|
|
Go to page 1~2~3~4 [Next] | ||||||||||
Vlad_77 Inner circle The Netherlands 5829 Posts |
I realize that we are only just past the middle of August, but, start thinking about the Book of the Year Award. With four months to go there seems to be some books due for release. Still, it's a good thing to review your latest published in 2012 BOOK treasures; maybe that book you bought in February just might be the one to garner the top spot!
A few notes are in order here and at the end of November I will lay out the specific guidelines to follow when the "official thread" is created. But for now: 1. As many of you know, last year's award got derailed because of two disagreements with Café policy. So right here, and right up front I will reiterate what some people missed: I am not affiliated with The Café in any way except as a member. Any disagreements as to policy need to be directed to The Café. However, to save the admins time and travail, the guidelines will again be crystal clear. Not to sound like a Fascist here but any vote that deviates from the guidelines - which will largely adhere to Peo's fine example over the years when he managed this award - will not count. 2. A few broad strokes for those new to The Café and for those who may never have voted in the past: a. Only physical books can be considered for this award. If someone desires to implement an award for E-books, and DVDs - and I think there SHOULD be such - then certainly do so. b. Compilations do not count. As wonderful as The Definitive Sankey is, it is a compendium of previous material that has been updated. It is not however a set of books containing mostly new material. Other compilations that do not count would be hard bound collections of classic magic periodicals. I love these but again, they are compilations. Last year saw the release of Talisman but even though the journal was "new" in the sense that not many had heard of it and in some cases were not even born when Talisman was published still would disqualify it. c. Admittedly a majority of books released in any given year are devoted to close up magic and a large portion of those are devoted largely to card magic. However, this award is not restricted to those sub-genres of the art. If the book is related to magic, mentalism, escapes, or any of the "allied mystery arts" then they do count as long as they were published in 2012 - this includes biographies. And yes, if that biography includes SOME effects it's all good as long as the focus of the book is the biography and not the effects. 3. This relates to point one: Two books were disqualified last year because two of the authors were banned from The Café. One of the authors even resorted to spamming the award which is nothing but puerile self-conceit. But more importantly, The Café does not allow the promotion of material penned/created by banned members. Please refer to official Café guidelines regarding this if you have questions. Perhaps I can persuade Steve Brooks or one of the admins to clarify the position prior to the start of voting which will commence on 31 December. Peo has done a splendid job in years past guiding this award and I am honored that he has asked me to take it over. Peo and I stay in contact and in the best Italian fashion he has been and continues to be a great consigliere. (Yes Peo I know you are Swedish but I just made you an honorary Sicilian!! ) So let's have fun with this! Yes there is no prize as such for this but past winners have expressed their deep appreciation for the recognition. We have 51,854 registered members as I write this and perhaps thousands of lurkers. This award (perhaps we should change the name to recognition) DOES serve an important purpose in that it helps to spread valuable information for the community as a whole. The next bit is optional but it worked until the troll derailment last year: with your vote, provide a few comments as to why the book you voted for deserves the recognition as the book of the year. It doesn't have to be scholarly, just a few bits of information. Again, this part is optional! Thanks for reading and more importantly for your participation in December! Namaste, Vlad |
|||||||||
Peo Olsson Inner circle Stockholm, Sweden 3260 Posts |
Gracias Vlad I'm honored, and well spoken.
Peo
Pictured to the left my hero and me during FISM 2006 in Stockholm.
|
|||||||||
kozmic kettle Regular user 123 Posts |
Quote:
On 2012-08-19 08:27, Vlad_77 wrote: This is quite a tricky distinction as many books contain material that has previously been published in some form. Your comments about The Definitive Sankey, for instance, would equally apply to the Pat Page book that received a lot of votes last year, or Maelstrom, which was in the lead last year before Tom got put on the naughty step, and contained material from his perviously published ebooks. The Definitve Sankey contains virtually no previously published writing. In terms of the text and illustrations, it's a completely new work that Andi and Josh have written from scratch. And the vast majority of the contents have never been published before in printed form before. It's difficult to see how we can have a definition of 'compilation' that rules out the Sankey collection but doesn't also rule out most other significant collections of a single magicians work. |
|||||||||
bugjack Inner circle New York, New York 1624 Posts |
Quote:
On 2012-08-19 09:34, kozmic kettle wrote: Pretty much agree with this. By the standards of what a book is, "The Definitive Sankey" is new. |
|||||||||
Cameron Francis V.I.P. 7025 Posts |
Yes, most magic books are compendiums of previously published material. Even a "new" book usually contains material perviously published in magazines or on DVDs. Tricky.
MOMENT'S NOTICE LIVE 3 - Six impromptu card tricks! Out now! http://cameronfrancismagic.com/moments-notice-live-3.html
|
|||||||||
Peo Olsson Inner circle Stockholm, Sweden 3260 Posts |
Very tricky indeed, but Im sure Vlad knows what he is doing, I have full trust in him.
Otherwise I wouldn't let him take over Book of the year.
Pictured to the left my hero and me during FISM 2006 in Stockholm.
|
|||||||||
nooner Regular user 187 Posts |
I would like to make a suggestion. Before anything turns down a dark road like last year, can we all agree to give Vlad absolute authority over the arbitration of things like the inclusion of the Sankey collection and anything else that arises that needs a decision? Vlad can digest what Kozmic Kettle said about this specific issue and consider any additional comments made about it and then render his decision. After that, can we all agree to completely drop the issue and not debate about what is fair and isn't fair? Let's empower Vlad to run this contest as he chooses. I trust him to make fair decisions because he has demonstrated consistent and honest behavior in the past. The constant debating and whining last year turned something that has been traditionally a fun event into a miserable experience for most people involved.
|
|||||||||
brehaut Inner circle kentucky 2531 Posts |
Quote:
On 2012-08-19 13:44, nooner wrote: I can agree with it. I don't know Vlad at all but from reading his posts he seems knowledgable and fair |
|||||||||
Vlad_77 Inner circle The Netherlands 5829 Posts |
Thanks Nooner and all,
I will consider everything carefully and offer my take on it soon in this thread for further discussion. While there is validity in Kozmic Kettle has stated, precedents have been set in the past that have excluded rewritten and updated books that also included some unpublished material. Truth be told though, what could make The Definitive Sankey tricky is the fact that Sankey distributed and still distributes a lot of his stuff on DVD. But I will - pardon the intentional pun - definitively and definitely think about it and freely offer my thoughts for discussion. This isn't a decision I can make in a few days and I understand that no matter what decision IS made, some people will be upset so apologies in advance! Namaste, Vlad |
|||||||||
kozmic kettle Regular user 123 Posts |
I suppose my main point is that the best way to avoid debating is to make the rules as unambiguous as possible, so there is nothing to debate. The "no ebooks" rule is a good example. Everyone understands what is and is not an ebook, so Vlad will never need to arbitrate on whether a publication counts as an ebook or not.
Personally, I would recommend that the rule should be ... Not Eligible: Re-published collections of books and magazines that have previously been in print, or compilations taken from the original text of books and magazines that have previously been in print (even if some updates have been made to the original text). Eligible: Newly written and illustrated descriptions of previously published effects that have never been collected together before. Material that has previously been published in non-print formats such as ebooks or on DVD. My reason for suggesting this is: the rule would then be easy to understand and require no arbitration. Otherwise it could start to look a bit arbitrary. Like I say, The Definitive Sankey is 3 volumes of entirely new text and illustrations, and the majority of the material has never been in print before, only on DVD. How do we draw a distinction between that and a collection of material that has previously been published in ebook format (Maelstrom/Vortex), a collection of material that has previously been published in a different language (A Book in English), or collection of material that has previously been published in magazines (all Barrie Richardson's books) ... etc? I'm happy for Vlad to disagree with my personal definition of what counts as 'previously published', but I hope he'll at least decide to give a clear definition of his own that makes it obvious whether books fit that definition or not. |
|||||||||
motown Inner circle Atlanta by way of Detroit 6136 Posts |
Quote: Not really.On 2012-08-19 13:22, Cameron Francis wrote:
"If you ever write anything about me after I'm gone, I will come back and haunt you."
– Karl Germain |
|||||||||
ixnay66 Inner circle Denver 1525 Posts |
When will you guys start talking about the best books of 2012?
|
|||||||||
motown Inner circle Atlanta by way of Detroit 6136 Posts |
Toward the end of the year. Maybe even 2013.
"If you ever write anything about me after I'm gone, I will come back and haunt you."
– Karl Germain |
|||||||||
wizban New user 21 Posts |
OT: Vlad, are you Sicilian?
|
|||||||||
Cameron Francis V.I.P. 7025 Posts |
Motown, I certainly don't mean all magic books are like this. But some are. Even newer authors who haven't had much material published in books and magazines do have effects published on DVDs or on sites like "The Second Deal". In other words, the material has appeared in some other medium before the book was published.
However, re-reading Vlad's post, he did say that the books had to contain "mostly" new material. So a book like John G's "One Degree", even though it has material which originally appeared on DVD, would count because it is mostly new stuff (I mean, it wouldn't be considered for this year's award because it came out in 2010 but you get the idea).
MOMENT'S NOTICE LIVE 3 - Six impromptu card tricks! Out now! http://cameronfrancismagic.com/moments-notice-live-3.html
|
|||||||||
Robert P. Special user Kansas 632 Posts |
Anyone know what happened with the award last year? I can't find the thread.
|
|||||||||
Caliban Special user 727 Posts |
Quote:
On 2012-08-20 15:06, RobertP wrote: The short version ... I think A Book in English was in the lead. Then Tom Stone posted something critical of the management and was banned. Then - by pure coincidence - loads of people voted for Tom's book Maelstrom making it the clear leader. Then all the votes for Maelstrom were deleted, causing many to question the validity of the poll. Then the whole thread was deleted. Maelstrom IS a brilliant book but few people received it before January, so I suspect there would have been a late surge in votes for Maelstrom anyway as the vote was due to end at around the same time that people would have finished reading it. Maelstrom could quite legitimately have won. It seems likely, though, that Woody Aragon's A Book in English would have been voted Book of the Year if Tom Stone hadn't been banned. |
|||||||||
duanebarry Special user 883 Posts |
Omitting the pseudonymous M Lewis spamming and T Stone supportive protest votes, I noted this tally for 2011 Book of the Year:
18 Aragon, A Book In English 6 Page, Magic Page By Page 4 Barnowsky, The Book of Destiny 3 Kaufman, The Berglas Effects 2 Richardson, Curtain Call With 1 each, sometimes voiced by the author or publisher/distributor, for: Albright ed., Erdnase Unmasked Behr, Handcrafted Card Magic 2 Gagnon, Avant Cards Kodell, Kodell: Do Something Different Lewis, Lives of a Showman Magus, Unspeakable Acts Munton/McLeod, The Con Schneider, Al Schneider Magic Stone, Maelstrom Swiss, Devious Standards Volpe, Emotional Mentalism |
|||||||||
Vlad_77 Inner circle The Netherlands 5829 Posts |
Quote:
On 2012-08-20 01:55, wizban wrote: 3/4 Sicilian 1/4 Irish Weird combination especially now that I live in The Netherlands (US expat). To confuse matters even more, my faith is Eastern Orthodox Christian (which is mainly comprised of Greeks, Russians, Romanians, Serbs, and Arabs) Thanks to Duaneberry for completing the picture of last year's derailment. A few folks have PM'd me with their thoughts and their support and I also appreciate the support I am seeing here. So I am going to offer three possibilities and ask for everyone's input here. I hope that we can reach some consensus and/or at least minimize the occurence of anything that might again derail the award - Mayans and trolls notwithstanding So in no particular order of importance or consideration: 1. In past years we have had excellent books that were - and are excellent - but were not eligible for voting because these books were compilations. Harry Lorayne's Classic Collection volumes and the H&R produced Nick Trost's Subtle Card Magic come to mind. As far as the Lorayne books, these were rewritten and updated with some new material. In that respect there is a similarity to The Definitive Sankey - but before you jump, read on please? This first option preserves the status quo but The Definitive Sankey presents a unique problem in that much of Jay Sankey's material was produced and released in media other than physical books. While Harry Lorayne's Best Ever DVD series contains a ton of his effects culled from a vast body of work, the material represented on that DVD series is infinitessimal when compared to his oeuvre in physical books. The Trost books are similar to The James File which was a compilation of previously unpublished Stewart James material. The James File however predated the Book of the Year Award. No one to my knowledge had nominated any of the three extant volumes of the Trost books. So The Definitive Sankey presents a rather unique challenge: even though Andi and Joshua rewrote the effects, much of the effects DO come from books originally written by Jay Sankey and Jon Racherbaumer. But other material was gleaned from DVDs. So, do I go through the three volumes and determine whether or not there are more effects from past physical books or from DVDs. Sankey is a prolific creator! Frankly my friends I do not want to engage in a quantitative exercise. So option 1 is to maintain the status quo and disqualify the Sankey set. 2. With a deep bow to my consigliere Peo and kudos to his superb work with this award in the past, I would propose that we change the rubric of the award to The Most Influential Book of 2013. The times they are a changin'and perhaps a change is in order. The caveat here however is that can we really label the set as influential because the best of Sankey is now gathered into one convenient place? I am therefore asking all of you if for instance you would have argued for the Art of Astonishment series to be included if it was published in 2013 even though Paul Harris' material was available - like Sankey's - throughout the literature in books, DVDs and other media? 3. Similar to number 1 but we make an exception for Sankey because the material comes from other media including physical books. Obviously there could be other solutions. I listed these as conversation points for the community to consider. Thing is, no matter what consensus might be reached in the discussion, some people will be upset. Please consider each of the options and certainly feel free to offer more alternatives. I really want this award to reflect a community effort and in the best - or worst, depending upon your epistemological stance - Benthamite utilitarian manner, consider "utility" as the measuring stick for the greatest aggregate good. I am not a fan of Bentham as he considered human rights as nothing more than "nonsense on stilts" but, we are talking about magic books here so the UN Declaration on the Rights of Human Beings is not germane here I am looking forward to your thoughts and I will consider each carefully. Namaste, Vlad |
|||||||||
duanebarry Special user 883 Posts |
I'd suggest people vote for their top 3 (or even 5) books of the year, in their order of preference.
Then to tally, use the instant-runoff voting algorithm to iteratively eliminate books and determine the order of finish. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting There's still a top winner, but there's also room for other notable books, and that would provide a more interesting view of the good books released in 2012. We should see more variety, since people won't feel trapped into voting for a book of tricks due to their expectation of what others will be voting for. So on a 5-book ballot, somebody can name a history book as their top choice without "wasting their vote," as if there's not other support it will be bumped off the top of their list and their next choice will rise up to replace it. With instant runoff, everybody really gets to vote for the books they want to win, in their order of preference, without wasting their votes. And since the result is an ordered list of good books rather than just a single winner, there's less need to disqualify books like Trapdoor, Essential Sankey, freshened-up Lorayne or whatever. We'd see history books and theory books named. It'd be nice. |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Books, Pamphlets & Lecture Notes » » It's Never too Early - Book of the Year 2012 (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page 1~2~3~4 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.07 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |