Tournament of Books discussion
note: This topic has been closed to new comments.
2016 Tournament of Books
>
Guest Interview with Nozlee
Thank you so much for taking the time to hang with us. These answers will be stored in the Goodreads group vault for years to come. :)
Nozlee wrote: "Yep, it's because of the quarterfinals and also making sure we can reference the Zombie results at the end of each round's commentary. Honestly the thought of having yet another piece of information stay an unknown until later during this whole process kind of gives me hives, but it's something we can consider for next year...."oooh. so I need to get reading earlier! Also... are the Zombie vote results published somewhere then!? I hadn't picked up on that. I certainly noticed commentary discussing them but thought they had some insider knowledge! I need to edit my personal bracket!
Nope, we don't release the data, actually! But you can get a feel for the shape of the list by closely following the clues Kevin and John give at the end of each round. If Book 1 gets the most votes but sails through every round of play, then Book 2 will be the top Zombie, and so on.
You might ask, why don't we release the full Zombie list? To which I would answer, Are you crazy, why would we release that many zombies into the wild?
Combining a couple questions again to talk about the long list:poingu wrote: "Do you ever pick a book for TOB for reasons other than you liked reading it? Maybe because you want to add a different kind of read to the mix, or to challenge us, or maybe just to mess with us?"
-
AmberBug wrote: Inquiring minds want to know...
Is there a theme for the selections, it seems like the crowd speculates this and maybe it's all a coincidence?
-
Amy wrote: How much of a book is read before greenlighting it for the long or shirt lists? (first page, first chapter, word of mouth enough?)
To poingu's question: dear readers, I promise we would never mess with you.
The long list comes from a bunch of places: as I mentioned earlier, a TON of it is suggested by the commentariat. The ToB team bolsters that list in March with all the books we're excited about for that year, and then we revisit in November or so and add some more. There's no science to it, exactly -- we're not filling quotas -- but if we look at the list and see a bunch of the same kinda voices (whether that's in terms of author diversity, press diversity, subject matter, length, etc), then yes, we're going to go in search of new ones. Sometimes that involves reading a whole book very quickly to decide; sometimes you read an excerpt and know it's going to be a great addition to the long list as a whole. It's a lot of trust -- none of us has read every single book on the longlist, but I obviously trust Kevin, John, and Rosecrans's taste. That means that we also trust award-givers, and put those books on the long list even if one one of us didn't love one of them.
Are you overwhelmed by how robust the commentariat has become? There are so many more comments---do you have to read them all to make sure it stays civil? Or is that just part of the fun?
Nozlee wrote: "To poingu's question: dear readers, I promise we would never mess with you....":) I'm betting Poingu was hoping you're messing with us!
Amy wrote: "Nozlee wrote: "To poingu's question: dear readers, I promise we would never mess with you....":) I'm betting Poingu was hoping you're messing with us!"
Oh I'm messing with poingu for sure. Just not the rest of you.
poingu wrote: "Nozlee wrote: "poingu wrote: "which book were you rooting for this year?"omg there are so many ways I could flub the answering of this question that my answer has been censored: ██████████████"
!!
Hmm I sort of love that you didn't say "I love them all equally""
I don't love all the books equally, but I do love all you readers equally.
Okay that was a little gross, I apologize.
And now the short list!Amy wrote: What criteria is used to reduce the long-list down to the final 16? (some of our other threads had great speculation like "one experimental WTF entry, one current social issue theme, one satire, one short story collection..." etc.)
-
AmberBug wrote: Does the committee intentionally exclude a few great/well-reviewed books and include quirky/experimental books that you know won't go far, just to spark discussion/outrage?
* This question is spreadsheet submitted & Anonymous *
-
AmberBug wrote: What elimination criteria are used to pare down the longlist?
* This question is spreadsheet submitted & Anonymous *
I want to address this middle question first, about "great/well-reviewed books" and "quirky/experimental books that you know won't go far." I know none of us are really sports people -- I'm not, anyway -- but I do know that teams are seeded into brackets according to various skill-based statistics. The same holds for our brackets!
Choosing the final 16 (I'm not counting our play-in matches, unless someone wants to hear about that) starts with Rosecrans, John, Kevin, and me each making starter lists of 16 that we share with each other as a starting point. We then go back and forth via emails for a few days until we hit on a list we all feel good about -- this past year I see 74 emails in the short list thread! Just a few of the things we're asking ourselves during this process (not that any of these are prescriptive or rule-based, just a peek at what is going through our heads):
- Does this list hold up vaguely to the idea of 1, 2, 3, and 4 seeds?
- Are [Book 1] and [Book 2] so similar in tone, plot, or author background that it'd be best to choose just one of them?
- Will a judge have really interesting things to say about this book, even if it loses?
- Was this book considered "important" by the literary world? Do we care about that?
- Will this book hold up to being reviewed up to four times and stay interesting? Is there a lot of "there" there?
- How many of these authors are white guys?
- Would I quit the ToB if the other three didn't let me put this book in play?
It's a strange calculus! I think all four of us would agree that you could throw out the final list of 16, choose 16 entirely new books, and still have an amazing month of March.
Beth wrote: "Thank you so much for doing this. My question is what book or books have generated the most debate among the organizers regarding their inclusion or exclusion in the TOB?"I love this question. I can't think of a single title that has started fights or anything, but the process of winnowing down the longlist to 16 can be exhausting -- so many books are left behind! -- and we've definitely sent some snippy emails back and forth before, um, stepping back and finding some perspective on the whole thing.
Do we really have to wait until March 7th? Can't we start early?
Nozlee wrote: "We've definitely sent some snippy emails back and forth before, um, stepping back and finding some perspective on the whole thing. ."Do you reach consensus before adding a book to the 16 or does someone have veto power or do you vote?
Nozlee wrote: "And now the short list!Amy wrote: What criteria is used to reduce the long-list down to the final 16? ... Would I quit the TOB if the other three didn't let this book in play?..."
I'm curious about the books that there have been passionate discussions re including or excluding from the short list. Do you tend to come into the discussion with a book or two that you really champion? Have there been any majority vote decides situations?
AmberBug wrote: How are books paired up to go head to head? Do you consider the bracket as a whole and how books will potentially face each other in later rounds or do you primarily set it up based on first round? Or is it random?* This question is spreadsheet submitted & Anonymous *
And now on to seeding the brackets! It's definitely not random, since we pay attention to "seeds." This is a more fun part of the process -- you just want to make sure that no one book is set up to potentially steamroll a bunch of others, and that the matchups seem interesting and neither too similar (two set of short stories, two family novels, two narratives about WOC) nor too different (giant bestseller versus very small press). You've all seen this year's bracket, for example -- you just stay lose and try to keep a bracket that will yield interesting results no matter what happens.
Mainon wrote: "Do you have a "biggest regret"--a book that you read later and desperately wished had been in the ToB?"Ugh, my only regret is that I get tantalized with all these excellent reviews by all our judges and then never get time to read as many of the books as I want to!
Jennifer wrote: "Adding in new question:This was mentioned in another thread (https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...), so I will bring it forward here:
"what did [you] think when [you] heard an alt-TOB was going on? what did [you] think of our list of 16*? did the alt-TOB worm into [your] process in any way? inquiring minds!! :) "
* - if you paid it any attention, of course. :)
Thanks, Nozlee!! "
ARE YOU KIDDING WE LOVE YOU GUYS. I seem to remember saying something like "Holy shit, our work here is done" when Rosecrans showed it to me for the first time. We have nothing but respect for the Alt ToB -- from the books you choose to the judgements you write.
The play in round, how do you decide if there is going to be one? And was it set up this year to be two authors who have been around for along time (maybe there best work is in the past?)?
Nozlee wrote: "AmberBug wrote: How are books paired up to go head to head? Do you consider the bracket as a whole and how books will potentially face each other in later rounds or do you primarily set it up based..."Has an author every complained about his/her books' seeding?
Neighbors wrote: "Are you overwhelmed by how robust the commentariat has become? There are so many more comments---do you have to read them all to make sure it stays civil? Or is that just part of the fun?"See previous answer -- we LOVE it. Specifically, I've read every single comment posted on every single judgement for the past three years, and I've seen a total of like, three? Maybe two? Comments that were iffy? I think one was from Ed Champion -- ugh -- and two were from people who just really, really don't like audiobooks.
In all honesty: we occasionally have little conversations about whether, because the commentariat is so tight-knit and intense, it might intimidate more casual readers or commenters and keep them from feeling like part of a community, but then we actually go in there and read and that's not really the case! I'm looking forward to having my inbox deluged by Disqus come March.
Nozlee - in case you need to go soon, a big THANK YOU from all of us for taking the time (and adding your brand of humor!) to answer our questions! It's been both deeply satisfying to understand more details while meanwhile sparking a flurry of new MUST-KNOW questions! Can't wait for the judgments to start rolling in (while frantically trying to finish the readings)!
Just FYI, I'm around for another 45 minutes!
I have a question. Hey Nozlee, how much do you love that part of Round 1 where you have eight simultaneous email threads going with the judges and then have to wrangle their final drafts from Word doc and Google doc and Pages and plaintext form into something semi-standardized in addition to fact checking and copy editing everything, a process that you always forget takes an entire weekend?????
Nozlee wrote: "I have a question. Hey Nozlee, how much do you love that part of Round 1 where you have eight simultaneous email threads going with the judges and then have to wrangle their final drafts from Word ..."Wow, what a great question, Nozlee. Thanks for asking. I love that part so much, it's my favorite. I think I forget about it every year because it's so much fun I just want to surprise myself with it. I especially love it when, for no reason, the same Word document is full of a mix of curly and straight quotes so I have to pay extra attention to all of them. It's the best.
Laura wrote: "The play in round, how do you decide if there is going to be one? And was it set up this year to be two authors who have been around for along time (maybe there best work is in the past?)?"The play-in is where we get to have some fun! We don't do it every year, but I think it adds a nice extra dimension to the Rooster. My favorite was our "three Iraq novels" play-in in 2013 (http://www.themorningnews.org/tob/201...).
Yes, this year's setup intentionally put these two career novelists against each other, but it's not necessarily themed. Basically, the play-in match is just one more way we get to say "you know this entire thing is arbitrary, right?"
Nozlee wrote: "Nozlee wrote: "I have a question. Hey Nozlee, how much do you love that part of Round 1 where you have eight simultaneous email threads going with the judges and then have to wrangle their final dr..."Hey! This sounds very familiar (alt.tob)...thanks for sharing, somehow I thought you would have all these software and organizational things completely laid to rest, and all would be easy to manage in the REAL tob world...
Beth wrote: "Nozlee wrote: "AmberBug wrote: How are books paired up to go head to head? Do you consider the bracket as a whole and how books will potentially face each other in later rounds or do you primarily set it up based..."Has an author every complained about his/her books' seeding?"
The closest thing I can think of is the weirdness with Hill William back in 2014: http://www.latimes.com/books/jacketco...
Nozlee wrote: "Just FYI, I'm around for another 45 minutes!"Have you heard from David Sedaris regarding naming the award after his brother?
Nozlee wrote: "Just FYI, I'm around for another 45 minutes!"Has there been any discussion of having a tourney in year 17 pitting the previous winners against each other? (Cock of the Walk award)
Nozlee wrote: "Beth wrote: Has an author every complained about his/her books' seeding?" The closet thing I can think of is the weirdness with Hill William back in 2014: http://www.latimes.com/books/jacketco... ..."wow. the ONLY reason I read Hill William was due to TOB! (I hated it - but I respect many folks who adored it). Thanks for the article - that is some serious wacky!
Nozlee wrote: "Just FYI, I'm around for another 45 minutes!"thank you very, very much of taking the time to be here tonight. it's so greatly appreciated, nozlee! :)
Beth wrote: "Has there been any discussion of having a tourney in year 17 pitting the previous winners against each other? (Cock of the Walk award)"Oh my god I read this and then became the little girl in this meme http://www.shemazing.net/wp-content/u...
Would TMN ever consider doing a TOB for different genres? Like all YA or all horror or something to that effect?
Anna wrote: "Would TMN ever consider doing a TOB for different genres? Like all YA or all horror or something to that effect?"We talk about it every once in a while! It's so much work though. And especially with the more narrow field offered by genre fiction (or narrative nonfiction, or memoir, or what have you), I don't think it would have the same effect of lifting up *all* books by judging books against each other. I'd love to hear any thoughts about how this might be accomplished well!
Hey Nozlee, if you need someone to help you copy edit the judgments...I volunteer as Tribute.
Neighbors wrote: "Hey Nozlee, if you need someone to help you copy edit the judgments...I volunteer as Tribute."What did I JUST say about not ruining the tourney for yourself by learning secrets!!
That's true. It's why I'd never want to be the reader judge. What would I do all the other days? I like the commentariat too much to give it up.
Thanks for reposting the Hill William thing. I forgot that bit of hilarity.One last question---we talked about good or bad behavior in the commentariat. Have you ever tried to talk the judge out of a terrible decision? Or do you mostly just let Kevin and John handle it in their match play?
Thanks so much for answering questions, Nozlee.
Thanks, Nozilee for the taking the time to answer all our questions. It was great getting a peak behind the scenes.
Yes, thank you! This was so fun to read.
poingu wrote: "It seems TOB started out as a lark, as an anti-book-award, and yet now people pay attention to it as if it were a "real" award for literary merit/best book of the year, where authors write press releases, or thank you on twitter at least, and people write articles about the winner. Are you becoming a Real Literary Award in spite of yourselves? How do you think the role of TOB in book culture has changed over the years, and how do you feel about it? "
So I've been thinking about this one for a few hours. I think we're all thrilled that the Rooster has been such a success that it's going on strong in its twelfth year. We love our authors, our judges, our readers, and the conversation we get to host every year about what it means for a book to be good by the strange and arbitrary act of pitting two books against each other.
But no matter how big we get, I still think we'll be an anti-book-award just by merit of who we are and what we do. For one, we're largely arbitrary and completely transparent, which the Nobel Prize in Literature is never gonna be. Second, we have you guys keeping us honest. I love it when authors take being in the tournament seriously, but I think that's more a testament to the value of being judged and discussed by one's peers and readership (as opposed to by a mysterious and unknown panel) than anything else -- and we love being the host to that experience.
I think that no matter how big the ToB gets (and um, if you're a company looking for something to sponsor, call us), we're going to keep being *us*. It's happened before that something has happened -- like what I linked to above, when Scott McClanahan went off on Facebook -- and we all exchanged frantic emails before being like "oh duh! you can't kill the rooster, we're not actually a real book award and this is going to be fine!"
So: we acknowledge and are grateful for the continued popularity of our version of March Madness, but we're gonna keep being us regardless. Does that make sense?
Beth wrote: "Have you heard from David Sedaris regarding naming the award after his brother?"Just heard back from Andrew: we have not! Why, do you know him? :)
And that's a wrap! Thank you all for your amazing questions! My fingers are tired! I'm looking forward to seeing you all in comments in March! Goodnight!
Nozlee wrote: "I think that no matter how big the ToB gets (and um, if you're a company looking for something to sponsor, call us), we're going to keep being *us*. ."Wonderful reply. Thank you Nozlee.
Y'all listen, if I win the lottery, the first thing I sponsor is going to be The Tournament of Books, followed by a full line-up of Rey dolls free for every girl in the world, and finishing up with whatever Nozlee wants as a thank you for doing this. And thanks to those of you who run the group for making this happen! Super awesome.
Neighbors wrote: "...finishing up with whatever Nozlee wants as a thank you for doing this.."something about a nacho & ski gear shop in lake tahoe comes to mind! :)
This was fantastic. Nozlee you rock.
Nozlee wrote: "Beth wrote: "Have you heard from David Sedaris regarding naming the award after his brother?"Just heard back from Andrew: we have not! Why, do you know him? :)"
No, just curious.
Thank you Nozlee. Can't wait for March 7!
This topic has been frozen by the moderator. No new comments can be posted.
My question, or more so, curiosity is around the Authors who are knocked out during the tourney or don't make the brackets. Do you ever have negative or 'competitive' feedb..."
Literary bloodsport. I love it.
I can see that the readers and fans are much more fierce in their reactions.
Thank you Nozlee, so great to have you here.