SciFi and Fantasy Book Club discussion

Hello,

I thought I would throw up a thread and ask for suggestions and concerns in the group. Let me know below! I want this group to be enjoyable to every member and I don't know about problems or ways to improve it unless you tell me.

Thanks!

As I brought up in a different thread, I'd like to see some newer or more obscure books. Basically our list of books so far is the all-star team of the sci-fi and fantasy genre. I don't mind this so much when it is something I have not read (like Snow Crash, which was awesome) but I am not one that particularly likes to reread books. Ender's Game in particular seems to be one where it seems only a handful of people actually read the book this month, since so many have read it multiple times already.

I don't know if others would be interested in this or not but maybe sometimes we could have two books in a month...one "classic" and one "modern". This month would have been a good "double" month because Ender's Game is an easy and quick read. However, Game of Thrones month would probably not be a good choice, since the book is massive.

Ben, I've thought about having 2 books each month as well. We're all seem to be pretty hardcore readers (just take a look at the 'What else are you reading this month' threads!), and if one of the two is a classic you've already read and don't want to reread, you'll have another option for the month. Game of Thrones IS pretty massive though.

I have to agree with Ben. I’d like to see some newer and more obscure books too. I thought the discussions of “Neverwhere” were very good. It seemed like it was a first read for most of the group and we were really able to dig into the meat of the book. In contrast, I felt like I was the only person who had never read “Ender’s Game” before. Every topic seemed to turn into a fan discussion and I felt a bit left out because I thought the book was okay, but everyone else thought it was the greatest book ever. And, many of the answers to the questions posted were based on sequels, not the book itself. I felt really lost because I have never read any of the sequels and was of the opinion that a discussion about a book should be based on that book, not on other books.

I’ve been a member of a Yahoo group that’s similar to this one. I’ve been a member since 2001 or 2002, but only started participating regularly about a year or so. I’ve read some wonderful books that I wouldn’t have read otherwise. Each month, we select one science fiction and one fantasy book to read as a group. We can read either, both or neither. The books are nominated and voted on three months ahead of time (two weeks of nominations, followed by two weeks of polling.) and the books of the month are posted two months ahead of the discussion month. So, the July books were just posted on the first of May. Recently, we started having occasional classics months where we select books that are more than 25 years old. The system works very well and might work better here because the message board format on GoodReads works better than the Yahoo Groups format.

I agree with the two books a month... I am really enjoying the choices so far so I would hate to lose them. I know a lot of people have already read them but I haven't. So I am excited to read them. By having two books, people can read both or neither.. whatever! But I would hate to lose the books we've been choosing. So I agree with Brooke. Plus Brooke is right about Game of Thrones.

I am in the middle of Ender's Game right now.

I agree that a second book is a good idea. I also like Nick's idea of horror in October. I'd suggest we mix up the bonus book category and keep the SF/fantasy alternation that has worked pretty well so far. For myself, I'd like to do some related categories, like nonfiction books on SF history or fantasy theory or SF's record of predictive success.
Also, I'd say that the current process is pretty democratic. If we want to see more avant-garde work, we just need to nominate and vote for it. One way to separate the classics would be to split the nomination process into more categories and cycle through them. Something along the lines of the sci-fi eras that were proposed in a different thread would do the trick.

A Sample Schedule
January: Pre-30s SF, Fantasy Author Biography
February: 80s SF, Urban Fantasy
March: 30s SF, Swords and Sorcery
April: 90s SF, Parodies
May: SF Comic Books, Fantasy Classics
June: Hugo Winners, Nebula Winners
etc.

Nick, you've done a fantastic job. Heehee. One thing that might help you schedule would be a thread to debate/vote future categories for scheduling/nomination.

A second book should do the trick. I have to agree with most of you on the selections though. Although I love the suggestions, I've read them all. I know I joined this club as a seasoned scifi reader and was hoping for some new material to discuss. I'd have to guess, based on posts, that most of the other members have read the classics as well. So yes, some more obscure picks would be nice. Or some newer material. It's hard since there is a lot of mediocre scifi out there as well. The classics are classics for a reason, after all.

I also second that you're doing a great job, Nick. :)

Thanks Jen and Thomas!

This all sounds good to me and we could put this in place starting in October. October will be horror themed so what suggestions do you have for November and December?

A second book will also be fine, I think. Most here read several in one month anyways.

June: Hugo Winners, Nebula Winners

How about instead of just winners, we vote from the entire list of nominated books for recent years, like November could be "2007 Hugo Nominees". Some more obscure books end up getting nominated for these awards, and picking recent years makes it even more likely that they won't be classics everyone has already read. I know this flies in the face of using the master list to vote from, but it could address some of our concerns.

I'm having a major brain-fart moment - do fantasy books have an annual award too? I feel like I should know this.

Good question. Wikipedia lists these:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category...

Love the idea of reading the Hugo nominations for a given year. I would recommend this be done next year after the noms are out for 2008. That way, people who want to can sign up at next year's worldcon and vote for them.

A problem with this might be that they will only be available in hard back and can also be hard to get a hold of from the library...which could cause participation to be low. I'd still be up for it, though.

I agree with the general sentiment. The lists are very heavily weighted toward the classics and while there's good reason for this, it also makes it less appealing for some.

While I primarily read science fiction and fantasy, I do not consider myself to be super widely read within the genres, yet I've already read every book this group has chosen from February through September (I have not read the very first book, Slaughterhouse 5, but didn't join GoodReads until the end of January/early February so had already missed it).

I think every book we've chosen to read is excellent (except for The Color of Magic), but I find it difficult to maintain an interest when they are all books I've already read and I have a lengthy list of things I'd rather read for the first time. I'm perfectly happy to reread a good book (many times in fact), but it's not generally my top priority.

To counter the hard cover issue maybe we could have only books two years or older. Thoughts?

Also, maybe one month a year we could pick a Goodread authors book. This, of course, does not exclude their books from being picked in any other month, but does make one month a definite pick.

I said it in YA also, different concern then picking the books. I think we should try to keep the goodread's authors book in the designated threads. I just think it helps keep it to where if someone is interested they know where to go and look for the author's books.

I mean for us to pick one to read and discuss per year. Such books would be new and obscure and has the added bonus of having an author present to ask questions to.

Having the author around to discuss books with is always good. On my Yahoo group, we recently had Richard Morgan join us for the discussion of "Thirteen". I upped my rating of the book after the discussion because I understood so much more of what's going on.

I think having a group read a new author is great. We could nominate from our goodreads author thread and having the author right there would be good too.

Choosing to read one of our own, i.e. a Goodreads author is a great idea. In the interest of full disclosure, I am an author, but I think you all know that by now. I think I can speak for most, if not all my fellow Goodreads authors in saying that we welcome the chance to talk about our books to readers; in fact, we crave the opportunity.