[HN Gopher] Nobel Prize in Literature 2025: Laszlo Krasznahorkai
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Nobel Prize in Literature 2025: Laszlo Krasznahorkai
        
       Author : PikelEmi
       Score  : 199 points
       Date   : 2025-10-09 12:54 UTC (10 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.nobelprize.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.nobelprize.org)
        
       | jelsisi wrote:
       | Just a one sentence description? When all other categories this
       | week got a detailed essay on what they discovered?
        
         | haunter wrote:
         | He got the biography too
         | https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/literature/2025/bio-biblio...
        
         | pkkim wrote:
         | If it's Krasznahorkai we're talking about, one sentence could
         | be very long indeed.
        
       | haunter wrote:
       | You can't mention Krasznahorkai without Bela Tarr. Tarr's main
       | filmography is basically Krasznahorkai's main bibliography:
       | Damnation (1988), Satantango (1994), Werckmeister Harmonies
       | (2000), The Man from London (2007), The Turin Horse (2011). I
       | honestly say the films from Tarr are arguably the best book-to-
       | film adaptations ever, especially Satantango, he is the master of
       | literary filmmaking where the spirit of text comes across the
       | screen perfectly.
        
         | BryantD wrote:
         | It is not easy to commit seven hours to a single movie; for me,
         | Satantango was worth it. Warm up on Werckmeister Harmonies
         | which is a short two hours since Bela Tarr isn't and doesn't
         | need to be for everyone. That said, Satantango is in my top
         | four movies of all time because of how well it reflects
         | humanity and how much it says about how we interact with each
         | other. (The cows are a metaphor for HN, obviously.)
        
           | jklinger410 wrote:
           | Yes, Satantango is quite the experience. Seven hour
           | investment for one film, and I actually want to do it again.
        
             | wahnfrieden wrote:
             | Try Out 1: Noli Me Tangere at 14 hours
             | 
             | Satantango was screened with a full dinner break in the
             | middle (long enough to see another movie in the interim)
             | when I saw it, but this one I went to had to be spread out
             | over two days
        
             | BryantD wrote:
             | Same here. I've been dedicating New Year's Day to a long
             | movie for a few years now --- Trenque Lauquen last year ---
             | and the habit is working out quite well.
        
         | towolf wrote:
         | > I honestly say the films from Tarr are arguably the best
         | book-to-film adaptations ever, especially Satantango, he is the
         | master of literary filmmaking where the spirit of text comes
         | across the screen perfectly.
         | 
         | If that is so, then these are books that you read to experience
         | ultimate ennui?
         | 
         | I know the films, I've watched them all, but doing e.g.
         | Satantango in book form sounds not so enticing?
        
           | xhevahir wrote:
           | "Doing Satantango in book form?" The book is the original.
        
         | kkukshtel wrote:
         | They truly feel like a match made in heaven. Krasznahorkai's
         | own writing is lovely and lyrical, and Tarr's interpretation of
         | it projects the same ideas onto the films but also in a way
         | that makes it stand distinct as a medium.
         | 
         | I could watch this scene from Werckmeister Harmonies every day
         | for the rest of my life:
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_d5X2t_s9g8
         | 
         | And The Turin Horse as well:
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wPCkjN3n6s
         | 
         | Think of some magical Tarr adaptation of Seiobo There Below...
        
           | mrsvanwinkle wrote:
           | Thank you so much to you and original commenter for the
           | passionate rec.
        
             | wahnfrieden wrote:
             | Try to see Tarr's movies on film. Except for the last
             | couple that got Bluray releases there are only horrible
             | quality DVDs available. But they come around on 35mm in
             | cities like NY somewhat routinely.
             | 
             | When Turin Horse came out I saw it at the NYFF (with an
             | hour long talk in a small room with the director) and then
             | another 3 times in theaters afterward. I've been lucky to
             | catch Satantango and Werckmeister on film.
             | 
             | Tarr also mentored a young Chinese director, Hu Bo. His two
             | works are very good: An Elephant Sitting Still and Man in
             | the Well. Tarr came out to TIFF to introduce and eulogize
             | the latter with an impassioned speech.
             | 
             | edit: Forgot that Criterion finally released a new edition
             | of Werckmeister recently.
        
           | squidsoup wrote:
           | > Krasznahorkai's own writing is lovely and lyrical
           | 
           | I would describe his writing style as relentlessly
           | oppressive, and hypnotic.
        
         | kalap_ur wrote:
         | oh wow, i sense a bojler elado, here.
        
         | moralestapia wrote:
         | >Satantango
         | 
         | >Running time: ~8 hours
         | 
         | Yeah, I'll pass.
        
           | squidsoup wrote:
           | Ironically, I think Satantango might be one of Kraznahorkai's
           | shortest novels.
        
           | wahnfrieden wrote:
           | How many Netflix series have you ever binged?
        
             | moralestapia wrote:
             | I don't know, a couple.
             | 
             | What does that have to do with this?
        
         | xhevahir wrote:
         | I've loved those novels of his that I've read, particularly War
         | & War, and haven't watched a single one of those films.
         | Krasznahorkai's work stands on its own perfectly fine.
        
           | wahnfrieden wrote:
           | You shouldn't dismiss them - they are not only adaptations,
           | their screenplays were written by Krasznahorkai and he
           | collaborated with their production.
           | 
           | Turin Horse is an original work by Krasznahorkai without
           | being an adaptation, too. (I've seen that one 7 or 8 times, 4
           | during its festival & cinema run.)
           | 
           | To dismiss them would be like to dismiss his works with Max
           | Neumann (AnimalInside being one of his best!) because they
           | combine writing with painting instead of being pure
           | literature.
        
         | squidsoup wrote:
         | In a similar vein, the novelist/film maker collaboration
         | between Kobo Abe and Hiroshi Teshigahara was very fruitful, and
         | produced some beautiful films.
        
       | TheAceOfHearts wrote:
       | I've never heard of them. Does anyone have a top suggestion for
       | checking out his works or standout book? And for those of you
       | that have read him, what did you get out the experience? Should I
       | just read Satantango?
        
         | giraffe_lady wrote:
         | Satantango or the melancholy of resistance are good places to
         | start. His books aren't all the same but there are some
         | qualities they all share.
         | 
         | They're intricate, reference-heavy, postmodern novels with a
         | lot of the emotional intensity purposely occulted behind the
         | prose style. If you like Gass or Sebald you'll have fun.
        
           | wahnfrieden wrote:
           | His recent works are also incredible and very different from
           | the early works. Try Seiobo There Below.
           | 
           | You can also appreciate him through his screenplay work on
           | Bela Tarr's movies.
        
             | giraffe_lady wrote:
             | Oh good to know, I actually haven't read anything of his
             | since war and war. Not for any particular reason, just
             | there are a lot of books.
        
               | wahnfrieden wrote:
               | I also recommend the illustrated novella AnimalInside but
               | you'll need to find a PDF, just found out only 2000 were
               | printed and my copy goes for $300 now :0
               | 
               | Do you have a GoodReads that you'd share?
        
         | jaccarmac wrote:
         | I've loved all of the work I've read except Satantango, so if
         | you bounce of that novel I would recommend the rest. That said,
         | I started with the short story collection The World Goes On and
         | thought it was brilliant.
        
       | redbell wrote:
       | A little bit of history..
       | 
       | In 1974, The Swedish Academy was heavily criticized for awarding
       | the Nobel Prize in Literature to two of its own members. One
       | laureate, Harry Martinson, was so shaken by the backlash he
       | committed suicide 4 years later.
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Martinson#Later_life_and...
        
         | jacquesm wrote:
         | That has absolutely nothing to do with this article.
        
         | ctxc wrote:
         | That's sad. It says post humusly he was celebrated as the
         | greatest writer after August someone.
         | 
         | But what's the point, he was gone .-.
        
       | b2ccb2 wrote:
       | I am a bit confused as to why he was chosen. Not to diminish his
       | tremendous body of work, but rather by the definition of the
       | rules laid down by Alfred Nobel in his will:
       | 
       | "All of my remaining realisable assets are to be disbursed as
       | follows: the capital, converted to safe securities by my
       | executors, is to constitute a fund, the interest on which is to
       | be distributed annually as prizes to those who, during the
       | _preceding year_ , have _conferred the greatest benefit to
       | humankind_ ... one part to the person who, in the field of
       | literature, produced the most outstanding work in an ideal
       | direction; "
       | 
       | Has anyone any insight on this?
       | 
       | https://www.nobelprize.org/alfred-nobel/full-text-of-alfred-...
        
         | MLR wrote:
         | That's not the basis the award is decided on, I presume it may
         | have been in the early years of the award, but generally it's
         | given as a lifetime achievement kind of thing - the recipients
         | are often decades removed from their most influential work.
        
         | pavlov wrote:
         | The Nobel Prize in all fields has become an award for lifetime
         | achievement, even though the wording of Nobel's will could also
         | be interpreted as meaning that it should be awarded for work
         | that had the greatest impact during the preceding year.
        
           | simonh wrote:
           | I don't know, but I suspect the interpretation is that the
           | impact should be during the preceding year, the wording
           | doesn't say the work has to occur in the preceding year. So
           | arguably the work could have been decades ago, but if the
           | impact has only recently become apparent that counts.
           | 
           | I think that's fine. Often it's not really possible to assess
           | the impact of a contribution until long after, it takes a lot
           | of context to be able to do that.
        
             | justonceokay wrote:
             | I don't think we should consider too strictly the intention
             | of someone who has been dead for 130 years.
        
               | kzrdude wrote:
               | Strangely enough though, there is a conflict around the
               | foundation managing Hilma af Klint's art collection and
               | they are now trying to change how the works are displayed
               | and loaned based on stricter interpretations of her
               | words.
        
               | stevenwoo wrote:
               | This is a sensible and reasonable proposition, which is
               | ironic considering the USA is run based on
               | interpretations of intentions of slave owners or those
               | copacetic with slavery who have been dead for almost
               | twice as long.
        
               | pavlov wrote:
               | Conveniently those interpretations can be whatever suits
               | the current lifetime-appointed guardians of the sacred
               | legal text. It helps that the text is old and originally
               | ambiguous.
               | 
               | When Napoleon seized power in 1799, he crafted a French
               | constitution that he wanted to be "short and obscure",
               | the better to enable his authoritarian power. The United
               | States has ended in the same place.
        
               | reliabilityguy wrote:
               | > When Napoleon seized power in 1799, he crafted a French
               | constitution that he wanted to be "short and obscure",
               | the better to enable his authoritarian power. The United
               | States has ended in the same place.
               | 
               | What is "obscure" in the US constitution?
               | 
               | The first amendment is the one thing that makes it
               | impossible for authoritarian US to be reality.
        
               | watwut wrote:
               | Authoritarian US is becoming the reality right now and
               | the first amendment provides exactly zero protection. We
               | are watching US constitution collapse right now.
               | 
               | Second, its meaning IS obscure. It get reinterpreted and
               | modified by supreme court to unrecognizable degree. The
               | words dont mean what they used to mean back then, because
               | court used some alternative history to achieve their
               | political goal. It is also not like the court was
               | grounded in contemporary reality when making those
               | decisions and explaining them.
               | 
               | Most of constitutional protections are weak. There is no
               | recourse if your rights are broken, only ever increasing
               | maze of special conditions and requirements you need to
               | fill if you want those protections to apply.
        
               | reliabilityguy wrote:
               | > Authoritarian US is becoming the reality right now and
               | the first amendment provides exactly zero protection.
               | 
               | Well, this is not true. As a matter of fact, you can talk
               | about it without fear that you would be arrested for your
               | speech. In real authoritarian regimes, e.g., Jordan,
               | Qatar, China, Russia (de jure protections exist, de facto
               | not so much) you have no protections at all. In those
               | places speaking out means you end up in jail.
               | 
               | > We are watching US constitution collapse right now.
               | 
               | Can you give an example?
               | 
               | > Second, its meaning IS obscure. It get reinterpreted
               | and modified by supreme court to unrecognizable degree.
               | 
               | What article do you think was interpreted to
               | unrecognizable degree?
               | 
               | > The words dont mean what they used to mean back then,
               | because court used some alternative history to achieve
               | their political goal.
               | 
               | Can you provide an example for that as well?
               | 
               | > It is also not like the court was grounded in
               | contemporary reality when making those decisions and
               | explaining them.
               | 
               | I think this is the case with all the precedent-based
               | judicial systems, no?
               | 
               | > Most of constitutional protections are weak. There is
               | no recourse if your rights are broken, only ever
               | increasing maze of special conditions and requirements
               | you need to fill if you want those protections to apply.
               | 
               | In order to argue about that you would have to be
               | specific. It seems to me that the constitutional
               | protections are the only ones that actually work, e.g.,
               | 1st, 2nd, 4th, and 5th amendments are really powerful,
               | and go without saying.
        
               | zeroonetwothree wrote:
               | France has had something like 16 constitutions since
               | 1791. I think I'll take the US model.
        
               | rzzzt wrote:
               | Which has 27 merged PRs in its git repository.
        
               | simonh wrote:
               | Which is basically a cut-and-paste of the British
               | constitutional model of the 1780s, but with an elected
               | King George III and upper house. Presidents are just
               | elected kings. The modern parliamentary model is much
               | better.
        
               | nautilius wrote:
               | Sure, stick to the Model T, why not. It had wheels and
               | seats, so there's that.
        
         | madcaptenor wrote:
         | The Nobel Prize hasn't been a prize for work done in the
         | previous year in a long time. This originates in the science
         | prizes because some prizes were given to discoveries that were
         | later discredited. But even the literature prize is generally
         | given in honor of a body of work. And if you look at the list
         | on Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nobel_laure
         | ates_in_Lit...), even those who are cited for a particular work
         | (which was mostly in the first half of the 20th century) didn't
         | get the prize for some time after that work. I suspect there
         | was the same idea that the work needed to be one recognized to
         | have lasting literary value.
        
         | ajkjk wrote:
         | I'm curious about the moral underlying an objection like this.
         | Why do you care about whether the prize exactly reflects his
         | will? And why specifically for this prize, when your objection
         | has applied for most of a century across every field?
        
           | b2ccb2 wrote:
           | It was a genuine question, I have no objections. I am rather
           | illiterate about the Nobel Prize, it just caught my attention
           | this year. I just noticed a discrepancy after checking the
           | body of his work after reading the will. That's all.
        
             | astrange wrote:
             | There's actually a second issue with the Literature prize,
             | which is that it's supposed to be given for work "in an
             | idealistic direction", but nobody knows what that means.
             | 
             | And since the literature committee tends to be run by
             | extremely pretentious artists they don't like idealism
             | anyway. Artists are supposed to be tortured postmodern
             | souls you know.
             | 
             | A lot of people want Haruki Murakami to get the prize, but
             | I don't think his work would pass this.
        
         | gnfargbl wrote:
         | I don't see a requirement that the work was created or released
         | during the preceding year, only that it conferred benefit to
         | humankind during that time. Presumably the argument is that
         | Nobel-worthy acts continue to confer benefit for long periods.
        
         | InitialLastName wrote:
         | Off-topic, but reading that will is a fascinating study in
         | 19th-century international economics: In the initial outlays, I
         | count 5 different currencies (crowns, francs, florins, dollars,
         | marks). I don't think anyone now would bequest cash in anything
         | other than their native currency (to be converted by the heir).
        
       | krasznahorkai wrote:
       | I knew it would happen eventually! I've been waiting for his
       | award. Long time fan. My favorite is War and War (Haboru es
       | haboru) because the confusion of the world and the endless
       | struggle of trying to be understood represented so well.
        
       | Maro wrote:
       | We're on fire!
       | 
       | 2025 - Laszlo Krasznahorkai - Literature - for his compelling and
       | visionary oeuvre that, in the midst of apocalyptic terror,
       | reaffirms the power of art.
       | 
       | 2023 - Katalin Kariko - Physiology or Medicine - for their
       | discoveries concerning nucleoside base modifications that enabled
       | the development of effective mRNA vaccines against COVID-19.
       | 
       | 2023 - Ferenc Krausz - Physics - for experimental methods that
       | generate attosecond pulses of light for the study of electron
       | dynamics in matter.
       | 
       | To be fair, there are only 2 others since 2000.
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Hungarian_Nobel_laurea...
        
         | madcaptenor wrote:
         | Hungary is a relatively small country, so that's quite
         | impressive!
        
           | bobcostas55 wrote:
           | "The Atomic Bomb Considered As Hungarian High School Science
           | Fair Project"
           | 
           | https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/05/26/the-atomic-bomb-
           | consid...
        
             | czhu12 wrote:
             | This was one of the most fascinating things I've read all
             | year. Thank you for posting
        
         | mihaaly wrote:
         | It is difficult to say 'we' here for me, when the common ground
         | with these remarkable people are only the country of origin and
         | most of the time the language spoken. Also when it is based on
         | achievements that are mostly theirs, which I have nothing to do
         | with.
         | 
         | I am glad that these people could achive so much coming from a
         | place like Hungary, that is providing inadequate possibilities
         | for these kinds of achivements so they reach it in other
         | countries too many times. Or sometimes even put obstacles in
         | their ways - which is actually good/ok in the end as they seek
         | out the places allowing their success.
         | 
         | But I am glad for any Nobel price winners, regardless of their
         | origins. They give us so much.
        
           | Maro wrote:
           | Ferenc Krausz has almost the same degrees as me: ELTE
           | Physics, BME EEng/Comp.Sci.
           | 
           | Katalin Kariko went to the same University as my sister
           | (Szeged).
           | 
           | But yes, we have to leave the country if we want good
           | opportunities.. unless we go into politics! Fidesz is easily
           | the most successful startup in Hungary after 1989, possibly
           | in Europe; Fidesz' CEO is one of the richest men in Europe..
           | unfortunately at our expense.
        
           | spicymaki wrote:
           | Agreed, I do understand the sentiment of when someone of your
           | tribe does something great you feel great sentiment, but it
           | can lead to zero sum thinking which is counterproductive. I
           | am pleased that every year we celebrate the achievements of
           | humanity.
        
             | inglor_cz wrote:
             | It can also lead to healthy competition.
        
       | wahnfrieden wrote:
       | He's my favorite working author! (Well, maybe that's Pynchon)
       | 
       | I recommend not only his early works like Satantango but also his
       | recent ones like Seiobo There Below (lucky to have a signed copy
       | of this one).
       | 
       | The short ones are interesting too. Animalinside (with Max
       | Neumann), The Last Wolf.
       | 
       | Interested in checking Chasing Homer which has musical
       | accompaniment: "Publishers Weekly described the book as a cross
       | between a Jean-Claude Van Damme film and the works of Samuel
       | Beckett and Franz Kafka"
        
         | slibhb wrote:
         | Seiobo There Below was really hard to get through. Earlier
         | stuff is much less so.
        
         | lanfeust6 wrote:
         | Should I start with Satantango?
        
           | wahnfrieden wrote:
           | Sure, it's a fine place to start
           | 
           | You might also try A Mountain to the North, a Lake to the
           | South, Paths to the West, a River to the East as a very short
           | one of his later works
           | 
           | Wow I just found out that I have quite a valuable collection
           | of his works - the surprisingly expensive ones that I had
           | casually picked up when they were new:
           | 
           | - The Last Wolf 1st edition, $300
           | 
           | - Satantango 1st edition, $200
           | 
           | - Music & Literature No. 2, unknown value (no record of
           | secondary market resale)
           | 
           | - AnimalInside, $300, only 2000 copies published
           | 
           | Time to encase these in something...
        
       | prinny_ wrote:
       | The melancholy of resistance is a book that shaped my
       | understanding of conflict and apathy. I am happy this man got the
       | Nobel, he is a tremendous writer.
        
       | derbOac wrote:
       | Can anyone comment on the translations of Krasznahorkai's works
       | into English?
       | 
       | Every time I read a translation of highly regarded literature I
       | can't help but wonder if I'm getting some inadequate rendition
       | that is missing something critical to why the originals are so
       | highly regarded. This isn't meant to be a criticism of
       | translators, just that I think their job is very difficult.
       | 
       | Of course, I still happily read and enjoy translations; there's
       | just this shadow cast for me all the time by the originals.
        
         | seizethecheese wrote:
         | His works were in Hungarian. If we are being honest, he
         | probably won the Nobel for his translated works as much as his
         | originals. Or, how many Nobel committee members are fluent in
         | Hungarian?
        
           | kruffalon wrote:
           | For me this is todays new conceptual thought!
           | 
           | Or something like this, just trying to express that I've
           | never really thought about it like that. That we don't really
           | interact with original works when we read/listen to
           | translated works and thus we can't really say anything about
           | the originals.
           | 
           | Small mind blown moment!
        
             | jaccarmac wrote:
             | I'm biased because I lived down the street from a bookstore
             | connected to a translation publishing house, but I can't
             | recommend translated fiction enough for opening one's eyes
             | to the weird relationship between a person, their language,
             | and the works they read.
        
         | squidsoup wrote:
         | The Hungarian poet George Szirtes, with no prior translation
         | experience, translated his first two novels, over a period of
         | many years. I can't speak Hungarian, but both the Melancholy of
         | Resistance and Satantango remain my favourite novels of his,
         | and I think I can partially attribute that to Szirtes's
         | translations.
        
       | more_corn wrote:
       | Could have sworn the Nobel for fiction was going to go to RFK jr.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-10-09 23:01 UTC)