Stephen King Fans discussion
Sometimes Dead Threads Come Back
>
Can I make a suggestion?
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Benjamin
(new)
Nov 03, 2009 08:27AM
Posting in the monthly book topic, Start with the chapter they are on so that we dont get spoilers?
reply
|
flag
I'd prefer if people just marked their spoilers. I generally don't discuss books as I read them. I read the entire book and then talk about it, so I will mark anything I think is going to be a spoiler for someone else, but I am not going to go back to try to find the reference in the book so that I can list the chapter.
I tend to agree with Becky --- I generally don't discuss a book until I have finished it -- that way, certain plot items and characters are revealed as to their purpose in the whole book. I just finished "Eyes of the Dragon" for that specific purpose.
Often, King doesn't utilize chapters in the traditional format (for example: From a Buick8 which uses headings such as Sandy:Now and Sandy:Then... but those headings can be used more than once within the narrative and there's not really a good way to determine which one you're referring to). Using page numbers is another option, but won't do anyone reading an ebook version any good as ebook readers don't track page numbers. I'm part of another group that breaks each book down into different themes and topics and states whether spoilers are allowed or not in the discussion title. That seems to work, but I enjoy the 'organic' flow of the discussions in this group more than the structured (more 'traditional' book group discussions) ones. However, since we don't really have discussion 'leaders' here anyone is welcome to start discussion threads and I'm confident that the members would respect any spoiler alert or block in the topic title. I should mention, though, that getting us to stay 'on topic' is a bit like herding cats... Right now our discussion of "Children of the Corn" is talking about the SyFy Channel's name change and the different V mini-series :D
Stacie wrote: "I'm part of another group that breaks each book down into different themes and topics and states whether spoilers are allowed or not in the discussion title. That seems to work, but I enjoy the 'organic' flow of the discussions in this group more than the structured (more 'traditional' book group discussions) ones."Stacie, I have to agree wholeheartedly with this. I think that sometimes the discussions in those groups are broken down TOO much. In one group in particular, there can be 5-10 different discussion threads that are so specific that they almost prohibit discussion of them because after a few posts, there's nothing more to discuss.
I love the format here. We have one thread, and the conversation goes where it will. The discussion of The Shining that we had here was one of the best and most interesting I've ever been involved in, and that one meandered through not only The Shining, but numerous other King books that may or may not be linked or associated with it.
I think it is easy to impose too many restrictions on a conversation to avoid people seeing aspects of the book that they are not yet ready to discuss. But this is a voluntary site, and the only restriction that I want is for people to be considerate of others and mark their posts with a spoiler warning when appropriate. There is nothing forcing anyone to participate in a group read until they are ready to do so.
Which is why, in my case, I discuss books I've read, not books that I'm reading. *shrug*
Mod
Angie -- Here's another vote for please don't change the way you've quite deftly managed this group - One of the things I like most about this group is the ability to wander off topic, because every time that happens, it's because it's related to something or someone in the book/story itself -- For instance, the argument about addiction in "Quitters, Inc." In more formally structured groups, we would be jerked back to a "stay on message" type structure and I HATE structure!!!!!
I agree with Becky and Bondama. We have a "stream of conciousnes" thing going on and I LOVE it. It feels so much more natural than the super-structured discussions I've seen elsewhere.
I can agree with all of the above but I also see where it could help motivate input if there were some sort of break up of the book. I have never been in any sort of book club before I joined this thinking that I would gain insight through the discussions; which I have. Unfortunately, I'm sort of a slow reader so I always feel like I am way behind in the discussions. Because of this I keep thinking that I can join in on a topic of a book that I have already read and possibly go back to read a paragraph or two to be up to date and give a comment. Without breaking up of the book I haven't been able to do that yet.Long story short I'm willing to give anything a try. Hopefully, we can try something a little new with Under the Dome. :)
Perhaps we could have both structured "aspect" discussions and a "free flow" thread? I can't see me using the structured ones all that much, but I will admit that they have led me to interesting discoveries that I wouldn't have made otherwise. No one person can analyze a book in every possible way, so I will say that it can be useful. Just not as fun as a freely flowing and wandering discussion.
my thoughts tend to be free flowing and a lil unorganized. I think when we do get off topic we eventually wander our way back to the path. I vote to not change a thing.
Mod
Lonnie wrote: "I can agree with all of the above but I also see where it could help motivate input if there were some sort of break up of the book. I have never been in any sort of book club before I joined this..."I agree!
Since this has changed from the original intent of the thread...I can't stop thinking of my idea of the experiment being performed in Firestarter, by The Shop,as being a possible way they were trying to either make or root out breakers.
I really wish King would write another book with The Shop as the big bad guy. More so than the books where they have been in the background.
Rob wrote: "Kandice wrote: "Hooray. Status Quo..."Haha! Conformity rules!"
No talking, 2198088. Get in line.
:P
Rob! You're supposed to be different. My husband's friends (that we've known since we were teens) call me B&C, which stands for ball and chain.@_@
That's what they SAY (in front of your hub, anyway). What they THINK is "Beautiful & Charming".
LOL
(What? She bought me a book! A little brownnosing never hurt anyone.) (Or a lot.)
Wait, Rob, are you saying the B&C title must be more apt in MY case? Butthead! *said with affection*Becky doesn't need to brown nose. I promise:D But, it's always welcome!
Kandice wrote: "I really wish King would write another book with The Shop as the big bad guy. More so than the books where they have been in the background.>Maybe the Dome is a continuation of the Shop's experiments on humanity?
after starting to read Under the Dome I am still torn between liking the idea of having seperate mini-discussions for and up to the individual sections and not. A person reading the book and just finished "Clustermug" could go to that section and discuss all chapters up to that point but specifically questions or comments regarding that specific section. The drawback is that it would take away from the free flowing random conversations encompassing the entire book.I am starting to think the sectioning would benefit the slower readers more than the faster ones. Since I am a slow reader I am leaning towards this but since I have recently been laid off I will have a little more time to read than usual so will hopefully either be done or quite ahead when the discussions start.
Just my 28 cents. :)
Avoid getting 'Domed'!Don't drop it on your foot.
