2015 ToB Competition Discussion Showing 1,051-1,076 of 1,076

[Gayla]

Emily -- I've always wanted to vote later, too, but I think it's hard because of logistics. I think the judges are actually reading for the Zombie round in mid-to-late February, so they could keep the poll going a little longer, but not much. On the other hand, maybe they could releases the brackets sooner so we would have more time to read the ones we're interested in before we have to vote.

The thing I don't like about having the Zombies face each other is that then you are guaranteed to always have a Zombie in the final. Which I also don't like. I am, apparently, impossible to please.

[Jan]

Ohenrypacey wrote: "My vote would be 1 zombie, or have the zombies face off in one semi and the winners bracket face off in the other, so it doesn't shake out to be z vs z in the final ever. fun is seeing the widely read books of the year pi..."

I think this is a great solution, especially since the logistics seem to dictate that we make our zombie selection so early in the process.

[Jan]

Kerry wrote: "Jennifer,

Regarding seething: Yes. Especially, when you read it for a book club and, as you or Poingu said, you show up ready to trash this colossal waste of a good tree and everyone starts prai..."

You guys!! Are you settling for a lowest-common-denominator book club? I'm in a book club that's been going 10 years. We avoid the typical "ideal for book club" choices, and our best discussions are when there's disagreement. We deal with disagreements respectfully, but we love bringing out the differences. Maybe it works because we're not trying to argue people over to our viewpoint, but why stay in a group where you don't feel free to say, "I really saw it differently" and share your thoughts, and when you're only choosing safe/boring books?

[Juniper]

haha, jan! no - i wasn't settling. i didn't stay in that group, though i did give it several months. the people not listening to one another and talking over each other was such a frustrating issue. it wasn't a good fit for me. i totally agree with you - i find the most interesting discussions about books have room for all the different opinions - it creates more opportunities to talk and ponder.

[Jan]

Gayla wrote: "The thing I don't like about having the Zombies face each other is that then you are guaranteed to always have a Zombie in the final. Which I also don't like. ..."

Totally agree with you on this, Gayla, and also on the Ferrante. Not on Brief History, however, and if you ever decide to revisit it, just let me whisper one word: Audiobook, haha.

[Jan]

Jennifer wrote: "haha, jan! no - i wasn't settling. i didn't stay in that group, though i did give it several months. the people not listening to one another and talking over each other was such a frustrating issu..."

Oh, whew, haha! Part of what I love about my group is that a lot of our members had been in other groups and knew the pitfalls, so we decided we wanted to be fairly strict about focusing on the book (for at least part of the evening), not having side conversations, having someone act as moderator each time, etc.

[Juniper]

it's very true, jan. i am glad to be clear about what will work for me in an in-person book group. so far... i haven't found a good one and actually gave up the search. for now. i am not a fan of groups that don't really talk much about the book (this apparently happens a lot). i actually want to talk about the book and don't need an evening out to gripe about life. (sorry!!) i have joked with friends that some groups should just drop the premise of the book even mattering - just call it drinking and complaining night. and a good moderator definitely helps - especially when things hit a lull or go too far afield. i also want to read and chat about books that are meaty. so... my demands are hard, i guess. haha!! i did meet some interesting people on my street, and we have talked about the possibility of starting a new group... but the schedule of one is making it hard. at least i have a couple of people nearby with whom i can have book talk IRL though. :)

[Gayla]

I actually do plan to revisit A Brief History someday -- I read it in very suboptimal conditions. So I'm going to keep it in mind for sometime when I'm on vacation or when my family goes out of town for a few days. (Audio very rarely works for me. I had a terrible time listening to lectures in college, too. I need the words on a page for whatever reason.)

[Kerry]

Jennifer, sounds awesome. I probably should try to find one in my area. The one I am in is a workplace book club which chooses material related to our primary subject matter.

[Juniper]

Kerry wrote: "Jennifer, sounds awesome..."

doesn't it, though? :)
thank goodness for the interesting groups and reasonable people that do exist on GR!

[Lark]

Jan wrote: "Kerry wrote: "Jennifer,

Regarding seething: Yes. Especially, when you read it for a book club and, as you or Poingu said, you show up ready to trash this colossal waste of a good tree and everyo..."

Well let me say that my original comment has morphed a little after a few paraphrases. I totally love my book club. Our reading differences are vast and the club has been going since 1994. Because of the way we select books, we read at least two books every round that are bound to be challenging. A couple that turned out to be favorites were Beijing Coma and Independent People.

BUT there is a certain category of book that really sets me off and my loathing increases all the more when (like Merritt) I'm committed to read the book. A Tale for the Time Being is a good example of a bookclub book that really invoked intense dislike in me and that almost everyone else loved a good deal. We're so respectful of one another's opinions that I feel like it's best to be on the quieter side rather than ruin someone's formerly perfect reading experience because they take me too seriously.

[Kerry]

Poingu,

Now I am jealous of you too. And you make a good point explaining why, even in awesome groups, sometimes discretion is the better part of participation.

I avoided People in the Trees because it sounded like it could be one of those books for me. I think I will try her new one, especially if it gets picked for the ToB.

[Juniper]

poingu -- how awesome your group has been running so long. that's wonderful! and it sounds like a good and respectful balance.

[Lark]

Kerry wrote: "you make a good point explaining why, even in awesome groups, sometimes discretion is the better part of participation."

That's another reason why I love Goodreads, since I get to stop with the discretion and vent in my reviews!

[Deborah]

Kerry wrote: "Can anyone delete duplicate posts? Sorry!"

You can, Kerry. Click on the down arrow next to your profile picture at the top right corner of your screen. Click on "Comments," which will take you to a list of all of your Goodreads comments. Click "delete" under those you want to delete.

[Juniper]

Kerry wrote: "Can anyone delete duplicate posts? Sorry!"

for any comment you have created, there is a 'delete' option on the bottom-right of the comment box.

reply | edit | delete | flag *

[Jason]

Flavorwire takes down Stephen Merritt's lazy, ridiculous judgment of An Untamed State. http://flavorwire.com/511904/is-steph...?

[Ellen]

My two book clubs are known in my household as "the book club that reads the book" and "the book club that doesn't read the book". Even when the latter DOES read the book, it's impossible to have any substantive discussion about it. The only reason I ever go to it is that I really like the people and wouldn't see them otherwise. The other one -- the one that reads the book -- was formed in annoyance at the first, with three basic "rules" -- 1) no more than 8 people, to avoid side discussions/conversations; 2) don't come if you haven't read the book, and 3) we must discuss the book for at least 45 minutes. Over the years this latter "rule" has taken on a life of its own, in that we've established so many running themes and discussion points that are ongoing throughout our history, that they often get applied to the book we're discussing and this often leads into a much wider conversation that often -- almost always -- will lead us back to the book. And we read a healthy mix of books -- a few "book club books" every year, but almost always one "classic" and one or two nonfiction books (2 of our members are academics and social scientists, and these often come from them).

I love this book club. I never leave a meeting without having been given an angle on something that I hadn't thought of myself.

Back to the original comment, though -- Station Eleven is definitely a book we might read in either book club, but I think it's way more than a standard book club book. It was my favorite read of the ToB this year, but I still thought An Untamed State was a potentially greater book.

[Janet]

Marlon James wins Anisfield Wolf Award for A Brief History of Seven Killings

http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/201...

[Janet]

And another interview with James

https://www.guernicamag.com/interview...

[Topher]

Poor TOB loser Doerr will have to console himself with the Pulitzer http://www.themillions.com/2015/04/th...

[Topher]

Poor TOB loser Doerr will have to console himself with the Pulitzer http://www.themillions.com/2015/04/th...

[Karen Michele]

Topher wrote: "Poor TOB loser Doerr will have to console himself with the Pulitzer http://www.themillions.com/2015/04/th..."

I bet he's feeling pretty ok about which one he won ;)

[Sherri]

I remember reading John Warner's comment awhile back that All the Light would win the Pulitzer, hands down. Has anyone read the other finalists?

[Janet]

That's a pretty awesome consolation prize....lol.

[Gayla]

I wish Doerr's book didn't make me so cranky. He seems like a really nice guy.