The Mookse and the Gripes discussion
Booker Prize for Fiction
>
2024 Booker Prize Shortlist Discussion
Just catching up with everything (I've been a bit off the grid for a few days). I honestly can't remember the last time that it seemed so unclear which shortlisted novel would win the Booker, or even which were frontrunners. Last year, for example, everyone seemed to know and understand that it came down to the two Pauls. But this year, I think I could make an argument for any one of the six, despite my strong preferences for some over others.I heard the shortlist readings were excellent and at least one friend who was there texted me that she has no idea how they are going to choose a winner.
I would second that - really excellent event. The chair mixed it up from the usual format - she asked the authors a few questions, then part way through interviewing them asked them to read from their book (interestingly they all read from Booker branded cards with the script typed out that they had chosen rather than the actual books) then used the reading to draw out more questions.
There were no audience questions and no panel questions - I think she had intended the latter but the event ran on for longer than she expected as (almost) all the authors were very engaged and detailed in their answers.
The signings were well organised as well - well they were for people like Jo and I who were at the front of the queue.
Jo it was a pleasure to talk books with you.
Everett as you may expect kept his answers very pithy). Even his passage (from when James started writing his own story) was very short.
On the night I thought Samantha Harvey was particularly impressive - powerful reading and really good answers particularly when the topics got in to more philosophical parts of the book. She read from the passage about Herdless and Heedful - when I was chatting to her about it briefly afterwards Charlotte Wood (who was I guess eavesdropping) lent over to say how beautiful she thought the reading was. Robert - Samantha did you proud. On the basis of tonight I would pick it as winner.
I must admit Rachel K while very articulate put me off the book a little - she clearly sees Sadie as an amoral vehicle for her to explore her real interests (It rather threw the chair whose initial line of questioning was about how much she loved Sadie). Instead Rachel K is much more invested in the anarchist community and in the philosophy of Bruno who she regards as the real character of the novel and seems to take both more seriously than I had assumed (she did say something like he is a bit mad but he’s my madman). Her passage was Bruno in the caves.
Anne Michaels was as thoughtful and reflective as you would expect …. I spoke a little to her afterwards and she expects people to have to work at the book and re read it to pick the links and allusions. She actually read a few fragments - the opening sentences and then the passage when Peter’s mother cradles her husband in the bath as he dies (the one that ends - Not still: held.). I thought it was beautifully done.
Yael van der Wouden came across well - and read the peach scene, but I felt the way she explained the book kind of came across as more trope fiction (Isabel and her character arc) than the other books.
I felt Charlotte Wood was perhaps not given quite the full time as the chair realised she had overrun - and spent quite a bit of time on aboriginal rights rather than perhaps directly on the book. Just as an example in the discussion neither the mice, Helen or the dead nun’s bones were really mentioned much (despite two being in the reading which started with the mice in the piano).
Jo - what were your observations.
Great summary! It sounds like it was an excellent event.
Thanks for the write up GY, much appreciated!
Was also nice to chat to Eric Lonesome Reader Anderson in the queue about each of the books (he is stillGutted over My Friends) and to meet Bernard Lombardi and his partner Christopher Metts
Also rather nicely Han Smith (from Goldsmith shortlist) came before at the start to say hello and discuss the books.
I enjoyed the readings, also that all six authors where there in person (in contrast to the international Booker this year where two were dialling for just a bit) was a treat! Anne Michaels her reading and answers resonated for me and I warmed up considerably to Samantha Harvey and Orbital. She was chatting the most in the signings, causing quite some logistical problems ;-). I think Orbital and James where most popular in the signings.
I have a hard time seeing Orbital as the winner, but I know it has some fans here so perhaps it will!
Thank you for the information, GY, and all. Very interesting.I have this feeling Orbital will win, but I've really no idea. I want Held to win, but I'm coming around to James as well, and after my third reading, I do see what a magnificent book James is.
I do not want The Safekeep to take the prize. For me, it lacked creativity and became very mundane.
I would like to see Stone Yard Devotional win but I predict that Held will take it.
Thanks so much for the summary GY. Really great and also nice for you to meet with others (pretty envious of that).
Oh I wish I was there. Hopefully if the awards fall on (or in) the mid terms, I’ll go up to London and attend(Or if the the IB readings are during the Easter holidays)
Gumble's Yard - Golden Reviewer wrote: "I would second that - really excellent event. The chair mixed it up from the usual format - she asked the authors a few questions, then part way through interviewing them asked them to read from ..."
Absolutely wonderful to meet GY and have a good ol' book chat in person.
Brilliant event. I think it has been my favourite of the past few years. It really was brilliantly chaired.
Percival - as expected and wonderful.
Anne - much much better in person, she really seemed to ramble, I thought, at the Cheltenham event where she was on camera.
Rachel - highly intellectual with some quite outhere ideas. Just dont have much appreciation for Creation Lake.
Yael - very similar to the interview at Cheltenham. I like The Safe Keep less than I did as a result.
Charlotte - interviews well. She really knows who she is and I think that positively contributes to her straught speaking narrator.
Samantha - great on interview, humble, humorous and highly intelligent. Orbital is a wonderful piece of art.
Hoping for James or Stone Yard Devotional to win but I wouldn't be upset if Orbital won. James will go on to be read for decades, hundreds of years, regardless.
Is the ceremony on now? I'm quite out of the loop this year!
Mod
Yes. I am not watching, because the announcement is not due until at least 2145 UK time (almost another hour and a half).
Hugh wrote: "Emily wrote: "Is the ceremony on now? I'm quite out of the loop this year!"Yes. I am not watching, because the announcement is not due until at least 2145 UK time (almost another hour and a half)."
Okay thanks for the timeline, I'm definitely going to bed!
It's live in 70 minutes. 2145 GMT as someone has already posted. Getting anxious.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TrYux...
Mod
Bob rules the Booker
After last night I am really pleased and my daughter (who I bought this for) is delighted.
Anna wrote: "I was sure he was talking about held."I thought so as well Anna.
Mod
I was oscillating between held and orbital. So pleased it’s a female author and the Booker gets much more publicity for a British author too.
I thought he was talking about Held, too.I'm happy for Harvey, but a little disappointed about Held or James not winning. I feel bad for Everett. I did like Orbital, beautiful book.
Of the books nominated, orbital was my second favorite, so I am not mad. nice to know Harvey did well at the live-event!
Orbital is rather lovely so I'm quite happy about that. James is the better book for me, but I'm happy for the wins to get shared about.
Orbital is creative, has some gorgeous writing, is something new in literature, but I could not connect emotionally with the characters. Still, I'm not unhappy with Harvey's win.I, too, think James is the better book, and I hope Everett gets some wins soon. He's overdue. I think James will be the most read book. I'm hoping James takes the Pulitzer. It's a good fit for him.
When we are listening my daughter called it as Orbital
So a book that we predicted on the longlist thread as a strong contender months ago based on Justine Jordan’s love for it. I will have to look to see when we first mentioned it
Orbital left me so cold. I liked Dear Thief so much better. For one thing, stuff happened in it. Happy for Samantha Harvey, though.
On the 2024 speculation thread Orbital is first mentioned as a strong contender on post 28 (out of more than 1100) way back in December 2023
I wonder if the judges did their voting after the readings, making the readings and conversation a type of final test.
I don’t think they are there so not sure they would see it.
Coincidentally, I just finished reading Orbital this evening. And as the article said, I did find it a very good book for the moment. It was soothing to be up there floating above all the stuff going on below, lol.
But, as some of you have stated, it has no plot, no story. Beautiful passages, but no story.
Erin wrote: "Coincidentally, I just finished reading Orbital this evening. And as the article said, I did find it a very good book for the moment. It was soothing to be up there floating above all the stuff goi..."It'll probably do well in terms of sales in that case, a lot of people seem to be reaching for comfort reads, but also sounds like a decent compromise choice, not too contentious, probably enough to fuel book group discussion, and likely to sell to a broad-ish market. I'm more in a space equals Elon Musk mindset, definitely with Olivia Rodrigo.
I guess we’re different: I’m still reflecting on Orbital 3 months after reading it. I loved the fragility from topics to prose. Just a personal thing. I really don’t like it when people say that other books deserved more. The judges made their decision. There was merit that we’re not seeing and that’s that. I didn’t like the fact that Kairos won the IB but I can see why. I have literary prizes and a lot of thought and discussion goes into choosing a winner
Just catching up as hadn’t been paying much attentionBut did no one notice that the prize was announced two hours early (7.45pm UK time). By the winning author who was tipped the nod by one of the judges.
https://x.com/sharveyauthor/status/18...
Paul wrote: "Just catching up as hadn’t been paying much attentionBut did no one notice that the prize was announced two hours early (7.45pm UK time). By the winning author who was tipped the nod by one of th..."
Thanks Paul for aclever and wonderfully timed post.
And who must have bought her first ever mobile phone that night as well
It looks odd - but ultimately someone created an account and correctly called the prize 2 hours early and we know that the press etc do know the winner before it is officially announced and around that sort of time. All a bit bizarre. Just surprised it wasn’t discussed on here.
Mod
Paul wrote: "Just catching up as hadn’t been paying much attentionBut did no one notice that the prize was announced two hours early (7.45pm UK time). By the winning author who was tipped the nod by one of th..."
I saw that. She's a good actress, then. She sure seemed surprised when the winner was announced at the ceremony! ;-)
The Mookse and the Gripes
Books mentioned in this topic
Dear Thief (other topics)Laozi's Dao De Jing: A New Interpretation for a Transformative Time (other topics)
Erasure (other topics)
Orbital (other topics)
Creation Lake (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Percival Everett (other topics)Yael van der Wouden (other topics)
Samantha Harvey (other topics)
Rachel Kushner (other topics)
Charlotte Wood (other topics)
More...
I think Barnes is right.
The winner is always a compromise among the judges, and often the objectively "best book" doesn't win. (Subjectively, something truly horrid could win.) For example, if The Safekeep wins, does that really mean it's the best book written in English last year? Certainly not. It just means, that for various reasons, the judges chose it, perhaps compromised on it. I think it's the weakest on the shortlist, not horrid, but I know others who feel differently. I want to be careful of what I say because I don't want to insult anyone here, but I have my own ideas of why it made the shortlist. Politics and being topical play a great part in who wins, even though they shouldn't.
I like the Booker; the winners always offer me a list of terrific books to read, but as a prize, it's fallen in my estimation.
(If my comment sounds stupid, I apologize. I'm Italian, born in Italy, and I didn't learn English until a short time ago when I wanted to attend the Creative Writing courses at the University of Leeds. Please don't say "no one could be that stupid." As an Italian attempting to express myself in English, I realize I sometimes come off wrong, even comical when I don't mean to be. Just call me a dangling modifier. LOL This was not addressed to you, Paul or you GY because you two gentlemen, along with Hugh and most of the others here have always treated me very politely. Thank you for that. It's very kind.)