2022 Booker Prize longlist discussion

[Laff]

The last three winners from the UK (one Irish, one Scottish, one English) were Shuggie Bain, Girl, Woman, Other and Milkman. I do not think any of these would be considered 'a comedy of manners, featuring a white middle-class household'. Whereas, Trust (which I am half-way through) seems to be nearer the fit!

[Laff]

The last three winners from the UK (one Irish, one Scottish, one English) were Shuggie Bain, Girl, Woman, Other and Milkman. I do not think any of these would be considered 'a comedy of manners, featuring a white middle-class household'. Whereas, Trust (which I am half-way through) seems to be nearer the fit!

[Lascosas]

Message 99 by WindyJW states that the mission statement for the Booker seems to have changed, which led me to a search for this. The statement of the intent/mission statement/whatever of the Booker prize used to be easy to find, and it always the dual goal of (going by memory) fine literature and a good read. There has always been tension between those goals, and the relative emphasis shifted year to year based on the judges. Most notoriously with Stella Rimington as chair. The only description I can find on the current Booker website is "the best sustained work of fiction written in English and published in the UK and Ireland."

No clue what 'sustained' means in this context.

[Elizabeth]

Lascosas wrote: " The only description I can find on the current Booker website is "the best sustained work of fiction written in English and published in the UK and Ireland."

No clue what 'sustained' means in this context."



Over 200 pages?

So vague...I used to think the Booker was trying to highlight books that were both well-written/structured and impactful, but recently I just don't know. They seem to be favoring the experimental, which I like, it takes great talent to create something unique with universal themes. But then they throw in books from lists, or authors who have been on lists, which don't really have powerful themes at all. Maybe it's just to get attention from the readers of those lists.

With that said, I'm happy with most of these. Re: The Trees, I understand the issues, but from the perspective of my US tunnel vision, if the recognition gets more people here to read it (everywhere really, since it reflects on history globally), then it's doing everything I'd want a prize to do.

[Lee]

Lascosas wrote: "No clue what 'sustained' means in this context. "

Against short story collections, I reckon.

[Ruben]

I wonder if there is indeed an objective of the Booker to conquer the US...and if so, if it is working? I think David the other day said Obama's summer list (an overall rather predictable and obviously expertly politically balanced and diverse list imo) gets more attention than the Booker. In US bookstores, do the Booker longlistees get a Booker-sticker for example?

Btw, I have read 4 of the 5 American longlistees and indeed they are not overly demanding or innovative, but they are all excellent books that are a joy to read. I also hardly find the 'British Isles' longlistees more literary, more diverse or more innovative (although Sappho is the only one I haven't read yet) - they are a bit 'colder'/less emotional than the Americans somehow though.

I think this jury went for outstanding storytelling and good writing first (often with an important but subtle underlying message) and that is probably why I am loving this longlist so far.

[Hugh, Active moderator]

I think it is right to maintain some flexibility on minimum length, after all both page count and word count are blunt tools - pages can contain small dense print or they can contain lots of white space, some writers use more long words than others etc.

You can find books of less than 150 pages quite a long way back in Booker history - for example A Month in the Country is shorter than Small Things Like These, though not shorter than Assembly, at least by page count.

I think the shortest longlisted novel was The Testament of Mary (104 pages). There was also The Driver's Seat (103) but I think that was the 1970 lost Booker, for which different rules may have been applied.

[Hugh, Active moderator]

My first four books arrived yesterday, and I started reading The Colony, but it is too early to decide where it ranks against my other favourites. The cover of Nightcrawling is truly hideous in the full-sized hardback.

[Tommi]

A bit off-topic but what’s the longest book ever listed for the Booker?

Agreed on the (UK) cover of Nightcrawling. I browsed a copy at the local bookstore but opted for an ebook because the cover (and, okay, the price) hurt my eyes.

[Hugh, Active moderator]

Tommi wrote: "A bit off-topic but what’s the longest book ever listed for the Booker?

Agreed on the (UK) cover of Nightcrawling. I browsed a copy at the local bookstore but opted for an ebook because the cover ..."

I am only looking at the ones in my spreadsheet, and of those the longest by word count must be Ducks, Newburyport, though my paperback edition of 4 3 2 1 has more pages (1070 to 1022). Next highest is The Mirror & the Light (904). There may be some big ones I haven't read yet, that aren't in my list, in the earlier years.

[Hugh, Active moderator]

Didn't look at the ones I read this year, and I missed Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell (1006 pages in the paperback).

[Paul]

Incidentally the Booker prize itself claims Small Things is the shortest book ever featured. Not sure that is true (and your records Hugh suggest otherwise).

“At 116 pages, Claire Keegan’s Small Things Like These is the shortest book recognised in the prize’s history”

Although elsewhere they say it would be the shortest winner ever if it won (beating Offshore).

[Hugh, Active moderator]

The other complication is that using page count, which edition, and how many of the pages are included in the numbering can make a significant difference, and the page counts here, particularly the ones supplied by Amazon bots, are often exaggerated.

[Laff]

I think that John Fuller's 'Flying to Nowhere' (shortlisted 1983) was only 97 pages long.

[Hugh, Active moderator]

Laff wrote: "I think that John Fuller's 'Flying to Nowhere' (shortlisted 1983) was only 97 pages long."

Thanks, that is one I have never tried to get hold of.

[Emmeline]

Tommi wrote: "A bit off-topic but what’s the longest book ever listed for the Booker?

Agreed on the (UK) cover of Nightcrawling. I browsed a copy at the local bookstore but opted for an ebook because the cover ..."

Which is the UK cover? The pink one? Is it just the colour that makes it hideous? I'm just looking online and they both seem acceptable in thumbnail form.

[Tommi]

Emily wrote: "Which is the UK cover? The pink one? Is it just the colour that makes it hideous? I'm just looking online and they both seem acceptable in thumbnail form. "

At least for me the color was so stark pink that it almost hurt, ha. Plus it was one of those trade paperbacks they sell especially outside of the UK (?), so basically a huge paperback, and the spine will crack the second you open it.

In other words, nothing serious at all.

[Gumble's Yard - Golden Reviewer]

Yes I got an airport edition which I think is what you mean Tommi - paperbacks of books currently only available in hardbacks (in terms of size and cover and even price) which are effectively the hardback just with the cover changed - they are designed to be taken in planes/holidays etc and sold at airports.

[Hugh, Active moderator]

Yes it is the amount of almost florescent pink I dislike - might have to read it sans dust wrapper.

[David]

Ruben, I have a theory that the American submissions are most likely to be the big blockbuster type novels whereas the UK submissions are a good mix that include more literary selections.

It’s nice to see two exceptions this year - The Trees and After Sappho.

[WndyJW]

I’ve seen a number of new releases in hot pink and pale pink, and I’m with Hugh, they’re repulsive. It took me awhile to realize I didn’t even look to see what the title was or what the book was about. They might be fantastic books, but I’ll never know because I scroll right past pink books.

[Gumble's Yard - Golden Reviewer]

One of the great Booker winners had a part pink cover ….. “lilac, purple, patches of pink – differing pinks ….. further pinking them more lilac”

[WndyJW]

US and UK have different colors, I’m sorry, colours, what book are you think of, GY?

is the US cover, complete with Oprah’s Book Club sticker

[David]

The orange cover is pretty hideous too.

[WndyJW]

Agreed.

[Gumble's Yard - Golden Reviewer]

Milkman of course - and the quote is from the famous sunset scene

[WndyJW]

Of course! Yes. the covers are the same in the US and UK. Those were muted colors anchored with browns and tans so not glaring nor nauseating.

[Gumble's Yard - Golden Reviewer]

Down to my last 100 pages on the long list !

[Neil]

Go GY - there are enough hours left in July!

[Hugh, Active moderator]

The Milkman cover was nowhere near as lurid

[Lark]

The Milkman cover also signaled the importance of a few brief sentences, of such beauty and imagination that, when I read them, and when I pondered the way the cover had anticipated them, I knew that the book was going to take me somewhere redemptive. That isn't at all clear for most of the book. In that sense it's a perfect cover for the story.

[WndyJW]

I agree, Lark. The Milkman is one of the best Bookers and among my favorite books.

I just checked the ranking of the longlisted and shortlisted Bookers to see where I ranked Milkman and discovered that I have never ranked my Booker reads. I ranked my Goldsmith reads. I have to wait until I get my older iPad back from sister-in-law (laid up for 12 weeks so far with two shattered ankles) because this list will take time even with two iPads!

[Joy D]

Ruben wrote: "In US bookstores, do the Booker longlistees get a Booker-sticker for example?..."
There are no bookstores where I live (in a small rural area), but I can say that the Booker stickers do appear on the library copies.

[David]

Bookstores in the US tend to be slow to get a Booker display table, perhaps in part because many of the books aren’t out here yet.

I also suspect that bookstores tend to tie promotions to organizations that reach out and work directly with them (Oprah’s book club, Reece’s book club, etc). My sense is the booker doesn’t do that.

[Neil]

Quick question. I have read or own 9 of the long list books. But I don’t feel much motivation to read any of the other four. How much am I missing if I don’t read Trust, Booth, Glory or Nightcrawling? On the face of it, none of them appeal to me.

[Alwynne]

Hugh wrote: "The other complication is that using page count, which edition, and how many of the pages are included in the numbering can make a significant difference, and the page counts here, particularly the..."

Really crucial point Hugh, plus the layout, use of white space etc

[Gumble's Yard - Golden Reviewer]

Longlist finished

[David]

Very impressive. Any overall impressions?

[Gumble's Yard - Golden Reviewer]

I think it’s the strongest longlist I have read - as my three favourite books of the 70 eligible ones I read and no real stinkers (Booth and Trust were the weakest two but still I enjoyed both - and more both fit the longlist very clearly I think)

Is it my prefect list - no, but I think it’s as good as any of the longlist wish lists I saw and that’s very rare as normally there are glaring omissions and really odd inclusions.

And great to see them recognising both often overlooked veterans - Everett, Garner - and two young authors writing books way beyond their years (Mottley and Mortimer)

The overwhelming theme to me seems to be internal conflict - most obviously on a country level books like Booth, The Colony, Glory, Seven Moons, The Trees and even Small Things Like These but perhaps best captured in the internal civil war of Maps of Our Spectacular Bodies

[David]

Neil wrote: "Quick question. I have read or own 9 of the long list books. But I don’t feel much motivation to read any of the other four. How much am I missing if I don’t read Trust, Booth, Glory or Nightcrawliing"

My two cents - read the others that you own first and then reassess. I think you will appreciate having read the entire longlist, but take it one step at a time. Although admittedly, the four you mentioned will probably be toward the end of your personal ranking.

[David]

Gumble wrote: "I think it’s the strongest longlist I have read - as my three favourite books of the 70 eligible ones I read and no real stinkers"

That's encouraging. I'm enjoying it too. You're right - even the books at the bottom (Booth, Trust) aren't total stinkers and make sense in the context of the whole long list.

The only one that doesn't seem to fit is the Lucy Barton.

[LindaJ^]

Congrats GY. It is quite an achievement! My July goal was to ride 500 miles on a bicycle and I completed that today, while listening to Glory. I read Trust while walking 10.5 miles in NYC. The Trees, read yesterday, took a 4.5 mile walk, lunch, and 2hours mowing the lawn. All have been good in audio - good narrators and not difficult to follow. I started Booth on Kindle on Friday and am enjoying it more than I thought I would.

[David]

Linda takes the prize for burning the most calories while reading the longlist.

[Paul]

Have woken up on 1 August to see a great end to July back in Europe - Gumble completes the Booker and Leah lifts the cup to bring football home.

[WndyJW]

Congratulations, Linda!! That must feel good.

Neil, those are the 4 I don’t intend to read. The only one I might be tempted to read if it’s shortlisted is Nightcrawling, but probably not.
I have heard too many people I trust say Trust is boring, same with Glory. If Booth was shorter maybe I’d consider it.

[Mohamed]

Gumble, congratulation on finishing the longlist. Such an achievement.
Now that you finish it, who do you think will make it to the shortlist? and who will be the winner?
Honestly I am rooting for Maps/ the colony

[Gumble's Yard - Golden Reviewer]

As Paul has pointed out on many occasions it’s so hard to predict a shortlist. Maps and the Colony are what I will root for also.

One observation I will make - some of the lesser known books come in two very obvious pairs with a lot in common in the concept within the pairs

Trust and Case Study
The Trees and Seven Moons (maybe even Glory)

That must make you think the judges like the ideas behind them - to pick two similar books in each case.

Also if I had a small criticism I do think the judges have picked a few books where the concept is for many readers stringer than the execution - including quite a few of the above if you read many but not all reviews. So again that may point to these concept type books.

Finally if I was a judge and setting up a shortlist panel - and remember it’s at that stage that most readers really follow the prize and the books metaphorically and authors literary start talking to each other - then I would be very intrigued at the idea of having say Garner and Mortimer and/or Everett and Mottley on a shortlist together … underrecognised but influential veteran and exciting new debutant

[Mohamed]

I have noticed the common concept between the novels, and even the tune (humor and satire in almost all of them). It is hard to predict a shortlist, but I am pretty sure it will include two debuts (maps for sure) and another big, unpopular name and I think it will ne Everett

[WndyJW]

I like that idea, GY.

[David]

Mohamed wrote: "who do you think will make it to the shortlist?"

I still have four to go, but I see this shortlist shaping up a bit more distinctly than last year. I would be surprised to see these miss the shortlist:
Glory
The Colony
The Trees
Maps of Our Spectacular Bodies