Community Room [ Edited ]

[Peppermill]

This may come across as bitchy, so please discount that aspect, 'cause I want to raise an issue that arises when discussing a book with so many participants, and I hope some of you have some really good ideas to help.

I know that one of the reasons I quit doing FL discussions for awhile was because sometimes the numbers of posts become so great that it is difficult to keep up with them.  Then, when one does go thru them, there seems to be a lot of redundancy.  Is the answer to simply read what one can and post from there and not worry about the duplication?

I note that here because as people have signed on the past few weeks, I have noticed again and again the same question about whether to read in sync with the schedule or according to the pull of the book and one's own time availabilty.  Now, that is a good and perfectly legitimate question and many of you are willing to answer it thoroughly and graciously again and again.  (That either way works; that if one is concerned about posting spoilers or likes to speculate with others about the plot, one may prefer to stay with the schedule; that moderators may post threads for those who have read the whole book or who aren't concerned about spoilers, and other great tips...) But ....

Pepper

[Thayer]

---

Peppermill wrote:

This may come across as bitchy, so please discount that aspect, 'cause I want to raise an issue that arises when discussing a book with so many participants, and I hope some of you have some really good ideas to help.

I know that one of the reasons I quit doing FL discussions for awhile was because sometimes the numbers of posts become so great that it is difficult to keep up with them.  Then, when one does go thru them, there seems to be a lot of redundancy.  Is the answer to simply read what one can and post from there and not worry about the duplication?

I note that here because as people have signed on the past few weeks, I have noticed again and again the same question about whether to read in sync with the schedule or according to the pull of the book and one's own time availabilty.  Now, that is a good and perfectly legitimate question and many of you are willing to answer it thoroughly and graciously again and again.  (That either way works; that if one is concerned about posting spoilers or likes to speculate with others about the plot, one may prefer to stay with the schedule; that moderators may post threads for those who have read the whole book or who aren't concerned about spoilers, and other great tips...) But ....

Pepper

---

Pepper,

I sometimes wonder as I peruse the myraid posts of others, if they have in fact read through the other posts as it seems that sometimes the same issues arise. 

Alas, I think sometimes, as with all things,  tolerance, understanding and patience are the best ways to deal.  I have no doubt that others have rolled their eyes and sighed at some of my rambling, and perhaps off subject and non-sensical comments.  But that is what draws me to this forum...the non-judgemental, cooperative, encouraging and knowledgeable group who not only participate, but also encourage me to do so.  And by doing so enlighten and educate me as to thoughts, ideas and avenues that I might not have pursued on my own.

Am glad that you have decided to rejoin the group after your absence. I look forward to your insights. I only wish that the schedule would get posted so I would be prepared as to when/what/.  haha

[Fozzie]

---

Peppermill wrote:

This may come across as bitchy, so please discount that aspect, 'cause I want to raise an issue that arises when discussing a book with so many participants, and I hope some of you have some really good ideas to help.

I know that one of the reasons I quit doing FL discussions for awhile was because sometimes the numbers of posts become so great that it is difficult to keep up with them.  Then, when one does go thru them, there seems to be a lot of redundancy.  Is the answer to simply read what one can and post from there and not worry about the duplication?

---

I can't and don't read every post.  I stick to the threads associated with certain chapters and only go to other threads once I  have finished the book.  I am sure to post my thoughts, even though they may be redundant, for the author's sake.  I know he/she wants to know if there is a pattern or consistency to readers' comments. 

[dhaupt]

---

nikki824 wrote:

Those of you how are in the FL book club. Do you start reading right away or do u read when the discussion starts. I was just wondering. I want to be on the same page with everyone.

---

Hi Nikki, I've done it both ways and I have to say for me that reading on schedule helps me to answer the posts without fear of spoilers and it also helps me understand the other posts better. But do it both ways for a few of the sessions and see what works best for you.

[dhaupt]

---

Peppermill wrote:

This may come across as bitchy, so please discount that aspect, 'cause I want to raise an issue that arises when discussing a book with so many participants, and I hope some of you have some really good ideas to help.

I know that one of the reasons I quit doing FL discussions for awhile was because sometimes the numbers of posts become so great that it is difficult to keep up with them.  Then, when one does go thru them, there seems to be a lot of redundancy.  Is the answer to simply read what one can and post from there and not worry about the duplication?

I note that here because as people have signed on the past few weeks, I have noticed again and again the same question about whether to read in sync with the schedule or according to the pull of the book and one's own time availabilty.  Now, that is a good and perfectly legitimate question and many of you are willing to answer it thoroughly and graciously again and again.  (That either way works; that if one is concerned about posting spoilers or likes to speculate with others about the plot, one may prefer to stay with the schedule; that moderators may post threads for those who have read the whole book or who aren't concerned about spoilers, and other great tips...) But ....

Pepper

---

Pepper, first, welcome back to the group. I try to read all the posts but sometimes I just can't, but what I do is to read and respond "first" to Rachel's question post and then to go through the other posts at my leisure and respond to or just digest them.

Glad to have you here again.

[Choisya]

IMO:  I think chapter headings, location location and biography threads help to split up the discussion into manageable chunks because the readers will use these on different dates.  Also, when there are a lot of discussants, it is helpful if people stick to the plot/story of the book and don't post trivia like 'I love this book' or 'I love such and such a character' without teling us the reasons why.  We need a bit of meat on the bones and continuity for a discussion to be worthwhile to readers and to the author.  Depth of discussion can also slow the pace of posts down because people have to think more about their responses.  There are a lot of bookclubs out there but B&N is one of the few where good, to and fro discussions about plot and characters take place. 

[kpatton]

---

Fozzie wrote:

---

Peppermill wrote:

This may come across as bitchy, so please discount that aspect, 'cause I want to raise an issue that arises when discussing a book with so many participants, and I hope some of you have some really good ideas to help.

I know that one of the reasons I quit doing FL discussions for awhile was because sometimes the numbers of posts become so great that it is difficult to keep up with them.  Then, when one does go thru them, there seems to be a lot of redundancy.  Is the answer to simply read what one can and post from there and not worry about the duplication?

---

I can't and don't read every post.  I stick to the threads associated with certain chapters and only go to other threads once I  have finished the book.  I am sure to post my thoughts, even though they may be redundant, for the author's sake.  I know he/she wants to know if there is a pattern or consistency to readers' comments. 

---

Laura, I appreciate your comment about posting our thoughts even though others have posted similar thoughts.  I never thought about the author looking for pattens.  Kathy

[DSaff]

Pepper,  your concern is valid and something I think most of us have thought about. For me, I try to keep up with the posts because I enjoy reading the thoughts of others. Yes, they get redundant somethings, but there are also soooooo many nuggets that I just don't want to miss one! I always write my answer before reading the others because it is my thoughts I am putting down. Either way you decide to view the board, I hope you continue to post your thoughtful questions and thoughts. That is what it is all about! 

---

Peppermill wrote:

This may come across as bitchy, so please discount that aspect, 'cause I want to raise an issue that arises when discussing a book with so many participants, and I hope some of you have some really good ideas to help.

I know that one of the reasons I quit doing FL discussions for awhile was because sometimes the numbers of posts become so great that it is difficult to keep up with them.  Then, when one does go thru them, there seems to be a lot of redundancy.  Is the answer to simply read what one can and post from there and not worry about the duplication?

I note that here because as people have signed on the past few weeks, I have noticed again and again the same question about whether to read in sync with the schedule or according to the pull of the book and one's own time availabilty.  Now, that is a good and perfectly legitimate question and many of you are willing to answer it thoroughly and graciously again and again.  (That either way works; that if one is concerned about posting spoilers or likes to speculate with others about the plot, one may prefer to stay with the schedule; that moderators may post threads for those who have read the whole book or who aren't concerned about spoilers, and other great tips...) But ....

Pepper

---

[Tarri]

---

Peppermill wrote:

[snip]

I note that here because as people have signed on the past few weeks, I have noticed again and again the same question about whether to read in sync with the schedule or according to the pull of the book and one's own time availabilty.  Now, that is a good and perfectly legitimate question and many of you are willing to answer it thoroughly and graciously again and again.  (That either way works; that if one is concerned about posting spoilers or likes to speculate with others about the plot, one may prefer to stay with the schedule; that moderators may post threads for those who have read the whole book or who aren't concerned about spoilers, and other great tips...) But ....

Pepper

---

I am retired and even I can't read all the posts.  I do read the questions when they are first posted and try to share my ideas about the chapters or at least one of the questions.  This may be a leftover instinct from the discussion questions that were posted weekly for my on-line college classes.  If you didn't post, you didn't get the points that counted toward one quarter of your grade. 

I skim all of the responses and read the ones that catch my eye.  In all honesty, the really negative/critical responses don't get read (by me) because I want to draw my own conclusions.  I am also much more likely to read the shorter answers, if it's more than four paragraphs, I probably will pass it by.

But that's just me.

[jb70]

---

Jane, I read my first Picoult over the summer, Handle with Care.  I then passed it on to a friend because I thought it so well written.  Now I have Nineteen Minutes on my bookshelf and look forward to reading that at some point in time.

[Peppermill]

Laura, Kathy --

Thank you for your comments.  Yours, along with the others, raise some very good ideas on how to participate in a First Look discussion -- which is what I was seeking!

However, I am going to disagree on the view of repeating just for the sake of the author seeing patterns in reception.  While I can understand the usefulness of this to the writer at one level, it seems to me far more useful, and pleasant, to both the writer and the participants, would be comments, no matter how short, that extend, rather than simply repeat, the conversation.  After all, while there may be a follow-on and advertising, this book is written.  It seems to me the discussioon is far more for these actual readers and for potential readers who may be following the board.  For me, the repetition is evidence that the person posting has not taken the time to "listen" to his/her fellow participants.  While I totally understand that, and almost view it as a necessity at times, it still fits the category I tend to label "rude", or, at the least, "inconsiderate."  But, perhaps more importantly, it means we are avoiding the opportunity of building on each others' insights -- which, as some of you have said, is what draws many of us to these discussions.  The subtle distinctions do matter, and they are otten fun!

To those of you who said "welcome", despite my scratchy comments, thank you.  Some of you know how positively I view these boards and the opportunity they give us to "converse" on a topic that our very presence indicates we probably share -- the love of reading a good book.

I appreciated the comments from some of you on how you do read and skim the entries.  If there are other ideas out there, I hope you keep them coming.  I suspect they can be helpful to many of us.  And that IS a pleasure of many inputs and viewpoints.

Pepper

[kpatton]

---

Peppermill wrote:

Laura, Kathy --

Thank you for your comments.  Yours, along with the others, raise some very good ideas on how to participate in a First Look discussion -- which is what I was seeking!

However, I am going to disagree on the view of repeating just for the sake of the author seeing patterns in reception.  While I can understand the usefulness of this to the writer at one level, it seems to me far more useful, and pleasant, to both the writer and the participants, would be comments, no matter how short, that extend, rather than simply repeat, the conversation.  After all, while there may be a follow-on and advertising, this book is written.  It seems to me the discussioon is far more for these actual readers and for potential readers who may be following the board.  For me, the repetition is evidence that the person posting has not taken the time to "listen" to his/her fellow participants.  While I totally understand that, and almost view it as a necessity at times, it still fits the category I tend to label "rude", or, at the least, "inconsiderate."  But, perhaps more importantly, it means we are avoiding the opportunity of building on each others' insights -- which, as some of you have said, is what draws many of us to these discussions.  The subtle distinctions do matter, and they are otten fun!

To those of you who said "welcome", despite my scratchy comments, thank you.  Some of you know how positively I view these boards and the opportunity they give us to "converse" on a topic that our very presence indicates we probably share -- the love of reading a good book.

I appreciated the comments from some of you on how you do read and skim the entries.  If there are other ideas out there, I hope you keep them coming.  I suspect they can be helpful to many of us.  And that IS a pleasure of many inputs and viewpoints.

Pepper

---

Peppermill,

I never saw your comments as grouchy.  I thought you raised a valid point (and reading the comments of others, so did they).  Not only do I have difficulty reading all of the posts, I have questioned how often to even reply back with thoughts (like I'm doing now).  I do try to read what others have written, but there have been times when I have posted only to finally have time to read posts and see that others have posted very similar thoughts.  Based on the nature of our busy lives, there may be some duplication, but I agree with your comments about adding to your post why you agree with someone.  In the last discussion I found that people responding with similar (or different) thoughts but expanding on their reasons, helped me explore the book in different ways than I might have without the additional comments.

I appreciate you bringing this aspect of posting to everyone's attention.  Perhaps we will all post with a little more thoughtfulness.

Kathy

[Paul_Hochman]

---

kpatton wrote:

---

Peppermill wrote:

Laura, Kathy --

Thank you for your comments.  Yours, along with the others, raise some very good ideas on how to participate in a First Look discussion -- which is what I was seeking!

However, I am going to disagree on the view of repeating just for the sake of the author seeing patterns in reception.  While I can understand the usefulness of this to the writer at one level, it seems to me far more useful, and pleasant, to both the writer and the participants, would be comments, no matter how short, that extend, rather than simply repeat, the conversation.  After all, while there may be a follow-on and advertising, this book is written.  It seems to me the discussioon is far more for these actual readers and for potential readers who may be following the board.  For me, the repetition is evidence that the person posting has not taken the time to "listen" to his/her fellow participants.  While I totally understand that, and almost view it as a necessity at times, it still fits the category I tend to label "rude", or, at the least, "inconsiderate."  But, perhaps more importantly, it means we are avoiding the opportunity of building on each others' insights -- which, as some of you have said, is what draws many of us to these discussions.  The subtle distinctions do matter, and they are otten fun!

To those of you who said "welcome", despite my scratchy comments, thank you.  Some of you know how positively I view these boards and the opportunity they give us to "converse" on a topic that our very presence indicates we probably share -- the love of reading a good book.

I appreciated the comments from some of you on how you do read and skim the entries.  If there are other ideas out there, I hope you keep them coming.  I suspect they can be helpful to many of us.  And that IS a pleasure of many inputs and viewpoints.

Pepper

---

Peppermill,

I never saw your comments as grouchy.  I thought you raised a valid point (and reading the comments of others, so did they).  Not only do I have difficulty reading all of the posts, I have questioned how often to even reply back with thoughts (like I'm doing now).  I do try to read what others have written, but there have been times when I have posted only to finally have time to read posts and see that others have posted very similar thoughts.  Based on the nature of our busy lives, there may be some duplication, but I agree with your comments about adding to your post why you agree with someone.  In the last discussion I found that people responding with similar (or different) thoughts but expanding on their reasons, helped me explore the book in different ways than I might have without the additional comments.

I appreciate you bringing this aspect of posting to everyone's attention.  Perhaps we will all post with a little more thoughtfulness.

Kathy

---

I think these are valid points, but I also think the free flowing, salon-like atmosphere of this board allows for some incredibly interesting comments and insights.

[Sunltcloud]

We had quite an interesting discussion last time in spite of repetitious posts; I would hate to see that batting back and forth of ideas be limited by concerns over the amount of posts being produced. We can't all be the first to give the definitive answer to the questions posed by the moderator and we can't all be the most clever interpreter of style, plot, and characters, but we all should get a chance to explore our understanding of the book, whether we are longtime participants or first timers.

I know that many readers never post because they are afraid of duplicating what has already been written. But who knows, a gem might go by the wayside. Even if the same idea is stated in nineteen similar sentences, it might be the twentieth statement that carries the seed, the essence, the feeling that makes me open the book to the page in question one more time.

It is also, I think, in the best interest of the author to accumulate a wide range of opinions - literary opinions as well as basic "like" and "don't like" opinions. We are here to let the author have a glimpse into the psyche of her future audience and what could be more rewarding than a large chorus of voices?      

---

Peppermill wrote:

Laura, Kathy --

Thank you for your comments.  Yours, along with the others, raise some very good ideas on how to participate in a First Look discussion -- which is what I was seeking!

However, I am going to disagree on the view of repeating just for the sake of the author seeing patterns in reception.  While I can understand the usefulness of this to the writer at one level, it seems to me far more useful, and pleasant, to both the writer and the participants, would be comments, no matter how short, that extend, rather than simply repeat, the conversation.  After all, while there may be a follow-on and advertising, this book is written.  It seems to me the discussioon is far more for these actual readers and for potential readers who may be following the board.  For me, the repetition is evidence that the person posting has not taken the time to "listen" to his/her fellow participants.  While I totally understand that, and almost view it as a necessity at times, it still fits the category I tend to label "rude", or, at the least, "inconsiderate."  But, perhaps more importantly, it means we are avoiding the opportunity of building on each others' insights -- which, as some of you have said, is what draws many of us to these discussions.  The subtle distinctions do matter, and they are otten fun!

To those of you who said "welcome", despite my scratchy comments, thank you.  Some of you know how positively I view these boards and the opportunity they give us to "converse" on a topic that our very presence indicates we probably share -- the love of reading a good book.

I appreciated the comments from some of you on how you do read and skim the entries.  If there are other ideas out there, I hope you keep them coming.  I suspect they can be helpful to many of us.  And that IS a pleasure of many inputs and viewpoints.

Pepper

---

[Peppermill]

Sunltcloud wrote (excerpt):  I know that many readers never post because they are afraid of duplicating what has already been written. But who knows, a gem might go by the wayside. Even if the same idea is stated in nineteen similar sentences, it might be the twentieth statement that carries the seed, the essence, the feeling that makes me open the book to the page in question one more time.

Linda -- I sincerely hope that there is no reason that keeps any reader never posting.  It seems to me that is the commitment we made when we agreed to participate in First Look.  (And, I know, life can interfere with even that.) Besides, that is the fun and joy of this.

I think your point is well made that we seldom know what twist can carry the essence for someone else -- or ourselves. Still, I have read enough of this story now (first week) to know that it has a lot to discuss from many perspectives.

[Peppermill]

PaulH wrote (excerpt):  I also think the free flowing, salon-like atmosphere of this board allows for some incredibly interesting comments and insights.

Paul -- what do you mean by "salon-like atmosphere"?  

Sort of like a big gathering where separate groups of people are discussing the same thing simultaneously? So of course there is duplication.  So of course no one can participate in all the conversations.  Neat analogy, if its the one you are making, but since I don't really know how salons operated, past or present, it may not be the one you intend or that is valid.

[Paul_Hochman]

---

Peppermill wrote:

PaulH wrote (excerpt):  I also think the free flowing, salon-like atmosphere of this board allows for some incredibly interesting comments and insights.

Paul -- what do you mean by "salon-like atmosphere"?  

Sort of like a big gathering where separate groups of people are discussing the same thing simultaneously? So of course there is duplication.  So of course no one can participate in all the conversations.  Neat analogy, if its the one you are making, but since I don't really know how salons operated, past or present, it may not be the one you intend or that is valid.

---

Yep. That's exactly what I meant, Pepper.

[Choisya]

Paul wrote:

Sort of like a big gathering where separate groups of people are discussing the same thing simultaneously? So of course there is duplication.  So of course no one can participate in all the conversations.  Neat analogy, if its the one you are making, but since I don't really know how salons operated, past or present, it may not be the one you intend or that is valid.

I love the idea of these boards being 'salons', with our moderators as salonnieres!  We are following in the footsteps of Socrates and the Marquise de Rambouillet.  Readers of War and Peace will remember that the novel starts in Anna Pavlovna's 'salon' in St Peterburg, where Pierre puts his foot in it by arguing about the 'balance of power in Europe' with her distinguished guest, Abbe Morio, and later he attends Helene Bezukhova's salon in Moscow: 

'To be received in the Countess Bezukhova's salon was regarded as a diploma of intellect. Young men read books before attending Helene's evenings, to have something to say in her salon, and secretaries of the embassy, and even ambassadors, confided diplomatic secrets to her, so that in a way Helene was a power. Pierre, who knew she was very stupid, sometimes attended, with a strange feeling of perplexity and fear, her evenings and dinner parties, where politics, poetry, and philosophy were discussed.'  [My emphasis.]

Both Anna Pavlovna and Helene Bezukhova had great difficulty in steering conversations between the trivial and the profound so as to make their evenings convivial and to reward their distinguished guests with intelligent conversation.  I guess we are trying to do the same here and some of us attend 'with a strange feeling of perplexity and fear' too.

[Choisya]

Sorry, in my post below about salons I meant to quote this part of Paul's post:-

I also think the free flowing, salon-like atmosphere of this board allows for some incredibly interesting comments and insights.

[dhaupt]

---

PaulH wrote:

---

Peppermill wrote:

PaulH wrote (excerpt):  I also think the free flowing, salon-like atmosphere of this board allows for some incredibly interesting comments and insights.

Paul -- what do you mean by "salon-like atmosphere"?  

Sort of like a big gathering where separate groups of people are discussing the same thing simultaneously? So of course there is duplication.  So of course no one can participate in all the conversations.  Neat analogy, if its the one you are making, but since I don't really know how salons operated, past or present, it may not be the one you intend or that is valid.

---

Yep. That's exactly what I meant, Pepper.

---

Pepper I love that analogy, and that's how I feel here too.

And now when I go to post on these boards I'll get all Regency and say in a terrible of course British accent I'll be retiring to the salon now