The Schedule for January through June 2024

[Lynn]

I've heard back from almost every discussion leader and I don't think we can wait any longer, so here's the schedule for the next six months. Please let me know if you have questions or see any errors. Thanks!

January
Classics: no book

Reading List (15th) – Somebody's Fool by Richard Russo, nominated by Gina (464 p.)

February
Classics (1st) – The Pursuit of Love by Nancy Mitford, nominated by Lynn I. (240 p.)

Reading List (15th)- The Sentence by Louise Erdrich, nominated by Barb (400 p.)

March
Classics (1st) – The Yearling by Marjorie Kinnan Rawlings, nominated by Barb (528 p.)

Reading List (15th) –The House of Doors by Tan Twan Eng, nominated by spoko (320 p.)

April
Classics (1st) – Our Town by Thornton Wilder, nominated by Mary Anne and Barb (340 p.)

Reading List (15th) – Tom Lake by Ann Patchett, nominated by Barb (316 p.)

May
Classics: no book

Nonfiction (1st) - The Wager: A Tale of Shipwreck, Mutiny and Murder by David Grann, nominated by Ann D

Reading List (15th) – Lady Tan's Circle of Women by Linda See, nominated by Lyn (386 p.)

June
Classics (starts on the 1st) – Love and War in the Apennines by Eric Newby, nominated by Katy (288 p.)

Reading List (starts on the 15th) – The Heaven & Earth Grocery Store by James McBride, nominated by Gina (385 p.)

[Steve]

Lynn wrote: "Please let me know if you have questions...."

Hi, Lynn. Actually, I do have a question for management, although it has taken me some time to get around my natural shyness and ask it.

Gina wrote: "We don't have a winner. There are five books that got 4 votes each, so we need everyone to again vote for the three books to read with Our Town...."

Gina posted that back when she announced the "Run-Off" vote on 2 December. Why the gaps in the "Classics Corner" schedule? In other words, what rule prevented those five books from being declared winners and listed along with Our Town to fill out a complete six-month schedule in "Classics Corner?"

Whatever the rule is, it apparently does not apply to the contemporary crap "Reading List." I do not recall ever seeing gaps in the contemporary crap "Reading List."

[Lynn]

Good question, Steve, but the answer predates my involvement in coordinating the selection process. The practice of having 4 Classics selections every 6 months is a pretty long-standing one (in the neighborhood of 20 years, perhaps), but I can't recall exactly when or why it started. Maybe Barb, Sherry, Tonya or others can help me out here.

[Barbara]

I think I remember that part of the reason was the length of most of the Classics books on our list at that time. Also, I think we might have been having more participation in the Reading List discussions than in the Classics ones at the time we made the change. If enough people want more Classics now, there is nothing written in stone about the current structure. Also, Sherry might remember more about it.

[Steve]

Okay, ladies. That makes perfect sense to me. Thank you.

I was not at all trying to make trouble. However, we just finished a Classics Corner discussion that featured 97 comments. I will tell you that it made my eyes wet up. It was like 20 years ago. Maybe--and only maybe--it is time to revisit that approach.

[Lynn]

I asked Sherry and she also thought it was because of the length of many of the Classics selections when the change was made. Since Gina is managing the selection process for Classics Corner, I hope she will weigh in here too, but I'm not opposed to making a switch to 6 selections for both Reading List and Classics Corner.

[Justin]

Regardless of the number of books included in each list, it seems advisable—in order to be respectful of everyone’s reading interests and to ensure a welcoming environment where CR members feel comfortable nominating and voting for books—to avoid characterizing any genre of literature, whether contemporary or classic, as “crap.”

[Erika]

I would be in favor of six and six, though I find it hard to maintain my preferred reading pace during the middle of the semesters. So March and October might be tough for me. I am new to participating meaningfully in this group, but delighted with what I am finding here and would be inclined to make this group of priority.

I took “contemporary crap” as an expression of Steve’s carefully cultivated curmudgeon affect. It made me want to hug him rather than feel ashamed of my reading tastes. YMMV, as they say.

[Erika]

On a different note, do y’all think I can enjoy and understand the Russo without having read the first two?

[Lynn]

Good question, Erika. I hope some others who have actually read Somebody's Fool will chime in here, but I'm hoping it won't be too hard to follow because I read the others so long ago I can't recall much at all about them.

[Shirley]

I've just finished the first three chapters, in which Russo gives a lot of backstory on the characters, probably to help the novel stand on its own. But getting it all straight is taking some work. I'm going to have to go back through it and make a list of the characters and their relationships with each other before reading further. So-It appears one doesn’t have to have read the two earlier books, but it may take a little work to get all the characters and their complicated relationships straight.

[Ann]

Agree w Shirley, though I’d add that this last in the trilogy builds on the previous works. It was a long time ago that I read these. Each time Russo brought up something from the previous books, I had that pleasurable feeling of “Oh .. I remember that..”

[Steve]

Erika wrote: "I took “contemporary crap” as an expression of Steve’s carefully cultivated curmudgeon affect...."

Ha! I now suspect that you have been lurking here for longer than you let on. The old salts here simply roll their eyes and move on.

You, madam, might be a keeper. But you've got to earn it. Read the damned Russo thing and quit worrying about it.

[Gina]

I hope reading this book will make you want to reading the other two, Nobody's Fool and Everybody's Fool. It does have a sly sense of humor. There's also an older movie with Paul Newman as Sully that I enjoyed.

[Gina]

As to the other issue, Classics are not my favorite, so four are enough for me. There are some I've really enjoyed.

But I happily run the nominations, voting, and occasionally the run-offs. We can do what most members want with regard to number of classic and literary books each time.

[Mary Anne]

I would like to throw another concept into this discussion: I've been thinking that we should have a separate nonfiction category nomination. We rarely get nonfiction books nominated, much less elected to be discussed. We could start small, say with three nonfiction books selected in each 6 month period. I feel that having a separate nonfiction category would make us appealing to new readers, which is important to the long-term viability of our group.

[Donna]

At least half of my reading is nonfiction so I like your suggestion, Mary Anne.

[Justin]

I’d love the nonfiction list, too!

[Barbara]

Mary Anne, how do you see us scheduling the nonfiction books? Would they be in addition to the 6 Reading List fiction books? Or would we have 3 fiction and 3 nonfiction books on the Reading List? I'm a little worried about scheduling too many books, maybe because I'm one of the slowest readers here. If we have 6 fiction, 3 nonfiction and 6 classics, that's a little overwhelming.

[Erika]

I don’t read nonfiction for pleasure (I read so much nonfiction for work, including lots of books in areas of interest to me) so would hope that nonfiction doesn’t replace any of the fiction (and certainly not the classics). But I also will really struggle to participate in the heart of the university semester, and I am new to participating, so my views should not count for much.

[Mary Anne]

Barbara wrote: "Mary Anne, how do you see us scheduling the nonfiction books? Would they be in addition to the 6 Reading List fiction books? Or would we have 3 fiction and 3 nonfiction books on the Reading List? I..."

Barb, I admit that I am in the habit of picking and choosing what I want to read and then participate in those discussions. Sometimes I have every intention to read a book, but life interferes and I don't get to it, or I read it months or years later. No guilt. I don't feel any of us are punching a clock or required to read for whatever reason. There may be some who don't care for classics. Others may find current books shallow.

So here's an idea: we now skip classics during a certain number of months? Why not pick a nonfiction to read instead? Just a thought.

[spoko]

About half my reading is nonfiction, so I like the idea of nonfiction-specific nominations. And it does seem like a natural way to fill the gaps in the classics schedule. I’m another one that doesn’t try to read every book, though, so I’d be just as happy if it were a parallel set of nominations.

[Steve]

I am so impressed at the interest y'all have taken in this discussion. I have read all the comments. For my part, I like the idea of filling out the Classics Corner schedule with two nonfiction works, although I realize that would involve more administrative work by management in handling the nominations and voting.

Here is an idea. There is currently no classic novel scheduled for May. Maybe we do nominations and a vote for one nonfiction work to be discussed in May and see how it goes.

[Shirley]

That sounds like a good way to try it out, if the organizers don’t mind. There are so many excellent non-fiction books. Where to start??

[Gina]

Lynn, I'll be glad to handle it if you like.

[Lynn]

I've been off the CR grid for a couple of days while I was traveling to attend a family funeral near Yosemite, but I am glad to see such a considered discussion in my absence. I like the idea of using May as a trial run for a nonfiction-specific nomination process. Thanks for offering to manage that process, Gina. I'll leave it to you to decide when to start.

[Ann D]

I like the nonfiction idea as well. I read nonfiction books on other sites, but you just can't beat the quality of discussions that we have here on Constant Reader. Looking forward to it!

Thanks, Mary Anne and Gina.

[Barbara]

I like that idea of doing 2 nonfiction books to fill in the months when we don't have classics.
Like Mary Ann said, I don't always read every selection on our schedules. But, that is usually my goal. Unfortunately, life, and occasionally other books, interfere.

[Ruth]

I don’t read everything either. And the Constant Reader Police haven’t knocked on my door yet! 😂

[Mary Anne]

I think Gina has just stepped forward, but Gina, if you need any assistance let me know.

[Lynn]

Steve wrote: "Okay. I think that I have a good grip on the general drift of the discussion. But what are we going to do? Is there a decision maker in the group?

Readers frustrate me almost as much as intellectu..."

Your question about "is there a decision maker in the group?" is an interesting one, Steve. In my experience, this group has generally operated on a consensus basis rather than relying on a "decision maker". That said, it appears to me that there's a fair consensus to add some nonfiction selections by scheduling them in the months where we don't have classics on the schedule.

If we find that feelings change after we do a trial next May, we can always revisit the discussion. Nothing has to be set in stone, as far as I'm concerned.

[Steve]

I jumped out of bed this morning and raced to the laptop to delete my last comment, Lynn. Unfortunately you had already seen it.

I take it back.

[Lynn]

I just edited the schedule to include the nonfiction choice in May. Gina, can you let me know who nominated that so I can list the discussion leader? Thanks!