Chinese writer Mo Yan favorite for Nobel Lit Prize

Source:Globaltimes.cn Published: 2012-10-7 17:41:00

 

Mo Yan
Mo Yan

As Sweden gears up for the annual Nobel Prize beginning October 8, all Chinese hopes are directed on Chinese writer Mo Yan, who is a projected winner for this year's literature award.

According to AFP, either Mo or Japanese writer Hakuri Murakami will likely receive the prize, while odds released by online gambling company Unibet favor Mo as the winner, followed by Murakami.

Although this burning Weibo topic has attracted the attention of almost all major Chinese websites, Mo offered little speculation as to his chances. 

"I have no opinion," Mo told the Xinhua News Agency. 

@快乐的东西:The value of a writer should be reflected in the influence of his work. Lately, Mo Yan said Weibo has no meaning, a comment which was questioned by many netizens and ended with him clarifying his statement and making an apology to the public. Actually, Weibo is the one which really changes people's lives, but why is there no prize to award this innovation?

@杜岳刚:The Nobel Prize has a special rule: the list of nominees and candidates will be kept in secret for 50 years.  Except for the winners, names of all nominees and candidates are not to be allowed to be announced. So where did the media get the information that Mo Yan and Murakami are the two leading choices? If it came from the nomination institution or the Swedish Academy, that calls the seriousness of the Prize into question.

@十月蟋蟀入我家:Chinese have lost confidence in our literature, so we need to win a Noble Prize to prove how excellent we are. But even if Mo Yan wins, it doesn't prove that our current Chinese literature is excellent.

@霍艳:If Mo Yan wins, I just hope this prize can help improve literature here as a whole, such as help critics tell the truth, encourage people to read, get publishers to stop looking out only for themselves and provide young talent with a chance in the literary world. Am I asking too much?



Posted in:

blog comments powered by Disqus