Abstract

Abstract When Salvatore Quasimodo won the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1959, many critics, both inside and outside Italy, expressed surprise that he should have been preferred to his two great predecessors, Ungaretti and Montale. Opinions were naturally varied, ranging from exclamations of utter disbelief to sheer cynicism, and even to suggestions of political intrigue. Was not Quasimodo after all (like many of his Swedish judges) a Marxist at heart in spite of his constant denials? and had he not made the classic pilgrimage to Moscow recently? Furthermore, was it not true that he had taken the precaution of having his works translated into Swedish while his rival claimants had not? So that once it was accepted that for reasons of prestige it was Italy's turn to have a prizewinner in this field, such a combination of circumstances, at least to the critical Italian eye, could only result in Quasimodo winning the award. The plain fact is, however, that Quasimodo was seen by his Swedish judges to be more re...

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.