Poll

Please, dear members, remember, any book is an investment of time and effort, especially a big one. Vote only if you are serious about the book and plan to read it together with the group. If you are not sure or if you think by voting you are recommending a nice book to read to your fellow group members, please think twice and ask yourselves twice, 'Am I really going to read and participate in the discussion?'.

I am sorry to say so, but we need participants more than we need just voters.

What Zulfiya said! I really want to remind people that ISoLT is going to be MORE THAN A YEAR LONG COMMITMENT of 50ish pages of reading every single week, and that these chunkster discussions only work well when everyone participates on a regular basis. I would be more than happy to read this book with a group of people that want to keep up with the reading and participate every week, but will be disappointed if the discussions fizzle out after a few hundred pages.

That being said, Zulfiya, if the final votes are this close at the end of the poll, is there going to be a second vote between the top choices like we mentioned doing before?

I believe we might have a run-off poll if the voice count is too close, or if they are on par.

Again, guys, your concerns and wishes are the most important, but I also want to make sure that if the super super massive book wins, there will be enough people who will participate on the regular basis. I am also excited about ISoLT if it wins and plan to participate, but I also hope we will have a team of dedicated readers to read it together.

I hate mentioning this, but some of our members who voted for this book only have one or two comments under their belt. Let us be fair - we have equal right here, but if you see regulars voting for it, it at least gives you more chances that the reading will be a success.

We are already discussing who is on the probation list after Fall of Giants. It is so frustrating when people vote and never comment.

Besides, reading such a massive book will possibly mean we will have to change something in our reading plans. For example, introduce some other reads to keep other members involved, like 'nearly a chunkster read' 'the mini chunkster - 500-600pp' because we might risk losing our members who want to read with us if they are not sure they would like to wait for a year for the next window of opportunity.

P.S. My nomination is a miss again :-) I will keep trying:-)

I was anxiously watching the poll, but my two favorites are behind...

I am interested in reading ISoLT, but it is such an undertaking and commitment that I don't want to just jump into it with without assurance that there are enough participants. It seems like the kind of book(s) that we would need some planning ahead to ensure we did have good participation. I don't think I'm in a place to start such a large read at the moment.

May I ask what your favorites are? :-)

The Gormenghast novels and Kristin Lavransdatter. And I wasn't voting because it would be a stretch for me to fit another read in now, but if one of those had won I probably would have tried starting them to see if I could keep up, or at least catch up with the group a little bit later on.

I'm with Linda. I'd love to read ISoLT, but don't want to commit to such a big book without an assurance of participation by a large chunk of members. I just keep hoping A Suitable Boy gets enough votes to be included in a run off poll!

A Suitable Boy also looks good, and I just found out it's on the 1001 book list... But still, I can't 100% commit to another read right now.

Zulfiya wrote: "I believe we might have a run-off poll if the voice count is too close, or if they are on par. Again, guys, your concerns and wishes are the most important, but I also want to make sure that if t...I hate mentioning this, but some of our members who voted for this book only have one or two comments under their belt. Let us be fair - we have equal right here, but if you see regulars voting for it, it at least gives you more chances that the reading will be a success.
"

I got curious about the stats (I'm a Director of Finance so Zulfiya peaked my interest). I haven't looked at the voter participation for ISoLT yet (I'm going to), but I did glance over the votes for War & Peace. It looks as if 50% of the votes are from members with 0 comments. So it sounds as if both of the two frontrunners are gathering some new participants.

Maybe a runoff with the top two would be a good idea, especially when you see that there are a lot of people who didn't vote for either one.

I haven't voted yet, but I had really hoped the Gormenghast Trilogy would have been further up in the pool because it's different and because it would be interesting to talk about - and I haven't seen any other group take it up. Shogun and The First Man in Rome are hugely entertaining and very easy reads, but with enough "stuff" to discuss in a group. Anathem is one of my favorite books, but as much as I love it, I think it wouldn't be an easy one to do in a group. I think you'd see readers falling by the wayside during long sections of it.

From what I've seen in periodically scouting out groups to join, W&P, Outlander and Fall of Giants seem to pop up frequently as group reads. There's a group reading W&P right now, in fact.

If ISoLT wins, I will definitely commit to it. It's a masterpiece and I love it. I never get tired of reading it. But yes, it is a big time commitment. If W&P wins, then probably not. I've read it twice and while it was a good, solid read for me, reading it a 3rd time is a stretch, particularly since my TBR pile is taking over my house :). I just didn't love it enough to do that. Same with Kristin Lavransdatter. I liked that book when I was a lot younger, but reading it a 2nd time decades later was less satisfying.

I am always happy when new people come; for a group to be successful, it should always rely both on new members, and the members who actively participate, but occasionally it is hard to find a balance. There were cases when the discussion came to a dead end in the past, and moderators either had to cancel the discussion or start again.

I think all nominations here are fantastic or at least worth consideration, and if I had time, I would read all of them, well, maybe not Tolstoy. I read this book twice and watched three versions of TV series, so I acknowledge its greatness, but I do not think anyone will persuade me to read it again :-)

Okay, it's obvious the bottom books that only have two votes each won't win. So change your votes for Kristin L so it can win, lol!

This is what I call a campaigning post! I hope it works for you, Sandra.

Haha, I like your style, Sandra! I want people to change to "A Suitable Boy!" :-) That one is closer to the top!

I cannot campaign for mine. Some might misinterpret it, but yes, Suitable Boy is my nomination.

Sandra wrote: "Okay, it's obvious the bottom books that only have two votes each won't win. So change your votes for Kristin L so it can win, lol!"

So funny!!!

I read A Suitable Boy. For me, once felt like enough, but maybe a group discussion would be different. I know a lot of it is just me. Family saga novels are seldom my thing, not that I've given up on them :).

Maybe if ISOLT wins, we read the first book and see how it goes? The reevaluate?

I don't think I'll be joining this one. I've read both War and Peace and ISoLT in the last couple of years. I read A Suitable Boy when it first came out and although that's a long time ago now, I don't want to reread it. I voted for Kristin L but unless there's a huge surge it looks unlikely to win. So I will breathe and continue with Infinite Jest :-)

Rosemary wrote: "I don't think I'll be joining this one.....So I will breathe and continue with Infinite Jest :-)"

That's how I'm feeling right now. :)

Rosemary wrote: "I don't think I'll be joining this one. I've read both War and Peace and ISoLT in the last couple of years. I read A Suitable Boy when it first came out and although that's a long time ago now, I d..."

Yeah...War and Peace...again. It does pop up everywhere. I've run out of things to say about it :). But it is a worthy read for someone who hasn't gotten through it. And I can catch up on other stuff.

Maybe ISoLT could be a leisurely side read if it doesn't win. It would certainly fit the dreamy, languid nature of it. And it would allow for an expanded discussion if the page count was reasonable, allowing for discussions of time, memory, art, music, architecture, food, etc.

Or Luffy, maybe we could read Gormenghast as a buddy read?

Plus, I'm always holding out hope that Everyman will start a history group where we can read Gibbons and Churchill and anything else he comes up with. He moderated Bleak House and he did an outstanding job. It was a wonderful experience. We need to start a lobby :).

Lisa wrote: "Maybe if ISOLT wins, we read the first book and see how it goes? The reevaluate?"

I really support this! I'd love to read at least part of this with a group, and if it wins, this would be a good way to ensure we have a way out if interest wanes.

Tolstoy again :-) h=He is an excellent story-teller and controls the narrative brilliantly, moving with equal ease from one setting to another whether they are receptions or battle scenes. He knows when and where to speed up and slow down, BUT I cannot accept his political agenda and his chauvinistic attitude.

I am sure it will be an excellent reading experience for those who have not read him, but I will focus on Infinite Jest and Dhalgren.

Besides, WaP definitely undermines my plans what to read next after IJ. I originally planed to read something Russian because there was some serious interest during the Challenging Read nomination, but now after WaP nearly winning the nomination, we simply will have to change the upcoming theme.

Zulfiya wrote: "Tolstoy again :-) h=He is an excellent story-teller and controls the narrative brilliantly, moving with equal ease from one setting to another whether they are receptions or battle scenes. He know..."

Too bad a Russian literature theme read couldn't be scheduled to catch W&P, Anna Karenina (which I think is his better book) and where I could lobby heavily for anything by Dostoevsky, who I prefer to Tolstoy.

We might exclude WaP:-) Do you really think people will read two Russian novels at the same time?!

As for Dostoevsky, I am with you - he is one of the world's best if not simply the best.

Zulfiya wrote: "We might exclude WaP:-) Do you really think people will read two Russian novels at the same time?!

As for Dostoevsky, I am with you - he is one of the world's best if not simply the best."

I meant more that I wish W&P wasn't in the super chunkster poll. I would have liked it to be part of a different theme and I remember a discussion about a Russian lit theme. Oh well, pay no attention to me guys. I'm just being a big, whiny baby because, with all the thousands of book groups, the same books seem to be read over and over. Kind of like turning your radio dial and the same 10 songs are playing on every station.

I 100% agree with you about Dostoevsky! To me, Tolstoy was very good writer, but Dostoevsky? Wow...he was a genius.

I struggle with Dostoevsky. I got a lot from The Brothers Karamazov, but didn't get The Idiot at all. I'd love to read Crime and Punishment again. I read it as a student and remember nothing.

I am drifting way off topic, but no apologies :-)

We simply have to read something that fits into the category 'Underappreciated Chunksters'. It means books that are usually selected will not be nominated, and we will definitely expand our literary horizons. There are so many undiscovered books that are exceptionally good, but they do not get enough media attention. Every time I come across one of them, I seriously think that the world of literature and the media culture that surrounds it have dumbed down their standards.

Zulfiya wrote: "We simply have to read something that fits into the category 'Underappreciated Chunksters'. It means books that are usually selected will not be nominated, and we will definitely expand our literar..."

Yay!!! Yes please...awesome idea!

Zulfiya wrote: "We simply have to read something that fits into the category 'Underappreciated Chunksters'."

I like that category!

Lynn wrote: "Dearest fellow readers.

I am looking forward to our next chunkster. A rhetorical question, but isn't opening a long book for the first time one of life's many pleasures?"

Depends on the book!

Paula wrote: "Yeah...War and Peace...again. It does pop up everywhere. I've run out of things to say about it :). But it is a worthy read for someone who hasn't gotten through it. And I can catch up on other stuff."

I generally agree with the principle that it a book is truly worth reading, it's worth re-reading, and War and Peace is one such, but in my case I re-read it just last year, and am not really ready for a third read yet. Which is why I didn't vote for it, though if it lost now and were re-nominated in a few years when it's time to re-read it, I probably would.

Paula wrote: "Oh well, pay no attention to me guys. I'm just being a big, whiny baby because, with all the thousands of book groups, the same books seem to be read over and over."

Yes, this does tend to happen. It's a shame, because there are a tremendous number of worthwhile books out there which aren't on the "big" lists and so seldom get nominated or voted for.

Zulfiya wrote: "We simply have to read something that fits into the category 'Underappreciated Chunksters'. It means books that are usually selected will not be nominated, and we will definitely expand our literary horizons. There are so many undiscovered books that are exceptionally good, but they do not get enough media attention. Every time I come across one of them, I seriously think that the world of literature and the media culture that surrounds it have dumbed down their standards. "

When we get to the point of nominating Underappreciated Chunksters, you might consider allowing multiple nominations, because I'm sure you, at least, have several worthy candidates in mind, and I would hate for you to have to restrict yourself to only one.

Everyman wrote: "Zulfiya wrote: "We simply have to read something that fits into the category 'Underappreciated Chunksters'. It means books that are usually selected will not be nominated, and we will definitely ex..."

We'd first have to define what 'underappreciated' means. A good start would be any book that isn't featured on the Boxall list.

It might be challenging to define one, but I actually mean the ones that do not feature in one of the classic novel lists to avoid popular nominations. For example, The Kindly Ones is in the Boxall list, but it has never been nominated or even mentioned in our group. The same is true for Middlesex. I think the groups should read something off the beaten track. Otherwise, the same novels are being nominated again and again, and we accept them because some of them were read as buddy reads, like Shōgun or The Name of the Rose, and others were previously nominated but never won the nomination.

This nomination will give a chance to get exposed to different books. Besides, it is only a one-timer, so then we can return to our usual novels :-)

Iselin wrote: "A good start would be any book that isn't featured on the Boxall list. "

I don't agree with that definition at all! I just read a book from the list that I randomly found at a local library that has less than 100 reviews on Goodreads and was only available on amazon from a third party seller. That seems like a very underappreciated read to me, but it is on the 1001 list...

1001 is a very large list. I agree that removing the "top" ones, or the ones more frequently nominated is the right idea, but there are sooo many underappreciated books I am discovering by reading through Boxall's that I think having a criteria that automatically removes all of the 1305ish books on the list is very limiting and we could be missing some great gems!

Kaycie wrote: "1001 is a very large list. I agree that removing the "top" ones, or the ones more frequently nominated is the right idea, but there are sooo many underappreciated books I am discovering by reading through Boxall's that I think having a criteria that automatically removes all of the 1305ish books on the list is very limiting and we could be missing some great gems!"

I agree with Kaycie. I started reading from the Boxall list just this year and mainly have stuck with the classics that I "should have read but haven't". But I'm continually surprised by the novels I find that are on there which I've never heard of, or which are obscure and have very few ratings.

Can someone tell me what In Search of Lost Time is about.....all the descriptions that I have found just talk about it as a classic masterpiece.

Also, isn't really a collection of 7 books --- they seem to be published in different years. Does this means that we would consider multiple books in a trilogy as one chunkster? Sorry for the silly question, I was an engineering major who just happens to like to read :-)

JoLene wrote: "Also, isn't really a collection of 7 books --- they seem to be published in different years."

It is a collection of seven books published at different times, but in the history of literature, they are typically viewed as one big book. So, we consider it as a super chunkster.

They are usually not viewed as a series, but one big book :-)

Oh, those literati can be quite fickle:-)

As for your second question about what it is about ... if my memory serves me right, and it was some 14 years ago (hmmm), it is about the recollections and memories. There are also a lot of fragmented memories and passages full of stream of consciousness. As a student, we were asked to read some passages and recollections for our WorldLit seminars.
Earlier parts of this humongous novel are more coherent tan latter one. This is as much as I remember about it :-)

Thanks for the info.... I don't think I feel like I can commit to the whole thing, but maybe one book at a time or as a relaxed side read.

Looks like W&P won, so that is a no for me. To everyone who voted for it, please enjoy!

Hmmm, what to do, what to do? I voted for The First Man in Rome, but I guess I will have to tread through that one in solitude. I've never read W&P, so it might be a good contender. Choices, choices...

Andrea wrote: "Hmmm, what to do, what to do? I voted for The First Man in Rome, but I guess I will have to tread through that one in solitude. I've never read W&P, so it might be a good contender. Choices, choice..."

I devoured The First Man in Rome. Thoroughly enjoyed it...it is long but it doesn't feel long. A real page-turner.

That's great to know Paula! I absolutely must find time to read it this winter. Have you tried the other books in the series?

Andrea wrote: "That's great to know Paula! I absolutely must find time to read it this winter. Have you tried the other books in the series?"

If I remember correctly, I think I've read 5 of the series. The First Man in Rome was my favorite, but they were all very good, with the exception of "Fortune's Favorites" (Book 3), which was a little slow, but not a bad book at all. I meant to go back and finish up the series, but you know how it goes, you get distracted by other books. It's an excellent series and I highly recommend it.

Just a heads up for anyone interested in Proust. A new group has formed called "A Year in Search of Lost Time", which will begin with Swann's Way on January 1. Come on over if you would like to participate!