moving.under.skies

(Even though I think this list is kind of horrible but what can you expect, it was a poor publishing year) I am spasming about with glee tonight. The Rooster is the most fun on the internet in March for bookish types and I’ve been looking forward to it for months now. I’ve read 7 1/2 of these already and will, of course, read the rest, even the ones that give me hives to even think about. Thoughts:

• Actually grateful for the lack of David Foster Wallace (even though I cannot believe it—along with 1Q84 and the Eugenides I thought for sure that was a shoo in). I’m not ready to read it, not sure if I ever will be. Posthumous publications—I have issues with them.
• Tea Obreht and Karen Russell? Both? At once? Ugh. How disappointing. One or the other, not both, that’s my rule. They’re both so overhyped—I’m fairly well convinced that they only get so much attention because they’re both young and female and pretty. It’s certainly not because of their stunning talent, particularly in Obreht’s case. If I had to grudgingly allow one I’d go with Russell (Swamplandia! did have its moments; I think Russell might grow into a good author but for now her structure is weak and her influences too obvious) and replace Obreht with something from Open Letter or New Directions or even a NYBRC—in short, something that’s actually good. That said, I predict that Swamplandia! will do well.
• Also inexplicably popular:  The Sisters Brothers by Patrick deWitt. This is a book I did not appreciate except for its potential to make a good movie someday but I won’t complain too much about its inclusion—it’s their token genre pick and I’m just thankful that they didn’t go for the equally beloved Ready Player One (awful) or The Magician King (unreadable). 
• Ann Patchett is an odd inclusion for me. I guess it fits—I’ll never forget The Lacuna debacle a few years ago, and how near it came to beating the far superior Wolf Hall—as she’s a similar author to Kingsolver, but I don’t really think of either as “literary” or, ahem, “prizeworthy”—they’re bookclub reads:  acceptable quality, just edgy enough to inspire discussion, but not transgressive or interesting. (Please note:  I read the Patchett and liked it just fine for what it was. I gave it to my mother. She liked it.) 
• Book I was planning never to read and now feel like I must:  Salvage the Bones. I know it won the NBA, usually a good indicator of quality, but everything about this looks painful and indulgent. Sure, fine, write about Katrina, but does your main character have to be fourteen, black and pregnant? That’s dicey, with lots of potential for horridness. Also I remember this being billed as one of those “searing narrative voice” novels which is always a red flag. Resentment. 
• I’ve been planning to read The Stranger’s Child but was going to skip Ondaatje’s newest. I can’t speak with confdience having read neither, but in terms of style and historical setting and possibly even intent these seem similar enough that I think they should have chosen one or the other not both. Lots of judges will find them dull—even I find it dull, thinking of reading them, and I like this type of book. Both very safe picks, neither strong enough to win. It seems to me that they erred on the conservative this year more than others—there’s no Anne Carson equivalent here.
• Previously unknown book that I’m most excited to read even though it is about WWII and has children for the main characters (a risky combination):  The Last Brother by Natacha Appanah
• Should probably win but won’t because its author is smarter than you (and me) and shows it and people either won’t get it or will feel inferior and push it away despite its merit:  The Sense of an Ending by Julian Barnes
• Will come close to winning but won’t because it’s just too damn long and many judges won’t finish it (and also because it’s either terribly written or terribly translated [who knows] for huge stretches of its considerable length):  1Q84
• Will win:  Eugenides, The Marriage Plot, but only if the judges lean towards the pretentious-literate. It’s such a booklover’s book, tailored for anyone who’s ever been young and in love with words and at a loss for how to live beneath their weight. Not to mention:  love triangle, DFW-inspired character, easy to read, lots of opportunities for the reader to feel clever. I’m not sure, but I think there’s a lot to relate to in this one for bookish judging types.