When Jean-Paul Sartre Refused The Nobel Prize For Literature

22 October 1964, everyone was waiting for the announcement of who had won the Nobel Prize for Literature. Finally, it was already afternoon, the news-tickers started working: Jean-Paul Sartre had been chosen to be honoured in Stockholm. A short time later, the news-tickers were busily writing again: Jean-Paul Sartre rejected the Nobel Prize for Literature. The literary world was left either speechlessly astounded or vociferously outraged.

Jean-Paul Sartre

It was around 1 pm on this 22 October 1964, when the news originating with the Swedish Academy came across the ticker that this year's Nobel Prize for Literature had been accorded to Jean-Paul Sartre, the author, playwright and founder of existentialism. The justification read that Jean-Paul Sartre's anarchistic spirit and his search for truth had exerted a far-reaching influence on modern literature.
 
Shortly afterwards came the next message which hit like a bombshell: Jean-Paul Sartre refused the Nobel Prize for Literature. The literary world went berserk. Journalists fanned out over Paris in the hope of finding someone or calling anyone who might know something. No one knew or even pretended they knew the background to the news. Journalists finally found Sartre and his life partner Simone de Beauvoir sitting in a restaurant and tried to get an interview. They were rebuffed with a statement that he had done it for personal and practical reasons and that he would issue a written statement with the full explanation the following day.

A day later, the newspapers were full of conjecture about Jean-Paul Sartre's reasons for the refusal. Swedish media were of the opinion that the Nobel Prize Committee had never been insulted more. The  refusal of the prize was unprecedented. George Bernard Shaw had not wanted the prize in 1925, but instead opted to donate the prize money to a literary society. Boris Pasternak had also rejected it in 1958 with a lot of help from his 'friends' in the KGB; Vladimir Putin knows how that one works very well.

Jean-Paul Sartre's rejection was unique: It was done voluntarily and based on his own conviction. He stated: A writer taking a political or literary stance should do so only with the means at his disposition - the written word. Any accolade received would put readers under pressure, which he consider undesirable. Writings would not read same if he were to sign "Jean-Paul Sartre" or "Jean-Paul Sartre, Nobel Prize winner". Furthermore, he didn't consider himself part of either political pole East or West and considered to be home in the free democratic order and socialism. By being awarded the prize, he felt he was being annexed by the West.

The journalists kept on drilling. Two days after the announcement, a team of journalists got lucky again. Again they caught Jean-Paul Sartre in a restaurant. They were kept waiting until the master was ready for them; when he was, they weren't. Neither camera nor sound was ready; the result was footage with too dark images and crackling sound. The catastrophe had high documentary value while he once again steadfastly refused to say something unambiguous. That was the problem of it all: How should he explain not taking sides without taking sides? He was sitting between two chairs; and that is the story the archive sequence tells us today.

The master seemed to refuse the media; at least that was the way it was interpreted. His motives for refusing the prize were difficult to convey. He did not want to be appropriated by any ideology. He was happiest in the no man's land between the political camps. And he didn't want the label "Nobel Prize" stuck unto his words to give them only seemingly more weight.

Jean-Paul Sartre was seemingly unfriendly, stubborn, and difficult to understand; or so it was received by journalists dealing with this particular story. But he was also open-minded, winning, and charming on other occasions.

On a visit to Geneva, he was accompanied by a team of journalists and cameramen from the Swiss newsreel company. As he tramped through the historic city together with Simone de Beauvoir, he showed a completely different side of his personality. It must have been a successful encounter between Jean-Paul Sartre and the media. Looking at the footage, he decided to write the voice-over comments himself. And not only that, he then did the voice-over himself. Jean-Paul Sartre in German acting as a speaker in the background. Unique. Unpredictable. Typical for him.

Further reading
High Literature: Being Politically Incorrect
United Nations World Capital Geneva
The Little Prince

Nobel Errors

Every year, the awarding of the Nobel Prizes and the subsequent announcement of the winners gives ample opportunity to make snide remarks and scope for a good gripe. Did the right person get it or was the wrong person overlooked and went away empty-handed? Was the award given from political motivation or was it handed out on the basis of a great discovery? The Nobel Prize has many stories that range from strange to touching and outright tragic.

The most fought over and most often prone to lead to discussions is the Nobel Peace Prize. The European Union or Barack Obama - just to name two winners of recent times - do not appear to have been a particularly happy choice. In retrospect, this also holds true for the award of 1994. That year, PLO leader Yasser Arafat, Shimon Peres and Yitzhak Rabin were honoured; it is always difficult when a terrorist receives recognition. Reason for the committee's decision was the Gaza-Jericho Agreement and the hope for peace in the Middle East. The course of history shows that this was a major mistake.
 
The award to Menachem Begin in 1978 was a similar mistake. Later, members of the Nobel Committee apologized for the decision. Menachem Begin was the leader of an underground organization that perpetrated lethal attacks against British Mandate authorities in 1948. In 1978, The committee didn't know of these atrocities, or maybe just didn't want to know about them.

Sometimes, the Nobel Peace Price is awarded as a lifeline to political prisoners. German publisher and author Carl von Ossietzky was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1935 when Adolf Hitler was consolidating his grip on power in Germany. He had made the secret rearmament of the German Reichswehr public to the world and as a consequence was interned in a concentration camp (today, the US government calls such people terrorist helpers and traitors, too; doesn't that make you think?). He was released after the announcement of the award, but at the order of the Nazis was not allowed to accept the award.

The Nobel Peace Prize in 2010 should also have served in a saving mission. It went to the Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo. Following the announcement of this award, he was released from prison but is still under house arrest. Like Carl von Ossietzky, he could not accept the price personally.

Albert Einstein was awarded the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1921. It was not awarded for his work on the general theory of relativity as you would expect. He received it for the little known publication of his explanation of the photoelectric effect. Critics claim that the committee was just too stupid to understand his theory of relativity.
 
Lise Meitner's contribution to the understanding of nuclear fission was overlooked by the committee, too. According to the laudatory speech, she had "only" found out how much energy is being released in the process and explained the result relatively simple formulas.

Occasionally, there were genuine mistakes. Danish pathologist John Grib Fibiger was awarded the 1926 Nobel Prize for Medicine for his discovery that a small nematode did trigger stomach cancer. This assumption later proved to be completely wrong.
 
Canadian John Macleod was awarded the Nobel Prize for Medicine in 1923. While his employees discovered insulin, he himself had actually been on holiday and in no way involved in the process.

Similarly, the relevant facts in the case of Selman Waksman point in an other direction. The American was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1952 for his discovery of streptomycin. In fact, the antibiotic was the discovery of his student Albert Schatz.

And at least once, the committee was completely wrong. Anthony Hewish was cited in 1974 for his "decisive role in the discovery of pulsars". Actually, all the work was done by his doctoral student Jocelyn Bell Burnell.

By content of the original deed, dead people can't receive an award. Sadly, the history of Canadian immune researcher Ralph Steinman partly overturned that inflexible rule. He died three days before the announcement of his win in 2011. The jurors were told of his death only after the prize had been awarded to him. Although the price may actually be awarded only to living people, the jury awarded a Nobel Prize posthumously.

Winston Churchill also graces the list of winners. But Mr. "No Sports" did not receive the Nobel Peace Prize, but the Nobel Prize in Literature. This was justified by his oratory and his biographical writing. The literary world reacted surprised and slightly annoyed. Only the winner was not surprised. When Winston Churchill received the news of having won the Nobel Prize, he just asked, "In which discipline?"

There is a group of multiple winners. A Nobel Prize was awarded twice to only four people ever. In addition to Marie Curie (1903 for Physics and 1911 for Chemistry), Linus Pauling (for Chemistry in 1954 and in 1962 for Peace) and John Bardeen (in 1956 and 1972 respectively for Physics) there was also Frederick Sanger (1958 and 1980 respectively for Chemistry). Of this illustrious list, only Linus Pauling didn't have to share his prizes with someone else.

When Albert Einstein received the Nobel Prize in 1921, he could not enjoy the prize money: He had promised the money to his wife Mileva to get her to consent to a divorce.

Something similar happened to Robert Lucas. His wife had consented to the divorce only if she gets half the prize money should he be an award winner. Nearly seven years later and a few weeks before the deadline of the agreement, her ex-husband received the news of the Nobel Prize for Economics in 1995.

The list of "unlucky" losers is long. Some incomprehensible jury decisions will always remain uncorrected. Mahatma Gandhi failed three times to receive the Nobel Peace Prize. During the fourth attempt, the signs were better. Before the committee meeting took place, he was murdered.

Vilhelm Bjerknes was no terrorist, yet the committee begrudged him the prize. The Norwegian meteorologist was nominated more than 50 times for a Nobel Prize. He never got it. The same happened to German physicist Friedrich Paschen who was nominated 45 times.

It's hard to imagine, but Adolf Hitler was once on the list of nominees for the Nobel Peace Prize. Swedish member of parliament Erik Brandt had nominated him. The nomination was made in protest in 1939. Erik Brandt was outraged that shortly before, British Prime Minister Chamberlain was proposed because of his policy of appeasement. Brandt removed the nomination later. However, it is still shown on the official website of the Nobel Committee.

Further reading
Prophet of The Great War
Robert Koch: With System Against Disease
First Family of Science

ITV Failed in Catching Tom Daley

ITV, usually in the lead when catching Tom Daley for a show, failed in getting him onto I'm a Celebrity 2013. Rumours have it that Tom Daley has turned down a £250,000 offer to appear in the most brainless show ITV has the honour of putting on every year. As it is also a show for has-been D-listers, I don't think Tom Daley should really be on it.

Tom Daley

While it had been repeatedly reported that the Olympic diving star said he would be up for a stint in the jungle, the offer was either not good enough, or the timing was just off as he has enough other commitments not least with ITV. And Tom Daley has been criticized in the past for not concentrating enough on his diving career.

And he already has two TV commitments to juggle around his diving. There is the second series of celebrity diving show Splash as well as a fly-on-the-wall documentary series. If you haven't seen Splash last time round, make time for it this year. While the celebrity diving is not too inspiring, the diving shows put on by the professionals are something not to miss out on.

But for Tom Daley to let other stunts go by seems a wise decision. Unlike most I'm a Celebrity contestants, his career is not over and he won't join the old age pensioners next year. So who are the non-entities that are rumoured to become part of the trashy display?

A former Apprentice winner by name of Stella English is set for the jungle after claiming to be broke. Seemingly she messed up on her job with Lord Sugar. I couldn't tell you more as I usually don't usually follow second rate celebrities except if they are really amusing.

“Stella’s basically claiming The Apprentice ruined her life, which would make great viewing if she dished the dirt. It would also be a good way for ITV to have a little dig at Lord Sugar and rival channel BBC,” a source told the Daily Star Sunday. “Although nothing is finalised yet producers are confident Stella will sign on the dotted line. It’s a great opportunity to ease her money worries and repair her image.”

Other names linked to this year’s series include Paul Gascoigne (a broke footballer if I'm not mistaken), Michael Le Vell (a minor actor in a minor TV series), and an Emmerdale actress by name of Lucy Pargeter (I was told she was Chas Spencer, one of the names would probably be from the TV series, one her acting name?) Who knows or cares.

There are more names bandied about. One of the thousand or more former X Factor singers on the list is Rylan Clark whose career has stopped after never taking off. There is also one Lucy Mecklenburgh from The Only Way Is Essex (TOWIE), one of the most pointless TV productions if you ignore I'm a Celebrity.

Further reading
Splash Line-up Next Round
Tom Daley Calendar 2014
Diving World Championship 2013

Banksy Exhibition in New York

When a graffiti containing the words 'Banksy Oct. 2013' appeared in Los Angeles a few weeks ago, it was clear the anonymous celebrity artist was planning a new exhibition. As usual, there were pretty few clues as to where it would take place. Now the secret is out: New York's streets have the honour of being embellished under the title "Better Out Than In".

On October 1st, a photo with a new mural painting appeared on the website of the artist. The new work by Banksy was announced as the first of a series to constitute the exhibition "Better Out Than In. An artists residency on the streets of New York." That artwork shows one small boy standing on the back of another reaching for a spray can that forms part of a sign reading 'Graffiti Is A Crime.' The homepage makes the further announcement that Banksy is trying to hold a whole exhibition on the streets of New York.

Just like in a traditional exhibition, the catalog with an image description is not missing. The form is not the usual one, though. It comes in the form of a phone number displayed near the graffiti. People calling the toll free number will get to listen to shallow hotel lounge music and a recorded text:

"Hello, and welcome to lower Manhattan. Before you, you will see a spray art by the artist Bansky [sic]. Or maybe not. It's probably been painted over by now. (…) The children in this case represent youth, and the sign represents – well, signs. (...) This piece is typical of Bansky's output."

Some of his works were recently auctioned in England for several 100,000 pounds after they had been callously removed from various walls in California or England thus depriving the intended public of their enjoyment. Banksy shows that despite the rampant greed of lowly house owners and thieving real estate companies, he hasn't lost either playfulness or wit. Banksy's works are known for their irony, unconventional content, and black humour; all this is far removed from the understanding of the limited intellect of the low lives stealing them from the communities. 

Graffiti on public walls are (mostly) illegal, and that leaves the artist exposed to controversy. The reviews range from "Master of Street Art" from the knwoledgeable to "pure vandalism" by the usual critics not creative enough to even form a full sentence. Banksy keeps his identity a successful secret. To a supposed revelation of his identity a few years ago, he responded in his inimitable style: "I am unable to comment on who may or may not be Banksy, but anyone described as being 'good at drawing' does not sound like Banksy to me."
 
Even though the guerrilla artist has arrived at the pinnacle of the exact establishment which he mocks with his art, he leaves his art out on the road for the public and the communities to be enjoyed - with all negative consequences that entails. Shortly after the publication of the photos on Banksy's website, the exact location of the graffiti in New York was found and shared through social media media.

As the speaker on the recorded catalog description had predicted, the graffiti located in the Lower East Side was partially destroyed only few hours after its discovery: The sign with the spray can had been removed. Almost 24 hours later, the wall was completely repainted. Pure vandalism.



Further reading
How Money Came to Dominate Our Lives
The President's Slaves
Museum City: Basel

Police at Martina Hingis' Residence Over Alleged Attack

Martina Hingis had called an early end to her tennis season recently. Her come-back to the tennis circuit as a doubles player had been less than an inspiration. It was an unmitigated disaster instead. And now the police were called to the residence of Martina Hingis and her estranged husband Thibault Hutin; according to the police report, they were called in by the latter.

Thibault Hutin and Martina Hingis

Martina Hingis and her husband Thibault Hutin had separated earlier this year in January according to a statement from Martina Hingis in July. The pair had married in December 2010 and rumour of problems had been ripe for months before that. Now the sleepy village of Feusisberg in the canton of Schwyz in Switzerland has become the latest stage of their estrangement. Feusisberg police is not used to being called out for disturbances. The village is best known as the retreat for super-rich captains of industry, heads of international banks, and other shady money bags saving on taxes.

The surprise of it all can be felt in the original press statement from the police. It states that Thibault Hutin called the police to the (still) shared residence over a disagreement that had progressed from verbal to physical. According to Thibault Hutin, Martina Hingis had attacked him together with her mother and trainer Melanie Molitor. He alleges that they had hit and scratched him; while he was trying to defend himself, Mario Widmer (the boy friend of Melanie Molitor) had hit him over the head with a DVD player.Martina Hingis' manager Mario Widmer called the story about the DVD player attack ridiculous; neither Melanie Molitor nor Martina Hingis made any public statements over the alleged attack. 

The so far last chapter in this unhappy marriage was in keeping with the sordid details known so far. Martina Hingis had stated in July that the estrangement was kinked to herself having been unfaithful to her husband. Thibault Hutin had added later that the estrangement had started at the beginning of their marriage. When Martina Hingis was in New York after their marriage in December 2010, he had flown in as a surprise for her. The surprise was a full success as she was not alone in her room when he arrived.

Further reading
Gripping: Monica Seles
When Doping Was All Bulls' Balls
Giving Up: The Key to Success

One Direction Are Good For Education

Would you believe it? One Direction are actually good for education. At least, one Australian mother showed that they can be used for educational purposes. If you extend her principle, the same can be said about Justin Bieber and several other young teenage celebrities.If you are parents, read on and learn. I found it most instructive.

One Direction

One Direction, that is Harry Styles, Liam Payne, Louis Tomlinson, Niall Horan, and Zayn Malik are due for a concert in Sidney on October 25, 2013. Tickets were, as usual, sold out in hours; lucky you if you got hold of one. Right now, though, you can get four - for a price. They have been put up by a local mother showing that grounding is sometimes not enough if you are dealing with unruly teenagers.

She had bought the four tickets for her daughter and her friends, but rescinded on the promise after finding out that the girls had used the sleep-over excuse to spend the night partying at an older boys home. Mother was not impressed and found grounding not to be adequate to express her extreme displeasure. She put the tickets on Ebay; have a go if you want them or think you have earned the privilege to attend. And to make it clear, none of the boys from One Direction was in any way involved in the sleep-over.

What I admire most about this mother is that she doesn't just say, threaten, or talk. She does. If you have children to bring up, take her as an example on how you do it. I have added some of the text from her auction.

Quote: THIS AUCTION IS FOR ALL 4 ONE DIRECTION TICKETS IN SYDNEY OCTOBER 25th. You can thank my daughters self righteous and lippy attitude for their sale. See sweety? And you thought I was bluffing. I hope the scowl on your bitchy little friends faces when you tell them that your dad and i revoked the gift we were giving you all reminds you that your PARENTS are the ones that deserve love and respect more than anyone. And your silly little pack mentality of taking your parents for fools is one sadly mistaken. Anyhow. Your loss someone else's gain who deserves them! THE TICKETS ARE SEATED IN ROW O section 57. REMEMBER AUCTION IS FOR ALL 4 TICKETS and will be sent registered post

...OH YOUR FRIENDS THOUGHT THAT A FEW PRANKS CALLS WOULD PUT ME OFF SELLING THE GIFT WE BOUGHT FOR THEM for YOUR BIRTHDAY because YOU all LIED to us about sleep overs so you could hang like little trollops at an older guys HOUSE????? Pffft!! I find it HIGHLY amusing that you girls think you invented this stuff. Tricks like this on OUR parents is how HALF of you were conceived .....And why a lot of your friends DONT have an address to send that Fathers day card to!!! I'm not your friend. I'm your MOTHER. And I am here to give you the boundaries that YOU NEED to become a functional responsible adult. You may hate me now..... But I don't care. Its my job to raise a responsible adult..not nuture bad habits in my teen age child. Unquote.

Further reading
Soccer Special: Louis Tomlinson
Confusing in More Than One Direction
Teen Choice Awards

Marathon Man Stanislas Wawrinka

Stanislas Wawrinka earned himself the epithet of Marathon Man over many long fought five set matches in Grand Slams. But he has been running a marathon for years; being Swiss, he has been ranked number 2 in Switzerland for many years behind Roger Federer. Unlike others I could name, he never complained about playing in an era of outstanding tennis players.

Stanislas Wawrinka

Many a great tennis nation would love to call Stanislas Wawrinka as their number one tennis player. Currently ranked at 10 in the ATP ranking, he is (still) behind Roger Federer at 7. That a tennis dwarf nation like Switzerland is able to have two men in the top ten ranking is an outstanding achievement. And it is testament more to a dogged work ethic of the Swiss number 2 than to the outstanding brilliance of Roger Federer.

Stanislas Wawrinka is an outstanding sportsman. Widely ignored by tennis commentators and even by the press in his homeland Switzerland, he never begrudged Roger Federer his place in tennis history or complained about how difficult it made things for him. Contrariwise, he always held up Roger Federer as the idol and driving force of Swiss tennis.

Davis Cup for a country like Switzerland is a no win situation. As a small nation, it is almost impossible to find enough players to fill a team with the aim to win it. Stanislas Wawrinka never hesitated to play in the thankless tasks set him in that contest, and usually he was the number one in the team. On the rare occasions where Roger Federer made an appearance, he handed over to him without hesitation and without complaint. Sportsman like, he put the aim of the team above his ego.

This year, he had probably his best season ever so far. Reaching the quarter finals in the US open is no mean feat; now he has to face Andy Murray to take it one step further. The present form of Stanislas Wawrinka is the bad news for Andy Murray, as is his own form that has not yet reached the peak. And the Scot isn't really comfortable with the game of the Swiss at any time. We might be able to see a titanic match tonight; and few would grudge Stanislas Wawrinka an upset over Andy Murray.

Further reading
Giving up: The Key to Success
Jerzy Janowicz and Andy Murray
Tennis: Mr Darcis Says Nada