 |
photo by Paréj Richárd on Unsplash
I became interested in reading groups when I was having
dinner with three librarians at a conference recently. They were all members of
the same (long-distance) reading group. When asked what they were currently reading,
none of them could remember! I’ve heard of books having an influence, but never
of a book having so little effect that three members couldn’t recollect the
title, or even the plot. It suggested that the real motivation for many reading
groups is just to get people together; which perhaps is no bad thing. Reading
may be for many reasons; I remember my mother borrowing armfuls of romantic
fiction titles from the local public library, giving me the impression that
filling the time was the key function of these books.
Following my discovery of the forgetful reading group, as an
exercise, whenever I meet people for social chat, I asked them if they are
involved with a reading group. All the women are present or recent members of a
reading group; none of the men. Then I asked them how they got on with the group.
Organisation
A common gripe among members is having to read something
they don’t like. However, the mechanism for choosing books seems to invite this
kind of criticism – in one case, one person chooses all the books, but in
several instances it seemed to be not quite a democratic process, meaning that
each member had an equal opportunity to suggest new titles entirely of their
choice. Of course, looking for consensus is its own form of censorship. Something
very innovative is unlikely to be chosen if suggested by only one member.
Which books?
Strangely (in my opinion) reading groups seem to concentrate
on fiction, and recent fiction at that, “recent” meaning from the last 25 years
or so. Suggestions that something older could be considered are usually not
received with any warmth. Perhaps I’m unusual, but I feel that this kind of
selection process is likely to focus on subject matter rather than quality, I
would imagine.
A reading group that never meets
One local reading group enthusiast talked about a very
different formula. The group never meets in person; the group leader simply
assembles every few months extracts or comments from the members, which she then
distributes as a print booklet for the others to enjoy. I was given an example
of this output, and initially I was very excited. My enthusiasm waned somewhat
when I realised that many of the extracts were just that, included without any
comment, leaving me none the wiser if the reader approved or disapproved of the
extract, or of any other opinion. The reprinting of an entire Tim Dowling
column from The Guardian suggested an uncritical enthusiasm.
What are reading groups for?
So often, a discussion about a book involves people talking
past each other. X likes the book, because she enjoys horse riding. Well, it
might be a justification, but not for Y, who likes historical dramas. You sense
we aren’t really talking about the book, here: the act of reading is reduced to
individual taste, rather than engaging with the text in a meaningful way. But
perhaps I’m over-thinking it – maybe the dinner is the most important criterion,
not the book.
A new idea for reading groups
Having to read a whole book is a slog; life’s too short for
me to devote several days, if not weeks, to struggling with a book I didn’t
choose. My preference would be to select short stories, or something so short
that everyone can read it even the same day if necessary. Perhaps even better
might be to have a reading group where nobody has to read anything new at all!
Each member simply has to talk about something interesting they have read since
the last meeting. There is no obligation for others to read it; but the person
reading it will feel the need to justify their choice to the others. I will
promote it as “the reading group where nobody has to read anything new”, an
idea so novel that it will probably be suspected as some kind of plot. Not, of
course, a fictional plot.
Posts
