Martin V

The mention of Two Flints above is on point. They are doing this very well atm. Along with the usual suspects.

Merry Christmas to all except whoever at the BBC decided a few years to deny us the small joy of Xmas Top of the Pops.

Love this sort of data. Not sure how much it actually tells you beyond confirming the obvious though (I.e. Love Actually is massively Tory)

Too hard to pick a run from DMS!

In terms of flow the first 3 tracks are pretty unsurpassed, but in terms of big old classics in a row maybe shift it to 2-4.

Finished this, loved it. Excellent debut. www.ontheprize.co.uk/blog/we-pret...

I'd totally forgotten this song existed. So good, thanks for the reminder!

Have to admit I did a double take at SJP being on here. But apparently she's a book publisher now. Who knew? (Not I, despite having read a book she's apparently published)

At the June meeting we drew up a list of forty-seven novels which were deemed worthy of serious consideration, and at the first September meeting we whittled these down to seventeen to be considered for the shortlist. During that time I had phone conversations with both Maggie and Helen. Maggie wanted an assurance that the shortlist would not be decided by a numerical majority of only 3 to 2. I could not give it, but reiterated what I had said at the beginning of the process, that I hoped we could reach a consensus by discussion. In the course of my conversation with Helen she listed her criteria for a good novel, and the last of them was, 'It must be ideologically correct'. I was so startled by this declaration that I did not challenge it, as I should have done. At this time the phrase 'politically correct' had not yet reached Britain from America, and when it did so it carried the scare quotes which allowed it to be used ironically by sophisticated left-wingers as well as scornfully by outraged right-wingers. 'Ideologically correct' was a much more inflexible concept which one associated with Stalinist Russia or Mao's China. In my view a responsible literary critic should always try to suspend his or her ideological principles and prejudices when reading a text to assess its literary merit. I prepared carefully for the shortlist meeting, and had a folder in my notes on all seventeen books, arranged alphabetically by author: The first of these was Amis, Martin. As mentioned earlier, I thought his novel Money had been unjustly excluded from the shortlist by the judges in 1984. I was pleased when I heard

that he had a new novel out this year, called London Fields, and looked forward eagerly to reading it. Having done so I described it in my notes as: Notable for dense, imaginative and expressive use of language, summoning up a wasteland vision of urban and global entropy. Brilliant metaphors and similes. Often blackly funny. Cunning interweaving of motifs and symbolism. MA's preoccupations with pornography & Swiftian relish of disgusting behaviour manifest in earlier work continue here, but much more under control. Keith is an extraordinary creation - totally loathsome, yet credible and weirdly vital... The flatness and unchangingness of the other main characters is the only arguable flaw in this generally brilliant achievement, and perhaps it is a little too long for its own good. But a frontrunner. The shortlist meeting took place in the utilitarian premises of Book Trust in south-west London. We sat at a rectangular Formica-topped table with myself at the head, Martyn to one side and slightly behind me, the two men to my left, and the two women on the right. I began by proposing that we should get an idea of our collective preferences by going through the seventeen novels one by one, each person classifying them as 'shortlist', 'hold' or 'eliminate', and I had prepared a chart to record these responses, but Ed suggested that instead we should each simply say what our current six choices for the shortlist were, and this won support from the others. At the end of the first round everyone had chosen Kazuo Ishiguro's The Remains of the Day, and Rose Tremain's Restoration, and they were accordingly shortisted, Both Ed White and David Profumo had nominated London Fields, though they were less enthusiastic than I in giving their reasons. I pointed out that no other novel in the remainder

we were now considering had achieved three votes in the first round, and proposed that it should therefore be shortlisted. At this Maggie launched a fierce attack on the book as morally and formally flawed: seriously confused, banal, unconvincing on nuclear catastrophe and pollution, and irredeemably sexist. It sounded like a prepared speech, lasted for ten minutes or more, and was remembered later by Martyn Goff in an interview as 'the time when Maggie Gee handbagged David Lodge'. She was supported unreservedly by Helen McNeil. The import of the telephone conversations I had had with each of them was now clear. I did my best to defend Amis's novel, but Maggie and Helen were adamant. Ed said that as I was chairman they should accept my casting vote in Amis's favour, at which Maggie looked distressed and said she would be very unhappy if London Fields went through. David Profumo said that he didn't think we could shortlist a novel to which the two women judges were so strongly opposed. It was 12.30 and we still had only two books on the shortlist. I put London Fields on hold and suggested we considered Margaret Atwood's Cat's Eye, which had been commended with some qualifications in the first round, and it was agreed that it should be shortlisted. With that accomplished, we broke for lunch.

"In the course of my conversation with Helen she listed her criteria for a good novel, and the last of them was 'It must be ideologically correct'."

David Lodge, Booker chair in 1989, thought Amis's London Fields a frontrunner for the prize. Here's when he realised it wouldn't even get shortlisted.

Great pub!

Quite intrigued by this as a concept. Looks like they've got the right lineup for it too.

STOP TELLING ME WHAT TO DO

Not bad for a pair of auld knob-twiddlers

Great read (via @curiouslyp.bsky.social) - agree with most of it especially the love for Sheffield and SMOD

Ghost Whale advent calendar on a table. Many beers in a box.

It’s the most wonderful time for a beer (or 24)

Aside from all the usual (valid) debate, surely this is just a right old mess?

The Mars Room (2018) by Rachel Kusher - 2018 Booker Prize Shortlisted — Eyes on the Prize Reading the 2018 novel by Rachel Kushner, who was Booker Prize shortlisted for the second time in 2024 with Creation Lake. This was her first appearance on the shortlist.

Having enjoyed Creation Lake on this year's Booker shortlist, I've dipped in to a little more Kushner via her 2018-shortlisted The Mars Room, which is probably even better (if slightly less bonkers)

www.ontheprize.co.uk/blog/mars-ro...

Incredible book which this makes me want to reread (I never reread)

Sign the Petition Moth Club Faces Second Building Planning Application

Moth Club is one of the very best small venues in the whole of the UK. The fact that it's under threat is appalling. Please sign.

www.change.org/p/moth-club-...

I am attempting to get the excellent Book Club Review Podcast to join us here, but sadly not here yet!

Apparently I’m 8 years old. I maintain this is a surprisingly decent lineup!

I think Gaga was seen as a nailed on success and very much in the public consciousness, but agree it’s not an exact comparison.

Fair point on the latter though for sure!

I’m broadly in agreement but the BBC list has always been (rightly or wrongly) aiming very much for acts not yet in the *mainstream* consciousness. Chappell is the one that tests this most this year, but it’s not entirely new- Lady Gaga was on Sound of 2009 after a not exactly under the radar 2008.

Oh and @themagfields.bsky.social are on here too! Excellent.

Not a surprise but great to see regardless!

Yes it was a great night. Brass in Pocket twice! Though that did make me wonder slightly whether there was anything stopping them having done a duet on it…

I get the changes (good context, thanks!) but this really is very far away as a concept from what it used to be, isn’t it?

Not that I would remotely ever go to this festival (drinking pens lol) but this looks like a fairly major improvement on recent years at a glance?

If this was the Pretenders / Suede show was this not a few years earlier (2019?)

YouTube video by NPR Music The Magnetic Fields: Tiny Desk Concert

Magnetic Fields @npr.org Tiny Desk, lovely stuff. Taking me back to the beautiful Barbican shows a few months back youtu.be/wnFQn7GD1rg?...

Oh thanks! And yes, absolutely. I think I’m in a real minority with my lack of connection with Hotel du Lac, and probably need to revisit it at some point. I stand by really enjoying The White Tiger though!