The Readers Review: Literature from 1714 to 1910 discussion

It's time to start the process of choosing our next book. The nomination thread will be open until the 31st. The guidelines are: the group must not have read the book in the last two years, and it must have been written during our time period. If we received ten nominations prior to the 31st, the thread will close early so as not to dilute the vote.

Acknowledged. Is there a list of all past group-read choices?

Feliks wrote: "Acknowledged. Is there a list of all past group-read choices?"

Felipe we have a read bookshelf where you can check. I also check each nomination prior to our voting on them :)

I nominate Indiana by George Sand

Deborah wrote: "Felipe we have a read bookshelf where you can check. I also check each nomination prior to our voting on them :)"

Understood. That's where I looked first. I saw a minimal number of books, so I thought I must be missing a list somewhere else. Is that shelf accurate? Those are the only books done so far as group-reads?

Of course, as moderator, I'd expect you to review any suggestion to make sure its not a repeat; that's natural. But as someone suggesting a book I simply want to make a firm/clear/lucid choice without it facing possible dismissal on a technicality. That would not be any fun, after putting on my thinking cap to come up with a great title...see what i mean?

Anyway so if the shelf is correct that leave a fairly wide field. If you can just confirm that one point I will then apply myself to a title! thanks

I want to throw A Harlot High and Low back into the ring again!

Feliks wrote: "Deborah wrote: "Felipe we have a read bookshelf where you can check. I also check each nomination prior to our voting on them :)"

Understood. That's where I looked first. I saw a minimal number of..."

I understand. I've only been moderating for about six months. I've put what we've read on the shelf, and what was nominated on the to be read shelf. I'm unsure as to its true completeness. However, I can tell you the shelf is what I use to determine if it has been read. I hope this helps.

Perhaps a little Henry James? The Turn of the Screw?

I'd love to do a Henry James novel that's read a bit less often than Turn of the Screw. What about The Spoils of Poynton?

Oh, a question. Does nominating the title commit one to providing background, leading a discussion, etc.?

I’d be just as happy with The Spoils of Poynton.

Okay! After mulling this over a bit I have 'shortlisted' a few books. Final choice is at the bottom of this message.

First, I thought of recommending Jules Michelet's famous History of the French Revolution
..this, by way of keeping-alive the discussion we held upon all matters French in the 'Tale of Two Cities' discussion. But I discount it, because it likely has a very high page-count.

Another similar work: Eugene Sue's The Mysteries of Paris. Dismissed for much the same reason.

Then, I considered Jules Verne's The Castle of the Carpathians. Its an adventure story set in Transylvania before Stoker came along. He has another one which interests me: The Survivors Of The Chancellor, a sea-survival saga.

Next, I thought of suggesting James Fenimore Cooper's The Spy --one of the earliest works of espionage, taking place during the American Revolution. I've never read any Cooper. But I set this aside as well, because it is said to be very much like the works of Scott.

Then, I considered Undine, a work of Germanic supernatural folklore, because the writing is said to be very fine. But, this is more something which might better appeal to a horror-lit group.

My final pick! From the prolific --but today, mostly forgotten British author of intrigue, Edgar Wallace--I nominate his influential work, The Four Just Men . I think reading this would be thought-provoking in terms of politics, savory in terms of history; instructive in terms of storytelling, a pleasure for any anglophile; and just a refreshing, lighter read for anyone wearied by the somewhat portentous tomes very-frequently treated by this brain-trust of a group!

Feliks

Kat wrote: "Oh, a question. Does nominating the title commit one to providing background, leading a discussion, etc.?"

Kat, no it does not. But we hope if you nominate and vote that you will participate

That's 5 nominations if both Henry James titles are put on the list.

I'd suggest only 1 nomination/author-we've had authors "lose" by having their votes split between 2 books before.

Frances wrote: "I'd suggest only 1 nomination/author-we've had authors "lose" by having their votes split between 2 books before."

Good point, and will include that for future.

I would like to nominate The Man Who Was Thursday: A Nightmare by G.K. Chesterton. The book was published in 1908 and is described as a metaphysical thriller and a detective story filled with poetry and politics. This combination of genres should make it an interesting read.

Two that are on my "to read" list that I didn't notice on the bookshelf are "Tess of the D'Urbervilles" by Hardy and "Wuthering Heights" by Emily Bronte.

A suggestion for future nominations - perhaps you can nominate some or all of those books that came in second in previous elections, giving the "also rans" another chance.

I suggest "Three men in a boat" by Jerome K Jerome. I have listened to an audio book narrated by Hugh Laurie. It is a representation of that famous English humor. Plus i think everybody can relate to what happens in the story.
Alternatively, "The importance of being earnest" by Oscar Wilde or "Wuthering heights" by Emily Bronte.

Mary Lou wrote: "A suggestion for future nominations - perhaps you can nominate some or all of those books that came in second in previous elections, giving the "also rans" another chance...."

If there is interest, I believe a "losing" book can always be nominated again at the next election. Sometimes interest just seems to disappear, at least for a time.

Deborah wrote: "Kat wrote: "Oh, a question. Does nominating the title commit one to providing background, leading a discussion, etc.?"

Kat, no it does not. But we hope if you nominate and vote that you will parti..."

Makes sense. Thanks.

Daria wrote: "I suggest "Three men in a boat" by Jerome K Jerome. I have listened to an audio book narrated by Hugh Laurie. It is a representation of that famous English humor. Plus i think everybody can relate ..."

Daria - I am not voting your nomination down in any way but I read the book last year and though some of the goings-on were ludicrously amusing, I wasn't charmed by it when so many people just love it and find it such an entertaining and hysterical read. I was disappointed that I wasn't among the admirers because I wish I would have "gotten" it more.

I saw Les Miserables on the group tbr shelf and would like to nominate it. I have been personally trying to get to it for a long time, and would love to read it with the group.

^^^the original? or some kind of abridged version? formidable book to tackle in just a month's interval

Lily wrote: "Mary Lou wrote: "A suggestion for future nominations - perhaps you can nominate some or all of those books that came in second in previous elections, giving the "also rans" another chance...."

If ..."

True, I think this is the second, or third time, A Harlot High and Low has been nominated...Poor Balzac :P Who knows, maybe he will have a fighting chance in hell with the new poll? LOL! I know I'll be voting for him...Again :)

Thanks Ami-maybe we can mobilize the sympathy vote for poor Balzac!

Frances wrote: "Thanks Ami-maybe we can mobilize the sympathy vote for poor Balzac!"

:) Seriously.

Feliks wrote: "^^^the original? or some kind of abridged version? formidable book to tackle in just a month's interval"

You're right, Feliks, it is a long book. It was on the group shelf as a possibility, and it appealed to me personally. They actually took two months to read Buddenbrooks, which is also a chunkster, so I guess extending the time might be necessary if Les Miserables is selected. It's just a suggestion. I will happily read whatever the majority decides on--Balzac has also been on my tbr shelf for years, as well as some of the other titles that have been mentioned, so I would be thrilled if any of those were chosen.

I've been surprised lately at how many obscure titles Thomas Hardy has in his bibliography

I'd love a reason to get to a George Sand book.

Janice George (JG) wrote: "I'd love a reason to get to a George Sand book."

What I have read of hers (not a lot) has disappointed me, perhaps at least in part because the translations seemed wooden. Do you have a suggestion, including translation?

"I've been surprised lately at how many obscure titles Thomas Hardy has in his bibliography"

Some of them are obscure for good reason. But not all. I've read almost all his work, and a lot of it is much less emotionally draining than his major works and quite enjoyable to read.

Lily wrote: "Janice George (JG) wrote: "I'd love a reason to get to a George Sand book."

What I have read of hers (not a lot) has disappointed me, perhaps at least in part because the translations seemed woode..."

No, I haven't read any Sand at all, which is why I would like to have this excuse.

Mary Lou wrote: "Two that are on my "to read" list that I didn't notice on the bookshelf are "Tess of the D'Urbervilles" by Hardy and "Wuthering Heights" by Emily Bronte.

A suggestion for future nominations - pe..."

Please choose one of the two you mentioned. All nominations are placed on our tbr shelf for future review. One nomination received for this month has already been nominated several times. We do open nominations and themed nominations. This one is open.

Feliks wrote: "^^^the original? or some kind of abridged version? formidable book to tackle in just a month's interval"

Intervals change according to book size

Just one? Okay - Hardy seems to be generating more interest, so I nominate Tess.

"Janice George (JG) wrote: "I'd love a reason to get to a George Sand book."

What I have read of hers (not a lot) has disappointed me, perhaps at least in part because the translations seemed wooden. Do you have a suggestion, including translation?"

Indiana by Sand has a recent translation on Oxford World Classics. This new translation is the first since 1900. Translated by Syylvia Raphael.

Mary Lou wrote: "Just one? Okay - Hardy seems to be generating more interest, so I nominate Tess."

Thanks. We have one spot left. If you haven't nominated anything yet, here's your chance

Will wrote: ""Janice George (JG) wrote: "I'd love a reason to get to a George Sand book."

What I have read of hers (not a lot) has disappointed me, perhaps at least in part because the translations seemed wood..."

Thanks. I've had the opposite response to Sand. I've always enjoyed her work,

Will wrote: ""Indiana by Sand has a recent translation on Oxford World Classics. This new translation is the first since 1900. Translated by Syylvia Raphael. ..."

Thanks, Will!

Lily wrote: "Will wrote: ""Indiana by Sand has a recent translation on Oxford World Classics. This new translation is the first since 1900. Translated by Sylvia Raphael. ..."

Thanks, Will! I may vote for this one, although she wasn't on my radar for 2015.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1...

Indiana by George Sand, Sylvia Raphael (translator)

Lily wrote: "Lily wrote: "Will wrote: ""Indiana by Sand has a recent translation on Oxford World Classics. This new translation is the first since 1900. Translated by Sylvia Raphael. ..."

Thanks, Will! I may ..."

I have a 1993 Signet paperback of Indiana, translated by Eleanor Hochman, with an Introduction (which I may or may not read) by Marilyn Yalom.

Janice George (JG) wrote: "I have a 1993 Signet paperback of Indiana, translated by Eleanor Hochman, with an Introduction (which I may or may not read) by Marilyn Yalom...."

Some info about Sands's publications and translators:

http://authorscalendar.info/gsand.htm

Will wrote: "Indiana by Sand has a recent translation on Oxford World Classics. This new translation is the first since 1900. Translated by Sylvia Raphael. ..."

Will -- perhaps you meant "since 2000"?

No, I read 1900 so I am the dispenser of misinformation. My apologies, as an old bookseller I should have been more careful.

Ami wrote: "I think this is the second, or third time, A Harlot High and Low has been nominated...Poor Balzac :P Who knows, maybe he will have a fighting chance in hell with the new poll? LOL! I know I'll be voting for him...Again :) "

I'd love to read more Balzac but not this one. I read it book last year and despite its title I didn't like it nearly as much as some other Human Comedy installments so don't want to reread. And I can't propose any other Balzac for fear of splitting the vote :).

I'm going to propose 20000 Leagues Under the Sea by Jules Verne which I want to read ever since I finished All the Light We Cannot See by Anthony Doerr (there were multiple references to Verne in that book).

Teanka wrote: "Ami wrote: "I think this is the second, or third time, A Harlot High and Low has been nominated...Poor Balzac :P Who knows, maybe he will have a fighting chance in hell with the new poll? LOL! I kn..."

Teanka please choose which one of these two is more important to you.

Teanka wrote: "Ami wrote: "I think this is the second, or third time, A Harlot High and Low has been nominated...Poor Balzac :P Who knows, maybe he will have a fighting chance in hell with the new poll? LOL! I kn..."

I'm taken with its subject matter, the dark seedy Parisian underworld and its ensnaring capabilities on society. It may not compare to his other works, but reading about the most villainous character in literature sounds intriguing to me (goodreads). I've been caught in the snare by that line, and I've used it often when nominating the novel...Repeatedly. So, apologize for the redundancy.

Deborah wrote: "Teanka wrote: "Ami wrote: "I think this is the second, or third time, A Harlot High and Low has been nominated...Poor Balzac :P Who knows, maybe he will have a fighting chance in hell with the new ..."

What are her two choices, I read only one nom, "20,000 Leagues..." Am I misreading?

Ami wrote: "Deborah wrote: "What are her two choices, I read only one nom, "20,000 Leagues..." Am I misreading?"

No, just 20000 Leagues Under the Sea . The other one is the current Pulitzer price winner for 2015, so it's a recent book. Sorry for the confusion.

Ami wrote: "I'm taken with its subject matter, the dark seedy Parisian underworld and its ensnaring capabilities on society. It may not compare to his other works, but reading about the most villainous character in literature sounds intriguing to me (goodreads). I've been caught in the snare by that line, and I've used it often when nominating the novel...Repeatedly. So, apologize for the redundancy.

I agree, Vautrin is interesting (the villain you speak of) and he appears in more books. And I don't say it's a bad book, I would definitely read it but I did so only recently .

p.s. Its not clear from my earlier post, but my two choices are 'Undine' and 'The Four Just Men'.