I haven’t read Jules Verne and wasn’t aware of the critique. I’m glad Jon raised it, but I must have missed his comment somehow, because I would have been fine changing my nomination. I considered other books for the theme, such as Mark Twain, and ruled them out for this very reason.

I agree that it difficult to find older books that adhere to modern sensibilities..I have my own criteria for assessing whether or not I feel comfortable with a particular author, but of course, that’s every subjective. I take everyone’s point about the freedom to sit out a particular month. But I’d also be ok with moving to the next book on the list.

Sorry I cross posted with Catlady. I agree that the issue should be raised during the nomination process. I must be missing something - where was the point raised?

Yes, certainly the point can be raised during the nomination process, but, and I can't over emphasize this, I will not allow repeated denigration of a book or author in any thread of the New Leaf Book Club. Full stop. We went through that with the MR Book Club, and I, for one, am not willing to have the NLBC side tracked by that kind of behaviour.

The proper way to handle books you don't want to read is to not vote for them. Further, the voting thread is not the appropriate place, especially after the voting is finished, to bring up your concern.

Thanks Charlie - I wasn’t sure when / where the issue came up. I agree that the nomination process is the best avenue for raising a concern.

I wouldn't want a nomination to be rejected out of hand for being offensive to modern sensibilities.

I didn't know about Verne until after the nominating. I read about it in the introduction in the Penguin Classic published version.

If a winning book or author is found to be offensive after the vote, does the rule of having to read the winning book if you vote still apply?

Yes, I can see how that might become a slippery slope.

I do vet books before I nominate them. However, the problem, as others have noted, is that most books reflect social attitudes prevalent during the time they were written, that at a later date are recognized as prejudiced.

It’s not possible for any of us to completely escape this, even today. All books, tv, movies, etc can be deconstructed and shown to have some questionable underlying assumptions. Unconscious bias is part of the human condition, and is very different from deliberately promoting hatred and bigotry. So the challenge for a book club is determining where to draw a line.

See my post above. I think that's as clear as I can make it. But in the case of Jules Verne's 80 Days -- why not give it a try, and if you find it unsupportable, then drop it. However, fair warning* -- my willingness to be flexible is directly related to how annoyed I am at the time.



*In the current time we live in, I find my tolerance for anyone trying to "find a loophole" of ANY sort is just about zero. So, therefore, my fair warning.

Agreed. And I won't ever do so, except by how I vote. That's one of the many reasons we vote, after all. If enough of us think a particular work or author is beyond what we can tolerate, it won't get through the voting process. Given that we're a pretty broad spectrum here, from at least 3 different continents, I think we constitute a reasonable filter.

I am reading Verne and so far so good.

I think that if we know ahead of time (if possible), then we can make up our minds and decide with out nods/votes.

OK, folks. I've had enough. I'm tired, worn out, and dealing with too many things at home to deal with the bickering and general attitude here. So I suggest that if anyone cares enough to run this club, go for it. Cause I can't do it any more. I just can't.

Charlie.