Wow, what an awesome video and an incredible amount of time, research and energy you put into this one, thank you for your hard work and wonderful presentation. The recent PBS docuseries on Hearst had quite a lot of information on Pulitzer as his archenemy when Hearst entered the NYC market and it was quite fascinating. I see the American Masters did one on him in 2019 that I should check out. The controlling people behind the scenes manipulating the process and results, especially in the early days, are quite interesting. Anne Carroll Moore was the head children’s librarian at New York Public library and is said to have an outsized influence on who and what won the Newbery Awards each year over the span of decades. Even after her retirement she had former underlinings and acolytes pushing her interests in who and what books would win. It is even surmised that her own mediocre book winning an Honor was engineered by her. Her power extended to publishing as well. While she had extensively lobbied for E. B. White to write for children and wrote him letters about it constantly, she was deeply horrified by Stuart Little, which she tried to get pulped and never released. That her archenemies Ursula Nordstrom at Harper Brothers was the editor added fuel to the fire. It is noteworthy to see Stuart Little, an American classic, did not receive any Newbery love, as she at least had control over that realm. I have to say of the winners I know about, I’m most interested in how All the Light We Cannot See, with French and German leads set in Europe became a winner.
Thank you, this was fascinating. When I was in sixth grade I read Seventeen and really liked it. I still have that copy, but because the memory is so wonderful, I will never reread it.
I have enjoyed you talking about the Pulitzer prize books. You talked about Honey in the Horn by H. L. Davis, the 1935 winner, set in Oregon. I checked it out of the library and am about halfway through. There is definitely content of those times that is not acceptable now but the descriptions of the land and how everyday people lived is great. Also, my grandfather was born in 1917 sixty miles upriver from The Dalles, Oregon and the cadence and turn of phrase used in the novel brought he and my grandmother right back to me, so thank you for that.
I just read the letter Sinclair Lewis sent to the body to reject the pulitzer prize. I wasn't aware anyone had rejected the award until I saw it in my book of his short stories!
Another fantastic video on the Pulitzer Prize! Such interesting details. It’s been decades since I read For Whom The Bell Tolls in school, but I can’t remember anything offensive. Wonder what Butler was on about. I’m still a bit mystified by the selection of The Netanyahus. It doesn’t strike me as an instant classic. Can’t wait to see what’s next!
This is a coincidence! Yesterday I picked up His Family by Ernest Poole from my library. Your Pulitzer series is so absorbing. Thank you so much for presenting this knowledge.
I truly enjoy your deep dives and appreciate the time but also the incredible energy you put into them. I used to be slavishly devoted to following the Pulitzer. As an aspiring writer it felt like the ultimate acknowledgment of literary achievement (like Oscars for film). Realizing how political and calculated they are (unsurprising that person with antisemitic principles was involved) and how the deciding body lacks the diversity that reflects Americana, I’ve become more of a casual follower. I’ve loved Pulitzer books before they were winners and discovered beloved books because of them. Yet, I wonder how many of the very early books reflect the best in American literature when there was no one to put them on the table, or, in the case of a Hemingway someone who could say “nah, not this one….I find it distasteful.” All awards involve subjectivity and so I just can be devoted to any really other than an interest in finding diverse, new-to-me books that reflect an aspirational excellence. With the addition of underrepresented authors on the Pulitzer committee I look forward to one day being excited about them again.
I think part of why I find this project fascinating is looking at what’s changed for the better, what’s the same, and maybe if anything has gotten worse. It’s difficult to answer the last part because a lot more of the goings-on with the Pulitzer happen behind closed doors (the 2012 situation is an outlier and even then, we don’t really know what happened). I do think a lot has changed for the better over time. The Pulitzer Prize started life with a noted Anti-Semite on the Board who wielded an outsized level of control on the winners, but the Board today is diverse and this year’s prize went to a book that is deeply concerned with Jewish life and history. All prizes are imperfect and have ways in which they need to do better. I believe that understanding what that flaws are makes it possible to hold them accountable to bettering themself. I’m not sure if any of that makes sense but that’s why I find all this fascinating.
OMG I never knew any of this! "Wholesome atmosphere of American life" oh yeah, we've always been sooooooooo wholesome. 😂 Bogus they didn't award that book in 1920 over that!! Will you still read it for this project?
Interesting video. Are you reading the Pulitzer winners chronologically Greg? I am currently reading The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier & Clay and it's shaping up to be my best fiction read this year so far so would be keen to hear your thoughts when you get to it
My original plan was to read them in order but I threw that out the window. I read Kavalier and Clay after it won the prize and am looking forward to revisiting it.
Just because I recognized his name, my interest was piqued by the Sherwood Anderson book. Evidently the book was republished in 1922 with a different ending, which you can read as an appendix in some versions. I may check it out, just because I'm curious, and I'll comment in the future if I think it'd be worth checking out!
You’ve got me very interested in the Pulitzer now ☺️ Did you know that the board in 1919 almost didn’t give a winner again, and Booth Tarkington almost didn’t win?
Not Pulitzer related but I spotted today on UK Netgalley that Matt Cain author of the Albert Entwistle book has a new book coming out about an ice cream seller in Northern England and his husband. Thought of you when I saw it
The only input I have is about Zane Grey. I help an older guy with low vision find and download audio books. He loves Louis L'Amour and is unimpressed with Zane Grey.
![Lethal Company Music Video 🎵 "Follow The Orders" [VERSION A]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/QeooZB4Z7RA/mqdefault.jpg)
Greg, I enjoy all your videos, but these deep dives are where you truly shine. This was great!
Thank you! I love doing them.
Im loving this project! Keep doing what you're doing! The Pulitzer Prize winners are a fascination of mine!
Wow, what an awesome video and an incredible amount of time, research and energy you put into this one, thank you for your hard work and wonderful presentation.
The recent PBS docuseries on Hearst had quite a lot of information on Pulitzer as his archenemy when Hearst entered the NYC market and it was quite fascinating. I see the American Masters did one on him in 2019 that I should check out.
The controlling people behind the scenes manipulating the process and results, especially in the early days, are quite interesting. Anne Carroll Moore was the head children’s librarian at New York Public library and is said to have an outsized influence on who and what won the Newbery Awards each year over the span of decades. Even after her retirement she had former underlinings and acolytes pushing her interests in who and what books would win. It is even surmised that her own mediocre book winning an Honor was engineered by her.
Her power extended to publishing as well. While she had extensively lobbied for E. B. White to write for children and wrote him letters about it constantly, she was deeply horrified by Stuart Little, which she tried to get pulped and never released. That her archenemies Ursula Nordstrom at Harper Brothers was the editor added fuel to the fire. It is noteworthy to see Stuart Little, an American classic, did not receive any Newbery love, as she at least had control over that realm.
I have to say of the winners I know about, I’m most interested in how All the Light We Cannot See, with French and German leads set in Europe became a winner.
So interesting!! Really appreciate these deep dives.
Thank you for watching!
I saw you posted this video. Had to hit pause and wait to get home to watch. Thanks for providing the evenings entertainment!
I hope you liked it!
This is great, very interesting information. Thanks for doing the deep dive, appreciate it!
I’m so glad you enjoyed it!
Thank you, this was fascinating. When I was in sixth grade I read Seventeen and really liked it. I still have that copy, but because the memory is so wonderful, I will never reread it.
I have enjoyed you talking about the Pulitzer prize books. You talked about Honey in the Horn by H. L. Davis, the 1935 winner, set in Oregon. I checked it out of the library and am about halfway through. There is definitely content of those times that is not acceptable now but the descriptions of the land and how everyday people lived is great. Also, my grandfather was born in 1917 sixty miles upriver from The Dalles, Oregon and the cadence and turn of phrase used in the novel brought he and my grandmother right back to me, so thank you for that.
I’m glad it brought back some good memories! I look forward to getting to that one.
Awesome discussion!
Thank you so much!
I just read the letter Sinclair Lewis sent to the body to reject the pulitzer prize. I wasn't aware anyone had rejected the award until I saw it in my book of his short stories!
The Sinclair Lewis deep dive is going to be FASCINATING when I get to it.
Another fantastic video on the Pulitzer Prize! Such interesting details. It’s been decades since I read For Whom The Bell Tolls in school, but I can’t remember anything offensive. Wonder what Butler was on about.
I’m still a bit mystified by the selection of The Netanyahus. It doesn’t strike me as an instant classic.
Can’t wait to see what’s next!
I haven’t read For Whom the Bell Tolls but I think some people (likely Butler included) didn’t like that it was a bit on the side of socialists?
I’m currently reading Interpreter of Maladies, which I think is a Pulitzer book.
It is! And it's one that I really enjoyed.
This is a coincidence! Yesterday I picked up His Family by Ernest Poole from my library. Your Pulitzer series is so absorbing. Thank you so much for presenting this knowledge.
I want to get to His Family soon since it was the first, but it won’t be next. Thank you for watching!
Why did I think of
Marlon Brando in "On the Waterfront"
when he is in the back of a car
and says:
"I could have been a contender"?
LOL
That cover for Windy McPherson’s Son though😳
RIGHT?? I'm so glad I'm not the only one who sees it.
I truly enjoy your deep dives and appreciate the time but also the incredible energy you put into them. I used to be slavishly devoted to following the Pulitzer. As an aspiring writer it felt like the ultimate acknowledgment of literary achievement (like Oscars for film). Realizing how political and calculated they are (unsurprising that person with antisemitic principles was involved) and how the deciding body lacks the diversity that reflects Americana, I’ve become more of a casual follower. I’ve loved Pulitzer books before they were winners and discovered beloved books because of them. Yet, I wonder how many of the very early books reflect the best in American literature when there was no one to put them on the table, or, in the case of a Hemingway someone who could say “nah, not this one….I find it distasteful.”
All awards involve subjectivity and so I just can be devoted to any really other than an interest in finding diverse, new-to-me books that reflect an aspirational excellence. With the addition of underrepresented authors on the Pulitzer committee I look forward to one day being excited about them again.
I think part of why I find this project fascinating is looking at what’s changed for the better, what’s the same, and maybe if anything has gotten worse. It’s difficult to answer the last part because a lot more of the goings-on with the Pulitzer happen behind closed doors (the 2012 situation is an outlier and even then, we don’t really know what happened). I do think a lot has changed for the better over time. The Pulitzer Prize started life with a noted Anti-Semite on the Board who wielded an outsized level of control on the winners, but the Board today is diverse and this year’s prize went to a book that is deeply concerned with Jewish life and history. All prizes are imperfect and have ways in which they need to do better. I believe that understanding what that flaws are makes it possible to hold them accountable to bettering themself. I’m not sure if any of that makes sense but that’s why I find all this fascinating.
OMG I never knew any of this! "Wholesome atmosphere of American life" oh yeah, we've always been sooooooooo wholesome. 😂 Bogus they didn't award that book in 1920 over that!! Will you still read it for this project?
Interesting video. Are you reading the Pulitzer winners chronologically Greg? I am currently reading The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier & Clay and it's shaping up to be my best fiction read this year so far so would be keen to hear your thoughts when you get to it
My original plan was to read them in order but I threw that out the window. I read Kavalier and Clay after it won the prize and am looking forward to revisiting it.
Just because I recognized his name, my interest was piqued by the Sherwood Anderson book. Evidently the book was republished in 1922 with a different ending, which you can read as an appendix in some versions. I may check it out, just because I'm curious, and I'll comment in the future if I think it'd be worth checking out!
Oh wow that is FASCINATING. Yes please do let me know what you think of it!
You’ve got me very interested in the Pulitzer now ☺️ Did you know that the board in 1919 almost didn’t give a winner again, and Booth Tarkington almost didn’t win?
Not Pulitzer related but I spotted today on UK Netgalley that Matt Cain author of the Albert Entwistle book has a new book coming out about an ice cream seller in Northern England and his husband. Thought of you when I saw it
When was musical competition added to the Pulitzer?
The only input I have is about Zane Grey. I help an older guy with low vision find and download audio books. He loves Louis L'Amour and is unimpressed with Zane Grey.
That sounds right based on what I’ve heard. 🤣😂
Thanks for the feedback!
Would you mind reviewing my book?