Thomas writes:
> Well, frankly, if I had to chose between
Pinter and Saramago, I would go with
Saramago.
While Saramago is fine, Pinter is clearly his equal for breadth, reach and political commitment.
Also, Pinter was both a talented playwright and screenwriter, and his work as a writer and director changed the face of theater and people's understanding of language.
Saramago has written novels that are as excellent as Pinter's work, but they did nothing to extend the medium or reach toward new audiences. Pinter is an artist of the proletariat, while Saramago a man of the elite.
> If this latter's novel "Blindness" does not depict
our present situation and the likes of people like Hitch,
I dont know what does.
A good novel, and yet familiar when read in the context of hs other work. There is a sameness to his novels that begins to bore after a while.
> Saramago does not need to belong to any party to get
the Nobel Prize...hope he does get it
That would mean he was awarded it twice, since he already received it in 1998. Sadly, the wrong Portuguese novelist was given the prize. It should have gone to Antonio Lobo Antunes, a far greater and more radical writer.
Brian Dauth Queer Buddhist Resister