GR III (Fast & Focused group read) aborted ...

[Terrance]

Tim Strzechowski wrote:
> 
> As I said, I'm interested.  If you're looking for more commitment than an
> "I'm interested" in an e-community, I don't know what else one can do.  Be
> assured: I'm interested.

Must be the Marine in me, but I'm looking for 10-12 good readers. That's
not a unreasonable expectation. 

> 
> Part of the problem as I see it is that, as "progressive and democratic" as
> you make this seem, I ... just ... don't see how it's logistically supposed
> to fall into place in this forum.  Is there a host?  Hosts?  

Yes. 

Do we divide
> the text into sections?  

Yes


or discuss the novel holistically?  

No. We won't need a spoiler clause, but we won't skip around. 

You've
> mentioned a pacing of 5 pages per day.  When does that begin?  

>From the Beginning. I'm ready to go. But we need more bodies. 

Who
> facilitates the discussion(s)?  

If need be, I will. But we do it the way have in the past. The
difference is that we will move faster and focus on one text. Hosts will
not do research and post notes and links. Instead, they will facilitate
a discussion of the text itself. 

In addition, there are people on the List
> who haven't been part of the previous readings as they unfolded; those of us
> on the list who *have* experienced a previous GR read might know what this
> one *won't* be (according to your definition), but what about the new
> listers?

They are probably smart. They will get it after a few days. 


> 
> There are questions of logistics for HOW this reading might take place that
> I can't "see" yet, but maybe that's me and my learning style. Help me see
> it.

You're a teacher, right? I'm going to model the activity. Then, each
host will work on their part and share-out with the larger group. 

> 
> If our "most active participants" don't seem interested, I consider it a
> blessing.  A group reading of GR with some new blood might make it a
> refreshing experience for everyone involved.

New blood is good. Old blood is is good too. And we have both. We need
both. 


> 
> As far as "respecting our fellow readers," that's a lost cause. 

I disagree. A fast and focused read will eliminate most of the bullshit. 


 There are
> far too many people on this list who delight in petty flaming (and screen
> name anonymity makes it easy enough to do without recourse), far too many
> others who justify its existence in this forum, and far too many worthwhile
> listers who've been scorched by the flames over the years, for this
> statement to be anything more than empty rhetoric.  Sorry.

Sorry, I disagree. It will work. 

> 
> Terrance, if you want to see this reading work (and I hope your money is as
> good as your word), I recommend you do another head count; help us see how
> this reading will transpire over a chunk of time (i.e., sections, pages,
> hosts, topics, whatever you are suggesting), and perhaps model the opening
> section so some of us can SEE how it might go.
> 
> And for the record, I'm interested.  But I can't commit to GR when I'm
> hosting my fortnight of TPPM (early Dec.).

We have Four readers. We need 10-12. Let's give it another week and see
who signs up. 

Thanks for sharing and caring,

T