William Faulkner: Nobel Prize Speech

William Faulkner: Nobel Prize Speech

[@victorrivadeneyra6250]

I think it's not the accent the audience didn't understand, but the complexity and duration of his speech.

[@ronwalker4056]

Faulkner did several remakes of speeches. One he gave at Jill's high school graduation he re-stated it for a TV documentary (parts of which were included in the PBS presentation entitled Faulkner, A Life on Paper).

[@jordanverbeek5121]

How did people not understand this? He speaks perfectly fine from my perspective.

[@Karzil21]

+Jordan Verbeek This isn't the original tape at all, though it's teh same speech.

[@kimberlymurray5293]

I could listen to Faulkner talk until the last ding dong of doom has clanged and faded.

[@cameronhill8172]

Who besides a troll could possibly dislike this??

[@thecofieldcollection3792]

What a fine bit of talking to have recorded. For the Faulkner family, Oxford, for the world to have. Photos of Mr. Faulkner at the end of the video, courtesy the Cofield Collection, UM Archives

[@davidcardona3004]

This is beautiful

[@Kamoblue]

+David Cardona Exactly how I imagined his characters to sound like

[@lyingiswrong-ye5ks]

the human heart in turmoil is the only thing to write about

[@notsoancientpelican]

Inspires me to continue poetry with renewed faith in its purpose and its worth to the world.

[@tommyhaynes521]

I dont' know if man will endure. Greed and avarice may bring him down

[@kieranmaciel6195]

I feel that this award was not made to me as a man, but to my work. A life’s work in the agony and sweat of the human spirit. Not for glory, and least of all for profit, but to create out of the materials of the human spirit something which did not exist before. So this award is only mine in trust. It will not be difficult to find a dedication for the money part of it commensurate with purpose and significance of its origin. But I would like to do the same with the acclaim too, by using this moment as a pinnacle from which I might be listened to by the young men and women already dedicated to the same anguish and travail, among whom is already that one who will someday stand here where I am standing. Our tragedy today is a general and universal physical fear, so long sustained by now that we can’t even bare it. There are no longer problems of the spirit. There is only the question, “When will I be blown up?” Because of this the young man or woman writing today has forgotten the problems of the human heart in conflict with itself which alone can make good writing because only that is worth writing about, worth the agony and the sweat.

[@roscoefoofoo]

Wisdom.

[@IgorSilva-iw7sn]

ai que tudo

[@johnk.lindgren5940]

kiitos

[@sealevelbear]

Right on!

[@HigherPlanes]

The last ding dong of doom. haha

[@Robtube686]

1) is this Faulkner himself? 2) was this recorded the night of the event or later? 3) Is there more? It appears to end abruptly...

[@hf8913]

1. Yes, it is Faulkner speaking. 2. No, this is a recording of the speech. You can easily find the original as delivered, though the quality isn't as good as this. 3. That is the end. What's more to be said than that good writing will be one of the pillars to help man prevail?

[@thecofieldcollection3792]

What Hugh said, all corrrect.

[@waheedahmed2074]

how do you relate this to Hamlet and The Great Gatsby?

[@jazzagenomad2953]

If I were you, I'd look for contrast between Faulkner's message and the the thematic emphases of both Hamlet and Gatsby. For instance, Faulkner speaks to the 'immortality' of man, not though fear, but through virtue, compassion, and (here's your biggest Gatsby hook) hope. Fitzgerald's Jay Gatsby is a man consumed by the artificial (in so much as he created a persona to match Daisy's tastes) and the superficial - despite his obsession with Daisy, it could be argued that Gatsby has been consumed by vice (chiefly avarice and lust, which Faulkner comments on here) rather than the virtue that originally inspired his transformation from James Gatz. Moreover, while most Gatsby fans will tell you that the book is about the death of the American Dream, I personally believe it to be about the death of hope, which is far more tragic (and universal; given Fitzgerald's experiences the world over, it stands to reason that he would give the novel a grander message than simply one pertaining to the AMERICAN Dream). Another big point you can hammer on (for both Gatsby and Hamlet) is Faulkner's great question: "When will I be blown up?" In the case of Gatsby, Gatsby himself is living in a fantasy, one which can be blown wide open the instant something does not go as planned. When Tom Buchanan needles Gatsby about his origins and Daisy's true allegiances, Gatsby becomes very defensive, looking "as if he had 'killed a man'". His attempts to calm Daisy in the same scene stand testament to this as well: "But with every word she was drawing further and further into herself, so he gave that up, and only the dead dream fought on as the afternoon slipped away, trying to touch what was no longer tangible, struggling unhappily, undespairingly, toward that lost voice across the room". Keep in mind that Gatsby also saw combat in WWI (and that Fitzgerald served as well, though I'm unsure as to whether or not he ever actually fought), which completely destroyed many of the men forced to live through it. "When will I be blown up?" was a very real question for Gatsby, Fitzgerald, Hemingway, and fundamentally changed even Adolph Hitler after a brush with death (and it only served to make Hitler more depraved, which aligns with some of what Faulkner is saying). As for Hamlet, he's on a collision course the moment he's sent on his quest to avenge his father's death. And it's very clear that he doesn't want to do it; he seems to know it's a suicide mission. He will be "blown up". It's very interesting to watch him evolve over the course of the play. At the start of things, he always somehow manages to stall his duty or talk himself out of it - Hamlet has a clear and easy chance to kill his Uncle as he prays, but refuses to do so out of the invented fear that King Claudius will go to Heaven if murdered while praying (III.3.73-96). This is the first in a long line of hesitations and excuses, and Hamlet is constantly giving us glimpses at his inner monologue as he agonizes over the duty tasked him. There's a great deal of insight given pertaining to his impending doom when he discovers Yorick's skull and muses about the death of Alexander the Great (V.1.174-206) - Shakespeare has created for us a bleak world, one in which the only purpose in life seems to be the march towards death. Again, like Gatsby, we see the loss of hope. By the end game, Hamlet is so consumed by fear that he becomes an entirely different person. He is no longer reserved and intelligent, plotting when best to strike at Claudius; he is brash and impulsive, opting to send Rozencrantz, Guildenstern, Polonius, and Laertes to their deaths. Hamlet also creates a false personality at the beginning of the play, like Gatsby, acting like a nutter in order to give himself the upper hand on Claudius (and to some extent, the other characters) tactically. And at the end of it all, he really is a nutter; Hamlet dies a nutter (the soldier's funeral given him by Fortinbras means little), Gatsby dies a tortured fool (no one even attends his funeral!). This all ties to Faulkner's "general and universal fear". When Faulkner says that fear is the "basest of all things", he means that it is the lowest (not the most essential) of all human emotion, and that man "labors under a curse" while under its influence. But Faulkner does not believe in the "end of man", as he believes most others do. He believes that man will "prevail" through his virtues, not his vices, and that the artist has a duty, more or less, to bolster these values (as he believes he has done). It can be contended, then, that Faulkner stands opposite Fitzgerald and Shakespeare in regards to both his fundamental beliefs (that man will "prevail", while both Fitzgerald and Shakespeare show us the "end of man") and his insistence that the artist must preserve virtue above all else. It is worth noting, however, that Faulkner's work is really, really damn dark. The Sound and The Fury is probably the saddest thing I've ever read, with The Wild Palms (also by Faulkner) coming in at a close second. This is an awfully inspiring, hopeful speech from a man who created such hopeless, desperate worlds and characters. You could argue that he's a hypocrite, but that might just piss off your instructor (you know how English teachers can be). I hope I've helped you at least somewhat. I'm an undergrad English major and an avid reader; Gatsby is my favorite book of all time, with Hamlet and Sanctuary (another Faulkner work) in my top ten. In other words, I know these authors well and I love them. Good luck, boyo!

[@jazzagenomad2953]

JazzAgeNomad Oh, and here's the speech transcript if you don't already have it. I found I could hardly understand this recording. www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/literature/laureates/1949/faulkner-speech.html

[@waheedahmed2074]

We need more people like you in this world. Thank you so much

[@jazzagenomad2953]

No problem. Hope it helped.

[@deepankaradhikari2410]

+JazzAgeNomad Thanks for sharing your knowledge on Literature. I never read any literary novel with much of interest, but I'm forcing myself to read literature and love it's beauty. Plus, I'm thinking majoring in literature even though English is not my first language.

[@eLouaiVideos]

This isn't William Faulkner's speaking. It's a stand in with a Southern accent, in the original there are pauses, hisses of the mic, grainy sound. It would be nice to know who the voice over actor was since he did a fine job.

[@matthewm4688]

+eLouai - Trailers and Parodies I think that this was recorded later, but it's definitely still Faulkner's voice if you listen to some of his other recordings - at least I think

[@cynthiareed4319]

I agree -- it his pronunciation of words like "travail" and "heart". It is a better recording, not done in front of a big audience, either. Or a really good impersonator, but I tend to believe it is the man himself, later.

[@uditshah9516]

William Faulkner was from Mississippi, therefore he would be southern. This is a recording of Faulkner's voice though, it is him.

[@thecofieldcollection3792]

It is Faulkner himself, period the end. You can stop even wondering about it now.

[@catdaddy3302]

People who knew him in Oxford, Mississippi say it is him. John Cofield, whose dad did his portrait, posted this on Facebook, and people recognized his voice.

[@cowardpaulrevere3879]

Actually audience didn't understand him due to deep southern accent

[@odyshape]

+Gareth Heinrich It's quite clear.

[@massdragon1452]

What's funny is I am writing during the end of man. Not in privileged paranoia that accommodates 1st world luxuries, but in the knowledge of the state of the heart of men. Fear being the driving force--its dictation erratic and violent; so will we who in conscious ignorance later recount of the warnings until posterity has driven us out of mind like we've to the previous generation.

[@garyspence2128]

Turns out that mankind is tougher than we often appear. Seven years have passed since your pronouncement of doom. How many more might we finagle out of this crazy world? Only time will tell. Until then, man will endure...and perhaps prevail.

[@TriPham-xd9wk]

Men heigh is not the physical of his stand the at the altitude or elevation he let go of his ambition and ego roll down

[@frankmithen8771]

pain in the arse of a writer

[@naturalfluency2315]

Was it forced on you in school?

[@roscoefoofoo]

If you're lazy, frank, then yes, he might be a pain.