I think the people who complied the list need to really, really examine their bias.
I cannot believe that 70% of books are written by men. I'd guess the ratio is more like 60f/40m although that may just be my reading habits.
Assuming that it is a 50/50 split in gender, the odds of the entire list being male by chance are 1 in 1024. Obviously a best books list is based on skill, not chance but the numbers suggest a flat out bias. #booklists
This is just ... so obvious to me. Why does it never occur to these supposedly top-of-the-food-chain-esque literary critics that the very foundation of their critical methodology -- as well as the pedagogy which shapes the methodology -- is informed by these very same prejudices?
I mean, duh. You go to the Oxford University reading list and, year after year, you see the very same 18th and 19th English authors held up as classics.
Dusty, musty, rusty, fusty. Never a difference. Nothing from Asia. Nothing from Africa. Nothing from Iceland. Or Norway. Nothing from the 20th damn century, even.
The only conclusion I can come to is that they get it and just don't give a damn. Which, as far as I'm concerned, is even more of a reason to just completely invalidate their "lists."
Just -- don't designate your critiques the mostest wellest-informedest of the well-informed the next time if you can't see past your own noses, Cri-Tee-Kays, okay?
Upfront, I do think it's ridiculous that there isn't single a woman on this list.
However, from a purely "publishing person" perspective, if I completely ignore the gender issues, I'm impressed by this list. There's a good mix of different publishers (as opposed to say, last year's NYT top 10 list, out of which 8 books were published by one imprint). There's a mix of fiction/nonfiction/stories/graphic novels. These books are not your average bestseller list fare. I've read "Lost City of Z" and "Jeff in Venice" and loved both, and the Chaon is at the top of my "to read next" list.
This is tricky, because as a woman who knows a LOT about books, I'm outraged. But I'm also just really glad that people are reading anything.#booklists
@TheGintheCity: What about the genre issues? There's a mix of different formats, but the list appears to be of the "lyrical writing about miserable topics" type, even the graphic novel... and I refuse to believe that there wasn't outstanding, best-of-the-year-worthy work in genre fiction this year. The comment in the article about how there was an outcry for a science fiction title seemed disingenuous to me, as though they want to head off criticisms of how Literary the list is. #booklists
@LBB: This is tricky for me to comment on, because I'm not a fan of genre lit.
However, I DO agree with you that in 2009, when one of the most "buzzy" books of the year was Pride & Prejudice and Zombies, this list warrants a nod or two to genre.
(Also, FWIW, I disagree with you a bit about the "miserable topics" thing. Jeff in Venice is sexy and satirical, and even laugh-out-loud hilarious in parts, and Lost City of Z is a straight-up, balls-out adventure tale.)
@TheGintheCity: I don't think this is a victory for reading. It is an industry list published in an industry publication. The Amazon bestseller list is more of a vistory for reading since it involved actual people buying actual books. #booklists
Wolf Hall, written by Hilary Mantel, won this year's Booker Prize. The Children's Book, by AS Byatt, and The Little Stranger, by Sarah Waters, were short-listed. I'm not saying that the Booker Prize is the authority on the best books (especially as it is self selecting to Commonwealth nations), nor that all readers have the same tastes, but it is seen as reputable book list. It found plenty of women writers, what was Publisher's Weekly's problem? #booklists
@TheGintheCity: I'm glad to hear it. I love her writing as well. I picked it up from the library but it was a 14 day book and I knew it would take me longer to tackle it (Possession beat me up the first time I read it). #booklists
@hfree: I'm finding this easier than Possession. Rather than long passages of poetry to muddle through, this one has eerie, creepy, awesome fairy tales. #booklists
@hfree: That's exactly what I was going to say. Of course, the Booker is only the most prestigious book award in the world, so what do they know? #booklists
"What we like" is always going to have biases. It's about personal taste and judgment. It's really stupid to try to deny that, and pretty insulting to suggest that "what we like" is definitively THE GREATEST and THE BEST.
Talking about how they "ignored gender and genre" reminds me of the discussion around Justice Sotomayor, when she dared mention that her race and gender had an effect on her world view. What they almost certainly mean by that is that they didn't give special consideration to female authors nor did they attempt to set up a quota system for books within different genres. What they almost certainly DIDN'T do was question whether their gender or race or class played a part in what books they chose to read in the first place, whether they undervalued certain genres because of personal biases, etc. etc. "Ignoring gender and genre" and attempting to construct a fair list for both men and women? Those are not the same things. #booklists
No no, there's never a bad time for lists! The great thing about a list like this (which is garbage for ignoring women) is that it can inspire discussion, just like what's going on right here. Someone says "hey, I read a great book(s) by a woman this year" and someone else says "me, too" and then we all get all sorts of book recommendations we might not necessarily have gotten before. Also, I love lists and read all that I see, even when I don't really understand what they're talking about (yeah, I'm talking to you, Lost). #booklists
I think the PW is being slightly disingenious when they say they "ignored gender and genre and who had the buzz", because while those things may not effect who ended up on the list, but they probably affected what they chose to read in the first place, and therefore had an indirect influence on what ended up on the list.
I don't want tokenism, but to say that these things 'just happen' is a cop-out, because they *never* just happen the other way, suggesting that there is some sort of bias somewhere along the line. #booklists
I don't know, I've only read one book the PW list (Dan Chaon's, which I thought was brilliant), so I can't really speak to quality of the books on this list. In general top 10 lists seem pretty arbitrary, and aren't something I look to when trying to find books to read.
@applejuice: ...And then we scroll to the comments and the honeymoon is OVER.
"I love women and have tried all my life to read their novels but I finally gave up this year.
I am 78 and read only classic lit. Have read about half of the commonly accepted "greatest novels of all time"
Women just don't write like men. They write for other women.
They try too hard and they are too structured, too perfect in thier grammer and formatting etc. The avergae length of a sentence in all the women's novels written in the past 100 years is approximately 17 words.
The average length of a male writer in the same time frame is 28 words."
And it only took two comments to make me throw up my hands in disgust! #booklists
@Zombie Ms. Skittles: "They write for other women."
To which I say,"Whatever, dude. Since more women than men read books, if you say this like it's a bad thing, feel free to imperiously opine yourself right out of a job, there, windbag."
*massive eyeroll* #booklists
PW is increasingly irrelevant in today's publishing world--they've been overtaken by smarter, nimbler, more thoughtful on-line publications like Publisher's Lunch and Galleycat.
Laura Miller is 1000% right when she says that the list is just proof of how narrow PW's editors' horizons really are. It's pretty amazing, since women constitute a significant majority of book buyers, editors and publishers. #booklists
Sarah Palin's book isn't even out yet so I don't understand how this list can possibly be complete. I can tell you right now, come November 17 this list will read:
How about best within 10 particular genres? Questions like "who wrote the best domestic political nonfiction?" or "who wrote the best historical biography?" might be more likely to turn up a woman author than "who wrote the best book this year?" which seems pretty subjective. #booklists
11/06/09
I cannot believe that 70% of books are written by men. I'd guess the ratio is more like 60f/40m although that may just be my reading habits.
Assuming that it is a 50/50 split in gender, the odds of the entire list being male by chance are 1 in 1024. Obviously a best books list is based on skill, not chance but the numbers suggest a flat out bias. #booklists
11/06/09
I mean, duh. You go to the Oxford University reading list and, year after year, you see the very same 18th and 19th English authors held up as classics.
Dusty, musty, rusty, fusty. Never a difference. Nothing from Asia. Nothing from Africa. Nothing from Iceland. Or Norway. Nothing from the 20th damn century, even.
The only conclusion I can come to is that they get it and just don't give a damn. Which, as far as I'm concerned, is even more of a reason to just completely invalidate their "lists."
Just -- don't designate your critiques the mostest wellest-informedest of the well-informed the next time if you can't see past your own noses, Cri-Tee-Kays, okay?
/mini-rant #booklists
11/06/09
11/06/09
However, from a purely "publishing person" perspective, if I completely ignore the gender issues, I'm impressed by this list. There's a good mix of different publishers (as opposed to say, last year's NYT top 10 list, out of which 8 books were published by one imprint). There's a mix of fiction/nonfiction/stories/graphic novels. These books are not your average bestseller list fare. I've read "Lost City of Z" and "Jeff in Venice" and loved both, and the Chaon is at the top of my "to read next" list.
This is tricky, because as a woman who knows a LOT about books, I'm outraged. But I'm also just really glad that people are reading anything. #booklists
11/06/09
11/06/09
However, I DO agree with you that in 2009, when one of the most "buzzy" books of the year was Pride & Prejudice and Zombies, this list warrants a nod or two to genre.
(Also, FWIW, I disagree with you a bit about the "miserable topics" thing. Jeff in Venice is sexy and satirical, and even laugh-out-loud hilarious in parts, and Lost City of Z is a straight-up, balls-out adventure tale.)
11/06/09
11/06/09
11/06/09
11/06/09
11/06/09
11/06/09
11/06/09
11/06/09
Talking about how they "ignored gender and genre" reminds me of the discussion around Justice Sotomayor, when she dared mention that her race and gender had an effect on her world view. What they almost certainly mean by that is that they didn't give special consideration to female authors nor did they attempt to set up a quota system for books within different genres. What they almost certainly DIDN'T do was question whether their gender or race or class played a part in what books they chose to read in the first place, whether they undervalued certain genres because of personal biases, etc. etc. "Ignoring gender and genre" and attempting to construct a fair list for both men and women? Those are not the same things. #booklists
11/06/09
11/06/09
I don't want tokenism, but to say that these things 'just happen' is a cop-out, because they *never* just happen the other way, suggesting that there is some sort of bias somewhere along the line. #booklists
11/06/09
11/06/09
11/06/09
11/06/09
"I love women and have tried all my life to read their novels but I finally gave up this year.
I am 78 and read only classic lit. Have read about half of the commonly accepted "greatest novels of all time"
Women just don't write like men. They write for other women.
They try too hard and they are too structured, too perfect in thier grammer and formatting etc. The avergae length of a sentence in all the women's novels written in the past 100 years is approximately 17 words.
The average length of a male writer in the same time frame is 28 words."
And it only took two comments to make me throw up my hands in disgust! #booklists
11/06/09
11/06/09
To which I say,"Whatever, dude. Since more women than men read books, if you say this like it's a bad thing, feel free to imperiously opine yourself right out of a job, there, windbag."
*massive eyeroll* #booklists
11/06/09
Laura Miller is 1000% right when she says that the list is just proof of how narrow PW's editors' horizons really are. It's pretty amazing, since women constitute a significant majority of book buyers, editors and publishers. #booklists
11/06/09
NPR's series where they ask an author to choose three books within a particular genre or theme is great. #booklists
11/06/09
11/06/09
1. Going Rogue
2. Going Rogue
3. Going Rogue
4. Going Rogue
5. Going Rogue
6. Going Rogue
7. Going Rogue
8. Something by Dan Brown
9. Going Rogue
10. Going Rogue #booklists
11/06/09
11/06/09
11/06/09
11/06/09
11/06/09