Group Read: BLEEDING EDGE: The Cutting Edge

[John Bailey]

I for one (two, three easy as Do, Re, Mi) can't wait to see what Alice
makes of BE. She lived there once, and might guide us down the rabbit
hole.

SPOILER tag for one month sounds good, though.

And I'm thinking we might need some kind of mega
YouTube/Spotify/iTunes/steam/whatever linklist. I spent ages sourcing
a bunch of hard-to-find songs after reading IV, but that now seems
easy given what's in BE. It's like Inception. You need to go deeper.

On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 11:58 PM, Mark Kohut <markekohut at yahoo.com> wrote:
> I say YES to SPOILER tag (as I let certain speed readers of Inherent Vice
> fill up some of my supposed mind)
>
> From: Prashant Kumar <siva.prashant.kumar at gmail.com>
> To: pynchon -l <pynchon-l at waste.org>
> Sent: Saturday, September 14, 2013 9:54 AM
> Subject: Re: Group Read: BLEEDING EDGE: The Cutting Edge
>
> Agree with David and the gang above (except possibly Alice (?); what's up
> dude.): a month to read and let one's own opinions settle before diving into
> a designated list discussion.
>
> And I also want to propose the use of a [SPOILER] tag for threads about BE,
> for the month following release.
>
> P.
>
>
> On 14 September 2013 22:32, Henry M <scuffling at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I'm with David and Ian.  Not only have I and we always had the opportunity
> for individual reads before group ones, but I will be visiting Iceland 21-15
> October, and will therefor not be available to... spar in Iceland.
> (Apparently they call it Silverberg in Iceland, I want me a piece!)
>
>
> Yours truly,
> ٩(●̮̮̃•̃)۶
> Henry Musikar, CISSP
> http://astore.amazon.com/tdcoccamsaxe-20
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 7:31 PM, Ian Livingston <igrlivingston at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Well, fwiw, I agree with David's approach, but due to circumstances, it
> looks like I'll have to save the discussions either way and read them when I
> get to read the book.
>
>
> On Fri, 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
> Chap 29. 313-325
> Chap 30. 326-336
> Chap 31. 337--346
> Chap 32. 347-353
> Chap 33. 354--365
> Chap 34. 366--383
> Chap 35. 384--395
> Chap 36. 396--409
> Chap 37. 410-- 424
> Chap 38. 425--440
> Chap 39. 441--449
> Chap 40. 450--464
> Chap 41. 465--479
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>