Longlist Debate

Is this the Booker Prize for fiction or the United Nations (excluding the US) prize for novels written in English? Surely the judges should look for the 13 best fiction novels in the year? Not, as it seems, a set of books which seem to satisfy every quarter. Still, what else could we expect from a committee run by a politician?

Dissapointment is the initial reaction.
As others have said the judges seem to have overlooked books simply better than those on the list.
A lot of young British talent has been ovelooked in favour of established writers probably passed their very best.
Still there are some titles I'm looking forward to reading and having to read so many titles probably means they don't really read the books properly.

In deference to MrByng I admire your honesty and appreciate your point of view though I have to say I don't think the Helen Garner is as good as you say.

I agree bookermt, but I do think The Spare Room better than Steve Toltz and as good as Joseph O'Neill (and I'm still confused as to how he is eligible as a US citizen and Dutch-born). By those measures it should have been on there.

Obviously there is only a limited amount I can say about the list having read only two of the books, but generally I think it a weak list because of its glaring omissions - could 20 or more informed readers really be wrong about Winton, Kelman, Crumey etc when they suggested them on the Picador blog? - and a blow to the credibility of the Booker. Perhaps Harry Potter fan Hardeep Singh Kohli was given too much influence.

JohnSelf
It is hard to say which judges support which book but I have to agree with you about whether so many readers on the picador site can be so wrong.
I have to say that I don't think either Mr.Kohli or MR.Heneage would be known for their love of top end literary fiction and whilst it would only take 1 judge to maybe get a book on the longlist surely it would not get on uless there was a consensus i that book's favour.
The influence of the chairman can be key. One previous winner was steamrolled onto the longlist by the chair (so I've heard) even when some others opposed it.
Last year was disappointing but I really felt there was a wide range of really good novels out this year from which to produce a stimulating and quality list. Maybe I've not read them yet!

I find JohnSelf and bookermt's comments interesting. This looks to me to be a pretty bland list with not very many interesting books -- I've only read five on the list and none of them made my list in the Picador contest. I've certainly found the discussion group recommendations to be of more worth.

And then again, it's a contest. And those of use who sit on the sidelines should appreciate the chance to comment. And, as bad as the list might be, bookermt won my contest on the other site by predicting 10 of the 13 longlist titles would have been mentioned.

Having set the scene nicely with my 2/13 longlist predictions I seem likely to maintain my 100% record of never choosing a Booker winner.
I can't really say what I think yet because I've only read three of them but I will endorse Jamie Byng's comments because I too am stunned at the presence of Child 44. It was a brilliant read, a thriller a real page turner, but what you read is what you get, it's not literary fiction, no hidden depths to plumb and fathom that I could discern.I loved it and said so,<http://tinyurl.com/2uwkr8> BUT that has never been what the Booker has stood for imho. It has always been about something much deeper in my mind and Helen Garner's The Spare Room embraces that depth with real dignity.
If I'd been a judge I'd have argued and pleaded that book's cause until I was flat on my face for what it tells us about illness, human nature, friendship, guilt and all those wonderful grist to the mill things that life is all about.Then you read it again and again and discover even more.
Doubtless I'll find all those qualities in the other books as I read them, but I just can't quite hide my disappointment about The Spare Room.

Helen Garner's The Spare Room is great. Linda Grant's The Clothes On Their Backs isn't. TIm Winton's Breath is great. Child 44 isn't. There are some truly excellent titles on this longlist, those from Sebastian Barry and Joseph O'Neill to name two, but there are some pretty poor ones too. One can't help thinking that if Helen Garner and Tim Winton were on the list there would be an imbalance of too many authors from one country.

Surely it wouldn't matter if the whole list was made up of Australians, as long as their books were the best. There is no requirement or need for regional balance.

Not having had a chance to read most of them yet - and purposefully avoiding too many thoughts about if the books are strong/weak before I have a chance to read them - I'm mostly just excited about the availability of the novels. I'll be able to read 8 of them easily before the shortlist is announced and might be able to find copies of a few more. That definitely beats my usual odds.

I was surprised and disappointed that ‘Pilcrow’ by Adam Mars-Jones was not on the long-list. This is an extraordinary and original novel—and a completely unexpected departure—from one of our most important and consistent writers.

I have read most of the books on the long-list, and very good some of them are. But ‘Pilcrow’ is the only novel I have read in the last 12 months that stays with me and gives me pause for thought.