The 2018 Constant Reader Awards begin January 16!

After four long years the Constant Reader Awards are back! We first started this thing almost ten years ago (November 2008) with irregular subsequent editions in 2010, 2012, and 2014. This will be the fifth edition of this event, and I am so very happy to host it and to have as many of our membership participate as possible. And with the original edition starting in 2008 (but officially being the 2009 CRAs), this could also technically be our 10th anniversary CRA event!

If you are new to the Constant Reader Awards, the premise is simple. We are voting on each book in King's canon to crown the Best Book. So far, four times in a row, it's been The Stand, unshakably. The voting also allows for ranking of the books from the top on down. Please look through the sub-forum archives here for past rankings.

The voting is done in three rounds, and Round 1 will commence on January 16!

As in 2014, in Round 1 we will be voting on each book on a scale of 0 to 5 with ten options, so allowing for something like 3.5. There will be 70 titles competing in the first round, from Carrie to Sleeping Beauties. These will be ranked from best to worst according to the score they will receive and the top 30 will move on to Round 2 for additional grading, after which the top 10 will make it into the all-important final Round 3 where we will get our winner, as well as a 1-70 ranking of all the nominees!

I hope participation will be high as we haven't done this in a while. Can The Stand make it five in a row? Yikes! Only you can make that decision, by voting! In the immortal words of one Paris Hilton: "Vote or Die!" (Not really, but I would really appreciate it, thanks!)

Great!! I'll be there!
And yes, The Stand for a fifth #1 - definitely!!

sk

Can't wait!

Yay!
:thumbsup:

I would like to nominate a rule where if a book wins first place five times in a row, it becomes retired from further competition.

An IT vs The Stand final is a foregone conclusion. Any voting prior to this seems a tad redundant tbh.

What is the list of 70 books? I came up with 75, but there are a few that maybe shouldn't be included.

i.e. Will there just be one entry for the Stand? What about the Gunslinger. Also not sure if Cycle of the Werewolf should be included or My Pretty Pony. So if you elimate those it brings it down to 71, but then there were a few I didn't include that maybe I should have:

Creepshow, Ghost Brothers of Darkland County, Secret Windows, Stephen King goes to the Movies, Six Stories, The Plant, The New Leutenants Rap,
Nightmares in the Sky

I will be posting an overview thread for Round 1 shortly, with the schedule and the 14 brackets. All main King books up to Sleeping Beauties are included. Removed from last time are Faithful and Blockade Billy. Cycle of the Werewolf has always been included as it's a stand-alone novel. My Pretty Pony never was included, nor were the other ones you mentioned, other than Secret Windows and Nightmares in the Sky once or twice. For books like The Stand and The Gunslinger, yes it's one entry for the original release but you can vote with either version in mind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shannon

I would like to nominate a rule where if a book wins first place five times in a row, it becomes retired from further competition.

---

I kinda agree. Seems like an exercise in futility/redundancy. Maybe we need to do something for only the last 20-25 years or so.

It is the tale, not he who tells it. It is the journey, not the destination. We still get a ranking from best to worst. And maybe one of these days The Drawing of the Three can top The Stand? Or It? Or something else?

just curious how you factor in books that people haven't read. So if someone has only read 40 of the books, how do they rank the 30 they haven't read? Sorry I haven't participated in one before so not sure how it works.

They just don't, there will be a Never Read option however, so no one is left out.

Just curious why there is no 0.5 or 1.5 option, but there is a 2.5, 3.5 and 4.5. I gave one book a 1, but might have given it a 1.5 if able to.

At the time that rating scale was devised, I suppose there wasn't seen a need for much of a distinction between a 1 and a 1.5. That's pretty bad either way.