Brain Pain discussion
This topic is about
The Waves
The Waves - Spine 2012
>
Questions, Resources and General Banter - The Waves
date
newest »
newest »
Bill wrote: "Whitney, Actually, my comments have a limited shelf life and start to spoil after a week.
I'm not really concerned about The Waves . I'm really suggesting the group move to different rules down..."
On the contrary, I feel like break down difficult books into smaller, more manageable bits aids discussion. Both The Waves and The Waste Land are quite short, but when we'll start reading Proust and Joyce, I think having hundreds of pages to discuss from the start will be detrimental not so much because of spoilers, but because these books are quite difficult and very multi-layered. Discussing everything at once will be confusing and discourage people, especially those on their first read, from joining the discussion because they'll feel like since they haven't finished the book yet, they can't participate in the discussion - which is not true.
Andreea wrote: "On the contrary, I feel like break down difficult books into smaller, more manageable bits aids discussionI'm not really concerned about The Waves . I'm really suggesting the group move to differe..."
Andrea, I feel like I may be starting to beat a dead horse here, but let me just add that I also like the idea of discussing the longer books in smaller chunks, instead of trying to swallow them whole. What I find a little restrictive is not always being able to discuss those chunks in a larger context, or in light of what follows. This is a minor quibble on my part, as the entire book will eventually be read and discussed in whole after being considered in pieces, and I do think breaking it into chunks is the best strategy for works like Ulysses, The Recognitions, Hopscotch etc.
I hate to be seen as complaining about the way things are being run, I love this book group. The topics, discussions, and comments are almost uniformaly thoughtful and insightful. Even more rarely for online discussions, they are actually about the book and the writing instead of endlessly veering off into barely related or unrelated tangents.
I think you need to distinguish between reading a book in smaller chunks, which makes sense for some books (less so for others) -- without being prohibited from ever bringing in data from a later part of the book, for example, to suggest how this relates to the book as a whole. My only disagreement with Lily is that I prefer not knowing the end of mysteries in advance because then I can't try to solve them myself. :-)
Mod
That being said, there is very much a place for the voice of the author and the experts for everything we'll be reading. The "Questions and Resources" threads are designed for those materials. Posting links there allows those of you who like to research the extra materials to share your efforts with the group. And because these links are outside the main discussion of the texts, it allows those who want to focus primarily on the books, to do so. The web is an endless resource which we all use to varying degrees, and so, if you want to post links to various interpretations of the given text, put the links in the "Questions and Resources" threads.
I'm reminded of a story I was told about a student who was making it very difficult for a substitute professor while the regular teacher, an academic heavyweight, was away. The course was in the history of religion and ancient religion was being discussed.When the regular professor came back, the student challenged him as he had been challenging the first professor, with so and so thinks this could be translated another way.
The regular professor, the heavyweight, put the cuneiform writing on the board and said, "How would you translate it?" The student was quiet for the rest of the semester.
I think it's always wrong simply to parrot someone else's opinion. But if you think that a given individual has a particular insight -- and you're either convinced by it or you want to put it up for discussion -- I don't see any problem with bringing it up in the context of the work in question.
In preparing myself to lead a discussion on The Waste Land I've been reading and rereading the poem. But this is a poem with obscurity after obscurity and I'd be useless without looking at additional material for information about allusions, different approaches to interpretation. They provide options to be tested on one's nerves, not "authority".
If someone thinks for example that, oh, a particular scholar has a particular argument about a text that's worth sharing -- for the purpose of expanding our approach, offering something for consideration -- why would you want to limit bringing that in? Why limit it just to members when we might also include some interesting non-members living or dead?
The point seems to me that what you bring in should enrich the discussion, not limit it, open it further, not close it, give people the option of seeing what they'd missed, not missing what they've already seen. :-)
Mod
Bill, I forgot to mention "The Waste Land Exception".
With the recommended NCE text and the schedule we're following (whole poem first, then the sections), the discussions will be filled with outside expert opinions along with yours and the group members'. The Waste Land demands those materials, so, Waiver Granted!
PS. Good story!
Bill wrote: "...because it requires more skill in reading than high school students typically have...."
It is also literature that often benefits from more years of exposure to life's slings and arrows and joys than is usually possible by one's teens. (Lest I put my noose in a sling again, let me hasten to say that in no way is intended to imply what the depth or comprehension of the experience might be for any one individual, regardless of their age. But, I remember well the learning of a two hundred (+ or -) participant forum where we formed a spiral from the youngest among us to the oldest (18 to almost 90). As we wound and unwound, we, probably especially those of us in the middle, were conscious of what had gone before and what was still (hopefully, mostly) to come.) Of course, those insights that come with time and experience are among the more compelling reasons to reread great literature.)
Mod
Mod
Not to worry! Join in as your schedule permits...
I just wanted to chime in on the breaking books into chunks. I really like it, because it actually makes the next bits I read even more enjoyable. So when I read comments and get viewpoints I wouldn't have otherwise considered on parts 1 and 2, while I'm also reading 3 and 4, it's making that reading of new (to me) material that much more enjoyable. At the same time, perhaps there always needs to be a clearly marked "Final Discussion" thread for people who want to comment on the entire thing, and if 99% of the comments were in that, that's fine! Really the comments in the chunks threads should be by and for people who are engaged in a process rather than with the viewpoint of the works entirety. They're simply supposed to be different things, not parts of a whole....in my humble opinion anyway.
Mod
Thanks Will!
The week 4 discussion will be about section 8 and 9, as well as discussing the book as a whole. I didn't do a separate final discussion week for The Waves since it is a short book and people are anxious to get to Ulysses, which does have a final week for discussing the book as a whole.
Before I analyze this into specifics, I just wanted to point out my overall initial opinion of The Waves. I'm glad I actually picked it up. Woolf's stream of consciousness may not appeal to the casual reader. I am seriously taken with her prose. She literally paints with letters. I also really thought, when you look into each character and the abstractness of their points of view, each has a separate token idea on life and relationships that I feel encompasses the human condition altogether at some point or another. For experimental writing, I think she did well at adhering to the abstract thought that wanders through our minds often.
I'm sure many of you have already done this, but I wanted to suggest that even people who don't have e-readers consider downloading the ebook and Adobe Digital Editions. I've found being able to do a word search in the book invaluable to finding passages of interest.
Whitney wrote: "I'm sure many of you have already done this, but I wanted to suggest that even people who don't have e-readers consider downloading the ebook and Adobe Digital Editions. I've found being able to do..."If I had one, I definitely would take that advice up. Modern technology makes analytic research a breeze for resources!
Kirsty wrote: "Ugh, I am so annoyed that I didn't get round to reading The Waves as soon as discussion started on it! I shall read it once I've finished the book I'm currently on and then haunt the discussion th..."I'm also late but hoping I might still catch up. At least I have a fellow latecomer. I'm definitely going to be in time for Wasteland, though!
Mod
Don't worry too much about catching up. Even though we're about to begin week 3, the week 1 discussion is active everyday and I suspect it will be for a few more weeks. The Waves is an engaging book and can be discussed much longer than the 4 short weeks we scheduled. Stay with the book and the discussion as long as you want to. You will find many members, including myself, who will continue to talk about the book beyond January.
Will wrote: "I just wanted to chime in on the breaking books into chunks. I really like it, because it actually makes the next bits I read even more enjoyable. So when I read comments and get viewpoints I would..."This post echoes my own feeling 100%. It's nice to have in-depth discussions that looks at each section under a microscope, and then a general discussion of the work as a whole.
Jim wrote: Don't worry too much about catching up. Even though we're about to begin week 3..."
Thanks, Jim, that's kind of you. :)
Whitney wrote: "I'm sure many of you have already done this, but I wanted to suggest that even people who don't have e-readers consider downloading the ebook and Adobe Digital Editions. I've found being able to do..."I don't have an e-reader, but I download the electronic version on my computer. I love being able to word search! It saves so much time, finding things on the Adobe version. I much prefer to actually read a paper copy, but the digital edition is extremely helpful when I'm searching for something specific.
Traveller wrote: "...This post echoes my own feeling 100%. It's nice to have in-depth discussions that looks at each section under a microscope, and then a general discussion of the work as a whole...."Some of us still find this a troublesome split -- sometimes by the time discussion of the work as a whole is undertaken, relating the whole (or some other element, internal or external) to parts is irrelevant and is just difficult to undertake, with what some of us view to be considerable loss to the richness of discussion that is possible. And that is not to say but what it is still possible to be very respectful towards reading sections sequentially. But, such discussions seem to introduce the risk that someone will choose to be (rigidly?) offended thereby.
Lily wrote: Some of us still find this a troublesome split -- sometimes by the time discussion of the work as a whole is undertaken, relating the whole (or some other element, internal or external) to parts is irrelevant and is just difficult to undertake, ..."Still, can't a compromise be arrived at, where really big spoilers, such as, for instance, someone's death, or how the book ends, could at least be covered by spoiler tags?
People who have already read the book can then participate in -that- specific discussion, and people who haven't, wouldn't have been able to anyway, since they wouldn't have the same perspective yet.
If one happens to be reading a work of literature for the first time, it's nice to be able to discover the work as it unfolds.
Traveller, ever since I once alluded a situation in an entirely different book with which I was making a comparison (and was even careful not to be explicit, but a sharp reader assumed relationships that turned out to be true, but need not have been, so considered her future read of that book impaired), and got jumped all over for doing so, I have probably carried a chip on my own shoulder about the attitude of some others towards spoilers. I think if everyone is considerate and not trigger happy and makes use of the spoiler tags if needed, intelligent conversations can be had that allow everyone to enjoy the experience. If not, I still say consider reading all first and use discussion forums as places for rereads, or at least be considerate towards fellow readers obviously more interested in deeply exploring the text than in spoiling anyone's reading experience. And, I think most of the time, we can tell the difference. When we can't, well, let's stay civil.
@ Lily: I hope the allusion to 'not being civil' wasn't to me, but to that previous person who overreacted.(Whoever that might have been..) :) Personally, like I said only big obvious spoilers bother me. It is of course inevitable that one will pick up minor 'spoilers' in a discussion such as this.(..and I am one of those who likes to do "homework" as in exploring the adjunctive material as I go along- hence my reading of this thread, but still endeavouring to avoid major plot spoilers).
Let me try and explain my own point of departure: Lily, I know you've read most of these books under discussion, but not all of us have. It's nice to see a book you've had on your "to-read" list is going to be discussed, and then, as you read and discover the work, it's nice to be able to make comments in a discussion thread as you go along.
To give an example: I am late in joining this reading, and that is nobody's fault but my own (though in my defence I was away on vacation without a laptop).
Still, I'm trying to catch up, and as I read, there are sections that I'd like to comment on (though most of it has been said by now).
If I had to rush trough the book on my own, and then only visit the discussion after reading it, to me, the whole point of "commenting as you discover" would be lost, since at the end of my reading, I'd have only a general impression left, and not the more specific impressions as relating to every section.
Also, sadly I have a lot less time to my disposal than I have books on my 'to-read' list, so I don't have the luxury of enough time to read books twice in a row.
I'm sure there must be people like me with similar circumstances who would still like to explore wonderful literature like this group has shelved, in a group experience, and may I say, it's lovely to be able to share the experience with you, even if one is just, like I am now, tagging along and reading what everyone is saying.
Thanks for understanding, and for contributing the richness of your own experience. Your and the rest of the group's comments enriches the entire experience of this first reading for me, I must say. :)
Mod
Thank you Kirsty!
I've mentioned this before, but my aim is to make this group a place where the individual members can approach, understand, and ultimately own these books in a supportive environment. Unlike the classroom, there is no homework, no exams, and no official due date. The titles selected will likely become part of the members' perennial bookshelves, to be enjoyed, puzzled over, struggled with, and re-experienced over the years.
And so, read at your own pace!
Ashley wrote: "Whitney wrote: "I'm sure many of you have already done this, but I wanted to suggest that even people who don't have e-readers consider downloading the ebook and Adobe Digital Editions. I've found ..."If your edition of the book is available on Amazon with the "look inside" option you can use that to look up references. If you search for a short phrase Amazon won't show you the whole page, but it will tell you the page number(s) where it appears in the book.
Traveller wrote: "If I had to rush trough the book on my own, and then only visit the discussion after reading it, to me, the whole point of "commenting as you discover" would be lost, since at the end of my reading, I'd have only a general impression left, and not the more specific impressions as relating to every section...."And what you express here, Traveller, is very close to why waiting to the end to discuss something in detail that might have occurred early in the book can be so frustrating -- the idea is gone, the connection is forgotten, there are overriding issues to be discussed, .... But, with some people, and I am not necessarily implying you, a comment like how does this section support the overall structure of the book or is the author doing an effective job of preparing the reader for what is to come become almost, if not entirely, off-limits discussions.
I haven't necessarily read everything before I participate in a discussion. But, if I do, I am quite willing to live with reasonable related comments about that section in relation to other books and to that book itself and just would not consider shouting "spoiler" unless I judged someone was being egregiously and deliberately inconsiderate. I would consider it part of the risk of reading with a group.
No, I wasn't referring to you or any one specifically about their civility. I have long ago forgotten with whom the tangle I mentioned occurred. Lots of kind people defended what I had done; at the time, I rather retreated and took the lashes. But, I have come to be willing to speak to how can we maximize the quality of these discussions for all of us. I don't quibble with exercising restraint about spoilers; I do quibble with not considering, if one encounters what one personally judges to be spoiler material, whether the conversation created may be adding to the reading experience for other readers. Certainly, even then, anyone is entitled to express the impact of the conversation on their own reading experience, preferably with minimum rancor, but still with integrity to self.
Lily wrote: "I haven't necessarily read everything before I participate in a discussion. But, if I do, I am quite willing to live with reasonable related comments about that section in relation to other books and to that book itself "....."
Sounds like you've had a bad experience there, Lily, and it definitely wasn't on any discussion I took part in; it doesn't sound like the kind of thing one forgets easily.
I must admit, that everybody has been very good about covering spoilers, here, I think, and I haven't yet (even in this thread) read any spoilers that I think anybody needs ruffle their feathers about.
Like I said, all that I personally am concerned about is that major major spoilers be covered up.
For the rest, I agree with you that an over-sensitivity that leans towards inhibiting the discussion too much, might not be conducive to the best possible result in a fuller understanding of the book, even if it may aid slightly in the way of having everything be a fresh experience for the newcomers to the book.
Especially in the case of this very specific work of literature, I for one, welcome all the input I can get. :)
I'm having a very difficult time with the discussion on this book because of the "spoilers". In struggling to really "get" this book, I began doing some additional research, and read a great deal of analysis, and in so doing, ran across the same info that somebody posted (and was moved to this thread) around Jan XX (my own redaction), which I won't repeat here since it seems we're treating it as a spoiler. So my problem is that the understanding of this information, which doesn't give away any plot or event, essentially makes the discussion occurring in the threads of less value. So I'm left with the following thought:
Is it best to experience the work as a reader of the day it was published, who most likely would not have had access to thoughts and opinions about it?
Or is it best to have the added power of all the minds who came before you to deepen your understanding?
I can certainly see the case for the former, but I NEEDED the latter, and now it's changed my relationship with the discussion...and if the former is best, then the approach to a book such as Ulysses is wrong, using the annotations and Bloomsday guides and such.
But, in considering Ulysses, I think that the latter approach is preferable still, so really perhaps our approach to The Waves is flawed. Anyway, that's my thought, which I've been struggling with a week or so now. I realize it's impossible to understand what the hell I'm talking about without the "spoiler" (namely something Woolf wrote about her book) but I think I needed to say that. Whew, I feel better!
Mod
Will,
Let me clarify a point or two.
For each book we read, there is a dedicated "Questions, Resources, and General Banter" thread. In this thread, members can discuss all aspects of the given book including authors opinions, critics opinions, and links to these resources.
There is also a series of "Weekly Discussion" threads. In these threads, the spoiler issue is about only discussing up to the point in the book scheduled for that week. This is common throughout most of Goodreads and is the rule for this group too.
Further, the "Weekly Discussion" threads are for the group members to discuss the books. The author and assorted critics and academics are not in the group, so their opinions and theories aren't needed in these threads. This is mentioned in the "Welcome" folder in "The Big Idea" post.
But why this split? Many people, including myself, like to read the text first without the influence of introductions and/or other extra-textual materials. Segregating the experts out of the discussions allows this first-hand encounter to happen without the voice of the experts leading the discussion into a particular direction. Any member can type "The Waves" into google and read these expert opinions whenever they want. However, in the group setting, we can discover our own ideas and conclusions with our fellow group members. If we arrive at the same conclusions as the experts, great! If not, those opinions are still out there to be found outside the discussion.
In the case of the one bit of author information I moved out of the weekly discussion and into this thread, was because it would have dead-ended the discussion into the single conclusion of the author - e.g. "the butler did it". Instead, members were free to explore all kinds of alternative ideas and theories. Much more interesting, and now these alternative interpretations belong to this group, and we are richer for the experience.
The question I would pose to you is why did you "need" the author's opinion? We are not in school and there is no final exam to take or term paper to write. Instead, we're free to explore and enjoy without constraint and without worrying about getting the answer "right".
All that being said, compared to The Waves, both Ulysses and The Waste Land are intentionally complex works that would be enhanced by extra-textual materials. So there is less to be gained by excluding them from the "Weekly Discussion" threads. Ulysses is particularly layered, so things like the "Gilbert Schema" will enter into the discussion to help us navigate. Whenever a book fits this kind of criterion for extra materials, I will spell that out at the beginning.
Well, I think one needs to also take into account exactly which work of literature is under discussion. For instance, I can still get a LOT out of Joyce's Ulysses, or Woolf's The Waves just on a first reading, on merit of the work itself alone, without knowing all the nuances and all allusive references included in the work.
However, with something like Eliot's The Waste Land, I'm pretty much lost without additional help.
Also, the shorter the work is, the less relevant I think spoilers are.
...so for instance, with a medium length poem such as The Wasteland, I personally wouldn't worry about spoilers re the end of the poem. (Well, one would probably only join the discussion after having tried to figure the poem out by yourself, since it's a quick read on the surface).
On the other hand, with such a super-long novel which is so richly dense in it's intertextuality and allusive references, such as Ulysses, it would also be less productive not to elaborate on all the references the author makes to other works and political situations, etc.,(as opposed to 'spoilers' regarding the ending) as one goes along with the reading, because in a novel like that, it's more about the journey and less about the destination.
In such a long novel, I think I'd prefer finding out everything everyone else has 'found' in the novel as one goes along, since, well, I wouldn't like to re-read such a thick tome.
EDIT: Ah, I didn't see Jim's post by the time of typing this, I was replying to Will. Yes, I see Jim kind of agrees with me re Waste Land and Ulysses.
Well, my two replies:#1 why I needed it? I honestly was being dim, and people were discussing the characters of the book and getting conclusions I just wasn't seeing. Having some of the author's thoughts and some outside writing on it helped me both get my brain on track, but also let me not feel like I was nuts and reading some other book than everybody else. It wasn't so much about getting something "right", but it was honestly inhibiting my enjoyment and ability to make heads or tails of anything.
Perhaps some of my confusion is due to me not fully understanding the scope of the various discussion threads. Is this thread a no-holds barred thread? (e.g. the butler did it) Is this (or if not, is there) a thread where any input can go, even if it's a danger to being prejudicial to someone who hasn't finished the book? Or is this for the final conclusion thread?
PS...OMG! The butler did it?!
Jim wrote: "...Any member can type "The Waves" into google and read these expert opinions whenever they want. ..."There are many opinions and complimentary resources out there (some "expert") and many of them are very lengthy. Over the years (since 2007), I have often been very grateful for the sifting and calling attention to particular materials and excerpts by reading colleagues.
Lily wrote:"There are many opinions out there (some "expert") and many of them are very lengt..."
One I intend to read more of (other than the excerpt through Google books) is of
Refiguring Modernism: Postmodern Feminist Readings of Woolf, West, and Barnes by Bonnie Kime Scott which looked to have some interesting thoughts on The Waves.
Mod
#1 why I needed it? I honestly was being dim, and people were discussing the characters of the book and getting conclusions I just wasn't seeing. Having some of the author's ...It wasn't so much about getting something "right", but it was honestly inhibiting my enjoyment and ability to make heads or tails of anything"
I'm adding an extra week to The Waves discussion (1/30-2/5) to explore some big questions I have about the book as a whole. Please join in that discussion, and share those feelings of being nuts and not being able to make heads or tails of anything. The extra week will be a chance to critique the author and her choices of experimental narrative techniques and their effects on the reading experience. No Holds Barred!!
And to summarize my longer message above:
The "Questions, Resources..." thread is wide open and all aspects and opinions can be shared and linked to.
The "Weekly Discussions" threads are limited to what Will and his fellow group members think about the book. Again, this is to allow for the text to be experienced without voices from outside the group. If we lose our way (or our minds), that is part of the journey of discovery.
D'accord?
Sounds good to me. And I love the extra week to explore the techniques and questions. Most valuable week IMO, looking forward to it!
Thanks Jim ! I'll try to follow it
Mod
Here are a few fun facts from Flavorpill
http://flavorwire.com/143610/59-thing...
Another writer on "The Waves":"In this book ( Hearts of Darkness: White Women Write Race , one of modernism's most insightful critics, Jane Marcus, examines the writings of novelists such as Virginia Woolf, Nancy Cunard, Mulk Raj Anand, and Djuna Barnes, artists whose work coincided with the end of empire and the rise of fascism before the Second World War. All these writers delved into the dark hearts of imperialism and totalitarianism and tackled some of the most complex cultural issues of the day. Marcus investigates previous unrecognized ways in which social and political tensions are embodied in their works. The centerpiece of the book is Marcus's dialogue with one of her best-known essays, "Britannia Rules The Waves." In that piece, she argues that The Waves makes a strong anti-imperialist statement. Although many are convinced by that argument, Marcus now goes further in order to question the moral value of such a buried critique on Woolf's part. Other chapters traverse the connected issues of modernism, race, and imperialism...."
Marcus is the mother of Ben Marcus.
Brain Pain
Books mentioned in this topic
Hearts of Darkness: White Women Write Race (other topics)Refiguring Modernism (other topics)
The Waves (other topics)
Virginia Woolf (other topics)
Edith Wharton (other topics)
Authors mentioned in this topic
Jane Marcus (other topics)Ben Marcus (other topics)
Virginia Woolf (other topics)
Bonnie Kime Scott (other topics)
Michael Weinman (other topics)
I am completely with you philosophically. While it's kind of interesting to hear people's ideas in the early stages, I think the limited reading stunts the conversation. Hopefully people will revisit some their early observations in light of the complete work at the end. That being said, I'm hoping having a reading schedule will serve to keep me on track for some of the longer books.
Really looking forward to The Wasteland discussion!