Moe Reading with the 'Stooge
É uma continuação do tópico Bookstooge Turns '21.
DiscussãoThe Green Dragon
Entre no LibraryThing para poder publicar.
1BookstoogeLT
I'd like to thank both Karlstar and ScoLgo for the clever title. All the praise goes to them, seriously.
As I'm very opinionated and not afraid to say so, I'll only be putting links here so as not to violate the Green Dragon terms and conditions.
As I'm very opinionated and not afraid to say so, I'll only be putting links here so as not to violate the Green Dragon terms and conditions.
2YouKneeK
>1 BookstoogeLT: Haha, it’s a great title. And great teamwork, too – Karlstar thought of it, ScoLgo explained it, and Bookstooge properly and efficiently implemented it. ;)
3Karlstar
>2 YouKneeK: Thanks to ScoLgo for the explanation, I'd missed the request for clarification.
Why is something this simple making me happy?
Why is something this simple making me happy?
4BookstoogeLT
>3 Karlstar: Glad it is :-D
6Narilka
>5 BookstoogeLT: Those are pretty good :)
7BookstoogeLT
>6 Narilka: Thanks :-) It was a lot of fun to do once I got going.
8Karlstar
>5 BookstoogeLT: Quite the challenge, good job!
9BookstoogeLT
>8 Karlstar: When I first saw it I wasn't sure if I could actually complete it. But it went really well :-)
13-pilgrim-
>12 BookstoogeLT: I felt "oh no, here we go again" when I first read it (when it first came out) and DNF'd it then.
After listening to your love for Eddings I had been wondering whether I had been unfair to it, and was contemplating trying it again. (I could do with some uncomplicated fantasy at the moment.) But after your review - maybe not.
I thoroughly enjoyed the Belgariad, quite enjoyed the Malloreon, and life intervened so that I never read the two prequels.
After listening to your love for Eddings I had been wondering whether I had been unfair to it, and was contemplating trying it again. (I could do with some uncomplicated fantasy at the moment.) But after your review - maybe not.
I thoroughly enjoyed the Belgariad, quite enjoyed the Malloreon, and life intervened so that I never read the two prequels.
14BookstoogeLT
>13 -pilgrim-: After the Elenium, it became obvious to all that Eddings was definitely writing the same story over and over with small variations :-(
I'll probably re-read the Belgariad at some point but not anything else by him. C'est la vie!
I'll probably re-read the Belgariad at some point but not anything else by him. C'est la vie!
15-pilgrim-
>10 BookstoogeLT:
To answer your question in your blog post comments about "minutiae of Anglican theology" and being expected to know this, you need to remember this:
Williams was English
In England, the Church of England is the state church
The Education Act (that was still in force in my day, I don't know how it has been modified since) prescribed as compulsory (I) religious education for all pupils and (ii) a daily "act of worship" (i.e. a religious service).
So, if you went to a state school, you got Anglican theology taught as the default. A lot of schools, even in my day, would have a specific chaplain attached.
Of course,
(I) there were/are specific faith schools for other denominations and religions
(II) if you went to a state school and your parents felt strongly enough, they could pull you out of the "act of worship" provided by the school, in favour of an alternative. (So the Catholics in my school went to a service with a visiting priest of their own instead of general assembly).
Even in my day, those schools that were not specifically CofE (i.e. receiving part of their funding from the Church of England) tended to recognise that Britain is actually pretty diverse and extend "religious education" to cover teaching about other denominations and sometimes other faiths.
And the morning assemblies (basically hymn-singing, prayers, readings plus school announcements) tended to pray to "God" in preference to Jesus - although the Lord's Prayer was always included, I think - and might include the scriptures of other faiths and even humanist moral teachings as "readings". Or they might not.
(N.b. Attendance was required, not active participation. My Jewish classmate duly stood there with her mouth shut throughout - unless the "hymn" was actually a Psalm, and then she sang along. It was completely up to her.)
But in Williams' day, it would probably have been a straight CofE religious instruction and prayer service. So you could be pretty sure that most English people, whatever their actual beliefs, would have a fairly thorough exposure to Anglicanism.
That is his context, and his expectations of background knowledge in his audience should be taken accordingly - just as he also assumes a greater knowledge of the Classics than is the norm nowadays.
To answer your question in your blog post comments about "minutiae of Anglican theology" and being expected to know this, you need to remember this:
So, if you went to a state school, you got Anglican theology taught as the default. A lot of schools, even in my day, would have a specific chaplain attached.
Of course,
(I) there were/are specific faith schools for other denominations and religions
(II) if you went to a state school and your parents felt strongly enough, they could pull you out of the "act of worship" provided by the school, in favour of an alternative. (So the Catholics in my school went to a service with a visiting priest of their own instead of general assembly).
Even in my day, those schools that were not specifically CofE (i.e. receiving part of their funding from the Church of England) tended to recognise that Britain is actually pretty diverse and extend "religious education" to cover teaching about other denominations and sometimes other faiths.
And the morning assemblies (basically hymn-singing, prayers, readings plus school announcements) tended to pray to "God" in preference to Jesus - although the Lord's Prayer was always included, I think - and might include the scriptures of other faiths and even humanist moral teachings as "readings". Or they might not.
(N.b. Attendance was required, not active participation. My Jewish classmate duly stood there with her mouth shut throughout - unless the "hymn" was actually a Psalm, and then she sang along. It was completely up to her.)
But in Williams' day, it would probably have been a straight CofE religious instruction and prayer service. So you could be pretty sure that most English people, whatever their actual beliefs, would have a fairly thorough exposure to Anglicanism.
That is his context, and his expectations of background knowledge in his audience should be taken accordingly - just as he also assumes a greater knowledge of the Classics than is the norm nowadays.
16BookstoogeLT
>15 -pilgrim-: Interesting. Thanks.
Since we're on the subject of Williams, do you think you'd be up for a group read with Majel-Susan of one of William's books? Or is that too big at the moment? I haven't seen M-Susan around since January either.
Let me know if you'd be interested or not.
Since we're on the subject of Williams, do you think you'd be up for a group read with Majel-Susan of one of William's books? Or is that too big at the moment? I haven't seen M-Susan around since January either.
Let me know if you'd be interested or not.
17-pilgrim-
>16 BookstoogeLT: Definitely interested, but right now is definitely not the optimal time.
18BookstoogeLT
>17 -pilgrim-: Then I'd say if/when you feel up for it, let me know and I'll try to rope Majel-Susan in and away we'll go.
19Majel-Susan
>16 BookstoogeLT: Haha, hi! I've been super busy lately and only logged back in a few days ago. I'm back for a bit now but I'm sort of really swamped until mid-April. But when you and -pilgrim- find a good time, you both can pick the book (I'd be happy to try any of them) and I'll do my best to catch up with you, earliest in mid-April.
20Majel-Susan
>10 BookstoogeLT: Ah, I see you've got round to Descent into Hell. I got to admit I didn't notice about the unfinished sentences, but I can imagine how that would be annoying. You took an interesting perspective on the themes, as well...
Hmm, it's funny but somehow it never occured to me thatWentworth might have died at the end of the book. I personally thought that his spiritual corruption had somehow accelerated to reach a kind of premature state of being in Hell, which was manifested in a true and literal madness (something in Battle Hill's water or something, but I wouldn't risk drinking it). But oh, well. It wouldn't be the first time I missed something glaringly obvious in a book. At any rate, I don't think Williams was presenting the totality of Hell, as he would have understood it, only an aspect of it, relevant to the madness Wentworth chose over his reason.
Hmm, it's funny but somehow it never occured to me that
21BookstoogeLT
>19 Majel-Susan: Well, with what Pilgrim is going through recently, it sounds like later is better.
>20 Majel-Susan: Not knocking what you're saying, but we'll have to figure out some way to have discussions on Williams' book without breaking the GD rules. Because I'm not sure how we're going to talk about his stuff without discussing religion.
>20 Majel-Susan: Not knocking what you're saying, but we'll have to figure out some way to have discussions on Williams' book without breaking the GD rules. Because I'm not sure how we're going to talk about his stuff without discussing religion.
24-pilgrim-
>21 BookstoogeLT: I may be wrong, but I think we are allowed to describe what we think an author meant by a passage, or what their beliefs are/were, as long as we do not stray into debating whether or not WE think those beliefs to be correct i.e. objectively true.
E.g.
A. "X believed in the doctrine of Z" (OK - we can discuss the evidence for whether X actually believed that)
B. "X was considered a heretic by group Y" (OK, but only really relevant if X was either persecuted by this group or expelled from former membership of it because of belief in Z)
C. "X was a a heretic" (Not OK - because it expresses a personal opinion on the validity of X's religious views)
E.g.
A. "X believed in the doctrine of Z" (OK - we can discuss the evidence for whether X actually believed that)
B. "X was considered a heretic by group Y" (OK, but only really relevant if X was either persecuted by this group or expelled from former membership of it because of belief in Z)
C. "X was a a heretic" (Not OK - because it expresses a personal opinion on the validity of X's religious views)
25BookstoogeLT
>24 -pilgrim-: You might very well be correct. But to talk about theology without being able to discuss why I think they are correct/incorrect views is not a line I'm willing to aim for. And with Williams, I KNOW I'm going to need to do that. We'll just have to figure out something.
ps,
I'm not going to censor myself in a readalong.
ps,
I'm not going to censor myself in a readalong.
26YouKneeK
>25 BookstoogeLT: I don’t know if you all would want to go down this route, but you could create a separate group on LT to use just for the book discussion. Then you wouldn't have to worry with any restrictions.
Since some people look at “All Topics” in Talk and run across random posts for groups they wouldn't be otherwise familiar with, you might want to make it a private group to avoid random passers-by jumping in to argue. Unless you would find that kind of thing to be part of the fun. :)
Since some people look at “All Topics” in Talk and run across random posts for groups they wouldn't be otherwise familiar with, you might want to make it a private group to avoid random passers-by jumping in to argue. Unless you would find that kind of thing to be part of the fun. :)
27BookstoogeLT
>24 -pilgrim-: Would what >26 YouKneeK: describes work for you? Or would that be too much? The main positive, that I can see is that you wouldn't have to leave LT and I wouldn't have to toe the line.
>26 YouKneeK: Thanks. I hadn't even thought about doing something like that....
>26 YouKneeK: Thanks. I hadn't even thought about doing something like that....
29-pilgrim-
>27 BookstoogeLT: Yes, that would be fine by me.
30Majel-Susan
>27 BookstoogeLT: We could also make use of the Inklings group for that. It's sufficiently inactive that I don't think other members will bother us much, if that is a concern.
31-pilgrim-
>30 Majel-Susan: Excellent suggestion. It would also prevent the loss of the info there, as discussed in one of the threads.
Have joined.
Have joined.
32Majel-Susan
>31 -pilgrim-: I've joined, too, now.
33Karlstar
>27 BookstoogeLT: >29 -pilgrim-: >30 Majel-Susan: If you do take the discussion elsewhere, let us know the final destination in case we want to follow along!
34BookstoogeLT
>31 -pilgrim-: & >32 Majel-Susan: I've joined as well. Seems like a nice little quiet place to have a discussion on one of Williams books.
Just so you both know, I only have The Place of the Lions, The Greater Trumps and Shadows of Ecstasy available to me.
>33 Karlstar: Will do! When we get going I'll put up a post here with a link.
Just so you both know, I only have The Place of the Lions, The Greater Trumps and Shadows of Ecstasy available to me.
>33 Karlstar: Will do! When we get going I'll put up a post here with a link.
36Majel-Susan
>34 BookstoogeLT: I have access to all three of those books, so any one of them will be good with me.
37haydninvienna
I’ve joined as well, and I might join in a group read. As far which book, I’d vote for The Place of the Lion. I have it, read it a long time ago, and would read it again.
38-pilgrim-
>37 haydninvienna: I have all three. I tried The Greater Trumps a long time ago; I would want some more practice with Williams' thinking before I attempt it again.
The Place of the Lion sounds good to me. However, I am an unlikely to be available to start this month. Mid-April sounds much more viable.
The Place of the Lion sounds good to me. However, I am an unlikely to be available to start this month. Mid-April sounds much more viable.
40Karlstar
>39 BookstoogeLT: Oh no! Maybe you won't find that one quite as bizarre as I did.
41MrsLee
I'm watching Masterpiece: Inspector Lewis, season 8, episode 3, part one, called Magnum Opus.
I mention it here because it is full of references to Charles Williams.
I mention it here because it is full of references to Charles Williams.
42BookstoogeLT
>40 Karlstar: Oh, weird, bizarre, some other word having the same meaning. This book is ALL that and I'm looking forward to writing up my review of it once I'm finished.
>41 MrsLee: Interesting. Williams seems to have pretty much disappeared from the modern literary scene and I have to wonder when that process began. Is Lewis an ongoing show or an older one?
>41 MrsLee: Interesting. Williams seems to have pretty much disappeared from the modern literary scene and I have to wonder when that process began. Is Lewis an ongoing show or an older one?
43BookstoogeLT
>38 -pilgrim-: Then The Place of the Lion it is. I'm good with waiting until you feel up to it, which will also give Majel-Susan time and let any others who might be interested have time to find a copy.
45MrsLee
>42 BookstoogeLT: It has eight seasons. I found it on the PBS channel through Amazon. The series has a LOT of literary references.
46BookstoogeLT
>45 MrsLee: I just checked it out on Prime and it was made just in '08 or so. Color me (pleasantly) surprised that something so new would have such references. That's a big point in its favor.
48haydninvienna
>41 MrsLee: Season 9, actually. But it's available here on Amazon Prime and I may watch it this evening.
49MrsLee
>41 MrsLee: I don't think season 9 is available here. One thing I noticed, the descriptions for episodes are messed up on Amazon, so you never really know the plot of the episode you are going to watch.
51BookstoogeLT
Just had an interesting time reading up in the New Features Group, specifically the powers being considered for admin's of groups. They seem to be leaning more towards moderators than admins.
I suspect my group days are very numbered.
I suspect my group days are very numbered.
52Karlstar
They are leaning that way, but it is still up to the admin whether they act like a moderator or not. I'll likely avoid groups that require a moderator. I'm only really active in 2 groups, so that's easy to do.
53BookstoogeLT
>52 Karlstar: The fact that it is even a consideration tells me more than I need to know. And considering that Tim represents everything typical "Massachusetts" tells me the rest.
Getting along is more important than anything, even free speech, to these people.
Getting along is more important than anything, even free speech, to these people.
54BookstoogeLT
Just started a topic over in the Inkling's group for the Charles Williams group read. Feel free to star it so you see when it actually starts up.
https://www.librarything.com/topic/330683#n7456439
Cheers.
https://www.librarything.com/topic/330683#n7456439
Cheers.
55Karlstar
>54 BookstoogeLT: Thanks, I can follow along without joining.
56BookstoogeLT
>55 Karlstar: No problem. I figured people might want to check in but not have enough interest to join a whole other group :-)
57-pilgrim-
My apologies; I realise that April has passed, and May too, without my being available for the planned Williams' read.
58BookstoogeLT
>57 -pilgrim-: I wouldn't worry about it. Williams broke my weirdometer and I'm in no place to talk about him rationally.
59MrsLee
>58 BookstoogeLT: I was wondering if that would happen after watching the show about him on Endeavor. Lol
60-pilgrim-
>59 MrsLee: I don't think Ib can access that. Can you tell me more?
61MrsLee
>60 -pilgrim-: Not really without breaking pub rules. I will send you a private message later. I'm at work now.