Yamaku Book Club (20220124 Dish Washing)

[Sea]

Ok, let me sort out some things here, first and foremost this thread is a book club yes, but secondarily it's to help clear up all the threads with huge amounts of discussion between chapters and no navigational system installed. I will clearly label and link to the meetings on the OP, and if everyone is done before the 28th we can go ahead and commence, but i want to give the less pious time to read.

[Helbereth]

Ok, let me sort out some things here, first and foremost this thread is a book club yes, but secondarily it's to help clear up all the threads with huge amounts of discussion between chapters and no navigational system installed. I will clearly label and link to the meetings on the OP, and if everyone is done before the 28th we can go ahead and commence, but i want to give the less pious time to read.

Oh don't expect it to have any effect on the amount of comments in the story threads. It won't. Nor should it. This thread will be more of a place to focus on one at a time and get the community involved in discussing the many fictions that have made their way through the forum.

The comments on the story threads themselves are often specific critiques, pointing out grammatical flaws and such, which would be sorely missed if they were suddenly absent. Granted discussions break out between chapters sometimes, but that's half the fun, I think. They're amusing and or annoying to the author (often both), and give the readers a chance to guess at how the story will flow next.

This thread is a whole other kind of forum.

[Comrade]

Just finished reading it, How long do you guys think we should wait untill the beginning of the first meeting?
Edit: oh i'm dumb. 28th it is

[Sea]

Just finished reading it, How long do you guys think we should wait untill the beginning of the first meeting?
Edit: oh i'm dumb. 28th it is

You think it's too long a time? From the time I first posted it the reading time is 6 days.

[Mahorfeus]

Well, the story is not particularly long, but I'm sure that not everyone has the free time to read it all at once, so I personally think a week is fine.

[Helbereth]

If we want to establish a standard, I'd suggest coming up with how many words seems reasonable to read in a day assuming 2-3 hours of free time to spend. I'd estimate somewhere in the neighborhood of 25,000 words as a low average for a three hour period. That's about 140 words per minute.

That would put Katawa Kijo at ~2 days (50,000 words), which is about how long it took me. The Suzu route would take ~10 days (250,000 words), which sounds about right. Tomorrow's Doom is about 18 days(450,000 words) presently (probably 20 by the time it's actually done), at that rate.

It's a suggested rate, either way. It might turn out that a number closer to 40,000 per day is closer to realistic, but it's something we'll have to determine based on feedback. I'd rather have everyone be able to keep up and finish reading in time for the discussion instead of trying to rush through content.

[AntonSlavik020]

I just started reading today and finished the first five chapters so far. I'll probably finish a couple more tonight. The slow pace is mainly because it's not a story that REALLY grabs my interest, at least not yet, but I'll get more into that when the meeting starts.

[Sea]

So im putting this up for general vote and just to pool ideas, We have the rather unique situation of having the author of our current fic actively on the the forums and more importantly paying attention to this thread, so what part should they have? Their insights would be immeasurably helpful on decoding their works, and I'm not quite sure where they stand during the meeting.

[AntonSlavik020]

I think Mirage's input would be awesome. I love the "behind-the-scenes" stuff, and while this probably won't be anything that detailed, it should still be interesting.

[Helbereth]

Another thing we should decide is to only analyze works that are finished or long-since abandoned. Works that are still in progress are not only incomplete and therefore prone to receive baseless speculation more than analysis, but also still active threads on their own. Finished works don't have that problem, and abandoned works can be considered finished because there won't be any more updates.

It might also be worthwhile to consider collections of shorts as fair game for the book club to look through. Many authors have them floating around, and some are listed separately in the archive, but they're usually very short - often less than 3000 words each - and aren't really enough individually to create much of a discussion. Together, though, you can find enough material for a decent discussion.

[Oscar Wildecat]

I think that a "finished works only" rule makes sense, as active works tend to get screen-time (on the first page) anyway.

Also, on the topic of Mirage analyzing his on work, for some reason, I want to now compare him to Kurt Vonnegut.

[Maristo]

Another thing we should decide is to only analyze works that are finished or long-since abandoned. Works that are still in progress are not only incomplete and therefore prone to receive baseless speculation more than analysis, but also still active threads on their own. Finished works don't have that problem, and abandoned works can be considered finished because there won't be any more updates.

I have to respectfully disagree with this statement. Unfinished or partially finished works are arguably more rewarding to analyse than completed ones. It's easy to allow confirmation bias to skew your inspection of the early and middle sections of a piece of literature if you already know how the author intended the story to end. By looking at partial or incomplete works, a discussion can be had on what was meant to be conveyed in the first or middle portions.

What attitude does the author want the reader to have after the first three chapters? The first five? Has the story taken a clear direction yet, or has much been left up in the air? How does the author establish different characters with the reader, and are they introduced in ways designed to elicit a specific connection or emotion?

When looking at a completed work, these questions often get skipped in favor of a more over-arching theme. Discussion tends to be more about why things turned out a specific way, and less about how things could be interpreted differently. Both perspectives are valid, and neither are baseless speculation. Speculation about the future of a literary work, if based on the available material, is a completely valid form of analysis. I have particularly enjoyed reading some of the discussions in various threads for that exact reason.

Even further, we have a unique opportunity here. Fan fiction tends to be "published" section by section, so readers have the ability to assess an incomplete work, engage in analysis and draw conclusions, and then come back to the finished work later and review their initial position from a new perspective. This isn't something that could be done as easily with finished or abandoned works. I think it could be very insightful to discuss the first half of an unfinished work as a group, and then revisit that discussion a bit later on, after the story is complete.

I can understand that an author might find such a discussion distracting or invasive. It's certainly not my desire to put-off any of the excellent content creators that write on this forum. I would hope that a healthy discussion about an unfinished work might provide valuable insight for an author, and serve as an opportunity to gauge whether or not the intended message is being conveyed. Of course, a writer could simply recluse himself from the discussion. It would be interesting to hear the writer's contribution to the analysis of their own work, but I doubt anyone wishes to discourage or otherwise put undue pressure on a writer to meet the expectations that arise from the discussions.

I think that a "finished works only" rule makes sense, as active works tend to get screen-time (on the first page) anyway.

That is true, however, I was under the (perhaps mistaken) impression that these book club discussions were intended to provide some deeper reflection on part or all of a fan fiction, as opposed to simply drawing attention to a particular work. The comments that come between chapters in most threads do not tend to delve beyond a cursory examination of the latest addition. This might provide an opportunity to view multiple chapters from a broader perspective.



That said, I'm looking forwards to participating regardless of what decision is made on this particular issue. I'd like to thank Sea and comrade for getting this going; it feels like a good way for new members to begin contributing to the community without writing a fiction of their own. I'd also like to thank Mirage for an excellent four hours of entertainment as I read through Katawa Kijo for the first time last night. I'm excited to see what other people have to say about it.

[Oscar Wildecat]

That is true, however, I was under the (perhaps mistaken) impression that these book club discussions were intended to provide some deeper reflection on part or all of a fan fiction, as opposed to simply drawing attention to a particular work. The comments that come between chapters in most threads do not tend to delve beyond a cursory examination of the latest addition. This might provide an opportunity to view multiple chapters from a broader perspective.

That (along with your full post) is a good counter-argument. However, the question would become: What would be the minimum amount of completion before a work should/qualify for discussion?

[brythain]

What would be the minimum amount of completion before a work should/qualify for discussion?

I think that's a great question when turned around a little. 'How complete is this work?' is a question even for a formally complete work. Since this has been called a 'Book Club', I suggest that a collection, collation, or single work of around 10,000 words is fine. For poetry, that bar is lower. For me, sufficient material to warrant a discussion would do: 1) there are at least two strong characters (well-described, memorable etc), 2) with complex interactions (practically, a range of possible believable responses), 3) leading to an obvious plot line (no matter how 'complete').

[Maristo]

That (along with your full post) is a good counter-argument. However, the question would become: What would be the minimum amount of completion before a work should/qualify for discussion?

A good question, but unfortunately not one I'm sure I can give a good answer to.

I think it depends on how we want to schedule the meetings. If we want to make the meetings a weekly or bi-weekly occurrence, then we should determine what is an appropriate length of literature to read before and discuss during each meeting. Once we've established that, then it will be easier to measure which partially completed fan fictions do or don't meet the minimums.

The current mindset in this thread seems to be that the meeting times will vary according to the length of the piece up for discussion. If we do choose to do things in that manner, then I'm not sure how to establish minimum requirements. Even if this approach is taken, it might be wise to break up some of the longer pieces into multiple sections.

If I were to throw out a number off the top of my head, I'd say 20,000 words of content would be sufficient to provide enough content for a healthy book club-esque discussion. I'm no expert, however, so feel free to propose a more reasonable number if that seems off-target. Edit: brythain proposes some useful judging metrics above.