January 2015, Nominations for Open Pick

[Whitney]

Time to nominate our first books for the new year! Nominations will be open for approximately 1 week before the poll goes up. Remember the usual rules: books must be works of fiction published from 2000-2014. Selections that are overly genre or fail to meet the group standards of literary quality will not be permitted in the final poll. One nomination per customer, please. January is also one of our Wild Card months, so book that may not make the cut for open pick could still qualify as a Wild Card. Please see the Wild Card nominations thread for more information.

Happy nominating.

[Zulfiya]

I am nominating Seven Types of Ambiguity again. I think Australian fiction deserves more acknowledgement here :-)

[LindaJ^]

I nominate Saints at the River byRon Rash.

This book is his second novel, published in 2004. It won 3 awards that year: Fiction Book of the Year by the Southern Book Critics Circle; Fiction Book of the Year by the Southeastern Booksellers Association and Weatherford Award for Best Novel.

Rash writes about Appalachia in novels, short stories, and poetry. I like his work in all these forms. Saints at the River is one of his novels I have not yet read.

[[deleted user]]

I was unsure what category this book fits into, however in the 2009 goodreads choice awards it was under fiction, so I'll go with that. I'd like to nominate Brooklyn by Colm Tóibín. I'll leave the mods to decide if it's eligible :)

[Pip]

Reposting from wildcard pick..

.I'd like to have a shot at Arthur & George in the new year. It's been lingering temptingly on my to-read shelf for far too long, and I love Julian Barnes - each of his novels I find quite unique.

According to the Goodreads blurb, this novel about Arthur (Conan Doyle) taking on a case of miscarriage of justice on behalf of the half-Scottish half-Indian George (Edjali) is "a novel about low crime and high spirituality, guilt and innocence, identity, nationality and race; about what we think, what we believe, and what we know."

[Gerry]

Pip wrote: "Reposting from wildcard pick..

.I'd like to have a shot at Arthur & George in the new year. It's been lingering temptingly on my to-read shelf for far too long, and I love [author:Jul..."

Sounds interesting.

[Lacewing]

Zulfiya wrote: "I am nominating Seven Types of Ambiguity again. I think Australian fiction deserves more acknowledgement here :-)"

Is there a social, political or historical orientation in this? It's been quite a while since I read it, and now I recall only interpersonal/psychological happenings.

[Marc]

Giorgia: Brooklyn seems well within the group parameters for open picks.

Quite a varied and fascinating list of nominations! I'm particularly taken with How to be both.

[Casceil]

I'm also interested in How to be both. The only other book I've read by Ali Smith was The Accidental. I enjoyed it, and I liked the way the author kept surprising me.

[Whitney]

Nominations are closing tomorrow, any more candidates?

[Lily]

I have two books to recommend: Anne Enright's The Forgotten Waltz (she's an Irish writer whose prose blows me away with its original metaphors and wit) and Per Petterson's I Curse the River of Time. He's an amazingly lyrical writer, and I would read anything by these two authors.

[Lily]

Lily wrote: "I have two books to recommend: Anne Enright's The Forgotten Waltz (she's an Irish writer whose prose blows me away with its original metaphors and wit) and Per Petterson's I Curse the River of Time..."

From one Lily to another Lily: And your nomination is? (One allowed per person per poll!??)

(The discussion of Per Petterson's Out Stealing Horses in October is here:

https://www.goodreads.com/topic/group... )

[Paula]

Zulfiya wrote: "I am nominating Seven Types of Ambiguity again. I think Australian fiction deserves more acknowledgement here :-)"

I could get behind this one!

[Casceil]

I have been meaning to read The Forgotten Waltz for a couple of years, so I will nominate it if Lily does not.

[Maureen]

I do not know if this group already read Hilary Mantel, but I nominate her Man Booker award winning novel, Wolf Hall, which has been on my to-read list for quite a while (sorry, my tablet does not allow me to italicizes titles).

[Lily]

Maureen wrote: "I do not know if this group already read Hilary Mantel, but I nominate her Man Booker award winning novel, Wolf Hall, which has been on my to-read list for quite a while (sorry, my tablet does not ..."

Maureen -- you can check the bookshelf for the group to help determine what has been read.

A scan of previous discussions indicates Wolf Hall was the July, 2013, selection:
https://www.goodreads.com/topic/group...

[Maureen]

Lily wrote: "Maureen wrote: "I do not know if this group already read Hilary Mantel, but I nominate her Man Booker award winning novel, Wolf Hall, which has been on my to-read list for quite a while (sorry, my ..."

Thanks for the tip on using the group site. I am not surprised that this group has read it.

[Lily]

Lily wrote: "I have two books to recommend: Anne Enright's The Forgotten Waltz (she's an Irish writer whose prose blows me away with its original metaphors and wit) and Per Petterson's I Curse the River of Time..."

Since you've read Out Stealing Horses Recently, I'll nominate The Forgotten Waltz.

[Whitney]

Okay - nominations are closed and the poll is up! January Open Pick. Also accessible from the group homepage.

Don't forget that January is also a Wild Card month, so don't forget to head over there and check things out.

[Whitney]

We currently have tied votes in both the Open Pick and the Wild Card. Voting ends tomorrow, so if you want to change your vote to one of the main contenders, or get a last-minute vote in, now's the time!

[Lily]

Per Petterson's I Curse the River of Time.

[Whitney]

Hi, Lily. The nominations for the Open Pick are closed, but the poll is still up. My announcement was to let people know to head over to the poll and vote if they haven't yet, or possibly change their vote to a book that has a better chance of winning. The poll can be found from the link in message 22, above, or by clicking on "polls" from the group homepage.

[Whitney]

After a neck and neck run off between three books, How to be both is our winner for January Open Pick!

[LindaJ^]

Interesting thing about this book - I saw it in the local Barnes & Noble this weekend but Amazon says it will be published on Dec. 2 (US edition, which has a much nicer cover than the UK and Canadian editions)!

[Whitney]

I checked Amazon. The Hardcover is going to be published in December, but the softcover was published in August. A little backwards from the usual. The ebook is also available now.

[Zulfiya]

I am on the hold for the hardcover copy in my library that is categorized as New Material, but obviously the book is not in the library yet.

[Zulfiya]

P.S. paperback is only from certain sellers on amazon, but Amazon is not selling it yet.

[Lily]

I nominate Per Petterson's I Curse the River of Time.

[Whitney]

Lily, please see my comment above, message 24 in response to your message 23. Nominations for January books closed two weeks ago. We'll be opening nominations for February in a few weeks.

[Lily]

I'm getting terribly confused by the email notices I receive about new comments. I searched for your name, and I assumed it was a new call for nominations.

[Whitney]

If you make a comment in a particular topic, you will get an email letting you know whenever someone else comments in the same thread. If you click on "edit" at the bottom of this page following "Email me when people reply", you can change your settings so you don't receive the emails.

[Whitney]

Yes - thanks, Tracy, I hadn't considered that Lily might be using the app. So, Lily, my instructions only apply if you're on GR from a computer or tablet, the app has limited functionality.

[LindaJ^]

Question about How to be Both, our January open pick --
Which way will we be reading? As I understand it there are two versions, one with the current story first and the 15th century story second and the other with the 15th story first and the current story second. Apparently the Kindle e-book is available in both versions and you pick when you buy. Based on the Goodreads reviews I've scanned, how you perceive the book is different depending on which story you read first.

[Lacewing]

I can see right now this will have to be a twice-read book. I want to read starting from now and then fold in the past, because, well, I'm here now and the past is then.

But don't quote me, because maybe the book will change my mind.

[Bart]

Ah, the brilliant Ali Smith. Time for me to crawl from under my rock and try to contribute something to this group. Although I must admit I am very good at reading and admiring great authors, but not that good at well-spoken commentary on these books. But I'll give it a try :-).

[Deborah]

Ben, I'm downright inarticulate. Sometimes I just grunt. Don't be afraid.

[Edgarf]

I have purchased the hardcover and my version starts with the 15th century version. I am 50 pages in and have not decided yet whether I love or hate the book. I'm leaning both ways. I am, however, looking forward to when the discussion of How To Be Both begins.

[Edgarf]

Deborah wrote: "Ben, I'm downright inarticulate. Sometimes I just grunt. Don't be afraid."

Me eh um well too.

[Lagullande]

I haven't voted in any of the polls so far, due to the dire warnings about voting but not posting. I have read the books and followed the recent discussions, but I'm not sure that my reactions to books are as "deep" as many you literati seem to have - usually, I just like a book or I don't! However, I really wanted the Ali Smith to be picked and it looked like it might lose out at the last minute, so I threw my hat in the ring.

I've finished the book (Francescho first, George second in my copy), and loved it. Just hoping I will come up with something sensible to say about it!

[Casceil]

Guys, we're here to share an interest in books, not to be "literati." Sharing what you enjoy or despise about a book doesn't have to be profound. It can be as simple as "I loved it when the main character did . . . (or said). Or, I didn't understand this part. Why did the author make the characters do this? I sometimes worry that this group is coming to be regarded as a bunch of literary snobs. The last two discussions I've led (both books I liked a lot), someone declared the book to be "crapola." So I guess my "books worth reading and talking about" are someone else's "crapola." But that can make for a lively discussion. Don't worry about coming up with "deep" comments. Just share what you think.

[Whitney]

I've found that people usually have more insightful things to say than they think they do. However, that being said, the purpose of the 'read and comment' statement is to prevent people who like to click on things with no intention of picking up the books.

Even a comment to the effect of 'interesting discussion' or 'what did people think of this part?' is appreciated to let us know you're out there and reading the book and the discussion.

The fact that people have posted here shows that they're not part of the problem in the first place. So, please don't hesitate to vote on a book because you think you don't have anything profound to say, because 1: you probably do, and 2: you're not required to.

And happy holidays, y'all!

[Lagullande]

Thank you for the encouragement, Casceil and Whitney. Hopefully, I will start small and work up to something super-significant! Watch this space.....

(And I don't need to vote on any of the books for February. They all look fantastic.)

[Todd]

Casceil wrote: "Guys, we're here to share an interest in books, not to be "literati." Sharing what you enjoy or despise about a book doesn't have to be profound. It can be as simple as "I loved it when the main ..."

That is refreshing. I appreciate reading what other people just think or feel. I myself just write what I feel. I tend to be long winded and thorough (that is how other people describe me sometimes), so please don't mistake that for pretension, or deep thoughts.