Jump to content

Booker Prize 2012


Michelle

Recommended Posts

Bring up the Bodies looks fantastic and Swimming Home isn't one I'd heard of before but after reading the synopsis, I'll be looking out to get a copy.

 

I love how these book lists and prizes bring together such a mix of books. My only problem is, there is usually at least one I want to get my hands on, so they can be quite expensive :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to admit seeing a book on the Booker list does make me less inclined to want to read it. I always think of such books as being a bit verbose, dull and perhaps overly clever. I've never been able to finish one, apart from The Life of Pi, which I did enjoy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to admit seeing a book on the Booker list does make me less inclined to want to read it. I always think of such books as being a bit verbose, dull and perhaps overly clever. I've never been able to finish one, apart from The Life of Pi, which I did enjoy.

 

I think you're right Andrea.

I struggled with Paddy Clarke Ha Ha Ha and God of Small Things - the only two I've read.

I should attempt The Life of Pi.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I struggled with Paddy Clarke Ha Ha Ha

 

Oh no! Really? I adored Paddy Clarke! It's been years and years since I read it, and can't rememmber anything exact but the general overall feeling of loving it. It's on my list of books to reread.

 

I'll have to take a closer look at the nominated books, as I've usually liked them. Not that I've particularly sought out to read the books nominated in any special way, but I do remember picking up a book more than once or twice with the sticker "winner of .." or "nominated for..." and enjoying the book very much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's an 'interesting' article here... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/booker-prize/9537028/Booker-Prize-shortlist-turns-its-back-on-readability.html

 

Including the following:

Last year’s head judge, Dame Stella Rimington, was pilloried for saying she prized books that “people would read and enjoy”. Her fellow judge, the former Labour MP Chris Mullin, added that he liked a novel to “zip along”.

The chairman of the 2012 judging panel, Sir Peter Stothard, has loftier ideals.

“I felt very, very strongly that I wanted to avoid that thing where people say, ‘Wow, I loved it, it’s terrific’,” he said of the judging process.

“I’m afraid quite a lot of what counts for criticism these days is of that sort: how many stars did it get? Did I have a good time? Would my children like it? It is opinion masquerading as literary criticism,” said Sir Peter, who is editor of the Times Literary Supplement.

 

I'm too tired to sort out what he's really saying, so I thought I'd bring it in here for discussion. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting quote, Michelle.

Without actually taking the trouble to read the original piece (sorry!) I think what he means is actually something I've discussed with my friends as well. That is, the difference between "I like it" and "it was well done". It's like... you can recognize good quality even if it's not your type. It's not just literature, mind you, and in fact I think in literature it is often a bit more difficult to see the difference. But say you hate ... oh, I don't know, salmon. You just don't like it no matter what. It doesn't take away from the quality of the ingredients, the skill in cooking it, in the pure genius and brilliancy of the dish, that you don't like it. I myself cannot stand Cabernet Sauvignon wines. I can still appreciate the wine as well-made and truly amazing wine of indisputably great quality, just not one I personally, due to my preferences and tastes, like.

 

And I think that's what Sir Peter's saying. Personal opinion is always a matter of taste. But we can, despite our tastes, say that a book was a truly amazing piece of literary art. Can we not? And when it comes to prize like the Booker Prize, we should focus on the pure quality, not just how it hits our tastebuds. Personally, I aplaud his courage in pointing that out instead of meekly pandering for popularity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm - that article just highlights why I don't like the Booker. It seems they prize use of language above storytelling ability, but the latter is a skill just as valuable as the former. And why on earth can't a book have both? :banghead:

Edited by ~Andrea~
Link to comment
Share on other sites

^That's exactly how I feel too, Andrea. Give me a great story written well and I'm happy, but why would I want to read something that may excel in "literary" circles but is boring or lacks any feeling of engagement with the characters or story (which I've had with previous winners). I've come to take the Booker with a pinch of salt now, and rarely bother to even note what's on the list and what isn't. Much happier to make up my own mind about what I want to read.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think "good literary quality" and entertaining and captivating storytelling are mutually exclusive, however. It's just that, as we can see here on this focum, what captivates one brings another to tears of boredom. So the latter "measure of goodness" is more personal, and depends on the person doing the judging or evaluating. The former can be thought of as something "absolute". What that absolute measure of quality in literature is, that I'll happily leave to people smarter than me! But we can have both, of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

......I can still appreciate the wine as well-made and truly amazing wine of indisputably great quality, just not one I personally, due to my preferences and tastes, like.

 

And I think that's what Sir Peter's saying. Personal opinion is always a matter of taste. But we can, despite our tastes, say that a book was a truly amazing piece of literary art. Can we not? And when it comes to prize like the Booker Prize, we should focus on the pure quality, not just how it hits our tastebuds. Personally, I aplaud his courage in pointing that out instead of meekly pandering for popularity.

 

(bolding mine)

Totally agree. Great way of putting it Gabbie.

 

^That's exactly how I feel too, Andrea. Give me a great story written well and I'm happy, but why would I want to read something that may excel in "literary" circles but is boring or lacks any feeling of engagement with the characters or story (which I've had with previous winners). I've come to take the Booker with a pinch of salt now, and rarely bother to even note what's on the list and what isn't. Much happier to make up my own mind about what I want to read.

 

Just because a book is popular in literary circles doesn't guaranty it's readability, or quality IMO. Readability is all in the eye of the beholder. However, as noted above, just because an individual doesn't like some writing doesn't mean it isn't quality writing. Quality in the language, or flow of the prose.

 

Lots of people speak of engagement or liking of characters in a book......I don't find it necessary to like a character as long as they are interesting in some manner, or can teach me something.

I like to see what is on the Booker list, but it doesn't form my reading preferences. It does, however, make me notice something different that I might have missed otherwise. For example, Julian Barnes' The Sense of an Ending. I'd not have bothered with him at all but for the Booker list. And.....it's ended up being one of my favorite reads, ever. /shrugs/ :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm - that article just highlights why I don't like the Booker. It seems they prize use of language above storytelling ability, but the latter is a skill just as valuable as the former. And why on earth can't a book have both? :banghead:

 

I'm not all too familiar with these Booker Prizes and all sorts of other prizes, being a foreigner, but I agree with what you've said 100%. If a novel's well written, to the point that all 'experts' in the field of literature sing its praises, but lacks in the actual storyline, I think it's just not worth reading. It's very much like 'look at me with my beautifully constructed sentences and use of long hoity-toity words'.

 

People want the best of both worlds!

 

Edit: As for the actual list, I've not heard of any of the books, and I've only heard of Will Self and Hillary Mantel but haven't read anything by them so far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 2 weeks later...

Will Self is far too clever for my little brain, I fear!

Me too .. reading is about enjoying yourself not making your head hurt. I think though that Willoyd was saying that Umbrella was complicated but worthwhile. I'm not forgiving Will just yet though, I had to dig out my old Enid's for comfort the last time I attempted him :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread reminds me that I have James Joyce's Ulysses somewhere on my bookshelves. I'm not sure I will ever want to read it.

I agree with what some of you have said here, that sometimes a writer can get too caught up in the idea of being "literary", and by doing so, the story and characters suffer.

This isn't always so, though.

The Children's Book by A.S. Byatt, that won the Booker Prize (I'm not sure what year), was brilliant on all levels, in my opinion. I loved the style, substance, themes, story, and characters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I gave up on The Children's Book after about 200 pages. I just couldn't get into it. :(

 

Such a pretty cover, too...!

The cover is gorgeous!

It's so curious how what speaks to one person doesn't speak to another. It's a good thing there are so many books out there for all the different tastes people have. I'd ask you to give it another go, but if you got through 200 pages, it probably isn't a book that you would enjoy. It's been awhile since I read it, but I was hooked very early on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...