Forgotten Classics and Other Lesser Known Books (or No One Has Read this but Me!) discussion

Thanks for all of your responses to the message I sent out yesterday. Before doing anything rash, I thought we should create a discussion thread here, but I have to warn you that I have several more active groups competing for my time, so my interest is limited, and my personal view is that we should consider allowing this group to die.

I thought I should share some of the comments in the replies:
"Perhaps there should be a moderator who will add 'forgotten classics' to a group bookshelf, and then monthly polls can draw from a pool of books, rather than people racking their brains for an obscure classic every month (or, even more discouraging, nominating a book again and again only to see it lose)." [Fine, but it won't be me!]

"Since there are two categories of book- classics and neglected, maybe there could be two bookshelves, with the two types alternating for book of the month." [I agree that we were never very clear about the distinction, and alternation might make things easier]

"Perhaps it would make the group more active if we make some topics about forgotten books in regards to today's social life or something like that. That is, probably some topics "for fun" would spark the interest.
"

"Perhaps the trouble lies, and always has, from the divided nature of its commonality. Both forgotten classics and under appreciated works. We'd need at least 7-10 readers regularly participating to make it satisfying and not burdensome.
"
"Loving the group. Hope the group can increase. Happy to help once I've got to grips with this!"

"Choose books that are in the public domain."

"And make sure that announcements go out.. I don't recall seeing call for March nom's or Feb poll in my email (and I don't use notification system)." [Mea culpa - this is really Luella's group and the only reason I started those nomination threads was because she has been very quiet recently]

"Sorry, so far I've just not been very interested in most selections. Group idea is fine, but people have other calls and will only read titles of interest."

"I certainly like this group. I like the books that we read. I would like to see it continuing."

"I enjoy the books nominated/chosen to read in this group. Maybe it will never be a large group of commentators, as the subject are lesser known works."

Note that some of you said more, but these are the comments that were specifically about this group.

I am not proposing to do anything without consultation and polling, just thought I should let you know where I stand.

carissa, why go somewhere else?
If there are ppl here who want to discuss lesser-known gems, they should simply do so, no?

maybe instead of setting up polls & nominations etc... set up 'buddy reads' on a very casual basis.

For example, I could just set up a thread for Crome Yellow, record some of my thoughts and questions about it, and at any time if anyone ever wanted to chime in, there it would be.

Cheryl wrote: "carissa, why go somewhere else?
If there are ppl here who want to discuss lesser-known gems, they should simply do so, no?

maybe instead of setting up polls & nominations etc... set up 'buddy rea..."

I agree. It does seem a bit silly setting up polls and nominations for less than 10 people. But there is no reason why we can not do buddy reads together.

I cant see that getting more members will help much. There are already about 80 members but the problem is that most of them are not active. Somehow we need to reactivate these people.

I dont see anything wrong with a very small group reading and discussing these forgotten gems.

I think people don't want to make a nomination because they can't/don't want to commit to leading the discussion. Perhaps just have a monthly folder and let people comment and question without actually having a leader.

I haven't been able to find some of the books from my library etc so I know I haven't been a very good participant.

Hugh, I know how hard it is to keep something going when everything falls to you, so I can understand if you think it's best to fold the group.

Thanks for all of your contributions. I am happy to keep things as they are as far as March, since we have already got a couple of nominations for that, so there is plenty of time to think, and no need to change anything yet. If we do decide to stop, I don't see any need to delete the group...

carissa wrote: "I agree with you Hugh.
I don't want to moderate this group, even though I really do enjoy the books mentioned and read.
Perhaps the few of us who want to read/discuss these lesser known gems can ..."

Carissa, both the Catching up on Classics and Women's Literature Classics Enthusiasts have Buddy Reads folders where members can set up threads for arranged buddy reads. The category for which there's no home is the lesser-known but not meeting the 50+ test. In reality, though, while we can always PM each other if we have a passion to read something specific, without a nominating and non-pressured voting process, and with the plentiful ideas and impulsive conversations that occur across other group threads, the likelihood is low of that occurring.

I'm delighted that the creation of this group provided an opportunity for several of us to get to know one another better and exchange bookish thoughts. Without the interest of five to ten regulars in participating in real-time in monthly group reads, I don't see it sustaining itself over time. The GR group landscape is filled with groups that exist but where 10-12 threads were last updated a year or more previously. Joining or staying in one of those groups is the online equivalent of talking aloud in an empty million square foot museum.

Thanks for initiating this thread, and for all you've done to grow this group, Hugh.

carissa wrote: "I'll check those groups out Carol!
I guess, for me, doing whatever we want in this group feels like squatting. It's not within the parameters set by the moderators...etc...
I like the idea of PM'i..."

Cool. Interesting, for grins and giggles, that there is a buddy reads thread in this group that no one has ever used.

I regularly buddy read with another GR friend who belongs to no groups. It works because I'm very flexible in terms of what we read, and we are both committed to the buddy read once we agree to it. It does take personal effort.

In any event. Carry on :)

Sandy (CA) wrote: "Carol, thanks for mentioning those two other groups. I tend to be more inclined to read the 50+ category myself since they are in the public domain. Availability is a problem for the more recent le..."

At the risk of being overly-focused on details, copyright in the US extends for the life of the author PLUS 50 or 75 or 120, depending on whether a work was in its renewal term in 1976. I am less familiar with English copyright duration. Only noting this because only reading books in the public domain tends to eliminate most 20th Century works, and virtually all works translated into English. That, of course, is each reader's choice. Kindle does seem to offer many pre 1900 works free or for .99 which is a treat for those not wedded as I typically am to print.

I think you have to be a moderator to edit the group bookshelf

carissa wrote: "Carol wrote: "Cool. Interesting, for grins and giggles, that there is a buddy reads thread in this group that no one has ever used. ..."

Should we start adding books we want to read to the shelf? ..."

If we use this thread, those who review group notifications will get a prompt to check out the posted message.

https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

As an aside, the algorithm for GR groups is driven by recency of postings on any thread. Use of the games threads are part of what has kept this group's messages displayed higher up in group notifications etc, so continued life is directly tied to volume of communications. A "what are you reading?" Or " what did you finish?" thread, if routinely populated, also keep this group in our notifications and help maintain engagement.

Hugh wrote: "I think you have to be a moderator to edit the group bookshelf"

True, at the moment. That's a choice, however. I am active in two other (lightly populated) groups where all members can add books, create and populate folders etc. Opening up the controls here could be part of the strategy.

Carol wrote: "Hugh wrote: "I think you have to be a moderator to edit the group bookshelf"

True, at the moment. That's a choice, however. I am active in two other (lightly populated) groups where all members ca..."

Well spotted - I wasn't aware of that option but I can see where it is. I am quite sympathetic to buddy reads but we could end up with even more discussions with low levels of participation...

Hugh wrote: "Carol wrote: "Hugh wrote: "I think you have to be a moderator to edit the group bookshelf"

True, at the moment. That's a choice, however. I am active in two other (lightly populated) groups where ..."

True that.

Sandy (CA) wrote: "Carol wrote: "At the risk of being overly-focused on details, copyright in the US extends for the life of the author PLUS 50 or 75 or 120, depending on whether a work was in its renewal term in 197..."

Understood. And I so wish I could enlarge the font size of some Kindle reads. Penguin Classics? Never again for this reader. I probably source 35% of my reads from the library, but our county system is atrocious for translated fiction, so used books and bookstores are key to my happiness.

Hi all -- good discussion. I saw Hugh's message and wanted to get on to respond rather just to him directly. I like much of the ideas said here. I have only been active on GR for less than a year, and I find that Buddy Reads have been a true winner for me. Yes, they may have less participants, but they are interested participants. Though if participation in the group in general is low, then that may not work. I completely agree with the Public Domain requirement. Accessibility was a problem for me. The first read Belinda was the only one I actually participated in because I could read through Gutenberg or listen through Librovox, did a bit of both. After that, I found my time limited to participate.

One suggestion that I don't think has been mentioned is to spread out the group reads. Rather than monthly, what about bi-monthly or quarterly? That may help.

Anyways, if this group decides to die, it was a good idea, just difficult to execute, clearly.

I have updated the bookshelf settings and also changed the polls setting so that both can now be edited by all members. This should minimise the amount of moderation required and allow us to keep the group going on a less formal basis.

Good!

I've started threads for some titles that I plan to read in the Buddies folder. Come join me for any of those books, or post your lesser-known want-to-reads and maybe I'll join you! :)

Thank you Hugh!