Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

As a group, we have decided our next Booker shortlist readalong will be the 1980 Booker Shortlist. This will officially start February 1, 2017, and will run through the end of April.

If you are reading this, you can join in the discussion as much or as little as you'd like. No one should feel obligated to read the entire shortlist. Read what you like, discuss what you like, have fun.

Here's the general setup:
1. Use this thread to discuss the year and its shortlist in general.
2. Use threads set up for individual books to discuss those individual books.
3. Use the dynamic ranking thread (here) to tell us how you stack the books up against each other.

Below are links to all of the individual discussion threads:

1980
Rites of Passage, William Golding
A Month in the Country, J.L. Carr
Clear Light of Day, Anita Desai
Earthly Powers, Anthony Burgess
No Country for Young Men, Julia O'Faolain
Pascali's Island, Barry Unsworth
The Beggar Maid, Alice Munro

I have read two so far. Burgess was great but I didn't really get on with Golding. I have copies of the Carr and the Munro and will try and get hold of the rest soon.

For me, this is one of the best Booker years. I have read them all except Desai and Munro and enjoyed each of them although they are so different.

This looks like an interesting year. I think I will give Carr a chance...

I read through Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ reviews of all of them and this year has some very passionate fans!!

Just been looking at ordering options from UK suppliers - it appears that 5 of the 7 can easily be ordered as new paperbacks. O'Faolain and Unsworth are currently unavailable as standard price paperbacks but are probably not too difficult to find second-hand...

I ordered No country for young men, Pascali's Island & A month in the country from the library - hope I'll have time to read them :-)

I read Rites Of Passage a couple of years ago and enjoyed it. Shortly after, I picked up A Month In The Country and was blown away with this short but powerful book. This is one that has stayed with me since and I'm forever recommending to anybody who asks me for a suggestion of which book to pick up next.

I haven't seen the film and I'm reluctant to give it a go as I don't want anything to detract from my memories of reading the book.

Joe, I completely agree: A Month in the Country is a gem, and has vividly remained in my memory for years. It's definitely one of my favorite Booker short-listed novels of all years.

I have just read A Month in the Country and enjoyed it hugely - I was almost tempted to place it at number one, but I think Earthly Powers still shades it for its scope and ambition. It makes the decision to award the prize to Golding seem even stranger. Will start the Alice Munro next.

I finished The Beggar Maid, so I have now exhausted the ones that were readily available from my local bookshops. I have ordered the remaining three second-hand but it may be a while before I read them.

Okay, it's now the official start of our 1980 Shortlist readalong!

Hopefully folks are feeling a burst of energy to get going on this. And thanks to those of you who have started to fill in the threads a bit with your reading. Let's get more up there! I'll be writing up some thoughts on A Month in the Country and The Beggar Maid soon!

Is 1980 the best Booker short list of all time, or what? Within the past few years, I've read or reread Earthly Powers, A Month in the Country, Rites of Passage, and, most recently, Pascali's Island. I'm now making my way through No Country for Young Men, which I may have read way back in the early '80s. All notable and memorable novels. I'm sorry that I waited so long to read Pascali's Island, which ranks with Morality Play and Losing Nelson as wonderful character studies. Reading Pascali's Island made me want to immediately book a flight there (but then again, I felt similarly when I read Jan Morris' Last Letters from Hav).

Dan wrote: "Is 1980 the best Booker short list of all time, or what?"

Sometime we need to settle once and for all what the best shortlist is, according to this group. I'd love to read all of the arguments for any given year, and I'm sure 1980 would be a strong contender!

The remaining three books have arrived, and I am about to start the O'Faolain, which looks very promising.

The O'Faolain is truly excellent, so far. A very brave selection for Booker

I continue to shill for the 1980 shortlist, having now read six of the seven within the past few years and having just finished Pascali’s Island and No Country for Young Men. Alice Munro is a personal favorite, and my ranking Beggar Maid third reflects how highly I think of Earthly Powers, which I rank first, and A Month in the Country, which I rank second. I read Rites of Passage, which I rank fourth, three years ago: I liked it enough that I purchased Close Quarters and Fire Down Below, the second and third volumes in the trilogy. I’m having my usual apples and oranges ranking problem with Pascali’s Island and No Country for Young Men: Unsworth’s portrayal of Pascali led me to rank Pascali’s Island fifth, and No Country, a really memorable novel, only sixth. I’m looking forward to reading Clear Light of Day soon, and I’m wondering if it will upend my current rankings.

Here are some tidbits about the 1980 prize, focusing this time primarily on Golding/Burgess:

-The judges that year were (Chair) David Daiches, Ronald Blythe, Margaret Forster, Claire Tomalin, and Brian Wenham.

-William Golding, the winner that year, received £10,000. In 1980, Golding had not yet won the Nobel Prize or been knighted, though he was 69 years old. Indeed, he had barely won any literary prizes. It seems his first came only the year before, when he won the James Tait Black Memorial Prize for his seventh novel, Darkness Visible. He won the Nobel Prize in 1983 and was knighted in 1988. So, though already known well for his debut novel, 1954's Lord of the Flies, the extent of Golding's literary legacy was still up in the air in 1980. He'd only just overcome a relatively fallow period, not publishing a book between 1971's collection of novellas The Scorpion God and 1979's Darkness Visible.

-Anthony Burgess also started publishing in the 1950s (his debut was 1956's Time for a Tiger, from his Malayan Trilogy), and he also came to fame early with a controversial work, 1962's A Clockwork Orange. He was a bit more active than Golding leading up to his contender in the 1980 Booker Prize, publishing two fiction biographies (1974's Napoleon Symphony and 1979's Man of Nazareth, a book of epic poetry (1976's Moses), two children's books in 1978 as well as his critique of George Orwell's 1984 (1978's 1985). He was doing so much, in fact, that people were surprised when the giant tome Earthly Powers dropped.

-Golding and Burgess each died in 1993.

I'll try to write up some bits of information on the other five authors soon, but 1980 is known as the year of the Golding/Burgess feud, so let's focus on them for this post.

I reached out to our contact museum curator who knows a lot about Booker history for some tidbits about the 1980 shortlist.

She said that certainly the thing that most stands out to her and to most people is the Burgess v. Golding feud. I think most of us know that Burgess refused to go to the ceremony when he wasn't promised the win, and that Golding eventually won. I did not know that Burgess had been giving Golding's work bad reviews over the year. Apparently, 1980 was the year Golding's Lord of the Flies exceeded 7 million copies in U.S. sales and the week it did so Burgess publicly declared Rites of Passage "a bad book...all too easily put down." Burgess obviously lost the Booker to Golding, but Earthly Powers went on to win the best foreign book award in France.

A bit of fun behind the scenes with the judges. From the notes in my email:

David Daiches was not in favor of Burgess [inscription on his copy at PML: "a remarkable novel in many ways. Has enormous range and gusto. Takes in many real characters from pre World War 1 to the 1970s. First person story of life of a homosexual novelist. Some of the actions and situations extravagant, farcical, unpersuasive; others very real. Some characters - Concetta, e.g and her attempt to shoot Himmler not at all convincing. The novel operates on different levels of probability. Obsessive in his details of homosexual activity. But definitely in the running".

Despite Daiches’s note that the novel is very much in the running, Claire Tomlin later remembered he began the final discussion abruptly: "We'll go through the list in alphabetical order. I take it no one considers Burgess a possible winner?" William Golding won the prize.

Tomalin elaborates further in her note to The Guardian (see ):

I was determined that Alice Munro should be on the shortlist, and stuck my heels in to get her there. There were two real contenders for the prize, I believed, Anthony Burgess's Earthly Powers and William Golding's Rites of Passage, and the night before the final judging session I lay awake debating with myself: the Golding beautifully written and constructed, but with a slightly musty feel about it; Burgess a magnificent entertainer, overflowing with good humour, sometimes tipping into the slapdash. Both books thoroughly deserving. The next morning David Daiches, our chairman, began: "We'll go through the list in alphabetical order. I take it no one consider Burgess a possible winner?" Silence from the others. I exploded into a eulogy of Burgess's energy, invention and comic gift. I saw I had convinced no one, and felt that left only Golding. And so it was. Burgess sent a message saying he would not come to the dinner unless he won. I don't blame him. I saw a tear trickle down Golding's cheek when the announcement was made. I have re-read neither book, and I have rejoiced to see Alice Munro win the recognition she deserves.

Trevor, that is all very intriguing. Can we assume that A Month in the Country was discounted because it was too short? I think Golding's reputation also owed something to Pincher Martin...

Trevor, thanks for uncovering and passing on this fascinating information. Perhaps you can convince Sheelagh Bevan to use her knowledge and the Morgan's collection to write a history of the Booker. Much as I enjoyed Edward St. Aubyn's Lost for Words, it would be even better to have a factual and less farcical history of the Bookers (then again, some of the facts of Booker history are no doubt farcical).

So far I have to agree that this is a strong candidate for the best ever shortlist - only two left to read and so far all of the losers have been very impressive (for me more so than the eventual winner).

Ive approached reading the 1980 list in a reading order which I had anticipated would enable me to peak with the best book last (drawing on comments on this group forum).
No Country for Young Men surprised on the upside; but conversely I am no fan of Pascalis Island whatsoever, and for the time being I remain doubtful that 1980 will turn out to be my best Booker shortlist overall as a consequence.
I'm looking forward to reading Rites of Passage, since I detect here feelings somewhat stronger than ambivalence for the 1980 winning book.

Jonathan, I would be interested to learn why you're "no fan of Pascalis Island whatsoever." While not among my 1980 shortlist favorites, I found it affecting and likely memorable.

I started Pascali's Island and was enjoying it but it was in such poor condition that I returned it for a refund and haven't replaced it yet.

Trevor, your information on the history makes great reading.

Dan wrote: "Jonathan, I would be interested to learn why you're "no fan of Pascalis Island whatsoever." While not among my 1980 shortlist favorites, I found it affecting and likely memorable."
Dan, I normally hold by the creed that if there's something good to say, then say it... otherwise keep your own counsel; but since you ask!
My primary issue with Pascalis Island is that it read, or was structured, in a way so derivative of Graham Greene's works; and that PI comes off very badly in comparison. Greene was still alive and writing in 1980.

In PI it's debatable whether it's Pascali or Bowles who is the central, most important character. That's a good starting point, and an opportunity to explore both the individual and the wider perspective, offsetting one against the other.
Greene was a master of description contrasting the local, indigenous, spirit of often poor countries coerced by depots and outside forces. The wide eyed, sometimes naive blundering of (Western outsiders) is a recurring Greene theme. Greene's Quiet American pitches Pyle and Fowler together(in Pascalis Island it's Bowles and Pascali). In my opinion Greene's examination of the human psyche, of motives, of the depth of character, makes Barry Unsworth read like a second rater.
Bowles in PI is so wooden, so one dimensional ; his love affair with Lydia Neumann is so peripheral, and the occasional insertion of supporting characters (e. g. the 'American') failed to enhance the overall story.

At the start of PI, Unsworth posts a setting date (July 1908) and I initially anticipated a novel of the historical fiction genre. There's potentially one there, and there's a fleeting reference to the Young Turks movement (the real life Young Turk Revolution took place in 1908 as more liberal constitutional government demands challenged the despots). Unsworth doesn't develop the bigger picture; doesn't develop the nameless "Excellency" of PI ruling through force and a network of spies.

A dreadful Butch Cassidy style shootout merely rounds off a book that’s struggling to impart it's deeper meaning.

A pity, because there's a good story to be told in there somewhere.

Jonathan, I generally hold by the same creed that you do: "if there's something good to say, then say it... otherwise keep your own counsel." So I especially appreciate your taking the time to respond to my question with your thoughtful and helpful comments. I don't disagree with your assessment of Unsworth's portrayal of Bowles and Lydia, but I nonetheless found Pascali an interesting and affecting character. I last read Sacred Hunger about twenty years ago, and I don't remember it well. I've read Morality Play twice, and I was impressed both times. I also read Losing Nelson, although not recently. Losing Nelson impressed me in some of the same ways as Rubens' A Five Year Sentence and Schofield's Martin John. I'm wondering if you just don't get on with Unsworth, or if Pascali's Island was an exception for you.

I haven't read Greene for many years, so perhaps it's time for me to do so again.

Dan,
You are right. Always give a second chance!
I will read some more Unsworth to redress the balance.
A recent example- I liked DeLillo's Underworld very much indeed, but found his 2016 novel, Zero K, very very disappointing.

I have now read all of the books on the 1980 shortlist, and the final one, Clear Light of Day, was a revelation - this and No Country for Young Men were the big surprises on this list. Only Golding and Unsworth left me largely unimpressed, so it is definitely one of the stronger shortlists.

I haven't had the chance to follow along at all and I sorry regret it. Except for PI and the Golding, I feel I must read all of these books.

Like Hugh, I've also now completed the 1980 shortlist, although I'm rereading Beggar Maid after several years away from it. Again like Hugh, Clear Light of Day was an unexpected and impressive surprise to me.

I'm sure of ranking Earthly Powers first and A Month in the Country second, but I could continue to rerank 3-4 (Beggar Maid and Clear Light of Day) and 5-7 (Rites of Passage, No Country, Pascali's Island) and remain dissatisfied with my judgments.

I've enjoyed the 1978 and 1980 short list readings and discussions, and I hope that we continue with other years.

Ok, I'm about halfway through Earthly Powers, and I am having a very hard time seeing how it didn't win. The other three shortlist titles I've read are simply not in the same ballpark. It's weird.

Nicole wrote: "Ok, I'm about halfway through Earthly Powers, and I am having a very hard time seeing how it didn't win."

Nicole, I completely agree. Earthly Powers could easily rank among the top Booker winners although, of course, it didn't win. Yes, very weird.

Does anyone know if there were any behind the scenes machinations that led to Golding's win, like what eventually emerged about the 1984 Hotel du Lac win?
Gets a brief mention here:

Did someone on the panel dislike Burgess, perhaps? These old literary types did love a good feud...

Antonomasia wrote: "Does anyone know if there were any behind the scenes machinations that led to Golding's win, like what eventually emerged about the 1984 Hotel du Lac win?
Gets a brief mention here: ..."

Trevor? Trevor?

I only know what I posted above. It seems the chair simply didn't take to the Burgess, giving it lip service but no real consideration.

Apologies, T, I hadn't read that post. Exactly the sort of info I hoped would be out there somewhere!

I was only 13 at the time, so I have no right to even speculate about motives. But, whilst it's still a free country... I have recently wondered about negative theories - particularly relating to Burgess and the controversy that surrounded A Clockwork Orange, and the hardly less controversial elements of Earthly Powers (which I only recently read, and is quite superb!) But it might just as easily be seen in terms of 'positive' discrimination - would a win for an author of Golding's stature be seen as good for the profile of the prize? Was someone forgetting that the Booker is not a prize for a whole corpus (Lord of the Flies is truly extraordinary), but for the title submitted?

The Guardian: "Reading group: Earthly Powers by Anthony Burgess is our book for March"

I think that might be my lot for this challenge. I read Golding a few years ago and was about to revisit just yet. Earthly Powers was a revelation, and would have been a worthy winner. No Country for Young Men was in its own way no less controversial, and held me even through its slower passages - I liked it, but not as much as Earthly Powers.

The others will have to wait as I've a few new novels to enjoy. Currently enjoying Barry's Days Without End, which might deserve a mention in this year's Booker speculation...

John wrote: "Currently enjoying Barry's Days Without End, which might deserve a mention in this year's Booker speculation..."

Yes, it certainly deserves a place on the longlist, and perhaps on the shortlist as well.

I just finished Earthly Powers and its has taken me the best part of two weeks to do so. This is a not a book to be rushed. It's packed full of interesting and subtly informed asides and references. A VERY good novel from a fiercely clever writer.

Earthly Powers is not really a book suited to the type of reader who I surmise is well represented on the Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ Mookse forum (I count myself as a typical participant). That's to say, marginally obsessive about book reading, and stimulated by more and more writing styles, nationalities and ideas, various prize lists, and hence with a 'to be read list' that never seems to diminish.

Earthly Powers could be read rapidly, and fit in with the book per week (or more) thrill that many here are drawn to. However, to speed read EP would be to miss so much, and this is a 650 page epic that covers much ground and many deep thinking ideas (in religion, not least).

Jonathan wrote: "I just finished Earthly Powers and its has taken me the best part of two weeks to do so. This is a not a book to be rushed. It's packed full of interesting and subtly informed asides and references..."

True it is a book to soak in - more rewarding that way - also there's a lot of clever word play (Hamlet = Ham Omelette) which can be missed if sped read.

Earthly Powers so far seems to be the consensus choice for winning the readjudicated 1980 Booker. Even after reading Trevor's interesting report above, I still wonder how the panel justified choosing Rites of Passage. I enjoyed Rites, and I have sitting on my to-read shelves the second and third novels in the Rites trilogy. But Rites just can't compare with EP. Perhaps David Daiches' comment that Burgess in EP was "obsessive in his details of homosexual activity" played a role, although I hardly think that EP was at all "obsessive in. . . details of homosexual activity." What would Dachas have said about The Folding Star?

I think you may be right, Dan, but I also wonder about Daiches's literary interests and how much they played a role. He wrote books on Woolf and Lawrence, which would suggest a bit of affinity for something like Earthly Powers and that the details wouldn't turn him off. However, he also wrote books -- plural -- on Robert Louis Stevenson and one on Sir Walter Scott, suggesting maybe his preferences do lie in something more like Rites of Passage. The play with 19th-century prose must have appealed to him.

I say this based on impressions of Earthly Powers and Rites of Passage because I've never read the books.

I don't know where to put this comment, so I'm just adding it here. I think that EP ranks among the very best, and possibly as the very best, of all short-listed novels that I've read. Looking just at oranges, I'd tentatively toss Hollinghurst's Folding Star ('94), Rushdie's Moor's Last Sigh ('95), Byatt's The Children's Book ('09), and Self's Umbrella ('12) into the same bin. And I don't know if Crace's Quarantine ('97) and Harvest ('13) are oranges or apples.

That's a great comment for here, Dan! And just you're listing those made me quite excited about fine books!

Dan,
Your laudatory comments about Earthly Powers concur with my own.
Of the other oranges you reference the only one I've read is Will Self's Umbrella, and I think a comparison of Self and Burgess is apposite.
Both authors pack out their prose with brilliant word play, and countless references to events, people, philosophy. It can't be an accident that, judging by the volume (or lack of) Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ reviews, neither novel (those cited here), has captured widespread reader support.
What a pity.
Having read all of the 1978 short list (with some very good books) and half the 1980 list, I am of the opinion that Earthly Powers is head and shoulders above the others (I include the much praised A Month in the Country).
You surmise that the homosexuality in Earthly Powers might have weighed against it with the Booker judges. I think you are right. In the Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ review I posted yesterday my only criticism of Earthly Powers was that I felt Burgess wrote too lightly in his portrayal of violent homosexual sex.

Dan wrote: "I don't know where to put this comment, so I'm just adding it here. I think that EP ranks among the very best, and possibly as the very best, of all short-listed novels that I've read. Looking just..."
I have just been looking at my booker-shortlist folder and found 31 that I rated 5 stars. I have sorted them (a little arbitrarily) and this is my top 20:

A Fine Balance by Rohinton Mistry
Earthly Powers by Anthony Burgess
The Black Prince by Iris Murdoch
A Month in the Country by J.L. Carr
Waterland by Graham Swift
The Story of Lucy Gault by William Trevor
The Children's Book by A.S. Byatt
The Lives of Others by Neel Mukherjee
According to Mark by Penelope Lively
Arthur & George by Julian Barnes
A Long Long Way by Sebastian Barry
Do Not Say We Have Nothing by Madeleine Thien
Grace Notes by Bernard MacLaverty
Rumours Of Rain by André Brink
The Book of Evidence by John Banville
On Beauty by Zadie Smith
Clear Light of Day by Anita Desai
Swimming Home by Deborah Levy
Hotel World by Ali Smith
The Gate of Angels by Penelope Fitzgerald

If we allow longlisted books too:
A Fine Balance
Earthly Powers
The Black Prince
A Month In The Country
Maps for Lost Lovers by Nadeem Aslam
The Blazing World by Siri Hustvedt
Orfeo by Richard Powers
Waterland
The Story of Lucy Gault
If Nobody Speaks of Remarkable Things by Jon McGregor
The Children's Book
The Lives of Others
Black Swan Green by David Mitchell
The Green Road by Anne Enright
According to Mark
Arthur & George
A Long Long Way
Do Not Say We Have Nothing
Purple Hibiscus by Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie
Grace Notes

I might do this later. As I said in other threads, my default assumption used to be that there were proportionally more enjoyable shortlisted and longlisted novels than Booker winners I'd like. Not sure I'll have as many as 30 5*'d but wouldn't be surprised if it were close.

It was quicker than I thought to make a top 20 - 10 of them I'd given 5 stars, and then the 10 best with 4 stars. Didn't deliberate too hard over these rankings, though I have a feeling I'd now move some of the top 4s up and the lower 5s down.

Darkmans by Nicola Barker
A Month in the Country by J.L. Carr
Dorian by Will Self
Small World by David Lodge
The Dog by Joseph O'Neill
Notes on a Scandal by Zoe Heller
The Wake by Paul Kingsnorth
His Bloody Project by Graeme Macrae Burnet
Harvest by Jim Crace
Orfeo by Richard Powers
The Blazing World by Siri Hustvedt
Umbrella by Will Self
How to Be Both by Ali Smith
Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell by Susanna Clarke
The Spinning Heart Donal Ryan
Nice Work by David Lodge
Chatterton by Peter Ackroyd
Empire of the Sun by J.G. Ballard *
Under the Frog by Tibor Fischer *
An Awfully Big Adventure by Beryl Bainbridge *

The last three I read in my teens; really liked them then but can't be sure what I'd think of them now.

Perhaps there should be a "General Booker Discussion" thread for this sort of thing. Or a thread to rank shortlisted and longlisted novels. What do others think?