in my opinion, most pulitzer prize winning novels are a disappointment

I can not say that I'm over impressed with prizes awarded by writers to writers. I have, in fact, been underwhelmed lately by the books picked as Newberry Award winners since the mid-1970's. (Young people's lit) before, they were awarded to books that were interesting and would get kids to read, then they became "messages" and the quality of the writing seemed to be less important than the message the people awarding the prize wanted to be heard. In fact, the only books I've read in the last 20 years that have won awards that I've liked have been the Hugo and Nebula awards, but they are picked by fans, not so much the "elite" of the genre writing field. Those might not be of interest to you, however, because they are Science Fiction and for some reason a lot of people don't like science fiction/fantasy books.

Hi, I read a lot and I tend to agree with you (also To Kill a Mockingbird is also one of my favorite books of all times as well. Maybe it is the style of writing that wins. Cormac McCarthy writes marvelously, but I've never been able to really get into any of his books. Years ago Larry MacMurty won (I think) for Lonesome Dove. That was a very detailed and very good book, still one of my favorites. And Pat Conroy (again I think, not entirely sure) won many years back for his book Prince of Tides. I really loved that book at the time but now my tastes in reading have changed although I still like Pat Conroy's writing. But a lot of the more recent Pulitzer Prize winning books I just can't get into. Same thing with Oprah Winfrey's book picks here in the states. They're always very well written but I never like them so I just started ignoring those selections, although I'm sure many others do like them. I always find them very well written but rather depressing and they rarely hold my interest all the way through.