Thread: Bob Dylan wins Nobel Prize for Literature
View Single Post
Old 10-26-2016, 01:40 AM   #202
frahse
occasional author
frahse ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.frahse ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.frahse ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.frahse ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.frahse ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.frahse ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.frahse ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.frahse ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.frahse ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.frahse ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.frahse ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
frahse's Avatar
 
Posts: 2,315
Karma: 2064403292
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Wandering God's glorious hills, valleys and plains.
Device: A Franklin BI (before Internet) was the first. I still have it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by william z View Post

But I still do not think that Bob Dylan deserved the Nobel Prize for literature.
I agree. Bob Dylan is a great songwriter, and I love many of his songs, but he didn't deserve a Nobel Prize in the literature field.

Likewise President Obama can give a great speech, but doesn't deserve a Novel Peace Prize.


Still there is long history of Nobel Prizes being rewarded for what were later determined to be wrong reasons.
My favorite is --

"Danish scientist Johannes Fibiger won the 1926 medicine award for discovering that a roundworm caused cancer in rats.

There was only one problem: The roundworm didn't cause cancer in rats.

Fibiger insisted his research showed that rats ingesting worm larvae by eating cockroaches developed cancer. At the time he won the prize, the Nobel judges thought that made perfect sense.

It later turned out the rats developed cancer from a lack of vitamin A.

Oops."

http://www.latimes.com/world/la-fg-n...nap-story.html
frahse is offline   Reply With Quote