /5 articles left.
Sign up for a free account or log in.
And the winner of the 2024 Nobel Prize in Literature is … Han Kang, the first South Korean to receive the honor. The 53-year-old author is known for her poetic prose and exploration of historical traumas and the fragility of the human psyche.
This selection raises a question: Who was the last truly canonical figure to receive the Nobel Prize for Literature—an author whose works have been widely translated, studied and taught, with lasting influence universally recognized?
Was it Mario Vargas Llosa, the Peruvian novelist and essayist who won in 2010, celebrated for his profound explorations of power, politics and society? Or Orhan Pamuk, the Turkish novelist and 2006 recipient, whose fiction navigates the clash between Western and Eastern values, tradition and modernity? Or perhaps V. S. Naipaul, the 2001 laureate, whose work on postcolonialism, displacement and identity remains central to the postcolonial literary canon.
The early 1990s saw a series of universally acknowledged laureates: Seamus Heaney (1995), whose poetry deeply engages with Irish history and culture; Toni Morrison (1993), whose explorations of race and identity in America contributed to her international stature; and Derek Walcott (1992), whose epic poem Omeros is a landmark of modern literature. Earlier still, Gabriel García Márquez, the 1982 laureate, revolutionized literature with his magical realism.
As New York Times critic A. O. Scott quipped, second-guessing the Nobel Prize committee has become a popular sport, given the frequent obscurity of many laureates and the long list of eminent nonwinners.
The Nobel Prize in Literature often sparks surprise and skepticism when the recipient is relatively unknown to the broader public. The reaction—“Who’s that?”—reflects the perception that the committee’s selections are influenced by factors beyond pure literary merit or widespread influence.
Many laureates are not household names, especially in English-speaking countries, where the literary canon is more focused on English-speaking writers or those translated early into English. The Nobel frequently celebrates authors from less globally dominant literary cultures, such as Austria (Elfriede Jelinek), Belarus (Svetlana Alexievich) or Tanzania (Abdulrazak Gurnah), whose international reach was often limited before their win. As a result, the prize appears to highlight writers whose work has yet to achieve broad recognition.
Accusations of political and social influences on the Nobel committee’s choices are not new. The prize is often awarded to writers whose works align with the committee’s views on issues like human rights or social justice, rather than focusing solely on literary excellence. For instance, Alexievich’s 2015 win was celebrated more for her exploration of post-Soviet life than for her adherence to traditional literary forms, with her work rooted more in documentary journalism than fiction, poetry or drama.
Similarly, Bob Dylan’s 2016 award sparked controversy. While his contributions to music are undisputed, many questioned whether his work qualified as literature. This selection showed the committee’s willingness to push the boundaries of what constitutes literature, reflecting a desire to engage with contemporary cultural trends.
The committee’s effort to recognize voices from underrepresented regions is admirable, but this approach sometimes leads to the selection of writers whose works, while culturally significant, may not have the universal impact typically associated with the Nobel Prize.
The reluctance to award the prize to popular or commercially successful authors further complicates its reputation. Writers like Haruki Murakami and Philip Roth, whose works are both critically acclaimed and widely read, have been passed over in favor of authors who challenge literary norms or operate on the margins of literary culture. This creates the perception that the Nobel is out of step with contemporary literary culture, often favoring experimentalism or political engagement over accessibility.
The Nobel’s preference for modernist, experimental or politically engaged works can alienate the general reading public. Writers who adhere to more traditional narrative structures are often passed over in favor of those aligned with avant-garde movements, fostering the impression that the prize rewards a narrow literary aesthetic rather than broader criteria of greatness or influence.
In the end, the Nobel Prize in Literature reflects the subjective tastes of a small group of Swedish academics, whose biases and cultural perspectives shape their selections. This subjectivity contributes to the perception that the prize is influenced by esoteric or ideological concerns, rather than solely literary merit.
Cultural critic Ted Gioia recently noted that none of the top 40 best-selling books on Amazon were for adults—all were children’s books. The first serious adult novel, Sally Rooney’s Intermezzo, appeared at No. 42. His conclusion: Literary culture for adults has shrunk to a level even smaller than that for toddlers.
French sociologist Olivier Roy describes a process he calls “deculturation,” where globalization and societal shifts erode specific elements of ethnic, class, religious and regional cultures. He warns that cultural stagnation is part of this broader decline.
Why, then, did the late 18th to early 20th centuries witness such remarkable literary achievements, and why does today’s larger, more diverse population of writers seem to have far less impact?
The earlier period was the novel’s golden age, when literary innovation thrived amid unprecedented social, psychological and political upheavals. Authors expanded the novel’s scope, using it to explore individual growth, societal structures and the human psyche. The novel became more than a storytelling device—it became a tool for intellectual experimentation.
From the late 18th to the early 20th century, novelists developed various literary forms to engage with the changing social, political and intellectual landscape. Key forms include:
- The Gothic novel, featuring elements of horror and the supernatural, explored themes of psychological terror and societal transgression. Examples like Frankenstein by Mary Shelley and The Castle of Otranto by Horace Walpole reflected anxieties about the conflict between reason and emotion during the early stages of industrialization.
- The Bildungsroman, or novel of self-formation, focused on the moral and psychological growth of a character. Works such as Goethe’s Wilhelm Meister’s Apprenticeship and Dickens’s Great Expectations examined personal development, ambition and the challenges of reconciling individual desires with societal expectations in an increasingly mobile society.
- The historical novel blended historical accuracy with fictional narratives, as seen in Walter Scott’s Waverley and Tolstoy’s War and Peace. This form arose from a growing interest in understanding the past and forging national identities, particularly during periods of revolution and war.
- The novel of manners portrayed the customs and social codes of particular classes, often the bourgeoisie. Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice and Edith Wharton’s The Age of Innocence explored themes of social mobility, marriage and societal expectations, reflecting the complexities of middle- and upper-class life.
- The social novel addressed specific social issues, such as poverty and class inequality. Charles Dickens’s Hard Times and Elizabeth Gaskell’s North and South raised awareness about the conditions of the working class and the impact of industrial capitalism, advocating for social reform.
- The psychological novel dived into the internal workings of the mind, exploring characters’ motivations and emotions. Notable examples include Fyodor Dostoyevsky’s Crime and Punishment and Henry James’s The Portrait of a Lady, which focused on the human psyche and moral dilemmas.
- The realist novel sought to depict life as it truly was, focusing on ordinary people and their struggles. Examples include George Eliot’s Middlemarch and Gustave Flaubert’s Madame Bovary. Realist novels aimed to address social issues and the moral complexities of everyday life, moving away from the romanticized characters of earlier fiction.
- The naturalist novel extended realism by emphasizing the impact of environment, heredity and social conditions on human behavior. Émile Zola’s Germinal and Theodore Dreiser’s Sister Carrie exemplify this form, depicting the harsh realities of life for the poor, often underscoring the deterministic and bleak forces shaping human destiny.
The rise of the novel as the dominant literary form in the 19th century was an international phenomenon. Unlike today, English-speaking readers were more likely to engage with foreign authors.
Then, there was a strong tradition of translating literature from French, German and Russian into English. Authors such as Honoré de Balzac, Victor Hugo, Fyodor Dostoyevsky and Leo Tolstoy were widely read by English-speaking audiences, with their works published in affordable editions accessible to the middle class.
European intellectual and literary traditions were highly regarded in the English-speaking world, especially among the educated elite, who saw foreign literature as a way to engage with broader intellectual movements across Europe. In the United States, where the literary scene was smaller than today’s globalized publishing industry, readers often turned abroad for new ideas and narratives. Movements like Romanticism, realism and naturalism crossed borders, sparking curiosity in how different countries explored these themes.
Today, however, English-language readers tend to focus more on works written in English, partly due to the sheer volume of domestic literature. National literary awards, such as the Booker Prize and the Pulitzer Prize, reinforce this trend. Despite globalization, translated books account for only about 3 percent of all books published in the United States, a far smaller percentage than in the 19th century.
Contemporary readers are also drawn to popular genres like fantasy, science fiction, crime and thrillers, largely dominated by English-language authors. The prevalence of these genres, along with other entertainment options, has further reduced exposure to foreign literary works.
While foreign literature once offered English-speaking readers new ideas and perspectives, today’s literary consumption is more insular and focused on domestic production.
Cynics often dismiss the golden age of the novel as mere reflections of bourgeois culture, arguing that these works primarily mirror the concerns, values and aspirations of the rising middle class rather than offering profound or universal insights into the human condition. According to this critique, novels from the late 18th to the early 20th centuries focus on issues central to bourgeois life—property, social mobility, marriage, family and moral respectability—reinforcing middle-class ideologies while neglecting the experiences of marginalized or working-class populations. These novels also devote little attention to issues like slavery, imperialism and colonialism, concerns more pressing today.
It’s true that many great 19th-century novels are preoccupied with bourgeois anxieties about status, social hierarchy and securing economic stability through marriage or inheritance, leading some critics to argue that these works reinforce social norms rather than challenge them. In addition, many work reflect capitalist ideologies and the moral justifications for wealth accumulation. While Charles Dickens critiques industrialization and the mistreatment of the poor, his protagonists often succeed through virtues like hard work and moral purity, implicitly supporting the idea that individual effort, rather than systemic change, leads to success.
Novels like Henry James’s The Portrait of a Lady or Gustave Flaubert’s Madame Bovary explore psychological struggles, but their focus on personal freedom, desire and social expectations unfolds within a world where economic and social privilege are central. Critics argue that these novels, while insightful, are narrow in focus, ignoring the broader struggles of the working class or colonized peoples during the age of European imperialism.
However, dismissing the golden age of the novel as purely bourgeois expression overlooks the complexity and depth of these works. While many reflect the social realities of their time, they also critically engage with those realities. Dickens, for example, exposes deep structural inequalities and Fyodor Dostoyevsky’s Crime and Punishment grapples with moral and philosophical questions—guilt, redemption and justice—that transcend class.
Even novels focused on bourgeois life often critique the very values they depict. Flaubert’s Madame Bovary criticizes the emptiness and despair underlying bourgeois aspirations, revealing the psychological toll of materialism and conformity. These works engage deeply with the contradictions of middle-class life, offering critical reflections rather than endorsements.
While cynics argue that the golden age of the novel is rooted in bourgeois culture, these works transcend their social contexts, offering rich explorations of psychology, ethics and society that resonate across time and class. Far from mere expressions of bourgeois ideology, these novels challenge readers to reflect on the limitations, hypocrisies and contradictions of the social systems they depict.
The charge that many great works of literature from the late 18th to early 20th centuries avoid issues like race, gender, colonialism, slavery, identity and sexual diversity is not without merit. However, while these critiques highlight omissions, they overlook the broader value of these works, which engage deeply with vital aspects of the human condition—morality, power, individual development and the tension between idealism and reality. Dismissing these works for not aligning with modern concerns ignores the richness of their engagement with themes that transcend their historical moment.
Many of these novels are deeply concerned with the moral and social issues of their time, even if they don’t explicitly address colonialism or gender inequality. Dickens’s Bleak House and Oliver Twist offer sharp critiques of class inequality, corruption and social injustice. While Dickens may not focus on race or gender, his moral universe is far from superficial, exposing the brutal realities of poverty, institutional failure and moral decay.
Similarly, novels from this period, especially the Bildungsroman, focus on internal moral and psychological struggles. Writers like George Eliot and Henry James explore personal integrity, self-sacrifice and ethical dilemmas, grappling with the complexities of moral growth. While these stories may not directly address race or gender in the ways that contemporary authors might, they offer profound insights into navigating a world filled with competing moral demands—still relevant today.
It’s also worth noting that many novels from this era critique, rather than endorse, middle-class morality. Flaubert’s Madame Bovary critiques the shallow materialism of the bourgeoisie, while Tolstoy’s Anna Karenina and War and Peace expose the hypocrisies of Russian aristocracy and the moral failures of the social order. These novels challenge the class structures they depict, offering more than bland moral lessons.
Though these works may not foreground issues like race or gender as modern literature does, they are not silent on these matters. In Jane Eyre, Charlotte Brontë explores gender and class through Jane’s struggle against Victorian society’s limitations. Similarly, Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness critiques European colonialism, though it has been criticized for its Eurocentric perspective. While these works may not align with modern sensibilities, they engage with power structures and hierarchies, inviting reflection on oppression, agency and identity.
The enduring relevance of these works lies in their engagement with universal human experiences. Themes of love, ambition, betrayal, identity and the search for meaning are explored in ways that remain pertinent. Jane Austen’s insights into human relationships and Dostoyevsky’s explorations of faith, guilt and redemption offer timeless reflections on the human condition, even if they don’t directly address race, gender or colonialism.
Moreover, many 19th-century novels grapple with the societal shifts brought on by industrialization and capitalism. Dickens’s Hard Times and Zola’s Germinal critique the dehumanizing effects of industrial capitalism and the exploitation of the working class, exposing the systems that supported colonialism and imperialism. These novels lay the groundwork for understanding structural inequalities that continue to shape global relations.
Finally, these works are celebrated for their formal and stylistic innovations. Writers like James Joyce, Virginia Woolf and Marcel Proust pushed the boundaries of narrative form, experimenting with stream of consciousness, time and memory. While they may not engage directly with modern political concerns, their formal experimentation reshaped how literature could represent consciousness and interiority.
Several influential scholars have explored the rise of the novel as the dominant literary form from the 18th century, offering distinct perspectives on its development and significance.
Georg Lukács, in The Theory of the Novel (1916), examined the novel as a reflection of modern alienation. Unlike the epic, which represented a unified world where individuals were connected to their societies, the novel expresses the fragmentation and isolation of modern life. For Lukács, the novel’s rise is tied to capitalism and bourgeois society, depicting characters navigating a world where the connection between the individual and society is severed.
Ian Watt’s The Rise of the Novel (1957) linked the novel’s emergence to the rise of individualism and formal realism. Watt identified three key factors: the novel’s focus on everyday life with plausible, individualized characters; its reflection of middle-class values, including personal ambition and economic individualism; and the influence of Enlightenment philosophy, emphasizing observation and personal experience. Watt argued that the novel became the quintessential genre of modernity by capturing these social and philosophical shifts.
Mikhail Bakhtin’s The Dialogic Imagination (1981) underscored the novel’s polyphonic nature, emphasizing two distinctive features: heteroglossia—the coexistence of multiple voices and perspectives—and the carnivalesque—the subversion of social hierarchies. Bakhtin saw the novel as an ideal form for reflecting the complexities and contradictions of modern life.
Fredric Jameson’s The Political Unconscious (1981) viewed the novel as a site of ideological conflict, arguing that novels reveal underlying social and political struggles, often without explicitly acknowledgment. Jameson believed the novel’s form is shaped by historical shifts in class struggle and capitalism, serving as allegories for broader societal conflicts.
Margaret Doody’s The True Story of the Novel (1996) challenged the view that the novel began in 18th-century Europe, tracing its roots to ancient works such as The Golden Ass and The Tale of Genji. She argued that the novel has always been a hybrid form, borrowing from various genres and traditions and that its “rise” in the 18th century was just one moment in its global evolution.
Franco Moretti’s Graphs, Maps, Trees (2005) introduced a quantitative approach to studying the novel, advocating for “distant reading” to trace patterns across large bodies of literature. Moretti argued that the novel’s rise was shaped by broader social and cultural forces, likening the evolution of literary forms to biological species adapting to historical environments.
David Trotter’s The Making of the Novel (1988) explored the rise of the English novel in relation to social and economic changes, arguing that it emerged in response to the aspirations and anxieties of a newly mobile, literate middle class. He linked the novel’s development to the expansion of print culture and the publishing industry, which made novels more accessible.
When the novel was king, society’s deepest questions were explored in fiction. Today, however, in the age of fast media, serious reading of long-form fiction has become a niche activity, with troubling consequences.
Novel reading is no longer the primary way the educated middle class engages with philosophical, psychological, historical and sociological issues. This shift carries significant psychological and ethical implications.
A major factor in this decline is the rise of digital and social media, which has shortened attention spans and made immersive, long-form reading less common. Complex narratives requiring time and patience are often overlooked in favor of quick, consumable content. In a commodified world, cultural consumption prioritizes entertainment and convenience over intellectual rigor. Streaming services, podcasts and serialized content provide easily digestible narratives, while serious literary fiction, which challenges and provokes thought, is less marketable.
Previously, novels served as a platform for discussing major social, philosophical and psychological questions. Today, these discussions are fragmented across academic disciplines, journalism and self-help literature, with little overlap. As each domain becomes more specialized, the novel’s role as a holistic way of thinking about the world has diminished.
The decline of literary culture has had profound psychological and ethical repercussions. Novels uniquely allow readers to inhabit another person’s consciousness, fostering empathy by exploring the interior lives of characters. Without serious fiction, this ability to connect deeply with others may erode, leading to a more fragmented and shallow understanding of human experience.
Furthermore, long-form fiction demands sustained attention and the ability to grasp complex ideas. As novel reading declines, so does society’s capacity for deep engagement with difficult concepts. This trend toward shorter attention spans encourages superficial thinking, quick judgments and instant gratification, while discouraging critical reflection. Novels also expand the imagination, offering new worlds, ways of thinking and possibilities. Without them, our inner lives become more constrained, losing the novel’s unique ability to broaden horizons.
Great novels—by authors like Dostoyevsky, Tolstoy, Eliot or James—often serve as moral investigations, inviting readers to engage with ethical dilemmas in nuanced ways. The decline in reading these works risks a more simplistic, binary approach to ethics, making it harder to grapple with the moral ambiguities that fiction illuminates.
Moreover, novels once provided a shared cultural framework for discussing common values, history and social issues. The decline of novel reading has fragmented this shared memory, leaving individuals less likely to engage with the same narratives, moral questions or collective history.
A key benefit of novel reading is its capacity to foster self-reflection. By engaging with fictional characters’ struggles and triumphs, readers are prompted to reflect on their own lives and ethical frameworks. Without this engagement, individuals may become less inclined to question their own assumptions and choices, leading to a more superficial ethical life.
If the novel once served as a vital tool for navigating life’s complexities, its decline leaves a gap in how we understand the world, our place in it and our responsibilities to each other.
The cultural shift away from long-form fiction has eroded the central role novels once played in shaping philosophical, psychological and ethical discourse. What was once a primary medium for exploring the human condition has been displaced by fragmented, easily consumable content. This signals a loss of depth in how society engages with big ideas, moral questions and human emotions.
As novel reading fades, we risk losing the intellectual and emotional engagement it once fostered. The shift from literary culture to digital consumption reflects a broader fragmentation of intellectual life, where entertainment is prioritized over depth and sustained thought. This threatens our ability to engage seriously with philosophical, psychological and ethical issues. If this decline continues, the cost may extend far beyond the loss of a literary tradition, leading to a future where critical thinking and deep emotional understanding are increasingly rare.
