|
View Poll Results: Which book shall we read for February's discussion? | |||
Portrait of Jennie by Robert Nathan | 13 | 20.63% | |
Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov | 14 | 22.22% | |
Circle of Friends by Maeve Binchy | 5 | 7.94% | |
The Greatest Knight by Elizabeth Chadwick | 8 | 12.70% | |
Shards of Honor by Lois McMaster Bujold | 10 | 15.87% | |
Outlander by Diana Gabaldon | 14 | 22.22% | |
Water for Elephants by Sara Gruen | 10 | 15.87% | |
A Town Like Alice by Nevil Shute | 24 | 38.10% | |
Love Story by Erich Segal | 11 | 17.46% | |
Stardust by Neil Gaiman | 22 | 34.92% | |
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 63. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
01-22-2013, 05:04 PM | #31 |
Indie Advocate
Posts: 2,863
Karma: 18794463
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Device: Kindle
|
*sigh*
Stardust in the lead. Oh well. |
01-22-2013, 05:12 PM | #32 |
Resident Curmudgeon
Posts: 75,899
Karma: 134368292
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Roslindale, Massachusetts
Device: Kobo Libra 2, Kobo Aura H2O, PRS-650, PRS-T1, nook STR, PW3
|
Too bad it's not Shards of Honor because for those that would enjoy it and have not read the series would then have a number of books to read from there. Whereas Stardust is it. When you are done, you have to go find something else to read instead of moving on two book two because you bought the two-in-one version to read Shards of Honor.
|
01-22-2013, 06:41 PM | #33 |
Bah, humbug!
Posts: 39,072
Karma: 157049943
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Chesapeake, VA, USA
Device: Kindle Oasis, iPad Pro, & a Samsung Galaxy S9.
|
Portrait of Jennie seems to me to have the greatest potential to be stimulating reading. The idea of two people separated by time but connected by their love of the same painting has possibilities.
|
01-22-2013, 06:50 PM | #34 |
Evangelist
Posts: 432
Karma: 1720909
Join Date: Mar 2011
Device: Voyage, K3
|
If you are reading Stardust, I would recommend the illustrated version. I think the art by Charles Vess is gorgeous.
|
01-22-2013, 06:53 PM | #35 | |
Series Addict
Posts: 6,180
Karma: 167189477
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Florida, USA
Device: Kindle Paperwhite (2nd Gen)
|
Quote:
|
|
01-22-2013, 07:12 PM | #36 |
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 5,185
Karma: 25133758
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: SF Bay Area, California, USA
Device: Pocketbook Touch HD3 (Past: Kobo Mini, PEZ, PRS-505, Clié)
|
I agree that most of these aren't "Romance" in the normal genre sense. I don't mind that; romance characters and tropes can be off-putting to people outside the genre, and there's no shortage of good discussion of the genre itself at Smart Bitches, Trashy Books. As a long-time avid romance reader, I'm plenty happy for February's selection to be "books with strong romantic elements" rather than "books that almost everyone agrees belong on the /romance/ shelf." I would rather romance got some indirect attention than that the genre was excluded entirely because most people here don't care for it.
|
01-22-2013, 07:45 PM | #39 | |
o saeclum infacetum
Posts: 20,547
Karma: 224837692
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: New England
Device: H2O, Aura One, PW5
|
Quote:
I get the impression that there's an element of shame or embarrassment about romance books that doesn't apply to crime or sci-fi or westerns or what have you, which doesn't seem just. I assume as with any genre category, there are the well-written books and then there's the typical dreck (which can be entertaining enough, not judging). Is it because women are the target audience, as opposed to other genres which appeal either partially or mostly to men? |
|
01-22-2013, 08:04 PM | #40 | |
Resident Curmudgeon
Posts: 75,899
Karma: 134368292
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Roslindale, Massachusetts
Device: Kobo Libra 2, Kobo Aura H2O, PRS-650, PRS-T1, nook STR, PW3
|
Quote:
Sometimes it's just the way romance novels are described. Makes them sound awful. Maybe whoever writes the descriptions should try to tailor them for people who may not be a fan of romance novels. Five of the books we are voting on, I will not read or reread. Outlander I've read and it was awful. Lolita is a book about pedophilia and I will not debase myself by reading it. The other three I won't read because they sound awful. |
|
01-22-2013, 08:37 PM | #41 |
Indie Advocate
Posts: 2,863
Karma: 18794463
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Device: Kindle
|
I'm not depressed that my nomination isn't getting that much of the vote. I actually thought later that Water for Elephants probably wasn't a really great fit for this genre.
Happy to see A Town Like Alice moving up though and as much as I think Lolita is a strange pick for the category, I'd also be happy with having a crack at it for the book club read. I'm a bit surprised at the lack of movement for Shards of Honor. I thought it would attract the sci-fi vote. And although I didn't vote for Stardust, it's actually my favourite Gaiman book. I have multiple copies of the physical book at home including one signed by Gaiman himself. It's just that I was hoping for something else to read and discuss for the Romance category. But I think I'm secretly (now not so secretly) hoping that Love Story or Portrait of Jenny gets up there. They seem to fit the category a bit better than most and neither are particularly huge books to invest time in if you're not a huge fan of romance novels. |
01-23-2013, 05:01 AM | #42 |
Born Yesterday
Posts: 129
Karma: 1197084
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Vietnam
Device: Kobo Libra 2 & Kindle Scribe & Kindle 2022
|
Three more days to go and I've actually started reading Stardust.
|
01-23-2013, 05:20 AM | #43 |
Gadgetoholic
Posts: 1,466
Karma: 3865860
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Sweden
Device: Kobo Libra2, Tolino Vision 6
|
I've put myself on the waitlist for Stardust, and I'm pretty sure I'll read it if it wins. A Town Like Alice I will probably read either way. Lolita... doubt I'll ever read it, but never say never...(after all, it is considered a classic) On second thought: I do say "never" to Outlander. It's on my "Book they would have to pay LOADS of money for me to read".
|
01-23-2013, 08:51 AM | #44 |
Bah, humbug!
Posts: 39,072
Karma: 157049943
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Chesapeake, VA, USA
Device: Kindle Oasis, iPad Pro, & a Samsung Galaxy S9.
|
I'm glad Lois McMaster Bujold 's Shards of Honor isn't in the lead, and I was wrong to give a third to its nomination. It's science-fiction, not romance, and doesn't belong on the list. Stardust by Neil Gaiman is fantasy, and likewise has no business being on the list. Both of these are simply stealth candidates whose only reason for running is to circumvent the romance category.
And that's my opinion. |
01-23-2013, 09:15 AM | #45 |
Gadgetoholic
Posts: 1,466
Karma: 3865860
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Sweden
Device: Kobo Libra2, Tolino Vision 6
|
I actually think Stardust sounds to be reasonably close to romance. Fantasy romance means you can put a lot of romance of different kinds in there. I don't know why that would be any less "romance" than for example Outlander (historic fiction with an element of fantasy). But since romance really isn't my "thing" I admit my ideas are pretty vague...
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
MobileRead February 2013 Book Club Nominations | WT Sharpe | Book Clubs | 95 | 01-22-2013 08:16 AM |
MobileRead January 2013 Book Club Vote | WT Sharpe | Book Clubs | 44 | 01-03-2013 09:54 PM |
MobileRead February 2012 - Book Club Vote | WT Sharpe | Book Clubs | 29 | 02-01-2012 10:02 PM |
MobileRead February 2011 Mobile Read Book Club Vote | pilotbob | Book Clubs | 67 | 02-21-2011 07:47 PM |
MobileRead February 2010 Mobile Read Book Club Vote | pilotbob | Book Clubs | 98 | 02-10-2010 07:22 AM |