Rowland, Jennifer A B
jennifer.rowland at ic.ac.uk
Tue Nov 6 05:24:26 EST 2001
I think it's better to read in bits, usually, because people have such
different amounts of time to spend on reading the book- it'd be depressing
to have everyone finished it and roaring off discussing the ending, when you
were only on chapter one. 5-chapter segments, or so, give time to catch up,
and I think they also give time to discuss and digest one bit before we look
at the next. Hexwood is quite complex and mysterious, I guess I feel that
trying to keep the whole in mind well enough to talk about it coherently
might give me mental indigestion!
Also, having read Hexwood before, I think seeing people's first impressions
as we go through will be really interesting and call up some of the things I
thought up my first time through, and then they can be compared with
impressions on a re-read- though we'll have to be careful of spoilers.
From: Jennifer Forsyth [mailto:jforsyth at equinox.unr.edu]
> That had occurred to me, but it also seems that being "right" isn't always
> purpose of a discussion. Part of the nature, and the art of literature --
> therefore the reader's experience of literature -- is that its
> linear. Addressing a work in chunks, then, seems natural. I think this is
> true for DWJ as for, say, Jane Austen, whose works, I would argue, are
> enjoyable when experienced/discussed a bit at a time. But I didn't really
> a fixed answer in mind when I asked, so this isn't meant to be a defense
> the right way for us to proceed.
> Paul Andinach wrote:
> > I don't think it's a good idea to read and discuss _Hexwood_ in
> > sections; it's one of those that an opinion offered halfway through is
> > probably wrong.
To unsubscribe, email dwj-request at suberic.net with the body "unsubscribe".
Visit the archives at http://suberic.net/dwj/list/
More information about the Dwj