Any interest in a General Literature or Book Discussion Forum

[OrwellwasRight]

on the DU?

A couple of us were batting the idea about in another thread. Fiction, non-fiction, serious, silly? What are your ideas? Anyone else interested?

We could start with Beowulf... ;-) OK, not really.

[rwenos]

1. It Should Include Both Fiction and Non-Fiction

Like, so I can find someone to discuss "Blade Runner" on one night, and on another night Richard Hofstader's "Anti-Intellectualism in America."

Fine idea. Count me in.

[patrice]

2. Love it! An excuse to do pleasure reading!!!

Or any other useful reading, like Brock's "The Republican Noise Machine". Others would benefit from the thread whether they read the book or not.

[othermeans]

3. "I will strike him from the head to where the wind is voided" Count me in

[politicat]

4. *raises hand* oh, yes. happily.

When I was a kid, I'd "bury my nose in a book" to avoid the awful unpleasantness that was the disintegration of my parents' marriage.

The next four years sounds like a wonderful excuse to resurrect that tactic.

(Tongue in cheek, mostly.)

Pcat

[billyoc]

5. Oh, please yes.

I've had such political tunnel vision for so long, I can't remember anything else. There are probably only about 9 people in the world outside DU that I could have a conversation with at this point.

BTW, I actually feel guilty saying that, as if I'm going to not work as hard because I'm reading something else for a while. I'm in bad shape here. :crazy:

[NVMojo]

6. Love this idea! Count me in!!

[212demop]

7. Yes please! Today I got reamed--

someone said everyone's moved on; no one's talking about the election anymore! It's not even in the news! Stop with the internet!

While I don't totally agree, I do think I have to broaden my interests again- outside the sphere of politics, that is. And for God's sake, I'm a writer.

Since someone mentioned a Phillip K. Dick book, here's another I LOVE that I think is actually better than Blade Runner and actually sort of politically pertinent: The Man In The High Castle

It's a What If novel (like the new Philip Roth) that speculates about what a post WWII USA would look like if the allies had lost and America was divied up between the Japanese and Germans. It's awesome. My favorite of all Dick's books.

If we do this how will I find you guys again in the jumble of these boards?

[OrwellwasRight]

9. I guess we have to ask the mods to start a subforum somewhere?

Anyone ever tried making such a request? Would it be better coming from a 1000+ poster?

I'm already excited by the books mentioned. I've been wanting to read Blade Runner for a while (love the film) and Anti-Intellectualism in American sounds right up my alley (and a must read for activists).

Right now I'm belatedly reading The Best Democracy Money Can Buy (among other books); and, based on the post-election board formerly known as fighting and acrimony, it looks like there's already enough for Palast to write part 2!

No guilt. We're honing our political/policy knowledge and skills with the non-fiction books and getting much needed perspective with the fiction books. How's that?

[rwenos]

21. How About "We Can Remember It For You Wholesale?"

Made into a movie with "Ahnold" -- Total Recall.

[OrwellwasRight]

45. OK, I vote we start with that,

then meet back in a week on the Books--Fiction Forum.

What do you think?

[Mojambo]

8. I am definitely in. n/t

[GreenPartyVoter]

10. That would be fun. Here are some books we could consider

http://timeforachange.bluelemur.com/Arts.htm

[OrwellwasRight]

14. I'm bookmarking that site. nt

[GreenPartyVoter]

18. Thanks! :^)

------------------------------------------------------
Fight the fraud; fund the recount!
http://timeforachange.bluelemur.com/electionreform.htm

[OrwellwasRight]

11. We could add each other to our buddy lists

to get back in touch.

:hi:

[212demop]

16. or bookmark this thread

pick someone to try to get us a forum and then set a time tomorrow to reconvene here to find out if it worked out.

[Snow]

12. Jah, sure - Somebody was asking about disaster novels

appropriate to the current situation a few days ago, and of course everyone mentioned "Handmaid's Tale", but I'm reading Kim Stanley Robinson's latest, "Forty Signs of Rain", and it seems a lot closer to the mark.

[212demop]

13. Funny- I was about to read the new Margret Atwood

Can we use Buddy Lists if we haven't donated or posted 1000+?

[OrwellwasRight]

15. I think so.

I put you on mine. Just click on the disk-looking icon and see what happens.

[212demop]

17. it said I have to be a donor to be on your buddy list

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

19. Would this be sort of like an on-line book club?

Sounds cool. I'd be interested.

[212demop]

20. I'm going to bed but I'll check this thread tomorrow and see what you guys

decide to do-- I accidentally hit an icon over post #12 and now it says ignore on my page-- I hope that doesn't have an effect on anyone's communications or my future communications with whoever put up post #12. I was just trying to see what would happen if I clicked on all the icons.

Real bright, huh?

Maybe I could use some a dat book learnin right soon.

Goodnight moons.

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

22. Sounds good

[Tyrone Slothrop]

23. I'm in

This definitely sounds like a good idea.

I could use some suggestions for good books. I just finished the last batch of used that I bought.

[OrwellwasRight]

24. Some ideas for our first book

Phillip K. Dick has been suggested in a couple of responses. Do we want to start with one of those or some other sci-fi?

Dystopian novels seem especially, and sadly, relevant right now (clearly I believe we are living in a version of 1984 :tinfoilhat:) ... and then move on to some political non-fiction? Other suggestions?

Also, how long should we give ourselves to read the first book and begin discussion?

[Runcible Spoon]

25. YES PLEASE! just spare me the friggin Ayn Rand!!!!

nt

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

26. I've noticed a lot of DUers don't like Ayn Rand.

I really have no idea why. I've always found her work interesting.

[Spider Jerusalem]

31. Because...

her writing is poor, her characterisation is laughable, her plotting is a joke, her philosophy is sophomoric...really, what's to like? Mein Kampf was "interesting", too, but that doesn't make it good.

I'd need far more space and time to go into a really thorough critique of why Rand is a terrible writer and a worse philosopher, so I won't. If you think otherwise, that, of course, is your privilege, and so we shall have to agree to disagree on this.

[Runcible Spoon]

36. amen to that

well put

[OrwellwasRight]

32. I've only read tiny excerpts

But isn't her central philosophy basically "Greed is good. Every man for himself?"

I think those ideas are antithetical to most DUers.

And please correct me if I am wrong in my premise.

Are you up for the book group?

[Spider Jerusalem]

34. Her philosophy was a radical reaction to Communism...

because her well-to-do White Russian family lost everything in the Revolution. There's nothing rational about it. Freud would've found her fascinating.

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

44. Her philosophy doesn't sound so good when you simplify it.

Here's a good explanation of her philosophy that I found at this website:

http://www.objectivistcenter.org/objectivism/faqs/jraibley_faq-virtue-selfishness.asp

"Rand writes that the "exact meaning" of selfishness is "concern with one's own interests" (VOS, vii). In that work, Rand argues that a virtue is an action by which one secures and protects one's rational values—ultimately, one's life and happiness. Since a concern with one's own interests is a character trait that, when translated into action, enables one to achieve and guard one's own well-being, it follows that selfishness is a virtue. One must manifest a serious concern for one's own interests if one is to lead a healthy, purposeful, fulfilling life.

Rand understands, though, that the popular usage of the word, "selfish," is different from the meaning she ascribes to it. Many people use the adjective "selfish" to describe regard for one's own welfare to the disregard of the well-being of others. Moreover, many people would be willing to characterize any instance of desire-satisfaction in these circumstances as "selfish," no matter what its content. Thus, many people arrive at the following composite image: selfish people are brutish people who are oblivious to the negative consequences of their actions for their friends and loved ones and who abuse the patience, trust, and good will of all comers to satisfy their petty whims.

Rand certainly recognizes that there are people who fit this description, and she certainly does not believe that their behavior is in any sense virtuous. But she opposes labeling them "selfish." Rand believes that this application of the word blurs important philosophical distinctions and foreordains false philosophical doctrines. First, this understanding of selfishness construes both whim-fulfillment and the disregard of others' interests as genuinely self-interested behaviors, which they are not. Second, this understanding of selfishness suggests an altruist framework for thinking about ethics.

To elaborate on the first point: Rand believes that the elements of human self-interest are objective. All human beings have objective biological and psychological needs, and one's actual interests are identified by reference to these needs. Mere whim-fulfillment is therefore not constitutive of human well-being because one's whims might be at odds with one's actual needs. Moreover, the character traits of the "selfish" brute are not compatible with any human being's actual, rational interests. Humans live in a social world; in order to maximize the value of their interactions with others, they should cultivate a firm commitment to the virtues of rationality, justice, productiveness, and benevolence. A commitment to these virtues naturally precludes such brutish behavior. (For the Objectivist view of benevolence and its component virtues—civility, sensitivity, and generosity—see David Kelley's Unrugged Individualism: The Selfish Basis of Benevolence).

To elaborate on the second point: Rand argues that the conventional understanding of selfishness implies an altruistic framework for thinking about ethics. Within this framework, the question, "Who is the beneficiary of this act?" is the most important moral question: right acts are acts undertaken for the "benefit" of others and wrong acts are acts undertaken for one's own "benefit." Rand believes that this approach passes over the crucial ethical questions: "What are values?" and "What is the nature of the right and the good?" In addition, the altruist framework suggests a dichotomy between actions that promote the interests of others to one's own detriment and actions that promote ones own interests to the detriment of others. Rand rejects this dichotomy and affirms the harmony of human interests (cf. "The 'Conflicts' of Men's Interests," VOS 57-65)."

Rand writes, "Altruism permits no concept of a self-respecting, self-supporting man—a man who supports his own life by his own effort and neither sacrifices himself nor others … it permits no concept of benevolent co-existence among men … it permits no concept of justice" (VOS, ix).


Also, I don't think I have to agree absolutely with an author's message to enjoy or appreciate their work. Her point of view maybe be radical or different, but it is not invalid. Her books are a far cry from some piece of crap written by the likes of Hannity, O'Reilly, or Coulter. I think her ideas are more linked to traditional conservatism, and not the neocon version of it.

[WCGreen]

27. I'm in....

Reading a couple of books now......

I'd love to discuss...

I try to read one fiction and one non fiction each week...

Key word is try.....

[OrwellwasRight]

29. Each week? I'm impressed!!!

I do so much reading at work that it is sometimes difficult to motivate myself to read on weeknights.

But I agree we should do both fiction and non-fiction. Maybe shorter books like Cat's Cradle with short turn-around times and longer books we can read over a few weeks before discussing?

What are you reading right now? Besides my post...

[WCGreen]

38. Sorry, I was off reading...

A novel called a Drink before the War, crime drama by Dennis Lehane of Mystic River fame...

And a collection of Essays about Liberalism in the modern world. They are both in the bedroom and Mrs. WCGreen is fast asleep so I can't go back and get the book to get the exact title....

As soon as I am finished I am going to post some interesting things from the book. Curious, the collection was published in 1989 and it is almost eerie how dead on some of these writings are about today's condition.

Finished Imperial Hubris just last week and I have a few books by Elaine Pagala, the Gospel of Thomas and the Gnostic Gospels for the next few weeks...

Fiction, I am going to pick up It Can't Happen here by Sinclair Lewis...

I read as much as I do because I am partially disabled and only work about twenty to thirty hours a week now. So I have a lot of time, at this point in my life, to kick back and get into a good book....

[qnr]

28. Count me in. n/t

Why

are

you

looking

here?

I

said

"n/t"

[OrwellwasRight]

30. LOL

I looked because I'm clicking on all the posts here to add the posters to my buddy list so we can be sure to stay in touch and get this going.

[qnr]

33. Ahhhh - ok. heheh

[faithnotgreed]

35. would love to though will likely be only a lurker

right now my mind cannot take deep or heavy or even fully meaningful. partially meaningful is however a possibility

ill keep one eye out for the progression since i love the idea of it

[derbstyron]

37. Yes

But I'm a little biased as I am a Creative Writing/Literature major headed for graduation in May (or so he hopes and plans).
Hence my Shakespeare look. :)
...well, before I voted anyway.

[Abelman]

39. I most certainly would

I love books.

[Baja Margie]

40. Yes, that or film.

[OrwellwasRight]

41. Or, some could watch the film instead of read the book

It might be like the Seinfeld episode where George watched Breakfast at Tiffany's and therefore blew it at the book discussion by not knwoing that George Peppard's character was gay... ;-)

[motely36]

42. I would love to join

but currently I am a grad student and don;t have a lot of extra time, but I will try to keep up!

[OrwellwasRight]

43. Look, Book Forums!! Thanks, Skinner!!

Up and running!!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=205

:bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

Let's go!!

[Skinner]

48. Psst.

They were there already. I created them on Friday morning. ;-)

[deadparrot]

46. I'll be happy to, especially after November is over.

Things slow down a bit in my personal life around December 1.

[OrwellwasRight]

49. Great screen name!!

Slow down after Dec 1?

Not planning a breakup are you?

On Edit: Stupid effing typos!

[deadparrot]

50. Thanks!

[Applan]

47. Good idea

I'll bet, judging from the quality of the posts here that there are many very well read people here.
What are people's recommendation for books on Monkey Boy George.
I'm reading Fraud by Paul Waldman at the moment and would highly recommend it- 9/10

[OrwellwasRight]

51. Tell me about Fraud!

Non-fictionwise, I am reading The Best Democracy Money Can Buy and Wealth & Democracy.

Welcome to DU! :hi:

[crispini]

52. Hey, Everybody! Come by the non-fiction book forum!

We're kicking around some ideas for a group now!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=209x25

Thanks for the pointer, OrwellWasRight!

[OrwellwasRight]

53. Kick.