I'm so enjoying reading all the comments on your book group experiences - there are good tips and guidelines there which might be useful to any group, and what fun is being had all round with films, meals, book-related walks, behind-the-scenes-at-the-bookshop visits, and other related activities going on!
Jodi mentioned that her group includes a severely dyslexic member, and I was glad to hear that; reading easily is something so many of us can take for granted, but for others it's no simple pleasure - being in the group must help that a lot, I should think. I'd like to know more.
Oxslip mentioned Rachel Cusk's article, and I'm not surprised that it didn't go unremarked (see Oxslip's comment for the links). But aside from the hurt feelings there, Ms. Cusk's respondent makes an interesting point: "Aren't unpretentious book groups like ours the backbone of fiction sales these days?"
Back to all of you who contributed your thoughts to the post, and what is so lovely to see is the enriched enjoyment that so many of you are getting by reading books you might not have chosen for yourselves and by seeing them through others' eyes as well as your own. Thankyou for taking the trouble to comment and for giving us such detail.
By the way, I finally figured out which book you left out of your photo in the Book Group post: "Travels With Charley". Maybe you didn't own this book - borrowed it from a friend or the library?
Posted by: Julie Fredericksen | 29 October 2010 at 02:34 AM
I do have it, Julie, but it and I Capture the Castle were in other parts of the house when I was grabbing what happened to be at hand for a quick snap!
Posted by: Cornflower | 29 October 2010 at 09:01 AM
I didn't post a comment as I have no experience of "physical" as opposed to "virtual" book groups. However I fully agree with
"so lovely to see is the enriched enjoyment that so many of you are getting by reading books you might not have chosen for yourselves and by seeing them through others' eyes as well as your own."
so many thanks to you for running the CBG.
Posted by: Dark Puss | 29 October 2010 at 09:33 AM
Thankyou, DP, it's a pleasure!
Posted by: Cornflower | 29 October 2010 at 09:52 AM
Oh, right, we haven't read the November book yet, so there were two missing!
Posted by: Julie Fredericksen | 29 October 2010 at 07:40 PM
Regarding the person in our group that is dyslexic - We are all very good friends in our group and it would be a shame to leave her out. What she brings to our table is life experience. She is older than some of us and for The Help she talked about what segregation used to be like in our city. For Water For Elephants she talked about how her dad hopped the trains before she was born.
These are things that add value to and deepen our discussions.
Posted by: jodi | 29 October 2010 at 09:00 PM
Hard not to sympathise with Rachel Cusk's group over her as I would have felt the same as them I think. I've been in a few groups with widely-read academics for whom writing is their life, not their pastime, and it's always difficult for them to listen to the rest of us fumbling through our analyses.
Ultimately reading is what you want it to be, there is no right or wrong way, but so great when you find a group with a similar approach to your own. And writers need us readers, however inept they suspect us of being.
I would also echo DP's thanks, I am only an unreliable online member, but I really enjoy the group and comments so thanks for coordinating
Posted by: Oxslip | 30 October 2010 at 08:14 AM
I absolutely agree - just read the article, and Rachel Cusk comes across so very, very badly. So self-satisfied and rude to other people. I think her group are better off without her!
Posted by: Simon T | 30 October 2010 at 02:40 PM