The Readers Review: Literature from 1714 to 1910 discussion

For April we will have an open nomination so you may nominate any work which fits within the groups timeline.

Last day to nominate is March 20th

I'd like to nominateZuleika Dobson from our bookshelf. It's something that's been kicking around in my library for a while, and I know it's on someone's top 100 books list (for what that's worth).

I'd like to nominate from 19th century France: Zola's L'Assommoir (variously translated as The Dram Shop/The Gin Palace/Drink/Drunkard). There's a lovely new translation in Oxford World Classics but people can also find it for free at Project Gutenberg. There's a commentary about it at http://readingzola.wordpress.com/2014...
It's also listed in 1001 Books You Should Read if anyone is doing that.

Esther Waters by George Moore

Lisa-this group already has a Zola read in progress and I assume they will be doing L'Assommoir in the next year or so-if you check the group homepage you'll see the Zola read there-enjoy!

The Return of the Native by Thomas Hardy

Frances wrote: "Lisa-this group already has a Zola read in progress and I assume they will be doing L'Assommoir in the next year or so-if you check the group homepage you'll see the Zola read there-enjoy!"
mmm, I'm half way through reading Zola in his recommended reading order so I'm ready to start this one now, don't really want to mess up my reading plan, it's the only one I'm sticking to!

Ooh, Frances, nice idea about Zuleika Dobson! I haven’t read that in years, and it’s hilarious.

Fathers and Sons by Ivan Turgenev

Jane Austen - Northanger Abbey.

I always wanted to read something by Jane Austen

Cindy wrote: "I always wanted to read something by Jane Austen."

Cindy -- Although far from her strongest work, Northanger Abbey is her closest to a Gothic novel (which I see among your interests). It is one I have not read, but I believe that it is a bit of a parody of the Gothic style. Probably Jane Austen knew both Ann Radcliffe's The Mysteries of Udolpho and Walpole's The Castle of Otranto.

I will add Northanger Abbey to my read list. If we don.t choose it for the book club reading in April, I will read Emma or Northanger Abbey.

Cindy wrote: "I will add Northanger Abbey to my read list. If we don.t choose it for the book club reading in April, I will read Emma or Northanger Abbey."

Hope you enjoy!

I second Zulieka Dobson! I've heard such good things.

Lily wrote: "Probably Jane Austen knew both Ann Radcliffe's The Mysteries of Udolpho and Walpole's The Castle of Otranto. "

No probably about it!

Cindy wrote: "I will add Northanger Abbey to my read list. If we don.t choose it for the book club reading in April, I will read Emma or Northanger Abbey."

Or both. Both are excellent.

Everyman wrote: "Lily wrote: "Probably Jane Austen knew both Ann Radcliffe's The Mysteries of Udolpho and Walpole's The Castle of Otranto. "

No probably about it!"

I thought so, but I don't know Austen's biography at that level of certainty, so hedged my comment. Thx for your confirmation, Eman.

For those of you planning to read "Northanger Abbey" be aware that it is one of Austen's weakest novels. It was the first Austen work I read, and I was surprised that she was so famous until I read her other novels. Still, it has a lot of that indescribable and subtle Austen charm. And yes, according to the introduction to my edition, Austen was parodying "The Mysteries of Udolpho."
As for the April read, I'll absolutely second Turgenev. I have been wanting to read "Fathers and Sons" for a long time.
Oh, and for those who want to read Zuleika Dobson, it is technically out of our reach, since it was published in 1911. Just kidding...

I'm not sure I would call Northanger Abbey weak - I would use the word "different." As Everyman said, she is parodying the gothic novels of her time. And having a bit of fun doing so. So, it definitely isn't a serious novel, unlike her other novels.

And I'd like to make a suggestion now. One of the reasons that I nominated Jane was that people have been nominating her for some time, and she never manages to win...usually comes in 2nd. (Always the bridesmaid, never the bride.) For example, in the January - I believe - poll, she came in second, with more votes than most month's winners. If she loses again, wouldn't it be nice to have just a Jane month? Only put Jane's books on the list? Given the time period of this forum, it seems a bit odd that we've never done an Austen.

Ditto Trollope, by the way.

Just my humble opinion, however. :-)

I see what you mean, about "Northanger Abbey". You are right, it is not really weak, though I still think it is not as well-rounded as some of her masterpieces. The reason Austen probably doesn't make it is that most of us have probably already read all or most of her books, and are looking for something new. Personally, I prefer voting on books I have not yet read. But that might just be me...

Clara, true enough. But everyone has read Gaskell, and we've had a Gaskell only month. And then we went on to read, I believe, 2 more of her books in the same year.

I did my Master's thesis on Jane - I don't need to read her again. But...again, people have been asking for Jane for awhile, she always does very well in the polls but never seems to win, and I think it would be a nice gesture to her fans.

Again, same with Trollope. People have been asking for Trollope for awhile, yet we never seem to get around to him.

I’m always game to discuss Jane Austen!

Clara wrote: "I see what you mean, about "Northanger Abbey". You are right, it is not really weak, though I still think it is not as well-rounded as some of her masterpieces. ..."

Clara -- your words @19 were really only comparative within Austen's oeuvre. They fit what has always been my understanding. I hope between you and Lynnm and the rest of us that we have reinforced Cindy's interests and dear Jane can get bumped up on her TBR.

I get the sense that this group has two distinct camps-one that is extensively read in "the canon" and therefore prefers less familiar reads, and one that has joined because they would like to read more of the "A-list" classics. (We had a discussion similar to this a year or 2 ago, I think). I'm not sure how to solve this issue, but perhaps alternating between the two types of books would help. ( I'm not even sure who would moderate which books belong to which category)

Also, I'm hoping that we are still planning to follow the Dickens read with a Trollope read of at least one of his series.

Frances, I deleted one copy of your post because it got posted twice.

While typically there are very active members of a much smaller number, there are over 2,000 members in this group. It's unfortunate, but we can't be all things to all people. No matter what we do or how hard we try to accommodate as moderators, we will always not please somebody.

Some things I hope we all think about: moderators have busy lives and like most of us, multiple books being read at the same time. It is very possible that a moderator ends up reading something in which he/she has no interest, but does so to facilitate discussion. Just since January, we've been asked by the members for: a Twain project, a Trollope project, books from other countries, and an Austen month (I'm working from memory and also with a migraine so I may have missed a few). That does not include the do we reread something or not duscussion and the timeline discussions. You have three active moderators. There is just not enough of us to go around. Please please please understand that your moderators are doing the very best we can.

I'm not sure what was meant by less familiar reads. Some of us have a wide experience of reading covering our time period. Some of us not as much. What I might think is less familiar, may be a great work or author for me to discover. Granted, as book lovers there will never be enough time to read everything we may want.

Truly, I'm at a loss. We have a poetry corner for poetry lovers. Yet, very few are using it. We have a Dickens and Zola project that has gone on for years. We have those choices, plus another book each month, and there is always opportunities for a buddy read. I can tell you one thing I noticed in another group that has four or more books each month - there is little to no discussion because there are too many choices. The group has become fragmented, and the discussion basically in that group is I liked the book. Our goals were, and are, loftier than that.

We try to handle this in a democratic way thru the nominating/voting process. Is it perfect? Nope. Some may vote, never planning to read, which causes the group to read something that the majority didn't actually choose. Plus I'm a firm believer that not every book, nor every author, is for every reader. We are doing the best we can, and a title some may feel is less familiar, others may feel is a major work for the time period.

Ok. I'm done...going to find more aspirin.

I am in the same situation as Clara and a couple others here. I don't vote for Jane Austen because I have read all of her books (that I know of) more than once. And I have assumed others are in the same boat. As you can see I have nothing against Miss Austen :-) I think it would be fine to have a "Jane Austen Month." or not, either way!

The moderators do a great job of managing everything, running the polls and the groups, sometimes having "open noms" and sometimes offering guidelines like language or theme. Really appreciate the Readers Review group and the books I have read because of it!

Deborah wrote: "Frances, I deleted one copy of your post because it got posted twice.

While typically there are very active members of a much smaller number, there are over 2,000 members in this group. It's unf..."

Deborah, no one is criticizing the moderators. You all do a great job, and your efforts are very much appreciated. I only moderated one read, and I know how extremely difficult it is.

And there is a lot of variety here. I love the Dickens project, and there are a great number of the monthly reads that I have enjoyed...both authors/books that I'm (very) familiar with or ones that are new to me.

With that said, I know for me, I was merely suggesting. And I believe that is what others are doing as well. There are 12 months in the year so that means you need 12 different reads...it was just a suggestion for one of those months. Isn't that what the nominating threads are for?

So, no need for aspirin. :-)

I prefer to read books that are new to me. That being said, I have read all the Jane Austen catalog, but it was 20+ years ago, so I would probably read one again if it won for group read. I like to see the nominations and vote for the one I want the most, as I'm sure everyone does. When there is a winner, it is then your choice whether to participate that month or wait until the next one. I am in another group where I am skipping the group read this month because I can't get the book from the library in time, and it's not a book I really want to buy. I guess just a long-winded way of saying the democratic method seems to be the best way since no matter how you do it, not everyone will get the outcome they desire.

Since I was the one that got us into this Austen "discussion," some humor to lighten the mood:

Quotes from some authors/critics who obviously aren't Jane fans:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03...

And a fun quote from the Jane Austen Facebook page:

"Conquering the world is a tall order, even with vast armies at your disposal. Try doing it with only wit, charm, and a Regency bonnet..."

I really don't care what we read for April. My concern is can I read and understand it. I have never read Northanger Abbey. If it does not get chosen I can add it to my read list and read it some other day. I sent a sample of Fathers and Sons to my E-reader and it was interesting.

Lynnm wrote: "Deborah wrote: "Frances, I deleted one copy of your post because it got posted twice.

While typically there are very active members of a much smaller number, there are over 2,000 members in this..."

Lynn. I started the day with a migraine, and will be ending it with a migraine. Therefore, aspirin is needed :). I appreciate what you and Bonnie have posted. I'm just trying to ensure our expectations are realistic. As you said, it's 12 books a year, plus the projects. It's hard to fit it all in with limited books, yet we risk losing the discussions if we add too many books.

Lynnm wrote: "Since I was the one that got us into this Austen "discussion," some humor to lighten the mood:

Quotes from some authors/critics who obviously aren't Jane fans:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/..."

I actually enjoy Austen, and you didn't get us into anything

Hi Deborah, I'm sorry, my post wasn't meant as a criticism at all, just a (rather clumsy) way of saying that members are coming with different wishes about what we read and different reading backgrounds. i do appreciate all the hard work that the. Moderators do and love the level of discussion we get here.

This is a great group—even though I haven’t had much time to participate yet—and all the moderators do a wonderful job. Multiple woots to you all! I am happy with whatever books get chosen, and will read and participate whenever I can. I did like the idea of maybe alternating one more familiar book, one less well known.

Let the polls take their democratic course and if an author is second, so be it! If you search GR under Groups Austen lovers will find a lot of Austen groups to choose from, one of which is sure to be discussing the book you want to read:

https://www.goodreads.com/group/searc...

Thanks for all your sterling work Mods!

Adding my support for the Mods, and dropping another aspirin into Deb's water.

Abigail wrote: "This is a great group—even though I haven’t had much time to participate yet—and all the moderators do a wonderful job. Multiple woots to you all! I am happy with whatever books get chosen, and wil..."

I have a question. How do you determine what is "A list" and "less familiar" books? I understand the intent, just not sure how it is possible to fairly make that determination.

It definitely is difficult to characterize. But to me, a familiar A list book is one that the average, educated person has heard of, while less familiar are books that even the majority of English/literature majors might not have ever heard of. Most books fall in between, and that's the majority of books we read here.

I think the point that some of us are trying to make is, while we have a lot of people here who have extensively read 19th century literature, don't forget the people that may never have read Austen or Bronte or Trollope, etc. And no, they shouldn't have to go to another forum to read those books. We are a 19th century literature forum, and that includes all 19th century authors.

Most of us in the Dickens project had read some/most of Dicken's novels as well - and he defintiely is a familiar A-list novelist - but we're enjoying re-reading some of his books, and reading the novels that we never got to before. We're coming up to A Tale of Two Cities soon. I have a Master's in English Lit, and I've never read A Tale of Two Cities. I know! I should be ashamed. But there it is. Some people here wouldn't nominate or vote for A Tale of Two Cities because it is too "familiar" and not new. But I'm sure I'm not the only person who has never read A Tale of Two Cities - even if I should have long ago.

I remember that Gaskell also had problems winning, always coming up second. Then, we had a Gaskell only month. It was so popular that - and I admit that it annoyed me by the third Gaskell book - we had another two Gaskell reads within months of the first Gaskell read.

And that's it for me. I'll keep nominating Austen and Trollope until one of them finallly wins...even if it takes 10 years. :-)

I was only suggesting they go to an Austen group until something comes up here that they want to read. I have been nominating books here since the group started several years ago and the Wharton last month was the first time one of my nominations got to the top of the heap. I would like to read some lesser known Wharton but there is fat chance of that when English authors prevail, so I resign myself to that.

Also, the more participants we have here the less likely it is that your own book will top the list.

I think the way we vote now is going great. Everybody can influence the book choice by nominating or voting, and whatever comes out of that is the fairest way of ensuring that group members have had their choice. Once in a while we could have an author theme, but if we do it too often, it might become a little messed up. Just saying, does anybody think we should only have independent candidates run for presidency in 2016 to give them a chance to win? They've been trying for a long time, and for good or bad, will continue trying until they get a chance, without the poll rules changing. Regardless... I am not trying to criticize the nomination of an author as theme, I am just saying that we shouldn't expect our favorites to make it forever. We might as well do a poll to ask whether readers would want to do an author project in one or several of the coming months or if they would prefer to do the usual free nomination. If the author project wins, then we could vote between several authors and get started that way. But perhaps I am making it too complicated! I am glad to read anything that wins the polls, and if I am ever unsatisfied, I will simply step out for a month...
And yes, you moderators do a wonderful job. I have joined many different groups, but this one is by far my favorite!!

Deborah wrote, “I have a question. How do you determine what is "A list" and "less familiar" books? I understand the intent, just not sure how it is possible to fairly make that determination.”

My guess is that books that frequently appear on high school and college curricula (my perspective being a U.S. one here) would be considered more familiar (A list in your wording) and those that don’t would be considered less familiar.

Lynnm wrote: "It definitely is difficult to characterize. But to me, a familiar A list book is one that the average, educated person has heard of, while less familiar are books that even the majority of English/..."

(Smile) Trollope is a favorite of mine. A Tale of Two Cities was my first Dickens book.

Clara wrote: "I think the way we vote now is going great. Everybody can influence the book choice by nominating or voting, and whatever comes out of that is the fairest way of ensuring that group members have ha..."

Clara, good points. We currently have two author projects going - Dickens and Zola. Zullifya moderates both of those, and I'm sure has her hands full, I know we hope to do another author in similar fashion once the current projects are complete.

Great discussion. Remember nominations close on the 20th so we may want to refocus on the suggestions for the next book.

Clara wrote: "For those of you planning to read "Northanger Abbey" be aware that it is one of Austen's weakest novels."

I'm not sure I would agree totally, though it's certainly not as strong as Emma. But any Austen at all is better than 99.2 percent of all the novels ever published!

Deborah wrote: "I have a question. How do you determine what is "A list" and "less familiar" books? I understand the intent, just not sure how it is possible to fairly make that determination.
"

There is a vast middle to chew over, but at the extremes I would say there is probably pretty good agreement on much, if not most, of the A list. In our time period, I would think it's pretty safe to say that the A list of English writers contains all of Austen, all of Dickens, much of Collins, most of the Brontes (maybe not the Professor), most or all of Hardy, much of Trollope, some of Scott, some of Kipling, and some single novels of authors, such as Vanity Fair. That just for starters.

Lynnm wrote: "Clara, true enough. But everyone has read Gaskell, and we've had a Gaskell only month. And then we went on to read, I believe, 2 more of her books in the same year.

I did my Master's thesis on J..."

Lynnm, I too have noticed the interest in Trollope often, but it's always thrown to the wayside by somebody, or another, bringing to attention the group in the future will begin a Trollope Project-Reading the collections in order, instead of reading them separately. If there's enough interest to start the project sooner instead of early 2016 (when the Dickens Project comes to an end), if somebody else would be willing to moderate for a little while since we're at a shortage with two other projects still going on (Dickens and Zola?) maybe we could start sooner...Something to think about? Or as you say, keep nominating them, until they win, if they ever do? :) I'll vote for Austen...Sure.

Deborah wrote: "Frances, I deleted one copy of your post because it got posted twice.

While typically there are very active members of a much smaller number, there are over 2,000 members in this group. It's unf..."

2000 members total and a small number of people who actively participate
Maybe it's time to clean house based on certain parameters? If you fulfill it, then you stay. If not, then you're out. Doesn't mean you're out forever, but if you decide to rejoin, you have to be far more conscientious of the membership than you were before you were removed...An active participant for X amount of books per year? It might revamp the group as a whole, it couldn't hurt? Just a thought.

Ami wrote: "An active participant for X amount of books per year? It might revamp the group as a whole, it couldn't hurt?..."

The 21st Century Literature board has gotten quite adamant in asking its members to participate if they have voted and their book is selected. To help encourage such, that board no longer sends a mass email when a new poll opens. In some ways, not an ideal solution, but it has greatly reduced the casual voters who have no intention to participate, but are willing to influence the selection. It does send the results to all members.