F13 Book Club

[Phildo]

You know, if we're in this for discussion, I'm just gonna throw this out there:

The Stranger by Camus.

[lamaros]

Doesn't everyone read that in high school?

The Onion hasn't been funny for 5 years. 

[Rendakor]

I thought the point was that we recommend books we've read, so that when everyone else reads it, they have some guarantee that it's not totally godawful. That's why I liked Samwise's idea. If I was willing to just pick books randomly from these genres, I'd have read them by now.

Well, there's no guarantee. Some of you like American Gods and such, afterall.

But seriously. How do you read and find new things if no one ever reads something new? For those of you not willing to take a chance on a new book you're dependent on people who are, and who's taste you share, to broaden your reading. You don't have to do it randomly. Afterall, the first time you read The Great Gatsby it was probably recommended by things you had just heard about the book generally. Reading Joyce, Faulkner, etc you were probably confident enough to just go off their reputation and not depend on someone who you knew having read the novel.

Umm...I don't, that's why I thought the book club here was such a good idea. Great Gatsby wasn't very good imo, and I read it because it was assigned in High School. Never read any Joyce or Faulkner. In after "wanting to broaden horizons." And while I'm willing to take a chance on a book at random, I'm not willing to take a chance recommending a book at random.

[Phildo]

Doesn't everyone read that in high school?

How much do you really absorb when you read a book for high school anyway?  The only thing I remember about that book is that the Cure wrote a song about it.  And it turned a friend of mine into a drug-addled born-again Buddhist who now lives in a monastery somewhere in the woods of New York.

[lamaros]

Well, it depends how recently you left high-school I guess.

But isn't it better reading something you havn't read at all rather than something you just can't remember? Especialy if most everyone has read it and might remember better.

[Phildo]

True.  Okay, how about Mein Kampf?

 

[Strazos]

Throwing random books out there:

The Pillars of the Earth - Ken Follet (historical fiction)

Son of the Revolution - Liang Heng and Judith Shapiro (um...factual historical account?durr, autobiographical)

I can elaborate if anyone would like, but they're both EXCELLENT books.

[cmlancas]

I'm not sure if I'd pick Joyce of Faulkner, simply because it might turn off quite a few people not interested in experimental literature. I love stream of consciousness, Araby, Portrait, and The Sound and the Fury. However, on the f13 list to people who are looking to broaden horizons? I'm not so sure. (However, if everyone was looking for a challenge, I'd be all for it.)

[lamaros]

If by experimental you mean beautiful. But it was only an example--I don't want to make the SF army here hate me--I'd not recommend them.

[MaceVanHoffen]

I don't think anyone has yet suggested John Steinbeck.  Now, I really dislike most of his work.  But one book is awesome:  Travels with Charley.  It's a simple, road trip travelogue that will really appeal to those who love to travel.

[cmlancas]

Not Grapes of Wrath or Of Mice and Men? Also, he has some good short stories. However, Steinbeck makes me ashamed to go to Monterey; it is so touristy now with the aquarium there. At least the aquarium is awesome though. 

[stray]

Grapes of Wrath is good stuff.

[Samwise]

I was forced to read Grapes of Wrath when I was about nine.  It scarred me for life.  And yet, having read a few other things by him in later years, I think it's my favorite book of his.   

[stray]

I always wanted to name a band Rosasharn. I mean... a woman breast feeding a bum. That's hot.

[edit] Seriously though... I like it for.. sentimental reasons I guess? Some of my family on my dad's side made that migration west back then. And Steinbeck's ideals are reflective of a time when socialism wasn't so villainized in America, so that's a neat peculiarity.

[MaceVanHoffen]

Not Grapes of Wrath or Of Mice and Men? Also, he has some good short stories. However, Steinbeck makes me ashamed to go to Monterey; it is so touristy now with the aquarium there. At least the aquarium is awesome though. 

Ugh, I just couldn't stand most anything else by Steinbeck.  It's a writing style thing.  Him and Hemingway, just ... ugh.

I did, however, really enjoy the characters and setting of Cannery Row.  Just not Steinbeck's prose style.  I'm the sort of reader that I'll reread stuff like Cannery Row if there was anything I liked about it, though.

As an aside:  I have a rabid love of everything Mark Twain ever wrote, and I've been told by "lit people" that that's just odd.  I guess Twain and Steinbeck get compared a lot for some reason.  God knows why.  Twain is clearly as far above Steinbeck as the Wii is above every other console 

[cmlancas]

So what do we think? Should we vote on the next book or just have someone choose it from the thread that people in the book club have posted in?

I see in the thread so far:

lamaros, Miasma, Samwise, Rendakor, Margalis, Strazos, Lt.Dan, hal, Stray, Tebonas, sigil, NowhereMan, MaceVanHoffen, Bokonon, Prospero and Phildo

I think it should be limited to those people, as opposed to those of you slacking who didn't read the first book! 

[stray]

I'm not really in this thread. Just lurking mostly. Haven't read Cat's Cradle in like ten years, not sure what to say.

[lamaros]

Just make stuff up and be provocative. It gets the juices flowing.

[Miasma]

I'm intrigued by that book which made somebody become a druggy-hippie-minimalist-Buddhist.

Edit: I just looked it up and it sounds horribly depressing, I don't need that.

[lamaros]

I have to reiterate my desire not to read The Outsider/The Stranger again. I've read it a few times in the last few years, recently watched a play of it, see it referenced everyone, and I'm rather over it!

It's short though, so people can just read it for personal pleasure. It's hot (get it!?). Also, if you've never read any other Camus, do so. I especially like The Plague.

[Engels]

I am still working on Cat's Cradle. Took me a while to get my hands on a copy. I don't have a strong feeling about the next book, but I'm not big on French existentialists. I got my Masters in Existential Phenomenological Psychology, so its a bit of a repeat for me. Hee.

[MaceVanHoffen]

I was just reminded of something ...

Back when Lost was in its first season, I remember reading that certain plot elements were inspired by a number of novels, among them The Third Policeman.  I intend to read it in any case.  It sounds strange and interesting, and could make for good discussion.

As I've not read it, I can't recommend it.  I had never even heard of the author until I saw that bit about Lost.  But maybe someone here knows something about it?  Does it even sound like something folks here would enjoy?

[lamaros]

*insert cheapshot at quality of writing of something associated in any way with Lost*

[stray]

I am still working on Cat's Cradle. Took me a while to get my hands on a copy. I don't have a strong feeling about the next book, but I'm not big on French existentialists. I got my Masters in Existential Phenomenological Psychology, so its a bit of a repeat for me. Hee.

Who the hell has a graduate program like that?

[Margalis]

Lost at first seemed like Ubik by Phillip K. Dick. (One of my favorite books) I think at this point they are just making shit up without rhyme or reason to keep the show going but it looked to be going down that road.

That's the book I'm suggesting when it is my turn BTW.

[lamaros]

So what do we think? Should we vote on the next book or just have someone choose it from the thread that people in the book club have posted in?

I think we should take turns choosing. Makes the choices more original I think, more room for wider scope, when it's not always the most popular option that gets in.

[Engels]

I am still working on Cat's Cradle. Took me a while to get my hands on a copy. I don't have a strong feeling about the next book, but I'm not big on French existentialists. I got my Masters in Existential Phenomenological Psychology, so its a bit of a repeat for me. Hee.

Who the hell has a graduate program like that?

Seattle University, a Jesuit school.

[Rendakor]

I agree that we should take turns picking books. We need some way of choosing genre though, if we want to keep our selections diverse.

How bout this: make a new poll with a more comprehensive genre list and we vote again. Then we start at the top genre; anyone can suggest a book of that genre, and we vote on books. Once someone's book is picked, they can't suggest until we've read something from everyone (or no one who hasn't suggested has a book for that particular genre). Its a little complex, but it would give everyone a say and keep our selection varied. (If we go with this, sci fi would go at the bottom with cmlancas unable to suggest)

Or just list our names in some order and alternate picking, genres be damned.

[Margalis]

Simpler is better. I say just list the names and go down the line letting each person pick whatever. They can solicit suggestions if they want.

[Johny Cee]

So what do we think? Should we vote on the next book or just have someone choose it from the thread that people in the book club have posted in?

I see in the thread so far:

lamaros, Miasma, Samwise, Rendakor, Margalis, Strazos, Lt.Dan, hal, Stray, Tebonas, sigil, NowhereMan, MaceVanHoffen, Bokonon, Prospero and Phildo

I think it should be limited to those people, as opposed to those of you slacking who didn't read the first book! 

I think a fair amount of people read the book,  but were turned off by the anti-discussion that followed.

[Samwise]

Yes.  Litfags throwing poo at each other about the correct way to discuss a book is not conducive to actually discussing the book.   

[lamaros]

Meanwhile the thread sits there for days inbetween, with us 'litfags' holding back, and no one else posts anything at all...

"I liked it!" isn't discussion. There are many topics raised there that havn't been discussed that much as yet, and many more people can bring up themselves beside. Yet they havn't.

Because cmlancas and I had a little digression about lit theory (in a literature bookclub) everyone else has been too put off to post themselves. Please...

[Margalis]

lamaros, instead of continuing to be a whiny self-centered douchebag who trolls every thread you could try asking people *what* about the discussion turned them off.

When the first post about the book is someone complaining after reading 30 pages you're off to a bad start. That's my take.

Samwise and Johny Cee, what turned you guys off? Feel free to blame me at least in part.

[lamaros]

If people are going to back out of discussing something because they don't like the fact that someone disliked the book...

I responded to samwise and tried to have a decent discussion. You took issue with what I said so we discussed things. cmlancas put on his teaching cap about lit theory and I took issue. Meanwhile we were still discussing Ice-9, religion, and how we all saw the book.

I enjoy discussing books and if it happens that someone takes offence with the way I've done it then they can let me know about it and I'll take it into account. (I sent you a PM along these lines, you'll remember). I'm opinionated, but not entirely unreasonable. But how am I meant to respond to nothing?

Others indicated a tepid response to the book, why single me out? 

[Samwise]

If you look at the contents of that thread and think "gee, I can't see what scared people off" there may be no hope for you.  

Speaking for myself, I mostly stopped posting in that thread because Lamaros started inexplicably blaming me for the dickwaving contest that you three were having.  Not knowing what exactly I had done wrong, I decided it was better to keep my big yap shut.