Why didn't Foster Wallace win a Nobel Prize?

Why didn't Foster Wallace win a Nobel Prize?

He exceeded the three do-rag limit.

he was a total dweeb

because he showed no discernible talent. only autistic contrarians disagree.

Largely because he killed himself. If he had just finished "Pale King" and continued teaching and writing short stories, he probably would have won it instead of Dylan.

But since the Nobel only goes to living authors... well, there we are.

The Swedish Academy probs thought they'd have another 50 years/chances to give it to him, so yea, pretty much this

>being this delusional
Why don't you imitate the talentless hack you idolise and kill yourselves?

...

The Nobel Prize committee clearly has an anti-American agenda. Every American winner after John Steinbeck has been a nigger, kike, or immigrant. Then there's a 23 year gap between Toni Morrison and Bob Dylan where plenty of legitimate American authors such as DFW, Dan DeLillo, Cormac McCarthy, etc. could have won. Frankly I'm surprised Franzen hasn't won it from them because his cuck style suits them.

Anyway, about less than half of the Nobel Prize winners have stood the test of time and even the ones in the past 15 odd years are nobodies who have faded back into obscurity since their award.

USians won 11 times, you are actually overrepresented. Your literature is not that good. Latin America deserves more.

Because he wrote that book about infinity, which was inexcusably terrible.

The only good writer in Spanish is Cervantes. The rest is pleb rubbish.

Caesar Aira, Gabriel Garcia Marquez, Borges, Santamango (or however you spell), etc etc.

Essentially, you're retarded.

Probably wasn't even nominated.

>Caesar Aira
literally contemporary trash
>Gabriel Garcia Marquez
i mean hes alright, but he doesn't touch the american greats
>Santamango
whew lad

Saramago is Portuguese

Because he had no discernible talent

>Santamango
This has to be bait

This. It's not even the fact that he killed himself, but rather that he killed himself too young to ever be considered as a nominee.

I really want to believe that he would've received it.

>humanist politics, generally pretty optimistic of people
>uses style as a means to an end, not for it's own sake
>sweet spot between being accessible and erudite
>consistent output, experimental while mindful of tradition

At least he gave us great memes, so his death wasn't all in vain

No I simply forgot his name get over yourself

->

If you forgot his name then he really couldn't have been all that great

The Nobel prize isn't awarded posthumously and DFW would have been a bit young for receiving the prize at the age he killed himself

>Santamango
>not Satan Mango
>not Satantango

This is now a Krasznahorkaborkadorkahorkai thread

Will Laszlo ever win a nobel price?

>legitimate authors
>lists 3 overrated meme tier hacks
what did he mean by this?
?

Because he sucks.

Cynics can't win.

Murakami is going to use black magic to make sure he wins one and outlives everyone else

nobody gives a fuck about what some shitty committee had to say about a retarded prize literature. With the exception of Years, eliot, sartre, camus, and a few others, almost all of the winners are literally-whos with slightly above average writing ability

consider the following:

did
>Joyce
>pynchon
>Dfw
>Borges
>ashbery
>Gass
>Asimov
>Pound
>conrad
>Woolf
>Auden
>Gaddis
>Don D
>any of the fucking beats
>Fitzgerald
>lovecraft
>Mccarthy
>nabokov

Ever win a prize? No.

The point of the prize is to promote shitty authors, probably to sell their works better. I wouldn't be surprised if publishers weren't involved in deciding the winners.

tl;dr nobel prize is shit

>the beats
oh yourw baiting

>The point of the prize is to promote shitty authors

Are you shitting on my boys Maeterlinck and Knut

>slightly above average writing ability
>>Joyce

sounds about right