My Booker Shortlist Thoughts

Today, the Booker Prize announced its shortlist, winnowing down its Booker dozen 13 longlisted titles to 6 finalists, which are:

Margaret Atwood (Canada), "The Testaments"
Lucy Ellmann (USA/UK), "Ducks, Newburyport"
Bernardine Evaristo (UK), "Girl, Woman, Other"
Chigozie Obioma (Nigeria), "An Orchestra of Minorities"
Salman Rushdie (UK/India), "Quichotte"
Elif Shafak (UK/Turkey), "10 Minutes 38 Seconds in This Strange World"

I managed to guess 4 of the 6 (even though I have only read 2 of them, although 6.5 of the longlist). That said, despite being relatively accurate I read the list and my heart sank as the strongest book from the longlist, Valeria Luiselli's Lost Children Archive, did not make it. A remarkable and technically brilliant look at the migration crises of the Americas, Luiselli's book is an accomplishment that soars both in its meticulous plotting but also how profound and originally she tackles a topic filled with political meaning and whose significance at the present time is immense. I really hoped that it would make the shortlist and possibly win, because it is a book so many more need to read. It is a book that needed the attention that winning the Booker would bring.

On the other end, however, are two books that needed no recognition to garner attention. Margaret Atwood's sequel to The Handmaid's Tale, The Testaments, is already garnering enormous buzz leading up to its release next week. Bolstered by the award winning television series, Atwood's book is going to be a massive best seller, no award needed to get it in people's hands. Similarly, Salman Rushdie's Quichotte will sell briskly, especially with some praising it as his return to form. Unfortunately, as one of the two I have read, I can't see this as any return to form. Rushdie is a solid writer, but after reading about a third of this retelling of Don Quixote, it felt like a formulaic redoing of his past novels, a bit too cute, too meta, pretension oozing from every sentence. This is not Rushdie "at the top of his game" as the chair of the Booker jury suggests it is.

I was also a bit surprised that Chigozie Obioma's An Orchestra of Minorities made it. His debut novel, The Fisherman, was a wonderful tale of innocent youth being destroyed by fate and was rightfully shortlisted for the Booker Prize in 2015. However, Orchestra was a much more tedious reading experience, using narrative devices that became grating if not pointless. At times beautiful prose almost saves it but it was too much of a slog to be saved by a few elegant passages.

Of the three others, Lucy Ellman's Ducks, Newportbury sounds the most exciting. A 1000 page, 8 sentence stream of consciousness that delves into the mind of a Midwestern housewife's thoughts about a contemporary American falling apart into chaos and division. I am also eager to pick up Bernardine Evaristo's Girl, Woman, Other, which delves into the diverseness of the black experience in the UK. The one I am least likely to pick up, however, despite it sounding vaguely alluring is 10 Minutes 38 Seconds.

So in many ways this is a good list. Ducks and Girl seem like the most likely to win. They are accomplished writers who may have hit their stride. It is unlikely that Rushdie or Atwood win their second Booker but I would not be totally shocked if Atwood somehow managed to win. That said, some of the reviews that just leaked today (embargo over I guess) suggest it is more literary thriller than the kind of experimentation with form and style that Booker juries look to award. But who knows.

That said, I feel sadness that Lost Children Archive is not part of the conversation moving forward. It's the prize's and the reading public's loss but hopefully Luiselli will get her due eventually.