Poll

Please feel free to use the comments section to gently persuade others to vote your way! You can change your votes until the poll ends on January 10 (end of day PST), so make your vote count!

I voted for 1988, mainly because I want to read The Beginning of Spring and maybe even finally The Satanic Verses, but my vote is definitely not set in stone. I'd love to hear why I should change it!

Nice! With 29 votes, there is just one vote separating three of the years!

Here's how the votes stand currently (I know you can see this, but this is for archival purposes):

1980: 10 votes
1988: 9 votes
1981: 8 votes
1985: a lowly 2 votes

Excited to see this shape up further!

Though perhaps there will be a few others to come in and make 1985 more competitive, if that shouldn't turn out to be true those of you who voted for 1985 might want to look at which year you'll go with for the second choice and change your vote to it. Your votes have the ability to really change the outcome!

1980's my top choice. I'm a proselytizer for Burgess' Earthly Powers, likely one of the very best of short-listed novels not to win. Carr's A Month in the Country is a lovely novel. I haven't read the O'Faolain, the Desai, or the Unsworth, all of which I would like to read. I would rank 1981 or 1988 as my runner-up.

Dan, I'm also a huge Earthly Powers fan. I think it's his best book, and I often wonder if it had won that year whether Burgess would be more widely ready today. Another plus for choosing 1980, and reading Earthly Powers, is that this year is Burgess's centenary, and what better way to celebrate than by reading Earthly Powers.

Trevor
Reading your words of encouragement above "might want to look at which year you'll go with for the second choice and change your vote" I think the world of electoral reform, of transferable votes, might have been your true calling!
Tempting as all four years appear (I assume it's Keri Hulme who's the 1985 deterrent) 1981 gets my vote because of Midnight's Children. A second reading of a good book offers up the chance to really absorb the content, and in the context of Goodreads and this Group, to be able to do so in eclectic company is appealing.
If MC is as good as its reputation there should be much to discuss

As before I find myself torn. I would appear to be out of step with the majority in that I found Keri Hulme's The Bone People to be breathtakingly disturbing and utterly compelling - in my top 10 Booker winners. But do I want to read a year where I know a brilliant book won (of these 4 options that would be 1981 and 1985) or a year when I was underwhelmed by the winner - definitely the case with 1980 and 1988. I am due a re-read of Midnight's Children - possibly my all time favourite winner - but I'm also a fan of his The Satanic Verses. So, in summary, whichever year we choose (and assuming I can find some time and motivation) there will be something to enjoy.

Like Jonathan, I voted '81 because of Midnight's Children. (The Spark is also excellent, if not my personal favorite of her books.)

However, '80 is a strong second choice, and I could be convinced to change over to form an alliance against '88. ;)

I find this from James very compelling:

Another plus for choosing 1980, and reading Earthly Powers, is that this year is Burgess's centenary, and what better way to celebrate than by reading Earthly Powers.

To keep up with some play-by-play commentary, here's where the votes stand today!

1980 is taking a big lead with 17 votes, nearly 40% of the total.
1981 moved into second place with 12 votes.
1988, my choice, has garnered only one vote since yesterday, slipping to third with 10 votes.
1985 has made some progress, but not enough to make it very competitive; it stays at the bottom with 5 votes.

This is shaping up to be a 1980 year, unless people voting for another year change votes to make another year competitive. Still, we have some time before we need to resort to back-room deals . . . but make sure there are some good refreshments prepped in those back rooms. (I just showed Jonathan that I'm corruptible and not a trailblazer for progressive vote reform)

I've voted for 1980. Just need to get over my phobia of big books. Earthly Powers has been on my TBR for years so I just need a reason to read it.

1988

I have to second what James says here - what a lovely way to celebrate Burgess a 1980 win would be.

Lee wrote: "I have to second what James says here - what a lovely way to celebrate Burgess a 1980 win would be."
Yes, yes! Now if Mark Knopfler would only join in with a tune.

Absolutely - as long as it's not 'Twisting By The Pool'...

Lee wrote: "Absolutely - as long as it's not 'Twisting By The Pool'..."
Indeed. You're dating yourself, Lee. I had worked hard to repress this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMX_B.... Knopfler moved a long way from there to Beryl.

I braced myself for a revisit there - only to find said musical travesty 'blocked due to copyright issues'. :-)

Lucky you: you're not missing a thing. I wonder if it's due to your having a UK-based IP address.

Probably so, Dan...and a lucky escape if memory serves.

I can't wait to read EP again, though, and JL Carr...

Lee wrote: "I can't wait to read EP again, though, and JL Carr... "
Lee, I believe it was on your recommendation that I finally read EP: great recommendation. JL Carr's "A month in the country" is one of my Booker short lists favorites.

Excellent! Two fabulous books, either would have been worthy winners...EP, though, in particular, wuz robbed.

Given that comments above led to me starting to read Earthly Powers I decided it was time to move my vote to 1980.

Hope you enjoy, John.

1980 it is!

Thanks, Trevor: excellent choice. Reassuring that each person's vote counts equally, at least with Mookse and Gripes.

1980 won bigly!

Lee wrote: "Hope you enjoy, John."

I did.