Catching up on Classics (and lots more!) discussion

Hello everybody!

I thought about making The Mists of Avalon part of my Bingo challenge. Most likely as Prize Winning Female Author.

Already two others are interested in reading along. Anybody else?

If so, for when should we schedule the buddy read?

I'd like to join but this month would be difficult. Mid February or later would be better.

Nice Phil! I´m also little booked (haha) this month and February maybe too. But I think I can manage what ever you decide!

Wonderful!

I'm also in favour of the second half of February (in the first half we can get the other group reads "out of the way") or later.
I'm quite flexible from mid-February onwards, so whatever works best for you!

Mid-Feb sounds great! Thanks for organizing it!

No problem, Phil!

I'll probably get the eBook. Any printed edition I found was at least 10€ more expensive. I also found an audio book on Audible read by the wonderful Davina Porter. It's the longest I've ever seen so far: 50 hours!!! My longest ever were the Ken Follett and Song of Ice and Fire ones with around 45 hours.

I loved this book too! One of my favorites. Unfortunately I don't think I'll have time for a reread anytime soon, but I hope you all enjoy it!

Christine wrote: "I loved this book too! One of my favorites. Unfortunately I don't think I'll have time for a reread anytime soon, but I hope you all enjoy it!"

Thank you, Christine!
It is very long indeed.

Should we fix 2/15 as the start date then?

Sure!

I just found this thread. I'd like to join, but I can't promise for I'll start a new job in February. Will there be a more detailed timeframe or schedule or are you going to make that up as you go? It would help me decide if I can join. I have my copy here, so no problem with that :)

Sam wrote: "I just found this thread. I'd like to join, but I can't promise for I'll start a new job in February. Will there be a more detailed timeframe or schedule or are you going to make that up as you go?..."

It's long and (in my opinion) fairly heavy. I would suggest a time frame of at least three weeks and probably more like a month and a half.

Everyone's speed is a little different. My speed on this book is affected by longer than average chapters, a lack of cliffhangeriness in general, and my living circumstances (full time job and two small children).

2/15 works fine for me! And I would also vote for a little longer time frame, since it´s a little hectic sometimes.
Does anybody know is the book divided somehow? Only in chapters or also in bigger portions?
I was just wondering would it be stupid to divide it in sections and then have different conversations about them, so we can discuss the book before we finish and also not spoil it.
We did that with Foucault´s Pendulum and I liked it!

Desertorum wrote: "2/15 works fine for me! And I would also vote for a little longer time frame, since it´s a little hectic sometimes.
Does anybody know is the book divided somehow? Only in chapters or also in bigger..."

It is divided into 4 books, all about the same length, plus a very short prologue. Each book consists of chapters, at least there are initials in my copy, but no chapter titles, so this might differ in different editions.

I like the approach by sections. But again, I can't promise to partake, so don't count my vote here.

I'm also in favour of sections. One per book? With a separate thread each?

The book is really long, so I'm also all for a longer timeframe. With our usual categories it would fall into the quaterly long read. Should we, therefore, also go for a three months period? Then Sam could join without problems.

Phil wrote: "I'm also in favour of sections. One per book? With a separate thread each?

The book is really long, so I'm also all for a longer timeframe. With our usual categories it would fall into the quaterl..."

Yes I would join then :)

I will join then or at a later date if that's when you start. How quickly do you envision reading through this? That matters too. Will there be a reading schedule? I think it's been said before, but a schedule keeps us discussing together.

Xan Shadowflutter wrote: "I will join then or at a later date if that's when you start. How quickly do you envision reading through this? That matters too. Will there be a reading schedule? I think it's been said before, bu..."

We are still discussing the time frame, so go ahead and suggest something.

I think a schedule is not such a bad idea, as long as it's not too tight. I believe we all have enough obligations in our lives (e.g. I'm preparing for my final law school exam, which over here contains all subjects ever studied in four years of university) not to have to worry about a reading schedule for something that should be stress free and fun.
But reading together is important.

So each book is about little over 200 pages? And there is four, so is it little hard to divide in 3 months? Is two weeks too short time for one book? Or is one month too long?
Other ideas how to divide? I´m already having fun with the planning ;)

Desertorum wrote: "So each book is about little over 200 pages? And there is four, so is it little hard to divide in 3 months? Is two weeks too short time for one book? Or is one month too long?
Other ideas how to di..."

If every book got two weeks, that would put it at two months, which seems reasonable to me. If we wanted longer, I suppose three weeks per book would put us at three months.

I'm also having fun with the planning ;) .

I believe two weeks per book should be doable.

Phil wrote: "I'm also in favour of sections. One per book? With a separate thread each?..."

We ask that Buddy Reads keep to one thread per book please.

Thank you for the information, Kathy!

Then we'll simply use spoiler tags, what do you think?
In order to really read together keeping the schedule would be useful, right? If we all keep to the schedule the spoiler tags maybe won't be necessary. Then, on the other hand, they aren't overly complicated and may help all the late comers who are most welcome, in my opinion. The more the merrier!

Spoiler tags and perhaps the first line of a post could say where in the book you are at?

Kathy wrote: "Spoiler tags and perhaps the first line of a post could say where in the book you are at?"

I like that! It specifies the range of the spoiler ahead.

Thank you for your help, Kathy! I'm completely new to buddy reads, so it does make things easier.

I think you will enjoy the buddy read.

Hey guys!
February 15th is approaching, so I thought I might put up the reading schedule we agreed on (we did, right?):

Week #1+2 (2/15-28): Prologue + Book 1
Week #3+4 (2/29-3/13): Book 2
Week #5+6 (3/14-27): Book 3
Week #7+8 (3/28-4/10): Book 4 + Epilogue

Looks Good.

Let's go for it!

I'm in. I always wanted to read this but things (other books) kept on getting in the way. I got the audiobook by the fantastic Davina Porter. Still on the hunt for a physical copy, maybe get one this weekend!!

Fran wrote: "I'm in. I always wanted to read this but things (other books) kept on getting in the way. I got the audiobook by the fantastic Davina Porter. Still on the hunt for a physical copy, maybe get one th..."

Welcome!
I've got the Kindle copy, but right at this moment I'm listening to Moll Flanders read by Davina Porter ;) .

Tomorrow we start. HAPPY READING everybody!!!

First question: What are the spoiler rules? Can we start talking about Part 1 now, or do we wait until Feb. 28?

Second question: I'm curious to know what brings people to this book. Why are you reading it? Here's my answer:

I was a big fantasy fan in my teens, but I gave up on the genre because it got too formulaic. This was in the '90s when Terry Brooks was king. Years later, I discovered on the internet that there were a lot of fantasy classics I hadn't read, so I'm going back to read them now. At this point, Mists of Avalon, The Stand, and Magician: Apprentice are the three biggest fantasy classics that I'm missing. I'm coming to this book as a fan of the genre who's looking for something that's not a Tolkien copy.

I don´t have answer to the first one but what comes to the second one:

I have been a huge fantasy fan after reading LotR (when I was probably 12 years) but also for me in some point, it was hard to find interesting fantasy to read. And also before goodreads I had no idea about the classics in this genre I have missed. So here I am, trying to correct that :)

Great pics!

I actually thought that the author was male but turns out I was wrong :) I don´t know why I thought so. I also wanted to read a little more about her and run into some disturbing things...I´m trying to ignore them to enjoy the book. I don´t say more, if you want to know, it´s easy to find. Otherwise, just enjoy the book!

I started yesterday and haven't gotten that far, but already I see several themes developing, and was wondering what all you think?.

Matriarchal vs Patriarchal society
Polytheism vs Monotheism (Paganism vs Christianity)
Myth vs Reality

Myth in the sense of wonder and possibilities. I've already read several times that our view of the world shapes the world. A world in which the subject (the individual) isn't just along for the ride but affects reality.

Desertorum wrote: "Great pics!

I actually thought that the author was male but turns out I was wrong :) I don´t know why I thought so. I also wanted to read a little more about her and run into some disturbing thin..."

I read this long ago, so long ago all I remember is my reaction (pleasure) to the story and not the details. That is one reason I am rereading it. But another is I too have read what you have read about the author (and husband), and I want to see if this affects my reaction to the story or, now that I know this, I can see things in the story I did not see before.

About spoilers.... Why don't we say "spoilers for book x" and then put spoiler tags. This way everybody knows which tags they can open and potential newcomers could join later in the game. What do you think?

It's my first time reading the book. Apart from having visited Tintagel, having listened to a free Arthur documentary on Audible, having seen a production of the Holy Grail musical and having watched the take on Arthur of Once Upon a Time I have no experience in Arthurian world. I've always wanted to read Le Morte d'Arthur: King Arthur and the Legends of the Round Table and The History of the Kings of Britain which were referenced in the documentary, but Mists sounded like an easier-to-read entrance in the subject. Besides, I'm a huge A Song of Ice and Fire fan and very actively listening to podcasts, following Youtube channels and reading essays about analysis and in-world history. In one of the many podcasts somebody stated that there were many parallels of aSoIaF and Arthurian legend. As it was not the topic of the episode they never gave examples. I decided to puzzle it out for myself before reading the corrisponding essays, so here I go!

My first reactions (I think I'm nearly done with book one) where "I bet she was/is a feminist. As a woman I have generally nothing against matriarchal society ;). In a time without DNA testing the point of knowing only the mother for sure does make sense. The idea of all the gods being the same god is highly up-to-date in our generation of religious conflict. And yes, I've already found some parallels to aSoIaF."
I find the story written in a most enthralling kind of way. (view spoiler)[Especially Morgaine's experiences in the two herb enhanced rituals were so beautifully delivered from her perspective that I felt all the magic, confusion, fear and the slightly surreal atmosphere. After finishing those chapters I felt like surfacing from the deep sea back into the real world. I was very sad indeed that the priestess training is not explained at all. But isn't it a more common thing of Fantasy authors to refrain from explaining where magic comes from and how exactly it works? aSoIaF is the same so far. I was also a bit disappointed that Arthur did not draw the sword out of the stone. (hide spoiler)]

Phil wrote: "In one of the many podcasts somebody stated that there were many parallels of aSoIaF and Arthurian legend.."

I thought it was mainly based on the War of the Roses. York=Stark, Lancaster=Lannister

Phil wrote: "I thought it was mainly based on the War of the Roses. York=Stark, Lancaster=Lannister "

The first book focuses mainly on that, yes. But there is soooooo much more in there. Literary influences like Lovecraft and history, religion and legend en masse.

Phil wrote: "My first reactions (I think I'm nearly done with book one) where "I bet she was/is a feminist."

I knew this was a feminist book going in, but I'm shocked by the kind of feminism it represents. I'd like to finish Part One before I comment any more, but it doesn't really equate with feminism that I encounter today.

As far as the author's private life goes, my reader's conscience tells me to ignore it and focus on the work. I never do, though. The crimes and the book were created by the same person, and I keep thinking that they have to intersect.

I'm so glad I saw this, even though I'm late! I joined this month and besides Middlemarch, I haven't found a book that I "love" for my first read. This is perfect. I'm a King Arthur fan who has just never gotten around to this, though I do own it and I'm going to jump in and see if I can catch up. How exciting!

Hi Candace -- I hope this book will be perfect for your first read with us.

WELCOME, Cadance!
Wow, you honour us a lot by choosing us to be your first book! It's my first buddy read, so we've got lot's of firsts^^.
I wouldn't say you're too late! You still have one week and a day to read book one and be perfectly on time.

Phil wrote: "Phil wrote: "My first reactions (I think I'm nearly done with book one) where "I bet she was/is a feminist."

I knew this was a feminist book going in, but I'm shocked by the kind of feminism it re..."

Looking forward to your comments!
Although I'm a woman and certainly for equal rights, I've never really thought about Feminism as an organized idea. My friends and me do talk a lot about our future and the problems we see (especially with family and job), but with more practical than ideological resolutions in mind. Plus, I have no clue about the author's background.
Thus, I am in not really biased and can look at the book from an outsider's perspective.
I think a purely matriarchal society is as bad as a purely patriachal one. Wasn't it Aristotle who said that the medium is best?
The Goddess religion and Christianity play the parts of opposite contenders. However, as I said before, in a society without DNA testing a geneological line through the mother makes more sense. Also, the more open way of seeing all gods as one looks way more sympathetic and human to me. If we could all believe that today our world might be better off with regards to wars. Then again, I guess wars are in the nature of men and if not for religion they would find another excuse. *heavy sigh*

Thanks everyone for welcome. I did start reading this morning,paused to check emails, and I am surprised by how much I love her writing. I just finished My Name Is Lucy Bartonand the real reason I was having such a hard time finding my next read is because MNiLB was such a thought-provoking read for me and I think I was looking to duplicate that. ((btw the writing was very sparse and condensed. The subject matter very realistic.) Obviously what I needed was something totally different!

As to the discussion above about the line through the mother, I have some first-hand experience with that. I must be in a sharing mood! (I always am! The more we learn,right?) Im a Southern Baptist who married a Jew. I had learned early that my husband very much wanted our children to be Jewish and that in the Jewish religion the children can only be Jewish if the mother is Jewish. You can imagine the conversions this encouraged. A couple of years later the Reform Judaism Council announced that they would accept a person as Jewish if Either of the parents is jewish And the child is raised Jewish. This applies just to Reform Jews. There are three classifications of Jews: Reform -the most worldliest- I mean no disrespect. This is half of my husbands family. Conservative- a little more strict than reform. More Hebrew spoken in services. You must get a Jewish divorce called a get before you can legally remarry a Jew. Orthodox- Extremely Religious. Do not drive, cook or do work of any kind on Shabbat. They usually wear their head covering at all times and not just in temple as the other jews.

I did not mean to give a lesson on Jews,only wanted to let you know that it is a very small section of Jews that have recently opted out of the matrilineal line for purposes of the child's community,culture, religion, etc. In a time when there are more and more inter-faith marriages, this seems harsh to me. This all happening in a time of paternity testing.

Candace wrote: "Thanks everyone for welcome. I did start reading this morning,paused to check emails, and I am surprised by how much I love her writing. I just finished My Name Is Lucy Bartonand th..."

That is so very interesting. THANK YOU for sharing! I thought I had read something like it, but wasn't sure about it, so I didn't want to advance it as a point.
Would you say that Jewish culture is generally matriarchal? With my non existing half-knowledge (based mainly on historical fiction) I'd say no. Please enlighten me! If not, do you know of any reason (besides the tradition of this rule and the missing gene tests in the past) for this curious mix between matriarchal and patriarchal?
In some religions (I think Christianity and Islam) the father (= head of the family) decides on the children's religion. Maybe because he lays down the general rules of how things word. Perhaps Judaism focuses more on the mother's role in upbringing and education (this would point to an overall patriarchal society) and thus on the possibility of influencing her children.

*Minor spoilers for pt. 1

I am baffled by this book's portrayal of birth and motherhood. Bradley seems to regard motherhood as a painful obligation at best. The entire first part is riddled with women who are angry at having to bear children. The only positive moment I can find is Viviane's description of the mix of "joy and pain" she had for her first child. The child then dies young, so there is no positive long-term maternal relationship to be found in the book. I would think that a book concerned with the spiritual power of women would have kinder things to say about the miracle of childbirth or the strength and wisdom of motherhood.

This is particularly striking when I compare it to my own life. My wife and I are currently expecting our third child. Childbirth and breastfeeding were transformative, empowering events in my wife's life. The realization that her body is strong and that she can do amazing things changed the way she sees herself and women in general.

The specific moment this happened was after our first child was born. In the US, formula companies (Enfamil and Simulac) somehow get the names of new parents and mail them tons of free samples, in the hopes of creating new customers. The samples are accompanied with sympathetic little notes that say things like, "Breastfeeding is so hard. Let us ease the load." My wife and I had a growing pile of formula samples just in case breastfeeding didn't work out. One day, my wife realized that she was breastfeeding successfully, and she threw all the samples in the trash. She could do it, in spite of what the formula companies were telling her.

This book (as yet) contains none of that empowerment. Instead, it contains Avalon, which sounds like an oppressive hellhole as far as I can tell.

Phil wrote: "Candace wrote: "Thanks everyone for welcome. I did start reading this morning,paused to check emails, and I am surprised by how much I love her writing. I just finished [book:My Name Is Lucy Barton..."

Thanks Phil! I can only speak for the Reform and the Conservative movements as those are the conversion classes I took and therefore was taught what felt like everything (I studied intensely for over a year. First, in a class with others, but more intensely later with my Rabbi who assigned individual work. Then I was tested by a beit dein, a trial by three rabbis from my community. ) I'd say Reform and Conservative teach equality in parenting and in all things I can think of. It was in that class that I was taught that it was for DNA/paternity purposes that the religion held this tenet of Judaism going down through the mother.(Even though the Reform Society issued the new rule ,the old rule has been around for so long, and the Conservatives still abide by it, that many are afraid the new rule may not be honored.) I do not know how Orthodox treat the subject of equality or if there is much or more emphasis on a male line. It is almost as if they are a separate religion. While Conservative and Reform often visit each other's Temples, the orthodox do not. In fact, I believe the sexes sit on separate sides of temple (in the Orthodox Temple) which makes me wonder if there aren't some differences in this area. I did not learn anything about the Orthodox in my Conversion class, except I seem to remember learning that they don't accept conversions! But that was 2005. However, they are like their own secret society that I wish I could sneak in and watch their religious ceremony.

This all reminds me of the Barbara Streisand movie where she pretends to be a boy so she can study the Torah. I can't remember the name but it's great! She must have belonged to some sect of Orthodox. Or maybe at one time everybody was Orthodox! But now in Phoenix, a large city, we have an openly gay female Rabbi at a conservative Temple. Coming from the Bible belt South that taught that men should resolve all impasses in the household, and women should not withhold sex from their husbands as it is how husbands get their feelings of intimacy and closeness from the relationship, while women get those necessary feelings from the man telling her regularly how much he loves her (talk about making a young woman have feelings of guilt and shame)- learning about Judaism was one of the more freeing things in my life. (I'm just now realizing how much.) I've always known both religions will forever be a part of who I am, but Judaism made me a more open, less critical person. I'm really lucky to have had both as part of my life. Enough about my religious experiences, I promise.

But I did skip to the back of my copy today to read the letter by Diana Paxson , wow, just, wow...