How the group will function

[Everyman]

The procedures of the group will be developed by the participants over time, but I expect that at least initially we will formally read and discuss one work (a better term perhaps than book, since we will be reading not only traditional books but plays, essays, Platonic dialogues, etc.) at a time, with the opportunity for participants to start side discussions of any other books they want to talk about.

The time frame of readings will not follow the one-book-a-month practice of many groups, since some readings will fit easily into a shorter period, and some – The Odyssey, The Divine Comedy, Paradise Lost come instantly to mind – deserve longer consideration.

The principles of the discussion are simple. Respect for the books and for other participants is expected. (Respect does not equal agreement. I expect some vigorous discussions. But they must be presented with respect for both the work and other posters.)

Opinions about a text should, when possible and convenient, be supported by citations from the text.

[Everyman]

Just to let folks know, I have added Laurel as a moderator for this group. For personal reasons, I wanted to make sure that if I have to leave the group for awhile, it will be in good hands. I've known Laurel from various book discussion groups for a number of years, and she is a superb discussion participant and moderator in her own right for other sites.

I'm delighted that she has been willing to join me as a moderator, and to be assured that the continuity of the group will be in excellent hands if necessary.

[Laurel]

Thanks, Everyman. If the time ever comes that you need to stop for a while, I'm sure there are many here who will help me hold the fort.

[Paula]

Good news for us! Great duo for leading discussions about great works!

[Peregrine]

Here's a question which has been rolling around in my head for a bit: Is it okay to include spoilers from previous group reads in comments on a current one? My thought is that, given that we're taking part in The Great Conversation, it would only be enriching to include parts from books we've read together, when that seems appropriate. Maybe mark them as spoilers for those who haven't read all the group books? And include spoilers only from books we've read together, to maintain group cohesion and the excitement of group travel, unless it's on a special thread like the Hugo-Tolstoy one? Thoughts? Mod decisions?

[Everyman]

Peregrine wrote: "Here's a question which has been rolling around in my head for a bit: Is it okay to include spoilers from previous group reads in comments on a current one? "

Great question. Since the Great Conversation is a continuum, with past works feeding into future works, I think it's impossible to have a full discussion of some books without including what would be spoilers of books we may or may not have read. For the classic example, it would be pretty meaningless to read Joyce's Ulysses without referring in detail to the Odyssey. Or to read the Divine Comedy without references to the Aeneid.

And the interconnectedness of those works in the Canon goes far beyond such obvious examples. Paradise Lost, for example, contains references to dozens of prior works and authors.

I guess those potential spoilers don't really bother me. Since we will read at most a dozen or fewer books a year, it's unlike that a spoiler will refer to a book we're likely to read soon enough for the spoiler to make a difference.

Rather, I see such interconnectedness as enhancing and enriching the discussion. It might even be the trigger to persuade a person to read a book they've been letting linger too long on the TBR shelf.

Others may feel differently, but I would say, for myself, that I would welcome any link made between works we're reading now and other works the author may have had in mind when he or she was writing the work we're discussing.

[Laurel]

Everyman wrote: "Peregrine wrote: "Here's a question which has been rolling around in my head for a bit: Is it okay to include spoilers from previous group reads in comments on a current one? "

Great question. Si..."

I agree with you, Everyman. The joy of seeing connections far exceeds the joy of not knowing the last page until one gets there. Trust in your power to forget. It will get stronger as you get older, believe me.

[Andrea]

I'm one of those odd people who doesn't mind "spoilers" anyway. Except for straightforward mystery novels, like Agatha Christie, for example, knowing what happens in a really good book is less important than how it happens. So referring to books I haven't read is more likely to encourage me to read the rest of the book.