Fw: Group Read: BLEEDING EDGE: The Cutting Edge

[alice wellintown]

Since Alice doesn't live here anymore, she won't vote. But the pieces of
Humpty have been part of every group-read that has ever been, and will talk
backward, paint under the roses red, chase rabbits, hunt Snarks, and do the
Jabberwocky, the usual unusual as usual.

looking back at how we did on the other books, some group reads were
magical, some not, and I don't think the fixed schedule mattered as much as
the flexibility, the efforts, sometimes of one or two who had or made
the time to keep the ball bouncing.

We don't need a month, we've got faces in the jar by the door prepared to
meet the faces that we'll meet, and we do the third policeman in different
voices, wearing those ragged trousers we was given by Mulligan to wear to a
mother's hasty wedding day, by that mocker of masses,  that buck
philanthropist, no friend to man, though blessed be he amongst the gentle
folk, and man, that n could jams a joist, sling an arrow, turn the bog, dig
with a pen.





On Friday, September 13, 2013, Keith Davis wrote:

> I agree with David. Take a month for a solo read, then dive into it. Big
> fun! I've never done a group read. I would claim to be a virgin, but that
> would be stretching things just a little.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Sep 13, 2013, at 8:27 PM, Bekah <bekah0176 at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> > I need at least a week with the book solo before I can lead any kind of
> discussion - two or three days to read it (being retired) and a couple days
> for putting something together prior to the lead.   So one week to a month
> -  I don't care.   Also,  I won't be reading any posts about the book until
> I finish it.  That said I'll be glad to take a section or two later.
> >
> > Bekah
> >
> >
> > On Sep 13, 2013, at 4:20 PM, Markekohut <markekohut at yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Others?
> >>
> >> Sent from my iPad
> >>
> >> On Sep 13, 2013, at 7:00 PM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I won't join nor read any group read that starts before 10/17, for
> reasons stated.  A first read should be solo, IMHO.
> >>>
> >>> On Friday, September 13, 2013, David Morris wrote:
> >>> Two thoughts from me about a BE group read:
> >>>
> >>> 1. However many pages or chapters a week are deemed reasonable, I
> think one group "segment" per week is best.  One "host" per week, covering
> a specified number of pages, with all others able to supply their own
> agendas on those pages as well.  More than one "segment" per week will
> quickly lose the group read altogether.  People have lives, you know?
> >>>
> >>> 2. If BE is Pynchon-lite (no endless GR sentences), then 60 pages or
> so a week might be reasonable.  But if there is real depth in BE, I think
> slower is better.  I hope BE demands slower...
> >>>
> >>> 3.  The group read shouldn't start until at least a month after the
> official release so the we can read it solo first, without a P-list
> glancing over the shoulder.
> >>>
> >>> David Morris
> >>>
> >>> On Friday, September 13, 2013, Mark Kohut wrote:
> >>> Natalie Portinari: "I'm in, Mark. I'm too excited to read this book to
> do it all alone. Does anyone else want to join?"
> >>>
> >>> Natalia and I invite you to join. A Group Read was/is one of the
> meanings of the plist, right?
> >>>
> >>> I have been able to learn of chapter and pagination breaks from
> someone who has an ARC.
> >>>
> >>> 41 short chapters. 479 pages. So, @12  pages per average chapter. I
> propose we sign up for
> >>> hosting @2 chapters every two days??!! (equals one chapter a day for
> the busiest of us. And, doing ahead
> >>> after 9/17 will be easy, right?).
> >>>
> >>> 6 chapters a week---want to take Saturday or Sunday off?--means @ 7
> weeks to finish. Done by Halloween(!), that DeepWeb holiday!
> >>> I will sign up for the first two. PLEASE JUMP ON BOARD, he says
> plaintively. (Otherwise I'll do it all to universal blocking, I'm sure.
> >>> Or I won't) . As has been indicated, it is just another mystery, so
> easy to read, right?
> >>>
> >>> We will all still post about all of it, or other parts that strike us,
> I'm sure. (But the civility of SPOILER ALERT
> >>> for most details might be worth a vote?)
> >>>
> >>> Old-fashioned: first page of Chap 1 is 1.   & I will probably comment
> on the epigraph to start, since, I do.
> >>> Chap 1 1---7                           Mark K.
> >>> Chap 2. 8--19                         Mark K.
> >>> chap. 3. 20--29
> >>> chap 4. 30--40
> >>> Chap 5. 41--52
> >>> chap. 6. 53--67
> >>> Chap. 7. 68--79
> >>> Chap 8. 80--86
> >>> Chap. 9. 87--95
> >>> Chap. 10. 96--111
> >>> Chap. 11. 112--119
> >>> Chap. 12. 120--131
> >>> Chap. 13. 132--142
> >>> Chap. 14. 143--157
> >>> Chap 15. 158 --169
> >>> Chap 16. 170--182
> >>> Chap 17. 183-195
> >>> Chap 18. 196-208
> >>> Chap 19. 209-216
> >>> Chap 20. 217-227
> >>> Chap 21. 228- 236
> >>> Chap 22. 237-244
> >>> Chap 23. 245--253
> >>> Chap 24. 254--262
> >>> Chap 25. 263--272
> >>> Chap 26. 273-286
> >>> Chap 27. 287-299
> >>> Chap 28. 300-312
> >>> C
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20130913/046b1c5e/attachment.html>