Reification (plus reading group suggestions)
- This topic has 39 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 10 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Maybe nominate an individual to write an opening statement/thinkpiece to kick off the proceedings? The 'library silence' idea is, I think, a good one.
Hud955 wrote:What are the group's aims? (Not necessarily obvious, and not everyone may have the same idea.)To better understand a text that at least two forum users have expressed an interest in reading
Hud955 wrote:How big do you want it to be? (Beyond a certain size it will become impossible to manage.)Who is going to be invited to join? And therefore how do you want to promote it? Do you want a membership arrangement? (Even if the membership is open to everyone, a semi-formal arrangement can sometimes help to create commitment.)Judging by my past attempts at this kind of thing we won't be swamped with people. I think the only criteria for 'membership' will be an account on the forum and to have actually read the text
Hud955 wrote:Do you want to treat this first title as a test run, and maybe keep it just to a few people? – or do you want to open it out from the word go?Maybe a bit of both for the first time. The full page ad in the Guardian can wait until later
Hud955 wrote:Do you want an open or closed group? Making it open to all is possible but could raise some problems for regular contributers who want to focus on the text and not get caught up in peripheral (or personal or political) issues from casual or outside contributers. What could you do to limit or manage this?If it is an open group, will you allow people join in ad hoc once the reading is under way?Again I don't think the group will be that different that a standard forum thread
Hud955 wrote:Do you want the reading to be structured and ask for structured responses, so everyone moves ahead at the same rate, and talks about the same things (broadly) at the same time? Or do you just want an informal space for people to contribute thoughts and carry out independent conversations? Do you want some rules for responding? How will people use the discussion space, for example? Will it be a free for all? Or do you want to give it a pre-determined structure – even if a minimal one? Do you want a 'moderator' or 'chairperson' with elected decision-making powers? Do you want to ask for positive contributions? Not ones that criticise other people's views? (The content can be the same; only the way preople present it is different.)I think the way forward is two come up with a suggested reading timetable then see what grows from that. Once a body of comments is up I see know reason for further people to add more for years to come.
Hud955 wrote:Do you want to limit the size of contributions? (to prevent some individuals dominating others who are less forthcoming or articulate?)Do you want to work though the first text section by section, discussing each as you go? Or do you read it all through and then pick themes to discuss? Or do you want some other arrangement?I would have thought initially comment chapter by chapter and add comments on themes as the reading progresses.
Hud955 wrote:What's the decision-making process on this: group vote or concensus or through an elected decision-maker (chairperson)If you are going to work through a text section by section, do you want to set a time allowance for people to read and digest the material, perhaps making allowance for slow or more thoughtful readers and those without a lot of time to spare? How will this be set?And no doubt there are other issues the group can think of.I think this is something people will vote for with their feet (or maybe fingers). Either people will participate or they won't.I think for the Rubin text, a couple of chapters a week is a reasonable speed. People can always comment on things a little later if they get behind. The joys of not having to be in the same place at the same time.
Jonathan Chambers wrote:I'm in! Got to be a better use of time than squabbling over moderation!Hear! hear!Pencil me in. Just a thought – should this discussion be hived off this thread — say from post #15.And be given a new (catchier) title?
How's this.TextTitle — Essays on Marx's Theory of ValueAuthor — I I RubinYear — 1928Source — http://www.marxists.org/archive/rubin/value/index.htmPrice — Links — http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaak_Illich_RubinStart — 18 Jan 2013 Discussion Timetable26 Jan — Introduction, Section I & Chapters 1 to 32 Feb — Chapters 4 to 716 Feb — Chapters 8 to 122 Mar — Section II & Chapters 13 to 1616 Mar — Chapters 17 & 1830 Mar — Chapter 19We'll soon get complaints if the reading/discussion timetable is too spun out over time, and we can adjust it accordingly.[By the way, can Admin offer us an icon for making lists? That helps to identify individual points, as here.]
twc wrote:How's this.Looks good to me. If there's another post in agreement posted I'll set up the relevant sections.
twc wrote:[By the way, can Admin offer us an icon for making lists? That helps to identify individual points, as here.]Thank you for the list icon.
Are we ready to go?I'm about to start reading Rubin up to Chapter 3 for discussion starting 26 January.Anybody else in?
Yep.
The group forum has now been set up. I've got my paperback copy and ready to make a start.http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/forum/reading-groups/ii-rubin-essays-marxs-theory-value
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.