SWG Re-read - Opinions wanted!
Mar. 16th, 2014 07:39 pm![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png)
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
Hi all! Chapter-wise, we’re nearly a third of the way through The Silmarillion and we have a few questions we’d like your opinions on. Also, if there’s anything else about the reread you want to tell us (how we’re doing, things we could do better, things we’re doing well, etc.), please do so!
[Poll #1960833]
Thank you for taking the time to help us. See you next chapter!
[Poll #1960833]
Thank you for taking the time to help us. See you next chapter!
no subject
Date: 2014-03-16 07:02 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-03-16 07:17 pm (UTC)Not a fan of the Alternate Versions section
Date: 2014-03-16 07:15 pm (UTC)HoMe is necessarily going to come up, the occasional reference is welcome in a lively discussion of the text we are supposed to be focusing on. But a number of people have not read those HoMe volumes (I have more than once and I cannot frigging remember all those alternative names and/or I have parts which I think enhance The Silmarillion text and others which are really annoying and distracting.)
I would like to see a poll on which volumes of HoMe people have actually read.
Re: Not a fan of the Alternate Versions section
Date: 2014-03-16 08:30 pm (UTC)If this was Silm-focussed, I would participate, but on the other hand, I a not going to tell people what they should or should not discuss, so I just don't join in.
Edit. I didn't even know there was a recc's section, but I am all for recc's!
no subject
Date: 2014-03-17 03:35 pm (UTC)Out of curiosity: You honestly didn't notice the Fanworks rec posts that Indy has been putting up separately after each fortnight's chapter Discussion post? If that's the case for others, too, that might explain the lack of responses!
no subject
Date: 2014-03-17 06:56 pm (UTC)I didn't see it, no. I would have recc-d something otherwise, (If I knew stories that were pertinent) even if I didn't join with the chapter discussions. I do enjoy recc-ing!
no subject
Date: 2014-03-17 07:01 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-03-18 01:15 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-03-18 10:57 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-03-16 09:50 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-03-17 03:29 pm (UTC)Do you have any suggestions how we could encourage discussion about the aspects that you'd like to talk about more? Naturally, you're extremely welcome to start that sort of discussion in a comment yourself, but as many people don't seem to read or respond to other people's comments, maybe we can provide a little push in the main post. I just don't have any ideas how to do that, right now. >_>
Indy and I have actually talked about such a poll, too! Not as part of this project (which after all isn't meant to be primarily about HoME ;)) - but out of sheer curiosity.
no subject
Date: 2014-03-17 08:38 pm (UTC)That was, of course, was the first thing I thought about after I posted that comment. That instead of whining, the more productive approach is to raise the points I'd like to discuss instead of complaining after the fact. I have a tendency in these discussions so far to be more reactive to the comments than raising the things that interest me in the texts themselves. I haven't even added my own favorite passages for the most part, although it had occurred to me to do so a few times.
I could try that, and will, but as you say people tend to respond to a few select items only. But one will never know if one doesn't try. I guess I would perhaps modify my stance on HoMe as part of the prompted discussion, to maybe wishing it would a little less prominent. I also thought about how irresistible it is to refer to those earlier versions (in my case, for example, in my character bios).
no subject
Date: 2014-03-17 07:54 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-03-16 07:30 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-03-16 07:54 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-03-17 03:39 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-03-17 05:54 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-03-17 06:26 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-03-17 07:53 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-03-17 07:58 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-03-18 01:11 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-03-18 03:43 pm (UTC)I honestly don't know!
no subject
Date: 2014-03-16 09:40 pm (UTC)"Food for thought": I like those sections. They do provide food for thought, even when they don't inspire comment or fic.
"Alternate versions": Most of us have absorbed them to some extent, through fan fic or electronic resources, if not directly from HoME. I find the section helpful--nobody forces people to actually discuss it. Perhaps the Food for Thought section has focussed a little more on these versions than necessary, although I personally didn't mind.
Oh, and I like the Favourite Quotes section, just wanted to mention that!
no subject
Date: 2014-03-17 01:44 am (UTC)And I think the "alternate versions" are interesting for very similar reasons: they help me remember what is Silm-canon, what is pure fanon, and what is based on something more obscure. Also, I imagine they will be a great resource in the future.
no subject
Date: 2014-03-17 03:48 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-03-17 03:47 pm (UTC)I hear you on the SSPs. I feel embarrassed whenever I do one of those, too. >_>
The purpose of the Alternate Versions section actually was to provide people with a handy overview of stuff from the HoME so they know (roughly) what else is there, without forcing anyone to read all those books themselves (or discussing their contents if they don't want to). Doesn't seem to work for everyone, though. Thank you for pointing out the connection between our Food for Thought questions and the perceived focus on HoME - I guess we'll have to pay better attention to that.
Glad you like the Favourite Quotes! :)
no subject
Date: 2014-03-16 11:03 pm (UTC)Alternate versions: considering that the Silm is a construct that CT made out of all the different versions, I don't think they can be left out. Maybe focus on the main bigger differences between the published Silm and HoMe?
Food for Thought: I like it. It helps to kick off and organize the discussion.
Recs: I haven't recced anything (shame on me) but I'll agree with Lignota about the reasons why not. I think it's useful and interesting to be reminded of / discover stories.
no subject
Date: 2014-03-17 03:55 pm (UTC)We can try that, though of course it's hard to draw the line between "main difference" and "ignore this"! So far, we've been trying to stuff everything in (or as much as possible, anyway) so people wouldn't accuse us of hushing up some detail that we might have found insignificant but someone else finds really important. ;) With the last chapter, due to the wealth of changes and developments, that was really hard - which is why we posed the question.
Good to know that the rec posts are appreciated even if there isn't always a lot going on there (for various reasons)! :)
no subject
Date: 2014-03-17 07:19 am (UTC)I am not doing much with the fanworks post because I feel like those would mostly be better enjoyed if I was more familiar with the lore.
no subject
Date: 2014-03-17 04:01 pm (UTC)Possibly! Though some people have come to the fandom without having read the Silmarillion first, purely through consuming fanfic. While that may not work for everyone, it goes to show that you don't have to be 100% familiar with the lore to enjoy fanfic based on it. ;)
no subject
Date: 2014-03-18 08:23 am (UTC)I could likely enjoy the fanfic, but I kind of want to form my own ideas about things before I start imprinting fanon. As I've commented before, now that I am actually reading the Silmarillion itself I'm finding that it's stories are pretty different from the summaries I've read and what I've seen fans claim about it. I should have read it myself long ago, but based on what I'd heard about it I thought I would dislike it and that it would interfere with my love for LOTR. That has not been the case however. Still, I want to finish and sort through my own thoughts on it before I dive in fanfic.
no subject
Date: 2014-03-18 10:59 am (UTC)