Catching up on Classics (and lots more!) discussion

What books are missing from our group shelf?

The question has been asked before. I am not linking to old discussions. I think, it will be more interesting to compare later.

This is not a critique in any way. It is meant as inspiration. There are many reasons for a book to be missing. I think the most common one is probably that all the usual gang of people nominating have already read it. I have been hanging around here so long, I can remember when Hamlet was missing, and it ‘finally’ was voted in, almost nobody discussed it, because most people had read it already.

So what do I think is missing:
Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? (or anything Philip K. Dick)
The Kite Runner
The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time
Who Goes There?
Life of Pi
A Game of Thrones
American Gods

And possibly also:
The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe
Jurassic Park
The da Vinci Code
The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo
Shhh, don't tell anyone: (view spoiler)[ Twilight (hide spoiler)]

What do you think?

J_BlueFlower wrote: "What do you think?"

It's nice to see how many different definitions of classic there are.

According to a quote attributed to novelist Alberto Moravia (1907-1990), readers have every right to say about a book or author: «I haven't read it and I don't like it». I was surprised and a little amused to discover that there is not a single title on your list that I have read or am willing to read. (view spoiler)[I did read Twilight, though, and I moderately disliked it. (hide spoiler)]

J_BlueFlower wrote: "I have been hanging around here so long, I can remember when Hamlet was missing, and it ‘finally’ was voted in, almost nobody discussed it, because most people had read it already."

Unlike you, I am new here. I have noticed that in more than one case, a book is chosen but then the discussion can peter out at the stage – generally exciting – of comparing the available translations.

Why do you not want to read the books on the first part of the list? Some of them are excellent.

I have no doubt that there are some great books on the list; I was just surprised that your list of obvious reads could be so unobvious to me.

When it comes to fiction, I rarely read books published in my lifetime. I use them more as an occasional interlude, about one in every twenty books I read, mainly choosing from Pulitzer and Nobel winners. I am particularly wary of contemporary bestsellers: partly because I feel they rarely stand the test of time, and partly because I have a basic distrust of collective trends. In the nonfiction compartment, on the other hand, I do appreciate recent titles.

Ascanio, there are some wonderful books on the Group’s list of read books. I recommend that you jump in anywhere you feel comfortable. It is also good to occasionally attempt a book outside of your comfort zone, and the Group has some challenges that help me do that, such as the yearly Bingo and Buffet challenges.

Am I correct in assuming that you prefer really old classics, such as by Socrates? As for me, I tend to enjoy reading works written from about the mid nineteenth century on. Since I read for pleasure, these tend to be the books I nominate or second, and then read and comment upon.

Perhaps one reason that some of our comments fade out is that, at least in my case, I try to write a thoughtful and personal review about every book I read. I know that some others in the Group always make it a point to write a review as well. In that process, I take my time to think about what I have read and make most of my comments there. I don’t want to be overly influenced by others, especially right after I finish reading, or as I near the finish.

If a book is especially moving, my reviews tend to be long. In my experience, if I don’t care much for a book, I hesitate to post negative comments for fear of ruining the experience of other Group members. My comments, then, are posted in my reviews, which can be quite short if I am only rating the book with one or two stars.

Terry wrote: "Perhaps one reason that some of our comments fade out is that, at least in my case, I try to write a thoughtful and personal review about every book I read."

Thank you, Terry – both for encouraging me to explore new territory and for sharing how you use the platform. When I registered, I wondered whether to write reviews. For me – someone who already writes detailed personal notes on everything I read – the most appealing aspect is discussion, either while reading or after finishing (both are possible). I realised that for many users, reviews linked to their profile are perhaps more appealing than group discussions, since the former form a sort of personal blog, while the latter are 'lost' in the ocean of data. I think I like this aspect: the fact that the web quickly swallows up information makes the moment of live sharing unique – a bit like contemporary art performances, if you like. It is true that personal reviews can also serve as a starting point for discussions, but in reality this does not seem to happen: user replies are often limited to a short appreciative note, which is perfectly understandable: those who have something to say will tend to do so in their own reviews, without investing time and effort in the less visible comment areas on other people's reviews.

Terry wrote: "Am I correct in assuming that you prefer really old classics, such as by Socrates?"

I tend to read mainly books from the late 19th century, but I strive to cover most periods, from ancient times to the mid-twentieth century, and to introduce a certain geographical diversity, although in recent years, after much wandering, I have been focusing on Europe.

Ascanio wrote: "For me – someone who already writes detailed personal notes on everything I read – the most appealing aspect is discussion, either while reading or after finishing (both are possible)."

This is how I feel too Ascanio! It's during discussion that I discover new aspects of books that hadn't occurred to me, and it's during discussion that I hone my own understanding. Reviews are interesting, but there are a lot of places to read reviews, whether of literary critics or of other readers. The thing that makes Goodreads special for me is the ability to actively engage during the reading process.

I get what Terry means in wanting to form her own understanding first because I do feel that way in terms of reading works of literary criticism. I don't like to seek out information from literary critics until I have engaged with a book on my own. After I have fully engaged with a book and have an idea what I think, only then, I like to read literary criticism to see what other aspects that experts in the field have focused on.

But I don't really feel that way about discussion. I enjoy discussing books as I read; that really deepens the experience for me.

It doesn't always happen on Goodreads that there are deep discussions, but it does sometimes happen. If you look at the threads for John Williams's work Augustus in this group, you will see a lot of very deep conversation throughout the entire group read. When a lot of people are reading a book, it often happens.

The problem with group reads is that some of these books have already been read several times by the most active members; so the engagement isn't always good. On books where the moderator is reading along too, the discussion can sometimes be better. But, of course, the moderators can't guide their whole reading based on what books are chosen in their groups; so they cannot always do that. Still, if you participate in the group long enough, you will occasionally run across books with some very deep and active conversation.

There are other groups too that have the sort of conversation that I think you are looking for. In "Works of Thomas Hardy" and "Dickensians!", for example, there are very deep discussions when the group engages with a particular book. But those groups work differently; the books are not chosen by members and the the reads are not monthly. Instead, there will be a book chosen by the moderators a few times a year and a the book will be read slowly by the group (with a chapter every day or two). Those groups work a little differently too in terms of how people comment; usually the moderator expects to take the lead in responding to other members' comments so it takes a little time to get the feel of it. The discussion is a bit more organized so I try to be careful when I participate in those groups not to over-comment, especially when there are a large amount of people in a read.

Although Goodreads has gotten a little quieter over the years, there are still a lot of wonderful people to talk to about books. It just takes a bit more patience to participate in things until you happen to run across group reads that generate more active conversation. Not all reads will be equal, but that's ok.

the main general deficiency I see in the group shelves is a dearth of world literature

a fair number of such titles get nominated, but they rarely do well in the voting

a quick glance down near the bottom of some of the more recent polls:

Lucky Per by Henrik Pontoppidan, 1898, 664 pages 7 votes

The Hour of the Star by Clarice Lispector (1977) 96 pages 10 votes

Gora by Rabindranath Tagore, 1910, 580 pp 10 votes

The Long Ships by Frans G. Bengtsson (1941) 478 pages 8 votes

Alberta and Jacob by Cora Sandel (1926) 247 pages 10 votes

Journey by Moonlight by Antal Szerb (1937) 299 pages 10 votes

The Tartar Steppe by Dino Buzzati, 1940, 198 pages 12 votes

12 votes for The Tartar Steppe - I stopped looking after that.

Greg wrote: "It doesn't always happen on Goodreads that there are deep discussions, but it does sometimes happen."

Greg, thank you for taking the time to share your experience—and above all, thank you for your valuable suggestions!

Ascanio and Greg, you both make excellent points. Feel free to follow or friend me to read my reviews. I prefer to friend people who also write reviews. I find that reviews have more depth of thought and if I want varied opinions, I read a lot of other reviews.

Getting back to the question at hand, I am wondering what books you both think we should read. I have already read 7 of the books that J_Blueflower posted.

Here’s one that I think belongs in that category: Sometimes a Great Notion by Ken Kesey.

Darren, that’s when I turn to Buddy Reads. If you can get six or seven people interested in a buddy read, there can be some good discussions.

Darren wrote: "a dearth of world literature"

• Antal Szerb: borrowed this week.
• The Tartar Steppe: one of my favourites.

Some European classics from the period 1900-1950, not on the bookshelf:

French language:
Guillaume Apollinaire
André Gide*°
Anatole France*
Louis-Ferdinand Céline
Colette°
Irène Némirovsky°
Maurice Maeterlinck*

Spain:
Miguel de Unamuno

Portugal
Fernando Pessoa

Italy:
Grazia Deledda*

Greece:
Nikos Kazantzakis

German language:
Alfred Döblin
Hermann Broch°
Gerhart Hauptmann*
Hugo von Hofmannsthal
Robert Musil°

Scandinavia:
Selma Lagerlöf*
Karl Gjellerup*
Henrik Pontoppidan*

Poland:
Witold Gombrowicz°
Stanisław Witkiewicz

Russia:
Ivan Bunin*
Maxim Gorky
Yury Olesha
Andrei Platonov
Konstantin Paustovsky°

* = Nobel Prize
° = on my list of “obvious” classics

Ascansio, that’s quite a list of authors. Of them, what individual books stand out in your opinion?

Terry wrote: "I find that reviews have more depth of thought and if I want varied opinions, I read a lot of other reviews."

Thanks Terry, and I do think you write great reviews! There are a number of people on the site who write insightful and wonderful reviews, and I love to read them!

But I think what is lacking in reviews is the ability to respond to specific motifs, symbols, and details of a book.

For example, when I participated in a group read of James Baldwin's Giovanni’s Room, I recall pages and pages of comments all on a single paragraph. That's because the text is so rich. Metaphors and symbols in the book have such a tremendous depth of psychological weight behind them that a whole discussion can ensue based on one page of the book that would exceed the length of most entire reviews!

Reviews are great at capturing books as a whole, and they are also great at capturing what is good and bad about a book. But with truly "classic" books, I am not sure how they can capture everything about the meaning of the book.

Reviews are usually much better thought out than random discussion; so in some senses, they do often go into greater depth. But the very format and length of reviews forces them to be shallower sometimes. For example, there is no way for any review or even a book of reviews to engage deeply with a book like Giovanni’s Room. Each page of the book would need a separate review for that to happen!

That is not always true of course. A book like And Then There Were None, as entertaining as it is, can easily be handled in full with one review, but it seems to me that there are some books that just can't be fully encompassed by that format.

Anyway, sorry for dragging this thread even further off topic!

Greg, that’s okay. Your review reminds me that I need to read Giovanni’s Room which has long been on my list.

Ascanio wrote: "Darren wrote: "a dearth of world literature"

• Antal Szerb: borrowed this week.
• The Tartar Steppe: one of my favourites.

Some European classics from the period 1900-1950, not on the bookshelf:
..."

This is a great list Ascanio!

I am ashamed to say that I am only familiar with half the names on your list, but many of the names that I am familiar with have written extraordinary works!

Darren, Greg and Ascanio — World literature is definitely an area on which I need to work. One reason that I hesitate on non-English literature is that I am afraid a translation won’t be effective for me. This is based on some past experiences.

I will say that I have had some good experiences with Asian authors. I really enjoyed reading Convenience Store Woman (although I think this was written in English) and I am currently doing okay with The Memory Police (which is a translation). They are both recent novels, though. Specific book recommendations from members of this Group do help me to overcome my hesitancy, especially if a specific translation is recommended.

Terry wrote: "Darren, Greg and Ascanio — World literature is definitely an area on which I need to work. One reason that I hesitate on non-English literature is that I am afraid a translation won’t be effective ..."

Convenience Store Woman was a lot of fun, and I loved The Memory Police, despite its obliqueness!

Translations do make such a difference.

Greg wrote: "I am only familiar with half the names"

I too know nothing about some of them other than their name and reputation – it's a small list of big names, to explore little by little.

Terry wrote: "what individual books stand out in your opinion?"

The only authors whose complete, or almost complete, works I have read are Broch, Musil, Colette, Hofmannsthal and Paustovsky. I have read some works by others, and I have not read anything at all by some. Several works that I have been able to read in French or in Italian translation seem to lack an English translation. Of the authors I know best, my favourite works are:

• Colette: Ripening Seed (1923) – if you like The Waves and To the Lighthouse, here you can find similar atmospheres, without stream of consciousness;

• Irène Némirovsky: L'Enfant génial (1927) – touching, dreamy novella with the flavour of a fairy tale; Deux (1939) – my favourite, I'm not sure if it's been translated into English; Suite Française (posthumous) – her most famous work;

• Hermann Broch: The Sleepwalkers (1930–1932) – wonderful & demanding; The Unknown Quantity (1933) – must read; The Guiltless (1950) – short stories masterpiece;

• Robert Musil: The Confusions of Young Törless (1906); Three Women (1924) – three novellas; The Man Without Qualities (1930, 1933, 1943) – the epitome of European literature;

• Konstantin Paustovsky: best known for his short stories on nature, author of novels rarely available in English, the first three parts of his six-part autobiography have recently been translated and are definitely worth reading: The Story of a Life (1945-1963) – an epic tale of early 20th-century Russia;

• Hugo von Hofmannsthal: Elektra (1909); The Letter of Lord Chandos (1902) – what he's best known for; Andreas (1907–1927) – fragmentary, unfinished novel for the connoisseur.

Of the authors I know in part, I really enjoyed:

• Kazantzakis: Zorba the Greek (1946) – despite the notoriety, a great book!

• Gombrowicz: Cosmos (1965) – if you like Beckett, Gombrowicz ads some humour;

• Maeterlinck: The Blind (1890), Intruder (1891) – dark one-act plays.

Thanks so much for the recommendations Ascanio!

Some of the ones I have read:

Guillaume Apollinaire: A very peculiar poet, though an interesting one. I feel like a lot is probably lost in translation with the English versions I read, but it was interesting nevertheless. I read him when I was reading a number of French Surrealists like André Breton and Paul Éluard.

Likewise The Book of Disquiet by Fernando Pessoa was intriguing though difficult and strange.

I have read a little by André Gide as well, but it was long ago.

I like Colette, and I do like Woolf as well.

One of the authors you mention that intrigues me most is Irène Némirovsky. I think I'll try nominating Suite Française. I have read nothing by her before, though I have heard her mentioned often.

Ascanio wrote: "Poland:
Witold Gombrowicz°
Stanisław Witkiewicz
..."

and Henryk Sienkiewicz* (Quo Vadis)

* = Nobel Prize

Darren wrote: "the main general deficiency I see in the group shelves is a dearth of world literature

a fair number of such titles get nominated, but they rarely do well in the voting

a quick glance down near t..."

I did not realise it was that bad. You are quite right. Maybe we could have world literature-nominations only now and then?

Greg wrote: If you look at the threads for John Williams's work Augustus in this group, you will see a lot of very deep conversation throughout the entire group read. ..."

Direct link: https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

(Some of it was light-hearted. Look mess 405)

I think we have to understand and respect the diversity of taste that makes up the group. The whole sense of "classic," has many different definitions depending on the reader. The group tends toward popular classics with which they have a familiarity rather than academic classics though that does not stop academic classics from getting picked. But I think that most here prefer to read for pleasure and make a difference between pleasure and school. I don't particularly care much what I read, so I adjust my taste to what the groups I read with choose for the most part. If there is a specific book I think others will enjoy, I look to buddy reads and might encourage fellow members to consider it if I feel they would enjoy the book, but I find determining whether people will like what you like at the same time as you is quite difficult. There are also other considerations. Books have suddenly become quite costly and that means people are going to rely on their libraries or wherever then can find books they can afford. Often the libraries do not have the specific book or even if they do might not have it available. This will lead to choosing more commonly accessible books. Also books are not always in print everywhere. That is especially applicable to literature in translation not yet in the public domain. All in all, the group does a pretty good job in selecting books. I sometimes think a too many books might be getting selected based on their adaptations but that is to be expected.

Thanks, Ascanio. I have read Cheri and the Last of Cheri by Colette, so I put Ripening Seed on my list. I was surprised that Zorba the Greek was not already on there since I knew that some friends thought it was great. I should get to that.

I would like to read Suite Francaise and The Story of a Life, as both stories sound appealing. Regarding the first, WWII novels ate a perennial favorite. Regarding the last one, last year or the year before I read a novel about life in East Germany under communism and escaping to West Berlin. It was excellent. I cannot remember the name, but when I look it up, I will post it here.

I am not quite up for the 3 volumes by Herman von Hoffmannsthal, and some of the books you recommend may not be available in an English translation, but thank you for taking the time to recommend them. I read about 60 books a year, which seems like a lot, but isn’t really that much when I consider two GR Groups that I choose books from, various Buddy Reads, my three challenges and a book club that takes up 10-12 spots a year. I will attempt to work in some of the books you have recommended — to expand my horizons!

Greg, If you nominate Suite Francaise, I will second it. If it doesn’t win, let’s do a Buddy Read.

The book I was referring to in my earlier post was actually a memoir — Forty Autumns: A Family's Story of Courage and Survival on Both Sides of the Berlin Wall, by Nina Willner.

Terry wrote: "Greg, If you nominate Suite Francaise, I will second it. If it doesn’t win, let’s do a Buddy Read."

Great! I'll do that, and I'd love to do a Buddy Read if it doesn't win.

... and what if this group tried to offer a group read with ONLY international classics?

let me dream a little more: maybe there would be native speakers to join in?

(sorry if you have tried and abandoned sth. like this already; I'm not a long-time member ... yet)

Sabagrey, I think someone would have to step forward to volunteer as a moderator. I am neither qualified nor do I have the time, but it is an interesting idea. The current mods would probably have to approve it.

Greg, you’re on!

sabagrey wrote: "... and what if this group tried to offer a group read with ONLY international classics? ..."

As mentioned in earlier posts, many of these books do not poll well. That is why we encourage buddy reads in this group. Happy reading all.

Buddy Reads are a good option, I remember ones for Monkey, Story Of The Stone, Kristin Lavransdatter, Conference of the Birds, The Alexiad

I'm scared to speak up here.. 🫣 I hoped to see some books listed for obvious classics- but am very overwhelmed in the lists shared being European and out of my life scope.. and I thought I had read many "classics".😟

don't be scared Liz, and thanks for bringing us back on topic! ;o)

how about a few bit more "obvious" ones (in English!) that I'm surprised are not on our shelves yet:

Faerie Queene, The Spenser, Edmund 1590
Tom Jones Fielding, Henry 1749
Princess Of Mars, A Burroughs, Edgar Rice 1912
Evelyn Waugh (Scoop, Decline and Fall)
Brighton Rock Greene, Graham 1938
Pursuit Of Love, The Mitford, Nancy 1945
Under The Volcano Lowry, Malcolm 1947
Naked And The Dead, The Mailer, Norman 1948
On The Road Kerouac, Jack 1955
Patrick White (Tree Of Man, Riders In The Chariot)
Cider With Rosie Lee, Laurie 1959
Saul Bellow (Herzog, Augie March)
Godfather, The Puzo, Mario 1969
High-Rise Ballard, J. G. 1975
Thomas Pynchon (Crying of Lot 49, Gravity's Rainbow)
Housekeeping Robinson, Marilynne 1980
Month In The Country, A Carr, J. L. 1980
Bonfire Of The Vanities, The Wolfe, Tom 1987
Don DeLillo (Underworld, White Noise)
Trainspotting Welsh, Irvine 1993

Personally, I often have trouble keeping up with the group when it's a sizable book. Augustus worked pretty well for me because there was a schedule.

I know it is frustrating when there is little participation for a book you really want to discuss, but one of the best discussions I had turned out to be pretty much just me and Greg. It was a discussion of The Wasteland and I'm not sure he got anything stunning from me, but boy did I get a LOT from him. So, buddy reads or even group reads that have two enthusiastic participants can sometimes be very worthwhile.

I often find that every book the group selects is one I have already read. I have to remind myself that this might be someone's first opportunity for that book and it is often one I would hate to see them miss. My own nominations seldom win. The buddy reads are a great alternative, and I am already wondering if I can work in Suite Française if Terry and Greg go for it.

I also appreciate your list Ascanio, although I will have many of the same problems Terry mentions. I wonder if there is a World Literature group on GR. I have never checked for one.

Darren, I feel good that I have tead dome of these books!

“Read some.“ When you want spell check, where is it?

Sara, that sounds great. I hope you can work it in.

sabagrey wrote: "... and what if this group tried to offer a group read with ONLY international classics?

let me dream a little more: maybe there would be native speakers to join in?

(sorry if you have tried an..."



If we continue with the Moderators Run Amok category, I would be willing to entertain using my quarter for an International book to read. But, I would need help with it from someone else I'm sure. I think if we continue with the format my turn comes around in March of next year. Until then there is the Buddy Read option and also monthly nominations.

A good starting point to introduce the group to an author is short stories. Any suggestions of good short stories that fit your criteria?

There was a mention above about lack of participation. I admit I have been posting much less this summer. I retired one year ago. It was time to work less and focus on improving my health. Although I am now much happier and healthier, I have Rheumatoid Arthritis and associated Carpal Tunnel Syndrome. In particular, years of typing at work have exacerbated the Carpal Tunnel. I have been avoiding typing, but I will be having a surgery soon. We are actually scheduling it on Monday.

Liz~In~Colorado wrote: "I'm scared to speak up here.. 🫣 I hoped to see some books listed for obvious classics- but am very overwhelmed in the lists shared being European and out of my life scope.. and I thought I had read..."

I understand Liz. Many of the members who have been with the group have read 70% or 80% + of the books on the shelves. I am barely at 50% and feel like there are still many I need to catch up on.

Annette wrote: "Personally, I often have trouble keeping up with the group when it's a sizable book. Augustus worked pretty well for me because there was a schedule."

I have trouble keeping up with the numbers of monthly books the group reads. Long ago I realized I could read half each month comfortably, but that was enough. I also do not usually read the Long Read Category books. They're wonderful books, but just more than I can complete.

Greg wrote: "I think I'll try nominating Suite Française."

In the case of a buddy read this year, I'm in too. Difficult to plan further ahead. Suite Française, whose manuscript was published posthumously, also had an “unpublished version” released a few years ago.

sabagrey wrote: "...a group read with only international classics? let me dream a little more: maybe there would be native speakers to join in?.."

This would be ideal for me too, however utopian it may be. If there is sufficient interest to open a new space – here or elsewhere – to cultivate the dream you describe, I am willing to contribute actively. I suppose the project should be discussed separately so as not to cannibalise this other ongoing discussion.

From our comments in this discussion, I realise that there may be two largely complementary views and concepts of ‘obviousness’ between native English speakers and the rest of the world, and the demographics of this group (perhaps of Goodreads in general?) seem to lean in one direction. The voting results favour the status quo – which is entirely reasonable because it meets the needs of actual users.

Terry wrote: "The book I was referring to in my earlier post was actually a memoir — Forty Autumns: A Family's Story of Courage and Survival on Both Sides of the Berlin Wall, by Nina Willner."

Link: Forty Autumns: A Family's Story of Courage and Survival on Both Sides of the Berlin Wall

Thank you! That went straight to my TBR.

If you are interested in the tension around the East Germany and the Berlin Wall. I can recommend The Spy Who Came In from the Cold (have been a group read here) and Stasiland: Stories from Behind the Berlin Wall. Also the movie Ballon (Germany, 2018) is excellent.

This is a great discussion and an excellent thread. One of the things I love about the idea of classics is that there is no set parameters and there is a gray area where we can discuss about this. I think this was brought up by Sam. We can all step back and discuss what actually makes a classic a classic. Anyhow, you all have some great points and love the discussion.

This is a great discussion! Thank you to everybody participating. Keep it going. As you probably guessed my interests are not only in popular classics. The top post was meant as a little bit of a provocation. If I had started out with a 100 books long list, the discussion might have died right there.

Here are some books, I think we are missing that has not been mentioned yet:

The Complete Essays or a selection Essays by Michel de Montaigne (on the World Library 100 list)
The Guns of August
The Devil to Pay in the Backlands (on the World Library 100 list)
Journey to the End of the Night (on the World Library 100 list)
Darkness at Noon
In the First Circle by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
The Things They Carried
Pippi Longstocking
Parable of the Sower

I think we are a few non-native English people around here. I am in Denmark and 6 hours ahead of the US East coast, so I get to be one of the first to vote, but usually are some who vote before me.

If we read something from Denmark, I have not read, I will join. I have nominated
Childhood Youth Dependency by Tove Ditlevsen (May 2025)
Niels Lyhne by Jens Peter Jacobsen (May 2025)
Lucky Per by Henrik Pontoppidan (Aug 2025)
Lucky Per by Henrik Pontoppidan (Dec 2022)
I think, I have nominated Inger Christensen, Karen Blixen and Hans Christian Andersen but cannot find it.

sabagrey wrote: "... and what if this group tried to offer a group read with ONLY international classics? ."

I think this is a good idea. It is mostly the new school that is English-centric. We have read a good share of Dostoevsky, Tolstoy and the ancient Greeks in old school. (But not enough Dostoevsky for me to have learned to spell the name in English... I look it up every single time.)

I also think it should be in place of some of the other regular discussions, so we do not spread us to thin.

If the moderators fear that it will be a lot of work to look up all the nominations, I would like to volunteer to do I single month of new school international classics nomination moderation. I have absolutely no relevant education in literature.

J_BlueFlower wrote: "Niels Lyhne"

A milestone in my reading journey; the rest of Jacobsen's works – novels and short stories – are also well worth reading.

J_BlueFlower wrote: "new school international classics nomination moderation"

Sometimes I wonder if having so many categories (old school, new school, long read, short read, moderator's, buddy reads) doesn't actually contribute to less participation in discussions. I see frequent comments from people who find themselves unable to keep up with the existing official group reads. For this reason, I'm not sure if adding another new category is the best solution. I also see the practical sense in the other types of management that Greg mentions, where the book is chosen by the moderator, who becomes personally involved in animating the discussion.

Perhaps we could consider the possibility of an unofficial group of a handful of regular enthusiasts who use the already existing resource of buddy reads, possibly combined with an open thread for announcements. Moderation could also be on a rotating basis, taking up Sabagrey's suggestion/dream: to have a few moderators linked to the region in question. Not necessarily literature experts; they could very well be people who propose a reasonably available book linked to their region. As new people interested in moderating their region join, the reading path/calendar (and the moderator's rota) can be expanded. Similarly, the calendar shrinks when a moderator decides to suspend their contribution.