10 July, 2008 | Leave a Comment

Literary blogs are buzzing this week with the news that Jhumpa Lahiri has won the Frank O’Connor short story prize — a major literary award worth £27,000. The fact that she won isn’t surprising, but what’s making news is that the judges announced they will not produce a shortlist of books that will compete for the top prize, as is the norm. No, they’ve bypassed the shortlist and just given the award to Lahiri for her new collection, Unaccustomed Earth. Apparently, no one could match her brilliance, so why bother having a shortlist. This means that the writers who would have gotten valuable media exposure from being on the shortlist will now get nothing. The judges claim they didn’t want to put other writers through the stress and suspense of being shortlisted, when it was a foregone conclusion that Lahiri would win. As if anyone on the shortlist would have been stupid enough to think they were going to win with Lahiri there. At least they could have gotten a little publicity for their work, which is important given that short stories are largely ignored by readers and the media nowadays — those short stories not written by Lahiri, that is.

I can think of no other contemporary writer in the English language who is as idolized as Jhumpa Lahiri. Zadie Smith comes close, but at least her work receives scrutiny. Not so with Lahiri. Every book she writes receives glowing reviews — no, not glowing, slobbering. Her first collection of short stories won the Pulitzer, thus turning her into an instant literary superstar like nothing I’ve ever seen. I read Interpreter of Maladies at the time (who didn’t?) and I liked it a lot. On further readings, I think the collection is a bit over-rated. When you read the stories, you can see the gears churning. I hate to use this term, but they’re “workshop” stories to a large extent.

When it came to her first “novel,” I thought the flaws were obvious. The Namesake is not really a novel, but a long short story. To my amazement, the book got glowing reviews everywhere, with very little mention of its problems. I went to a reading by Lahiri at a church in Harvard Square during her publicity tour. It was packed and she was treated like a rock star by the crowd, which was all a tad creepy.  Not surprisingly, her brand new third book has experienced a critical love fest.   Perhaps there’s a negative review out there somewhere, but after reading so many positive reviews and interviews lately, all of which say the same exact thing, I’ve had enough.

The Jhumpa Lahiri phenomenon is a strange one. If someone sold their soul to the devil in exchange for literary success, they could not do better than her career. I don’t think she courts this kind of attention, so my annoyance isn’t directed at her as a person. She’s not out at parties or having high-profile affairs or being photographed for glossy magazines while posing seductively. After reading interviews with her, she seems like a rather boring person who likes to stay home all the time. She is beautiful and this is certainly played up in the press, but this cannot account for her astonishing success. When she won the Pulitzer, no one had ever heard of her. She defies the odds by not having ever been subjected to any kind of backlash, which is virtually unheard of for a writer of her stature. [I am just speaking here of the Anglo-American press. Apparently she is criticized by the Indian press, though much of this seems to be political, rather than literary.] It’s almost as if Lahiri exists in a world beyond criticism, where everyone loves her and treats her like a goddess. Excuse me for being turned off by that.

I don’t mean to imply that Lahiri is not a wonderful writer. She is. However, she is not perfect and she does not deserve the level of crazy attention she receives. Perhaps I should be glad that a new short story collection made it to #1 on the New York Times bestseller list. If anyone can carry the flag for short stories, it’s Lahiri. Her stories are easy to read. She uses very straightforward prose and no stylistic tricks that may intimidate readers who don’t normally read literary fiction. But it’s a shame that readers and reviewers tend to forget she is not the only short story writer out there. All these people rush to buy and review her new collection, but why don’t they ever give other short story writers a chance? It’s damn near impossible to get a short story collection published these days, so clearly this Jhumpa love is only benefiting Jhumpa. [It's also clear from interviews with her that she isn't interested in blurbing and promoting the work of other contemporary short story writers.] I don’t like this “flock of sheep” mentality. As such, I’m in no rush to buy her new collection. From what I’ve read about the book, the stories are probably very similar to the ones in her first collection. I’d rather spend my money supporting other writers.

1. Comments RSS | TrackBack URI

1. Kristin Says:

   July 10th, 2008 at 6:54 pm

   Other writers like who? Give a little publicity (and suggestions to those of us out of the loop) for what’s worth reading right now in short stories. Pretty please.

2. Anglofille Says:

   July 10th, 2008 at 11:22 pm

   Well, I’ve been reading Kafka’s stories, but those are classics!

   As for people publishing now, one of my favorites is Lorrie Moore. Alice Munro is a master, as is Amy Hempel (a former teacher of mine). These three women are famous short story writers, but none of them receive the attention Lahiri does.

   Another teacher of mine, Alice Mattison, is publishing short stories now and she is fabulous. William Trevor is a master. I also like George Saunders, who is very off-the-wall. Other well-known contemporary short story writers are Jayne Anne Phillips; Joy Williams; Anne Beattie; Barry Hannah; Mary Gaitskill; Junot Diaz and too many more to name.

   I’ve heard great things about the following writers who are newer to the scene, but I have not personally read them: Nam Le’s first collection “The Boat” is receiving rave reviews; Kelly Link; Julie Orringer; Nell Freudenberger; Miranda July; Alison MacLeod.

3. Kristin Says:

   July 11th, 2008 at 4:20 pm

   Kafka, of course! And I love Mary Gaitskill (and a couple of the other well-known writers you mentioned). I’ve only recently come to Alice Munro: it was somewhat accidental and a lovely surprise. I will definitely check out Lorrie Moore and Amy Hempel–I haven’t yet. Thanks! Oh, and the up-and-comers, too, are now on my list. The ever-growing list!

4. SpliceGirl Says:

   July 11th, 2008 at 6:06 pm

   Ha! Last week I had bought “Stranger Things Happen” by Kelly Link from a blog recommendation. I just started it yesterday and it’s good so far…I’ll let you know the verdict, because I know you can’t continue on until I tell you how I liked it.

5. SpliceGirl Says:

   July 11th, 2008 at 7:11 pm

   Oh, I had wanted to say too that the film world is exactly like the literary world I see. The studios/media see a filmmaker they like and basically anoint them as a messiah. It’s so sad because there are so many talented people who would love a shot to work, most of the time they are more talented than the one who everyone is slobbering over.

   The most recent example of this in film of course is Diablo Cody, writer of “Juno”. The most overwritten, overrated, over-hyped film of the last decade. She even won the Oscar because the media demanded it! She got all the press and no one even knew the other people nominated. She didn’t deserve the award but was considered the “shoe-in” so much that no one even bothered mentioning the other nominee’s (like with the shortlist you mentioned!) She won and she won on hype, not talent. She also won because the media has made her out to be this wild genius who is SO much more exciting than us, the little people, could ever dream to be.

6. C Says:

   July 11th, 2008 at 11:46 pm

   God you intelligent/artistic/in-the-know bloggers irritate me to no end with your complaining. Criticize, please but have you not recognized the reason that we read you regularly is so that we can find out the good writers that don’t get ’slobbed’ over by the media? we read you because we are hungry to know what else is out there beside what mainstream powers try and spoonfeed us. You just increased the publicity for the writer who will get it all anyway plus a nice financial reward. do you know the names of the ’shafted’ writers and have the names of their work? that would be a better post. I already know it’s your blog and you have the right to say what you want I’m not disputing that but vent and inform, please?

7. C Says:

   July 11th, 2008 at 11:50 pm

   sorry, didn’t read the comments before I posted to realize that Kristin said what I meant only much shorter and much nicer. maybe you got the end of a long workday frustration rant and I apologize for that. I do enjoy your reading your posts whether I agree or not.

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website