Lit and MR Book Clubs - the way forward

[Bookpossum]

Maybe a compromise of starting the discussion thread on the 15th of the month? Also easy to remember, gives people a couple of weeks to get their heads around what they are doing, and then a couple more weeks for (hopefully) a good discussion.

I would like to add here from past experience, that Bookworm_Girl comes up with some really fascinating websites and articles to read on either the actual book, or the author or the setting or whatever. Some people may not be interested in reading these items of course, or prefer to leave reading them until the book is finished, but they can really help give depth to the ensuing discussion.

I'm not very keen on having Book Club type questions to follow, but maybe there are some we can put together ourselves as we settle in together in the new Club.

[Bookpossum]

And I forgot to add: yes, I think the leapfrogging idea is an excellent one, especially as it gives more time to track down a book, be on a waiting list at the library or whatever.

[Alohamora]

Originally Posted by astrangerhere

Price limit. I would like us to agree on an upper limit for a monthly investment. Are you willing to spend the price of one movie ticket a month? Are you willing to spend the price of a six-pack of craft beer? Or are you a bargain hunter?

I'm a cheapskate. But the retail price of a book isn't of much concern to me because my local library is pretty darn good, at least for mainstream titles. I rarely have to wait more than 2 or 3 weeks for my holds to come in.

[CRussel]

Originally Posted by Alohamora

I'm a cheapskate. But the retail price of a book isn't of much concern to me because my local library is pretty darn good, at least for mainstream titles. I rarely have to wait more than 2 or 3 weeks for my holds to come in.

Current wait on one of mine is more than 3 years.

[issybird]

Originally Posted by CRussel

Current wait on one of mine is more than 3 years.

Golly, Charlie!

FWIW, it seems to me that my OD libraries add books on Tuesday and Friday, so I try to skim the new offerings on those two days (late day) in order to get a decent position on the hold lists.

[Alohamora]

Originally Posted by CRussel

Current wait on one of mine is more than 3 years.

I should have added that I was referring to books that have been out a while, not new releases.

[issybird]

Originally Posted by Bookworm_Girl

I believe that the literary club has done better at in-depth discussions than the main club. I believe that starting the discussion right away rather than waiting a few weeks promoted better discussions. I feel quite strongly about that actually . It enables people to post when they have time available and when thoughts are fresh. We discuss topics like where to find a book or merits of different translations or the publisher's version with the best introductory/supplemental material. We also discuss information about the author such as interviews, podcasts, links to book reviews, etc. Sometimes I find reading someone else's thoughts while I am reading helps to see things I would have missed.

I was a big proponent of starting the discussion immediately; I think sometimes we try to shoehorn online activities into the real time mode when they don't necessarily work that well and when it ignores the relative advantages of online. It didn't work in the MR Club; however, that could be due to various factors including low participation overall. I certainly wouldn't be averse to giving it another try. We can also always use the voting thread for ancillary information and questions as soon as the vote closes.

I don't want to feel like discussions are forced but clearly it's not happening organically and it's going take an effort at facilitation to promote it.

Emphasis added because I think this is very important.

I think that as a club participant we should also feel accountable to add something meaningful to advance the discussion even if it is as simple ad adding "because" after I did or didn't like it.

Ditto.

[Alohamora]

Originally Posted by CRussel

I'm not aware of what the Lit club uses, but I have liked the way we've done the MR club nominations. (Three nominations to make it to the vote, three tickets for each member to nominate with.)

For voting, I honestly think we need a bit more responsibility connected to voting. As it has been, we sometimes have the voting distorted by those who don't ever participate, and that has, in some cases, led to selections to which the participants don't feel connected. Which, in turn, leads to reduced participation. The club can't survive without discussion -- otherwise it's simply a vanity contest to see what book gets the most votes this month.

How we get to where we only have active participants voting, however, I'm actually not sure, but I honestly believe we need some way to limit voting to those who are active members.

Right now, the only qualifying statement in the Voting thread lead-off post is "You may cast a vote for each book that appeals to you"

I think that explains the "drive-by" voting. Someone who hasn't followed along with the discussion threads doesn't know there's any commitment at all expected of them with a vote. Not even reading the book voted for, let alone coming back for the discussion.

I always thought the vote was intended to choose which book was most likely to pull in the most readers/discussion participants. I say make it clear that a vote is a commitment to read and discuss the book(s) voted for. Making it into a commitment to discuss whatever book is choosen feels like too much to ask for.

[4691mls]

I'm a lurker who might or might not participate in the future. I would not vote if I had absolutely no intention of reading any of the nominated books. However, playing devil's advocate, i can imagine a situation where there might be one book on the list I knew I would not read. Maybe it's a book I previously tried to read and didn't finish and don't want to try again. Or someone suggested above the possiblity of nominating books in a variety of genres all related to a topic such as history. What if one book nominated is in a genre I'm just not interested in? Does this mean I shouldn't vote at all because I know I wouldn't read the one book if it were selected? Again, I might or might not participate in future anyway, so feel free to ignore.

[issybird]

Originally Posted by Alohamora

I always thought the vote was intended to choose which book was most likely to pull in the most readers/discussion participants. I say make it clear that a vote is a commitment to read and discuss the book(s) voted for. Making it into a commitment to discuss whatever book is choosen feels like too much to ask for.

Ideally, we'd like a committed core who are willing to discuss all the books. It's a courtesy; you'd like others to read the book you nominated if it won, so it's something you extend to them in turn. Anyway, it's something to shoot for.

Realistically, not everyone is going to read every book. Sometimes life happens. Sometimes the book isn't available. The huge advantage of keeping books in the inexpensive to free range is that there's much less of an argument for passing on it. At least try it! A good discussion can make an unliked book interesting, and you may be surprised at that.

There's some wiggle room here. Since as I said, life happens, the assumption would be that someone didn't read a book because s/he couldn't, and not because s/he wouldn't, so long as they keep it to themselves. Moreover, droppers-in are fine and so long as someone who voted for a book showed for the discussion, the assumption would be made that they'd show up in any case; people who vote for a book that loses and then don't participate at least haven't swayed the vote away from a choice the participants will discuss.

But ultimately, we need people who show up most if not all the time. And people who show up all the time for the discussion are entitled to pick the books they'll read.

[CRussel]

Originally Posted by issybird

I was a big proponent of starting the discussion immediately; I think sometimes we try to shoehorn online activities into the real time mode when they don't necessarily work that well and when it ignores the relative advantages of online. It didn't work in the MR Club; however, that could be due to various factors including low participation overall. I certainly wouldn't be averse to giving it another try. We can also always use the voting thread for ancillary information and questions as soon as the vote closes.

I'd certainly be willing to look at it again once we get a new club that has reliable participation. That could well change the dynamic. For now, of course, we can use the voting thread for non-spoiler stuff. (And I like someone's trick of sending themselves a PM. Forget who, but I'll go find them and give them some K for that!)

[CRussel]

Originally Posted by Alohamora

Right now, the only qualifying statement in the Voting thread lead-off post is "You may cast a vote for each book that appeals to you"

I think that explains the "drive-by" voting. Someone who hasn't followed along with the discussion threads doesn't know there's any commitment at all expected of them with a vote. Not even reading the book voted for, let alone coming back for the discussion.

I always thought the vote was intended to choose which book was most likely to pull in the most readers/discussion participants. I say make it clear that a vote is a commitment to read and discuss the book(s) voted for. Making it into a commitment to discuss whatever book is choosen feels like too much to ask for.

Clearly, the text and presentation of the process needs to change. There's absolutely nothing wrong within the current rules, but what I think we're all suggesting is that the rules need to change a bit. And we need to be clear and unambiguous about the changes.

I think as long as we're clear it won't be an issue. Yes, 'life' happens, or the final choice turns out to be something you simply can't read. (Though I _did_ try with Lord Jim, really. ) What we're moving towards, however, is having the vote reflect the tastes of those who regularly participate along with any who think they want to participate this month. That seems reasonable, and doable.

[CRussel]

Originally Posted by Alohamora

I should have added that I was referring to books that have been out a while, not new releases.

Yes. This was the Giller Prize winner and they only have a single copy. That will change, I know.

[Bookpossum]

Originally Posted by CRussel

Clearly, the text and presentation of the process needs to change. There's absolutely nothing wrong within the current rules, but what I think we're all suggesting is that the rules need to change a bit. And we need to be clear and unambiguous about the changes.

I think as long as we're clear it won't be an issue. Yes, 'life' happens, or the final choice turns out to be something you simply can't read. (Though I _did_ try with Lord Jim, really. ) What we're moving towards, however, is having the vote reflect the tastes of those who regularly participate along with any who think they want to participate this month. That seems reasonable, and doable.

Yes I agree - we need to be clear in how we want the Club to operate, both in terms of participation and also of courtesy. And we certainly want the selections to be enjoyable for the greatest number of members, accepting that everyone isn't going to love every book chosen.

Sometimes of course the members choosing a book find out on reading it that it's a disappointment for one reason or another, and I can certainly recall that happening with some selections in the Literary Club over the years, usually with non-fiction books. But we were still able to have a good discussion about the topic of the book.

[JSWolf]

One thing I think we need to do is a greater variety. This means don't always nominate a "classic" or old book just because it's free and fits in the category. But then again, don't always nominate something new, expensive, and hard to get at Overdrive. Try to mix things up. If we get too much of the same, it can turn some people off.