Interview with Mats Malm, Permanent Secretary, and Anders Olsson, Head of the Nobel Committee
by Gisèle Sapiro, April 2024
1/ Could you please describe the two phases of the Nobel Committee’s candidate selection process, involving:
i) the selection of the 20–25 names considered by the Academy as preliminary candidates;
ii) the further selection of five priority candidates for Academy consideration.
The 20–25 preliminary names are chosen largely from the nominations received by the Academy from all over the globe by no later than 1 February. The final list also includes supplementary nominations put forward by the Nobel Committee, based partly on recommendations and reports sent to them by external experts in January. The task of reducing the list from approximately 200 to 20–25 names is to be concluded by the beginning of April, and is the most intense and time-consuming period in the Nobel Committee’s working year. Another essential part of the process is the reassessment of prime candidates from previous years. Before settling upon the selected names, they are presented to the Academy for its approval.
The final selection of the five priority candidates is presented to the Academy in the beginning of May and confirmed in plenum a few weeks later, ahead of the summer vacation. Since every Academy member is involved in the decision process, they are all expected to read the work of the priority candidates. Included on the final list will be names known from previous years, as well as new candidates. The system provides a stable and renewable process for ensuring a high degree of acquaintance with candidates’ work, while maintaining and renewing the awareness of the current state of the world’s literature.
2/ What would you consider to be a valuable recommendation?
Valuable recommendations from nominators or our own appointed experts are those which are both informative and provide us with compelling arguments for considering an author.
3/ Do you feel that the nominations by external recommendation provide a sufficiently wide and diverse group of candidates? Or do you feel there can be biases?
Any particular nomination can be biased; that is a fundamental assumption. However, candidates are assessed independently, which removes the potential problem of their nominator. And whether or not nominations may be considered biased, it cannot be taken for granted that they together cover every candidate worthy of consideration.
The Academy has always taken the opportunity to seek the help and opinions of experts, for example regarding particular language areas. In 2021, with a view to ensuring that no promising candidates escape the Academy’s notice, a group of around 10 experts was assigned to deliver annual reports based on their particular areas of expertise.
4/ Do you often commission translations of a candidate’s work?
That does happen, and it can have a decisive impact on the Nobel process – but it is a laborious and time-consuming method.
5/ Do you sometimes feel that you lack specialists in certain languages or areas of language?
The Academy has always been aware that it cannot cover every single language, and always known that it needs external expert assessments in order to widen its scope.
6/ From your experience, what are the main criteria for evaluating candidates?
Literary quality is the main criterion. Similar to the scientific Nobel prizes, the focus is on achievements that have advanced the development of the world’s literature. Historically, the Academy has directed its attention towards innovators, influencers, or masters of lesser-known language areas or genres (see Espmark: https://www.svenskaakademien.se/en/the-nobel-prize-in-literature/the-nobel-prize-in-literature-a-new-century-by-kjell-espmark). One criterion that may, but need not, conflict with pioneering achievements is universality – in the sense that the work of a priority candidate should retain its literary power even in translation to other languages. Another aspect of universality is the ability to expand the personal into a universal address. Clearly, no work of literature can appeal to every single reader, but the ability to retain an appeal beyond linguistic and cultural borders is essential.
7/ Are form and style criteria? If so, in what way? How can experimental writing (in its various genres) be considered?
Outstanding achievements certainly involve form and style – and formal and stylistic innovation can evidently take many guises. To be sure, experimental writing is one way of contributing to the development of literature. Criteria of style and form are measured in regard to the development and expansion of a literary field. Following on from the answer to the previous question, radical experimental writing may conflict with the aim of transferability into other languages. However, one should always bear in mind that it is difficult to predict the possibilities of translation and transcultural dissemination. The late boom and influence of Western modernism in China after Mao bears witness to this.
8/ Is success a criterion? And if so, what represents success?
Popularity and successful marketing are often poor criteria of quality. The kind of success that can function as a criterion is however that of influence, as influence indicates that a new venue was established and others continue to develop it. Moreover, what informed readers and writers have admired and made productive may help us to discover further hidden merits.
9/ To what extent is translation a requirement?
- Do authors need to have been translated in order for them to be eligible for the prize?
- Are there languages that count more than others?
- Could an author be selected if his or her work has not been translated into English? Or German? Or French? Do translations into Swedish count?
Translation is not a formal condition, but in many cases a practical concern. While a rich availability of translations may be an indicator of quality, this is not always the case. Since so many literary works are written in languages in which Academy members lack proficiency, translations are of course required in order for them to be made accessible. This inherent problem obviously makes some languages more available than others.
There is no particular target language into which authors need to have been translated. Works can be assessed provided they have been translated into a language that is available to the Academy. Obviously, translations never render the original completely. Translation is one of the most remarkable means for transferring culture imaginable, but it does not solve all issues.
10/ Are literary prizes important? Which ones?
Literary prizes can contribute to the development of literature and the widespread discussion about what literature is, could be or even should be. This is true regardless of the extent to which the public agree or disagree with the selection of a particular laureate. The Academy does not assess other prizes, but believes that Alfred Nobel’s placing of literature on a par with medicine, physics, chemistry and peace in itself is to be regarded as a wonderful celebration of literature.
11/ Do countries apply political pressure in order to promote their candidates?
Attempts at convincing seem to have been made historically, but we know of no contemporary examples.
12/ Are any other forms of political pressure applied?
The Nobel prize in literature is never politically motivated, but certainly may have political effects. Depending on the political regime in a laureate’s home country, the reaction to a prize award could be oppressive to the laureate in the event that it were perceived as politically inappropriate – although the Academy only ever awards the prize on literary grounds.
Potentially, if a prize were seen as politically motivated, this could provoke discussion on a diplomatic level. However, the Academy is not to be confused with the Swedish state, and it has no ambitions in terms of developing international public policy.
13/ How do you interpret the notion of ‘ideal’ direction referred to in Alfred Nobel’s will?
While the word ‘ideal’ was initially much interpreted in terms of traditional western ethics, it has over time been interpreted more widely. An author such as Samuel Beckett (1969), for example, did not display conventional ethics but a sense for “true human value”. While the field of the prize is works written in an “ideal direction” – not far from “with an existential dimension” – the actual criterion is that the achievement be “outstanding” in aesthetic regard. The decisive factor is not the author’s outlook on life, but rather the artistic power and precision of the literary contribution.
14/ Do you separate the work from the author?
While the prize goes to an author, it is based upon that author’s literary achievement – in other words, the work. The aesthetic evaluation is not complemented with political or moral valuations, but there is a general threshold for being considered: “an author who gives expression to a basic contempt for human values is in conflict with Nobel’s spirit and cannot be considered for a prize”. Ezra Pound’s antisemitism is the obvious example (https://www.svenskaakademien.se/en/the-nobel-prize-in-literature/the-nobel-prize-in-literature-a-new-century-by-kjell-espmark).
That threshold having been considered, the literary merit of the work is not weighed against perceptions of political or moral appropriateness. The principle of freedom of speech and thought is essential to literature.
15/ Would you consider a candidate who has behaved inappropriately in the past (a convicted rapist, for example, such as the film director Roman Polanski)?
The Academy is not a court of law and does not perform in-depth investigations into the history of the candidates. If, however, a candidate is known for having committed acts which show disrespect for human values, this would be taken into consideration.
16/ Would you consider a candidate who had previously expressed racist views?
Please see the previous response.
17/ How did the Academy respond to the demonstrations and attacks that followed Peter Handke being awarded the prize?
The Academy does not argue for its decisions. In the case of Handke a clarification was made. A number of allegations against Handke were made to the extent that his publisher published a list of factoids spread about him. While he certainly had sided for the idea of a united Yugoslavia and behaved provocatively, the Academy did not find that this could invalidate him as a worthy laureate. Every writer has the right to provoke and speak out his or her mind freely as long as he or she does not express contempt for human values.
18/ How do you look back upon this ‘scandal’ from the perspective of today?
The prize is never awarded with political intentions, but it most certainly has political effects. The award to Handke and its reception provided the most illustrative evidence of this dynamic.
19/ Literature is today sometimes considered as elitist. Do you think the Nobel Prize should be extended to more popular authors and genres? Can the award of the prize to Bob Dylan be seen as a response to this critique?
In regard to the scientific prizes, the achievements that are rewarded are those that have significantly advanced science. Since the same principle applies to the literature prize, it follows that it may not necessarily be awarded to the most popular author or genre. Literature is advanced through experimentation, invention and refinement. While popularity is not a criterion, that does not imply any contempt for best-sellers.
The award of the prize to Bob Dylan was based not on popularity but, to put it briefly, on his innovative renewal of tradition.
20/ The Academy has shown through its selections that it views literature as more than just fiction, and that it considers not only all the traditional literary genres but also non-fictional literary writing. What are the Academy’s motivations and criteria in the latter case?
Encompassed within the field of literature are not only works of literature in the stricter sense, but also other works of literary value, since these may also make important contributions to the evolution of the world’s literature. In the statutes of the Nobel Foundation it is phrased: “The term ‘literature’ shall comprise not only belles-lettres but also other writings which, by virtue of their form and style, possess literary value.” (https://www.nobelprize.org/about/statutes-of-the-nobel-foundation/)
21/ How do you see the future of the Nobel Prize in Literature?
We like to think of the Nobel Prize in Literature as a contribution to the worldwide conversation about what literature is and can be, and regard any objections to our choices as a natural part of this discussion. Since consensus and conventions on values in different areas are undergoing ever more rapid change, it is likely that reactions to literary prizes on the whole will become increasingly heated and critical. The debate around the meaning and impact of literature is of great importance, and the more perspectives that are heard, the better.
Gisèle Sapiro is Professor of Sociology at the Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales, Centre européen de sociologie et de science politique, and Research director at Centre national de la recherche scientifique (CNRS). Among her most recent books is Qu’est-ce qu’un auteur mondial? Le champ littéraire transnational (2024).