tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-490022902167479769.post7461416846269354219..comments2022-12-13T06:24:13.329-08:00Comments on Read This / Eat That: Man Booker Prize Olympics, Part the Second (and Last)Alyssahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14446498003134999999noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-490022902167479769.post-76733571545222856852013-09-06T06:30:16.286-07:002013-09-06T06:30:16.286-07:00That's definitely how I feel - but people aren...That's definitely how I feel - but people aren't rating on quality, they're rating on whether or not they liked it. Kind of a People's Choice Awards for books, right?<br /><br /><br />Although - People's Choice Awards as compared to Oscars-level class. It really WOULD be cool to attend.Felizahttp://felizacasano.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-490022902167479769.post-45988311559534001072013-09-05T21:40:11.047-07:002013-09-05T21:40:11.047-07:00Goodreads has an extreme bias towards easy to dige...Goodreads has an extreme bias towards easy to digest books (the rating for Throne of Glass is an unfathomably high 4.15, for example), and a decent bias towards inflating ratings in general. That being said, I think the people rating the Booker nominees and winners on Goodreads are not likely to be giving them low ratings just because the books focus on structure instead of storyline. Except for the books that have made it onto school reading lists and into movies, (Atonement, Life of Pi, Midnight's Children, Ishiguro, etc.), I would think that people who don't like literary fiction aren't going to pick them up so frequently that the ratings come from their failing to live up to genre fiction plot standards. <br /><br /><br />I threw out my notes from the Booker posts, but I know that my problems with the Ishiguro books are about Ishiguro's fascination with having a dialogue dump in the second to last chapter or so (it happens in both). I cannot think of a more disappointing way to wrap up a story than having everything explained in conversation at the end of a journey. I didn't really care about any of the characters in Never Let Me Go, and the science fiction elements were not well thought-out, but those problems were nothing compared to Ishiguro abandoning his tight style for that chapter of answer-giving.<br /><br /><br />But I think "literary novels" are overrated in general. When you sacrifice the recognizable elements of a novel (plot and character development) you do make a point with the style that you're using, but your point is dependent on your readers encountering mostly traditional novels. It's the same as walking through an art museum. An abstract expressionist piece essentially works as a reaction to more naturalistic art. If, however, the viewer has seen another fifty such canvases in the last hour, the impact of that rather blank canvas is low, and the abstract style eventually becomes more of a gimmick than a meaningful artistic effect.<br /><br /><br />The acclaimed writers of the 20th century seem to have exhausted the effects of unreliable narration, time shifts, stream of consciousness, and unusual punctuation. If prize committees continue to reward books for simply using some combination of those effects and don't put some emphasis again on story-telling, is that advancing literature beyond what Woolf and Joyce have done?<br /><br /><br />It's disturbing to me that people were upset that the 2011 Booker longlist was "too accessible." If the "literary novel" stays unaccessible and stagnant, the novels classified that way risk being ignored in general conversations about literature. (And they have no influence on the vast majority of the population, which seems like an incredibly sad fate for books that represent the best the British Commonwealth past and present have to offer.)<br /><br /><br />I do like the look of the Booker banquet though!Susannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-490022902167479769.post-4618750238236613822013-09-05T20:21:05.193-07:002013-09-05T20:21:05.193-07:00Yeah, I agree that Goodreads ratings are more ofte...Yeah, I agree that Goodreads ratings are more often than not completely wonky. For books that I think deserve all the stars in the world, there seems to be a low average rating (my example was going to be Megan Whalen Turner's The Thief, but the rating seems to have gone up to 3.99 since I last looked!); books that I think were completely poorly written get great ratings (such as Jennifer A. Nielsen's The False Prince, which managed 4.24 stars); and yet other times the rating seems to line up pretty well with my own opinion of a book (no example comes to mind, but I'm sure it's happened once or twice). Since the general Goodreads opinion is not usually reliable, I tend to skim the written reviews to see if the stuff that people like/dislike about a book are things I know that I would like/dislike. In the end though, if a book sounds interesting to me, I read it and decide for myself. Also, book Oscars--how great would that be?! Red carpet, champagne, awards for books...it'd be great. :)Alyssa L.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-490022902167479769.post-54456481483759630582013-09-05T19:40:58.184-07:002013-09-05T19:40:58.184-07:00We had fun making them! I hope you've been pla...We had fun making them! I hope you've been playing along at home.Susannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-490022902167479769.post-38766261424709046132013-09-05T19:35:39.667-07:002013-09-05T19:35:39.667-07:00Generally speaking, I almost NEVER use the average...Generally speaking, I almost NEVER use the average Goodreads rating to judge ANYTHING - usually they don't reflect how I'd think of the book or judge it. Also, I've noticed any kind of literary fiction gets kind of low ratings - literary fiction usually focuses a lot on structure instead of storyline, which most reviewers on GR don't seem to like.<br /><br /><br />On the other hand, I can totally appreciate the idea of Hollywood-level posh parties for book awards.Felizahttp://felizacasano.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-490022902167479769.post-66778653006069724472013-09-05T16:06:44.587-07:002013-09-05T16:06:44.587-07:00Yay, thank you! We are always glad to amuse someo...Yay, thank you! We are always glad to amuse someone other than just ourselves. :) I can't wait to see which ones are actually shortlisted!Alyssa L.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-490022902167479769.post-64882686318590004112013-09-04T05:34:39.155-07:002013-09-04T05:34:39.155-07:00You guys are crazy. ;-) I have loved your Booker...You guys are crazy. ;-) I have <i>loved</i> your Booker posts!Debbie Rodgers @Exurbanisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-490022902167479769.post-33690896139589838192013-09-03T09:39:32.495-07:002013-09-03T09:39:32.495-07:00I like that they have a sense of humor with the lo...I like that they have a sense of humor with the longlist/royal birth announcement. And holy crap, I need to get invited to that party, if only for hand-bound books, a shiny program, and a chance for a photo-op with cousin Matthew (he still looks very early 20th-c. to me--I am convinced he is a time traveler)! Alas, as an American citizen, it is not to be...not until 2015, at least, when I think they're doing the next International Booker. As for the books themselves, these ones sound interesting enough that I might be tempted to try them out at some point in time: A Tale for the Time Being, Five Star Billionaire, Harvest, TransAtlantic, and We Need New Names. Everyone seems to adore Jhumpa Lahiri, too, so even though I never read the Namesake I could be talked into trying out the Lowland (although I really want to write the Everglades version!).Alyssa L.noreply@blogger.com