MobileRead Book Club 2016 Categories Runoff Vote

Originally Posted by sun surfer

Congrats to the Humour supporters. It can't get any closer than that. I think the last time we had a tie followed by a run-off tie in any vote in this club was way back in November 2011 for the monthly selection so it's a rare thing to be this evenly split.

The list looks good. I do notice that most of the new or resurrected categories (3/4 of Science, Humour, History, Fantasy) are at the end of the year so we won't get to them for a long while. We may even be voting on 2017 categories before we try out some of those first. However that's not a big deal and I'm just as good with keeping the list as is as with changing it, so whatever you prefer Tom.



This made me interested in my own stats. I joined this club in February 2011 and have read 42 of the selections since. This club has expanded my reading horizons over the last many years and I've really enjoyed it. There've been a few duds I've read such as Neverwhere, Shutter Island, Black Rain (and those three all within one six month period! ) or Doomsday Book but there've been many more good books including gems such as The Name of the Wind, Anna Karenina, Cloud Atlas or The Age of Innocence.

2015 to date: read 5 of 8, though all except The Iron King before choice as book of the month. Did not think much of The Iron King.

2014 read 5 of 12, all before selection of book of the month. Eye troubles kept me out of things for much of 2014.

2013 read 7 of 12, A Town Like Alice, The Swerve, Fanny and Stella, when selected as book of the month, others prior. Didn't much care for A Town Like Alice or Fanny and Stella.

2012 Read 7 of 12. Black Rain and Ivanhoe read before selected as book of the month. Really did not think much of Shutter Island or Cloud Atlas.

2011 Read 8 of 12. Anna Karenina, Slaughterhouse Five, The Island of Dr. Moreau, and A Christmas Carol read before selected as book of the month. All were alright to good except for silly Hal Spacejock. March of year marked my start of participation.

So my ratio considering the start date of March 2011 through August 2015 is 32 out of 54 read. Not great I'll admit, but did I mention that I don't care for genre fiction?

[issybird]

OK, I'll play, too, and expand my post and up my stats a bit, as I only included books where I participated in the discussion and not total read, i.e., the books that I didn't reread because they were too long or because I didn't like them enough. In a few cases, I didn't reread, but remembered the book well enough to discuss it anyway.

2015 - I read and discussed six of eight so far. I mentioned especially enjoying Our Man in Havana and The Age of Innocence, which was a reread and so good I upped my stars to five at GR as a result. West with the Night and Cannery Row were rereads that I still didn't like much.

2014 - I read seven of twelve, but didn't reread/discuss The Grapes of Wrath (not a Steinbeck fan, see above and unlike Cannery Row, it's long). Several others were rereads; new to me was On the Trail of Genghis Khan and it was one of my books-of-the-year.

2013 - I read nine of twelve, but it was kind of a dud year. A reread of Persuasion is always lovely, but dreadful books included A Town Like Alice (I didn't reread this, but remembered it well enough to discuss, no doubt because of my loathing.), Dr. Izard and 20,000 Leagues under the Sea. I think this is why my participation was down the next year.

2012 - I read ten of twelve, which includes several rereads. The good:Tender is the Night (my single favorite book with the club). The bad: Shutter Island and Cloud Atlas. The latter really surprised me, as I had loved The Thousand Autumns of Jacob de Zoet by the same author.

2011 - I read nine of twelve, including rereads. Best new-to-me was The Island of Dr. Moreau; no real duds that year. (I was lucky; I knew Hal Spacejock wasn't for me so I didn't even try. )

That brings me up to 41 out of 56, of which I discussed 35.

[sun surfer]

Originally Posted by Hamlet53

2015 to date: read 5 of 8, though all except The Iron King before choice as book of the month. Did not think much of The Iron King.

2014 read 5 of 12, all before selection of book of the month. Eye troubles kept me out of things for much of 2014.

2013 read 7 of 12, A Town Like Alice, The Swerve, Fanny and Stella, when selected as book of the month, others prior. Didn't much care for A Town Like Alice or Fanny and Stella.

2012 Read 7 of 12. Black Rain and Ivanhoe read before selected as book of the month. Really did not think much of Shutter Island or Cloud Atlas.

2011 Read 8 of 12. Anna Karenina, Slaughterhouse Five, The Island of Dr. Moreau, and A Christmas Carol read before selected as book of the month. All were alright to good except for silly Hal Spacejock. March of year marked my start of participation.

So my ratio considering the start date of March 2011 through August 2015 is 32 out of 54 read. Not great I'll admit, but did I mention that I don't care for genre fiction?

It's interesting we only started one month apart Hamlet! I knew we were close in start dates but not that close.

I'd only read one selection prior to it being brought up in the club, The Picture of Dorian Gray, so that'd bring my total read to 43, and I'm also currently reading The Satanic Verses so almost 44 total reads. I plan to make up A Canticle for Liebowitz by the end of the year as well. I guess that's not too shabby for reading less than 50 books a year and reading books for the lit club too.

When listing the duds I'd missed Fanny and Stella so thanks for pointing that one out. That was probably the most disappointing book I've read for the club because the premise sounded so fascinating, and it was chosen the month before Doomsday Book. Actually it seems that for me books I don't care for come in five-month clusters here. January-May 2012 brought three books I read and didn't care for (Black Rain, Shutter Island, Neverwhere). June-October 2013 brought four I didn't care for - two I read (Fanny and Stella, Doomsday Book), and two I thought either I wouldn't like (Dr. Izard) or would annoy me (The Swerve) so didn't read and reading others' posts in those discussion threads validated my initial thoughts. I've been lucky to not have any clusters like that since though so I should probably knock on wood, heh.

By year, it looks like I've been pretty consistent between 2/3 and 3/4 read:

2015 - 6 of 8 so far.
2014 - 9 of 12.
2013 - 8 of 12.
2012 - 9 of 12.
2011 - 8 of 11 (started in February).

[CRussel]

I'm a newbie to the club, so no point bringing out my stats. But I'm impressed with those of you who've managed to participate in >50% over a number of years. Given the very broad range of books in the list, that's a sign of real commitment.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Hamlet53

Yeah good question. It "NEEDS to be"? Why?

Because September is the month of my birthday and SF is the category that fits best in September. That and there is no way in hell I want classics for September.

[Dazrin]

I have read under 50% of the selections but I have found several times that many books or authors through the nomination process. For example, in 2014 I read only 5 of the selections but read 12 other works because of the book club.

[John F]

I've read 47 of the selections and my best year was 11 of 12. An additional 5 I had previously read. I participated in 0 (practically) of the discussion threads (although I do read them.)

[issybird]

Originally Posted by John F

I participated in 0 (practically) of the discussion threads

Why?

[John F]

Originally Posted by issybird

Why?

It's just not my thing.

Why do you post in the discussion threads?

[sun surfer]

Originally Posted by John F

It's just not my thing.

Why do you post in the discussion threads?

That's sort of the point of a book club, to read and discuss a book together.

I post in the discussion threads because I like to try to contribute to the club and share my thoughts on a book, and in return read others' thoughts that often enrich me. It's enjoyable for me to interact with others over a shared reading experience.

[John F]

Originally Posted by sun surfer

That's sort of the point of a book club, to read and discuss a book together.

I post in the discussion threads because I like to try to contribute to the club and share my thoughts on a book, and in return read others' thoughts that often enrich me. It's enjoyable for me to interact with others over a shared reading experience.

Thank you issybird.

I guess I'm demoted to junior status. Maybe we should change the welcoming message of new members to "Welcome. Feel free to nominate, vote, find books you may not normally read, read and discuss as many or as few books as you like; but if you don't discuss, No Books For You!"

[sun surfer]

Originally Posted by John F

Thank you issybird.

You are posting in a public forum; if you're only interested in a reply from one person then take it to PM.

I guess I'm demoted to junior status. Maybe we should change the welcoming message of new members to "Welcome. Feel free to nominate, vote, find books you may not normally read, read and discuss as many or as few books as you like; but if you don't discuss, No Books For You!"

I'm not surprised by your sarcasm and hyperbole considering previous posts of yours. It's been made abundantly clear by Tom et al. that you or anyone can participate in the book club however you want. That said, I'll freely give my opinion of encouraging people to discuss the books we read because to me that's the best part of the club.

[John F]

Originally Posted by sun surfer

You are posting in a public forum; if you're only interested in a reply from one person then take it to PM.



I'm not surprised by your sarcasm and hyperbole considering previous posts of yours. It's been made abundantly clear by Tom et al. that you or anyone can participate in the book club however you want. That said, I'll freely give my opinion of encouraging people to discuss the books we read because to me that's the best part of the club.

Fair enough.

[issybird]

Originally Posted by John F

It's just not my thing.

Why do you post in the discussion threads?

It's kind of the point of a book club, isn't it? To discuss books you've read?

But to respond to the first sentence in your post, I've got two related reasons. I'm going to adapt a popular slogan of my youth, and ask, "What if you gave a book club and nobody came?" Sometimes I think we get perilously close to the point where people nominate and vote, but nobody comes to the discussion. I admit I get a little frustrated by this at times. There can be good reasons for a poster not to show up in a particular month (and I don't always show up myself and sometimes my reason isn't good, or even perceivable to me, The Man Who Would Be King being a case in point). The problem, as I see it, is that if few enough people show up most months, even the semi-regulars will be less inclined to bother. Because if there's not going to be a real discussion, again, what's the point?

The second reason is courtesy. If I nominate/vote for a book or books and I'd like other people to read and discuss them if they win, then I feel a certain obligation to follow through in turn even if my choices lose. Otherwise, it smacks to me of the kid who won't play if he doesn't get his way in every particular. Granted, the slate can seem like pretty dire reading at times to people of certain tastes, and this is why I'm glad of the new slate for next year, so that people who have felt disaffected by the current topics will get the book club they want. This sense of obligation is why lately I haven't nominated or voted in months when I think I'm unlikely to read the choice. By my lights, it's not fair of me to try to influence the outcome if I'm not likely to participate. The people who are going to discuss the book should determine the choice. Again, I fully acknowledge that I don't always follow through, despite sterling intentions. Sometimes the selection is a book I know I can't stand or not good enough to reread or it's just too long - these are my usual reasons.

Originally Posted by John F

Maybe we should change the welcoming message of new members to "Welcome. Feel free to nominate, vote, find books you may not normally read, read and discuss as many or as few books as you like; but if you don't discuss, No Books For You!"

I think this is perfect as a welcoming message. It can be daunting to join in and voting or nominating can be a great way to stick your toe in. I'd like to see a few of those newbies convert to participants, however, most especially when a book they've voted for wins. Ultimately, and this is, again, just my opinion, a book club is participation and not a performance, where the few discuss the books selected by the many. Tom can boot me for saying this if he wants. I'm not agitating for a change in the rules, but I am pointing to the elephant in the corner.

To employ another overused phrase, "it is what it is." I know I'm free to participate or not along with everyone else to the extent that works for me and that's fine.

[John F]

Originally Posted by issybird

It's kind of the point of a book club, isn't it? To discuss books you've read? ...

I would say it is a point, it is not necessarily the point. That would depend on what the members of the particular book club want. IMO, I like the MR Book Club the way it is: Nominating, voting, no dictatorship (just about everything is decided by poles); and there is also a thread for discussing the book chosen for a particular month, which is nice for those who like that sort of thing. I like that there is no bias in the process for "active members".

... But to respond to the first sentence in your post, I've got two related reasons. I'm going to adapt a popular slogan of my youth, and ask, "What if you gave a book club and nobody came?" Sometimes I think we get perilously close to the point where people nominate and vote, but nobody comes to the discussion. I admit I get a little frustrated by this at times. There can be good reasons for a poster not to show up in a particular month (and I don't always show up myself and sometimes my reason isn't good, or even perceivable to me, The Man Who Would Be King being a case in point). The problem, as I see it, is that if few enough people show up most months, even the semi-regulars will be less inclined to bother. Because if there's not going to be a real discussion, again, what's the point? ...

And I don't see this as a problem ("if nobody comes" (to the discussion)). So what? We would still get a lot of great books, people can still nominate, discuss during the nomination, vote, and have discussions during the vote.

... The second reason is courtesy. If I nominate/vote for a book or books and I'd like other people to read and discuss them if they win, then I feel a certain obligation to follow through in turn even if my choices lose. Otherwise, it smacks to me of the kid who won't play if he doesn't get his way in every particular. Granted, the slate can seem like pretty dire reading at times to people of certain tastes, and this is why I'm glad of the new slate for next year, so that people who have felt disaffected by the current topics will get the book club they want. This sense of obligation is why lately I haven't nominated or voted in months when I think I'm unlikely to read the choice. By my lights, it's not fair of me to try to influence the outcome if I'm not likely to participate. The people who are going to discuss the book should determine the choice. Again, I fully acknowledge that I don't always follow through, despite sterling intentions. Sometimes the selection is a book I know I can't stand or not good enough to reread or it's just too long - these are my usual reasons. ...

IMO, I disagree (with the bolded/italics part). I value all the participants nominations and/or votes and/or discussion.

... I think this is perfect as a welcoming message. It can be daunting to join in and voting or nominating can be a great way to stick your toe in. I'd like to see a few of those newbies convert to participants, however, most especially when a book they've voted for wins. Ultimately, and this is, again, just my opinion, a book club is participation and not a performance, where the few discuss the books selected by the many. Tom can boot me for saying this if he wants. I'm not agitating for a change in the rules, but I am pointing to the elephant in the corner. ...

To me, the elephant in the room is that some people want to steer the MR Book Club in a direction that the Club doesn't want based on a couple of vocal participants.

Tom isn't going to boot anyone for expressing their opinion. The problem, IMO, is
thinking he will, and people continuing to want him to make unilateral decisions. It is going to be very interesting (for me) to see the direction the club will take when Tom quits and a new Club administrator is "chosen".

How many times does Tom need to say "let the nominations/voting decide" before people get the message.

... To employ another overused phrase, "it is what it is." I know I'm free to participate or not along with everyone else to the extent that works for me and that's fine.

I agree completely.