Personally, daily. But this is not a competition, nor a combat. You do what works for you, which is what I do.

I used to go to a bookclub at the local library, and as a fellow social anxiety sufferer I can relate to stressing about it. In my case, I found this to be a pretty good set up. There was a clear "discussion leader" who kept the conversation going with questions and prompts, and I could eiter take part or just quietly observe if I had nothing to contribute.

Personally I found this a much less anxiety inducing situation than a less structured acquaintance based group, because there was less pressure for small talk and "normal" social interaction :D

Yeah, I think I'll probably just view the footnotes when I'm puzzled by a reference. Thanks for your response!

Personally I buy one book only after I finish the last. I don't have a backlog. But I id you are happy collecting. Go ahead.

Thanks for your reply! I think I'll probably do that :)

Yeah, it definitely reads like it's for those who are familiar with the story. I'm definitely going to enjoy it anyway, I've read the likes of Jurrasic Park etc after seeing the film and still loved the books.

Yeah, I've not really come across many academic ones, but I feel like I'd give them a miss. If ots by the Author they're normally quite interesting.

Yeah, there's a bit of a spoiler but it's not gonna ruin the book. I think especially if they're by the Author it gives a good insight into how the ideas of the hook came about, 2001: A Space Odyssey had a good intro explaining how the book was written with the intention of being turned into a script

The bible and the quran. Maybe then we'd stop killing each other over the tiny differences and let people live their lives how they want to, instead of not allowing people to be homosexual etc.

If you were approaching Lolita expecting that it would be similar to “dark romance” that might be part of the disconnect. The point of Lolita is not the portrayal of “weird kinks” nor to show the central character as “misunderstood”. The point of the book is that it is narrated by a character who is trying to justify something that the other characters in the story, the readers and the writer find (rightly) abhorrent.

I would never suggest that people read Lolita if they are put off by the depiction of child abuse material or upset by it. If you don’t want to read content like that, then absolutely don’t. However, it does a tremendous disservice to the book to say that it’s on Humbert’s side.

Blatant misinformation that is directed to vulnerable people can be very harmful. Predatory books by health gurus directed towards ill people and their loved ones.

I have worked in healthcare with cancer patients and their close ones who were given false hope by some alternative medicine books and gurus selling books and supplements/lifestyle advice. Seeing the patients suffering and refuse treatment (even for pain) and slowly slip away, all the time blaming themselves for not responding better to the woo-woo prayers/substances/positive thinking/particular diet/supplements… Seeing them hurting and SO confused and hurt about why they are becoming worse and not better… Some of them even perished from things that a surgical procedure would likely have cured. All of it while lining the pockets of some sociopath with a degree and a book deal.

If it was tough for me to witness, I can only imagine how it was for them and their families living it.

Traditional medicine does not work all the time either. Refusing treatment of any kind is definitely within anyones right! I am not looking for a debate on this. My point here is not about the science being right or wrong, it is about predatory guru-like authors (sometimes using their educational credentials in traditional sciences) using cancer patients to sell books and branded supplements and putting the blame on the patients when the particular “treatment” does not work.

In theory, I would like to burn these books. In practice, I realise and accept that it would be impossible to do in a reasonable way. Also, there is the danger of the slippery slope, controlling free speech and all. But I still want to see those particular books burn.

[deleted]

Agree with these points.

I would note that there is a significant distinction (that is often lost) between freedom of press and platforming. I would not put the Unabomber’s manifesto in a high school library or go out of my way to encourage people to read it; we shouldn’t encourage high schoolers or people in general to get radicalised by hateful ideologies, and the UK is already seeing the consequences of that. But I do think there is a place for it in the records. There is a place for all written work in the records, be it Nazi rhetoric or weird smutfic.

That's nice. I read Pratchett and Heinlein to review my ethical guidelines.

Wonder which of us read and consider our touchstone literature more often.

add: Poor Sir Terry

I actually threw out a book recently because of the writing; I think that banning books that spew horrible hateful ideas should be banned. But the books that are being banned in question should NOT be banned in the slightest.

There are books out there about how beating babies with canes is good parenting you just have to make sure you don't leave marks others could see. So those get my full purge vote, let's keep some copies for archival and research purposes but let the rest burn. (I'm not even sure how it's legal to sell these)[edit: Now two people mentioned the same title, but I sadly report it's a whole genre, and I meant every single one of them]

There are books with other blatant misinformation urging people to be abusive. I also won't defend those.

Hate speech and incitement with call to genocide / murder / rape / war crimes etc. (Again, I'm not sure how it's legal)

I'm very against censorship in general, especially when it comes to art. Even books I'd throw on a bonfire with my own hands if it's about a few copies as a symbol or protest, I'd not want them banned. But I just can't find an excuse for some nonfiction works.

Another no from me. Even in the case of overtly dangerous ideas and pseudoscience that makes a case for bigotry (The Bell Curve, Irreversible Damage, etc), burning the books is an overly simplistic solution that would make a martyr of these authors while ignoring the real reasons people are drawn to exclusionary or fascistic ideologies. These tendencies arise out of social inequality, scapegoating, and unexamined fear of the other that won't go away simply with the removal of certain titles. Moreover, I think the words (fictional and otherwise) of cruel and hateful actually offer us a very valuable insight into the draw of certain ideas and behaviours, and therefore leave us better equipped to combat them - in ourselves, too.

I agree very young children should have a certain amount of benign control exercised over what they have access to (ETA: and that this is the responsibility of their carers and teachers, not the state), or at the very least an adult in their lives who'll talk them through anything they read that upsets or confuses them. For the rest of us, I don't believe the potential for someone to make a bad choice should be answered by restricting our choices. It's through conversation that we learn, and unsavory book can make for a great starting point.

If you don’t imagine how the author might separate what they portray and tell from what they endorse, and you can only stomach those stories which you can translate into literal ethical guidelines… Then, well, I guess you can read books about gardening

[deleted]

Trying to erase the Bible from world literature makes as much sense as doing away with “Greek mythology”. It’s a collection of many different books, spanning many different periods and ideas.

The thing with Lolita is that it’s a waste of time to argue with the puritans who mistake character portrayal with character endorsement. Reading any of its pages at random should be enough to make it obvious that it is incomparably well written and to put the petty moralistic controversy in the foot note where it belongs.

It’s also a shame that the “scandal” made it into Nabokov’s most famous, as, despite being a great book, it is far from his best work.

Flows pretty easily with a big group. Just chime in your thoughts on whatever comes up, people are receptive. Good on you doing something out of your comfort zone/touching grass

If you want to talk about what you read like you have a voluntary english class, theyre great.

If you dont care for the book and dont know the people, they will probably be drab.

I run one with some old friends and we hard cap it at about 50-75 pages per week, and one hour per meeting (we do zoom so the time limit is less imposing on ones day) Plenty of time to discuss the book and shoot some shit.

Also they are always better with a little vino

Thinking that the best way to disarm and censor the ideas in Mein Kampf is to burn the book would be quite the irony

Classic novels are always worth a read, if only so you can form your own opinion on them

The novel is unfinished, though. I read the Wordsworth Classics edition of it, and it had an ending compiled posthumously from Gaskell's notes by her editor, I think.

It serves, but you know - it's not Gaskell. Her genius is in her narration.

To wit, you should also read Gaskell's biography of the Bronte sisters.