Most Popular New Books Added to the 2017 Reading Challenge

None of these really appeal to me, but if you're looking for 2017 books, I'm gonna read The Hate U Give, by Angie Thomas, really soon. I'm curious about Hunted, by Meagan Spooner, too.

Haven't read any of those either but really liked "Faithful " by Alice Hoffman.

Several in my TBR, one I've already read (King's Cage) and one I've purchased but haven't read yet (Norse Mythology).

Lisa wrote: "Haven't read any of those

One of my favs this year so far as well.

Haven't read any o f these. I have read a favorite author's new book - "In This Grave Hour" by Jacqueline Winspear; "Left Neglected" by Lisa Geneva; the Eliot triology by Ellen Goudge; "Commonwealth" by Ann Patchett;"The Animators" by Kayla R Whitaker; and "My Survival in the Killing Fields" by Mao Sim.

What an interesting an unexpected list. A few looked OK but nothing stood out as "MUST READ." I agree with some of the add-ons above!

None on my list.

I liked . I have 5 others in my TBR

Who are these people and what have they done to the reading challenge?! Most of these books I have never seen or heard about.... except "The Girl Before" which is really good....

For goodness sake, can't we separate these reading challenges by sex, and have one for women and another for men? I mean, what's with all the hunky covers, is that what passes for literature today? Not a single book in this list appeals to me, nor is there a single non-fiction book. Why not?

Bobby wrote: "For goodness sake, can't we separate these reading challenges by sex, and have one for women and another for men? I mean, what's with all the hunky covers, is that what passes for literature today?..."

I may be a woman, but I don't like hunky covers either. If a book's cover features a guy's bare chest, I most probably won't read it.

Only book on the list that has featured in my challenge has been King's Cage. Nothing else really caught my eye...

And a bare male torso on a book cover? No thanks. That is the best way to make sure it gets ignored - no matter how good the book may be.

I have The Girl Before but haven't read it yet. None of the others are on my list of 150 or so! So many books, so little time....

Bobby wrote: "For goodness sake, can't we separate these reading challenges by sex, and have one for women and another for men? I mean, what's with all the hunky covers, is that what passes for literature today?..."
If you are looking far a good non fiction read I'd recommend Ben McIntyre's A Spy Among Friends. It's about Kim Philby & came out about 3 years ago. Most enjoyable!

I can't believe how many book snobs there are on here. Some people like romance, and like seeing good looking models on the front cover. But for you to make snide remarks and look down on those of us who enjoy these types of books is ridiculous. You don't see me putting down some of the more serious books...each person likes what they like, and these books are obviously popular on Goodreads, even if not in the rest of the world, for them to make the top of the list.

I'm the snob for wishing there was a non-fiction title or two amidst the towering pile of YA and hunk fantasies. All this tells me is who is using Goodreads and who isn't, and how narrow its focus has become.

I have the Bear and the Nightingale on my on my Want to Read list. Neil Gaiman's Norse Mythology keeps drawing my attention but I haven't made a decision about that yet.

Bobby wrote: "For goodness sake, can't we separate these reading challenges by sex, and have one for women and another for men? I mean, what's with all the hunky covers, is that what passes for literature today?..."

That's kind of a demeaning thing to say... I'm a woman and no more interested than you in having romance novels with shirtless guys be the biggest item on this list. But there they are, and it's probably because some people read them.

I like things like 19th and 20th century German lit, Irish history, WWII memoirs, thrillers, mystery, sci fi, crime novels, fantasy, horror, biographies, contemporary fiction, philosophy, feminist essays, graphic novels and YA, amongst other things.

Neither my sex nor my gender has anything to do with the type of books I enjoy. You assume it's only women who read romance novels, which isn't true. That aside, I feel that your suggestion of segregating women and men's reading challenges is, well, if not intentionally insulting, then just irritating. Do we seriously all have so little in common that we need to make a great big divide?

I have the You I've never known by Ellen Hopkins(that I'm currently reading). I'm going to try to get through most of Ellen H.'s books and read Heroes of Olympus series. After that, maybe I'll finally finish TMI and TID.

This list is more confirmation that YA & Romance rank highly with Goodreads users. I've no problem with that but I'm still looking for where Scifi owns the kingdom. lol Covering my YA base for 2017, I've read Defy the Stars. For Romance, I've read A Thousand Letters (the Persuasion sell got me) & felt it was a profound waste of time. I read The Girl Before last year.

I've heard great things about Gaiman's Norse Mythology, but it's not on my list yet. I've just finished The Space Between the Stars & plan to begin New York 2140 soon. I've also been trying to delve into my backlist TBR pile, so that's also a priority for my 2017 Challenge.

This isn't recommended reading or anything, it's only showing what the most popular new book reads are at the moment.

For someone who enjoys more classic and serious novels for the most part (I admit I like an occasional Elmore Leonard), it is sad to see confirmation of what sorts of books are most popular with the reading public, but not really surprising. Romance and cowboy stories have always been popular. At least they're reading- and for some their tastes in books will mature as they do. The Norse Mythology one sounds interesting actually.

Too may six packs in covers for my taste. Will these books be remembered in 10 years?
I would prefer something that gives me a hint of the best books of this century, that would be worth investigating.

I wish they would make a list for youth

Actually, my reading tastes have broadened significantly since buying a Kindle and joining GoodReads.

I read some YA, and I'm 52. Young at heart and cynically romantic. That said, I just finished Caraval last night and am not a huge fan.

I don't read the hunky romances, either, and most of my books would not rate on any GoodReads popularity contests. Who cares? I'm entertained, they're entertained, and we all share this community based upon similar preferences, which is why there are groups.

GoodReads has simply crunched statistics - there's nothing to be offended by. I've read one, want to read 3 more but won't buy them because they're too expensive right now, another is the third in a trilogy and I haven't read the first two yet, and one I own but haven't read yet. Those are my personal statistics from their list. None of my favorite authors made the list. That list will be completely irrelevant and different in 6 months.

The reason nonfiction books aren't on this list is because one just wasn't in the top 20. This week. I read to escape - I don't read nonfiction. That doesn't make me stupid or anyone else smarter. I'm sure there are hundreds of GR users who read nothing but nonfiction.

I would seriously be offended if GR broke the list down based on sexual identity. That's a pretty outdated statement. Reading preferences has nothing to do with sexual identity.

As for the best books of the century, that's pretty subjective, too. Does it matter what will be remembered? People are reading - that's what matters. Remember censorship? Let's not go back there, please. If buff covers are the price we pay for the ability to openly buy and enjoy any book of our choosing, then we're getting off cheap.

I love John Steinbeck, Ernest Hemingway, Charlotte Bronte. Do you think anyone will ever care today, 10 years from now, or after I'm dead that I read them?

It boils down to this: the list is just for fun. Reading is fun. Read whatever you want. Don't worry about anyone else's choices. Get a small grip.

I'm not saying censor this.
I'm saying that to some readers this list is quite meaningless, you can check the above comments. Sure, no list will be of everyone liking.

Personally I'm interested on a list of books that for some reason are highly regarded as there are chances they are of high quality.

We could argue if quality is subjective or not or even if quality is enjoyable.
Personally I want to see a very different kind of list published also.

Beth wrote: "Actually, my reading tastes have broadened significantly since buying a Kindle and joining GoodReads.

I read some YA, and I'm 52. Young at heart and cynically romantic. That said, I just finished..."

Salieri wrote: "None of these really appeal to me, but if you're looking for 2017 books, I'm gonna read The Hate U Give, by Angie Thomas, really soon. I'm curious about Hunted, by Meagan Spooner, too."

I just finished Hunted last night and loved it. You should read it!

Ugh- too much romance and too many YA titles. I wish they would make a. GR just for YA titles- then i would never have to see one again.

Caraval and A Conjuring of Light were both fantastic!!

What's with the formulaic trashy romances? Can't a woman be strong and independent and not chase after or pine for a vapid man whose best feature is a six-pack and not his personality or his brain? I don't need rescuing and I don't need to be portrayed as a weak, submissive woman. It's pathetic how many books on this list are like this. Of course, this is just my opinion and people can take it or leave it.

It's wonderful to know people are reading. Reading is one of the greatest joys. Since censorship was brought up, from reading through people's comments the consensus is that more than a few readers would like to see a substantive, multiple genre, thought-provoking list. I think youth readers also appreciate the same taste levels and others, but recognize sometimes we all need a little bit of fluff in our downtime to decompress and relax. This site is a place for people of all ages, tastes, and reading levels to gather and no one should be excluded because of their age or preferences.

I don't see anyone's comments calling for censorship. I take that accusation very seriously; as a writer, The First Amendment is sacred ground to me and many others, including this community. Suggesting a separate reading list for youth is not censorship. Nothing prevents them from reading any post they would like on Goodreads. However, I think excluding anyone from a post is a missed reading opportunity and demonstrates ignorance and age discrimination.

Other than Gaiman none of these look my thing, but seeing the name "Roth" reminds me that I was going to read some Philip Roth this year... although I might have said that last year too...

Colleen wrote: "I just finished Hunted last night and loved it. You should read it!"

Thanks! I am a bit wary of retellings but I've heard a lot of good things about it so I'll probably give it a try later this year :)

As for the debate about the selection: for Heaven's sake, no one is making you read these books! Don't like them? Don't read them, it's as simple as that. Do you HAVE to be a douche about it? How about you make some other suggestions instead, huh? Try to introduce people to other books instead of insulting them? No non-fiction in the list? Just add a few titles in your comment. How hard is that, really?

And by the way, Bobby: I'm a woman who reads YA as well as "adult" books or classics, and hates new romance (or whatever this genre is called nowadays), like several other women on this thread. So making a list by gender would be pointless (and offensive to a lot of people). Kinda like your comment, actually.

Anyway, let's try to get something good out of it, everyone: got any nice non-fiction to recommend? Or non YA? Or anything? What's in your challenge that you'd like to share?

Do you HAVE to be a douche about it?
Some people can't hide what they are.

I am really sad about Norse Mythology: I grew up with them as my cultural heritage, know quite a lot about them and really looked forward to reading Neil Gaiman's interpretation. But no, it's a simple retelling of the most famous stories, and I sat there like "A, this, hm, okay, what's next?".
And now I am quite confused about the reactions the book gets. Well, it's not bad, it's just not what I hoped it would be. If you're new to the Edda, give it a try.
But be aware that you're reading the stories of a religion and if you're saying it's fiction, you're saying the Bible is fiction.

Cindy wrote: "Who are these people and what have they done to the reading challenge?! Most of these books I have never seen or heard about.... except "The Girl Before" which is really good...."

What's wrong with seeing books you haven't heard of before?

If you liked the girl before, you might really enjoy behind her eyes as well.

Lauren wrote: "I can't believe how many book snobs there are on here."

Well said!!

This is obviously a list cured based on popularity. If you don't read popular genres, then you should KNOW that you won't find books to your taste here. Why feel the need to denigrate other people's tastes? Just ask GR to do posts based on Non Fiction or whatever genre strikes your fancy!

The idea of segregating women vs. men's list is plain misogynistic as there are plenty of women who don't read romance or YA.

"The idea of segregating women vs. men's list is plain misogynistic as there are plenty of women who don't read romance or YA."

"Reading preferences has nothing to do with sexual identity."

How on earth is it misogynistic to filter a list by sex? Why would anyone have a problem with this? In fact, it's misandrist to promote only female-marketed genres.

If you really think there isn't a major difference in topical/genre interest between the sexes, and how books are marketed or not marketed to each, well that kind of proves my point as to what the problem is. If it's to be verboten by feminists to recognize a difference between sexes, then how about allow the ability to filter out certain dominant genres like YA and romance that have no business being recommended to me, or to the women who would rather read crime noir and sci-fi?

How about this as a thought experiment: replace "sex" with "race". Of the eleven book covers on this "most popular" list that show clearly visible skin (fifteen people in all), all are of white people. Not a single person of color.

How is this defensible in today's world? If a person of color were to comment on this and ask for the ability to filter their recommendation results by this criteria, would there be this much push-back and name-calling? Would they be told that they're racist for wanting it and should be quiet and happy with the "popular" choices, and that their demographic isn't important?

Olivia "Don't Blame Me I Voted for Hillary" wrote: "Bobby wrote: "For goodness sake, can't we separate these reading challenges by sex, and have one for women and another for men? I mean, what's with all the hunky covers, is that what passes for lit..."

I agree with both of you! This list is interesting, but I'd like to see it separated by genre. If they did that, I might have more of them on my own lists!

Salieri wrote: "None of these really appeal to me, but if you're looking for 2017 books, I'm gonna read The Hate U Give, by Angie Thomas, really soon. I'm curious about Hunted, by Meagan Spooner, too."
What a great choice -- I loved The Hate U Give! Enjoy.

Superbambi wrote: "Bobby wrote: "For goodness sake, can't we separate these reading challenges by sex, and have one for women and another for men? I mean, what's with all the hunky covers, is that what passes for lit..."

I suggested splitting the list by genre - that way, I bet everyone would find some things they've liked or are interested in.

Diane-OP wrote: "I suggested splitting the list by genre - that way, I bet everyone would find some things they've liked or are interested in. "

Splitting by genre would be a good idea. Then people could see the popular choices in the genres they like.

I just think making it a 'men vs women' thing is silly. Not all women like the same thing and not all men like the same thing.

Behind Her Eyes is amazing......did NOT see the ending coming so that was a huge surprise.

Anissa wrote: "This list is more confirmation that YA & Romance rank highly with Goodreads users. I've no problem with that but I'm still looking for where Scifi owns the kingdom. lol Covering my YA base for 2017..."

I know what you mean. I have to completely ignore the popular lists. If you're looking for new books to read, you might be interested in The Stars Are Legion and Six Wakes.

Bobby wrote: "How about this as a thought experiment: replace "sex" with "race". Of the eleven book covers on this "most popular" list that show clearly visible skin (fifteen people in all), all are of white peo..."

First of all, you can't use racism to defend your own sexism. What you suggested was not like asking for books with POC in it but to filter to get only books that white people would have added. Which, yes, would be considered racist since it would imply that POC read shitty books. And that is basically what you said about women.

Second, while I do agree that there is little diversity (actually none at all) shown on these covers, I still don't get how looking down on white readers for it would make any difference.

Third, you've been invited to share your own titles to make up for the lack of interest you have in this list, yet for some reason you still haven't. I have. And guess what, The Hate U Give is about a black teenage girl who just witnessed her unarmed friend getting shot by a policeman. There is no diversity in the books people seem to read the most? Then I bring some. How about you do that instead of belittling other readers' tastes?

So try and defend yourself all your want, you still have said something offensive. Now you can use this thread for something actually useful, like sharing titles you like, or keep ranting about "women books" and reap what you sow. Your choice.


Leslynn wrote: What a great choice -- I loved The Hate U Give! Enjoy.

Thanks, I've heard a lot about it. I read the first few chapters online and loved them! Can't wait to get into it :)

Yeah, you did pretty much say "Women read crap books" with that suggestion. OTOH, I admit I looked at the list, of which the only book that even remotely interests me is Lincoln in the Bardo, and thought, "What's with all the crap beefcake books?" So I guess I'm a snob, too.

An alternative that might have wider appeal is to tell us what the five most read books in the ten most read genres are for 2017 so far.

Some good non-fiction I've read recently:
Truevine by Beth Macy
Born a Crime: Stories from a South African Childhood, by Trevor Noah
The Gene: An Intimate History by Mukherjee Sidhartha

Two novels that could easily appeal to a wide range of people are News of the World (Paulette Jiles) and Dido's Crown (Julie K. Rose). News of the World takes place in Texas after the Civil War and focuses on the relationship that forms between a traumatized child who was kidnapped by Indians and the old veteran who is charged with returning her to her family. Dido's Crown is a spy-thriller-adventure that takes place in Tunisia and France in the mid-1930s.

Jamesboggie wrote: "I know what you mean. I have to completely ignore the popular lists. If you're looking for new books to read, you might be interested in The Stars Are Legion and Six Wakes. ..."

Thanks for the recs. I have Six Wakes in my TBR pile & will have to check out TSAL. I admit to having mostly given up on the Popular list. I'd love it if GR did the Popular Reviews by genre, but I do still check those with a fool's hope that I'll see something in there that's relevant to my reading interests (which are actually pretty broad).

I'm sorry I made it sound like I was criticizing the taste of readers who enjoy certain genres, that was thoughtless. I am also amazed at the rudeness of some members in here. I've been called a douche, sexist, racist, misogynistic, and offensive (without even running for President!) for pointing out something that is obvious and would be helpful to a large number of Goodreads users. Sounds like I struck a nerve with certain people, but their bullying response feels like projection of their own lack of tolerance -- what they're accusing me of. Accusations like that are meant to shut down speech that's disagreed with. Might want to think about that in your self-assigned role as moral arbiter and censor.

With that said...

I read mostly older books, but of recent publications these were my favorite so far:

●2016
 ○ Free Men by Katy Simpson Smith
 ○ The View from the Cheap Seats: Selected Nonfiction by Neil Gaiman
●2015
 ○ Furiously Happy: A Funny Book About Horrible Things by Jenny Lawson
 ○ Saturn Run by John Sandford and Ctein
 ○ One of Us: The Story of Anders Breivik and the Massacre in Norway by Åsne Seierstad
●2014
 ○ The Narrow Road to the Deep North by Richard Flanagan
 ○ In the Kingdom of Ice: The Grand and Terrible Polar Voyage of the USS Jeannette by Hampton Sides
 ○ Quarantine: A Novel of Quantum Catastrophe by Greg Egan
 ○ Working Stiff: Two Years, 262 Bodies, and the Making of a Medical Examiner by Judy Melinek
●2013
 ○ The Ocean at the End of the Lane by Neil Gaiman
 ○ Fosse by Sam Wasson
 ○ One Summer: America, 1927 by Bill Bryson
 ○ Gettysburg: The Last Invasion by Allen C. Guelzo
 ○ Let's Explore Diabetes with Owls by David Sedaris
●2012
 ○ The Old Ways: A Journey on Foot by Robert Macfarlane
 ○ Train Dreams by Denis Johnson
 ○ Hallucinations by Oliver Sacks

Gee, three out of five of the most recent are by women authors... how misogynistic of me! I also tried expanding my horizon last year by reading a couple of romances. "Foul Play" (1989) by Steffie Hall aka Janet Evanovich I unfortunately found to be really dumb, but it won't keep me from eventually trying Evanovich's later serious mysteries if I live long enough. And "Nine and a Half Weeks: A Memoir of a Love Affair" (1978) by Elizabeth McNeill was good though I thought the movie adaptation was a little better.

I even enjoy YA but before it was marketed as YA. Earlier classics like Narnia, Madeleine L'Engle, Lloyd Alexander, Susan Cooper, etc.

Bobby wrote: "I've been called a douche, sexist, racist, misogynistic, and offensive (without even running for President!) for pointing out something that is obvious and would be helpful to a large number of Goodreads users."

No you haven't. Your attitude on this thread and your comment have been called douchey and sexist because your attitude on this thread and your comment were douchey and sexist, not you as a person. You have been called a litterary snob, though, I'll give you that.

Also, while I did call you out on your comment, I didn't try to shut down what I thought was the point of it: non-fiction books not being in the list. Which is why I asked you (twice) to tell us what non-fiction books you would have recommended. But you're right, I asked for your opinion therefore I am a censor trying to shut it down. Totally makes sense.

Again, separating books by the members' genre is pointless since it has been pointed to you several times that "women" don't especially like new romance either. I think the problem is that this is a compilation of books most added by members, not personal recommendations for you (or me or anyone in particular) and maybe that's not what you were looking for. I'm sure you already know that recommendations tailored for you do already exist (Browse => Recommendations), but it's not the point of this post. So no, I really don't think having a different list for men and women would actually be more helpful than your personal recommendations.

Anyway thanks for recognizing your comment sounded offensive and for such an extensive list of recommendations. I am not a big fan of non-fiction myself so I can't contribute to it but I'm sure some other readers will find something they'll like in it and have other books to recommend, which is the point of us all commenting after all. I had no idea the Ocean at the End of the Lane was non-fiction, though, so I guess I've learnt something today and I might try it some time.

Salieri wrote: "Bobby wrote: "I've been called a douche, sexist, racist, misogynistic, and offensive (without even running for President!) for pointing out something that is obvious and would be helpful to a large..."

Ocean at the End of the Lane is definitely fiction and I don't think he specified that he *only* reads non-fiction.