2022 Booker Shortlist Discussion

[Hugh, Active moderator]

Glory by NoViolet Bulawayo
The Trees by Percival Everett
Treacle Walker by Alan Garner
The Seven Moons of Maali Almeida by Shehan Karunatilaka
Small Things Like These by Claire Keegan
Oh William! by Elizabeth Strout

[Debra]

That was fast, Hugh

[Paul]

I guess biggest surprise for me is Oh William! as it just doesn't seem to belong on this list (that's not to say it is bad, just seems very different)

From the description of what they wanted I'd written off After Sappho (which again was relative different to others)

Clearly short books are their preference (yay!) so they had no issue with the two some think aren't novels - and did length do for Maps?

[Paul]

Yes impressive Hugh - thanks!

[Ranjit]

I’m crushed that Audrey Magee’s The Colony wasn’t selected in the shortlist.

[Debra]

Ranjit wrote: "I’m crushed that Audrey Magee’s The Colony wasn’t selected in the shortlist."

Same here!

[Robert]

I'm very surprised that colony didnt make it

[Paul]

So 3, 4, 5, 6, 8 and 11 on our collective ranking (Hugh method)

Which is really the two obvious ones missing and Oh William! making it

[Paul]

And 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12 on our predictions (which actually quite closely mirrored our rankings)

[Lee]

Yet Glory is way too long for what it does.

[Alysson]

Ranjit wrote: "I’m crushed that Audrey Magee’s The Colony wasn’t selected in the shortlist."

Yes!! I wanted it to be there too.

[Paul]

Lee wrote: "Yet Glory is way too long for what it does."

One could argue Seven Moons as well.

So perhaps Maps wasn't length. It was one I felt could have been edited a bit - and there did seem to be something behind his comment, unless he was thinking of some they didn't even longlist.

[Paul]

Anyway - all our love now needs to switch to #teamtreacle

If that wins then all will be ticketyboo

[Jamie]

Im absolutely devastated about The Colony. I really am. I don't understand these choices? Glory, Oh William and Seven Moons are average books and Treacle Walker was painful. Im hoping for Small Things or The Trees now. The Colony was robbed!!

[Irene]

Alysson wrote: "Ranjit wrote: "I’m crushed that Audrey Magee’s The Colony wasn’t selected in the shortlist."

Yes!! I wanted it to be there too."
me too
Guess i have a few more books to read before the winner announcement.

[But_i_thought_]

Paul wrote: "Clearly short books are their preference (yay!) so they had no issue with the two some think aren't novels - and did length do for Maps?"

I would suspect this to be the case. Maps needed some serious tightening.

[Cindy]

I am really surprised that Colony didn't make it, and quite surprised that Oh William! did, even though I am a big Strout fan. What an unexpected shortlist. The only novel on the shortlist I thought completely matched his comments was The Trees.

[Emmeline]

I'm delighted The Colony didn't make it, sorry everyone!

[Roman Clodia]

Unpopular opinion alert... but I found Maps unreadable due to the horribly overwrought and precious writing. Maybe some of the judges felt the same?

I've said enough on the dedicated thread why I was underwhelmed by The Colony so won't repeat myself.

Sorry some of you are disappointed though.

[Tracy]

Though I’m sad that Colony wasn’t there, I’m not mad at this list. I liked all of them.

I read Maps a few months before the longlist was announced, and I remember very little. Maybe I’m not alone in that.

I’m just glad that Trust and Booth weren’t chosen- still not sure why they were longlisted. There were so many good books this year to choose from.

[Paul]

But_i_thought_ wrote: "Paul wrote: "I would suspect this to be the case. Maps needed some serious tightening"

It did - almost a shame it can't be reissued in a Readers Digest abridged version and re-entered.

[Britta]

Oh William! is quite a surprise for me!

[Hugh, Active moderator]

Not quite a 2017-style massacre, but I lost 3 of my top 4 again...

[Hugh, Active moderator]

will work out the scores for the predictions in the morning

[Tracy]

Paul wrote: "Anyway - all our love now needs to switch to #teamtreacle

If that wins then all will be ticketyboo"

I agree. With Colony off the table, I think this may be the one.

[David]

I would put Glory as the slight favorite to win but wouldn't be surprised if it's the Garner. Or frankly any of them at this point.

[Paul]

Cindy wrote: " What an unexpected shortlist. The only novel on the shortlist I thought completely matched his comments was The Trees."

Well the comments were about a rich/imagined world with language, and person or society undergoing a big change, or something like that.

Treacle Walker and Seven Moons fit as well

Small Things is an odd one though for that.

(haven't read other two)

[But_i_thought_]

Roman Clodia wrote: "I've said enough on the dedicated thread why I was underwhelmed by The Colony so won't repeat myself."

I too wasn't a huge fan of The Colony. The book reads like the careful construction of a bonfire that never alights.

[Lascosas]

Of the 39 people and 1 panel that made shortlist predictions only William and Britta excluded both Maps and Colony, and another 3 (Jamie, Suzanne and Carl) included Colony but excluded Maps. 35 included both books in their shortlist predictions, 87.5%.

[Debra]

I'm waffling between Small Things and Treacle Walker for my #1 position. Small Things was the more enjoyable read, but Treacle Walker engaged me more (and is sticking with me).

[Paul]

Britta's 5 is likely the winner (William only got 3)

[Nicole D.]

I am team Seven Moons. I'm disappointed by the inclusion of Small Things and Oh William.

Both were great, but I don't see how you can compare Small Things to the other books in anyway. And Oh William had nothing really new, though delightful as always.

[Paul]

David wrote: "I would put Glory as the slight favorite to win but wouldn't be surprised if it's the Garner. Or frankly any of them at this point."

Interesting that bookies top 3 all made it (Treacle W, Oh William! and Glory).

[Ruben]

Very happy with this shortlist, mostly 4 to 4,5 star reads for me with the exception of The Trees that I gave 5 and would be my winner (with Glory a good second).

I maybe would have replaced Treacle with Booth.

Not sad about Maps at all, but maybe a bit about Colony (and definitely surprised).

Surprising also Trust and Case Study didn't make it, I thought they'd select at least one of the two puzzle books.

[Anna]

Very interesting! It seems to me they left out all the books that garnered emotional rather than balanced attention from their supporters.

Motivation-wise I'm fortunate. I've read and enjoyed two of them (Treacle and Small Things), and everything they haven't shortlisted I've already read or had no intention of reading. Which means I'm very excited about the four books I've yet to read!

[Emmeline]

I liked Small Things but I admit I'm confused that it's getting so much attention. When I read it I didn't write a review (unusually) because I couldn't think of anything to say other than "it was good." I then gave it to my dad who later just said "it was good," and we didn't talk about it further. And whenever people gush about it, including the Guardian article that's just gone up, it's to do with "moral compasses", which Keegan says wasn't her intention. It seems to kill conversation and analysis. I just feel like I'm missing what makes it so special (I do still think it's very good).

[Paul]

It's the perfect length that makes it so special!

[Scott]

More than surprising - bizarre! All this talk of 2017 has apparently jinxed this year. Disappointing shortlist, in my opinion.

[Emmeline]

Paul wrote: "It's the perfect length that makes it so special!"

I bet Treacle's even shorter, word-wise.

[Eva]

I think I'll have to revisit Small Things Like These or something. I thought it was an ok book. Ordering Treacle Walker now.

The Colony....I'm not surprised it wasn't shortlisted

[Gumble's Yard - Golden Reviewer]

Mixed for me - the two books I had hoped and thought might win (the two widely tipped ones even pre Booker) were omitted but also the four I didn’t like and even After Sappho which I had ranked 8th but was probably 9th in my views without a Norfolk bias.

Would be pleased with TW, Seven Moons or Small Things and even Trees (although it dies not reward a second read), not unhappy with Glory and pleased for Strout although I think it’s the weakest of her three Lucy novels.

[Paul]

Emily wrote: "Paul wrote: "It's the perfect length that makes it so special!"

I bet Treacle's even shorter, word-wise."

Yes that is also perfect. From the Chair's comments on short books showing the sign of a good editor, I very much hope the prize is now between the two of them.

[Lee]

Emily wrote: "I liked Small Things but I admit I'm confused that it's getting so much attention. When I read it I didn't write a review (unusually) because I couldn't think of anything to say other than "it was ..."

I'm honestly not sure what Keegan thinks she wrote at this point, after all the quotes I've heard! I think she wrote a brilliant miniature showing someone struggling with self-interested considerations that tend to push the average person against doing what is moral but not advantageous to themselves, rather than showing someone simply "being a hero".

[Gumble's Yard - Golden Reviewer]

Guardian is reporting TW is only 15,000 words and is shortest on the list.

[Cindy]

Page count wise, Small Things is shorter, but word count wise, Treacle Walker wins. I think I'm going to be rooting hard for The Trees but would be surprised if it's the winner.

[David]

I think what makes the shortlist so puzzling is that the longlist seemed so well curated with identifiable themes. The shortlist feels like they threw darts at the wall.

[endrju]

It's either The Trees or The Seven Moons for me and I honestly can't decide. I'll finally read Glory as I was waiting to see if it'll get this far.

[Vesna]

I never understood why The Colony was resented by some readers as having too much hype about it. There was no establishment hype, only the enthusiastic responses from the readers who connected with it. The hype about Small Things, which I enjoyed though less so, was reverse - very much hyped by the establishment (award committees, professional reviewers). Not sure if it rises to that level. I gave it 5 stars when I read it last year, but would prefer Treacle Walker and The Trees, both originally 4.5 stars from me, to win, far more original in many ways.

[Lee]

I really disliked Oh William! so that's my only real disappointment (I liked Colony a lot but am ok with it not making it), but I have to accept that it evidently has an appeal to other literature lovers that just passes me by.

[Debra]

Emily wrote: "I liked Small Things but I admit I'm confused that it's getting so much attention. When I read it I didn't write a review (unusually) because I couldn't think of anything to say other than "it was good..."

What you wrote would make an excellent review.