This year, many announcers seem to be latching on to the fact that she wrote some SF as the "quirky" element to the story and this really annoys me. SF writers regularly write about the very issues that the Nobel winners are considered "bold" for addressing. Had Lessing been known first as a SF author, she'd never have been considered for this prize because she wouldn't have been a "serious" author.
It is as though the Nobel prize is awared to congratulate "normal" authors for catching up to SF authors, but that's not how the prize is presented in the media. Writers who should really know better (Andrew Leonard on Salon) ends up with article titles like: Science fiction wins a Nobel. Dystopian futures don't just belong to the cyberpunks. Doris Lessing could play post-apocalyptic with the best of them.
Dystopian futures don't just belong to the cyberpunks.???
Dystopian futures have been around for FAR longer than the cyberpunks.
Science fiction wins a Nobel.?
No, a woman who wrote some SF won a Nobel. She didn't win for her SF.
The sad, but somewhat amusing part is that when I talked to Robert Silverberg this past WorldCon, he mentioned that no SF author had won an Nobel. I told him I hoped he'd be the first.
Maybe, just maybe there's a bright side to this and the Nobel committee will now start looking at SF authors for their SF work. Asimov was certainly worthy of winning one of these, but he never will.
Personally I consider the Hugo a better prize to win. I'd want an SF author to get the prize because of the associated $.
How could I go about nominating Mr. Silverberg?