Reading the Chunksters discussion

We seem to have enough interest in the current group read to justify continuing, and I am open to suggestions on when we should choose the next group read, and maybe whether to restrict this one to being a contemporary pick rather than another classic. Any thoughts?

I like the idea of switching back and forth between classic and contemporary, but bottom line is my participation will mostly depend on whether I want to read the book or not. If I don't vote for it, I don't feel obligated to read it.

My one suggestion would be to allow members to nominate more than one book but to second only one.

Agree with both of Xan’s points. Alternating contemporary/ classic and the fact that a book with “ chunkster” size needs to be one you really want to read.
Democratically constituted nominations don’t always produce a read that suits one and all, and not many selections will have the proven merit of Dickens.

For myself there is an abundance of lengthy books I would sign up to (not just my own nomination), but a few others I wouldn’t be keen on.
I think the key is to gather opinions as much on what doesn’t appeal at the outset- say from an initial master list of thirty, and then eliminate those- as it is to vote in a poll with no awareness of whether other participants are distinctly averse to a book ( eg read it recently; bad previous experience with the author)

I'd love to alternate between classics and contemporary novels as well but I've made myself a promise that I'll focus on unread books in my own shelves so that's the reason why I haven't been a part of the discussions now. But I follow the actions of this group the whole time and awaite a chunkster choice that suits me. I don't know if the group has read James Joyce's Ulysseus earlier or if that one will be of interest to the group?

I like the method of alternating between classics and contemporary books.

I also think Xan’s idea of being able to nominate more than one book, but then vote for just one, might be good to try. Gets out of the rut of each person voting for their one nomination and there may end up being more books that appeal to people.

As to when we choose the next read, I would start at least mid-March, maybe even earlier. Do we want a week break after the current read before starting the next, or start the next book right away? Maybe start nominations March 1 and plan to start the next book April 1? These are just rough ideas.

I like Linda's idea of taking a break between reads. Two weeks sound plenty to me. I have no particular thoughts on when to start the nomination process. Just remember, it may take some people a few days or even longer to acquire the book, so let's put some distance between picking it and reading it, but not too much distance.

Linda wrote: "Maybe start nominations March 1 and plan to start the next book April 1"
That sounds like a good plan

I missed this earlier but I’m happy to see the group continue. I definitely like the idea of alternating but I’m also not opposed to just an open nomination and see what wins. I also like allowing 2 noms and 1 second exorcist since the number of active members is fairly small right now. Taking a couple of weeks between books is good. I’d like to see the nominations sooner just so people have a longer time to secure copies and we can read some newer books. All just my 2 cents I’m just happy to see the group active :)

Bumping this topic to bring it back to the top of the folder.

Hugh wrote: "Bumping this topic to bring it back to the top of the folder."

Yes, thankyou Hugh! This was the topic thread I didn't find! =)

I’ve enjoyed reading several novels with this group, though irregularly. I’m a fan of an early vote, it’s disappointing when you read a book only to find one of your groups will be discussing it next month - despite best intentions I rarely return to participate in discussions of past reads, I much prefer to read while the discussion is happening. Just my two cents, and full disclosure I only participate in discussions where I voted for the book, typically.

No preference for classic or contemporary here. Alternating might mean that contemporary novels stand a chance more often, however. It seems to me that with open vote a meaty classic usually wins. And we do have a new Yanagihara published this month (just saying!).

Hey! I'm a newbie/lurker but just to say I am planning to join the next read (got too much on to catch up with OMF at the moment). @Nike I'm currently reading Ulysses for the second time. It's a GREAT book for a group read and has slightly dominated my life since I read it last year!!

Holly wrote: "Hey! I'm a newbie/lurker but just to say I am planning to join the next read (got too much on to catch up with OMF at the moment). @Nike I'm currently reading Ulysses for the second time. It's a GR..."

Wow! Twice in less than two years! That makes it sound even more tempting. =)

I would be up for Ulysses. Started it with a group a couple years ago, but didn't follow through. Any way, I've set myself a "theme" of The Odyssey for 2022, so I intend to read it anyway. Thinking about September right now. So doing something contemporary first would be just fine...

Nike - it is a book to dive headfirst into. I'm reading it with different support materials this year and think I probably will again and again! Laurel - can I ask what else is on your Odyssey reading list for this year?

Holly wrote: "Laurel - can I ask what else is on your Odyssey read..."

Sure! It is not limited to these, but I like to keep my lists to a dozen titles, soooo:
The Odyssey and The Iliad (obviously, so not counted...)
1. The World of Odysseus
2. An Orchestra of Minorities
3. Ulysses and
Ulysses: Complete Text with Integrated Study Guide from Shmoop
4. An Odyssey: A Father, a Son, and an Epic
5. Omeros
6. Olympus, Texas
7. The Penelopiad
8. Homer's Odyssey
9. Ilium
10. Ransom
11. Over the Wine-Dark Sea
12. The Siege of Troy

Oh thank you! I'm going to share this list with my Ulysses reading group and catch a few of these myself :)

I don't quite understand the desire to let people nominate more than one book. Some enthusiastic nominator might nominate 4 books. I don't see having a poll of books consisting of books nominated by only 2 enthusiastic readers as being a good thing, especially as it would likely be the same nominators. Such a system could work if you rotated who is allowed to nominate.
However, since most here seem to feel like allowing more than one nom, I would suggest having Amanda's limit of 2 nominations or at least some limit. However, I don't mind a moderator nominating more than one or even ruling some out as they definitely have to read the darn book.

As to page length, I agree we should keep to true Chunksters but agree with Hugh that this could include a book series. This group did read Kristin Lavransdatter as 3 separate novels at about a month for each novel, and it worked well.

I also agree with Jen's opinion on having an early vote - it helps with planning.

I agree that aiming to start the next book in April/May is a sound plan, but I am tempted to start the nomination process in early February so that we can hold the poll in time to give people a few weeks to get hold of the winning book.

On nominations, I think a limit of two nominations per person is a sensible one, but in that case maybe two seconds too, but ideally we don't want too many books in the poll, because (as I have seen in other groups I have moderated) winners with small numbers of votes often lead to inactive discussions.

One other point is that I am currently the only moderator, but if any of you are interested in sharing the role, I would consider it - I can't guarantee that I can participate in every discussion, as my book buying budget and reading time are not unlimited.

Brian wrote: "I don't quite understand the desire to let people nominate more than one book. Some enthusiastic nominator might nominate 4 books."

I guess I wasn't thinking of someone nominating 4 books, but instead having people be able to nominate up to 2 books. I was thinking that if we have more books out there in the beginning of the nominating process, there might at least one book that someone wants to second. Sometimes people nominate a book, but don't second any, so it seems that the only book they might be willing to read is their own nomination. Who knows if this would help participation any. And I agree with Hugh that if the winning book doesn't have very many votes, it usually don't end up with a very robust level of participation.

Oh I’m very curious to see what thr next read will end up being - keen to read along finally if it’s something that’s been on my radar. Is there a place for auggestions already?

I know that there are many online sources for all sorts of categories of books.
This is one list I cam across with a number (for me) of mouth watering books (the "contemporary" selection in the 500+ page category

https://lithub.com/the-50-best-contem...

Thx, Jonathan!

Excellent selection.

Yes, thank you for that list, Jonathan! I meant to look at it when you first posted it, then forgot until just now when Xan posted.

I love scanning lists like this. From this list, I've already read 12 of the 50 books, and I physically own another 5 yet to be read. Although I had a book in mind to nominate that's not on this list... :)

I've only read 9 and most were from the shorter end of the Chunkster spectrum. I didn't read any of the selections over 900 pages. As I age I'm getting less inclined for the more experimental contemporary Chunksters like Infinite Jest that I planned to read someday when I was younger. I'm more apt to read ones like the last I read in this group, A Fine Balance, that carry the contemporary Dickens designation. I noticed a few of the books in this list do too.

Now you had me curious on length. I've read 3 that were over 900 pages:


2666
Ducks, Newburyport
Infinite Jest

Now I've reading through that list too. I'm actually planning to read The Fifth Season by N.K. Jemisin in february since we'll read it together in another GoodRead's group. Two of the books on the list I've got in my shelves but still haven't read (so I wouldn't mind at all if they were chosen for the group read here) The Name of the Rose and Midnight's Children.

I've seen the TV - series Fingersmith recently and I loved it so much! But to early for me then to read the book as well, I'd prefer to forget most of what I've seen before reading the book.

I've read The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle and liked the most part of it. I've read and really, really love bothWinter's Tale and Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell.

Apart from the ones I have unread in my shelves I'm interested in reading Pachinko, The Robber Bride, All the Light We Cannot See, American Gods, An Instance of the Fingerpost and 2666.

And here is a much longer list including books from the 2000th century and some even older.
https://www.goodreads.com/shelf/show/...

(May I be brave enough to confess that I actually haven't read the Harry Potter books yet ... the only person in the reading world I guess. I'm blushing now)

Somehow we are well into the second half of February, so we'd better get a nominations round underway.

Hugh wrote: "Somehow we are well into the second half of February, so we'd better get a nominations round underway."

Shall we nominate classics or contemporary or both?

The discussion of Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell is now underway, and will continue until August, so I will probably start another round of nominations, probably for a classic, some time in June.