Decidedly ambivalent about the Pulitzer Prize winners.

Last week they announced the 2010 Pulitzer Prize winners, and I can't say it was a list that thrilled me. But, I was not surprised, as I am often underwhelmed by the Pulitzer Prize winners. I don't know why.

I was particularly not thrilled about the selection of Liaquat Ahamed's nonfiction book Lords of Finance: The Bankers Who Broke the World, which I read parts of and found dry, even by business subject standards. I couldn't imagine any but the most dedicated of financial history readers really loving it, but perhaps I am wrong. Did anyone else read that one and think I'm dead wrong?

I thought the strongest book on the list, the winner for Biography, was T.J. Stiles's The First Tycoon: The Epic Life of Cornelius Vanderbilt. That's another one I only got about a quarter of the way through, but I really enjoyed that quarter, and Mr. CR opined that someday we should get the book back again when we had more time to read the whole thing. We found it a very interesting mix of history and biography, with not too much mind-numbing detail of either. I'm also happy that the fiction winner, Tinkers, was published by a small and independent press, although I'd read that book (it was nice and short) and didn't find that it did anything for me. The history winner, The Dead Hand: The Untold Story of the Cold War Arms Race and Its Dangerous Legacy, sounds educational, but the Cold War ranks right up there with World War II and the Civil War as a subject I can never summon much interest in.

Anybody else read any of these winners? Have different thoughts about them? Oh, and this morning I have a question by email from my sister (she just asked me, but I figured, why not harness the power of technology for better answers), asking if I am familiar with and/or have an opinion about Joyce Carol Oates. I don't have an opinion, as it happens. Does anyone? The only book of hers I've read is Zombie, which was a decidedly icky horror novel, but I don't know that it's representative of her usual writing. If one was going to read a couple of Oates books, where should one start?

Comments

[Venta]

Hey, CR!

I, too, tried reading "Lords of Finance," and I was relieved when the book was recalled. You are right on that it was dry, and I thought overly complicated.

I read a lot of Oates when I was in college, and my oldest sister is a huge fan. I never have to worry about what to get her for Christmas. I've only read her earlier work (haven't read Zombie. That bad?), and I don't know if her novels date well. My suggestions: "Do With Me What You Will;" "Them;" "Unholy Loves" and "Wonderland." I read great reviews of "We Were the Mulvaneys" which was published after your sister was born.

[Lu]

I've read two Oates books, one I hated and one I enjoyed (as much as you can enjoy a heartbreaking story). I hated Black Girl/White Girl, though I did finish the whole thing, so I still found something about it to keep reading. The one I enjoyed reading was We Were the Mulvaneys. It's no picnic by any means, but the characters are well-drawn and the tragedy is quite tragic. So if that's something your sister is interested in reading, then it's perfect.

[Citizen Reader]

Venta!
Oh, I'm glad you didn't waste all your time on "Lords of Finance." I kept waiting for it to pick up, myself, and it never did.

Actually, I found "Zombie" quite interesting, but it was graphic, and might not be for everyone. Thanks for the suggestions--I love the title "Do With Me What You Will" and may start there.

Lu,
Thank you for the suggestions too. I had that idea about the Mulvaneys, that it was kind of a tough read, but it might be worth it. I'll say this for Oates: she's got plenty of titles to pick from.

[Sarah]

The "royal we"?

[Citizen Reader]

Sarah,
More like the "uncoordinated we." There's so few books Mr. CR and I read in common that it's always a thrill when we can talk about one. He only got a few chapters into "The First Tycoon" too, but thought it was interesting.

[Beth]

I read Tinkers and absolutely loved it. I wasn't blown away, but it's not that type of book. It felt like very slow, subtle genius to me, but slow and subtle in a dreamy sort of good way. I recommend it highly. And yes, the fact that it is short drew me to it as well. It tickles me that it was a huge surprise for everyone, as it was a debut novel and an independent press. I'm interested to see if it will be a one hit wonder.

[Jessica]

I loved Tinkers too. I'm equal parts pleased with myself that I read a Pulitzer winner before it won the prize, plus PO'd that there isn't one I hadn't heard of for me to go seek out. Didn't even realize the Pulitzers had been announced until I read it here!

I recommend WWtM also - I think it's Oates's best work, though I've only read a half dozen or so. She writes faster than I can read. Here's a joke: I've been trying to get ahold of Joyce Carol Oates for an interview for some time. Her agent put me through to her assistant, who said, "Ms. Oates is currently very busy working on her new novel." I said, "That's okay, I'll hold."