Tournament of Books discussion
This topic is about
Version Control
2021 TOFavorites - The Tourney
>
TOF Zombie Round #1 Version Control v. Milkman
date
newest »
newest »
Kyle wrote: "Terra Ignota frickin rocks, the final one's out today and I'm plowing through my book 3 reread to get ready for itThat being said, genre can be tricky because they are ALL about series..."
Oh yeah! I hope she writes other books set in the same world(s). This series deals with the elites running these worlds, it would be interesting to have a view from the plebe pov.
Elizabeth wrote: "We've been tongue-in-cheek dissing genre, maybe classic genre? Those who read each type of book could recommend the best in the category, most likely to appeal to litfic readers...It might stretch us...."I love this idea! But worry that when I get to a "mystery vs. sf" matchup in a TOB-like tournament, my strong preferences would win out, no matter what. That said I would join any group that made this a priority--in fact you've given me an idea.
Defining some genres might be hard. I always have trouble understanding the romance genre, once we get past the mass market stuff. Everything about Pride and Prejudice feels like romance done well to me, but I'm guessing it wouldn't be considered genre? What about fantasy that isn't 'high fantasy'? Or books that are sci fi but very light on the sci, like one of my favorites, Michel Faber's The Book of Strange New Things? Maybe I'm making this more complicated than it needs to be - we just trust a real aficionado reader to chose, knowing that they have high quality standards?
It would be fun though to see people here draw up lists of their favorite books in different genres - and maybe note if they usually don't like the genre, but liked that particular book.
Would love to see translation/world lit and/or maybe the "deserve a second chance" books (longlist books we loved that never made it to the shortlists)?? I couldn't do classics or genre since there's a very narrow window of books I can read in those categories, but understand if that's what the majority of the group would prefer.
If we go with the former ideas I could help with planning/organizing. ;)
Nadine wrote: "Everything about Pride and Prejudice feels like romance done well to me, but I'm guessing it wouldn't be considered genre? ..."I'm definitely a neophyte when it comes to the romance genre but Pride and Prejudice seems like the blueprint for an entire subgenre of romance novels known as "Regency Romance."
So yes, it gets sticky what to call things. My confusion grows very big when authors who (to me) are clearly writing scifi are shelved in the 'literary' or 'general' parts of my bookstore--why they are there, and other authors aren't, seems a matter of which publisher published the book vs. the content of the book.
Also there is the problem of what we call "crossover." what is crossover except really really well-written genre?
Lauren wrote: maybe the "deserve a second chance" books (longlist books we loved that never made it to the shortlists)?? "This was the idea that popped into my head, although there are *so many candidates*
It could also just be a true "tournament of favorites" in which people nominate their favorite books that have never been in the tournament. I also love the idea of classics
I agree the challenge with genre is that the very best of sci-fi and fantasy is all about the series, and while I would love to got all of your reactions to some of my favorite wonders of the multi-volume, it takes a really long time to read them. That being said, there are probably some classics of genre that could fit into a general classics tournament.
I'm happy to play survey master for any of them!
lark wrote: "That said I would join any group that made this a priority--in fact you've given me an idea...."Intrigued...
(Please invite me if you do this!)
Maggie wrote: "Lauren wrote: maybe the "deserve a second chance" books (longlist books we loved that never made it to the shortlists)?? "This is also cool, seems we have a few good ideas to make this an annual thing potentially. I like the longlist idea for a Tournament That Wasn't.
I'd just like to point that in the Tournament of Favorites, Milkman has now lost TWICE. So much for being some kind of definitive winner. :)I am not a fan of either of these, honestly, so I just want my favs to beat these favs.
And at least we judges haven't phoned it in as some of the "official" judges have. I've been impressed by each person's unique approach and viewpoint. I love all of you even when you are cranky.
Jenny (Reading Envy) wrote: "I'd just like to point that in the Tournament of Favorites, Milkman has now lost TWICE. So much for being some kind of definitive winner. :)I am not a fan of either of these, honestly, so I just ..."
YES, round of applause for every single judgement being top notch!!!
Maggie wrote: "Lauren wrote: maybe the "deserve a second chance" books (longlist books we loved that never made it to the shortlists)?? "This was the idea that popped into my head, although there are *so many c..."
One idea I had on the longlist books was that each person could nominate five or so books from previous longlists (or we could go wider with just TOB-type books we loved that didn't make longlists) and from there we could vote to narrow those nominations down to the 16 spots.
Yay for surveys! Maybe we can vote on which type of tournament after we've heard some more suggestions here?
Jenny (Reading Envy) wrote: "I'd just like to point that in the Tournament of Favorites, Milkman has now lost TWICE. ..."Lost twice, but won the opening round, and then won zombie competitions against =Skippy Dies=, =Pachinko=, and =Stephen Florida=.
No book except the ultimate winner will have more victories if you count the off-stage zombie matchups. Which, for the purposes of this argument, at least, I do.
Any single judge can sink a great book, but it takes an army of fanatical fans to bring a zombie to life - so when you look at it that way, the zombie wins should be worth even more than a regular match win.
I think there can be no doubt that =Milkman= has scored a moral victory, and thus emerges triumphant, whatever happens tomorrow.
Tristan wrote: "Risa, I would have advanced Idaho over Milkman. ;)"Whether you are joking or serious, may I say: love you, my fellow lawyer!
As much as I love Milkman I have no interest in ever reading it again. I've been pondering that fact over these last few days. I'm fairly certain I won't like it as well the second time. I guess I don't think of it as a masterpiece. It was just an enormously surprising delight of a novel, which is certainly enough to make me happy to have read a book.
A lot of my delight was in the unexpected surprises, which will no longer be surprises the second time through.
The scene about colors when I finally understood what the cover was about.
The milkman not being a milkman, but a Milkman.
The dog surviving the dog purge, even though I think it was cheating on the author's part.
The unexpected alliances that come about at the last minute.
It's really quite a conventional novel in terms of plotting and character. "Conventional' not being meant pejoratively in any way.
lark wrote: "It's really quite a conventional novel in terms of plotting and character. "Conventional' not being meant pejoratively in any way. ..."It is. It's the telling that elevates it.
I actually liked Milkman more the second time I read it. I got more of the details. I actually counted how many kids in each family, kept track of what books Middle Sister read while walking. They’re all written down on post it notes in my book! I be paid attention to when milkman was capitalized and when it wasn’t. I might be a little bit of a fanatic. That’s how much it meant to me. I may read it again right now!!
Bryn wrote: "They’re all written down on post it notes in my book! I be paid attention to when milkman was capitalized and when it wasn’t. I might be a little bit of a fanatic. That’s how much it meant to me. I may read it again right now!!"This is making me smile...Love the book adoration!
I love the idea for the "Tournament that Wasn't" (Kip's idea?) that allows those books that never made the jump to the shortlist to get their day. It would be unwieldy, perhaps, with so many potentials, but the idea of folks nominating a few from previous longlists could work. I like the World Lit/Works in Translation, too, as that's a gap of mine.
Let's be honest: I'd be on board with pretty much anything that brought us together in the fall! :)
'Night Boat...so good. Definitely in the tourney of best long listers not in the ToB.'I cast this vote in the Anti-favorites thread last week in response to Kyle's 'long list gems'.
I like the other ideas too, genre, classics, world lit. In for any as you said. Though I realize a ton of work goes into it, easier said than done.
Lauren wrote: "Maggie wrote: "Lauren wrote: maybe the "deserve a second chance" books (longlist books we loved that never made it to the shortlists)??"I love this idea. I would love the opportunity to explore the long lists - the ones that didn't make it. Or as Peggy/Kip state above, "The Tournament that Wasn't".
It's a broad net to cast, but I would also be down for some longlist picks. Granted, I've read maybe 10% of each longlist, but that just means more for me to dig into - for this tournament, after all, I'd already read 15 out of 16.
I really love the longlist idea. A similar idea would be other book prize longlists but how would we even pick!I know I'm not the only one who knocks out a good chunk of the longlist in anticipation of the shortlist for ToB, and there are still some titles I want to read but haven't yet - like A Certain Hunger
This may be hard also, but we could try for a pre-ToB. Books from years prior to the tournament or groups of years like (2000-2004) that we believe have that perfect ToB quirk.
Kip wrote: "This may be hard also, but we could try for a pre-ToB. Books from years prior to the tournament or groups of years like (2000-2004) that we believe have that perfect ToB quirk."Good idea, Kip. The Hugo Awards have been doing this methodically, and they call them the Retro Hugos.
Kip wrote: "This may be hard also, but we could try for a pre-ToB. Books from years prior to the tournament or groups of years like (2000-2004) that we believe have that perfect ToB quirk."I like that idea, too. It may be possible for folks to use their own GR lists to identify books published back then that they loved.
Regarding what I am calling the "Shoulda Been a Contender" version of the ToF (books from the ToB longlist that never made the shortlist), my suggestion would be that we keep all of the nominees that achieve any kind of critical mass of support, because that will probably give us several tournaments' worth of brackets.
Lots of great ideas! Should we collect them from the various threads and create a poll to vote what we do next fall? And should we try ranked choice voting for that?
I put a question about this on the survey too, so we’re getting some suggestions over there that I’ll consolidate this weekend. I agree a new thread might be helpful.
Kip wrote: "This may be hard also, but we could try for a pre-ToB. Books from years prior to the tournament or groups of years like (2000-2004) that we believe have that perfect ToB quirk."This sounds interesting - to do a complete ToB, from longlist, to shortlist to contest. The difference being that these are more likely to be books we've heard of before - although not necessarily, especially if we lean harder on small press books.
Which is another idea - I don't know if it's been raised yet - a ToB for only small press books? We'd have to define 'small press', but that shouldn't be too hard to get consensus on....
Maybe we can do a current year translation TOB since translated lit doesn't get picked that often?
Nadine wrote: "The difference being that these are more likely to be books we've heard of before - although not necessarily, especially if we lean harder on small press books."I was 11-14 years old in the years I listed, not exactly prime good literature years so this is mildly selfish as I have read very few books from this period. I have gone back and hit some of the bigger ones though like The Last Samurai and Gilead. I would like people reading not exclusively Harry Potter and Golden Compass to lead me!
Kip wrote: "I would like people reading not exclusively Harry Potter and Golden Compass to lead me!"Hahahah!
Maggie wrote: "I put a question about this on the survey too, so we’re getting some suggestions over there that I’ll consolidate this weekend. I agree a new thread might be helpful."That's right, you did have that question on there - thank you!
I'm interested in these ideas of small press and current year translation. :)
Kip wrote: "Nadine wrote: "The difference being that these are more likely to be books we've heard of before - although not necessarily, especially if we lean harder on small press books."I was 11-14 years o..."
I think I can safely speak for some of us in the Commentariat when I say (with love): OUCH. ;-)
Gosh, these are such great ideas!! My only thought is that they should be easy enough for most to get from our libraries, since I don't think most of us want to buy 16 books. That might make small presses (and some works in translation) a bit harder for those with smaller library systems, although I love both of these ideas!
I like a lot of these ideas, but I've got one big concern:It takes a lot of planning for me to arrange to be a ToB (near) completist each year. With that, and my IRL book group and my regular reading, I don't think I could do another 16 books for another tourney each year. (In fact, I only participate in the summer camp opportunistically - if the books happen to cross my path anyhow. Even the 6 of those can be too much extra to commit to.) The nice thing about the ToF was that I had read (almost) all the books for the ToB already, and I could coast on my (gradually worsening) memory.
My preference would be to continue to do something that let us re-engage books we've already read. So a translated lit or small press or women authors or genre books all sound great to me, as long as we are pulling from the ToB pool with the presumption that we have already read most of those. I think having a themed tournament every fall where the theme changed eachyear but the contenders were limited to shortlist books would be ideal.
Tim wrote: "I like a lot of these ideas, but I've got one big concern:It takes a lot of planning for me to arrange to be a ToB (near) completist each year. With that, and my IRL book group and my regular rea..."
I hear that. I try to be a ToB completist, too, and it IS a big commitment -- especially because I have rarely read any of the shortlist books beforehand. That said, the reason why I like the longlist-but-never-on-the-shortlist concept is precisely because I will not have read those books before, and this tournament will motivate me to do so.
I had read embarrassingly few of this year's ToF selections, because I came to ToB belatedly, and because my TBR mountain has made me a modern-day Tantalus when it comes to newer works. What a joy it was to read these amazing selections! This tournament gave me the push I needed to grab those particular volumes off the shelf, where they had sat unread for too many years.
Just a different perspective, for what it's worth.
Perhaps the answer lies in compromise -- a genre theme that then combines shortlist and longlist favorites?
Risa wrote: "a genre theme that then combines shortlist and longlist favorites?"Yes, most of the themes can fit in here, I think.
I definitely get what you're saying, Tim. And I think if we stick to TOB books, some of the collating work will have been done for us. But if only shortlist books, I'd worry that we'll only be voting for the next 16 in the Favorites list. For me personally, I think one of the reasons I like these ideas is because I'm sure many of the books won't already have been on my radar. I just love the idea of discovering some gem I've never heard of.
But that's only because I don't expect to be a completist, regardless. (I've never been a TOB completist.) These days I only pick up longlist/shortlist books where the blurbs or reviews here intrigue me, and then drop them if I'm not meshing in the first 50 pages. I think I'd do the same for whatever next year's theme is...and then later continue with a book if the judgments here intrigue me (FOMO.)
(Maybe there could be a discussion before voting, with people campaigning for books they loved that others might not have heard of?)
With that said, I'll be happy with whatever idea is chosen, and make it work!
Putting in my two cents, for what it is worth. This group is in fact a ToB discussion group, so we are all here because of the ToB. I presume we think that means there is something valuable in the books selected to be on the ToB longlists and then the contenders. So whatever else we do, I think we should limit the books from which we choose to those that have actually been part of the ToB. Otherwise, we could all go join some other discussion group (for any of the book prizes, etc.).
Phyllis wrote: "Putting in my two cents, for what it is worth. This group is in fact a ToB discussion group, so we are all here because of the ToB. I presume we think that means there is something valuable in the ..."Good point - thanks for bringing us back to earth ;)
I totally get your point, Tim. I have four other book clubs outside of this group and can only get to about one book in print per week (where I can give it a closer read), so it is tricky to add a bunch more books to my "I should read this because one of my groups will be talking about it soon" list. I purchased print copies of the six ToF books I didn't remember too well, fully intending to re-read them, but it didn't work out. I plan to be a completist for the official ToB shortlist this upcoming year, but it's possible I won't be able to read all of the books for whatever we come up with next fall. I think Risa and Elizabeth's points above make sense - whatever we come up with will have some crossover with books that some of us have likely read, which will help. And of course there's no expectation for everyone who participates/comments to read all of the books. If we go with judges again, we'd need those folks to commit to reading those two books, but outside of that it's flexible.
Thanks for all the thoughts on this!
Kip wrote: "This may be hard also, but we could try for a pre-ToB. Books from years prior to the tournament or groups of years like (2000-2004) that we believe have that perfect ToB quirk."I suggested this, too! I recently read Robinson's *Housekeeping* (1980) and my reaction was "this would be an amazing TOB book."
And, I also appreciate the time commitment challenge and the reminder to keep it focused on TOB years.
Tournament of Books
Books mentioned in this topic
The Last Samurai (other topics)Gilead (other topics)
A Certain Hunger (other topics)
The Book of Strange New Things (other topics)
Version Control (other topics)
More...
Tim, and what of the spectators watching Federer demolish you? Would we be enjoying the experience? Probably, but that speaks more to the pleasure of watching an iconic athlete perform than to any 'hint' of schadenfreude ;)
To your point though, did I enjoy every moment of Milkman? No, but more important than that (to me!) was that I was in awe of its artistry and originality, and I respect the book for the singular reading challenge it confronted me w/.
A part of me thinks serious and seriously good art is impervious to our opinions. Everyone here could say that hate Emily Dickinson's work. But the fact of her craft remains.