BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Underground > Books, Criticism & Writing >

Why don't we talk about books?

  
  

Page: (1)2

 
 
Our Lady of The Two Towers
13:31 / 12.05.03
OK, the Gibson thread is an exception, but most of the time people start threads for books they've read and no-one replies, as with 'Tommy's Tale' or 'Brick Lane'. So why is it, when a thread in Film and TV or Music will tend to find at least one reply from someone else who has also experienced whatever it is, our reading tastes are so different?

Yet, when someone starts a thread for 'Sci-fi' or 'Dickens books', a lot of people are suggesting the same things...
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
13:35 / 12.05.03
Books take a long time to read.
 
 
Kit-Cat Club
14:41 / 12.05.03
Well, a large part of the reason no one has replied to Sax's thread on Brick Lane is that the jammy so-and-so got hold of an advance copy... and with Tommy's Tale, it's only just come out and not many of us can spring for hardbacks on a whim (and yes, libraries, I know, but not all of use them). The lag between hardback and paperback causes a lot of dislocation, I think, and explains the poor response for books that aren't by high Barbelith authors like Gibson.

Also as Flyboy intimates, books aren't made for immediate consumption (with the possible exception of Harry Potter... I'd expect the inevitable Order of the Phoenix thread to have a reasonable number of replies fairly swiftly, even if it is eight hundred pages long.

Reading is also in some ways a more personal activity and responses can be harder to articulate, I think. List threads have always got more responses than discussion/criticism ones in this forum.

I'd post more if I wasn't wound up in work reading...
 
 
Our Lady of The Two Towers
16:14 / 12.05.03
'Tommy's Tale' was a paperback acherlee... Is it a case that Roth's 'what books are you reading' encourages us to just mention a book in that rather than start a thread about it?
 
 
Simplist
16:43 / 12.05.03
In addition to the above points, the sheer volume of reading material available, even within genres, makes it possible for individual reading habits to be extremely taste-specific, ie. with certain notable exceptions (such as W. Gibson) most people's reading choices will be fairly idiosyncratic. OTOH, there tend to be only two or three major, say, fantasy films out in a given six month period, so pretty much everyone who's into fantasy will end up seeing them. Same applies with TV.
 
 
Kit-Cat Club
16:49 / 12.05.03
But a trade paperback, I think, which does increase the expense slightly... anyway that's not especially germane - was just trying to say that people tend to wait a bit longer before buying books, unless they're sad cases like me and rush out to buy the latest Diana Wynne Jones as soon as it hits the shelves...

I think that 'What are you currently reading?' thread does encourage that, yes, but at the same time it does keep people talking.
 
 
Rage
07:03 / 13.05.03
There's a shitload of music out there too, but someone names a band and the chance that you've heard at least one of their songs is pretty spiffy. Someone names a book and that chance that you've read at least one of its chapters is pretty tiny. All the chapters come in one single book, after all. MP3s are everywhere.
 
 
The Strobe
09:32 / 13.05.03
That analogy doesn't quite work, Rage: the only thing I can compare to an album is a book of short stories. Each chapter can exist alone or together. Reading chapter 3 of Pattern Recognition alone is like listening to individual movements out of symphonies, Classic FM going fucking mad for books - futile and foolish (and doubly foolish to consider you like books based on a favourite chapter).

I'd say: volume of material, diversity of material, diversity of tastes - most people's reading taste is far more diverse than their musical (I said most, not all) - and the fact that books are slow-burners. They often don't elicit gut reactions bar "that was awesome - give me a while and I'll tell you why". I can tell you pretty soon after hearing a song how much I like it and why; films take a tad longer. The density of the artistry within a book, the density of information - there's a lot to process. So responses are slower.
 
 
Quantum
10:28 / 13.05.03
Just to agree with the reasons given- there's more books, they take longer to read and are a more personal phenomenon. Also I think a lot of barbeloids studied literature and are likely sick of talking about books
Just have to rally with KKC on the Diana Wynne Jones front, she rules and the homeward bounders is the best book ever.
 
 
Loomis
10:28 / 13.05.03
I think Rage was referring to availability. You hear individual songs on radio and tv all the time, and can get one off the net in a matter of minutes, whereas books tend to be all or nothing. If someone asks, "Have you read Dickens?" you're unlikely to answer, "Well I read one chapter the other day." If you get your hands on a book, you usually read the entire thing. Again, with music you might get a friend to make you a compilation CD, which you wouldn't do with book chapters.

It's possible that there is a perception of an aura of elitism around books, and there is a resultant lack of confidence in speaking about them. Most people feel confident giving their opinion about music and tv, maybe because most people have experienced such a lot of those media, and also probably because of the gut reaction aspect raised by Paleface. When it comes to books however many people seem reluctant to jump in with a remark unless they're absolutely sure about it.

Which is partly a good thing, as you get less of the sux/rulez debates that sometimes mar the music and film/tv fora. But it does get awfully quiet around these parts. And I know that I'm reluctant to start threads about books I like, for fear of the tumblin' tumbleweeds.
 
 
No star here laces
10:39 / 13.05.03
I feel it's a 'pop culture' thing, althought the phrase itself makes it sound more reductive than I intended. We discuss film, television and music by essentially hurling around big chunks of cultural signifiers. "This episode of Buffy references Milton and uses a Weezer song as a soundtrack" or something (excuse the inaccuracies, I've never watched a full episode of Buffy...). Level of discourse tends to be good/bad/amusing rather than qualified analogue discussion.

In other words, you have to type too damn much if you want to talk about books. It's hard to say something pithy about, say, Don DeLillo...
 
 
The Return Of Rothkoid
13:12 / 13.05.03
To be honest, I think the music/book disparity isn't because of availability per se - you can just as easily get books as you can music; even moreso now that there's things like Bartleby or whatever - it's possibly because of the amount of time each thing involves.

Put simply, it's easier to digest an album or a song or a symphony. Sure, in the case of a Stockhausen piece, you mightn't "get" what it's about or understand it in great depth by having it on as you're Hoovering, but you can react immediately. Books just aren't like that. Generally, you have to invest a reasonable amount of time to read through them - your entire youth if you end up checking out Infinite Jest, say - and they're not always as immediate as something like music is; often you have to labour through, and like a wine, it's not until you get the aftertaste of completion that you can make a proper judgement about what's just been read.

Perhaps, in these go-go naughties, we're less inclined to give more time to activities that require a bit of dedication to make a go of? That's what I think may be a big factor: people leave work, are fucked off, tired, whatever - they go to a pub or something, hear some tunes in the background and chill out. Personally, I read, but I'm Fucked Up That Way. But I know that at times it takes a fair amount of discipline for me to pick up and soldier on with the novel (so much more to read!) rather than just clicking online to see what's going on in Get Your War On.

Barbelith seems to me to be tending towards the more conversational than the analytical, anyway; look at the size of The Conversation as opposed to some other forum. Unlike political beliefs, too, books aren't necessarily things that people feel gut-level strongly about (the heathens!) so I think it's less likely that conversation about them will flow as freely. I dunno.

And I'll have no more impugning my thread, goddamnit. It is mighty and rocks with fists of steel, fuckya.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
14:57 / 13.05.03
Sometimes he's good, sometimes he's shit. How's that?

But seriously, 'Laces, I have to disagree with your reasoning if not your conclusion - yes, it's difficult to sum up an entire book in a post of even medium length, but I don't think that this is anything to do with a reliance on discussing other media only in terms of references.

Paleface: I think the point of Rage's analogy is perfectly valid (analogies aren't meant to map 100% onto each other) - we don't have the means to experience prose writing in the casual way that we can hear music, or watch visual media, on a day-to-day basis. Even in the case of very popular/populist, mainstream authors, it's very easy to avoid having read a word of their work, which you can't exactly say for a pop star who gets in the Top Ten. Unless you watch Late Review, read the LRB or listen to a lot of Radio 4 (which some people here will, but I'll wager fewer than might happen to overhear a song on the radio or catch a movie trailer on TV), I don't see how you can offer a slightly-informed opinion without reading the whole book, and argh, I've lost the trail of my point. I read slower than many people here. Sigh.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
15:04 / 13.05.03
Don Delillo for the "sometimes..." bit. Obviously.
 
 
HCE
16:24 / 13.05.03
Loomis writes: Again, with music you might get a friend to make you a compilation CD, which you wouldn't do with book chapters.


Now there's a really lovely idea. Rothkoid, I'll trade you.

I wonder how much of this business of not talking about books is simply because we lack the habit, and therefore don't really know how to go about it. Before you have your first kiss you've seen loads of screen kisses, but what models are there for talking about books? I can think of only one, off the top of my head, Michael Silverblatt's "Bookworm" on public radio here in LA. Are there others where the rest of you are?
 
 
Kit-Cat Club
20:19 / 13.05.03
We could try a commonplace book thread, perhaps. Someone suggested something like this to me a while ago - a 'favourite passage/prose stylist' thread, but I never started it because I don't have any of my books here (or not many of them). What do you think? We'd have to limit the size of extracts though - say to one or two medium paragraphs (i.e. up to about 300 words).

Personally I just don't read as much as I used to - or not as much non-academic stuff, and though I could easily start a thread on that I don't think many people here would go for 'My favourite pamphleteers - why Milton was better than Martin Marprelate' (with the possible exception of Haus, who almost certainly knows more about it than I do). I don't have the time to read as much as I used to, and as Flyboy says it's hard to offer an opinion on a book which you've read say the first five pages of in Borders (apart from 'it didn't really grab me', which is of no use to anyone whatsoever).

I get a bit down in the dumps about this sometimes, but I can't kickstart the forum if I'm not reading myself! I do think the 'annotated bibliography' one I started a while back was an example of one way to proceed which wouldn't mean that people who hadn't read the latest whatever were always unable to contribute. It was on 'the afterlife', I think - any other themes that might be worth a shot?

'Images of [thing] in books'?

fred - there are quite a few bookish programmes on Radio 4 (as Flyboy has said) - Book of the Week, A Book at Bedtime, A Good Read and the various review programmes. But again, I can't listen to them and work... I tend to rely on the papers for my book news, so I usually know what's going on if I'm not reading, but I refuse to proffer an opinion as though it is mine when I have cribbed it from the Guardian.
 
 
HCE
17:34 / 15.05.03
I'd love to see a 'favorite passages' thread. It would be a lovely way to sample what others are reading and see if it's to your taste. Thanks for note about Radio 4, I can listen to it online.
 
 
_pin
21:27 / 24.05.03
Whatever happened to the Barbelith Book Group? Was there a reason for them just ending, or did I imagine them in the first place?

Am I right in thinking that a scheme like that would, you know... mean us discussing more books?

Althought having just read yr abstract, I realise that that isn't really the question. I have no idea what the answer to the actual question is.
 
 
Spatula Clarke
01:15 / 25.05.03
I really dislike the book group idea. I read books to suit my mood, and feeling pushed into reading a certain one at a certain time - even if I'm pushing myself - tends to lead to me not really taking anything in. That said, there are plenty of people who get along with them just fine, so what do I know?

As for threads about specific titles, to be honest there's probably just as many of those in this forum as there are in Music, as a proportion of each forum's total thread tally. I'm not likely to start a thread about an album if I don't think it'll garner enough replies to justify its existence; the same applies with books.

This point is backed up by the 'What are you currently reading' threads. I've yet to see a post that matches my current reading list. Hell, it's only very occasionally that I'll see one that mentions anything I've read in the past. It's a combination of the two issues that have been mentioned most often in this thread: the sheer wealth of material available alongside the amount of time it takes some of us to get through single examples. Take the numerous SF threads we've got: they generally seem to devolve into people talking about the one author, with current SF getting pushed aside, and that's because there's so much out there that people feel obliged to check out the 'classics' first. Problem being, of course, that you'll never get through all those classics, leaving you no time to read anything new.

Wait, I've gone off-target a little here...

The pop culture thing does stand, I think, but maybe not in exactly the way Laces reckons. It's all about points of reference; I can compare one album/song/whatever to a hundred others because music surrounds us wherever we go without us having to drop everything else to be able to pay attention to it. I can't do this for books because I can only compare to those that I've made an active attempt to seek out and absorb. That's going to ba a much lower figure, partly because of the element of active participation and partly because the much smaller number of reference points I have may make such attempts at comparison entirely fruitless.

Okay, so discussion of any art form shouldn't be based on the use of comparisons; we should be able to discuss any piece and judge it on its own merits. That said, I think this 'active participation' is the main problem area. Music and films can be enjoyed and - more importantly - digested passively, whereas the reading of a book requires much more input from the audience at a fundamental level. It's therefore natural that more people are able to contribute to threads in the fora dedicated to those media.
 
 
rizla mission
12:13 / 25.05.03
I think new-ness is also an issue;

It's probably not unusual for many of us to wander down to the record shop/cinema/video rental/radio show/whatever on a regular basis to check out the new stuff on offer, and chances are some others have probably done the same thing and noticed the same stuff - hense discussion is possible.

The same is true of bookshops of course, except that, as has been noted, you can't really get an angle on a book just from looking at it for a minute or two, and, I don't know about you, but if I buy a book it can be anything up to two years before I actually get 'round to reading it, so hence asking "hey, what do you think of the new [insert author here]?" probably won't lead to an immediate discussion - it's more likely to generate a glacially slow one taking place over months or years, for which messageboards aren't really suited..

I guess all of that's probably been put better above though.

Actually, I wonder what part media plays in this - I mean, what with there being dozens of places where you can absorb information about the latest music / films - it's perfectly normal to see the poster for a film, see the trailer, read a couple of reviews and decide "I think that film sucks", without actually having to watch it. It would be ill-advised to do the same thing with a book though. Excluding the possiblity of reading what somebody-or-other thinks about it in the Guardian (and that would likely be a more vague/complex response to the book that the "that is great!"/"this is crap!"/"if you like X you'll like Y" reviews common to more pop media), there aren't really any signifiers you can use to judge a book without reading it, except possibly for the cover design and the blurb on the back, which are unreliable at best..

..where am I going with this? i don't know.
 
 
HCE
16:57 / 11.06.03
Rizla writes: there aren't really any signifiers you can use to judge a book without reading it, except possibly for the cover design and the blurb on the back, which are unreliable at best..


So how do you get a sense of what you'll like? How do you cull tips about books? From other people, from authors' info, at readings, or? There must be something that gives you a sense of what you might like.
 
 
rizla mission
14:04 / 12.06.03
Good point. The rep of the author, the subject matter and the first paragraph does a pretty good job in my experience.

I think what I was trying to say is that books differ from more 'pop' media in that you can't really comment upon them until you've actually read them.
 
 
grant
13:51 / 13.06.03
Put simply, it's easier to digest an album or a song or a symphony.

That’s just what I was going to say. But even more: I think in order to digest sound or image, it helps to write in up in words, while to digest words, pretty often more words is beside the point.


Again, with music you might get a friend to make you a compilation CD, which you wouldn't do with book chapters.


This is why I love Granta. Because that’s exactly what it does.

I do think there’s another reason – a lot of times, I don’t comment because I simply haven’t read what y’all are talking about.
Books are less of an ephemeral commodity than pop music or film… they tend to stick around for years. So, for instance, I’m only now getting around to reading the His Dark Materials trilogy, more than two years (I think) after it was first brought up here.
And some of the best discussion I recall reading (but not participating in) was about the Iliad (which I still have yet to read). Hardly a summer blockbuster or a new indie label release. In part, valued for oldness, not newness, see?

Oo - Rizla just said that, didn't he?
 
 
Kit-Cat Club
12:34 / 28.06.04
I'm just bumping this thread to see if we have any new ideas for how to talk about books - the forum seems a bit moribund, and I for one am stuck for ideas on how to kickstart it. Perhaps New Blood will help?
 
 
Sax
13:01 / 28.06.04
Ghod, I haven't even read New Blood yet!

Just kidding.

I know what you mean. Starting threads on random books doesn't seem to get that much attention, for the reasons outlined above. Perhaps we should think about discussions on literary movements; styles; comparisons of books to film adaptations; the worth of literary prizes; maybe detailed character studies as a companion piece to "book club" readings...
 
 
Kit-Cat Club
15:06 / 28.06.04
Yeah, these are all good ideas, though I do think that they are likely to result in good discussions between a few posters, rather than threads with a high volume of traffic and many individual participants - but that's not necessarily a bad thing, of course.

I especially like the idea of constructing topics around styles, themes etc. rather than around individual works or authors - it seems to me that we could get some really interesting and fruitful connections going.

Book Personals might also be due for a revival - I always thought it was an excellent idea for communication and collaborative reading on the internet and deserved to be a success...
 
 
Tryphena Absent
16:08 / 28.06.04
Maybe we could have more discussions about authors? For instance I can't comment on Yellow Dog by Martin Amis but having read a number of other books by him I could happily whine about him all day! The same goes for Thomas Hardy and other authors, on the opposite side of the fence it's quite easy to extrapolate on how wondrous Murakami is and how much I like Charlotte Bronte but neither of her sisters. If threads focused on the various works of an author/authors then there would be less threads but more content within them.
 
 
Tryphena Absent
16:13 / 28.06.04
(Would there be less threads? I think that was a bit of an assumption.)
 
 
Grey Area
16:55 / 28.06.04
I think the Book Club was a good idea, but maybe we could start one with a title that's a bit less classical...something that can be read quickly but still has lots to discuss in it. There's no reason more than one Book Club can't exist, after all. Anybody else think has merit?
 
 
iconoplast
18:02 / 28.06.04
The Eyre Affair would lend itself to a BarbeBook Club - it's shortish, full of references, not very serious, and involves car chases and gun fights.

But I'm probably just suggesting that since I've already read it.

However, something /like/ it would be perfect.

Or a book of poems might be fun.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
20:30 / 28.06.04
Fforde was discussed here, in a thread that had the unfortunate effect of killing any desire I might have had to read his work stone dead, and also touched on here.

Hmmm... I think one problem is the law of diminishing returns - why are you tempted to write a long post about a book if you cannot be sure anyone else will reply to it? Discussing authors or genres might be one way out of that, or more general threads like "What's your favourite poem/ prose stylist - give examples". The book clubs worked quite well, too - you can have quite a long and interesting discussion between three or four people if they are all engaged with the text - two guys have kept a discussion of the latest Stephen King going for 40 posts or so pretty much on their lonesome. We've seen the success of a thread like "Good fantasy novels", which has at least largely avoided listmania, and something even on something reasonably specialist but geek=friendly like Dr. Who novelisations might work reasonably well...


I'd like to kick off a book club on the Aeneid, mind, but I'm not sure I'd have the time to commit to it...
 
 
Kit-Cat Club
15:06 / 29.06.04
I don't think it matters if we have a lot of threads, provided people feel able (and want) to contribute to them. And I also think Haus is right that it doesn't particularly matter how many people contribute to a thread, so long as the people who do so are enjoying it...

So author threads would probably be successful (though prey to the odd one-sentence 'I've only read one book by X and I couldn't finish it, he SUX0rS' type post - I exaggerate but you know what I mean). Genre also interesting, as might be topics organised by theme (see my old 'bilbiography' thread on the afterlife - an idea which I would still like to see given another go).

The Stephen King thread is a good e.g. of how the Book Personals idea might work very well in practice, I suppose...

I had an idea of selecting a book of poems (one that I want to read anyway, e.g. 'The Orchards of Syon' by Geoffrey Hill) and working through it with commentary on the board, but this seems a bit egocentric as I can't think of anyone else who has ever expressed an interest in Hill. It would be like Stoatie's '24 Hours of Throbbing Gristle' thread, only less interesting, and more pretentious.

I'm up for the Aeneid as you know, Haus, but I too am a little short on time at the moment.
 
 
HCE
17:59 / 29.06.04
Anna de L writes " For instance I can't comment on Yellow Dog by Martin Amis but having read a number of other books by him I could happily whine about him all day!"

Likewise.

What is it that people want to get out of this forum? Ideas on what to read next? New pals with similar taste? New ideas for how to think about what you've read already? Help sorting out references? All of these things? Maybe if we identify a specific result we're going after it'll be easier to figure out what would elicit the desired response.
 
 
Jack Vincennes
07:30 / 30.06.04
Slightly off topic, but I'd also be up for reading the Aeneid... I'm going to have a 3 hour commute for the next couple of weeks, so don't think I'm going to be short on time to read. Also like the idea of Book Personals, as my reasons for not starting threads on books are outlined pretty much exactly by Haus upthread.

For instance I can't comment on Yellow Dog by Martin Amis but having read a number of other books by him I could happily whine about him all day!

Likewise.

Actually, I think that the idea of starting threads on authors you hate is a good one ; it means that there's actually something to discuss, as it's often easier to articulate why you dislike something than why you like it, and easier to articulate why you like something in light of someone else's criticism. Sorry, that's horribly tortuous, but I remember someone (I think Illmatic) started a thread on not enjoying Doestoevsky and it turned out well.
 
 
Olulabelle
09:31 / 01.07.04
Sometimes the Books forum makes me feel like I need to go back to school.

That's why I don't post here a great deal, and I think there are probably lots of people who read the Books forum but just don't feel that they have anything of any value to say.

I read all of the threads and quite frequently find that you're talking about books I've never even heard of. Maybe I'm exaggerating slightly, but I read heaps and heaps yet am clearly not in the same leagues as you all; for instance I haven't a clue what 'the Aeneid' is about or who it's by or anything, so it's impossible for me to join in the conversation and say I would like to read it with the possible Book Club.

Obviously I'm not suggesting that you all post things like, "What about The Aeneid, written by Virgil, a Roman poet." (Is that right? I've just googled.) because that would be dull for everyone. I just think there's a kind of general assumption that everyone who posts in the Book forum threads will, for example, of course know who wrote The Aeneid. Which makes those of us who don't feel slightly stupid.

Oh I'm not really sure what I am trying to say. I did English Literature A Level, yet this forum sometimes makes me feel like I didn't even pass my English Language GCSE. Which is vaguely upsetting.

And what's a book personal? Please.
 
  

Page: (1)2

 
  
Add Your Reply